I have to say that I too am very disturbed by the palestinian extremists refusal to cooperate in the roadmap, though for rather different reasons.

It does not seem to be a very intelligent response.

Doubtless they have no confidence in Israel's sincerity (as I don't).
See  http://uk.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=69627&group=webcast
for what seems, according to Israeli press reports, to be Sharon's actual negotiating position. If these 14 "red line" conditions are correct, then there is no hope whatever of any decent progress, and Israel is playing games with us all.

There will just be a repeat of the fake negotiations which lead to the famous "95% offer" of which the poster speaks, but which has recently been revealed to be an utter farce with no real sovereignty at all - almost exactly as repeated in the "14 points" referenced above. For details of this famous "non-offer" please see
 http://www.phillyimc.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/01/0310226&mode=thread
from paragraph 7 onward.

However absolutely convinced the extremists may be that the Israeli's are just playing the same old game again, if they refuse to co-operate with the roadmap (as it seems they have) they hand the Israeli's a huge propaganda victory on a plate. (As we see from this posting).

If Israeli duplicity is to be exposed, the roadmap must be given every chance. Who knows, there is even a small chance Bush may find some moral sense and backbone, and compel them (as he easily could) to cease their endless warcrimes and agree to something reasonable.

Either the extremists are very stupid, or, just like the Israeli extremists, their real agenda is indeed the destruction of the enemy - and they are both as bad as each other.

Still, they are the extremists, and the extreme parties and settlers in Israel are themselves exactly equally opposed to this roadmap and the direction it is headed. So perhaps it's not that surprising, or that significant. Nothing more than the symmetrical response we should have expected.

It just means that we must all increase the pressure on Abu Mazen to crush these elements and honour the roadmap, just as we must increase the pressure on Sharon to control his own extremists and aggressive settlers, and do the same.

But just lets remember that Sharon in many ways has the easier task. Almost everything he is required to stop doing is being perpetrated by a highly disciplined modern army which will obey him instantly at a single command, and he has the infrastructure weaponry and power to suppress any Israeli extremist violence with a flick of the finger he so willed.

Abu Mazen has no infrastructure, no decent police force even (the Israelis have systematically and deliberately demolished the lot), and to succeed he must fight, without adequate tools, to suppress multiple secretive violent organisations which have never been under his military command and have no loyalty to his authority at all.

The only thing required of Sharon is three or four straightforward orders. Abu Mazen faces a huge task such as daunted and almost defeated the UK govt in Northern Ireland for years. Hardly a symmetrical situation.

Which is why I am convinced that it is Sharon, who only needs give a few simple orders, who should take the first steps toward defusing the situation by ceasing the massive violations of palestinian civilians human rights, the collective punishments, the bulldozings, the imprisonments etc etc. Five minutes is all it would take, and after a little while everything would begin to improve. Why not, for heavens sake, if he is serious about peace, and not just playing games ?

One of the snags to the Israeli relaxation is that the suicide bombers are dressed as innocent civilians. The problem for the Israeli security forces is then to decide who is innocent, and who may be a bomb in disguise.

If assurances were given that the bombings would stop, then a lot of the security measures wouldn't be needed.

ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT IT IS THAT ISRAEL HAS BEEN OCCUPYING THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES SINCE 1967 AND THE PALESTINIANS HAVE BEEN SAYING PISS OFF THAT'S NOT YOUR LAND GET OUT AND THE UN HAS SAID ERRR EXCUSE ME YOU REALLY OUGHT TO GIVE THAT LAND BACK TO THE PALESTINIANS AND THEN WHEN ISRAEL PULLS BACK ITS TANKS A BIT AND SAYS THERE YOU CAN HAVE THAT LITTLE PATCH OF LAND THERE WITH THE FLATTENED HOUSES IN IT THEY EXPECT THE PALESTINIANS TO GET DOWN ON THEIR KNEES AND WEEP WITH GRATITUDE AT THE GENEROSITY OF THEIR ISRAELI LANDLORDS.

If Israel didn't have those extremist settlers deliberately planted in the occupied territories in direct contravention of the Geneva Convention and repeated UN resolutions, then its way forward would be simpler.

