Jump to content
Islamic Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Cecile

  • Rank
    Jr. Member

Previous Fields

  • Marital Status
  • Religion
  1. You have a comprehension problem in reading my post. I never said that anyone who writes anything negative about israel is antisemitic at all, and I don't know anyone who has ever said that. You seem to imply that nothing positive can be said about israel. What is boring is when you make up your mind how to respond before you've taken time to read my post. It certainly seems that you refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn't portray israel in a terrible light. What on earth if we all did the same to Muslims? I HATE it when some ignorant people say, "All Muslims are terrorists." That's garbage, and I'll be the first to defend you. I won't defend terrorism, but I'll defend ignorant statements like blaming all Muslims for the acts of a few extremists. I simply wonder why you insist on making up your mind that nothing can be positive about israel. Is that how you want people to act towards Islam? Let me lead you by the hand. From the story I quoted originally: Even though there was no evidence as to who was responsible, other than Palestinian claims of israeli culpability for a "massacre," the international media immediately bought into the Palestinian storyline. This, despite the continuing barrage of Qassam missiles, some of which had fallen on Gaza, and the "work accidents" caused by Palestinian explosives detonating prematurely, which should have made journalists think twice. In other words, where is the proof that the israeli government had anything to do with it? If I ask, "Okay, who ate all the cookies in the cookie jar?" and you are standing there with crumbs on your mouth, shall I immediately accuse and convict you, or should I investigate to find out what the truth is? I can say that I'm the Queen of England, but without proof, my words mean nothing. Were any israeli bullets or shrapnel found in any of the bodies? From the original story: 1) Shrapnel removed from two of the wounded Palestinians evacuated to israeli hospitals was not from israeli-made ordnance. 2) No large crater was evident on the beach as would be expected from the impact of an artillery shell landing from above. The blast site would suggest the likelihood of a mine exploding from below the sand rather than above. 3) The IDF fired six shells towards the Gaza area, one of which remained unaccounted for. All of the shells were fired, however, more than 10 minutes before the blast that killed the Palestinians. Also: Palestinian terrorists continue to launch Qassam missiles from Gaza, subjecting israel to an intolerable blitzkrieg of over 100 missiles launched since the weekend, wounding at least two israelis in Sderot and causing damage to a number of buildings in Sderot and the western Negev. No country, including israel can be expected not to take action under these circumstances. While attempting to escalate the situation further, Islamic Jihad terrorists were prevented from launching even more deadly Katyusha missiles by an israeli air strike on Tuesday. Unfortunately, due to Palestinian terrorists operating from within densely populated areas, a number of civilians also died when the terrorists' vehicle was hit by an israeli missile. Due to the continuous barrage of Palestinian missiles, israel has been left with little choice but to take action to defend its citizens. Here is an interesting experiment: stop all attacks by Palestinians. ALL. Then, see how many "attacks" from israel there are. So what's all this talk about it being biased, when virtually noone from the Arab or Muslim world accuses it of being so?? Why would Muslims care if the media is biased against israel? You should love it because you hate israel so much. Unfortunately, I do not see a willingness by several people here (not all) to sincerely keep an open mind on the situation, so I feel the task of trying to engage in intelligent conversation is fruitless. Please note for the record that I've never said all Jews or israel were perfect. I've admitted that we've been in the wrong, though I've yet to hear that from Muslims. israel has tried to make peace with its neighbors. Yet, I see very little on this forum except finger-pointing and denial of anything that doesn't set well with pre-conceived ideas. My last thought: "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." (Golda Meir, 1957) [using large font size is not allowed]
  2. Palestinians Attack Israelis

    Where did you get a notion like that -- from your own negative pre-conceived ideas of israel or from a news source? Either way, the source is wrong. Hadassah Hospital was launched in 1937! After the Palestinians refused to allow Jews back in Jerusalemh in 1948, Palestinians did not take care of the hospital and refused to treat Jews. However, after 1967, when Jews took control of Jerusalem again, the hospital was renovated and opened again for ALL people. By chance, do the Muslims have any hospitals in that area where they treat everyone, regardless of nationality or religion? Hadassah Hospital was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize in 2005. But since that fact isn't one you'll like, I'm sure that even if you called the Pulitzer Prize committee, you'd say that they're just making up the story.. There was at least one (possibly two, but I'm not certain) film made about Hadassah Hospital because it paved such a road to the peace-making process and improved the lives of everyone there.
