Which is it? I’m becoming confused.
But then again, terrorist-flag-waving scarfnecks* screaming “the Jews are our dogs” all look alike to me.
Which is it? I’m becoming confused.
But then again, terrorist-flag-waving scarfnecks* screaming “the Jews are our dogs” all look alike to me.
Rallies are for the most part emotional rather than rational expressions. That’s what they are geared to do..express black and white positions..and usually in extreme terms. There are certainly rallies based around a ‘gray’ or non-conentious position which don’t operate in extreme support for or support against, such as rallies to support our troops. But most rallies are gatherings expressing emotional extremes.
Rallies are examples of mob behaviour. Mob behaviour, whether expressed in hysteric running from a Yelling of Fire, or looting or vicious attacks on people, are unique extremes of humans which are somehow primarily expressed within the crowd or mob experience.
Therefore, to take a rally as the true expression of a whole population or of a whole situation is, in my view, an error. This is the same whether the rally is about Israel-Gaza or about abortion or about the Iraq War.
That’s because the extreme positions are strangely enough, only found and only taken up by us when the reality is very complex and the reality can’t be reduced to black and white. So, emotions reduce the complex situation to black and white.
As I’ve said, the situation in Gaza isn’t that simple and can’t be reduced to the binarism of ALL Israel/Jews are good; and ALL Gaza/Arabs are bad. Life isn’t that simple.
Again, there are THREE problems in the ME, overlapping, entwined, but with different causes. If we ignore this complexity and deal with only the reductionist causes, we won’t solve the problem.
The I-P situation is complex, caused by both Israel and the Arab states. Israel’s settlement of the West Bank, its obvious intention of holding on to this land, its radically unfair treatment of Palestinians in the two areas (WB & G), its economic destruction of Gaza – are one cause of unrest and anger.
The Arab States have both stood back and enabled Israel’s settlements and actions because they have no desire for Palestinians to have their own democratic state; Palestinians are, among Arabs, the lowest of the low and the Arab States, as tribal, don’t want any hint of democracy in their midst.
Islamic fascism, a creature of the 19th c, arising from this dysfunctional tribalism, is yet another cause of unrest in the ME. The unrest ought to be internal, a civil fight against a tribal political system by a desperate middle class. Instead, this anger is readily diverted by the Arab/Persian states to focus on the West’s capitalism, democracy..and Israel.
Finally, there is Iranian imperialism, an agenda of a Persian state to take over the Arab world.
All of these combine into a complex morass. Add to that, the orthodox ideologies of both Islamic and Judaic religions, which are highly similar to each other in their treatment of non-members of the group…and it’s nightmare.
But, reducing this complexity to ONE causal factor, eg, All Arabs hate Jews, won’t even tough the other causes, and certainly won’t solve even one of them.
Here’s a small reaction of extremism within the Israeli Parliament. It won’t stand up in court; my point is the anger and isolation is as much in Israel as it is in the Arab states.
Israel bans Arab political parties
ET, it can be very simple, very black and white.That’s because the rallies have nothing to do with the present situation and are all about an expression of Muslim anger at the Jews themselves, and their continued existence.
Sometimes things are black and white, and as such need black and white solutions.
One would be a crack down on the radical imams here, arrest those incite violence and stop the importation of those who cause the trouble.
Be the one holding the big stick, literally and figuratively.
kursk – I think you’d need some proof of “Muslim anger at the continued existence of Jews’.
I don’t think it’s valid for ALL Muslims and that’s my point about the error of black and white decisions. Such decisions are primarily functional in mechanical systems (light switch on/off) or in particular situations (This butter is rancid). But not in general situations.
After all, there are many Muslims and Jews here in N. America who work together and don’t share that sentiment. Same thing in Europe.
I certainly agree with you about a crackdown on radical imams (or any radical preacher). The radical imams are in particular, preaching Islamic fascism. I agree with criminal charges against those how incite violence; these are already on our books in Section 318, 319 of the criminal code. I also agree with not allowing people in who advocate such an agenda. As I’ve said before, Australia has an excellent Visa and Immigration Code, which they developed in 2007, where all Visa/Immigration entrants much sign an agreement to honour Australian rule of law, and its basic concepts of equality, democracy, etc, etc.
My concern in many of these rallies, and blog posts, is the unilateral approach, which generalizes ALL people of one faith/ethnicity into one Mass, attributes similar agendas, beliefs, behaviour to all of them, freezes them into a stereotype and rejects any differences among them, rejects any capacity for thought, reason and change.
The situation in the ME is extremely complex; based on centuries of rules and laws among both Muslims and Jews, based on realities of behaviour since 1948 by BOTH sides of the issue, mixed in with the political morass of the Arab/Persian tribal political structure..and so on. Mix it up together and you don’t get a perfect cake; you get a horror story – and it can’t be fixed with simple, one-level, one-issue solutions.
