Bush calls Sharon a "man of peace" - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-28-2002, 10:32 PM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesimus,
Most people in Europe are not racist against anyone or any faith. But there are elements in Europe that are anti-Jewish. While nearly if not all the criticism by European governments has no underlying racist motivation, the un-objective nature of the criticism is cause for concern. The media in Europe make it look worse.

3 Billion dollars a year is clearly justified given the military balance in the region vs Israel. Israel has been attacked numerous times over the past 50 years by multiple countries. Israel is outnumbered when it come to numbers and needs high quality US military equipment to defend itself against Arab armies that have superior numbers of men and equipment. Israel is the only democracy in the region and has been a friend of the USA since its inception. The 3 billion dollars a year is clearly neccessary and not all of it is for military aid. Israel has one of the most difficult security situations worldwide given the constant possibility of a 3 front war. I'm surprised the level of US funding is not more. The USA gives just as much money to Egypt.
__________________

STING2 is offline  
Old 04-28-2002, 11:07 PM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesmus,
The Palestinians do seem to want to end the state of Israel. Israel is not an empire. Even if it was it would be the smallest empire in history. Israel was attacked by several Arab countries on the day it first became a State. It was then attacked by other Arab states in 56', 67', and 1973. The land that was taken happened the course of defeating Arab armies. Given Israels difficulty in defending itself, it kept the land because much of the terrain was good for defense. The Arab countries of course still had the goal of destroying Israel, so naturally they have kept this land which acts as a buffer and gives the IDF more time to prevent the country from being overrun in an all out war due to its small size.

Jews have lived in parts of Israel for nearly 4 thousand years. Of course they have not always been the majority or even close to it, but there has always been a Jewish community there. So the claim that Israel has no right to any land there is false. In the late 1800s with a population of only 400,000 people, most of the land(Palestine) was not being used or lived on and belonged to no one except the Ottoman Empire which allowed Jews from Europe to settle there as anti-semitism increased in Europe.

Most of the suicide attacks do NOT occur in the west bank and gaza. They usually take place in non-occupied areas against non-military targets. There are nearly a billion people on this planet that live in worse conditions than the Palestinians. Yet, they don't strap themselves with bombs to blow innocent people up. There is no logical defense for terrorism. Non-violent action will result in a Palestinian state. Terrorism will only insure that it will never happen. Oh, and you say that rifles are not effective against tanks and planes and that their only choice is to use bombs to blow up innocent people in non-occupied areas. Why don't they direct their bomb attacks against IDF soldiers in OCCUPIED territories instead of teens in a disco in Israel perhaps listening to U2.

Terrorism will never achieve the goals of Palestinians and will only bring more Israely soldiers into the West Bank. As far as Jewish people being against Israely actions, their views are in the minority, and fail to have proof to match that of the majority. But at least they are allowed to express their views. How many people in the West Bank and Gaza or for that matter most Arab countries would be allowed to hold a rally in support of Israel or in condemnation of Palestinian terrorist?
__________________

STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 12:00 AM   #83
Babyface
 
Ballistic Tweed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The land of the capitalist-pigs and freedom-loving infidels
Posts: 17
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Ten Tips on How to Be an Arafat Apologist:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/columnis...ov04-11-02.htm

Twenty facts about Israel and the Middle East:

http://www.empoweramerica.org/stories/storyReader$515

Palestinian victims:

http://www.empoweramerica.org/stories/storyReader$511
Ballistic Tweed is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 12:29 AM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesimus,
You talk of Israely terrorism in the 1940s. How about Palestinian terrorism. Severe riots against Jews by Palestinians happened through out the 1930s and 40s. A full scale revolt by Palestinian Arabs from 1936-1939 against the british involved acts of terror and the murder of british soldiers. Then you have the rejection of every British compromise proposal including one to divide Palestine into Arab and Jewish sectors. The Palestinians continued to reject proposals for peaceful settlement of the Issue including the UN Peace proposal of 1947 that offered Palestinians a state, and Jews a state. Palestinians could have had their state 55 years ago but rejected peace and decided with the Arab countries to destroy Israel. As late as 2000 the Palestinians continue to reject peace proposals.

