Since you are so sensitive, I'm sure there are so many other things in Israel that offend you, perhaps the way Ehud Barak carries his umbrella in winter? Please write to us and we will be sure to investigate further.
It's kind of you to bring the facts to us.
What really happened I don't know. There are dozens of possible scenarios. The one made public by Israel and written all over the net doesn't make sense.
'Israel has fabricated the story about how I killed the child during the attack I carried out in 1979,' Kuntar told the Hezbollah- run Al Manar television.
He said that he read in the Israeli paper Maarev a report, which was published April 23, 1979, a day after he carried out his attack that the child was killed in cross-fire.
Kuntar stressed that he is not saying this to clear his image before Israelis, but because 'the Israelis have used this fabricated story to defame his image and the cause he is fighting for.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c...h?
v=cS6NyrexKlk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c...h?
v=cS6NyrexKlk
Tal from Israel
A Reader - I'm sure there's a materialist explanation but I heard or I read (sorry, can't remember where) that the Druze have a doctrine of loyalty to the state in which they live. This means that in Israel the leaders encourage loyalty to Israel, in Syria, to Syria but in Lebanon, where the state is a tad wobbly, they seem to be more openly for themselves.
Does anyone know why the court case details were kept secret btw.?
You're not alone thinking it was me Ken. Harry's Place are heaping the credit on me as well. Apparently, some of them are so upset with this Kuntar chap, they're thinking unpleasant thoughts about Muslims, Lebanese, Arabs maybe even Palestinians. Nay more, some are thinking of embracing the "clash of civilisations" thesis.
Hizbullah have really shot themselves in the foot with this one. Just when Harry's Place were going to reject zionism, Martin Amis and the CoC(k) thesis, Nasrallah drives them away. It could take decades to repair the damage and restore muscular liberal confidence in the peace process.
In this prison he was able to communicate with other prisoners and the outside world. He recieved visits from government & independent watchdogs.
Furthermore, the man was given a fair trial - the evidence was overwhelming, the girl's skull had been crushed, the rocks he lay her head atop was covered in blood...
Really now, do you really believe Israelis would be afforded such treatment if they were in Hezbollah custody? The answer is no. Instead the hostages families would be tortured as well as Hezbollah would taunt them by not divulging the state of their loved ones.
See: http://wingless.aoriginality.com/?p=65
BTW: What the hell did Hezbollah kill these guys anyway? Israel left all of Lebanon almost a decade ago (Shebba was never part of Lebanon, if anyone has claim to it it's Syria, who lost it when they tried to annihlate the Jewish state, in wars you run the risk of losing lives & land...they did!)... I can fathom what claim Hezbollah, the Persian occupier of Lebanon, has to even one millimetre of Lebanon or Israel.
Dispicable. A society that cheers a child killer. Disgusting.
Back in the 6 day war, before American financial support, when Israel was buying weapons from whomever would sell - they dessimated the Arabs armies, the Arabs had no air force and their infantry & armour was nearly wiped out - if Israel was about expansion then why did it not march to Cairo, to Damascus?
You people make these obscene claims yet I doubt even one of you knows the Balfour Declaration from the Peel Commission, I doubt you can even recall that Jordan was carved out of Palestine, that Yemen, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon & Syria are all new nations carved from the leftover of the Ottoman Empire, JUST LIKE ISRAEL (yet Israel is the only one who doesn't have a right to exist?!)... You talk of Palestine, as if a country called Palestine ever existed (btw: if you can prove it, come on down, I offer a CASH reward). You talk of Jerusalem, as if it was ever the capital of any arab state (it wasn't, it's not even mentioned in the Koran ONCE!). You talk of Zionism as if it's some religious edict when all it is: The Jewish Right of Return to lands they were exiled from by various empires.
And you talk of occupation. Occupation of what? Occupation refers to land taken from a state that is the recognized and legitimate owner of said land (it's a legal term), yet no state legally held the lands (Egypt had illegally held Gaza from 48/67, Jordan the same w/ Judea)...
Occupation, right. If this is about Land then why did Arafat LEAVE NEGOTIATIONS when offered the 2000 offer (100% of Gaza (which they have now anywayz), 97% of West Bank, 3-5% of Israel-proper (to make up for permanent towns), EAST JERUSALEM. Arafat didn't just reject the CLINTON/BARAK offer, he left the accords and began planning the 2nd intifadah (Marwan Bargouti has admitted this).
If this is about occupation, why does Jewish concessions and Arabs GAINING land lead to an increase in Jewish deaths?
Israel pulls Arafat out of his mansion in Tunisia for the Oslo accords...Arab rocks turn to guns, turn to bombs...
Israel leaves all of Gaza, even moving Jewish graves! Some naive Jews even leave millions of dollars in agricultural equipment & greenhouses, thinking that a means of production will lead to decrease in violence... The result? Greenhouses didn't even last 24hrs before the hordes destroyed them... Over 5000 ROCKETS have hit Israel from the areas the IDF left in Gaza.
Israel leaves Lebanon, what does it get? Hezbollah invades Israel without reason or provokation and launches thousands of rockets into Israel.
But that doesn't matter right? If it serves your purpose it's truth, if it doesn't it's Israeli propaganda, how convenient.
What about arab crimes. Palestinians enslaved africans before 1948. Now arab countries import sex slaves from the South Pacific. You dont care about these girls unless theyre enslaved by Israelis.