  3. The article I mentioned above I'll print here: (from jpostDOTcom, a source that is frequently cited on this forum by Muslims) Amnesty Int'l redefines 'war crimes'[using large font size is not allowed] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALAN DERSHOWITZ, THE JERUSALEM POST The two principal "human rights" organizations are in a race to the bottom to see which group can demonize israel with the most absurd legal arguments and most blatant factual mis-statements. Until last week, Human Rights Watch enjoyed a prodigious lead, having "found" - contrary to what every newspaper in the world had reported and what everyone saw with their own eyes on television - "no cases in which Hizbullah deliberately used civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack." Those of us familiar with Amnesty International's nefarious anti-israel agenda and notoriously "suggestible" investigative methodology wondered how it could possibly match such a breathtaking lie. But we didn't have to wait long for AI to announce that israel was guilty of a slew of war crimes for "widespread attacks against public civilian infrastructure, including power plants, bridges, main roads, seaports, and Beirut's international airport." There are two problems with the Amnesty report and conclusion. First, Amnesty is wrong about the law. israel committed no war crimes by attacking parts of the civilian infrastructure in Lebanon. In fact, through restraint, israel was able to minimize the number of civilian casualties in Lebanon, despite Hizbullah's best efforts to embed itself in population centers and to use civilians as human shields. The total number of innocent Muslim civilians killed by israeli weapons during a month of ferocious defensive warfare was a fraction of the number of innocent Muslims killed by other Muslims during that same period in Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, Algeria, and other areas of Muslim-on-Muslim civil strife. Yet the deaths caused by Muslims received a fraction of the attention devoted to alleged israeli "crimes." This lack of concern for Muslims by other Muslims - and the lack of focus by so-called human rights organizations on these deaths - is bigotry, pure and simple. AMNESTY'S EVIDENCE that israel's attacks on infrastructure constitute war crimes comes from its own idiosyncratic interpretation of the already-vague word "disproportionate." Unfortunately for Amnesty, no other country in any sort of armed conflict has ever adopted such a narrow definition of the term. Indeed, among the very first military objectives of most modern wars is precisely what israel did: to disable portions of the opponent's electrical grid and communication network, to destroy bridges and roads, and to do whatever else is necessary to interfere with those parts of the civilian infrastructure that supports the military capability of the enemy. That's how the American and Britain militaries fought World War II. (In fact, israel shows far more restraint than Britain did during World War II. Prime Minister Winston Churchill directed the Royal Air Force to bomb the center of towns with the express purpose of killing as many civilians as possible.) Had the Allies been required to fight World War II under the rules of engagement selectively applied to Amnesty International to israel, our "greatest generation" might have lost that war. The strategy of destroying some infrastructure was particular imperative against Hizbullah. israel first had to ensure that its kidnapped soldiers would not be smuggled out of the country (as other soldiers had been and were never returned), then it had to prevent Hizbullah from being re-armed, especially given that Hizbullah damaged a ship using advanced radar technology provided by the Lebanese army and rockets provided by Iran. Hizbullah was being armed by Syria and Iran - as those countries themselves admitted - and the president, government, and population of Lebanon overwhelmingly supported the militia's indiscriminate rocket attacks against israeli civilian population centers. The Lebanese army actively supported Hizbullah's military actions. israel was, in a very real sense, at war with Lebanon itself, and not simply with a renegade faction of militants. HERE'S HOW law professor David Bernstein answered Amnesty's charge: The idea that a country at war can't attack the enemy's resupply routes (at least until it has direct evidence that there is a particular military shipment arriving) has nothing to do with human rights or war crimes, and a lot to do with a pacifist attitude that seeks to make war, regardless of the justification for it or the restraint in prosecuting it [at least if it's a Western country doing it], an international "crime." In other words, if attacking the civilian infrastructure is a war crime, then modern warfare is entirely impermissible, and terrorists have a free hand in attacking democracies and hiding from retaliation among civilians. Terrorists become de facto immune from any consequences for their atrocities. THE MORE troubling aspect of Amnesty's report is their inattention to Hizbullah. If israel is guilty of war crimes for targeting civilian infrastructure, imagine how much greater is Hizbullah's moral responsibility for targeting civilians! But Amnesty shows little interest in condemning the terrorist organization that started the conflict, indiscriminately killed both israeli civilians (directly) and Lebanese civilians (by using them as human shields), and has announced its intention to kill Jews worldwide (already having started