Guardian Report Misses the Real Child Abuse

January 24, 2012 12:27 by Simon Plosker

The images grow no less shocking with time — a gaping wound on a tiny skull, the hair matted with blood; a gunshot that pierced the skin of a small torso and went straight toward the kidney; and finally, the broken neck and severed penis of a 13-year-old boy, his mangled body contorted on a plastic sheet.

This isn’t, however, a story from Israel but the shocking example of what is happening to Syrian children being tortured and murdered by the Assad regime.

Meanwhile, in Israel, The Guardian runs a special report on the alleged mistreatment of Palestinian children detained by the Israeli military. With the report is an 11 minute video which includes footage of an interrogation. A Palestinian child cries, not as a result of torture but because he is going to miss some school exams.

By opening this critique with the emotive and disturbing description of a dead child, we could be accused of being deliberately manipulative. Just like The Guardian’s Harriet Sherwood who also set the scene in a similar fashion:

The room is barely wider than the thin, dirty mattress that covers the floor. Behind a low concrete wall is a squat toilet, the stench from which has no escape in the windowless room. The rough concrete walls deter idle leaning; the constant overhead light inhibits sleep. The delivery of food through a low slit in the door is the only way of marking time, dividing day from night.

This is Cell 36, deep within Al Jalame prison in northern Israel. It is one of a handful of cells where Palestinian children are locked in solitary confinement for days or even weeks. One 16-year-old claimed that he had been kept in Cell 36 for 65 days.

It is an ugly scene for an equally ugly story that paints Israel as a serial abuser of Palestinian children. The real child abuse in reality, however, is that caused by Palestinian society and media that glorifies terrorists, suicide bombers and “martyrs”, encouraging Palestinian youth to follow the same path.

A vulnerable child is easy pickings for recruitment by terrorist organizations. In recent years the most predominant activities characterizing involvement of minors were involvement in suicide bomb attacks, Molotov cocktail throwing, stone throwing and stabbing. Minors have also been involved in grenade throwing, use of explosives, shooting, car bombs, transfer of weapons, kidnapping, rocket launching, as well as assault and murder.

See here for more on Children Dying to Kill.

And while it suits Palestinian propaganda to promote the image of children armed with stones facing Israeli armor, the reality is that stones can kill. As recently as September 2011, Asher Palmer and his infant son Yonatan were killed after the vehicle he was driving overturned as a result of Palestinian rock throwing.

The Israeli response: Unpublished by The Guardian

There are often complaints that Israel does not react in a timely manner to address allegations such as those made by The Guardian. While Israeli Government spokesman Mark Regev does appear in The Guardian’s video along with a token paragraph in the main article, most of the Israeli Security Agency’s (ISA) response went unpublished as Harriet Sherwood picked out only a few quotes.

Here, for the record, we are including the response from the ISA that was sent to The Guardian before its article was published. In it, the ISA states:

The claims that Palestinian minors were subject to interrogation techniques that include beatings, prolonged periods in handcuffs, threats, kicks, verbal abuse, humiliation, isolation and prevention of sleep are utterly baseless.
Those detained for ISA questioning receive the full rights for which they are eligible, in accordance with international treaties of which the State of Israel is a signatory and according to Israeli law, including the right to legal counsel and visits by the Red Cross.

Click here for the full ISA response.

Continued on Page 2

Pages: 1 2

Next Page: 1 2

57 Comments

57 Comments → “Guardian Report Misses the Real Child Abuse”

george forrai

5:03 am

Jan 28, 2012

Your argument is that since the Palestinian rock-throwers are on their own land, they are justified in their violent action and jailing them is “abuse”. ( You are not alleging that they are mistreated in jail, I think, although being in jail is never pleasant.)
I disagree. The correct name of the West Bank and Gaza is : Legally Occupied Territories. UN Resolution 242 required Israel to withdraw ot “secure and recognized boundaries”, NOT total withdrawal. That is expressly clear not only from the wording but the Security Council discussions on the issue. The US stood by Israel and opposed a resolution to withdraw to the 1967 (indefensible) borders.
Thus, it is up to the various protagonists to agree on what the new borders will be. Despite numerous offers of a settlement ( including under Pres. Clinton where HE stated that Arafat had missed a great opportunity for peace and a State), the “Palestinians” have refused to agree on “secure and recognized boundaries”. Hence, the occupation continues. And it is LEGAL because it arose from a war of aggression against Israel. Even the UN did not condemn Israel for its pre-emptive air strike AFTER Egypt and Jordan had mobilised.
Conclusion: the Palestinians are not throwing rocks at Israeli troops who are occupying their lands BECAUSE until a settlement is reached, it is NOT theirs.

Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 13 2

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

8:39 am

Jan 28, 2012

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
They are Palestinians without the “”. Israel even recognises that. So if they are not the legitimate occupants of the territory, who are they? It is a nonsense. Most of that land belongs to them, and who says that in losing some areas, they would not gain others? If that is the case, calling people Israeli now living in such areas would be an error? 242 is based on the Charter principle of non-acquisition of territory by armed force. Occupations end. and all agree there will have to be agreement as to final borders. That still does not make any part of the current territories part of Israel nor does it justify prolonged and continued occupation. The UN has recognised the territory as that of the Palestinians, even Israel recognises the Palestinian Authority. Authority of what? Why and how has Israel negotiated with this Authority? No other state recognises Israel’s occupation as de jure, rather it is de facto. The Palestinians are throwing rocks because they are under occupation. I am not alleging their children’s mistreatment in Israeli jails, many of them are, and the general consensus is that this is happening. If Israel is in the middle of a battle for opinion, advancing specious arguments is not helpful. The Boers used to argue that the black people reached the Cape same time as they did to justify a historical basis for apartheid. Israel’s apologists need to avoid that kind of distortion of history. You neglect that Israel was founded within the framework of a 2 state solution, agreed at the UN. Israel’s pre-emptive Declaration of Independence did not change that. We all know the Arab states have not played a constructive role in this also, but surely Israel’s own interests dictate that the ending of over 60 years of non-independence for the Palestinians needs to happen. If any nation has a claim to the territories it is Jordan to a large extent, but they have ceded that claim to the Palestinians.

Poorly-rated. Agree or Disagree: 0 10

Reply
george forrai

2:39 pm

Jan 28, 2012

Just 2 points and then I am done with this:
I have no idea how old you are but I am 66 and I can tell you one thing: NOONE WAS CALLED A “PALESTINIAN” BEFORE ARAFAT INVENTED THE TERM AFTER THE 1967 WAR ! There has NEVER EVER been a Palestinian state, with a flag, currency, army, borders etc ! So don’t give me this BS that it is PALESTINIAN LAND.

Resolution 242 stated what I said . It did not require Israel to stop occupying the conquered JORDANIAN lands until there was a deal on ” SECURE AND RECOGNIZED BOUNDARIES”, WHICH TO THIS DAY the new claimants (after Jordan gave up the territories as you admit), the “PALESTINIANS”, HAVE REFUSED TO AGREE TO.

Your statement that “the UN has recgnized the territory as that of the Palestinians” gives the LIE to your argument ! Pray what “territory” has been recognised by the UN as Palestinian ? You cannot answer that because the UN itself cannot do so. It is clearly NOT all the pre-1967 areas (Resolution 242 above)… so what is it ? To this day, there are on-going discussions as to what “territory” should be given to the Palestinians to create – for the FIRST TIME IN THEIR HISTORY- a State of their own !!!

The 2 State solution of 1948 was REJECTED by the Arab States ( not the “Palestinians” who did NOT exist as a State or other recognized entity in any shape or form) and so Israel is entitled to tell the Arabs that the 2 State solution is dead. Bye-bye !
However, since Israel does not want to be stuck with so many Arabs (it already has 20-25% of its population of Arabs and BTW how many Arab Sates have that % of Jews ???), Israel is even now – after the Arabs had rejected the 2 -State solution for 40 years or so in the hope of DESTROYING Israel – willing to help the Palestinians get a State of their own on the basis of Resolution 242. They should be grateful for that instead of throwing rocks.

Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 17 2

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

3:49 pm

Jan 28, 2012

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I’m 67. The rest of the world recognises ‘Palestinian’, even Israel as a state does. There is nothing in 242 which says, for example, that Israel may allow its citizens to build settlements in what even Israel terms ‘occupied territories’. There is no precedent for this, no authority. Building them does nothing to promote a final agreement, it creates the basis for conflict, which it has. Israel is not entitled to tell the UN that a 2 state solution is dead. In any case, what if there is no 2 state solution, what is left? Israel annexes the land? So what becomes of the ‘Palestinians’? Or you just continue occupation and creeping de facto annexation? You must answer that – do you see this as a matter of expulsion, integration …. what??? When Israel was created, there was no international agreement ahead of the declaration as to what exactly constituted the State of Israel, it took matters into its own hands. Should not the Palestinians have exactly that right? Israel claimed the right to create a state and to defend its territory. This is not allowed to the Palestinians through resistance to occupation? I’d say you’re lucky it’s only stones they have access to most of the time. If Israel was occupied, you’d be the first to preach resistance, quite rightly. Israel pre-existed in historical times, but always the same territory? If the Palestinians are not worthy of their own nation, who then ARE they? Arabs? Well, Brits are Europeans but I bet they’d be sore if they were told they were the responsibility of Europeans if a power occupied their land. I guess too they might resist, rock-throwing for a start. I can argue the Palestinians primarily are a semitic people. Studies shown that in DNA terms the people of Israel have more in common with the Palestinians and the Italians than anyone else – harks back to Roman connection in the latter. Basically tribal, divisions were religious but tolerated over a long period when semitic Christians, Jews and Moslems lived side-by-side for the most part peacefully. These semitic people have occupied these lands for centuries when nation states meant nothing. We live in a nation-state era often based on ethnic, cultural and language commonalities, Israel’s creation in 1948 intruded such reality into that area, and has made it necessary to complete the identification of land in such national terms. Jordan in fact has best title to that land, it says it cedes that to a Palestinian homeland. Jordan recognised it had two populations, and the 1967 war meant that the division into modern-day Jordan and the area where the Palestinians live (ie their Homeland) became the reality. Jordan recognises that, but, you may know this, have they formally ceded that territory to ANYONE? Guess what, certainly NOT to Israel. 242 will give the Palestinians their homeland, Israel its security, but land exchange, for security and/or other land, is a major issue. The settlements cannot be advanced as automatic gains, some may have to go, and as compensation, some Israeli territory may have to be ceded. Is there any appetite for any of this in Israel? No? Then expect worse to come, and it surely will.

Poorly-rated. Agree or Disagree: 0 10

Reply
Name

2:11 am

Jan 30, 2012

This article was completely pointless, baseless, and useless. Why was it even written? It didn’t prove a single thing…

Agree or Disagree: 1 3

Reply
Karl

8:20 am

Jan 30, 2012

Sometime the accusations against Israel comes from people that seem to know what they are talking about…but actually they don’t:
1. “When Israel was created, there was no international agreement ahead of the declaration as to what exactly constituted the State of Israel, it took matters into its own hands…”
- Yes there was definitely an agreement and an UN resolution which the Arab side clearly infringed when they “ took matters into their own hands” – Iraq and other countries without common borders sent troops against the Jews and Tel-Aviv was bombed by the Egyptian air-force – any problems with those facts?
2. “Israel’s creation in 1948 intruded such reality into that area, and has made it necessary to complete the identification of land in such national terms.”
- Wrong again, long before the creation of Israel- the colonial powers artificially created/invented most of the Arab/Muslim states and nation including Jordan which they created by subdivided an arbitrary area called “Palestine” without the international approval. Jews were excluded from living in Jordan while at the same time Arabs continued migrating and settling in the remaining “Palestine” – now claiming to had lived there for centuries. Any problem with those facts? Do you have also a problem with all the other invented Arab states and nations?
3. “Tolerance of Christian and Jews in the Arab World…”you mean the blood libels (Damascus 1832), pogroms (Hebron 1929, etc.) and ethnical cleansing (Iraq, Egypt, etc) of Jews living in the Middle East – for millennia before the Arab/Muslim invasion!? Can Jews and Christian visit Mecca ? Which countries have still de-facto slavery and Apartheid?
There are many other specious arguments that need to be cleared before a rational discussion about what is the best way to solve this conflict but I am sure that any peace solution should be based on the Arab side admission of its wrongs and any compensation agreements should include the rights of the dispossessed Jews of the Middle East. This is REAL JUSTICE!!!!

Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 12 1

Reply
Guardian Report Misses the Real Child Abuse | My Blog

3:42 pm

Jan 30, 2012

[...] This is cranky posted by Simon Plosker during HonestReporting [...]

Agree or Disagree: 0 0

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

12:06 am

Jan 31, 2012

The 2 state solution was agreed by the UN, Israel declared independence before it was implemented, and the first Arab-Israel war began. Arabs had lived in that territory for a long long time, to deny it is distortion. It was not uninhabited. Migration occurred within those lands generally as a way of life. As for the artificial creation of countries, that’s most of Africa and some of Asia, Israel included. Jordan emerged out of the Transjordan, “a Hashemite ruled British protectorate in the Southern Levant, included within the British Mandate of Palestine, but having a fully autonomous governing system. In 1946, the Emirate became an independent state in 1946 and in 1951 was officially declared as the the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.” Recognised by the UN. “The British Mandate for Palestine, also known as the Palestine Mandate and the Mandate for Palestine,[1] was a geopolitic polity under British administration, carved out of Ottoman Syria after World War I. The mandate formalised British rule in Palestine, from 1922 until 1948. With the League of Nations’ consent, Britain later subdivided Mandatory Palestine into two administrative areas. The land west of the Jordan River would remain under direct British rule and opened to Jewish settlement, while the land east of the Jordan would be a semi-autonomous region known as Transjordan, under the rule of the Hashemite family from the Hijaz.[2]”

That is how Palestine developed. What is under occupation by Israel is the land east of the Jordan minus the current Jordan. It is not Israel’s, not intended to be for Jewish settlement, and you have neglected to answer my question: if not 2 states (not Israel’s “offer” by the way) then what? Back to Jordan. Israeli annexation (unlawful)? What then of the INHABITANTS (if you object to the term ‘Palestinian’) now living there? Citizenship? Expulsion? Answer that.

Your “claiming there” has the ring of apartheid-style apology, that’s what the Boers claimed about the Blacks of the Cape, I read it in apartheid-era propaganda for the South African government. A denial of history to suit a racist state in that case.

I said Jews, Christians and Arabs lived together well enough for the most part. There were indeed appalling episodes but things generally leveled out. And who says dispossessed Jews cannot be included in a proper settlement. That would be just. Would some want the right of return, to live equally in a Palestinian state? That must be considered. Or migration to a final-border Israel? Or financial compensation but staying where there are now? Justice must be for all.

“Admission of wrongs”. Well not my choice for achieving peace, unless it’s on the Truth and Reconciliation basis which means all taking part to examine the truth in order to reconcile. No Israeli wrongs …..? “Beat your breasts, Arabs, we did nothing wrong” …. Which is where this discussion started. Palestinian children in Israeli jails.

