Ten years without Yitzhak Rabin

[Orwell]

Here's a summary of the 2005 Amnesty International report for the region:

The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force. Palestinian armed groups killed 109 Israelis — 67 of them civilians and including eight children — in suicide bombings, shootings and mortar attacks. Stringent restrictions imposed by the Israeli army on the movement of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories caused widespread poverty and unemployment and hindered access to health and education facilities. The Israeli army destroyed several hundred Palestinian homes, large areas of agricultural land, and infrastructure networks. Israel continued to expand illegal settlements and to build a fence/wall through the West Bank, confining Palestinians in isolated enclaves cut off from their land and essential services in nearby towns and villages. Israeli settlers increased their attacks against Palestinians and their property and against international human rights workers. Certain abuses committed by the Israeli army constituted crimes against humanity and war crimes, including unlawful killings; extensive and wanton destruction of property; obstruction of medical assistance and targeting of medical personnel; torture; and the use of Palestinians as “human shields”. The deliberate targeting of civilians by Palestinian armed groups constituted crimes against humanity.

 

[Orwell]

Note that when it comes to this conflict, my position is pretty clear, and it echoes the general tone of that Amnesty International report: I am as much against Palestinian terrorism as I am against Israeli human rights abuses. Palestinian terrorism doesn't justify or excuse Israeli abuses. Israeli abuses do not justify Palestinian terrorism.

 

[Orwell]

ZN- you are missing one very important point --- Arafat was killed by the Israelis who injected poison into his ear, and therefore, it is the vile jews who are themselves responsible for inciting the ongoing hatred against them.

See, many continue to claim the conflict revolves around Palestinian Nationalism and Freedom, but it is really all about hatred of the jews. As it has been from Time Immemorial.
(see: Public statements by the head of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement, Sheikh Ra'ad Salah, who on Sunday morning entered the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Temple Mount)

It is as much about hatred of the Israeli Jews as it is about hatred of the Palestinians.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Yes yes, I know, hatred, blah, blah, blah, evil, yadda yadda, same old same old... Boring! Ok, here's some more bleeding obvious pointers: the PA is the closest thing the Palestinians have to a government. You might not like them, but if you want peace, that's who you have to deal with.

And this is why debate on the Middle East is tiresome. 30 years of international terrorism by Palestinians "in the name of Palestinian Nationalism" is just a boring sidenote that Israel should just shut up about already and get negotiating.

Funny thing about those Amnesty International reports Orwell, they don't differentiate between palestinians who died as combatants and those who died as noncombatants. But since Amnesty International reports are all that really matters then:

The al-Aqsa intifada (uprising), which started on 29 September 2000, continued throughout 2001. More than 460 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli security forces, the vast majority of them unlawfully, when no lives were in danger. A total of 187 Israelis, including 154 civilians, were killed by Palestinian armed groups and individuals. Thousands of other people were wounded; many were maimed for life. (See also Israel and the Occupied Territories entry.)

Palestinian members of armed groups attacked Israeli military personnel and civilians, including children. Armed groups and individuals arbitrarily killed 65 Israeli civilians in the Occupied Territories and 89 Israeli civilians within Israel. The main armed groups involved in attacks on Israelis were Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) also carried out attacks on civilians. Other civilians were killed by new groups whose political organization remained vague or by individual Palestinians unconnected with armed groups. It is unclear how much control the Palestinian Authority (PA) has over any of these groups.

http://www.amnesty.org/results/is/eng

Now I am not down on Amnesty International but here is an excellent example of how broken the world's moral compass is when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

• Notice Amnesty International describes the Palestinians killed as "unlawful" and the Israelis killed as "arbitrarily". Nice morality judgement huh?
• Notice Amnesty International does not differentiate between Palestinian combatants versus non combatants...."More than 460 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli security forces".
  
• Notice Amnesty International does differentiate between Israeli combatants versus non combatants...."Israeli military personnel and civilians, including children."

Such is the lopsided morality when it comes to the Middle East...It is no different than if Amnesty International described al-Qaida & al-Zarqawi insurgents killed in Iraq as just plain old "Iraqis" which were killed "unlawfully" by American Forces... and American forces/Iraqis murdered by al-Qaida & al-Zarqawi insurgent suicide bombs as "arbitrary" deaths.

