By Ash Pulcifer

YellowTimes.org Columnist (United States)

(YellowTimes.org) -- On June 6, four days after the Mideast peace summit in Jordan, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades launched an attack on the Israeli military in northern Gaza. The groups managed to kill four Israeli soldiers and wound four others. Despite the fact that the militant groups focused their attacks on the Israeli military, rather than attacking civilians as they have in the past, Israel responded by launching what can only be defined as a "terrorist" attack. On June 10, Israel fired missiles into a crowded street in Gaza, missing their main target but killing and wounding innocent bystanders. The following day, a Palestinian suicide bomber responded with a "terrorist" attack against Israel, exploding on a bus in Jerusalem, killing 16 people and injuring more than a hundred more. Shortly after, the Israeli government was directing helicopter attacks in Gaza.

While it claims otherwise, Israel has been fighting "terror" with "terror." It is impossible to suggest that Israel is worried about Palestinian civilians when it launches raids like the one on June 10. Authorizing helicopter gunships to launch missiles into crowded Palestinian streets? Only a ruthless government would authorize such attacks. Furthermore, as many others have stated, the target of Israel's June 10 attack was not a suicide bomber packed with explosives on his way to blow up a bus or a café. No, that target was Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the well-known Hamas political leader who was merely driving down the street at the time; Rantisi barely survived the attack. It is a highly dubious assertion for Israel to claim that this extreme level of force was needed.

Such heavy-handed and careless attacks by Israel are making it harder and harder for the Jewish state to claim the moral high ground. In order to defend its occupation of what the U.N. has labeled Palestinian lands, the Israeli government is using similar tactics that its enemies use: not distinguishing between militants and civilians. The only difference between the opponents is that Palestinian militant groups admit they are uninterested in peace; the Israeli government, on the other hand, claims that it is interested in peace, while at the same time ordering massive military attacks meant to bring terror and death to the Palestinian populace.

It seems that the Israeli government, and the Israeli populace, still believe that they can break the will of the Palestinians. This explains why they continue their harsh repression of the Palestinian population, along with their massive retaliatory attacks anytime Palestinians defend themselves either justly or unjustly. But the past 55 years have shown that such actions merely further radicalize the Palestinian population, resulting in more terror and death for the Israeli people.

Palestinians from 1948 would be shocked at the current methods of Palestinian resistance. What used to be a civil disobedience movement has now been radicalized into one that largely approves of the use of suicide attacks on civilian populations. So, too, would Jews from the 1940s be shocked at what is now considered "self-defense": occupying a land whose population does not wish to be occupied, continuing to build illegal settlements on that land, following a policy of assassinations, and firing rockets and missiles into crowded streets or apartment buildings.

And now with these latest attacks, it looks as if the conflict will radicalize even further. According to Joel Greenberg of the Chicago Tribune, in the June 10 attack, Israeli Apache helicopter gunships fired seven missiles at Rantisi, who was driving on a busy street in downtown Gaza. Greenberg writes, "The explosions sprayed metal fragments across sidewalks and buildings, shattering windows. A woman who stepped out of a taxi was killed, and an 8-year old girl was critically wounded in the head." Does the Israeli population still believe that such careless attacks are actually helping the peace process? The frequency of these attacks force any honest analyst to wonder if the current Israeli government wants peace at all.

The coming months will decide whether these latest incitements by the Israeli government and Palestinian militant groups will further radicalize the conflict. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has already said that such strikes by Israel will continue. And Hamas spokesmen have made even harsher statements. "The Israelis will never enjoy security or stability as long as they occupy our territories," Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the target of the June 10 attack, said from his bed in Shifa Hospital. "We are going to retaliate by all means," another Hamas spokesman stated, as quoted from Greenberg's article in the Tribune. "Every person in Israel should condemn the policy of their government because they are going to pay the price."

So, once again, we seem to be back at square one with the Mideast peace process. This time the Israeli government is as much to blame for derailing the peace process as Palestinian militant groups are. If the Israeli government and its people truly want to live in peace, then they will have to stop fighting terror with terror; their current harsh policies towards the Palestinians have to come to an end, otherwise they are no better than the "terrorist" groups they are fighting.