I am well aware of the suffering of many people through out the world in history. I NEVER SAID JEWS WERE THE ONLY PEOPLE TO EVER SUFFER. Your attempt to marginalize what happened to the Jews in World War II, by listing other people that have suffered is not needed.

You mention that Israel has dug its own hole, but that is not the case. Unlike most countries, its very existence has and is constantly threatened by other Arab states. It is the Palestinians that have dug their own hole by rejecting peace deals from the UN in 1947 to the latest rejection of the peace deal in 2000. The Palestinians have chosen terrorism and the destruction of Israel and what has that left them with? Israel has managed to survive 4 wars started by Arab countries. Rather than being in a hole Israel is a prosperous democracy in a region where democracy does not exist. Nearly 40,000 Israely U2 fans attended U2s POPMART show in Israel at the same ticket price most Americans and Europeans payed. Why do you think U2 did not bring POPMART to the Arab countries? It is the Palestinians not the Israely's that have dug themselves into a hole.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 12:35 AM   #85
Babyface
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 26
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
[b]Mikesmus,
The Palestinians do seem to want to end the state of Israel. Israel is not an empire. Even if it was it would be the smallest empire in history. Israel was attacked by several Arab countries on the day it first became a State. It was then attacked by other Arab states in 56', 67', and 1973. The land that was taken happened the course of defeating Arab armies. Given Israels difficulty in defending itself, it kept the land because much of the terrain was good for defense. The Arab countries of course still had the goal of destroying Israel, so naturally they have kept this land which acts as a buffer and gives the IDF more time to prevent the country from being overrun in an all out war due to its small size.

You talk of this as being only strategic and only in the best interests of the Israeli people. You didnt address the fact that maybe the Palestinian people, who have lived on this land for generations, might not enjoy being controlled by an outside power? Its more than just simple defense here, the people in this strategic area you speak of clearly despise being controlled and manipulated by an army that is much more superior to them. Do you think that any country in the world would like being a "strategic zone" for their enemy? I think not.

Jews have lived in parts of Israel for nearly 4 thousand years. Of course they have not always been the majority or even close to it, but there has always been a Jewish community there. So the claim that Israel has no right to any land there is false.

I didnt say the Jews had NO claim at all, I said that they dont have claims to control and manipulate large Palestinian settlements like they clearly have, or to build settlements miles away from many Palestinian towns, which has the effect of dividing Palestine and making a future state very difficult to unite. Jews have lived in the region for thousands of years, but that dosent give them the right to manipulate other people and kick them from their homes. And dont try saying that the IDF has NEVER harmed an innocent soul. Its been well documented how they fired rubber bullets at and arrested people at the Wailing Wall, how settlers have murdered children in cold blood. Read some of the accounts on the website Ive provided, unless you want to discount that as well. I have a question for you: how does bulldozing an entire settlement to the ground, destroying peoples olive trees (justify this at least?), and denying medical aid to people in places like Jenin qualify your organization as one that cares for the people its occupying? Because that would be an awfully strange form of protection for people under occupation, dont you agree?
BTW, native peoples have lived in the New World for much longer than any European. Theyre not in the majority now, but they do have settlements. I guess that they should be given a state then? You support Israel fine but I doubt many people would support any sovereign aboriginal state. And they have been in the New World for at least 13,000 years, a bit longer than 4000.


In the late 1800s with a population of only 400,000 people, most of the land(Palestine) was not being used or lived on and belonged to no one except the Ottoman Empire which allowed Jews from Europe to settle there as anti-semitism increased in Europe.

Most of the suicide attacks do NOT occur in the west bank and gaza. They usually take place in non-occupied areas against non-military targets. There are nearly a billion people on this planet that live in worse conditions than the Palestinians. Yet, they don't strap themselves with bombs to blow innocent people up. There is no logical defense for terrorism.

