Wednesday is cartoon day! (The Wall)
| June 18th, 2003
42 Responses to “Wednesday is cartoon day! (The Wall)”
Leave a Reply
If you have questions about the moderation policies here, please read this post. Short version: treat other posters with respect.
(Need to know how to create blockquotes and links, i.e., linked text?)
If your submitted comment fails to appear, without even an error or "waiting for moderation" message, then our spam-blocking program may have blocked your comment by mistake. When this happens, please contact the moderators right away so we can rescue your comment!
June 18th, 2003 at 6:10 pm
Why am I geting “Red Dwarf” flashbacks? *pfft!* This is mine, and *pfft!* this is mine, and *pfft!* this is mine …
This comment was written by Janis.Report this comment to the moderators
June 18th, 2003 at 6:29 pm
ouch! :)
This comment was written by pericat.Report this comment to the moderators
June 18th, 2003 at 11:22 pm
Sounds about right.
Shades of the Enclosures Act.
This comment was written by Joel.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 6:41 am
One thing I really like about your cartoons, Barry: you never cariacature people who are doing the wrong thing as ugly. This isn’t the first time I’ve noticed that. Even your “ugly American” character isn’t drawn to be physically repulsive.
In this case I really appreciate it, because of how many cartoons that show Israel doing something self-destructive (like this) show a hideous version of Arik Sharon or something else that looks anti-Semitic. (Mark Fiore even gave the Israeli soldiers in one cartoon silly noses–though admittedly he also stereotyped the Palestinians–though that really didn’t make me feel better at all…)I think it’s important to be able to criticize what Israel is doing without drawing on these heinous stereotypes.
You also draw people with realer-looking bodies and hair, and your fat people are cute and attractive-looking. Makes it fun to read your cartoons.
This comment was written by RA.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 8:51 am
I agree with R.A. I’m glad you spared us the vile Jew-hating imagery of many anti-Israel political cartoons, such as these Qatari ones. The fact you put a normal-looking Israeli guy (gasp!) instead of some subhuman monster makes me that much more receptive to your ideas. (And yes, I’m equally dismissive of American newspapers’ portrayal of the Arab world as a bunch of Ayatollah Khomeini doppelgangers.)
As a side note, do “facts on the ground” really matter that much? If I’m not mistaken, Israel had an extensive system of settlements on the Sinai peninsula, but was able to dismantle them when it returned that land to Egypt.
This comment was written by Anonymous.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 11:11 am
“Facts on the ground” aren’t an all-important factor; they don’t make an agreement impossible. But they are a factor. Building the wall in a land-grabbing fashion, rather than along the green line, doesn’t make a real peace agreement impossible; but it does set up yet another hurdle between where we are now and where we want to end up, an additional hurdle that in my opinion isn’t necessary.
RA and anonymous, thanks for your compliments regarding my drawing. I’m really not into the entire “ugly people are evil” subtext that you do see in a lot of political cartoons, and I’m glad you agree.
On the other hand, for single-image cartoonists - who have less space than I do to let the script indicate to the reader who is being talked about - I can see the advantage of a visual icon that instantly says “Israel.” But those cartoons anonymous points to cross WAY over the line into blatant anti-Semitism.
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 11:12 am
Hee hee, Janis - I didn’t even think of Red Dwarf until I read your comment, and I love that show!
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 2:06 pm
I agree with Ampersand; I don’t understand why a Wall should be built in a land-grabby way if it can be built in a clearly legal way. God knows, Israel exists in extreme conditions, but sometimes the current government seems to be trying to make things even harder.
This comment was written by PG.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 3:24 pm
Can you do another cartoon which would be as accurate, if not more so titled “Hamas prepares to negotiate?”
In this one, please draw a Hamas terrorist blowing up a bus full of people, shooting and killing a little girl riding in a car, and blowing up a 60 year old shopkeeper with three kids.
And then you can have him say, “Okay, NOW I’m ready to talk about a possible ceasefire.”
Then you can put the two cartoons side by side, and ask which one is more morally foul and horrible, building a wall, or murdering people.
This comment was written by Allison.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 3:43 pm
I think there’s plenty of murder to go around, and at this point, the most egregious immorality going on over there seems to be “deliberately making oneself an obstacle to solving the fucking problem.” Translation: not wanting to solve the problem. Not “not wanting to solve it at an unacceptable cost to oneself.” Not wanting to solve it at all.
