Agreed that the seperation of the Zionists from the picket by the police really showed up the hollowness of their position. Here they were free to speak to members of the public, have their own protest, but no, once they were prevented from using their playground bully tactics (which I have seen include sexist and homophobic as well as racist abuse, physical threats and intimidation to protestors and their families including young children), they stood there lamely for a few minutes and then cleared off.

As for the VTI member arrested, it will be entertaining to see the four heavily built Zionist men tell the tale about how they were assaulted by a lone woman half their size! Yes magistrate, she didn't really move away from all her comrades in order to hand out leaflets and talk to people, really she went off by herself so she could pick a fight with us. No, really!

Hi,

What happened to the lady who was arrested and is she OK? Was she charged (i bet the three zionists were not)?

If she was surrounded by 4 thuggish men than surely she was acting in self defence?

But we all know what the British police are like so in all probability they congratulated the zionists on apprehending a terrible villian.

Anyway - well done for standing up to the Manchester Israeli Occupation Contingent

Footage of the Manchester Marks and Spencers picket on 26th Feb 05. 30 people from around the country join the mcr picket in solidarity with the regular picketers and are subjected to the same harassment they experience on a weekly basis from a group of organised agitators.

 http://video.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/48.shtml

i would just like to enquire on whether you people believe in a one state or two state solution to the middle east conflict? your claims seem to suggest a one state solution, isn't this racist in itself? Without a state the Jewish people would be the only major world religion without a state, surely this is unfair and calls ofr this are racist within themselves?

The population of Israel (including the Arab population) enjoys a higher standard of living than those of all the other countries of the middle-east. If I were an Iraqi, a Syrian or a Jordanian, I'd be hoping Israel invaded and freed us from repression, serfdom and poverty.

And anyway, what are socialists like you lot doing wasting your time in Manchester opposing a bit of scrubland and a few hills? Everything else in the world must be pretty fine if you can't find anything more important to protest about.

You'll be fighting in favour of hamsters and chickens next....


Oh, you are.

I Can't speak for anyone else but i believe in a 1 state solution. Surely all the people that live in the area currently known as israel should be allowed to vote for its leaders and its form of state. This isn't racism. It's just democracy. If a majority of those people were to vote for that area to be a non-jewish state, so be it. That's the will of the majority and in democracies, the will of the majority is what's meant to be accepted.

Furthermore, i feel you're confusing concepts of race and religeon. Is Judaism a religion, a race or both? Racism only applies to races, not religions. It would be racist to suggest that a nation should be run by one race. This is racist against people of other races living in that state. Examples (apart from the obvious) could include apartheid in south africa or NAZI germany. It is not racist to say that a nation should not be run by one religion. However religions tend to do awfully bad jobs of running countries, particularly from the point of view of people living in those countries who arn't of that religion. Examples ad infinitum.

There are aproximately 20 million Kurds internationally yet only 15 million jews. The Kurdish people have no state.

It is also questionable to presume judaism is a major world religeon. 15 million jews do not seem very major when compared to 2 billion Christians, 1.3 million muslims, 900 million hindus, 360 million budhists, and 23 million sikhs. Thats before we've even thought about the 225 million believers of traditional chinese relgions, the 95 million followers of African tribal religions or the 850 million of us who don't follow any religion at all. Incidentally Sikhs don't have a nation either. And, if you're going to call judaism a major religion - deserving of it's own state, you're going to have to say the same (more so) for Kimilsungism. That's the 19 million strong religion of North Korea, by the way.

If you believe in nation states and you believe in democracy you have to accept that it is right for a states form to be set by the collective will of the majority of citizens of that state. (Not the majority of citizens from one religion or one race.)

GIVE ALL WHO LIVE IN THE HOLY LAND THE VOTE.
Otherwise it's just silly.

I've just watched the above link to the video in complete horror

 http://video.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/48.shtml

I can't believe what I've just seen - especially the bit where the older man says, "KILL ALL PALESTINIAN BASTARDS!"

what's happening to manchester?! :(

So, you're in favour of everyone living in the state of Israel having the vote? Great. They do. (That's why there are many Arabs who are members of the Israeli Parliament).

And, Israei Arabs of whom there are more than 1 million (the population of Israel is about 4.5 million), don't want to live anywhere else in that region. Ask them if they want to become part of a bigger state that incorporates part of TransJordan and is run by Hamas or Islamic Jihad and I suspect the answer you would get would be the same as you would if you could ask a suicide bomber if he's enjoyed his first virgin yet.

Israeli Population:
6,199,008
(Roughly 80% to 20% Jewish and Arab.This includes 187,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank and fewer than 177,000 in East Jerusalem (July 2004 est.)


West Bank Population:
2,311,204 Arabs


Gaza Strip Population:
1,324,991 Arabs


Jewish settlers in gaza and west bank can vote in Israeli elections. Why not let the Arabs living there vote too?

The country has a real population of just under 10 million. That’s 4.5 million Jews and 5.5 million Arabs – 3.5 million of whom aren’t allowed the vote.

Let ‘em. Fair’s fair now.

Presumably, in order to be able to vote in an Israeli election, you have to be an Israeli citizen. But,I'd be happy to enfranchise the 3.5 million Arabs who live in West Jordan if that meant, as it certainly would, the de facto recognition of Israel by these people.

If it's not too naive, a world in which peoples of different background, religious beliefs and disbeliefs are able to live in peace is something that the publishers of this site ought to be aiming for. But, what I see on this site is appallingly biased 'news', the peddling of lies, mis-information and dis-information, small-mindedness and no attempt at balance.

All we are saying, is give truth a chance.

Hi Simon!

You claiming that this "news" that has been put up is biased? can i just ask if you were there on Saturday?

If you weren't, these are the basic facts of what happened:-

30 people came in support of Palestine (VTI Group), 20, or so, came in support of Israel (Zionist Group).

