Desicritics Comments on Gaza: Shock, Awe and Uncertainty 2006

Comment by maadah

Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:52:13 EST

Cool website! Good work. Good resources here. Best regards!

Comment by anen4fh9jr

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:06:02 EST

6skrw81c01v7fju v1z3mm11jb6ucqym m838pj8dh

Comment by anen4fh9jr

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:05:56 EST

6skrw81c01v7fju http://www.502207.com/464558.html m838pj8dh

Comment by anen4fh9jr

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:53 EST

6skrw81c01v7fju [URL=http://www.1045940.com/585133.html] 4d78leuje56morv5 [/URL] m838pj8dh

Comment by anen4fh9jr

Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:50 EST

6skrw81c01v7fju 29oad6v8s28x7i37 [URL=http://www.1045940.com/585133.html] 4d78leuje56morv5 [/URL] m838pj8dh

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Fri, 8 Dec 2006 05:48:28 EST

Abdallah, As I pointed out to you "there is a way out". Initially, when the Arabs conquered this land, Omar, for whom the Golden Dome on the Temple Mount is named, considered building a mosque north of the original site of the Holy of Holies on the Temple Mount, so that Jews and Moslems, worshipping pretty much together, would both face south - Moslems toward Makka, Jews toward the Holy of Holies. At one time, apparently, Jews could worship as Jews in a mosque. There are enough similarities between Jews and Moslems that they can worship together. Wrest reconciliation out of hatred, and that could possibly occur again. The prophecy in Isaiah about the Children of Kedar sacrificing bulls at the Temple indicates that it will happen again in the future. How near that future is depends on what we do. THE STEER SHALL NOT BE PRESENT TO PROTEST WHILST THE BUTCHERS DISCUSS HOW TO CUT HIM UP First a brief note on why I pay so little attention to the doings of the Israeli government. I don't know if you noticed but they are on their way out, being slowly executed by Americans whose loyalty is to the Saudi thugdom and their corporate masters in the oil and banking establishment, pigs like James Baker. Baker proposes a meeting at Madrid (or somewhere like it) where ISRAEL WILL NOT BE PRESENT SO THAT THE MEETING WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO JEWISH PRESSURE Baker is telling Olmert and all the other fools who think that America is a friend to Israel that the steer shall not be present to protest whilst the butchers discuss how to butcher him. Why waste words on what will soon be a corpse? It is wiser to look to the future and build an alternative. There will be a Jewish entity here after the State of Israel either collapses or is brought down, and there will be a need to secure a decent future for both Jews and Moslems on a basis of justice and common beliefs. That will NOT occur at the hands of the oil and banking establishment, to whom we are mere wogs to be exploited and ordered around. BUILDING A COMMON FUTURE OF PROSPERITY I had posted a comment here indicating how I thought we could proceed to provide a secure economic future for Arabs in this country, end a humiliating military occupation, and provide political representation for the Arabs living in Eretz Yisrael - all without sacrificing Hebrew sovereignty over this land. Why can't we sacrifice Hebrew sovereignty? Because we do not have the right to give away G-d's land. Any Hebrew who seeks to give away what G-d has gifted him with to a non-Hebrew will fail in his efforts. All the innumerable plans to bring peace here by denying Hebrews their home have failed. One definition of insanity is repeatedly trying to do what has been already demonstrated as a failure. Let us step into a sane world. Let us talk about peace. Let's start by granting Jordanian citizenship to all resident Arabs here (nota bene: Druze and Cherkessim, though they speak Arabic, are not Arabs). The king of Jordan becomes "king of the Palestinians", making legal what is already nearly a reality. This means that all resident Arabs will have a "homeland," and will, under no definition of international law, be stateless persons. At present, those under the control of the Palestinian Authority are very close to being stateless persons. Palestine is not a sovereign state, and the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria are not Israeli citizens. Let's give the king of the Palestinians the right to have a home in Jerusalem, one near Pisgat Ze'ev that overlooks the Temple Mount from the north - one such home was already under construction before the Six Day War. Resident Arabs will have the right to elect delegates from the Arab provinces of Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Nablus, and a new one in