Hamas Takes PA Parliament
Forbes reports,
Israeli officials convened emergency meetings on Thursday to decide how to respond to the militant Hamas group’s upset victory in Palestinian elections, maintaining an outward silence while privately blaming each other for the upheaval.
Hamas’ stunning showing in Wednesday’s vote could send tremors through Israel’s own political establishment ahead of March elections by bolstering hawks who oppose territorial concessions to the Palestinians.
Official results in the Palestinian balloting aren’t expected before late Thursday, but leaders of both the ruling Fatah Party and Hamas said that Hamas, which has masterminded dozens of suicide bombings against Israel, won a majority of Palestinian seats in its first legislative run.
Haaretz reports,
Hours after unofficial results indicated Hamas’ clear victory in the Palestinian elections, Hamas supporters poured into the Palestinian parliament amid clashes with Fatah loyalists.
The Hamas supporters then raised the Hamas flag over the building.
The two camps threw stones at each other, breaking windows in the building, as Fatah supporters briefly tried to lower the green Hamas banners. The crowd of about 3,000 Hamas backers cheered and whistled as activists on the roof of the parliament raised the Hamas banner again.
It was the first confrontation between Hamas and Fatah since the Islamic militant group won parliament elections on Wednesday.
Dubya chimes in:
Asked if the United States was ruling out dealing with a Palestinian government that was made up partly of Hamas, [Bush] replied:
“They don’t have a government yet, so you’re asking me to speculate on what the government will look like. I have made it very clear however that a political party that articulates the destruction of Israel as part of a platform is a party with which we will not deal.”
But Bush also sought to project a positive note on the election.
He said the vote was a sign Palestinians were unhappy with the status quo and showed democracy at work, which was positive for the Middle East region.
I argued this on another board: from an outsider’s perspective, this is not a victory for the Palestinians. Here’s what I wrote (no need to hypertext this shit):
Hamas has no experience building or sustaining infrastructure, with international diplomacy outside of their own very limited circles, and refuses to even recognize the principle element they have to negotiate with.
It was easy for them to campaign as the untainted outsiders – THEY’VE NEVER INVOLVED THEMSELVES WITH POLITICS outside of rhetoric and rocketry.
What are they going to do to sustain Palestinian universities?
What are secular and Christian Palestinians going to do under a strict Muslim regime that has shown very little tolerance to non-Muslims?
Are they going to build airports and pulbic transportation services?
Hospitals?
No one knows – because they essentially pushed themselves as the Noble Outsiders Come to Fix An Intrinsically Tainted System. Which is a flaw in and of itself.
They might build a frickin’ Utopia, Remy – I’m not saying it’s impossible. A trailer park boy from Arkansas swept into the Oval Office with NO international experience, and gave us a GREAT decade. Great things can happen when people rise to the occasion. But Hamas has consistently presented itself as an idealist organization; replete with rhetoric and religious iconology. They’ve presented no aver-arching plan, and again; have no track record dealing with international loans, diplomats, or conflicting international hiearchy. so yeah, I’m a little pessimistic for the Palestinians.
I don’t think this really effects Israel – my sense is, they operate off the notion that whoever is in charge will be hostile and that they may have to operate unilaterally.
It is probably Christians. There will not be a constitutional democracy there and Hamas’s domination is a distaster for them. Anyhoo, this is the result the Israeli right wanted. That is why they expended all efforts at destroying the secular pa.
Ah…it’s OUR fault again. Thanks for clarifying Dameocrat.
How far are you willing to take this line of reasoning…I’ve heard people suggest Israelis blow up their own busses to bolster support for their repressive agendas. That far?
Once again Dameocrat defers to the least common denominator, but I’ve come to expect this type of cynical and largely incorrect analysis from her/him.
Targeted assassinations of the Hamas leadership was a direct response to Hamas suicide bombings. The theory was that if you chop off the head of the hateful snake, you’ll eventually limit the ability for that snake to strike out at you and murder your citizenry. Pretty sound policy, if you ask me.
