snopes.com Post new topic  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » SLC Central » War, What Is It Good For? » Jimmy Carter's "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Jimmy Carter's "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid."
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AnglRdr:
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
The U.S. occupied Germany and Japan, and imposed restrictions more severe than the South African Whites upon the South African Blacks. But...that was after a war.


Silas

Really? There were some pretty severe restrictions for a brief period of time in both Germany and Japan, but this smacks of hyperbole to me. The US didn't prevent Germans or Japanese from speaking their languages, or segregate where they lived based upon skin color.
Well, the "skin color" argument is a bit facile, since neither society was notable for having subpopulations differentiated thus...

After the war, large populations were moved around; jobs were reassigned; names were changed; people were sequestered by previous political party affiliation, etc. etc.

Again, this was after a war, and thus the straight-up comparison is invalid. That's my point: the straight-up comparison between the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the South African *domestic* apartheid is fallacious.

It's a little like when anti-abortion activists refer to a "holocaust." The situations are sufficiently different to render the term invalid.

(Why are such terms so important? Why does it matter if Iraq is in a "Civil War" or not? Why do we spend so much time on such minutiae?)

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I dunno...I'm really not trying to argue whether "apartheid" is the right word. I think an argument can be made in support of it, in that at its simplest, apartheid is racial segregation. I think the word could be expanded to apply to how Palestinians are restricted in movements pretty much the same way black South Africans were (an excellent demonstration of this is a documentary called "A Wedding in Ramallah").

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
But, again, the West Bank is under military occupation. The South Africans never used that as an excuse to keep blacks from all-white sections of their own country.

In any case, I'm not saying things are good in the West Bank... And the settlements are a gigantic problem, especially if seen as colonies and not as "defensive installations."

However, as I've said a number of times, the Palestinians could have a country of their own, right now: they only need to draw a map with clear borders (such borders not to cut too deeply into Israel.)

Oh, well: once Bush and Condi are gone, maybe the U.S. will have a real foreign policy again. The U.S. has pretty much controlled this issue since 1956, and, now and then, we manage to do things well.

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troberg
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troberg     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
So, yes, I think the Israeli settlements in the West Bank are bad. But they do not constitute "apartheid" because they aren't treated as "occupied" land, but as "seized" land.
Could you explain what the difference is? The only major difference I can see is that they are spelled differently.

--------------------
/Troberg

Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
But, again, the West Bank is under military occupation. The South Africans never used that as an excuse to keep blacks from all-white sections of their own country.


Does that really matter, though? The South African government certainly was not above using military force to quell insurrections in the black townships.

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Carter is not the first person to have raised the issues of parallels between Occupied Palestine and Apartheid South Africa

quote:
There is many a city in other parts of the world where minorities are forced into poor, underfunded neighbourhoods and treated as unwelcome outsiders. Where Israel's self- proclaimed capital differs is in policies specifically designed to keep it that way, as in apartheid Johannesburg. In Jerusalem and other parts of the occupied territories, Palestinians face a myriad of discriminatory laws and practices, from land confiscations to house demolitions, de facto pass laws and restrictions on movement. "The similarities between the situation of East Jerusalemites and black South Africans is very great in respect of their residency rights," says John Dugard, the international law professor widely regarded as the father of human rights law in South Africa and now the UN's chief human rights monitor in the occupied territories. "We had the old Group Areas Act in South Africa. East Jerusalem has territorial classification that has the same sort of consequences as race classification had in South Africa in respect of who you can marry, where you can live, where you can go to school or hospital."

Palestinians in East Jerusalem, often the city of their birth, are not considered citizens but immigrants with "permanent resident" status, which, some have found, is anything but permanent. In the old South Africa, a large part of the black population was treated not as citizens of the cities and townships they were born into but of a distant homeland many had never visited. "Israel treats Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem as immigrants, who live in their homes at the beneficence of the authorities and not by right," says B'Tselem. "The authorities maintain this policy although these Palestinians were born in Jerusalem, lived in the city and have no other home. Treating these Palestinians as foreigners who entered Israel is astonishing, since it was Israel that entered East Jerusalem in 1967."

quote:
"Planning and urban policy, which normal cities view as this benign tool, was used as a powerful partisan tool to subordinate and control black people in Johannesburg and is still used that way against Palestinians in Jerusalem," says Scott Bollens, a University of California professor of urban planning who has studied divided cities across the globe, including Belfast, Berlin, Nicosia and Mostar. "In South Africa there was 'group areas' legislation, and then there was land use, planning tools and zoning that were used to reinforce and back up group areas. In Israel, they use a whole set of similar tools. They are very devious, in that planning is often viewed as this thing that is not part of politics. In Jerusalem, it's fundamental to their project of control, and Israeli planners and politicians have known that since day one. They've been very explicit in linking the planning tools with their political project."