No logical defense for terrorism? It is interesting that you failed to mention anything about Jewish terrorism in the 1940s against the British. Im guessing that either that was justified, or you just forgot about it. It is fact that Zionist terrorism against the British had an influence in Britain withdrawing their forces, and had a role in the state being formed. I agree, that if the Palestinians werent being controlled by Israel, they would be able to have a better army to fight off invaders from their land. If Israel has a right to defend itself, why shouldnt the Palestinians? It is awful that they attack teens in discos, as you say. If only the IDF was targeted it would be more justifiable, as they are armed invaders. It is also equally awful how Israeli troops and civilians murder in cold blood Palestinian civilians, particularly the women and children. Im sure that the 5 year old children they kill pose an enormous threat to innocent teens in discos, dont they? By killing and further controlling Palestinians, I dont see the incentive in people hating the Israelis any less than they did before. I wouldnt love someone if they killed my whole family, why should they?

Non-violent action will result in a Palestinian state. Terrorism will only insure that it will never happen. Oh, and you say that rifles are not effective against tanks and planes and that their only choice is to use bombs to blow up innocent people in non-occupied areas. Why don't they direct their bomb attacks against IDF soldiers in OCCUPIED territories instead of teens in a disco in Israel perhaps listening to U2.

What kind of nonviolent pressure? Its clear in Israels constant aggressive actions against the Palestinians that they are not going to peacefully settle anything, and with the US backing them up, the Israelis can insure that a Palestinian state will never happen. I agree that attacking Israeli civilians is wrong, but Israel happens to be controlled by a man who murdered 5000 innocent people in Lebabon a while back.

Terrorism will never achieve the goals of Palestinians and will only bring more Israely soldiers into the West Bank. As far as Jewish people being against Israely actions, their views are in the minority, and fail to have proof to match that of the majority. But at least they are allowed to express their views. How many people in the West Bank and Gaza or for that matter most Arab countries would be allowed to hold a rally in support of Israel or in condemnation of Palestinian terrorist?
Israel has attacked Egypt, destroyed Beirut, invaded Jordan, divided the Palestinians land. And you are asking why people in other Arab countries dont support Israels actions? I doubt that they would want to support Israel in the first place.

[This message has been edited by Mikesimus (edited 04-28-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Mikesimus (edited 04-28-2002).]
Mikesimus is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 12:49 AM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesimus,
The parties need to move back to the 2000 peace deal for there to be a final lasting settlement. Israel must be secure from Arab invasion and widespread Palestinian terrorism. The Palestinians, if they want their own state, must uproot and prevent terrorism and the idea of terror as a tool to achieve the political goals. IF the Palestinian leadership is incapable of doing this, then the IDF will have no choice but to do it for them as was the case of the past month. Unfortunately, Palestinian security and leadership that was supposed to be preventing terror was actually aiding it and supporting it.

When the Palestinians get leadership and security forces that actively disrupt terrorist cells instead of creating and supporting them. Then there will no longer be any reason for Israely incursions, and keeping or implementing a lasting peace deal will be easier.

There also must be a regional peace deal between Arab countries and Israel. By insuring Israely security, the Palestinians will have their state. As far as the boundries of a Palestinian state, the deal Palestinians were offered and rejected in 2000 is the best they are ever going to get. Hopefully the Palestinian leadership realizes that terrorism has failed and will be willing to go back to the negotiating table and sign a deal similar to the one they rejected in 2000.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 12:57 AM   #87
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
It was Israel that was attacked by Egypt, Jordan and by terror cells in Lebanon! How about Arab people having the freedom to demonstrate on any issure regardless of what side their government is on. When was the last time you ever saw that?
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 01:00 AM   #88
Babyface
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 26
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
Mikesimus,
You talk of Israely terrorism in the 1940s. How about Palestinian terrorism. Severe riots against Jews by Palestinians happened through out the 1930s and 40s. A full scale revolt by Palestinian Arabs from 1936-1939 against the british involved acts of terror and the murder of british soldiers. Then you have the rejection of every British compromise proposal including one to divide Palestine into Arab and Jewish sectors. The Palestinians continued to reject proposals for peaceful settlement of the Issue including the UN Peace proposal of 1947 that offered Palestinians a state, and Jews a state. Palestinians could have had their state 55 years ago but rejected peace and decided with the Arab countries to destroy Israel. As late as 2000 the Palestinians continue to reject peace proposals.

