Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Berkeley March in Defence of the Palestinian People
Hundreds, and possible over a thousand people held a rally in defence of the Palestinian people at the Berkeley BART, then marched down University Avenue to stop and hold the intersection of University & 6th, next to the freeway overpass..
Hundreds, and possibly over a thousand people held a rally in defence of the Palestinian people at the Berkeley BART @ 5:00pm, then marched down University Avenue to stop and hold the intersection of University & 6th, next to the freeway overpass.
All along the march passing cars honked and residents cheered in solidarity. When we reached University and 6th, just before the freeway overpass, we were confronted by a few dozen police. There was a scuffle, and one female was pulled away and taken to a police car. She was charged with assaulting an officer, which eyewitnesses deny (including a photographer).
Demonstrators took over the intersection and a standoff ensued. All freeway traffic to downtown berkeley and vice-versa was cut off. We chanted "let her go!" and eventually she was released, but her charges still stand. Dozens more police arrived.
We held that intersection for hours, chanting and singing. At one point a car tried to plow into us. Around 9:30pm we headed back up University Ave., with a motorcade of cars waving our signs, to end the march back at the Berkeley Bart station. There will be a National Day of Action April 9th - at 12Noon there will be a rally and direct action at Sproul Hall, UC Berkeley. See you there!
All along the march passing cars honked and residents cheered in solidarity. When we reached University and 6th, just before the freeway overpass, we were confronted by a few dozen police. There was a scuffle, and one female was pulled away and taken to a police car. She was charged with assaulting an officer, which eyewitnesses deny (including a photographer).
Demonstrators took over the intersection and a standoff ensued. All freeway traffic to downtown berkeley and vice-versa was cut off. We chanted "let her go!" and eventually she was released, but her charges still stand. Dozens more police arrived.
We held that intersection for hours, chanting and singing. At one point a car tried to plow into us. Around 9:30pm we headed back up University Ave., with a motorcade of cars waving our signs, to end the march back at the Berkeley Bart station. There will be a National Day of Action April 9th - at 12Noon there will be a rally and direct action at Sproul Hall, UC Berkeley. See you there!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$190.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
I put up a video (trying to add another or two) and a bunch of other pics.
Way to go Indymedia SF... this story has more coverage than any yet... and it was an "emergency rally!" Awesome!
Free Palestine!
I suspect it's because the occupation is illegal and immoral, but that's just a wild guess. ;)
Free Palestine!
I really can't wait for one of these little punks - most of whom are from very wealthy families, and dress in smelly thrift-store garbage so they look poor - I say, I really can't wait for one of these spoiled rotten littel pigs to fuck with me.
Because the little pig is going to get a baseball bat across his newspaper-stealing face, if not a bullet in his pig skull.
FREE PALESTINE!
No justice, No peace! Free Palestine!
Let's also try not to forget that an Israeli and Palestinian state were part of the original UN provisions 50 years agao, but within a few hours of the declaration, then entire surronding states rolled in declaring was on Israel, and they've been fighting for survivavl ever since. The surround countries and Arafat have been the root causes of the Palestinian suffering.
Maybe you've failed to remember the why's of the creation of the Israeli state...please see Genocide: Europe 1936-1945
Right...it's just Anglo-American neo-imperialism.
The UN is now, and always has been, an instrument of American foreign policy. It’s independance is illusary at best. It is a totally corrupt organization, for sale to the higest bidder.
Yes, and when you include the events of the US being voted of the Human Rights Council, the Conference Against Racism declaring Zionism as racist, along with our boycotting of said conference, it's really easy to deduce that the UN is just a US extension. Not to mention the WTO will probably smack us a bit over the steel tariffs.
Peace.
They are out of control and need to be stopped ASAP!
Then maybe all the peacniks would shut the hell up and see what's really going on, too...but I doubt it.
From whence arises your great expertise on the topic?
Have you ever even been to the Holy Land?
>Then maybe all the peacniks would shut the hell up and see what's really going on, too...but I doubt it.
Practice what you preach. Many of us feel likewise about your unenlightening oral exercise.
I guess I'm not sure what you folks are yet. Are you:
a) pro-Palestine?
b) pro-Peace?
c) anti-Israel?
d) anti-America?
You see, there's one post that claims the Israeli occupation is illegal, but illegal according to whom, I'm not sure. International law, I'm left to assume, but then there's another post that claims the UN is just an American puppet. Then there is another post that says things will continue until the US stops supporting Israel. So if the US supports Israel, and the US controls the UN, then how can the Israeli occupation be illegal?
Now, I assume you're OK with these statements, because you agree with them, even though no supporting "knowledge, truth or fact" is stated, no matter how contradictory they may be.
So why don't you enlighten me, dasa? I'm obviously in need of it. Gimme hell, sans argumentum ad populum.
Although, you'll still have to contend with:
1) The FACT that since Arafat has been locked in a closet, and the Israelis have gone door-to-door to clean things up, there hasn't been another suicide bombing.
2)The FACT that the US is going in to negotiate, and the Israelis are starting to pull back.
3)The KNOWLEDGE of two options: either Arafat has had control of the terrorist organizations and has been behind everything from day 1 or he has no control over the terrorist organizations and is an ineffectual leader of his people.
The sad TRUTH is that your little march had nothing to do with any of these developments.
And then there's this little piece from Slate, if you're left wondering what you could do to make a real difference:
Some of us recognize international law. Some of us only recognize our own law. Some of us recognize only Higher Law. Others of us recognize no law at all.
So clearly, a purely legal analysis can't explain all this. But what can?
You tell us.
It's not a legal analysis that is used to explain these things, it's a moral and ethical one. When I quoted the various posts, I used them to demonstrate that, while you may be arguing for the same end, you are coming at it from different, conflicting, and contradictory means. You've got an end that you're trying to support that has so many differing viewpoints that I wonder what the philisophical means are by which you arrive at your conclusions. Do you have a cohesive moral philosophy? Or are you trying to stretch a philosphical framework to merge all of the means together to justify the ends?