I doubt if there are any out of the four of us who post to JSF who don't know the details of Balfour, Sykes-Picot, Peel and on and on. Imposing boundaries is not the same as imposing one population and removing another. The former we call colonial settlement, the latter, ethnic cleansing.
Like me, my co-bloggers must have heard this irrelevant tosh about whether or not Palestine was ever independent and whether or not Jerusalem gets mentioned in the Koran. Canada isn't named in any religious work that I know of but does that mean no one can live there? Or is the current population packing its bags in case a bunch of Europeans turn up with a new book of god's preferred people.
You need to bring your arguments down to earth and argue on humanist merits rather than dabbling in religious and racial mythology. The ethnic descent of today's Jews is a case in point. Suppose the Jews of today are the ethnic descendants of a community that was exiled 2,000 years ago. So what? The right of return is an individual right not a collective one accruing to this or that identity group. Who's to decide who belongs to which group. There have been conversions to Judaism since time immemorial. Why should a convert to a religion acquire the right to dispossess someone of their home. No more right than someone who is accidentally born into that religion. And if an Israeli Jew converts to say Christianity, do they have to leave Israel on that account? Well maybe according to some zionists they do. Which is why it's best to stick to humanist values and insights. They don't help zionism one iota but they may come to the rescue of the descendants of zionist settlers one day.
I've been in Jewish company where it has been clear that people think these points about who thinks what about Jerusalem or whether or not there was a sovereign state of Palestine are actually relevant to who lives and rules where. Mostly it would have been in a suburb of London where Jews are thrashing out the "issues". What it points to is the fact that an ideology has been so deeply inculcated into a people that common sense arguments go out the window. Is it worth engaging with? That's the toughie.
I'll leave you with this thought though. Back in 2002 the zionist movement in London led by the Chief Rabbi (or him being led by them) organised a massive rally in Trafalgar Square in support of Israel's reinvasion of Jenin and other West Bank towns. Some members of the Jewish Socialist Group went to counter demonstrate and saw some people who they knew on the zionist demonstration. I don't know what argument got them to the zionist rally nor what argument was used to persuade them to join the counter-demo. Perhaps the answer to both was "it's good for Jews!" I really don't know, but JSG people persuaded Jews off of a zionist demo on to a counter demo.
The moral of the story? Nope, I don't know that one either. Really, we need to hone our arguments at a variety of levels and sometimes we have to engage even when the enemy's being silly.
Wingless - Frankly, there's something contrived about your ignorance. You say Israel's creation doesn't stand out from other post-Ottoman states, but Jews were returning to where they were exiled. You're overlooking that Arabs had to be killed and expelled en masse so Israel could be a Jewish state, and then act like Israel's lack of legitimacy is due to anti-semitism. Many states in recent history had their 'right to exist' challenged and some of them really did exist on an unjust basis, like the Soviet Union.
Hilmi Shusha - Palestinian child beaten to death in Nov 1996 by West Bank settler Nahum Corman, who put his foot on the boy's throat and beat him to death with the butt of his rifle. Sentenced by a sympathetic judge in Israeli district court to 6 months community service. Welcomed home as a hero at Hadar Beitar settlement. Millions of Israelis utterly apathetic at the release of a child killer.
thanks! I added it to the entry.
-----------
Imposing boundaries? Whose imposing boundaries?
Edited By Siteowner
Edited By Siteowner
Edited By Siteowner
Edited By Siteowner
If people want to read your stuff they can visit your blog.
Thanks
You know, it's the same feeling I get when we light the Shabbos candles, but nobody gets hurt, unless I burn my fingers in an act of symbolic expiation as I invariably do.
Interesting... If your argument is just, then why the censorship?
I've debated this topic at Universities, public forums, & workshops in both the Middle East & North America... Never ever have I been censored before - so much for freedom of speech and idea...
If truth is on your side you have nothing to fear...
RE:
" Imposing boundaries is not the same as imposing one population and removing another. The former we call colonial settlement, the latter, ethnic cleansing.
-----------
Imposing boundaries? Whose imposing boundaries?
Edited By Siteowner
Wingless | 07.20.08 - 6:40 am | #
"
-----------
Either eliminate that entire post OR post it in it's full text... What you have done here is libelous, you have taken a post that was written to be read in its entirety and cut it off to one sentence, therby changing the meaning.
I expect this matter to be handled expeditiously, in the next 5 business days, if it is not be assured that the matter will be escalated. You have a right to censor, you do not have a right to attribute a different meaning to something I wrote by cutting off selected portions. We do not take such matters lightly and if this is not rectified immediately, we will persue this matter as we see fit.
Reply at wingless@aoriginality.com
The whole story is that he was aquitted in his first trial because there was no direct evidence he had killed the boy. However, the Supreme Court overruled the lower court and found him guilt of negligent manslaughter. It was then the responsibility of the judge who had AQUITTED HIM to sentence him...
There are differences between Kuntar and Korman. Kuntar went on a mission to kill or kidnap, Korman went to investigate and then abused his authority. Kuntar hit a downed girl with a RIFLE, implying intent as to use a rifle in that manner requires changing grip, and turning it around. Korman hit the boy with a PISTOL which he had in his hand as he punched the boy. It's the difference between punching an assailant and kicking an innocent while he is down.
Both dispicable, both should rot in jail but there's a moral difference.
Most of the people who hail Kuntar must not believe he killed Einat, because he's publicly denied it from day one and they won't believe anything Israel says (for good reason).