At the heart of Israel's strategy is the policy adopted three decades ago of "maintaining the demographic balance" in Jerusalem. In 1972, the number of Jews in the west of the city outnumbered the Arabs in the east by nearly three to one. The government decreed that that equation should not be allowed to change, at least not in favour of the Arabs.

"The mantra of the past 37 years has been 'maintaining the demographic balance', which doesn't mean forcing Palestinians to leave," says Daniel Seidemann, a Jewish Israeli lawyer who has spent years fighting legal cases on behalf of Jerusalem's Arab residents. "It means curtailing their ability to develop by limiting construction to the already developed areas, by largely preventing development in new areas and by taking 35% [of Palestinian-owned land in greater East Jerusalem] and having a massive government incentive for [Jews] to build up that area."

The political decision to discriminate against Arabs was an open but rarely acknowledged secret. The authors of a 1992 book on Jerusalem, Separate and Unequal, laid bare the policy. The writers, two of whom were advisers to the city's mayors, said that Israeli policy since 1967 was "remorselessly" pursued with four objectives: to expand the Jewish population in the mainly Arab east of the city; to hinder growth of Arab neighbourhoods; to induce Arabs to leave; and to seal off Arab areas behind Jewish settlements.



--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
quote:
So, yes, I think the Israeli settlements in the West Bank are bad. But they do not constitute "apartheid" because they aren't treated as "occupied" land, but as "seized" land.
Could you explain what the difference is? The only major difference I can see is that they are spelled differently.
Sure. The U.S. occupied Germany and Japan after WWII, but did not seize them. The Soviets, on the other hand, seized the Baltic Republics and parts of Poland.

The seizure of land via conquest is not a good thing, and I am not celebrating it nor defending it. However, land seized in conquest is *different* than land occupied as a temporary military measure.

"Apartheid" applies to citizens of a region. Black South Africans were citizens of South Africa. Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank are *not* citizens of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

If, after WWII, large numbers of American civilians had moved to Okinawa and settled there, claiming that land in the name of the U.S.A., it would have been wrong, perhaps illegal, certainly an example of "ethnic cleansing," but not of "apartheid."

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
quote:
So, yes, I think the Israeli settlements in the West Bank are bad. But they do not constitute "apartheid" because they aren't treated as "occupied" land, but as "seized" land.
Could you explain what the difference is? The only major difference I can see is that they are spelled differently.
Sure. The U.S. occupied Germany and Japan after WWII, but did not seize them. The Soviets, on the other hand, seized the Baltic Republics and parts of Poland.

The seizure of land via conquest is not a good thing, and I am not celebrating it nor defending it. However, land seized in conquest is *different* than land occupied as a temporary military measure.

"Apartheid" applies to citizens of a region. Black South Africans were citizens of South Africa. Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank are *not* citizens of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank.



You're wrong, I'm afraid. Under Apartheid, Black South Africans were not citizens of South Africa, but were citizens of separate and nominally sovereign 'homelands,' although the sovereignty of those homelands were not recognised by any other country. These homelands became known as "Bantustans." When Apartheid was enacted, the Black population were assigned homelands on the basis of their nationality, in many cases forcibly relocated, and had their South African citizenship revoked.Yes, I know it's Wikipedia, but it's correct.

There are clear and demonstrable parallels with the way in which Palestinian residents in East Jerusalem have been reassigned as aliens and stripped of residency rights despite the state having moved around them, rather than them moving.

quote:
If, after WWII, large numbers of American civilians had moved to Okinawa and settled there, claiming that land in the name of the U.S.A., it would have been wrong, perhaps illegal, certainly an example of "ethnic cleansing," but not of "apartheid."

Silas

It isn't the mere existence of the settler communities in the West Bank and Gaza which are deemed akin to apartheid, it's the series of restrictive laws, for example the laws aimed at protecting the demographic make-up of Jerusalem, or the laws restricting the right of Palestinians to own property, businesses or have free movement, or the laws which, as pointed out in my post above have resulted in people who have lived in East Jerusalem all their lives being reclassified as migrants.

