arthur sauerhaft wrote: > >I am a neutral observer. > > >It does not appear that way.
You're saying Fox is biased against Israel? Just how would you see a "neutral observer", Arthur? Would it be possible for a neutral observer to criticise Israel in any way whatsoever? I suppose you'd say "of course it is, no nation is perfect" and so on, but I'd reckon that when it came down to it you'd reject any criticism of Israel as "biased". That's what you've done so far, and ignored anything and anyone you needed to ignore in order to do so. I don't think you've shown yourself to be much of a judge of neutrality in this issue. What would you say of the 150,000-odd Israelis who demonstrated for peace last month in Tel Aviv? - former government ministers, current and former members of the Knesset, former generals, former combat veterans, former heads of internal security, people from all backgrounds, not a fringe movement. Also biased? > > To distinguish between what > >is just and what is not. Jews have taken other > >peoples' homes and have driven them out of their land. > > > > >Not all jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. >At the time many(to be fair, not all) Arabs left their homes voluntarily >with the promise of their leadership that they would be back within >days, after they had pushed the Jews into the sea. If you say so... Right now, however, Israel is taking other peoples' homes and driving them out of their land. > >i understand that all the arabs have accepted the fact > >that Isreal is to exist. > > >This is incorrect, most Arabs have not accepted Israel's right to >exist, and the ones that have, have not done so in spirit. Most have accepted it. The trouble is that Israel's behaviour does nothing to encourage that idea among Arabs, nor a few billion other folks, quite the opposite. How to make enemies. > > They have offered to live in > >peace provided Isreal returns all the land it stole > >from the arabs in 1967. > > >That is also incorrect, even if Israel returned to pre '67 borders there >are many Arabs who would not be satisfied until they Israel is abolished >entirely. Quite, so why bother giving the stolen land back, that being so, hmm? >Israel tried cutting deals with the Arabs and to both Israel >and the some moderate Arabs it ended in disappointment and chaos >sparked by right wing Arabs (most recently the failure of Arab >leadership to abide by Oslo accords). You're kidding, aren't you? No, you're not. See below. > >Why have Jews rejected it? > > > > >It is not the Zionists who have rejected overtures for peace when they >made sense, it is Hamas and Fatah and their likes that have consistently >destroyed the atmosphere of negotiation and hope. >Israel right now is involved in a unilateral peace plan because the >Arabs cannot present a unified front at the table. >I'm sure many of you will dismiss this as propaganda and "spin", let me >remind you of what good partners Israel and Egypt are once a deal was cut.. >The "Palistineans" (here I mean their divided cuththroat leadership) >have never failed to miss or destroy an opportunity. >-Arthur Yes, that's what Sharon says. Would you say Arundhati Roy is biased, a victim of anti-Israel propaganda? Here's some more from her speech that I quoted briefly from previously - if you disagree with it, it might help you to say why rather than "That is incorrect" and spouting the party line. >September 11th has a tragic resonance in the Middle East, too. On >the 11th of September 1922, ignoring Arab outrage, the British >government proclaimed a mandate in Palestine, a follow-up to the >1917 Balfour Declaration which imperial Britain issued, with its >army massed outside the gates of Gaza. The Balfour Declaration >promised European Zionists a national home for Jewish people. (At >the time, the Empire on which the Sun Never Set was free to snatch >and bequeath national homes like a school bully distributes marbles.) > >How carelessly imperial power vivisected ancient civilizations. >Palestine and Kashmir are imperial Britain's festering, >blood-drenched gifts to the modern world. Both are fault lines in >the raging international conflicts of today. > >In 1937, Winston Churchill said of the Palestinians, I quote, "I do >not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger >even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not >admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong >has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of >Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people >by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more >worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their >place." That set the trend for the Israeli State's attitude towards >the Palestinians. In 1969, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir said, >"Palestinians do not exist." Her successor, Prime Minister Levi >Eschol said, "What are Palestinians? When I came here (to >Palestine), there were 250,000 