Gaza to the parliament in Amman, and for the most part, they will be under Jordanian law. But the entire territrory will be under joint control of the Jewish entity and Jordan with the Jewish entity having sovereinty up to the Jordan river. Bear in mind that Jordan is already a "Palestinian state," so the issues will be how to make this enlarged "Palestinian" state viable and prosperous, AND how to make sure that the descendants of all those Arabs who had to leave there homes west of the Jordan in 1948-9 have prosperity and security. This Arab state, partly independent, and partly under Hebrew sovereignty, will be able to absorb all those in refugee camps who now suffer from anger and a lack of justice, and give them prefabs and the long deserved opportunity to imrove their lives. The day of the Arab refugee must end. The day of the UN intervening in the lives of such peple to enable terror groups to grow must also end. FUELING PROSPERITY This is a land that grows olives, and olives, aside from being good in martinis, make good oil. This oil can be used in cooking and eating to the benefit of the eater - it is far superior to the rapeseed oil (aka Canola) now being pushed all over the world by the Canadian Agriculture Ministry. It is also good for fuel. Biodiesel - diesel fuel made without petroleum - is the key to prosperity for this part of the world. You modify the diesel engine slightly, use olive oil and some other chemicals to make a bio-diesel fuel to run the engine, and you cut down immensely on both pollution and the use of oil. You still do need petroleum as a lubricant for the engine, but one uses far less of petroleum for lubricating oil than for gasoline. One result of switching to bio-diesel is that the price of petrol would drop immensely. One could continue to use petroleum to make plastics to house computers and other products that are do not come in contact with things that people eat, and the housings would be less expensive than they are now, thus further depressing the price of computers, making them more common and available to poor people. This would give many poor people with reasonable educations a chance to make money educating those with less education, so that all could benefit from the benefits that computers bring (the ability to do an immense amount of mathematical operations in mere seconds) The key to all of this is finding the money that will fund this kind of economic development and in seeing to it that any economy that develops here develops without reference to the soon to collapse economy of America, not to mention that of Europe... EVERYBODY CAN SIT UNDER HIS PWN FIG TREE IN PEACE There is an immense amount of money floating around in Israel. The reason nobody mentions it is that Israel's version of Inland Revenue would come sniffing it out like a junkyard dog, turning everybody's pocket upside down to empty every shekel it could find and put in the Israeli treasury, where it would be promptly stolen by the politicians in control. That is the money that can be used to build the prosperity I'm talking about. Let's bring this down to base level. There is nothing wrong with resettling Jews in their homes in Gaza and refunding the hothuses they used to grow Qatif vegetables. Also, there is nothing wrong with building Arab owned hothouses so that they too can grow and market vegetables using the technology we have developed. The price of the vegetables will drop and they can be shipped all over the world, not just to Europe. People in India and Pakistan also can have Gaza grown vegetables on their tables if the prices are low enough, and the profit to the growers will come from the volume of the sales, rather than a high unit price. There are similar joint projects that can be pursued in Samaria and Judea, where Arabs and Jews, instead of trying to use olive trees and grape vines to make political points against each other, work them together for common benefit. I frankly admit that I am not an expert in economic development, and my ideas, as they look right now, seem half baked. But the home grown experts are here and certainly in Jordan as well, and given that there will be funding for economic development, economic development will result, provided the international banking giants and corporate mafias are kept out. The big price that will need to be paid will be the determination to keep the hate, anger and spirit of recrimination and blame that has dominated the past in the past, and the recognition that the common enemy of the Children of Abraham, all of us Semites, is America and Europe. If this seems like a comment you have already read, it is. A comment like this that I posted was erased in chasing down spam and has not be reposted to his article.

