Welcome to The Jewish Palestinian Encounter . Please make you sure you adhere to our policy.

193098 ben Wed Jul 2nd 10:13:04 2008

of a country the destruction of it's infrastructure 1200 people massacred , it goes on, and a million child killing landmines . . .

what's the big deal? you know how it goes, wartime, fear, people do things. someone as well versed in human psychology and movies as you seem to be should understand this better than anyone.

193103 george Wed Jul 2nd 14:11:30 2008

193075 ben

you can only hold them responsible for the consequences if you don't hold the killers responsible for their actions

Where did you get that idea from? If a husband hires a "hit man" to kill his wife, who is responsible? You can't hold both responsible, can you? Let's take a look at the following real-life case www.answers.com/topic/crown-heights-riot Let's see Lemrick Nelson was convicted for murder and Charles Price for the incitement. How can that be?! Was the court wrong for convicting both? Can only be "responsible"?

As a completely seperate matter from the above, your example is not the same as this case. To start with, the lynching you are talking about was factual. The situation we are talking about (al-Dura) was lying propaganda. It is like someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. Does it make a difference if there really is a fire in the theatre? The US Supreme Court thought it does make a difference.

193105 ben Wed Jul 2nd 14:45:37 2008

The situation we are talking about (al-Dura) was lying propaganda. It is like someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre.

this is a ridiculous comparison. people in a theatre are in a closed room facing what they think is a life or death situation. the guy sitting at home watching dura get shot is under no threat. that he chooses, days, weeks, months, years later to go out and kill is his business.

To start with, the lynching you are talking about was factual

and somehow, even though it was completely, absolutely true, i managed to control myself and not go to beit lehem with the m16. i would think that the same should hold true for propaganda.

193106 Will Just a Yankee. Wed Jul 2nd 15:01:16 2008

How can we stop the JewZ?

Joe,

Well According to Israeli news they've already stopped you. The Israelis have officially decided that the opinions of correspondence zionists, such as yourself, is of no value to Israeli government decisons. So you have been demoted from irritating to irrelevant.

193110 george Wed Jul 2nd 16:20:56 2008

193105 ben

this is a ridiculous comparison. people in a theatre are in a closed room facing what they think is a life or death situation. the guy sitting at home watching dura get shot is under no threat. that he chooses, days, weeks, months, years later to go out and kill is his business.

The main topic was whether both can be held responsible, and I showed the US courts believe they can, both, be held responsible. The response you gave was concerning the matter of analogy. To falesly "yell fire" in a crowded theater is quite an appropriate analogy. The audience has every capability of exiting in an orderly fashion. The fact that the person doing the yelling knows there is a non-negligable possibility of what could really happen is sufficient to make the person culpable. What you are complaining about is that there is a semi-rational justification why those in the crowded theatre may choose to behave they do, but, there is no such semi-rational justification as to why the terrorist behave the way they do. So what. The question is whether the one yelling can have any reasonable expectation of the consequence of that yelling (and it does not matter whether or not the reaction to the yelling can be rationalized - it only matters whether ir can be foreseen as a non-negligable possibility).

The affect was nearly immediate and continued for a long time (and still continues) .

and somehow, even though it was completely, absolutely true, i managed to control myself and not go to beit lehem with the m16. i would think that the same should hold true for propaganda.

which is why the perpetrators are also responsible, as well as the instigator.

193111 ben Wed Jul 2nd 16:48:04 2008

The main topic was whether both can be held responsible, and I showed the US courts believe they can, both, be held responsible.

you showed that someone involved in incitement can be charged with incitement. you didn't show that the a bad, false report can be called incitement.

So what. The question is whether the one yelling can have any reasonable expectation of the consequence of that yelling (and it does not matter whether or not the reaction to the yelling can be rationalized - it only matters whether ir can be foreseen as a non-negligable possibility).

so what to you, but not to anyone else and not to the supreme court that made that ruling.

the so what is exactly the difference between the two cases. the fire in the theater restriction to free speech is limited to cases where the speech is "likely to incite imminent lawless action". two weeks after the shooting is not imminent.

btw your words are EXACTLY the words used by those who claimed that right wingers should have been charged with incitement with regards to rabin's murder.

and btw i don't accept the implied racism in your comments: arabs see a film of an arab being killed and can be expected to go crazy.

which is why the perpetrators are also responsible, as well as the instigator

give me a break. that guy was bad reporter, a liar. he was not the instigator of freedman's death.