I see quite a few parallels between Hamas and the IRA. The British government employed a very similar tactic with eliminating the militant and murderous leaders of the IRA, although not quite as public a response as had to be employed by Israel. The IRA was then boxed into a political corner over time and co-opted into power sharing by Her Majesty’s government. Check and mate. The IRA couldn’t operate as a ‘legitimate’ partner in power sharing AND continue to bomb and maim, nor could they afford to let the opportunity to join in power sharing pass them by. The result is the decommissioning of IRA weaponry this past summer.
Now, I have a moral objection to inviting murdering thugs to join democratic institutions and the removal of moral clarity represents everything that is wrong with realpolitik. But I cannot deny that the Crown’s tactic appears to have worked, and we are witnessing the end of the Troubles.
Might we be witnessing the same with the inclusion of Hamas into a Palestinian government?
I didn’t know I brought up targeted assasination, nor did I accuse Israel of blowing up their own buses, but Israel likes Hamas leadership because it gives them an excuse to establish unilateral borders, or take the west bank and leave the Palestinians in little cantons. Canton is Sharons own word, so don’t bitch. That was why it blamed Arafat for suicide bombings instead of Hamas. It also didn’t really give a damn about the bus bombings or it would have desegregated itself and sent more bus routes to Arab neighborhoods. That would have put an end to bus bombings pretty quickly. The country is a Jewish state, where Jews have special privlages over others, and seek to live in Jewish only enclaves.
I am cynical because unlike Sharon and they majority of Israels leaders, and many here I am a humanist, and care about oppression of people. All people. The center in israel would be properly recongnized as right wing if the Palestinians could vote in Israeli elections.
This is the time to say thank you to successive Israeli governments that coddled Palestinian Muslims.
First we have the ‘live and let live’ policy of the 1970’s, when the Muslim Brotherhood was allowed to thrive. Israeli military leaders – such as Rabin – were quite explicit about encouraging this part of Palestinian society, which was in opposition to the democratic and secular PLO.
This escalated in the 1980’s, when the IDF would allow the brotherhood to rally, but smash heads and fire tear gas when the nationalists tried the same. By engaging in active suppression against one side and not the other, Israel was effectively pruning Palestinian society – in the Hamas direction.
When the first Intifada broke out, Israel refrained from targeting Hamas until – wait for it – 1989, around 18 months after Hamas was born. Why? Because the Israeli leadership mistakenly insisted that it was a PLO directed effort, and were eager to see the emergence of a rival that could weaken it. In fact it was a popular uprising that left the PLO surprised; Hamas emerged as a force able to capture that energy, for the most part in the face of Israeli indifference. (they were chasing down Fatah, Communists, and the PFLP at the time.)
So the chickens continue to come home and roost. First the suicide bombings, now the legitimacy of an electoral victory. It seems the Israelis won’t change direction until al-Qaida and the Islamic Jihad take over where Hamas leaves off.
Arrogant Israelis, you had a chance with Arafat… and you blew it. Reap the whirlwind. If you had any sense, you’d release Marwan Barghouti right away and hope he becomes the next leader.
(with love and compassion, of course, to all Jewish and Palestinian victims of the conflict.)
“It also didn’t really give a damn about the bus bombings or it would have desegregated itself and sent more bus routes to Arab neighborhoods. That would have put an end to bus bombings pretty quickly”
Speechless.
“The country is a Jewish state, where Jews have special privlages over others, and seek to live in Jewish only enclaves.”
Are you high? I expect this drivel from a grade 9 student who just read about Che.
“I am a humanist, and care about oppression of people. All people. ”
Touching.
Israel had a chance with Arafat? What are you referring to? Or was the Karine A a plea for peace?
Shtreimel: If you disagree than dispute it. Insults are no substitute for debate.
Dameocrat…at times, insults are more apropos than debates.
Your understanding of why and how Israel handles their affairs borders on conspiracy. And the fact that you see yourself as more “humane” than Israeli leaders indicates a narcissism that is need of some head-shrinking.
“It also didn’t really give a damn about the bus bombings”
And comments like this are repulsive.
“It also didn’t really give a damn about the bus bombings or it would have desegregated itself and sent more bus routes to Arab neighborhoods. That would have put an end to bus bombings pretty quickly”
WTF are you talking about?
I often wonder where to draw the line between people who I think are terribly, dangerously wrong about important issues and people who are just sick. But not this time.