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 19:32:49 EST

Abdallah, Glad to see you back. First of all, a few points for you to understand. WHO FIRST PROPOSED ZIONISM? WHO CARRIED IT OUT? The initial writers 150 or 160 years ago who suggested the re-establishment of a Jewish state were all rabbis. They were condemned by their fellow rabbis of the day who had a narrow interpretation of the messianic concepts of Judaism. The later writers who advocated the re-establishment of a Jewish state were largely socialists who hated the rabbis (whom in Eastern Europe at the time were mostly narrow minded allies of the "rich" Jews in the Jewish villages of Eastern Europe who maintained power through pushing ignorance), and who wanted to overthrow the existing order of Jewish society and wanted to use a re-established "Jewish" state as the tool to do it. Of course their version of a "Jewish" state was one without G-d, rabbis or religion. The concept of returning to to Israel is very much rooted in Judaism and in our prophetic books, but to the degree they could, these "labor Zionists" wanted to cut the religion out altogether. These are the people who actually made aliyah, cleaned the soil, etc., etc. Their descendants, who have ceased to believe in what their predecessors did here (as Rabbi Kook predicted would happen in the 1920's), are the criminals who run the State now. Further points. HOW THE TALMUD RELATES TO THE TORAH AND WHY IT DOES NOT ADVOCATE A JEWISH STATE To clear up a misconception of yours. The Written Law and the Oral Law go together. The Written Law is the Torah. The Oral Law is the Talmud, which originated in the oral instructions Moses Gave to his brother Aaron (Haroun) for the purpose of making the Hebrew faith work. These instructions were passed on orally from priest to priest until they were reduced to writing by the remnant of the Sanhedrin meeting in Yavne after the Romans had destroyed the Temple along with the Kingdom of Judea. The original Talmud was known as the Talmud Yerush�lmi. Much of it was lost, but rewritten as the Talmud Bavl� in Babylon. We use both today. The key point is that the Oral Law is the equal of the Written Law and both are binding on Jews. That law is a law designed to govern Jews here. In other words, the norm is living here. The adjustments that need to be made are made to alien situations and alien environments that exiled Jews havd found themselves in over 1,800 years. While the Torah does not talk about re-establishing a state, the rest of the Hebrew Bible does. Since the Talmud is written with the assumption that its readers will live here to follow its precepts, it too does not talk very much of re-establishing a Jewish state. WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE ARABS? Finally the key point I wish to drive home to you is this. The "two state" proposal is one that cannot benefit the Arabs living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. The reason is simple. The Arab "state" would be a dependency of the Israeli economy, which it would consequently drag down, and in addition would be a recipient of European and American largess just to get by. Just so that you comprehend, without the burdern of maintaining a military like that of a world power, Israel could get by easily without the foreign "aid" the Americans provide. It is the security burden that weighs down the Israeli economy. But let me get back to my main point here. Any solution that is to bring about reconciliation between Moslems and Jews must provide for the economic security of Moslems. It is injustice now that Moslem kids have to search the garbage dumpsters of Jerusalem, and that Moslem adults are considered as people to be paid a sub-standard wage. A "two state" solution, as is constantly harped on by people like Temporal, Anamika and Sujai would only further that injustice and create more poverty and anger among Arabs in this neck of the woods... The result would be an irredentist Wahhabi based movement to destroy Israel getting more and more support from Arabs here. That's not peace - that's war. And yes, there is a way out.

Comment by Anamika

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 19:25:15 EST

Just for the record Abdullah, am a woman. :-)

Comment by abdallah

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 17:57:51 EST

Guys, I do apologize for the grammatical errors or missing words in most of my posts..! I'm learning so be patient with me. Ruvy, I find in tune with Anamika's post #68, I think, he is right on the money all most 95%, I took away that 5% coz he /she found you condescending and I did not..! yet again each one of us has every right to his points of if you and we all MUST learn to live with it but not necessarily by it....! Just though to put it across.......!

Comment by abdallah

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 17:42:10 EST

Ruvy, I missed quite few of your points and it's not getleman like to be selective in picking up the points to seem like I'm picking up on you, but I have one point that is really sticking out..as far as the "Promised Land" is concerned and I believe this is the central issue to our discussion, from Torah point of view, could you please clearly explain the following 3 points and point out clear section or verses from the Torah (Not Telmud or other writings or traditions) let's urgue on the basis of the Books of Prophit Moses(Peace and Blessings of G-D be upong him). 1) In the past two thousand years of the dangers and sufferings of exile and oppresions the Jewish people undergone not once did any of the Sages of Israel suggest that Jews make a state to protect themselves. In every generation Jews had thousands of Sages well versed in the Torah. 2) There are so much of legal work of Torah law that have been handed down to todays Jews by the Sages of all generations. Not once do did it say anywhere a word suggesting the establishment of a state. Actually most of the Jews agains establishment of Israel, specailly those based in the States and particularly in New York, perhaps in Williamsburg are find it totally against teachings of Law of Torah and are bitterly fighing against it. 3) Do you agree that, the founders of Zionism were all atheists who denied the Torah. All the Torah Sages of that time opposed them and opposed Zionism, saying that Zionism would lead only to destruction. Please try to figure out the above and as I said help me with the supporting verses. Honestly, I just can't accept the idea of "God giving land" specially when you are have other people living in the same people. Imagine, if everyone of us decides that God ahs giving him or her an eternal right to certain land or lands? I mean it's understandble if it was a place of worship, like a teple or a mosque, church or synagogue. I remeber few years ago how sadned we were all after the incidents in Ayodha in Utter Pradhesh in India. I remember telling one of my friends, why don't the Muslims just give up of the site or share it with thier Hindu countrymen if these guys believe so much that spot is so holly to them, at least if they could proof it was the birth place of one of their Lords just to save human lives....! I don't but if each one of us acts on behalf of his God without any consideration to justices, human suffering and the pain we cuase to others, then we are should be all Atheists. becouse the God I know demands me to be just, righteous, fair-minded and companionate to all of his creations. particurly to all people of all races and religions. Do you agree with me...?

