Hamas wins Palestinian Elections
January 27, 2006
[One note about this picture: While Hamas is known for its militance and resistance, I find it interesting that we often see photos of armed Palestinians, but we rarely see the photos of equally armed Jewish settlers. It's a bizarre thing to see young teens and other settlers walking around with guns all the time in Israel. It's just hard for Americans to be used to seeing so many arms. I'd encourage you to keep that in mind as you watch the news and see all of the armed Hamas supporters - there are an equal number of armed Jewish settlers who carry their guns with them everywhere...but when was the last time you saw that on TV?]
It’s all over the news. Hamas wins the elections. I’m not quite sure what to make of all this. Those of you who read this blog know that many of my commenters indicate that I have been ‘brainwashed’ by Hamas, which is interesting, because I’ve never even met anyone who is part of Hamas. When I was in Palestine this summer we did meet with leaders (some militant) within Fatah, but never Hamas. I understand the resistance movement within Palestine. I understand "to exist…is to resist." However, Hamas has no desire to recognize Israel and has called for the destruction of Israel. And that is extremely problematic. I want nothing more than freedom and liberation for Palestinians under oppression by the Israeli government. I make no qualms with that. I believe that oppression in any form is wrong, and that it is wrong for Israel to take away the freedom of movement for Palestinians, which has so many harsh implications and consequences for the Palestinians: economic, social, religious. However, I believe that Israel should be allowed to exist. I believe that we should recognise Israel.
Technorati Tags: Hamas, Palestine, Israel, Peace Process
The Palestine News Network
(which I commend to you all as an important addition to where you are
receiving news about the Middle East) recently interviewed a Hamas
leader Sheikh Yasser Mansour here. Part of the interview involved the following exchange:
PNN: Will resistance stop especially given Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza and the movement’s participation in the elections?
Mansour:
Resistance is a legitimate right so as long as there is occupation
there will be resistance. The safeguarding of armed resistance is a
duty for
us all. We all reject labeling the resistance as terrorism.
I watched Bush’s press conference where he addressed the question of whether they would continue to engage in peace talks with Palestinians. Israel has said they will not be in conversation with Hamas. However, I was somewhat impressed that Bush would not say that, at least not in the press conference. He said, "Well, I made it very clear that the United States does not support political parties that want to destroy our ally, Israel, and that people must renounce that part of their platform. But the government hasn’t formed yet. They’re beginning to talk about how to form the government. And your question on Abbas was a good one. And our message to him was, we would hope he would stay in office and work to move the process forward." Bush didn’t, as far as I heard, come right out and say, "We are going to abandon the peace process because of this election" (which is good since the election was primarily able to take place because of the US support and backing). However, he made it clear, over and over again, that they will not work with a goverment that calls for the destruction of Israel.
I can only hope that this is the beginning of a new vision and hope for Hamas. If they continue to maintain that Israel should NOT have the right to exist, I can’t see how the peace process will continue to move on.
Posted in 
Adam Walker Cleaveland: 
January 27th, 2006 at 2:53 am
i tend to agree with you on this issue. i think the american media is biased toward israel and it’s shown in the way the palestinians are portrayed (i.e., the gun-toting, violence-hungry monsters). but, like you said, the israelis are much the same way, but that image is hardly ever broadcast.
i’m not a big fan of hamas winning this election…i don’t feel that anything good is going to come out of it. but i hope i’m wrong. i think peace is the goal: peace for palestinians; peace for israelis, with each of their respective sovereign rights respected and honored. i pray it happens irregardless of the election.
January 27th, 2006 at 8:56 am
Bush’s new conference comments were indeed better than I expected. He’s kind of stuck b/c Hamas was elected in a open and free Middle East election–just what he’s been pushing for.
On the news point, I try to balance American sources with english.aljazeera.net
January 27th, 2006 at 9:09 am
Cope, aljazeera is a good source as well, for sure. Yah, and that’s the deal - this is the election that Bush wanted. And he didn’t put the people at fault, which was good. He understood that they’ve had enough with the corruption that existed within some of Fatah, and they wanted something else. Hamas, the organization that really takes care of the community, is involved in all the social services, humanitarian services, definitely made themselves look good to the people.
I just hope and pray that it was the right choice for the people, and that Hamas begins to rethink its position and agenda in relation to Israel.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:14 am
I knew it wouldn’t be long before you came out with a pro-Hamas post.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:24 am
>”He’s kind of stuck b/c Hamas was elected in a open and free Middle East election–just what he’s been pushing for.”
So b/c Hamas was elected democratically that means Bush HAS to support them? That’s a weird thing to say. Choices have consequences– especially democratic choices. The Germans learned that the hard way when they elected Hitler.
So when American and Euro donor money dries up, who you gonna blame? The “zionists”? Choices have consequences.
And with this election we have just one more out of countless examples of the palestinians shooting themselves in the foot. They never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, as they say. They are their own worst enemy.
And ps., I’ve seen pics or armed Israeli settlers for as long as I can remember. The difference is that usually the settlers have their weapons hanging at their side– instead of brandishing them and firing wildly into the air palestinian-style.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:35 am
We must continue to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:45 am
Bill, you totally misread the statement, “He’s kind of stuck b/c Hamas was elected in an open and free Middle East election” - I can’t speak for Cope, but I don’t think that he meant that Bush has to support Hamas. More so that Bush can’t complain about the way in which Hamas was elected - it was his democracy that allowed that to happen (which he acknowledges in his statements).
Bush wanted democracy…he got it. And Hamas was elected. He can’t, and hasn’t, come right out and say, “We are going to stop negotiations with Palestinians” because Hamas has yet to actually form the government, and I think that he’s waiting to see if they are going to change at all before he commits to not working with them in any way.
If they don’t lose the ‘Israel must be destroyed’-line, of course Bush wont’ work them, and I don’t support that type of an agenda by Hamas at all.
If you think this was a pro-Hamas post, you’re not reading carefully enough.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:05 am
Some on the Israeli side, though deeply troubled by the Hamas victory, say that at least they know who they are dealing with now. Arafat was a double-talker, and Abu Mazen was virtually powerless. With Hamas in actual power, the Israelis will be able to respond to palestinian attacks with little concern for world public opinion.