Wow, sane voices in what could have turned into an indymedia fest of bile.
Dameocrat, I normally make it a rule not to have a battle of wits with those that are unarmed. But in your case, I’m going to make an exception.
I fail to see any analysis, debate, or anything approaching what I would consider intelligent discourse. Rather, you take the opportunity to bash the ‘right’ and anyone else who doesn’t agree with your very ‘unique’ perspective on the world without providing any real analysis. If you were to remove your vitriolic rants and just present a lucid point, I might listen.
I would advise your reading a little more Christopher Hitchens and Natan Sharanksy and a little less George Galloway and Michael Moore.
Eyal: If a Palestinian bombed the bus, it would kill palestinians too, therefore no Palestinian terrorist would bomb them. Segregation makes life more dangerous for Jews. It naturally fuels resentment, and makes them easier target.
shtreimel: many Israelis feel this way too. Just read todays column by Meron Benevesti.
Not all governments are nice, or particularly bright. Look at the US debacle in Iraq.
J: are you still glad Rachel Corrie died?
Matis: I used to read Hitchens until he lied repeatedly about WMD. Shuransky is one of those bright guys that thought democracy on the west bank and in Iraq was a panacea.
Just as a parting shot, Dameocrat:
‘I am a humanist, and care about oppression of people. All people. The center in israel would be properly recongnized as right wing if the Palestinians could vote in Israeli elections.’
Really? Please do list for the crowd the Arab countries where Jews are welcome to live, become citizens, and vote. Last time I checked Saudia Arabia, Syria, et al. won’t allow Jews to live as citizens in their countries so why pray tell would we open up Israeli elections to Palestinians?
and why the hell should Israel look to them as examples? Doesn’t Israel claim to be a democracy?
Guys, please do not use name-calling and insults when debating Dameocrat. And don’t give some response justifying it. Just stop it, and stick to the issues.
Charles, while you are correct that Israel at first foolishly supported the Muslim Bortherhood franchise which is Hamas, I don’t see how you feel they had a chance with Arafat.
Dameocrat, your theoryis interesting, but I think that if arabs were serviced by Israeli buses, the fundamentalists would justify blowing them up anyway since they “shouldn’t” be riding Israeli buses.
See the bombings in Iraq of Fundamentlists against other Muslims for all sorts of reasons. All the more so for those participating in Israeli infrastructure.
Dameocrat says:
“If a Palestinian bombed the bus, it would kill palestinians too, therefore no Palestinian terrorist would bomb them. ”
Absolutely, demonstrably false. Arabs of all kinds have been killed in the bus bombings.
And further, I think Dameocrat is aware of this, but didn’t let it stop her from throwing an anti-Israel ‘argument’ against the wall to see if it would stick.
And Dameocrat, I am indeed still glad that Corrie died. And I wish the same for all of her ilk. ALL.
Kelsey- Usually, I agree that it’s proper to stick to issues and avoid name-calling. But that’s where the arguments are made in good faith. I don’t think there’s any good faith here. The motivation is not to understand the realities of the situation, but to smear.
Im always astounded that people use the word “excuse” when talking about Israeli actions vis-a-vis Arab policies. Hamas’ declared intention of destroying Israel is not an “excuse” for Israel to target their leaders, kill their members, build the separation fence, etc. , it is a damned good reason for all of those things.
This discussion can really be divided into two camps: those who believe that Israel is responsible for Arab bellicosity, and those who believe that the Arabs actually have minds of their own and are responsible for their actions and choices.
If one believes that the Arabs hate Israel for this or that policy, rather than for the sin of existing, then inevitably one believes that Israel, by some action or another, can get the Arabs to stop hating it.
If, however, one believes that the Arabs always have been and always will be opposed to the existence of a state in the ME of, by, and for Jews, then this line of argument simply doesn’t wash. (This is Hamas’ stated policy, as everyone knows.) People like Daemocrat are obviously opposed to the very idea of a Jewish state, and his comments about bus bombings and “oppression” make this quite clear. So his comments are not really directed against specific polies of Israel; everything he/she/it says, and all the policies he/she/it advocates, are driven by the view that Israel cannot and should not exist as a Jewish state. It is only this fundamental belief that can explain why such people blame Israel for absolutely everything and never hold the Arabs responsible for everything at all.
