Jews sans frontieres

Gravatar Israel has bombed synagogues in Beruit in the past, apparently.


Gravatar Sorry. I didn't read to the end lol...


Gravatar Israeli pilots bombed the house of worship because they believed that Palestinian weapons were hidden there.
- Why else would the IAF bomb the Beruit Synagogue - it stands to reason.

That's why Israel bombed synagogues in Iraq as well, once upon a time - they were going after Jewish-hating terrorists!


Gravatar Maybe commenteer Bob might like to help me out in my chain of reasoning here.

Israel gets created - Israel starts attacking Jews (amongst others) who don't follow zionist orders and return to the Fatherland - Israel blames its terrorism and war crimes against Jews, who don't follow their zionist orders and return to the Fatherland, on the non-Jewish victims of of its terrorism and war crimes - Bob appears claiming same.


Gravatar http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.c...not- israel.html


Gravatar Now, of course, Amal, led by Nabih Beri is very pro-Syrian and works in the shadow of Hezbollah. But in 1982, the Israelis would not have shelled an area held by their then allies, Amal.

And the Lavon affair never happened either, nor the USS Liberty and the Mossad never bombed any Jewish targets in Baghdad.


Gravatar And the Farhoud never happened (179 Iraqi Jews dead in 1941) and the sequestration of their property and that of Egyptian Jews in 1956 (TWO years after the Lavon affair)


Gravatar http://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/1...e- israelis.html

It costs to read but the first paragraph tells what you need to know.

I'm still skeptical about Baghdad, though. Read Moshe Gat.


Gravatar PONR - Aha, so you know about these things and yet can still say, "the Israelis would not have shelled an area held by their then allies". They do shell stuff held by their allies and by Jews.

Me, on the other hand, I didn't say that Jews haven't suffered losses in Arab countries. I don't think there should be a trade off between Jews from Arab countries with Arabs from Palestine though. That is as clearly racist as any zionist idea. Rights of return and to compensation are individual, not collective.


Gravatar here's the full NYT article Andrew R linked to:

The New York Times

August 12, 1982, Thursday, Late City Final Edition

BEIRUT'S ONLY SYNAGOGUE IS CASUALTY OF THE ISRAELIS


DATELINE: BEIRUT, Lebanon, Aug. 11



Israeli shells have fallen on Beirut's only synagogue, sending dozens of Jewish families fleeing for safety, residents said today.
Before the Israelis invaded Lebanon to crush the Palestine Liberation Organization, about 100 Jewish families lived in the quarter near the Maghen Abraham synagogue on Wadi Abu Jamil Street in the northern half of Israeli-ringed west Beirut. It is a few blocks from the so-called green line that divides the capital into Moslem and Christian sectors.


Now the once-lively neighborhood is virtually abandoned. Seven Jewish families remain, members of the community said in interviews.
 
No Harassment by Arabs
''My house is broken, my house is broken,'' an old Jewish woman, practically deaf, mumbled in French as she sat in a chair behind the synagogue.

Jewish residents say they have not been harassed by their Moslem neighbors or the Palestinians since the Israelis invaded Lebanon on June 6.
Neighborhood residents, including the Jewish families, said Israeli artillery firing from east Beirut and gunboats cruising offshore had persistently pounded the district, which is also populated by large numbers of Kurds and Lebanese Shiite Moslems.

A week ago, during a fierce Israeli assault, a shell blew a hole in the roof of the cream-colored stucco synagogue, sending about 60 Jewish and Moslem refugees sleeping there fleeing into the street, residents said. The building is now locked and vacant, plaster and concrete strewn on the floor.
 
Without Water for a Week
A block away, 80-year-old Khuder Namoud lives on the fourth floor of an apartment building with his wife, Rachel, and son and daughter, Ibrahim and Lisa. Their apartment has been without water and electricity for a week, Mr. Namoud said.

''We are sick of this war,'' Mr. Nahmoud said, his son interpreting from Arabic. ''All the money is gone. We can't work. The electricity is gone, the water too. We have just stayed here in the house for two months.''

