Palestinians Are Trapped by Their Own Culture

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-manji1sep01,1,4053271.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

"But let's not lose sight of the larger reality. After the Aqaba peace summit in June 2003, both the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers encountered protests. Hard-line Israelis resorted to demonstrating and jeering. Hard-line Palestinians resorted to blowing up buses and the people in them. That's a life-and-death difference in choices
<snip>
"What's the difference," I asked, "between 'suicide' and 'martyrdom,' as you folks now call it?"

"Suicide," he replied, "is done out of despair. But most of our martyrs were very successful in their earthly lives."

Hindi's answer floored me. By his own admission, what drives so many of today's suicide bombers isn't that which the material world has failed to deliver to them, but something besides — perhaps the Koran's promises for the afterlife or, perhaps more precisely, Palestinian culture's ideological exploitation of the Koran's promise of paradise.

This much is clear: We liberals need to be asking as many tough questions of Palestinian officials as of Israeli ones. Until we do, we'll always reduce Palestinians to the status of mere victims. And that does nothing to recognize their dignity. Or their capacity for making ethically — and ideologically — sounder choices."

Interesting editorial. There's a lot in there.

and the U.S. to do it for them.

And THAT is the difference.

God forbid the Palestinians fight back with force rather than lay down
and die as so-called liberal pacifists would have them do.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

For example you ignore the massive military assistance given to Isreal by the U.S. but that is not really important.

The real issue here is what the Middle East would be like today
if the British had welcomed the Jews with open arms back in '48 instead
of promoting the Zionist cause that inevitably led to the land grab
that created Isreal. You cannot just take land from people
and expect them to embrace those to whom it was given.
Theft is theft and the end result of Zionism is perpetual war, death, and destruction.

expect the israelis not to do whatever they can to prevent their own deaths. Or do you? Here's a thought: the Israelis would rather kill Palestinians than be killed by them. And, they are the stronger party. Just being weaker does not justify the suicide bombing tactics.

before the first intifada the residence of israel were safe from suicide bombings.

yet the state of israel was still bulldozing homes and treating ALL palestinians as prisoners in their homeland.

present day hostile actions are no suprise.

let me also say nobody here on the board justifies suiced bombings. nobody.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How is killing people via massive military infrastructure any better?
The palestinians are using the tools at their disposal as does the isreali's. Killing is killing and the method is not relevant.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

just a country trying to prevent its citizens from being murdered

to justify the killing of Palestinians because they are weaker

"Still, you can't expect the israelis not to do whatever they can to prevent their own deaths. Or do you? Here's a thought: the Israelis would rather kill Palestinians than be killed by them. And, they are the stronger party"

The way I see this issue is kinda like this:

If someone, 6ft plus, 90+ kgs and built like a brick shithouse picks a fight with me in a bar for no reason (I'm 5ft 3 weigh 50kg and am piss weak) I'm NOT going to fight fair, I'll go for eyeballs and testicles and whatever I can to avoid the outcome being paramedic scraping my brain back into my skull. Normally I wouldn't agree with wrenching off a goolie but sometimes fighting fair means dying.

killed because they won't stop killing Israelis.

that they feel that the Israelis are getting killed because they wont stop killing Paletsinians??

Why am I even bothering - I'm talking to a bloke that calls a camp survivor a whacko Nazi lover (that IS the inference when you say he's suffering Stockholm syndrome) just because he doesn't view zionism like you do

are you insane?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

'Palestinians' came from elsewhere. I believe that if their fellow Arabs had governments that cared anything about them,, the 'refugee' problem could have been solved long ago. I think that an established nation, Israel, has the right to defend itself and its citizens, and will regardless of whether you or I think differently. It doesn't matter how it got established.

I think until the Palestinians give up their terror campaign, their grievances should not be addressed.