[Ash Pulcifer is a U.S. based analyst of international conflicts and is also a human rights activist. While he does not justify or accept the killing of civilians in warfare, he attempts to understand why groups or governments resort to such means in order to achieve their strategic objectives.]

Ash Pulcifer encourages your comments: apulcifer@YellowTimes.org

YellowTimes.org is an international news and opinion publication. YellowTimes.org encourages its material to be reproduced, reprinted, or broadcast provided that any such reproduction identifies the original source, http://www.YellowTimes.org. Internet web links to http://www.YellowTimes.org are appreciated.

This article comes from YellowTimes.org

http://www.yellowtimes.org

The URL for this article is:

http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=1415

the guy who Israel tried to assasinate is explicitly and totally against any state of Israel whatsoever and more than willing to blow up a thousand buses to get his way. Not only has he been recorded saying he wants to kill all the jews, but his organization and actions speak for themselves. I am a peacenick, but this guy, for sure, was no innocent Palestinian child, he was a killer, and he was against peace from the start. It's really a shame that we always botch the killings of people who deserve to be dead and kill innocents in their stead. If you want to argue that the collateral damage was intolerable, I may agree, but to act as if this guy was not a legitimate and direct threat to Israelis is preposterous.

...attacks against civilians by Palestinian Fanatics neither do I agree with the routine repression carried out by the Israeli Government. Nor are Rocket Attacks which claim innocent life morally superior to the original crime. Neither is acceptable, neither is humane, and neither will work to achieve a just and lasting peace.

...you almost accidentally condemned Palestinian terrorism.

Luckily you saved the day by criticizing Israel's right to defend herself.

Whew!

...anybody near an assassination target don't you?

Defend themselves? Killing indiscriminately is now self defense?

My, my, will modern innovations never cease?

As for your snide comment I have not now, nor ever, defended the practice of Sacrifice Bombing.

Stick it where the Sun doesn't shine.

"Sacrifice Bombing. "

That term is abhorrent.

You are simple filth.

No better then the filthy palestinian terrorist animals you support.

The term is genocide bombing.

... have not now, nor ever, defended the practice of Sacrifice Bombing."

Liar.

By calling the splodeydopes "Sacrifice Bombers" you condone it.

But if they weren't killing Jews, you wouldn't care at all.

...we have returned to the cliches eh?

Anyone who questions Israeli actions why "you filthy anti-semite". It's become the all purpose slur for those vacant a rational defense of indefensible actions.

Good show!

Know any more great cliches?

Opposition to actions which are inhuman and inhumane is opposition to actions which are inhuman and inhumane. It is not specific to a race, gender, or creed. It is founded upon ACTIONS not heredity or beliefs.

Stick it further up.

Must have hit a sensitive spot.

You may say what you like.

However, you don't need to interpret your own words to me.

"Sacrifice bombers" is tacit support.

Why not call 'em homicide bombers? That's closer to the truth.

"Opposition to actions which are inhuman and inhumane is opposition to actions which are inhuman and inhumane."

Certainly. Yet I sense a noticeable lack of opposition to the inhumanities which happen to Israelis, and a boatload of oppostion to inhumanities which happen to Palestinians.

Like I said, say what you want.

You've already made your position clear.

...you got me. I am very sensitive in a warm and fuzzy way. One of those sensitive spots is I am highly intolerant - of dishonest arguments.

As always instead of reinforcing your own arguments you resort to personal attacks. Not that it fazes me it is what I expect from you and your ilk. I would be flabbergasted to see an honest argument emanate from your keyboard.

I use the term Sacrifice Bomber because I refuse to acknowledge the Spin. Suicide Bomber is, I am sure, a carefully focus grouped term designed to elicit the most negative response.

I use the term Sacrifice Bomber as, I believe, a more accurate reflection of what is occuring with the bombers. Whether rightly or wrongly the Palestinian Terror Bombers are striking back in the only way they can. When you have emasculated a people and made their lives a living hell - sacrificing their lives to strike a blow against the oppressor might seem reasonable. That does not mean I approve. I most emphatically do not.

