Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Shministim
Pilots
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network


Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile



Google
Web antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Blogs

Sites




Previous Posts



Powered by Blogger

 


Friday, January 20, 2006

Hatred is hatred

Regrettably, incitement and anti-Semitic pronouncements are common throughout the Arab world. Edward Said campaigned strongly about this insidious trend throughout his life. No less disturbing is Jewish hatred of Arabs and Palestinians, equally irrational and dangerous.

The following news item, only appearing in Hebrew, offers evidence of well-known Rabbis expressing racial vilification:

"A conference which took place yesterday against the establishment of a mixed Arab-Jewish school in Pat, Jerusalem saw harsh attacks made by well-known rabbis.

"The (ha-mekubal) Rabbi David Bazri said: 'The establishment of such a school is a foul, disgraceful deed. You can't mix pure and foul. They are a disease, a disaster, a devil. The Arabs are asses, and the question must be asked, why did God did not create them walking on their fours? The answer is that they need to build and wash. They have no place in our school'.

"His son, Rabbi Itzhak Bazri, also referred to the interpretation of Ishmaelites – people similar to donkeys, and said 'the Arabs are inferior. What do they want? To take our daughters. They say we are racists. Well, they are the evil, they are the cruel, they have the foulness of snakes. There's foul and there's pure, and they are foul'.

"In response to questions by 'Walla!', Rabbi Bazri said that he meant to emphasize the difference between Arab and Jewish culture, and that there is no common denominator that can bring us together. Bazri went on to say that 'our experience is to prevent situations in which our Jewish girls be hurt by Arabs and to prevent danger to Jewish lives. We intend to demonstrate in front of the City Hall and to do everything we can to prevent this initiative'.

Rabbi Yehuda Der'i, brother to Arie Deri and Chief Rabbi of Ber Sheva, also participated in the conference and said that 'this is a thing that the Jewish mind, logic and soul cannot tolerate. We have to go from house to house and raise supporters in the neighbourhood to prevent this horrid punishment.'

"Today the school is running in a temporary building and is looking for a permanent residence in the Pat neighbourhood of Jerusalem. The municipality assigned a territory for the school but because of repeating appeals to court the process is delayed. Today the matter is scheduled for a debate in the High Court."

When Arab clerics preach hatred, they are rightly condemned. There is a telling silence when Jews do likewise.

83 Comments:

Blogger violet said...

You need to move on Antony,

Edward Said is as outdated and irrelevant as postmodernism.

Friday, January 20, 2006 10:51:00 am  
Blogger Moodymann said...

Changing the subject again. Can you for once aknowledge the facts and say yes, these are racist jews, just as there are racist arabs..

Friday, January 20, 2006 11:20:00 am  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

violet said...
"Edward Said is as outdated and irrelevant as postmodernism."

Really? If he is "outdated", then presumably he has been superceded. By whom? (And please don't say Daniel Pipes. I'm talking about scholarship.)

Friday, January 20, 2006 1:21:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

i agree moodyman,
violet, you should either say nothing or acknowledge it for what it is, racism
why cant you for once acknoledge the core point of a post like that,
instead of picking on a secondary aspect of it,
and the FBI disagree with you, since they bugged and followed him to the day he died i would say they thought him current and very relevant

Friday, January 20, 2006 1:41:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

edward

You think so conventionally...something can be outdated without a labelled and categorised replacement. Think outside the square Eddie. Postmodernism is dead, it was a fad created by idiots like Said. It had no logic and was impractical and incredibly stupid. It did more harm than good and created a whole generation of moral relativists who thought they had to tolerate all sundry of abuse in the name of tolerance. It is what is wrong with our universities and the whole stupid concept needs to be killed.


And here is a photo of the mess the Tel Aviv suicide bomber left for the Jews, Arab hatred that you don't see in the mainstream press.

Friday, January 20, 2006 1:42:00 pm  
Blogger rejitex said...

Well said Violet, the problem is Israel bashers like Edward, Evan Jones and AL dont want to see this kind of stuff, and dont want others to see because it totally blows away their arguments.

Here is another pic they like to deny
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5864

anyway, enough from me, AL can you provide us with some more self-hating posts. What a scummy little grot you are.

Friday, January 20, 2006 1:56:00 pm  
Blogger Moodymann said...

so what!!! you want us to post pictures of dead babies killed by the isreali army? Kids with the bodies blown apart after having bombs dropped on their homes. Kids with bullets in their heads fired by isreali soldiers.

Are you claiming that only the palestinians are commiting wicked crimes.

What the fuck is your point?

Friday, January 20, 2006 2:25:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

israelis are not all jews, the bomber left the mess for ordinary israelis,

terrorism is wrong whoever does it, and 'arab hatred' as you call it violet is reported endlessly in the mainstream media, what planet are you on

Friday, January 20, 2006 2:28:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Indeed, the IDF soldier who emptied 17 rounds into the body of a Paelsitinian girls was Druze. UndeIsraeli court, he was essentially exonerated for the fact tha the had followed IDF protocol.

I'm sure that woud have been a pretty sight.

Friday, January 20, 2006 3:11:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

It is not a crime to riddle a dead body with bullets. It is stupid, insensitive, useless and demeaning.

But it is not a crime.

Friday, January 20, 2006 3:25:00 pm  
Blogger Moodymann said...

How did the girl die ibrahamev? Natural causes

Friday, January 20, 2006 3:39:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

She did not die from the arab pouring bullets into her a close range. She was already dead.

Yes, only the palestinians are deliberately committing wicked crimes as a matter of policy.

The FBI following someone does not make them relevant nor current. Bankrobbers, kidnappers, murderers and suicide bombers are neither current nor relevant.

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:13:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

violet,
i am intrigued by your continued attacks on postmodernism and relativism,
what self evident truths or proofs would you offer to justify your own beliefs or vehement opposition to these philosophical arguements

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:16:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Seems you missed the point. No comment on the suicide?

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:24:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

its really quite amusing because the comments are just so easy to refute,
like relativism is a fad,
Greek historian Herodotus (ca. 484–420 BC) observed that each society thinks its own belief system and way of doing things are best, in contrast to that of others. Various ancient philosophers also questioned the idea of an absolute standard of morality.(wikipedia)

that modern scholar herodotus, sucked in by all the fads

if there is a god which i thoroughly doubt, i'm sure he has a soft spot for questions,
postmodernism asks them, religions seldom do after a certain point in their degenaration

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:25:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

As one of the oldest religions, Judaism continues to ask questions.

It is clear that you do not have the answer.