The major difference between Korman and Quntar regards the likelihood they got a fair trail. I have no reason to doubt that Korman did, indeed, he got such a sympathetic trial that even the Israeli Supreme Court though it was too much. Quntar was tried in the court of his enemies, under suspicious circumstances (Israeli police shooting like mad in the direction of Israeli hostages), and the trial was marked "top secret." Korman's trial illustrates precisely why I don't think Jewish Israeli judges can be trusted to be above racism. Furthermore, the stories that were published in the papers are riddled with prima facie impossibilities.
Given all that, it is impossible for a fair minded person to have a high degree of trust in the conclusion of the trial. I consider therefore Kuntar's own version of the event more likely to be the true one.
Now, as for his mission. Yes, he came to Israel to take hostages, and he killed a policeman. You may think that's immoral but I don't. Israel is a legitimate target of guerrilla warfare intended to secure Palestinian rights. Korman, on the other hand, "went to investigate," namely he went to enforce the rule of Jews over Palestinians. His mission was illegitimate from the outset.
Guerrilla warfare doesn't mean deliberately smashing the skull of the child. So had I been certain that Quntar did it, I would not hesitate calling him a monster, EVEN though he was on legitimate mission. But I believe that is most likely not true.
As for the fact that Korman wasn't celebrated. puleeeeeze! If Israelis celebrated every child murdered by Israelis, every day would be a holiday!
Last Friday, the Israeli daily Ma'ariv published a series of interviews one of its reporters conducted with him over the last four years. In those interviews, Kuntar indeed claims he did not kill the Harans. However, parts of his version do not tally with evidence at the scene - including the eyewitness testimony of Smadar Haran (or is she lying too?), regarding what went on in the apartment (he claims he tried to get Danny Haran to leave his daughter in the apartment and the latter refused; Smadar, who was hiding in the apartment, denies he made such an offer). Furthermore, even if we accept his testimony at face value, he explicitly says he set out to kill civilians. Case in point - the first victim of the attack was a police officer. According to Kuntar's version, the officer was killed in an ambush they layed - with the explicit intention of attacking the first car they saw.
I don't think innocence and guerrilla warfare are compatible. Even a just war isn't pretty. But the issue is not whether Quntar is your Aunt Suzy who would never hurt a mosquito. He isn't. you may fault him for that, I won't, and that's a political difference. I am not going to argue here the legitimacy of armed struggle because that is not the issue.
The issue is Israel launching a racist propaganda effort intended to spread the idea that the Lebanese people are sub-human because they celebrate the release of a monster. And the point is a) this is deeply racist. b) it is based on what there are good reasons to believe is a fabrication, namely that Quntar murdered the Haran's in cold blood.
The part of the Ma'ariv interview that can be found on the Guardian website is highly disingenuous. To mention only a couple points:
- it is mentioned in the header that the journalist in question is "the daughter of an Auschwitz survivor". Why? What does that have to do with Quntar?
- the interviewer claims that "Qantar's version of the events of April 22, which have been articulated here in his voice for the first time, is different from that of the security service personnel and Israeli civilians who were present" - but the only "civilian present" was, apparently, Smadar Haran, who wasn't "present" at the time her daughter was killed.
Israeli cops shooting like crazy in direction of hostages? Do you make it up as you go along?
Request the evidence, the bullet inside the head of Mr. Haran was a Kalatchnikov Rifle (7.62), not a 5.56. And the girl's head was crushed, as testified by a pathologist (not to mention the butt of Kuntar's rifle, the blood there matched the 4 year old)...
And Kuntar's trial, including all the evidence is available, having been declassified.
BTW: The majority of Israelis do not support these settlers... The issue comes when people start calling every dead Jew a settler, as if Israel is some 'settlement' on Arab land (Sderot is no settlement, neither is Gilo). Israel was founded by a UN (or League of Nations, I don't recall) vote after over 70% of Palestine was granted to the Arab Palestinians.
Hopefully this post will make it to the site in entirety, I see this is yet another Israeli site that picks and chooses those comments it deems fit for debate.
Israel was founded by a UN (or League of Nations, I don't recall) vote after over 70% of Palestine was granted to the Arab Palestinians.
"I see this is yet another Israel" apologist "that picks and chooses those" UN decisions "it deems fit" to abide by. The issue is whether a decision is just, not whether the decision was made.
Jordan was granted to a mediocre royal family, not anyone west of the Jordan river. And we have yet another 'we didn't expel anyone but they can go to Jordan anyway' comment.
If anyone's interested, here's the Palestine Remembered entry on Najd, which is near Sderot.
http://www.palestineremembered.c...Najd/ index.html
Najd is the yellow dot, Sderot is 103 and a mile south.
http:// www.palestineremembered.c...elliteView.html
When it comes to partition in particular, I think it is worth bearing in mind that:
1. 'The International Community' at the time comprised only about 50 countries. The only sub Saharan African country represented at the UN in 1947, for example, was racist South Africa, on the verge of formalising apartheid in law. Many of the countires that did exist at the time were in Latin America and consequently in the US 'sphere of influence', which may have affected how they voted on the resolution.
2. Everyone was acutely aware at the time of the outcome of the partition of India three months earlier, and chose partition of Palestine anyway.
3. There was an alternative binational proposal on the table at the same time that was cynically dismissed by the chair.
4. Nobody asked the Palestinians what they wanted. My understanding, vis a vis the constant refrain from the hasbara crowd that Israel is the exercise of 'The Jewish People' to their right to self determination, is that all the inhabitants of an area need to vote in a referendum on the status they prefer. It seems decidedly improbable that the majority of the population of Palestine in 1947 would have favoured partition.