ET for your own benefit get educated on Islam, its Koran, Hadiths and history; otherwise you continue making a fool of yourself by spouting liberal rubbish – “the situation in the ME is extremely complex; based on centuries of rules and laws among both Muslims and Jews…” To believe that this is only about Muslims and Jews indicates ignorance of Islam and what all these devout Muslims say and practise. And the problem did not being in 1948 as you claim.
These mobs inciting violence and murder on Canadian soil are no more accepting of you or any other non Muslim. Unless you are prepared to accept your inferior status as a non Muslim and worse as a woman.
This is not immigration its invasion.
Am I the only rightwinger who looks at these slavering mobs and thinks to himself: “Baton Charge!”
Time to study Roman Army thrust tactics. Works really well with a cylindrical shield and a nightstick…
“Maak Skoon!”
ET: Mein Kampf is a non-stop bestseller in the region. As is The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which has even been done recently as a popular TV series. Hitler is extremely popular. As you know they had their own Hitler in the Brit-appointed Haj Amin al-Husseini who attempted to get Hitler to help with a Palestine holocaust. I could go on, and on, and on. The schools, the mosques.
In fact, I honestly believe that Jew-hatred is even more extreme than Hitler’s, being doctrinal!
No ET, this wasn’t just a emotional mob blowout. All through Europe we’re seeing attacks against Jews who have nothing to do with Israel. 1930s style anti-semitism is upon us. The feint of mere anti-Zionism has been exploded.
Again, you’re too cerebral on this topic, too academic.
You simply can’t understand this conflict without getting the visceral hatred of Jews. And you can’t understand that until you get what Islam is.
Again, liberal cognitive egocentrism; again, no street smarts on this subject which, sorry, is not at all complex. It’s: get all Jews out of all Palestine even though they inhabit only about 10% of the initial mandate, even though they inhabit only a small fraction of 1% of the land mass of the Arabs.
Smacking forehead with palm of right hand. Promised I wouldn’t get entangled in this anymore.
ET, ET, I cannot agree with you.
I’m a pro-lifer and have been to many pro-life rallies in my day. Long ago, the deranged pro-aborts.—radical feminists like Judy Rebick (she’s one of the saner ones!) and other left wing, anti-Christian whackos—and the pro-lifers used to sometimes be in the same place at the same time: when the pro-lifers had a demonstration and the opposition came to wreak havoc—if they could.
Honestly, the pro-lifers were generally moderate, good humoured, serious too, and often prayerful. The lefty opposition behaved like the Muslims: sneering, rude, demeaning, screeching, and threatening: think the worst of the lefty trolls (Robert McClelland) we see here.
This idea of equivalency doesn’t wash, ET, because it simply is NOT true. Pro-Israel rallies are an entirely different kettle of fish from the howling Muslim mobs—right here, in a neighbourhood near you, in Canada. (If I hear of a pro-Israel rally near me, I’ll be there.)
You would know which logical fallacy you are using to falsely say, “If A = B, and B = C, then A = C”, when it’s absolutely clear that A (Muslim extremists) DOES NOT EQUAL B (those of us who aren’t extremists, who support Israel, and are altogether appalled and sickened by the Muslim hordes’ dangerous, adult toddler behaviour, right in the middle of our communities).
ET, I cannot agree with this, what seems to me, disingenuous, analysis of yours: all rallies are most definitely NOT the same. E.g., No other religious group I know of actually KILLS people in mob rage because of cartoons about them—and all religions are lampooned. Some anti-Jew and -Christian cartoons I’ve seen are infinitely more offensive than the quite mild Danish ones the deranged Muslim Street—yes, ET, these people are deranged—felt justified to kill for.
How you can say, “A rally is a rally is a rally” is quite beyond reasonableness, IMO.
“Two Police Officers Sustain Head Injuries as Pro-Palestinian rally in New York turns violent”
While sad to hear, at least the NYPD has the bollocks to confront evil. In Britain, the bobbies in their green ‘safety vests’ simply retreat to the cries of “run you cowardly bastards”.
“I wonder if all the references to Nasarallah and Hezbollah mean that the word has gone out to the agitators that Hamas is finished”
Not at all. It’s simply a case of ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’. We’ll go back to the normallacy of throwing one another them off of tall buildings shortly.
“I wonder if Sid Ryan can see that his protestations (a letter in last weeks National Post) that he is not a racist or an anti-semite.”
Semite, schmemite. Ryan is just your garden variety communist and these rallies are merely one of the tools in his kit. End justifies the means and all that.
People! Start the ball rolling by writing the CHRC and Stephen Harper, Dalton McGuinty and David Miller regarding the anti-Israel protests in Toronto (or substitute appropriate names for your location). Don’t hide behind your e-mail address. Give them your real name and phone number!
Another interesting argument/analogy would be the liberal views on our native Canadian brethren. Apparently we owe them because they were here first. Was Jesus a Jew? Allegedly. So Jews were in existence before Christians. And did Mo start to rape and pillage in the name of Allah in or around 680 AD? Seems like the Jews were in the general area of the current ME long before the Muslims.