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:26:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

which is why i used the word seldom, i totally agree that judaism does continually question and refine and i respect that aspect of that religion

no-one has the answer, although if pressed i'd say that there is no meaning and the best you can do is to try as hard as you can to unconditionally love people and enjoy the brief flash of life you have

Friday, January 20, 2006 4:32:00 pm  
Blogger Stev said...

How did the girl die ibrahamev? Natural causes

She did not die from the arab pouring bullets into her a close range. She was already dead.

You do realise you've completely avoided the question don't you Ib? A respectable debating technique if ever I've seen one.

Iman al-Homs was 13 when she was shot and killed by the IDF. No 'arab' poured bullets into her. She stepped into an off-limits area, was shot by an IDF captain who then walked up to her and emptied his magazine into her body. Or perhaps you believe she was already dead when she stepped into an off-limits area? Those pesky corpses, always going where they're not supposed to.

These facts have been verified by the reports of other IDF soldiers in the same company. So you'll have to keep the 'anti-semitic propaganda' card for another day.

Friday, January 20, 2006 5:01:00 pm  
Blogger Stev said...

I apologise. That post was unnecessarily acerbic. I do feel that the point remains though in spite of the tone.

Friday, January 20, 2006 5:22:00 pm  
Blogger smiths said...

i'm going out tomorrow morning on a boat with my girlfriend of jewish descent, my four and half year old son and our very good friend mohamed, a moslem from tanzania, to catch a few crays,
over time we've cooked, laughed, shared a few joints on the balconey and a lot of great music discovered by mohamed as he travels the world,
funny that it never occured to me before that he must be full of moslem hatred and i ought to be alarmed,
thanks for waking me up violett, melanie, neolefty, shab, ibrahamev and all the others who know who you are

(ps. you all ought to check out fela kuti, nigerian singer, some of the best music i've discovered for ages)

Friday, January 20, 2006 6:18:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

smiths said...
(ps. you all ought to check out fela kuti, nigerian singer, some of the best music i've discovered for ages) "

Also try Ali Farka from Mali?- terrific!

Friday, January 20, 2006 7:59:00 pm  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

And let's not forget Youssou N'Dour's Egypt !

Friday, January 20, 2006 8:57:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

What you guys all miss (and this takes in my comments on postmodernism) is that when Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians (or anyone else) by accident or even by stupidity and ignorance, there are consequences and court marshalls. When Arabs (including Palestinians) kill Jews there are great celebrations and monetary rewards. The fact that you cannot see the difference is very disturbing. Why do you have a different set of rules for each?

Let me give you another example. When Sharon did not foresee the tragedy of Sabre and Shatila and the Lebanese militia slaughtered hundreds of Palestinian refugees, Sharon was the subject of a state enquiry and lost his job. Now, what did the Arabs do to those who did the actual slaughtering? Nought. Was there ever an enquiry by the Arabs? Nope. Those who did the killing got away with it and the Jews copped the blame. Different rules again.

So, is it perfectly fine to punish Jews and reward Arabs? Yep, according to you all, it is. You have one set of rules for Arabs and one for Jews. This hypocrisy is postmodernist bullcrap. You have a different set of rules for each culture and you have different degrees of tolerance for each culture. It's idiotic. It's racist. It's unjust.

Big bad Imperialist America is hauled over the coals for every suspected misdemeanour, but Saddam Hussein can murder, torture and persecute his own people and it's none of our business. Hypocracy is blind I guess.

By the way smiths, to your childish comment -- of course there are good Arabs and good Palestinians -- but the dominant culture of Islam is primitive and barbaric and needs to undergo a reformation...personalising it doesn't win you any points.

Friday, January 20, 2006 9:08:00 pm  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

violet,

I might as well begin all my posts with "and this goes for logical positivism too", but, as I'm sure you would agree, that would be pointless. Similarly, it is hard to see what your most recent rant has to do with a particular development in French philosophy - viz. postmodernism.

And while we're on the topic of postmodernism - or let's be a little more precise, deconstructionism - I'm interested in the dichotomy you are forever turning too (a dichotomy, you'll note that few others here, except perhaps some of those who sympathise with you, lean on). The dichotomy is basically racial, evaluative and combative: Jews verses Arabs. The former is given descriptors that are desirable; the latter, undesirable (in much the same way as, say, positivism does in scientific discourse between Objective-Subjective, Facts-Values, Pure-Applied, etc.). So we have

~ "Arabs...kill Jews"
~ "punish Jews and reward Arabs"
~ "one set of rules for Arabs and one for Jews"

And for cases that would seem to undermine the dichotomy, there is a rhetorical slide to escape obvious contradictory representations. For example,

~ "Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians" (Israeli soldiers, not Jewish people, can be careless with human life).
~ "Sharon did not foresee...[but] the Lebanese militia slaughtered" (the Jewish leader is excusable, the Arabs followers are not).

The dichotomies are of course unqualified - that is, they carry an implicit all-inclusiveness ('Arabs/Jews do X', 'the Arabs/Jews are Y', never 'some Arabs/Jews' or 'A number of Arabs/Jews', 'b% of Arabs/Jews', etc.). As such, in your rhetoric, they serve as de facto ontological categories; they give the impression of capturing the Aristotelean 'essences' of the operative nouns.

But then there seems to be a pulling back at the last moment. The 'evil' is not due to a genetic 'essence'; rather the 'essence' lies in the "the dominant culture of Islam". But of course, this is only an apparent pulling back because in fact it extends the (negative) valuation outwards. The evil of "the Arabs", we now realise, is not restricted to them, but in fact fans out across the globe to those who have grown up under the dark, "primitive and barbaric" shroud of Islamic culture (note the universalising). So actually, the evil we find on the left-hand side of the dichotomy ("the Arabs") is really everywhere - "the Arabs" are merely one particular manifestation of it; we are really talking about the much broader category of 'the Muslims'. (Of course we don't have to be postmodernists or deconstructionists to diagnose the problem here. It is as old as classical philosophy itself. The is merely a mish-mash of fallacies: appeals to emotion; selective use of data; gross generalisations from that cherry picked evidence; ad hominem attacks on people who disagree; and so on and so forth.)

What I find interesting here is that you seem to get very frustrated when people refuse to adhere to the categorical dichotomy you wish to frame the discourse with. Because reasonable people here don't use the dichotomy you do (and presumably believe is real), it is necessary to infer that they are secretly using it. So, for example, a criticism of Israeli government policy is secretly (in your dichotomy) a criticism of the Jewish-race category, and simultaneously, by virtue of the opposite, support for 'the Arabs' (and indeed everything Islamic). Thus, we see that a criticism of the Israeli policy of occupation described as being, by virtue of the dichotomous categories, a clear manifestation of underlying anti-Semitism. Like I said, interesting.