If so, it would seem that it's failing you. This is your cause, Bubba. If you can't arrive at a standard philosphical model to meet your ends, then you may have to accept that the model is flawed. Why do you support the ends that you do, and why are you over-stretching you philosophy to meet those ends?
As long as anyone puts up a post that coincides with the agreed upon ends, that seems to be OK to you, regerdless of whether the means are agreed upon. As long as the means are conflicting, despite the ends, to the rest of the world you will seem foolish at best. While you may not care what the rest of the world thinks about you, you do need to accept that you will not be taken seriously and your goals will never be met on your terms, basically because you don't have any (terms, that is).
So what, exactly, in International law makes Isreali actions illegal?
There's no difference between this item and the fourth one.
So which Higher Law allows for the killing of innocents? If both sides participate in the killing of innocents, how is either side possibly absolvable?
Then you have no right to the party at all. In a world without law, shit happens. Deal, then read Thoreau.
I honestly don't see how you can arrive at the conclusions you do using any type of logical, moral, or ethical reasoning. This is your show, Bubba. You first.
That would have to be countless United Nations resolutions. Countless Human Rights conventions. Countless acts of collective punishment, extrajudicial executions, illegal arrests and incarcerations. Countless massacres. Countless homes demolished. Countless civilians shot. The list goes on. You seem intelligent - just put the effort into reading more than one source...
2) Some of us only recognize our own laws
That would be laws/policies that allow Israeli soldiers to shoot children - shoot to kill - when faced with the horrible threat of a stone. From a football-field's length away. That would be United States "terminology" which define "terrorism" - allowing all of the above to be undertaken without international rebuke, while oppressed, frustrated, and desperate Palestinians live a life of daily hopelessness. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock - all "terrorists" according to modern-day US policy. Where is the "inalieble right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" for the people of Palestine.
3) Higher law...
That would be using the historical biblical claim that "the Jews belong in Israel" to excuse the actions of the "Children of God"
4) No laws at all...
Just look at that fat bastard Sharon. He has the blood of more innocents on his hand than the most merciful of Gods should forgive....
-----------------------------------------
The people of Palestine will survive. Will endure. And with the will of God, will overcome.
We do not hate Jews. We are not anti-Semetic. We are fed up, however. And the Jews in Israel, though not all, support and willingly advance the murder and rape of an entire people. An entire culture.
Give us liberty, or give us death.
God have mercy on the souls of the innocent.
Salam.
by Senator Jim Inhofe
A skillful presentation by U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) on the Senate floor, March 4, 2002.
Receive Israel Update by Email:
e-mail:
HTML Format
Text / AOL
Join
See all email lists
Recommended Products:
See related audio tapes
audio tape
http://inhofe.senate.gov
I was interested the other day when I heard that the de facto Saudi ruler, Crown Prince Abdullah, made a statement which was received by many in this country as if it were a statement of fact, as if it were something new, a concept for peace in the Middle East that no one had ever heard of before. I was kind of shocked that it was so well received by many people who had been down this road before.
I suggest to you that what Crown Prince Abdullah talked about a few days ago was not new at all. He talked about the fact that under the Abdullah plan, Arabs would normalize relations with Israel in exchange for the Jewish state surrendering the territory it received after the Six Day War, as if that were something new...
[But] there isn't anything new about the prospect of giving up land that is rightfully Israel's land in order to have peace. When it gets right down to it, the land doesn't make that much difference, because Yasser Arafat and others don't recognize Israel's right to any of the land. They do not recognize Israel's right to exist. Yasser Arafat and others don't recognize Israel's right to any of the land. They do not recognize Israel's right to exist.
I will discuss seven reasons why Israel is entitled to the land they have and that it should not be a part of the peace process. If this is something that Israel wants to do, it is their business to do it. But anyone who has tried to put the pressure on Israel to do this is wrong.
We are going to be hit by skeptics who are going to say we will be attacked because of our support for Israel, and if we get out of the Middle East -- that is us -- all the problems will go away. That is just not true. If we withdraw, all of these problems will again come to our door. I have some observations to make about that.
But I would like to reemphasize once again the seven reasons that Israel has the right to their land.
1) ARCHEOLOGY
The first reason is that Israel has the right to the land because of all of the archeological evidence. All the archeological evidence supports it. Every time there is a dig in Israel, it does nothing but support the fact that Israelis have had a presence there for 3,000 years. The coins, the cities, the pottery, the culture -- there are other people, groups that are there, but there is no mistaking the fact that Israelis have been present in that land for 3,000 years. It predates any claims that other peoples in the region may have.
The ancient Philistines are extinct. Many other ancient peoples are extinct. They do not have the unbroken line to this date that the Israelis have. Even the Egyptians of today are not racial Egyptians of 2,000, 3,000 years ago. They are primarily an Arab people. The land is called Egypt, but they are not the same racial and ethnic stock as the old Egyptians of the ancient world.
The Israelis are in fact descended from the original Israelites.
2) HISTORY
The second proof of Israel's right to the land is the historic right. History supports it totally and completely. We know there has been an Israel up until the time of the Roman Empire. The Romans conquered the land. Israel had no homeland, although Jews were allowed to live there. They were driven from the land in two dispersions: One in 70 A.D. and the other in 135 A.D. But there was always a Jewish presence in the land.
The Turks, who took over about 700 years ago and ruled the land up until about World War One, had control. Then the land was conquered by the British. The Turks entered World War One on the side of Germany. The British knew they had to do something to punish Turkey, and also to break up that empire that was going to be a part of the whole effort of Germany in World War One. So the British sent troops against the Turks in the Holy Land.