It could withdraw all its massive military forces back to the '67 borders, and protect Israel proper from the bombers, who would in any case rapidly de-escalate their efforts except for the hardcore which Abu Mazen could hunt down. Their popular support would evaporate.

It is the settlers who are simultaneously the biggest barrier to Israel's moving forward, and the huge proof of their bad faith in every negotiation over the years. What on earth are they doing there, and why are new ones still being injected even now, people from all over the world deliberately collected by offering huge subsidies in housing etc.
The program is still in full operation, have a search on the internet.

What possible right do these people have to seize the land of others? They have no connection with the palestinian land except through some antiquated religious mania. Most of them don't even come from Israel !

No, Israel does NOT have a "Right" to exist. According to the Torah, not "Islamic estremists" or "anti-Semites". Zionism and other imperialists need a clue. The real anti-Semites are the zionists.

1. Palestinian and Arab people are SEMITIC.

2. Through their own actions, Sharon and and zionists that run Israel generate anti-Jewish hatred.

3. Zionists collaborated with nazi Germany in order to take over Palestine and establish Israel.

How often to we have to keep reminding you braindead zionists of these facts?

but does israel have a sincere desire for justice? Not while most of the murderous illegal settlements are left intact.

A headline on BBC's Ceefax :

"Israeli Forces Destroy Settler Outposts"

but if you read the actual story, you get :

"An army and police unit destroyed several disused caravans near Ramallah".

Big f*cking deal! When they start pulling down the luxury apartments of the land-thieves, *then* we will know that Israel is sincere.

The Israeli people are not the Israeli state, even if it's a "democracy". Criticisms of the Government are not attacks on you. Realize this, and you will see the situation more clearly.

Captain Doughfish may wish to read the above posts to realize that his words are untrue. The far left and the BNP are both Nazis and can goosestep off to hell together.

> direct contravention of the Geneva Convention and repeated UN resolutions
U appear to know a lot about this! could u please explain to me which parts of the Geneva convention, and which UN resolutions Israel has violated? i would appreciate that a lot, Freddie.

> It could withdraw all its massive military forces back to the '67 borders, and protect Israel proper from the bombers
Errr, how exactly do u propose it should defend itself against terrorists who dress in civilian clothing and cowardly hide among civilians? and who deliberately maim and murder innocent civilians in nightclubs, cafes, restaurants, hotels, universities, buses, etc.?

> who would in any case rapidly de-escalate their efforts except for the hardcore which Abu Mazen could hunt down
Ya think? dont u realise that the Hamas charter calls for the complete destruction of Israel? u think they'd stop at Gaza & the West Bank?

> Their popular support would evaporate
the political climate in the Palestinian territories, nurtured by King Terrorist Arafat himself, favours the complete destruction of Israel. popular support for palestinian terrorism will evaporate once Arafat fucks off and dies. not a moment before.

> No, Israel does NOT have a "Right" to exist
in your opinion maybe. i believe it does have a right to exist. so does the UN, and virtually every other country in the world. only a few loony racist nutjobs believe the trash u wrote there.

> Zionism and other imperialists
Zionism: A policy for establishing and developing a national homeland for Jews. seems reasonable and straight-forward enough to me. please explain why Zionism is an imperialist philosophy.

> The real anti-Semites are the zionists
utter bullshit. see the definition of Zionism above, then explain why zionists are anti-Semites, if u would be so kind.

> Palestinian and Arab people are SEMITIC
so are Jews. what's your point? do u even have a point to make?

> Through their own actions, Sharon and zionists that run Israel generate anti-Jewish hatred
GOTCHA! Racism at its finest! not that Sharon is a brutal dictator, because he isn't. but by your logic, Mugabe generates anti-Zimbabwe hatred. Pol-Pot generated anti-Cambodian hatred. women who wear skirts deserve to be raped. u're a complete anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish, specifically), racist piece of shit.

> Zionists collaborated with nazi Germany in order to take over Palestine and establish Israel.
More bullshit! did u fantasize about this last night while u were masturbating?

> How often to we have to keep reminding you braindead zionists of these facts?
Facts? u haven't provided any facts! the only fact u've reminded us of, is that so-called "anti-zionists" are a bunch of stupid racist idiots.