Almost all of these discussions can be avoided if one clarifies at the very beginning whether one’s interlocutor believes that Israel has a natural right to exist as a Jewish state. If they do not, the only discussion they are willing to have, really, is how to get Israel to adopt policies that will reverse what they see to be Israel’s original sin: it’s existence as a state for Jews.
Deamocrat obviously believes that Israel has no such right. So why waste time talking to him/her/it?
Sorry, that should read “It is only this fundamental belief that can explain why such people blame Israel for absolutely everything and never hold the Arabs responsible for anyything at all.
And it should be”its existence as a state for Jews”, without the apostrophe.
David, when that nutcase Zaqawi bombed the wedding in Jordan trying to get Israelis it turned 2/3 of the Jordanians including many of Palestinian ancestry against suicide bombings and Al Qaeda. Zaqawi was definately on the defensive.
They hate Israelis, but they love their fellow Arab Muslims. When everyone is in the same boat it becomes more difficult to be a hater.
The bombings in Iraq are Sunni vs Shia, which is a great division in the Arab world, like Protestant vs Catholic in Northern Ireland. The Iraqi Sunnies and Shias don’t share any identity, and they too are segregated.
It could maintain a Jewish majority without oppressing Arabs. It doesn’t. It wants to annex west bank, so no real Palestinian state is possible, and maintian discrimintory practices both inside and outside Israel.
My position is Arabs have rights whatever state they live under. I have no preference for two states or one. I don’t believe two states is what Israel wants and their behavior proves it.
J: Why precisely are you glad Corrie is dead? What is her ilk? People who don’t like seeing Palestinians lose their homes?
David polls show that Jordanians, half of whom are Palestinian turned against Zaqawi dramatically after the Amman Wedding bombing.
http://www.proteinwisdom.com/index.php/weblog/entry/19375/
Zaqawi was in major ass covering mode.
Iraqis are Sunnis and Shias so they are not the same kind of muslim.
“J: Why precisely are you glad Corrie is dead? What is her ilk? People who don’t like seeing Palestinians lose their homes? ”
People who don’t bother to try to understand the truth or do honest research, but rather are led by their emotions and self-righteousness to impede Israeli soldiers from doing their job in a dangerous area, thereby exposing them to added risk of death, and grandstanding for the media in order to slander Israel, a country which cannot afford to be slandered.
And I’m still waiting for a response on your novel bus-bombing theory. Do you deny that Arabs were killed in bus bombings? If not, why did you write that BS?
I’ve played this game with you before. You make five accusations, I answer them all, and instead tring to attack my answers, you make five more, unrelated, accusations. Not this time.
Waiting for the explanation.
Your request for Dameocrat to tone down the rhetoric would seem far more compelling if you yourself made any attempt to write reasonably. Dameocrat is making sweeping generalizations and not-too-believable policy arguments. You, on the other hand, are calling for the death of nonviolent persons who happen to oppose your viewpoint. If you want to raise the standard of discussion here that’s not a good way to start.
Arafat offered what I am eager to accept – as an Israeli, former soldier, Jews, etc. That would be: Modified Green Line as an international border, a shared capital in Jerusalem in which Arab nieghborhoods are governed by Palestinians, and the limited right of return for some number of Palestinians. (The Palestinians were flexible on this, more so than the Israelis. Out of millions of Diaspora Palestinians, they were willing to have Israel accept only some tens of thousands, perhaps 100,000 over a decade…)
This is the peace offer that Barak rejected, with Clinton’s support, and which was on the table for a long time before the negotiation trap at Wye blew up in Israel’s face.
We’ll look back on Arafat’s rule as ‘the good old days.’
We could have had peace with generosity. Now we’ll have peace with a nuclear armed Iran and a Hamas state claiming victory. Way to go, Israel strategists! Keep up the good work, as outlined by Golda Meir (who rejected peace with Nasser) and Dayan (who rejected negotiations with Jordan), and of course Begin (who rejected negotiations with the PLO.)
(Dameocrat, I love it that you are getting all the fire!)