The Zionist Group came to disrupt the VTI Protest.

The police REPEATEDLY failed in their duty to separate the to groups, this result in 3 of the Zionist Group (if i'm wrong, feel free to correct me, althought that info did come for a "reliable source") and 1 VTI got arrested. (if the police had done their job, no one should of been arrested!)

For the last 40 mins or so, CI Ullah, served section 14, on both groups, with each group having there own designated area, and each protest/counter protest to last 1 hour with a max. of 10 people!

Simon, you do thing that the press in this country is really unbiased? it is not! for example, US and Briton INVADE iraq, and the iraqi's that RESIST the INVASION, are called TERRORISTS. if briton was invaded, and you choose to resist it, would you be a TERRORIST, or part of the RESISTANCE??

Think about how any news story will have a level of bias!

PEACE!

Let us also not forget that Jordan and Egypt had ample opportunity to declare a Palestinian State when they occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Instead they murdered over 20,000 Palestinians and the left wing of politics stayed silent about the occupation and the slaughter. I wonder why?

Anyway, as I have said before, I trust the anti Israel group will soon start picketing hospitals because they offer life saving treatments and medicines developed and produced by Israel; the only state in the Middle East where women have full rights, homosexuals have full rights, all religions have full rights.

What a lot of wankers you all are. Some of you really stand out, but to single you out would be to detract from the fact that you are all idiots. So long as people with polar opinions like you lot exist, the longer it will take for any kind of resolution to happen. But obviously your own conceited opinions are FAR more important than the people of both sides who are suffering daily. As the majority of you seem to have been graced with some form of intellect, why can you not see that this pathetic mutual antagonism leads precisely nowhere?

rapattaque

We come here to express our opinions, even if SOME do get taken off by IndyMedia UK, even thought there are disagreements on how the situation between Israel and Palestine can be resolved.

No one that puts a comment on here is far from an idiot, as you said!

"Some of you really stand out, but to single you out would be to detract from the fact that you are all idiots."

Although it would be interesting who the ones that stand out! I would guess it would be the ones that message here on a regular basis, ie Hermes and Jewish and Proud, as well as myself! None of us are idiots, far from it. Our views differ, that's all!

So please, if you going to comment here in the future, just remember that people here views differe, as they do in the middle east. It's called being human!

Well, if even one agreed, would that solve problems in the Middle East? I doubt it!

Why have i possibly wasted my time replying to this????

Rappataque:

I recall you posting on here before a recent one of these demonstrations and you said you'd try and make it down, and see for yourself what was going on? I'd be genuinely interested if you did, and what your opinion was, whether the perception above is just based on indymedia posts, etc.

Cheers

In any pluralist, liberal democracy, Mr Rappataque - people will disagree and will have the right to argue with each other in certains forums; be they chat rooms, universities, journals or the streets.

As long as laws are not broken, then these rights should be protected. This is the hallmark of democracy.

This hallmark can be seen in Israel - Peace Now (the voice of the left) frequently engages in heated debates with right wing settler groups, by way of an example.

Similar democratic rights can also be seen in Israel

- the right to vote (for all religions)

- freedom of religion

- freedom of press

- right to trial

- no death penalty

- freedom of speech.

- equal rights for women

- freedom of sexuality.


Within this sphere - difference can be dignified through understanding.

However the 'Anti Zionist' above will be hard pressed to name an anti-Israel Arab state which offers any of the above rights.

Iran for example:

In Iran - if you are gay, you will be killed
In Iran - women can be stoned to death for adultery
In Iran - there is no election for Ayatolla
In Iran - if you speak against the state you will dissapear
In Iran - there is a frequently used death penalty
In Iran - there is no right to trial
In Iran - there is no freedom of press
In Iran - there is no freedom of religion.



I know where I would rather live.

anon. You know what i meant. I'm burnt man, you've shot me down in flames. I am the idiot because I rushed my message. I hold my hands up. What i meant to say however, and i'm sure someone as clever as you could have already worked this out, is that you are not idiots, yet you act like you are.

Yes the world is full of individuals who are characteristically human, who have a right to disagree with one another. Should that right be at the expense of other peoples lives and happiness? Erm, no. Tit. That right to hold and express an opinion comes with the responsibility to listen to other peoples thoughts, take them on board and think about them. Not wheel out well rehearsed arguments about how bad the other side is. I think their is a general awareness that the general situation in the middle east is fucked at the moment. How on earth this can be resolved through each side reeling off lists of casualties, citing atrocities committed by the other or regurgitating terrible things that 'they' have said is beyond me. Peace isn't achieved through screaming at one another. It is achieved through respecting one another (cue one of you at least to say 'how can we respect them when they've done this') and tolerating one another. You don't wait for the other side to start doing this first, it is your responsibility to act first no matter what the other side are doing.

To the other person, Yes i'd like to come down and see whats going on because i'm curious.

Anyway, i haven't re-read so hopefully I have made some mistakes for all you semi-academics to pick up on.

J&P

I do agree with the first part of you comment "In any pluralist, liberal democracy, Mr Rappataque - people will disagree and will have the right to argue with each other in certains forums; be they chat rooms, universities, journals or the streets."

...although you said that Iran was an Arab State, but since when has Iran been an Arab state? Yes, Iran is a Muslim country, probably more accurately discribed as an Islamic State, but personaly, I wouldn't called Iran an Arab State.

"The following are Arab states:

* Algeria
* Bahrain
* Djibouti
* Comoros
* Egypt
* Iraq
* Jordan
* Kuwait
* Lebanon
* Libya
* Morocco
* Mauritania
* Oman
* Palestine (only recognized by the Arab League)
* Qatar
* Saudi Arabia
* Syria
* Sudan
* Somalia
* Tunisia
* United Arab Emirates
* Western Sahara/Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (not universially recognized)
* Yemen

Iran, Turkey, and Afghanistan are Muslim countries in the Middle East, and Pakistan, and Bangladesh are Muslim nations in South Asia but are not ethnically Arab and their nationals often resent such characterization."