Shorter NewYorkLL: "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I'll blather on anyway."
christian h. | 07.21.08 - 10:32 pm |
ThanX for the enlightenment... I've been called far worse by far better...
---------
Well, sort of. Jordan was originally granted to the Jews, the league of nations ratified the balfour declaration into law, thus promising all of Mandate Palestine to the Jews. The Hashemites (what you call a mediocore royal family) were originally given an area of Herjaz as reward for aiding the Brits in defeating the Ottomans (the Hashemites commanded the loyalty of many, partially because they claim to trace lineage back to Muhammed). Heraz is a land mass that makes up much of modern Saudi Arabia. It was Ibn Saud & family that pushed the Hashemites off the land. The Hashemites then went back to the Brits, asking for yet another artificial kingdom (artificial because like Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq - the nations & often the rulers put in place had no precedent & no justification to ever be put there). They then went back on the Balfour declaration & the League of Nations ruling and granted the land to the Hashemites.
This does not change the fact that Jordan's population was and is made up of the Arabs whom lived in Mandate Palestine, aka "Palestinians". Jordan forbids accurate release of it's demographics today (esp. figures for "Palestinians") because Abdullah's greatest fear is the re-emergence of the "Jordan is Palestine movement" (hasn't been popular since Jordanian Black September, where King Hussein killed more Arabs in one month of peace than Israel has in 60 years of war).
NewYorkLL - your whole point, like earlier ones posted as Wingless, is completely irrelevant to the fact that whilst Arab states have had boundaries and governments foisted on them, Palestine (that is as you know, Palestine west of the River Jordan) has had one population imposed on it and most of its natives removed or displaced. Nor does it have any relevance for the fact that when we say Palestinians we are referring to mostly Arabs from west of the River Jordan, those from the east preferring to be known as Jordanians. It seems their identity is based on the reality of where they are from whereas the Jewish identity is based on the mythology of ones ancestors. It's a curious thing to have as the deciding factor on whether you get to have human or civil rights or not.
I think you'd better go focus on your legal action. You're just wasting time here.
Funny you never mention the nearly 1 millions Jew expelled from their homes on newly branded 'Arab states'... Apparently "Right of Return" does not apply to the Juden...
Edited By Siteowner
Anyhow, for the record, it wasn't 50 countries, as I wrote earlier, it was 56, plus Siam, whose delegation was absent. Specifically,
In favour: 33
Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussian S.S.R., Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukrainian S.S.R., Union of South Africa, U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Uruguay, Venezuela.
Against: 13
Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.
Abstained: 10
Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.
To save you the trouble of reading the post and the 44 comments it generated, there are no anti-zionists who comment here who are opposed to the right of return for Jews. On the contrary, it was the zionists on the thread who argued against the right of return for both Jews and Arabs.
Now, I can't allow you to continue wasting time here and misrepresenting the opinions or comments of others. If you want to yabber on about the same old same old, you have your own blog and no doubt other zionist blogs for that.
Or is this how you escalate to legal action?
There is scientific evidence that the blood on the rifle butt was that of the unfortunate child.
As for not getting a fair trial in Israel, that is complet nonsense.
Inany vent at least in Israel you get a trial unlike the hostages Hizbollah and Hamas take, with their bodies used as trading currency.
What kind of trial did te two Israeli soldiers have some years back when they were handed over to a lynch mob?
And what of the fate of all Israel's missing in action.
It is often the ply of a guilty person to retract a confession.
I have absolutely no doubt that this monster has the blood of this unfortunate four year old, her father, and a policeman and no boubt many others on his hands.
The most telling point of all for me comes from his own mouth. One of his first published statements when he knew he was to be released was to vow to return to his terrorist tactics and carry out similar acts to the one form which he was convicted and sentenced
You can't get better evidence thant that from the mouth of the person themself.
In any event those celebrating with dancng in the streets and distribution of sweets also made it clear that part of their cause or celebration was two coffins with two Israeli bodies.
We are looking at two different cultures with entirely opposite views on the value of human life
No doubt Jews Sans Frontieres will laud Samar Kuntor when he carries out his next promised terrorist murders
Joy Wolfe UK
Funny you never mention...."
that was number 2 from my system.
Mark, we should enumerate all these quote unquote arguments.
That way wingnut and others can just come here and say...
"but Mark, how come you don't mention 2.17. And frankly I think you and your friends are 3.9. And besides 4.5"
That would simplify everything.
Two shackled prisoners, just convicted, get on the bus behind the court to be transported to the penitentiary. The Palestinian prisoner asks the Israeli, 'What are you in for?'
The Israeli says, 'I ran a stop sign and killed a little girl.'
'So what did they give you?'
'I'm in for six months,' replies the Israeli. 'What about you?'
'They gave me six years. I got caught driving without lights.'
'That seems a little extreme,' says the Israeli.
'Not at all,' the Palestinian says. 'The judge said he'd have given me life if it had been after dark.'
There is scientific evidence that the blood on the rifle butt was that of the unfortunate child.
As for not getting a fair trial in Israel, that is complete nonsense.
In any event at least in Israel you get a trial unlike the hostages Hizbollah and Hamas take, with their bodies used as trading currency.
What kind of trial did the two Israeli soldiers have some years back when they were handed over to a lynch mob?
And what of the fate of all Israel's missing in action.
