Bilal said:
There are difference between ‘’State terrorism’’ and ‘’individual terrorism. While I am completely against what some Palestinian doing, I see most of Israeli supporting a ‘’terrorist government’’.
The question remains, what have you done to stop those Palestinians who you disagree with? Look at all the activism in Israel. I go to so many protests to show my resentment at my side's wrongdoings, as well as a lot of other Israelis. How come that on the Palestinian side - the only side using suicide bombers - there was not even one small demonstration against the killing of innocent civilians?
Bilal said:
Palestine was full in people, so you can not claim it was empty land!
I never said it was empty, but it certainly had a fraction of the population it had after the war of independence, and definitely a smaller fraction of its population today - which obviously means there was a lot of room back then. You even agreed that the Jewish immigration made much of the previously uninhabitable land habitable, thus increasing the land available for the population. Also, the population of the Negev desert was a tiny fraction of what it became thanks to the cultivation of it by the Jewish immigrants, and the Bedouin Arabs have flourished thanks to that.
Bilal said:
I told before, I have no problem with Jews and I understand their suffering for ages, but this not means to solve their problem by creating another tragedy for another nation.
And I told you before, the tragedy is not entirely Israel's fault. Palestinians share a lot of the responsibility. All that doesn't matter anyway, since we need to focus on the solution, not the cause.
Bilal said:
The problem is that there is now Jews State, and they did not satisfy.
I'm very satisfied, and I'll still be satisfied after we pull out of Gaza and then hopefully out of the West Bank. But that won't happen until you control your terrorists.
Bilal said:
Just examples of State terrorism in recent years:
Qana massacre 1996
http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles18.htm
((Qana, southern Lebanon - It was a massacre. Not since Sabra and Chatila had I seen the innocent slaughtered like this. The Lebanese refugee women and children and men lay in heaps, their hands or arms or legs missing, beheaded or disembowelled. There were well over a hundred of them. A baby lay without a head. The Israeli shells had scythed through them as they lay in the United Nations shelter, believing that they were safe under the world's protection. Like the Muslims of Srebrenica, the Muslims of Qana were wrong. ))
Is trhat terrorism or not? also you can check the UN report:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qana_Massacre
((The UN investigated the incident in detail, concluding "while the possibility cannot be ruled out completely, the pattern of impacts in the Qana area makes it
unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of technical and/or procedural errors".))
So why would Israel just kill so many innocent civilians? And in a UN camp? Don't you think it would have been easier to have done that in a village? Furthermore, the UN report stated:
(a) Between 1200 and 1400 hours on 18 April, Hezbollah fighters fired two or three rockets from a location 350 metres south-east of the United Nations compound. The location was identified on the ground.
(b) Between 1230 and 1300 hours, they fired four or five rockets from a location 600 metres south-east of the compound. The location was identified on the ground.
(c) About 15 minutes before the shelling, they fired between five and eight rounds of 120 millimetre mortar from a location 220 metres south-west of the centre of the compound. The location was identified on the ground. According to witnesses, the mortar was installed there between 1100 and 1200 hours that day, but no action was taken by UNIFIL personnel to remove it. (On 15 April, a Fijian had been shot in the chest as he tried to prevent Hezbollah fighters from firing rockets.)
(d) The United Nations compound at Qana had taken in a large number of Lebanese seeking shelter from Israeli bombardments. By Sunday, 14 April, 745 persons were in the compound. On 18 April, the day of the shelling, their number is estimated to have been well over 800. When the Fijian soldiers heard the mortar being fired not far from their compound, they began immediately to move as many of the civilians as possible into shelters so that they would be protected from any Israeli retaliation.
(e) At some point (it is not completely clear whether before or after the shelling), two or three Hezbollah fighters entered the United Nations compound, where their families were.
So you see, these "freedom fighters" purposefuly fired from nearby that UN installations with the aim of having an Israeli retaliation hit that compound. When a UN soldier tried to stop them, they shot him in the chest - hell, they even walked right into the UN base on that day (show of how pathetic the UN is when dealing with terrorists). These terrorists purposefuly risked the lives of their compatriots, hoping for an Israeli retaliation.
