Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Daniel Pipes :: Townhall.com Columnist
Fund the Palestinians? Bad Idea
by Daniel Pipes
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Lavishing funds on Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to achieve peace has been a mainstay of Western, including Israeli, policy since Hamas seized Gaza in June. But this open spigot has counterproductive results and urgently must be stopped.

Some background: Paul Morro of the Congressional Research Service reports that, in 2006, the European Union and its member states gave US$815 million to the Palestinian Authority, while the United States sent it $468 million. When other donors are included, the total receipts come to about $1.5 billion.

The windfall keeps growing. President George W. Bush requested a $410 million supplement in October, beyond a $77 million donation earlier in the year. The State Department justifies this lordly sum on the grounds that it "supports a critical and immediate need to support a new Palestinian Authority (PA) government that both the U.S. and Israel view as a true ally for peace." At a recent hearing, Gary Ackerman, chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, endorsed the supplemental donation.

Not content with spending taxpayer money, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice launched a "U.S.-Palestinian Public Private Partnership" on Dec. 3, involving financial heavyweights such as Sandy Weill and Lester Crown, to fund, as Rice put it, "projects that reach young Palestinians directly, that prepare them for responsibilities of citizenship and leadership can have an enormous, positive impact."

One report suggests the European Union has funneled nearly $2.5 billion to the Palestinians this year.

Looking ahead, Abbas announced a goal to collect pledges of $5.8 billion in aid for a three-year period, 2008-10, at the "Donors' Conference for the Palestinian Authority" attended by over ninety states on Monday in Paris. (Using the best population estimate of 1.35 million Palestinians on the West Bank, this comes to a staggering amount of money: per capita, over $1,400 per year, or about what an Egyptian earns annually.) Endorsed by the Israeli government, Abbas immediately raised nearly that amount for 2008 at the donors' conference.

Well, it's a bargain if it works, right? A few billion to end a dangerous, century-old conflict – it's actually a steal.

But innovative research by Steven Stotsky, a research analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) finds that an influx of money to the Palestinians has had the opposite effect historically. Relying on World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and other official statistics, Stotsky compares two figures since 1999: budgetary support aid provided annually to the Palestinian Authority and the number of Palestinian homicides annually (including both criminal and terrorist activities, and both Israeli and Palestinian victims). Graphed together, the two figures show an uncanny echo:

 

The correlation is even clearer when the aid of one year is superimposed on the homicides of a year later:

In brief, each $1.25 million or so of budgetary support aid translates into a death within the year. As Stotsky notes, "These statistics do not mean that foreign aid causes violence; but they do raise questions about the effectiveness of using foreign donations to promote moderation and combat terrorism."

The Palestinian record fits a broader pattern, as noted by Jean-Paul Azam and Alexandra Delacroix in a 2006 article, "Aid and the Delegated Fight Against Terrorism." They found "a pretty robust empirical result showing that the supply of terrorist activity by any country is positively correlated with the amount of foreign aid received by that country" – i.e., the more foreign aid, the more terrorism.

If these studies run exactly counter to the conventional supposition that poverty, unemployment, repression, "occupation," and malaise drive Palestinians to lethal violence, they do confirm my long-standing argument about Palestinian exhilaration being the problem. The better funded Palestinians are, the stronger they become, and the more inspired to take up arms.

A topsy-turvy understanding of war economics has prevailed in Israel since the Oslo negotiations began in 1993. Rather than deprive their Palestinian enemies of resources, Israelis have been following Shimon Peres's mystical musings, and especially his 1993 tome, The New Middle East, to empower them economically. As I wrote in 2001, this "is tantamount to sending the enemy resources while fighting is still under way – not a hugely bright idea."

Rather than further funding Palestinian bellicosity, Western states, starting with Israel, should cut off all funds to the Palestinian Authority.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
What accountability do we have?
Mr. Pipes has written a provocative article. He suggests that foreign financial aid is being funneled to terrorist causes, or at the very least he suggests a direct correlation between violence and financial aid to the Palestinians. I wonder what level of accountability is exercised over the donated funds. If accountability is weak, it follows that the correlation between funding and violence is valid. If accountability is strong, it would tend to weaken that link. Mr. Pipes didn't address this question.

Corruption and deceit have been defining characteristics of the Palestinians for generations, so my humble guess is that there is little, if any, accountability for the millions of dollars going to them. The last I heard, official textbooks still teach Palestinian children that Jews and Christians are apes and pigs, and that killing them pleases Allah very much indeed.

If it is found that any portion of humanitarian aid is diverted to the Islamic hate agenda, then by all means, cut it off completely. Continued funding of the old Palestinian agenda would be counterproductive.

I believe in this truism:
The more you GIVE 'them,' the more 'they' need.

No matter WHO 'they' are - it is true.

Hamas RULES gaza, no doubt about it.
State labeled Hamas a 'terrorist org.'

WHY is the USA supporting a terrorist organization???? Please, tell me WHY Israel is?

END THIS MADNESS!

Well Now
We are stupidly funding the PA because it 'looks good' from a humanitarian view point.
What we are in reality doing is funding our own demise.
There is absolutely no accountabilty for the funds they receive and a a very large proportion of it finds it's way into the Swiss bank accounts of their so called leaders. They have yet to start even one project that could, in the future bring prosperty to their people. Heck, if they just divided up the donations between everyone, poverty would disappear over night there.

On investment
We've spent much more money on Israel than on the Palestinian Arabs, I grant you.
What have we gotten for our money in each case?

In Israel we have gotten a stable nation with Democratic processes; womens' rights on par with our own; an inclusive political process that allows the Others (Palestinian Arab citizens) to freey vote and hold office; paramountcy of law over graft; freedom of religion; freedom of the press and of dissent; even a society in which homosexuals do not have to fear for their lives (I am not homosexual, but yes I consider this important).

In the Palestinian regions we have exactly the opposite in every case, and no indications of improvement commensurate with the money spent on them.

For those who call for a 'cost-benefit' analysis of the campaign in Iraq -- apply your stated principle in this case.

To Bouette
I submit that the United States has no business funding a polity that pays people to murder innocents, trains children to engage in suicide bombings, foments unrest in other nations, engages in the most appalling graft and nepotism, employs spies and agents of influence here, assasinates officials, holds women in subjection and hangs homosexuals simply because of their sexual preferences.
Least of all when this polity pursues the declared goal of toppling one of the tiny handful of representative democracies in the region.

As for Israel: it is far less racist than any of its neighbors who won't even allow Jews to attain citizenship (or often, even enter the country). It is far less religiously zealous than its neighbors who kill persons who leave Islam for other religions and do not allow Judaism (and often, other religions) to be practiced within their borders -- not to mention refusing to countenance the right of people to hold no religious convictions at all. Further, Israel only 'grabbed land' after being an unprovoked attack by its neighbors (attaining defensible borders in the face of aggression is not all that unreasonable in my book). I could go on, but I doubt you will listen anyway.

To Bouette
I submit that America has no business funding a polity that murders gays, holds women in subjection, trains children to perform suicide bombings, murders innocents for political gain, is awash with graft and nepotism, assasinates officials, foments trouble in neighboring nations and maintains agents of espionage and influence here. Not to mention pursuing the declared goal of toppling virtually the only representative democracy in the area.

As for Israel, you probably don't want to hear this, but they are far less religiously zealous than the many Muslim nations that refuse to even allow Judaism and other religions to be openly practiced, as well as killing apostates from Islam. I might note that there is a reason you never hear about atheists in those nations -- it isn't tolerated. Further, Israel is far less racially bigoted than her neighbors that will not even allow Jews entry, let alone participating citizenship. Then there is the fact that Israel only 'grabbed land' in order to attain defensible borders in the face unprovoked and repeated attack by its neighbors.
I could say more, but I suspect there would be little point.

Second to Bouette
Tell you what: I'm willing to immediately stop funding all parties to the conflict... under the provision that we support whichever party is next the victim of invasion, and bomb into the stone age the next aggressive party.
Wonder on whose side we would find ourselves fighting under such a rule?
Not too difficult to imagine, what with the constant stream of rockets being fired into Israel from her neighbors.

Earned Freedom
I'd submit that whenever you recieve something for nothing, you don't value it as much as when you earn it.

I think a financial windfall empowers ever grantee the freedom to spend their money as they wish when rule of law is scant and the psychosis of Palestinian schools teach that all problems and obstacles are the fault of the Jews.

They are not taught discernment or rugged individualism because they are still desperately reliant on whatever small measure of peace they have established. They are cowed by the daily bullying and voilence, the constant stress of ignorance, injustice and brutality.

Their population is immature and rift with mental health problems. I think Secretary Rice has a good idea in this public/private partnership however I think it a monumentally difficult task if Palestinine will not allow all textbooks and materials to be oriented toward the basics rather than ideology that could otherwise be taught at the mosque.

Apparently Palestinian schools are not the best. No schools buses where children must negotiate real danger or expense. Three children to a desk is the norm and drop out rates phenomenal.

I think it is a poverty when Palestinian leadership doesn't publically list the Capital Improvement projects they have settle upon when aid is given above operating expense. At the very least this gaurentees Palestinian awareness and perhaps some demand and reciept of accountablility by some brave Plestinians.


To Lisa
The revelation of Yasser Arafat's enormous nest-egg certainly doesn't argue in favor of throwing good money after bad. And Arafat, though the chief executive, was only the greatest offender among thousands of officials who undoubtedly siphoned (and are still siphoning) public funds into their own accounts.

I suspect that a study of Israel's provisions for open accounting of government funds would yield an interesting contrast. Unfortunately, I have not the time to carry out such a study.

IMO
it is a bad ideal from the start to fund your enemies! How many bullets and rockets have been bought with this money? How many Israelites have been killed with this money? I say again, it’s a bad ideal to fund the ones who would kill you OR your allies!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com/
Hunter’s bet quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy wing of the Republican Party!

To Doc
Lots. But for some reason, then number of dead Israeli women and children is far less important to certain parties than the number of dead Palestinian militants (who are invariably counted as 'victims' rather than the combatants they truly are).

On funding the PLO... I mean PA
I suppose if one feels no particular loyalty to democratic or humanitarian ideals, funding the Palestinian Authority seems reasonable.

It is simply beyond argument that Israel IS a representative democracy, that it DOES allow open dissent and religious freedom, that the Israeli Supreme Court DOES sometimes even rule against the government. It cannot be denied that Palestinian Arab members sit in the Knesset, that the lot of women is comparable to that of the U.S. (at least in the eyes of the law; who knows what goes on in the Arab community) and that gays are safe from bigotry-driven murder.