One of the generals who was leading the British armies was a man named Allenby. Allenby was a Bible-believing Christian. He carried a Bible with him everywhere he went and he knew the significance of Jerusalem. The night before the attack against Jerusalem to drive out the Turks, Allenby prayed that God would allow him to capture the city without doing damage to the holy places.
That day, Allenby sent World War One biplanes over the city of Jerusalem to do a reconnaissance mission. You have to understand that the Turks had at that time never seen an airplane. So there they were, flying around. They looked in the sky and saw these fascinating inventions and did not know what they were, and they were terrified by them.They dared not fight against a prophet from God, so Allenby captured Jerusalem without firing a single shot.
Then they were told they were going to be opposed by a man named Allenby the next day, which means, in their language, "man sent from God" or "prophet from God." They dared not fight against a prophet from God, so the next morning, when Allenby went to take Jerusalem, he went in and captured it without firing a single shot.
The British government was grateful to Jewish people around the world, particularly to one Jewish chemist who helped them manufacture niter. Niter is an ingredient that was used in nitroglycerin which was sent over from the New World. But they did not have a way of getting it to England. The German U-boats were shooting on the boats, so most of the niter they were trying to import to make nitroglycerin was at the bottom of the ocean. But a man named Weitzman, a Jewish chemist, discovered a way to make it from materials that existed in England. As a result, they were able to continue that supply.
The British at that time said they were going to give the Jewish people a homeland. That is all written down in history. They were gratified that the Jewish people, the bankers, came through and helped finance the war.
The homeland that Britain said it would set aside consisted of all of what is now Israel and all of what was then the nation of Jordan -- the whole thing. That was what Britain promised to give the Jews in 1917. In the beginning, there was some Arab support for this action. There was not a huge Arab population in the land at that time, and there is a reason for that. The land was not able to sustain a large population of people. It just did not have the development it needed to handle those people, and nobody really wanted this land. It was considered to be worthless land.
Mark Twain -- Samuel Clemens -- took a tour of Palestine in 1867. This is how he described that land. We are talking about Israel now. He said: "A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. A silent, mournful expanse. We never saw a human being on the whole route. There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."
Where was this great Palestinian nation? It did not exist. It was not there. Palestinians were not there. Palestine was a region named by the Romans, but at that time it was under the control of Turkey, and there was no large mass of people there because the land would not support them.
This is the report that the Palestinian Royal Commission, created by the British, made. It quotes an account of the conditions on the coastal plain along the Mediterranean Sea in 1913. The Palestinian Royal Commission said:
"The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track, suitable for transport by camels or carts. No orange groves, orchards or vineyards were to be seen until one reached the Yavnev village. Houses were mud. Schools did not exist. The western part toward the sea was almost a desert. The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many villages were deserted by their inhabitants."
That was 1913.
The French author Voltaire described Palestine as "a hopeless, dreary place." In short, under the Turks the land suffered from neglect and low population. That is a historic fact. The nation became populated by both Jews and Arabs because the land came to prosper when Jews came back and began to reclaim it. If there had never been any archaeological evidence to support the rights of the Israelis to the territory, it is also important to recognize that other nations in the area have no longstanding claim to the country either.
Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.
Historically, Israel gained its independence in 1948.
3) AGRICULTURE
The third reason that land belongs to Israel is the practical value of the Israelis being there. Israel today is a modern marvel of agriculture. Israel is able to bring more food out of a desert environment than any other country in the world. The Arab nations ought to make Israel their friend and import technology from Israel that would allow all the Middle East, not just Israel, to become an exporter of food. Israel has unarguable success in its agriculture.
4) HUMANITARIAN
The fourth reason I believe Israel has the right to the land is on the grounds of humanitarian concern. You see, there were 6 million Jews slaughtered in Europe during World War Two. The persecution against the Jews had been very strong in Russia since the advent of communism, and before then under the Czars.
These people have a right to their homeland. If we are not going to allow them a homeland in the Middle East, then where? What other nation on Earth is going to cede territory, is going to give up land?
They are not asking for a great deal. The whole nation of Israel would fit into my home state of Oklahoma seven times. They are not asking for a great deal. The whole nation of Israel is very small. It is a nation that, up until the time that claims started coming in, was not desired by anybody.
5) STRATEGIC ALLY
The fifth reason Israel ought to have their land is that she is a strategic ally of the United States. Whether we realize it or not, Israel is an impediment to certain groups hostile to democracies and hostile to what we believe in, hostile to that which makes us the greatest nation in the history of the world. They have kept them from taking complete control of the Middle East. If it were not for Israel, they would overrun the region. Israel votes with America in the United Nations more than England, Canada, France, Germany -- more than any other country in the world.
They are our strategic ally. It is good to know we have a friend in the Middle East on whom we can count. They vote with us in the United Nations more than England, more than Canada, more than France, more than Germany -- more than any other country in the world.
6) ROADBLOCK TO TERRORISM
The sixth reason is that Israel is a roadblock to terrorism. The war we are now facing is not against a sovereign nation; it is against a group of terrorists who are very fluid, moving from one country to another. They are almost invisible. That is whom we are fighting against today. We need every ally we can get. If we do not stop terrorism in the Middle East, it will be on our shores.
One of the reasons I believe the spiritual door was opened for an attack against the United States is that the policy of our government has been to ask the Israelis, and demand it with pressure, not to retaliate in a significant way against the terrorist strikes that have been launched against them.
Since its independence in 1948, Israel has fought four wars: The 1948 War of Independence, the 1956 Sinai campaign, the 1967 Six Day War, and the 1973 Yom Kippur War. In all four cases, Israel was attacked. They were not the aggressor. Some people may argue that this was not true because they went in first in 1956, but they knew at that time that Egypt was building a huge military to become the aggressor. Israel, in fact, was not the aggressor and has not been the aggressor in any of the four wars.
Also, they won all four wars against impossible odds. They are great warriors. They consider a level playing field being outnumbered 2-to-1.