I believe that Arabs in Arab-run states are suffering much more greatly that Arabs in Israel. I believe that the Palestinians are bringing their extra suffering on themselves by supporting murderers. Until Arafat is gone, the Palestinians will be living in hell. Not an endorsement of the fact, just a statement that it is a fact.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and if I had been politically interested back then, I would have been against them, too. But now they have, and are entitled to defend it. Understand, if the Palestinians want to fight for 'their' land, that is their right. But having appealed to the sword, they should accept its verdict without whining.

And be careful how you toss around accusations of hypocrisy.

please understand that both sides have a policy of an eye for an eye which i do not support.

however realize one side has tanks and bulldozers which inflict collective punishment on countless innocents every day and every hour. israelis poison well water and shell "suspected" areas.

seldom does the IDF bother to investigate these "suspect" areas to any degree of detail. it is a shoot first and dont bother with asking questions policy.

acts like this have been IDF policy long before the first intifada.

palestinian acts of terrorism are acts which are carried out by the extreme members of the population.

the state of israel claims to be a "democracy"...
it is not only the state which commits these crimes.
most everyone enlists in the army and is more responsible for perpetuating this violence.

OK, make a true peace with Israel, take what they can get, keep the peace. Hope to maybe acquire more land as they prove they can be trusted. Realize that they brought this on themsleves, and suck it up.

This is not a viable suggestion, and I would hope you see that.

A true peace with Israel calls for a fair approach to creating a sustainable Palestinian state. To say they can "acquire more land as they prove they can be trusted" is a biased and condescending notion. This idea assumes that Israel has any right to dole out Palestinian lands to the Palestinian people. It does not.

Maybe Israel should have access to THEIR lands based on values of trust? Should the Palestinians trust a government that has vowed to end construction in the settlements, and then continued to build? That destroys apartment buildings when hunting for lone terrorists?

How, in fact, did the Palestinians "bring this on themselves" any more than the Israeli's have brought this on themselves?

don't want that. They want it all. True peace does not at all call for a "sustainable" P state. There could be many other approaches. And Israel does have a right to dole out the lands that they won in a defensive war.

The Palestinians brought it upon themselves by continuing to use violence against innnocent women and children. It does not work, will not work, and cannot be allowed to work to get them what they diesire.

For years, Israel has given land for peace and obtained no peace. Now if the Ps want peace, they will have to give something.

'JEWS' came from elsewhere. I believe that if their fellow JEWS had governments that cared anything about them,, the problem could have been solved long ago. I think that an established nation, GERMANY, has the right to defend itself and its citizens, and will regardless of whether you or I think differently. It doesn't matter how it got established.

Thank you mr/mrs. nameless...its funny how their words can be used against them in most defenses of Israel's brutality.

didn't have a nation, did they? and how, exactly, were the jews threatening Germany? Please be specific instead of throwing mindless mockery around.

Look, let's say the Palestinians are right in their cause. They still must, must be stopped from killing innocent women and children, on purpose, by targeting them.. Any other conclusion is moral leprosy. This is somewhat different from targeting Palestinian murderers who hide behind their women's skirts. Hell, now they are even sending their own women and children out to die for them while they cower in dark holes like Osama so that thye won't be killed themselves. Nothing they want should be given them.

"they"?

who is "they"?

surely YOU are not speaking of every palestinian when you point the "they" finger.

if an african american man murders someone... do you fire a missle as he walks out of KFC in responce? do you seize his home? render his family homeless? do you assassinate his friends and neighbors?

do you then tell me and others that ALL african americans are murderers?

No every palestinian is not quilty of these crimes. But the paleswtinian society is. The terrorist get their support from the society and the PA.

The palestinians are at war with Israel, they say so themselves. so they will be treated as such by the Israelis.

Palestinian society is guilty of these crimes?

How the hell do you figure?

That is a step further even than implying the Americans are guilty of war crimes committed in their name in Iraq, it is utter nonsense. A PEOPLE can't be guilty of a crime. This is the same logic used by racists in the south when dealing with blacks, it is the same logic that Hitler used with the Jews. You CAN'T use a broad stroke to judge an entire people.

