posted October 13, 2000 04:22 PM            

Israel-Gaza Food Blockade
STARVE THEM TO DEATH??

Many seems to miss the point here. Isreal is in control of Palestine today, Palestine is nonexistent, ALL THE PALESTINIANS ARE ASKING FOR IN OSLO IS 22% of that 100%, how can they ask to give up more than that 22% (gaza and west bank). Where is justice?? Give them 22% 1967 BORDERS AND THE PROBLEM SOLVE.

Isreal wants all 100%, how can their be peace in the middle east.

 Zionist Regime Blockading Food Supplies To Gaza

London, Oct. 13, IRNA -- Foreign Secretary Robin Cook was expected to

urge Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak Friday to allow food supplies

into Gaza and stop the worsening humanitarian crisis in Palestinian

areas.

Cook, who has extended his stay in the Middle East due to the

deepening crisis, was planning to hold further talks with the

Zionist leader in an attempt to persuade him to attend a summit with

Yasser Arafat in Egypt, according to Britain's Press Association.

The news agency quoted Cook saying that with bread in short supply

in Gaza, it would be "hard for Mr. Arafat to attend the summit if

people were unable to get food."

He said he was hopeful of bringing both sides together but that

with events "taking on a life of their own," he was unsure what

would happen.

The British Foreign Secretary, who said he was staying in touch

with Prime Minister Tony Blair at the EU summit in Biarritz, was

also hoping to get support for European leaders for the summit.

"I hope that it will be possible to arrange for the European

Union to send a united call today from Biarritz to both sides to get

together, to encourage them to come together, to stress the

importance the international community attaches to that," he said.

"We have got to start now in creating the conditions for the

talks to proceed with the objective of success, with the chance of

success and that means there has to be an end to the violence," Cook

posted October 13, 2000 10:35 PM            

We are accused of terrorism by Nizar Qabani

We are accused of terrorism:
if we defended rose and woman
and the mighty verse ...
and the blueness of sky ...
A dominion .. nothing left therein...
No water, no air ..
No tent, no camel,
and not even dark Arabica coffee!!

We are accused of terrorism:
if we defended with guts
the hair of Balqis
and the lips of Maysun
if we defended Hind, and Da`d
Lubna and Rabab ..
and the stream of Kohl
coming down from their lashes like the verses of revelation.
You will not find with me
a secret poem
or a secret logos
or books I put behind doors.
I do not even have one Qasidah
walking down the street, wearing Hijab.

We are accused of terrorism:
if we wrote about the ruins of a watan
torn, weak ...

a watan with no address
and an ummah with no names
I seek the remnants of a watan
none of its grand poems is left
except the bemoans of Khansa.
I seek a dominion in whose horizons
no freedom can be found
red .. blue or yellow.

A watan forbidding us from bying a newspaper
or listening to the news.
A dominion wherein birds are forbidden
from chirping.
A watan wherein, out of terror [ru`b],
its writers got accustomed to write about
nothing.

A watan, in the likeness of poetry in our lands:
It is vain talk,
no rhythm,
imported
Ajam, with a crooked face and tongue:
No beginning
No end
No relation with people's worry
mother earth
and the crisis of man.
A dominion ...
going to peace talks
with no honor
no shoe.

A watan,
men peed in their pans ..
women are those left to defend honor.
Salt in our eyes
Salt in our lips
Salt in our words
Can the self carry such dryness?
An inheritance we got from the barren Qahtan?
In our Ummah, no Mu`awiya, and no Abu Sufiyan
No one is left to say "NO"
and face the quitters
they gave up our houses, our bread and our [olive] oil.

They transformed our bright history into a mediocre store.

In our lives, no Qasidah is left,
since we lost our chastity in the bed of the Sultan.
They got accustomed to us, the humbled.
What is left to man
when all that remains
is disgrace.

I seek in the books of history
Ussamah ibn al-Munqith
Uqba ibn Nafi`
Omar, and Hamzah
and Khalid, driving his flocks conquering the Shem.
I seek a Mu`tasim Billah
Saving women from the cruelty of rape
and the fire.
I seek latter days men
All I can see is frightened cats
Scared for their own souls, from
the sultanship of mice.
Is this an overwhelming national blindness?
Are we blind to colors?

We are accused of terrorism
If we refuse to die
with Israel's bulldozers
tearing our land
tearing our history
tearing our Evangelium
tearing our Koran
tearing the graves of our prophets
If this was our sin,
then, lo, how beautiful terrorism is?
We are accused of terrorism
if we refused to be effaced
by the hands of the Mogul, Jews and Barbarians
if we throw a stone
at the glass of the the Security Council
after the Ceasar of Ceasars got a hold of it.

We are accused of terrorism
if we refuse to negotiate with the wolf
and shake the hand with a whore
Amrika
Against the cultures of the peoples
with no culture
Against the civilizations of the civilized
with no civilization
Amrika
a mighty edifice
with no walls!

We are accused of terrorism:
if we refused an era
Amrika became
the foolish, the rich, the mighty
translated, sworn
in Ivri.

We are accused of terrorism:
if we throw a rose
to Jerusalem
to al-Khalil
to Ghazza
to an-Nasirah
if we took bread and water
to beleaguered Troy.

We are accused of terrorism:
if we raised our voices against
the regionalists of our leaders.
All changed their rides:
from Unionists
to Brokers.
If we committed the heinous crime of culture
if we revolted against the orders of the grand caliph
and the seat of the caliphate
If we read jurisprudence or politics
If we recalled God
and read Surat al-Fat-h
[that Chapter of Conquest].
If we listened to the Friday sermon
then we are well-established in the art of terrorism

We are accused of terrorism
if we defended land
and the honor of dust
if we revolted against the rape of people
and our rape
if we defended the last palm trees in our desert
the last stars in our sky
the last syllabi of our names
the last milk in our mothers' bossoms
if this was our sin
how beautiful is terrorism.
I am with terrorism
if it is able to save me
from the immigrants from Russia
Romania, Hungaria, and Poland
They settled in Palestine
set foot on our shoulders
to steal the minarets of al-Quds
and the door of Aqsa
to steal the arabesques
and the domes.

I am with terrorism
if it will free the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth,
and the virgin, Meriam Betula
and the holy city
from the ambassadors of death and desolation
Yesteryear
The nationalist street was fervent
like a wild horse.
The rivers were abundant with the spirit of youth.
But after Olso,
we no longer had teeth:
we are now a blind and lost people.

We are accused of terrorism:
if we defended with full-force
our poetic heritage
our national wall
our rosy civilization
the culture of flutes in our mountains
and the mirrors displaying blackened eyes.
We are accused of terrorism:
if we defended what we wrote
El azure of our sea
and the aroma of ink
if we defended the freedom of the word
and the holiness of books

I am with terrorism
if it is able to free a people
from tyrants and tyranny
if it is able to save man from the cruelty of man
to return lemon, olive tree, and bird to the South of Lebanon
and the smile back to Golan
I am with terrorism
if it will save me
from the Ceasar of Yehuda
and the Ceasar of Rome
I am with terrorism
as long as this new world order
is shared
between Amrika and Israel
half-half
I am with terrorism
with all my poetry
with all my words
and all my teeth
as long as this new world
is in the hands of a butcher.

I am with terrorism
if the U.S. Senate
enacts judgement
decrees reward and punishment

I am with Irhab [terrorism]
as long this new world order
hates the smell of A`rab.