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

Sorry, if i'm being picky!

Anon - you are quite right, but perhaps you can tell me which of the states you list enjoy the rights afforded by Israel

in Israel there is:

- the right to vote (for all religions)

- freedom of religion

- freedom of press

- right to trial

- no death penalty

- freedom of speech.

- equal rights for women

- freedom of sexuality.


Are these rights offered in


* Algeria
* Bahrain
* Djibouti
* Comoros
* Egypt
* Iraq
* Jordan
* Kuwait
* Lebanon
* Libya
* Morocco
* Mauritania
* Oman
* Palestine (only recognized by the Arab League)
* Qatar
* Saudi Arabia
* Syria
* Sudan
* Somalia
* Tunisia
* United Arab Emirates
* Western Sahara/Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (not universially recognized)
* Yemen


?

Yet do you spend your time ranting about public executions in Saudi Arabia, slaughter of 100,000 Kurds in Iraq under the old regime,the Jordanian slaughter of 20,000 Palestinians, the Libyan funding of terrorism eg the Lockerbie attack, the Syrian repression of Lebanon, the murder of muslims in Sudan by the Janjiweed Malitia, the civil war in Somalia and the lack of basic democratic rights in all of the above?

No you do not?

and why not?

J&P.

Thanks for saying that I was right, re :- Iran.

When you mentioned about the murder of 100,000 kurds in Iraq, the slaughter of 20,000 Palestinians by Jordan, and the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, these are all before my political time! So that might my why I don’t “rant” (as you put it) about the above mentioned.

Oh, by the way, when Pan Am Flight 103 blow up over Lockerbie, I don’t think the terrorist that blew up Flight 103, probably knew where the plane was going to be at the time the bomb detonated! So, the “Lockerbie attack” you mentioned, (meaning the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, in 1988), couldn’t of been an attack, as the terrorist weren’t probably not targeting Lockerbie!!!!

I do campaign in support of those who wishing to leave the countries, and more, that are rape, oppressed, and persecuted in, and choose to come to Briton, even if they get the chance to choose! I was on the 2nd April march in support of Asylum Seeker, and Gay, Lesbians and Bisexuals.

Now! Did I see you there?

Did I see any your Zionist friends there?

Nope!

I wonder why?

I worked for years with asylum seekers - I dealt directly with over 500 from some of the worst regions in the world.

The Jordanian slaughter of 20,000 Palestinians may not have been in your time.

The Iraqi murder of 100,000 Kurds may have been

The slaughter in Darfur by the Arab Militias certainly was

I have not seen one post on this site from you condemning the murder of 100,000s of Sudanese muslims.

Simply you are obsessed with the Jewish state. Not a passing interest - a bloody obsession.

Zionism embraces gay people - marches freely take place in Tel Aviv. Will the same happen in a Palestinian state - so by marching for gay rights and then attacking the one state in the Middle East where they are guaranteed is rather duplicitous is it not?

The German Nazis also phantasized about being an "innocent people" enslaved by the Jews.
The consequences are familiar

J&P

Can you please answer these questions!

Were you on the 2nd April march? And if you were on it, how come I didn’t see you on it???

You repeatedly mention about various atrocities that have happened in the world! Such as the estimated 37,000 people --the great majority Kurdish --.killed my Turkish forces. Genocide of Kurds, by Turkey. All of these should be condemned.

But these do not condone Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian Land, that being the West Bank and Gaza!

Under UN Resolution 242, Israel has to withdraw from the territories that Israel was occupying. That being – Egypt, Syria (The Golan Heights) and Palestine (West Bank and Gaza) – which Israel invaded in 1967 (Six Day War) as part of “Pre-Emptive” attacks.

In 1973 (Yom Kippur War), Egypt and Syria attacked, the areas of their respective countries, that Israel, by then, where illegal occupying.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,5860,720353,00.html

The West Bank and Gaza are STILL occupied!

Is it wrong to disagree with that? Is it Anti-Semitic to disagree with that?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

babaryba

IMC is not a fascist site. If you look around, you will find news stories that are not about Palestine or Israel!

For example there are stories on Pro Asylum Seeker Demo’s, Demo’s against the Invasion of Iraq, Campains that are under attack (ie Edo on the South Coast)

Edo news stories are interesting ones, having been part of it!

If you think that IMC is fascist or anti-semitic, check this storie out -  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/manchester/2005/02/305091.html - your find J&P has added 1 or 2 comments.

IMC is dodgy, with the way they censor their site, even removing a story about their censorship, but hey!

Peace!

Firstly - you answer my questions

Israel affords greater human rights and respect to persons of all beliefs, creeds, races, gender and sexuality than any other country in the Mid-East. Why therefore do you not condemn the countries I listed above for their failure to afford such rights to their citizens?

Why are you so obsessed with Israel?


I have always agreed that Israel should hand back the Gaza Strip and West Bank. You may recall Barak tried to hand it back to Arafat, with East Jerusalem, however Arafat rejected it and chose instead the path of violence.


Should Egypt and Jordan not be criticised for having failed to declare a State when they occupied that land? Yes - but the loony left made no noise about it whatsoever, despite awful human rights abuses.


I have never seen you condemn the Syrian occupation of Lebabanon which so recently ended, or the Chinese occupation of Tibet or the Russian occupation of Chechnya - many times more have died in those conflicts - your silence is demonstrative of the disproportionate condemnation you point at Israel.

THAT IS ANTI-SEMITIC!!!!!

So carry on boycotting our goods, our shops, our universities, our life saving treatments, our businesses.

We have suffered that 60 years ago and we are still here.