This comment was written by Janis.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 4:04 pm
Of course it is not Hamas that is taking part in the negotiations. It is the Palestinian Authority. Hamas is merely a group of extremists trying very hard to scuttle any negotiations. And they’re getting their way.
Or have I missed something?
This comment was written by Jake Squid.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 5:19 pm
If Abbas can’t keep the terrorists from killing Israelis, and AFAICT he’s not even trying, then there’s no point in talking to him.
This comment was written by Thlayli.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 6:41 pm
I see. So Israel & the US want to get rid of Arafat because he can’t or won’t stop the terrorists. They’re happy when he is replaced. After two months (or is it longer), terrorist attacks keep happening (as do Israeli attacks) so Abbas is not even trying. Abbas has no effective police force or military. What does he (or the PA) need to do in order to convince you that he is trying? I mean other than having no more terrorist attacks. Which you might remember happened during the 90s while the Palestinians waited to see the Oslo Peace Accord come to fruition.
But really - I do wonder what Abbas (who has no police or military force) can do to satisfy those who hold him accountable for terrorist attacks carried out by various groups that are not the PA.
This comment was written by Jake Squid.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 8:14 pm
So as you see it, Israel should stand back and allow the PA to build up a conventional army, which it promises to:
a) use against Hamas/AAMB/etc
b) *not* use against the IDF.
And they should trust Abbas to do this because…?
This comment was written by Thlayli.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 9:30 pm
Allison, that wouldn’t be a very funny cartoon. The closest I’ve ever come to that cartoon is this one, which isn’t funny either.
I’ve never understood the implicit logic of comments like yours: Is pointing out that Hamas is scum (and of course, Hamas is scum) somehow an excuse for land-grabbing? Does the fact that the Israeli goverment isn’t the most horrible entity in the world (and it’s not, not by a long shot) make whatever wrongs Israel does commit okay?
Jake, Hamas is currently in negotiations for a cease-fire, which is different from the “road map” negotiations which get more press play.
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 10:22 pm
Amp,
The thing is, I don’t see the Wall cartoon as funny, either.
This comment was written by Allison.Report this comment to the moderators
June 19th, 2003 at 10:54 pm
Like Allison, I also fail to see anything funny about the cartoon above. I find it mainly to express a complete misunderstanding of the situation. But then I’m Israeli, maybe it’s some American humor thing that I don’t get.
This comment was written by Imshin.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 12:48 am
The cartoon would be funny if the wall was being built in order to grab land. It isn’t. It is being built to reduce the risk of attack against Israelis - a point which your cartoon completely dismisses.
Remember - no attacks, no wall. And no messy assassinations, road blocks, curfews either.
I also don’t think that it is possible to consider Hamas as being entirely separate from the palestinian people as a whole. They have considerable support among the general community, and we are told that a majority of palestinians support their campaign of murder inside Israel itself. Perhaps this justifies snipping pieces off their prospective state. After all, there is nothing sacred about the Green Line - it was merely the cease-fire line after the first Arab-Israeli war.
I am equally unimpressed by the arguments that Abbas isn’t suppressing Hamas because he hasn’t the military force to do so. He has himself already stated that he wouldn’t use force to stop Hamas. Nor has he employed any of the non-military means at his disposal, such as stopping incitement against Israelis in the media organs under his control.
This comment was written by parallel.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 1:07 am
Barry, to address your questions:
I’ve never understood the implicit logic of comments like yours: Is pointing out that Hamas is scum (and of course, Hamas is scum) somehow an excuse for land-grabbing?
– No, but the criticism of Israel’s actions seems to be in a vacuum in which you don’t seem to understand that these often unpleasant actions are taken in order to prevent this scum from killing people — NOT in order to land-grab, and not as some kind of revenge. The wall is a security wall, and the reason that it is encroaching into the West Bank is to protect more human beings - who live in settlements. I, like you, don’t agree with where it’s being built, but I understand that the reason is to save more lives and not to “land-grab.”
You ask: Does the fact that the Israeli goverment isn’t the most horrible entity in the world (and it’s not, not by a long shot) make whatever wrongs Israel does commit okay?
No, but it is upsetting when Israel’s actions are criticized as if they are occuring in a vacuum and not in a situation where Israel’s citizens are being attacked and killed every day. I have to admit, it irks me when I see blogs that don’t even acknowledge attack after attack after attack on Israelis, and then devote post after post to what happened to Rachel Corrie or to Rantisi or to curfews or to the Wall.