193114 george Wed Jul 2nd 18:22:52 2008

193111 ben

This turned out so long I have to continue it in anotehr post.

and btw i don't accept the implied racism in your comments: arabs see a film of an arab being killed and can be expected to go crazy.

What can I say? You just distilled the matter down to the essential point. What can we expect from the, as you called them, "arab"? In case you haven't noticed, they are a different culture. They do not think the same way, nor react the same way, as other cultures. That is not racist. It is a fact that different cultures are, well, different. The French culture celebrates when their main leader has a mistress. The US culture throws their main leader out of office (nearly impeaches him even) because he had a sort-of-affair-or-something. Is that a "racist" observation? At the same time, the US has this "spring break" thing where (in certain places and for a very large number of persons in certain groups) all sort of unspeakable license and unfathonable hedonism takes place. Here in Canada we just had a father/brother murder their teenage daughter/sister because she would not put on a scarf. * Is that a "racist" thing to say? Or is it a matter of fact, different cultures.

And after what is known about certain cultures reacting in certain ways (and gullably and willingly believing certain things, while others deny the obvious, because it fits their cultural view of things), the report was criminally negligent at the very least. Especailly when one knows, as the journalists most certainly did (they are not stupid) the politically motivated instigations that go on. How many examples are there from, say, Rushdie (who still has a price on his head and any number of people in some way related to his endeavours are still being assassinated) to the "cartoons" to the "Van Gohs".

he was not the instigator of freedman's death.

One person "freedman"? We are talking about a rather wide-spread phenomenon over a rather long period of time.

give me a break. that guy was bad reporter, a liar

and that he refused all those years to release (and to this day, even against a court order, still refused to release all of) the evidence that would exhonerate Israel plays no role in exposing his motivation?

* www.comcast.net/articles/news-world-canada/20080628/Canada.Head.Scarf.Killing/

193115 george Wed Jul 2nd 18:48:43 2008

193111 ben

btw your words are EXACTLY the words used by those who claimed that right wingers should have been charged with incitement with regards to rabin's murder.

My words are EXACTLY the words used by those who make that claim? Amazing, but even if true, I don't see the relevance. But leaving that aside to return to topic. My words stated "reasonable expectation". In the al-Dura case, propagandizing to untold billions* of people (a considerable number of whom have a long history of violence already) against any number of millions of people, leads to a reasonable expectation of violence. Propagandizing against a much smaller group (which has no meaningful history of violence) to kick out the one highly-protected-by-the-best-security-apparatus-in-the-western-world elected representative, in the soon-to-be election, does not invoke a feeling of "reasonable expectation" of violence.

* it is self-evident that a report like that was going to be taken up by the major news agencies both western and middle-eastern

193116 george Wed Jul 2nd 18:56:24 2008

193111 ben

addition to 193115 george footnote

* it is self-evident that a report like that was going to be taken up by the major news agencies both western and middle-eastern especailly as (according to stories)** the edited clip was made available free of charge (in contrast to the rest of the tape which was held without release)

** www.upjf.org/actualiees-upjf/article-14384-145-7-al-dura-enderlin-affair-once-good-guys-cin-jonathan-rosenblum.html

193120 Joe Will's Jew Problem Exposed Wed Jul 2nd 21:41:14 2008

The Israelis have officially decided that the opinions of correspondence zionists, such as yourself, is of no value to Israeli government decisons. So you have been demoted from irritating to irrelevant.

Will -

I wish I was as relevant as you are (LOL). And you still didn't answer my question!

193121 eugene Wed Jul 2nd 21:53:55 2008

hello everybody, i dropped by again to see what's going on.
i see the general hilarity has been enhanced by the connoisseurship our cultural commentator george.