Hot debate. What do you think? 1 9

Reply
Karl

2:00 am

Jan 31, 2012

All those additional facts don’t change anything in what I said. The Palestinian nation like many other Arab and African nations were created by the European Colonial powers. Previously all the non-Arab/Muslim natives nations of the Middle East were invaded and colonised by the followers of Mohammed. Europeans and Americans are constantly reminded about their crimes while the accusers play innocent victims who supposedly never invaded someone else countries, colonised ,destroyed the native cultures, engaged in slave trade, etc.?! The last Muslim Empire (Ottoman) lost the war to the European Empires and received a bit of their “own medicine” which they intended to administrate to Europe if they had won the war. The point is that losing a war (especially if you started it ) does not entitled you to an “innocent victim” status and you should not expect to get back your territories as long as you don’t provide solid evidence that you are not going to try again. Think Germany after the WWII- American troops on the ground making sure no regime sympathetic to the previous one will play on the Germans “feelings of humiliation” losing the war, while demanding the unconditional, immediate ending of the Allies occupation and not recognising the right of a neighbour ally country to live in peace- will gain power again.
Israel should stick to a similar approach as a basis for a peace agreement which will probably involve giving away some of the former Jordanian territories to create a Palestinian state. As far as the “resistance” (i.e. terrorists- targeting civilians) continues Israel is entitled to treat enemy combatants under martial law.
It is also very important also to realise that in the vast majority of the cases, Israel’s actions are much better than the Arab/Palestinians/Muslims and even NATO’s actions. Ignoring this basic fact makes all those anti-Israeli accusations hypocritical and useless. This is exactly the point of this article – for those that didn’t get it yet!

Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 7 2

Reply
Karl

2:07 am

Jan 31, 2012

All those additional facts don’t change anything in what I said. Israel declared independence according to UN181 resolution one day before the end of the British Mandate – do you have any proof that this contradicted the international law??!!! Or is this just a part of the One Thousands Arabian Nights – anti Israeli mythology ?
The Palestinian nation like many other Arab and African nations were created by the European Colonial powers. Previously all the non-Arab/Muslim natives nations of the Middle East were invaded and colonised by the followers of Mohammed. Europeans and Americans are constantly reminded about their crimes while the accusers play innocent victims who supposedly never invaded someone else countries, colonised ,destroyed the native cultures, engaged in slave trade, etc.?! The last Muslim Empire (Ottoman) lost the war to the European Empires and received a bit of their “own medicine” which they intended to administrate to Europe if they had won the war. The point is that losing a war (especially if you started it ) does not entitled you to an “innocent victim” status and you should not expect to get back your territories as long as you don’t provide solid evidence that you are not going to try again. Think Germany after the WWII- American troops on the ground making sure no regime sympathetic to the previous one will play on the Germans “feelings of humiliation” losing the war, while demanding the unconditional, immediate ending of the Allies occupation and not recognising the right of a neighbour ally country to live in peace- will gain power again.
Israel should stick to a similar approach as a basis for a peace agreement which will probably involve giving away some of the former Jordanian territories to create a Palestinian state. As far as the “resistance” (i.e. terrorists- targeting civilians) continues Israel is entitled to treat enemy combatants under martial law.
It is also very important also to realise that in the vast majority of the cases, Israel’s actions are much better than the Arab/Palestinians/Muslims and even NATO’s actions. Ignoring this basic fact makes all those anti-Israeli accusations hypocritical and useless. This is exactly the point of this article – for those that didn’t get it yet!

Agree or Disagree: 3 1

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

1:01 pm

Jan 31, 2012

The territories are not Israel’s “to give away”. If they belong to anyone they belong to those living there. and that (excluding an illegal settler population) is what the rest of the world calls the Palestinians. All your excuses about colonial powers etc can’t change that, they lived there then and they live there now. You can’t or won’t answer what happens if there is no 2state settlement. There are those in Israel who advocate formal annexation, which won’t be recognised internationally but when has that deterred Israel. You admit ‘land for peace’ is part of the deal, but how much do you think Israel can keep? Palestine is hardly viable in land terms now, it’s territories are divided. So how does further land snatch improve that? More settlements? What will Israel give in exchange to strengthen that viability? Israel would be able to administer as an occupying martial power if its occupation was recognised as being lawful. It isn’t, the issue is withdrawal and ensuring peace and stability, including recognised secure borders and that in turn means Israel’s right to exist. Whether Israel behaves better or worse than anyone else is not relevant, it simply should not be there. So far Israel has managed to come out on top in a conflict. What happens if that does not happen in a future time? Occupied territories? Stone throwing kids? Tit for tat all round? Another cycle? And do you think Israel will remain peaceful within as some religious forces gain strength and challenge the secular nature of much of Israeli society, the very same forces that fuel settlement-building and who advocate territorial acquisition by conquest?