J&P,

I’m sorry, but your claims on Israel’s behalf hardly stand up to any genuine scrutiny. Jews (or those claiming Jewish heritage) from anywhere in the world are entitled to settle in either Israel or the Occupied Territories, where they are granted Israeli nationality, the vote, subsidized housing and military protection by one of the world’s best equipped armies. Non-Jews, whose families just happen to have been living in the West Bank and Gaza for centuries (OK, some only for decades, many are refugees, kicked out of Israel proper in 1948) are treated as third class citizens, exposed to random violence and arrest, are permanently stateless, refused the vote, yet have to pay their taxes just like any enfranchised Israeli*. Any person of an objective mindset would recognise this as a case-book example of apartheid and racism. If you find this judgement anti-semitic, then you are watering the term down beyond recognition, rendering it a non-word, and are in clear denial of the fact that Israel is, regrettably but undoubtedly, a deeply racist state. Please consider that pride in being Jewish should entail disgust at evil perpetrated in your name.

You ask a contributor why he/she is so obsessed with Israel? I suppose you will argue that Israel is a dot on the map, and is culpable of far lesser evils than many other regimes, and that Jews have suffered hideous persecution over history. You are correct, but consider a few reasons for being “obsessed” with Israel:

Israel is often heralded as the “only democracy in the Middle East”. This beggars a very simple question: how on earth can such dreadful disregard for human life be tolerated in a beacon of democracy?

Israel is a state unlike other states: how many states have been created since the end of the colonial era on the back of an exodus of “chosen” people into a land peopled by inconvenient natives, who were to be spirited over the border** to make way for whiter, more civilized immigrants? Israel is a throwback to a bygone racist age

While Iraq was invaded on the basis of the infamously spurious WMD claim, Israel is one of the world’s major hoarders of WMD (its non-declared nuclear weapon stockpile is claimed by some experts to be bigger than that of the UK or France), and does not recognize either the biological weapons convention, the chemical weapons convention or the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. And whereas other countries are held to their international responsibilities under International Law, Israel seems to be permanently exonerated of any. The Palestinian Arabs ethnically cleansed in 1947-1948 have still had no redress, almost sixty years later.

Israel is granted unconditional support in all its endeavours by the United States, receiving financial aid, military hardware and expertise, and moral support that no other country in the entire world could dream of. Moreover, the United States allows dual US/Israeli citizenship, yet denies dual citizenship to nationals of any other country.

In short, Israel is no North Korea, Uzbekistnn or Sudan. It is a democracy, with military service. Its people have choices that those in dictatorships don’t have, yet they few exercise them. It is armed to the teeth, able to crush its enemies with ease, yet feels the need to carry out a policy of slow strangulation on a weak and barely armed native population, squeezing them out of existence to make way for its professedly superior motives. Fairly viable reasons for an “obsession”, I would suggest.

*often considerably more – I can recommend “Drinking the Sea at Gaza” by Amira Hass, for further insights into life under the occupation.
** You will probably recognise that I deliberately paraphrased a well-known statement by Theodor Herzl here. He is recognized as the founding father of Zionism, and – even by those who disagree with him – must be admired for his candour.

On the point of principle, i will not answer those questions, that you have asked me, until you answer the question that i have asked you. I will answer them, when you have answered mine, which to me seams fair!

To your comment regarding about Barak, Arafat and East Jerusalem. You need to take into account the Muslim perspective that Arafat would be coming from. For Muslims, Jerusalem is the third most Holiest City. For Muslims, Jerusalem would have to be under Muslim control (Palestinian Control), Shared (between Israel and Palestine) or given the Status of an International City. If you remember after the 2000 Camp David talks, this is where things broke down. Yasser Arafat later remarked, "How could I go back to my people, and show them an agreement without Jerusalem"

Jerusalem is a significant within Judaism, with it being the holiest city with in Judaism. So in my opinion, the easist, if not best, way to resolve the issue over Jerusalem, is not for the Palestinians or Israelis to have 100% control over Jerusalem. But for both Palestinians and Israelis to have Shared Control of Jerusalem.

If past discussion regrading the start of the Al Asqa Intifada are anything to go by, we will simple disagree on the start of the 2nd Intifada. So is it worth discussing, even thou we may argee that Ariel Sharon visit to the Temple Mount/Har HaBayt was not the best political move!

Peace

David,

If anyone is watering down the meaning of words - it is you!

Ethnic cleansing - are you serious?


Israeli Arabs and Christians enjoy the exact rights that Jews do - it is enshrined in the declaration of independance.

So was the wish for peace, but Israelis have been attacked from the first waves of immigration until today - shall we just take a beating? You would like that wouldn't you. Your left wing minds cannot accept jews unless we suffer - as soon as we start to fight back and do not need you to feel sorry for us, you cannot work it out!

By the way Anon,

I neglected to answer your question.

1. No I was not on your march - however I have previously worked for 4 years assisting asylum seekers (longer than your march lasted, no doubt)

2. Your comment that "In 1973 (Yom Kippur War), Egypt and Syria attacked, the areas of their respective countries, that Israel, by then, where illegal occupying" is wholly incorrect. It was the declared intention of Syria and Egypt to "rid the world of the zionist entity". They did not merely intend to take back lands lost. That is why families in Tel Aviv were issued with anti tank missiles. The invaders were hell bent on destruction.

J&P

Thanks for answering 2 my questions. (well, trust me, you did in a way!!!)

Ok, like I said I would answer your questions, so I will!

1 “Israel affords greater human rights and respect to persons of all beliefs, creeds, races, gender and sexuality than any other country in the Mid-East. Why therefore do you not condemn the countries I listed above for their failure to afford such rights to their citizens?”

Ok, there reason that you seam to believe I don’t condemn is because the only places that we “talk” is on issues regarding Israel and Palestine. These are the only places that I seam to see you putting posts on IndyMedia. If I’m wrong, then please prove me wrong!