There were 39 Scud missiles that landed on Israeli soil during the Gulf War. Our president asked Israel not to respond. In order to have the Arab nations on board, we asked Israel not to participate in the war. They showed tremendous restraint and did not. Now we have asked them to stand back and not do anything over these last several attacks. We have criticized them. We have criticized them in our media. Local people in television and radio often criticize Israel, not knowing the true facts. We need to be informed.
I was so thrilled when I heard a reporter pose a question to Secretary of State Colin Powell. He said: "Mr. Powell, the United States has advocated a policy of restraint in the Middle East. We have discouraged Israel from retaliation again and again and again because we've said that it escalates the violence. Are we going to follow that ourselves?"
Mr. Powell indicated we would strike back. In other words, we can tell Israel not to do it, but when it hits us, we are going to do something.
But all that changed in December when the Israelis went into Gaza with gunships and into the West Bank with F-16s. With the exception of last May, the Israelis had not used F-16s since the Six Day War. And I am so proud of them because we have to stop terrorism. It is not going to go away. If Israel were driven into the sea tomorrow, if every Jew in the Middle East were killed, terrorism would not end. You know that in your heart. Terrorism would continue. It is not just a matter of Israel in the Middle East. It is the heart of the very people who are perpetrating this stuff. Should they be successful in overrunning Israel -- which they won't be -- but should they be, it would not be enough. They will never be satisfied.
7) BIBLICAL RIGHT
I believe very strongly that we ought to support Israel, and that it has a right to the land, because God said so. In Genesis 13:14-17, the Bible says: "The Lord said to Abram, "Lift up now your eyes, and look from the place where you are northward, southward, eastward and westward: for all the land which you see, to you will I give it, and to your seed forever... Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it to thee."
That is God talking. The Bible says that Abram removed his tent and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar before the Lord. Hebron is in the West Bank. It is at this place where God appeared to Abram and said, "I am giving you this land" -- the West Bank. This is not a political battle at all. It is a contest over whether or not the word of God is true.
CONCLUSION
The seven reasons, I am convinced, clearly establish that Israel has a right to the land. Eight years ago on the White House lawn, Yitzhak Rabin shook hands with PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. It was a historic occasion. It was a tragic occasion. At that time, the official policy of the government of Israel began to be, "Let us appease the terrorists. Let us begin to trade the land for peace." This process continued unabated up until last year.
Here in our own nation, at Camp David in the summer of 2000, then-Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Barak offered the most generous concessions to Yasser Arafat that had ever been laid on the table. He offered him more than 90 percent of all the West Bank territory, sovereign control of it. There were some parts he did not want to offer, but in exchange he said he would give up land in Israel proper that the PLO had not even asked for. Barak even spoke of dividing Jerusalem. Arafat stormed out of the meeting.
And he also did the unthinkable. He even spoke of dividing Jerusalem and allowing the Palestinians to have their capital there. Yasser Arafat stormed out of the meeting. Why did he storm out of the meeting? Everything he said he wanted was offered there. It was put into his hands. Why did he storm out of the meeting? A couple of months later, there began to be riots, terrorism. The riots began when now-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon went to the Temple Mount. And this was used as the thing that lit the fire and caused the explosion. Did you know that Sharon did not go unannounced and that he contacted the Islamic authorities before he went and secured their permission to be there? It was no surprise.
The response was very carefully calculated. They knew the world would not pay attention to the details. They would portray this in the Arab world as an attack upon the holy mosque and use it as an excuse to riot. Over the last eight years, during this time of the peace process, where the Israeli public has pressured its leaders to give up land for peace because they are tired of fighting, there has been increased terror.
In fact, it has been greater in the last eight years than any other time in Israel's history. Showing restraint and giving in has not produced any kind of peace. It is so much so that today the leftist peace movement in Israel does not exist because the people feel they were deceived. They offered a hand of peace, and it was not taken. That is why the politics of Israel have changed drastically over the past 12 months. The Israelis have come to see that, "No matter what we do, these people do not want to deal with us... They want to destroy us."
That is why even yet today the stationery of the PLO still has upon it the map of the entire state of Israel, not just the little part they call the West Bank. They want it all.
We have to get out of this mindset that somehow you can buy peace in the Middle East by giving little plots of land. It has not worked before when it has been offered.
These seven reasons show why Israel is entitled to that land.
Open Letter to the World (by Ariel Ben Attar)
A timely and powerful letter to the world by an Israeli, Ariel Ben Attar.
Dear World, I understand that you are upset by us, here in Israel. Indeed, it appears that you are quite upset, even angry (Outraged?). Indeed, every few years you seem to become upset by us. Today, it is the "brutal repression of the Palestinians"; yesterday it was Lebanon; before that it was the bombing of the nuclear reactor in Baghdad and the Yom Kippur War and the Sinai campaign.
It appears that Jews who triumph and who, therefore, live, upset you most extraordinarily. Of course, dear world, long before there was an Israel, we- the Jewish people - upset you. We upset a German people who elected Hitler and upset an Austrian people who cheered his entry into Vienna and we upset a whole slew of Slavic nations - Poles, Slovaks, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Russians, Hungarians and Romanians.
And we go back a long, long way in the history of world upset. We upset the Cossacks of Chmielnicki who massacred tens of thousands of us in 1648-49; we upset the Crusaders who, on their way to liberate the Holy Land, were so upset at Jews that they slaughtered untold numbers of us.
For centuries, we upset a Roman Catholic Church that did its best to define our relationship through inquisitions, and we upset the arch-enemy of the church, Martin Luther, who, in his call to burn the synagogues and the Jews within them, showed anadmirable Christian ecumenical spirit.