by blowing up the Jewish Community Center in Argentina.) Apparently Amnesty has no qualms about Hizbullah six-year war of attrition against israel following israel's complete withdrawal from Southern Lebanon. As has been widely reported, even al-Jazeera expressed surprise at the imbalance in the Amnesty report: During the four week war Hizbullah fired 3,900 rockets at israeli towns and cities with the aim of inflicting maximum civilian casualties. The israeli government says that 44 israeli civilians were killed in the bombardments and 1,400 wounded. AI has not issued a report accusing Hizbullah of war crimes. Amnesty does not even seem to understand the charges it is making. Take, for example, this paragraph from its report: israeli government spokespeople have insisted that they were targeting Hizbullah positions and support facilities, and that damage to civilian infrastructure was incidental or resulted from Hizbullah using the civilian population as a "human shield". However, the pattern and scope of the attacks, as well as the number of civilian casualties and the amount of damage sustained, makes the justification ring hollow. But the issue of human shields and infrastructure are different. The first relates to civilian casualties; the second concerns property damage. Of course israel intentionally targeted bridges and roads. It would have been militarily negligent not to have done so under the circumstances. But it did not target innocent civilians. It would have given them no military benefit to do so. The allegations become even more tenuous, as when Amnesty writes, "a road that can be used for military transport is still primarily civilian in nature." By this reasoning, terrorists could commandeer any structure or road initially constructed for civilian use, and israel could not touch those bridges or buildings because they were once, and still could be, used by civilians. This is not, and should not be, the law. Consider another example: "While the use of civilians to shield a combatant from attack is a war crime, under international humanitarian law such use does not release the opposing party from its obligations towards the protection of the civilian population." Well that's certainly nice sounding. But what does it mean? What would Amnesty suggest a country do in the face of daily rocket attacks launched from civilian populations? Nothing, apparently. The clear implication of Amnesty's arguments is that the only way israel could have avoided committing "war crimes" would have been if it had taken only such military action that carried with it no risk to civilian shields - that is, to do absolutely nothing. For Amnesty, "israeli war crimes" are synonymous with "any military action whatsoever." The real problem with Amnesty's paper is that its blanket condemnations do not consider the consequences of its arguments. (It doesn't have to; it would never advance these arguments against any country but israel.) Amnesty International's conclusions are not based on sound legal arguments. They're certainly not based on compelling moral arguments. They're simply anti-israel arguments. Amnesty reached a predetermined conclusion - that israel committed war crimes - and it is marshalling whatever sound-bites it could to support that conclusion. Amnesty International is not only sacrificing its own credibility when it misstates the law and omits relevant facts in its obsession over israel. It also harms progressive causes that AI should be championing. Just last year, for example, Amnesty blamed Palestinian rapes and "honor killings" on - you guessed it - the israeli occupation. When I pointed out that there was absolutely no statistical evidence to show that domestic violence increased during the occupation, and that Amnesty's report relied exclusively on the conclusory and anecdotal reports of Palestinian NGOs, Amnesty stubbornly repeated that "israel is implicated in this violence by Palestinian men against Palestinian women." This episode only underscored AI's predisposition to blame everything on israel. Even when presented with an ideal opportunity to promote gender equality and feminism in the Arab world, it preferred to take wholly unrelated and absurd shots at israel. Amnesty International just can't seem to help itself when it comes to blaming israel for the evils of the world, but rational observers must not credit the pre-determined conclusions of a once-reputable organization that has destroyed its own credibility by repeatedly applying a double standard to israel. [using large font size is not allowed] The writer is a professor of law at Harvard. His most recent book is Preemption: A Knife That Cuts Both Ways.
  4. I agree completely! And, I think that we as individuals, regardless of our religion or nationality, need to be constantly aware of this. When I travel internationally, I put up with a lot more rudeness from others than I might at home. The reason is simple: like it or not, we're all "little ambassadors" of our own nation/religion when we're outside of our home territories. Very true: although I am aware of that, my post did not reflect that very well at all. My apology. The educators. If you have some evidence, I'd like to see it. If you go to Google video (or YouTube), and type in the words "Blaming the Jews" a reporter goes to a very nice Palestinian school in Gaza where the teachers and administrators both admit that they leave out key facts (especially about the Holocaust) about Jews and israel. Teaching children their (our) own biases is a crime. Take care and peace to you.