Comment by abdallah

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 17:39:09 EST

Comment by abdallah

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 16:49:19 EST

Haya everybody, I was away for couple of days and I see I have missed plenty...! Ruvy, How is it going..? I see you have taken the time to reply some of my questions, thanks that is very kind of you. Now, allow me to jump the debate, and ask you one more question, whatever happen to the people who were living in all thses places you mentioned...! personally I know most of them are west bank settlements and not arab vilages, but what happen to the arab viilages close to where these settlements are built on..? Good to see you all are healthy and still kicking..!

Comment by Anamika

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:31:57 EST

Thanks temporal - the issue is precisely of using god as reason for the land, and hence as you right say, the intractability. The best thing about using god as rationale is that all anti-humanity excesses can be explained away, ignored or justified. Some of the posts above remind me of Spielberg's opus (especially Munich) where injury to the Jewish soul due to Israeli political excesses are considered far more important than the wounds left by Israeli bullets on Palestinian bodies. Thus internal dissensions of the Israeli or indeed Jewish society takes precedence. Ruvy - I could bring post an equal number of harrowing stories about the Israeli state which has little respect for Palestinians. The "framing" Palestinians for fictitious crimes or "terrorism" is all too frequent to even warrant a comment from most Israelis. The IDF has also been proven in international courts to deliberately shoot journalists, NGO-workers, and even UN officials who are covering the confict. The point here is not that Israeli state is corrupt or unjust. The point is that a purported democracy (of couple of million voters) chooses to maintain a state that is patently so. The difference here also is of the "narrative" and its correlation to power (as Edward Said would say). That makes Israeli political and military decisions "acceptable" if not entirely moral in the Western world. At the same time Palestinian or indeed "Arab" actions are judged as immoral and "barbaric." Hence no peace and no end in sight. PS - temporal - I can resist. :-) Why trade freedom for institutional privileges when remaining on the outside is far more interesting!

Comment by temporal

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:50:13 EST

ruvy my friend: i am not the one who is not paying attention here;) you wrote: Temporal, if the problem in Israel was a mere real estate issue, a couple of lawyers and a generous helping of moolah would have solved the problem long ago. the point i was trying to make is whether it is jews or palestinians...moolah is not a valid consideration ... it is LAND...their land, your land, God's land! hence the intractability from both sides

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:08:12 EST

Temporal, I see you haven't been paying any attention to what I've been writing at all. I'm not some paper waving Hassid from Williamsburg who gets bought off with a generous wad of cash. If I were, I'd be deserving of all the Jew-hating contempt that could be poured my way. No, Temporal. I could say it is a matter of honor, but it goes beyond being a mere matter of honor. It is a matter of identity. The man who emerged from the Williamsburg slums in Brooklyn to eventually make his home here will not be bought off. I will not sell my soul for money. And I hope I can say the same about my neighbors in Ma'aleh Levona, Shilo, 'Eli, Sh'vut RaHel, 'Ofra, and Kokhav Ya'akov.

Comment by temporal

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 16:18:43 EST

thanks for this story about internal schism and political jockeying ruvy:) but this does not detract from the earlier discussion with anamika also one query for you...earlier you mentioned moolah...tell me honestly if there is enough money in the bank of england vaults or at fort knox that can make you abdicate your claim to the land?