And it is because we became so upset over upsetting you, dear world, that we decided to leave you - in a manner of speaking - and establish a Jewish state. The reasoning was that living in close contact with you, as resident-strangers in the various countries that comprise you, we upset you, irritate you and disturb you. What better notion, then, than to leave you and thus love you - and have you love us? And so we decided to come home - to the same homeland from which we were driven out 1,900 years earlier by a Roman world that, apparently, we also upset.
Alas, dear world, it appears that you are hard to please. Having left you and your pogroms and inquisitions and crusades and holocausts, having taken our leave of the general world to live alone in our own little state, we continue to upset you. You are upset that we repress the poor Palestinians.
You are deeply angered over the fact that we do not give up the lands of 1967, which are clearly the obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Moscow is upset and Washington is upset. The "radical" Arabs are upset and the gentle Egyptian moderates are upset.
Well, dear world, consider the reaction of a normal Jew from Israel. In 1920 and 1921 and 1929, there were no territories of 1967 to impede peace between Jews and Arabs. Indeed, there was no Jewish State to upset anybody. Nevertheless, the same oppressed and repressed Palestinians slaughtered tens of Jews in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Safed and Hebron. Indeed, 67 Jews were slaughtered one day in Hebron in 1929.
Dear world, why did the Arabs - the Palestinians - massacre 67 Jews in one day in 1929? Could it have been their anger over Israeli aggression in 1967? And why were 510 Jewish men, women and children slaughtered in Arab riots between 1936-39? Was it because Arabs were upset over 1967? And when you, world, proposed a UN Partition Plan in 1947 that would have created a "Palestinian State" alongside a tiny Israel and the Arabs cried "no" and went to war and killed 6,000 Jews - was that "upset" caused by the aggression of 1967? And, by the way, dear world, why did we not hear your cry of "upset" then?
The poor Palestinians who today kill Jews with explosives and firebombs and stones are part of the same people who - when they had all the territories they now demand be given to them for their state - attempted to drive the Jewish state into the sea. The same twisted faces, the same hate, the same cry of "itbach-al-yahud" (Massacre the Jew!) that we hear and see today, were seen and heard then. The same people, the same dream - destroy Israel.
What they failed to do yesterday, they dream of today, but we should not "repress" them.
Dear world, you stood by during the holocaust and you stood by in 1948 as seven states launched a war that the Arab League proudly compared to the Mongol massacres. You stood by in 1967 as Nasser, wildly cheered by wild mobs in every Arab capital in the world, vowed to drive the Jews into the sea. And you would stand by tomorrow if Israel were facing extinction.
And since we know that the Arabs-Palestinians dream daily of thatextinction, we will do everything possible to remain alive in our own land. If that bothers you, dear world, well - think of how many times in the past you bothered us. In any event, dear world, if you are bothered by us, hereis one Jew in Israel who could not care less.
Ariel Ben Attar, Israel
And as a student of history, I'll be glad to decide my own interpretation of history for myself rather than have one foisted on me about what "we should be gratefiul for" by someone who obviously does not have the interests of Jews at heart.
And as a student of history, I'll be glad to decide my own interpretation of history for myself rather than have one foisted on me about what "we should be gratefiul for" by someone who obviously does not have the interests of Jews at heart.
To wit, Lets just recap recent events:
Within the last 2 years in Berkeley,
Two Orthodox Jews got assaulted, because they looked Jewish.
Berkeley Hillel, the religious and cultural center for Jews had a cinderblock smashed against its window and "F-- the Jews" scrawled as grafitti.
Jews coming out of Yom Kippur services two years ago at I-House were egged.
A Jew was attacked during Simchat Torah observances at Bancroft and Telegraph last fall.
A Jew was followed from the Berkeley BART to College and Bancroft, by a youth, who confronted him and asked if he was Jewish. When he said yes, he was beaten. He wasn't asked if he was pro-Israel!
And in France
A Jewish soccer team was assaulted by a gang wielding crowbars, a Jewish cemetary was firebombed, a school bus of schoolkids was pelted with rocks, a couple including a pregnant Jewish woman were beaten by thugs, several synagogues have been attacked and/or destroyed.
In Tunisia five Jews were killed by an explosion at an historic synagogue.
In Berlin two orthodox Jews were severely beaten by a gang of Middle-Eastern descent after being asked if they were Jewish, not Israeli.
The common denominator:
All of the above were attacked because people or buildings were Jewish, regardless of whatever other ideological baggage the attackers had in mind.
If you think this is merely anti-Zionist, what is going on right now, you are sadly deluded -- this is also a virulent anti-Semitic outbreak.
I am a liberal and a progressive on many issues. But I am ashamed at how much denial of blatant prejudice is being enabled and even encouraged by people on the left who I thought were supposed to be against prejudice and hatemongering of all kinds!
As you know not every Jew supports Israel. If this is not anti-Semitism then why is every Jew bearing the brunt of this for being a Jew? Or is it possible that some who should know better are stereotyping and stigmatizing Jews because they assume that all Jews support Israel?
And if Jews are attacked for being Jews then doesn't that make the case for Jews needing Israel in the first place?
in the newspaper, be sure you
know how to read between the lines.
Every media outlet has its own stylebook, designed to be as fair and impartial as possible. These days, however, it often seems like the Palestinian Minister of Information is publishing and distributing his stylebook to dozens of newspapers and media outlets.
Since September 2000, a new de facto "stylebook" has emerged for reporters covering the Palestinian violence against Israel. In some cases, the "new rules for reporting" are based on actual policies promulgated by news organizations and editors.
Though elements of "pack journalism" are evident, there are probably no conspiratorial hands behind the emergence of this de facto stylebook. For the most part, reporters and correspondents have informally, perhaps even subconsciously, adopted these guidelines.
Invariably, the new rules are biased against Israel.
For now, the bias appears to have had little impact on American public opinion regarding Israel. In Europe, the stronger, more strident anti-Israel tone of much of the media may be having a different impact.