2. Why are you so obsessed with Israel?

So, if your are saying that I’m “obsessed” with Israel simply because I disagree with Occupation of Palestinian land, the building of Israel’s illegal barrier with in the West Bank and the Building of Israeli Settlements in the West Bank, then your wrong. As I may have mention previously, or on other IMC stories, I am involved and support campaigns that are not linked with Israel. For example Smash Edo. Edo MBM is a Brighton-based arms company that makes military products include bomb racks, release clips and arming mechanisms for warplanes. They have contracts with the UK Ministry of Defence (sic) and US arms giant Raytheon relating to the release mechanisms of the Paveway bomb system. They are a wholly owned subsidiary of EDO Corp, a US-based arms multinational that is currently number 10 on the Forbes 100 list of fastest growing companies.

If you wish to have a discussion that is not about Israel and Palestine outside of IMC, then let me know!

On your work with Asylum Seekers, it's probably about 3years 364 days and about 21
hours longer than the march i was on (

PACE!!!!!

I am not going to discuss your points re the occupation of the territories. I have frequently made clear that the West Bank/Gaza Strip should form a Palestinian State (A state which in 20 years of occupation, Egypt and Jordan may have declared. But instead embarked on mass slaughter and faced no criticism from the left wing.)

Re the fence.
You may say its land grabbing but when Israel constructed a fence on the Lebanese border it moved it after the pull-out in accordance with Res 245.

It inconveniences Palestinians but saves lives. The rate of suicide bombers successfully carrying out mass murders has plumetted. Of course you are against this.

My point re the obssession was that there are no other IMC threads condemning behaviour of many other countries, both those who occupy other land, oppress religions, have no democratic rights, oppress women or have terrible regimes. Yet threads to attack Israel regularly appear. Is Israel worse than all these other states. Absolutely not. And yet all your energy is directed against Israel. Why? Accept it - where the left and the right meet is in their obsession with Jews.

J&P

Regarding Israel – Lebanon. Just to clarify, wasn’t it UN Res. 425 and 426 calling for Israel to pull out of Lebanon, not 245 - which was to do with South Africa. I guess that it was a typo, easily done!

If the barrier (a fence and a wall are both barriers) was truly for security, then surely it would be being built on the bordered of Israel and the West Bank! Think about it!

I do focus my energy on other areas other than Israel and Palestine, IE EDO! I’m working on getting people involved! Hmmmmmmm not to do with Israel, is it!

You go on about threads about “attacking” Israel coming up regularly! Yeah, they do. But because of the occupation! Ok, I’ll say no more!

Anyway below are IMC threads about Darfur,

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/04/309314.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/05/310644.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2005/02/304795.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2005/02/304800.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2005/02/304607.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2004/09/298274.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2005/05/310544.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294292.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/295665.html

and Iran

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/sheffield/2005/02/305017.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2004/10/298900.html (about being a target)
 https://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/03/307015.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/10/298665.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/03/307479.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/oxford/2005/03/306632.html

 https://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294888.html

and Chechnya

 https://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2004/06/292611.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/02/284968.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/01/1241.html (ok 2001)

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/02/284967.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/06/273042.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2002/09/42440.html

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/12/18126.html (ok the last are between 2001 and 03)

 https://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2004/10/300151.html

Well like it or not communities of Jews live in the territories. Whilst I believe that they should re-settle outside the territories, the point is they do live there.

Living somewhere, whether it is right or wrong to live there does not carry the death penalty.

However many settlers were killed by terrorists, including children, babies, elderly people etc.

That is wrong!
If you take a different view and believe that these people (many of whom were born into these communities and know no different, or moved for their comprehension of religious
grounds) - then we have no basis for further dialogue.

When terrorsists break into a home and shoot a pregnant woman and her family - should we let them?

When terrorsists plant a bomb near to a nursery - should we allow this just because they are not within the green line?

NO.

Until a final settlement is reached and the future of the settlers and their location is decided, they must be entitled to have their lives protected.

So if the fence is built around these settlements then that is why. It will be moved (as with the fence in RES FOUR TWO FIVE IN LEBANON) when a two state system is declared and the communities are moved, but to suggest that they should be entitled to no protection in the interim is ludicrous.

By the way there is a difference between a fence and a wall. The barrier is 97% fence 3% wall - the fence can be easily removed in the future. The wall area is to stop snipers in an area which was famed for such attacks, such as those who killed Shalhevet Pass in her mothers arms. She was 10 months old.

Of course the BBC only ever show the 3%, and the truth is re-written.

Something which the left wing and right wing love so much.

J&P.

I knew it was a typo, I just wanted those that didn’t know what res it was! Not offence intended!

I’d agree with you that the settlers have the right to choose where they live, as does everyone else! I would agree with you that the settlers shouldn’t be living inside the territories. However, I would only question the legality of the Israeli settlements.

When anyone is killed, be it 5 Palestinians, or 5 Israelis, be it a baby, a teenager or an adult, it is tragic.

Those that were born there, it is different to those that moved there. They had no choice compared to those whom choose to live in the Occupied Territories (OT). BUT….the settlers who choose to live there, for what ever reason, should know the legality of the settlements, and they do know what the current situation is.

I’m not saying it is right that they are killed, nor am I saying they should not be protected. As I said above it is tragic when someone is killed.

The easiest way to protect the settlers ultimately would be to move them, with assistance, out of the OT. Therefore the construction of the barrier could be, or could have been, built on the green line.

Could you let me know were I can find proof that the barrier is 3% wall, 97% fence. I know that in the past that you have said you have driven the length of the barrier.

On you TV comment, the media will always “put spin” on how they report what is happen to suit their stance. If the BBC shows sections on the wall, if can be “twisted” to suit Israel, or Palestine.

Also, taking account in the numbers, or lack off, if you want to take a break from this dialogue for a week or so, simple to see if someone else replies.

Let me know!