“People who don’t bother to try to understand the truth or do honest research, but rather are led by their emotions and self-righteousness to impede Israeli soldiers from doing their job in a dangerous area, thereby exposing them to added risk of death, and grandstanding for the media in order to slander Israel, a country which cannot afford to be slandered.”
–J
Wow. The parallels to the actions of some settler youth this summer in Gaza and very recently in Hebron is pretty striking, don’t you think? The whole throwing acid and wearing Jewish stars thing, just for example?? And I think Israel can least afford to be slandered by its very own.
All this said, I might add that I’m beyond appalled by the fact that the Israeli government has allowed Jewish ex-Gazans to languish in DP-like settings since August. Absolutely, unequivocally deplorable. I don’t care if these people registered with the government beforehand or not, it’s wrong and cruel for the govt to drop the ball like this. And it doesn’t help Israel on any count whatsoever.
Just sayin’.
Charles,
Wasn’t it Arafat who left an offer that included Jerusalem on the table? And how exactly would a limited right of return work? Would you split families? How long before the liberal position is that the limitations are oppressive? A right of return for Palestinian refugees, many of whom left voluntarily when their leaders promised a swift end to the Zionist enemy, would remove Israel’s status as a Jewish state. Not to mention the immense difficulty of proving one’s refugee status. Of course, that’s a little easier given that the Palestinians’ Arab brethren have kept them in refugee camps, instead of assimilating them into the general populace. But aside from the minority of Palestinians who have kept deeds, and keys for 40-50 years, how will it be determined who is allowed to return? And to where will they return? And how would Barghouti’s release, given that he’s a convicted murderer, be helpful to Israel? It can’t be both ways, i.e. you can’t blame Israel for targeted assassinations, and then demand that the people they do process through their judicial system be released in the name of political rights. Where does negotiation stop, and appeasement begin?
And what does Iran having nuclear power have to do with the Palestinians?
Charles-
Regarding Arafat’s offer, we can’t really discuss it until you give us a source, or identify the offer specifically (by time and/or place). On these issues, the devil really is in the details (all puns intended).
But in any case, the offer is irrelevant. Arafat never kept any agreements throughout the so-called ‘peace process’. He was very clear (explicitly so when speaking Arabic in front of his home crowd) that peace was not his intention.
“We could have had peace with generosity. ”
Incredible how much evidence has to be ignored to produce that statement. More like “peace in our time”.
“Now we’ll have peace with a nuclear armed Iran …”
Say WHAT? How did that get in here? How is Israel responsible for that? Or is it responsible for all bad things?
Insanity or malice?
Dameocrat: You’re way off-base about the bus bombings. Plenty of Arabs are killed in them.
Matityahu: There are still Jews in Syria, and they are citizens of Syria. I’m pretty sure they’re allowed to emigrate if the want to, and the community is very small now.
Also, check out:http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1137605924104&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
You make a good point that I should be more careful to use facts with attribution. But the ‘fact’ that Israel repeatedly scorned opportunities for peace is really a conclusion based on countless facts….. where to begin?
Fact #1: Nahum Goldman went to Golda Meir and asked if she would negotiate with Nasser. She said now. One consequence was the first generation of Israeli refuseniks, who refused to serve on the grounds that ‘war wasn’t inevitable – Israel is rejecting peace talks.’ This is well known history, taught in Israeli textbooks.
Fact #2: Israel rejected repeated calls to adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It’s refusal to endorse the call for a Nuke free Middle East is the single largest contributing factor behind Iran’s drive to build the bomb. This conversation was held more vigorously in the eighties, after the Vanunu whistle-blowing.
Charles-
“You make a good point that I should be more careful to use facts with attribution.”
Great. So where is the Arafat offer information? (I’m not being unduly demanding here – there were dozens of offers of varying seriousness floated around over many years. I’m only asking for the very minimum I would need to do the research.)
“Nahum Goldman went to Golda Meir and asked if she would negotiate with Nasser. She said now.”
I’m guessing “now” is a typo. Again, WHEN did this happen? (And I know who writes Israeli textbooks. Not exactly the gold standard.)
