BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Switchboard >

PALESTINE - IS IT JUST ME?

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
GreenMann
14:27 / 14.08.02
Is it just me, or do other peoples' stomachs also turn as the wiping out of Palestinian society continues?

Is it just me, or does our "free press" really censor the fact that at least 5 times as many innocent Palestinian civilians have been murdered in the last 2 years, compared to Israelis, without media comment?

Is it just me, or over the last 50 years have hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families really being evicted, their centuries-old olive trees uprooted, their homes demolised causing them to flee for their lives from the racist colonies then planted on their razed land?

Is it just me, or have the Israeli colonists really re-diverted water (remember, we're talking desert here) from Palestinian towns to Israeli colonies?

Is it just me, or has the media totally censored WHY there are Palestinian refugees and refugee camps in the first place?

Is it just me, or has Palestine been gradually colonised by a foreign people, armed to the teeth by the US, during the last 50 years on the basis of a biblical stories?

Is it just me, or does the US really subsidise Israel to the tune of $8b per year?

Is it just me, or is there REALLY a slow, silent genocide happening as I write?
 
 
Jack Fear
14:29 / 14.08.02
Have a poke around the Switchboard section of the site for many, many threads on various aspects of this topic.
 
 
SMS
21:44 / 14.08.02
I don't think it's possible to have an opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that many, many others do not share. Maybe if you believed that the people of Israel and Palestine were actually just chums taking the piss out of the rest of the world as some kind of sick, perverted joke, then it would be "just you."
 
 
Bad Horse
21:48 / 14.08.02
I don't think either are real, it's all done in a studio just like the moon landings. What I need to know is what are we not supposed to be looking at?
 
 
Seth
22:30 / 14.08.02
This thread really reminds me of that Day Today anti-speeding sketch:

"Is this cool?"

"Look at me! Am I cool?"
 
 
Lilith Myth
23:12 / 14.08.02
My stomach churns at the inequality of information the UK press give about Israel.

Not all Palestinians are innocent; many of the Palestinians who died are choosing to murder Israelis, and citizens of other nations, as they go about their daily business. My friend Mark was about to be best man at Marla's wedding. She was killed in a suicide bomb attack at the Hebrew University two weeks ago. So was Ben. This was not, too my knowledge, reported in detail in the European press.

My great-grandfather was evicted from the land he legitimately bought off Palestinian Arabs in 1929. Centuries old olive-trees and orange-groves were torn up. My family still don't have their land back.

Where's the media coverage of the surrounding Arab nations' loaded inaction and vested interest in the Palestinians remaining in refugee camps?

Where's the press coverage of the PA being funded by the EU?

Genocide is a very emotive word. So's your language.
 
 
Turk
02:20 / 15.08.02
Blah blah blah, Pilger.
 
 
Stone Mirror
02:38 / 15.08.02
Is it just me, or do other people's stomachs turn at a fewer-than-two-dimensional portrayal of an exceedingly complex situation?

Thanks, Lilith, for providing a modicum of balance.

If you want to get good and upset about a culture being wiped out, take a long look at the Tibetans. While you still can.
 
 
Lurid Archive
02:47 / 15.08.02
Lilith. I think that a reasonable person should condemn the killing on both sides. However, I admit that my urges are strongly, if not entirely, pacifistic.

So yes, I condemn Palestinian suicide bombers. Its not only wrong, it is also counter productive to their cause. I'm willing to talk about the reasons behind it as a means of understanding their plight, but not as an excuse.

And yes, some of the Palestinian dead are terrorists. That doesn't mean they deserve to die, however, as I condemn the killing on both sides. The "collatoral" deaths of Palestinian children should be enough to convince anyone that their posture is too aggressive.

So, cards on the table, my sympathies have to be with the Palestinians overall for the many, many reasons that so often come up. There are injustices on both sides, naturally, but Israel holds almost all the cards in this bloody game.

BTW, the EU funding of the PA is no secret. For instance, I recall it being mentioned widely in the last Israel action that destroyed so much Palestinian infrastructure. After all, it is an economic concern if nothing else. I don't think it is military aid, however.
 
 
Lilith Myth
06:14 / 15.08.02
My views probably aren't pacifist, though I acknowledge that this is a deeply complex, disturbing situation, with people on both "sides" killing uneccesarily.

I didn't moderate what I was saying because GreenMann didn't moderate what he was saying. I am very happy to debate this issue, but it's clearly personal to me. I struggle when I come across language that betrays no interest in a real debate or conversation.

Finding Barbelith feels a little like coming home, to me. And then I feel that I have to "defend" Israel because I see threads with only one perspective represented. I'm not a one-trick pony, I just want a fair debate.