But if none of that means anything to a given individual (or if one's hatred of Jews is even stronger), then funding the diametrically-opposed Palestinian Authority might be attractive.

For Tallil2long @ 07:50
You failed to also note that an Arab (Azmi Bishara, a Druze) ran for PM (albeit losing).

Basically, the nearest outside comparison is that of India (most similar to Israel) with Taliban/AQ (and sympathising militants--unquestionably similar to PA and Hamas):
(1) Lots of Muslim MP's in India, several cabinet posts (including at least one erstwhile Home Minister--think of combining Attorney General and SCOTUS chief-justice as one)
(2) India has had Muslim army generals and one airforce chief--and several police IG's and prominent judges

By contrast, the lot of Muslims under Taliban rule in Afghanistan (and the writ of Taliban/AQ and sympathisers in parts of Pakistan) has been generally an introduction of misery (note--this is also true of PA since 1993, and even more so of Hamas in Gaza)

To Bouette
" could care less whether Jewish semites beat Arab semites or vice versa"

If my claim that Israel is a representative democracy and the Arab nations are not (a claim you haven't even attempted to refute), then you confess you could care less whether democracy or oppressive theocracy wins.
Interesting view.

As for the suggestion that I mightbe wealthy, guilty about safety and uncertain about my loyalties... I can only laugh.

V/R
SSG James Anderson
36th Engineer Brigade
Sharana, Afghanistan

Basically, aiding PA like aiding Taliban
Like Taliban, PA never had any constructive ideas (though PA did/does have some PR to pretend otherwise) and is basically an organisation of near-total-evil (PA was till 2006 synonymous with PLO, successor to an organisation formed by Haj-amin Husseini who actively collaborated with Hitler during WW2; Hamas considers Hitler as a hero).

Basically, if you would have any qualms about funding the Taliban, don't fund any "Palestinian" organisation!

funny you\ mention camera, pipe (dream)
another isreali propaganda front
http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2007/10/cameras-unwri tt.html

CAMERA Director: 'Many, Many Times We Have Urged' Israeli Gov't to Take Action Against American Publications

CAMERA president Andrea Levin said that the pro-Israel lobbying group has "an unwritten contract" with the American media to watch their step when writing about Israel.

Levin's speech was about Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper whose bleak portrayal of the occupation has helped to brief the world on the horrifying conditions there. Levin said that after Haaretz ran an opinion column describing the separate roads in the West Bank as "apartheid" roads, CAMERA members wrote letters to Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken saying this was a false charge. She then read from Schocken's responses. In one he said "the term 'roads for Jews only,' which may be mathematically incorrect, is fine with me.. because it describes the true nature and purpose of the roads." In another reply, Schocken wrote, "Your legalistic response is exactly the type that is used to blur reality, rather than clarify it. It is utterly ridiculous not to call these roads apartheid roads because the entire presence of Jews in the Occupied Territories is of an apartheid nature..."

This was distressing, Levin said, because Haaretz calls itself "the New York Times of Israel." The audience groaned and jeered.

Someone in the audience asked if the Israeli government couldn't take action. "Good question," Levin said. "Many many times we have urged in regard to American coverage-- to really, really serious defamatory reports in the American media--we have urged the Israel government, whether it was the IDF or some other components of officialdom, to be involved. Times that we thought that legal actions could be taken." But evidently that couldn't happen in Israel, where they have a "very free press."

to tallli and svp
quit spreading delusions about that little cancer of a country being a democracy.

it does not even have a constitution!
and the legal system is a mix of old testament, talmud, and rabbinical laws. which pretty much leaves gentiles with the rights of a beast of burden.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index. html

Israeli law bans Christian missionaries
'We are a Jewish state,' official says

The dwindling number of Christians in the Holy Land are facing yet another threat. Militant Jews and Israelis are trying to force members of the religion from seeking converts in the country.

Most alarming to Christians is a newly proposed law that would let authorities jail anyone who shares Christian literature.

"It could even include the New Testament because, after all, that is certainly a document Jesus would say, 'go out into the world and make disciples,'" Pastor Ray Lockhart of Christ's Church in Jerusalem says.

The proposed legislation is aimed at those who possess, print, reproduce, distribute, import, track or publicize information meant as an inducement to religious conversion.

"We are a Jewish state," explains Israeli Knesset member and bill co-sponsor Niffim Zilli. "We want to remain a Jewish state."

Much of the literature in a small Christian bookstore in Jerusalem would be outlawed by the legislation in its present form. Orthodox Jews already visit the store to harass customers, and there are fears that if the proposed anti-missionary law passes, militants might try to close the shop.

"I see this as being quite contrary to human rights, particularly to the right of religious freedom and choice of religion," Lockhart says.

svpallava
The solution to the Palestinian problem isn't to just let Israel take more and more of their land. Every president we have had has been against Israel occupying/stealing the West Bank and the Sheba Farms. As for collaboration with Hitler, a lot of countries did that, like Italy and Japan and George Bush's grandpa. Really, you cant kill and imprison thousands of Palestinians and expect them to love you.

good article and good posts
Bush promised to fight terrorism wherever it exists. But the US funds the terrorists of Hezzbollah and Hamas, now in Gaza after the US pressured Israel to give up gaza. Next all of the West Bank. A shooting range to fire upon Israeli communities and will be controlled by Hamas. Abbas is nothing other than Arafat with a different face and a smoother lie. I have been to Gaza prior to the pull out. Itsagriculture gave jobs to 9000 Palestinians. I have subsequently gotten the reports of Gaza after the pull out. All the Greenhouses smashed that were handed over to the Palestinians.. All buildings and Israelie improvements smashed!

We have a democracy in Israel who have fought terrorism prior to 48 and since and have won 5 wars that have been instigated against them! And yet we are trying to start another campaign that will destroy our only ally in the mideast.

Bush and Rice are crazy.

Meggy
I don't think you understand. The stealing of the West Bank isn't to have a buffer zone, the Israelis are filling it in with themselves.

sonofsam
Your name is pretty revealing.
Look, Camera is a necessary antidote to the propaganda wielding machine of CNN, State Department, most of the US News Media whose ability to forget history five minutes after it happens is incredible!
.
All you need is to go back and review history. History has been badly distorted.

A good start would be Joan Peters, previously of CNN, who wrote From Time in Memorial. One half of each page is footnotes.

The truth is prior to the 48 war, more Jews became refugees from "Arab" lands than "Arabs" became refugees from Israel. Israel and the US absorbed Jewish refugees who had to leave homes and bank accounts. The major Arab countries refused to absorb the "arab" refugees from the '48 war to use them as a political pawns.

Said refugees were first renamed "Palestinian" by Yassar Arafat to promote the lie of some sort of permanent attachment to the land of Palestine which had already been partitioned in 1922 by Churchill. 78 percent of Palestine was given to Arabs, and 22 percent would be the new homeland for the Jews.

Why isn't 78 percent enough? A new country was born called first TransJordan and then Jordan. Room enough for the "Palestinians?"

The ARab population in Israel increased dramatically prior to the 48 war as zionism created many jobs for ARabs.

and if they had only been there 1 year, they were cited as refugees.

READ YOUR HISTORY!


To sonofsam
I note that the link mentions a 'proposed law'. Was this law passed or defeated?

I also note that the bill was up for vote by the Knesset, the elected parliament of Israel. Thus, even if the bill is improper, and even if it was passed, the means by which the bill was presented and voted on proves the democratic nature of Israel.

Nice try, though.

Taft!
I understand plenty!

The WEst Bank was annexed by King Abdullah after Isarel won the 48 war. King Abdullah was a Saudi Arabian from the Hashemite family imported to be King of Churchill's newly created country, Jordan.

No international community recognized that annexation except Iraq. And now this area, previously Judea and Samaria, the heart of the Bible lands, previously belonging to the 22% of Israel appropriation, is de facto considered to belong to "Arabs."!

I understand also, having traveled extensively through the west Bank
that no one would be living there had not Israeli's dug wells, run electricity, and planted trees so that birds could come, so that butterflies and bees could arrive, so that crops could be pollinated so that survival could be possible. There is no more desolate land on earth than Samaria (especially Samaria)!
But where the Jewish pioneers have made life possible, Arab communities soon piggy bank!

Palestinian "aid"
Much like the Byzantines of old, the USA embraced the rendering of bribes, oh, sorry "aid", in the post-WW2 era in an attempt to buy peace; it was a failed theory in history and is a failed theory in modern times.
Since the founding of Israel by the "WORLD BODY" of the United Nations in a vote of the GENERAL ASSEMBLY and not the Security Council (a vote where every member state was equal in voting power), enough "aid" has been rendered to the "Palestinian people" to have covered the out right purchase of the land of Israel many times over. Although the vast majority of this "aid" has never reached the "Palestinian people", having been siphoned off by their "leaders", enough is enough already. Stop the "aid" completely and force a peace, or let the oil rich Islamic states support their brothers and sisters (states for the most part who don't want the "Palestinian people" anywhere in their countries and are more than happy to keep them in Gaza and the West Bank).
As far as Israel restricting Christian missionary work, well, we have our own brand of radicals in our Congress just as Israel has in their Knesset; the bill in the Israeli parliament is a bill of a radical minority and will never see passage into law, but should it, the Israeli courts would strike it down as it would violate Israel's "constitution". Compare this "rule of law" to waht goes on to Christians, much less Christian missionaries, in Muslim nations across the globe!

Meggy
"Said refugees were first renamed "Palestinian" by Yassar Arafat to promote the lie of some sort of permanent attachment to the land of Palestine which had already been partitioned in 1922 by Churchill."

Palistine is as old as the bible. The area first carved out for Isreal in 1948 has now tripled and continues to grow. Why won't they give back Sheba Farms?

Absolute insanity
You do not try to buy off evil. This is like funding organized crime ... only this is on an international level.

To paraphrase what one founding father said about the Barbary Pirates: "Billions for defense; not one red cent for tribute."

To sonofsam
Perhaps you should have researched more thoroughly.

The bill you referenced was withdrawn -- democratically:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1998/july13/8t814b.html

And a bill drawn up to succeed it was defeated -- democratically:
http://www.saministries.org/urgent.htm

As I said, though, nice try.

Meggy
Thats true, in part, that the Israelis did more with the land, but the Palestinians have lived there just as long as the Israelis and have a right to their land. If you have traveled there, you have seen the huge long walls that vivisect the homes of these people or the Israeli settlements on their land.