  5. Palestinians Attack Israelis

    Paston, your post doesn't make much sense. I don't know how old you are, but you simply do not seem to have the basic skills to read and digest information. Also, your knowledge of history is not accurate. The reason there are Palestinian refugees is that Arab nations attacked israel, and many Palestinians either left or (to be fair) perhaps were indeed banished. However, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me not to allow back people who just attacked you and then want to return to live right next to you! I have demonstrated a willingness to admit that israel is not perfect and has commited many mistakes. To my knowledge, no Muslim here can do the same. After reading the posts, I do not think that many of you here even have that ability, and that's a real shame, because you're only harming yourselves. Education yourselves, and learn how to ask proper questions to learn the truth. Re-iterating platitudes without even thinking about them is a simple argument with yourself and leads you nowhere. Jews have been and are willing to work with others. An excellent case in point is Hadassah Hospital. Both Jewish and Palestinian doctors and staff work there. They deny NO ONE medical care. Even when the Palestinians create violence agains the Jewish doctors' family or home, they are still treated. I honestly thought Muslims were more open-minded, intelligent, and educated than what I've seen here. And perhaps many are but simply do not post here. As I mentioned in another post, I sincerely hope that you will learn HOW to think, not WHAT to think. I have tried to explain many things here, but other than illogical and emotional responses, I don't see a willingness from many to try to understand the situation. I really don't have time to spend here if many are simply going to respond emotionally and not really hear the message. I've repeated ad naseum that israel has made many mistakes but that statement is continually ignored. Please remember one important aspect in life: if you want others to listen to you, you need to at least have the willingness to listen to them. By ignoring most of what I've said, you haven't demonstrated that you are even capable of allowing information -- that doesn't agree with your pre-conceived ideas -- into your heads. Education: the only way to peace.
  6. Palestinians Continue Violence

    I'm trying to find out more information to make an educated inference about the situation. Shouldn't that be the goal of everyone -- not to jump to conclusions but to find out exactly what the numbers mean? I don't know how old you are, but I sincerely hope that somewhere at home or in school, you were taught to find out as much information as you can before jumping to a conclusion. However, if you look at recent news, it is true that many Palestinians are responsible for the deaths of their own countrymen. All I want to know is how many of the deaths in the story above are attributed to their own people.
  7. The name "Human Rights Watch" sound very noble, and most unfortunately, they have been proven to be antisemitic -- ignoring crucial evidence. Go to jpostDOTcom and type in the words "Alan Dershowitz" and "Human Rights Watch." I am very sad by what I read in this forum. I used to have a much higher opinion of the Arab world. But some of you (and I certainly won't do what many here are doing -- judging an entire people by the words or actions of a few) simply do not have the education or open mind to look objectively at a situation that you find uncomfortable or unwilling to accept. I only hope that the majority of Muslims have been taught better. I know that Palestinian children receive very biased educations. A truly educated person learns HOW to think, not WHAT to think.
  8. Palestinians Attack Israelis

    Quite the opposite. What I see here is thread after thread placing all blame on israel. No admission of any wrongdoing whatsoever is given to the Palestinians. When you choose to believe only that which fits conveniently with your pre-conceived ideas that anything to do with Palestinians is good and anything that has to do with israel is evil, you'll never find the truth. Are you more concerned with blaming israel with everything or finding the truth, and more importantly, peace? If you'll read more carefully, I have admitted that israel is far from perfect and has made many mistakes. I see no one admitting any wrongdoing by Palestinians whatsoever. Do you see a problem here? If not, then that's the problem. Anything can be used as a weapon. Someone holding an item, like a rock, is generally not a threat. However, when that rock is used as a weapon (some third-world nations literally "stone" people to death), then don't you think people should protect themselves?
  9. Unfortunately, you failed to either read the story or failed to comprehend what was written. It is very, very sad that anything does that not support your pre-conceived ideas is immediately dismissed.
  10. ~ Holy Warriors Set Sights On Iran ~

    Mr Hedges needs to dig a little further for the truth of what date it is! However, I will agree that the American Christian Right is a force that I do not wish in power.