And that is why I tire of these threads, because I tire of this endless lopsided morality play.

 

[Skeptic]

Yes yes, I know, hatred, blah, blah, blah, evil, yadda yadda, same old same old... Boring!

I'm sorry, Orwell, but just because it bores you it doesn't mean it isn't true.

By the way, I'm really bored with 2+2 = 4. It's been that way for years now and it isn't changing.

I suppose that means we can just ignore it and pretend 2+2=17 from now on, just like you pretend that the Arabs want peace.

For variety, you know.

 

[zenith-nadir]

A Palestinian student gives the victory sign from behind a billboard depicting the late Yasser Arafat, during a rally by students of the al-Quds university to mark the first anniversary of Arafat's death in the town of Dura, near the West Bank city of Hebron , Saturday Nov. 19, 2005.

(courtesy of Associated Press)

This is 2005, Arafat is dead.. and a new "moderate" is in power. Yet after several peace agreements and thousands of promises take a moment to notice how the map of Palestine on the billboard does not include the borders of Israel - (the map is overlayed with the Palestinian flag and is behind the masked guy with the gun and the other masked guy with the suicide vest)...just an F.Y.I.

Masked Palestinian members of Fatah's al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades march during a rally in Gaza November 17, 2005.

(courtesy of REUTERS/Suhaib Salem)

Abbas is the leader of Fatah, which rules the Palestinian Authority. The al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades - which is designated a terror organization by the E.U., U.S. and Israel - is part of Fatah...which, in case you missed it the 1,000,000 times it's been pointed out, rules the Palestinian Authority....which Abbas is leader of. Just another F.Y.I.

Need proof skeptics?... OK.

Here is the official Fatah website: http://www.fateh.net/ ...notice the Fatah logo. Now notice the logo on the gunmens' bandanas above. They are the same. Now here's the clincher;

The ruling Palestinian party, Fatah, failed to hold primaries Friday, blaming infighting and extortion attempts by militants. Younger members of Fatah fear that the older leaders are trying to keep them off the ballot.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-18-fatah-primaries_x.htm

So infighting and extortion attempts by militants - AKA "Younger members of Fatah" - caused the ruling Palestinian party to not hold primaries Friday. Am I the only one who sees the forest from the trees?

[edited to add]

And this is why 10 years after Rabin nothing has changed. Fatah still is disfunctional. After ten years in power the P.A. still has a terror wing - see: gunmen picture above - and many Palestinians do not even recognize Israel's exsistence - see: billboard picture above. With this status quo it is very hard to assure the Israeli's security concerns that the PA has control over it's people and the terror groups will lay down their arms.

Lemme put it in another context Orwell. Picture Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades as "the mob". Because that is what they really are, organized criminal and terror enterprises. Murder, extortion, beatings, smuggling, infighting...that is, when they are not terrorizing Israel.

Now imagine you are the mayor of New York City and you are keenly aware of who the mob is and what they do. The head of "the Italian Mob" comes to you and says "I'll tell ya what Mayor, let's make a deal, you tell the cops to lay off us, stop all their wiretaps, surveillance and arrests...and we'll stop all our criminal activities."

Sound like the "deal of the century" to you? Or a clever scam?

Now imagine you are the Prime Minister of Israel and you are keenly aware of who Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa are and what they do, you also know they are backed by Syria and Iran. Now the heads of "the terror Mobs" tells the head of the powerless P.A. "I'll tell ya what Abbas, let's make a deal, you tell the Israelis to lay off, pull back to the Green Line, stop the roadblocks, surveillance and arrests...and we'll stop all our terror activities."

Sound like the "deal of the century" to you? Or a clever scam?

That is why the terror has to end before the occupation can. The party obligated to disarm the terror groups is the Palestinian Authority under several international peace agreements. The bad guys are not "the Palestinians" or "the Israelis" they are the terror groups - backed by Syria and Iran - who are the bad guys. And I am tired of documenting it time and time again, thread after thread, page after page... ad nauseum.