You demean a culture when you judge it as a whole instead of the individuals who carry out the crimes. This sort of verbal trash is offensive.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I find a lot of hatred against palestinians does have a racial bent to it.

At least THREE Palestinians to every one Israeli have died. IDF shoots women, children, all in the name of "defense." We must stop sending Israel billions of bucks every year with no accountability for its actions.

Nobody supports suicide bombers (ISLAM does not condone suicide nor the killing of innocents) but neither should anyone support the brutal actions of the IDF, burying old men alive in their homes with bulldozers, killing from the air with helicopters and missiles (innocent bystanders be damned), shooting kids who throw rocks, etc... it has to stop somewhere.

destroy property being used for terror. Why don't the old men leave when they are told to? Israel is also entitled to target terrorist leaders. Why are they hiding behind the skirts of their women?? How do you propose they get them? Which is not to say that I am not appalled by the loss of life of the Palestinian women and children, I am. but there is a difference between killing those who are plotting your murder, even if there is "collateral damage", and deliberately killing innocent children because you are too chicken-shit to attack armed soldiers.

I would like to see you go up against an armed soldier with little more than an old AK47 and some rocks.

What gives the IDF the right to tell the "old men to leave" in the first place? Destroying homes of old men has nothing to do with finding a sustainable peace. Plotting murder is done on both sides of the fence.

the IDF, so why would I do that. Anyway, their weakness does not excuse the murder of innocent women & children. If they can't win, then maybe they shouldn't fight.

As for the old men, maybe they should tell their grandsons not to plot murder in their houses, not to store arms there, nor smuggle them in from Gaza through a tunnel in the basement. Not to flee there when the Israelis are hunting them after their horrible crimes.

A nation and a state are two different things. The Kurds and Palestinians are nations without states. The Jews were a nation without a state for a long period of time.

All of these peoples have the right to defend themselves. However, they must also live amongst the community of man where the rule of law for peaceful co-existence is expected to be observed.

How many other Jewish governments are there now?

Jews never threatened Germany's existence or wanted it wiped off the map. They never detonated suicide bombs on German buses.

And Germans tried to exterminate Jews. Israel has not tried to exterminate the Palestinians. (Brutal mistreatment--yes. Extermination/genocide--not even close.)

So, in other words, your post is completely wrong on all levels, and manages to use the old "Israel=Nazi Germany" canard as well.

Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny do exist. That's what I believe and no-one ain't going to put a dent in my beliefs with pesky facts ;)

Same goes for yr beliefs about the Palestinian people. Where the hell do you think they came from, and when did they arrive? Considering most Israelis came from elsewhere (and that's a fact and not some belief that can't be backed up by facts), it seems a rather silly line of argument to take...

When it comes to the refugee issue, why do you believe there's no responsibility on Israel's part to resolve it? The homes of the approximately 700,000 refugees were inside what is now Israel (and what was already Israel when some of them fled or were expelled). At the cessation of hostilities, which would have been the armistace agreements of 1949, Israel should have allowed them to return. If their homes had been in neigbouring Arab states, then yr argument would hold some water, but because they weren't, it doesn't. The mistreatment of Palestinian refugees in many Arab states is a separate issue from that of where the responsibility lies for them becoming refugees in the first place...

I think until the Palestinians give up their terror campaign, their grievances should not be addressed.

I think that until you draw a distinction between the Palestinian people and groups like Hamas, etc, this brick wall's going to get in the way of yr arguments. The Palestinian people do have legitimate and very pressing grievances that should not be ignored because of the actions of the extremists amongst them. If we ignored their grievances, that'd give Israel and any other government indulging in the oppression of people within their own population or in territory the government's occupying a green light to commit any atrocity they want under the label of 'The War Against Terror' (or TWAT for those fond of acronyms)...

Until Arafat is gone, the Palestinians will be living in hell. Not an endorsement of the fact, just a statement that it is a fact.