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 16:05:59 EST

Let's move away from the theoretical for a moment and look at reality. This came to me courtesy of the Root & Branch Information Service. Anyone seeking to receive their e-mails can go to the Root & Branch Website and subscribe. This is a story that shows how the Israeli "government" manufactures murder cases and tampers with evidence and the truth. While this is not particularly significant in countries where this is the norm, this particluar case is part of the constant propaganda against Jews generally (overseas propaganda), and against Jews who live in Judea and Samaria in particular (propaganda aimed at secular Jews in Israel). It is from these tissues of lies that Al Jazeera, CNN and the BBC manufacture their lies. The emboldening of the letters in some paragraphs is mine. ISRAELI-AMERICAN TEENAGER, SHIMSHON CYTRYN, CHARGED WITH ATTEMPTED MURDER IN MELEE copyright � 2006 by Mrs. Elli Rodan YERUSHALIYIM, Fifteenth Day, Ninth Month ("Kislev"), 5767; Yom Revi'i (Fourth Day of the Week/"Wednes"-day, December 6, 2006), Root & Branch Information Services: A 19-year-old Israeli-American has been charged with attempted murder for what he said was throwing a clump of sand during a melee with Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Shimshon Cytryn faces a maximum of 20 years in jail if convicted in connection with a rock battle on the beach of the Gaza Strip weeks before the Israeli military evicted more than 10,000 Jews from the area in August, 2005. Cytryn, who said he threw sand toward a Palestinian, was the only Israeli in the melee charged with attempted murder. "All they [the authorities] want is to see him [Cytryn] sit in jail", Marilyn Cytryn, Shimshon's grandmother, said after a hearing in the Beersheba District Court on November 21. Cytryn has been charged with trying to kill 18-year-old Hilal Ziad Mujaida during a rock battle between Jewish and Arab residents of the Katif Bloc in the southern Gaza Strip on June 29, 2005. A video presented by the prosecution showed Cytryn hurling something toward the Palestinians, many of whom threw bricks and rocks toward the Jews. Several Jews were injured in the clash. Mujaida, who was also seen throwing rocks, was struck in the melee, and the video taken by television news crews showed him bleeding from the forehead. The video then showed Cytryn leaping toward a stone barrier and throwing something toward Mujaida. No Palestinian was arrested or charged in the melee, but four other Israelis were arrested and charged with crimes ranging from aggravated assault to disorderly conduct. Avinoam Crispin, 19, was charged with aggravated assault and spent 10 months under house arrest. In October, 2006, Crispin reached a plea bargain in which he was convicted of disorderly conduct and sentenced to five months community service. "At first they wanted to charge him [Crispin] as they did Shimshon -- with attempted murder", Crispin's father, Shlomo, recalled. "Soldiers caught him when he tried to kick the Arab, but this does not amount to attempted murder". Supporters said the indictment of Cytryn was part of a vendetta against his father. In 1995, Cytryn's father, Shmuel, was arrested and held without trial for eight months. The elder Cytryn, an activist of the banned Kach movement, was detained after he released hospital records that challenged the official version of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. "Shimshon is high on the list of the Shabak [Israel Security Agency]", Shmuel Cytryn said. "The Cytryn family is targeted because of its activities on the extreme right. We represent something that to them is the enemy". The prosecution did not bring Mujaida to testify in the trial of the junior Cytryn, who has spent most of the last year either in jail or house arrest. Instead, the prosecution summoned an Israeli soldier, Shimon Marom, who said he sought to protect Mujaida from further harm after he was struck in the head. In his testimony, Marom said he did not see Cytryn attack Mujaida. The 21-year-old soldier, who also appeared in the video, said he did not know whether Mujaida sustained additional injury before he was handed over to a company commander. "During the incident I did not see the throwing of the object because my back was turned to the injured person", Marom testified. "Immediately afterwards, the injured person tried to stand but couldn't so a journalist helped me lift him up to take him, and after a few minutes we met Avi Shaked [company commander]. He took the injured with the journalist to another place and then I was out of the picture". "When the injured person got up and fell down, were there any injuries other than his forehead?" defense Attorney Yarom HaLevi asked. "I didn't pay attention", Marom said. Mujaida never filed a complaint against or identified Cytryn as his attacker. Despite a police search, the prosecution failed to retrieve the stone that allegedly struck Mujaida in the head nor did the prosecution supply medical evidence detailing Mujaida's injuries or hospitalization. After the melee, Israel's state-owned media accused Cytryn of seeking to "lynch" Mujaida. But Mujaida told Israel Radio in early July that the injury on his forehead was caused by being struck by the rifle butt of an Israeli soldier. "One soldier took me to a separate place -- not any settler -- and hit me with the rifle butt in my stomach and in my head", Mujaida said. "He put me against the wall and let children hit me". Mujaida said he lost consciousness and did not know what happened next. But later in the radio interview, he said he was struck and injured by a stone. "Someone came behind the wall and threw a stone on my head and then I fainted", Mujaida said. For his part, Cytryn acknowledged that he participated in the melee. But he said he threw clumps of sand rather than rocks. "I threw clumps of dirt", Cytryn testified. "I wanted to deter them". The trial was scheduled to end on December 10. Cytryn has been arrested several times for violating a court order to remain under house arrest. "They [the police] were waiting for him when it was clear he had permission to be with us", Hedva Herbst, Cytryn's host, recalled. "They [the police] said they made a mistake". Despite the lack of prosecution witnesses, the three-judge panel appears ready to convict Cytryn. At one point, the judges sought to adjourn the trial until February, 2007, while Cytryn remains in jail. "How long has he served?" presiding Judge Ruth Avidah asked Judge Chana Slutky. "Three months", Slutky replied. "This time will be deducted [from the sentence]", Avidah said.