 

[Orwell]

I know, it's a big anti-Israeli conspiracy... Funny thing about the Israeli Defense Forces, Zenith-Nadir, it tends to not distinguish between Palestinian civilians and Palestinian terrorists. Just like the Palestinian Terrorist tend to not distinguish between Israeli civilians and the IDF... See, when it comes to Palestinian civilians, the IDF behaves a bit (hell, all even go as far as saying it behaves quite a lot) like the Palestinian terrorists!

 

[Orwell]

Yes yes, I know, hatred, blah, blah, blah, evil, yadda yadda, same old same old... Boring!

I'm sorry, Orwell, but just because it bores you it doesn't mean it isn't true.

By the way, I'm really bored with 2+2 = 4. It's been that way for years now and it isn't changing.

I suppose that means we can just ignore it and pretend 2+2=17 from now on, just like you pretend that the Arabs want peace.

For variety, you know.

No, you hypocrite! I'm not referring to that conflict in that particular post! I'm bored with all the single minded, one sided hate filled diatribes that you and your prejudiced friends (I'll even name names: Zenith-Nadir, Mycroft, We-fusion, Skeptic) have been posting on the subject of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict! It's not analysis, and sure as hell it's not fair nor balanced. It has to be concluded that it can only be one thing: nationalist propaganda. You're pro-Israeli jingos, but you don't admit it. Like any propagandist, you pretend that your one sided tirades are actually the truth. Maybe you're even dumb enough to believe it, I don't know!

 

[Mycroft]

Note that Orwell distinguishes between nationalism and patriotism. If we stick to Orwell's definition of nationalism, then I think that all nationalism is bad, and that goes for everyone, palestinians, israelis, americans, canadians...

Okay, so what should the Palestinian goals be if not an independent nation? By what right, other than agreeing with some essay, do you tell them their nationalistic goals are wrong?

No Mycroft. See, I am being honest. I am telling you exactly what I think, in no uncertain terms. I am using something that Orwell said to make it clearer: I think that your suffer from what Orwell has defined as being "nationalism". Your particular nationalist allegiance lies with Israel, to the point were you are willing to abandon all reason to defend your particular allegiance. And you're not the only one here. You, Mycroft, on the subject of Israel, behave like a partisan hack. See, my position is clear and simple. It is also supported by many many examples, and, I am certain, witnesses.

And yet you can’t tell me where it is that I “abandon all reason”, you can only claim that I do. This is your problem, you continually make this assertion without being able to tell me where and how I’m wrong.

Don't play stupid, it doesn't become you. The essay isn't irrelevant because the essay was directed to you, not the Palestinians. What is irrelevant is if Palestinians are nationalists or not.

It is relevant if you condemn Israeli nationalism but don’t condemn Palestinian nationalism, it demonstrates a double standard on your part.

You want to equate nationalism to loyalty to a favorite sports team, and claim that it’s stupid to be willing to fight or die to defend that, but you forget (or willfully ignore) that for people all over the world, their nation determines the very essence of their lives, from the freedoms and rights they enjoy to their standards of living. It’s not just flags, uniforms and anthems, it’s their very ability to pursue their dreams and shape a good world for their children to grow up in.

Some of us are lucky and live in good nations, others are not. Some, such as the Palestinians, have no nation at all. Some, such as the Israelis, are not so confident of the continued existence of their nation. For them, nationalism is something completely different from you or I, who have the luxury of taking it for granted.

See, even though I believe you are a partisan hack of the worst kind, I would not approve of you being tortured, jailed without due process, or summarily executed.

How very…white of you.

What's that CapelDodger signature? "Nationalism is the love which ties me to the blockheads of my country, to the insultors of my way of life, and to the desecrators of my language" If you are willing to put countries on par with next of kin, then may the Great Zarquon have mercy on your soul.

It’s easy for you to take for granted that which will never be threatened. Which is great for you, but think for a moment what nationalism means to people in other parts of the world. Imagine refugees from Sudan dreaming of a nation that represents their needs, protecting them from the Janjaweed that kills them. Do you think nationalism for them means the same as it does to CapelDodger?

This is simply more than just disagreement! You are not intellectually honest when it comes to Israel! You will say one thing, and in fact do something entirely different! You are always willing to make excuses and justify the unjustifiable, and I had it up to here with your crap and the crap from the other partisan hacks! Is that clear or must I repeat it?