Following are eight new "rules" for reporters covering the Middle East, as distilled from hundreds of articles covering the recent violence:
Rule 1. Sensationalize the intensity and scope of Israeli military actions.
Call the Israeli actions "aggressive," "devastating" or "intensive." [CNN, April 16] Refer to Israeli incursions into Palestinian territory as "deep," even when they involve only 300 yards. [The New York Times, April 14]
On the other hand, refer to Palestinian mortar attacks as "ineffective" or "falling harmlessly" even though the intent of the mortar teams is malevolent.
Rule 2. Whitewash Palestinian acts of violence.
No longer label Palestinian bombings and shootings of Jewish civilians as "terrorism," nor the perpetrators as "terrorists." Label the perpetrators as "militants" or "activists." [Associated Press, BBC; CNN, The Guardian, et. al, March 27] Even bombs planted in the middle of Israeli marketplaces are not classified as "terrorism."
Reporters may make exceptions to the rule when their own " ox is being gored." For example, in referring to Irish bombers as "terrorists," the BBC's News Online declares: "It has long been the policy of the domestic service to refer to terrorists in Northern Ireland... but the policy of the World Service is not to refer to anyone in those terms." According to BBC Newshour duty editor Maya Fish, "In BBC World Service reporting the word 'terrorist' is not used, no matter who plants bombs, kills or murders."
Rule 3. Blame it on the settlements.
Mitigate Palestinian aggression and attacks by labeling Israeli victims as "settlers" and the locations of the attacks as "settlements" or "occupied territories." Label the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Gilo and French Hill as "settlements" and "settler enclaves" -- even though they have been part of Jerusalem for 30 years and house tens of thousands of middle class Jewish families. [CNN, Reuters, AP, and others]. When possible, call Israeli towns within the Green Line, such as Sderot, "settlements," as well. [Guardian, April 17].
Further, refer to all Jewish victims in the territories as "settlers" -- whether a 14-year-old boy or a 10-month-old baby.
Label Israeli residents in areas of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza as some new non-civilian entity, as in The New York Times' reference to Israeli "soldiers, settlers and civilians." [March 10]
Rule 4. Deprecate Israeli leaders; sympathize with Arafat.
Always refer to Ariel Sharon as "hard-line," "war criminal," "vilified by Arabs," or "The Bulldozer."
Never refer to Yasser Arafat as "the former terrorist" or bellicose, corrupt, or despotic. Whenever possible, solicit sympathy by referring to Arafat's old age or as "Parkinson's-haunted" [The Independent, UK, April 17, 2001]
Rule 5. Blame Israel for all Palestinian casualties.
Blame Israel, whether for "work accidents" in Palestinian bomb factories, Palestinian demonstrators hit by Palestinian snipers aiming at Israeli soldiers, or Arabs injured in Israeli crowds during a suicide bomb or bus bombing.
Arab auto accidents may also be blamed on Israel. In early October 2000, several stories blamed Israelis for the beating death of Issam Judeh Mustafa Hamed. On November 2, pathologists brought in by the Palestinian Authority, concluded that Issam Judeh died in a traffic accident. It is unknown how many of the Palestinian "martyrs" died of natural causes, accidents, or intra-Palestinian fighting.
In addition, refer frequently to Palestinian children as traumatized, orphaned, killed or severely injured -- even if at the hand of Palestinians' own bombs and bullets. Make no mention of Israeli children also victimized by Palestinian attacks
Rule 6. Active and passive verb usage.
Use active verbs to describe Palestinian casualties -- i.e. Palestinians are "shot dead" or "gunned down" by Israeli soldiers.
On the other hand, use passive verbs to avoid blaming Palestinians for Israeli casualties. Say that shooting " broke out." The headline reporting 10-month old Shalhevet Pass shot and killed by a Palestinian sniper read: "Jewish Toddler Dies in West Bank." [Associated Press, March 26]
When possible, juxtapose two deaths, blaming the Israeli's for one death, and leaving the Palestinian blame unstated. For example: "During clashes near the West Bank village of Dura, an 11-year-old Palestinian boy was shot dead by Israeli troops. One report said the boy had been watching Israeli soldiers and Palestinian gunman exchange fire when he was hit in the chest. On Monday, a 10-month-old Israeli baby was killed by gunfire in nearby Hebron." [BBC, March 27]
Rule 7. Offset an Israeli death by mentioning some unrelated Palestinian death.
Offset a Palestinian atrocity such as a bus bombing, by reporting on the tragic Palestinian death of an elderly woman or child, even if the Palestinian death occurred long before.
In reporting on the shocking discovery of two butchered Israeli teens near Tekoa, the CNN article entitled "Two Israeli teenagers found dead" carried a photo underneath the headline of a Palestinian baby shot and buried earlier in the week. [May 9]
On May 1, CNN reported: "An Israeli was killed and another injured in shooting attacks on West Bank roads Tuesday. The attacks followed explosions and clashes in Gaza and the West Bank which claimed seven Palestinian lives." This was reported even though the fatal explosions in Gaza were a "work accident' in a Palestinian bomb factory.
Rule 8. Invoke Arabic terms for holy sites.
Use Arabic terms for holy sites, even if the Jewish term is standard reference in any encyclopedia, university textbook, diplomatic document, or other acceptable Western source.
Avoid referring to the Temple Mount as "Judaism's holiest site," or "as the Jewish capital for 3,000 years." References to the Temple Mount should be qualified as mere claims, e.g.: "which Israel claims to have been the site of the First and Second Temple." [New York Times]
Preferably refer to the Temple Mount as "Haram al Sharif, the third-holiest Moslem site," or "the holiest Moslem site in Jerusalem." By contrast, never refer to Hebron, where the Jewish matriarchs and patriarchs are buried, as "Judaism's second-holiest site," nor to the Tomb of Rachel near Bethlehem as "Judaism's third-holiest site."