Comment by temporal

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 15:25:38 EST

agree it is not easy:) disagree... moolah is worthless here...the only real GOD here is land -- both parties would have nothing else

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 15:12:30 EST

Temporal, if the problem in Israel was a mere real estate issue, a couple of lawyers and a generous helping of moolah would have solved the problem long ago. Sorry, it ain't that easy.

Comment by temporal

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:24:32 EST

ruvy: the believers worldwide believe in the same God...yet it does not stop them from killing and maiming each other in the name of the same God khair real estate ownership is the main culprit behind almost all world conflicts... in the short term force can bring about a resolution - but for the long haul a just and equitable settlement (for all parties to a conflict) is needed - without divine help ... and this applies to all conflicts including israeli-palestinian dispute

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:05:45 EST

I could go into a lengthy and detailed description of events in the past, but I'd rather not resurrect old hates and arguments in an attempt to convince you of the justice of my words, and that is what I'd have to do. You will not be convinced by this puerile explanation in this comment. You will be convinced, if you are at all, by seeing events on the scale of a tsunami or even more terrible. I apologize. I did not mean this to sound condescending. I was once an atheist. Events occurred to me in my life that my rational construct of a world could not explain. So, I adjusted my philosophy bit by bit to what more and more seemed reality. Rational argument could not have convinced me to hold the beliefs I do. Were that the case, I'd be rich now from having sold my best seller "Solid Proof of the Existence of G-d." People, even people who say they are atheists or who condemn those who worship G-d, hunger after faith. Give them something solid to grasp onto, and they're yours - at least until the next interesting book rolls around. So rational argument is not likely to convince you, and the seeming irrational arguments certainly won't. Attempting to explain the history of the Arabs and the Jews here in the last nine decades is not really a difficult task, but in the process of it going through the comments of others, it would bring so up much anger, hurt and pain, not to mention disputation, that the one thing needed to get to any kind of peace, the willingness to move on and leave the hatreds of the past firmly in the past, would vanish in a second. And at the moment, it is peace that I'm pursuing. That is why I have not pursued the topic on this thread. Thsat is not dodging - that is discipline. I'd much prefer to argue over events of the past. As for the approach, it is simple. Jewish politicians here have all been bought up like so many offshore subsidiaries. Arab politicians are cowed by the Kalashnikov-waving terrorists who have been making deals with, as well as killing Israelis. If I wish to see the objectivity of international bodies of the UN, I need only look at whatever monkeys are sitting on the latest incarnation of the Human Rights Commission. They have all the time in the world to condemn Israel, but not one ounce of sympathy for the human rights of the people of southern Sudan. So politicians and the "international community' are not the place to turn for a just solution to the problems of the Children of Abraham in the Land of Israel. That leaves the religious leaders of Jews and Arabs. They will need something to get behind - a concept, a program. One of the comments I had here which were removed during a spam removal campaign dealt with just this topic - a program to get for Arabs and for Jews a better solution than is being offered by the thieving and bought out politicians who talk "peace". Hopefully, it will return.