“It’s refusal to endorse the call for a Nuke free Middle East is the single largest contributing factor behind Iran’s drive to build the bomb. ”
How do you know this? From Iranian rhetoric? Clearly not. The Iranian government has a lot to say about what it will do with nukes, which seem (to put it mildly) to be unrelated to Israel’s nuclear program. In any case, is it reasonable to say that the Iranians are afraid of an Israeli nuclear attack after all these years (Israel’s had the Bomb since the 60’s)? And was/is Israel unreasonable in having nukes?
I can’t believe any reasonable person could say what you said. You apparently have an animus against, at the least, the Israeli government. Care to tell us why?
And we’re still waiting for Dameocrat to explain how she knows the inner workings of the minds of Israeli leaders and Middle East events, yet is unaware that Arabs were blown up in bus bombings, a very obvious and well-known fact (it’s usually reported in mainstream media outlets).
If there is no response, I’ll have to conclude that this is not about facts or debates, but rather emotions and animus. And when facts and debates are ignored in favor of negative emotion and animus directed at Jews, I start to wonder…
calling for a nuke free might be the best way, the only way, to stem proliferation. Israel doesnt need nukes — it has massive conventional advantage. Iran is also motivated by having the US on two sides of it (Iraq, Afghanistan), and a nuclear Pakistan. it wants to be a regional power, and it wants a cause to rally its reform-minded populace around a conservative, nationalistic cause. Even WINEP has called for Israel to give up its nukes.
I never claimed to be as bright as J. But in this instance I smelled Daemocrats BS W-A-Y early.
And
“calling for a nuke free might be the best way”
Sounds great huh? Kinda like…a rape-free society…a violent-free highschool. How about this, why don’t we have a violent-free Middle East, or a we-promise-not-to-ever-attact-Israel-free pan-Arab agreement. And then we’ll talk nuke free. Until then, there’s more than enough evidence that in past confrontations, Israel’s ass has been saved by the mere threat of having nuclear arms.
And you gotta love this reasoning:
“Well, if Israel has ’em, doesn’t Iran get to have them to?”
No. No Iran shouldn’t get ’em. Kinda like…cops get guns, but certain people, no matter how hard they try, should never get them.
“It’s refusal to endorse the call for a Nuke free Middle East is the single largest contributing factor behind Iran’s drive to build the bomb” obviously subjective…and in my opinion, bullshit.
anyone a fan of the theory of mutual destruction.
the idea that if both sides have it, neither will use them. not really willing to see if this theory is stands true though.
I have posted three responces, but they don’t show up.
This is fucked! Why the one sided pig pile on me, without letting me respond?
Danny,
What you fail to realize is that MAD IS working as we speak, and has been since the cold war. So yes I am a fan of the theory.
Iran hopes to g-d that it continues working because as long as Israel and the US are unable to ruin Iran’s second (and probably third) strike capability, Iran will not be getting bombed anytime soon.
David Kelsey:
You’re quite right; my apologies and I will stick to topic in future.
Xisnotx:
Thanks for pointing out the factual inaccuracy regarding Syria. That said, ‘et al’ translates as ‘as others’. What about the other Arab states? I’m think I’m fairly safe in my understanding that Jews are not permitted to become citizens or vote in places such as Saudia Arabia.
Dameocrat:
‘The bombings in Iraq are Sunni vs Shia, which is a great division in the Arab world, like Protestant vs Catholic in Northern Ireland. The Iraqi Sunnies and Shias don’t share any identity, and they too are segregated.’
I’m intrigued that you would use the situation in Northern Ireland to support one of your views, but yet gloss over my entrie analysis vis the peace process in Northern Ireland has much to offer us with regards to Hamas and the PA elections and peace process in general. Have you ever been to Belfast? I have, and have also lived for a time in the Republic of Ireland. The separation of Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland is largely at the request of the leaders of the respective communities who rightly understand that fences breed good neghbours. Moreover, physical separation allowed for the removal of violence from sectarian differences (with the obvious exception of the Omagh bombing) whilst democracy was introduced to produce a lasting piece. As you are no longer a fan of Hichens and don’t see any value in reading Sharansky, I would recommend a read of A.B. Yehoshua’s ‘The Liberated Bride’ which speaks to the value in sectarian separation quite well.