Now, there may be an argument that the restrictions placed on Palestinians aren't quite as bad as the Apartheid restrictions in South Africa, and that's one with which I'd probably agree, and I'd also accept that the Palestinians haven't been lucky enough to have as wily and noble a leader as Mandela, but you can't dismiss the comparisons entirely.

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
It all depends where you sit apparently.

As I see it, the Jews, who used to live all over the Middle East, were, in the course of the 20th century expelled from almost all of it, and confined to a small corner of it. Except for Israeli responses to the repeated attacks on Israel ever since the 1947 UN partition, the mostly Jewish partition would be a good deal smaller than it is. The conflict is all about the fact that the Jews basically accept partition along communal lines, while Palestinian Arabs have resisted this. Also note that Israel allows an Arab minority, whereas the Arab partition has always sought to be essentially free of Jews.

Most South Africans may not realize it, but the contrast between their own national liberation movement and that of the Palestinians is overwhelming. African National Congress-allied forces attacked the South African military, and infrastructure like power stations -- and hardly ever went after civilians (biggest and almost only exception was one day in Durban when 3 whites died in beachfront bars). In contrast, Palestinian Arabs have been trying to massacre-out the local Jews since the early nineteenth century.

Nelson Mandela:

quote:
During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to see realized. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.
Yasser Arafat:

quote:
Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations.
While you can find out of character quotes (mostly Arafat speaking to a Western audience), these quotations are representative of the dominant figures in the respective movements. Also, contrast the Constitution of the African National Congress with the PLO Charter.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troberg
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troberg     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Could we stop comparing the level of atrocities? It's not really meaningful, as any level is wrong.

Is it not aparthied because it's slightly better/worse than South Africa? Does it matter? If I have a slightly larger dick than someone else, does that mean that he doesn't have one? Of course not. The israeli/Palestine issue has enough similarities to apartheid to justify a comparison for rhetoric reasons, and it is certainly enough for the issue to be taken seriously.

Getting stuck on semantics will not bring the issue anywhere closer to a solution or even understanding.

--------------------
/Troberg

Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
It all depends where you sit apparently.

As I see it, the Jews, who used to live all over the Middle East, were, in the course of the 20th century expelled from almost all of it, and confined to a small corner of it. Except for Israeli responses to the repeated attacks on Israel ever since the 1947 UN partition, the mostly Jewish partition would be a good deal smaller than it is. The conflict is all about the fact that the Jews basically accept partition along communal lines, while Palestinian Arabs have resisted this. Also note that Israel allows an Arab minority, whereas the Arab partition has always sought to be essentially free of Jews.



Notwithstanding the existence of the Bantustans, there were some Black South African citizens in Apartheid South Africa as well. What's your point?

Doesn't Israel operate a racist and discriminatory immigration policy, like Apartheid South Africa? Doesn't Israel take artificial measures to keep its Arab minority a minority? Don't Arabs in Israel face discrimination in terms of employment, education, access to services etc?

You seem to be condoning the wrongs committed by the Israeli state on the grounds that Jews have it worse in Muslim countries. Is that your stance? So long as Jews are mistreated in other Middle Eastern countries, the excesses of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza are perfectly acceptable?

quote:
Most South Africans may not realize it, but the contrast between their own national liberation movement and that of the Palestinians is overwhelming. African National Congress-allied forces attacked the South African military, and infrastructure like power stations -- and hardly ever went after civilians (biggest and almost only exception was one day in Durban when 3 whites died in beachfront bars). In contrast, Palestinian Arabs have been trying to massacre-out the local Jews since the early nineteenth century.

Nelson Mandela:

quote:
During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to see realized. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.
Yasser Arafat:

quote:
Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations.
While you can find out of character quotes (mostly Arafat speaking to a Western audience), these quotations are representative of the dominant figures in the respective movements. Also, contrast the Constitution of the African National Congress with the PLO Charter.

That's just an expansion of my earlier point. But that doesn't justify or condone the discriminatory laws and practises that exist in Israel, seemingly purely to maintain demographics. You have a habit of responding to any criticism of Israel with an attack on the Palestinian cause; it's understandable, but it doesn't address the subjects raised.

Just because the PLO or Hamas are worthy of criticism, and of course they are, it doesn't necessarily follow that Israel does not deserve criticism.

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
Is it not aparthied because it's slightly better/worse than South Africa?

I never said it was not aparthied, or that it was.