  11. Gaza Beach Libel Following Palestinian claims and the media reports of israeli culpability in deaths on a Gaza beach, the real story emerges... It is now becoming clear that, despite the claims of the Palestinians and the international media's rush to blame israel, the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians on a beach in Gaza on 9 June were not caused by the IDF. Investigations by the IDF and others over the past few days have revealed new evidence that a Hamas mine was most likely the cause of the beach blast: 1) Shrapnel removed from two of the wounded Palestinians evacuated to israeli hospitals was not from israeli-made ordnance. 2) No large crater was evident on the beach as would be expected from the impact of an artillery shell landing from above. The blast site would suggest the likelihood of a mine exploding from below the sand rather than above. 3) The IDF fired six shells towards the Gaza area, one of which remained unaccounted for. All of the shells were fired, however, more than 10 minutes before the blast that killed the Palestinians. It is now increasingly likely, that in true "Pallywood" fashion, as seen in the Mohammed Al-Dura case and the Jenin "massacre" libel, the Palestinians have attempted another cover-up in order to smear israel: 1) Palestinian Television broadcast doctored scenes showing file footage of israeli naval vessels shelling Gaza, interspersed with video of the beach victims, despite the fact that the israeli Navy was not responsible for any shelling at the time. Click here to see the footage courtesy of Palestinian Media Watch. 2) Suspicions were initially raised by the Palestinian refusal to cooperate with israeli investigators and the remarkably swift cleansing of evidence from the blast scene by Hamas gunmen who arrived shortly after the incident. Palestinian spokespeople usually display parts of israeli shells to the international media - but not this time. 3) israeli intelligence suggests that Hamas had mined the beach area in order to prevent israeli naval commandos from landing there as part of anti-terror operations to prevent Qassam missile launches. THE MEDIA'S PREMATURE RESPONSE Even though there was no evidence as to who was responsible, other than Palestinian claims of israeli culpability for a "massacre," the international media immediately bought into the Palestinian storyline. This, despite the continuing barrage of Qassam missiles, some of which had fallen on Gaza, and the "work accidents" caused by Palestinian explosives detonating prematurely, which should have made journalists think twice. Here are some examples of those who did not: The Washington Post's headline: israeli Fire Kills 7 Beachgoers in Gaza Excerpt: israeli artillery fire targeting the northern Gaza Strip on Friday killed at least seven Palestinian civilians and wounded 30 others, Palestinian hospital officials and witnesses said. Contact: letters[at]washpost###### and ombudsman[at]washpost###### The New York Times' headline: Errant Shell Turns Girl Into Palestinian Icon Excerpt: Eleven-year-old Huda unwittingly became a symbol of Palestinian pain and loss during an afternoon picnic with her family on a hot day when a cameraman captured her shrieking "Father, Father, Father!" as she hovered over the bloody bodies of 13 dead or wounded members of her family, hit by what was apparently an errant israeli artillery shell. Contact: letters[at]nytimes###### and public[at]nytimes###### Australia Broadcasting Corporation's headline: israel faces criticism over Gaza beach shelling Excerpt: Seven Palestinians died on Friday, when the israeli military shelled the beach where they were enjoying the Muslim day of rest, an eighth victim died in hospital on Saturday. Contact: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"http://############abc######.au/contact/contactnews.htm"]############abc######.au/contact/contactnews.htm[/url] CNN's headline: Beach strike shakes Hamas cease-fire Excerpt: An israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach Friday, killing at least seven people and prompting the military wing of Hamas to call off a 16-month-old cease-fire with israel. Contact: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"http://############cnn######/feedback/"]############cnn######/feedback/[/url] The Guardian's headline: Death on the beach: seven Palestinians killed as israeli shells hit family picnic Excerpt: A barrage of israeli artillery shells rained down on a busy Gaza beach yesterday, killing seven Palestinians, three of them children. Contact: letters[at]guardian.co.uk The Independent's headline: Palestinians killed on Gaza beach by israeli gunboats Excerpt: israeli naval gunboats killed at least seven Palestinian civilians and wounded about 40 others as they relaxed in the summer heat on a beach in northern Gaza yesterday. Contact: letters[at]independent.co.uk The Times of London's headline: Girl who saw family die on beach becomes icon and media celebrity Excerpt: In the days since a wild-haired Huda Ghalia was filmed howling with anguish amid a family picnic blown apart by shellfire, she has become an instant symbol of suffering across the Arab world. Contact: letters[at]thetimes.co.uk CONSEQUENCES FOR israelI DIPLOMACY Aside from the very real damage caused to israel's public image, the images and headlines transmitted