Friday, January 20, 2006 11:10:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Actually you should start your posts "As an antisemite, I feel..." and that way the newcomers would be aware prior to your 3rd or 4th post on the subject.

And it isn't very interesting.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:11:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

violet said...

"What you guys all miss (and this takes in my comments on postmodernism) is that when Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians (or anyone else) by accident or even by stupidity and ignorance, there are consequences and court marshalls."

This is what you said abot the US, in spie fo the fact that the US has never prosecuted any soldier for war crimes that have not been first exposed to the public.

This week, it was revealed that upon conducting their investigation into abuses in by US tropps, the American's weren't ven interviewed. Needles to say, there was no evidenc of rwongdoign uncovered. Surprise surprise.

Trials and court martials are by and large, put on for public consumption. This reminds us that while the public has a snese fo justice, our leaders are more concerned with minimizing accountability.

Yes it is commendable that Israel has court procedures in palce, however, what is most disturing is that most of Israel's most severe examples of human rights vilatinos are state sanctioned, and thus as Ibraham pointed out, perfectly legal.

So at the end of the day, the Palestinin suicide bomber may or may not be acting in accordance with the agreement of Palesitnian leadership (I doubt Abbas sanctions such acts), and the IDF are acting in accordance with the directives handed to them by ISrael's leaders.

A criminal can wear a suit and tie, but he is still a criminal.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:24:00 am  
Blogger Mannie said...

I am not sure why the non-jewish ibraham thinks his ravings, starting every sentence with "as an anti-semite---" is of any interest to readers of and contributors to this blog
I believe it reflects a mind incapable of any other deeper thoughts and is really a waste of space on this blog.
One hopes that these sorts of people will grow up some day and become adults - a difficult thought at this stage.
Edward Said will continue to be thought of, discussed and read for years to come, while ibrahim will remain just an anti-semitic blob.
What has post-modernism got to do with this discussion on Israel and Palestine - will you enlighten us??

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:38:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Well put Mannie,

You'll come to know that Ibraham often attemtops to stifle debate when it's headed in the wrong direction (according to him). He also has a habbit of pretending he is talking to a receptive audience.

We suspect he doesn't have too many friends, unless you count the voices in his head as real people.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 1:07:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

At the end of the day, it appears that the Palestinian suicide bomber is fully supported by the Palestinian people.

If you are not receptive, it is merely an indication of early brainwashing by antisemites like your host, eddie.

Whether or not mannie is sure of anything isn't important. After all, he is becoming senile.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 1:16:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Very big of you Ibraham.

Your semility must have been obvious from birth, or was it the oxygen deprevation?

Saturday, January 21, 2006 1:25:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

It is big of me, isn't it.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 2:32:00 am  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

Ibrahamav said...
"If you are not receptive, it is merely an indication of early brainwashing by antisemites like your host, eddie."

"Host"! That's a newie. Incidently, Ibby, let's play pretend for a moment: who was it that "brainwashed" me?

Saturday, January 21, 2006 4:52:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Newie? Not so. It has already been disclosed that he resides up your ass.

When have you stopped pretending? regardless, I don't play with antisemites. For some reason, they always wound up running home to their mothers.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 5:47:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

It may not, by legal definition, be a 'crime' to pump bullets into the body of someone who is already dead but it is surely a crime against humanity, a crime against decency, a crime against morality and a terrible blight upon the mind and soul of the person committing the act.

I suspect, in Australia, to shoot bullets into a body would be a crime.... Israel's tragedy is that the culture has become so debased by the wrongs of occupation and colonisation that people have come to accept the unacceptable, deny the evil and defend the indefensible.

Those who seek to 'support' Israel in this way are in fact her greatest enemies.

Any hope of a future as a respected nation lies in those who are prepared to stand up and speak out against such appalling atrocities: the dissenting IDF reservists, the people of conscience and honour who make up Israeli peace and human rights groups, and anyone who is prepared to risk hatemail and villification to speak the truth about what Israel is doing to the Palestinians.

As to fanatical religious Jews spewing ignorant and bigoted hatred toward Arabs, it is a reminder that anti-semitism is a human condition and exists on both sides.

It is also a reminder that religion, sadly, is often an excuse for ignorance and prejudice. Judaism may well question but those who practice the faith in an orthodox manner are not free to 'change.' They can ask questions and they can debate, but they remain as firmly entrenched in their religious prison as do fundamentalists of Muslim, Christian and Hindu religions.

In many ways it is a pity that fundamentalist Jews and fundamentalist Moslems cannot be settled somewhere together for they have so much more in common with each other than they do with other less fanatical members of their societies.

It is important as well to remember that people who are so filled with hate toward others... are also filled with fear. The trouble with fundamentalist religions, of all kinds, is that they create fear and a sense of being divided from others .... enemies are required if one is to rationalise the fear.

People, all people, even those who spew hatred are more ignorant than evil and more damaged than cruel.

Just as Israelis need to see the humanity in Palestinians and Palestinians need to see the humanity in Israelis, each also need to see the humanity in those of their own societies who are filled with hatred sourced in fear.

Love thine enemy and turn the other cheek are words as wise today as when they were first written down by the ancient Egyptians. They may have been attributed to Jesus but it is advice which runs deep and far in the ancient veins of human beings.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 5:58:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

RHRoss said...
" Those who seek to 'support' Israel in this way are in fact her greatest enemies."

That's IT!

When something is wrong, it is WRONG. When South Africa was an Apartheid state there were all sorts of arguements about how prosperous it was, ran smoothly, great rugby tradition, change it and it will resort to chaos, Kaffirs no better than animals....etc. However, the system was constructed based on race and had to be pulled down. End of Story.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 7:02:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

rhr, if it is not a crime, it is not a crime. End of story. What don't you get? Can't stand the hard facts?

Don't suspect, find out! It seems that most of your knowledge' is of the 'I Suspect' genre.

Religious fanatics do not rule Israel. But they do appear to be the guiding light of most arab nations. Therein lies the difference.

Turn the other cheek is as moronic as you are, in this situation. You want to die? Commit suicide. But don't ask us to.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 7:25:00 am  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

RHRoss said...
"I suspect, in Australia, to shoot bullets into a body would be a crime"

It is a crime if an Australian soldier violates a dead body in ANY way. An Australian SAS soldier operating in East Timor in 1999 was charged with kicking a dead body. (The charges were eventually dropped in 2003 due to a lack of evidence - basically, the New Zealand troops who were witnesses refused testify and started to mysteriously loose their memories.)