Taft / Sedonaman
Yes But "Palestine" is a Roman name and no self respecting Sheik at one time would have anything to do with such a name. Arafat made the renaming of Arab Refugees into a political ruse that would insinuate they were there first like the American Indians and had an indigenous right to the land.

To taft
The Jews were happy to accept the 1947 partition plan, which would have given Israel a much smaller amount of land -- and given the Palestinians everything that they now claim to want.
Unfortunately, before Israel 'grabbed' anything at all, the Palestinians -- not the neighboring nations' militaries, but the Palestinian Arab civilian population -- marched on the nearest Jewish settlements with rifles and axes. That unprovoked attempt at genocide convinced Israel that their only hope for survival lay in securing defensible borders.

Oh yes, I understand very well.

As Meggy stated
It is obvious that Taft has done LESSresearch than (the little) I have on this matter:
(1) "Palistine is as old as the Bible" -- false! that name was first applied to the Holy Land by the Romans AFTER AD 70 (to insult the Jews by naming the land after the long-defunct Philistines)
(2) On Israel's "stealing" land. Wrong again -- the land was won in a war STARTED by several Arab states; the West Bank was under rule of Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
(3) The only mistake made by Meggy is of claiming that the term "Palestinian" for Arabs was invented by Arafat--in fact, the term was invented in 1946 by Haj-amin Husseini (who had collaborated with Hitler during and prior to WW2). It is not even possible to make a "P" sound in Arabic, as shown in 1985 by a Pakistani diplomat complaining that Indian Ocean should be renamed "Muslim Ocean" ("Arabs call us 'Bakistan'...")

As I stated earlier, funding PA is at least as bad as funding Taliban. Due to Taliban not existing prior to 1980 (created on orders of 1971-warcriminal Zia ul-Haq), it just happens to lack the history of collaboration with Hitler (and total lack of remorse over it) of "Palestinians"--so I could easily have stated that funding "Palestinians" is WORSE than funding Taliban!

Sedonaman / Taft
Yes, I like that quote a lot as it was said by my ancestor, great great great grandfather, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, "Millions for defense but not one cent for tribute".

Taft:
I don't know what you mean when you say "palestinians" have lived there as long as Jews.
Yes, many Arabs lived there with Jews prior to 48.

But not the 750,000 that became refugees;
Prior to the Zionist movements, the Arab populations were small, some fixed, many fluid!

I have not seen this thing that you describe. Where do you get your information? However, I have seen the "settlement" of Ariel, population 16,000 that has a University that freely allows Arabs to enroll; the enrollment is 50% Arab.
Ya, you're right. Jews should not have started that community and built a university. Bad business all that trying to get along!

The idea that no Jew could be on "Palestinian" land is crazy. Should the opposition be correct and that the flawed premise that this is "palestinian land" be correct,
Who ever heard of a country that did not have mixed populations?

The hatred must continue and the State Department's utter confusion and contribution to the continuation of terror will probably go on non stop until Rice is removed!
nonsense.

To Taft
Furthermore, Jordan was CREATED to be the Palestinian state. Who do you think resides in Jordan, if not Palestinian Arabs? Do you think there was some mystical distinction in the Arab population of the time? The fact that a non-Palestinian dynasty was placed (by Europeans) in charge of the region means nothing.

Look up Churchill's memorandum to the 1921 Cairo Conference.

palestians and moiney
billions have been channeled to the palestians. How much ended up in the bank accounts of arafat and his cronies. Mioney was sent to aid the people and rebuild their infrastructure. Bit surprise nothing was done. Had arafat and his successors worked at building a country for their own people rather than waging a never ending war things would be infinitely better for the whole region. Alas the legacy of hatred prevents this pathetic people from anything but being the worlds most vocal and thankless beggarsd. But where are the oil rich countries and their aid. They talk of brotherhood but we don't hear reports of saudi or iranian oil money supporting anything but terrorism

The US need to end it
We need to end all foriegn aid folks. American tax payers should not be funding other nations. There are plenty of private charities in this country that send money overseas.

RIPOFF and FRAUD
"Foreign aid", in most cases,
IS A SECRET MECHANISM of paybacks for both parties. :(


Arafat's money
Arafat's 'personal nest egg' was estimated at one time as being between one and three billion dollars -- and that doesn't count the sums he had SPENT rather than tucking away.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/07/60minutes/main582 487.shtml

In 2004, Arafat's wife was reported to still be receiving $100,000 PER MONTH from the PA.

Yet so many people want to continue giving limitless sums to the PA.

Tallil2long
It's simple, the Israelis must give back the West Bank and stop ripping of the homes of Palestinians (or whatever you want to call them). You have a lot of bad things to say about Arafat, but Israel has had some doozies themselves and happen to have the worlds largest sex slave trade.

To Taft
"Here's what I'm talking about.
http://3quarksdaily.blogs.com/3quarksdaily/2007/09/it-is-un just-an.html#comments"


An op-ed piece by a former PLO representative is the evidence you offer?

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/karma_nabulsi/profile.h tml

No, sorry, this is not compelling.

Tallil2long
I can see the wall. Is it an optical illusion?

Walls
Here's a wall that cuts right through a Palestinian village.

http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/67.php?id=190

Today's paper
had a story about this questionable giveaway as well as reaction from officials in Gaza whinning about how this money given to Abbas's administration is an attack on Hamas.

Hamas is desperately cash poor but who could think this money would not first go to build more rockets into Israel? Concern exists about the citizens but recent polls show they support the attacks so in a sense, they are fighters for Hamas.

We are stupid in funneling more money into Palestine ,remember how much used to end up in Arafat's bank account in Switzerland now enjoyed by his widow living a lavish life in Paris.

To Taft
The Palestinians and Israel's Arab neighbors must *demonstrate* beyond any doubt that they have renounced violence against Israel utterly; until then, Israel giving up its defensible borders would be utter suicide -- or the deliberate sacrifice of its civilian population.
As you very well know since history has demonstrated this fact time and again.



To Taft
Of course it's a wall. You'd build one too if murderers kept coming to blow up your wife and children.
Why don't we examine the wall of governmental bigotry that prevents Jews from entering most Arab nations?

Oh. You don't want to talk about that.

To Taft
Why don't we talk about the hundreds of thousands of Jews who were forcibly evicted from Muslim nations in which they had often dwelt for decades or centuries. Not because of anything they had *done* but rather because their Arab hosts had decided to hate them because the nation of Israel had been formed and they detested the notion of Jews exercising political authority in any part of the Mideast.

But you can only see your wall, because you are not interested in applying the same standards of decency to Arabs that you expect from Jews. Got it -- I understand quite well.

Tallil2long
What is the score card. 10 to 1, Palestinian to Israeli. How many innocent civilians did the Israelis kill when they flew around Lebanon bombing places Arafat could be. I like Israelis and think they have a right to be safe and protect themselves but at the same time the Palestinian refugee crises can't go on and they need their homes. Iran offered the US complete withdrawal of support for Hezbollah in 03, but Cheney turned it down.

stop your antisemite rant mdog
"what would you have them do get rounded up and turned into bars of soap?"

I blame them for turning Palestinians into 'bars of soap'

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/925695.html
Dying of occupation - a case of cancer and the Israeli right

This past weekend, a Gaza cancer patient named Nail al-Kurdi, 20, waiting since July for permission to cross into Israel for treatment, died of his illness. For five months, officials of the Shin Bet security service received request after request from Physicians for Human Rights, asking that they grant al-Kurdi a permit to be treated in Israel.

Request after request was denied. The stated reason? Security. In July, he was referred to Ichilov hospital for urgent diagnostic procedures. As the refusals mounted, his cancer spread. In a case involving al-Kurdi and a number of other seriously ailing Palestinians denied travel requests for treatment, the physicians group appealed the Shin Bet refusals to the High Court. The court allowed prosecutors an extension in the case to allow them to study it further. Al-Kurdi did not survive the extension.

There is no evil quite like the evil of denying crucial medical treatment. Except one, perhaps.

Consider the case of Y.H., a 37-year-old Gazan in need of open-heart surgery. By contrast to al-Kurdi, the Shin Bet granted Y.H. an exit permit, so that he could travel to the West Bank city of Nablus for the operation. According to the physicians group, when he came to Erez Crossing to leave Gaza, Shin Bet agents called him aside for interrogation.

"If you help us we will help you," Y.H. quoted the agent as telling him, adding that the Shin Bet man asked him to provide information about his acquaintances.

The physicians group said that when Y.H. replied that he had no such information, "the interrogator said 'If you don't help up we won't help you. Go and die in Gaza.' He sent him back home, promising that he would never leave Gaza."


Peace
So far, there is no indication that the Arab leadership in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are interested in peace.

Last to Taft
I guess I've beaten this dead horse long enough, and you certainly aren't going to change your mind no matter how many facts are presented to you.
It is nearly 2100L here (that's 9:00PM) so I'm going to hit the shower and turn in; PT tomorrow, you know.

If you have any more arguments to make, I'll try to check in tomorrow to respond. If not, good night and God bless. I hope you eventually consider viewing this matter in an objective fashion.

Simple, but hard
Sometimes the reason something is very difficult to accomplish is because the chioces are limited, simple, and also unpalatable.

For longer than my entire adult lifetime the dispute in the Middle East has remained centered over one simple issue; the right of Israel to exist.

So the choices are simple, limited, and hard to make. There are three options. (1) Support Israel's right to exist, which means telling the Palestinians that this is the way it's going to be, get used to it, (2) agreeing to let the Arabs 'drive Israel into the sea', which means washing our hands of the entire region (and no, oil supplies won't dry up if we just walk away)and discontinuing the billions in annual aid we give to Isreal, or (3) accepting the status quo, which is an endless, violent, lethal guerilla war.

If we adopt option 1 we should pursue it by discontinuing all aid of any kind to the Palestinians until they behave. If we adopt option 3, which is a de facto acknowledgement of Israel's right to exist, we should also discontinue aid to the Palestinians. We should not be financing their murderous temper-tantrums.

Only under option 2, the elimination of Israel, does it make any sense to send aid to the Palestinians.

So meggy why doesnt report this?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=93435 3&contrassID=0&subContrassID=0

Red Cross: Israel worsening Palestinian humanitarian crisis

Israeli restrictions have caused a humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the West Bank that is growing worse, leaving hospitals unable to treat the sick and keeping farmers off their land, the ICRC said.

the humanitarian agency called on Israel to "lift the retaliatory measures which are paralyzing life in Gaza" and urged Palestinian factions to stop targeting civilian areas and putting lives at risk.