I am well aware of the suffering of many people through out the world in history. I NEVER SAID JEWS WERE THE ONLY PEOPLE TO EVER SUFFER. Your attempt to marginalize what happened to the Jews in World War II, by listing other people that have suffered is not needed.

You mention that Israel has dug its own hole, but that is not the case. Unlike most countries, its very existence has and is constantly threatened by other Arab states. It is the Palestinians that have dug their own hole by rejecting peace deals from the UN in 1947 to the latest rejection of the peace deal in 2000. The Palestinians have chosen terrorism and the destruction of Israel and what has that left them with? Israel has managed to survive 4 wars started by Arab countries. Rather than being in a hole Israel is a prosperous democracy in a region where democracy does not exist. Nearly 40,000 Israely U2 fans attended U2s POPMART show in Israel at the same ticket price most Americans and Europeans payed. Why do you think U2 did not bring POPMART to the Arab countries? It is the Palestinians not the Israely's that have dug themselves into a hole.
You misunderstood me when I talked about other peoples suffering in history. What I am trying to do is say something about the fact that when European governments or citizens or others criticize Israeli actions, that saying such a thing automatically qualifies as a racist statement. It is not a racist statement, it is a statement against excessive military force. What I dont appreciate is how SOMETIMES one cannot protest Israels actions without somehow hating Jewish culture. I also refer to statements being made that the Germany of today should be fully supportive of all of Israels actions, I know that such statements are rare but I wanted to let you know how foolish they sound!

You mention how Israel being the only democracy somehow justifies its superiority. I have talked to people from un-democratic nations in the Middle East who are just fine with their lives. Forcing democracy on them would be seen as a form of imperialism. Some in the Middle East would much rather have an Islamic community than the many nations. Islamic culture, unlike Western, does not see a seperation between religion and government. It was this way for centuries and it was in the very core of their way of life. Perhaps some more cultural understanding of the Islamic nations would help.

Mikesimus is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 01:16 AM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesimus,
I'm well aware of Islamic culture and was not defining Israels democracy specifically as a reason to define it as superior. But it does give women the right to vote and to oppose the actions of their government. While many in the Arab world prefer their government and culture which is tied to it, HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE COUNTRIES HAVE A CHOICE? What about people that might want to have the opportunities that western democracy offers?
In terms of freedom of Religion, the ability to vote and choose ones leaders, human rights, and freedom of speach, western democracy is vastly superior. While many in those countries may prefer their system, most have narrow view and understanding of western democracy and have never lived in the USA. Many who would prefer the rights and freedoms of western democracy in arab countries have no choice but to continue to submit to the undemocratic laws and customs of the country they live in.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 01:17 AM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Mikesimus,
I'm well aware of Islamic culture and was not defining Israels democracy specifically as a reason to define it as superior. But it does give women the right to vote and to oppose the actions of their government. While many in the Arab world prefer their government and culture which is tied to it, HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE COUNTRIES HAVE A CHOICE? What about people that might want to have the opportunities that western democracy offers?
In terms of freedom of Religion, the ability to vote and choose ones leaders, human rights, and freedom of speach, western democracy is vastly superior. While many in those countries may prefer their system, most have narrow view and understanding of western democracy and have never lived in the USA. Many who would prefer the rights and freedoms of western democracy in arab countries have no choice but to continue to submit to the undemocratic laws and customs of the country they live in.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 05:48 PM   #91
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,044
Local Time: 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
Salome,
Well if you support Israels right to defend itself against terrorism, then you should support the military action in Jenin that uprooted one of the largest terror cells on the West Bank.
I do support military actions when negotations don't work, when it's clear what the results are that you trying to achieve and when chances are that you will achieve your goals with the actions taken
so I do support Israel in taking military actions to prevent further terrorism
here military actions ended up in acts of terrorism themselves
I do not support that

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it
Salome is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 06:08 PM   #92
Refugee
 
Anthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,538
Local Time: 09:02 AM
STING2;

You argue exceedingly well sir, and your arguments are not only cojent but fair as well as balanced. And you almost convince. However, I still don't see why Britain should commit itself when the rest of Europe aren't really bothering.