I am with terrorism
as long as the new world order
wants to slaughter my off-spring.
and send them to dogs.
For all this
I raise my voice high:
I am with terrorism
I am with terrorism
I am with terrorism ...
Nizar Qabbani
London, 15 Nisan (April) 1997.

posted October 15, 2000 06:00 PM            

It's time for peace loving Muslims the world over to see that the Palestinians are just being used as bait. Their blood is being shed for some Jihad that can never be won. The Arab fanatics have even gone so far as to bomb a US destroyer refueling in the region. Innocent American lives were lost - black, white and Hispanic. The same random killing may soon come to our subways and tunnels here in the US, all because one man dared to visit some holy place of the Arabs.

Abu Jihad and Jansher,

Note well - Jerusalem and the Middle East in general doesn't dictate Christian beliefs. For us it is a place of history and nothing beyond that. We don't go on pilgrimages there or worship in any of the ancient sites. On the day Christ was crucified the temple vail was split in 2. It was a sign that God didn't dwell in places anymore, but in the heart of every believer.

As far as prophecy goes, the Christian merely observes the signs of the times and looks to the second coming of our Lord. We do not have any instructions on fulfilling prophecy. God can do that on His own, He doesn't need us. Furthermore, the Jews are not exactly tolerant of Christian beliefs, so Jansher's insinuation that Christians have ulterior motives and are involved in some conspiracy is ludicrous. It is in keeping with most of his fanatical diatribes here.

posted October 15, 2000 09:04 PM            

We are accused of terrorism
if we defended land
and the honor of dust
if we revolted against the rape of people
and our rape
if we defended the last palm trees in our desert
the last stars in our sky
the last syllabi of our names
the last milk in our mothers' bossoms
if this was our sin
how beautiful is terrorism.

I am with terrorism
if it is able to save me
from the immigrants from Russia
Romania, Hungaria, and Poland
They settled in Palestine
set foot on our shoulders
to steal the minarets of al-Quds
and the door of Aqsa
to steal the arabesques
and the domes.

I am with terrorism
if it will free the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth,
and the virgin, Meriam Betula
and the holy city
from the ambassadors of death and desolation
Yesteryear
The nationalist street was fervent
like a wild horse.
The rivers were abundant with the spirit of youth.
But after Olso,
we no longer had teeth:
we are now a blind and lost people.

The above poem captures the sentiments of the Palestinian people.

posted October 16, 2000 09:27 AM         

Let's deal with facts and not factoids. http://www.mountainoflight.co.uk/

posted October 16, 2000 11:02 AM            

Terry, Jansher and BK you see why I will never buy into opinions concerning the mid east crisis.
Eddie predicted crap like this would have happened.

posted October 16, 2000 11:49 AM         

quote:

---

Terry, Jansher and BK you see why I will never buy into opinions concerning the mid east crisis.
Eddie predicted crap like this would have happened.

---

There are many options, the most immediate one is to strive for peace and the Israeli should stop building on Palestinian lands and demolish their homes.

It does not take a rocket scientist to predict that violence would erupt in a land where for 52 years the people are being corralled into refugee camps - that's 360° for the Jews.

Relations between the once cordial Barak and Arafat have soured in recent weeks because of the repeated clashes in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel. Nearly 100 people, all but a few of them Palestinians or Israeli Arabs, have been killed, and hundreds wounded in the battles.

How many of the 100 people killed were Jews? Do you see the way the phrased the above ....

posted October 16, 2000 12:00 PM         

Who were the two suicide bombers? People saw them.

posted October 16, 2000 12:08 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by BONUS:
yep now we are back to the 52 yr history of Israel. You and your PLO leanings actually want to claim the whole of Palestine on a religious basis but yet you expect us to deny the 4000 yr history and tradition of the land of israel belonging to jews.
but that's another story.

the story at hand is the killing of the 17 US servicemen and servicewomen by terrorist which is a direct result of the mid east conflict.
I'm waiting for you guys to justify these killings and so far you have just be dodging the issue.

---

Bonus - then we should all go back to the land before time!

Justify what killings ... doesn't your religion teaches you "an eye for an eye" ... and then we would end up with all blind people, not that it would make much of a difference. The life of a Palestinian is worth how many Jews!!

Were you behind the "terrorist attack" on the USS Cole. Which group has claimed responsibility. I condemn all "terrorist" acts - including those perpetuated by the Jews.

posted October 16, 2000 12:14 PM            

quote:

---

Justify what killings ... doesn't your religion teaches you "an eye for an eye" ... and then we would end up with all blind people, not that it would make much of a difference. The life of a Palestinian is worth how many Jews!!

---

What did 17 US servicemen had to do with an eye for an eye. Did they visit the Mosque? Let's face it, this has nothing to do with human rights.

posted October 16, 2000 01:34 PM            

Posting sources are useless on this topic because folks like Terry and Jansher will immediately discard them since they are 'western' or 'white man' sources of info. This is how preposterous you guys are.

For any type of negotiations to work, there has to be concessions on both sides to arrive at a common ground. Can any of you tell me what efforts Arafat made to arrive at a common ground. Here's the demands and how the concessions made:

1. Arafat wants East Jerusalem to become the capital of Palestine. The Israelis offered Palestine a symbolic role in East Jersusalem to use as its capital. While not the ultimate solution, it was a start. Arafat rejected the proposal and didn't give in one ounce to find common ground.

2. Arafat wants Israel to withdraw totally from the West Bank back to the 1967 borders. The Israelis offered to withdraw and keep only TEN PERCENT of the West Bank. Again, this was met with opposition and Arafat refused to give any ground despite the fact that he had just negotiated control of 90% of the territory. This is unacceptable in any peace negotiations.

3. Arafat wants Israel to assume responsibility for the refugees. Why should they? Aren't those 'his people'??? Where are the wealthy, oil rich Arab bretheren and why can't they pitch in to provide for relocation if necessary?

4. Arafat wants final say on the use of water thru the territory. The Israelis asked to keep control of the aquifier which supplies them with 25% of their water. What is unreasonable about that? As you will see later, the intent was to cut off the Jews water supply.

Anyone can see that Arafat gave nothing in the negotiations. The intent is not to acheive peace, but to wage a Holy Jihad against the Christian and the Jew.

As for BK, her memory is shallow. By the end of 1995 Israel had turned over control of most of Gaza and 6 West Bank cities. The withdrawal from Hebron and other cities was halted after a series of suicide bombing attacks on Israelis. Now tell me, is that what people interested in peace do? Imagine, the Jews were WITHDRAWING from the territory and these Holy Jihad fanatics still killed them. It is proof that Israel cannot give Arafat the edge on issues such as water, his intentions are clear.

This doesn't stop with the Israelis, it extends to the US (the Great Satan) as well. Each and every one of us that rides the subways, buses, etc are targets of these fanatics. It doesn't matter whether you're Guyanese, black, Indian, or whatever, the fanatics will kill indiscrimately.

Should Arafat negotiate peace tomorrow, I think he will instantly be shot by an even more lunatic fanatical fringe such as Hezbollah etc. This is the reality of that culture which trains babies to hate the Jew and American from the time they leave the womb. But you'll never hear the Anti Semites here mention that.

posted October 16, 2000 02:20 PM            

Instead of telling us we're wrong and trying to infer that our arguments have no validity because of some misconception about a Jihad, why don't you explain to us what a Jihad is? Why is it that most of the terrorist groups in the Middle East have the word Jihad in them? Don't be shy.

posted October 16, 2000 02:36 PM            

If you still cant find the answer I will be of assistance.

posted October 16, 2000 02:38 PM         

After much meandering, you have finally begun to grasp the crux of the mideast problem. "The Refugees!!!"