Agree or Disagree: 0 7

Reply
Karl

3:33 pm

Jan 31, 2012

I guess that all the facts I’ve presented are OK with you as you couldn’t deny them so all you can say is that they are just “excuses”…OK then let’s see,
“Those territories are” “Israel’s to give” because it won the war-this is the reality and this is how the rest of the World operates (on this planet anyway). But usually the Losing side doesn’t impose so many conditions just to start negotiating a peace agreement with the Winner…strange isn’t it?
The reality is that:
1.There is NO UN Security Council resolution requiring Israel to UNCONDITIONAL redraw from ALL those territories occupied during the wars (which Arab started and should be held responsible for). As far as there is no peace agreement Israel is in charge of the security in those territories -by law, FYI. Forced transfer of populations from those territories is forbidden but it will be very difficult to accuse the Israeli government of forcing Jews into Judea and Samaria or ethnical cleansing of Arabs form there given that their population doubled or tripled since the occupation, isn’t?
2. Jews like any other human being have the right to build houses everywhere they own or bought the land, either recently or long time ago -like in Hebron where they have been massacred and their properties stolen by Arab Palestinians in 1929. It is racism to argue against this principle but some “intelligentsia” manages to do just so…amazing.
“If they belong to anyone they belong to those living there” – you mean the Chinatowns in San Francisco, Sydney or other places belong to China or can declare independence based on an ethnical majority living there for centuries??? I don’t think so.
Israel should do what USA did in the past against the Nazis and Communists –either win the war decisively and get the enemy to “mend their evil ways” and make peace which it will benefit them too, or stand firm as long as necessary, without any concessions, until the enemy crumbles from within. The current Islamo-Fascist movement sweeping the Middle East countries looks very similar to the Communism sweeping Asia, Africa and South America in the 60’-70’–it crumbled to dust in a couple of decades.

Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 7 1

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

2:26 am

Feb 01, 2012

No, international law has settled the issue, the matter is one for negotiation, not one-sided giving. Now how do you think the population increased? Israel let them in? Or did they multiply in situ, like most other instances? Israel’s population has increased by this method and immigration. So if Jews can build on land they owned before 1929, where can ‘Palestinians’ build? On land they occupied before a settlement was built illegally? You can’t have it both ways, claim restitution on an historic wrong but deny that to others. Your approach is confused and conveniently selective as to facts and victims, if that’s possible. The Chinatown idea is daft, you know why that is not relevant. These folk and their kind have lived in those occupied territories since historic times, or do we need archeologists to settle the issue? Or are you still trying to falsify history and say they only arrived recently…? Echoes of apartheid-style distortion and falsification if you are. My take is that none of those involved has a clean sheet as to their past actions. It needs some real courage all-round to face up to that fact and to get things moving. What I see sweeping the Arab world is a desire for reform and democracy. no matter how hard its rulers try to oppose it. What do you think has been happening in Syria – celebrating their Leader’s birthday a bit too strongly? Egypt? Libya? The rest? The problem is, those countries will not crumble, or change their stances whilst Israel remains in occupation of those territories, no matter what governments come to power. The problem will NOT fade away. Their wrongs added to yours do not make a right.

Hot debate. What do you think? 1 7

Reply
Leon

8:20 am

Feb 20, 2012

Judea,(including Jerusalem), Samaria and the Gaza Strip were liberated by Israel in 1967, having previously been illegally occupied by Arab states which abused the Arab residents of those 3 regions.
Handing these territories over to Arab rule would endanger Israel’s existence , and that is why Israel’s enemies, both Arab and Western,demand this..

Agree or Disagree: 1 1

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

2:54 pm

Feb 20, 2012

Leon, this is a lebensraum argument. The terms you use are biblical, not related to modern-day realities or history. You may have some politico-religious ambition/dream of restoration. But you don’t say what will happen to the Arabs living in those areas if you get your way. Hitler had a vision, of ‘restoration’. It didn’t have any room for Jews, Slavs etc. The former not at all, the latter as slaves to be worked to death until there were no more.