Ant.
Anthony is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 06:14 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
But what acts of terrorism were committed by Israels military incursion? Even the most liberal of human rights groups have now admitted that a massacre did NOT happen in Jenin. But the investigation is still continuing.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-29-2002, 06:35 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Britain has an interest in the stability of the Middle East because of that regions vast reserves of oil and the effect instability and war, or the sudden loss of supply of that oil, would have a dramatic effect on the british economy and way of life. Saddam Hussain has shown that he is a threat to the region by launching wars against Iran, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. His willfull destruction of the environment, slaughter of civilians, and pursuit of Weapons of Mass destruction, that could cause mass loss of life in the UK, through direct use by Iraq or indirectly through a terrorist group, in total constitute a threat to the United Kingdoms interest that cannot be ignored.
Certainly, the threat to other European countries is just as great. But most other European countries do not have the power projection capabilities that the British military has. France is the only possible exception. The French unfortunately believe that Saddam is a dove that can be engaged.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-30-2002, 02:35 AM   #95
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Stow, MA, USA
Posts: 256
Local Time: 09:02 AM
Salome, I generally like your answers... There short and simple.... and convey a simple and genuine answer.

---
I do believe that though relgion is a factor within this conflict... The two main issues are the geographic problems and lack of good leaders..... I wish Palestine could rebuild itself, and have a good leader with it.... I wish Israel fount a less corrupt leader....
I wish we could have peace on earth...
--------------------

Sting, do u think Sharon is a man of peace...?
Amna is offline  
Old 04-30-2002, 09:43 AM   #96
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,815
Local Time: 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
But what acts of terrorism were committed by Israels military incursion? Even the most liberal of human rights groups have now admitted that a massacre did NOT happen in Jenin. But the investigation is still continuing.
What I've heard and read a massacre (thankfully) did not occur. But human rights groups do say that there are cases of gross misconduct by the Israelis. Until now 52 dead bodies are found, but of those 52 dead almost half are not people Israel suspected of terrorism, but children, old women, etc. There are claims that Israelis willfully destroyed houses while knowing that people were inside. And Palestinians were used by Israelis as a human shield while the Israelis fired from behind them, claims supported by Israeli reserves (as broadcasted on CNN yesterday).

BTW, here's a link with a little bit of information about the situation in Jenin (and the two main reasons Israel is blocking the fact-finding mission there): http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/...nin/index.html

Marty


------------------
People criticize me but I know it's not the end
I try to kick the truth, not just to make friends

Spearhead - People In Tha Middle
Popmartijn is online now  
Old 04-30-2002, 10:51 AM   #97
Babyface
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 14
Local Time: 09:02 AM
I'm surprised that the religious right didn't jump up in arms about that because some believe that's a pseudonym for 'the Antichrist' (ref. the book of Daniel).

'Man of peace' Dan 11:17

Or did they? I'm not in America - so I'm interested if there were any noises about this.

Always looking for trouble!!!
David the Great is offline  
Old 04-30-2002, 04:30 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:02 AM
I am not sure if Sharon is a man of peace or not simply because I am uncertain of the true role Sharon played in Beirut in 1982. Evidence to directly link him to the slaughter there has not surfaced.

One thing you have to remember is that Sharon is not a dictator. He is the elected leader of the only true democracy in the region. Foreign policy is not formed by Sharon alone, but everyone in his cabinet. While I'm unsure if Sharon is a man of peace himself, his government is a government of peace.