These refugees have been systematically kicked out of their homeland starting 52 years ago, by the Israelites, into refugee camps. You and the Israelites are claiming it's Arafat problem and an Arab problem? No, my friend, it's a problem the Israelites have to address. They occupy their land and their homes, and the people want them back. Your way of thinking reminds me of the Nazis when they wanted to get rid of the jews.

Be careful of when you say "anti-semitic"
Both Arabs and Jews are semites. In any case, the Christians are the ones who are ant-semitic. Read Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" to see how it got started. Also as Abu states, go research the word Jihad.

There is no way you can convince me that the party who is condemning the violence and seek peace is Israel. How can you condemn violence when you are the one inflicting the violence?
100 dead, 22 children, some 9 years old, over 1000 wounded including many children, helicopter rockets and wartanks against stones. It seems to me that if the Israelites were seeking peace, they would have ignored the first stones thrown, instead of retaliating with bullets.

Bonus,
Instead of raving and ranting, give me facts, not factoids.
Who claimed responsibility for the bombing and why was it done? Who were the two suicide bombers?

I bet you still think it was Arafat who bombed Oklahama City building and killed all those little children.

posted October 16, 2000 07:15 PM            

WHAT A SOLUTION, AS ONE OF OUR ESTEEM FAIR MINDED citizen have suggeted, Arabs nations must take the Palestinians in. Did the Palestinian say they want to leave PALESTINE? Has Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon not have enough Palestinian refugee.

SIMPLISTIC AND NAIVE PEOPLE keep using terms such as Jihad, Fundamentalist, Anti-Semetic, etch, their only object is that of the zionists to dehumanize a people by labelling them in order to deflect attention from the REAL ISSUE, the occupation of Palestine. PALETINIANS WANTS 22% of Palestine, ISREAL ONLY WANTS TO GIVE THEM 12% . FAir is fair, and how can we be so naive not to recoginze the genesis of the crisis.

posted October 16, 2000 07:22 PM            

We are accused of terrorism:
if we write about the ruins of a watan( nation/country)
torn, weak ...

a watan with no address
and an ummah (people) with no names
I seek the remnants of a watan
none of its grand poems is left
except the bemoans of Khansa.
I seek a dominion in whose horizons
no freedom can be found
red .. blue or yellow.

A watan forbidding us from bying a newspaper
or listening to the news.
A dominion wherein birds are forbidden
from chirping.
A watan wherein, out of terror [ru`b],
its writers got accustomed to write about
nothing.

A watan, in the likeness of poetry in our lands:
It is vain talk,
no rhythm,
imported
Ajam, with a crooked face and tongue:
No beginning
No end
No relation with people's worry
mother earth
and the crisis of man.

A dominion ...
going to peace talks
with no honor
no shoe.

A watan,
men peed in their pans ..
women are those left to defend honor.
Salt in our eyes
Salt in our lips
Salt in our words
Can the self carry such dryness?

posted October 16, 2000 07:29 PM            

PROVOCATION OR WHAT??

Oct 17, IRNA - Spokesman of Iran's foreign ministry Hamid-Reza

Asefi vehemently condemned the latest Israel's act of laying down a

first stone in the holy mosque of "Masjid al-Aqssa" in the occupied

Qods for construction of what Zionists call the " temple of Solomon".

In a communique released Monday evening, Asefi said the act is

another step towards judaization of the holy Qods and an insult to

the Muslims as well as an effort to establish Zionist control over

the city and the holy mosque.

Referring to the Zionists' incentives for their recent crimes in

the occupied lands, he said the Zionist regime is undoubtedly trying

to create a religious war in the region through making a rift among

different religions, and expand a regional crisis.

Asefi said that Islamic Republic of Iran once again underlines the

fact that the only solution to the Middle East crisis is eliminating

the root cause of the crisis, that is putting an end to occupation of

the Palestine land and restoring rights of the palestinians including

the right of making decision about their own future and also the right

of repatriation of the palestinian refugees.

posted October 16, 2000 07:32 PM            

Palestine-Intifadah

 Israeli snipers kill Palestinian school boy

Athens, Oct 17, IRNA -- Israeli army snipers killed a Palestinian

school boy in a cold-blooded manner in Bethlehem Monday while the

child was returning home from school, said a despatch from al-Qods.

The boy, 12 year old Mo'ayad Isa, was fatally wounded when Israeli

soldiers stationed on building rooftops in the vicinity of the Bilal

Ibn Rabah Mosque opened fire on a group of school children who were

returning from school at the Ayda refugee camp in Bethlehem.

The occupation authorities claimed the children were hurling

stones toward the soldiers.

Eyewitness said the Palestinian boy, who was still carrying his

school bag, was hit with a live bullet in the chest as he was

returning home from school. He died immediately.

Another Palestinian was killed by Israeli soldiers' bullets in

Gaza Monday afternoon.

Palestinian sources said Musbah Abdul Kader Abu Ma'atuh, 29, was

killed as he was trying to prevent Palestinian protesters from hurling

stones on Israeli positions.

Meanwhile, as many as a hundred Palestinians were injured in

violent confrontations between unarmed Palestinian demonstrators and

heavily-armed and often trigger-happy Israeli occupation soldiers.

Palestinian sources said at least five of the injured sustained

critical wounds and that at least two of them were clinically dead.

posted October 16, 2000 11:25 PM         

quote:

---

As for BK, her memory is shallow. By the end of 1995 Israel had turned over control of most of Gaza and 6 West Bank cities. The withdrawal from Hebron and other cities was halted after a series of suicide bombing attacks on Israelis. Now tell me, is that what people interested in peace do? Imagine, the Jews were WITHDRAWING from the territory and these Holy Jihad fanatics still killed them. It is proof that Israel cannot give Arafat the edge on issues such as water, his intentions are clear.

---

"Limited self-rule" was granted in the West Bank and Gaza strip in 1993 by the Oslo Accord. And we have all seen evidence of what that means. They are still suffering from the legacy of prolonged occupation -- otherwise referred to as the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).

[

posted October 18, 2000 10:56 PM            

I think if Arafat would agree to Israel conceding 90% of the West Bank he would have somewhere to put the refugees and get them out of the refugee camps. He doesn't want to do so because it destroys his racist Jihad behavior of waging war against the infidel Jew. Hebron was also being given over to Palestinian control when the suicide bombings CONVENIENTLY started in 1995, so don't give me that crapola about 'where do we put the refugees'. Go ask Arafat, not me.

Seems like the Yemen govt has confirmed that the bombing of USS Cole was the work of terrorists with groups in Yemen. In an interview with a Pakistani newspaper, noted terrorist Osama Bin Laden fully condoned the bombing and said the fight was necessary against the enemies of Islam.

This underscores my contention all along that this has nothing to do with politics, land or Palestinian refugees. These poor people are being indoctrinated and used as part of a religious Jihad against the Jew. Abu alludes vaguely to some line that separates a Jihad from terrorism. Well, I don't see him nor any Islamic leader or Arab country condemning the terrorism of Bin Laden. In fact, Bin Laden finds shelter among many of these Arab countries.

I know you Arabs consider Osama Bin Laden your freedom fighter, and we all know he uses terrorism to kill innocent men, women and children thousands of miles away who have nothing to do with his war. Middle East Arabs also indoctrinate children from birth to hate the Jews and Americans and wage war against them. That's your version of warfare. Well, don't complain when you get your asses kicked. You've got your precious Jihad now, so enjoy it.