Comment by temporal

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:55:00 EST

ana: fata morgana indeed:) (let's see for how long you resist;) - please reconsider writing here)

Comment by Anamika

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:35:26 EST

Ruvy, thanks for the explanation, although your tone has been increasingly condescending. But perhaps that is only to be expected. You still have not answered the basic question I posed earlier despite my posting it in various ways. That question remains quite simple: Why is a supposed promise from god ample reason to displace an entire population and take over land that has been inhabited by them for many hundreds of years? Your theoretical weaving of Zionist vs Judaism reminds me of the writings of Herzl who was distressed by the number of "Arabs" in Palestine but implicitly expected their displacement and erasure for the greater purpose of the establishment of Israel. Ben Gurion's implicit recognition of the removal of Palestinians from "Israeli" lands has been well documented as well. He was far too much of diplomat to frame it in explicit terms although his writings make the intent of removing Palestinians from their lands quite apparent. And of course Golda Meir was less diplomatic when she claimed that there were "no Palestinian people" (a claim similar to the Chinese claim of "no Tibetan people" as prelude to the genocide in Tibet). If the above language sounds harsh, it is simply because as a nonpartisan observer, I am stating the reality as seen objectively from beyond the confines of religion and faith, or indeed historical guilt. You also have not answered why this "refuge" for the Jewish people "persecuted world-wide" came at the price of the Palestinians? Surely if the crime was committed by Europeans, the price should have been paid by them as well? Your choice of the term "world-wide persecution" in any case reflects a Western (Ashkenazi) bias especially since the Jewish people weren't persecuted all over the world, but primarily in Europe. May I point to the Cochin synagogue - 800 years old - that stands as the oldest continuous synagogue and testament that there were parts of the world where Jews lived in perfect harmony with their nonJewish neighbours. In framing Israeli identity with sole reference to Western Jewish experience, the inherent colonial rationale of the final "settler colony" enterprise becomes distressingly obvious. I can see this discussion going no further mostly because your own location will not allow you to see the contradictions between rationality and faith, or indeed the intertwined threads of Judaic identity and Zionism. Yes, even the "secular" Zionism that you so disdain is rooted in religous fundamentalism. In any case, the discussion with you has been very illuminating as regards the levels of denial and ideological extremism. Thus far I had only understood one side of the extremist rhetoric and ideology - of the Arabs (note, NOT the Palestinians!). Now I understand the other side of that equation, and why peace shall remain a fatamorgana in that part of the world.