So why the debate about whose land it is? Are the libs not consistent with their logic? (OK, forget that example….)
me no dhimmi – I disagree with your viewpoint. I also disagree that your ‘street smarts’ – (and you don’t define what this actually means), has some inherent capacity to understand reality over and above reason and experience. Your insistence that I don’t have ‘street smarts’ is puzzling, since you neither define what it is, how one achieves such a state – and you have no knowledge of me and my state. And no, I’m not ‘egocentric’. Nor am I Liberal. But I do reject reductionism of complex situations to simple binarisms.
I disagree with your red herring that Jews inhabit only 1% of the land mass of Arabs. That’s not the point. The issue is whether or not a state of Palestine, promised in 1948 – is possible. Nothing to do with your merging of Palestinians in as a part of ‘all Arabs’. Your view is obviously that since they are ‘Arabs’ then they should be content with the ownership of the ‘other Arabs’ in other ME states. But that’s not the issue.
Arabs are not homogeneous as you imply; there are differences of regional history, cultural and even dialect differences and hierarchies of respect and authority. The issue is about a Palestinian state, not ‘being an Arab’.
And what’s your proof that I don’t ‘get what Islam is’. I’ll guess, and I may be wrong, that I’ve read more of the primary texts, and secondary sources about Islam, than you have. And as well, am quite able to differentiate Islam from Islamic fascism – I’ve put quite a bit of time into research on fascism – and on Islamic fascism.
So, Alain, your claim that I know nothing about Islam etc is without foundation. Equally, I don’t claim that ‘this problem’ begain in 1948; what began then, was the problem of the division and legal status of Israel and Palestine.
My reference to centuries of rules about attitudes towards Other peoples among both Muslims and Jews refers to the hadith and Halakhas rules of both – and I’m sure you are familiar with both and can see how similar they are in treatment of non-members of the group.
lookout – I wasn’t talking about equivalenc of behaviour of the two SIDES in a rally (yes/no sides)!! Where did I say that BOTH sides are equally rabid? I was talking about issues and, for example, as you outline in the abortion rallies, you can get the same emotional hysteria about the abortion issue as in the Muslim rallies. Again, I was talking about emotional hysteria about an issue which can emerge in mobs, not about the two sides of an issue being emotionally equivalent.
Nor did I say that all rallies are the same. Indeed, I specifically said that they weren’t. Kindly react to what I wrote and not to what you incorrectly interpret. I said that there are rallies that are ‘grey’ rather than ‘black and white’.
And I’m NOT supporting such emotional hysteria! Where did I say this? Kindly show me. Nor did I say ‘a rally is a rally is a rally’.
What I said is that a ‘black and white’ or emotional rally, an extremist rally, is a mob situation, and as such, can’t be viewed as indicative of the emotional or intellectual nature of the WHOLE community which they claim, incorrectly, to represent.
I’m sure you know that the anti-cartoon rallies were deliberately set up by various radicalists – including their even adding three images which were never in the original set of cartoons. And in Syria, Lebanon etc – no rally is possible without government approval; they were political setups. But that’s another issue.
ET, I appreciate your response, but I’ll tell you something: the behaviour of the anti-abortion crew was a pretty good descriptor of the totalitarian, pro-death, anti-life fanatics they were/are.
And, now that “the abortion wars” have been declared over by the totalitarians, who are the anti-life, pro-death fanatics in the front seat? The Muslims. And, from personal experience, they make the pro-abort. lefties look like mere Orcs.
The Muslim’s Uruk-hai-like rally behaviour–have a look at the London one and a few others–should make the hair on the back of our necks stand on end. We’re mere meat to them.
I think you’ll find fault with my gut feeling, based on my on-the-ground experience for over three decades. But, professors don’t deal with the rank insubordination of sub-university students: public school teachers do, every day. We see student appeasement and FEEL teacher abasement–did I EVER identify with those outnumbered, humiliated police officers.
As I said, we’re mere lunch to the fanatic Muslims, who are already within our walls.
ET, you might like to construct another scenario. It’s a free country and you may do so. But I don’t think it helps us deal with the catastrophe that’s not so far away if we, as a society, continue to avert our delicate eyes and sensibilities.
ET has no credibility on this topic and insists on ignoring facts including the events and history of the non existent state of Palestine. In any case this is not about Gaza or Israel but about organised mobs on Canadian soil inciting violence and murder. It happens over and over with only the pretext or excuse changing, any pretext for outrage will do. Islam demands a superior status to all other religions or beliefs and these devout Muslims intend to make it so wherever they reside. This idea of supremacy is unique to Islam. There are no Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or any other demanding that everyone submit to their religion by right. Furthermore the never ending claim that the majority of Muslims (in Canada at least) are moderate and do not support this ideology is doubtful to say the least. Otherwise they would be turning out en masse to denounce these mobs. They have a much greater self-interest in this matter than anyone else.