If you don't like seeing children killed, then don't indoctrinate them from birth and send them out to throw rocks under the guise of them being 'soldiers'.

posted October 19, 2000 07:08 AM            

Can you point to one bit of evidence that puts Bin Laden to these crimes. I have looked and couldnt find anything.

He seems to be in the same category as Saddam when the world fought his imaginary army in operation desert storm.

Finally, Jihad does not involve the killing of innocent women and children so put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Maybe you are suffering from Crusadism if such a word exist. Looks like you have the word Crusade mixed up with Jihad.

You should really seek the meaning of Jihad and you will be enlightened rather than using your cut and paste research mentality.

posted October 19, 2000 09:36 AM         

You haven't even mentioned Israeli squatters still putting up buildings on occupied lands, even though they are claiming they are giving up land.

And enlighten us on this new Yemen terrorist group that you mention, and what are they fighting for?

posted October 19, 2000 05:56 PM            

WOW, THE WORLD IS NOW SEEING WHAT THEY ARE DOING: I DON'T SEE ANY CONCESSIONS, WHERE ARE THEY, ALL IT TAKES IS TO RECONGNIZE THE 1967 BORDERS, AND DECLARE AN INDEPENDENT PALESTINIAN STATE

Lives have been lost unnecessarily, says Amnesty

By BBC News Online's Kathryn Westcott
Leading human rights groups have criticised what they describe as the use of excessive force by Israel to curb demonstrations in the Palestinian territories.
Reports by Amnesty International and the US-based Human Rights Watch say lives have been lost unnecessarily because of methods used by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF).

We believe there is a policy to accept the deaths of civilians as part of collateral damage in policing riots

Elizabeth Hodgkin, Amnesty International An Amnesty fact-finding team comprising Elizabeth Hodgkin and Dr Steven Males, a British former police officer and expert in riot control, visited the occupied territories and Israel between 4 October and 13 October.
Their report concludes that the IDF used "military methods - that is to say of eliminating an enemy, rather than policing methods of serving the community and preserving lives."
Rules of engagement
Ms Hodgkin told BBC News Online that she believed the IDF had used disproportionate force when attempting to defuse some situations.
She said that in many cases there was an "extremely rapid escalation to the use of firearms".
More than 100 people - many of them Palestinians and nearly 30 of them children - have been killed in the violence.

The IDF says it only shoots when its soldiers have been fired at
The IDF's rules of engagement for a low-intensity conflict authorise soldiers to fight rocks and petrol bombs with tear gas and rubber-coated bullets.
But when troops come under gun-fire, they are authorised to fire back with live ammunition. Molotov cocktails, too, can come under this authorisation.
"We are very strict with our firing orders," IDF spokesman Elian Sztulman told BBC News Online. "We only shoot live ammunition when we are shot at."
He maintains that many of the casualties of the conflict have been caught in crossfire. This is disputed by Palestinians.
'No imminent danger'
Amnesty has criticised Israel for failing to carry out investigations into the past 19 days of violence and is calling for an international inquiry.
A report by Human Rights Watch, also published this week, said that in investigating clashes it had documented "repeated excessive use of lethal force against unarmed Palestinian demonstrators, who posed no imminent danger of death or serious injury to security forces or to others."
It also said it had witnessed indiscriminate use of force in responding to situations involving gunfire from the Palestinian side.
Both groups, along with local human rights groups, have criticised what the say is the IDF's improper use of rubber-coated bullets - usually metal ball bearings covered in a layer of black rubber and capable of causing lethal injuries.
Rules of engagement authorise soldiers to fire these at a minimum range of 40m, but the IDF's Mr Sztulman conceded that on occasions they are fired at a closer range.

Nearly 30 children have been killed in the violence
"People can get hurt badly if shot at close quarters, so this is only allowed if a soldier is forced to protect himself, say, from 10 youths pelting him with stones at close quarters," he said.
He added that if the IDF believed the rule had been applied improperly, the soldier could appear before a military court.
However, commentators say there have been few cases in the past in which Israeli soldiers have been prosecuted for shooting Palestinian protesters.
The IDF spokesman also said rules of engagement authorised soldiers who could identify the source of fire to shoot at that source with the intention of killing.

We use as much restraint as is possible and people get caught in the crossfire

posted October 21, 2000 11:06 AM            

Don't twist my words, I never said Bin Laden was responsible for the bombing, I said he condoned it. ABC news cited a Pakistani newspaper who interviewed Bin Laden and he said the bombing was the right thing to do against the enemies of Islam. This is what it is all about, yet you Arabs expect people to stick their heads in the mud and ignore that.

It is not for me to figure out what a Jihad is. You ought to tell me, but then again you'd have a hard time explaining the existence of a group called the Islamic Jihad which exists solely for the purpose of reigning terror on us in the West, since we're the enemies of Islam.

Terry,

The essence of negotiations is to arrive at a compromise. If one side gives you 90% and you refuse it, then don't hide behind 'negotiating' any more. Say you want it all and go to war for it. In essence that's what the Arabs have done all along, whilst giving Clinton and the west these cameo appearances at the White house lawn and Camp David. Ask Arafat about the Yemen terrorist groups, not me. The Yemen government acknowledged that there are Islamic terrorist groups operating within Yemen and it seems like they're powerless to stop them.

You stated

quote:

---

I haven't seen you condemn Israel for killing over 25 innocent children

---

If you want to place 'innocent children' as you call them on the frontlines as soldiers, then they'll pay the consequences. This is a ploy by the Arabs to gain Western sympathy using the lives of innocent kids. If you're that concerned about the lives of children, then your justifiable outrage ought to be directed at the Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups that indoctrinate children into thinking they're soldiers and dying for a cause right before sending them like lambs to a slaughter.

By contrast, you don't see children in the West being used as 'soldiers' do you? Half don't even know the Middle East exists. Yet your warlike Arab bretheren seek out innocent women and children as victims by trying to bomb subways, bomb the world trade center, commerical airliners, etc. That is the kind of war the Arab world wages on civilians. It is the ultimate sign of cowardice and you ought to be ashamed of it.

Eddie

posted October 21, 2000 11:29 AM            

If you're going to condemn the Arabs for terrorism, then you have to do the same for the Israeli's. Wasn't former PM Begin the leader of a Zionist terrorist organization which reigned terror on Arab civilian populations? But I guess its convenient to forget such things. When you win, they call you freedom fighters. When you lose, terrorists.

My personal opinion is that this situation has come to a point where it is more appropriate to use Gandhi's tactics. You have a Goliath as an oppressor, you have a David as the ones being oppresses, and you have unlimited world media attention. It's time for the Palestinian Gandhi to rise up. Violence is not going to solve anything.

posted October 21, 2000 05:28 PM            

In none of my posts have I excused the Israelis for their actions. They are certainly not above board in their actions here. However, one cannot deny that the Arabs have resisted every attempt at diplomacy. Instead they resort to their base tendencies and invoke violence and war against Israel and the Great Satan - America. My point is that if they select that approach then they must realize they will suffer the consequences. Any crying after that is useless as far as I'm concerned.

This is not 7th Century Arabia. Let them stop sending their children to the frontlines with rocks, bombing innocent civilians and plead their case properly at the table of diplomacy. Or are the Arab fanatics willing to concede that they don't have the acumen to do so?

Eddie

posted October 21, 2000 06:32 PM            

Let me make one thing clear. You are the one making blanket statements about arabs and muslims not me so I dont owe you an explanation as to what Jihad means.