Paix, Paz, Shalom

J&P

I would agree that the people who choose to live in the Occupied Territories (OT), then it is there choice to live there, like anyone else has the right to choose where they live. I would also agree that they shouldn’t be living in the OT. I would however question the legality on the settlements

When anyone is killed - be it 5 Palestinians, 5 Israelis, a baby, a child, or an adult – then it is tragic.

For those that were born in the OT within the settlements, then I’d agree that that they had no choice. Although those that choose to move and live in the OT, then they should be aware of the legality of the settlements, and they would be aware of the current situation when they moved there.

I’m not say that it is right that they are killed, nor am I say they should not be protect. As I have said above it is tragic when anyone is killed.

When it comes to the barrier, if the settlers were moved from the OT, then the barrier could be built on the green line! Which seams to the be the best solution, if the barrier is only temporary, for both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

On the subject of the BBC and only showing the wall. Any news story will put spin on it to suit the angle they want to put on it! Depend ton the type of spin the BBC want to put on it, it can suit either the Palestinians or the Israelis! Does a barbed wired fence look more dramatic than an 8ft high concrete wall?

I don't know if your aware, but out of the last 7 comments, 4 have be form you and 3 from me! If you want to take a week, or so, break from this dialogue, to see if anyone else is reading and wants to reply, then let me know!

Peace

Yes it would be better if the fence wason teh Green Line and teh settlers were moved.

You may have seen how long it is taking to move 8000 Gaza settlers. They need to be rehoused as a community and this needs to be done under heavy security.

www.bicom.org.uk - useful statistics re the fence (including % fence and % wall) and the fall in attacks.

Your threads re Darfur were all by one guy with no responses. The deaths of 100,000 Muslims hardly causes a stir does it, when they are killed by Arabs?

Shalom Chaver

J&P

J&P,

Without wishing to get bogged down in a historical debate, I most certainly was not joking when I referred to "ethnic cleansing". About 750,000 Palestinians either fled or were driven from their homes in the 1948-1949 war, and the civil war that preceded it. Their villages and towns were taken over by Jews and given Hebrew names. Those refugees have never been allowed to return. That was ethnic cleansing.

Of course, a large number of Jews were ethnically cleansed from the map of certain nuslim countries too, both in the aftermath of the 1948-1949 wars and following the 1967 war. That's not controversial either, to any reasonable-minded person.

Your psychoanalytical reference to the problems that the "left-wing mind" has with Jews is not altogether out-of-place. I think I agree with you - and maybe it's because so many of us are Jews. Jewish suffering at the hands of murderous racists is abominable, something nobody should turn a blind eye to. The same surely applies when non-Jews suffer from Jewish racism, as the Palestinians do in the Occupied Territories. I find both evils of equal gravity. Do you not agree?

If it helps, try looking beyond the (unhelfpul and highly instrumentalised)labels of Jews and non-Jews, and you will find a wealthy, democratic and very well-armed state slowly squeezing the life out of an impoverished stateless people, whose only mistake was to be born in the wrong place with the wrong ancestry - pretty much like the Native Americans in 18th and 19th Century America. My "left-wing mind" finds that hard to condone.

David - this article by Manfred Gerstenfeld may interest you:-

Jewish and Proud - thank you for standing up for us

This double image of the Jew thus leaves a loophole through which
some Jews can escape identification with the evil "violent Jew."
To do so they must explicitly denounce the acts of the Israeli
government and dissociate themselves from it. They must identify
with the suffering of the Palestinians and belittle their crimes.
They then, as it were, say to the non-Jewish world: "We are among
those examples of the Jew you should like. We are the good Jews."
The most extreme among these say that for so-called "ethical"
reasons they cut their ties with Israel, initiate actions against
Israel, and support extremist peace claims against Israel such as
taking back Palestinian refugees. A disproportionate number of
initiators and supporters of the anti-Israel boycott and other
anti-Israeli actions are found among them.
In the 1950s, Gordon Allport discussed various aspects of
self-hate. Among these he mentioned "the subtle mechanism" where
the victim agrees with the persecutors and "sees his own group
through their eyes." He said that a Jew "may hate his historic
religion...or he may blame some one class of Jews...or he may hate
the Yiddish language. Since he cannot escape his own group, he
does in a real sense hate himself - or at least the part of
himself that is Jewish."33
New versions of this old motif have now emerged. Among these are
Jews who hate Israel or see it through the eyes of "politically
correct" members of some Western elites. They may even lead, not
just join, these attacks.
Self-hating Jews have become an important tool in the anti-Israeli
campaigns of Western media. On the British media, Robert Wistrich
observes: "Only those Jews who smash Israel appear in the media,
and Israel is routinely represented as an ethnic-cleansing rogue
state - when not compared to Nazi Germany and South Africa - and
at the same time is held to a higher standard than other
countries."34
So far there have been many rewards with correspondingly limited
penalties for some Jews who attack Israel. They have positioned
themselves in society in a way that they are applauded by part of
the non-Jewish environment. As Jews attacking Israel, they provide
an alibi for Israel's Western enemies.


The Kreisky Precedent
Jewish self-hate has manifested itself in many ways in the
post-war period. It has, however, been largely ignored by Jewish
defense organizations. One major example of a Jewish initiator of
anti-Israel actions was the Austrian prime minister, Bruno
Kreisky. He played a crucial role in making Yasser Arafat
acceptable to the Socialist International.
As one observer wrote:
Kreisky apparently never seriously examined whether in helping
Arafat he was also helping to advance a new form of warfare that
would eventually threaten many of the very values in which he
and his fellow socialists believed. When confronted with the
facts of Arafat's engagement in terrorism, he would downplay or
deny it altogether, while concentrating his attention on what he
saw as advancing the wronged people and on the need to bring
peace to the Middle East.35
Kreisky's behavior had another effect against Jewish interests.
Austria presented itself as a victim of the Nazis rather than a
willing co-perpetrator of war crimes. While avoiding confronting
its past, it could now claim that the best sign that post-war
Austria was not anti-Semitic was its election of a Jewish prime
minister.