The investigation so far does not point to a massacre, but there continue to be unresolved claims of IDF misconduct. So far only 21 civilians have been found dead which seems to be amazing(except for the civilians families and friends) considering the intense fighting that occured. Just as there was no massacre of 3,000 civilians as the Palestinians claimed weeks ago, what ever claims of IDF misconduct will have to be proven. Right now there are only claims, just like there was claims of 3,000 dead civilians a couple of weeks ago. The use of civilians as human shields is not Israely army policy, so if it is found to be true, then those soldiers who engaged in such actions should be punished. I would hope that the Israely military will consider using active military units rather than reservist the next time it engages such a sensitive terrorist or military target.
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-30-2002, 06:44 PM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:02 AM
from The Boston Globe...

Claims of massacre go unsupported by Palestinian fighters

By Charles A. Radin, Globe Staff and Dan Ephron, Globe Correspondent, 4/29/2002

JENIN, West Bank - Palestinian Authority allegations that a large-scale massacre of civilians was committed by Israeli troops during their invasion of the refugee camp here appear to be crumbling under the weight of eyewitness accounts from Palestinian fighters who participated in the battle and camp residents who remained in their homes until the final hours of the fighting.

In interviews yesterday with teenage fighters, a leader of Islamic Jihad, an elderly man whose home was at the center of the fighting, and other Palestinian residents, all of whom were in the camp during the battle, none reported seeing large numbers of civilians killed. All said they were allowed to surrender or evacuate when they were ready to do so, though some reported being mistreated while in Israeli detention.

Palestinian Authority leaders have asserted that more than 500 people, mostly women and children, were killed in the camp and that many of the dead were buried by Israeli forces in mass graves. Investigators for Amnesty International said that Israel failed to provide safe passage from the camp to noncombatants.

The Palestinian allegations led to the creation of a UN fact-finding team for Jenin, but Israel yesterday barred the team from arriving amid allegations of an anti-Israel bias.

Israel says that those Palestinians killed in the Jenin battle were almost all fighters, that none were buried in mass graves, and that ample chance was given to fighters to surrender and for civilians to leave. It initially estimated the death toll at 100 to 200, and has since revised that toll downward to 50.

Meanwhile, a British military adviser to Amnesty, Reserve Major David Holley, was quoted yesterday by Reuters news service as dismissing the Palestinian allegations of a massacre and predicting that no evidence would be found to substantiate them.

Jamal al-Shati, who was appointed by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to document events at the camp, said last night that 52 deaths have been documented, including those of three women and five children under 14. He asserts that the Israelis secretly removed bodies from the battleground.

Munir Arsam, 15, a member of Islamic Jihad, said that during the siege, which began April 3 and ended around April 11, he did scouting work for older militants, threw homemade pipe bombs, and helped with ambushes of Israeli troops. He said he was one of 50 boys, divided into groups of 10 by militant leaders, who were assigned these tasks.

In contrast with allegations by some Palestinians and Amnesty investigators, Arsam said women and children were able to evacuate the camp before the climactic battle began. Even at the height of the struggle, fighters were able to put down their weapons and surrender, he said, though he also said, as did the Amnesty investigators, that those who surrendered were beaten and otherwise mistreated while in detention.

Arsam said he knew of five fighters in houses bulldozed by the Israelis, at least two of whom were wounded and screaming for help when the bulldozers came. ''The men in the tanks and bulldozers could not hear them,'' he said.

He said he saw Sheik Ri'ad Abu Abd, 57, of Tulkarem, one of the Palestinian heroes of the battle, wounded with a bullet in the leg near the end of the fighting, and asked him if he wanted to surrender.

''He said `No, I want to die, I want to fight and die,' and a while later that house was bulldozed,'' Arsam said. On the last day of the battle, with no ammunition left, Arsam buried the weapon he had acquired during the fighting and surrendered.

''They destroyed all the houses in Hawashin,'' he said, describing a now-demolished neighborhood in the camp. ''I was in the last house, and they called out, `Surrender or we will fire at you.' There were only two of us, so we left, and they destroyed the house.'' He said the Israeli soldiers held him for four days, frequently beating and kicking him to make him confess to membership in Hamas or Islamic Jihad, then released him.

Asked if he felt any massacre had occurred, Arsam said: ''We killed them and they killed us, but we were victorious.''