I deeply dislike knee-jerk reactions and un-thought-out stances when they come from the left or the right. As someone who has always identified as a left-wing Democrat, I guess I expect it more from the right, and am more perturbed and insulted when I find it on the left. I’m finding it more and more.
This comment was written by Allison.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 2:00 am
Nice cartoon, shame about the debate. Palestinian-bashers always say “You haven’t denounced the Palestinians enough! They are killing us, while all we are doing is killing them, stealing their land, torturing them, and suppressing their human and political rights! THEY are the evil incarnate! WE torturing, murdering oppressors are PURE!”
Waste of time arguing with such people, however polite and sincere they may be.
This comment was written by MFB.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 2:20 am
but it is upsetting when Israel’s actions are criticized as if they are occuring in a vacuum and not in a situation where Israel’s citizens are being attacked and killed every day.
Seems you (and most pro-Israeli supporters) tend to criticize Palestinian actions as though they are occurring in a vacuum. You don’t seem to have a problem with that.
This comment was written by bean.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 3:24 am
No, they aren’t occuring in a vacuum. They are occuring after the Palestinians have been invited, asked, begged and even cooerced to come to the negotiation table and resolve this conflict in a non-violent manner.
Israelis (even Sharon!) have reached the point a long time ago, when they are willing to say — OK, we know we’re not pure. We know our actions in the past haven’t been pure. Let’s sit down together and try to figure out how we can best repair past errors and build a real future for both of us to live in peace and security.
The Palestinians appear unwilling to admit that they have ever been less than pure, that they have ever made serious mistakes, and that now is the time to negotiate a two-state solution, and stop trying to destroy Israel. We’re waiting for them to come around. But while we’re waiting, we’re going to try to stay alive as best we can.
Oh, and it’s nice that at least I’m a POLITE and SINCERE “torturing murdering oppressor.”
This comment was written by Allison.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 4:34 am
This is a hefty debate to weigh into. But i wholeheartedly agree with the comments made above about the lack of ugly stereotypes in the ‘toons. Thumbs up.
I totally diagree, on the other hand, with Allison’s statement that “The Palestinians appear unwilling to admit that they have ever been less than pure, that they have ever made serious mistakes, and that now is the time to negotiate a two-state solution, and stop trying to destroy Israel.”
Allison presumably is confusing the terrorists and the Palestinians. Because the PA have long accepted the idea of a two-state solution, and have long condemned terrorism. And confusing Palestinaians and terrists is about the worst, most cruel mistake you can make debating this whole issue.
And crikey, no, the cartoon from Zmag is not funny at all. Very powerful, though.
This comment was written by Ryan / Beatniksalad.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 5:00 am
The PA has long accepted the two state solution? Is that why their constitution still calls for a Palestinian state in the ENTIRE land of Israel? Is that why it supports and facilitates the Fatah terrorist groups?
Hmm…
This comment was written by Tara.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 5:04 am
The PA has long condemmed terrorism? Perhaps out of one side of their mouth. While out the other side they call for jihad and let the al-Aqsa martyrs brigade do the “negotiation” for them.
As for the cartoon, it’s amusing only in that it’s supposed to be a comment on Israeli negotiation tactics when in fact the wall is a response to Palestinian negotiation tactics: blowing up buses and Bat-Mitzvahs.
This comment was written by Geoff.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 6:54 am
MBF - you aren’t open to evidence or reason, so I won’t waste your time. You won’t want to read this.
bean - it is no secret that the Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al-Aqsa Brigades intention is genocidal - to create a Judenrein middle-east. The history for this goes back prior to the 1967 war, and indeed prior to 1948. The context for this goes back to the time of Mohammed - who personally oversaw the massacre of a jewish tribe in Medina - so it certainly isn’t occurring in a vacuum, but has little to do with current Israeli policies.
If you go back prior to the first Intifada, there is no question that the arab palestinians in the west bank and gaza had more political freedom and greater economic development than in any arab state. To explain the uprising and subsequent history, you have to understand two things. First, the muslim idea that land, once part of muslim territory, is always rightfully muslim. They are still bitching about the Crusades and the tragedy of al-Andalus, 1000 and 500 years respectively after the events. Secondly, that Israel was vulnerable to that kind of rebellion precisely because they are moral. If they had tried this in some Arab country, they would have been slaughtered, as in Hama (Syria) 1980.