Saturday, January 21, 2006 7:31:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

Kiwis, short attention spans.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 8:02:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Ibraham is right everyone. It is not a crime to kill young Palesitinian girls.

The act is part of the process of "confirming the kill" - a term that seems more appropriate in hunting profession that security enforecement.

There's justy a lot of stray bullets around check ppoints these days, and Palestinian girls just happen to step in front of them.

Maybe Violet can explain how this is the result so the children being mind controlled into being in the wrong palce at the wrong time.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/59DCC598-F1BB-4405-9953-22CE400BFC7F.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1643573,00.html

And in reponse to the notion thatIsrael enfores justice againt such crimes, here is a quote fro an article by the Christian Science Monitor.

"Disregard for human life and being trigger-happy is not exceptional at all," says Nimrod Amzalak, a staffer at B'tselem, an Israeli human rights organization. "The exceptional part here is that it was documented."

http://csmonitor.com/2004/1126/p07s01-wome.html

Saturday, January 21, 2006 8:11:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Poor _01, when he loses the debate, he starts making up things.

Nimrod is right, the typical Palestinian seems to have no regard for Human life. There are many documents supporting the fact that some Palestinian mothers totally disregard the lievs of their children. In fact, they want their children to die.

Go figure. No wonder there is so much addamo regarding palestinians and human rights.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 8:57:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

I made nothing up Ibraham. My poor factually challenged little cretin. In case you hadn't nticed, I actually provided links and quotes. Something you do once in a blue moon.

The person losing the debate is usually the first one to revert to name calling and insults, and we all know how quick you are with that trigger don't we Ibby?

Sorry to beat you yet again. You are just to lame to debate sometimes.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:05:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

RHRoss,

You might find this refreshing. it appears most Israelis favor a unilateral pullout from the West Bank:

http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=10922124&src=rss/worldNews

So let's see if indeed the leadership if Israel will behave democratically and listen to eh majority of the public, or ignore them to appease he extremists.

It is anotehr exmaple of how the majority of people are indeed motivated by good intentions, in spite of the extremist minories being more vocal and visible.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:12:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

ibrahamav
No parent wants their child to die. People may hold beliefs that make it something that they can countenance but no parent actively wants their child to die.

Palestinian parents may comfort themselves with the death of a child by thinking that at least they have gone to a better world.

In the same way Israeli parents who choose to live in illegal settlements comfort themselves that if their children die because of the risk they have chosen to take, it is in a worthy cause.

Neither parent wishes the death of the child but each has found ways to rationalise it should it happen.

Those who seek to demonise an entire people, as you do, reflect your own ignorance and bigotry, not to mention fear and denial, rather than any sort of rational argument.

All human beings, regardless of race, creed or sex experience the same desires and feelings. All are capable of great good and all are capable of great evil.

Evil happens more easily when people live in denial or demonise.

I am struck by the fact that you cannot see the irony in how often your statements mimic, almost word for word, the sorts of things that Germans said about Jews.

Don't you think that your position is the most terrible betrayal of Jews who died because others held similar beliefs about them?

Any dysfunction reflected in Palestinian society must be understood in light of their dispossession and brutal occupation. No, it doesn't make the violence right but it does explain why it exists.

It is harder to explain Israeli violence although one can understand it in light of the dysfunctional thinking that is so much a part of the religion and the culture.

Anyone who commits any act of violence is to be pitied and hopefully understood.

Even while condemning Israeli acts of violence and aggression, and the Palestinian violence which comes in response, it is important to seek to understand and to respond with compassion.

Condemn the act, not the individual. Seek to understand why the act was committed.

It is the only way that any sort of lasting resolution can take place. But then, lasting resolution would mean you would have to take off your mantle of self-righteous victimhood.

Reality is fuelled by a chilly wind but it is a wind which blows away fantasy, deception and irrational fears.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:15:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

edward

You have spent far too long absorbing university babble and jargon. All your pseudo academic lingo does not commuicate anything except ideological theories that can't stand up on their own in the real world --- and still after all your long rambling you did not answer my questions.

Please inform me why Sharon was the subject of a state inquiry over Sabre and Shatila and there was never any Arab enquiry into the same?

Why do you object so vehemently to me writing that the Lebanese did the slaughtering of Palestinian refugees and Sharon was charged for not foreseeing it?

Why are Palestinian suicide bombers beatified as martyrs and their families rewarded, when Israeli soldiers are courtmarshalled for transgressions?

You appear to find it impossible to apply blame, to look objectively at actions but prefer to delve into academic psychobabble to justify your thinking. I'm asking you to address reality, to look at behaviour not ideology and to get out of your postmodernist frame of mind. While you continue to apply different sets of human rights for different cultures you remain trapped in an ideology that is bankrupt.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:24:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

01, you certainly made that up. Lying about it doesn't help your cause.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:24:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

addamo,
Yes, I have also read that most Israelis would return to original borders and let go of settlements if they were to have real peace.

One of the difficulties however is that the level of ignorance in Israeli society is very high. So too is the level of racism and bigotry, things which suck noisily at the trough of ignorance.

Yes, they say they would give up the settlements but they have been told for so long that there can never be true peace without complete destruction of the palestinians that they do not believe it can happen.

Also, the level of racism is high in Israel in general and not only toward Palestinians. Israel in many ways is a divided society, and not just between religious and secular, but between white Israelis and black Israelis, new Israelis and those who have lived there longer.

The greatest bigotry is aimed at Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular and because so few Israelis have been to Palestine, even when it was possible, they really have no idea.

When I was there a few years ago Israelis would talk about how filthy Palestinians were and yet we drove through spotlessly clean Palestinian villages while the roads out of Tel Aviv were lined with litter and the beaches were filthy. People believed they were cleaner than Arabs and I guess, given the Third World levels of litter in Israel, that meant they believed the Palestinians were unspeakably filthy. Because they had not been to Palestine they had no way of knowing they were wrong.

And so while one would like to be heartened when Israelis say they would give up the settlements for peace I doubt that it would happen without it being imposed upon them.

The level of ignorance is just too great. The level of denial is even greater. Interestingly Palestinians probably know more about Israel because so many worked there in the years before the latest intifada.

Palestians hate Israelis, but not because they consider them to be inferior, they hate them because they are occupiers and colonisers.

Israelis merely hate Palestinians because they believe they are inferior and also because they exist. The fly in the ointment of Israel is the existence of the people who lived there before the state was created.