Here's a fact for you. The Palestinians will be living in hell no matter who's leading the Palestinians. He sure isn't making it easier for them, but even if they had a leader that placed the interests of the Palestinians over that of cronyism, empire-building, and corruption, the Palestinians would still be living in hell. In fact, it'd probably be even worse than what we see now, as someone who put Palestinian interests first would be seen as even more of a danger to the Israeli govt than Arafat, who I think suits Israel's purposes as a handy blame-bag. Blame Arafat for everything and maybe the denser amongst us won't notice that it's Israel that commits human rights abuses on the Palestinian population...

Violet...

and so you do, VC, so you do.

Give me some specifics to go on here. I gave you some specifics about yr beliefs...

Violet...

That they are foreign to Palestine/Israel is a canard which has long been disproven. One well known example has been Norman Finkelstein's excellent commentary which dissect and dismiss Joan Peter's claims to this effect.

The majority of Palestinians do indeed have familial roots in the territories.

L-

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Ever heard of Edward Said?

http://www.edwardsaid.org/modules/news/


Edward Said, who has died aged 67, was one of the leading literary critics of the last quarter of the 20th century. As professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University, New York, he was widely regarded as the outstanding representative of the post-structuralist left in America. Above all, he was the most articulate and visible advocate of the Palestinian cause in the United States, where it earned him many enemies.

The broadness of Said's approach to literature and his other great love, classical music, eludes easy categorisation. His most influential book, Orientalism (1978), is credited with helping to change the direction of several disciplines by exposing an unholy alliance between the enlightenment and colonialism. As a humanist with a thoroughly secular outlook, his critique on the great tradition of the western enlightenment seemed to many to be self-contradictory, deploying a humanistic discourse to attack the high cultural traditions of humanism, giving comfort to fundamentalists who regarded any criticism of their tradition or texts as off-limits, while calling into question the integrity of critical research into culturally sensitive areas such as Islam.

Said was born in Jerusalem into a prosperous Palestinian family.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1049931,00.html

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Edward Said is of no concern to me. In as much as your information about him comes from the UK, I would call it suspect. Lets remember, it was the UK that was caretaker for the region now called Israel and it was the UK who committed crimes against Jewish refugees from Europe when they tried to emigrate to Israel. It was the UK forces that violated the terms of the Balfour declaration that London had agreed to. That Declaration established Israel as a refuge for Jews who survived the Holocaust but the Brits threw up in front of them every roadblock they could think of to keep them away.

And just because a man is a University professor, it does not signify
wisdom, tolerance, evenhandedness or even the necessary scholarship to be considered an expert. In your description of him, you did not say he was a professor of international relations, government, history, politics or any other related subject. Therefore, his writings have to be opinion and one man's opinion is as good as the next mans.

There is another aspect to this subject that I will NOT go into and therefore, I have said all I wish to say.

I was merely proving to you Said's existence not his wisdom, which is
proven in his writings. You however made the blatantly false comments
in your original post and that was the point.

Now as far as you discussion regarding the Balfour agreement, as well as Sykes-Picot, I have to ask you this: What ever gave the British or the French the idea that they had the right to lay any claim whatsover to these lands? The answer is the racist colonial mindset that has characterized European history for the last 500 years.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"What ever gave the British or the French the idea that they had the right to lay any claim whatsover to these lands? The answer is the racist colonial mindset that has characterized European history for the last 500 years."

>> or Palestine to divi up other people's property ....

one.

You may agree or disagree about specific thoughts, but to summarily dismiss Mr. Said as a valid voice shows either great intellectual dishonesty or pure ignorance about the Israeli/Palestine situation. He represents one of the two significant academic lines of thought which are currently in play. The other is Mr. Bernard Lewis. Any honest study of the history and interplay of the historical figures will study both lines.

The import of Mr. Said is easily shown by the length and depth of his obituaries in several leading papers:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1049931,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3140570.stm
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/25/obituaries/25CND-SAID.html?ex=1094184000&en=dc701d4129fdfb2c&ei=5070

I will ignore your other comments as being similar for your commentary of Mr. Said.