It is often the ploy of a guilty person to retract a confession.
I have absolutely no doubt that this monster has the blood of this unfortunate four year old, her father, and a policeman and no doubt many others on his hands.
The most telling point of all for me comes from his own mouth. One of his first published statements when he knew he was to be released was to vow to return to his terrorist tactics and carry out similar acts to the one for which he was convicted and sentenced
You can't get better evidence than that from the mouth of the person themself.
In any event those celebrating with dancing in the streets and distribution of sweets also made it clear that part of their cause for celebration were two coffins with two Israeli bodies.
We are looking at two different cultures with entirely opposite views on the value of human life
No doubt Jews Sans Frontieres will laud Samar Kuntar when he carries out his next promised terrorist murders
Joy Wolfe UK
Scientific evidence is evidence that was published in a peer reviewed academic journal. Please send us the bibliographic reference and we'll check it.
You have absolutely no doubt about, and I have absolutely no faith in the Israeli court system, especially when it comes to "security" trials. we got that. We registered your disagreement with us. Now what? Do you have anything to SAY?
Is it just to deflect from the original topic.
A farily familiar tactic when not having adequate answers is to change the subject and go off at an unrelated tangent.
Scientific evidence is evidence that was published in a peer reviewed academic journal. Please send us the bibliographic reference and we'll check it.
By the way, your letter in the Guardian today suggested that "Israelis" have superior values to "Palestinians". Perhaps by Israelis you mean Israeli Arabs and by Palestinians you mean Palestinian Jews. My guess though is that you were saying that Jews are superior to Arabs. But that's not me dodging a question. Like I said, you haven't asked one. You've been asked one. And you haven't answered.
We are looking at two different cultures with entirely opposite views on the value of human life
How is this not asserting the superiority of [Israeli] Jews over Arabs? (Assuming that valuing human life is a good thing, something even Zionists usually pay lip service to.)
As for the answer you request the papers relating to the trial and the evidence regarding the child's tissue on the butt of Kuntar's rifle have now been released into the public domain.
I find it compelling but no doubt those of you who are apologists for terrorists will not want to accept it
The reference is as follows and I have copied and pasted the text
"After almost 30 years of being classified, File No. 578/79 has been granted permission for publication: the murderer's testimony, the shots in Danny Haran's back and the death blow to toddler Einat's head.
(Translated and reprinted with permission)
Evidence from the pathologist's report (Photo courtesy Doron Golan)
For almost 30 years the Samir Kuntar file has sat in the district courthouse archives in Haifa. Its contents were never authorized for publication. Until yesterday. Right before his expected release in two days' time, the court acceded to Yediot Aharonot's request and allowed Kuntar's testimony, copies of the copious evidence and other testimonies in the file, the indictment and the judges' verdict, to be perused."
Also compelling for me are Kuntar's own words where he says he has no regrets about what he did and can'
wait to return to his terror against Israel
Please don;t even try to believe me, as I know that would stick in the throat, but do heed his own words and tell me what answer you have to that evidence
As for differing values, you need to compare those who use children as human shields, who kidnap and kill soldiers and allow their families to hope for years without putting them out of their misery, who don't allow Red Cross access to prisoners of war, who murder children in cold blood, entering their homes, shooting children as their mother reads them a bedtime story or smashes their head against a rock with those prepared to release convicted terrorists back into society to bring terror again, who run bulldozers into buses and who place themselves in crowded restaurants, pizzerias and disco queues to kill the most women and children they can. You can judge for yourself.
Kuntar denies having killed a four year old but he says that he wants to return to armed struggle against Israel. That for you is an admission that he did kill a four year old. That seems to be what you're saying. That of course, is clearly ludicrous. A threat to struggle against Israel is not a threat to kill children. Israel kills plenty of children, it's threats tend not to receive that much publicity. There seems to be no correlation between the killing of children and the uttering or publicising of threats.
Now as regards the differences between Israelis and Palestinians, you are saying that they are equal but different. Is that right? You are not suggesting that Palestinians are inferior to Israelis. Is that so? It's just it looks like you are suggesting that 6 decades of ethnic cleansing and relentless aggression by Israel are justified by reference to the fact that Israel insists (and you say proves) that a Palestinian killed a child and Palestinians and Lebanese celebrated his release while Israel accepted the return of two corpses. Whatever point you were trying to make you need to make it a little more clearly because it looks like you were indeed saying that Israelis are superior to Palestinians. Perhaps you realise that since Israel has killed more children than any Palestinians have, your logic could lead to a very different conclusion. But I suspect you don't even take Israel's killing of children into account.
So go on Joy, stop playing games and tell us what point you were trying to make?
I am opting out of this thread as it is impossible to confront blind bias and hatred, or to have any reasoned debate.
I do not accept Kuntar's denial and my point was very simple. All he is saying is that he wants to return to terror and that is no way to move forward.
But no doubt it is a route Jews Sans Frontieres will find acceptable.
For me the evidence is unchallengable and there is no doubt that he committed the crime for which he was convicted
You asked me to provide the references and I did but clearly you are not interested in the truth and are not prepared to allow proven evidence to get in the way of your version.
I said explained all that I know of this Kuntar case by reference to Gabriel's post. Nothing for you to quibble over there but still you manage it.
You have dodged questions put to you and accused others of that when no questions were asked of them. You accuse us of hatred when we want desegregation and you want segregation based on "different" values that you haven't explained.