One can only wish that ultimately the Palestinian 'irritation' creates a pearl.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:25:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

violet

Sharon was not charged for not foreseeing the Sabra and Shatila massacres, he was charged for inciting it.

Sharon told the falangists that the Palestinians had been responsible for the murder of one of their leaders ...it was proven to be a lie ...knowing that they would take revenge.

When the slaughter began Sharon knew about it but refused to intervene. He kept his troops away while the massacre happened.

He was rightly charged, and rightly found to be a war criminal.

Then again, given that Israel's first prime minister had been actively involved in terrorism .... yes, the zionists used terrorist tactics to establish the State of Israel .... and yes, they killed civilians ... similar tactics to the Palestinians who are trying to establish their State.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighters.

Why are suicide bombers regarded as martyrs? They are not per se: They are by Muslims who believe that to die in such a way is a blessing, but they are not by Christian and non-Muslim Palestinians nor anyone else.

In addition the suicide bombers are not members of a State army but resistance fighters, operating, if you like, beyond control.

Why are Israeli soldiers charged?

Because Israel purports to be a functioning democracy with a State military which is accountable. Because Israel is a signatory to the Geneva Convention and because it has a legal system where such charges are possible. Any nation is responsible for the actions of its Army. Nations that purport to abide by international rules pertaining to human rights and acceptable behaviour are even more accountable. Israel is such a nation.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 9:38:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Israel has a highly educated society, yet rhr thinks that the level of ignorance in Israeli society is very high.

Could it be that rhr has been smoking dope? Or has he fed at the trough of reasonable antisemites like eddie?

By the way, could you provide the link that showed Sharon being found guilty of inciting the slaughter at Sabra?

Also the conviction of Sharon as a war criminal?

Or are you lying as much as your mate, _01? Are you also residing in eddie's ass?

Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:08:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

The US in regarded as highly eductaed, yet is undoubtedly one of the most ignorant of not the mot , in the Western world.

As you have said many times Ibraha, even the Nazis were educzted and look at the diatribes they spoke and wrote about.

Your own words are comming back to haunt you Ibby.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:34:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

RHRoss said...

"Sharon told the falangists that the Palestinians had been responsible for the murder of one of their leaders ...it was proven to be a lie ...knowing that they would take revenge."

So Rhr, who was responsible for this assaisination of the Falangists leader?

Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:44:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

Read more carefully ibrahamav.

I said Sharon had been charged. I did not say he had been convicted although in the year following the massacres Sharon was found guilty of 'personal responsibility' for the massacres by the Kahan Commission.

The Commission did not accept that Israel had direct responsiblity but admitted to indirect responsibility involving Sharon and seven others, including the Prime Minister of the time Menachem Begin.

In 2001 he was charged with war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity in a Belgian court. The suit is proceeding.

Insults and and name-calling make you look bad, not me. They also reflect a level of immaturity on your part and a lack of argument.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:45:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

addamo

Quite right. The level of education in a society does not necessarily reflect a high level of knowledge.

In the case of both America and Israel there are high levels of official and non-official censorship in regard to the Palestinian situation.

Americans don't really care and Israelis don't want to know. Hence the disinformation and lack of information is compounded by disinterest in one instance and denial on the other. Both dangerous.

The trouble with denial is that ultimately it will destroy you because those who are prepared to investigate and assess all of the facts will be in a more powerful position in terms of bringing about change.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:49:00 am  
Blogger Glenn Condell said...

Simple test for our Likudnik brethren: defend the comments of those rabbis. Go on. If you can't, you will have to... condemn them. It won't hurt a bit, promise. You might even feel a bit cleaner.

The rabbi that buried Baruch Goldstein (who has a state-approved shrine to his memory which is visited daily by families of settlers) stated that '1000 Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail'. Once you've finished with the others, have a pop at that one.

Let's for once desist with the tedious diversions and comparisons; confront this evil directly and either support or condemn it. That means you ibrahamav.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 11:48:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

glenn, well said.

Sadly most of Israel's supporters do not have the integrity to condemn evil when they see it. Condemning such appalling outbursts does not diminish one's position as a supporter of Israel, it strengthens it because it shows that there is some sort of reasoned intelligence at work.

Name-calling, insults and abuse seem to be the weapons of choice for Israel's supporters and, as others have said, ibrahamav is no supporter any Israeli would wish to have.

One could in fact suspect, as others have said, that he or she is just the opposite.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:02:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Rhoss

Your comments are not true, in fact, they're plain dishonest

Read the Kahan Commission report, which is freely available online. This judicial commission, chaired by the chief justice of the Israeli supreme court, found that Sharon bore indirect responsibility for the Sabra and Shatilla massacres because the commission ruled that he should have foreseen that the Christian Falangists would be in a murderous mood after Syrian intelligence agents assassinated the Falangist leader, Bashir Jumayel.

Nowhere is Sharon accused of inciting the Falangists to commit murder. Nowhere is the Israeli army accused of direct involvement in the killings. The Kahan commission found that two Israeli junior officers (one a tank platoon commander, and another listening to Falange radio traffic at division hq) concluded on the basis what they saw/heard that killings of civilians might be going on. But the murders were carried out deep within the rabbit warren of the refugee camps where the Israelis were not present, and there was no line of sight to Israeli positions.

A few quotes from the Kahan Commission report might shed some light on the issue (and correct your dishonest claims):

We do not say that the decision to have the Phalangists enter the camps should under no circumstances have been made and was totally unwarranted. Serious considerations existed in favor of such a decision; and on this matter we shall repeat what has already been mentioned, that an understandable desire existed to prevent I.D. F. losses in hazardous combat in a built-up area, that it was justified to demand of the Phalangists to take part in combat which they regarded as a broad opening to assume power and for the restoration of Lebanese independence, and that the Phalangists were more expert than the I.D.F. in uncovering and identifying terrorists. These are weighty considerations; and had the decision-makers and executors been aware of the danger of harm to the civilian population on the part of the Phalangists but had nevertheless, having considered all the circumstances, decided to have the Phalangists enter the camps while taking all possible steps to prevent harm coming to the civilian population, it is possible that there would be no place to be critical of them, even if ultimately it had emerged that the decision had caused undesirable results and had caused damage. However, as it transpired no examination was made of all the considerations and their ramifications; hence the appropriate orders were not issued to the executors of the decisions and insufficient heed was taken to adopt the required measures. Herein lies the basis for imputing indirect responsibility to those persons who in our view did not fulfill the obligations placed on them...