However, my belief is that it is the Jews who have been confined to a little corner of the Arab world, and they are even begrudged that. This is not exactly like apartheid, but has its similarities.

quote:
Getting stuck on semantics will not bring the issue anywhere closer to a solution or even understanding.
Agreed. I wouldn't spend time figuring out which historical analogy is closest to reality except in response to the situation being portrayed more or less as the reverse of what it is.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
Just because the PLO or Hamas are worthy of criticism, and of course they are, it doesn't necessarily follow that Israel does not deserve criticism.

I am also critical of Israel, on grounds that lack of consistently firm response to attacks (for example, withholding of counterbattery fire) ultimately prolongs the conflict.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
Just because the PLO or Hamas are worthy of criticism, and of course they are, it doesn't necessarily follow that Israel does not deserve criticism.

I am also critical of Israel, on grounds that lack of consistently firm response to attacks (for example, withholding of counterbattery fire) ultimately prolongs the conflict.
So your only criticism of Israel is that they aren't tough enough on the Palestinians? What about the various injustices highlighted in the article I posted, or referred to by former President Carter? Do you have no issues with any of those at all?

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troberg
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troberg     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
However, my belief is that it is the Jews who have been confined to a little corner of the Arab world, and they are even begrudged that. This is not exactly like apartheid, but has its similarities.
Are they? There are Jews all over the world, and most of them are quite happy with their situation, on some world population average scale guesstimate thingy.

The israelis, on the other hand, are confined in a little corner, but that has little to do with race and much to do with nationality, so I'm not really prepared to call it apartheid. Yes, most israelis are Jews, but that's not the issue.

Israel is also the part in the conflict that is operating from a position of strength. Even though they are small on the map, they pack a punch that few nations in the world can match and no nations in the vicinity can match. That makes it even hardet to say that they are the ones discriminated against.

--------------------
/Troberg

Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
Getting stuck on semantics will not bring the issue anywhere closer to a solution or even understanding.

This, from someone who refuses to capitalize the word "Israel?"

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Archie2K
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 01 posted      Profile for Archie2K   Author's Homepage   E-mail Archie2K   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
I am also critical of Israel, on grounds that lack of consistently firm response to attacks (for example, withholding of counterbattery fire) ultimately prolongs the conflict.

I'm curious as to how you think this would work out. My reading of history is that every aggressive step Israel has taken in the name of security as been untimately counter productive. The establishment of buffer zones of settlements on the West Bank primarily has only strengthened the Palestinian cause and helped create a fourty years and counting conflict.

More recently, the Israeli attacks against Hezbollah don't seem to have weakened the group but did affect a large number of lives who are now likely to be more sympathetic to Hezbollah and their cause.

If Israel were to increase the strength of its repercussions to terrorism what do you think would happen? I don't foresee the Palestinian people deciding to give up. It is only likely to strengthen them.

Sad as it is, the ultimate ending may be when all sides realise that violence isn't going to get anywhere. I'll probably get stomped on by Dara for an irrelevent Northern Ireland analogy but here goes. It wasn't until the extermists on both sides had realised that violence wasn't going to achieve anything and that negotiation was the only way forward could a settlement be reached. The crashing of most expansionist parties in the 2006 Israeli elections may indicate moves towards a more concilliatory approach (as did 1999 I guess). It remains to be seen if the Hamas led government will reach the same conclusion soon. I'm sure it'll happen in my lifetime.

--------------------
Vox populi vox canem

Posts: 1985 | From: Reading, England | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Archie2K:
. . . I'll probably get stomped on by Dara for an irrelevent Northern Ireland analogy but here goes. It wasn't until the extermists on both sides had realised that violence wasn't going to achieve anything and that negotiation was the only way forward could a settlement be reached.


He may stomp on me, too, for I see it the same way. When enough people are ready to accept a compromise in order to end the killing, then a peace process has a chance.

The "stick" won't work, but maybe the world can offer enough "carrots" to the region to stabilize it. (Outright bribery helped bring Egypt to peace with Israel; why not keep it up?)

quote:

I'm sure it'll happen in my lifetime.

Well...I hope so, but, as the saying goes, "We should live so long..."

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by E. Q. Taft:
However (he claims), in the occupied territories, in the West Bank and Gaza, it's another story entirely. Carter claims the oppression of Palestinians there is, in his opinion, worse than the oppression of blacks during apartheid.

I've give you this much -- I would rather raise my children in a Bantustan than a war zone.

My observation is that when Israel unilaterally withdraws from territory without a peace treaty (West Bank self-rule starting in 1994, Gaza in 2000, Southern Lebanon in 2005), the result is an intensified war zone on both sides.