My ancestry is British/Polish. It’s like saying Poland used to occupy what is now part of the Ukraine and that must be restored. Or the Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth. Wars were fought, treaties established, borders agreed. People moved naturally. History moves us on. That’s how it done, the less bloodshed and suffering the better.

Wars of liberation are only so if people living in the area feel they have been liberated. The Palestinians (let’s call them that for convenience at least) clearly feel they are occupied by oppressors. Or haven’t we sussed that yet?

Saying Israel liberated the territories has the ring of cant about it. Hitler fought wars, took territory, expelled people, settled German stock – in Poland for example. Did he ‘liberate’ that land? You seem not to have learned a lesson a world war was fought to learn.

Greater Israel has a ring about it I don’t feel comfortable with. You see, I recognise admirable aspects about Israel – democracy, tolerance being two of them. What is happening seems to me to sully that and undermine your very best qualities. God knows the Middle East needs them. Some of us see your national moral fabric being damaged, seriously so.

Getting to grips with injustices committed by your own forces is essential. The Brits need to over Iraq, you do over the Palestinian issue.

Agree or Disagree: 0 1

Reply
george forrai

3:05 pm

Feb 20, 2012

Your “lebensraum” point is interesting and shows the vacuousness of all your arguments. Hitler used “lebensraum” to occupy other nation states! Israel has never done that. There has never been a State of Palestine. If there is EVER such a State, the “Palestinians” should kiss Israel’s “tuchus” for giving it to them after winning it from Jordan/Egypt.

Agree or Disagree: 1 1

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

3:59 pm

Feb 20, 2012

You contradict yourself. You admit Israel ‘won’ the land from Jordan/Egypt. Like Hitler ‘won’ Poland. Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Norway, France …. Careful who you keep company with. Your argument is lebensraum – taking land occupied by others for a ‘manifest destiny’. We’ve seen it before. Your history doesn’t permit you to prostitute the truth. Fascism is what it is. Nazism had bogus history behind it. Like Germany, Israel is a democracy at this stage. Germany’s people made a conscious choice which now many of their generation wave away as if they weren’t part of it. Be careful, you can make that mistake, you aren’t excused. Be warned by history, you aren’t excused from making the same mistake, you have to avoid it. Israel has a right to exist. Your vision, as I read it, doesn’t. Your path is one of bloodshed and suffering for all, there are plenty on the other side just like you.

Agree or Disagree: 0 0

Reply
Karl

12:32 am

Feb 21, 2012

How about the poor Germans now living in the occupied/liberated Sudeten or Russians in Moldavia or West Timor Indonesians fighting against “occupation” in East Timor? I would guess that people openly supporting the Nazi like the Palestinians in WWII and the Arab street obsession with Nazi propaganda would clearly put them on that side – that is if you have any logical capabilities and try to use them?

Agree or Disagree: 0 1

Reply
Jan Cosgrove

2:57 am

Feb 21, 2012

No their lands are not occupied, the borders are decided. I hold no brief for sh*te Arab regimes, may they perish soon as possible. We expect such regimes to be as they are. As for Palestinians supporting Nazis, yes some did. And there were Jewish elements who made treasonous attempts to work with the Nazis. Both on the premise my enemy’s enemy is my friend. In both cases the British. Why we even teamed up with the Soviets. So such arguments do not sway the logic and the concern as to Israel’s action. It’s supposed to be the good guy, we want it to act like it, that’s all. And for Palestinian kids to grow up in a country of their own, at peace. Occupying them won’t bring peace. Putting them in your prisons won’t either.

Agree or Disagree: 0 0

Reply
Leon

4:39 am

Feb 21, 2012

Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip were an integral part of the 1922 League of Nations determination which established the boundaries of the evolving Jewish nation-state. This was international law.

In 1947-48 the Arab world violated that law( and a host of others) by initiating a war of intended extermination against the Jews. In the process the Arabs illegally occupied the abovementioned 3 regions. The resultant armistice lines were not “settled borders” at all.
In 1967 Israel liberated and regained what the Arab world had stolen from it.
Today there is no Arab authority/regime/government that is willing to accept the legitimacy of a Jewish nation-state.

Agree or Disagree: 0 0

Reply