In the witnesses' testimony and in various documents, stress is laid on the difference between the usual battle ethics of the I.D.F. and the battle ethics of the bloody clashes and combat actions among the various ethnic groups, militias, and fighting forces in Lebanon. The difference is considerable. In the war the I.D.F. waged in Lebanon, many civilians were injured and much loss of life was caused, despite the effort the I.D.F. and its soldiers made not to harm civilians. On more than one occasion, this effort caused I.D.F. troops additional casualties.

And for all you leftwing anti-Zionists who will argue that the Commission report was a whitewash, Justice Kahan and his colleagues included this preemptive strike:

We do not deceive ourselves that the results of this inquiry will convince or satisfy those who have prejudices or selective consciences, but this inquiry was not intended for such people. We have striven and have spared no effort to arrive at the truth, and we hope that all persons of good will who will examine the issue without prejudice will be convinced that the inquiry was conducted without any bias.

Using this venue to argue opinion is one thing, but to use it to misrepresent the truth is unacceptable.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:10:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Oh, and by the way, I'm still waiting for all you postmodernists to point me to an Arab enquiry on Sabre and Shatila???

Come on, where is it?

Where is anything, a court case, a question, a query regarding the massacre the Lebanese malitia carried out at Sabre and Shatila? And don't come back to me with psychobabble and don't change the subject.

I'm waiting...

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:15:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Rhoss,

Just clearing up another little error of yours, you need to stop this sort of misrepresentation it makes you appear dishonest.

In 2001 he was charged with war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity in a Belgian court. The suit is proceeding.

"Belgian Court Dismisses Sharon War Crimes Suit

BRUSSELS - A Brussels appeals court threw out a lawsuit against Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on Wednesday, ruling he was immune from investigation in Belgium over his alleged role in a 1982 massacre of Palestinian refugees. "

Read the whole story Rhoss and then say sorry

and what was that you said about denial and assessing the real facts...
The trouble with denial is that ultimately it will destroy you because those who are prepared to investigate and assess all of the facts will be in a more powerful position in terms of bringing about change.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 12:29:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 2:08:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

So ross just lied some more and hoped he could get away with it? For shame.

Saturday, January 21, 2006 3:22:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

violet said...
"Belgian Court Dismisses Sharon War Crimes Suit

Read the whole story Rhoss and then say sorry"

Say sorry for what? You post this with great fanfare and gusto as if the court dismissed the case because he was innocent??

Your style is admirable but you are still a liar, or you don't read what you post;

"What the court decided is that the complaint against Sharon ... is not admissible because of the principle of Belgian law that crimes committed in other countries cannot be prosecuted in Belgium unless the author or presumed author has been found in Belgium," a court spokesman said."

The complaint is not admissable because of a technicality.
The c*cksucker still did it.
By the way is he dead yet - hope not. Hope he's on a drip for the next 50 years.
Can they charge someone with war crimes if they're unconscious?

Saturday, January 21, 2006 7:42:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Sorry that he lied. We don't ask you because of what you are. There is a hope that ross is human.

RHRoss said...
In 2001 he was charged with war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity in a Belgian court. The suit is proceeding.

That is a lie, no suit is proceeding. Regardless, the charge was not correct because it is not what Sharon did.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 12:56:00 am  
Blogger Glenn Condell said...

Jeez, the sayanim are working overtime right now aren't they? ('now, where did I put those talking points')

You can almost admire the dedication. Almost.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 11:04:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

mea culpa. I was sloppy. I should have been more specific and will make sure I am in the future.

Yes, the Belgian move to indict Sharon was withdrawn following US pressure.... they were being very naughty and looking to charge George W with war crimes too.

This is not to say Sharon was exonerated. He was not.

It is also not to say that the charges may not be re-activated.

And, moves to indict Sharon for war crimes do still proceed but at the instigation of Human Rights Groups and groups involved with international law.

The point remains that the evidence is there that Sharon could and should be tried for war crimes.

And the point I made about the Kahan Commission was that he was found to be 'personally responsibility.' That point remains, whatever other points can be made.

But that does not negate my sloppiness. So, as I said, mea culpa. Another reminder that typing fast is not always a plus.

At the end of the day Sharon's record is not the issue .... the fact is that Israel's first prime minister had a record as a terrorist....

the issue is, and remains, not the quality of Israel's leaders per se" except in terms of how it impacts on the resolution of the problem, or rather the lack of resolution.

Who Israelis choose to lead them is their business. What those leaders do to others is anyone else's business.

Sharon's record in terms of settlement building and continued colonisation of Palestine and the atrocities committed against the Palestinians are more important. History will judge him for those even if he does not appear in an international court of justice for literal war crimes.

And I would add, whatever Sharon's record I would either wish him a complete recovery or a speedy death. To wish suffering upon him is to lower yourself to his level Orang. Plus, if you have ever known anyone who had a major stroke you would not wish 50 years of suffering on him.

Whatever crimes he committed he did so because he believed they were things he had to do. That does not make them right. He, like so many was and is a damaged individual and his acts of cruelty have arisen out of fear, not a desire to simply be cruel.

Sharon should be judged for his actions and held accountable for them but he is also deserving of compassion.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 1:08:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

You wish you could rise to the level of a Sharon. But you will always be found wanting.

You weren't sloppy, you were just so full of shit.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 2:31:00 pm  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

Ibrahamav said...
"You wish you could rise to the level of a Sharon."

No sane, moral human being would wish that upon themselves. Sane, moral human beings have self-respect and respect for all human life.

By the way, how is your hero going?

Sunday, January 22, 2006 2:49:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 4:30:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Rhoss

Answer my question:

Where is a link or a query or an enquiry into the role of the Lebanese militia at Sabre & Shatila? You want to prosecute Sharon for not foreseeing it -- why do you dismiss those who did the actual slaughtering?

Why aren't you jumping up and down demanding an Arab enquiry into the slaughter?

l have asked you and others several times to provide evidence of an Arab enquiry -- come on -- are you really that hypocritical that you want to persecute Sharon but not those who actually carried out the massacre?

You are all hypocrits who would prefer to blame the Jews rather than find the whole truth. It's sickening. Really sickening.

Perhaps you could start with the Lebanese Christian militia commander (who was recorded on the radio ordering the women and children to be slaughtered) who went on to become a cabinet minister in the Lebanese parliament. Rhoss, why aren't you calling him a war criminal or demanding an enquiry??

Come on you pack of hypocrites... please tell me why it's all the Jews' fault.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 4:40:00 pm  
Blogger RHRoss said...

Violet,

Accusations made against Sharon in regard to war crimes have nothing whatsoever to do with him being Jewish. They have to do with the crimes committed.