And yet again you make this assertion without giving examples. How many times will you do that before you decide to come up with a specific example to argue?

 

[Orwell]

Okay, so what should the Palestinian goals be if not an independent nation? By what right, other than agreeing with some essay, do you tell them their nationalistic goals are wrong?

And yet you can’t tell me where it is that I “abandon all reason”, you can only claim that I do. This is your problem, you continually make this assertion without being able to tell me where and how I’m wrong.

It is relevant if you condemn Israeli nationalism but don’t condemn Palestinian nationalism, it demonstrates a double standard on your part.

You want to equate nationalism to loyalty to a favorite sports team, and claim that it’s stupid to be willing to fight or die to defend that, but you forget (or willfully ignore) that for people all over the world, their nation determines the very essence of their lives, from the freedoms and rights they enjoy to their standards of living. It’s not just flags, uniforms and anthems, it’s their very ability to pursue their dreams and shape a good world for their children to grow up in.

Some of us are lucky and live in good nations, others are not. Some, such as the Palestinians, have no nation at all. Some, such as the Israelis, are not so confident of the continued existence of their nation. For them, nationalism is something completely different from you or I, who have the luxury of taking it for granted.



How very…white of you.


It’s easy for you to take for granted that which will never be threatened. Which is great for you, but think for a moment what nationalism means to people in other parts of the world. Imagine refugees from Sudan dreaming of a nation that represents their needs, protecting them from the Janjaweed that kills them. Do you think nationalism for them means the same as it does to CapelDodger?



And yet again you make this assertion without giving examples. How many times will you do that before you decide to come up with a specific example to argue?

First:

By ‘nationalism’ I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’(1). But secondly — and this is much more important — I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

Orwell distinguishes between nationalism and patriotism, and since I am accusing you of corresponding to Orwell's definition of a nationalist, I am unwilling to discuss subjects that fall within what Orwell (and I) would define as patriotism. So don't try to side-step the issue.

Secondly:
Note that I never said countries were not important to individuals. I do not condemn patriotism, as long as it stays reasonable. I hinted that love of country that is put on par with love of family is unhealthy, and it falls within Orwell's definition of nationalism.

Thirdly:
I have already condemned "Palestinian Nationalism" in no uncertain terms.

Note that Orwell distinguishes between nationalism and patriotism.
If we stick to Orwell's definition of nationalism, then I think that all nationalism is bad, and that goes for everyone, palestinians, israelis, americans, canadians...

What's the problem Mycroft? That's not one-sided enough for you? Do I have to find a way to condemn palestinian nationalism while at the same time propping up Israeli nationalism, so that you can approve and understand? Needs less equanimity and more self-righteous partisan jerk? Do I have to foam at the mouth, Skeptic style? What?

 

[Mycroft]

I know, it's a big anti-Israeli conspiracy...

Straw-man.

Funny thing about the Israeli Defense Forces, Zenith-Nadir, it tends to not distinguish between Palestinian civilians and Palestinian terrorists.

Evidence?

Just like the Palestinian Terrorist tend to not distinguish between Israeli civilians and the IDF...

Just like...?!!!

No.

The IDF sometimes kills civilians while targeting militants. Palestinian terrorists target civilians. When you claim these are the same, you're lying.

See, when it comes to Palestinian civilians, the IDF behaves a bit (hell, all even go as far as saying it behaves quite a lot) like the Palestinian terrorists!

Except they don't. If they did, there would be no Palestinians.

 

[Orwell]

And yet again you make this assertion without giving examples. How many times will you do that before you decide to come up with a specific example to argue?

Yeah, yeah, so that you can side step and lie your way out of it by reinterpreting and spinning. I know the Mycroft drill!

Hey, I'm just giving you a taste of the way you treated AUP and The Fool. But unlike your accusations of anti-semitism, my accusations of you being a partisan hack concern things that are pretty much obvious to anyone who reads your posts. Wasn't there a thread somewhere in the archive where you said something about never criticising Israel because it was 'inappropriate' or something to that effect?

 

[Orwell]

Straw-man.




Evidence?



Just like...?!!!

No.

The IDF sometimes kills civilians while targeting militants. Palestinian terrorists target civilians. When you claim these are the same, you're lying.