Next, this is not 7th century arabia but its the 21st century Isreal whose army was defeated by Hezbollah in Lebannon. Dont even think that Isreal left Lebannon and their christian allies in an effort to make peace because you will be the biggest fool.

Dont worry, it took 200 years plus for Salahuddin to appear so your rein of 50 years is nothing.

Finally the longer you take to come up with a definition of Jihad, the more I can see that you know not what you preach.

[This message has been edited by Abu Jihad (edited October 21, 2000).]

posted October 21, 2000 08:52 PM         

As fighting raged today in the West Bank and Gaza and protesters in Yemen and Egypt shouted for war on Israel, Mr. Arafat delivered one of the least radical of the speeches that were televised at the start of the meeting, which conducted all its debates behind closed doors. He called for substantive international action to protect Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to castigate Israel. But he did not advocate, as did more fiery delegates, a return to war to achieve his goal of Palestinian statehood.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/22/world/22ARAB.html

posted October 22, 2000 02:49 AM            

SHAMIR, BEGIM, ETCH

Introduction

This booklet documents the background and criminal activities of Jewish Zionist terrorist groups, and especially the Jewish Defense League. Particular emphasis is given here to terror--including murder--against "thought criminals" who question the Holocaust story that six million Jews were systematically killed during the Second World War.
Zionist terrorists openly proclaim an arrogant Jewish-supremacist ideology and acknowledge their readiness to use violence against those who disagree with them. With a well-documented record of bigotry and crime, they pose a serious danger to our society, and to men and women everywhere who treasure freedom.

Meir Kahane and the Jewish Defense League

posted October 22, 2000 02:59 AM            

THERE WILL BE NO SOLUTION UNLESS ISREAL RECOGINZE THE 1967 BORDERS.

We are accused of terrorism
If we refuse to die
with Israel's bulldozers
tearing our land
tearing our history
tearing our Evangelium
tearing our Koran
tearing the graves of our prophets
If this was our sin,
then, lo, how beautiful terrorism is?
We are accused of terrorism
if we refused to be effaced
by the hands of the Mogul, Jews and Barbarians
if we throw a stone
at the glass of the the Security Council
after the Ceasar of Ceasars got a hold of it.

posted October 22, 2000 02:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Abu Jihad:
Let me make one thing clear. You are the one making blanket statements about arabs and muslims not me so I dont owe you an explanation as to what Jihad means.

---

In each of my posts I've laid the blame for Arab aggression at the feet of the fanatical, not every Muslim. So your accusation of me making blanket statements about Muslims doesn't hold water.

quote:

---

Next, this is not 7th century arabia but its the 21st century Isreal whose army was defeated by Hezbollah in Lebannon. Dont even think that Isreal left Lebannon and their christian allies in an effort to make peace because you will be the biggest fool.

---

Lastly, I could care less what your textbook meaning of Jihad is. If I am as clueless about it as you state, then it begs the question why none of you devout Arabs would respond and state otherwise. I'm sure even the terrorist group Islamic Jihad would differ with your definition.

Jansher,

From your post above it is clear that you likewise advocate violence and the use of innocent Palestinian children as soldiers. You justify this by stating they have no future, are impoverished and live in refugee camps.

Likewise, many Afro Guyanese are frustrated with their future and are impoverished. They perceive that they are dispossessed by Indians. As a result, some riot during election periods, venting their anger against Indo Guyanese. At those times, why is it that you start whining on this forum about violence against Indians? Why is it that you seek to denigrate blacks and post negative articles about their behavior around the world? Are they not simply reacting to perceived oppression the way the Palestinians are?

The actions of those few Afro Guyanese against Indians are wrong, just like the Palestinian response to Israel is wrong. However, being the big, fanatical hypocrite you are, you elevate one cause while seeking to denigrate and destroy Afro Guyanese that use the very same method. It speaks volumes about your character. I'm waiting for you and Terry to mouth off about African violence come Jan 2001.

Eddie

posted October 22, 2000 10:48 PM            

How many Christian Milita members were kill by the fanatical Hezbollah when their Jewish Allies abandoned them in Lebannon.

Dont you think that if they were fanatical they would have wanted revenge for the slaughter of innocent muslim women and children in those two refugee camps back in 1982.

Instead they were so scared they ran and hid in their churches knowing fully well that the muslims will not attack them in their church.

This was not the case two weeks ago when the Isreali army opened fire on muslims praying in masjid Al Aqsa. Did you see or hear that on your local news?

posted October 22, 2000 10:54 PM            

Jerusalem, October 18, 2000

By Dr. Hanan Ashrawi http://www.egroups.com/message/Letters_from_Palestine/34

Blaming the victim has been the common resort of the guilty in rationalizing
and distorting the horror of the crime itself.

Whether battered wives, abused children, or Palestinians long subjected to the
brutality of the horrendous Israeli military occupation, the first (and last)
resort of the cowardly is in maligning the victim, in accusing him/her/them of
having brought about the deserved cruelty of the crime.

The essential prerequisite, of course, is the total dehumanization of the
victims and the elimination of their most basic rights and attributes as well
as claims to protection.

Inevitably, the resultant compound victimization is further enhanced by
increased vulnerability, distortion, and exclusion from the protection of human
consideration and moral imperatives.

Hence, the latest eruption of confrontations between the Israeli occupation
army and civilian Palestinian protestors became the playing field for the full
force of the Israeli spin machine in a most deliberate, concentrated, and
racist exercise of deception and dehumanization directed against a whole
people.

The most basic form of deception is in fabricating a false symmetry between
occupier and occupied, between oppressor and victim. The violence of the
powerful Israeli occupation army using live ammunition, tanks and helicopter
gun ships is (at best) equated with the "violence" of Palestinian civilians
protesting their victimization and continued loss of rights, lands, and lives.

In addition, the Palestinians are called upon to be docile, to stop the
"violence," to end the "siege of Israel" as though the strongest army in the
region is being "threatened" by the unarmed people's rejection of its
occupation and brutality. The obvious and simple solution, of course, is to
withdraw the army and end the occupation.

This, ironically, is accompanied by a devaluation of Palestinian rights and
lives by translating our objective weakness into a diminution of rights whereby
the powerful determines the parameters of "justice" for the weak.

The whole presentation constantly exhibits the "white man's burden" syndrome.
Palestinians should be "grateful" for whatever "generous offer" Israel chooses
to "grant" them, regardless of the glaring injustice and illegality of the
Israeli negotiating stance.

Both the extreme right and extreme left in Israel (as well as the US) have
adopted this condescending, patronizing approach to peace—Barak has gone the
“farthest” in “offering” the Palestinians almost 90% of their lands with some
“responsibilities” in Jerusalem, and those “ungrateful” Palestinians are being
“intransigent” and hard line.

Having compromised ourselves down to 22% of historical Palestine, we are no
being asked to be party to Israel’s illegal annexation of Jerusalem and its
settlement policies—i.e. an unholy partnership for the violation of
international law and the relevant UN resolutions.

Should we be unwilling to self-negate, to refuse the role of good little
natives, and to continue rejecting the Israeli unilateral version of “peace”
that “offers” us a subservient statelet of isolated Bantustans under Israel’s
apartheid system, then we will be pounded into submission.

After all, if pressure and threat and political arm-twisting do not work, sheer
naked military aggression can produce the desired results—since “Arabs
understand only the language of violence.”