Bilal said:
Yonoz said:
We already discussed this, the PA was offered everything Israel could afford under Arafat, but he chose the path of violence. Now that there's a real chance, it is up to Mahmoud Abbas to get terrorist organisations under control. Even though he hasn't, Israel is still pulling out of the Gaza Strip. I would say the Palestinians are getting a really good deal here.
Here is the answer from Israeli peace bloc and antiwar movement :
http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf
http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h020802.html
The first site refers to the December 2000, I am referring to the
January 2001 Proposal. The second site is obviously way too extreme, the only parties he seems to accept are the Communist ones. Anyway, his views are obviously shared by an extremely small minority of Israelis. I know a few Israeli Arabs who would think this guy's crazy.
Bilal said:
The attacks you mentioned are attacks by Lebanon-based Palestinian organization not by the people of WB and Gaza …
Oh please...
On this date, the 26th anniversary of Israeli independence, three Arabs subsequently identified as members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), a faction affiliated with the PLO, broke into the high school in Ma'alot, a community in northern Israel, where a group of 100 14-16 year olds were sleeping on the floor after a day spent hiking.
Black September Organisation:
The Black September Organization (BSO) was a Palestinian paramilitary unit founded in 1970. It is believed to have drawn its members chiefly from Fatah, the PLO faction controlled by Yasser Arafat. In 1973, the U.S. State Department distributed documents regarding the
links between the PLO and the BSO.
Avoiding responsibilty is so easy for terrorists.
Bilal said:
The discussion about people of WB and Gaza …. We live in peace under Israeli occupation from 1967 till 1987, then we started peaceful resistance till 1993, then after Hebron massacre (1994) , the suicide bomber started.
Oddly enough it was also after the Oslo Accords. While the Hebron massacre was an isolated incident, the bombings never stopped. It seems that as the negotiations became more intense, so did the
attacks. It was proved that the bombings were not only supported by the PA, it was proved the PA was actively funding acts of terrorism. One can only assume Arafat meant to use this as leverage against Israel. So if your claim is to be believed, it shows Palestinians lived peacefuly under the Israeli occupation, but became violent during the negotiations - very odd.
Bilal said:
This historical sequence is proving that security has nothing to do with occupation.
It does, as I believe the occupation reduces Israel's security, even though you apparently proved the opposite above.
Bilal said:
Israel builds settlements and continues the occupation because they need the land and they do not want the people who live on that land.
Israel is a democratic state and the settlers have a strong lobby. There's also something about the way the Palestinians are behaving that makes Israelis antagonistic towards them - maybe it has something to do with the fact they're killing their innocent civilian friends and families. You must remember - Israelis vote with their hearts, not their brains - you should try to win our hearts.
Bilal said:
Yonoz said:
So why is this acceptable:Is it alright in your opinion for Jews to surrounded by fences but it's not alright for Palestinians?
I did not say that, I mean they should build the wall on the border.
Yes you did:
Bilal said:
If you decide to separate in pure Jews State, then you can build the wall on the borders of Jews cities
If you want the wall to be built on the border, that means Israel has to move all its settlers. While I am for that, it remains a problem to convince Israelis to support such a move when they are constantly attacked. Furthermore, it would signal a victory to violence - if we pull the settlements as a result of violence, that would strengthen the terrorist organisations - it would appear to the Palestinian public as if the only way to gain something would be to support the violent struggle. If the PA worked to control these organisations, it would make it a lot easier for people like myself to convince Israelis to support that sort of move.
Bilal said:
For settlements they can replace those ‘’extremist Jews” by “peaceful Jews” who suppose to be good citizens in democratic Palestine the same as Muslims and Christian.
I'd rather they pull the settlements out completely, I don't believe anyone "peaceful" will agree to live there.
Bilal said:
Yonoz said:
Bilal said:
Our freedom and dignity is the most important.
You mean it is more important than the life of innocent Israeli civilians.