You claim to have provided a reference when asked, but you had to be asked twice and then you provided evidence that was already provided (with the same link) by Gabriel in his post.
Joy - your support for zionism means you can say anything you like and get published in the mainstream media without counter-argument. But come here and you'll be challenged, hence your opt out.
As for your ridiculous remark about support for Zionism meaning you can say anything you like and get published in the mainstream media, you must be living on another planet.
So now Jews Sans Frontieres is accusing the mainstream press of a pro Zionist bias. What a joke and how that illustrates just how out of touch you are.
Even on the day my short and edited letter appeared in the Guardian it was preceded by two anti Zionist ones.
If you were ever prepared to do your homework and work with facts rather tha your own fiction you woud know there are far more anti Israel letters in the mainstream press than supportive ones.But as I said before clearly you don't let truth get in the way of a story that suits your agenda
The idea that the mainstream media in the UK is pro-zionist is a joke?
Israel has a resident apologist in every national newspaper. Are there anti-zionist equivalents to them all? If so, please give links to their anti-zionist articles. Who is the resident anti-zionist to match Melanie Phillips and Richard Littlejohn at the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday? Who is the anti-zionist counterpart to Jonathan Freedland, Ian Black and Linda Grant at the Guardian? Who opposes Nick Cohen at the Observer? Which anti-zionists provide balance to David Aaronovitch and Danny Finkelstein at the Times? Who balances the ludicrous nonsense of the Israeli ambassador at the Telegraph? Who is the Kilroy-Silk for the Palestinians at the Express and the Star? And who do you think will replace the recently deceased Eric Silver at the Independent?
Regarding the letters that preceded yours in the Guardian a couple of days ago, only one could be construed as anti-zionist. You might be opposed to any criticism of Israel but not all criticism is anti-zionist. Also, the letters pages are there for people to either praise or criticise the articles and the articles, especially the commentary, are overwhelmingly pro-zionist, even those that criticise Israel. But it's usually only the Guardian and Independent that publish letters criticising Israel and they are usually responding to articles by their resident zionists. Letters can hardly be claimed to balance out articles in the main paper. I think you'll find that the Guardian has published two anti-zionist articles in the last 8 years and the Independent had published only one.
I don't see only what suits my worldview or "agenda". That's one major difference I find between zionists and anti-zionists. We see what we see then we make up our minds. You make up your mind then you claim to see what you claim to see. It's the evidence bit that you find a bit tricky. Indeed it's the evidence bit that you try to opt out of.
Anyway, thanks for pointing out that the Guardian edited your letter so badly that you can't even explain what it meant. You ought to talk to their ombudsman about that, especially as it led people to think that you were giving vent to the manifestly racist idea that Israelis are superior to Palestinians. It even had me thinking that you believed that Jews are superior to Arabs and that you can justify a system that guarantees the supremacy of Jews over Arabs.
You've definitely got a case against the Guardian there Joy. You might want to crack on with that just as soon as you've given me all those links to anti-zionist articles in the mainstream media in the UK.
Thanks.
Since then she has ducked and dived through the whole thing, accused people who haven't been asked anything of not answering things and after twice being asked for evidence gave evidence from a link in the post she was describing as "outrageous".
She's been asked at least twice to explain her letter to the Guardian and now she claims that thanks to editing by the "anti-zionist" Guardian it wasn't even her letter.
Gabriel asked if she had anything to SAY. I think he meant anything of significance. The answer was an emphatic "NO!"
Right, but how do we know you didn't erase her post? Your credibility is nil.
Wingless/VinceEsquire, go focus on your legal action. By my calculation you've got two days to make good on your threat. You know I didn't erase her post because her posts that dodged the question altogether are there to see, and her post that pretended to address the question by linking to something that Gabriel had already linked to is also there to see. But it's interesting that you think the comments by Joy Wolfe that you can actually see amount to no comments at all. Finally we agree wingless.
Thank you
These kapo 'Jews' (I believe they may be 'false flag' operators) are the scum of the scum. They try to deny Kuntar's crime, next they will be denying the Holocaust
May they all be spared the indignity of old age
How much better it would be to focus on positive cooperation projects than to think that the Palestinians are helped by anti Israel rhetoric.
"HAFLA 'Peace meal' for U.K. Muslims & Jews provides taste of Middle East harmony Kosher or Hallal... 'peace' meal for City workers." said the photo caption in the news report from England. COOKING FROM THE HEART happened in London this July month, wrote supportive relationship builder and participant, Gavin Langford The host was HAFLA - http://hafla.org - "a London-based organisation creating cultural events, celebrating a vision of peace and prosperity in the Middle East.
"We bring together Israelis and Palestinians, Muslims, Arabs and Jews and all people who are committed to creating peace in this part of the world."
HAFLA describes itself further:
Our Name: The word 'HAFLA' is common to both Arabic and Hebrew and means 'celebration' or 'party'. It has a particular connotation as being the third stage of a reconciliation process that comes after the stages of truce and forgivness. As a group HAFLA asks you to imagine such a celebration.
Our Vision: We have a vision of the Middle East where each of the many and extraordinary cultures present there acknowledge, love and respect each other, as much for the many obvious similarities as well as the differences. We therefore focus on creating events that provide a platform for artists from many disciplines to express their vision of life in this part of the world, and we ask our audiences to share in this cultural feast! Co-sponsors were: FERTILE GROUND
A growing network of prominent business, sports, education and arts people, organisations and community leaders drawn from across the cultural and religious spectrum who support Israeli-Palestinian initiatives.
http://iblf.org/regions/
middle_e...tile_ground.jsp
Maybe the Kuntar apologists in this posting would like to go online and see his threats of renewed terror activity since his release. I am sure we won't have to wait long before they become a reality.