Instant scare tactics or panic politics come into play with such labels as the
“terrorist” or “dictatorial” or “violent” Palestinians, while depicting the
reality of the Palestinian human will to resist subjugation and oppression as
proof of such misrepresentations.

A catch-22 situation is clearly visible: Arafat must “control” his people
(nation of sheep?) and “order” them to calm down and accept their enslavement
and repression by the Israelis, otherwise he is no longer a “peace partner” and
cannot be considered a “leader.”

At the same time, Israel cannot deal with Arafat or the Palestinians because
they are inherently “undemocratic” and therefore have nothing in common with
such “civilized” democracies as Israel and the US.

In parallel, other ready-made labels and stereotypical epithets are easily
pulled out as a convenient branding exercise to reduce the humanity of the
Palestinians.

The historical and familiar slurs used by Israeli officials and public figures
(including cockroaches, two-legged vermin, dogs) have been expanded to include
“snakes” and “crocodiles.”

The reduction of our humanity to a series of abstractions is nowhere as
sinister as in the numerical game. Palestinian victims of Israeli live fire are
daily given as “x” numbers killed and “y” numbers wounded. Their names,
identities, dashed hopes, and shattered dreams are nowhere mentioned. Absent
too are the grief and anguish of their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, and
other loved ones who will have to live with that tragic loss.

The visual documentation of the cold-blooded murder of the child Muhammad
al-Durra shattered the complacency of those who had been comfortable with the
anonymity of the Palestinians and the invisibility of their suffering.  Even
then, the Israeli propaganda machine tried to distort the truth even in the
face of irrefutable evidence.

First, it was said that he was killed by Palestinian “gun men.” Then, he was
“caught in the crossfire.” The worst version was in the cynical depiction of
the child Muhammad as a “trouble-maker” or a “mischievous” child who brought it
upon himself—as though the proper response to a child living his childhood is
deliberate death. The last accusation involved a question:  “What was he doing
there?” The real question should have been “what was the Israeli army doing
there” in the heart of Palestinian Gaza shooting at civilians including a child
and his father who had been caught red-handed attempting to indulge in the
“provocative” act of shopping together.

posted October 23, 2000 01:09 PM            

If you think that the Hezbollah group is not a fanatical terrorist organization, then so be it. That could be the source of your problem. I choose to see the facts as they are, and yes, there are fanatical Israeli and Christian groups as well. Unlike you, I don't turn a blind eye to them.

posted October 23, 2000 10:59 PM            

Was it not the same racist propaganda to justify Salavery??

One asked about Guyana and racial question. Well by question is: When Guyana was born in 1966, did any ethnic group of that country lost their homes and land? Did u have a flight of refugees? Was Guyana declared or imposed upon any indigenous population? How can we compare PALESTINE AND GUYANA??

BY DR. HANAN ASHWARI

A CHRISTIAN PALESTINIAN LIKE ABOUT 30% of Palestinians are CHRISTIANS. Arafat's wife is a Christian. TARIQ AZIZ OF IRAQ IS CHRISTIAN, BOUTOS BUTROS GALI IS A CHRISTIAN, AND HAD ONE OF THE HIGHEST POSITION IN EGYPT. CAN A MUSLIM RISE UP TO THESE RANKING IN NON MUSLIM COUNTRIES? COME ON , LETS FACE IT, IF THE MUSLIMS WERE SO TERRIBLE, CHRISTIANS AND JEWS WOULD NOT HAVE RISEN TO SUCH HIGH OFFICE IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

posted October 24, 2000 09:18 PM            

This is a very insightful and brilliant piece of writing that cuts to the core of the issues, I wish that fair minded people will read it. Dr. Hanan A. in her scholarly manner bring to light the ETNOGENESIS OF the Palestinians, in order for the Zionists to justify their campaign of ethnic cleansing.

The apologists of the oppressors should realize that Isreal is no longer living in a dangerous world; she is not realpolik vulernable by the so called enemies. For today, Isreal is the superpower of the middle East, with lazer guided weapons and over fifty nuclear bombs, and no one is asking her for arms control.

posted October 25, 2000 01:02 PM         

http://www.oneworld.net/anydoc2.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fww w%2Eglobalsolidarity%2Enpaid%2Eorg%2Fpales%5Fjust%5Fpeace%2Ehtml

http://www.oneworld.net/anydoc2.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Famnesty%2Ecupboard%2Eorg%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Featsoup%2Ecgi%3Fid%3D972390976x212v2v8t51

posted October 25, 2000 02:53 PM         

The western Christian media has always portrayed Islam in a negative light. To them, the Palestinian issue is a religious issue, so they completely ignore the human rights aspect of the Palestinian people. This deeply rooted negative attitude towards Islam is based on ignorance and fear, going all the way back to the marauding, unholy Crusaders.

posted October 25, 2000 06:38 PM            

We are lucky that they havent figured out how to control the internet as yet.

Where is Kofi Anan?

posted October 25, 2000 08:19 PM            

I have had this link for sometime now and I didnt want to post it but I think people should know what the Zionists are doing to other humans.

posted October 25, 2000 09:50 PM            

An existential exercise

Gideon Levy

Ha'aretz, October 16, 2000
http://www2.haaretz.co.il/special/mount-e/b/331085.asp

The right was right again: There is no one to talk to. There is truly no
partner for peace. But - and this is the difficult bit to swallow - it
is on our side that there is no one. The recent events have proven, even
more convincingly, that Israel is still not ripe for a peace agreement
with the Palestinians.  Supercilious jargon on the part of the prime
minister about the lack of "readiness" on the other side and the cliches
about the lack of suitable partners are a perfectly accurate de******ion
of Israel. Concentrating solely on itself and its own needs, Israel -
both right and left - has been struck, perhaps more than ever, by a
terrible blindness as to what is happening to the other side.

For most Israelis, the Palestinians are almost non-existent. They're
like thin air. Likud Chair Ariel Sharon did not go up to the Temple
Mount in order to harm the Palestinians; he went up ignoring their
existence completely. He went up for internal political reasons, without
giving a thought to how his behavior might affect them.

For many Palestinians, this disregard is worse than deliberate harm; it
is even more humiliating. They know that their needs, their distress,
their fears and their problems are of very little interest to most
Israelis. Israel demanded that the Palestinians learn about the
Holocaust in order to understand the motives and roots of the Jews, but
the fate and history of the Palestinians is of no interest to the
average Israeli whatsoever.

posted October 25, 2000 09:58 PM            

Just so you can keep up with the perpetual crisis in the Middle East, I have a
little quiz for you.

Question: Which country alone in the Middle East has nuclear weapons?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the nuclear
nonproliferation treaty and bars international inspections?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: Which country in the Middle East seized the sovereign territory of other
nations by military force and continues to occupy it in defiance of United
Nations Security Council resolutions?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: Which country in the Middle East routinely violates the international
borders of another sovereign state with warplanes and artillery and naval
gunfire?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What American ally in the Middle East has for years sent assassins into
other countries to kill its political enemies (a practice sometimes called
exporting terrorism)?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: In which country in the Middle East have high-ranking military officers
admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have
acknowledged executing prisoners of war?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country in the Middle East created 762,000 refugees and refuses to
allow them to return to their homes, farms and businesses?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to pay compensation to people whose
land, bank accounts and businesses it confiscated?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: In what country in the Middle East was a high-ranking United Nations
diplomat assassinated?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: In what country in the Middle East did the man who ordered the assassination
of a high-ranking U.N. diplomat become prime minister?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country in the Middle East blew up an American diplomatic facility in
Egypt and attacked a U.S. ship in international waters, killing 33 and wounding
177 American sailors?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country in the Middle East employed a spy, Jonathan Pollard, to steal
classified documents and then gave some of them to the Soviet Union?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country at first denied any official connection to Pollard, then voted
to make him a citizen and has continuously demanded that the American president
grant Pollard a full pardon?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country on Planet Earth has the second most powerful lobby in the
United States, according to a recent Fortune magazine survey of Washington
insiders?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: Which country in the Middle East is in defiance of 69 United Nations
Security Council resolutions and has been protected from 29 more by U.S.
vetoes?
Answer: See 1 below.