You can spin it any way you wish. You know your arguments are dishonest, I know your arguments are dishonest, and anyone with a modicum of reasoning ability can find the gaping holes in your attacks.

Q.E.D.

Diogones the Wise has Spoken.

Sorry, Skippy, it don't wash.

Let's see here:

"I use the term Sacrifice Bomber as, I believe, a more accurate reflection of what is occuring with the bombers."

Really? Let's look at some numbers:

In a recent attack, there was 1 dead homicide bomber and 23 dead Israelis.

That's one sacrifice and 23 murders.

Looks like "homicide bomber" wins by a wide margin.

I'd call 'em "sacrifice bombers" if they blew their silly selves up in the middle of a field with no innocent people around. By "innocent", I mean non-combatants; I realize there are some people here who see ALL Israelis, men, women and children, guilty of being Jews, and therefore legitimate targets, but that's more evidence of the rampant Jew-hate around here.

"When you have emasculated a people and made their lives a living hell - ..." Tell that to Arafat. He's done far more evil to the Palestinians than Israel ever has...or will.

"...sacrificing their lives to strike a blow against the oppressor might seem reasonable. That does not mean I approve. I most emphatically do not."

You see the murder of children as "reasonable"? You are praising it with faint damns. Here's a litmus test: When you feel the same way about the death of an Israeli child as you do about the death of a Palestinian child, then you're looking at the situation reasonably. So far, you fail that test.

Time after time Israel has offered peace. Time after time the leaders of the Palestinians have chosen terror and death, and are raising the next generation of homicide bombers. It's a death cult.

When you admit the Palestinian leaders, and a good majority of the Palestinian people themselves, don't want peace with Israel, they want ALL of Israel, and all the Jews pushed into the sea, then we can have a rational discussion about it.

Until then, you're not capable of rational discussion.

Q.E.D.

"Sacrifice bomber"!??!???!!

What color is the fucked up sky on your over medicated planet?

What would Diogenes call the 9-11 terrorist, "skyway helpers"?

Thank you Diogenes for another fine example of public education.

...on you know you have struck paydirt.

...Freedom Fighters? That's what Reagan called the Contras in Nicarauga. What's the difference?

Some people think EVERYONE is out to persecute them, which makes them REALLY paranoid. Any idiot whom compares Iran to the Third Reich is f*cked in the head! Get real! The biggest threat to the world is from so-called demockracies like Amerikkka and it's Zionist puppet-master.

This kind of propaganda, however, is very similiar to the Nazi style. I wonder who came up with this?

Oh yeah: if countries would stop dropping bombs on people, maybe everyone wouldn't hate them so much. But that makes too much sense to work.

History happens to be my strong suit, ijit. Seems to me that if you people would just give back the land you stole...

"Any idiot whom compares Iran to the Third Reich is f*cked in the head! Get real! "

Brian you are so stupid you make idiots look smart. How did you like all the Iranian photos using the Swastica? Duh. Noticed that shut your pie hole up pretty quick.

"Give back the land you stole."

Oh man you really don't know your basic history to save your ass. Typical Jew hating liberal, ignorant but willing to make shit up.

OK here you go.

Palestine 101

A Short Take on a Long History

July 31 - August 6, 2002

JAFFA—Have you heard the one about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Chairman Yasir Arafat finally sitting down to negotiate? Sharon opened with a "biblical" tale.

"Before the Israelites came to the Promised Land and settled here, Moses led them for 40 years through the desert. One day, miraculously, a stream appeared. They drank and then decided to bathe. When Moses came out of the water, he found all his clothes missing.

" 'Who took my clothes?' Moses asked. 'It was the Palestinians,' replied the Israelites."

"Wait a minute," interrupted Arafat. "There were no Palestinians during the time of Moses!"

"All right," smirked Sharon, "now that we've got that settled, let's start talking."

"If the lie is big enough and told often enough, it will be believed," Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels once said. What worked for Goebbels evidently is also working for Arafat.

The blatant lies and vicious propaganda emanating from the Arab world have gotten out of hand. Anti-Semitism is out of the closet. Jews are murdered in Canada, their graves are desecrated in Italy. It's time to sort through the spiteful drivel.