Except they don't. If they did, there would be no Palestinians.

More blatant examples of one-sidedness. The IDF targets civilians. Read the damn Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports.

 

[Mycroft]

No, you hypocrite! I'm not referring to that conflict in that particular post! I'm bored with all the single minded, one sided hate filled diatribes that you and your prejudiced friends (I'll even name names: Zenith-Nadir, Mycroft, We-fusion, Skeptic) have been posting on the subject of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict!

And yet you still refuse to identify any specific fact where we are wrong. Hate filled? Just give me an example.

It's not analysis, and sure as hell it's not fair nor balanced. It has to be concluded that it can only be one thing: nationalist propaganda.

We disagree with you, so it must be "nationalist propaganda" even though you still can't identify any specific area where any of us are wrong.

You're pro-Israeli jingos, but you don't admit it. Like any propagandist, you pretend that your one sided tirades are actually the truth. Maybe you're even dumb enough to believe it, I don't know!

The very fact that we are "one sided" is evidence we are propagandists?

Sometimes when you study an issue, you form an opinion. That's how it happened with me. I used to be like you, condemning both sides. Then I decided to learn more.

 

[Mycroft]

Orwell distinguishes between nationalism and patriotism, and since I am accusing you of corresponding to Orwell's definition of a nationalist, I am unwilling to discuss subjects that fall within what Orwell (and I) would define as patriotism. So don't try to side-step the issue.

That’s exactly my point. Orwell created an “out” for himself. He can claim that nationalism is bad, it’s the source of all evil in the world, but if you happen to point to a nationalism he approves of, he just relabels it as “patriotism”, which is a good thing. So long as he controls the definitions of the words, he’s always right.

But that’s not honest. An honest person would recognize that the world isn’t so simple, that both the Palestinians and the Israelis have legitimate reasons for nationalistic ambitions.

Secondly:
Note that I never said countries were not important to individuals. I do not condemn patriotism, as long as it stays reasonable.

Oh bullsh!t. You objected to my using a personal pronoun to refer to a country.

I hinted that love of country that is put on par with love of family is unhealthy, and it falls within Orwell's definition of nationalism.

Nations are bigger than families, and are correspondingly more important. That’s why some people are willing to sacrifice for them.

Thirdly:
I have already condemned "Palestinian Nationalism" in no uncertain terms.

Sure, when backed into a corner. But do you condemn jingoistic support for the Palestinians in the same terms you condemn support for Israel?

 

[Mycroft]

More blatant examples of one-sidedness. The IDF targets civilians. Read the damn Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports.

I did. I missed that portion. Perhaps if you could quote it for me?

 

[zenith-nadir]

I know, it's a big anti-Israeli conspiracy...

So my documentation is dismissed and your rebuttal is the "rolleyes" smiley. Ok, I'm cool with that.

Funny thing about the Israeli Defense Forces, Zenith-Nadir, it tends to not distinguish between Palestinian civilians and Palestinian terrorists.

I disagree with that claim. The IDF doesn't drive down the streets every day blasting the crap out of anything Palestinian that moves. They do distiguish between Palestinian civilians and Palestinian terrorists.

And yet Palestinian noncombatants do get killed, why? Because the Palestinian Authority allows it's own streets to become warzones, it allows armed and known combatants to roam freely, it allows said combatants to dress in civilian Palestinian clothes and mix within the unarmed Palestinian civilian population without danger of arrest.

Put all those things the Palestinian Authority allows together Orwell and it is difficult to identify the combatants from the noncombatants. This ambiguity then provides cover and concealment for the folks trying to destroy Israel and who kill Israeli civilians by committing suicide. It also endangers the lives of all noncombatant Palestinians.

The armed militants in the above pictures are using Palestinian civilians for cover, this is why so many Palestinian "civilians" get killed. Where is the Palestinian Authority? Why are they not separating these shooters from the civilians? Who's job is it to stop armed terror groups from roaming the Palestinian streets? The IDF or the PAlestinian Authority?

This is why I was so surprized by the Amnesty International reports you linked which did not distinguish between Palestinian non-combatants and Palestinian combatants killed by the IDF.

Now I know you are going to say what about targetted killings? Well the sad truth there Orwell is the people killing Israelis use Palestinian civilians for cover and concealment. They feign civilian or noncombatant status to deceive the IDF. They dress like civilians, they hide their bases of operations inside civilian buildings, schools and homes on purpose so that when the IDF strikes them it kills noncombatant Palestinians. And then the useful idiots scream Israeli war crime and IDF terrorists!

Since the Palestinian Authority doesn't lift a finger to stop terror groups Orwell should Israel simply allow HAMAS, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa to plan their next suicide attack? Should the leaders of the groups responsible for the Sbarro pizzeria bombing or the Dolphinarium Disco Bombing or the Maaalot school massacre be "protected" simply because they hide inside civilian buildings? Oh, I see... the IDF should simply arrest them. Well then you run into two possibilities: 1) they go peacefully - unlikely, and 2) the scenerio depicted in the pictures above, where Palestinian noncombatants die in the ensuing firefight between Palestinian combatants and the IDF.

Just like the Palestinian Terrorist tend to not distinguish between Israeli civilians and the IDF...

When a Palestinian suicide bomber detonates him/herself on an Israeli bus or in an Israeli restaurant or at an Israeli bus stop or an Israeli market they are definitely distinguishing between Israeli civilians and the IDF - with malice aforethought.

See, when it comes to Palestinian civilians, the IDF behaves a bit (hell, all even go as far as saying it behaves quite a lot) like the Palestinian terrorists!

Well if you say so, my rebuttal is you are mistaken and that the IDF is nothing like HAMAS, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa.

And round and round it goes...day after day...month after month...ad nauseum...I've been through this a hundred times....and it's always the same.

• Israel is the problem... no, the Palestinian terror groups are the problem.
• The IDF are just like the terrorists....no, the IDF are nothing like the terrorists.
• Israel indiscriminately murders Palestinian civilians...no, civilians are at risk on both sides because the Palestinian Authority refuses to disarm the terrorists.
• Your complaints about Palestinian terrorists hiding among civilians is just an effort to justify the murder of innocent people... no, it is the terrorists themselves who do not care about the lives of innocent Palestinians, which is why they are not hesitant to use them as human shields.
• etc...etc...etc.

If the PA really disarmed the terror groups - per their international obligations - the IDF could retreat and both sides could begin final negotiations without any sort of military or terror threat hanging around their respective necks.

End of story.

 

[Orwell]

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/isrlpa9806.htm

Unlawful Use of Force
The Israeli army and security forces carried out numerous attacks in Palestinian areas over the course of 2004. These were most intense and extensive in the Gaza Strip, and were often carried out in a manner that failed to demonstrate that the attackers had used all feasible measures to avoid or minimize harm to civilians and their property. Human Rights Watch documented serious violations of international humanitarian law in the course of the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) May 2004 assault in the southern Gaza town and refugee camp of Rafah, in which over two hundred homes, along with cultivated fields, roads, and other infrastructure, were razed without regard to military necessity. Israeli forces also continued to use lethal force in an excessive or indiscriminate manner. On May 19, 2004, for instance, during the Rafah incursions, an Israeli tank and helicopter gunship fired on a crowd of demonstrators, killing nine persons, including three children. In late September 2004, Israel launched a massive incursion into the northern Gaza Strip. Around 130 Palestinians were killed, more than a quarter of them children. One thirteen-year-old girl, Imam al-Hams, was shot twenty times by an Israeli officer. Several children were killed in their classrooms in other incidents.

There were also numerous instances in the West Bank of civilians killed by indiscriminate Israeli gunfire, such as the deaths in Nablus in June 2004 of Dr. Khaled Salah, a lecturer at Najah University, and his sixteen-year-old son. Israel has failed to investigate suspicious killings and serious injuries by its security forces, including killings of children, thus continuing to foster an atmosphere of impunity.