I mean innocent people are innocent whether they Palestinian or Jews …..
So why do you say your freedom and dignity is the most important?
Bilal said:
Again you spread misleading information about the wall! There are no direct shooting from Palestinian side to Israel, because there are no rockets in WB, all what Palestinian have is simple guns and explosive materials, which can not reach the Israeli side directly.
And they used those simple guns to fire onto a major highway adjacent to the west bank barrier and injure a child a few months ago. Some Israeli settlements and roads are well within firing distance of the barrier, which is why it was made of concrete in those areas.
Bilal said:
If the wall provide security to Israel, then they can build it on the border and withdraw as Syria did in Lebanon … let the UN forces to separate both nations..
We saw how good those UN forces guarded the border which is why we don't want them here. They do more harm than good. I would like to have no barrier at all, but it's a necessity right now. I wish it would be built to interfere less with Palesitinian lives, but that would mean moving settlements and roads - and that would mean a victory to terror, which is why this barrier was constructed in the first place. If we reward terrorists with concessions, that would be like asking for more terror. It would all be unnecessary, though, if the PA would handle the terrorists themselves.
Bilal said:
Could you check on the map how the wall surrounds the city of Qalqilya?! Do you agree to force 50000 people to live inside wall with two gates?! Is that city or concentration camp?
As I've said before, I wish there'd be no wall. The barrier, however, proved itself as since its erection there's been less attacks inside Israel. I hope we get to negotiating again and that the wall will be removed as quickly as possible.
Bilal said:
Yonoz said:
I already proved that is a lie.
You did not prove, because I live in WB and I know when suicide bombers attacks … just after Hebron massacre in 1994. The attacks you mentioned was originated from PLO in Lebanon, and Israel reply by Sabra and Chatila massacre and by complete invasion in 1978 and in 1982. WB and Gaza were calm areas in that time..
Then we agree to disagree. I won't argue that point since it's meaningless to my basic argument - the worst attacks were during the negotiations, regardless of the Hebron massacre.
Bilal said:
http://electronicintifada.net/bytopic/255.shtml
Thanks for referring to a site called "Electronic Intifada". I am aware of those events but I would not name them a massacre, as they occurred in separate demonstrations. That day is a sad historical chapter in the history of Israel and is tought as part of the curriculum at high school, but I do not agree it can be termed a massacre.
Bilal said:
Several settlers (belong to the secret Jews terrorist organization) attacked Hebron University. In the same year the same group tried to explode the Dome of Rock in Jerusalem.
No link? Not even to electronicintifada.net?
Bilal said:
It is not documented also on the internet. In 1988, the Israeli soldiers attacked the town of Nahlin near Bethlehem and murdered several people in cold blood.
Rather odd it's not mentioned anywhere, seeing as the Palestinians usually have a very efficient coverage on all these incidents. I guess we'll have to take your word for it.
Bilal said:
Rishon Litzion (south of Tel Aviv)-An Israeli called (Ami Bober) was angry from his girl friend, so he wore his military clothes and asked many Palestinian workers to stand in the work site to check their ID, then he started to shoot them by using (Uzi gun). He murdered and wounded many of them. He is prisoner now, but he got married and he is allowed to spend several days/monthly with his wife in hotel. (Five star jail!)
I think I vaguely remember when that happened. You have to understand prisoners have rights in Israel, even Palestinian ones (unless they're members of a paramilitary organisation). That guy would have that right even if he murdered Israelis. BTW, due to a decision of the government's legal aid most of the military prisons are being turned over to the civilian prisons service, which means they'll get more funding and basically better conditions than what they get now.
Bilal said:
I said that I do not support murdering civilians, whatever their religion or race, also I do not support wars and I wish to see peaceful solution. The problem that you start to write by very biased views, so I have to balance your extreme views by showing the other side of story …..
Well, I understand we don't see eye-to-eye on most things, but no matter what is being argued, I cannot understand murder - regardless who the victims are. Surely you understand that is a problem with your side, just as I understand my side's problem is the building in the settlements.