L-

where it is written that I must accept the words of Mr Said or anyone else? I believe freedom of thought allows me accept or reject who I want.

but actually reading and comprehending his posts might be useful:

"You may agree or disagree about specific thoughts, but to summarily dismiss Mr. Said as a valid voice shows either great intellectual dishonesty or pure ignorance about the Israeli/Palestine situation.".....I'd go with both.

Your comments indicated a summary dismissal of the man.

My comment said that while you may agree or disagree with what he has to say, to arbitrarily dismiss him for the reasons you gave along with the strong suggestion that you had never even read his works is intellectually dishonest when discussing the I/P situation.

Personally I do have problems with some aspects of Mr. Said's work, but I do agree that he raises some very important questions and issues which should be discussed.

Which is true, but raises the question as why he is coming around
here and annoying us with his solipsistic view of the world and
contrafactual ideas about the history of the Eastern Mediterranean
littoral.

I like hanging out with guys who use big words.
:wow:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You won't like to hang out with me. I use small words and have a vok ab ul ar ee of less than one hun dred words! If it can't be said in one sill y ab bel then I won't say it!

Sorry :)

Vio let...

Decided it was not worth the trouble anyway.
Reverend Steve would be appropriate here.

with you. I've heard of Edward Said. i've read some of his stuff. In my opinion, he was a racist, terrorist-supporting fool.

But where I disagree with you, is that what makes one man's opinion as good as another's?? Nothing!! Otherwise, George Bush's opinion is as good as John Kerry's, and vice versa, of course.

Opinions not based on facts are worthless. Even mine.

can be taken both ways. The opinions can be horsehockey
or they can be valid as gold. And you are right, opinions based on nothing are generally worthless.
My problem is...no one tried to determine if my facts were correct and how I came by them. In that case, opinions are worthless if the listener isnt interested.

i dont mean to perpetuate this part of the thread but im sure many of us are more than open to view your sources of info if youd like to post them.

Refute Mr Said's facts with facts of your own and I will be more than happy to chirp in here. At this point it seems like this portion of the thread is blind (read: You haven't even read his stuff) rhetoric, which is MORE useless than an opinion.

Isn't hard to have an opinion of someone you haven't read?

How could you possibly have read his works and come to the conclusion that he's a 'racist, terrorist-supporting fool'? What stuff of his did you read to come to that conclusion?

Opinions not based on facts are worthless. Even mine.

Yes, couldn't agree more :)

Violet...

I read "Orientalism". I've read numerous articles about him and comments he has made. It's like when I read "Black Athena" by Martin Bernal (Volumes 1 & 2. I don't know and don't care whether he ever got around to the promised vol. 3). After a while, you get to know when someone is looking at things through a prism of race and ideology rather than facts. Bullhookey is bullhookey, even if a "respected" academic is shooting it.

As for terrorist - supporting, what would you call him?

I'm not interested in what anyone chooses to misread into someone's words. I was looking for comments made by Edward Said where he's supported terrorism. You know, facts, rather than a possibility that someone is looking at his words through a prism of race and ideology and falsely labelling him a 'terrorist supporting fool' just because he was a Palestinian who spoke out against what's been done to the Palestinians...

What would I call him? I'd call him someone who's referred to suicide bombings as barbaric and cruel. I'd call him someone who rather than being a fool, was a respected academic. I'll tell you what's bullhookey and foolishness - it's when someone claiming that Edward Said supported terrorism because that someone claims they read between the lines...

Violet...

What does your last line mean?

I would be interested in this other aspect of your thought, perhaps that would shed light on where you are coming from..