around the world also demonstrated the sometimes insidious influence of the media on israel's diplomatic standing. Coming at the same time as israeli PM Ehud Olmert's visit to the UK, it was therefore damaging that the British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett launched a scathing attack on israel following the incident, which the British press interpreted as casting a shadow over the trip. In addition, the French also rushed to issue condemnation of israel, deploring "israel's bombardments on a beach in the Gaza Strip, whose disproportionate character has cost the lives of several civilians and injured many others." HonestReporting is aware of the political and diplomatic damage that biased or inaccurate reporting causes for israel within international governmental circles. Contact details for elected representatives from a number of countries can be found on HonestReporting's website along with those of many national and international media outlets. While the media may choose not to believe the results of the IDF inquiry, it has a duty to report on the developing story and the new evidence that has emerged. HonestReporting calls on its subscribers to hold the media to account for its initial premature judgments and to also ensure that the real story is published. QASSAM BLITZKRIEG ON israel Palestinian terrorists continue to launch Qassam missiles from Gaza, subjecting israel to an intolerable blitzkrieg of over 100 missiles launched since the weekend, wounding at least two israelis in Sderot and causing damage to a number of buildings in Sderot and the western Negev. No country, including israel can be expected not to take action under these circumstances. While attempting to escalate the situation further, Islamic Jihad terrorists were prevented from launching even more deadly Katyusha missiles by an israeli air strike on Tuesday. Unfortunately, due to Palestinian terrorists operating from within densely populated areas, a number of civilians also died when the terrorists' vehicle was hit by an israeli missile. Due to the continuous barrage of Palestinian missiles, israel has been left with little choice but to take action to defend its citizens. As seen by this and recent events, Palestinian terrorists show scant regard for the lives of their own people as well as israelis, continuing to cause suffering in the region.[using large font size is not allowed] Probably most of the URLs in the story have been crossed out by forum software, so I'll try to post the original URL here: (replace DOT and SLASH with appropriate symbols) ######DOThonestreportingDOTcomSLASHarticlesSLASH45884734SLASHcritiquesSLASHGaza_Beach_LibelDOTasp
  12. Palestinians Attack Israelis

    Pashton, You've done a wonderul job of not discussing my points. It's called ad hominem, and it means when something is uncomfortable for you or when you cannot logically make an argument, you change the subject so you don't have to address the points. However, I will not do that to you. Yes, we gave money to Arafat that he squandered on himself and terror activities. However, the big difference is that I have little choice but to pay taxes. My taxes fund literally billions of activities. I can't directly control where my tax money goes. Arafat absolutely could control where his money went. Are you truly comfortable with the fact that Arafat lived like an absolute king while "his people" suffered? Your words, not mine. Never have I stated that israel is always right. However, what I don't see is anyone discussing the terror activities of Palestinians. Or even acknowledging them. Ah, but in so many posts here, the stories about what israel has done wrong CAME from israel! My point exactly. I don't see anyone here posting stories about the "wrongs" of Palestinians -- from Palestinian sources. When someone (or an entity) refuses to take any responsibility, then dialogue closes. With responsibility come rights. I haven't seen stories from reputable sources, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm not sure if you're aware, but a rock hitting someone's head can be a weapon of death. Would you really want your children throwing rocks at anyone? What if someone threw rocks at your head? Would you stand by twiddling your thumbs, or would you protect yourself? Here's what I don't understand -- you seem to think nothing is wrong for Palestinians to use violence (throwing rocks) but when others try to protect themselves, all of a sudden it's a crime. Do you honestly not see the grievous lack of logic? Have you ever seen Palestinian television? Children are encouraged to use violence. It's just sickening what Palestinians are doing to their children. Go to: pmwDOTorgDOTilSLASH Click on "Teaching Children to Aspire Death for Allah" A lot of the hatred of Jews and israel comes from people TELLING others what Jews and israel think (and most of it is nothing but vicious lies). Jews and israelis don't have to fabricate stories of the hatred towards them: the Palestinians say it in their own words. It is amazing! israel, the 100th smallest country with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, was one of the very first nations to offer substantial aid and to send medical rescue missions to Islamic people in the stricken tsunami areas. israel mobilized 150 doctors and relief teams as well as an 82-ton