“There will be no excuses or ambiguities when Hamas fires rockets on Israel and launches suicide attacks against civilian targets. Until Tuesday, the PA could hide behind the excuse that they were not directly responsible and they could not rein in the ‚Äúmilitants.‚Äù Now the ‚Äúmilitants‚Äù are the militia of the ruling party. They are one and the same with the Palestinian Authority. If they bomb Israel from Gaza ‚Äî not under occupation anymore, and is therefore, technically, part of the Palestinian state the PLO proclaimed in Algiers in 1988, but never bothered to take responsibility for ‚Äî that is an act of war, which can be responded to in kind, under the full cover of the internationally recognized right of self-defense. No more excuses that the Palestinians live under occupation, that the PA is too weak to disarm Hamas, that violence is not the policy of the PA. Hamas and the PA will be the same: What Hamas does is what the PA will stand for.”
http://nationalreview.com/comment/ottolenghi200601261002.asp
January 27th, 2006 at 11:28 am
As this Middle East issue is seemingly escalating the to the forefront of the media and boundaries are beginning to be drawn more clearly I’m wondering what can we as Christians do better to show love to Hamas and the new governing people of Iran? There has to be a tangible way to reach out out of pure love and say to these governments that we Americans actually love them despite our differences. My initial thought is a letter writing campaign where us Americans can just write simple letters not condemning them but expressing our sincere love for them as people and that although we differ on opinion we would like to extend an “olive branch”. There has to be some tangible ways to express love to them from the people of America instead of just government leaders conversing back and forth.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:57 am
Adam. Good work. Love you brother.
January 27th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
Jason,
Precious. It’ll be so adorable watching folks whose favorite pastime is hating “Bush” and christian “fundies” go out of their way to show unconditional “love” for violent and tyrranical religious wackos in Iran and palestine.
Welcome to the upside down world of Liberalism.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
If you can understand hamas why can’t you understand Isreal trying to exist?
Why can you say you are a Christian and then say you understand the targeting of innocent people? You UNDERSTAND suicide bombings targeting kids?
And I have been to Israel you don’t see teens and kids with guns everyplace.
Sorry Adam.
Don’t lie to make you support of Hamas less sickening.
If PTS had any credibility as a Christian institution they would throw your sorry ass out.
Guess the church is more hard up for pastors than I thought.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:08 pm
Hamastan established in Palestine right before our very eyes. Shiiastan in Iraq.
Maybe the Bush bashers got it right. The Arabs aren’t ready for democracy after all.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
Why can you say you are a Christian and then say you understand the targeting of innocent people? You UNDERSTAND suicide bombings targeting kids?
So, where did Adam “say” this, Callie?
January 27th, 2006 at 5:35 pm
In fact, Callie, I think Adam actually wrote these words:
“If they don’t lose the ‘Israel must be destroyed’-line, of course Bush wont’ work [sic] them, and I don’t support that type of an agenda by Hamas at all.”
January 27th, 2006 at 7:07 pm
Adam, are you mad? Hamas is a militant Terrorist organization … thats why their shown on tv with guns.
Here’s to the new vision of peace:
http://lauro.blogs.com/farcountrytell/2006/01/hamasthe_politi.html
Hamas Leaders Speaking at Damascus Rally: We Shall Regain Safed, Beit Shean, Tiberias, Ashkelon, and Lod
Following are excerpts from speeches by Hamas leaders at a rally, broadcast on Al-Jazeera TV on December 30, 2005.
Nizar Riyan, Hamas leader in Gaza: We shall return, we shall return. we shall return. We shall return. We shall return - despite the borders, despite the obstacles, despite the Jews. We shall regain Safed. We will regain Beit Shean. We will regain Tiberias. We will regain Ashkelon. We will regain Lod. We will regain our entire country.
[...]
Crowd: Dear Bashar - destroy Tel Aviv. Destroy Tel Aviv.
[...]
Hamas Leader Khaled Mash’al: Who can tell, my brothers and sisters, when we will celebrate on this podium, the liberation of the West Bank? When will we celebrate the liberation of Jaffa, Haifa, Safed, and the Negev? When will we celebrate the departure of the last Zionist from our land? Yes. Some people ask when this will happen. Say: It could be soon. Such is our faith in Allah. We have no doubt that victory will come, and that just as we liberated Palestine from the Crusaders and from the Mongols, we will regain it ‚Äì pure and purified - from the Zionist occupiers.
[...]
What was our situation like on the eve of the occupation of Iraq? Everyone was afraid that if the American train would reach Baghdad, it would storm all the capitals of the region. But this train crashed into the rock of Iraqi steadfastness. This train will turn back and return to Washington, and all the American and Zionist plots will be shattered.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:12 pm
The real question now is why did the Pal’s vote for Hamas?
Does this mean that the majority voice agree’s with the Hamas platform of destroying Israel? You betty have a pretty strong argument to say otherwise because now –through democrative election– the smily faces you portrayed on your summer blog look pretty different.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
But you know what?
In all seriousness, hats off to Pomomusing for a fine and well balance post on the topic …
January 27th, 2006 at 8:54 pm
reno how can you say hats off to someone who supports a group that calls for the genocide of an entire people?
And Adam may say he doesn’t support the anti Israel stuff, but he posts one anti semitic post after the next.
He is not different from the Lutherans who put swastikas on Bibles.
Different day, same old same old from Christians who support and ‘understand’ the murder of Jews.
Not anything new.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:50 pm
kp
Adan says himself he ‘understands’ resistance and to hamas that is the targeting of innocent people, on buses, in cafes and at the mall. Mostly kids is who they try to blow up.
Adam does say that.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
Callie I’ve been to Israel too and seen the Israelis and settlers with their guns.
Reno, I think it is a pretty huge leap from saying that because there was a Palestinian majority that voted for Hamas, that means the majority of Palestinians are also for the destruction of Israel. I know that there are many who are not happy with Hamas being in power, those who voted for people in other parties, the PFLP for instance.
And no, that doesn’t change the “smily [sic] faces on my summer blog” - they are still people who are made in the imago Dei, who still struggle for life and liberation.
January 28th, 2006 at 2:34 am
Adam,
You bend over so much for the palestinians your spine is going to snap.
The huns and the nazis, and the rapers of Shanghai were all made in God’s image too. What does that have to do with anything.
The palestinians elected Hamas in a landslide. Try as you may, you can’t spin your way out of that one.
January 28th, 2006 at 2:58 am
fatah was corrupt. that simple. hamas was the “other” alternative. makes sense to me. do I think they are a good choice for palestine? hell no. but you know what? sharon was a poor choice for Israel I thought, but at least he started some withdrawl. maybe hamas will turn out to be better then we think. I doubt it of course, but who knows. the reality is that the Israelites have given the palestinians no reason to wish them good will. now that certainly does not justify suicide bombing. however, to suggest that there is simply unwaranted aggression from palestinians is blatantly racist and evil. That is straight at you callie. you are an obvious racist. you do not accept the palestinians right to life and land. you hate them. now, should yuou condemn what they do? sure. of course. but don;t you see, by hating all palestinians because of their actions is what THEY are doing to the ISRAELIS. which by the way is not all jews. israel is a nation with citizens, not people world wide. that is not to say palestinians cannot be racist. many are, against you how you are against them. what it does mean is that your assumption that critique of israel is anti semitism betrays your irrational nature. the situation in palestine/Israel sucks. just plain sucks. and hatred of one side or the other will do no good. however things are the way they are, yes? All we can do is be careful with what brush we paint the other. hamas murders innocent people. this is undoubtably true. as does the Israeli government. the difference is you callie are jewish, and thus identify with one victim over the other. thas it. So maybe if you were more willing to see adam’s point, that palestinians at times use evil means to achieve an admiral goal, progress could be made. regardless adam I am with you. I understand why they elected hamas, but hamas has no chance of moving the peace process forward till they let go of their desire to eradicate Israel. Israel is going nowhere. what palestine needs is tyo seek to coexist in a just relationship. Israel needs to learn to see palestinians as people. if these two sides can rehumanize each other this whole process will move forward much easier.