Does this mean Israel is perfect? Not at all. But I honestly cannot think of any people who would have done better after being faced with the mortal threats Isaelis have had to face, and that arab hatred of jews would be the same whatever they had done.
Ryan - you have to understand that what the Palestinians say in ENGLISH and what they do and say in ARABIC are two different things. They condemn terrorism - occasionally - for the international press, then name the streets and schools after murderers of children, and canonise them in the schools and media.
Finally, to prove who is willing to live with who - the population of Israel is about 20% arab, and they live in relative harmony with full civil rights. The jewish population of the arab countries is approximately 0% after mostly being expelled after 1948. Go figure.
This comment was written by parallel.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 7:10 am
Regarding what’s funny: although there are specific exceptions, in general nobody finds political cartoons they strongly disagree with to be any good.
I can recognize a good right-wing political cartoon, but even I don’t usually find them funny; I just am enough into the craft of cartooning to be able to recognize well-crafted cartoons, even when I don’t agree with them.
In general, I find the “your cartoons aren’t funny and/or good” response from people who are angry at the views contained in my cartoons unimpressive. Over the years, I’ve been praised by people who actually know things about cartooning - including by Will Eisner - and I’ve won the most prestigious award for non-pro cartooning the USA has. There’s a lot I don’t like about my work, but I’m not worried that it’s no good at all.
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 7:11 am
Parallel - so in your view, if Israel is doing a better job than the Arab states, is that good enough? Is that the standard you think Israel should be held to?
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 8:42 am
I agree, to some extent, with everyone who’s posted here (except MBF). I think the fence as such is very important, because it will create a defensible border between Israelis and Palestinians. One of the key factors in prolonging the conflict is that there is no natural border between Israel and Palestine, so it is critical to create an artificial one. I disagree strongly with the people who describe the fence as an “apartheid wall” or “Berlin Wall” - it’s a border between two countries, not an exercise in apartheid.
At the same time, the location of the wall is a matter for legitimate question. I think it should be built closer to the 1967 lines or to something that is likely to approximate a final border (e.g., the Taba map) rather than where Sharon is building it.
This comment was written by Jonathan Edelstein.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 9:39 am
Parallel raises the issue of historical claims to ownership: First, the muslim idea that land, once part of muslim territory, is always rightfully muslim. They are still bitching about the Crusades and the tragedy of al-Andalus, 1000 and 500 years respectively after the events.
I would argue that a) this is not solely a muslim idea, as identification with The Land is a trait common among most long-standing cultures of the world—even the Jewish Diaspora that held Israel as a beacon property to which the scattered tribes might one day return.
Then b) there is the statute of limitations. What are they? To historical memory, they can be long indeed. Native Americans frequently cite the presence of their ancestors graves as one among many reasons to reclaim lands stolen by settlers. Geography strongly determines the shape of a culture, of its belief system, its mythological tropes, its sense of place and time. To be uprooted is to risk the death of culture. The uprooted thus retain historic memory of the land encoded in their myths, symbols and ethos. Again, I could point to the Jewish Diaspora, who offer the strongest example of this phenomenon. Yet arabs in the middle east—Christian and Muslim alike—retain more recent memory of the lands they have lost to Israel, some in their grandparents’ living memory, yet some still as recent as yesterday. So if you question their sense of propriety, do you not also question the same sense of propriety among the Jewish Diaspora?
We are dealing with a competition of historical claims to property founded largely in religion and myth, yet also to the realities of time and space, that cannot be resolved save by compromise and mutual respect. The right of Israel to exist is as strong as the right of Palestine to exist—if either side wishes to avoid the pain of enduring war, conflict and possibly genocide. Yet the rhetoric I hear from either side, on this blog yet certainly elsewhere, is often self-righteously vile, angry and dehumanizing. I admire Barry’s bravery for dealing with this issue in his cartoons, because I simply don’t have the patience for it. It usually just disgusts me.
This comment was written by Kevin Moore.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 9:42 am
And I should add: Great cartoon! You deal with symbolism so well, dude!