planeload of supplies for Sri Lanka. israel also sent aid to India and Thailand. The scientific technology employed by NASA to beam video images from its Mars land-rover back to Earth was developed by two israelis. An israeli company designed a special parachute that will allow people to jump from high-rise buildings in case of emergency. An israeli group of scientists from the israel Institute of Technology developed methods to improve the efficiency of solar-hydrogen, non-polluting powered cars. “60 Minutes†focused on Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem where medical staff — both Jewish and Arab — work together to save Jewish and Arab lives. israeli scientists developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer. An israeli company developed a computerized system for ensuring proper administration of medications, thus removing human error from medical treatment. Every year in U.S. hospitals, 7,000 patients die from treatment mistakes. Researchers in israel developed a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood, an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with heart disease. The new device is synchronized with a camera that helps doctors diagnose a heart's mechanical operations through a sophisticated system of sensors. Archaeologists in israel and from all over the world have discovered and recovered amazing artifacts long neglected or desecrated by others who occupied this area. israelis have developed very advanced hydrology technology that allows crops to grow in the most arid conditions. israel has shared this technology with other peoples, including the Hopi Indians. The X-Hawk rotorless helicopter, the first helicopter to have the capability to move in tight spaces, is now in development in israel. The cell phone was developed in israel by israelis working in the israeli branch of Motorola, which has its largest development center in israel. Most of the Windows NT and XP operating systems were developed by Microsoft-israel. The Pentium MMX chip technology was designed in israel at Intel. Voice mail technology was also developed in israel. The technology for the AOL Instant Messenger was developed in 1996 by four young israelis. israel has the highest average living standards in the Middle East. The per capita income in 2000 was over $17,500, exceeding that of the UK. Twenty-four per cent of israel's workforce holds university degrees, ranking third in the industrialized world, after the United States and Holland and 12 per cent hold advanced degrees. In 1984 and 1991, israel airlifted a total of 22,000 Ethiopian Jews (Operation Solomon) at risk in Ethiopia, to safety in israel. The Middle East has been growing date palms for centuries. The average tree is about 18 -20 feet tall and yields about 38 pounds of dates a year. israeli trees are now yielding about 400 pounds a year and are short enough to be harvested from the ground or a short ladder. When the U. S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya was bombed in 1998, israeli rescue teams were on the scene within a day — and saved three victims from the rubble. **** It should be noted that the Arabs rejected the UN Proposal in 1947, not the Jews. The Arabs could have worked together with israel but instead chose to attack them.
  13. Palestinians Continue Violence

    I'll try! The problem is that until I have written a certain number of posts, I cannot post URLs. Thus, I'll try to say DOT, SLASH, EQUALSIGN, QUESTIONMARK, etc. where the symbols should go. It's an Associated Press story, but here's the source where I happened to find it: (start out with ######DOT)onelocalnewsDOTcomSLASH owelltimesandtranscriptSLASHVi wArticleDOTaspxQUESTIONMARKidE UALSIGN38882&sourceEQUALSIGN2
  14. Palestinians Attack Israelis

    I don't blame you at all. Arafat was a huge embarrassment. He squandered billions of dollars of money given to him in good faith. Instead of helping "his" people with it, he squandered it and used it to fund terror activities. He never brought peace. Other than being a physical body at the 2000 Summit, he made no counter offer or made no advances towards trying to work out any kind of peaceful arrangement with israel. Here is what is unacceptable in a discussion with intelligent adults: a closed mind that refuses to acknowledge or take any responsibility for any wrong-doing on one's own side. I sincerely feel sorry for the plight of many Palestinians. However, I don't see people here acknowledging anything that may be painful or negative about the Palestinians and their actions. If you don't want to discuss something uncomfortable, a comment like "Well, the israelis wouldn't accept it, anyway" (How do you know? Pessimism and a defeatist attitude never win) or "I don't discuss dead men" (does that argument flow both ways?). Looking at only one side of an issue is simply to ignore the entire situation, and when the broad spectrum is not seen, rarely does an understanding and willingness to work towards to peaceful solution ever result. I simply don't see any flexibility or responsibility on the part of many Palestinians. Negotiation means that *both* sides have to give and take. We can stand around and count the innocent victims and point fingers, but wouldn't it be more productive to work towards reaching an agreement that is fair and equitable to all?