January 28th, 2006 at 6:56 am
Adam,
“they are still people who are made in the imago Dei, who still struggle for life and liberation”
yeah … the same people who said this:
“destroy Tel Aviv. Destroy Tel Aviv”
and who voted for a political party who rejected the Oslo peace accords AND who ran on a platform that said this:
“when we will celebrate on this podium, the liberation of the West Bank? When will we celebrate the liberation of Jaffa, Haifa, Safed, and the Negev? When will we celebrate the departure of the last Zionist from our land?”
You use words like imago dei, life and liberation but refuse to ground them in any meaning. You’ve succeeded in robbing these words of meaning.
Hammas Party wants Israel destroyed …. Pal’s vote for Hammas OVERWHELMINGLY rather than Fatah.
The Pal’s had an option. Fatah was on the road to a peace plan and had been responsible for negotiating the Gaza Plan.
TELL ME!!! How is that a “pretty huge leap”?
You’re like the kid who thinks that just because he says it it’s true ….
January 28th, 2006 at 9:29 am
Well, Reno beat me to it, but I was going to ask you to clarify the meaning you have in mind when you use terms like “imago Dei.”
Saying someone is created in the image of God certainly is not a trump card in a debate, especially one such as this.
So, for the sake of your readers, please offer an analysis of your use of imago Dei, and how it applies to this conversation.
Thank you in advance.
January 28th, 2006 at 10:09 am
if you go with the Barthian explanation of imago Dei, then it’s only by the HS that we are in the image of God. That explanation, I roundly reject. Instead, let’s go with the one articulated by the RC, particularly DeLubac, which is more profoundly Scriptural and the harder one to swallow, I think:
If we are created, as Scripture testifies, by the Father and Son, then being created in the image of God is forever bound up with the work of the Father and Son. The upshot of this is that all people are created in God’s image, and some choose to not embrace it as well as those who have also been made in the same image.
The image of God is not an abstract trump card, but a reality which underlies the Christian confession that all that has been made has been made through Christ (John 1). As such, one cannot call themselves Christian and not affirm that the Son has been been involved in the creating of even those that would deny him. Or those that one disagrees with and does understand.
January 28th, 2006 at 11:32 am
Adam,
I have spent alot of time in Israel and have many family memebers there.
One does NOT see children walking the streets shooting rifles in the air. One does NOT see jewish families speaking of ‘killing all Arabs’ as if this is something postive. No ones want war. There are only about five million Jews clinging to a patch of land some eight miles wide in places.
They are surrounded on all sides by people for whom “Mein Kampf” is a best seller.
They are made in G-ds image too btw.
Funny, how so many of you Christians have never been able to admit that.
How precious to sit at an elite school and celebrate Hamas as heros.
Typical rich kid BS.
January 28th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
“who voted for a political party who rejected the Oslo peace accords…”
These are the same palestinians who danced in the streets and handed out candies on 9/11. That’s the day they lost my sympathy vote. This Hamas landslide only seals the deal for me.
January 28th, 2006 at 12:03 pm
callie,
and please don’t pin it on “christians”. This is about being LIBERAL.
January 28th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
But Ezra, according to Pomomusing the footage of the Pal’s dancing in the streets after 9/11 was inaccurate media bias … it was a fraction of the population. (sarcasm intended)
Well now that small percentage of people victimized by media bias have shown their cards and voted into power a terrorist organization that has left the entire world speechless and confused.
Your words don’t add up Pomomusings …
January 28th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
It’s not even about being ‘Liberal’ … it’s about a new form of Radical Liberal which can only be described as Leftist Fundamentalism.
January 28th, 2006 at 12:42 pm
hopefully this ‘hate speech’ won’t get me “banned” again.
January 28th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
Interestingly enough, perhaps Fatah and Hamas will destroy one another. From the way they behave with each other, a civil war doesn’t seem entirely impossible….
January 28th, 2006 at 12:51 pm
Would using the “imago dei” trump card in an argument like this qualify as taking the Lord’s name in vain?
January 28th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
Myles,
Ezra raises a good point. Where is the line? How might someone from your position respond to this claim?
German Nazi’s are made in God’s image, so they should not be pursued by means of war.
It’s the early 40’s and you’re sitting down to teach a Sunday School class, and you are asked whether you would support American intervention in Nazi Germany. Give me your position and a theological response, based on the imago dei
Thanks (just preparing you for your comps),
- kp -
January 28th, 2006 at 1:26 pm
KP and Myles-
That’s an interesting conversation, indeed. However, I think what we’re waiting on is what Adam meant by his use of the imago Dei. Let’s hold off on the other discussion and give Adam a chance to answer the questions that we’re put to him.
January 28th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
John Burk,
don’t hold your breath. I’m guessing Adam will shut down the comments soon, as he does whenever he takes a little bit of heat. Or he may delete comments, and outright ban some folks. (gulp!)
January 28th, 2006 at 9:01 pm
john and Ezra,
Note that Jews are not mentioned as being made in the image of God.
We are not worth living, not worth going to the WASPY country clubs or even to breath the air…
Our children are fair game for suicide bombers the fence is inconvient for the Arabs, and so it must come down.
Ezra, for the most part the anti semitism of Christians today is from mainline old rich WASPY churches like the Anglicans and the Presbytarians and the Lutherans. Nothing new there.
Catholics and Baptists and born agains shun that elitist crap.
Did anyone else note how many pics this guy has of himself here, he loves his face and he is pretty immature.
I think he might grow up one day, and realize that this bigotry Ivy League snotty hate rowards Jews is just plain dumb.
Or maybe he will run a church and teach everyone there to hate and put up swords and flags from Hamas.
His call.
January 28th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Callie,
In the same way that you want people to be more sensitive toward Jews and anti-semitic concerns, I would ask you to be more sensitive toward Christian denominations who are making efforts to contribute positively to the Jewish-Christian dialogue, even if at some point in their past they mistreated the Jewish community. I am repeatedly offended by your characterization of Lutherans as anti-semitic. I am Lutheran, and I am strongly sensitive to Judaism and Jews - I am grieved by anti-semitism. Despite horrors in its past, I know that the Lutheran church is working toward reconciliation and has made official statements of dialogue and peace concerning Judaism and Jews. Please stop blindly bashing denominations who are actively trying to foster peaceful and productive dialogue between Christians and Jews. I understand the problems in the past, but it is irresponsible to continue to say negative things about Christian denominations without taking a look at the positive things that they are working on in our present time.