Current Examples
The new manifestations of Jewish self-hatred have only been
minimally researched. Doing so is beyond the scope of this study.
Yet it is an important subject since this self-hatred plays an
important role in the boycott actions against Israel. Finding ways
to diminish the rewards of the publicity the anti-Israeli
activists obtain should be an important strategic target in the
battle against boycotts.
In Austria, Jewish political scientist John Bunzl is in the
forefront of today's attacks on Israel. MIT Linguistics Professor
Noam Chomsky has viciously attacked Israel from Boston for
decades. Jewish author John Docker was one of the anti-Israel
academic boycott initiators in Australia. Jean-Marc Levy Leblond
of the University of Nice played an important role in the initial
academic boycott campaign in France.
Another example of a Jewish promoter and initiator of attacks
against Israel is the South African minister of Water Affairs and
Forestry, Ronnie Kasrils - a former African National Congress
guerilla (ANC). Kasrils initiated a discussion about a possible
boycott against Israel in the South African cabinet.36


Israeli Aspects
Self-hate manifests itself in Israel as well. There, however, it
is confined to people outside the mainstream of society. The World
Jewish Congress drew attention to this phenomenon in one of its
publications, stating:
Certainly, a most disturbing element in the present situation is
the fact that certain extreme left-wing Israeli organizations
are often operating in concert with the Arabs in such campaigns
and even orchestrating them. For several years now, such
organizations have been circulating a list of Israeli firms
operating in the West Bank, the Gaza District and the Golan
Heights, and even the boundaries of east Jerusalem, and have
called on Israelis to boycott these firms. Moreover, the same
people have sent their list to the offices of the European Union
in order to have those firms disqualified as Israeli companies
and thus receive certain benefits.37
Tanya Reinhart, an Israeli who teaches Linguistics at Tel Aviv
University, has been actively promoting the academic boycott
against Israel. In an open letter to another left-wing academic,
Baruch Kimmerling of Hebrew University, who came out against the
boycott, she wrote: "But no matter what you think of the Oslo
years, what Israel is doing now exceeds the crimes of the South
Africa's white regime. It has started to take the form of
systematic ethnic cleansing, which South Africa never
attempted."38
Though not as extreme as terrorists, Israel-boycotters are a
highly negative category. Regarding policy, what Alan Dersho-witz
said about terrorists is equally valid for boycotters: "The first
and most important macro step is eliminating all possible
incentives for terrorism by enforcing the principle that
terrorists must never be permitted to benefit from it."39


Israel as a Paradigm of the West's Future
What happens to Israel is also a tool for analyzing internal
tensions in Western society. Israel and the Jews have, to some
extent, become paradigms for how these tensions may expand. This
is not a new motif. Often the metaphor has been used that Jews are
like "the canary in a mine." When the latter was not feeling well,
there was something wrong with the air. Today many anti-Semitic
and anti-Israel activities are indicative of ills that will affect
other parts of Western society at a later stage.
Josef Joffe, editor of the German weekly Die Zeit, commented on
the link that certain circles in Europe and the Arab world see
between hatred of America and hatred of the Jews:
Images that were in the past directed against the Jews are now
aimed at the Americans: the desire to rule the world; the
allegation that the Americans, like the Jews in the past, are
interested only in money and have no real feeling for culture or
social distress. There are also some people who connect the two
and maintain that the Jewish desire to rule the world is being
realized today, in the best possible way, by means of the
"American conquest."40
In France one finds several such "indicators of the future." The
many anti-Semitic acts committed over much of the last decade by
Maghrebinian school children against Jewish pupils have two major
aspects. They illustrate the frequent violence in French schools
and are indicative of probable future outbursts of Maghrebinian
loathing of French society.
Western self-abhorrence is another example of a motif similar to
the hatred that manifested itself earlier regarding the democratic
State of Israel.
A further aspect to be studied in more detail concerns the methods
used by the most extreme adversaries of the Jewish people and
Israel. They comprise disparate groups and individuals whose
attacks are carried out in many different ways. The ultimate aim
of their "drip, drip" approach is trying to tear Israel apart,
limb-by-limb. It is particularly important to realize this because
a series of enemies of Israel wait for new occasions after each
failure of their attacks. Somewhat similar efforts are carried out
by those trying to dismantle the United States or to change
Western society's democratic system.


Lessons from Boycotts Against Other Countries
Some lessons from boycotts against other countries can be used as
case studies to understand what Israel's enemies wish to achieve.
The boycott against white-ruled South Africa is especially
relevant as some organizations model their attacks against Israel
on the actions against the South Africa apartheid regime.
At the United Nations World Conference Against Racism in Durban
2001, SANGOCO (the South African NGO Committee) promoted the
proposal to act against Israel in a similar fashion to what was
done in the past against white-ruled South Africa. SANGOCO has a
close relationship with the PLO.
The eight points proposed by SANGOCO have been summarized by
Shimon T. Samuels, International Liaison Director of the Simon
Wiesenthal Center:41
The first point: to launch an educational program to create
worldwide solidarity against Israel, the last bastion of
Apartheid. This word strikes a redolent chord across Africa and
is meant to unleash the arsenal of the 1970s and 1980s
Anti-Apartheid Movement, including the sanctions, boycotts, and
embargoes known as the Sullivan Program.
The second point: to use all legal mechanisms in countries of
universal jurisprudence against Israel. This we have seen in
attempts to create war crime accusation cases against Sharon in
Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and recently also in the
United States. Eventually our enemies aim to use the
International Criminal Court against Israel.
The third and fourth points of attack were to discredit the Law
of Return, the foundation of Zionism and Israel, and to replace
it with a Law of Return for all Palestinian refugees in order to
create moral equivalence.
The fifth point: to re-institute the Arab boycott out of
Damascus combined with a secondary boycott as in the 1970s and
1980s. We are already seeing the certificate of negative origin,
once again, being demanded from European companies dealing with
Arab countries.
The sixth point: to impose a sports, telecommunications,
academic, scientific, and military embargo on Israel. Points
seven and eight encapsulate their broad goals: the eventual
rupture of all diplomatic relationships with Israel and the
measures against any state that does not accept ostracism of
Israel. All of these eight points were to be carried out in a
five-year program.