Failure to apply the rule of law and continued tolerance of such intolerance can only result in the victory of barbarism over Western civilisation.
Merci beaucoup, Alain! I believe that what you say is the truth.
ET/lookout/Alain
Vitruvius had asked us for our “plan” to solve this conflict.
My #1 suggestion was to unwind UNRWA (United Nations Relief Works Agency) on the presmise that it perpetuates this conflict.
This piece from Wall Street Journal Europe (via Israpundit) supports my argument. ET, many of the points made here about demography/economics/war are right up your alley.
Ending the West’s Proxy War Against Israel
lookout – I know exactly what you undergo with the PC crowd. And you, and the others who tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about, totally misunderstand me. I’ve said right from the start, that we, in the West, have to fight against Islamic fascism. I’ve never said to ‘appease’ fascism or to ignore it. Quite the opposite.
How does one fight against Islamic fascism? The Iraq War, the Afghanistan war, is one tactic, which is to militarily free a country that has been taken over by a fascist dictatorship and enable them to move into democracy.
In the Western countries, refusing to allow multicultural relativism, refusing to allow the denigration of Western values of the rule of law, equality, democracy, etc. Prosecuting calls for and actions of violence and hate.
Supporting the development of Islamic reform and Islamic moderation. This includes NOT denying that Islamc can reform, not insisting that ALL Muslims are rabid haters, but instead, dealing with the reformists WITHIN Islam – and there are plenty of them. Funding them, publicizing them, helping them.
Moderates of any type are not going to be found at these radical rallies, alain, so don’t make the illogical claim that because they weren’t there, that they don’t exist. Remember, it was Muslim women who gathered together and got the Ontario govt to REFUSE to accept Sharia Law. Moderates exist – the fact that you’ve never heard of Salim Mansur, Tarek Fatah, Irshad Manji and her organization – and others (academics who write in journals about the means of reform of Islam)…well, that’s your problem.
What else have I previously advocated about Islamic fascism? Keeping out and deporting radical imams, radicals of any type. And being very clear about the difference between Islam, which can be modernized, and Islamic fascism, which is a political movement emerging from the tribal political structures of the ME.
Alain – you keep insisting, without supplying any data base or evidence, that I have no knowledge of Islam, that I have no ‘credibility’ on the topic. Perhaps to you, but you offer no proof of my ignorance.
me no dhimmi, I don’t think that your article provides any analytic force. What it ignores is that, in a functional (as opposed to dysfunctional) society, you won’t get a ‘youth bulge’; this has happened in the Arab states only due to fighting both internal civil wars, against each other (Iraq/Iran) and against Israel. What is also not considered is that this internal fighting is due to the tribal political and economic structure which has repressed the development and empowerment (politically and econmically) of a middle class. Until these states move out of tribalism, Islamic fascism will continue.
I posted this article the other day; I’m guessing none of you read it. I suggest that you do; it discusses the problems in the Arab states, due to their own refusal to modernize.
Hamas prefers war as an alternative to progress
I think you’ll find it an interesting and accurate article. As I’ve said, the situation in the ME is complex. There’s the I-P situation, and Israel’s denial of and hindrances to a Palestinian state can’t be brushed off lightly.
Then there’s Islamic fascism which has a completely different cause but which has readily moved into a branch, diverting its real focus (the internal politics of the Arab states)to the I-P situation.
And there’s Iran’s imperial agenda.
The fact that both Judaism and Islam have ancient traditions which the orthodox and conservatives in both religions still consider vital – which define how each treats others, and in particular, how Jews treat ‘Arabs’; and how Muslims treat Jews – I think that these traditions can be overcome. Certainly, in Judaism, the Reform Jew does not follow these rules.
But, I think it’s a great error to reduce this complexity to ALL Muslims hate Jews and so on. That won’t solve anything. Nothing. Instead, what has to be done is to recognize these three, and four and maybe more complex ‘threads’ in the ME situation, and deal with them ALL – rather than the utter simplistic view of ‘All Muslims hate Jews’..which solves nothing.
analytic force, ET?
It’s the most basic economic principle: you get less of what you tax, more of what you subsidize.
The Pal-Arabs dysfunctional culture is subsidized by the EU and the US; this funding cultivates large families — at a low level to be sure — who don’t need to work. As an aside, I can’t for the life of me figure out why it’s their responsbility. Nor is it Israel’s. It’s a welfare trap.
I had never meant to suggest that it’s the sole factor — but it’s a huge one. It’s 60 years ET. 3 generations. The UN is deliberately perpetuating this conflict because of its increasingly undisguised wish that Israel didn’t exist. Israel has NEVER been the aggressor. EVER.
I’ll say it again, and you know this: the Arab states created this mess. They should be fixing it. They have no incentive to fix it. They’re paying just 7%.