Our mistake, in my estimation, has been in propping up dictators such as Arafat who seek to oppress their own people in an effort to retain power. We should have encouraged democracy within the PA and the territories, and I cannot see why we wouldn’t encourage it now even allowing for the fact that Hamas have won a majority. We may not like who they vote for, but it is my firm belief that democracy and reform will produce a lasting piece between Israel and the Palestinians much in the same way that it has in Northern Ireland.
How precisely has the seperation of protestant and catholic in Northern Ireland contributed to peace?
There are no problems between the two groups in any western country but that one.
I believe segregation in the South sucked too so sue me.
BTW, I didn’t brush off you analysis of the process in northern Ireland, I just didn’t comment on it one way or the other.
Anyway that peace is pretty much predicated on majority rule, which means that when Protestants become a minority rule of northern Ireland will fall to the Republic. Either way, I don’t see how you can say segregation helped the situation.
BTW, the Omagh bombing fits my idea perfectly, in that most of those who died were Catholics. It turned the Catholics completely away from sectarian violence and that is why there is hope for peace now.
Matityahu : Not being allowed to vote is fairly meaningless in some of the Arab countries. Morocco is a place where the Jews do comparatively ok. One of the King’s high officials is Jewish. There is also a Jewish parliamentarian in Tunisia. Yemeni Jews are not allowed to hold government office. Some countries have varying restrictions on what remains of Jewish communites. Probably the biggest question w/citizenship is property rights of those who fled post- ’48. Libya has made overtures towards letting Jews return and restoring property. I’m not sure Saudi Arabia has a specific law about Jews, although it specifically listed Jews as proscribed from entry on the website of its tourism ministry (no longer online). It recognizes only the worship of Hanbali school of Sunni jurisprudence in public. Other religions must be practiced in private, although it does not always respect this. Open Jews have occasionally been granted entry visas by the Kingdom, usually American Jewish officials. According to the Scribe, there are in the Kingdom “thousands of crypto-Jews who lead a separate existence from the main population” http://www.dangoor.com/74008.html. During the first Gulf war, the US army told Jewish soldiers to keep their Magen Davids inside their shirts. This applies also to foreign oil workers, who cannot openly celebrate Xmas, etc. This goes on behind closed doors, as does the consumption of alcohol. There are whole cities built exclusively for foreign oil workers, and they can buy all the ingredients to make alcohol at home at their supermarkets. Shiite Muslims, non-Hanbali Sunnis, Sufis, Bahai’is, Hindus and Zoroastrians are in pretty much the same boat, with varying levels of discrimination. (Shia have their own mosques, but are not officially recognized as Muslim).
Rachel endangered the soldiers to the same degree that MLK endangered police officers when he opposed Bull Conor, or Gandhi endangered them when he opposed the raj. Your bluster doesn’t change this. Also how precisely did Rachel slander Israel? Please be specific, because I am sure this is fascinating.
I responded on my busbombing theory upthread, mobius just didn’t post it very quickly.
We didn’t fully understand the true dangers of Islamic fundamentalism until recently. Only within the last ten years have we come to realize that Islamic fundamentalism is a dangerous movement that is anti-democratic. Policies of the US and Israel have changed since the 80s with this realization.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that “this is what Israel wanted.” What were the intermittent negotiations with the PA going on for? Why did Israel opt for the moderate Abbas over the more extreme Ahmed Qureia? If you’re going to say that it’s all so that Israel can bring Hamas to power so that it can carry out some plan of transfer, then you have to assume that Israel put a whole lot more planning into this than it is capable of. And it is simply not in Israel’s interest to deal with Islamic fundamentalists now. The politicians understand that the current situation has to end. Allowing the Hamas situation to grow out of control will just bring more chaos, something that is clearly not in Israel’s interest.
Dameocrat, you base your twisted conspiracy theories on some article in Zmag. I looked at that bit about cantonization. Halper says that Sharon came up with it without offering any proof. He even concedes that Sharon hasn’t explicitly stated his plan. The writers in Zmag are a bunch of raving rabble rousers who believe in myths anyways. Most experts on the Middle East dismiss cantonization as a myth.