non-Jews, mainly Arabs and Bedouins. >It was a desert, more than underdeveloped. Nothing." Prime Minister >Menachem Begin called Palestinians "two-legged beasts." Prime >Minister Yitzhak Shamir called them "grasshoppers" who could be >crushed. This is the language of Heads of State, not the words of >ordinary people. > >In 1947, the U.N. formally partitioned Palestine and allotted 55 per >cent of Palestine's land to the Zionists. Within a year, they had >captured 76 per cent. On the 14th of May 1948 the State of Israel >was declared. Minutes after the declaration, the United States >recognized Israel. The West Bank was annexed by Jordan. The Gaza >strip came under Egyptian military control, and formally Palestine >ceased to exist except in the minds and hearts of the hundreds of >thousands of Palestinian people who became refugees. In 1967, Israel >occupied the West Bank and the Gaza strip. > >Over the decades there have been uprisings, wars, intifadas. Tens of >thousands have lost their lives. Accords and treaties have been >signed. Cease-fires declared and violated. But the bloodshed doesn't >end. Palestine still remains illegally occupied. Its people live in >inhuman conditions, in virtual Bantustans, where they are subjected >to collective punishments, twenty-four hour curfews, where they are >humiliated and brutalized on a daily basis. They never know when >their homes will be demolished, when their children will be shot, >when their precious trees will be cut, when their roads will be >closed, when they will be allowed to walk down to the market to buy >food and medicine. And when they will not. They live with no >semblance of dignity. With not much hope in sight. They have no >control over their lands, their security, their movement, their >communication, their water supply. So when accords are signed, and >words like "autonomy" and even "statehood" bandied about, it's >always worth asking: What sort of autonomy? What sort of State? What >sort of rights will its citizens have? > >Young Palestinians who cannot control their anger turn themselves >into human bombs and haunt Israel's streets and public places, >blowing themselves up, killing ordinary people, injecting terror >into daily life, and eventually hardening both societies' suspicion >and mutual hatred of each other. Each bombing invites merciless >reprisal and even more hardship on Palestinian people. But then >suicide bombing is an act of individual despair, not a revolutionary >tactic. Although Palestinian attacks strike terror into Israeli >citizens, they provide the perfect cover for the Israeli >government's daily incursions into Palestinian territory, the >perfect excuse for old-fashioned, nineteenth-century colonialism, >dressed up as a new fashioned, twenty-first century "war". > >Israel's staunchest political and military ally is and always has >been the U.S. The U.S. government has blocked, along with Israel, >almost every U.N. resolution that sought a peaceful, equitable >solution to the conflict. It has supported almost every war that >Israel has fought. When Israel attacks Palestine, it is American >missiles that smash through Palestinian homes. And every year Israel >receives several billion dollars from the United States - taxpayers >money. > >What lessons should we draw from this tragic conflict? Is it really >impossible for Jewish people who suffered so cruelly themselves - >more cruelly perhaps than any other people in history - to >understand the vulnerability and the yearning of those whom they >have displaced? Does extreme suffering always kindle cruelty? What >hope does this leave the human race with? What will happen to the >Palestinian people in the event of a victory? When a nation without >a state eventually proclaims a state, what kind of state will it be? >What horrors will be perpetrated under its flag? Is it a separate >state that we should be fighting for or, the rights to a life of >liberty and dignity for everyone regardless of their ethnicity or >religion? > >Palestine was once a secular bulwark in the Middle East. But now the >weak, undemocratic, by all accounts corrupt but avowedly >nonsectarian P.L.O., is losing ground to Hamas, which espouses an >overtly sectarian ideology and fights in the name of Islam. To quote >from their manifesto: "we will be its soldiers and the firewood of >its fire, which will burn the enemies." > >The world is called upon to condemn suicide bombers. But can we >ignore the long road they have journeyed on before they have arrived >at this destination? September 11, 1922 to September 11, 2002 - >eighty years is a long time to have been waging war. Is there some >advice the world can give the people of Palestine? Should they just >take Golda Meir's suggestion and make a real effort not to exist? -- From: Come September by Arundhati Roy http://www.lannan.org/_authors/roy/transcript.htm Or would you say the eminent Malaysian scholar Dr Chandra Muzaffar is