The war zone is, to be sure, worse on the Palestinian side, because they are, I think, very slowly losing the war. Despite all Jimmy Carter's anti-Israel statements, he unwittingly essentially admits this in recommending the Palestinians take a worse deal than was available to them in past generations.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
So your only criticism of Israel is that they aren't tough enough on the Palestinians? What about the various injustices highlighted in the article I posted, or referred to by former President Carter? Do you have no issues with any of those at all?

This may be a bit too complicated to go into fully here. While on the right of the Israeli spectrum, I do have limits, and would not give Gaza City the fate that (and I know you may not approve of this either) the UK and US gave to Hamburg.* There are some things I might do, if made the King of Israel, that the outside would like (get tougher on Jewish residents of the West Bank who harass Arab neighbors), but there are so many others where I would be perceived as worse (always fire back when shelled; conscript Israelis from every community), that it would be hypocritical of me to criticize Israel's human rights record.

This quote from chapter 7 of Carter's book, linked in the OP ABC story, illustrates how far off the mark his camp is, even at its best:

quote:
Jonathan Kuttab, Palestinian human rights lawyer: "Everybody knows what it will take to achieve a permanent and lasting peace that addresses the basic interests of both sides: It's a two-state solution. It's withdrawal to 1967 borders. It's dismantlement of the settlements. It's some kind of shared status for a united Jerusalem, the capital of both parties. The West Bank and Gaza would have to be demilitarized to remove any security threats to Israel. Some kind of solution would have to be reached for the refugee problem, some qualified right of return, with compensation.
Qualified right of return? Who gets to return? Rich Palestinians? Or Palestinians who saved certain papers? Or who left at certain times? Kuttab's well-meaning proposal is a guarantee of near civil war conditions among Palestinians who did and did not make the cut. And Arab states would jockey to see who could best take advantage of the outrage. Of course, the reason Kattub is suggesting a compromise "qualified right of return" is to prevent conflict, not create it. But not everything can be compromised. Borders can be compromised, but the Palestinian dream of how everything was better before we left cannot. Either all the Palestinian who want to get to go back, or none do. If some do, or none do, the Western powers, along with those like Jonathan Kuttab, will be blamed for creating a second Palestinian catastrophe.

Diplomacy only works when there is a basis for compromise and the sides are close. An imposed settlement, which is the only way to achieve Carter's vision, will just create new variants on old patterns of warfare.

___________________________
* This is not because I am better or worse than the World War II generation, but because today's more precise weapons allow some modest improvements in how we fight wars.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
. . . Either all the Palestinian who want to get to go back, or none do. . . .

One compromise, of course, would be that those specific Palestinians who fled could return, but not any additional people, even family members.

I very much doubt anyone would accept it...but it would make *some* sense.

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
There are Jews all over the world, and most of them are quite happy with their situation, on some world population average scale guesstimate thingy.

This may be true, but we are getting close to the point where most of the world's Jews live in Israel. That's is due both to a relatively high birth rate for Israeli Jews, and the large migration of Jews to Israel since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

See: More than 1/4 of French Jews considering emigration, poll says

That was back in 2003, and the postion accorded to the Jews of France (perhaps the third largest Jewish community after Israel and the US) doesn't seem to be improving:

quote:
Along came Yanniv Hazout, 25, a Paris supporter who had come to the game sporting the colors of his favorite club, Hapoel. With shouts of "kill the Jews", and "the dirty Jew must die," the mob set after the fleeing Hazout. Spotting a lynching in the making, plain-clothes policeman Antoine Granomort thrust himself between Hazout and the mob, fending off kicks and punches with sprays of tear gas. With the horde's racist frenzy escalating at the sight of the Jewish Hazout shielded by Granomont, who is black, the cop pulled out his service revolver, ordered his attackers to back off, and fired shots when they surged anew. One of those bullets injured a PSG fan before its ricochet killed Julien Quemener — a 25-year-old season ticket holder. Amid the recoil and confusion, Granomont spirited Hazout into a nearby McDonald's, which the band of thugs then besieged before police reinforcements arrived.
American blacks lived under such conditions for generations, and without any Antoine Granomorts at the ready to protect them. However, I would question how happy this makes people. At least in Israel there is more guarantee of finding a local Granomort.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troberg
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troberg     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
This may be true, but we are getting close to the point where most of the world's Jews live in Israel. That's is due both to a relatively high birth rate for Israeli Jews, and the large migration of Jews to Israel since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Frankly, I don't feel much sympathy for someone who willingly moves to a war zone, then complains that there is a war going on. Sorry, but they've made their bed, now they got to sleep in it.

