Since when does anyone have a right to enter a country to work? I can't go to the US just because I want to. If they want jobs why don't they start up a real economy and not one based on payments to the families of suicide bombers.

Sorry, did I just fall off the roof of my house head first?

Israel should lift the restrictions on the movement of Palestinians that constitute collective punishment and that they should be imposed only in relation to a specific security threat and as long as they are non-discriminatory.

This has to be a joke...please let it be a joke...it has to be!

No doubt Amnesty officials have removed the locks and peep holes from the doors of their offices and residences. To not do so would be discriminatory.

The underlying premise that they work under is that Israel is illegitimate and anything that happens to the Israeli people flows from their original sin of existence.

.only if the fkrs at Amnesty ride the Jerusalem busses as human shields.

amazing how debased people will become to rationalize their judenhass

Non-discriminatory? Only one RACE poses a security risk in Israel. Race, you Amnesty freaks. Only one religion, too. Add 1+1 together and you may jsut come up with 2.

It is now official:

Amnesty International has gone full-blown idiotarian. AI is now committed to the destruction of the west, and in turn the very civilized culture that gave it birth.

Great job!

Rob.

First of all, there is a "specific security threat." Israel receives dozens of threats of attack every single day.

Second, the Pals have no right under international law or otherwise to come into Israel to work. They are not citizens of Israel, and Israel has the same right any sovereign nation does to decide who comes in and who doesn't. Let them go work in Jordan or Kuwait or Saudi Arabia, where they're appreciated (yeah, right).

Third, Pally workers have been exposed as terrorist aiders and abettors.

Fourth, as long as the Pally polls show that the vast majority of Pallies support continuing the stupidfada and suicide bombing, then collective punishment is appropriate. They expect to reap the benefits when Israel is destroyed, so they should also be subject to Israel's response. Until they repudiate the terrorists, they deserve no consideration whatsoever. Let 'em rot.

With few exceptions, AI invariably gets it wrong, kind of like scoring a basket, repeatedly, at the wrong end of the court.

I joined AI in high school because I thought I could help out political prisioners in places like communist China by writing a few letters. I'm ashamed at what it's become--an anti-American, dictator and terrorist apologist. Disgusting.

Re #1: My local newspaper's editorial staff wrote an editorial against Israel erecting a security fence, in part because once Palestine was an independent state, the fence would make it more difficult for Palestinians to seek job opportunities in Israel. I wrote a letter to the editor in reply (which they didn't publish) saying that their understanding of the word independent was a novel one with which I was previously unacquainted. Once an independent Palestinian state was established, I was under the impression that it would have to negotiate with its neighbors as to the extent of their economic ties.

I'm sure that if America's neighbors had embraced a campaign that entailed blowing up grandmothers and babies, we'd be re-thinking NAFTA and border control at this point.

The right of free movement for these murderous people does not trump the right of Israelis to survive. Maybe if the Palis could go an hour without trying to murder Jews, IDF could back off. Amnesty International should STFU.

Take a member of AI dressed as a Jew/IDF soldier and drop him off in a Jordyptian town. Repeat as necessary. Just don't expect them to do a screaming write-up on their front page about being murdered for perceived race/religion/nationality.

I used to give them charity dollars. Shameful bastards. During the recent Iraq war they had nothing but alleged flimsy coalition human rights abuses on their front pages, while giving Iraqi war-crimes and atrocities a free pass. Damn shame, cause someone should be out there looking into human rights abuses, and Amnesty ain't it anymore (if they ever were).

I haven't had any faith in Amnesty International for about a year now. Human Rights Watch is way better and much less biased.

Any mention by these arrogant turds at AI about the collective punishment inflicted upon the Israeli population at the hands of the PA? That’s right, Arabs can only be VICTIMS!

The duty of every govenment is to defend its population. That is what the government of Israel is doing.

The road map demands that the Pali Authority dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. But the Pali Authority refuses to do this. So it is up to the government of Israel to take the necessary passive defense and active defense measures that will protect its population.

If this results in some inconvenience on the enemy side, well the blame should be put first of all on the terrorists who have been massacring people and who retain that capability; secondly the blame should be put on the Pali Authority that is not doing its obligation of dismantling terrorist capability and infrastructure.

Under those circumstances, what Israel is doing is just self-defense. To fail to exercise its right of self-defense would be criminally negligent and suicidal -- and the government of Israel cannot in good conscience assume that role even if Amnesty International tells it to.

The purpose of Israel's actions is to defend its population. Whatever inconvenience results to the enemy side is collateral.

For Amnesty International to defame Israel and lie about Israel's purpose by calling it "collective punishment" reduces Amnesty International's credibility. If they cannot admit the defensive purpose of these measures, they are blind or fools or liars, or possibly all of the above.

"Israel should lift the restrictions on the movement of Palestinians that constitute collective punishment and that they should be imposed only in relation to a specific security threat and as long as they are non-discriminatory."

That Arafat, for example, has restricted the movement of ALL Israelis entering the West Bank or Gaza ("ALL JEWS WHO ENTER HERE WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE LIVING") is conveniently dismissed by the fucks.

They will argue that Israel is the aggressor and therefor Arafat's actions don't rise to the level of International Crime. That, my friends, is where the pussys display their preferrences. They prefer to take it a priori, requiring no justification or proof, that Israel and not the Paleolithestines is the aggressor. This axiom is the one which is in accord with the way they prefer to see the Middle East dynamics.

So revises amnesty report...

Amnesty report: Palestinian Authority violates international law

...according to So?