Slobodan Milosevic has been charged with war crimes.... some believe with less of a case than that against Sharon.,.. he is not Jewish. It is not about being Jewish.

When the case comes to a court the actions of the Lebanese militia will come into it and those responsible will be held to account.

Why Sharon? Because the topic here is Israel and the way it acts in the world and the way its leaders act. Also, because it was Sharon who held power at the time to incite and encourage such acts of murder or to calm and discourage them. The evidence suggests he chose the former.

As the one with all the power, he holds greatest responsibility. It's a fact of life that the buck stops somewhere and it stops with the people in power.

For example, Israel will always be called to account more than Palestine while it remains an occupier. As an occupier it has a capacity to control things that the occupied do not have.

Israel if you like is free to do whatever it chooses whereas the Palestinians are not. Ergo: the greatest power lies with the Israelis. Therefore, those with the greatest power have the greatest responsibility.

That's why our governments are held to account. We give them power and they exercise power. If they exercise power badly they must answer for it.

Palestinians, as an occupied people, do not have the freedom to pursue justice and human rights as do Israelis. They have no functioning legal system, no functioning governmental system, and, as an occupied people are completely dependent upon their occupier, Israel, in terms of what they can and cannot do.

The reality is that if this matter were taken to the Hague all of those responsible would be charged and called to account. It would not be Sharon alone.

I agree with you that everyone involved should be held responsible. I only hope that one day they will be.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 5:31:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Rhoss

When the case comes to a court the actions of the Lebanese militia will come into it and those responsible will be held to account.

Rubbish rubbish rubbish, I asked you for evidence of an Arab enquiry? Where is it? An Israeli state enquiry was held in 1983. That's right 25 years ago.

Robert Maroun Hatem, Elie Hobeika's bodyguard, stated in his book "From Israel to Damascus" that Hobeika ordered the massacre in defiance of Israeli instructions to behave like a "dignified" army. Elie Hobeika, the Phalangist commander at the time of the massacre never stood trial and held a post of a minister in Lebanese government in the 1990s."

Your argument is rubbish.

They have no functioning legal system, no functioning governmental system, and, as an occupied people are completely dependent upon their occupier, Israel, in terms of what they can and cannot do.

Rubbish again. Gaza and the West Bank operate under Jordanian law. This is a law, by the way, that hands out a 6-month sentence to a man who honour-kills his daughter or sister. This law also affords rapists freedom if they offer to marry their victims. This law will not allow complaints of incest to be made (despite over 400 cases of incest in the West Bank alone in a single year) unless it is made by a male.

Gaza is now Palestinian land -- and what have they done? There is lawlessness and violence everywhere as well as continual Kassam rocket attacks into Israel. This was their big chance. If they had began to build communities and industry, the world would have donated millions to help them. Instead even the EU is holding back on committed funding because they are so hopeless at managing their own economy. You need to stop reading the propaganda and start to look at the real facts Rhoss. and stop shooting off your mouth about the situation until you have researched this properly.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 7:25:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

Oh and Rhoss, l just can't let this one go:

Palestinians[sic]do not have the freedom to pursue justice and human rights as do Israelis.

So, according to your logic the Palestinians commit honour killing, gang rape and incest because they "do not have the freedom to pursue justice and human rights."

A 4-year-old Palestinian toddler was raped by a 25 year-old man in 2002 and her family left her to bleed to death because she had dishonoured their family. You are arguing that this is not a cultural atrocity but due to a "lack of freeedom"?

When Rafayda Qaoud was raped by her two brothers in her bedroom and became pregnant her mother slashed her wrists after she refused to commit suicide. You are arguing that this is due to a "lack of freedom."

Clearly Rhoss, you are very misguided.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 8:10:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

He is more than misguided.

Monday, January 23, 2006 12:37:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

violet
your bigotry reflects on you and no-one else, least of all Palestinians.

Let me get this right though, what you are suggesting is that somehow Israelis are culturally superior to Palestinians?

Isn't that what Germans said about Jews and look where that got them?

Or is it bigotry against Muslims?

Honour killings, gang rape and incest are present in many societies.... sadly ... quite common in Africa and they are not necessarily Muslim. Would you believe, also, sadly, extremely common in India ... among Hindus as well as Muslims.

Rape, honour killings and incest, wherever they exist, do so because of flawed cultural and religious values.

Those in free democracies have a greater ability to move beyond these values, those in non-democratic societies do not.

Those who live under occupation have even less freedom to bring about any sort of change. All power lies with the occupier, ie Israel.

Those who live under brutal and repressive occupation, as do the palestinians, are going to experience much higher levels of social dysfunction .... courtesy of their aggressors, in this instance, Israel.

Not only do Palestinians, the few who may commit such acts, not have freedom to act, their lives are brutalised in such a way that any existing dysfunction will be magnified.

One can of course, as you know, find rapes, murder, incest in Israeli society ... secular and religious, but of course, your point is to try to say Israelis are somehow superior and Palestinians inferior so you do not want to go there.

Here's a reality for you. It may be shocking but here it is.

Jews and Israelis are guess what? Only as good as other human beings, not better.

And, not only that, they are as bad as other human beings, not worse.

Surprise surprise, Israelis and Jews are as good as the best of us and as bad as the worst.

In terms of a functioning democracy Israel is performing way under par and more like a backward, tyranny than a free and liberal society.

But, just as I would make some allowance for the dysfunction in Palestinian society because it is occupied, so I make allowance for the dysfunction in Israeli society because it is an occupier.

Aggression diminishes people; violence debases; occupation both diminishes and debases.

Israelis have also had to deal with the paranoid dysfunction that is so much a part of Judaism and their cultural heritage and which Jews who do not have the courage to live in Israel continue to impose upon them.

No people living under repressive occupation have the same freedoms as those living in freedom. Even you should be able to grasp that simple logic despite your bigotry.

Monday, January 23, 2006 6:39:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Monday, January 23, 2006 8:28:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

Rhoss

I guess you missed the point in amongst your emotive rambling.

When rape, incest and the killing of women is committed in democratic countries -- including Israel -- the perpetrators are caught and punished. It is not celebrated or condoned by the society, as it is in Arab countries.

When a woman is raped in an Islamic country it is considered under Islamic law to be HER fault and she is sentenced to stoning or 100 lashes. In Nigeria recently a 15 year old girl was raped by her stepfather. She received 100 lashes.

There are hundreds of cases I can cite where women are murdered for being raped, flirting or doing nothing at all in Islamic countries. The age of consent in Iran is 9 years-old. A girl of this age can be stoned to death for being raped. And YES this occurs.