Abdel Rahman Sa'adi, 14, another Islamic Jihad grenade-thrower, said he was one of a group of 11 adults and seven young men who surrendered upon Israeli demand. He said they were confined in a courtyard near the camp to which the Israeli troops brought dozens of other men and women.

''They told all the small kids to just leave, and they let all the women go after they checked their bags,'' said Sa'adi, who has braces and was wearing a baseball cap. ''None of them were kept for questioning.''

''Of course the Palestinians won'' this battle, he said, because ''they did not shake our morale. This was a massacre of the Jews, not of us.''

Prompted by bystanders, he revised his statement. ''I think there was a massacre here - maybe 100 people,'' he said.

Khalid Mohammed Taleb, 70, lay on a concrete slab from his ruined house, shaded by a makeshift plastic awning, watching with a blank expression as people clambered over the rubble yesterday and buried mines and grenades occasionally exploded.

''I come every day,'' he said. ''I lived here 50 years.''

Taleb and his extended family of 11 people stayed in the camp rather than evacuating because ''we thought it would be like the first invasion, they would make an incursion and leave. I used to say I wouldn't leave even if they buried me in this house, but I saw the bulldozers killing people and I left.''

That was around midnight, on the day before the battle ended.

Taleb said he raised a white flag and walked at the front of a group of 20 people - his own family and those of two neighbors. The destruction of his house and the surrounding buildings occurred after the civilians left, he said, when only fighters remained.

He said several times that no civilians were killed, but after repeated questioning from reporters and bystanders, he said: ''Well, maybe one or two. It was a big battle.'' Was it a massacre? ''Perhaps,'' he said. ''Both sides lost.''

An Islamic Jihad leader, who insisted on anonymity, said he was wounded as the battle drew to a close, and crawled 300 yards to where other fighters were gathered.

''There were 35 of us, and they were bringing down houses on us, so we surrendered,'' he said. Israeli soldiers ''threw me on the garbage near the hospital at noon'' on the last day of the battle, ''and I remained there until 1 a.m.'' The Israelis did not attempt to confine or question him, and he returned to the camp Saturday, he said.

All the fighters said that the Israelis failed to wipe out the militant leadership in the camp, which long has been known as an Islamic Jihad stronghold.

''Of course we are reorganizing,'' said the Islamic Jihad leader, who walked with a cane and was thronged by comrades near the wreckage. ''I don't know what is the plan, what is the strategy, but people are full of hatred.''

Arsam, the 15-year-old fighter, said leaders of Islamic Jihad and other factions were taking new groups of youngsters to a hill near Jenin every day for military training, teaching them to fire automatic weapons and to make bombs.

A spokesman for the Israeli army asserted, meanwhile, that Palestinians were moving bodies of people not killed in the Jenin fighting into graveyards around the camp ''to score points with the UN committee due to arrive to investigate the happenings in the Jenin refugee camp.'' The military said this charge was based on information received from Israeli intelligence agencies, and refused to elaborate.


This story ran on page A1 of the Boston Globe on 4/29/2002.
Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 04-30-2002, 07:01 PM   #100
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 04:02 AM
You know, I have been very silent on this thread and anything like it for a while now. Reason why? I really don't like either side. Let them blow each other up into oblivion. I'd be inclined to have a bit more sympathy for Arafat and his cause, had it not been for the fact that it's not like they're the only Islamic nation around that area. Why aren't the "good" nations of Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt taking care of their own people? Of course, at the same token, what kind of silly thought is it to resurrect a long dead nation? When is enough enough? It is just as silly to me as the thought of slave reparations 140 years after the fact. Multiply that by 10 and you have the ridiculousness of resurrecting Israel. I think its due time to resurrect an old American Indian nation, and make Los Angeles the capital. Sounds silly, right? Such a nice little gift we received from religious zealots on all sides...

Melon

------------------
"Still, I never understood the elevation of greed as a political credo. Why would anyone want to base a political programme on bottomless dissatisfaction and the impossibility of happiness? Perhaps that was its appeal: the promise of luxury that in fact promoted endless work." - Hanif Kureishi, Intimacy
__________________

melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×