Wearing a Jewish prayer shawl and skullcap, he said he prays daily for the bombardments to stop. His son said about seven families remain - the ones without enough money to flee. The others have gone to Junieh, the Christian port north of Beirut in an Israeli-held area, or to safer districts in east Beirut, he said. Israel has said several families have emigrated to Israel since the invasion.
---

I also found this interesting tidbit, from AP, July 2, 1982:

"During the 1975-76 civil war, when rightist Christians fought a coalition of mostly Moslem Lebanese leftists and Palestinians, PLO leader Yasser Arafat said the Jews should not be hurt and sent his own bodyguards to Wadi Abu Jamil St. to ensure his orders were obeyed."


Gravatar Was that report datelined from Beirut by Tom Friedman?


Gravatar Utpal: it says the byline is "AP"


Gravatar 'Neighbourhood residents, including the Jewish residents, said....'
Well of course they would say...it is standard practice to blame Israel. The Jewish families in particular had a vested interest in claiming that they were not being harassed or attacked by Muslims. They would say anything to survive. But I don't consider hearsay quoted in the NY Times conclusive proof.


Gravatar No, you consider a letter to the Jewish Chronicle to be conclusive proof.


Gravatar I don't consider a letter to be conclusive proof any more than hearsay in the NY Times, but it shows that the facts are still a matter of dispute


Gravatar 'but it shows that the facts are still a matter of dispute'

Well by your own criteria - that if a single individual(in this case you) disagrees with a widely accepted interpretation of an event renders the 'facts' in 'dispute' - then the 'facts' of the Holocaust are equally a 'matter of dispute' due to the large numbers of people who deny it occurred.


Gravatar What amazing logic James. You're saying that something occurred because most people believe it did. But we simply don't know for sure in this case. and even if the Israelis did not bomb the Beirut synagogue you will never believe them, because you are always inclined to believe that Israelis do not tell the truth.


Gravatar 'What amazing logic James. You're saying that something occurred because most people believe it did.'

Perhaps you should read my post a little more carefully; you've been presented with evidence including news reports and statements by eyewitnesses that the IDF bombed the Beirut synagouge, and you've presented zero evidence to the contrary. Your case is based on the conjecture that the IDF wouldn't have bombed the synagouge because it was in an area held by their allies. Now, if by your standards this means that the 'facts are a matter of dispute', then the 'facts' of any historical event would also be in dispute provided that some groups or individuals (c.f holocaust deniers) contested those facts, even though their arguments, like yours, are wholly worthless.


Gravatar "you've been presented with evidence including news reports and statements by eyewitnesses that the IDF bombed the Beirut synagouge,"
The news reports all derive from the same eyewitness statements, James. And we know how reliable eyewitnesses are, don't we! So your evidence is no less conjecture than mine.


Gravatar But you have already said that Israel doesn't attack Jewish targets or targets of its allies and you subsequently owned up to knowing that that wasn't true. And James wasn't conjecturing, he was running with eye-witness testimony. You simply asserted that Israel doesn't bomb its allies when you know of cases when it has done. The balance of probabilities is very much against you.

Can you stop wasting people's time now, unless you have something new to offer?

Thanks


Gravatar 'So your evidence is no less conjecture than mine'

Except you haven't offered any evidence; you've just claimed that Israel wouldn't attack a target in an area held by it's allies . . . and that's it.


Gravatar "And we know how reliable eyewitnesses are"
In order to prove the existence of Israeli crimes to a Zionist you'de need to conjure up more sensory evidence than mere eyesight.. Let's face it, it's just photons shooting across space..
You'de need to cough up how it smelled and tasted, but c'mon, we know that people smell what they wanna smell, and are severely discriminatory about what they put in their mouths. You'de need a little more than THAT.
Conjure up the prophet Elijah to stand witness to the meta-natural sequence of events that Israelis bombed a religious building in Lebanon, but let's face it.. thats a shoddy character to hang to his word, he always blows us at seder.


Gravatar When confronted by Israel's crimes, generally Zionists contort themselves into one of two postures 1.) it didn't happen and 2.) they made us do it.


Gravatar and we can't forgive them for making us do it.


Gravatar james O - you wrote "synagouge". uh-oh.


Gravatar so we must do it again.


Name:

Email:

URL:

Comment:  ? 

 

Commenting by HaloScan