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=38326&item=3744535515&rd=1



1904 MAP OF PALESTINE ISRAEL JERUSALEM ** CYPRUS **
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=37960&item=3744470958&rd=1




1820 PALESTINE ISRAEL FULLY HANDCOLOURED MAP BY NEELE
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=63598&item=3745520553&rd=1



check out other maps...

http://search-desc.ebay.com/map-palestine_W0QQsofocusZbsQQsbrftogZ1QQsonewuserZ1QQfromZR10QQsotextsearchedZ2QQsotrZ2QQsosortpropertyZ1QQsosortorderZ1

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

generates heated arguments everywhere.
Everybody had his own idea of what is happening and who is to blame.

As for me, I lost 27 relatives in the holocaust including one set of grandparents plus aunts, uncles and cousins I never got to meet. So I have rather intense views of Israel and what is happening there. I also have several close friends who live there today. My interest is sparked by several things....my career in the military, my career in journalism and of course my personal observations. But I also do my own research. I don't depend upon others to do research for me because far too often, I cannot verify their words. And opinion is just that...opinion and there is one opinion for every person alive today.

I don't care one bit if you don't agree with me or if you simply think I am blowing smoke. I don't care because neither your words or mine will change the situation. Only the Israelis and Arabs can do that and right now, that is an iffy proposition. But with two buses being blown up and 16 people dying, somebody is not helping the process.

I will tell you though what truly steams me.....thats getting into a discussion, debate or argument and suddenly determining that the subject at hand is not the issue. That the issue appears to be a personal matter. At that point, I bow out. So...I have nothing more to say at this time.

the original op-ed I posted, but no one seems to want to really discuss it. Even you.

LAT is annoying; registration, and I have to turn Java on, and
remember user/pwd blah blah blah.

Some interesting points, a bit simplistic, the present situation
WRT the Palestinians and their culture and so on did not come into
existence in a vacuum, they have lived in a peverse situation for a
long time and hence become somewhat perverse, like prison inmates.

This is not to say that things are not disfunctional, and I am all
for getting rid of Arafat and his like, but to do that without
improving conditions in terms of jobs, education, and hope will
accomplish little. One reason religious nutballism is attractive is
because it is the best thing on offer, even if it is bullshit.

:-) Thanks.
I like that she considers the Palestinians adult enough to make better choices for themselves. Would that she could work on the Republicans next.

we have to play the cards we are dealt as best we can.
And it helps to realize we all fall in the same category: humans.

Nevertheless, to expect any sort of animal to behave well when
they are not treated well is unrealistic, and humans are observably
like any other creature in that regard.

I did subscribe to that place, but I forgot my password and I'm too lazy to go through it all again. Feel free to PM me the article in it's entirety, though...

Violet...

does not actually "explain" unquestioning support for Israel or the occupation. There are many many posters here who are in the same position and they disagree with you.

One of the most fervent Jewish anti-zionists I know did not just loose relatives he'd never met but those he'd lived with all his life and he himself spent nearly three years in a concentration camp. When ignorant folk call him anti-semitic he rolls up his sleeve and shows them his camp ID tatoo, it usually shuts them up pretty quickly

It's called Stockholm Syndrome. Check into it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Please agree to disagree here and move on. The issue at hand is rich in grey tones spanning the spectrum and which are correct for different people for differing reasons; pushing towards a black/white response is incorrect, insensitive and full of pitfalls.

Lithos
FA/NS Moderator
Democratic Underground

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

yes I read the article ....

" they're economically impoverished and desperate. Not according to Mohammed Hindi, the top Gaza leader of Islamic Jihad. His response was part of a longer interview I conducted with him in Gaza "

>> so "top Gaza leader of Islamic Jihad" is the expert on Palestinian
economics ???

this article isn't very good ....

just a guess. :shrug:

Cassandra obviously did this just to trick me, since I'm usually right with that guess.

Her name sounds familiar.. the Ugandan with the spikey hair?

Peretz would have used more blunt phrasing.

A lesbian, liberal, muslim, etc. Clearly fond of the media
spotlight, and selling books is part of the agenda.

The mix of bias, shallow blather, and essentially sound ideas
is more interesting than usual. A "useful idiot" I would say.