The Palestinian Authority does not apply "reasonable, necessary and proportionate" measures in its police-keeping actions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to protect the security of its own citizens and borders by dismantling the terrorist organizations in these terrorities.

Unfortunately Amnesty International did not make any of the above allegations in its latest report on Israel and the Palestinians, to be released early Monday.

According to the 79-page report, not entitled "Israel Surviving Under Siege: The Impact of Suicide Bombings on Israelis" "the indiscriminate blowing up of buses, restaurants, bars and pool halls by Hamas and other terrorist networks do not meet the collective punishment of these terrorists groups and violates one of the main tenets of The Roadmap to Peace. The Palestinian Authorities obligations under international law to ensure freedom, proper education, and an adequate standard of living for its own peoples is virtually non-existant.

The "stringent" restrictions imposed by Yasser Arafat and the PA to have a normal life have had a devastating impact on the lives of the Palestinians," was unfortunately not at mentioned by Amnesty. "Closures, blockades, military checkpoints, curfews and a barrage of other restrictions are necessary to ensure Jewish blood no longer flows on the streets of Israel.

Palestinian population keep complaining that these efforts have contributed to the virtual collapse of the Palestinian economy which was non-existant to begin with. Why? Yasser hijacked all the money aimed at improving the lines of Palestinians and stashed it into Swiss & French bank accounts.

The rest of the report contains too much bullshit to waste time editing it.

I think that, sure, we can let the Palis in as Amnesty International requests, but that each one needs to be handcuffed to a non-Arab AI "worker" at all times they're in Israel.
If there's a bombing, we say AI is in cahoots and shut them down for supporting terrorism. If there's no bombing, well, there will be, so it's not even an option.

Even simpler--don't let them in at all.

So sorry for many typos in previous post. I had a "rush" deadline.

as far as i am concerned most people in my corner of the world (australia) expect israel to once and for all deal with its problems properly and they have made a good start

most people are giving respect to the honesty and effectiveness of israels current policy despite some press bleating

the lefties will always side against israel so i am glad the latest charade is over - israel will not lose freinds but will gain respect from her enemies and that is what is needed

Hamas vows to kill Sharon sounds like a pretty specific threat to me.

Let Amnesia International move its headquarters to Jerusalem, and see how sniffy they get about the Israelis' security measures then!

This "report" is just more hate from the incredibly stupid ones.

More from the Time/CNN poll - 51% Say the US Has Done a 'Good' Job in Iraq Since Major Fighting Ended, and 53% Say the Campaign Has Been 'Inbetween' Successful and Unsuccessful. For the rest of the details, including the answers to the questions: "In your view, is the war against Iraq worth the toll it has taken in American lives and other kinds of costs, or isn't the war worth these costs?" and “Do you think the United States was right or wrong in going to war with Iraq?" Check out the Political Times.

#24

Not so cute plug.

I don't need polls.

This report just shows one of the major problems with the whole peace process. It comes from the point of view of I owe the Palis., a state from which to carry out terror attacks and second I owe them a job in my State. So they can take jobs away from Jews and money out of Israel into a PLO terror state.

The day is coming where we are going to have leadership in Israel where we will give the PA 24 hours to start their civil war at 24 hours and one second if they have not done so to our satisfaction. Then we will go to war with the PA. At the end of that war we will take to trial the leadership of the PA and then hang them and spread their ashes in the Med, at the same spot an other Jew haters ashes were spread.

We will then go to the arabs living in Judea and Samaria and tell them we have lived with terror for many years you now will have no state and their will be no terror.
If they can go 25 years with no terror, they will be able to come into Israel to look for work and go to our hospitals, etc. If one Jew is murdered they loose this option. The people from the village where the terrorist came from will be loaded onto trucks and taken to Lebanon. Then the bulldozers go to work and in place of an arab town or village we build a Jewish one. Yes of course this includes Ramallah, Hebron etc. For their will be no more dead Jews.

Yoni

#26 Yoni
That day can't come soon enough.

Yoni,
To quotw Utak from the movie "Never Cry Wolf"
"Good Idea!"

It's funny that AI doesn't come down on Saudi Arabia for keeping non-muslims out of Mecca. It certainly isn't mentioned in their 2003 report. Hypocrites ...

Amnesty International out of touch with reality? Not exactly shocking, but nevertheless it's a new low for them. Time for a massive thorazine infusion.

Isn't AI demanding we (the US) free admitted cop-killer Mumia-whatever-the-f*ck the verbose race baiter calls himself? The worst they had to say about Saddam was some oh-well-maybe muttered under their breath.

Next.

Amnesty's preoccupation with being non-discriminatory is nuts. According to their screwy logic, if being non-discriminatory is a virtue, all terrorists must be virtuous. After all, they don't discriminate among those they try to kill. They just detonate the bomb and take as many with them as they can: women, children, old people, young people, Jews, Americans, Australians, and Indonesians. Yep. They're non-discriminatory all right.

Somewhere in the Bible (sorry, don't have the exact quote) G*d orders man to go forth and be 'fruitful' (i.e. multiply). Elsewhere in the telling of the tale of the Great Flood, Noah is commanded to take two of each secies of animal onto the Ark, presumably in order that the surviving 'pair' would help save the species after the Flood.

I'm sure the Qu'ran has a couple of similar stories (it seems to be a lot like the other two books in many instances). What is the overall gist of these messages from the Higher Being out there? That life is to be saved.

Therefore, Israel is acting upon the first law of Nature and of God; Israel is attempting to save herself as commanded by G*d.

Thus whatever had to happen in order for the people of Israel to defend themselves is commanded by a law higher than that which Amnesty International is citing.