(george, i heard some comments on the jewish culture as exemplified by the corruption of the last 2 israeli pms and its president; something about greedy jews; i didn't take offense, since i realized this was not anti-semitism but rather an yinian of cultural differences).

193122 ben Wed Jul 2nd 22:56:50 2008

What can I say? You just distilled the matter down to the essential point. What can we expect from the, as you called them, "arab"? In case you havn't noticed, they are a different culture

congrats george, you have placed yourself squarely in the camp of the multiculturalism supporters.

193123 george Wed Jul 2nd 23:47:15 2008

193122 ben

I don't know what that means "multiculturalism supporter".

193124 eugene stumped Thu Jul 3rd 00:09:31 2008

I don't know what that means "multiculturalism supporter".

nu, what happened george, all of a sudden google search stopped working for you?

193125 george Thu Jul 3rd 00:34:58 2008

193121 eugene

george, i heard some comments on the jewish culture as exemplified by the corruption of the last 2 israeli pms and its president; something about greedy jews; i didn't take offense, since i realized this was not anti-semitism but rather an yinian of cultural differences

It seems to me that you are sarcastically implying that I have defamed all "arabs" (in ben's word) as violence prone.

This should not be necessary to explain, as this has been made clear so many times by so many different posters. But it seems that there is tendency to attack just for the sake of attacking. Must be a pass-time.

So here we go again. I stated that given the billion or so "arabs" (meaning Muslims, more or else, but "arab" was ben's word so I am using it for now) that if there is incitement, some violence is going to happen. That is no more racist, nor more of a generalization, than the court that convicted a black man for inciting another black person to kill a random Jewish victim. It is simply a fact of society. Incite a bunch of people, someone is bound, eventually, to take the bait. The inciter is culpable, despite not knowing who the perpetrator, or the victim, are.

And I will say this. Tempt a whole bunch of Jews with a chance for a quick buck despite it being of questionable legality, then someone, somewhere, will take it. To be consistant with your sarcastic implications, recognizing the fact of what I just said about Jews makes me a "self-hating" Jew, I suppose.

The point here is, first, that "Tempt a whole bunch of Jews" is just as valid a statement as "Tempt a whole bunch of anybodies". Thus when a statement that is valid across the board for everyone is applied to Jews alone, that is antisemitism.

But there are such things as genuine cultural differences. Which countries allow, and which countries do not allow, polygamy? Interwined with the culture is politics, which makes it all the more complex. But put simply, if ben were to randomly blow up some "arab" guys, how would the State of Israel treat him if caught? Now, if some Palestinian was to randomly blow up some Jewish guys, how would the (who is it now, "PA"? "Hamas"? whomever the Palestinian government is) treat the perpetrator if caught?

Perhaps tha answer to those questions might help explain at least one reason why ben and so many other Jews are less than motivated to revenge the lynching of Jews.

193126 george Thu Jul 3rd 00:52:13 2008

193124 eugene

I am not interested in knowing what google means by that term. I need to know what ben meant by that term.

193127 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 01:00:10 2008

Perhaps tha answer to those questions might help explain at least one reason why ben and so many other Jews are less than motivated to revenge the lynching of Jews.

perhaps the answer to all the self-serving nonsense you're writing is that wael and so many other arabs are less than motivated to revenge the killing of arabs.

btw there are also jews who fit your description of arab "culture":

"For the second time in less than a week, angry Israelis roamed the streets on Sunday night and again this morning, shouting ''Death to Arabs!'' as they looked for Palestinians they could lynch, this time in retaliation for the death of a soldier whose body was found on Sunday with a bullet to the head."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE6D6173CF93AA35756C0A96F948260

193128 george Thu Jul 3rd 01:12:29 2008

193127 eugene

"self-serving"? I am not in Israel nor in the Palestinian Authority, so I do not understand "self-serving"?

btw there are also jews who fit your description of arab "culture":

Your point is what? The are violent Jews? My point is, if any of those Israelis will do anything violent and get caught by the Israeli government, they will be (the reader can finish the line themselves).