I’ll read the piece, but I already know that Hamas prefers war as an alternative to progress. So does Fatah by the way!
Which is why I favour the just war that Israel is fighting which Hamas STARTED, as did Hizbollah summer 2006.
I also continue to feel, but even more strongly than ever, that Israel is the fault line in Islam’s war against the West. Gound zero is the global jihad.
… forgot to mention:
That’s a straw-man argument ET: that NOT all Muslims hate Jews. No one thinks that. I certainly don’t. But you can’t deny that Jew-hatred is central to Islam and endemic to the region. And as pointed out earlier, Mein Kampf and the Protocols sell extremely well in the region.
I’ll make one serious criticism of Israel to placate you however. If I’m not mistaken, they brought in the PLO (right?) with the execrable Arafat as the “spokesman for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people”. And if I’m not mistaken they also funded Hamas in the early days as a kind of antidote to the “nationalist” PLO.
Disastrous errors, albeit well-intended.
ET, I appreciate your acknowledgement of my position, but, what do we do about the Muslim fanatics among us who are becoming ever more bold and bullying, in our streets, with, apparently, no one in authority willing to stop them?
You say that “In the Western countries, refusing to allow multicultural relativism, refusing to allow the denigration of Western values of the rule of law, equality, democracy, etc. [and] Prosecuting calls for and actions of violence and hate” should be happening. THEY AREN’T.
I believe that the Muslim fanatics we’ve recently seen, in the heart of our own communities, and the supremacy they champion are a clear and present danger, right now, right here.
You also say to, “me no dhimmi, I don’t think that your article provides any analytic force. What it ignores is that, in a functional (as opposed to dysfunctional) society, you won’t get a ‘youth bulge’”.
Guess what? WE live in a dysfunctional society. We now have a “Muslim bulge”: VERY bad for our health.
What about that—which, I think, is the topic of this thread?
Muslim bulge, lookout. Indeed.
As I never tire pointing out: just look at what’s happened to the UK with only about 3% muslim pop.
They had the cops on the run in that Islamo-Nazi demo in London. Sharia law. Multiple wives receiving welfare. No go zones. Holocaust removed from some school curricula.
I am truly spooked by Canada’s big city Muslim-Nazi demos.
ET says: In the Western countries, refusing to allow multicultural relativism, refusing to allow the denigration of Western values of the rule of law, equality, democracy, etc. Prosecuting calls for and actions of violence and hate.
Isn’t Israel also a Western country with Western values? As MND said, Israel is on the front line of the West’s war with Islamic terrorism.
If we are not going to allow multicultural relativism, then why would we equate orthodox Jews with orthodox Muslims? Orthodox/conservative synagogues do not rant about Arabs/Muslims. Take a visit to the Memri site to hear/read the sermons in mosques.
Oh and the link to the Haaretz article about not allowing the Arab parties to run in the upcoming elections – so what? so some right of center folks decided that actions should have consequences. If you cohort with the nation’s sworn enemies, should you be allowed to run or sit in government?
MND, I still cannot wrap my head around the fact that Israel (Peres and Rabin I think) managed be bring Arafat back after he and the PLO were driven out of Lebanon (by Sharon I think) and put far away in Tunisia. Israel actually brought him back and armed the PLO/PA so they could “police themselves”. hmm, that worked out well. Israel has too many socialist blockheads.
me no dhimmi, lookout
No, I don’t think that Jew-hatred is central to Islam, just as I don’t think that ‘goyim’ hatred is central to Judaism. Both cultures, however, stem from the same early isolationist tribal mentalities and are very clear about maintaining that purity of tribe. The settlers of the West Bank are an example of this isolationism and rejection of Others.
No, I don’t think that Israel’s big mistake was ‘bringing in’ (not sure what you mean) the PLO, which was started in 64, I think..and in 88, recognized a two-state solution, ie, recognized Israel.Arafat, admittedly totally corrupt, recognized Israel in 93. Israel, by the way, has never acknowledged the ‘right’ of a Palestinian state.
I think that Israel’s errors were and are, the refusal to acknowledge a Palestinian state, the settling of the West Bank, which ends any future Palestinian state, as well as its treatment of the Palestinians there (no water for irrigation, no road rights, harassment by settlers); its ending the economy of Gaza. In both cases, apart from the political rejection of recognition, the problem is Israel’s disabling the ability of Palestinians to have an economy, either in the ‘occupied territories’ or working in Israel. Such a repression, leads to reaction- anger. That’s why the Palestinians require external international aid – because they aren’t able to have any economy in either the West Bank or Gaza – and the fault for this, is Israel’s control of water, hydro, borders.