--------------------
/Troberg

Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:


That was back in 2003, and the postion accorded to the Jews of France (perhaps the third largest Jewish community after Israel and the US) doesn't seem to be improving:

quote:
Along came Yanniv Hazout, 25, a Paris supporter who had come to the game sporting the colors of his favorite club, Hapoel. With shouts of "kill the Jews", and "the dirty Jew must die," the mob set after the fleeing Hazout. Spotting a lynching in the making, plain-clothes policeman Antoine Granomort thrust himself between Hazout and the mob, fending off kicks and punches with sprays of tear gas. With the horde's racist frenzy escalating at the sight of the Jewish Hazout shielded by Granomont, who is black, the cop pulled out his service revolver, ordered his attackers to back off, and fired shots when they surged anew. One of those bullets injured a PSG fan before its ricochet killed Julien Quemener — a 25-year-old season ticket holder. Amid the recoil and confusion, Granomont spirited Hazout into a nearby McDonald's, which the band of thugs then besieged before police reinforcements arrived.
American blacks lived under such conditions for generations, and without any Antoine Granomorts at the ready to protect them. However, I would question how happy this makes people. At least in Israel there is more guarantee of finding a local Granomort.
Oh come on, Steve. The deplorable actions of a group of PSG fans to a supporter of an Israeli football club say nothing about conditions for Jewish people in France in general. You're over-reaching quite dramatically here. Do better.

It is interesting, however, that you condemn French society for this one incident, which has after all provoked widespread condemnation and debate in France about the existence of racism and anti-semitism in French football, particularly in Paris, yet you seem to condone the human-rights abuses of Palestinians that seem to be endemic to Israeli society and some of which are enshrined in law.

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
NancyFancyPants
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for NancyFancyPants     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:
quote:
What happenned to expelling Israeli Jews back to Western countries from which they may or may not have come? Do you now favor peace on the basis of making the results of the 1948 Israeli War of Independence AKA Nabka (catastrophe) permanent?
No, I still favour a complete restoration of Palestinian rule of the area. What I wrote above was what I consider the bare minimum for some kind of peace.
Can you tell me when Palestinians last ruled the area that is now Israel? And with a cite?

--------------------
And on the 7th day, God said, "Let there be lips!"

Posts: 296 | From: Munhall, PA | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
It is interesting, however, that you condemn French society . . .

Never did it. Every society has its strengths and weaknesses. I condemn society, or at least government, in Sudan or North Korea, for reasons we could discuss. But the French government, and the great majority of the French people, are against attacks on Jews, and Freedom House properly gives France the highest ratings.

Having said that, I do notice a fair number of statements like this, both in Jewish and general media:

quote:
Michael Murciano, 30, speaking in his bakery, said: "If the economic situation was not so unfavourable there I would go to Israel. Since the second Intifada, anti-Semitism has definitely worsened in France. I do not feel safe to go anywhere wearing a kippa. . . .

Yaguil Allouche, 38, who runs a bookshop, said: "Most of the Jewish people I know, whether they are religious or not, whether they are on the right or on the left of the political spectrum, want to leave France.

Paranoid? It all depends on how high a bar you set for your personal acceptance. I just brought this stuff up to refute Troberg's claim that "There are Jews all over the world, and most of them are quite happy with their situation."

In as much as Troberg's statement comes close to being true, it is because the Jews in Arab countries have almost all fled to Israel.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
It is interesting, however, that you condemn French society . . .

Never did it. Every society has its strengths and weaknesses.



Oh, come on, Steve. You made a direct comparison between the way in which Jews are treated in France and the way in which African-Americans were historically treated in the United States; presumably alluding in particular to lynching. I consider that, if not a condemnation of the society, at least a critique. Like I said, you over-reached quite dramatically, and should do better.

To be honest, I'm not sure if your selective editing of my post was to take my remark out of context, or to duck out of responding to the second part, where I pointed out that you have conspicuously failed to criticise the various human-rights abuses and democracy deficit inflicted on Palestinians by Israel.


quote:
Paranoid? It all depends on how high a bar you set for your personal acceptance. I just brought this stuff up to refute Troberg's claim that "There are Jews all over the world, and most of them are quite happy with their situation."

In as much as Troberg's statement comes close to being true, it is because the Jews in Arab countries have almost all fled to Israel.

WEll, that's fair enough. Troberg's statement was foolish, and I always think it's unwise in these sort of debates to admit that one's pulling facts out of one's bahookey.