"The measures imposed by Israel come at an enormous humanitarian cost, leaving the people living under occupation with just enough to survive, but not enough to live a normal and dignified life," said Beatrice Megevand Roggo, the ICRC's head of operations for the Middle East and North Africa.

The ICRC said Israel's "severe restrictions" on the movement of people and goods, imposed to tighten security, had deepened economic woes and affected every aspect of life in the West Bank and Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

"The Palestinian Territories face a deep human crisis, where millions of people are denied their human dignity. Not once in a while, but every day," the Geneva-based agency said.

The ICRC estimated that 5,000 farmers in Gaza and their families relying on exports of cash crops like carnations and strawberries were "about to suffer a 100 percent drop in sales."

"The harvest season for these important crops started in June, but the embargo on exports has left them rotting in containers at the crossing points," it said.

Getting medical care or studying in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Israel or abroad has also become "nearly impossible," except for those needing life-saving treatment, the ICRC said.

In the West Bank, the ICRC said many Palestinians have been powerless to prevent the confiscation of their land.

Tallil2long
That was a very nice reply and have been trying to learn as much truth as a can. Its very hard, besides being complicated, there are a lot of emotional,(understood), views on the matter. So, thanks again and maybe I will have time to today to research some more.

you got me talli
I had to shorten the article to fit,
but the isreali anti-Christian law was passed on
Christmas Day, 1999.

Kinda symbolic huh.

For dbz77
Basically, no Muslim in the region bounded below is interested in peace:
on east by Gandak river, on south by Godavari, on north by Oxus and on west by Nile

Due to the vast majority of them being descendants of FORCED converts.

To Taft
Well, just one more post.

Virtually every comparison I have seen between Palestinian deaths and Israeli ones count known Arab militant deaths along with obviously innocent bystanders. They also rely upon unsubstantiated Palestinian claims, whereas Israel's casualties are easily verifiable by official reports with documentation.

Nonetheless, I'd certainly be willing to look at your statistics if you have a source (other than a former PLO rep like last time).

One final note. The U.S. - Nazi Germany casualty ratio was pretty favorable to the U.S. in World War Two. Did that prove the U.S. was the bad guy and the aggressor? I'll ask another question too: have you personally seen the destructive capabilities of modern weapons, such as 155mm artillery shells and 1000lb bombs? It is simply unbelievable. Were Israel NOT exercising extreme caution in the use of its military might, the casualties among Palestinians would be scores or hundreds of thousands -- literally hundreds per week. If you are a civilian, I wouldn't expect you to recognize that, of course.

Now really, good night. I'll try to check back in tomorrow.

svpallava
I'm not familiar with those rivers but...

Ahmadinejad has called for a one-state solution for Palestine, to be achieved peacefully by referendum. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

Also, didn't Sadat want peace?

A little tidbit for Tallil
It never dawns on Taft, sonofsam and other "pretend-pro-Palestinian" touts (really, theirs is as transparent as KKK statements on the same matter) to even acknowledge the collaboration of "Palestinians" with Hitler (for which I have used Biharis' participation/collaboration in "Opearation Searchlight" as closest equivalent--and even this comparison falls WAY short). To even have to discuss giving funds to unrepentant Nazis or Nazi sympathisers is way beyond imaginable in egregiousness.

svpallava
KKK my *ss. I never denied the influence of Nazism with some groups in the ME. During WWII hitler wanted allies on his side to fight the British in Palestine. Fascism is was spread to European peoples too. Do you know that in WW I the Muslims were on our side. See one Lawrence of Arabia. Also the Muslims saved thousands of Jews in Iran. Look up the Orphan Trains to Tehran. Lets be honest with the truth.

To sonofsam
I was going to bed, but you've got me curious.

Would you post a link on the anti-Christian law, please? Or the number/name of the law? It's a bit hard to believe that one anti-Christian law was voted down on 20July99 and another proposed, debated and passed, all by 25Dec99 (5 months).

I do not say it couldn't have been done. It just seems unlikely. Especially as United Torah Judaism left Barak's coalition in Sep99. I've been looking on the net for the last fifteen minutes or so, and can't find anything.

For sonofsam
You can't look at Israel's current "retaliatory" action in a vacuum.

This is a very old story. Arabs attack Israel from the surrounding areas. Israel counter-attacks and occupies Arab land near the Israel border to create a buffer zone. Arabs complain that Arab people in the buffer zones are being oppressed on Arab land by Israel. Israel relents and agrees to withdraw back to inside its own borders in return for a promise that the homicidal attacks on Israel will cease. The Arabs agree and then the attacks resume. When the attacks resume the same Arabs who promised they would stop claim it is the act of individuals that they can't control. So Israel goes back to imposing "retaliatory" conduct in the buffer zones. Then Arabs (and their sympathizers, like sonofsam) castigate Israel for this and cycle repeats itself. Endlessly. It has happened three or four times in my lifetime alone.

Don't kid yourelf. When Bill Clinton offered Yassir Arafat "97%" of what he wanted and Arafat turned it down, you don't have to have been a fly on the wall to know what that other 3% was - Israel would continue to exist.

There never was any such thing as a "Palestinian" until Israel was created. "Palestinian" is not a language, a religion, a tribe, a geopolitical state, or a culture. The only attribute that is common to those who call themselves "Palestinians" is the desire to destroy Israel. As long as observers, "reporters", and sympathizers obscure or ignore this fact there will be no common sense in the discussion, no lasting progress in negotiations, and no peace in the Middle East.

To sonofsam
I find it interesting that the International Religious Reports for Israel of 1999, 2000 and 2001 failed to mention any anti-Christian laws being passed, though the 2000 report mentions the failure of anti-proselytizing bills in 1997 and 1998. The 2001 report mentions that a further effort was made in 2000 but failed. Also all three reports mention that no efforts to enforce the old 1977 anti-proselytizing law have ever been noted. Still can't find the law you claim was passed on Christmas 1999.

http://atheism.about.com/library/irf/irf99/blirf_israel99.h tm

http://atheism.about.com/library/irf/irf00/blirf_israel00.h tm

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/r elisrael01.html


To sonofsam
The website below which maintains a pretty comprehensive list of wrongs and allegations of wrongs against Christians in Israel and the Palestinian Authority -- last updated Feb03 -- claims that proselytizing is 'not prohibited but is discouraged'. It claims that the anti-proselytizing law of 1977 only forbids someone from "offering or receiving material benefits as an incentive to change religions". And though it notes a Nov99 bill against proselytizing, it doesn't report the bill's passage.

http://www.persecution.org/Countries/israel.html

Still can't find your 25Dec99 law.

I'm really racking out now. I'll check back tomorrow and see if you've presented a source.

I'd be willing to bet ...
... dollars to dog droppings and hold the stakes in my teeth that if we get them to switch lands (Palestinians get what is now Israel, and Israelis get the Gaza Strip and West Bank) that in 50 years what was Israel will look like Gaza, and the old Gaza will look like today's Israel.

Why doesn't anyone ask the Arab-Islamic countries with their vast land holdings and oil wealth to give a little corner of it to the Palestinians and fund their settlement of it ? Hmmm ?

Palestians...
should not be paid not to fight. If we pay them not to fight we are in fact paying tribute. The big problem with this type of tribute is that it will never end. They are now carping for half of Jerusalem. If they get half they will next want another piece and they will end up with everything. Their ideology requires that they have everything and that is the way that it is.

Israel and the USA should tell them up front that they will not get one more inch of real estate. What Israel has it is keeping and there will not be a roll back to the 1967 borders.

In my opinion,
funding the welfare dependent "Palestinians" is basically the same thing as funding the Crips.

God Bless Israel; "Adonai Yevarechet Amo Bashalom"
(The Almighty will bless His people with peace)

sonofsam
ah hem:

The Palestinians in Gaza had the benefits of an Israeli society before it was turned over to the Palestinians!!!!! jobs, hospital care, etc. etc.. But when 9000 Israeli's lost their homes in Gaza with mortgages and became homeless in and Katushas began to be fired at Israel from the new warzone known as Gaza, the poor Palestinians were the ones to lose some benefits. but ya know, all the wise ones thought the Palestinians would really prefer to have Gaza to themselves!
And the poor Israeli's just had to view Gaza as enemy territory. Get it???

So bleeding heart, without any knowledge, just let it be known this is exactly what will happen when the West Bank becomes a Palestinian State with the help of Bush and Condi

sedonaman @ 13:12
Now that post makes sense.

You also touched on a detail commonly missed. While the Arabs shill plenty about "Palestinians", NO ARAB COUNTRY HAS EVER BEEN INTERESTED IN THE EXISTENCE OF A "palestinian" NATION:
(1) Did you think Syria, Transjordan, Iraq and Egypt attacked in 1948 to establish a "Palestinian" state? All of them wanted to grab as much of the Holy Land as possible (Jordan actually did so, the West Bank and eastern part of Jerusalem including Old City--the others got their tar kicked)
(2) 1967 -- again, the Arab states (except for Jordan?) rushed in to grab territory (Israel did try to persuade King Hussein to stay neutral, but he apparently believed bellicose-Nasser's claims of victory--when he had gotten creamed royally--and wound up losing West Bank and Jerusalem)

This in fact is in accordance with scripture (remember that "Palestinians" are descended from Edomites) -- see entire book of Obadiah.

In fact, I can remember telling many Indians in 1987 this comparison:
(1) At most, the only things we can learn from Arabs are new ways to communally riot (even that doubtful in light of Meerut and Bijnor)
(2) By contrast, from Israel we could learn how to make certain parts of India (western Rajasthan, bulk of Marathwada, Bidar, Mehbubnagar, Kalahandi--all of these areas are either desert or rocky) produce like Punjab (wheat-bowl) or Thanjavur (one of rice-bowl districts)

sonofsam
You seem to worry about Israel's treatment of Christians. I should think vice versa would be in order???

If you were really a Christian you would not mind Israel possessing Judea and Samaria, the heart of biblical Israel, (West Bank to the uninformed) that G-d gave to Abraham for an everlasting possession through the covenant with his son Issac! Christians embrace this covenant because the Jewish Messiah came through Issac (Christians believe).

But then there always has been a difference between Bible believers and those who are nominal Christians, who don't have much Bible knowledge and don't even seem to realize that the greatest gift given to them was from the Jews! What an incredible legacy! The debt owed Israel is enormous.

svpallava
"This in fact is in accordance with scripture (remember that "Palestinians" are descended from Edomites) -- see entire book of Obadiah."