Q: What country is the United States threatening to bomb because "U.N. Security
Council resolutions must be obeyed?"
Answer: See 2 below.

1. Israel
2. Iraq

Please pass this on...

posted October 26, 2000 02:53 PM            

I'd like to know why some of the richer Muslim countries (with the exception of Egypt) won't take
an active role in assisting the Palestinians? I find it ironic that Saudi Arabia seems more willing to
spend money to send Korans to american prisons than providing basic assistance to the
Palestinians. It seems as though the rest of the arab world has forgotten the Palestinians.

posted October 26, 2000 03:11 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by BK:
[b]Possibility of Arafat receiving US$1.0 billion in aid from Arab countries.

As fighting raged today in the West Bank and Gaza and protesters in Yemen and Egypt shouted for war on Israel, Mr. Arafat delivered one of the least radical of the speeches that were televised at the start of the meeting, which conducted all its debates behind closed doors. He called for substantive international action to protect Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to castigate Israel. But he did not advocate, as did more fiery delegates, a return to war to achieve his goal of Palestinian statehood.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/22/world/22ARAB.html

[This message has been edited by BK (edited October 21, 2000).][/B]

---

posted October 26, 2000 03:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by BK:

here phalnax... see how much is in the pipeling!

---

Arab leaders held out the possibility of giving Yasir Arafat, the
Palestinian leader, up to $1 billion in aid.

posted October 26, 2000 06:47 PM            

The Saudis are hugh donators when it comes to humanitarian aid, they just dont publicize it. They were one of the biggest contributors of drugs etc during the Kosova crisis.

posted October 27, 2000 12:40 AM            

It seems that leading Arab states are in agreement with what I've stated all along. They are now trying to put a stop to the Jihad and return to the bargaining table. At least they're not as stupid as Jansher and his foolish cries 'let me be a terrorist'.

By the way Jansher, where's the pictures of Saddam Hussein gassing the Kurds to death? Where's the pictures of the thousands slaughtered in the Iran/Iraq war? How about Egypt and Syria, oh professor emeritus Jansher? This is why I favor a total withdrawal of all US and Israelis from that area. Within days, you guys will jump on each other and wipe yourselves out.

Here's the article: Arab States denounce clamor for Holy War

posted October 27, 2000 03:34 PM            

Dont you know the words of Brother Bob "Every man has a right to his own destiny".

You sound like the white racist trash that spoke of Mandela and the people of South Africa. I must let you know that my brothers in South Africa is doing just fine(within the context of freedom) and the only ones complaining is the white racist trash.

It seems like your tank is running low and you are now burning fumes.

Sorry, I was going to respond to your post but why bother.

posted October 27, 2000 05:37 PM            

I see that Africans are now your 'brothers' and Malcolm X is now referred to by Jansher as 'my man'. You guys are such hypocrites. Perhaps you should try telling Afro Guyanese why black people are enslaved in the Sudan by you Muslims.

January cometh soon and your racist bilge will be on display for all to see. Don't forget, this is the same Jansher that wanted Indians in Surinam and Guyana to unite and drive the Africans out. You guys are jokers.

posted October 27, 2000 06:27 PM            

All Sudanese , NIgerians, Malians, SENEGALESE, MAURITIANS, NIGERESE, SOMALI, CHADIAN ARE BLACK, GABMIANS OR LETS SAY AFRICANS, THEY ARE FINE PEOPLE, I work with them.

Stop the nonesense of ARABS AND BLACKS, its between BLACKS AND BLACKS, like it is in India between INDIANS AND INDIANS, stop DEHUMANIZING, AND STICK TO THE ISSUE AT HAND.

HAVE U EVER BEEN IN THE COMPANY OF A PERSON FROM Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, Gambia, NIgeria, Niger, Sudan, Somali, Chat, Mauritania, Gabon, Ghana, South Africa, Mozambique, Kenya, Tanzania, ZANZIBAR?????

THEY ARE such ortrodox Muslims and so much different in thier culture than us in the west.

posted October 27, 2000 06:33 PM            

REGARDING MY PREVIOUS ISSUE, I MENTION MANY AFRICAN NATIONALITIES BECAUSE us Caribbean people think that Africa is one country, one people, one language, one traditions, one value system, one religion,e tch. Furthermore, we should ask the Africans themselves about slavery, Islam, Arabs vs Africans,etch, Us Caribbean people will learn a geat deal.

Some Notes on the Current Crisis in Palestine

On Media Bias

US headlines and opinion pieces have presented a false symmetry between
Israelis and Palestinians in the current confrontations. The reality of
these street battles is that one of the word's best equipped armies is
confronting mostly young, unarmed stone-throwers with massive military
force.1 Yet the media's frequent use of the term "cease-fire" conjures
images of two equal forces laying down arms.

Some US media have gone so far as to imply that Palestinian civilians are
the aggressors and the Israeli army an embattled underdog. This inversion of
reality is supported by statements like that of US Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright, who remarked that Palestinians have "placed Israel under
siege" and that the Israeli army is defending itself (NBC’s "Meet the
Press,"10/8/00). Comments like Albright's encourage the media to simply
ignore Israel's 33-year, illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and
the litany of human rights violations that are fueling the protests. In the
US, public discussion of military occupation has largely been replaced by
discussion of the Israel-PLO negotiations, making it seem as though
Palestinians are rejecting the possibility of peace itself.

Vast differences in the portrayal of Palestinian and Israeli deaths
encourages the dehumanization of Palestinians. For example, the killing of
two Israeli soldiers on October 12 by a Palestinian mob was rightly
described with horror and outrage in the US press. Replayed images of the
murders and in-depth interviews with friends and families of the victims
brought home the brutality of the killings and the tragedy of these needless
deaths. We were all horrified by these murders, just as we are horrified by
the murder of Palestinians, who account for over 90% of the fatalities. But
the media is quite casual about the killing of these civilians. Only one day
before the Israeli soldiers were killed, two Palestinians were shot dead by
Israeli forces. This day was characterized by The New York Times as "a lull
in the violence." Several Palestinians have been bludgeoned, burned and
tortured to death by Israeli setters. And These murders were hardly even
reported in the US, much less condemned with the force of emotion reserved
for Israeli casualties.

"Why Won't Palestinians Agree to Live in Peace with Israelis?"

Mainstream US media pose this question repeatedly, presenting Palestinian
protests against a backdrop of "generous Israeli compromises" in
negotiations, with frequent reminders that Barak has "gone farther" than any
Israeli leader in meeting Palestinian political demands. Actually, Barak has
given back no conquered territory since taking office. His much-lauded Camp
David offer on Jerusalem amounts to "municipal autonomy" for Palestinians,
which would allow Israel to maintain political control over the city with no
responsibility for administrative services or infrastructure. In addition to
full sovereignty over the heart of the city, Israel would retain control
over the nearly 30% of the West Bank that it unilaterally defines as
"Greater Jerusalem."