I agree that Jews in Arab countries, and other Muslim nations like Iran, have often faced persecution, discrimination and indeed in some cases death purely because of their religion/ethnicity. I condemn that utterly. Moreover, I condemn the hostility of these same Arab and other predominantly Muslim countries towards the existence of the state of Israel.

Now, do you condemn or do you condone the persecution, discrimination and indeed threat of death faced by many Palestinians in Israel and the occupied terrorities?

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
To be honest, I'm not sure if your selective editing of my post was to take my remark out of context, or to duck out of responding to the second part, where I pointed out that you have conspicuously failed to criticize the various human-rights abuses and democracy deficit inflicted on Palestinians by Israel.

Rightly or wrongly, my impression is that lately, when posters stick up for Israel's right to vigorously fight the bitter war it has been engaged in since its founding, you find some little part where the defender of Israel mentioned that some people don't actually judge Jews or Israelis by the same standards they would apply to others, and you make the issue one of when one is allowed to use the term antisemitism. It seemed to me you were doing the same with me, so that's the part I choose to respond to.

As for the "democracy deficit" Israel inflicts on the Palestinians, I think I already indicated how I see this. Short of World War II style indiscriminate destruction of cities and town, the Israelis should fight back harder. If I was an Israeli, I would be rather far to the right, perhaps voting for Natan Sharansky. I wouldn't turn Ramallah into a Dresden, but I certainly would blockade Palestinian cities, as that is shown to be an effective way to reduce successful attacks on Israel. This is a very long war, but no war lasts forever. Eventually, one side will indeed tire of the fight, and it will matter who it is.

"In War: Resolution; In Defeat: Defiance; In Victory: Magnanimity; In Peace: Good Will"
-- you know who

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
Now, do you condemn or do you condone the persecution, discrimination and indeed threat of death faced by many Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories?

Under the state of warfare existing, the Palestinian Arab welfare priority for Israel frankly has to be those who are loyal to it, ranging from the lowliest West Bank "collaborator" to Major General Hussein Fares, head of the Israeli Border Police.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
Now, do you condemn or do you condone the persecution, discrimination and indeed threat of death faced by many Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories?

Under the state of warfare existing, the Palestinian Arab welfare priority for Israel frankly has to be those who are loyal to it, ranging from the lowliest West Bank "collaborator" to Major General Hussein Fares, head of the Israeli Border Police.
But the point is that these people are also treated as second-class citizens in Israel. For example, the various government policies to maintain the existing demographic balance in Jerusalem, including for example land confiscation, removal of citizenship and denial of basic services doesn't differentiate between 'good' Palestinians and 'bad' Palestinians.

More to the point, surely regarding one section of the community as second-class citizens merely perpetuates the conflict, and reinforces the resentment that leads to the current war situation. Not to mention that it offers a quasi-justification to the other Arab and Muslim countries who persecute their Jewish population; it's very easy after all to deem an ethnic group as 'disloyal.'

Incidentally, do you believe that Jews who oppose the current policies of the Israeli regime should face denial of basic human and democratic rights? Surely they're disloyal as well? Or is your 'loyalty test' something which is only applied to one ethnicity?

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by Dara bhur gCara:
To be honest, I'm not sure if your selective editing of my post was to take my remark out of context, or to duck out of responding to the second part, where I pointed out that you have conspicuously failed to criticize the various human-rights abuses and democracy deficit inflicted on Palestinians by Israel.

Rightly or wrongly, my impression is that lately, when posters stick up for Israel's right to vigorously fight the bitter war it has been engaged in since its founding, you find some little part where the defender of Israel mentioned that some people don't actually judge Jews or Israelis by the same standards they would apply to others, and you make the issue one of when one is allowed to use the term antisemitism. It seemed to me you were doing the same with me, so that's the part I choose to respond to.


I presume you're referring to the whole Halfpint Mindy "anti-semitic Left" thing. You can use the term "anti-semitism" any time you like, Steve, but expect to be challenged if you think isolated incidents at football matches are comparable to state-sanctioned discrimination in terms of housing or access to vital services. Or draw a parallel between the Jim Crow era in the US and conditions for Jewish people in modern France.

By the same token, and in the same spirit of frankness about the subtext of one another's posts, you have a tendency to respond to criticisms of Israel's human rights record with posts about how tough Jews have it everywhere else. These may or may not be true, (in the case of France, your first post was certainly, doubtless inadvertently, misleading) but they don't say anything about whether or not the various critiques are right or not. Yes Israel is in an invidious position regarding its neighbours, yes Israel is engaged in an existential struggle, but that doesn't make the way in which the Palestinians are treated right.