It may be my turn to correct you. Palestinians are Arabs. The original Philistines are Greek Sea people. They are now extinct! Rather arabs are descended from Ismael! There is NO connection between Philistine and Palistinian, if there were, there arguments might be more valid.

King Herod the Great was an Edomite (those peoples who were descended from Esau. But in no way is there even a race known as Palistinian. C'mon, we used to be on the same side! Be careful or you will give the pro Palestinian cause much ammunition! Don't forget the forest for the trees.

Sorry spelling
Ishmael; Palestinian, etc.

For Meggy @ 02:45
I already binned the idea of "Palestinians" being descended from Philistines (see my 10:09 post). Actually, Philistines, being descended from Ham were closest ethnically to the Upper Nilote (currently several of the ethnic groups of Uganda and Kenya, Tusi of Rwanda and Burundi).

You are correct that "Palestinian" was never an ethnic description till 1946--when it was invented by Haj-amin Husseini (of Syrian origin--his family was the one behind Damascus "blood-libel", binned many times by OTTOMAN TURKISH courts).

I will however stick with their being descended from Esau (FYI, I could easily have said "Amalekites"--as that group really fit the character of the "Palestinians" more than the other descendants of Esau, the plain-jane Edomites).

Palistinians
Those palistinians/fakers have some nerve making up a name to call themselves, and then to pretend that they need a home to live in. Lebanon everyone knows was a wretched country until the Israelis destroyed it more in the 80s. The things some peoples kids do.
zI really don't care what people call themselves, they are all children of
Abraham and from Iraq.

This is SO Unbalanced

I read the article, and while I didn't read every post in detail I scanned them as best as I could, and I don't think that any poster (and certainly not Daniel Pipes) acknowledges that the Fatah and Hamas factions are in more-or-less low-level civil war with each other, and we are giving the bulk of our aid to Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah. Mr Pipes' colorful graphs make no effort to distinguish between Fatah and Hamas WRTO who perpetrates violence and just as importantly against whom is it directed.

This article also says nothing about the fact that all the aid to Palestinian factions is DWARFED by the annual bucks the U.S. gives to Israel, and it also says nothing about the millions in tax revenue collected by Israel from the palestinians in the name of the Palestinian Authority, which Israel refuses to now disburse!

to svpallava
"On more than one occasion, Pipes has called for the extension of Israel's already ruthless policy of collective punishment, arguing that leveling Palestinian villages is justifiable if attacks are launched from among their inhabitants."

http://www.slate.com/id/2086844/

Well now, if were talking about fascist, who does that above quote remind one of? Its with twits like Pipes that the situation in the ME is so crappy.

More on Pipes
It appears there are Israelis who think Pipes is a looser.

"The nomination has angered American Muslim groups and liberal Jewish leaders, who see Pipes as a poor choice for a peace institute. "Daniel Pipes is not a peacemaker," says Susannah Heschel, a professor of Jewish Studies at Dartmouth and co-chair of the liberal Jewish group Tikkun. "It would be like appointing me to be the head of nuclear physics at Los Alamos."

wise?one
why is it the msm always report that isreal 'retaliates' and only kills 'militants'?

In any case, there is NO excuse for their degrading and illegal brutal treatment of the Palestinians.
One would think that those like svp, who cry kkk and hitler would have a fundamental understanding of that simple point.

if you dont like the term, Palestinian, how about human being, at least.

sonofsam challenge
ok sonofsam, you think Christians are so mistreated by Israel do you? I challenge you to go to Gaza or any other Muslim country in the Middle East and profess your Christianity. Let's see if you make it back in one piece.

http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2007/10/07/1009128-christian- activist-killed-in-gaza

To svpallava
Wiseone is exactly correct. I don't know what you are going to do pallava. Argue with archeology?

Palestinians are not an indiginous people and you using the Book to prove it, just heaps fuel on the fire. Why not just relent on that one?

I'm almost out of this discussion permanently because of permanent heart burn. but just in case you have an open mind, Sherds found in archeological digs in the Gaza strip indicate Philistines to be close related to the Phoenicians, also sea peoples! The early phoenicians, now Lebanon. descended from Mizraim yes a son of Ham.

Of course there's always a chance that I don't know what "binned" means



sonofsam
you seems to think Christians are treated so well by Muslims, I'd challenge you to go profess you Christianity in Gaza or any other of the many Muslim countries. Let's see if you come back in one piece. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is. Or perhaps you're not really Christian.

tammy
Turkey, Saddam's Iraq, India, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon

Iran has thousands of Christians.

Who does Palestine...
...belong to? It belongs to whatever people are strong enough to seize it and hold it.It belongs to them only as long as they can hold it.The same with our country and every other country on earth.

That's who Palebstine belongs to.

Taft
India is not a Muslim country (though it has a lot of Muslims). The Christian communities in these countries had dwindled to almost nothing. Why do you think that is? I stick to my original assertion.

http://www.aina.org/news/20061224201210.htm

Just Sick of It!!!!!
Condi Rice trots over there with her bucket of promises of money....our money that's siphoned from taxpayers in the U.S. Abbas gets it, Hamas wrestles it away. Condi makes another visit and we tax payers see another bucket of promises of money given to Abbas. Hamas wrestles it away. Same routine. More wasted money. Money used against Israli interests and our interests. Gawd, but our recent administrations make the rest of us look like such dumb clucks. Condi Rice's "trips for peace" are a joke. Just maybe, warts and all, we should have someone like Guiliani (sp?) who will insist on results.

taft
In regards to Christians in Iran..

http://www.jubileecampaign.co.uk/world/ira1.htm

Tammy
That one, Iran, was a bad example. But Is the persecution a new thing? And does it have to do with the perceived notion in the Islamic world that the West has started a war on Muslims? This I found interesting though. Also Turkey is fine. One of my favorite RWers here, Mrs. Paddy, lived there.


"In modern times, under Saddam, Christians were treated much the same as Muslims; Saddam's right hand man, Tariq Aziz, was Christian."

Mr. Pipes
For the man that has a face suited for an evil guy in the movies, this is an excellent opinion peice. The end result of sending this money will be more of the same. The leaders will siphon off as much as possible, the people that need it will only get it if they do certain things for the leaders, and we are then back to the same old, same old!

Tallil2long
I've been busy today, but I've read your posts and I wanted to say Thank You.

It's good to see someone who has the true knowledge of Israel and the Palestinians. Thank you for defending her.

Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah

Annie Mation--Best Line of the Day
"Annie Mation writes: Tuesday, December, 18, 2007 2:09 PM


Oh PALestinians...
I thought he said PAUListinians."

That one did not go over my head, LOL. It just about fits, doesn't it? Well done.


Shells
Pardon me while I throw up. Israel is not a little sissy. They have a very powerful army, billions in aid from us, and dozens of nukes. It seems the Palestinians, oops I forgot, I mean those people who live in the Wet Bank refugee camps, could have a fair chance for once.

right flame, will clean my pipes justify
the TRILLIONS sucked from US taxpayers:
Just thru 2001 http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html

Economist tallies swelling cost of Israel to US

Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person.

This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist

Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel in its violent dispute with the Palestinians. the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War.

Israeli officials made a pitch for $4 billion in additional military aid to defray the rising costs of dealing with the intifada and suicide bombings. They also asked for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees, the US would end up paying both principal and interest.

Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. $2.04 billion in military assistance and $720 million in economic aid in fiscal 2003.

The US has already guaranteed $10 billion in commercial loans to Israel, and $600 million in "housing loans."

Israel buys discounted, serviceable "excess" US military equipment. these discounts amount to "several billion dollars" over recent years.

Israel uses roughly 40 percent of its $1.8 billion per year in military aid, ostensibly earmarked for purchase of US weapons, to buy Israeli-made hardware. It also has won the right to require the Defense Department or US defense contractors to buy Israeli-made equipment or subsystems, paying 50 to 60 cents on every defense dollar the US gives to Israel.

Weapons make up almost half of Israel's manufactured exports. US defense contractors often resent the buy-Israel requirements and the extra competition subsidized by US taxpayers.

US policy and trade sanctions reduce US exports to the ME about $5 billion a year, costing 70,000 American jobs. Not requiring Israel to use its US aid to buy American goods, costs another 125,000 jobs.

only zionist christians, meggy
which are not christians at all, but zionists.
as exemplified by the nitwit hagee:
http://christiansstandingwithisrael.blogspot.com/2007/11/jo hn-hagee-jesus-refused-by-word-and.html

[I'm delighted to present my latest book, 'In Defense of Israel'] It will prove that the Jewish people as a whole did not reject Jesus as the Messiah. It will prove that Jesus did not come to be the Messiah. It will prove that there was a Calvary conspiracy between Rome, the High Priest, and Herod to execute Jesus as an insurrectionist too dangerous to live. Since Jesus never claimed by word or by deed to be the Messiah, how could the Jews be blamed for rejecting what was never offered? Read it in this shocking expose in defense of Israel."

oh tammy, is islamofascism
comforting somehow?

nice try to distract though.
try to focus on the brutalization of Palestinians.

even so, I'll go if you pay.
I always wanted to see the pyramids!

Taft
"Pardon me while I throw up."

--Seems like you have been Taft with every post of yours.

"Israel is not a little sissy. They have a very powerful army, billions in aid from us, and dozens of nukes."

--Hell no, they are no sissy. They are a productive and essentially peaceful democratic nation who when provoked, will fight back. And remember, Israel had no nukes and billions of aid from us way back in the day when the Arabs decided to genocide the settling Jews. Seems the Jews kicked some pretty hard a** there too, didn't they bud? I guess they just didn't feel like bowing their heads to their Arab neighbors and wait for their heads to roll off. Shame on the Jews for fighting for their lives, right?

"It seems the Palestinians, oops I forgot, I mean those people who live in the Wet Bank refugee camps, could have a fair chance for once."

--A fair chance? You're speaking of those cuddly people who do no Jews any harm? Not the same people who strap bombs to their children and tell them Allah loves them if they kill infidel Jew pigs?

Here's something closet cases like you just don't get....The Palestinian people would have a fair chance to excel, grow, be productive and live well had they chosen PEACE with the Israeli's to begin with. I could go into history with you on how many times the Israeli's nearly met 95% of what the Palestinians demanded during the peace settlements but still turned down.

Why?

Because it's not about the land, you moron. It's all about having a pile of dead Jews at their feet. But I'm almost certain, you would find that a glorious alternative, right?

tallli
you got me my friend.
I had it, honest, but lost it, sorry.