January 28th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
Melissa,
If the followers of Martin Luther had any decency and some do, they would seek to apologize for the deaths of the six million people they happily helped murder.
When did that happen?
Did we jews miss it?
January 28th, 2006 at 11:57 pm
Callie,
I speak to you as a friend of the Jews and Israel. I think what you perceive as anti-semitism on the part of Liberal mainline churches is not the case, but rather misplaced sympathy for what they consider to be the “oppressed.”
Such people’s moral barometer for distinguishing right from wrong is how weak or strong they perceive the parties are. To them, the weaker is always right, the stronger always wrong. In this case, they perceive the palestinians as weak, and therefore right, and vice versa with the Israelis (even though the Israelis aren’t allowed to exercise their strength). It has to do with that, not anti-semitism.
Secondly, although I consider such thinking to be morally confused (and I would place people like Adam in that category), you go too far in your personal attacks on him. It doesn’t help your argumentation to pick on him personally like that.
January 29th, 2006 at 12:21 am
Austin
Your support for Adam is very touching.
Let me tell you a short story.
My grandparents were from Austria. They were in the camps as children.
Out of respect for them I will spare the details.
They grew up and my grandmothers sister went to live in Israel as a small girl since no country in Europe would take her as A Jew and her parents had been murdered by the Nazi’s.
They were twins and were experimented on and were both blinded by the dye injected in their eyes.
Common thing the Nazi’s did to kids btw.
Anyone one went to Israel to try to have some kind of normal life.
Did she?
Her daughter was blown up in the Sbarro bombings and is now on life support with full conciousness but no ability to move.
This poor womans son was killed at the border by a Hamas bomber who he tried to search.
This is typical for people in Israel. Nothing exceptional at all.
So don’t lecture me.
I have no ill will towards anyone.
I am just calling things as I see them.
And this blog is not a place for this
Since Jews are unwelcome and mostly banned here I am sure you will all be happy to see the one Jew who stumbled by to have been made every bit as unwelcome as you would make me or my family were we to meet in real life.
January 29th, 2006 at 1:20 am
Callie,
http://www.elca.org/ecumenical/interfaithrelations/jewish/declaration.html
January 29th, 2006 at 1:28 am
And even if that isn’t good enough to make you like Lutherans, at least show some respect for those of us in mainline denominations who are NOT perpetuating anti-semitic theology or attitudes. All I ask is that you stop making blanket comments indicting ALL members of given denominations - those are unfair generalizations that do nothing to encourage peaceful and productive dialogue.
January 29th, 2006 at 1:56 am
Melissa
I am sure you are well intentioned.
The fact that the Lutheran Church continues to support the genocide of todays Jews is not your problem.
You support the boycott of the ragtag people who live in Israel and made a getaway from your grandparents efforts to wipe them off the earth.
Youe paster who was quoted on this blog and 2hose words hoorified me so much I printed them and read them to a service for a thousand people.
A Lotheran paster gave a prayer in which not ONE Jewish kid was mentioned and who prayed the names of only Hamas and Fatah members.
It shocked a thousand Jews to silent horror to hear it.
Silent tears rolled down the faces of so many old women I felt so sad to read it.
But thats true.
We have to face it. You have no remorse.
you say you do but you support Hamas and other genocidal maniacs just the same as your grandparents.
Most Jews wouldn’t even talk to a person like you. You don’t feel one bit dad about it.
I with you could walk thru the Holocoast musieum and understand how people like you took part in that.
You might learn something. Maybe. Well people like you have always an excuse for your hate.
Always a reason to stay busy hating Jews and not helping starving people in African.
That is the rich WASP way. Alwasy has been always will be.
January 29th, 2006 at 10:07 am
Callie,
I hear where you’re coming from, trust me on that. That’s why I and mine will always support Israel and the jews.
But you are confusing intent with impact. Leftwing politics (be it secular or “christian”) can be said to be anti-semitic in impact, but not necessarily in intent. These people– like Adam– don’t hate jews. They are merely blinded by a misplaced sense of “social justice” and anti- “colonialism” to the point of religious fanaticism. Essentially, they hate whitey, and they hate the West (It’a a guilt thing that afflicts many in the rich WASP community. As long as they feel “guilty” they won’t have to give up their goodies. But that’s another discussion).
In impact, this tends to fall against Israel. They are perceived as “white” and “western.” The Palestinians are brown and “the other”. The “other” has a high pedestal of nobility in the Leftwing worldview. They can do no wrong. And when they do wrong (see electing Hamas), that’s whitey’s fault too.
But again, the intent is not anti-semitic– only the impact.
January 29th, 2006 at 10:10 am
Callie,
I don’t want to keep arguing with you about this. I’m sorry that you think that I am expressing hate here toward you or toward any Jews. That is certainly not who I am or what I stand for. I got physically ill going through the Holocaust museum because I honestly and truly did understand. I’ve tried so hard here to stand up for people like myself who are not perpetuating hate - to separate myself from a grievious history. I don’t know where you have heard from me that I support Hamas, that I have no remorse, or that I don’t feel bad about the horrors in my denomination’s history. The pastor quoted on this blog was not my pastor. The two Lutheran pastors I’ve had in my life are just as horrified as I am about the injustices and hate that is perpetuated around the world against the Jews. I want to cry that you feel you have to write “well, people like you have always had an excuse for your hate.” I don’t hate you or any Jews! I have never said anything like that on this blog or anywhere! I do not for the life of me understand why you keep saying hurtful things to me while I am trying to exhibit myself as a model of a non-anti-semitic Lutheran. Telling me I have no remorse is completely unfair. I have more profound Jewish sympathies than you may ever know, very personal ones, and ones that hit hard at the very center of my faith. If you assume that I am hateful simply because of my denominational affiliation, then you have assumed wrong. I have tried so hard to have productive dialogue with you - I just need you to accept that I can be better than others in my denomination. I am not defined by being Lutheran - I hope to redefine what it means to be a part of that denomination, to take part in admitting and then changing the evils of the past. I want you to understand that.
January 29th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
“I believe that oppression in any form is wrong, and that it is wrong for Israel to take away the freedom of movement for Palestinians, which has so many harsh implications and consequences for the Palestinians”
Then you must not truly believe it’s wrong for Palestinians to use that freedom of movement to blow up Jews in pizza parlors– otherwise you would see the need for blocking Palestine movement.
Yet you apparently don’t see the need, therefore blowing up Jews must be ok with you. Sorry, I’m a mathematician, and that’s the only logical conclusion I can reach.
January 29th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
apparently callie’s racism is justified because some other people hurt jewish people, and thus palestinians can be oppressed. that makes total sense. the british oppressed the Irish for 700 years. it tried to exterminate them many many times. now there is a lot of death and pain there, BUt that does not justify the bombing of the british right? in the same way, callie suggests that despite the oppression of the palestinians they should not blow up jewish people. great point. but does the oppression of the jews justify their murder of palestinians? no. now apparently being against murder is anti semetic. that makes a huge amount of sense. Israel has a right to exist. but so do palestinians. things aren’t all about being pro and anti jew callie, and you are letting your pian push you into racism and hatred.