The "right to work"?!?!

IDF Pays Hevron Shopkeepers Millions of Shekels

#34 Outsider

Check Israel's Supreme Court. That should answer your question. Alas.

Has anyone actually read the report?

The report is primarily about the restriction of movement within the occupied territories (ie: not cross border travel into or through Israel). Most of report concentrates on this issue.

[Link: web.amnesty.org...]

Freedom of movement for people and goods, at least within borders, is an essential requirement for any functional economy, particularly so for a new economy trying to develop and establish itself against the backdrop of dependency created by 36 years of occupation. Yet some 3.5 million Palestinians who live in the Occupied Territories are often effectively confined to their towns and villages by closures enforced by Israeli military checkpoints and roadblocks. Some villages have been completely sealed off and urban areas are frequently placed under 24-hour curfew, during which no one is allowed to leave the house, often for prolonged periods. Palestinians have been prohibited from driving on main roads connecting one part of the West Bank to another.

When I went to Israel, before the 2nd Intefada, you could pretty much drive anywhere, I drove to Jericho, the only road blocks were sheep on the road.

Not mentioning why the road blocks are there is its self an act of deceit and dishonesty.

36 view from Ireland

as usual...opining in ignorance

Freedom of movement for the arabs is contingent on non aggression, i.e. cessation of terrorist activities.

[Link: www.wikipedia.org...]

The principles agreed were, in essence, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and the Palestinian right to self-government within those areas through the creation of the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian rule would last for a five year interim period during which permanent status would be negotiated (beginning not later than May 1996).

Permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, Israeli settlements in the area, security and borders were deliberately excluded from the Accords and determined as not prejudged.

The interim self-government was to be granted in phases. Until a final status accord was made, West Bank and Gaza would be divided into three zones:

Area A - full control of the Palestinian Authority.
Area B - Palestinian civil control, Israeli military control.
Area C - full Israeli control.

...if the arabs dont comply, the Israelis cannot unilaterally withdraw to leave a terrorist gang on its borders.

AI and you, totally ignores signed agreements,

The report is primarily about the restriction of movement within the occupied territories (ie: not cross border travel into or through Israel).

restriction of movement is built into the Oslo accords, until the arabs meet the requirement they SIGNED AND AGREED TO.

In the up-is-down-black-is-white world of Amnesty International-speak, preventing suicide killers from boarding busses and exploding civilians is a discriminatory practice. In the cloud-cuckoo land of Amnestry International, Israelis should collude in their own deaths in the interest of "fairness", as defined by that supreme arbiter of fairness, Amnestry International. So if Israel abides by A.I.'s dictates and allows free movement of Palestinians, many of whom are bent on blowing up Jews, that would be fair, and kind, and people on the left would applaud, and Palestinians would be nicer, and Alice Walker would pen an International anthem based on that old Coke commercial and everyone would join hands on a hillside and we'll all become vegans and smoke an organically-grown doobie or two and get high on life.

Yeah, that'll work.

The Secretary General of Amnesty International is called Irene Khan Zubeida, and here is a recent news story entitled: Amnesty International leader denied visa from India.

I wonder whether she is a member of the Religion of Peace?

VFI,

Skimming the report it appears that the real problem is extreme lack of context. AI should examine whether the curfews etc. were necessary to ensure the safety of the IDF and local residents during IDF operations against terrorists. AI can even examine whether IDF operations against terrorists were commensurate to the threat that they present to the Israeli population (clearly they are).

But AI just ignors the whole issue and acts like Nablus is a suburb in East Anglia rather than a city where various "militant" groups have operated openly with tacit acceptance of the Palestinian Authority.

AI makes a token acknowledgement that Israel has a right to defend itself. But how can anybody take the AI "specific threat" remark seriously?

Also, AI fawningly footnotes the load-of-crap ISM website.

What AI failed to leave out is that prior to the intifada, palestinians worked on settlements, enjoyed medical, dental care from the bad (re)settlers, as well as obtaining free legal advice. This is simply another scam to persuade the vast majority of the uneducated (to the facts) world to continue to hate Jews.

Has anyone read the report. It is about restriction of movement in israeli occupied territories. Its not what you are making it to be. Hah your comprehension skills or wait is it your propaganda skill.
[Link: web.amnesty.org...]

#40 RC Neo-Jew

Although it's not mentioned in the article, I'm betting that the reason this hag was denied a visa is that the indian government knows that AI is a pro-terrorist organization. AI criticizes the Indian government incessantly about "human rights violations" by the Indian army in Kashmir, but barely says anything about the ethic cleansing of Hindus from Kashmir by Mulsim terrorists. It also never talks about the horrible attrocities being committed every day against Hindus in Bangladesh.

Basically, to groups like AI, only certain approved victim groups can be victims of human rights violations, and only certain approved aggressor groups can be the perpetrators of such violations. Muslims are always victims, while Hindus and Jews are always aggressors, regardless of what the facts on the ground may actually be.

The more these assholes whine and whinge, the more convinced I am that finally Isreal is on the right track. They never mention how "inconvenienced" Israelii bus riders are when the buses get blown up.

Separation now, separation tomorrow, separation forever!

If an amnesty international member can show
they don't use ANY keys then they'd at least be consistent.

Incredibly stupid, but consistent

Jay Nordlinger, Impromptus

I think I'll simply note this event without comment — for if one doesn't understand the power of it, there is little anyone else can do to explain it: "Three Israeli F-15 jets piloted by descendants of Holocaust survivors circled [Auschwitz] to pay tribute to the victims" last week. "During the flyover, some 200 Israeli soldiers stood at attention at the former Birkenau death camp, adjacent to Auschwitz."