I can back up my claim by referring to the talmud, if you wish: (it also explains settler 'mentality' - an oxymoron)
http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt04.html

Non-Jews — No Property Rights

The Talmud teaches that non-Jews have no property rights. Their possessions are "like unclaimed land in the desert." (See Jewish Encyclopedia), … Gentile property is considered public property, like unclaimed land in the desert."

The Talmudic authority which holds that Gentile property is like unclaimed land in the desert is the Talmud Book of Baba Bathra. Samuel: The property of a heathen is on the same footing as desert land; whoever first occupies it acquires ownership."

Gentiles Must Not Rest, Even on Mondays

There are no labor union laws for Gentiles under Talmudic "religious" doctrine.

The Jewish Encyclopedia states:

"A Gentile observing the Sabbath deserves death not even on Mondays is the Gentile allowed to rest

"A heathen who keeps a day of rest, deserves death their prohibition is their death sentence."

The above Talmudic "precepts" are certainly at variance with the fourth of the Ten Commandments, concerning the Sabbath day, in which this appears: "Thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates." (Ex.20: 10) Obviously a "stranger" would be a human being, and even cattle get to rest on the Sabbath, under the Commandment. However, under Judaism, Gentiles rank even lower than cattle. And, this twisting of the Bible by the Pharasaical Judaists once again illustrates how they "follow Moses," in reverse.

sonofsam
You continue to miss the point.

Whether Israel retaliates by killing militants, or civilians, or whther they're after what they believe are militants and kill/injure civilians instead, the fact remains that there would be no violence if the Arabs that surround Israel would recognize Israel's right to exist and stop their homicidal attacks against Israelis.

All of the self-restraint in the world by Israel will not bring peace as long as Arabs surrounding them are trying to drive them into the sea.

One more thought. How do you define "civilian" or "human being" when every non-military muslim may be a potential homicide bomber?

You have a strange set of standards when you are sanguine with muslim homicide bombers but require purity in Israel's response.

If the "human beings" don't want to be called on their phoniness tell THEM to stop using the term "Palestinians". Tell THEM they don't really need a "Palestinian" state, since that's never been their real complaint, their real beef, or their real cause.

Tell THEM what awful people THEY are when they perpetrate attacks against Israeli "human beings" (or are Palestinians the only ones entitled to this sacred designation?).

did you red tide, shells
your thought processes are suspect.
you mixed which side is racist

http://www.monabaker.com/quotes.htm

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
Golda Meir, Sunday Times, 15/6/1969.

"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15/10/1971

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"
Yitzhak Rabin, NYT, 23/10/1979.

"[Israel will] create in the course of the next 10 or 20 years conditions which would attract natural and voluntary migration of the refugees from the Gaza Strip and the west Bank to Jordan. To achieve this we have to come to agreement with King Hussein and not with Yasser Arafat."
Yitzhak Rabin, NYT 04/04/1983

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
Menachem Begin, New Statesman, 25/6/1982.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
Yitzhak Shamir, NYT, 4/1/1988

"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more"....
Ehud Barak, jerusalem Post 30/8/2000

"there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
Ariel Sharon, Agence France Presse, 15/11/1998.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
Ariel Sharon, 25/3/2001 BBC News Online

pALESTINIAN fUNDING
Enough already. If any funding for the Palestinians comes from anywhere, it MUST come from from the oil rich Arabs. In a time when America suffers from utterly ridiculous trade and budget deficits- and never mind the long and murderous history of the Palestinians/Philistines- the absolutely last thing we need to be doing is giving our money away to these people. If all those Arabic "brothers" of the Palestinians/ Philistines are so concerned about peace and justice, then let them cough up some of that oil money they've been earning for so long. $410 mill......... hey, those folks light their cigars with that. For us , NO!!!! Not one nickel.

Funding Hamas
Sometimes I think the State Department has no brainy people. To fund a terrorist organization like Hamas (Fatah is not much better) seems to be a suicidal act. Aren't all those people our enemies? Do they not plan to kill all the Israelis? It is forgotten that the West Bank was part of Jordan, Gaza was part of Egypt and the Golan Heights were part of Syria. Those countries made war on Israel and lost. The Palestinians never had those territories even though they lived there. Also forgotten is that at its narrowest point Israel is only nine miles wide. Israel is surrounded by Arab enemies. Arabs in Israel have more freedom and more rights than Arabs have who live in countries controlled by Arabs.
The Palestinian Arabs should not be receiving any funds from the U.S. They have never responded to any program that was for peace. They don't want peace and they are repeatedly being rewarded for
violence.
Donald W. Bales, (I am not Jewish)

To sonofsam
A further note on your quotes.
Notice that the first of them is dated to 1969 -- twenty years after those same Palestinian Arabs tried to murder the population of Israel (1948). Also after twenty years of rhetoric from Arabs about how the Jews needed to be killed or driven into the sea. After twenty years of tension and attacks. And only two years after a war in which Israel survived ONLY because she preempted the great forces that had *already been deployed* on her borders.

Neighbor, try this. Find a person with whom you've always been on cordial terms. Start calling him or her a racist wh0re, making threatening gestures, keying their car at night, assaulting their children, spreading slander and hatred. Maintain an unfailingly hostile disposition for one month. Then ask others what that person says about you. If, that is, you haven't been put in jail long ago.

Shells
"-Hell no, they are no sissy. They are a productive and essentially peaceful democratic nation who when provoked, will fight back. And remember, Israel had no nukes and billions of aid from us way back in the day when the Arabs decided to genocide the settling Jews."

God, how many times do we have to hear that. We know, but we don't want Israel to take over the West Bank. Every American president has been against it and the public are against it.

--A fair chance? You're speaking of those cuddly people who do no Jews any harm? Not the same people who strap bombs to their children and tell them Allah loves them if they kill infidel Jew pigs? "

Prove where I said anything remotely like "cuddly." You can't lie.

"Here's something closet cases like you just don't get...The Palestinian people would have a fair chance to excel, grow, be productive and live well had they chosen PEACE with the Israeli's to begin with. I could go into history with you on how many times the Israeli's nearly met 95% of what the Palestinians demanded during the peace settlements but still turned down. "

I haven't been called a "closet case" yet and I'm not sure what it means. But it indicative, me thinks, to your cognitive abilities. The Palestinians made mistakes, no doubt, and that 95% peace deal is b.s. You keep stating the obvious and misconstruing everything els. I'd say i've more than wasted good finger movements on key pads on you.

No, I know that there are a great many good hearted israelis and they don't aprove of the Shells of the world.

http://flickr.com/photos/anomalous/214417158/in/set-522872/



Arafat and the Settlements
" Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak were still negotiating at Taba in January 2001 when Barak, facing elections, suspended the talks. As Carter argues, and Clayton Swisher documents in his thorough study, "The Truth About Camp David," the standard U.S.-Israeli line that Yasser Arafat turned down Barak's "generous offer" and is thus wholly to blame for the collapse of the talks is simply false. Swisher argues that the U.S. and Israel were largely to blame for the fact that the talks were ill-prepared and mutual trust was not established. But even if one puts some of the blame on Arafat for making the perfect the enemy of the good, and holding out for a better deal, as does former Israeli Foreign Minister and peace-talks negotiator Shlomo Ben-Ami (who is broadly sympathetic to the Palestinians and opposed to Israeli colonization of the occupied territories), the basic lineaments of a peace deal remain the same. If peace talks fail the first time, the answer is not to cut off negotiations and continue building settlements, but to try again."

To Taft
The route of the West Bank Barrier certainly doesn't suggest any intention by Israel of "taking over" the West Bank:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier

And while we're on the subject of the barrier (and, in a larger sense, Israel's supposed lack of concern for Palestinian Arab welfare) let's look at some interesting Israeli Supreme Court decisions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_Barrier%2C_I sraeli_Supreme_Court_Opinions

Note: I don't consider Wikipedia to be the fount of all reliable information -- but it is accessible and frequently well-sourced.

Wake up and snort the coffee
Who do you honestly think is funding BOTH sides of this ongoing war?

Ever noticed how an attack on Israel is an "attack", yet an Israeli attack is a "retaliation"?

Why don't we waste these billions of dollars harvesting the refugees who only want to live in peace, let those bent on havoc and destruction wipe each other out, and then start rebuilding and returning the refugees?

To Taft
Every time the Israelis give up a bit of occupied ground, what happens? The Palestinians start launching attacks from that area *regardless* of promises not to do so.
Shall I provide links? I imagine I could find them.

Tallil2long
That's why deeply sympathize with the Israelis. That must be horrible. Still, I'm hard headed I guess, solutions must be possible. Not all that's going on on the Israeli side is ,(I was going to say kosher, but is that disrespectful?), is on the up and up. I read where that some settlers killed some cave people's sheep, their lively hood, so they would have to leave and they could have it.

Hey, even the Pope is in on it.

"A senior Vatican cardinal said on Wednesday that all Palestinian refugees had a right to return to their homeland. "

Tallil2long
My day is used up. Hope to read your comments tomorrow. Thanks for the civil debate.

To Serge
The reason Israeli strikes are usually called 'retaliation' is because the Israeli government often specifically states to what act of aggression each is designed to respond:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/17/gaza/index.html

Of course, we might note that Israel frequently refrains from retaliating:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2167528,00.html

We might also note that many measures Israel takes that cause hardship for Palestinian Arabs would not occur if the Pals would just stop the continuous rain of rockets:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,305717,00.html

Maybe if the Palestinians actually desired and worked for peace, they could have it. Instead they launch constant attacks, then whine about how Israel's response hurts them.

Here's more interesting data on rocket and mortar attack frequencies:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Pale stinian+terror+since+2000/Missile+fire+from+Gaza+on+Israeli +civilian+targets+Aug+2007.htm

Wonder what would happen if the Israelis ever decided to return fire one-for-one?


To Taft
There is a solution:
the Palestinian Arabs give up the knee-jerk violence they have pursued since 1948. Israel would much prefer to assuage international and domestic pressure by compromise, but certainly can't do so as long as their women and children are being murdered. Every time they DO compromise, the Arabs just use it as a weakness to exploit with more violence.

Incidentally, the point you made about the media always reporting Arab 'attacks' and Israeli 'retaliations' is not completely correct:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-04-24-israel-hamas_ N.htm

There are probably lots more examples if one searched for them.