Maybe you would also find it enlightening to have a look at Israel21C.net or I would be happy to post my Advice to Boycotters so you are aware of all the innovative things you would need to do without to boycott properly, starting with your mobile phones, voicemail and many of you lifesaving medications.
For your information I did not take my reference from this posting but from a relaible website.
As for Mark Elf's ridiculous comments about my Guardian letter, in no way I have I claimed it is not mine, nor do I complain about editorial right to cut and edit readers' letters.
Maybe he would like to try Robert Fisk and George Galloway for starters in the list of anti Israel columnists.
The idea that the mainstream media is pro Israel has to be the joke of the year.
As for the posts about me, it would be more effective if they did not concentrate on being personally insulting but I realise that is the nature of organisations such as JSM
I suppose I should be pleased I have succeeded in getting under your skin which seems to be why you keep coming back at me.
Maybe the Kuntar apologists in this posting would like to go online and see his threats of renewed terror activity since his release"
You've offered that as evidence that he killed a four year old. It isn't. If you have nothing more to offer on that, then stop digging.
Advice to Boycotters - this is just more of the Israeli chauvinism we are well used to here. Gabriel deals with it in his post on being a Joy to Israel. Sorry did I say "Joy to Israel"? I meant apologist for Israel. I doubt if Israel produces anything that can't be obtained elsewhere and Israel is heavily dependent on aid and favour from the west.
For your information I did not take my reference from this posting but from a relaible [sic] website."
You made out that Gabriel had avoided the evidence and that you were providing evidence. The link you gave to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs was the same as one provided by Gabriel in the post.
As for Mark Elf's ridiculous comments about my Guardian letter, in no way I have I claimed it is not mine, nor do I complain about editorial right to cut and edit readers' letters.
You have been asked several times to explain what looked like a racist letter and your only comment on it was to deny that you were suggesting that Israelis have superior values to Palestinians and to say it was edited. Go ahead and explain it and stop causing misunderstandings.
Maybe he would like to try Robert Fisk and George Galloway for starters in the list of anti Israel columnists.
As a match for Melanie Phillips, Richard Littlejohn, Jonathan Freedland, Ian Black, Linda Grant, Nick Cohen, David Aaronovitch, Danny Finkelstein, Ron Prosor and Kilroy-Silk? Ah well, as long as it's balanced. Your exhaustive list of "anti-Israel" columnists consists of two people who like those I named claim to want a two state solution. Also, you only have to look at the Israeli media to see how pro-Israel the UK media is. Both Ynet and Ha'aretz publish regular exposés and criticisms of Israel that no UK editor would allow to be published in the UK. They're not paragons of course but if you want facts on Israel and genuine criticism, the Israeli media is a far better starting point than any of the UK papers.
I suppose I should be pleased I have succeeded in getting under your skin which seems to be why you keep coming back at me.
Joy your capacity for projection knows no bounds. It's not me who keeps coming back. I have to check the comments to approve them or not. It's you that keeps coming back in spite this line by you "I am opting out of this thread as it is impossible to confront blind bias and hatred, or to have any reasoned debate".
And this from someone who has refused time and time again to explain a letter she had published in the Guardian. Not to mention someone who supports a segregationist state based on colonial settlement and ethnic cleansing.
Or was that just bad editing by me?
As for your blanket rejection of what Israel's R & D, medical and technological research has contributed to the world in 60 short years you really are letting your negative bias show. Most reasonable people would not agree with you even if they hate Israel as much as you do.
The piece from the Australian Times was equally not linked to the thread but I notice you didn't come back on that
How about adding Stephen Rose, Jacqueline Rose Richard Kuper Ilan Pappe Stephen Sizer, to the list.
As for listing the Israeli Ambassador, how ridiculous Is he supposed to do anything other than defend israel against all the verbal attack!!!If I was to post all the anti Israel articles from the UK press and the BBC it would swamp you
Are you suggesting Israel21c.net does not open try israel21c.com as an alternative then Both worked for me
Your letter needed explaining because you mentioned differences between Israelis and Palestinians with regard to the value of human life in a way that suggested the superiority of the former over the latter, especially as you support colonial settlement and ethnic cleansing.
I don't know what the Australian Times has to do with this.
Stephen Rose, Jacqueline Rose Richard Kuper Ilan Pappe Stephen Sizer are not reporters or commentators. They have had very occasional articles in some newspapers but not many. The people I named as being pro-Israel are regulars in the mainstream media and some are household names. I have demonstrated that the Israeli media is more critical of Israel than any UK media and you have gone to an academic directory and copied out some names. They're not journalists Joy. They're visitors.
You were right to opt out. This is painful to see, it's true, but mostly you're hurting yourself here.
I don't know what you're on about re Israel21c. Come Joy, stop digging now. You're going round in circles. You've ducked and dived your way through the whole thread. You've made unsubstantiated claims that people haven't given you answers and now you're saying that you are above giving answers to questions put to you. You also claim that you have been insulted. No one's insulted you here. I've been very patient with you.
Now, you say you don't have to answer questions. That's true you don't and you can't. But you have no right to make out that people here have left questions unanswered when they haven't been asked anything. That's insulting.
I think we've reached the end of the line now Joy. Take your own advice. Opt out.