No, Charlie, despite what you read on a zillion Arab Web sites, Jews do not use the blood of Arab children to bake their holiday bread.

Yes, Harriet, the Jewish Temple did exist in Jerusalem. I know Arafat insists it didn't and his excavators are busy destroying all archaeological record of it. But next time you visit Rome, go check out the Forum and you'll find its story carved in the ancient stone of Titus's arch. Let's start at the beginning.

First, who really owns the land encompassing what is now Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority? The answer is so well documented it could be the subject of future UN resolutions—the Canaanites. They established the Land of Canaan here around 2000 B.C., so they have first dibs. Unfortunately for them, there isn't a single Canaanite left on earth.

Abraham, the Father of the Jews and a figure revered by Islam, led a band of Hebrews from Mesopotamia and began the conquest of Canaan in 1741 B.C.—that's 3743 years ago. Those first Israelites were joined in about 1290 B.C. by the Jewish slaves led out of Egypt by Moses.

After many years and a lot of help from Joshua, the Israelites finally defeated the Canaanites and old King Saul united the country in 1100 B.C. King David added Jerusalem in 1000 B.C., and King Solomon built the First Temple around 956 B.C. The land was plagued by raiders like those guys dubbed the Philistines, "Sea Invaders," who came out of the Aegean and snatched a nice chunk of the coast. Remember Goliath? He was a Philistine and King David made mincemeat of him, but the Philistines were a nuisance for many years.

Big trouble loomed in 586 B.C. when the Babylonians (nasty ancestors of the nasty Iraqis) invaded under King Nebuchadnezzar II. They sacked the lavish city Solomon had built in Jerusalem and tore down the First Temple. The Babylonians rounded up all the Jews they could catch and deported them to Babylonia as slaves. That "Babylonian Exile" lasted a mere 50 years and the Jews returned to build the Second Temple.

For the next 1000 years, everyone and his brother grabbed a piece of the territory—Persians, Greeks, and Romans. The Roman reign was particularly benevolent. They destroyed the Second Temple in 70 A.D. and killed an estimated 1.1 million disobedient Jews, including one named Jesus. The Romans also maliciously renamed the area Palaestina, after the Jews' old enemy, the Philistines. The Christian Byzantine Empire took over in 300 A.D. and held on for more than 300 years. During that era, the Muslim Prophet Muhammad was born in Mecca in 570 A.D.

Muhammad's followers believed in conversion, big time, and swarmed around the Middle East giving everyone a fair choice—become a Muslim or die. These Arabs stormed Palestine in 638 A.D. Do the math. The Arabs got to the region 2379 years after the Jews. So, who is occupying whom??

The Arabs considered Palestine unimportant and ruled from Damascus and Baghdad. You could call them benign except for the massacres and the fact that they were uncomfortable with trees . . . so they cut them all down, turning the once fertile region into a more familiar desert.

With all the hoopla about Jerusalem, check out the Muslim holy book, the Koran. The Koran mentions Mecca and Medina countless times but never once speaks of Jerusalem. On the other hand, there are 811 references to Jerusalem in the Bible.

Christian Crusaders arrived from Europe in 1099 and ousted the Arabs. In subsequent years, the land switched back and forth between invaders, and in the turmoil Jews began filtering back from their scattered exile. Many came from Spain, whence they were expelled in 1492.

In 1516, the non-Arab Ottoman Turks conquered Palestine and held sway until after World War I, when the British took over.

We really have no idea how many Jews and how many Arabs there were at the time—mainly because both groups hid from the Ottoman census takers to avoid taxes.

But we do know that there were probably fewer than 350,000 people, the majority Arab, in the whole region (including what is now Jordan) when Mark Twain made a pilgrimage in 1867.

In his travelogue, Innocents Abroad, Twain wrote, "One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings."

"Nazareth is forlorn . . . Jericho the accursed lies a moldering ruin today," Twain said, adding, "There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere."