As much as you think that Israel has some evil intentions with the Palestinians, keep in mind that it also has an international reputation to worry about. I do not like the way that Israelis seem to disregard international opinion at times, but past all the political rhetoric that you hear, Israel has many important dealings with other countries, typical of a state in the international economic and political arena. All Israeli politicians, except for the most jaded such as Baruch Marzel, know that doing something drastic and morally wrong like transfering millions of Palestinians is completely impractical as well as wrong.
Attempting to take the moral high ground by blaming Israel for everything that goes wrong in the region doesn’t make you smart.
“Most experts on the Middle East dismiss cantonization as a myth.”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/673436.html
The route of the fence – which runs inside the West Bank, joins about 10 percent of its territory to Israel, seriously interferes with lives of nearly half a million Palestinians and cuts up the West Bank into at least three enclaves – will never be a recognized border but will only exacerbate and prolong the conflict between us and the Palestinians.
And still we wait for Dameocrat to explain her bus bombing remarks. Bueller? …Bueller?….
Matt: I have no twisted conspiracy theories. That is just your buzzword. Sharon and his camp followers have been very out in the open about their intentions, so there is no conspiracy. It is just facts. Listen to Dov Weisglass. Sharon’s senior advisor.
The explanation for this is forthcoming, I’m sure:
Dameocrat: So holding onto Gush Etzion and Ariel counts as cantonization and securing the right to Greater Israel. Fool.
Gush Etzion was bought from the Arabs before 1948. Just about everyone agrees that it is not on the negotiating table. Fuck, the Palestinians have probably accepted this long ago. And Ariel? Well, I don’t know, but that is an awfully large plot of land with a large population to give up.
Your quote proves nothing to me. There might be a few objectionable statements here or there, probably because he wasn’t careful about what he was saying, but it sounds like a reasonable Israeli plan to me. And that thing about people focusing on the Palestinians? What, you don’t think that they have their own end of the bargain to keep? Or is it wrong to actually get the Palestinians to do something, like maybe, stopping terrorism?
You’re interpreting comments in your own way. They’re not as explicit as you say.
And for chrissakes, how many times must it be repeated that the security fence is not a final border for the Palestinian state? Fucking speculation.
“And for chrissakes, how many times must it be repeated that the security fence is not a final border for the Palestinian state? Fucking speculation.”
Olmert, Mofaz, and most recently Livni have all “speculated” this in the last few months. These are three of the most powerful people in the Israeli government. Does that amount merely to “fucking speculation?” What wild, crazy, speculation — that the barrier will be the border!! whoever would imagine such a crazy thing??
As for cantonization, it’s not Gush Etzion that will divide the central from southern cantons; it’s the extension of the fence around Ma’ale Adumim. It’s been argued that’s not a problem, you can just connect the cantons with a tunnel for the Palestinians. The Palestinians will be able to travel from Jenin to Hebron over roads of their own, over bridges and thru tunnels, from one population center to the other. I had hamsters when I was kid that lived in something like that, and they seemed happy.
As for Ariel, that’s an awfully large plot of land on top of an important aquifer. And it’s built in contravention of interational law and convention, not that Israel gives a darn about something silly like that. The population is merely a little over twice as large as Gush Katif, so instead of taking six days to evacuate Ariel, it’ll take 12, maybe less, since half of em are Russians, and not so ideological.
Regenspan says
“The explanation for this is forthcoming, I’m sure:
“And Dameocrat, I am indeed still glad that Corrie died. And I wish the same for all of her ilk. ALL.”
Of course. See comment 28.
Dameocrat is at it again: “Rachel endangered the soldiers to the same degree that MLK endangered police officers when he opposed Bull Conor, or Gandhi endangered them when he opposed the raj. Your bluster doesn’t change this. ”
Who needs bluster? If you think there’s any comparison between the safety of police officers at peaceful protests and the safety of Israeli soldiers in the middle of hostile Arab villages, I’d say you’ve confirmed my thesis.
“Also how precisely did Rachel slander Israel? Please be specific, because I am sure this is fascinating.”
Not fascinating, obvious. ISM probably isn’t deluded enough to think that a few idiots getting in the way of bulldozers was going to stop the IDF from demolishing the houses. The whole point was to try to make Israel look bad in the eyes of the world.
“I responded on my busbombing theory upthread, mobius just didn’t post it very quickly.”
Where is it?