And do you think that these settlements which are military-supported takeovers of Palestinian farms and property, this denigration of any economic viability in the WB and Gaza – is not an act of aggression?
ex-liberal, for these far-right parties in Israel to define the Israeli Arabs as ‘like all Arabs’ is ‘racist’ and a rejection of their existence and participation in Israeli life. The Israeli arabs are not Hamas.
lookout, no, Canada is not dysfunctional in the same way that the Arab/Persian states are dysfunctional. We have a middle class in power over our political and economic agenda (though the Coalition was/is trying to take this power away from us!).
The fact of multiculturalism IS a serious problem in Europe and Canada, but we do have the right and power to change it – and more and more voices are being expressed and heard – about this. What is required is more court cases that reject violence and 318-9 hatred.
No, Israel isn’t on the front line for the West against Islamic fascism. Iraq and Afghanistan are. The reason for this, is because democracy and the development of a middle class must emerge within an Islamic state. It’s totally irrelevant to the Muslim population if it emerges in a non-Islamic state. Instead, Israel is functioning as an excuse for Islamic fascism, when the real cause of Islamic fascism is the internal infrastructure of the Arab states.
ex-liberal, don’t merge Islamic fascism with Islam. What I’m saying is that orthodox Judaism and orthodox Islam are extremely similar in their traditional rules of self-definition, definition of and correct behaviour towards Others not of the tribe. Such similarities are understandable since both ideologies emerged within similar areas of the world and cultures. What orthodox Islam needs is the reform movement that also enabled Jews to operate in an industrial global world. This takes time and an agenda that reform is needed. It also requires that the non-Islamic world insist on modernization.
ET: I read your link, “Hamas prefers war as an alternative to progress by Sami Alabaa.
If you agree with this piece we have more common ground than we realize for I agree with every word and punctuation mark in it.
From the piece:
“The “struggle” of Hamas is backed by Islamists across the globe. [that’s what we’ve been saying: jihad]
… consumed Hamas propaganda; they allege that the israeli blockade has caused abject misery in Gaza …. but who is to blame …. stops … launching it missiles … the blocade will be lifted[exactly what we’ve been saying]
Also note, his accurate stereotyping which you’d take us to task for! [not ALL Arabs, etc]
– we Arabs are very good as twisting facts and exaggerating them. [bingo]
– we Arabs also prefer to be mystical, wishful rather than realistic [bingo]
– violence is the only “argument” we possess. Rational, realistic thinking has never been a part of our discourse [bingo, Vitruvius made this point in a cryptic comment]
“All Israelis and decent Arabs would be grateful to the Israeli army if it rids us from those thugs. We want to live in peace”.
YES. But you were against the military action which any just and fair-minded person should see as absolutely unavoidable in this situation. I can’t for the life of me imagine a more cut and dried casus belli!
Your lack of realism [what I call your lack of street smarts] is not realizing that Hamas can’t just be by-passed with some kind of “outreach” programme!
ex-liberal, indeed, the Labour party – socialist blockheads. I saw something the other day that had me laughing out loud: Peres said something to the effect that “No one knows why Hamas is firing rockets into Israel”.
ET: You are wrong when you say that Arafat recognized Israel’s right to exist. He made vague comments to this effect, but you know what modern love birds say, “if you love me … put it in writing”. Arafat never removed the clause calling for the destruction of Israel. The PLO/Fatah objective remains all of Palestine for the Arabs.
And again, Fatah — the slow jihadis — are no better. It is only a question of tactics — waiting for the right time. In the jihadi world for example, there was much controversy about the wisdom of 9/11 (as it might awake the dozing infidel).
Arafat made it crystal clear to his Arab interolcutors — in Arabic — that any state would be a mere staging ground for the final assault. I could find some quotes if you insist.
Where oh where is the Arab Gandhi, the Arab Mandella!!??
me no dhimmi – yes, I agree with the article but not with its generalizations. After all, as a realist, I’m against all generalizations of human beings. You cannot, ever, say that ALL Arabs, or ALL Israelis or ALL Canadians..and so on. It just isn’t a valid statement. So, I took his views in the metaphorical way in which I think he wrote them.
I’ve said frequently that Islamic fascism has moved into the I-P conflict, but I maintain that they are two separate issues and must be addressed by two different strategies.
As for the Gaza war, I remain opposed to it. I think that Israel’s refusal to acknowledge a Palestinian state, its settlement of the West Bank which effectively denies any such state in the future, its economic restrictions on the Palestinians of the West Bank and its economic breakup of the Gazan economy – were/are terrible policies. To separate the Palestinians from the fascists, I suggest that you enable the Palestinians to have a robust economy; then, they will turn against the fascists. This is what has happened in Iraq.
No, Arafat wrote a public letter to Israel, September 9, 1993 acknowledging Israel’s right to exist. Here it is (and by the way, thanks for helping me set these inserts up).
Letter from Arafat
Fatah is corrupt and hasn’t helped the Palestinians. However, my view is that if Israel were genuinely committed to a Palestinian state then it would never, ever, have settled the West Bank. Why settle it unless you intend to own it, and as we know, Sharon and others had such intentions.