When necessary, drudge up obscure Arabic terms, such as referring to Jaffa Gate, the main western entrance to Jerusalem's Old City, as "Bab al-Khalil." [CNN, January 8, 2001]
Conclusion.
While not a "conspiracy," an anti-Israel press "convention" has emerged, and clear biases are evident.
What will this stylebook look like in another six months? It all depends on the outcome of this ongoing battle of the media war.
For starters, the Palestinian media has called for the killing of all Jews. In October 2000, after two Israeli solders were lynched in Ramallah, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya gave a sermon on official Palestinian Authority television:
Have no mercy on the Jews no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them - and those who stand by them... (translation by memri.org)
The betrayed Jesus Christ in the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Muhammad.
Doesn't sound like purely a land battle to me. Let's look at Israel's neighbors. During the Pope's trip to Syria last year, President Assad said,
They (the Jews) tried to kill the principles of all religions with the same mentality in which they betrayed Jesus Christ in the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Muhammad. (ADL, October 2001)
Maybe the moderate Saudis are a little more reasonable? In December 2001, the Saudi government-controlled newspaper, Al-Watan, published a report entitled, "The Jewish organizations are implementing their strategic and hellish plan to take over the world":
The Jews act by means of the control of the media, politics and the economy in order to weaken the non-Jewish groups and bring about their disintegration." (translation by memri.org)
In the Saudi government daily Al-Riyadh, columnist Dr. Umayma Ahmad Al-Jalahma of King Faysal University in Al-Dammam, wrote last week (March 10, 2002) on "The Jewish Holiday of Purim." The following are excerpts of the article:
Special Ingredient For Jewish Holidays is Human Blood From Non-Jewish Youth:
For this holiday, the Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare the holiday pastries. In other words, the practice cannot be carried out as required if human blood is not spilled!!
The Jews' spilling human blood to prepare pastry for their holidays is a well-established fact, historically and legally, all throughout history. This was one of the main reasons for the persecution and exile that were their lot in Europe and Asia at various times.
How the Jews Drain the Blood From Their Young Victims:
I would like to tell you how human blood is spilled so it can be used for their holiday pastries. The blood is spilled in a special way. How is it done? For this holiday, the victim must be a mature adolescent who is, of course, a non-Jew -- that is, a Christian or a Muslim. His blood is taken and dried into granules. The cleric blends these granules into the pastry dough; they can also be saved for the next holiday. In contrast, for the Passover slaughtering, about which I intend to write one of these days, the blood of Christian and Muslim children under the age of 10 must be used, and the cleric can mix the blood [into the dough] before or after dehydration. The Actions of the Jewish Vampires Cause Them Pleasure:
Let us now examine how the victims' blood is spilled. For this, a needle-studded barrel is used; this is a kind of barrel, about the size of the human body, with extremely sharp needles set in it on all sides. [These needles] pierce the victim's body, from the moment he is placed in the barrel.
These needles do the job, and the victim's blood drips from him very slowly. Thus, the victim suffers dreadful torment -- torment that affords the Jewish vampires great delight as they carefully monitor every detail of the blood-shedding with pleasure and love that are difficult to comprehend. (translation by memri.org)
Egypt, the first Arab country to make peace with Israel, recently ran a TV series called "Horseman Without a Horse," a 30-part series based on the anti-Semitic forgery, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."
Sheikh Muhammed Abd Al Hadi La'afi, responsible for Religious Teaching and Instruction in the Office of the Wakf, wrote in the official P.A. newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (May 18, 2001):
The battle with the Jews will surely come... the decisive Muslim victory is coming without a doubt, and the prophet spoke about in more than one Hadith and the Day of resurrection will not come without the victory of the believers [the Muslims] over the descendents of the monkeys and pigs [the Jews] and with their annihilation.
These hate-filled teachings proliferate even in America. The Washington Post reported (March 2002) on Muslim elementary and high schools in the U.S.:
[One] 11th-grade textbook, for example, says one sign of the Day of Judgment will be that Muslims will fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: 'Oh Muslim, Oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him.' Several students of different ages, all of whom asked not to be identified, said that in Islamic studies, they are taught that it is better to shun and even to dislike Christians, Jews and Shi'ite Muslims... [In addition,] maps of the Middle East hang on classroom walls, but Israel is missing.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Beyond the traditional anti-Semitic slurs, there is a new strategy that strikes at the heart of our Jewish heritage, seeking to deny our history. Remember the dismantling of Joseph's Tomb, the attack on Rachel's Tomb, and the ancient Jericho synagogue that was destroyed by the Palestinians? Their purpose was to turn Jewish history into a myth. The Mufti of Jerusalem has said of the Temple Mount:
"There is not the smallest indication of the existence of a Jewish temple on this place in the past." (Boston Globe, April 2001)
The Mufti's comments have been echoed by Arafat's cabinet, and much of the official press of the Arab world. In some sort of kow-tow, even The New York Times described the Temple Mount as what "Israel claims to have been the site of the first and second Temples." The Temple is mentioned in the Jewish Bible, the Christian Bible, the Koran, and every history book of the past 3,000 years. But it is now just a claim. A poll found that 71 percent of Pakistanis believed there was a September 11 Jewish conspiracy.
And let's not forget how, throughout the Arab world, the World Trade Center attack was reported as a Jewish-led conspiracy.
At a meeting in Damascus in October 2001 with a delegation from the British Royal College of Defense Studies, Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlass said the Mossad planned the ramming of two hijacked airliners into the WTC towers. He also told the British visitors that the Mossad had given thousands of Jewish employees at the towers advance warning not to go to work on September 11. (Jerusalem Post, October 19, 2001)
The slander took hold. Paknews.com, a sophisticated English-language news site based in Pakistan, found that 71 percent of its readers believed the report of a September 11 "Jewish conspiracy."The Mufti of Jerusalem personally recruited 20,000 Muslims in Bosnia to serve in the Waffen SS.