But the population was growing. More Jews arrived from Eastern Europe and Russia in the 1880s, either fleeing oppression or following the Zionist dream. And Arabs from neighboring countries flocked to jobs created by Jewish immigrants.

Take a deep breath, because now the plot thickens.

In 1917, Britain issued the Balfour Declaration and promised "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People."

The British then turned around and gave over 77 percent of Palestine to the Arab Hashemites, for what later became Jordan. The remaining 23 percent, west of the River Jordan, was supposedly for the Jews.

But in 1947, the UN voted to partition that 23 percent of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. The Israelis accepted the plan and in 1948 proclaimed the establishment of their state. Neighboring Arab nations, however, rejected both the partition and the idea of a Jewish state and launched a massive invasion of Israel.

They were defeated, and at the end of the 1948 war Israel held all of Western Palestine except the West Bank, which was captured by Jordan, and Gaza, which was seized by Egypt.

In the 1967 Six Day War, Israel again defeated Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, gaining control not only of Gaza and the West Bank, but also of Egypt's Sinai Peninsula and Syria's Golan Heights.

The big question is: Where were the calls for a Palestinian state during the 19 years Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt held Gaza?

A 1978 peace accord signed with Egypt returned the Sinai to Cairo, but the Egyptians seemed relieved to leave Gaza with Israel. In 1988, King Hussein of Jordan officially renounced all claims to the West Bank.

As far as Israelis were concerned, the land, won in a defensive war, belonged to them.

But even after all the nauseating terror of the last 23 months, the majority of Israelis are willing to give Palestinians the West Bank, Gaza, and half of Jerusalem for their state. We just wonder if they are willing to let us keep ours.

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. But you can keep telling yourself and I love this quote, "Ah yes, we treat the hug the islamic terrorist nice fanatics who seek our destruction because otherwise .. they might get mad and seek our destruction."

“Peace will come only when Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews”

Israel's Former PM Golda Meir

“Those who fill the minds of children with hate, who use the bodies of children as weapons, who exploit the deaths of the young to further their own power-- have as their goal the destruction of peace and freedom”. Paul Wolfowitz



Now Brian you can go back to your comic book history classes. The rest of us can READ, LOL!

What a chump for allah.

Does it make you sleep well at night to believe the horse$hit you post?

>Seems to me that if you people would just give back the land you stole...

The land belongs to whoever can conquer and defend it.

The early hominids understood the concepts of survival and dominance and hierarchal structures. Alpha males were continuously having to slap down the rest of the wannabe leaders.

That's because liberals are typically the Beta members of society. The subordinates. They have no concept of survival or dominance. They're our bitches. They do our bidding and nothing more. We say jump and they ask permission to say "how high?"

And after we smack 'em around, they wine and piss and moan and complain.

"You stole their land, boo hoo hoo."

No mention of how Israel seized that land during as a result of the 6 days war, after significant Arab military buildups and threats of attack. Just another example of the Beta males grimacing and flexing and trying to dominate...and losing...just another power struggle in the history of hominids.

A winner. A loser. And a bunch of whining and whimpering.

Eric and Brigg,

I just looked up Fascist in the dictionary. Guess what I saw? Pictures of you two!

The leftists/anarchists dictionary could have any number of things in it. So what.

"Bush lied" was one of the Dead Horses. Believe it was #1.

The land belongs to whoever can conquer and defend it. If you can't live with that, if you don't like it, that your problem. Won't change anything.

English: Hominid

IMCspeak: Fascist

Bush Lied! Bush Lied! Bush Lied!

Presidents lie all the time. So what if he did. It got the job done, didn't it? Yep, that it did.

There's no law against lying, you pansy-assed liberal.

Unless of course, you're under oath. Then it's perjury; an impeachable offense. Talk to Clinton 'bout that one.

Palestinian terrorists have murdered Noam Leibovitch, a seven-year-old Israeli girl who was fatally shot as she traveled with her family along an Israeli highway adjacent to the West Bank.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/305241.html

Reuters, as usual, isn't content to report the news, instead dressing it up with opinionated clichés:

Palestinian gunmen killed an Israeli girl on a road near the West Bank, feeding a cycle of violence that has battered a peace plan Secretary of State Colin Powell will try to rescue in a new Middle East visit.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=1&u=/nm/20030617/ts_nm/mideast_dc

The Israeli group IMRA reports that Voice of Palestine radio described the little girl as a "settler," even though she both lived and died in Israel and not the disputed territories. Both the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Yasser Arafat's al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades confessed to the crime.