193129 Will Thu Jul 3rd 01:31:15 2008

Dear Jow,

How can we stop the JewZ?

I dunno what I could do. Maybe you could lobby the lobby to lobby Israel to nuke Iran.LOL !

oh, In my part of the world that means "Lobbying Ould Langer".

Say hello to the kerb for me.

Cheers.

Willy Willington.

193130 Will The enemy within Thu Jul 3rd 01:50:27 2008

George george,me me me me me me......

My point is, if any of those Israelis will do anything violent and get caught by the Israeli government, they will be (the reader can finish the line themselves).

Is this a competition George? Cos I know the answer.

They'll be severely reprimanded for not calling the army first to make sure that if any of the Arabs struck back they would be shot. Thats how it works, even for Israeli citizens who happen to be Arab in the Democratic Jewish State. Sure lookie..

In October 2000, Israeli police used live ammunition against unarmed civilians demonstrating their solidarity with Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Thirteen Palestinians, of whom twelve were Israeli citizens, were shot dead. An official commission, headed by Judge Theodor Or, was appointed to look into the events which came to mark a dramatic deterioration in Arab-Jewish relations inside the country. In 2003, the Or Commission confirmed that the police used "excessive" and unjustifiable force, reported that the police viewed the country's Arab citizens as "enemies" and documented a pattern of "prejudice and neglect" towards them by Israel's establishment.

Whats the prize ?

193131 george Thu Jul 3rd 02:06:02 2008

Anyone interested in the Or Commission report can get a summary at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Or_Commission or www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=335594 (compare to the claim made by others that the "civilians" were "unarmed")

193132 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 04:07:13 2008

Your point is what? The are violent Jews? My point is, if any of those Israelis will do anything violent and get caught by the Israeli government, they will be (the reader can finish the line themselves).

george, for the last 10 years if not more violent settlers have been destroying palestinian property and intimidating and attacking palestinians.
but, even with recent video documentation of such acts, they never get caught for some reason.
why?
because:
1.there is a culture of violence against palestinians of condoning and not condemning this violence among settlers
2.there is a culture of not doing anything about it in the IDF and israeli police

would you be interested in my analysis of charedi culture in israel?

(mind you i'm just pointing out some cultural facts, not condemning anybody)

193133 Ha Ha HA Ha ha ha Thu Jul 3rd 04:57:45 2008

HA HA HA LOL HAHAHAH

Where s the Bag ?
HA HA

193134 Will Get down you Mongrel Thu Jul 3rd 04:58:53 2008

Sorry, My sheepdog wrote the above.

193135 ben Thu Jul 3rd 07:45:47 2008

would you be interested in my analysis of charedi culture in israel?

here you go eugene. maybe this will show you how wrong you are:

://www.haloscan.com/comments/hmaryles/8606906935945406924/

these comments are about an article written on ://haemtza.blogspot.com/ (The Enforcement Squad).

193136 ben Thu Jul 3rd 10:17:13 2008

Bat Sheva Unterman, murdered yesterday, was married to Ido Unterman. Ido was my roommate back in the 90s, along with another guy, michael. We shared an apartment in the Roscoe neighborhood, for those of you who know jerusalem. the son of a former chief rabbi, ido's father had moved from israel to england for personal reasons. being a fervent zionist, ido decided to move back to israel.

over the years I lost touch with Ido, and i am very saddened that this is the reason that we will be seeing each other.

193137 Jaron the collective individual Thu Jul 3rd 13:09:18 2008

Eugene, RE 193132,

Maybe we should "understand" the settlers' "legitimate resistance" in the same way that Hamas rockets are acceptable to Will? I am with George on this one. Every person on this earth is a fully equal individual who has free choice in what to do. Some people do indeed act outside the framework of their cultural conditioning. But such people are IMO a minority. A few concrete examples:

1. Jews don't do suicide attacks the way the neighbors do. Even in the darkest days of WW2 (which is about as bad as it can get), we didn't do them. The neighbors celebrate when their 17 year old blows up a commuter bus, the parents say how proud they are and the community regards it as a triumph.