OK, I'll stop now.
 
 
w1rebaby
10:41 / 15.08.02
What annoys me most is when people on both sides of the argument start counting up deaths against each other. "X Israelis killed last week in bombings!" "Ah, but there were Y Palestinians killed!" <sneer>Like it's some sort of competition, like maybe if you could balance the two figures it would be fair, and everyone's on one of two sides.</sneer>

All the deaths come under the same count.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
10:55 / 15.08.02
I'm kinda with Lurid on this one.
The killing of innocents is always wrong. I'm not a pacifist, though. I just think violence should be avoided whenever possible.
However, both sides are now so entrenched in the self-defence thing that... it may never end.

My sympathies, however, lie largely with the Palestinians. I don't deny that Israel has a right to exist, and I don't deny that Arafat's sold his people out so many times it's just not funny. Sharon, on the other hand... wasn't this a man who lost his position as (I think) defence minister for presiding over a massacre?

But, Lilith, I am more than willing to hear the "other side"... as is currently being debated in the Switchboard, it's easy to hold an opinion when you're not actually there. And I lack a lot of the facts. Mea culpa. And I think it's great that someone is hitting me/us in the face with the opposing argument. Otherwise it's just a bunch of Western liberals wringing our hands.

And if we can't disagree reasonably on a bulletin board, then what hope for those on both sides who are willing to kill? (Reason number 7,498 why I love this place.)

Peace is the goal. For everyone. There ain't no easy answers.
 
 
sleazenation
11:00 / 15.08.02
It kind of reminds me of a joke i think from the Arrggh its the Mr Hell Show -

it was a histroy of ethnic violence with two old men discussing the origins of their conflict
old man one: well your village burned our village in 1524
oldman two: well your village burned our village in 1523
old man one: well your village burned our village in 1522
oldman two: well your village burned our village in 1521
and on and on.

it made me laugh because it really wasn't very funny.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
11:03 / 15.08.02
btw... someone (mods?) wanna move this to the Switchboard? I think it'd work better there.
 
 
Lurid Archive
13:22 / 15.08.02
And I think it's great that someone is hitting me/us in the face with the opposing argument. Otherwise it's just a bunch of Western liberals wringing our hands. - Chairman Maominstoat


Perhaps this is asking too much of someone like Lilith or any pro Israeli on the board. After all, the general mood is much more sympathetic to the Palestinians, as far as I can tell, and numbers do make a difference. Maybe that is why we get comparatively little discussion about the Middle East?

(Still waiting for the thesis, Flyboy.)
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:44 / 15.08.02
Well, the general mood seems to be that there are a few outspoken posters either vaguely or strongly sympathetic to the Palestinian people, but I think it's quite telling that (in my admittedly lazy and overlong absence in delivering a promised reply) no-one's actually bothered to pick holes intelligently in LM's post over in the 'Cherie Blair' thread. Mind you, not many people did the same to Lurid's post or autopilot's here. Or Frances Farmer's here.

If I was being cyncial, I'd say a lot of people just want to say "violence is bad, peace is good, people shouldn't kill each other because they 'worship different versions of the same God'". The general unwillingness of anyone to educate themselves about the situation (and I count myself in this, I find it a complete struggle) can also be very discouraging for those people who know a lot about what's happened through direct involvement or otherwise.

I also think it's important not to confuse "general opinion of regular Barbelith posters" with "general European opinion". And I'd be amazed to know which European papers Lilith Myth has been reading to have missed the vast amount of coverage of the University bombing, complete with the usual emotive talk of "tragedy" notably missing when Palestinian "casualties" are discussed.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:47 / 15.08.02
Sorry - link to Lurid's thread from a while ago here
 
 
w1rebaby
15:09 / 15.08.02
While I obviously have my opinions on the matter I will not discuss them, something I decided a while back in other surroundings. The basic reason is that, while there are people out there who will actually discuss things rationally, provide interesting sources etc, there are always people who will rabidly attack, not listen to a word anyone says, deliberately avoid seeing anyone else's argument, post enormous lists of biased "facts" they have cut and pasted, and do the above repeatedly and to such an extent that it wrecks the thread.

I've got no interest in going there again and so I will be avoiding the subject, except possibly if it is tangentially approached (e.g. an examination of the politics and behaviour of surrounding states might be interesting, though that would probably degenerate too). I would actually love to discuss things reasonably but it always goes down the pan.

I usually apply the same logic to threads concerning abortion or gun control, except there seems to be either enough consensus or enough restraint on Barbelith that these are not such bad subjects. But Israel/Palestine is thread poison.
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:26 / 15.08.02
I very much agree with fridge, that this is the usual pattern. This is why one tends not to become more educated about the situation by discussing it on boards. But... Are we really unable to discuss such an important issue intelligently? As fridge says, there is a civilised atmosphere on Barbelith. Isn't that sufficient?
 
 
w1rebaby
15:44 / 15.08.02
It would be nice to think so. But there seems to be something there that turns normally intelligent, open-minded people rabid, with Godwin's Law coming into play at about the third post.

Might be interesting to discuss what the factor is that inspires this...
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:52 / 15.08.02
It would be interesting, yes. But its a shame if people like you, fridge, don't feel comfortable in contributing to a Middle East discussion. I wonder how many people here feel the same way.
 
 
luminocity
16:00 / 15.08.02
Off topic, but ever since Godwin's law was brought up again a few weeks ago I've had the feeling that there should be a meta-GL to prevent it from being mentioned except when actually in play. Shit I should listen to myself maybe.
yes I am that rabid a lurker.
 
 
GreenMann
16:03 / 15.08.02
The problem is highlighted by Lilith's 'accusation' that the EU funds the Palestinian Authority (PA). Of course we in Europe want to help the PA! That's because the PA is a democratically elected body and we believe in democracy.

I think half the problem is that people simply don't know what's going on in Palestine behind the Israeli army's house arrest of practically every Palestinian family, and behind massive pro-Israel media censorship by multinational media organisations that dominate the world's news.

The history of the Israeli colonisation of Palestine since 1948 is hardly ever reported in our free press. The Jewish community in Palestine before 1948 was a tiny minority, similar to the Jewish community in many other countries. The fact is that in 1948, on a wave of pro-Jewish sympathy throughout the world, the UN gave Jewish refugees from post-Nazi Europe large patches of someone else's country (i.e. Palestine).

I know i'm going to get lynched here because if anyone criticises the Israel in any way they are accused of being "anti-semetic", even if they are Arab, so any objective discussion of the conflict is practically impossible! I hate rules so i'm going to break that one. In 1948, the Israelis then drove out (the Israelis say they left their homes and land "voluntarily") much of the Palestinian population into surrounding countries (i.e. Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt etc) where the UN put them "temporarily" in refugee camps. In 1967, Arab countries tried to invade Israel, but were driven back by the US-funded and equiped Israeli army who also took advantage of the war and invaded the REST of Palestine.

This is the colonisation of a land by another people. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have had to flee their land or have been tortured (legal under the Israeli criminal justice system!)and murdered by the Israeli army. Those Palestinians who remain live in nothing less than hell, under a brutal collective punishment imposed by our close friend Butcher Sharon. Palestinian kids with stones are regularly shot at by Israeli soldiers using the very latest US military arms, helecopter gunships frequently launch 1000 pound missiles at residential blocks, like at Jenin or recently in Gaza.

Despite the horrific experienced of the Jewish people under the nazis they seemed to have learned nothing and are behaving like nazis themselves in their treatment of the Palestinian population. It is as if a person (Israel) had been abused and then later transferred that abuse onto another person (Palestine) in a vicious cycle of hatred and violence.

But our media ignore all this preferring to constantly focus on the suicide bombs, without any explanation about WHY these people rather commit suicide than live under Israeli rule and murder innocent Israeli men, women and children in the process. Mabey we'll get both sides of the story in a couple of hundred years time when it doesn't matter, like with the Native Americans.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
16:05 / 15.08.02
As an addendum to Fridge's concise explication of why many people feel uncomfortable contributing to threads about the Middle East, as an American, right or wrongly, i feel the Europeans don't take my opinion as seriously as they do those of other Europeans as (1) I live in the State complicit of the ongoing "genocide" (2) The U.S. media is seen as incredibly biased towards Israel, which leads Europeans to infer that Americans are arguing from a less than complete picture of the situation.
 
 
Lurid Archive
16:47 / 15.08.02
Greenman. Although I do sympathise with what you are saying, I think we should also try to be as civilised as possible in order that a useful discussion can take place. Pre-empting accusations of anti semitism and comparing Israelis to Nazis is ultimately counter productive. It is also rather depressing, given the posts that went immediately before.
 
 
w1rebaby
16:58 / 15.08.02
I think you're probably right, t.o.d.d., though that might be part of an overall patronising attitude towards American political opinion on the part of Europeans (either you're a brainwashed ignorant redneck, or you're one of the rare breed to get things right and agree).

I have to say that one of the best things I ever saw about Israel/Palestine on TV was, oddly, on CNN in the States. Mid-morning, admittedly, but it was a long debate between a UN spokesman and Henry Kissinger. Once I'd got over the shock of seeing the man on TV without anyone trying to arrest him, it was a fascinating piece. It was actually real debate, no interruptions, not just a constant restating of standard positions. Kissinger came out worse but that was down to the paucity of his arguments, not bias.

Regarding the media presentation of the arguments, I wonder whether that doesn't influence how people discuss it in private. The official spokesmen for both sides seem to be very given to aggressive statements, which you either sympathise with or don't based on your outside perception of the issues, rather than what they have to say which is usually the same as last time. I've heard more than one pro-Zionist Israeli say that Israeli government spokesmen really don't do themselves any favours.
 
 
w1rebaby
17:02 / 15.08.02
re: godwin, it's one of the peculiarities of this debate that people on both sides feel justified in making Nazi accusations... so twice as likely it will come up... normally, there is a defined "state/authoritarian" side which will be the one accused of Nazism
 
 
Jack Fear
17:30 / 15.08.02
...the PA is a democratically elected body and we believe in democracy.

Last I checked, the Israeli government was also a democratically elected body.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:15 / 16.08.02
And, er, the PA really kinda isn't. The fucked-up thing is that if you believe Bush & Sharon, the thing that really compromises Arafat's authority is his association with and inability/alleged unwillingness to control "terrorists". Whereas if you believe certain commentators on the region (eg Chomsky, Said - who don't necessarily disagree with the above per se, just the moral validity of people like Bush & Sharon making such an accusation) the thing that really compromises him and the way in which he and the PA are most guilty of failing the Palestinians, and not acting in accordance with either the majority's wishes or interests, is in being so desperate to hold on to his/their limited share of power in the region that he/they make too many concessions to the Israeli government, goes along with the myth of the "peace process" and generally allows the terms of the debate to be defined by the American/Israeli power-brokers.

On another note: I think it's extremely important, Greenman, to realise that it's not "the Israeli people" or even "the Israelis" who are the problem here. Any more than the war on terrorism is the fault of "the American people" or "Americans" (and I actually agree with pretty much all of what t.o.d.d. says in another thread about that, but I'll deal with that there). Ascribing the actions of a government and military to the wishes of the general populus is not only the kind of fucked-upn generalisation that leads to the justification of civilian killings on both sides, it also subscribes to the current widespread doctrine of the nation state as unified actor that conceals the actual power structures and thus the motivations behind the actions of those who claim to speak for their nation.

By a similar token, nor do "Europeans" universally support Palestinian self-determination or sympathise with their plight - something both GM and Lilith Myth should take into account - and let's not forget that if you're looking to assign blame to a national government for the Israel/Palestine situation, the British were arguably more culpable than anyone (and the Ottoman Empire before them).
 
 
Lilith Myth
07:17 / 16.08.02
How can you begin to resolve a conflict without recognising the rights of both sides? Greenman's post seems to be a one sided pastiche of the Israeli postion (and a one-sided whitewashing of the Palestinian one).

There has been continuous Jewish settlement in Israel for over 3,000 years. Every day, three times a day, Jews have turned towards Jerusalem and prayed for a return to the land. To deny the historical connection of the Jewish People to the land of Israel while asserting the Palestinians's claims is totally one-sided. This approach is reflected continually in the Palestinian position, for example, in Yasser Arafat's refusal to acknowledge at the Camp David Summit that a Jewish Temple ever stood in Jerusalem. How can we hope to have successful negotiatiations if myths are promulagated and there is a failure to recognise the fundamental beliefs and concerns of both sides?

It is interesting to see how Israel has changed in its view towards the Palestinians. The overwhelming majority, even today, want to achieve a peace settlement. Around 70% of the population in a recent poll said that they would trade land for a genuine peace.

Oslo was built on the commitment by the Palestinians to negotiate without resort to violence. They have failed to do this time and time again. The Al-Aqhsa Intifada of suicide bombers has killed over 600 Israelis, three-quarters of whom are civilians. The Palestinian Charter still calls for the destruction of Israel even though as part of Oslo it was agreed that it would be amended.

Trust is at all time low. The solution is not to characterise the other side but to understand it. Israel has genuinely moved and wanted to make peace at Oslo, Wye, Camp David. It has accepted the terms of every peace proposal presented - Wye, Tenet, Mitchel and even the Saudi plan . But at the moment the Palestinians are playing for the whole pot or nothing at all. By denying Israel's entire legitimacy, as Greenman's position does, we fuel mistrust and scupper efforts to reach a solution.