biased? http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_9699.shtml The truth is out By Chandra Muzaffar Jun 6, 2004, "Israel never intended to leave the West Bank. It never intended to relinquish effective control over the Gaza Strip. It never intended to facilitate the return of Palestinian refugees to their homeland." No? Biased, eh? How about Tanya Reinhart then? She's a much-published Israeli professor (Tel Aviv University and the University of Utrecht) who wrote a book called "Israel/Palestine: How To End The War Of 1948". There's an interview with her here: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=50&ItemID=2595 Interview With Tanya Reinhart "... the Gaza strip, where 6000 Israeli settlers occupy one third of the land, and a million Palestinians are crowded in the rest. As years went by since Oslo, Israel extended the "Arab-free" areas in the occupied Palestinian territories to about 50% of the land. Labor circles began to talk about the "Alon Plus" plan, namely - more lands to Israel. However, it appeared that they would still allow some Palestinian self-rule in the other 50%, under conditions similar to the Bantustans in South Africa." That's all changed since 1999. Reinhart makes it clear that what has been happening is opposed by the majority of Israelis. Three chapters of her book are online: http://www.tau.ac.il/~reinhart/books_ME/index.html She wrote this too: http://zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=1805 Jenin- The Propaganda War And, more recently, this: http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/treinhart5.htm Sharon's Gaza plan and the freedom to starve and kill 22 April 2004 "In 1969, the Israeli philosopher Yesayahu Leibovitz anticipated that, in the areas of the occupation, "concentration camps would be erected by the Israeli rulers... Israel would be a state that would not deserve to exist, and it will not be worthwhile to preserve it". How far are we from Leibovitz's prophecy in the fenced Gaza Strip?" You think she's biased too? And Leibowitz? And also this: http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/treinhart3.htm The reality behind Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan 22 March 2004 She quotes Amira Hass writing in Ha'aretz ("Words have failed us", 3 March 2004): >This is an admission of failure. The written word is a failure at >making tangible to Israeli readers the true horror of the occupation >in the Gaza Strip. This admission of the failure of the written word >is not meant to enhance the role of photography. A picture may >indeed be worth a thousand words but, for the Israeli occupation to >approach some level of comprehension, Israelis need to see tens of >thousands of photographs, one after the other, or watch >documentaries that are at least eight hours long each, so they could >grasp in real time the fear in the eyes of the school children when >some whistling above turns into twisted crushed metal with >charcoaled bodies inside. > >Another movie should show the viewers the vineyards of Sheikh >Ajalin, the ripe grapefruits, the peasants who for years nurtured >the fruit with great love only to see it all turned to scorched >earth left behind by Israeli tanks and bulldozers. No movie has yet >been produced that would enable Israelis to taste the wonderful >grapes of Sheikh Ajalin. The vineyards are gone so the military >positions can protect Netzarim. > >How would photographs illustrate the following facts: from 29 >September up to Monday this week, 94 Israelis have been killed - 27 >civilians and 67 soldiers, according to the IDF. From that same date >up to 18 February this year 1231 Palestinians have been killed - all >of them were terrorists? Lacking a central Palestinian agency, there >are differences between the data provided by Palestinian groups and >none claim to be 100 per cent accurate. > >The failure to bring all this home to readers is not because of the >weakness of words or a lack pictures. It is because Israeli society >has learned to live in peace with the following facts. There are >8000 Jews and 1.4 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The total >area of the Strip is 365 square kilometres. The settlements occupy >54 square kilometres. Along with the areas held by the IDF, >according to the Oslo accords, 20 per cent of the Strip is under >Israeli control. That's 20 per cent of the territory for half of one >per cent of the population. > >The proximity of every expansive settlement to the densely >populated, suffocating crowded Palestinian community is what causes >the large number of Palestinian casualties in the Gaza Strip, >including many civilians. It is what determines the flexible rules >of engagement, the type of bombs that break into fragments, the >unmanned aircraft that fire missiles. Hass is also biased? Would perhaps everybody be biased who doesn't agree with you and with the party line you extoll so faithfully, and blindly? Keith ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