This comment was written by Kevin Moore.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 11:50 am
first, I thought it was a great strip. I hadn’t thought about it, but once it was mentioned, it occured to me how often “evil us ugly and vice versa” shows up in political cartoons, and I applaud you for not following that scheme. calling people “evil” seems counterproductive to any sort of negotiation or hope for peace in any circumstances.
then, of course, there’s this debate. it seems to me that the wall is simply another symptom of how lopsided the conflict is. certainly israelis see themselves as “fighting for their lives and freedom.” Hamas sees themselves the same way. and I have had a hard time granting israel the moral highground, and they make it harder on a more or less daily basis. I have a low tolerance for civilian casualties, and “‘they’ killed our civilians first” doesn’t strike me as a credible excuse.
that being said, I’m still wondering WHY this hasn’t been a matter for the UN. strip Israel of the IDF, and all you’ll have on either side there are a bunch of wackos with guns and bombs killing civilians. this seems to be the precise reason UN peace keeping forces were created in the first place. the only arguements I can think of against it would be similar to the “right of return” thinking (equally flawed in many contexts). That somehow everywhere else in the world is so baised against jews that, say, French, or Italian, or Canadian troops would be so biased against them that they would “allow” palestinian terrorist groups to win. if someone can really show me a difference that would disqualify the region for UN management similar to the Balkans, I’d like to hear it.
I’d be interested in knowing how you know what they say in Arabic, Parallel. do you speak arabic, or are you just relying on what others have told you. it’s not some secret code language. if there WAS major discontinuity between the statements the PA says “for the international community” and “what they say and do in arabic” I have a feeling the Israel Lobby in the US would make it much, much louder than it is.
one more thing: since someone brought it up, there ARE groups that have been through much worse for just as long as the Jewish people.
This comment was written by karpad.like the Buddhists. centuries ago, they were much more widespread than today, with holy sites and temples throughout most of the east.
most of their holy sites in India (Buddha’s homeland) have been destroyed by groups hoping to reassert Hindu’s dominance in the country. Indian Buddhists are relegated to the “untouchable” caste, where they are regularly beaten, raped, and murdered for wanting such “nice things” as a house better than a straw hut, pots and pans, and clean drinking water.
the largest genocide in the history of the world was committed in southern china against the buddhists around the year 1000. 100 million buddhists were killed over the course of a century.
so let’s not pretend that “jews have the plight of the world on their shoulders” there are plenty of other oppressed minorities, and most of those don’t have the courtesy of a UN established “homeland” with it’s own army and the legal right to travel there under any circumstances.
Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 12:49 pm
No, they aren’t occuring in a vacuum. They are occuring after the Palestinians have been invited, asked, begged and even cooerced to come to the negotiation table and resolve this conflict in a non-violent manner.
Israelis (even Sharon!) have reached the point a long time ago, when they are willing to say — OK, we know we’re not pure. We know our actions in the past haven’t been pure. Let’s sit down together and try to figure out how we can best repair past errors and build a real future for both of us to live in peace and security.
The Palestinians appear unwilling to admit that they have ever been less than pure, that they have ever made serious mistakes, and that now is the time to negotiate a two-state solution, and stop trying to destroy Israel. We’re waiting for them to come around. But while we’re waiting, we’re going to try to stay alive as best we can.
See, this is exactly what I mean. You absolutely refuse to examine some of the reasons behind suicide bombers and other terrorists. You refuse to see that some of Israel’s policies are indirectly creating these anti-Isreal terrorists. You refuse to look at Palestinians from anywhere but withing a vacuum.
This comment was written by bean.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 3:31 pm
Bean, even if you were right, and even if Israel stopped doing everything you don’t like tomorrow, and even if that worked and among the kids who are being born or who are under two now none of them grew up supporting or being part of terrorism, all of which I am highly skeptical about,
what about all the present and future terrorists, the grown up ones leading the groups, the young ones carrying out attacks, the children being radicalized (whoever’s fault it is, would they stop terrorism all at once tomorrow?
And if they didn’t, but Israel had stopped its practices of checkpoints and borders and so on, that would be at least, say, fifty to seventy more years of open and free terrorism against Israel, maybe thirty or forty IF the younger generation managed to wrest control away from the older one and promote peace.
Remember, these are not groups and individuals that support terrorism towards the cause of peace, these are groups that have as their charter missions the elimination of the state of Israel, in many cases the elimination of the Jewish people, from the land of Israel, and the institution of an exclusively Palestinian (often Muslim) state.
So, say it’s only twenty-five to thirty years with unhampered access to Israel for such terrorist organizations… how many Israelis would die before/until you said they could return to having some checkpoints?
Whatever the causes of terrorism, it has to stop, as does the hate mongering, as does the international support for hate mongering and terrorism and weapons smuggling. Without that, what kind of “peace” will there be?
This comment was written by Tara.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 4:10 pm
I support Peace. Which means I do not support terrorism nor do I do not support suicide bombings. It also means I do not support illegal [ab]use of power, oppression, and other human rights atrocities all in the name of alleged safety for some.
Oh, I can understand it. I can totally [i]understand[/i] why there are suicide bombers, I understand their motives, their thinking, their reasonings. I can also totally understand the Israeli’s desire for safety which is so strong they’ll do [i]anything[/i] to attempt to achieve it. I can understand all of that.
But I cannot and will not support it. And I sure as hell won’t stand by and say nothing or that one side is “more right” than the other when they’re both the ones causing the problems, they’re both the ones hindering the peace process, and they’re both completely and utterly in the wrong.
This comment was written by bean.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 4:14 pm
Oh, and FTR, when I talk about the reasons that indirectly lead to suicide bombings — I’m talking about a hell of a lot more than “checkpoints.”
This comment was written by bean.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 4:15 pm
Oh, and FTR, when I talk about the reasons that indirectly lead to suicide bombings — I’m talking about a hell of a lot more than “checkpoints.”
This comment was written by bean.Report this comment to the moderators
June 20th, 2003 at 8:03 pm
I’m not sure how fully you understand their reasoning if you really believe that their terrorism is in support of, and evidence of their support for, a two-state solution…
This comment was written by Tara.Report this comment to the moderators
June 21st, 2003 at 9:34 am
Ampersand -
I only noted the difference between Israel and arab countries as evidence that the Israelis have demonstrated that they are prepared to live with arabs, but that the arabs have demonstrated the opposite.
I would never claim that merely being better than arab governments - an extremely low standard - is “good enough”. Nor do I think that Israel is perfect. But I do feel that from a moral perspective, they are doing as well as can be reasonably expected in the circumstances. Of course, in my view (which obviously not everyone shares) those circumstances are that they are being attacked by genocidal maniacs with no real desire for peace.
Kevin Moore - I did not intend to raise the thorny issue of historical ownership, because the muslim (not arab) attachment to “muslim land” is another thing entirely. I suggest you bone up on the concepts of “Dar al-Islam” and “Dar al-Harb” (sp?). The desire is not to return the land to its previous owners, but to ensure that whoever is on that land is muslim with a muslim government. Similar violence is taking place in many places around the world, including Kashmir, Ambon, Mindinao, etc. and was part of the reason to the violent reaction to the independence vote in East Timor (though nationalism was perhaps more important in that case).
Karpad - No, I do not read arabic nor do I watch palestine TV. Translations are available from MEMRI and to my knowledge their accuracy is not contested. As to why they aren’t widely reported and criticised in the western media, who knows? They deserve to be. But just yesterday the Italian govt removed the imam from the mosque in Rome, and during the Iraq war it was reported that the PA named a square after the bomber who successfully killed four US troops in Iraq, so some of it does get through, at least when it affects non-Israelis.
This comment was written by parallel.Report this comment to the moderators
June 21st, 2003 at 12:55 pm
I do believe that Jews in the mideast were doing fine BEFORE all the Zionist immigrations, and that some even OPPOSED Zionism.
This leads one to think that the Arabs before 1948 didn’t hate Jews per se, but the political philosophy that was taking away their land. Of course, many of the descendants of these Arabs, such as Hamas et al, actually hate Jews for being Jewish. But do you really think that raw hatred of Jews is what drives this violence?
This comment was written by Assamite.Report this comment to the moderators
June 21st, 2003 at 8:59 pm
And here we have Assamite, another glimpse into the infinite mutability of “fact” and “history.”
This comment was written by Tara.Report this comment to the moderators
June 22nd, 2003 at 9:43 pm
Assamite,
“Zionist” immigration started much earlier - around 1880. This was when palestine was part of the Ottoman empire.
Anti-jewish violence by arabs did not distinguish between recent immigrants and long-established communities - the Hebron massacre in 1929 is illustrative of this. Though one has to ask why violence against immigrants is somehow justified (the implicit subtext of your remark). If the land they built their farms on was properly purchased, why should there be a problem, if not for arab racism?
Jewish immigration post 1948 included large numbers (800,000?) of refugees from arab countries. This isn’t Zionism, but Zionism had made sure there was a country prepared to make them welcome. This was NOT the case the case before the establishment of Israel - recall the German jews trying to flee before 1939, who were unable to find a country to take them and ended up back in Germany? So good for Zionism, I say.
This comment was written by parallel.Report this comment to the moderators