2. Women in Saudi Arabia have about the same rights as a US domestic house cat. Women in Israel and west have more rights both in practice and in theory. Yes, Saudi men are just as human as an American, Chinese or Irishman. But the culture they inhabit steers behavior a certain way.

3. Make fun of Judaism and odds are some self-hating Jews will cheer you on as you do so. Make fun of Christianity and some Christians might complain. Be criticial of Islam in a cartoon (the Dutch Prophet Mohammed cartoons), a novel (Salman Rushdie) or a book (Irshad Manji's call for reform with Islam) and expect credible attacks on your life. That is culture speaking in all three cases.

4. Try to do business slow in NYC and you will get run over. Try to do business "in a New York Minute" in Mississippi and the locals may regard you as a space alien. Culture again.

5. Be a Jew who supports Palestinian nationalism and you will have considerable Jewish support. Be a Palestinian who considers Zionism legitimate and you will be ostracized at best and lynched as a collaborator at worst. Culture norms at work again.

So, yes, I can reasonably expect based on cultural models that Ben can see soldiers lynched on the news and not act. Just as I can reasonably expect that a Palestinian will (on average) react more strongly to the Al-Dura thing. Any photographer with two brain cells should understand that as well. Dropping a match into gasoline is incitement, whether it violates a criminal statute or not.

193138 Joe Thu Jul 3rd 14:05:57 2008

I dunno what I could do. Maybe you could lobby the lobby to lobby Israel to nuke Iran.LOL !

Dear "Jew on the Brain" Willie,

Surely you can do better than that. Perhaps you could spend another 10 years on this forum and criticize your pro-Israel Jew friends?

Just a suggestion.

BTW - No one is going to "nuke Iran". This is only something you've conjured up in your anti-Jew mind.

193139 deleted

Joe drop it before you start

193140 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 14:15:52 2008

We shared an apartment in the Roscoe neighborhood, for those of you who know jerusalem.

rasko perchance?

193141 Joe Thu Jul 3rd 14:19:10 2008

News article concerning yesterday's act of "freedom-fighting":

www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3563363,00.html

The myth of poor, destitute Arabs is broken once again.

193142 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 14:23:09 2008

jaron, i'll tell you now about a cultural similarity between "arabs" (muslims) and jews: they both think they know the other's "culture" when they don't speak and read the other's language, have barely met 3 individuals belonging to the other's "culture" and "understand" the other's religion based on newspaper articles and wikipedia.

193143 ben Thu Jul 3rd 14:40:06 2008

eugene

we pronounced it with a short o. anyway, rekhov shimoni to be more exact.

193144 george Thu Jul 3rd 15:21:12 2008

193132 eugene

I suppose you mention "charedi culture" not because you believe that the "violent settlers" are "charedi", but because you want to talk about different "cultures"?

Well, this is a free forum. Talk as you wish.

About the videos and settlers. Do you mean that "settler" security officers may not care if their fellow "settlers" get violent? Perhaps so. But it sounds more like you are saying that the IDF is somehow in cahoots with the settlers. I did a simple google search (video settler). The following topped the list www.btselem.org/english/Video/200802_Settler_vandalizes_trees_and_steals_wood_in_Hebron.asp

Now, I could not find a name associated with the person on the video. That is, do they know who this person is? What's his name? (the heading is dated Feb 2008 - surely enough time for Btselem to find out this information?) I don't see wanton destruction. No "confrontation". At most it shows someone, a single person, pilfering a few branches. So what is it? Petty theft? IDF should call in troops over petty theft by a single person?

Now Btselem has on its website reports making such claims. Interesting wording and a rather amazingly wide sweep: A report that B’Tselem published shortly before the establishment of the Commission concluded that all Israeli law-enforcement authorities – the army, the police, the State Attorney’s Office, and the judiciary – implement an undeclared policy of leniency, compromise, and failure to fully prosecute Israeli civilians who harm Palestinian residents in the Occupied Territories.

Somehow they believe that publishing a report that they themselves wrote it makes the statement true.

As far as I am concerned, their very own example is sufficient to discredit such an unbelievably wide assertion. Take their own example, Nahum Korman. They give their version of the story. Pure obfuscation. The next post I give my version of the Korman matter.

193145 Will Spare us from another tearjerker. Thu Jul 3rd 16:12:48 2008

George drop it please,

I couldnt possibly take another dose of Eugene berating the violent settlers and the unsympathetic Army. His scorn ...Its just to harsh .

193146 ben Thu Jul 3rd 17:44:42 2008

surely enough time for Btselem to find out this information?) I don't see wanton destruction. No "confrontation". At most it shows someone, a single person, pilfering a few branches. So what is it? Petty theft? IDF should call in troops over petty theft by a single person?

i would imagine that if someone sent a video showing someone doing some sort of destruction, in which the guy's license plate number can be made out, that the police should not have such a difficult time figuring out who done it. this isn't exactly the type of crime that requires the facilities shown in "the border".

193147 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 18:23:22 2008

george,

well, since you started talking about cultural issues, i thought i'd add some insights too.
i'll leave the israeli charedi culture of self-righteous parasitism for another time.

now i'd like to add some notes on different cultures that are not that different:

it is my opinion that violence against palestinians along with not speaking out against this phenomenon and covering it up is a cultural feature of the yesha jewish population.
it is also my contention that the israeli authorities in yesha are laboring under a culture of turning a blind eye and making minimum efforts to combat this phenomenon.

so here you go, george, a cultural similarity between yesha settlers and "arabs" and between israeli authorities in yesha and the palestinian authority.

193148 eugene Thu Jul 3rd 18:26:49 2008

would imagine that if someone sent a video showing someone doing some sort of destruction, in which the guy's license plate number can be made out, that the police should not have such a difficult time figuring out who done it. this isn't exactly the type of crime that requires the facilities shown in "the border".

when there's no film of it, the many, many instances of orchard uprooting and tree destruction by settler thugs it's called: "pilfering a few branches".
when there is a video of settlers attacking palis, there's the suspicion (taken seriously even by the authorities) that the video has "been staged".

193149 Jaron Fri Jul 4th 02:22:18 2008

In 193142 eugene wrote: "jaron, i'll tell you now about a cultural similarity between "arabs" (muslims) and jews: they both think they know the other's "culture" when they don't speak and read the other's language, have barely met 3 individuals belonging to the other's "culture" and "understand" the other's religion based on newspaper articles and wikipedia."

Funny, that is actually similar to Edward Said's orientalism thesis. The nub of his argument is that you can't criticize a culture with any real credibility unless you are actually a part of it. I strongly disagree with that idea. I am not a communist and never lived in the Soviet block. I speak barely 10 words of Russian. But I can make a reasoned judgement from a reading of history that communism was a human and social catastrophe. My evidence is tens of millions of dead people and accounts of their suffering under that totalitarian system. By your standard, I should not be allowed to judge communism since I didn't actually personally live through it. No one should be able to form good views on ancient history since none one alive today lived in ancient Rome.

Likewise, I don't need 4 wives, to practice gender apartheid, to personally commit "honor killings" or to cheerfully send my children off to be suicide bombers to raise meaningful objections to these practices. I don't need to be Muslim or Arab to do that.

I can see with my own eyes the tangible verifiable facts that Palestinians tolerate no living Jewish population (a few lone individuals excepted) in places they control. There are no Jews in Gaza and from 48-67 there were none in the WB and Gaza. I can contrast that with the verifiable fact that 20% of Israeli voters self identify as Palestinian. That is a judgement of cultural difference in the realm of tolerance that I am competent to make on bare facts alone. Likewise, a Palestinian who does not speak Hebrew but gains a decent grasp on the culture of the Jews IMO should indeed be able make criticisms of Israel, even if they have NOT lived among Jews, provided they do their homework.

"lived reality" (as the US academic left likes to call it) is only one of several ways to form a valid level of understanding.

Name:    
E-mail: