Welcome to those who arrived from this Belgian portal. Please leave me a message or email me to let me know what you think of my weblog.
I haven't been writing as much as I used to, so you might want to look at some archive postings.
1 hour ago
F--- intellectuals. In the last 2 years, in my travels to Europe, there's a heavy and unpleasant atmosphere of hostility to you [Israelis], which in my eyes amounts to antisemitism in sophisticated language. I don't understand why every runny-nose sees an obligation to blame Israel for all the world's ills - after he finishes blaming America. Regarding my country I understand the controversy... But Israel? its actual existence? after the Holocaust and everything? How can they be so arrogant?
72 percent of the Palestinians would be willing to renounce violence if Israel would be willing to agree to the creation of a Palestinian state on terms acceptable to the Palestinians.
1. Palestinian leadership will not consent to any agreement that stipulates that most descendents of 1948 Palestinian refugees will be permanently settled outside of pre-1967 Israel, even with humanitarian monetary compensation (notwithstanding the imaginations of people like Yossi Beilin).
2. Palestinian leadership will not take action against terrorists who kill Israelis unless their own vital interests are at risk.
Moratinos added the EU "has reached the conclusion that there can't be any dialogue between the sides while terror and suicide attacks are taking place in Israel."My gosh how sensible.. Is that now the EU's policy? Funny thing is that Amram Mitzna - the first Labour leader to advocate negotiations "under fire" and unilateral partial cave-in to Palestinian demands (ie. without a peace agreement or "end to the conflict") - is soon to be warmly fete-d in the UK at the invitation of Tony Blair (report)
Hamas faces a clear choice between the Turkish model, of democratic Islam, and the Al-Qaida model. If it chooses the second model, the EU will cut its ties, drop out support and end our aid to it.""end our aid" ? To Hamas ?!? Doesn't Moratinos realize that Hamas "chose the second model" by 1994 or earlier.
Do you all know why Bush isn't more agressive toward the Saudis? Because of the JEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If anybody thinks I'm kidding, here's the link that clarifies it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,849670,00.html
According to Simon Tisdall in today's Guardian:
"Another priority is Israel. Without US protection, military aid and financial backing, Israel's very existence would be in continuing doubt. As it is, with the rulers of Saudi Arabia (and Egypt and Jordan) on America's diplomatic team, the enmity of rejectionist Arabs and hardliners in Iran can be kept at bay and the illusion of a peace process maintained.
This also means that Israel's current government, led by Bush friend and ally Ariel Sharon, can continue its repression of the Palestinians almost with impunity. This is why Bush listened politely to Abdullah's peace plan in Texas (and then held out the prospect of a Palestinian state one distant day). The US needs to keep the Saudis sweet if a lid is to be kept on the intifada, and if Jewish interests, in Israel and the US, are to be maintained. "
Nice, isn't it? According to this idiot the US protects the philosemitic antifundamentalist house of Saud in order not to endanger Israel and (he says it withour blushing) not even Israeli bu JEWISH INTERESTS!!!!!!!!!
Thus, if the Jews weren't directly responsible for the spilling of American blood, they surely are obstructing the punishment of the guilty. But there's no antisemitism here, of course.
Netanyahu will bring back security. He already did in his gov'f of 1996-1999. 4 suicide attacks in 3 yearsNot that I support Bibi or accept this claim of his.
Avri: The Amnesty report, I must say, didn't make my morning. Even if I ignor all the regular Amnesty flaws ... like, say: removal from context, and uh, "removal from context" we said already, what else?
Uri: Lies, slander ...
Avri: "Lies, one-sided testimony from the Palestinians only, falsified ?, and a worldview that ... again it's "removal from context", but not looking at ...
Uri: ... Accusations of crimes that they didn't do there ... but beneath the banner of a human rights organization with all the prestige of Amnesty and all of the usual ?? like Zahava Gal-on and Peace Now are already calling not to appoint Mofaz to Defense Minister... Beautiful, hitch a ride - this time on the backs of the IDF and on the back of Mofaz - because the sacred Amnesty put out a report...
Avri: "Amnesty's not sacred, but what you're doing now is exactly the same automatic ritual the leftists do, as you are noting.....you're doing the mirror-image ... because dismissing the report is also ..... As soon as you say "there were no crimes" you give a stamp of approval of the crimes that were in fact.. and it's clear that there were crimes ... here's an example from today - small, not connected, but nonetheless: the charavot from the Mukata ... The commander who judged the soldiers for a charge of looting - he himself divided loot from Mukata to his officers ...
Uri: What are you talking about? You're not making distinctions among crimes ....
Avri: Looting is a war crime ... looting is a serious war crime ... not just a war crime but a serious one ...
Uri: There exist [categories of] misdemeanours, felonies, crimes, war crimes ... I don't think Amnesty is talking about that type of thing [ie. looting from Mukata]... When Amnesty talks about "war crimes" they have other things in mind ..
Avri: They're talking about stories where despite my desire to say "No it can't be.... Our IDF is always ethical... Your testimonies are all false", when I hear about parents who are sitting with a seriously ill child, for example over several days, and in the interim there are negotiations between the Red Cross and the IDF about admitting an ambulance and the IDF doesn't admit the ambulance and the child dies.... then I can say "OK, it's their fault, they brought it on themselves..." on the other hand I say: maybe, among all the other actions that were appropriate, or were unintentional, or in the middle of warfare they brought it on themselves, it's plausible that under that umbrella, problematic people concealed actions that constituted war crimes... And you can't just put it all in a package and say nothing at all happened - you have to investigate each case....
Uri: If Amnesty were to say ".....in the course of IDF operation in Jenin, there also occurred problematic incidents, also crimes, and even on certain occasions actions that enter the definition of 'war crimes' " - then maybe ... But they don't say it that way... they stamp the entire operation in Jenin, and the IDF, and you, and me as war criminals...
Avri: What I say is that when Amnesty comes with their good intentions to correct etc. they do bad. ...As soon as they put us all in the same package and say we're all war criminals, and [describe] the IDF as the biggest ??? ever, they do the reverse, because immediately the opposition .... exactly like Peres yesterday defended Sharon on the BBC, as if he was speaking about some guy from the Mapai... it won't work if they do it that way...
Uri: The other side works that way ... you think that Amnesty is organization of righteous people for whom all that interests them is only human rights, but you have to understand that within these organizations, there's a "recurring spirit", there's people from the European "progressive left" as it's called ....
Avri: .. and there are many good people, for whom human rights is the candle by their feet and the pillow by their heads, morning and evening ... there's both types....
Uri: But when they release a caustic report like this one on what happened in Jenin - for which we have more or less testimony [of our own] ... There are other human rights organizations - that I don't fall to the ground and worship the dust of their feet - that say different things.. so it's possible to be skeptical also if it's Amnesty and not just say "Wow how guilty we are and how much bad are we doing to them". I remind you that 13 soldiers died in Jenin - and several more a few days earlier - just because we didn't do what we maybe needed to do: to say "if you don't come out, then we start shelling" .... and there were armed people there and our soldiers went in and ...
Avri: You're using a single "merit" - if you can call it that of course - in order to say "all of the sins never were". And that's not the situation... You have to look at the details of the situation and not general statements like that. True that in one circumstance we sacrificed 13 soldiers ... it's plausible that in a different circumstance different things happened. I'm just saying that in each instance it's necessary to investigate ..
Uri: Why does this get me so upset? Because I hear these responses - not just from some pro-Palestinian spokesman from the Arab League or something..... I'm talking about MKs [from] Zionist [parties] like Zahava Gal-On, like Peace Now: Important institutions which I value according to their worth - that's the way to say what I think of them ... . how they jump immediately ..automatically... Don't appoint him Defense Minister .. ....
To: Reporters Without Frontiers
Just 1 or 2 questions: is it possible that some countries are nice to journalists (and receive a high score) because they are generally getting good press?
And that these same countries would be much more repressive if they were getting bad press, or in the middle of a war?
Or that these same countries leave media intimidation to freelance groups (eg. Lebanon and Hezbollah)?
From: RSF - Afrique [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wed, October 23, 2002 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: World Press Freedom Survey
I dont think countries like Benin or Senegal (more than 1000 people recently died in a ferry accident and a war is dividing the country for more than ten years) are getting a good press. And there is a real press freedom there. They have a good rank in our index.
On the other hand, when there is a war in a country of course journalists are often victims of it.
Groups of masked Jewish settlers have charged into the village, coming at night with dogs and horses, stealing sheep, hurling stones through windows and beating the men with fists and rifle butts, Palestinian residents said.The Itamar settlement has a web page.
But settlers have also made violent forays into Khirbat Yanun itself, coming with increasing frequency over the past year, especially on the Jewish sabbath and holidays, villagers said. The settlers would threaten residents at gunpoint, hurl stones from rooftops, smash windows and vandalize property, according to the villagers. They described huddling in their homes with frightened children as settlers pounded on doors.
To understand this better, consider two competing views found on both sides of the conflict - the constructionist and the destructionist. In simple terms, the constructionists believe in a two-state solution and the destructionists do not.
Israeli and Palestinian constructionists have similar outlooks. They say the best way to foster peace, security and prosperity for both sides is through the creation of a democratic Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This state would work for the benefit of its people, and in the process control and stop violence against Israel. In this scenario, both sides win.
Israeli and Palestinian destructionists both seek total control of the land at the expense of their adversaries, and are in a kind of unholy embrace that is fueling today's downward spiral. For them, only one state can emerge west of the Jordan River: Israel or Palestine. It is a zero-sum game.
The fourth trend is perhaps the most significant of all: Israel's continued expansion of West Bank settlements, and the land confiscation that goes with it. Even as the world repeatedly calls for a freeze to all such activity, it continues apace. The settlements, and the highways that serve them, could soon envelop East Jerusalem, cutting it off from the rest of the West Bank, which would then also be split in half. Other settlement projects will bisect the northern West Bank and encircle Bethlehem and Hebron to the south.
But the Prime Minister added, from "day one," he made it clear that the Litani River hardly satisfies the demands of the region and the Wazzani waters are needed for vital projects. Mr. Hariri said while Lebanon entrusted the United Nations with the issue, the country has also been in contact with the United States, the European Union, and the international community, to counter Israeli claims.
"It's worth pointing out that, contrary to what the Nobel Peace Committee announced about Carter's pacifism, he launched a military attack against Iran on the pretext of liberating the U.S. hostages," the paper said.
1) It's the details, rather than the basic fact of the IDF's presence in the PA areas that are problematic. Better training and administration is what's needed, not immediate withdrawal or other moves that constitute concessions to the PA.
2) There should be an example from somewhere in the world where a military force did a better job of maintaining order among a hostile population.
Who have most justice on their side?
a) The Israeli people and their leaders.
b) The Palestinian people and their leaders
c) Don't know..
MIDDLE EAST (Cnn) -- In the "profughi slaughter" to the field of Jenin they have been killed more than 500 Palestinian. Saeb Erekat, the head of the Palestinian negotiators has asserted, in a declaration to Cnn(from CNN Italy - Translation by Google)
Look, Bill, I told you yesterday, if the number of Palestinians who were killed in that refugee camp is as small as they say, I'm willing to come to Jenin and say we made a mistake. But when Sharon tonight says it's not dozens, but it's not 500, what is it, 400, 300? What is it? And the point is about the civilians. Where are the civilians in this refugee camp? Is there a refugee camp left?
You know, I have a list of 1,600 Palestinians now from this refugee camp who called me. People are missing their mothers, their fathers, their daughters, their husbands, their wives, their little children, families that were fragmented, families that haven't seen anything other than the atrocities and war crimes in this refugee camp. And I stand that there were crimes committed in this refugee camp. This was a flagrant violation of the international law. And I stand by the term massacres were committed in the refugee camps. And I know for sure that witnesses told me that they dug various graveyards and had buried a lot of people...
Israelis, Americans and Europeans have frequently found the ongoing Palestinian support for the violent conflict inexplicable. Over and over during the last two years, statesmen, journalists and ordinary people have asked the same question:
How is it that the Palestinians have failed to realize that violence undermines their cause? But if the "cause" is to hurt Israel rather than to promote the Palestinian welfare, the deep commitment to the intifada makes perfect sense.