Hadas,

Thanks very much for the article. I won’t dissect Gerstenfeld’s thesis too much – that might be a little messy. However, I do admire the man’s chutzpah: Can he really hoodwink his educated readership into believing that Yasser Arafat invented a “new form of warfare” [terrorism] that was actually perfected to deadly and highly potent effect several decades earlier by Shamir, Begin, Stern et al?!!

As regards “self-hatred”, I suppose Gerstenfeld should be well acquainted with the term. In his native Austria, this pathologically fascistic insult was once hurled at any ethnic Germans who dared defend Jews against those who saw it as a national imperative to murder them. The horrors visited upon Europe’s Jews may have been prevented by a greater degree of German “self-hatred”. Alas…

In essence, “self hater” is the knuckle scraper’s response to people with an ounce of humanity in their bones. The term – and its variants - is a favourite of fascist bully-boys, racial supremacists and religious zealots throughout the world. These are the real “haters”, and they hate nothing more than those who don’t share in it.

David

Israel is a strong country - it has to be or another 6 million jews would be wiped out - Israels neighbours have been calling to push us into the sea since Haj Amin Al Husseini (Hitlers friend) coined the phrase.

One day you may need Israel - if the population here turns against the Jews.

You say "Of course, a large number of Jews were ethnically cleansed from the map of certain nuslim countries too, both in the aftermath of the 1948-1949 wars and following the 1967 war. That's not controversial either, to any reasonable-minded person"

Yet the World was silent, the UN was silent and the Left Wing was silent when Jews were expelled and forced from their homes.

There is no call to compensate Jews who had their land taken in Iran, Egypt and Syria or to give the land back.

There are no calls to boycott the universities of countries who forced Jews to flee. There are no calls to boycott business which were taken over by those who forced Jews to flee.

There are no UN resolutions condemning the expulsion of Jews from these countries.

When Jews were forced from Libya in 1967 and allowed only one case each and £50 - No protest was held, no condemnation was heard.



So do not say that it is the same - Jews are treated differently and that is a fact.

Do you really think, David, that 60 years after a serious attempt by Germany, her collaborators and a silent world tried to wipe out the entire race, that anti-semitism has just gone away, that the deep sub-conscious mistrust and hatred of Jews does not still exist - the Right Wing do not hide it , the Left Wing only thinly veil it.


If Israel existed before WW2 there would have been no holocaust of such scale. If Israel did not exist tens of thousands of Etheopian Jews, forced to convert would have been stopped from practicing judaism and the religion would have ended in that part of the world.

If Israel did not exist to take in Russian Jews who wanted the freedom to practice their religion would not be able. In the eighties, we used to smuggle siddurim and tsitsit to underground shools.

You clearly have no respect or regard for the Jewish right to believe and to live in peace and to worship and learn - clearly we should be tolerated only when weak.


David, I hope one day you look beyond the blinkered extreme left viewpoint and understand that we are a downtrodden people who have chosen to stop dying, to stop hiding, to stop forced conversions and instead to choose life.

J&P

Sorry about not getting back to you sooner! Been busy with other non political stuff!

Anyway, thats beyond the point! To answer where we got to on your last reply, about the settlements!

If theory there should never have been built in the OT. Simple because under the genver convention, it is illegal for an occupying for to built settlements, etc, on the land they are occupying! I'm not say the settlers should be living there as that is a whole different kettle of fish!

Also, i'm after some clarification with what you've been saying to David regarding Israel as a safe haven for Jews! Are saying that Israel is the only safe place for Jews to live in this world? thus justifing the existance of the Zionist State?

Because if that is point your tring to get across, then there should be no "safe Haven" for Jews, as there should be no Anti-Semitism in the world. I fact there should be no discrimination of any form in this world!

No wouldn't that be fantastic!

PEACE

Anon,

I wish that this was true.

However the non Jews of this world have, since the Romans threw the Jews out of their homeland, have suffered greatly throughout the ages. We have been persecuted by Arab nations, Christians and Pagans for centuries.

Millions of us have died while the World stood by, watched and in some cases encouraged and participated.

We have faced autos da fes, lynchings, forced conversions, gas chambers, pogroms.

Of course we should not, of course we should not need a safe haven - but we do.

Anti semitism is still a strong force. Israel is a focal point for those who suffer this, a refuge, a way of having a place where the word 'Jew' is not a slander, a place where if we are attacked we can stand together.

If you feel that anti semitism is wrong then you accept it exists. As long as it does, Israel needs to be strong, needs to be a haven, needs to welcome immigrants as brothers

Basically you should be focussing attentions on ridding the world of anti semitism - not exposing us to it while it is still a dangerous force


Shalom

You asked why there is such an "obsession" with Israel.

Human rights abuse, massacre and ethnic cleansing are contemptable wherever they are, and I don't think anyone sane would disagree with that. I think the reason so much attention has been paid to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is

a) Because Israel has traditionally been allowed to conduct, sometimes even been openly supported in, its policies and actions towards the Palestinians.

b) Because the conflict is more than just a regional bloodbath. For better or for worse, it seems to stand at the centre of what can be seen to be a global conflict between Muslims and the West. Whether you like it or not, it is seen as a symbol of the oppression of Arabs or Muslims at the hands of the West. So sorting the situation out is of the utmost importance in terms of global security and understanding between cultural spheres.

For this reason (among others), all the Jews I know are opposed to the way Israel treats the Palestinians. They, by the way, are also "Jewish and Proud".