Incidentally, in this HRW study, the claim was made that some rockets seized during a raid were made from Israeli-made pipes intended for a Gaza sewage system. See the paragraph just above the first photo. I would be willing to bet the sewage system was being funded by aid projects.

http://hrw.org/reports/2007/iopt0707/5.htm#_Toc170198344

Well, guess that's enough for you to read when you awake. Good night, and I too appreciate the civil discussion. I started to get kind of snide to you on one or two posts, so I thank you for your graciousness. It reminded me to check myself -- I need that sometimes.


Boutte to the rescue!
Early on in this thread Boutte wrote an observation about Israel that bears repeating:

“American taxpayers shouldn't be funding a fanatical, racially and religiously inspired movement which grabs land, assassinates foreign leaders and foments trouble in their countries, employs thousands of agents of influence here, unleashes spies on us, drowns our sailors, defies UN resolutions and persecutes the peoples of the territories it has occupied, plundered and colonized. Least of all when this movement possesses huge secret armouries of WMDs and nukes.”

Daniel’s title: “Fund the Palestinians? Bad idea.” My title: “Fund the Israelis? Even a worse idea.”

As an American taxpayer, I don’t care if we don’t give the Palestinians a red cent, just as long that we do not give the Israelis anything either, and further, we must also call all “loans” to Israel; I want our money back, now!

Nothing to Palestine, nothing to Israel, at least from us. The Europeans can do whatever they want; it’s none of our business.

For Meggy @ 16:44 yesterday
The word "binned" in Brit English means "tossed in the dustBIN" (trash can). No surprise that it's not understood in North America.

No surprise that Taft is unfamiliar with geography as well as history (amongst other subjects), especially when he quotes Ahmedinejad's "one-state peaceful solution" (hint: means that all non-Muslims in Muddle East will be allowed "rest in peace").

For Tammy @ 17:19 yesterday
You are correct in stating that "India is not a Muslim country despite of having lots of Muslims" (in fact, it probably has the largest Muslim population at 220 millions--real figure, not the fudged ones of census). And you are also correct that in most Muslim countries, the percentage (and sometimes even the NUMBER) of non-Muslims has decreased (due most oft to persecution from Muslims).

But they also have started facing persecution in India since 1989 (when a few state governments elected BJP, political wing of Hindu-fanatic RSS), especially from 1998-2004 (when BJP in federal power due to election horsetrading--there is almost NO chance of BJP getting true-majority government federally). The numbers though have NOT fallen (as Hindus don't really have the concept of forcible conversion, except by paper/decree***)


***Prior to 1926, Dalits and indigenous tribals were considered separate (by ruling British) from Hindus--the closest to a technically-correct definition of Hinduism. After 1926, Dalits and tribals were merged as Hindus--without either prior knowledge or any consent--due to lobbying from K.M. Munshi.

Anecdotal comparison
Basically, the arguments of Taft and sonofsam sound a lot like those of Aziz Munshi (a Muslim, no relation known to Hindu K.M. Munshi) at International Court of Justice (about 1999 Atlantique Incident).

Record shows that Munshi got clobbered right-quickly by Soli Sorabjee (didn't help that Munshi couldn't get his distances consistent).

svpallava
Too funny for words.
Here I was knocking myself out.
But still it is important to all posters here to get rid of the idea of Philistine /Palestinian connection or Palistinian / native connection
shoot Pallava, if we go back any farther we will get to Adam :)

The Palestinians are Arabs, before 48, during '48
After '48

They were war collateral! refugees.

Ben Gurion told the Arab neighbors to stay in their homes and they would be fine.
Hussenini urged his generals to tell the Arabs to leave and in a few days overwhelming victory would be theirs. (Source O Jerusalem by La
Pierre)

There is a nutjob here sonofsam
and then Taft who insists on ridiculous ideas brainwashed by the media, who has no historical foundation.

wiseone let me refer you to
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/936024.html

A Jewish joke tells of a mother who briefs her son before battle: "Kill a Turk and rest,". the son asks: "what happens if the Turk tries to kill me?" She opens her eyes wide in surprise: "Why would he want to kill you? What have you done to him?"

This self-righteousness accompanies our attitude toward the Palestinians. It is in the reports on the media which paint only a partial picture. when considerations of ratings and cowardice determine coverage, the information the public gets is biased. extremist public opinion is created, which believes that all of the justice is on our side, "what have we done to them?"

Wednesday, the media reported the rocket attack on Sderot. 20 rockets landed on the city and Mayor Eli Moyal resigned. The broadcasts were dramatic. Reporters interviewed furious residents who demanded immediate and harsh military action in the Gaza Strip.

the situation in Sderot and Gaza is deserving of comprehensive coverage. the story also has other angles, None of the channels remind its viewers that several days prior to the attack on Sderot, the IDF had begun an extensive action in Gaza.

Tuesday, the day before, 3 people were killed in Gaza by a tank shell fired into a house southeast of Khan Yunis. 2 were killed by a bomb dropped by a plane on their car and another "met his death" in the area of Beit Hanoun. According to the IDF, all of the dead were terror activists. 13 people killed in the action and 40 arrested for interrogation.

The Islamic Jihad announced that it would take revenge and the following day the barrage of rockets landed on Sderot. The connection is clear. But it doesn't film well. Arabs "avenging" their dead does not serve the ratings. It is easier and popular to show only the suffering of Sderot's inhabitants. the story becomes simple: bad and irrational Arabs who are firing on us for no reason.

Taft and Sonofsam
When I have a discussion with opposing views with anyone, I consider the source. I look upon you both as completely misguided individuals drawn into propaganda because it sings the tune of hatred you have had already planted inside you so many years ago.

I could google real facts and give you real perspective of the Jewish people, as I am one, but obviously it would fall on deaf pointy ears.

Let me give you a bit of nurishment this morning to chew on. If Israel were so covitous as you both believe, aggressive, and has motive to destroy their surrounding Arab neighbors...with their billions of dollars, their plethora of nukes and their bloodthristy military who wishes to kill all Arab civilians----why haven't they done that already?

Israel could easily take out their millions neighbors in a matter of hours, and yet they haven't or even attempted to. Why?

Because they have always wanted peace. Get it?

I have Palestinians friends who fled to America and left their families there, why did they do this? Because they didn't want to be a part of the angry terrorist groups there who wish to destroy Jews. They wanted peace with the Israelis but were ostracized and had brute force put upon them if they didn't comply with there secretive tactics.

Those tacticts? Go into populated public areas, strap on a bomb and kill as many civilian Jews as they could. The next tactic they were told:
Those involved were to come back to the Palestinian settlements and stay in highly populated Arab areas so that the Israeli military would too have no choice to take out Arab civilians which they new would turn against Israel in the MSM and anger the world.

You don't have to believe a word I say or care. You both simply are a product of established hatred.

Boutte
"Shells thinks so, but she's a Jewess.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com"

Yes Boutte I am, and you are a typical Ron Paul stereotype of what the worst of his supporters have to offer.

Mind you, I think if we don't fund Israel any longer, I think they can hold out just fine. I still believe they have a right to exist and defend themselves. You and your kind on the other hand are no different than our enemies, you both wear sheets.

Don
Sensible post: Israel won territory in wars she did not start.
However when you said the West Bank was part of Jordan, I must remind all posters that the newly created country of Jordan, King Abdullah, annexed the West Bank in 1948. This was swipe of land that was
desiginated Jewish by Churchill in 1922.


I thought what Ron Paul said last night made sense. Cease all foreign aid, even that to Israel as it weakens Israel by making her aid dependent on US policy. The US has been anti Israel since (how far back to we have to go?) Truman, maybe!!!
Truman made some decisions that was decidedly positive regarding Israel's future. After that the US has played fast and loose, broken promises, etc.

We need to stop all foreign aid. BTW the aid we give to the Russian satelite countries is the same as we give to Israel. Since these Satelites have gone Muslim and have already committed terrorist acts. Fact as my son an Attache to the Russias has dispersed such aid .

tallil2long

I've said all I can say. One thing, haven't many Arabs come around to the idea of a Jewish state in the ME. I read that after 1973 , or so, even Arafat knew Israel wasn't going anywhere. Egypt too, seems to have enough problems of their own, to worry about Israel. As to your post getting a little "snide" I know how emotional this topic is, and you were very reasonable.

svp and meggy
and your responses sound the irrational babbling of little children resorting to name calling to divert attention from, rather than deal with the facts.
oh and by bleeding heart, you MUST mean like those that get outraged by the jewish holocaust, right, as opposed to the armenian, rowandan, or the (slow motion) Palestinian holocausts. because ALL human life is valuable, or did you forget already.



talli - the quotes to show a LONG history of racism by isreali leaders, the fruit of which is what we are dealing with today. the most relevant being:

"[Israel will] create in the course of the next 10 or 20 years conditions which would attract natural and voluntary migration of the refugees from the Gaza Strip and the west Bank to Jordan. To achieve this we have to come to agreement with King Hussein and not with Yasser Arafat."
Yitzhak Rabin, NYT 04/04/1983

which clearly indicates that today's conflict is just part of a broader isreali plan. and that blaming the Palestinians is kinda like blaming the american indians for causing confict in the settling of west. no matter what danny "i never met an arab i didnt hate" pipes(quek) says.

For Shells, a comparison
It is commonplace that India and Israel both get painted as "aggressive and expansionist" by their enemies. In India's case particulary, the comparison is downright laughable:
(1) unilateral withdrawal by 1972/03/31 from Nagar Parkar and Shakargarh salients (captured from Pakistan, 1971) when these two areas have been serious security issues right since Partition
(2) fact that India did not annex Dinajpur and Rangpur districts (also captured from Pakistan in 1971, during liberation of Bangladesh) as payment (from newly-liberated Bangladesh); even more serious security issue as narrowest point of Shiliguri "chicken-neck" is right beside part of Dinajpur District.

And it is notable that Israel withdrew from Sinai after negotiation with Sadat (admittedly, this is not unilateral, but...) and that it did not attack Jordan or Syria between 1948 and 1967 (Nasser had decided to be bellicose in 1956, but was saved from consequences of it by Dulles). Had it actually been expansionist, why would it waste 19 years?

shells
you're resorting the tiresome 'antisemite' attack, too, rather than deal with documented posts.
best try it on one more concerned with schoolyard squabbles than grown up debate.

Sonofsam
A grown up debate? I didn't realize copying and pasting propaganda tripe was a debate. Also, it's a bit hard to have a cognitive discussion with someone who is completely flawed mentally.

Revel in your muck. Sorry to break it to you: Ron Paul will not win, and Israel will survive.

Shells
I don't hate Israel one bit. You can choose to not believe anything I say, but the Pope, the US presidents, and most of the world agree, Peace with palistinians must continue to be attempted and settlement of the West Bank must end. What sense is it to say you fear them and then move into their homes?