The sham of Israeli "generosity" extends to the entire occupied territories.
Despite the gross imbalance of power reflected in the Oslo Accords, most
Palestinians were initially willing to accept the basic framework in order
to finally be rid of the Israeli occupation. The problem was that under
Oslo, Israel actually consolidated its control over the West Bank and Gaza.
Israeli settlements have been expanded into large blocs and a massive road
network (directly funded by US taxes) has been built exclusively for Israeli
settlers -- all in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. A maze of
roadblocks and permanent military checkpoints is used to police Palestinian
movement and to bar Palestinians from reaching their jobs, schools,
hospitals and places of worship in Israel proper and Jerusalem. Israel
controls all travel between the West Bank and Gaza, and the territories
themselves have been truncated into dozens of isolated cantons, separated by
Israeli-controlled areas. Large swaths of Palestinian territory are still
patrolled by Israeli soldiers and occupied by hostile settlers. Palestinians
are unable to move freely between their towns and villages or control their
borders, economy or natural resources. The failure of the peace process to
protect Palestinians from Israeli domination is the source of the
frustration and despair underlying today's militant demonstrations.

The US as an Obstacle to Peace

Having pressured Palestinian negotiators at every turn to accept agreements
that violate human rights, the US shares responsibility for today’s crisis.
Since the onset of negotiations, the US has effectively abandoned human
rights standards in pursuit of a political settlement, claiming that
international law would "compromise" negotiations. Unyielding support for
Israel as the guarantor of its policy in the Middle East -- even in the face
of gross human rights abuses --  belies the US role of "honest broker" in
negotiations. The US allots Israel more than three billion dollars annually
in military aid, 75% of which is earmarked for purchase of US-made weapons,
including the Apache and Blackhawk helicopters used recently to fire
anti-tank missiles into residential Palestinian neighborhoods. Finally,
throughout this crisis, the US has continued to undermine the leadership of
the United Nations. The US abstained from UN Resolution 1322 condemning
Israel's "excessive use of force against Palestinians;" voted against the
call for a Special Session of the UN Human Rights Commission to address the
crisis; and vowed to veto any further Security Council resolutions on the
issue. If negotiations are to culminate in a just peace, they must be based
on full respect for international law and human rights. Therefore, both the
terms and the venue of past talks must change. Further negotiations between
Israel and the PLO should be held under the auspices of the United Nations
rather than the US and future agreements must meet the standards of
international human rights and humanitarian law.

Palestinian Children in the Frontlines

As we've seen in the media, Palestinian children and teen-agers are playing
a key role in demonstrations that are rocking the West Bank and Gaza. It is
always disturbing to see children, who should be playing and learning,
engaged in the political turmoil of adults' making. Yet their participation
in the conflict should be understood in a historical context. Youth have
been in the frontlines of demonstrations for national independence and other
popular struggles worldwide. As an Israeli journalist wrote recently, "In
the struggle waged by our underground groups during [Israel's] war of
independence, boys and girls played an important part. The boy who, in 1948,
destroyed a Syrian tank, is a national hero. I joined the Irgun, defined by
the British as a terrorist organization, at the age of 14... By the age of
15 I carried guns" (Gush Shalom, 10/21/00). Children killed by South African
police at Sharpsville and Soweto and those attacked during civil rights
protests in the US were, like Palestinian youth today, in the streets to
demand a better future for themselves and their community.

US media, however, has uncritically echoed Israeli claims that Palestinians
"put" their children in front of Israeli troops in order to profit
politically from media images of Israeli brutality. This is an unfounded
accusation that not only blames Palestinians for their own deaths, but
presumes that Palestinian parents willingly sacrifice their children's
lives. The belief that these parents protect or love their children any less
than other mothers and fathers reflects the dehumanization of Palestinians
in US media. The real question is not why so many children are protesting,
but why the Israeli military is reacting to stone-throwing youth with live
ammunition and anti-tank missiles.

Have Israeli Forces Targeted Children?

MADRE has stated that Israeli forces are targeting Palestinian children with
gunfire. This is a horrifying thought and we do not make the allegation
lightly. Unfortunately, there are numerous well-documented cases of soldiers
using lethal force against children when they themselves were in no imminent
danger. To cite just one example, on October 10, Amnesty International
delegates reported that an 11-year-old boy had been declared brain dead
after being shot in the head by Israeli troops. The boy was part of a crowd
of about 400 elementary-school children throwing stones at a military post
in Gaza. According to Amnesty, the soldiers, who held a heavily fortified
position located far from the children behind two wire fences, were in no
immediate danger.

From the onset of these clashes, Israeli troops have responded to young
protesters with deadly force. By October 26, at least 40 children under the
age of 18 had been killed, including two infants. Mohammed Al-Dura, the
12-year-old boy who was shot dead as television cameras filmed his father's
desperate attempts to protect him, is only the most visible of the victims.
In early October, a United Nations Special Rapporteur conducted a mission to
Palestine and found that a full 40% of the 3,000 Palestinians wounded were
children. According to UNICEF, many of those killed had been shot with live
ammunition in the head or upper body, rather than less vulnerable area of
the legs. Similarly, Palestinian doctors have reported dozens of cases of
demonstrators, including children, shot in the eyes at close range with
rubber-coated bullets, which troops are authorized to fire only at
demonstrators' legs from a distance of at least 100 feet. Several children
have been killed by explosive, high-velocity bullets, which are outlawed
under international weapons conventions. Less lethal means of crowd control,
such as night sticks or tear gas, have rarely been used by Israeli soldiers
in these confrontations.

Why would the Israeli military deliberately use more force than necessary,
especially against children? In contrast to the US media, Israeli newspapers
discuss the army's massive use of force as an explicit military strategy
(Yediot Aharonot, 10/3/00; Ha'aretz, 10/4/00). In fact, Prime Minister Barak
announced months ago that he would use rockets and helicopter gunships in
response to any Palestinian uprising or unilateral declaration of statehood
after last summer's failed Camp David Summit. Barak's strategy, according to
Israeli military analysts, is to put a stop to popular disturbances quickly
by exacting a very high toll from protesters (Gush Shalom, 10/6/00). Israel
has used such strategies before. During the Intifada, when then-Defense
Minister Rabin ordered the army to "break the bones" of Palestinian children
caught throwing stones. Unfortunately, the Israeli military is not unique in
its brutality, but contrary to the "purity of arms" myth surrounding its
troops, neither is it any more moral or law-abiding than other state
security forces around the world.

On Recent Attacks in US Jewish Communities: An "Ethnic War"?

For some in the US, the violence raging in the Middle East has been brought
closer to home by a series of anti-Jewish attacks, including beatings, bomb
threats and desecrations of synagogues in a few communities. These are human
rights violations that must be condemned and combated. Perpetrators of
attacks like these should be held accountable for their actions. We should
also understand that such acts are fueled when the media portrays political
violence as ethnic or religious strife. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is
not a "holy war" or an "ancient rivalry," as much of the media contends.
Despite its religious overtones, the conflict, like other land disputes, is
fundamentally political. Disentangling concrete issues of the conflict from
identity politics will help us gain a clearer understanding of the problem
and better equip us to insist on US policies that maximize the chances for a
just peace in the Middle East.

ăMADRE, October 2000, By Yifat Susskind, Associate Director, MADRE

1. Most of the clashes involve shooting only from the Israeli side. But
Palestinian security forces and militias have also opened fire at Israeli
soldiers. These men must be held to the same international standards as
Israeli troops and all state security forces.