Predictably, some imbeciles at the Auschwitz Museum objected, decrying the flyover as a "demonstration of Israeli military might" at "a place of silence."

You're damn right it was a demonstration of Israeli military might: and, as such, it was a demonstration of the refusal to die. Far be it from me to speak for the dead, but I would be shocked if they objected — if they could know about it.

Typical idiotarian baloney from these a-holes, as if a job in Israel is a birthright. Why should anyone have to give a job to those who have murdered 400 of its citizens in the last 3 years? Why don't they ask the Fish what happened to all of the billions of dollars the PA received over the past decade, and why their standard of living dropped so dramatically in the same time?
As far as I'm concerned, every one of the Palis can eat rocks.

#41   Tal G.

Sure it's all about context, but also proportionality. Not all the occupied territories are Nablas, and indeed not everyone in Nablas is a terrorist. I think AI's point is that the restrictions on movement, the blockades, the curfews, the effective supression of ability to perform everyday commercial and agricultural tasks by such numbers of people constitutes more of a 'community punishment' than a realistic security concern.

In any case, the report is not about releasing terrorists into the Israeli heartlands to kill at will. It's about allowing normal people the facility to go about their everyday business without excessive hinderence.

#44   Anant

Spare us the 'pro-terrorist' crap. AI make it their business to be a thorn in everyone's side. Do a search on the AI site and you'll get objective reporting of human rights abuses by both sides in Kashmir, and of the murder of Hindus in Bangladesh.

#36 view from Ireland

Your observation makes a lot of sense. If AI is upset that the Arabs can not move within the West Bank and Gaza strip regions freely their argument is logical. Westerners believe that individuals are innocent until proven guilty. Disrupting the lives of the average Arab can be seen to be immoral by the left leaning liberals that work for the AI and support it.

However, if the AI expects Israel to let the Arabs into the pre 67 boarders then they are really dreaming. Of course most arabs seem to still be under the delusion that Israel does not belong to the Jews and that the arabs have a right to come and go as they please along with the murderers.

Unless the AI report is specific about the issues above I recommend giving them the benifit of the dought just like all freedom loving westerners. After all that is what makes us better than those children killing monsters.

#48 Darwin Akbar

I think that the arab quality of living suffered so much after Oslo was because many quite their well paying Israeli jobs expecting that Arafat and his fellow PLO thugs would invest all those arab petro dollars as well as the european pitty funds into palestinian jobs.

As you implied all those funds were instead spent on weapons and security forces that did nothing to keep the peace but rather european shopping trips for their families.

In the Leftist mind, Israel is an extension of the West, and therefore white, and dominant. And therefore never justified in her acts.

The Paleos, on the other hand, are brown-skinned third-world peoples, and "victims", and therefore always justified in her acts. No matter how animalistic the act.

As victims, they hold an exalted position in the Leftist psyche. This exalted position is paternalistic to the point of racist.

Why?

Because right and wrong is a relative concept in the Leftist mind. It is determined by who is perceived as weak and who is perceived as strong.

That's why Arabs generally, and paleos specifically, can get away with things the Israelis never could. Paleos commit mass murder, but in the Leftist mind this is justified because they are "driven" to commit atrocities. They are "victims." No matter that the mass murder cannot possibly be justified under any circumstance. But in the relativistic mind of the Leftists, it's perfectly justifiable, and they can't fathom how blinded they are.

That's why Israel was a darling of the Left shortly after WWII. It was a nation of Holocaust survivors and defying the odds! Today Israel, with a great army and feared by its enemies, is vilified by the Left. Those who tried repeatedly to exterminate the jews and drive them into the sea are now "victims," and therefore exalted.

That's why arabs, on the other hand, can act out their animalistic instincts at all times, while Israel is shackled and bound by the queensbury rules of conduct.

#40 RC neo-Jew.

According to [Link: www.amnesty.ch...] she is:

Der Senegalese war der erste nicht-westliche Botschafter der Bewegung gewesen; die aus Bangladesch stammende Irene Khan steht nicht nur als erste Frau, sondern auch als erste Asiatin und Muslimin an der Spitze von AI.

Also [Link: www.amnesty.asso.fr...]

Irene est née le 24 décembre 1956 à Dhaka, au Bangladesh et a une fille. Elle s'engage à aider Amnesty International alors que l'organisation fête son quarantième anniversaire et revoit sa stratégie, afin d'adresser l'évolution constante des violations des droits de l'homme dans le monde. En tant que première secrétaire générale de sexe féminin, d'origine asiatique et de religion musulmane, Irene apporte inévitablement un nouveau point de vue à l'organisation.

"New view point" What a laugh. Amnesty International, brought to you by the Religion of Peace and High Explosives™. [Link: www.amnesty.org...] is illuminating.

I'm having a heck of a time finding anything in English about this though ...

#49 VFI

>Sure it's all about context, but also proportionality.

I believe I said that didn't I?

> I think AI's point is that the restrictions on movement,
>the blockades, the curfews, the effective supression of
>ability to perform everyday commercial and agricultural
>tasks by such numbers of people constitutes more of a
>'community punishment' than a realistic security
>concern.

My point was that if the AI wants to argue this, they will have to examine specific places/time periods and incidents ie. try to understand and then evaluate (or "second-guess") the IDF's considerations. If they did that there would be a lot more information in the report about "militant" hideouts and bomb labs etc. to go along with the admittedly sad anecdotes.