January 29th, 2006 at 8:57 pm
Liam,
when was the last time you called a Palestinian a “racist” for hating Jews?
More than likely never.
January 29th, 2006 at 9:12 pm
Liam,
Perhaps if you dropped your sardonic tone, some people in the room might listen to your arguments. As it stands, I can hardly see the forest of logical worth in your words for some rather large trees of sarcastic arrogance.
Perhaps you don’t mean anything by it, but in heated conversations such as this, other people will always read you at your worst. I think it’s best to take a milder tone. We’re called to represent a God who died on a cross. Humility is always a good way of doing such a thing. Especially on blogs. And especially when you’re dealing with someone who is already obviously upset (i.e., Callie).
Just some friendly advice that a lot of us could stand heeding — myself included….
Kellen
January 29th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
well juan, the next time I meet a palestinian who hates jews, i will point out their racism. but I have only met four palestinians in my life, and none of them hated jews. so your comment, though quite good at making me look bad, doesn’t have much of a point.
kellen, I appreciatte your concern, and perhaps you are right, and I should tone down the sarcasm. Or perhaps the idea of quiet conduct and manners is a tool of established culture to quiet the radical voices that stand in opposition to it. I am not sure. Everyone is usually handling callie with kiddie gloves. I don;t understand why. She clearly has no qualms with misrepresenting what adam says, accusing whole denominations of anti semitism based on very little empirical evidence, and then accusing anyone who criticizes Israel’s policies as being anti semetic. From her conduct i would say callie is unafraid of harsh words or tough ideas. what is more, I find her attitude to be pretty blatantly racist. if I am wrong, she has every opportunity to refute me the same way I have the opportunity to refute her accusations. However, as a minority myself, i am often confused at the desire to use kind words when confronting racism of this type. Perhaps for more subtle cases, but blatant racism should be condemned in the harshest possible language, right? or did I miss something.
Now I understand we are taught that everyone should get along. However, to me that si when discussing abstract ideas. This is no abstract idea, but a struggle for life and death. If callie was a muslim justifying murders by hamas, I would argue the same. the question is would you be as offended by my sarcasm then? seriously, thas not a rhetorical or sarcastic question. I think that harsh rhetorical devices become understandable the face of hatred.
now maybe I am wrong. that is entirely possible. being passionate about things often misleads us and makes us make wrong decisions. So I will try to avoid sarcasm in future posts. and if you choose to point it out to me again when it happens, i will thank you for it. However, I think still it is far to easy to discount the voices around us that make us uncomfortable because of their tone. My problem with callie is the content of what she says, not just her disrespect. Yet maybe you are right, and discussions like this will not be so painful with a calmer voice. however as someone who has experienced callie’s kind of racism not just as an abstract idea, but as a reality of my existence, it is hard for me to be so measured in what i write.
soo, all that going back and forth is to say if my sarcasm has been to harsh for people, i do apologize. My only defense is that I find this issue important enough to act passionately towards, and if that passion is innappropriatte I will try to keep it in check.
January 29th, 2006 at 10:45 pm
Liam,
Your reasoning is understandable, but I’ve been convinced by some (a guy named Alan Jacobs, to be specific) that in debate and conversation — even in heated debate about real as opposed to “abstract” problems — we as Christians are called to act with kindness and charity above all. *Insert Pauline passage exhorting love here.*
If callie was a muslim justifying murders by hamas, I would argue the same. the question is would you be as offended by my sarcasm then?
Yes. I would encourage you all the same to act the same. It’s what you and I are called to.
Or perhaps the idea of quiet conduct and manners is a tool of established culture to quiet the radical voices that stand in opposition to it.
Or perhaps charitable and understanding conversation could be a powerful witness to a world that knows only hatred, polarization, and a hasty plugging of the ears in disagreement. If we are to demonstrate to the world that we really mean business, we couldto begin with the way we address and listen to one another — Muslim, Christian, Jew.
January 29th, 2006 at 10:59 pm
Liam,
so being a minority gives you the privilege to be obnoxious. Check. But Callie being obnoxious makes him a “racist”. Check. I have yet to hear someone who is pro-Palestinian refer to Pals as “racist.” Even when they refer to Jews as descendants of monkeys and pigs. I guess Palestinians, like us minorities, are “privileged” to say whatever the hell they want, while Jews are not. Calling someone a “racist” has become a punchline. People like you have cheapened the word. And I’m a minority, by the way, so don’t even try pulling rank on me like you do with all those kind white folks at Princeton.
January 29th, 2006 at 11:46 pm
juan, again you seem unable to reason out what i am saying, so to clarify, it is not callie’s tone I take offense to but content. the content to me betrays a racism towards palestinians. thus, if callie were saying the same things very chill like, then I would still be offended. as far as giving me a right, no. however, surely you have encountered how people who are not affected by an issue can be more “objective” about it thus making more passionate responses seem irrelevant. that would seem obvious. and I was not pulling rank, but pointing out a reality that as a victim of racism i respond angrily towards it. however, you have a point that anger does not justify being obnoxious. so I will attempt to be less obnoxious. that does not make callie not racist, but I will try not to mock him/her for it.(i thought callie was female). as far as what you have yet to hear from pro-palestinians, that is irrelevant to me. I have certainly no qualms calling anyone who refers negatively to jewish people racist. I have a problem with an ideal, not a race. the ideal of extreme zionism is wrong. thas it. jewish people, even israeli citizens I have no issue with. it is zionism i condemn. now if you understand zionism and my qualms with it you will understand why I call callie a racist. callie seems to support zionism, which claims that palestinians have nor ights, and that the land must be made only jewish at all costs. thas racism. so if you think that cheapens the word, then perhaps we should discuss our shared latin american history (I am assuming from your name you are latin american like myself. if that si a false assumption I apologize).
kellen, point taken. I still think though you are slightly simplifying things. that is to say while I have no problem with you telling me to tone down the sarcasm, and I accept this rebuke and concede you have a point, I am uncomfortable with what you are saying philosophically.