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 6 Dec 2006 01:47:49 EST

Anamika, Let me return to an earlier comment here, so you comprehend just what is being talked about here. Let's go back to comment #14, which is the basis upon which all my comments here stand and recopy its essential points. What are the fundamental elements of the Zionist state? 1. Reclaiming (as in draining swamps, clearing off rock and planting forests) the land and settling it, all the way from Met�lla in the north to Net�nya and Kesar�a (Caesarea) in the west, to Eil�t in the south and to Mitzpé YeriH� in the east, overlooking the Jordan. This dream was expressed best by Naomi Shemer (z"l) in her song "Yerushalayim shel Zahav" (Jerusalem of Gold); "The shofar will be again heard blowing from the Temple Mount and we will travel to the Dead Sea via the Jericho Road." This song was a hit in May 1967. This verse was added after the victory over three Arab nations in June 1967. 2. Resurrecting Hebrew as a spoken language among the Jewish people. 3. Ingathering the exiled Jews from outside the Land: 3a. Serving as a refuge for the Jewish people who are persecuted world-wide, 3b. Attracting Jews from prosperous countries like America, Britain and France. 4. Establishment of a state just like all the other nation states in the world! Note what didn't make it into this list. 1. No Third Temple on the Temple Mount. 2. No Sanhedrin to fix up Jewish law. 3. No messianic redemption. 4. No establishment of the primacy of Jewish law in the Land of Israel. 5. No recognition that the Children of Israel will be a nation reckoned apart from the other nations of the world! 6. No recognition of the role of G-d in creating the universe, or Jewish destiny. All the six elements above are primary elements of Judaism and of Jewish identity. Zionism is not a religious movement at all. It is a secular nationalist movement among Jews who sought freedom from Christian and Moslem oppression. Its goal, the State of Israel is a standing accomplishment - but that goal is threatened by the fact that Jewish identity is split between two visions among our people; the first one is the secular vision of being a nation like all the other nations, one that is recognized as an equal in the councils of mankind; and the other is the religious one of being reckoned apart from all the nations. Zionism is largely the political movement of agnotics amd atheists, Anamika. It is a movement of people who have no interest in G-d or in religion. They view being Jews as being like lemons, and Zionism is their way of making lemonade. And socialism was the sugar in the lemonade... Religious Jews have attempted to append themselves to the movement, but were accepted only so long as they gave up part of their own identity. Gush Qatif was a success largely of religious Jews following religious precepts in establishing an agricltural community independent of and without refernce to the secular economy of the State. It was their big "sucess" story. Uprooting them from their homes was more a matter of "getting religious Jews" (something admitted to at long last by Tommy Lapid, late of the militantly secular "Shinui" [Change] Party), more in light of the wholesale failure of the (secular) kibbutz and moshav movement than anything else. The point of my subsequent comments is that this secular nation/state, the State of Israel, is collapsing. In other words, this entire artificial structure of secular Israeli nationalism is not doing the job it was meant to do. It can no longer provide the rationale for its army or its flag. It's leaders no longer believe in its fundamental goals, providing a homeland for the Jewish people from persecution. They are confused and because they no longer believe in the basics of their country, they are willing to give it away. Zionism is what happens when you try to cut G-d out of the equation of Jewish identity, and the collapse of the Zionist state is the inevitable result of Jews trying to imitate the mentality of the "civilized" Europeans - those same wonders who saw fit to send a third of the Jewish people off to be made into soap and lampshades. Hence we see the injustices that we do, the "negative" side to Israeli nationalism you highlight, the discrimination against Jews who do not have the European background of the "founders" of the State, the discrimination against non-Jews who would like to ally themselves with the State, like the Cherkess and the Druze, and the discrimination against non-Jews who ally themselves with the State out of perceived econmomic necessity, like the Bedouin who live in our country. And now we see the willingness of this movement to discard its ancient homeland to get "peace." That is the story behind "Oslo", Camp David and all of the other bullshit that has moved this country from being indeed the fourth most powerful military on the planet to being a mewling dependency of America and the EU with all the sovereignty of Bhutan. Faced with a choice of war with honor or peace with dishonor, they have chosen peace with dishonor - and they have gotten neither peace nor honor. I could go into a lengthy and detailed description of events in the past, but I'd rather not resurrect old hates and arguments in an attempt to convince you of the justice of my words, and that is what I'd have to do. You will not be convinced by this puerile explanation in this comment. You will be convinced, if you are at all, by seeing events on the scale of a tsunami or even more terrible.

Comment by Anamika

Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:22:53 EST

Also where in a "Jewish" land of Israel would the Arabs find homes? Isn't the logic of the state of Israel of a homeland for the Jewish people? Isn't the demographics in the occupied territories already termed a problem for "Jewish" Israel? And this from the Chicago Tribune: "Seeing the negative side of Israel's nationalism: The subsequent Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands rendered her an instant foreigner. Since returning in 1975, she has tried to obtain permanent residency status, but like tens of thousands of other Palestinians, she was given a tourist visa, which requires quarterly renewal. So she diligently left and came back. For 31 years. A Foreign Ministry spokesman recently told the British Daily Telegraph that Samara and people like her "are foreign nationals with no legal status, living [in the West Bank] as tourists while we turned a blind eye." I happen to believe - with some decent evidence that peace isn't going to happen unless both sides STOP talking faith and belief and gods and start talking about humans instead. Ruvy you say you moved for "personal" reason? But surely you chose Israel over other parts of the world because you chose to make "aliyeh"? You speak of "coming home" to a country that you have never seen, you have not lived in, that your ancestors inhabited 2000 years ago. That in itself is a politico-religious motive rather than such a "personal" one? And that "coming home" will automatically have to be at the cost of someone being forced off that same land? Am I the only one on the forum who sees the moral/logical problem with this?