As it stands AI are just another leftist group paying mere lip service to the fact that the IDF is there now because in 2002 the PA was in control of the urban areas and the vast majority of the Palestinian population and was intent on blowing people up in my Jerusalem neighborhood.

Isn't it interesting how you never hear someone argue that Israel needs to be in the Palestinian areas but should do it more humanely? People who acknowledge the necessity of being there are reluctant to second-guess the IDF too much (other than in specific incidents when lots of facts are available). And of course the people who claim to believe that peace would somehow come about from an IDF withdrawal condemn virtually any act of Israeli self-defense as being provocative...

Ummm, in reference to #53, 3rd link - you have to type her name in the search box. I'm not sure why the results page didn't come up. Sorry.

Kelly

The worst thing that has happened to the Palis the past 10 years was when Israel imported the thugs, murderers and thieves from Tunisia into the West Bank and Gaza. The Pali standard of liveng prior to that was pretty high by Middle Eastern standards. However once the Thugocracy and Kleptocracy was established it all went to shit. The days of massive Pali employment in pre 1967 Israel are over. The State of Israel is not an employment agency and the work that Palis were doing will be done by foreign workers. The Palis have no right of access to Israeli social services as well. Unfortunately for them, Palis are not like Arafat's wife Suha who has access to the best that Paris can offer.

#54   Tal G.

You mentioned the issue of "whether IDF operations against terrorists were commensurate to the threat that they present to the Israeli population". I'm referring to the broader and continual policy of obstruction of daily life irrespective of security threats to Israel. The routing of the security fence/wall for instance appears in some cases to have little to do with security issues, but rather with, at best the avoidance of any association with the green line, and at worst, the intentional fragmentation of communities and consequent land grab.

In a scenario where any issues relating to IDF operations are off limits to legal and critical anylisis (as is so often the case) it's rather optimistic to assume that AI are in any position to weigh up the threat/response ratio as applied by the IDF. All they have to do is claim some overriding security concern, and they have carte blanche to do whatever they desire.

I take your point about the absense of considered criticism in a divisive conflict. I just think that AI have a point about the scale and strategic usefulness of stopping so many people having a chance of a normal life and livelyhood.

#44 anant:
that was a cheap exercise to earn sympathy. Indian soldiers kill 10 to 15 kashmiris everyday without any proof of them being involved in any sort of terrorist activity. The laws like POTA enable security forces to arrest and molest any one they feel like keeping. already many voices have been raised from within india against such laws. And amnesty international is an international organization of sound credibility. they re[port both sides of the story and say what is right. you need to read a little more of their reports.

57 VFI

I just think that AI have a point about the scale and strategic usefulness of stopping so many people having a chance of a normal life and livelyhood.

Do you think that's what's occurring?

Even the crackiest crackpots talk about how the checkpoints turn what were formerly 15 minute trips are turned in to (shock) 45 minutes. What do you think the actual delay is when even she says it's just 30 minutes?

That stops their chance of having of having any normal life? There is a war going on, one where most "militants" don't wear fatigues when they're on the job, just when they're on parade.

Have them move to L.A. and try and get somewhere on the 405 or 101 during midday. Talk about your human rights violations, they'll be sploding themselves all over the place.

(the last paragraph is hyperbole, just in case you were wondering).

VFI:

I didn't mean my post to say that Palestinians living in WB and G aren't inconvenienced and/or living abnormal lives.

But I think there's a much greater threat to their normalcy than the IDF. Namely Arafat. And Hamas. And Islamic Jihad. And Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. And their state controlled media. And their state sponsored Imams.

Didn't most checkpoints come down after the Israelis signed Oslo? Well, start an Intifada and they come back up. Crocodile tears.

Viking Kitten (Spunky) (#47):

Think about this: More Jews are murdered weekly (even daily!) in Israel, with all their 'armed strength', than in all the years since 1945 in Auschwitz.

I feel that the whole 'Auschwitz-flyover' was more a sad joke than anything else...

Joseph

You ever wonder why folks like VFI expend so much time and effort on a struggle that has practically nothing to do with them (especially when the Protestants and Catholics have been slaughtering each other in Ireland for 400 years?)

Even more so, why do they overwhelmingly take the side of the brutal child-killers???

Notice when you try to contact Amnesty's staff on their website and they offer a dropdown box listing of countries, how ONLY Israel is occupying another nation...

#60  SoCalJustice

I'm just basing my opinion on the experience of an associate who experienced many delays of considerably longer than 45 minutes in the territories. And he was traveling as an accredited 'western' NGO representative. He spent a couple of weeks there and his assessment was that any sort of regular travel was impractical to say the least. We have our own congestion problems in Dublin, so the 405 might not provide any novelty.

There are lots of documented instances of delays, blockades and curfews causing real grief and hardship (along with the occasional death due to ambulance delay etc). It's not always about a 45 minute inconvenience, and certainly the AI isn't about that.

And view from Ireland has inside information and knows when there are and aren't threats to Israel. Bloody idiot. What kind of a post is #57?

All they have to do is claim some overriding security concern, and they have carte blanche to do whatever they desire.

You make me ill. There aren't enough valid threats to Israel's security for you? When have you ever seen anything from the Jews' perspective?

64 VFI:

Again, no Intifada, no West Bank traffic jams.

Why do people fail to see that?

I'd be right there with AI, if not for the Intifada. But there is an Intifada, so I'm not with them.

#58 Moiz

And amnesty international is an international organization of sound credibility. they re[port both sides of the story and say what is right.

That's your opinion. Here are some different opinions:

ADL Labels Amnesty Report on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict "Biased and Wholly Misleading"

and In conclusion, a fairer assessment of Israel's human rights record would have given equal treatment to violations committed by Palestinian terror groups

I hope you will read these, and not dismiss them out of hand because they are written by Jews, and, well, they would say these kind of things, wouldn't they, etc?

I'm not Jewish, and my response to AI is a combination of disappointment and "who do these people think they are to sit in judgement on everyone else?"

Anant - you might be interested to know that the secretary general of AI is from Bangladesh.

#65   zulubaby

If you're suggesting that all IDF actions in the occupied territories are determined by genuine security concerns then you're being rather naive.

What's the security basis for the current routing of the security fence? Those routing decisions are primarily political ones, not security driven.

I'm not saying that all IDF actions are political (or pernicious even), rather than practical, but some certainly are. I've actually no problem with the fence, as long as it lay on the green line. Military roadblocks/security checks (which I've been all too familiar with) are an inevitable aspect of the current administration arrangements, but there's currently an abuse of those operations in the eyes of observers with a greater knowledge than you or I.

I notice that you're quite the drama queen with your unsettled stomach. You need to strenghten up your digestive system. Yet another post that makes you ill.

VFI:

Did your country allow even a single Jewish child to enter it during the Holocaust?

You people ought to go hide under a rock or beg forgiveness... Who know if my 5-year old aunt would've avoided the ovens otherwise?

Think about this: More Jews are murdered weekly (even daily!) in Israel, with all their 'armed strength', than in all the years since 1945 in Auschwitz.

Not sure what your point is, last Polish pogram-1946!

[Link: www.btfiloh.org...]

Our first stop is KIELCE, a city where 25,000 Jews lived before the war.
It had two synagogues, several shtiebels, schools, libraries - a typical
Polish town, where the citizens ostensibly lived in peaceful
co-existence with their Polish neighbors. That was the reason some two
hundred survivors returned there after the war, hoping to rebuild their
lives. And there, in 1946, after the war had ended, after they had
survived unspeakable hardships, after they returned home, a crazed mob
attached them and killed 42 innocent Jews. We visited the building
where they had been staying, formerly a Jewish center, and said a "Kel
Malei Rachamim" in their memory, watched by Polish bystanders.

61 Joseph wrote:

I feel that the whole 'Auschwitz-flyover' was more a sad joke than anything else...

Sad Joke? Doubt it.

"We pilots of the Air Force, flying in the skies above the camp of horrors, arose from the ashes of the millions of victims and shoulder their silent cries, salute their courage and promise to be the shield of the Jewish people and its nation Israel."

*Shield of the Jewish people and it's nation Israel*

Joseph, why are you talking about Ireland and the Holocaust? Don't you realize that the topic is the shallowness and unfairness of the AI report?

"We pilots of the Air Force, flying in the skies above the camp of horrors, arose from the ashes of the millions of victims and shoulder their silent cries, salute their courage and promise to be the shield of the Jewish people and its nation Israel."

I just had to repeat it. It makes me feel so proud and melancholy at the same time. And isn't that, ultimately, the Jewish experience? Mixed blessings. Would that we didn't need an IAF or an IDF at all, but given the reality, thank God they are as powerful and merciful as they are.

>What's the security basis for the current routing of the
>security fence? Those routing decisions are primarily
>political ones, not security driven.

Security and politics aren't distinct issues. It took a lot of time and haggling to determine the path of the fence. While I can't claim awareness of the details(or claim that the path is optimal) - broadly speaking the path of the fence aims to a) separate the Palestinian areas from Israel b) not isolating the large settlements.

I've heard specific complaints about its path and I'm not familiar with the details and considerations. But the people who say it's collective punishment or a "land grab" don't give particulars generally. And they often throw in some garbage about how it's a "wall of apartheid" or preparation for "ethnic cleansing".

The theory that putting the fence between the Green Line and Ariel would simply direct all the would-be Islamikazes from Jenin into Ariel is quite reasonable.

>I'm not saying that all IDF actions are political (or
>pernicious even), rather than practical, but some
>certainly are.

I'm not disagreeing with you. But it's funny how AI et. al. will never say stuff like "by April 9, Islamic Jihad gunmen had abandoned the casbah, but the curfew continued anyway". This suggests that they don't give a s--- and will criticize us no matter what we do.

>I've actually no problem with the fence, as long as it lay >on the green line.

Why? Fences can be dismantled.

>Military roadblocks/security checks (which I've been all
>too familiar with)

Do you have first-hand experience?

> are an inevitable aspect of the current
>administration arrangements,

That's a mild way of putting it.

> but there's currently an abuse of those operations in
> the eyes of observers with a greater knowledge than
> you or I.

As I've said, I have some problems with these "observers"...

Other observers with greater knowledge than you and I (including friends of mine in combat units) acknowledge that there is abuse and inefficiency, but that there is also some empathy (exploited by the scuzz of the ISM) and also a bureaucracy to curb the abuse and inefficiency.

The question is "is the abuse and inefficiency dramatically worse than the best that can be expected in the circumstances"? Or to put it differently: has another army done better? US in Iraq? UN in the Balkans?

view from Ireland (#68)

Military roadblocks/security checks (which I've been all too familiar with) are an inevitable aspect of the current administration arrangements, but there's currently an abuse of those operations in the eyes of observers with a greater knowledge than you or I.

Firstly, speak for yourself. Secondly, who are these "observers"? Your ISM friends? Please, you're so full of shit.

#74   Tal G.

Thanks for the considered response. My experience of the inconvenience of miltary checkpoints and searches is in a Northern Irish context, but not quite the same situation.
Judging from bloggers in Bagdhad, the US military aren't doing a particularly good job either. I'm not surprised though. They haven't got the training or experience that say the british have in military 'policing' in a conflict zone. The UN in the balkans (or east Timor) aren't particlarly good analogies, but I think in policing terms they have managed a pretty good job. Letting the IDF police the border and a UN force police (as opposed to a monitoring mission) the territories always seemed a pretty good basis for progress to me. Continual mutual antagonism hasn't been working out to date, so why not try something else?

#75   zulubaby

touchy touchy. You haven't been on the ground monitoring civil abuses in the occupied territories on the sly have you? Thought not. My point stands.

view from Ireland (#76)

And you have, I suppose? Your point is bull. But don't let that stop you from posting your usual drivel.

To clarify:

I should've listed some of my comments as 'OT'.. Sorry.

The point I was making is what the hell's the use of flying over Aushwitz to show off our might when Jews are being slaughtered in the heart of Jerusalem (and Tel Aviv and Haifa and Netanya) and the IDF, for one reason or another, is helpless... Am I the only one who sees this absurdity??? That someone like Rabin, Peres, or their hundreds of thousands of minions can glibly assert, "There's another sacrifice to Peace!" and "You don't make peace vit your friends, but mit your enemies!!!"

Tal: You ask, "Joseph, why are you talking about Ireland and the Holocaust? Don't you realize that the topic is the shallowness and unfairness of the AI report?"

I was answering VFI's baseless and Jew-hating rants.

VFI

What's the security basis for the current routing of the security fence? Those routing decisions are primarily political ones, not security driven.

silly twit...

the current routing of the security fence is based on Israel's percived security needs.

And its on contested land...DISPUTED LAND

it does not belong to the arabs.

The arabs/jordanians LOST IT in an aggressive war, and the arabs/Jordanians ILLEGALLY ANNEXED IT, IN 1948

stop vomiting propaganda

And if they ARE political? All the Israelis get back, when attempt negotiations is violence and terrorism.

Zulubaby. Left a message for you on the Mazen Resigns thread. Make it 300!

selpaw (#80)

LOL! I just did. How funny :-)

#78 Joseph

Can you direct me to the 'Jew hating rants'?

How are those voices in your head?

#79 ploome

If they are 'disputed lands' they doesn't belong to Israel then either do they? These things swing both ways. And spare me the 'spoils of war' nonsense. Grabbing things that don't belong to you by force is never a clever idea.

The location of the fence is purely political in areas, since it needlessly includes Palestinian communities on the 'Israeli side' of the fence, where it could easily move back towards the green line and avoid doing so. If anything its current location in spots runs counter to logical security reasoning.

I'm not the one 'vomiting propaganda' , that would be you. I'm just reflecting on the obvious political tinkering with supposed security concerns that lie before us.

82 VFI writes:

Grabbing things that don't belong to you by force is never a clever idea.

Just to clarify, is that you're reading of the '67 war?

82 VFI:

And if that is your reading, then who did the "things" the Israelis "grabbed by force" belong to?

view from Ireland, you're getting more trolly-like by the day. Go spew your nonsense elsewhere. You're making me ill again.

Grabbing things that don't belong to you by force is never a clever idea.

Does that apply to everybody, or just Jews, O Wise One?

View from Ireland. the British are coming. The British are coming.

#84 SoCalJustice

I'm thinking more in terms of the settlements and the effective land grabbing that the security fence has brought about.

Though the wisdom applies to all scenarios where the military victor in conflict has no consent to govern.

88 VFI:

Though the wisdom applies to all scenarios where the military victor in conflict has no consent to govern.

And who, aside from you, is the arbiter of such consent?

World Opinion?

The U.N.?

The Arab League?

If people want to worry about consent to govern, perhaps they shouldn't attack a sovereign nation and then whine about the consequences of losing.

Egypt and Jordan had plenty of opportunity (19 years), to give the Palestinians ALL of Gaza, ALL of the West Bank, and ALL of Jerusalem as a capital. Instead, their bloodlust and hatred led them to folly.

Since then it's been nothing by whining and demanding ever since, with a quick respite in '73 when they attacked Israel on the holiest day of their calendar, only to get their buts kicked again.

What comes after that is not for the U.N. or the Arab League to decide.

Egypt played ball eventually, got the Sinai back and then someone assassinated Two decades later, Kind Hussein made the same choice and no one took a shot at him. Arafat's had chance after chance after chance after chance. Palestinians suffer at his whim, no one elses.

buts = butts.

assassinated [Sadat]..

I'm surprised no one else caught this little VFI gem:

Judging from bloggers in Bagdhad, the US military aren't doing a particularly good job either.

You've got to be kidding. You mean former Ba'athist government lackeys who were (and are) the only ones with any internet skills or English proficiency? Yes, I'm damn sure they would say that.

When the Fascists were in charge in Italy, at least the trains ran on time.

#89 SoCalJustice

And who, aside from you, is the arbiter of such consent?

The populace of the conquered territory. Consent to governance is a basic building block of society, and if it's absent, there isn't much future in that arrangement.
The same is true of despotic dictatorships by the way.

VFI...so happy you asked

If they are 'disputed lands' they doesn't belong to Israel then either do they?

actually, according to international law...

The Ottoman Empire had ruled the territory for approximately 500 years.

The Ottoman Empire abandoned the ME territory after being defeated by the Allies in WWl

The ME territory was divided by these allies under the LEague of NAtions, and by virtue of the League of Nations, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Arabia, Jordan, and Israel were all recognized as states.

The League of Nations, gave GB mandatory powers over an area subsequently named 'Palestine", which had been the southern part of Syria.

The ONLY reason for this mandate...

[Link: www.wikipedia.org...]

The San Remo conference (19-26 April 1920) of the post-World War I Allied Supreme Council determined the allocation of Class "A" League of Nations mandates for administration of the former Ottoman-ruled Arab lands of the Middle East by the victorious powers.

Britain received the mandate for Palestine (including modern Jordan) and Iraq, while France gained control of Syria including present-day Lebanon, subsequently intervening militarily to depose (24 July 1920) the government which had been established in Damascus by Arab nationalists.

The Instrument under which Great Britain administered 'Palestine'

[Link: www.lib.byu.edu...]

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

[..]

Article 2.

The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

Article 3.

The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

Article 4.

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognized as a public body for the purpose of advising and cooperating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration, to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist Organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate shall be recognized as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

Article 5.

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.

Article 6.

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

...VFI...I hope you can compredhend this...

YOU DONT HAVE TO LIKE IT

all of mandate Palestine, was given IN TRUST to Britain, for the JEWS.

the 1923 division, which created TransJordan was illegal, according to the mandate which was to determine British behavior in Palestine.

The 1947 planned, additional division, was ILLEGAL under the terms by which Britain held this mandate.

Just as the annexation of Judea and Samaria by Jordan was ILLEGAL under international law...and not recognized by ANY Arab country.

The legal status of Judea and Samaria, as part of the Mandate Palestine Instrument...favors Israel.

Israel accepted partition...the Arabs REFUSED TO ACCEPT

Just as the refuse, to this day, to negotiate permanent borders.

92 VFI:

The populace of the conquered territory. Consent to governance is a basic building block of society, and if it's absent, there isn't much future in that arrangement.

Well, then the populace of the conquered territory (who were Egyptians and Jordanians - and by that I don't mean to say there are no Palestinians, I'm talking about "citizenship" at the time) shouldn't have allowed their governments to attack. Or they should have petitioned their governments for their own state, 19 years after they refused it for the first time.

And if that's your standard, I hope you're all over the Chinese (Tibetan), American (Native American) and Russian (Chechen) website espousing the same philosophies.

Of course, the one major difference with those cases is that the Arabs were the constant aggressors.

I am worried about the conquered population to a certain extent. But they are in no position to demand anything. That's the breaks.

VFI...you still dont 'get it'

The location of the fence is purely political in areas, since it needlessly includes Palestinian communities on the 'Israeli side' of the fence, where it could easily move back towards the green line and avoid doing so.

SC resolution 242

never said, and Lord Cardigan the author of this resolution has repeated confimed, that Israel and the arabs are to negotiate borders. The pre 67 borders were cease fire lines, never defensible secure borders, which are called for in the resolution.

Besides, the arabs never even pretended to comply with their responsibilities of...

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

Lord Caradon

(ooops)

[Link: christianactionforisrael.org...]

Lord Caradon, an author of U.N. Resolution 242, U.K. Ambassador to the United Nations (1964-1970):

"We didn't say there should be a withdrawal to the '67 line; we did not put the 'the' in, we did not say all the territories, deliberately.. We all knew - that the boundaries of '67 were not drawn as permanent frontiers, they were a cease-fire line of a couple of decades earlier... We did not say that the '67 boundaries must be forever."
MacNeil/Lehrer Report - March 30, 1978

Lyndon B. Johnson, U.S. President (1963-1968):

"We are not the ones to say where other nations should draw lines between them that will assure each the greatest security. It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4, 1967 will not bring peace."
September 10, 1968
U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 - A set of guidelines for Peace & Security

What does it say?

"Termination of all claims or states of belligerency "
"respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every State in the area "
"[every State's] right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."
"Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories in the recent conflict."
What does it mean?
The Arab states must end the state of war initiated and maintained by them since 1948.
The Arab states must recognize Israel's right to exist.
Israel is entitled to clearly defensible borders. This is not a privilege, but rather a right guaranteed by international law.
Israel should withdraw from some, not all, of the territories captured in the 1967 Six-Day War.
Israel's indefensible pre-1967 borders provided no security.
The Arab states should sit down with Israel, without preconditions, to negotiate peace.

VFI,

I'm glad that you seem to agree that the primary issue is how to run the occupation in the manner that's the most sane and humane; and that AI (and it goes without saying the ISM) are way off base in not acknowledging this. The difference between us on this score is whether and to what extent AI's behaviour should be considered vile and unfair.

You say that British forces are a model for how to police a combat zone. I'm skeptical but can't comment knowledgeably.

>Letting the IDF police the border and a UN force police
>(as opposed to a monitoring mission) the territories
>always seemed a pretty good basis for progress to me.

Such an arrangement has never been proposed - presumably because it means essentially that the UN would be taking over the occupation. Though in truth UN forces would never to do anything that would antagonize the Palis. More likely they would tacitly aid the terrorist groups, just as UNIFIL and Terje Larsen did after Hizbollah kidnapped 3 IDF soldiers in 2001 - see [Link: www.israelinsider.com...]

>Continual mutual antagonism hasn't been working out
>to date, so why not try something else?

"Trying something else" delays what's really necessary, which is changing the rules of the game.

#91 spiny norman:
i don't think this is a baa'athist party blog
[Link: dear_raed.blogspot.com...]

View From Ireland:

If we can't live in countries like Ireland and Poland and Germany, etc. and we can't defend ourselves in Israel, you obviously want us dead.

Is that not a 'Jew-hating rant'???

The BBC is publishing the "diaries" of a couple of Irish ISMers.

[Link: ismcentral.blogspot.com...]