The Holocaust is another point to examine. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, lived in Berlin from 1941-45. He was in charge of supervising Axis propaganda to Muslims all over the world. When Jews fleeing Hitler's ovens were able to obtain emigration visas to Palestine, the Mufti was instrumental in getting those visa cancelled. He met several times with Hitler, and personally recruited 20,000 Muslims in Bosnia to serve in the Waffen SS. (See: http://notendur.centrum.is/~snorrigb/muftism.htm)
This tradition continues today. "Mein Kampf," previously banned by Israel, has been allowed by the PA and was sixth on the Palestinian best-seller list. A senior commander in Arafat's personal bodyguard is Fawzi Salem al-Mahdi (known as "Abu Hitler"), whose two sons bear the first names Hitler and Eichmann.
The official Arab mouthpieces are among the ranks of the most stubborn Holocaust deniers. And American neo-Nazi and white supremacist parties have found in Muslims a new audience to advance theories discredited in the west for more than 50 years.
BEYOND THE MIDDLE EAST
Anti-Jewish sentiments are spreading far beyond the Middle East. France has one of the largest Jewish communities in the world, and is also one of least hospitable to its Jewish residents. CRIF (an umbrella group of Jewish organizations in France) reported that between September 2000 and November 2001 there were 330 anti-Semitic incidents in metro Paris alone, nearly one per day. The study also reported that the perpetrators are primarily young Arab immigrants. (ADL, January 2002)
Britain's Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, has said that Jews of his country are suffering from the worst anti-Semitism since the Holocaust. The contributing factors of this anti-Semitism have been the rise in Islamic fundamentalists who use the Israeli-Arab conflict as an excuse to create open displays of anti-Semitism. (Simon Weisental Center, February 2002)
In December 2001, the largest neo-Nazi march since World War Two took place in Berlin.
At the world conference on Racism in Durban this past September, literature with hook-nosed Jewish caricatures were distributed inside while thousands of South African Muslims marched outside carrying banners saying that Hitler should have finished the job. (Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, December 2001)
Copies of the libelous "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" are selling fast in Malaysia and Pakistan. "The Bulawayo Chronicle," which supports the government of Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe, recently published a 3,000-word article alleging Jewish responsibility for the ongoing economic problems facing the country. In America, 73 percent of all reported hate crimes on the basis of religion were against Jews, according to FBI figures.
America is not exempt, either. In the year 2000, 73 percent of all reported hate crimes on the basis of religion were against Jews, according to FBI figures.
The spreaders of hate have a strong ally in the press. Organizations such as the BBC, The New York Times and the once-proud CBS News, have subtly manipulated terminology and provided unbalanced reporting. When Israel suffers a terrorist attack and retaliates by targeting the terrorists, it is called the "cycle of violence" -- drawing a moral equivalency between civilians and terrorists, and dehumanizing civilian victims.
Let's not forget how the press uses the word "terrorist." If a military action is targeted toward civilians anywhere in world, it is "terrorism," but somehow when it targets Jewish civilians, it is "militancy," "activism," "freedom fighting," or as The New York Times prefers: "What Israel claims is a terrorist act."
CALL FOR ACTION
Make no mistake about it -- this is a war about much more than land. It is being waged by Islamic zealots who corrupt the name of religion to spread hate. The anti-Zionist rhetoric is just a front for deep anti-Semitism.
During an appearance at Harvard University, a student stood up and asked Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to address himself to the issue of Zionism. The question was clearly hostile. King responded, "When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism." (San Francisco Chronicle, January 21, 2002)Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said: When people criticize Zionists, you're talking anti-Semitism.
We need to wake up before it's too late. Recognize what is going on and take action. Write your government; tell them to take action against anti-Semitism in your county. Take notice of what is being said in the media. Write letters about their inaccuracies and omissions -- not only in letters to the editor, but also to their advertisers. Sign up to http://www.honestreporting.com. Visit Israel or at least buy Israeli products; support the economy of our brethren who are on the front lines.
Prior to coming to power in Germany, Hitler wrote "Mein Kampf" which outlined many of his plans, including a discussion of the "Jewish Problem." His horrible goals were laid out in black and white. Despite the forewarning, most people had their heads in the sand and were surprised when Hitler followed through on his plans.
Seventy years ago, we did not take Hitler at his word. Will we take today's anti-Semites at their word?
If your are so honest then why you are so worried about journalists in Jenin and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, not this website or other fabricated news
by Israeli intelligent service can not cover the massacres of innocent people.
Please see http://www.indictsharon.net
Have a nice day !!!!
A proud U.S citizen
If your are so honest then why you are so worried about journalists in Jenin and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, not this website or other fabricated news
by Israeli intelligent service can not cover the massacres of innocent people.
Please see http://www.indictsharon.net
Have a nice day !!!!
A proud U.S citizen
If your are so honest then why you are so worried about journalists in Jenin and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, not this website or other fabricated news
by Israeli intelligent service can not cover the massacres of innocent people.
Please see http://www.indictsharon.net
Have a nice day !!!!
A proud U.S citizen
If your are so honest then why you are so worried about journalists in Jenin and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, not this website or other fabricated news
by Israeli intelligent service can not cover the massacres of innocent people.
Please see http://www.indictsharon.net
Have a nice day !!!!
A proud U.S citizen
Maybe some of the people here are Jews and Christians who believe that Israel has a right to exist and that the violence on both sides has to stop to achieve a workable two state solution that everyone can live with!
Or India, or China, or Vietnam, or Cambodia, or Zaire, or Nigeria, or Morroco, or Algeria, or Japan, or Korea, or basically any country and any people under the imperialistic rule. Your arguement 'me' is an impossible one to substantiate unless you want to say China did not belong to the Chinese people because they did not have completely defined borders.
Mr T. How much for that crashed bmw ?