Finally, the charcterisation of Israelis as Nazis is a particularly vicious slur. It aims to suggest that Israelis / Jews are no better than those who singled them for mass slaughter in the worst crime against humanity of the 20th century. 'Nazi' is a term that is perhaps far too frequently bandied around but to use it against Israel is deeply insensitive. How do you expect Israelis to trust those who assert that they are genocidal war criminals and fail to understand that they believe that they are unwilling particpants in a struggle which the other side is not prepared to end?
 
 
GreenMann
08:32 / 16.08.02
Within the context of my argument, '68 Comeback Special Flyboy, I have not once suggested that it is "the Israeli people" who are the problem here. I referred to "the Israelis" within the context of the Israeli government and the Israeli army (IDF).

There are many brave Israelis who are against the slow genocide of Palestinian society, such as the many IDF conscripts who refuse to murder innocent Palestinian civilians, and non-violent direct-action peace groups such as Gush Shalom but ... again ... we know little about these individuals and organisations due to media censorship.

The problem is not the Israeli people but the racist government of war criminal Sharon.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:25 / 16.08.02
Although I said earlier (and stand by) "my sympathy is with the Palestinians"... (and to agree with Flyboy here, to say "Sharon" is not to say "The Israelis", and to say "Arafat" is not to say "The Palestinians")...

With or without the suicide bombings, Arafat's not done his people too many favours. And I hold little more respect for him than I do for Sharon. (I think he probably- like most politicians- meant well to start with. But has become entrenched. And it's the entrenched-ness - if there is such a word- of both sides that means, like Northern Ireland- though I admit that was on a much smaller scale- peace seems impossible. But I amend my earlier comment- I think it IS possible. Just not easy.)
 
 
sleazenation
11:05 / 16.08.02
Greenman

a word of warning - lack of coverage is not always the same as censorship. For example, while there is limited coverage of israllis who are against the the policies of Sharon and people like him compared to the masses written about the hard liners - the coverage still exists - likewise coverage of the organizations you mention plus coverage of peace demos such as this one are available all over the net.

Also, I'm not an expert on israeli government but from my understsanding (and please correcrt me if i am wrong) is that to accuse the Israli government of blanket rascism fundementally misses one of the most important problems of Israeli politics. Unlike the UK - The israeli government is not elected on a first past the post system- thus not only is the government almost always assembled out of coalitions from all sides of the political spectrum, but also the prime minister is often not (as is the case with Ariel Sharon) not the a member of the party with the most members in the knesset.

Therefore it is as ridiculous to say Sharon's government is racist as it is to say all politicians are racist.
 
 
GreenMann
11:54 / 16.08.02
I base my assertion that the current Israeli government is racist on the following grounds.

It is well documented by the UN, the EU, Israeli, Palestinian and international NGOs that the Israeli government specifically evicts Palestinians from their homes (using a catalogue of excuses), demolishes their homes, requisitions their land, expells them from their country and, through other acts of state terrorism, ethnically cleanses the neighbourhood of Muslims, Christians and other ethnic groups in preperation for colonisation (or "settlement") by Jewish people. The Israeli colonies are 100% Jewish, mostly new immigrants.

The Israeli government learned a great deal from its close friendship with racist South Africa during the Apartheid years. However, while the South African government took the best land and gave the wasteland to blacks with token independence, the current Israeli government wants the same "Bantusation" of what remains of Palestine, but without independence.

The Sharon government refuses point-blank the right to return of the Palestinian diaspora while, at the same time, allowing and encouraging the right to "return" of Jewish people who have never even visited Israel, whose ancestors have never lived there either. The collective punishment of Palestinian refugees by the IDF after suicide attacks, including the use of Palestinian kids as human shields, is nothing less than racist and well-documented. Israeli human rights groups have a mountain of evidence to show that Israeli Arabs are regularly targetted by refenge-seeking Israeli-mobs (after suicide and other terrorist attacks), discriminated against in employment, social services, hospitals etc., harassed and treated as second-class citizens, with the occasionally pogrom.

Israel Racist? Ridiculous!
 
 
Lurid Archive
11:59 / 16.08.02
But Chomsky and Herman would probably argue that a systematic, politically driven focus, if displayed by large sections of the media, can amount to something quite close to censorship. And this can arise out of structural considerations rather than some grubby blokes excising the news they don't like.

Not that I'm saying that any particular accusation of censorship is justified - you have to make a case for it - nor is censorship really an accurate description most of the time, more a convenient shorthand. But there is scope for a discussion of what drives the media and if there is a politically distorting slant that one can detect.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply