Login to post comments | No account yet? Register here
Adverts/Promotions
| Sick But Dangerous? |
|
|
| Tuesday, 13 November 2007 | |
|
The State of Israel invests more than a third of its national budget on security expenditures, equips itself with sophisticated advanced weapons, builds fences and walls, and utilizes an army and secret services. However, it appears all these efforts are in vain. Israel’s security situation is apparently so unstable that six very sick Palestinians residing in Gaza threaten Israelis to such extent that public and media pressure is required in order to prompt the defense establishment to let them leave the Strip in order to receive medical attention. The 47-year-old Palestinian known as H. apparently suffers from a liver tumor and urgently needs to undergo a biopsy that would enable treatment. Meanwhile, C. is a Palestinian who requires urgent surgery, A. is a 20-year-old Palestinian woman who suffers from cancer and needs to urgently visit a hospital, 16-year-old girl T. suffers from a heart defect and urgently requires catheterization or surgery, 20-year-old L. has cancer and needs radiation and chemotherapy, and 27-year-old A. has a brain tumor and requires urgent treatment. All these cases were examined by senior Israeli oncologists and cardiologists who ruled that treatment is urgently needed and postponing it endangers the lives of the patients. The State of Israel rejected the requests, arguing that the six are prevented from entering Israel for security reasons. However, after repeated inquires by the Physicians for Human Rights organization, the interference of Knesset members, and petitions by human right groups abroad, the six patients were granted a permit to leave the Strip. Israel’s actions boost hatred. Do these six severely ill patients constitute a threat to national security or to the security of Israeli citizens? Can the person who signed the entry ban to Israel honestly claim they are dangerous? The fact that they ultimately did receive the permit proves that the denial of entry for security reasons was dishonest, and that this move was merely a way to exert pressure on the Palestinians. This inhumane approach regularly prevents seriously ill Palestinians from receiving the required treatment. Ever since Hamas’ Gaza Strip takeover we have encountered an increasing number of rejected applications by sick Palestinians. The security establishment is increasingly refusing to approve the entry of patients who are not facing life-threatening diseases but require treatment to improve their condition and prevent suffering. On many occasions, patients facing life-threatening diseases are also refused entry. The decision to exert pressure on Hamas on the backs of Gaza residents, and particularly the ill and weak, is not only immoral and inhumane. It will also serve to boost the hatred and support for the most radical alternatives. Philosopher Emmanuel Levinas characterized evil as the inability to take responsibility for the effect of our actions on others. The meaning of evil is to demand the right to life for ourselves but deprive it from others. Is there a better way to describe the obstacles that the State of Israel places before seriously ill people who desperately need treatment? By Dr. Danny Filk who is the chairman of Physicians for Human Rights Source: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3470830,00.html           Readers have left 29 comments.
Existentialist Politics...:
Quote
...which is not necessarily "terrorist" should dictate that the Arab world should stop oil supply to Israel's vassal states the USA and UK just as Israel has cut off energy supplies to Gaza . The desperate despot King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia who visited all the entertaining caricatures of the Christian world from the Queen to the Pope should have been told that by the Muslim community when he attempted to lecture us on terrorism.
To stop the genocide in Gaza , we must act fast and now before Israel and its vassal states have exterminated those who have defeated their tacks, jets and bombs...
(1)
2007-11-14 06:50:09
Bob:
Quote
Not a bad article, thought I don't see why these patients can't go to Egypt and take advantage of the great health-care system they have there. Why would a Palestinian want to be treated by the medics of the occupying army?
I am surprised though that your website contains no article about the Hamas militia opening fire on the Fatah demonstrators a couple of days ago. At least 6 killed and 100's injured. Oh the occupation, the occpation. I suppose that was Israel's fault.
(2)
2007-11-14 08:44:23
Zesto:
Quote
Not a bad article, thought I don't see why these patients can't go to Egypt and take advantage of the great health-care system they have there. Why would a Palestinian want to be treated by the medics of the occupying army? — BobI am surprised though that your website contains no article about the Hamas militia opening fire on the Fatah demonstrators a couple of days ago. At least 6 killed and 100's injured. Oh the occupation, the occpation. I suppose that was Israel's fault. The truth is that many thousands of Palestinians get treatment in Israeli hospitals. Israel has always offered medical assistance when there have been accidents in the Palestinian areas like 'work accidents' or children with chronic or life threatening diseases. If Gazan's stopped trying to killk Israelis then will will see normal service resumed.
(3)
2007-11-14 10:34:05
RSD:
Quote
The answer to Bob's questions is two-fold. 1st the border between Gaza and Egypt is closed to Palestinians. 2nd Egypts health care facilities are poorer quality and more expensive.
(4)
2007-11-14 12:13:09
Ibrahim Sidat:
Quote
There is nothing new in this article these kind of actions have been going on since the illegal occupation of palestine started since the UN resolution, Stan Cohen a cetified academic stated that 'people are starting to get tired of the truth' is this concept true in terms of Israeli aggression against the poor palestinian muslims, jews and christians? I certainly think so, as almsot every western country tend to stay away from the facts and want to sign the hundreth decleration for the hundreth time without giving thought of the illegal ocupied terrotries expanded in recen times so there is nothing new here it's the same from a Palestinian point of view
(5)
2007-11-14 14:29:40
Taz:
Quote
Not a bad article, thought I don't see why these patients can't go to Egypt and take advantage of the great health-care system they have there. Why would a Palestinian want to be treated by the medics of the occupying army? — ZestoI am surprised though that your website contains no article about the Hamas militia opening fire on the Fatah demonstrators a couple of days ago. At least 6 killed and 100's injured. Oh the occupation, the occpation. I suppose that was Israel's fault. The truth is that many thousands of Palestinians get treatment in Israeli hospitals. Israel has always offered medical assistance when there have been accidents in the Palestinian areas like 'work accidents' or children with chronic or life threatening diseases. If Gazan's stopped trying to killk Israelis then will will see normal service resumed. Oh dear Zesto you've broken my lie detector. Israel prevents many Palestinans from getting medical treatment (which is against international law by the way) and prevents pregnant women from getting to hospital. It also attacks ambulances and it does this in the name of Zionism.
(6)
2007-11-14 16:05:54
RSD:
Quote
I. Sidat's assertion that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is / were illegal is inaccurate. Israel's occupation as a result of the 67 war is legal. What is illegal, if you believe that Israel is a legitimate state defined by the 1949 cease-fire lines, is the colonisation of land in the West Bank and Gaza that is illegal. However if you don't regard Israel as a legitimate state, and thus it cannot exist as anything other than a Zionist enclave in Palestine, then the occupation cannot be illegal as the law relates to legal states.
If Israel is a legitimate state then in international law it has the right to close it's borders to anyone it so choses, it has no obligation to allow the transfer across its territory of anyone, nor is it obliged to allow non-nationals access to its health care system. Palestinians in Gaza have lost access to Israel's health care system due to the on-going violence as Israel refuses to open the border crossings due to the frequency these are subject to Palestinian mortar fire. It is a pecualiar idea that a democracy such as Palestine can elect a government on a manifesto for war and then complain that the enemy don't cooperate or provide health care and other services to the citizens of that democracy. It should be born in mind that Hamas has declared that it intends to expel or kill the health care professionals that these poor individuals are trying to get to.
(7)
2007-11-14 16:59:00
Paul M:
Quote
Genocide is now defined as failing to provide first world health care facilities to people who have elected a government sworn to your annihilation.
Why would any Palestinian want - or expect - to be treated by the genocidal Nazi state which MPAC keeps telling us Israel is? Yesterday there was blood including that of children on the streets of Gaza, but that of course was not reported by MPAC, nor were there pictures of dead children shown. I wonder why not? The answer, of course, is that it was the result of inter-Palestinian fighting. The Palestinians must be free to kill each other, fire rockets into Israel, send in suicide bombers, but if they are not all and always given first class health treatment then Israel is a Nazi racist apartheid state.
(8)
2007-11-14 17:32:48
Zesto:
Quote
Not a bad article, thought I don't see why these patients can't go to Egypt and take advantage of the great health-care system they have there. Why would a Palestinian want to be treated by the medics of the occupying army? — TazI am surprised though that your website contains no article about the Hamas militia opening fire on the Fatah demonstrators a couple of days ago. At least 6 killed and 100's injured. Oh the occupation, the occpation. I suppose that was Israel's fault. The truth is that many thousands of Palestinians get treatment in Israeli hospitals. Israel has always offered medical assistance when there have been accidents in the Palestinian areas like 'work accidents' or children with chronic or life threatening diseases. If Gazan's stopped trying to killk Israelis then will will see normal service resumed. Oh dear Zesto you've broken my lie detector. Israel prevents many Palestinans from getting medical treatment (which is against international law by the way) and prevents pregnant women from getting to hospital. It also attacks ambulances and it does this in the name of Zionism. Dear Taz, you've been drinling too much Taqiyya. Israel treats thousands of Palestinians in its hospitals every year. Only an idiot would try and send a heavily pregnant woman through an Israeli check-point when they would be better off using local midwives and sending the women to the Suha & Yasser Arafat Natal Clinics instead. My guess its the Palestinian men who don't have any real sympathy or respect for their women. They do this in the name of Islamism.
(9)
2007-11-14 19:03:36
Zesto:
Quote
Genocide is now defined as failing to provide first world health care facilities to people who have elected a government sworn to your annihilation. — Paul MWhy would any Palestinian want - or expect - to be treated by the genocidal Nazi state which MPAC keeps telling us Israel is? Yesterday there was blood including that of children on the streets of Gaza, but that of course was not reported by MPAC, nor were there pictures of dead children shown. I wonder why not? The answer, of course, is that it was the result of inter-Palestinian fighting. The Palestinians must be free to kill each other, fire rockets into Israel, send in suicide bombers, but if they are not all and always given first class health treatment then Israel is a Nazi racist apartheid state. Paul, you are so right? Why don't the Palestinians boycott Israel and refuse to step on its soil? Come on people. Let's have a good reason.
(10)
2007-11-14 19:05:35
RSD:
Quote
There is a more important issue which everyone seems to be overlooking. The Palestinians as a national collective have received over the years, and continue to receive, vast amounts of money in aid and assistance from a number quarters. This money should have been spent developing social infrastructural facilities such as hospitals, housing and workplaces. Sadly the majority of this money has either been stolen or spent on weapons which does not benefit the ordinary Palestinian people. While the notion of resistance to occupation has a romantic ring to it, if it is at the expense of the potential to create a sustainable society then it is very much pointless. The weapons have always pointed in two directions, at the Israeli / Zionists and at the Palestinians. Too many so called supporters of the Palestinians are in denial about the nature of Palestinian politics and the degree to which the Palestinians are denied freedom of expression.
These unfortunate individuals who are trapped in Gaza are simply symptomatic of the fundamental malaise in the Palestinian political heirarchies and society. If MPACUK and others care about the Palestinians where are the expressions of condemnation about the corruption and violence directed by Palestinians against Palestinians?
(11)
2007-11-15 12:33:38
jeff:
Quote
Arab and Muslim states have never helped their Arab cousins from the Occupied Territories because it remains the most powerful stick with which to beat the West. Without the 'Palestinian' issue they don't have much to grumble about. That is why the Palestinians have been failed principally by their 'own' people. So much for the 'Ummah'.
(12)
2007-11-15 13:17:14
Zesto:
Quote
Arab and Muslim states have never helped their Arab cousins from the Occupied Territories because it remains the most powerful stick with which to beat the West. Without the 'Palestinian' issue they don't have much to grumble about. That is why the Palestinians have been failed principally by their 'own' people. So much for the 'Ummah'. — jeffSaddam paid the families of suicide bombers and helpfully fired missiles at Israel. Syria and Iran gave Hamas to the Palestinians. Jordan and The Lebanon fought agaist the Palestinikans to stop them trying to overthrow the governments. Egypt and Jordan 'dumped' the Palestinians in Gaza and The West Bank to get rid of them. Arab Brothers HAVE tried to help!!!
(13)
2007-11-15 13:21:19
I Sidat:
Quote
I. Sidat's assertion that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is / were illegal is inaccurate. Israel's occupation as a result of the 67 war is legal. What is illegal, if you believe that Israel is a legitimate state defined by the 1949 cease-fire lines, is the colonisation of land in the West Bank and Gaza that is illegal. However if you don't regard Israel as a legitimate state, and thus it cannot exist as anything other than a Zionist enclave in Palestine, then the occupation cannot be illegal as the law relates to legal states. — RSDIf Israel is a legitimate state then in international law it has the right to close it's borders to anyone it so choses, it has no obligation to allow the transfer across its territory of anyone, nor is it obliged to allow non-nationals access to its health care system. Palestinians in Gaza have lost access to Israel's health care system due to the on-going violence as Israel refuses to open the border crossings due to the frequency these are subject to Palestinian mortar fire. It is a pecualiar idea that a democracy such as Palestine can elect a government on a manifesto for war and then complain that the enemy don't cooperate or provide health care and other services to the citizens of that democracy. It should be born in mind that Hamas has declared that it intends to expel or kill the health care professionals that these poor individuals are trying to get to. How is Israel a legitamte state? when the borders for a new israel was discussed at UN almost every nation oppossed this except for some western countires and palestine rejected this as it was thier land. the Balfour decleration and the UN decleration was illegal as it went against the wishes os the palestinians, no one can establish a new state in some elses country, what if bush came in with his wmds to cornwall and declared that this was amercian territory would you still say this was an legal occupation, also i am not disputing Israel as a state i am disputing thier illegal occupation of palestinian lands and illegal settlements. Also Israel have broken every international agreements in the world it is the only country to do this frequently again to quote key academics "Israel wishes to do what it wants when ever it wants and when it kills innocent they justify this as safeguarding thier own" i do not hesitate to brand Israel as state of hate towards poor palestinians including people of thier own faith so its you who has got it wrong not me
(14)
2007-11-15 13:47:35
Zesto:
Quote
I. Sidat's assertion that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is / were illegal is inaccurate. Israel's occupation as a result of the 67 war is legal. What is illegal, if you believe that Israel is a legitimate state defined by the 1949 cease-fire lines, is the colonisation of land in the West Bank and Gaza that is illegal. However if you don't regard Israel as a legitimate state, and thus it cannot exist as anything other than a Zionist enclave in Palestine, then the occupation cannot be illegal as the law relates to legal states. — I SidatIf Israel is a legitimate state then in international law it has the right to close it's borders to anyone it so choses, it has no obligation to allow the transfer across its territory of anyone, nor is it obliged to allow non-nationals access to its health care system. Palestinians in Gaza have lost access to Israel's health care system due to the on-going violence as Israel refuses to open the border crossings due to the frequency these are subject to Palestinian mortar fire. It is a pecualiar idea that a democracy such as Palestine can elect a government on a manifesto for war and then complain that the enemy don't cooperate or provide health care and other services to the citizens of that democracy. It should be born in mind that Hamas has declared that it intends to expel or kill the health care professionals that these poor individuals are trying to get to. How is Israel a legitamte state? when the borders for a new israel was discussed at UN almost every nation oppossed this except for some western countires and palestine rejected this as it was thier land. the Balfour decleration and the UN decleration was illegal as it went against the wishes os the palestinians, no one can establish a new state in some elses country, what if bush came in with his wmds to cornwall and declared that this was amercian territory would you still say this was an legal occupation, also i am not disputing Israel as a state i am disputing thier illegal occupation of palestinian lands and illegal settlements. Also Israel have broken every international agreements in the world it is the only country to do this frequently again to quote key academics "Israel wishes to do what it wants when ever it wants and when it kills innocent they justify this as safeguarding thier own" i do not hesitate to brand Israel as state of hate towards poor palestinians including people of thier own faith so its you who has got it wrong not me Quite a silly comment. You deny the pre-existence of The Land of Israel granted by Allah to the Jewish Nation. You don't even know that the State of Israel is 50% of the Palestinien it was given by the original Mandate. People who came to steal other people's lands are a rag-tag of Arab people who renamed themselves Palestians after the attempts in 1948 and 1967 to steal land from the Jews failed.
(15)
2007-11-15 19:32:12
RSD:
Quote
I Siadat
There is a distinction to be made between the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza after the 1967 war, and establishment of settlements. The Occupation occurred as a result of the failure of the Egyptian and Jordanian armies to hold the areas. International law provides for the occupation of land after war but bars the integration of that land into the territory of the Occupying State. In the strictest reading of the law it is an offence for the Occupying Nation to carry out any change at all in the Occupied Territories, as can be seen in UN exchanges as a result of Israel carrying out slum clearance in Gaza in the late 1970's. Under 242 the UN required Israel to withdraw from "territories" captured and for the members of the Arab League (the direct and indirect Arab belligerents) to make peace and recognise Israel. In 1970 Lord Caradon stated that the Security Council intended that there should be adjestments to the 1949 ceasefire lines as they could not be maintained as international boundaries between Israel and its neighbours. However the Arab belligerents rejected 242, and thus Israel remained in legal occupation. Although some of Israel's conduct has been reprehensible it cannot be said with any justification that it has uniformly been so. The occupation enforced primary and secondary education for all, whereas girls had has no state provision between 49 & 67. It kicked started the Palestinian economy. It facilitated the construction of universities and colleges which had not existed before. It provided for the first time access to an independent judiciary. And provided the Palestinians with job opportunities. The mass unemployment that Palestinians experience today is caused by the closure of the Israel labour market to most Palestinians. The failure of the Oslo Agreement etc has been a disaster for the Palestinians on a scale equal to the Nakhba. It's promise has disppeared in a welter of violence and corruption. If there is to be a sustainable Palestinian state the Palestinian people must come to terms with the existance of Israel if they want to benefit from what it has to offer. If the Palestinians voted for Hamas out of frustration with Fatah / PLO, we need to ask the question why there was no alternative. The answer is readily available to anyone who cares to read. It is unrealistic to imagine that the Israelis will want to help create a Palestinian state if the Palestinian people support a party whose manifesto clearly sets out for genocide against Israelis (Jews, Christians, Muslims & Bahais) and war. I would remind everyone that in the early '90's 70% of Israelis voted for peace - now barely 5% would do so on the same terms. IMO there is the possibility that all of Palestine could be brought back together for the benefit of everyone - Israelis, Jordanians and Palestinians. But it will not be achieved by war.
(16)
2007-11-15 19:53:55
RSD:
Quote
Zesto
I am afraid you are talking drivel... No specific area was assigned to the Jews in the Balfour Declaration or the League of Nations Mandate, they simpy aspired to a Homeland for the Jews, but not at the expense of the indigenous people. The Sykes-Picot Agreement contradicts the Balfour Declaration and indicates no consistency of policy In the early stages of Zionism in the Levant, there was amongst liberal "Palestinians" and Zionists an attempt to find common ground and cooperation, and it showed considerable promise. Sadly the faction led by Hajj Amin El Husseini assassinated enough liberal Palestinians to scare them off and ensure that the communities were polarised. He then led the Palestinians into a series of fruitless violent actions and ultimately into the Nakhba. His successor and nephew Yassir Arafat carried on in the same tradition. There were significant numbers of Jewish, Muslim and Christian immigrants into the Mandate and they all sought land to settle. The demographics of the region are complex and do not readily support any of the political stand points. The El Husseini clan have opposed any form of progress since the 1850's as it threatened their position and wealth. The corruption to be seen in Palestinian politics is merely a continuation of this. There were haphazard attempts in 1948 / 49 by the Zionists to clear certain areas of non-Jews and there were notable exceptions. There was ethnic cleansing by the Palestinians led by El Husseini of Jews in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. However some Muslims in Palestine allied themselves with the Zionists, notably the Circassians who had suffered a massacre by the Palestinian forces. The UK was very interested in the Palestinian Mandate to provide it with a naval base in the eastern Mediterranean (which it did) and that's why Haifa is twinned with Portsmouth.
(17)
2007-11-15 20:47:06
I Sidat:
Quote
I. Sidat's assertion that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is / were illegal is inaccurate. Israel's occupation as a result of the 67 war is legal. What is illegal, if you believe that Israel is a legitimate state defined by the 1949 cease-fire lines, is the colonisation of land in the West Bank and Gaza that is illegal. However if you don't regard Israel as a legitimate state, and thus it cannot exist as anything other than a Zionist enclave in Palestine, then the occupation cannot be illegal as the law relates to legal states. — ZestoIf Israel is a legitimate state then in international law it has the right to close it's borders to anyone it so choses, it has no obligation to allow the transfer across its territory of anyone, nor is it obliged to allow non-nationals access to its health care system. Palestinians in Gaza have lost access to Israel's health care system due to the on-going violence as Israel refuses to open the border crossings due to the frequency these are subject to Palestinian mortar fire. It is a pecualiar idea that a democracy such as Palestine can elect a government on a manifesto for war and then complain that the enemy don't cooperate or provide health care and other services to the citizens of that democracy. It should be born in mind that Hamas has declared that it intends to expel or kill the health care professionals that these poor individuals are trying to get to. How is Israel a legitamte state? when the borders for a new israel was discussed at UN almost every nation oppossed this except for some western countires and palestine rejected this as it was thier land. the Balfour decleration and the UN decleration was illegal as it went against the wishes os the palestinians, no one can establish a new state in some elses country, what if bush came in with his wmds to cornwall and declared that this was amercian territory would you still say this was an legal occupation, also i am not disputing Israel as a state i am disputing thier illegal occupation of palestinian lands and illegal settlements. Also Israel have broken every international agreements in the world it is the only country to do this frequently again to quote key academics "Israel wishes to do what it wants when ever it wants and when it kills innocent they justify this as safeguarding thier own" i do not hesitate to brand Israel as state of hate towards poor palestinians including people of thier own faith so its you who has got it wrong not me Quite a silly comment. You deny the pre-existence of The Land of Israel granted by Allah to the Jewish Nation. You don't even know that the State of Israel is 50% of the Palestinien it was given by the original Mandate. People who came to steal other people's lands are a rag-tag of Arab people who renamed themselves Palestians after the attempts in 1948 and 1967 to steal land from the Jews failed. Ok firstly you have no legitimate point because all your facts are obviously from the media which puts political spin at a new level, the illegal settlements are safeguarded by israeli forces fr illegal israeli settlers these settlements were NOT given by the UN mandate almost all parts of southern israel and some northern parts (Lebaneese land including Golan heights) are illegally occupied, and no 50% was not given by the UN mandate where have you got that from you confuse me, lastly your last comments contradictory because majority of the israeli settlers were dumped by a racist europe my facts are from many key acdemics such bengin, brenner, grollenberg, said, alexander, usher and bishara (ironically this guy is an israeli) so justify your remarks with valid source not something from the media
(18)
2007-11-16 02:47:36
I Sidat:
Quote
I Siadat — RSDThere is a distinction to be made between the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza after the 1967 war, and establishment of settlements. The Occupation occurred as a result of the failure of the Egyptian and Jordanian armies to hold the areas. International law provides for the occupation of land after war but bars the integration of that land into the territory of the Occupying State. In the strictest reading of the law it is an offence for the Occupying Nation to carry out any change at all in the Occupied Territories, as can be seen in UN exchanges as a result of Israel.............. tha The comments and facts you have made me laugh these areas that your talking about were never included in agreement and i go back to the example i made earlier about cornwall, these areas invaded and stolen evidently, when a war ends you retreat from those lands israel have not done this the terrorist organisation namely the UN a key player in the destruction of Palestine have never stated this fact so i don't know what your talking about, this includes southern lebanon which israel still occupy i do agree with one aspect that arab countries were also responsible for the inhuman destruction of palestine. Also hamas is not a terrorist organisation they are a resistant force, again the media have completely villified this group through israel, the facts are hamas has always retreated whenever asked by the international community for ceasfire but then israeli forces go in gun blazing attacking them and state that it was a defence startegy, anyway Hamas is democratically elected no one in the world can disposses them as its democracy this is an international agreement, if you want to see a real evil regime then look at Burma's junta or the pakistan's pervez
(19)
2007-11-16 03:09:13
RSD:
Quote
In law a victorious nation should withdraw and surrender the territory to the government of the lands they have captured by way a peace treaty. However there was no government or authority to surrender the territory to in an orderly manner.
You are right Hamas is the legitimate ruling party as the democratically elected government of Palestine. Hamas is a fascist sectarian political movement committed to war against the Jewish community in the Levant and the application of a rigidly divisive society in Palestine. While we can all accept that the Palestinian people chose Hamas to govern and represent them, it is hard to concieve quite how peace and a viable Palestinian state could come into being even if Israel were to withdraw back to the 49 ceasefire lines. Possibly even more disturbing is that the Palestinian people did not understand how their Israeli neighbours would interpret the outcome of the election if Hamas won. It suggests a political and social immaturity which is almost byond belief. The more serious question is why there are no viable alternatives to Hamas and Fatah. The answer to this is in the manner in which both Hamas and Fatah have violently suppressed independent political expressions which conflict their paradigms. Another matter over which the world has been largely silent.
(20)
2007-11-16 09:52:46
I SIdat:
Quote
However there was no government or authority to surrender the territory to in an orderly manner. — RSDHamas is a fascist sectarian political movement committed to war against the Jewish community in the Levant and the application of a rigidly divisive society in Palestine. The more serious question is why there are no viable alternatives to Hamas and Fatah. The answer to this is in the manner in which both Hamas and Fatah have violently suppressed independent political expressions which conflict their paradigms. Another matter over which the world has been largely silent. The first point of your argument is stupid, becuase those lands were captured by neighbouring nations they were the rightfull owners of that land this was concieved when the UN decleration failed to administer in appropriate fashion and these arab states took advantage. Your second point again is ridiculous these people have been oppressed since the ottoman empire's rule and the susbequent british, french and russian rule and now the illegal occupation of majority ownership by israel, how do you want them to react? Hamas and Fatah is the only legal and viable option for these people who have been oppressed since the ottoman rule and the diaspora of violence is irony becuase israel is no different, the only thing is that hamas will cease the fire when told. The question really is, Does the world think Israel is justifies its reason correctly? the answer by a majority is no this is according to amnesty international, the same body has also stated that israel has committed genocide since the UN approval, furthermore Rev Desmond Tutu has described this situation as the african aparthied now to me almsot everyone can see injustice except for israel and its citizens who were dumped by a facist europe and those western countries who see economic viability such as america, if your asking for justification then look no further because the real problem lies within the scope of israel's society where a number of middle class citizens are being held captive for speaking the truth and the dozens of palestinians and lebaneese held in israeli dungeons without any justification the reality is that israels actions are no different to that of the nazi regime (quote from Bauman) and there will be no peace unless israel withdraws its illegal ocupation in many parts including west jeruselum
(21)
2007-11-16 15:15:46
RaviM:
Quote
" israel's society where a number of middle class citizens are being held captive for speaking the truth and the dozens of palestinians and lebaneese held in israeli dungeons without any justification the reality is that israels actions are no different to that of the nazi regime (quote from Bauman) and there will be no peace unless israel withdraws its illegal ocupation in many parts including west jeruselum "
________________________ Where is all this happening? On Fantasy Island? Hamas are actually behaving no better than Nazis by shooting Fatah members in hospital beds, throwing them from roof-tops and shooting them in teh back. Hamas are the real Nazis of the region and following the Palestinian tradition of associating with Nazism, as Al Husseini did. Where are the Palestinian Concentration Camps? Where are the gas ovens where millions of Palestinians are being slaughtered? Where are the mass graves of thousands of Palestinians? Where are the medical experiements on Palestinians? You odious creature. You vile person.
(22)
2007-11-19 07:52:03
RSD:
Quote
I Sidat: You lack of knowledge about the socio-economic history of the Levant and the Ottoman Empire is the root cause for your inaccurate renderings of the current situation, and the reasons why the Palestinian people have failed to secure for themselves an independent nation state. If you were to study the nature of the pre & post Tanzimat society and compare these structures with those of Fatah and Hamas you would notice certain characteristics which illustrate the underlying forces present in Palestinian politics.
(23)
2007-11-19 08:56:42
I Sidat:
Quote
Ravi your becoming laughable there have been public testaments to the events described where have been for the last twenty years? Palestinians are fighting for thier rights, again people like rev desmond tutu have described the palestinian situation to that of african aparthied also many people like Bauman (middles class israeli) described the situation as that of the nazi regime countless ket theorists and almost every country in the world condemns israel not palestine on thier continuous opression and illegal border expansion, you and america will be the only people in this world to differ, and if you ever go to israel and palestine you will see more palestinian graves than israeli, persumably you sit front of a tv set and only get the information on 'israeli' sides point of view let me tell you one thing, every debate that has occurred between israel and palestine has come down to the israeli backing out as they have no answers, check it out for yourself indulge your self in some academic reading you will know what am talking about. These guys that i am pointing out are not muslims they are jewish, christians, aethists and many more just to give you a piece of mind. And don't call me vile and odious becasue everyone knows from this that your islamaphobic and clearly have some form of degenarate mind that can't see beyond assumption.
RSD i don't think you understand the pre-text, if you are under rule of one empire which is suceeded by another subsequently byb another how are you going to secure an independent state? this isn't about politics its opression
(24)
2007-11-19 14:08:38
YossiB:
Quote
I Sidat, Tutu is out of his tiny mind if he says "Palestinians are fighting for thier rights, again people like rev desmond tutu have described the palestinian situation to that of african aparthied"
How can the Palestinians, in towns like Ramallah & Nablus, in a place like Gaza, devoid of any Israeli influence be experiencing Apartheid? You can ONLY have Apartheid like South Africa if you have a single government that treats its citizens differently based on race or religion. Since Israel doesn't run the Palestinian territory then any Apartheid is self-imposed by the Palestinians on themselves. Even Carter stated "There is NO Apartheid in Israel".
(25)
2007-11-19 19:40:58
RSD:
Quote
I Siadat: In the pre-1856 period the southern element of the Damasek Sanjak, which became Palestine in 1919, was virtually autonomous largely ruled by the feudal elites and the waqf in accordance with Sharia law. The feudal elites supported themselves by tax farming in which they levied particulary onerous taxes upon the non-Muslim communities. Failure to pay these taxes resulted in violence and expulusion as happened to the Ashkenazi Jews in the mid-18th C.
Following 1856 and the imposition of Tanzimat, the application of Sharia law ended and all inhabitants became equal before the law, and local government became more representative of all communities. The same feudal elites still dominated but their absolutist power was significantly diminished. The Ottoman authorities imposed their own agents as rulers to end the attrocious levels of corruption, stabilise the region and attempt to bring about some economic regeneration. The detailed censuses of the period give us particular insight into the composition of the population. When the British took over under the Mandate they largely repeated what had been successful in India and worked through the elites, though this was tempered by the presence of the highly organised and irritatingly persistent Zionists (read Arthur Koestlers book "Thieves in the Night"). The Mandate authorities allowed for political development, but this was ineffective in the face of the actions of the Muslim faction led by Hajj Amin El Husseini which intimidated any opposition through assassination. From 1967 onward Fatah and its allies imposed a policy of Sumud upon the occupied territories to prevent the Palestinians from developing any alternative political force. The only viable political movement that succeeeded is Hamas and this is because Hamas is even more violent and threatening than Fatah. What is clear from Fatah practice and Hamas policy is that both seek to revert to a pre-Tanzimat society in which Muslims are awarded power of persons and property by virtue of religion. Both of these parties are profoundly corrupt and violent towards Palestinians. It is very sad fact that the only Palestinian political parties that have freedom of expression are those represented in the Israeli Knesset. Unless the Palestinians can develop political movements that do not rely upon violence and crime to maintain their power base then the prospects for Palestine are dire indeed. It hardly matters what the Israelis do if the Palestinians cannot establish and maintain the rule of law.
(26)
2007-11-19 20:00:32
I Sidat:
Quote
Ha ha ha ha ha, Yossi you make me laugh, Israel are in total control of Gaza they have settlements all over the place in fact they control the entire area of gaza, golan, west bank and so on....
RSD the mandate your talking about was created by the british under the Balfour decleration which was given to the UN. There was no mandate prior to the british rule. Palestinians have been under oppression by successive regimes that's my point that's the reason why they have resulted in these actions, if you look at my thread above i gave an example based on cormwall and a hypothetical situation similar to palestine. What seems to have happened over the years is prior to media hysteria and lies the majority of the UK was behind palestine when Israel was formed and started expanding it's borders (in fact a jewish cabinet memebr was against the formation), what has happened is media lies have been fed into british society and across the world and there seems to be no news on palestinian oppression if peopel can't see this then there must be something very sinister in this society as clearly everyone can see injustice except a few, your comment is completely wrong because Palestininas have always ceased fire when it came to international co-operation it's always those israeli thigs who carry on in the name of 'defence'
(27)
2007-11-20 01:08:03
RSD:
Quote
I Sidat: I would agree that for the last 1000+ years people who live in the Levant have lived under oppression at the hands of one force or another. It would be hard, I think, to find a single 100 year period when there was an absence of sectarian violence and exploitation. Unfortunately thos people who today define themselves as Palestinians are descendants of the perpetrators of that violence and oppression.
(28)
2007-11-20 20:40:58
I Sidat:
Quote
I Sidat: I would agree that for the last 1000+ years people who live in the Levant have lived under oppression at the hands of one force or another. It would be hard, I think, to find a single 100 year period when there was an absence of sectarian violence and exploitation. Unfortunately thos people who today define themselves as Palestinians are descendants of the perpetrators of that violence and oppression. — RSDSay those words to a scholar, or an acdemic and they will laugh, what evidence have you got on these precepts, there is nothing in history to jusify and prove what you are saying. Palestine has gone under huge transformation, mosques, churches, poor jews synagogues have been wiped away, i really and honestly see this as nazi ideology you may disagree, but many academics have TRIED to address this but sanctions have prevented them from doing so. Personally i believe that Zionjist ideology are based on the pinciples of nazism in terms of ethnic cleansing and fascist behaviour, now you tell me who are the oppressors, the 1.2 million palestinians who were driven out of thier homes for new jewish state, even more are being driven out to expansion of borders and illegal settlements ansswer this oppression before you make assumptions out of the blue
(29)
2007-11-20 22:07:42
|
The decision to exert pressure on Hamas by denying entry to sick Palestinians is immoral and inhumane.