With regards to the rest of your post, well, I think you're wrong. I don't think the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be decided by a conventional victory on either side; but by some sort of compromise between the two. I certainly think that the abuses of human-rights carried out by the Israelis perpetuate the conflict, rather than bring its close any closer, in much the same way as the much milder human-rights abuses of the UK government perpetuated the resentment that exacerbated the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Quite apart from being wrong in pure Manichean terms, the behaviour of Israel towards its Palestinian subjects is impractical, and just exacerbates the conflict.

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Archie2K:
My reading of history is that every aggressive step Israel has taken in the name of security as been untimately counter productive.


Have you read this:

The cycle of Violence: An Empirical Analysis of Fatalities in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict

The weakness in the above link is that it only goes back to year 2000. I think the same results would have been obtained if they had gone back to 1950, or 1900, or 1800. However, no one seems to have done the depressing tasks of adding up body counts from yellowing newspapers, so it is a moot point as to whether Zionism as a whole saved Palestinian Jewish and Israeli lives. But the evidence for the recent past seems clear.

quote:

The establishment of buffer zones of settlements on the West Bank primarily has only strengthened the Palestinian cause and helped create a forty years and counting conflict.


Forty years? You may want to read more about this conflict. For example, as a percentage of Israel's population, the hundreds killed in 1950's attacks on Israeli civilians seem to me greater than those killed in the infitadahs.

The world would be a wonderful place if turning the other cheek to those trying to kill you usually worked. Every conflict is different, to be sure.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Freshman
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Freshman   Author's Homepage   E-mail Freshman   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Has anyone heard that Israel apparently supported Hamas in the late 80s? I do agree with Dara that both countries should come to a compromise

--------------------
"High-Five!" - Borat

Posts: 1056 | From: Racine, WI | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Tarquin Farquart
The First USA Noel


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Tarquin Farquart   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freshman:
Has anyone heard that Israel apparently supported Hamas in the late 80s?

It's possible, although unlikely, as at that time Hamas were the opposition to the mostly secular PLO.

--------------------
I shall baffle you with cabbages and rhinoceroses in the kitchen and incessant quotations from "Now We Are Six" through the mouthpiece of Lord Snooty's giant poisoned electric head. So there!

Posts: 802 | From: London, UK | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Dara bhur gCara
As Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Buy Now Pay Later


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dara bhur gCara     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tarquin Farquart:
quote:
Originally posted by Freshman:
Has anyone heard that Israel apparently supported Hamas in the late 80s?

It's possible, although unlikely, as at that time Hamas were the opposition to the mostly secular PLO.
Well, there is some circumstantial evidence to show that Israel supported the development of Islamist groups in Palestine in the 1970s, to act as a bulwark against Fatah and the PLO. Certainly, radical Islamic groups and the Islamic University were authorised by the Israeli military authority to receive payments from abroad. These Islamist groups were at the time predominantly involved in social welfare, and didn't evolve into an armed struggle liberation/terrorist group until the First Intifada.

Wikipedia on Hamas

quote:
According to the Israeli weekly Koteret Rashit (October 1987), "The Islamic associations as well as the [Islamic university - founded in 1978 in Gaza] had been supported and encouraged by the Israeli military authority" in charge of the (civilian) administration of the West Bank and Gaza. "They [the Islamic associations and the university] were authorized to receive money payments from abroad." By the end of 1992, there were 600 mosques in Gaza. Hamas attracted members through preaching and charitable work before spreading its influence into trade unions, universities, bazaars, professional organizations and local government political races beginning in December 2004. “Thanks to Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad (Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks), the Islamists were allowed to reinforce their presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, the members of Fatah (Movement for the National Liberation of Palestine) and the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression”, according to L'Humanité.[48] Indeed Israel supported and encouraged Hamas' early growth in an effort to undermine the secular Fatah movement of Yasser Arafat.[49] According to UPI, Israel supported Hamas starting in the late 1970s as a "counterbalance to the Palestine Liberation Organization".[50] At that time, Hamas's focus was on "religious and social work".
That is not the same as saying that Israel supported Hamas, though, any more than the US' support for various mujahideen during the Afghan liberation struggle was tantamount to supporting the Taliban.

--------------------
This wrinkle in time, I can't give it no credit, I thought about my space and it really got me down.
Got me so down, I got me a headache, My heart is crammed in my cranium and it still knows how to pound


Posts: 2794 | From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2