What, in my view, ought to have been done, is for Israel to acknowledge a Palestinian state, NOT settled the West Bank, but worked to set up a very close economic and political deal for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Enabled them to have a robust economy. Instead, Israel won’t allow Palestinians water for irrigation in the WB, won’t allow them to use the roads, allows settlers to take their lands..etc. And in Gaza, cuts off water and hydro and closes the border.
The first ‘state of feeling’ and existence of a people is their economy. If they have no food, no homes, no hope of living – you’ll drive them into the arms of the ideologues, the people who talk violence and ideas and future agendas. Israel ought to have worked with the local man-on the ground Palestinian, and enabled them to co-exist economically, with Israel.
But Israel didn’t do this. Why not? Because it wants the West Bank for itself. It hopes the Palestinians will simply disappear into the ‘rest of Arabia’..and Egypt will take over Gaza. It’s all about that West Bank, its land which is arable, highly productive, with irrigation, and those vital aquifers.
As for an Arab ghandi – the problem in the Arab States is INTERNAL to these states; it has nothing to do with Israel or the US or the West. It’s their own medieval tribal political and economic system..which has caused fascism to emerge. The West has to reject this fascism, move it back into the Arab countries so that THEY face it, rather than us. That’s what Bush accomplished. A great accomplishment.
But Israel’s attacks on Palestine drive the fascism OUT of the Arab states..and back into the West!
Again, if, if only Israel would acknowledge a Palestinian state, and give up the West Bank, and set up close economic links with the Palestinians. But it wants the West Bank..and therefore, won’t do it. That’s my view.
Thanks ET. We will have to respectfully disagree mostly. Yeah, I’ve noticed you got the link imbeds going (wasn’t quite sure if my tutorial was formatted quite right, but I guess so).
The letters. OK, didn’t know this, But, er, it’s a bit of a dead letter. He made wink-wink nudge-nudge statements in Arabic to Arabic audiences about his true intentions: a state as a launching pad for the final assault. And if I’m not mistaken, the PLO charter was never amended.
Everybody involved with Oslo incl. Clinton knows he was never sincere. Clinton was bitterly disappointed and felt betrayed. As I understand it, Barak offered 95% of the WB, all of Gaza, and a divided Jerusalem. You have to be amazed that he didn’t continue to negotiate but instead called up the — pre-planned — Intifada. As you know about 1000 innocent Israels died from homocide bombers, mostly from the WB.
The “settlements” are a problem, I’ve acknowledged this. Dershowitz does too. I think most Israelis know this also, and know that a lot of them — apparently 1/2 of them are under 500 population — would have to go. The big 5 though — mostly suburbs — will stay, and I gather most Palestinians know this too. But I strongly believe that you exaggerate the value of the settlements as a obstacle to peace [see Gaza 2005]. And again, with 1.5 million Arabs in Israel, I simply can’t understand why there would have to be no Jews in the new state. Really, this judenrein thing mystifies me.
The dilemma was of course that the initial 1947 State of Israel was simply not defensible. I’ve never been there [would love to!], but I’ve looked at the map and frankly I gasp when I see it. UN resolution (242?) acknowledged this when it said that Israel in any peace and security agreement would vacate lands (not the lands, but some lands) occupied after the six-day war. So, my reading is that the “interational community” at that point never envisioned a complete withdrawal from the WB. And again, remember the 3 No’s from Khartoum. The Arab countries simply refused to negotiate at all. Limbo situation.
They were offered all the WB in 1947 but rejected it and as we discussed so many times 5 Arab countries waged an illegal war against Israel.
You say, Israel failed to “enable” a state. My take is that Israel simply never got that clinching agreement on peace and security. I may be naive but I feel that Israel is very very tired and desperately wants peace. I feel that the PA doesn’t.
Finally, the PA never delivered anything they promised. Didn’t disarm the terrorists, did reform the school system, etc.
As menionted, the Palestinian economy was great post-67 when Israel occupied the territories.
The TRAGEDY was the insertion of the PLO into the equation. It’s a kind of liberal calculation I think: OK they’re terrorists, but they have valid grievances, so if we treat them nice they will moderate, chill out, and become civilized. But really, you can’t negotiate with terrorists. It never works. To terrorists nice = weakness.
no, me no dhimmi, Rabin didn’t offer the West Bank or Gaza as Palestinian states. He offered municipal governance, not national governance. The settlements were not to be removed. Security and borders were in the control of Israel. The PLO would have a police force in these areas.
In Israel, the left supported, the right opposed the Accord. Same kind of deal in Palestine: Fatah approved, Hamas rejected. After the Accord, Israel continued to expand current settlements in the WB. And of course, economic blockades and so on.
No-one is saying that there couldn’t be any Jews in a Palestinian state! The issue with the settlements is that IF they remained, and the area was a Palestinian state, then, they would be Palestinian citizens. No settler would agree to this! Plus, as I’m sure you know, most settlers are orthodox, and believe, sincerely believe, that the land is Jewish, by God’s will, and would never accept it, or themselves, within a Palestinian state.