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=17291

Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

Airic,

You honestly believe it was 'OK' for Bush to lie about his and cronies' motivation to go to war and you think Clinton should have been impeached for lying about Monica?

Put down the crack pipe, son. Something has been tweaked in your brain.

I must have missed that one. Nope, didn't say that. Lying is never okay.

What I said was pretty clear I think.

They stand around peeing their britches about how Bush lied, yet they themselves don't hesitate a nanosecond to lie about the "evil JOOOS!"

Typical.

"They stand around peeing their britches about how Bush lied, yet they themselves don't hesitate a nanosecond to lie about the "evil JOOOS!" "

No double standard here, because to these bitter fools they are one in the same.

canaan

by brigg • Wednesday June 18, 2003 01:35 PM



>Seems to me that if you people would just give back the land you stole...

The land belongs to whoever can conquer and defend it.

Gee, okay. Tell me where you live and I'll see if I can "conquer" your property. Idiot.

>Gee, okay. Tell me where you live and I'll see if I can "conquer" your property.

That's for me to know and you to find out. Should you, give it your best shot.

>Idiot.

I agree, you are.

The land belongs to whoever and conquer and defend it. It's the History of the World 101.

Please read my copy of "Logic for Dummies." Even I'M laughing at you!!!

Anti-brigg,

You crack me up! Gave me the best laugh I'd had in a while! Fair play to you and yours!

Brigg certainly seems to be set upon conquest and empire building. Maybe he should read a history book or two and see how the British Empire faired in Iraq. LOL! I really feel sorry for the poor GI's who are now over a year into their tours, with no relief in sight. Apparently the troops that took Iraq were supposed to be relieved after the initial conquest. Hmmm, another Bush lie, this one to the military.

>Brigg certainly seems to be set upon conquest and empire building. Maybe he should read a history book or two and see how the British Empire faired in Iraq.

BOC, you reach for a lot out of one statement.

Did the Bristsh Empire conquer and defend the land? If they did, who at that time owned it? Did they lose the land? Who owned it then?

The land belongs to whoever can conquer and defend it. Exactly what happened between the British and Iraq, wasn't it??

And faker/KOBE (anti-brigg) IS the best thing your side's got going. He is the embodiment of all that the leftist/anarchists/peace marchers has to offer. Unfortunately for your side, it's ALL you have going for you. My side, on the other hand, is in power and doing what we damn well please.

...I invite everyone to try and conquer my land. If you succeed, I'll sign the deed to my house over to you. Yes, I'm really this stupid. Logic escapes me. I'm a conservative.

Old material. You need to update your form in order to get a higher EV rating.

...a House of Cards is not a secure edifice.

Just thought you might want to know since it would seem your powers of observation would seem to need some sharpening.



BUSH LIED, CHILDREN DIED. It really is that simple.

Watch out!!! "faker/KOBE" is watching you from across the street with binoculars!!! Increase the dosages of your anti-psychotic meds, you psycho.

"...my powers of observation were right on the mark..."

Don't worry your empty, little head. That will never happen.

Oh, how you just MUST get in The Last Word.

Hi! I'm faker/KOBE and my whole world revolves in getting in The Last Word on an obscure website where maybe 10 people in the whole world read. Me and those who believe as I do will never be in power nor will we ever do anything here on Earth that will make it a better place in which to live unless we all commit mass suicide. But, I get to type in The Last Word. This makes me feel better.

Go to it!

Hey brigg, you're not gonna get onto the comet with an attitude like that young man!

Watch out!! "faker/KOBE" is outside your window!!!! Get back on your medications, you psycho.

"Hi! I'm faker/KOBE and my whole world..."

Wow. Now, this nutcase thinks that he/she is this imaginary "faker/KOBE."

If you hate Muslims and niggers as much as we do, visit our website.