You assume that all viewpoints are equal. that is to say, callie just represents a differing rational view with no paricular moral weight and thus must be treated with respect. now I think i should learn to be more respectful to callie as an individual. however, to make that a maxim is to invalidate the voice of the angry. i think that is a dangerous thing to do, especially coming from a place of priveledge like we do as americans. while we may be confused by the angry response of the poor and condemn them when they react in evil ways, we can never ignore them because they do not respond in what we feel are “respectful tones”/ responding with respect is still, I maintain, a refuge of the priveledged to discount the voice of the oppressed who are fed up with their oppression. now this obviously does not apply to me because despite callie’s prejudice, she or he is certainly not oppressing me so I should at least show some respect. But respecting oppressive view points is one way of maintaining status quo for the elite who do not want to acknowledge their own corruption. all that to say, i was over the line, but I do not think that proper conduct is an objective value but rather culturally defined. soo again apologies for my attitude. hope it did not offend too greatly.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Liam,
if zionism is “racist” because, as you say, it claims the Palestinians have no rights, then you will surely agree that Hama’s platform of wiping Israel off the map is equally, or more, racist. At least the zionist are willing to give the Palestinians a state. If you don’t believe Hamas is racist, then indeed you are using the term “racist” as a political club of opportunity, which nobody takes very seriously anymore, by the way. And the less seriously people take it, the more you use the club, and the less people take it seriously, etc. As a minority, I object to the the cheapening of the word “racist”, just as Jews must also object to how the term “nazi” has become such a joke.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:13 am
juan,
if you will do me the service of rereading my posts, you will notice I have condemned hamas a few times now. it is frustrating that no matter how much critics of israel also criticize hamas and other hate groups, they are still accussed of supporting anti semites. The only positive thing I have to say about hamas is that they could surprise us. fatah were no innocent babes, and they seemed to be moving a good driection. sharon had quite a good deal of innocent palestinian blood on his hands, and yet he did some positive things before this recent medical issue. so perhaps hamas will prove themselves more then just terrorists. the original ira did it in ireland, when they gained independenc ethey laid down their arms. now offshoot extremists continued to fight in the north, but most of the IRA accepted their new legitimacy. perhaps hamas will do the same.
oh by the way, the original zionists were not willing to give plestinians a state. they just wanted them gone or dead. at least that is what they said, referring to palestinians either as vermin, or as not a real people. now callie is definately not that extreme, but shows little concern for palestinians deaths at the hands of Israel, which seems racist ( the formula being israeli death=bad, palestinian death = indifferent). Now perhaps she does not mean that and I am perfectly willing to see her express that and thus retract my statements. but I have pointed this attitude out to her before merely to be accused of anti semitism. I do defend the idea though that to criticize a country is not to condemn her people. I oppose zionism, I question the actions of the Israeli government. thas it. I certainly oppose the actions of hamas and fatah before them. but even the Israeli defense minister pointed out that hamas has been trying to restrain the actions of the more extremist islamic jihad, and has not conducted any suicide bombing for a while now. so if such a man whose responsibility is Israels defense mention there is hope for hamas, then maybe I am not crazy in suggesting the same.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:19 am
Liam,
I don’t care if you “criticized” Hamas, or wether they might “move in the right direction.” My question is simple: is Hamas RACIST. Yes or no. Don’t try to weasel your way out of it.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:34 am
“oh by the way, the original zionists were not willing to give plestinians a state. they just wanted them gone or dead.”
Not only is that that factually incorrect, it’s vile slander. The original zionists agreed to the U.N. partition plan of ‘47 giving both peoples a state, with Jerusalem an international city. It was the Arabs who voted against it, and declared war on the Jews. So I ask again, where the Arabs then, and Hamas now, RACISTS?
January 30th, 2006 at 12:38 am
who is being obnoxious now juan? I am not weasiling out of anything. apparently courtesy is only for perspectives you like. so my shortness with callie is innapropriatte because you agree with him/her but you can say whatever you want. you could merely say i am unsure of what you mean, as you seem to be, rather then accuse me of something. I would normally sarcastically point out how ridiculous such a response is, but kellen has pointed out to me how innapropriatte that is. so instead I will swallow my pride and just ask you to avoid that sort of thing in the future and hope that a more measured response will inspire something similar in you. anyone who condemns jewish people as a race is racist. that simple. I think hamas’ platform is probably racist, however I have not engaged with hamas leaders in conversation. Perhaps what everyone says is their platform is not actually their platform. or perhaps they will change their platform and realize it is not right. who knows. but the idea that one kind of person’s death is more valuable then another to me is racist. if that is a driving force behind hamas then of course they are racist.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:42 am
Callie –
You are either a troll, or so psychotically defensive and angry that you’re hurting everyone. Either way, just stop.
Anti-semitism is certainly alive and well in America — that’s not about to be denied, and the ADL will be more than happy to illustrate that.
That said, STOP accusing Adam of anti-Semitism, unless you’ve got some good examples from his actual posts to back up that claim. Equating him to Lutherans putting swastikas on Bibles and declaring that Christians are fundamentally anti-Jewish is simply wrong.
He’s explicitly said that he supports the existence of Israel. He’s tried to make it clear that he’s opposed to violence. He certainly wouldn’t support terrorist acts, particularly terrorist attacks targetting children. All these claims are bizarre.
Finally, your hate-mongering towards Christians — particularly driving a wedge between 1000 Jews and the Christian faith community as a whole — is counter-productive to the entire process of bringing peace in.
I’m not a big fan of what Adam’s said in this post, since I’m deeply concerned about Hamas. I see the election of Hamas as being the result of having effectively two options, and I think America has a lot to learn from that example.
That said, NOTHING that Adam has said was anti-Semitic, and he does not deserve the attacks or accusations you’ve levelled against him.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:47 am
>”I think hamas’ platform is probably racist, however I have not engaged with hamas leaders in conversation.”
Have you engaged with the zionist leaders in conversation that you are so willing to label them as “racists”? Yet you first must interview Hamas leaders in conversation before you label their “platform” a little bit racist?
It’s as I suspected. Calling people “racists” is your political club. It’s meant to pummel people into silence, with your minority status added only for heft.
If zionists are “racist”, then Hamas are genocidal Nazi thugs by comparison. Enjoy your “conversation” with them when they finally grant you that interview.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:02 am
On July 12, 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in his diary explaining the benefits of the compulsory population transfer (which was proposed in British Peel Commission):
“The compulsory transfer of the [Palestinian] Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we never had, even when we stood on our own during the days of the first and second Temples. . . We are given an opportunity which we never dared to dream of in our wildest imaginings. This is MORE than a state, government and sovereignty—-this is national consolidation in a free homeland.”
And in 1938, he also wrote:
“With compulsory transfer we [would] have vast areas …. I support compulsory [population] transfer. I do not see anything immoral in it. But compulsory transfer could only be carried out by England …. Had its implementation been dependent merely on our proposal I would have proposed; but this would be dangerous to propose when the British government has disassociated itself from compulsory transfer. …. But this question should not be removed from the agenda because it is central question. There are two issues here : 1) sovereignty and 2) the removal of a certain number of Arabs, and we must insist on both of them.”