So, your claim that it’s the Palestinians who might object to Jews in the WB isn’t the point; it’s the Jewish settlers who would object to being Palelstinian citizens, and to having the land OWNED by Arabs (as a state) rather than by a Jewish state. This is no small issue; their Halakhah rules are quite specific about this area and who owns it.
I don’t think you can insist on Peace First or No Agreement. That’s because there will always be an element of the population, even if it’s less than .001% who will be radicals. About anything.
And I think that it’s important to separate and distinguish between terrorists and regular people. Not ALL Arabs are Fascists; Not ALL Arabs are terrorists. My own view is that Israel ought to have dealt with, on a one-to-one level, with the Palestinian local people, helped set up embedded, connected economies. NOT settled anywhere in the WB. NOT set up different economies, ie, where the settlers are allowed water for irrigation while the Palestinian farmer right next door isn’t allowed water for anything other than household use. And so on.
I think it would have made a huge difference. My claim is that Israel wants the WB; and wants Egypt to take over Gaza’s people and economy.
We’ll see what happens. As for the Islamic fascists, their trouble is within their own states. My concern at the moment is that George Bush recognized this, and I don’t think that Obama knows or cares. His focus is only on surface appearance, and what will get him elected. I fear that he’ll appease the Islamic fascists because such appeals to the left in the USA and elsewhere.
ET where do you get these ideas from?
” The issue with the settlements is that IF they remained, and the area was a Palestinian state, then, they would be Palestinian citizens. No settler would agree to this! Plus, as I’m sure you know, most settlers are orthodox, and believe, sincerely believe, that the land is Jewish, by God’s will, and would never accept it, or themselves, within a Palestinian state.”
Do you know that Jews cannot safely visit Joseph’s Tomb or Hebron in the West Bank? Religious and non-religioius Jews live everywhere in the world and would surely live in an Arab state – except that it is not safe for them. And the PA police do not protect them. Orthodox Jews lived in Hebron and Safed and Jerusalem for 1800 years before the modern state of Israel was established even though they believe that the land is holy and given to Jews by God. Jews may be reluctant to live in Fatah or Hamas controlled Judea because they would have to fear for their lives. The 1 million Arabs living as Israeli citizens do not have to worry about getting killed by their Jewish neighbours. You know this.
The Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria are on approx. 2% of the land. How could this be such a problem? There were none of these “settlements” between 47 and 67, so how could Jews living there be such an affront to so-called Palestinian nationalism. And you never answer the question as to why there was no talk of a state for Palestinians when this land was part of Jordan (47-67).
ET: Rabin? Barak, isn’t it. And where do I get the idea that he offered 95% of the WB, all Gaza, and a divided Jerusalem for a STATE, not a municipal government.
And what do you say about a man who gets offered this much and doesn’t continue to bargain, but shuts it down and calls up the PRE-PLANNED Intifada, triggered on the phony non-event of Sharon visiting the Temple Mount.
Did he eschew terrorism as he said he would in those 1993 letters? Of course not. If you’re negotiating for a state and don’t get 100% of what you want, do you then sick your terrorist henchmen on innocent Jews and kill 1000+ or them.
Arafat’s letters to Rabin/Norway 1993: Don’t know this history that well: were they letters before he was invited in, before the PA was set up — in 1994?
Arafat: I’m a businessman. Not only would I not believe anything he told me, I would never do a contract with him — selling him something on credit. Cash only, in escrow, before he got the goods. Like the way US sells food and humanitarian supplies to Cuba. Cash only!
You have to look at the reality on the ground. What did he do about, say, the school curriculum? Nothing peaceful. In fact he radicalized it even more. Taught the most vicious and vile Jew-hatred. History/geography textbooks sans Israel. See, this is what I look at. Is this behaviour of a true peace-maker? Of course not! Did he try to create any kind of civil society in the WB as preparation for a state. Of course not.
The settlements: You’ve mentioned Jews taking land. That definitely is not my understanding. They bought the land from Arabs and also vacant state lands, didn’t they. And let me repeat: the current status is that Israel “owns” the WB — territory taken in a defensive war. You don’t believe this, but Israel would have gladly traded this for real honest-to-g_d peace and security. Again, the Three No’s. REJECTION. No negotiations with Dhimmi Jews.
Arafat destroyed whatever chances there were for a “Palestinian” state. And, contrary to the delusional Condi Rice, I trust Abbas not one iota more. Not one iota!
But as ex-liberal keeps pointing out, there was no nationalist movement when Jordan and Egypt ILLEGALLY occupied Judea-Samaria and the Gaza strip respectively. Ergo, the nationalist movement “awakened” only with the presence of Jews and the only thing “nationalist” about it is the nation of Israel and their desire to destroy it.