In answer to your questions about the Geneva conventions, please refer to Mary Robinson's report to the UNHCR of Dec 5 2001, you can find a copy at:  http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/e67e912a7852f44c85256b19005c46a8?OpenDocument

UN security council resolutions are too numerous to list, but 242 will do for a start - it's only one of 67 resolutions, by the way.

Freddie was a little intemperate, but I would contend that Israel is an apartheid state, as referred to by Desmond Tutu (no stranger to apartheid) in his column of April 29, 2002 - link is:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,706911,00.html

You say that Israel is not imperialist - I would agree. However, it is expansionist, with the belief in Eretz Israel and the attempts to dominate the regional water supplies being the most visible aspects of this expansionism.

I personally do believe that a withdrawal from the occupied territories would allow the Palestinian leadership to marginalise the lunatics with their suicide bombs, and that within a few months Hamas and Hizb'Allah could be shut down. But then I'm an optimist.

The links between Zionism and the Nazis are more tenuous (it was the Stern Gang, not mainstream Zionists who contacted the Nazis and proposed an alliance against the British in 1941), but are good fun to throw in the face of apologists for Zionism, all the same.

Finally, will you please stop writing in textish - it makes you look like a member of Junior Mossad, rather than an intelligent commentator.

One point of yours I think is worth dealing with.
I agree that suicide bombers dressed as civilians inside israel are difficult to deal with.
My proposal to draw back to 67 lines and seal the borders does assume that 98% of suicide bombers come into Israel proper for the purpose.
Certainly the IDF seems to assume this, as its whole policy is concentrated in the disputed territories, and in preventing movement there and from there into Israel.
If as you seem to suggest, suicide bombers originate inside Israel this policy is misguided and useless.
If they do not, then my proposal to defend at the border should work.

On the other hand, if the worst comes to the worst, I am willing to be a bit of an extremist myself.

If the only way to get every settler back inside Israel was to expel every palestinian from Israel into the territories, then I think it would be worth the price. Just get these loonies of both camps apart.

I understand huge amounts of compensation would have to be found, and I understand that without palestinians working in Israel, both economies would suffer badly (particularly the palestinian).

Nevertheless, if that's the only way, so be it.

With regard to the geneva convention, there's lots and lots.

Just for starters it forbids any power which is occupying land seized by force of arms, from settling any of its own population in such territory.

Clear, simple, straightforward. I am afraid the fact that you can ask such a fundamental and important question does not suggest that you are well qualified to engage in any debate on these topics.

BRIAN.

> UN security council resolutions are too numerous to list, but 242 will do for a start - it's only one of 67 resolutions, by the way.
I will contend that statement on another day when i have more time. Most of the resolutions u refer to have also been violated by the Palestinians.


> I would contend that Israel is an apartheid state
really? 20% of the Israeli population is Arab/Muslim. Muslims/Jews/Christians/Catholics are all free to practice their religion, and have equal rights under Israeli law. there is also no segregation based upon race or skin colour. now, on what basis is Israel an 'apartheid' state???


> I personally do believe that a withdrawal from the occupied territories would allow the Palestinian leadership to marginalise the lunatics with their suicide bombs, and that within a few months Hamas and Hizb'Allah could be shut down.

Israel withdrew from Lebanon on May 24, 2000. Hezbollah continues to fire missiles routinely across Israel's borders. The Palestinian leadership cannot marginalise lunatics while a lunatic continues to preside over the Palestinian leadership. Arafat must go. additionally, and perhaps more importantly, the education of Palestinian children towards extremism, 'martyrdom', and violence and terrorism must end NOW. these kids are brought up on a diet of hatred and vengeance, and are taught to kill Jews in order to eradicate them from ISRAEL, not just the Palestinian territories. this mentality must be stopped, or we will not see peace in that region for generations to come.