The lead lawyer of the three who addressed the Tel-Aviv district court yesterday on behalf of Marwan Barghouti, spent much of his time developing the argument of "parliamentary immunity" for his client. On this basis, Jawad Boulos said, Barghouti ought not to be tried in an Israeli court. This has serious implications. It implies *no* court could ever try him on terror/murder charges. Immunity -- what a wonderful notion! Sitting there in the over-filled court room, I fantasized trying to explain to my murdered fifteen year old daughter Malki how immunity would work. Barghouti can finance, organize and plan massacres of civilians like the one which destroyed my daughter's life and my family's last year... and then sit back and laugh the cynical, ice-cold laugh I saw yesterday. Anyone know a parliamentary immunity doctrine that works like this?
Contrary to the impression conveyed by press reports, most of the victim families present in court yesteday (outnumbered, in my estimation, by Barghouti supporters and quasi-lawyers) did NOT engage in violent clashes with anyone. I'm one.
Another thought about the Barghouti proceedings on Thursday.
The BBC report quotes Khader Shkeirat accusing http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2296113.stm) "Israeli police of beating and shoving him when he tried to get to Mr Barghouti in the crowded courtroom." Having sat there and seen it all, I know he's bending the facts.
He arrived after proceedings started and gave the impression of itching for a fight. He was decked out in a black legal robe (required dress for lawyers in courts here) as were four or five other Arabs who may or may not have been members of Barghouti's legal team. (These were in addition to the three who actually addressed the court. The adequateness of the man's representation is beyond doubt, at least in terms of numbers.) Boulos, the lead lawyer, who was in the middle of presenting his arguments, advised the judge that Shkeirat is not admitted to the Israeli bar.
On that basis, Shkeirat was told he could not sit at the already-full bar table. Choosing to stand in the aisle near the door at the back, he was visibly edgy and irritated, and seemed intent on picking a fight. Eventually he got into one - not clear to me with whom - which clearly disturbed the proceedings. When the Israeli security men who ringed the court made their move, it was an elegant piece of "social engineering" which got him out the door in seconds.
In general, the security people were polite to the point of walking on eggshells throughout a difficult day's proceedings, at least until bedlam broke out after the hearing itself ended. Hard for me to imagine court officials being quite as careful and considerate in other jurisdictions (I'm thinking of US and Australian court systems, both of which I know fairly well), given the intense hostility of the people passing through their hands.
The Israeli authorities bear the responsibility for any loss of lives resulting from a collapse of the wall,"
Here is the original German article:
I guess a computer translation would give a good idea of it.
It does describe a meeting between Mossad and CIA agents under "Langely, 23. August 2001". There is neither a specific mention of Atta, merely of "4 out of 19" terrorists, nor of an expulsion of the Mossad agents.
"Capabilities and principle are two different things. Besides ending the occupation, our major goal is not to be labeled collaborators," said Masri.
"Why should we be responsible for security in Tel Aviv," asked Masri, "when we have enough trouble protecting our own people against Israel?" For this reason, the GIS is not engaged in roundups of suspects, but is attempting to dialogue with them.
"The Palestinian Authority has always stood to condemn all attacks on Israeli civilians, not just children. It's really unfair to put the blame on the Palestinian Authority, which is being crippled and systematically destroyed by the Israelis," he said.
Interviewer: What is the way to end the intifada?
PA official: Israel should implement, immediately and without negotiations, the plan advocated by King Abdullah - and return to the '67 borders (more or less), evacuate all of the settlements, and create a Palestinian state.
Interviewer: OK. That's what you think Israel should do .... but what about your own government? What should the PA do?
PA official (angrily): The ball is not in our court, the ball is in your court etc. etc.
Interviewer: What about arresting or neutralizing Hamas? That's something that many Israelis ask about..
PA official: You expect us to neutralize Hamas?! And then what?! The government of Israel will go and fund more settlements etc.
Interviewer: What do you expect in the near future?
PA official: We're waiting to see what happens in Iraq and in the Labor and Likud Central Committees. We are in a waiting position for probably the next nine months or so....
Later that week, a member of Hamas, the largest Palestinian Islamic group, nearly blew up a bus filled with the school-bound children of Israeli settlers in the Gaza Strip. (An Israeli army jeep escorting the children cut him off, absorbing the blow of his 170-lb. car bomb. The bomber and one soldier died.) "[Arafat] was really panicking about it," said an official who saw him afterward. "Had it been the 40 schoolchildren, it would have been the end of the peace process as we know it."
"We are determined to wipe out Zionist terrorism. They are targeting civilians. They are targeting children. There are at least 15 children among the wounded here," said Rantissi.