Peace with "Palestinian" near-impossible
To be taken as being serious toward peace, the "Palestinians" will need to:
(1) REMORSEFULLY acknowledge the fact that Haj-amin Husseini covenanted with Hitler--in Arabic first, then in other languages
(2) Officially recognise Israel as a nation with right to exist--in Arabic first (as message in Arabic is actual policy), then in other languages--and implement such policy
(3) Stop asking for "right of return" (of so-called "refugees" or their descendants to ANY part of pre-1967 Israel; they have no more "rigtht" to be there than mohajirs have to be in post-Partition India)!
(4) Leave to areas awarded them in 1922--kingdom of Jordan, strictly east of river

Noted that in nearly 60 years, "Palestinians" have not fulfilled ANY of the above!

To sonofsam
"which clearly indicates that today's conflict is just part of a broader isreali plan"

You mean the plan whereby they agreed to take a much smaller proportion of land hoping that the numerically superior Arabs would attack them, narrowly avert their own destruction, then seize the rest of the land in return and set themselves up in a position of eternal enmity with the vast majority of Arab nations and be constantly threatened with national and individual destruction?

If that isn't far-fetched, I don't know what is.

Taft
We all would love peace with the Palestinians. Imagine how prosperous and harmonious that part of the ME would be if it were so. Israel would love nothing more than to have peace with their neighbors.

The problem is, the Palestinians truly do not want peace if it means Israeli's are across the street. If they teach their children that Jews aren't even human beings, then how can future generations of Palestinians accept Israel's right to exist alongside them?

I truly believe funding Palestine means funding more weaponry, which is why you see the death toll charts coincide with the "aid." No matter how much money, how many peace talks, how many concessions are made to appease the Palestinians, they simply cannot get rid of their murderous core against the Jewish people.

to sonofsam
check out Memri.org and see for yourself the hatred that is tought to Palestinian children. It's sad and shocking really. You'll never find this sort of hatred taught to Israeli children. How can two people's ever reconcile when on group is taught to hate and kill from birth? stop the hate and maybe there will be a chance for peace.

For Tallil2long @ 10:37
In the case of "sonofsam", his handle gives away enough--that he has the same sanity-level as the killer***.


***Reminds me of the following from an 1988 byelection campaign in India:
"A man who had just been released from Agra Asylum with a Certificate of Sanity went around Mathura starting lots of fights. Whenever police moved in, he would blame the other party claiming the latter as insane--due to their lacking an Agra Asylum Certificate of Sanity". LOL.
(btw, the candidate who used that quote won the byelection)

Funding the Palestinians? Bad Idea!
One of the lessons and basic truths the politicians never learn in all of their training for international service is: "You cannot negotiate with evil. You will lose every time!" We are attempting to do it again with the Palestinians. They will siphon off the money given and there will not be peace. There will be another war with Israel. The tax money Americans give now will ultimately wind up killing America's real friends, and ultimately Americans. But no one in the State Department or in Congress will take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. There is no such thing as a "balance of power" when you are dealing with evil. Funding the Palestinians is a bad idea!

observations
After reading this piece and (even more revealing) the resultant comments, several facts are evident even to me as a fairly objective (Christian) observer of the Middle East:

1. Funding the "Palestinians" makes no sense at all, given their history of terrorism, violence, lack of trustworthiness, and corruption. What have they to show for all the money already provided, besides having enriched corrupt leaders like Arafat?

2. In striking contrast whatever we have provided to Israel has been repaid in value to the US many times over-- the Middle East's only democracy and trustworthy partner,which has built an impressive array of schools, universities, commercial centers, and a thriving economy against many obstacles (including the Arab boycott!) all of which success greatly raises the standard of living of both the Jews and Arabs living there!

In addition we have had a lot of valuable security and military collaboration with the Israeli's who apparently pretty good at both and open with their technologic acoomplishments.

3. And I'm always fascinated by how even the most rational description of Islamic middle Eastern terrorism somehow brings the anti-Semites out of woodwork. Comments on this site about Israel by the likes of son of Sam, Taft, Bouette,etc. are so irrational and ignorant of both Middle East history as well as current reality that one can only conclude they are driven by their authors' rabid hatred of anything Jewish.

I'm fascinated for example by concerns that writers like Taft have for the poor "Palestinians" (kept that way by their own leaders), yet in areas of the world where many are being daily murdered (think Sudan), we see no concern at all! Wonder why that would be?
And among all the complainants about US foreign aid to Israel, I haven't noticed a single objection to the aid given to Egypt every year, which is nearly the same amount! Hmmm.....


DRJ
Well done!

Have a wonderful Christmas!

Clarification
Not to imply that Ron Paul is in anyway correct about the Islamic menace. However, has American policy forced Israel into some very bad choices?
Oslo? Road Map, Sharon pushing for the withdrawl from Gaza? When he won the election on the opposite premise?

Rice forcing "peace talks" with Hizbollah in the 2006 war, Olmert buying into something, some pressure?? that prevents Israel from fighting to win?

Having Arafat on the Whitehouse lawn during the Clinton Administration?;
Bush's pushing for a "two state solution?" and Annapolis which will be deadly in the long run?

Have we in fact strong armed Israel with our foreign aid (which is no greater than given to all the Russian satelites (each)! which are harboring the PKK)!!!!??

Thoughts? I don't see how the US has been such a friend.


Great Article
December 2007 National Geographic has a very interesting article about what's being discussed on this thread.


http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/2007-12/bethlehem/fin kel-text.html

Don't let the assorted trolls trick the reader of this thread. The Geneva Convention even says the occupation of a territory like the West Bank by an occupying force is illegal.

Good points DrJ
As Shells said, well done.

Adding some details for you: you're quite accurate that few make noises about Sudan's atrocities, particularly in Darfur (a region whose population is almost cent-percent Muslim), even when the atrocities (either in South or Darfur) are proportionally larger (and of much longer duration) than "Operation Searchlight".

Not only is there no protest about aid to Egypt, none also about aid to Pakistan (not irrelevant here, as it was the nation that CREATED the Taliban in the first place--and supported it right till 2001, only swapping against it due to fear of a remotely-possible joint invasion by US and India).

To Taft
"The Geneva Convention even says the occupation of a territory like the West Bank by an occupying force is illegal. "

Lets assume you are correct.
Is it legal for the Palestinian Arabs to shoot between one and two thousand rockets each year into Israeli communities?
Is it legal (forget that, is it MORAL) for Palestinian Arabs to teach their children to be suicide bombers?
In fact, was it lawful for the Palestinian Arabs (and, later, neighboring Arab nations) to defy UN Resolution ; to get up one day, walk over to the nearest Jewish settlement (with whom they had coexisted peacefully for years, in many cases) and try to murder man, woman and child?

If the law prevents you from saving the life of your family at the hands of a criminal, what would YOU do?

One says a lot about one's dedication to principle when one only applies it to a select few... and gives the others a pass. I doubt whether you have thought this matter through fully, neighbor.

For Tallil2long @ 01:24
About Taft, you wrote: "One says a lot about one's dedication to principle when one only applies it to a select few... and gives the others a pass. I doubt whether you have thought this matter through fully, neighbor."

A good question is if Taft thinks AT ALL; parroting KKK and neo-Nazi yellowjournals (which use "Palestinians" oft as excuse to stir up hate of Israel****) doesn't require thought last-I-checked.

****Perhaps because of the not-even-secret collaboration of first self-declared "Palestinian" leader Haj-amin Husseini with Hitler, and the remorselessness of "Palestinians" claiming Hitler as heroic.

To svpallava
I generally assume the better of people I haven't met. They sometimes disappoint, but it is how I prefer to live.
Most often I find that if I presume a person to be reasonable and civil, and *treat* them so, they show themselves to be reasonable and civil -- at least much more so than if treated as a presumed fool in the first place.

Taft and I (and sonofsam as well) will probably never agree on this particular issue. As things stand, though, nothing in our conversations would prevent me being willing to call each of them 'friend' in the future, were we to meet socially.

svpallava
If you think I'm a kkk or nazi type, you may want to seriously reconsider using such terms so lightly. Please, quote one of my posts that are such. I can easily understand your disagreeing with me, but my views are not fascist and for people, like myself, they are more inclined to take your view points seriously if your understanding of them. Other readers of this blog would be surprised at your charges because I have been very harsh on some of the anti-Semitics who pop on here at times. I not as ignorant as you might assume on the matter, I known about the hate on the Arabs side, but I also see, perhaps, a blind hate on the other side as well. Children signing bombs ect.. When I read that Palestinians are all evil, lazy, and born killers, I think bull sh*t.

taft
I have to admit that it remains fascinating to me how folks like Taft will continue to try to conjure up the most absurd rationales for taking the side of terrorists whose avowed goals include the maiming and murder of as many innocent men, women and children as possible, and have never shown the slightest inclinations to approach any peaceful solution to their grievances. And the "occupied" West Bank? Occupied by whom? Many serious students of Middle East history feel the Jews have at least as much claim to the West Bank area (read some history Taft) as the Arabs. Perhaps the Palestinians could be absordbed by the 160 million or so of their brethen in the area, something akin to what tiny Israel has done for any Jew anywhere in the world who wants to live there.

Instead as we all now, the charmers from Riyadh and others would much rather allow their co-religionists to live in these refugee camps for only one reason: to use as political pawns in an undying attempt to embarrass Israel.

Any why aren't you at all concerned about all the Jews expelled from Arab lands? Or the daily influx of instruments of war in the form of rockets raining down upon a civilian population? Do you really think there's a single country in the world which wouldn't respond to these attacks in ways designed to protect their citizens from murder?

If you can't see how ridiculous your support of hate-filled murder-bent terrorists, vs. a peaceloving, highly civilized people just trying to defend themselves, you're either incredibly stupid, or more likely so blinded by the world's oldest bigotry as to be incapable of seeing the ludicrous nature of your political "concerns"


drj
History? You mean like the things/terrorist activities the Isrealis did to achieve freedom from Britain? Or the things they did to get around initail quotas? King David Hotel ect.. People who are desperate to have a home and to be safe go to some exstremes. Read the National Geographic article posted above and get some perspective. And I am concerned about other threats to Jews around the world. Iran, I am led to understand has been getting pretty nasty with them. I wish you posters would argue with facts and logic, and some do (like tali).

Tallil2long writes: Thursday, December,
Probably too late, but that post is the product of one very wise person. Have a happy Christmas/Hanukkah.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.