> but are good fun to throw in the face of apologists for Zionism, all the same.

well there we go, i cant say im surprised. u admit that u enjoy spouting bullshit and lies in order to win your 'argument'. and what really pisses me off is that I have to hear brainless idiots call my Jewish friends "filthy zionist jew bitch", along with other pathetic comments, and to see my friends suffer this abuse because of the baseless fucking bullshit lies that u PRICKS irresponsibly spew out 'because its good fun'. fucking wankers.
"Zionism: A policy for establishing and developing a national homeland for Jews". what is your problem with this? I have yet to hear an 'anti-zionist' give a satisfactory explanation for their opposition to this policy. perhaps u can enlighten us? come on, lets hear it once and for all. or is it just 'good fun' to oppose a national homeland for Jews?


> Finally, will you please stop writing in textish - it makes you look like a member of Junior Mossad, rather than an intelligent commentator.

Yea u've used that 'joke' before Brian. my sides are not splitting with laughter the second time round. well actually they weren't the first time round either. the truth is i couldn't care less what u think i look like. its the message that's important, so no i wont stop replacing the word 'you' with the letter 'u', because its easier for me to type, and its really not so difficult for most people to translate. be thankful for the fact that im coherent, i can spell, and i offer logical arguments that aren't based on lies. this of course is in stark contrast to most 'anti-zionists'.



FREDDIE.

> If as you seem to suggest, suicide bombers originate inside Israel
No, that's not what i suggested.

> my proposal to defend at the border should work
September 2000 - the IDF were mostly withdrawn inside Israel. what happened next? suicide bombings inside Israel. why? because its not possible to completely defend the border. so when Israel tries to deal with the terrorists (because Arafat refuses to do so) it is chastised by u people. when Israel erects a fence (which doesn't kill anyone) to protect itself, it is chastised by u people. whatever Israel does to defend itself is chastised by u people. should Israel just let them all in to blow themselves up and drive Jews into the sea? should terrorism be allowed to go unpunished?

> without palestinians working in Israel, both economies would suffer badly
Yep, and guess what - u'd probably blame Israel. 'collective punishment' or some other bullshit.

> Nevertheless, if that's the only way, so be it.
Easy for u to say, not so easy to do. I'm happy for u that u are fortunate enough to live in Utopia, rather than the real world that the rest of us must inhabit.

> With regard to the geneva convention, there's lots and lots
No there isnt. u're exaggerating. whatever Articles of the Geneva convention have been broken by Israel have also been broken by the Palestinians. apart from Article 49 as u mentioned.


> I am afraid the fact that you can ask such a fundamental and important question does not suggest that you are well qualified to engage in any debate on these topics.

U're saying i should not ask questions? if u believe that, then it is u who is not qualified to debate. questions and debates go hand in hand mate, so your statement above is completely self-contradictory. the fact that u'd rather i didnt question your comments also says something - do u have something to hide?
Actually, i asked the question to see if u really knew what u were talking about, rather than spouting some second-hand nonsense that u've heard on the street. your comments about the Geneva convention suggest the latter is more true than the former.

Jamie - "bullshit and lies"?

I never said that Zionist-Nazi contacts in the Second world war were bullshit, or lies. They are, in fact, true.

What is the case is that it was only an extremist faction within Zionism that actually went that far - Irgun were content merely to fight the British, while Haganah actually supported Britain in WWII.

But it has to be said that pointing that sort of thing out, or any of a number of embarassing things said by Zionist loonies in the 1940s, is a great stick to beat you with.

You may call me all the names you like - you still look like a spoilt little kid stamping your feet because you're not allowed to steal sweets from your neighbour.

Bri.

>> my proposal to defend at the border should work
>September 2000 - the IDF were mostly withdrawn inside Israel. what happened next? suicide bombings inside Israel. why???

You misunderstand. My proposal was to withdraw IDF AND SETTLERS inside Israel. I suggest the results would be totally different.

>when Israel erects a fence ?.

I think a fence is a good idea Jamie. But it makes things worse, not better, if it annexes more territory. It shouldn?t be built unilaterally, it should form part of the negotiations, and be built along a negotiated border. Then it would be a force for peace, and give Israel the security it needs.

> should terrorism be allowed to go unpunished?

You really need to stop for a moment and examine your language.
Many people would define terrorism as roughly
?the attempt to coerce a population for political ends by threatening the lives or property of civilians?
Certainly suicide bombings are terrorism.
But so I believe are the actions of the IDF. Both should be punished.
But be aware that history does seem, again and again, to retrospectively redefine the morality of terrorism, when conducted by an occupied people against its oppressors. Think of Nelson Mandela?s current status in the world community.
No such retrospective forgiveness seems ever to attach to the army of repression.

If a jewish resistance organization had fought back against the Nazis by using terror tactics and suicide bombings against the German civilian population, how do you think its members would currently be thought of in Israel? As heroes I think, rightly or wrongly.

>> without palestinians working in Israel, both economies would suffer badly
>Yep, and guess what - u'd probably blame Israel. 'collective punishment' or some other bullshit.

No, Jamie. Few would blame Israel for this if it came about as part of an agreed settlement. And if they saw as the result a Palestine geographically continuous and free of jewish settlers antagonistic to its existence. Ditto for Israel.

>> Nevertheless, if that's the only way, so be it.
>Easy for u to say, not so easy to do. I'm happy for u that u are fortunate enough to live in Utopia, rather than the real world that the rest of us must inhabit.

Maybe you are right on this. Certainly I have never seen such a drastic population swap proposed by either side. But I can?t help wondering how the Palestinians, for instance, would respond if Israel proposed it.

>> With regard to the geneva convention, there's lots and lots
>No there isnt. u're exaggerating?.. apart from Article 49 as u mentioned.

Jamie, there are article after article of obligations imposed on the ?occupying power? in its treatment of the occupied peoples. That?s Israel. Ditto with regard to definitions of war crimes and human rights abuses in general. As for making the absolute injunction against settling your own population an ?apart from? aside !
Well ! The presence of the settlers is the biggest crime, from which all others flow. And the shameless hypocrisy of negotiating peace while more are still arriving??..

> whatever Articles of the Geneva convention have been broken by Israel have also been broken by the Palestinians.

Surely a modern democratic state, seeking acceptance on equal terms into the circles of civilized western countries, should not frame its policy on tit-for-tat with the extreme elements of a population driven to the last pitch of desperation. Do you really believe two wrongs make a right ? Did the UK sink this low in Northern Island ?



>> I am afraid the fact that you can ask such a fundamental and important question does not suggest that you are well qualified to engage in any debate on these topics.

>U're saying i should not ask questions? if u believe that, then it is u who is not qualified to debate??

No no, you misunderstand. Questions honestly asked are always good. I was concerned not that you did ask, but that you needed to. Yes, I have read it. Since it seems you now have too, I find it hard to understand that you fail to acknowledge that Israel is violating it. Its pretty simple.
?Don?t move your own population in? ? Israel moves them in.
?Protect these rights of the people? ? Israel doesn?t.
I could go on?..

> Jamie - "bullshit and lies"?
Yes.

> I never said that Zionist-Nazi contacts in the Second world war were bullshit, or lies.
U wrote: "The links between Zionism and the Nazis are more tenuous... but are good fun to throw in the face of apologists for Zionism, all the same".
So despite the fact that your 'argument' is at best completely irrelevant and at worst a lie, u'll happily use it to discredit Zionism. i also point out that u STILL havent provided an explanation as to why u vehemently oppose Zionism, a philosophy for the establishment of a Jewish state.

> Irgun were content merely to fight the British
In pre- and post-war Palestine. they did NOT collaborate with the Nazis, in fact they collaborated with British forces during the war. i suspect u got your info from a right-wing hate site or somewhere in the Arab media.

> while Haganah actually supported Britain in WWII.
Again, they did NOT collaborate with the Nazis.

> But it has to be said that pointing that sort of thing out... is a great stick to beat you with.
No, it's a very very poor one, Brian, but it's the best 'stick' u've got. by your twisted logic, we should criticise all British Muslims for what Abu Hamza says. we should accuse all Germans of being Nazis, and all South Africans of being racist. we should 'beat' them all with the same irrelevant 'stick'.

> you still look like a spoilt little kid stamping your feet because you're not allowed to steal sweets from your neighbour.
No, i look like someone who's pissed off with jerks like u spreading baseless lies and other assorted crap to further your 'argument'. u just dont get it do u? the reason i have to hear my friends being insulted simply for being Jewish is coz of pricks like u, who spout lies and propaganda 'just for fun'.