Thanks
Did you check the nazi-zionist collaboration stuff? You should.
How dare you accuse me of supporting ethnic cleansing. The only ethnic cleasing I am aware of in the area is the expulsion of all Jews from their homes in Gaza and the Jewish refugees from Arab lands in 1948
And if you must have an answer like a spoilt child then yes I do believe there is a difference between the way some Palestinians and Arabs, not all, and Israelis value human life.
Israelis don't encourage young people with learning difficulties to offer themselves as suicide bombers. Nor do they walk into a home where a mother is reading two young children a bedtime story and shoot them or shoot helpless children and their mother in a cold blood at close range in in their car. You don't find Jewish Israeli mothers praising their sons for being suicide bombers and hoping their other sons will do the same
You don't find Israelis placing themselves in a disco queue of teenagers or next to baby buggies in a pizzeria or in a hotel room full of old people to kill the maximum number of defenceless people Nor do you find Israeli kindergarten teachers applauding tiny children for calling for the blood of their perceived enemies and wanting to be shahids.
Israeli cartoon characters don't demonise Palestinians and Israeli schoolbooks don't teach hate.
Furthermore you don't find Israelis using women and children as human shields or placing their rocket launchers and weapons stores and bomb factories in residential homes and hospitals - so yes I do stand by your interpretation of my letter.
I am sure your warped mind will find a way to explain or excuse all of this
As for your list of so called pro Israel columnists, I am sure Ian Black, Nick Cohen and even Jonathan Friedland would be amused to find themselves on it. And in case you hadn't noticed, the Israel Ambassador isn't a journalist or columnist either but you choose to include him
My suggestion that people might like to look at israel 21c was not for your benefit. It is of no use to closed minds. While there about it they might like to look at the ISRaid site to familiarise themseves with Israeli humanitarian aid around the world. Quite hard to deny that however hard you try, and you will.
Strangely enough this chain of postings does not cause me any pain - just makes me feel pity, and at times it makes me laught out loud. And while I appreciate the efforts of Scum terminator to protect me, let me assure you I am quite capable of looking after myself, even against unfair and unwarranted accusations.
I suppose in the terms of Mastermind, the problem is "I've started so I'll finish" - that is I would if you didn't keep coming back with false accusations
I guess I am giving you too much oxygen of argument since you don;t seem to inundated with supporters of Jews Sans Medecins
Actually until earlier this week I had never even heard of you which says a lot.
You say I can't answer questions - I suggest you look to yourself regarding that.
To suggest that Israel has done nothing that others could not do really highlights your bias.
It may well be true that others could do some of it but they don't. Hence Israel's unequalled record for innovation and technological,medical and artistic achievements
Have you ever looked at the list of Israeli Nobel Prizewinners - quite an eye opener.
Your attempt to answer this thread by trying to divert to Nazi links is pathetic
The bottom line is of course you have the last word by choosing whether or not to publish this post
Show me a link to an article by Nick Cohen that suggests he's not pro-Israel, or one by Jonathan Freedland that suggests the same about him. And the fact that the ambassador for Israel is given space in the Telegraph without counter argument does suggest (and Alex Brummer agrees) that the Telegraph is still as pro-Israel as ever. You complain that one name on a lengthy (but by no means exhaustive) list of zionist hacks isn't a journalist. You named two people who criticise Israel in a serious way and one of them is a politician.
No one has put words in your mouth and no one has levelled a false accusation at you. Again you are projecting your own wrong-doing to others. I haven't looked closely enough at your comments to confidently call you a liar until now and I don't like to call people liars except as a last resort. In this comment however, you show that you are aware of "Scum's" comments and that they are supporting you. Then you will also know that it was Scum who was so pathetic as to divert the thread by invoking the holocaust and kapos. I merely responded to him as you know.
That was a deliberate lie by you Joy. You're right, I do have a certain amount of control here and whilst, as Ernie pointed out, I have a high troll threshold, I don't have to tolerate lies about me.
Now then, you can come here with a link to a Jonathan Freedland or Nick Cohen article that shows they are not pro-Israel or you can simply stay away. I blog about zionism so I have to tolerate lies from Israel's defenders but that's lies about Israel and the Palestinians. Lying about what I have said and in a thread that people can see for themselves shows that you are not just dishonest but that you have no shame about it. Some might find your selflessness for Jewish supremacy impressive. I find it, erm, pathetic. But go get those links and in spite of your being a liar, I'll let them through.
Joy told you there was forensic evidence that Kuntar
killed the child.
Yet still you want to twist the truth. You twist and twist about which journalists are or are not pro-Israel, as if you even knew. But you obfuscate around Kuntar's guilt.
You are nothing more than a free-riding traiterous verminous truth-bending piece of detritus. You do not deserve to be Jewish.
It's all very straight forward.
And anyway, she told you she didn't need you and she even accidentally accused you of being, I think the word was, "pathetic". Apparently invoking the nazis in the thread (diverting she said) is pathetically off topic. Ok she falsely accused me of doing that. But it was you wot dunnit.
Oh, I see you've already done another comment in another thread. I won't be long. And nor will you.
Edited By Siteowner
I have deleted your comment in full having skimmed it for the links I asked for. I have marked it "edited by siteowner" to show what actually happened. Now it could be that the links were there and I missed them. If so, give the links - two will do - in one comment so that I can check them. Then I might let you comment again. But keep the false accusations to yourself.
Thanks
Commenting by HaloScan