In Saudi, when 15 girls fled their burning school, do you know what happened? They were forced back into the burning building because they were not wearing their veils. They all burned to death. Are you blaming the Israelis for this too?

You blame the Islamic treatment of women on occupation and lack of freedom? And you call me a bigot because I don't agree with you?

Calling me a racist is idiotic and not addressing the problem. The Arabs commit shocking human rights abuses against their women. Do not call me a racist and a bigot for pointing this out. This must be pointed out or ignorant people like you will continue defending those who commit these atrocities.

Namecalling simply shows your ignorance Rhoss. You appear to have gathered your blighted, subjective knowledge of Arab culture from second-hand sources and listening to ideological babble that has no connection to the real situation.

Read Irshad Manji, Oriana Fallaci, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nawal el-Sadawii or Fatima Mernissi and broaden your mind. Or, like me, perhaps you could meet some of them.

With the exception of Fallaci these are Muslim feminists fighting the oppression of their sisters. Many of them live with constant death threats and fear of being murdered themselves because they are standing up to the men in their culture.

And you ask whether I consider a culture that murders and rapes its own women with religious sanctity to be inferior. Absolutely. I certainly do. And the dilemma is -- if you believe in human rights -- why don't you?

Why do you have one set of rules for the Western world and a different more tolerant one for the East?

By the way Rhoss, have you been to Israel? How do you justify what you write -- from reading Antony ?

Monday, January 23, 2006 8:28:05 AM
Delete

Monday, January 23, 2006 8:33:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

violet
in terms of human rights abuses against women we have something in common.

In terms of this being peculiarly Muslim or Arabic we disagree.

It isn't. These dysfunctional cultural attitudes are found in many places throughout Africa (non muslim) and, as I said, in India, amongst Hindus.

Hindus grieve at the birth of a daughter; women are killed every day in India and raped and the perpetrator rarely gets convicted even if charged. A woman who is raped in Hindu society is considered to be responsible.

My point remains, these are not Islamic nor Arab values but patriarchal values which history shows, existed to varying degrees in European society.

And you also miss the point, perpetrators of such acts can be caught and punished in democratic societies in a way that they cannot in non-democratic societies which is what most Arab nations are.

India, shamefully, is one democratic society where the appalling treatment of women and the murder of female babies, goes on without halt.

When I was living in India in the 90's a woman an hour was burned to death in Gujarat; a woman a day in Delhi. One hopes these figures have improved.

Young girls are given away in marriage; girls as young as seven are 'sold' into prostitution.

It's not about religion, it is about patriarchy at its worst.

These are backward cultural values and to that degree reflect inferior elements in the societies.... but it does not make the people themselves inferior in any way. Particularly as I said when they do not have the freedom to become other.

You might also have a look at the mysoginistic practices of Judaism, which, like Islam and fundamentalist christianity, represses women and abuses them in emotional and psychological ways, if not physical.

By all means condemn the abuse of women but do not try to make it a particularly Muslim or Arab condition.

You diminish the power of your case when you cite such practices as being a sign of inferiority in people you clearly hate.

Monday, January 23, 2006 10:28:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

violet
Yes, I have been to Israel and to Palestine. I have also read a lot.
Anthony is important because he, like those Israelis who fight for human rights and justice for Palestinians are the people who will ultimately save Israel.

Speaking the truth about what is happening is the only way that things will be righted.

Do I agree with everything Anthony says? No, but I defend his right to say it. Just as I defend yours.

I would put more credence on your argument and that of ibrahamav if you did not become so abusive and reveal such deep levels of bigotry and racism.

But I can understand that you care and are emotionally involved in what happens and this clearly diminishes reason.

Unfortunately, with such a position you do Israel no favours.

Reason, being reasonable and being fair, balanced and compassionate towards both sides is what is needed.

Monday, January 23, 2006 10:45:00 am  
Blogger Glenn Condell said...

I score it to rhoss about 76-0. Impressive heavy lifting, but probably not worth the effort.

Monday, January 23, 2006 11:54:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Antony will not save Israel. He does Israel no favors.

You have already shown that you are neither versed on the situation, and what little you do know is out of date. One can only imagine what sources you use for information.

As the Palestinian side has never been reasonable, fair, balanced or compassionate, the Israelis have decided that there is no reason for them to be either.

Monday, January 23, 2006 12:38:00 pm  
Blogger RHRoss said...

ibrahamav

You are forgetting the core point: Israel occupies the Palestinians, not vice versa.

The Palestinians while they remain under occupation are the victims. That's v-i-c-t-i-m. No way out of it. Fact of life.

Your comments would have some weight if Palestinians lived in freedom.

Israel, as the occupier, carries the can. Always will.

Monday, January 23, 2006 4:02:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

You keep forgetting that the palestinian's have acted in the same way from 1948 through 1967, when the land they occupied was not controlled by Israel.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 3:38:00 am  
Blogger RHRoss said...

The Palestinians have been occupied since 48 because Israel has never dealt with the wrongs of its foundation.

Yes, I know you don't see it as a wrong but they did.

Palestinians were dispossessed. Their homes were taken. Many were killed. They fought back against that as would most people.

Until Israel acknowledges the wrongs of its foundation and makes redress as other modern colonisers have had to do not only will it not have moral legality, it will not be at peace with itself or the Palestinians.

It is a fantasy to believe that Israel was established peacefully on land legally purchased or land on which no-one lived. It is this great lie which has made the issue impossible to resolve.

Israel came into existence through the theft of Palestinian land.... sure, with the approval of the international community but that does not make it right.

The international community approved the invasions and colonisation of the Americas, Australia and Africa ... but it did not make it right. As we now know. Those nations have had to accept the wrongs of their foundation and make redress. So must Israel.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:30:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

rhross

Oh dear. How old are you? 14? Somebody needs to sit you down and remind you that Israel does not rely on any biblical gift nor should it feel any responsibility for Arab dissolution.

Israel got its state by hard and smart work since the 1880s. In 1948 it fought and won a bitter civil war and then a war against an invasion of seven rogue Arab states, which they defended in 1948, and which the UN again recognized in 1949.

The horrible reality is that nobody has ever said that the Palestinians have a right to any state. Somebody should tell the Israel haters THAT.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 1:17:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

Edward

Said was always a crook and a charlatan. If you want to read the real deal try Bernard Lewis. Lewis' demolition of Said is so thorough it is almost cruel.

Even a Year 12 History education is enough to spot Said's bizarre lies about History in "Orientalism." It says a lot about the political correctness of late 1970s and 1980s America.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:17:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home