While in 2004 the number of Palestinian suicide bombings and similar attacks targeting civilians inside Israel dropped considerably compared to immediately preceding years, neither the Palestinian Authority nor the armed groups responsible have taken any serious steps to act against those who ordered or organized such attacks. Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip on numerous occasions fired so-called Qassam rockets, an inherently indiscriminate home-made weapon, at illegal Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip as well as at communities on the Israeli side of the border. Qassam rockets killed a man and a small child in the border town of Sderot in June, and in a separate incident killed two small children in the same town in September. In August 2004 gunmen apparently affiliated with the Hamas movement threw one or more grenades into a cellblock in a P.A.-run prison that housed alleged collaborators, and subsequently entered a Gaza City hospital to kill two of those who had been seriously wounded in the grenade attack. In July 2004 gunmen attempted to assassinate Palestine Legislative Council member Nabil Amr after he criticized PA President Yasir Arafat in a television appearance; Amr was gravely wounded and doctors had to amputate his leg.

Note that I include Palestinian terrorist attacks in my quote. That's how you do it if you're not a partisan hack. There's more from where that came from.

 

[Orwell]

That’s exactly my point. Orwell created an “out” for himself. He can claim that nationalism is bad, it’s the source of all evil in the world, but if you happen to point to a nationalism he approves of, he just relabels it as “patriotism”, which is a good thing. So long as he controls the definitions of the words, he’s always right.

No Mycroft. When discussing a particular subject, it is always a good idea to identify and define the subject being discussed. That's what Orwell did.

But that’s not honest. An honest person would recognize that the world isn’t so simple, that both the Palestinians and the Israelis have legitimate reasons for nationalistic ambitions.

That's not what's being discussed. Apparently, you believe that Israeli nationalism (in the sense of the Orwellian definition of nationalism) is legitimate (since you have never ever condemned it), while you demand that I condemn Palestinian nationalism. That's a double standard.

Oh bullsh!t. You objected to my using a personal pronoun to refer to a country.
Nations are bigger than families, and are correspondingly more important. That’s why some people are willing to sacrifice for them.

The fact that you think so demonstrates that you correspond to Orwell's definition of a nationalist.

Sure, when backed into a corner. But do you condemn jingoistic support for the Palestinians in the same terms you condemn support for Israel?

Note that Orwell distinguishes between nationalism and patriotism.
If we stick to Orwell's definition of nationalism, then I think that all nationalism is bad, and that goes for everyone, palestinians, israelis, americans, canadians...

And I don't condemn support for Israel. I support Israel's right to existance and security, but I don't support it unconditionally. I condemn unconditional, one sided, jingoistic support for Israel, the kind of support you, Web Fusion, Zenith-Nadir, Skeptic, are renowned for. Nuance. Actually, I even believe that your kind of support for Israel is bad for Israel, since your blatant blind partisanship gives support for Israel a bad name. And I didn't condemn "Palestinian nationalism" when backed into a corner. Funny, a few posts ago, you said I didn't condemn Palestinian nationalism and now you say I did (when backed into a corner), and I didn't change one iota of the post where I condemn nationalism, period... You just say whatever works, eh Mycroft? By the way, your mention of Palestinian nationalism when I was demonstrating my annoyance at Israeli human rights abuses and at your one sided treatment of Israel is thread drift that smells of Tu Quoque. Or more probably and accurately, just another one of your attempts at side-stepping the issue by moving into irrelevancies, something that you do quite often when under pressure...

 

[zenith-nadir]

Lemme illustrate how the cart pulls the horse. If Amnesty International was being honest about the course of events they would put the effect behind the cause instead of infront of it.

Maybe something like:

While in 2004 the number of Palestinian suicide bombings and similar attacks targeting civilians inside Israel dropped considerably compared to immediately preceding years, neither the Palestinian Authority nor the armed groups responsible have taken any serious steps to act against those who ordered or organized such attacks.

Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip on numerous occasions fired so-called Qassam rockets, an inherently indiscriminate home-made weapon, at illegal Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip as well as at communities on the Israeli side of the border.

...These acts of Palestinian terrorism, and the refusal by the Palestinian Authority to take any serious steps resulted in...

The Israeli army and security forces carrying out numerous attacks in Palestinian areas over the course of 2004. These were most intense and extensive in the Gaza Strip, and were often carried out in a manner that failed to demonstrate that the attackers had used all feasible measures to avoid or minimize harm to civilians and their property.

But the Amnesty International wording does not paint it like that. As usual, with most reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the words place the effect - IDF raids against Palestinian terrorists - before the cause - Qassam rockets, terrorism and the refusal by the Palestinian Authority to take any serious steps to stop it.