Moshe Sharett, the first Israeli foreign minister, wrote in 1914:
We have forgotten that we have not come to an empty land to inherit it, but we have come to conquer a country from people inhabiting it, that governs it by the virtue of its language and savage culture ….. Recently there has been appearing in our newspapers the clarification about “the mutual misunderstanding” between us and the Arabs, about “common interests” [and] about “the possibility of unity and peace between two fraternal peoples.” ….. [But] we must not allow ourselves to be deluded by such illusive hopes ….. for if we ceases to look upon our land, the Land of Israel, as ours alone and we allow a partner into our estate- all content and meaning will be lost to our enterprise
Yitzhak Rabin wrote in his diary soon after Lydda’s and Ramla’s occupation on 10th-11th of July 1948:
“After attacking Lydda [later called Lod] and then Ramla, …. What would they do with the 50,000 civilians living in the two cities ….. Not even Ben-Gurion could offer a solution …. and during the discussion at operation headquarters, he [Ben-Gurion] remained silent, as was his habit in such situations. Clearly, we could not leave [Lydda's] hostile and armed populace in our rear, where it could endangered the supply route [to the troops who were] advancing eastward.
Ben-Gurion would repeat the question: What is to be done with the population?, waving his hand in a gesture which said: Drive them out! [garush otam in Hebrew]. ‘Driving out’ is a term with a harsh ring, …. Psychologically, this was on of the most difficult actions we undertook”.
Later, Rabin underlined the cruelty of the operation as mirrored in the reaction of the soldiers, he stated during an interview (which was censored in Israeli publications) with David Shipler from the New York Times on October 22, 1979:
“Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action.”
In April 28, 1930 Menachem Ussishkin stated in an address to journalists in Jerusalem:
“We must continually raise the demand that our land be returned to our possession …. If there are other inhabitants there, they must be transferred to some other place. We must take over the land. We have a great and NOBLER ideal than preserving several hundred thousands of [Palestinian] Arabs fellahin [peasants].”
By the turn of the 20th century, Ben-Gurion advocated exclusively Jewish labor (Avodah Ivrit) in Jewish businesses. He explained why a Jewish laborer should earn a higher salary because:
“[he was] more intelligent and diligent” than the Arab
Zionist leader Moshe Smilansky said in 1914:
“We must not forget that we are dealing here with a semi-savage people, which has extremely primitive concepts. And this is his nature: If he senses in you power- he will submit and will hide his hatred for you. And if he senses weakness- he will dominate you …. Moreover … owing to the many tourists and urban Christians, there developed among the Arabs base values which are not common other primitive people … to lie, to cheat, to harbor grave [unfounded] suspicions and to tell tales…. and a hidden hatred for the Jews. These Semites- they are anti-Semites.”
In 1895, Herzl, the founder of Zionism, wrote in his diary:
“We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back.”
ben-gurion also wrote that “in each attack [against palestinians] a decisive blow should be struck, resulting in destruction of homes and the expulsion of the population”
when that was accomplished the “palestinian arabs have one role left, to flee.”
to cap off golda mier wrote
“it was not as though there was a palestinian people considering itself as a palestinian people and we cama nd threw them out and took their country away from them. they did not exist”
they didn’t exist?
January 30th, 2006 at 1:07 am
and ps., Liam, it’s not your being obnoxious that I objected to - it’s using your aggrieved minority status as a privilege to be obnoxious which I objected to. It’s your crutch. You aren’t doing the rest of us any favors. I am the equal of any anglo, and don’t need to fall back on my ethnicity to justify my behaviour, just like your friend KP doesn’t use his ethnicity to justify his.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:10 am
well juan, again you show that your hypocrisy is pretty obvious but I will pretend you are responding rationally to me and do so myself. The reason i used the term conversation is because I have responded to callie on here so that she can clarify what she means. hamas is not here to defend itself. perhaps their issue is not with jewish people, but with a government that is oppressing and killing them? that would not be racist. However, if it is based upon the race or even creed of the people, then it is racist. I was trying to express that while I have certainly read some very hateful things from palestinians, I have not read anyt specific hamas things so felt uncomfortable either defending or condmening hamas. that simple. if they are racist, then I condemn them as such. but simply calling for the destruction of a government is not racist. I believe it is evil and wrong, but it does not prove them to be racist. However, juan, rather then actually read what i wrote you again responded as if what i said was not obvious. perhaps you should stop assuming you know what i mean and instead respond to what I actually write. my accusation of racism against zionists is based upon what i have read. if I read similar things from hamas, then i will do the same. i certainly have not said that hamas is not racist, I think they probably are. of course that is what seems to actually bother you, that I have decided to be more precise in my language and response. sorry if that bothers you, but it seems to go along with responding in a more rational and less passionate way. if you would prefer me to condmen hamas without actually knowing anything about them, then simply state that to be the case.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:12 am
>>>and ps., Liam, it’s not your being obnoxious that I objected to - it’s using your aggrieved minority status as a privilege to be obnoxious which I objected to. It’s your crutch. You aren’t doing the rest of us any favors. I am the equal of any anglo, and don’t need to fall back on my ethnicity to justify my behaviour, just like your friend KP doesn’t use his ethnicity to justify his.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:30 am
Liam,
I’M a hypocrite? lol! You call zionists racists, but give Hamas the big pass, and I’M the hypocrite. Good one.
Also, very impressive racist quotes. And yet those zionists voted for a two-state solution — which the Arabs refused.
Not to mention Palestinians TODAY are quite racist in their own right:
Islamic claims that certain Jews had been transformed into lowly animals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionists
Racist?
Do you see how silly this racist game is that you play?
January 30th, 2006 at 1:47 am
well juan a few problems with your reply
1. I give hamas no pass, I am in fact researching their platform right now, but seem unable to find a primary source online, only secondary ones. once I read it I will let you know since it seems rather important to you. of course you probably know I am not actually giving hamas a pass, but it sounds pretty good.
2. you have stated this vote a few times, but being willing to temporarily compromise does not change the ideals of a movement. any movement that does not value the lives of a people is wrong. which is why I have said that even if hamas does not attack Israel for racist reasons, it is still wrong. course you always skip that part.
3. um…I never said palestinians cannot be racist or are not racist. that is irrelevant to my point, but thank you for bringing it up.
4. um, islamic is an odd term, because islam is not a monolithic reality, but has a variety of strains. like judaism. in fact i am even willing to say zionism has afew strains, and maybe some zionists are less extreme then others. however the zionism things I have read seem rather unnacceptable. if you know some better authors hook me up.
5. a wikipedia link is hardly proof. however, i did read it and the article, though biased, even admitted that many see zionism as containing racist strans. the defense of this is that jewishness is not a race thus cannot be racist. seriously. so therefore can hamas not be racist because jews are not a race? read sources before you post them maybe.
6. all i see is that you will not budge until you have discredited me via the internet. I can also see that this discussion has run it’s course. if you want to find out what i think of hamas’ platform once I read it email me. till then I am out, i have already broken my promise to kellen to be nicer to people so i am gonna go before it gets any worse.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/669006.html
January 30th, 2006 at 2:07 am
actually juan one last note, I just found the charter. you will be pleased to note, for some strange reason, that I do find it to be racist, or prejudice rather since that article you posted makes it clear judaism is not technically a race. it is in fact prejudice thought regardless of how you define it. there was this odd section though:
“Article Thirty-One:
The Islamic Resistance Movement is a humanistic movement. It takes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religions. It does not antagonize anyone of them except if it is antagonized by it or stands in its way to hamper its moves and waste its efforts.
Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam. Past and present history are the best witness to that.”
it seems hamas seperates judaism as something that can exist, just not rule. kinda like the rule of omar. odd. they do in fact though make claims that are not isolated to the government of israel but jews in a general, which makes it “racist” or “prejudice” or whatever. ie: not mearly a revolutionary movement. hope that excites you that i was able to find and read it.
here is the site
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
January 30th, 2006 at 10:07 am
LIam,
I have not discredited you. You have discredited yourself. The reasons are self-evident for anybody who cares to read this thread. You are a hypocrite, and a terror symp. That’s not intended as an insult to cow you (as you use the term “racist”), but as a simple fact statement. Your obnoxiousness is the least of your sins.
out
January 30th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Actually alot of what Adam has said here is anti semitic.
His post showing the separation barrier as somehow stopping the three wise men echos back to ancient christian anti semitism.
This is but one example.
In any case, this conversation is pointless for me to participate in since I get so upset about it I become emotional and thats solves nothing.
It is my opinion that many posts here are indeed anti semetic. For example, the one about the wall stopping the wise men from seeing Jesus echoes medival anti semitism.
Its offensive.
That said, I think its silly to just quarrel and no one will have their minds changed this way.
For the record, I am not racist and happen to believe Hamas is just as bad if not worse for the Palestinians than for Israel. Sadly the corruption of the Fatah leaders was allowed to go on and this is what happened.
To those who I offended my apologies.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:49 am
Liam btw those quotes are mostly bogus….
January 30th, 2006 at 11:57 am
Melissa,
I read your post again when I wasn’t so upset and thanks for your wishes.
I agree that all Lutherans are not anti semitic and I have a terrible hot head and should never ever have implied otherwise.
This is a very heated subject, its hard to talk about it rationally and without getting into ad hominum attacks.
Again, my apologies to you in particular. This is a topic that can really drive people apart.
And Austin thanks for explaining this to me, I don’t think i really understood it until now.
Thanks, and blessing to you all.
Shalom.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
Seventy-three comments. Adam, you have officially now been named Pimp of Controversy by the State of New Jersey. Con grat you lay shuns.
;)
How’s the fatburn going?
January 30th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Callie,
Thanks - and I look forward to more conversations with you. There is always more to learn about this, and I look forward to growing as a person and as a Christian in this matter.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
Callie,
i definitely understand the emotion behind this debate, but your leveling everyone with racist banter is quite uncalled for. However, to better understand your position, could you ellaborate more on how Adam is an anti-semitic. And, especially, how his commnent about the three wiseman in conjunction with the wall is such. Again, generalizations are dangerous and weaken all arguments, even the most cogent.
January 30th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Kellen, thanks for trying to restore some sanity and peace to the comments, although I am not sure that everyone got the message.
Callie, I can certainly understand your passion…reading all of these posts has really broken my heart.
Candide, a troll, psychotically defensive? I am just curious, if it were not Callie (who is obviously and rightly upset and hurt) posting here, and instead a palestinian posting with the same passion…would you have the same hurtful, non-effective statements for them or would you instead sympathize?
January 30th, 2006 at 2:21 pm
Melissa, I could just cringe when I read how upset I was went I wrote that.
Its easy to understand why people over there can’t have a discussion when we here (myself included) can’t even seem to be civil.
Joel,
Thanks for your question. I agree, I don’t sound very rational and I admit I was actually crying when I wrote one of those replys so I can see why I didn’t make my point very well at all.
Ok the reason the three wise men post was so offensive is that it implys that Jews are stopping people from seeing Jesus.
The separation barrier is sad. I agree, but it was built for a reason, to stop the killing of innocent people. It has made the bombings go down a great deal.
Jews have typically been accused being against Jesus, against Christianity and alot of Church sponsored violence against Jews has resulted. I hate to see those old images return.
Actually in Bethelem because of the decline in bombings ( thanks to increased security from the wall) business was much better for the residents. Tourists have started to return.
Another example is in the upper picture when Adam says that the media is not reporting images of Jewish teens with guns as it does Hamas kids.
First of all, this is not the case, children in Israel do not carry guns randomly and this is a falsehood.
Also, to imply the media is somehow lieing to benefit Jews is yet another relic of Nazi beliefs. If it were true that Jewish kids carried guns around all the time shooting them off the press would report it. There is no Jewish conspiracy to silence the truth.
Isreal has been forced to become a modern day Sparta. In spite of this, they have built hospitals, schools and some of the finest Universities in the world.
Yes, they make mistakes. But how would we live if we were surrounded on all sides by people who were dedicated to our destruction? Think of the near limitless petro dollars pouring from Iran and Saudi Arabia into groups like Hamas and Hizbollah and what good does it do anyone?
There are only some six million Jewish people who live mostly normally with the two million arab citizens of Israel.
Can you think of one muslim country that would allow millions of Jews to live there?
Its actually against the law to be Jewish in most Muslim countries.
I don’t expect to change anyones mind, least of all yours.
But at least make an effort to see both sides.
There has to be common ground and common humanity, you can’t run TV stations calling Jews pigs to be exterminated and expect to be taken as trustworthy.
You can’t advance ancient mythes of Jews controlling the media and trying to stop Christmas without causing people pain.
Its offensive as using blackface…its the same kind of thing, or talking about Latin Americans as lazy, its bad to call back old stereotypes that aren’t true and that are hurtful.
January 30th, 2006 at 2:28 pm
>”Candide, a troll, psychotically defensive? I am just curious, if it were not Callie (who is obviously and rightly upset and hurt) posting here, and instead a palestinian posting with the same passion…would you have the same hurtful, non-effective statements for them or would you instead sympathize?”
Holly,
Perhaps Candide–like one of the commenters above–would first seek to have a conversation in private with said palestinian to study in depth his/her platform before jumping to any conclusions about his/her comments.
January 30th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
oh Joel and one more thing, I do see the Arab point of view.
I can understand why people elected Hamas with Fatah so corrupt. And I can understand why people are frustrated with Abbas and Arafat and the lies and the stealing.
But blowing up kids eating pizza isn’t the answer. OR burning down a synagogue in Syracuse NY which happened not too long ago.
Israel left Gaza, and is leaving most of the West Bank, I think they should make Egypt take back Gaza and Jordan take over most of the West Bank and built a border and let the Palestinians sort themselves out hopefully with some new leadership and new goals.
Goals about fixing the problems in their own society and not just trying to have everyone organized around killing Jewish people. It just hasn’t worked out well for anyone, including them.
January 30th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
From the charter of Hamas, anyone who can ‘understand’ these people’s position might be thought of as anti semitic but thats my opinion:
Excerpts of the Hamas Charter:
“Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him‚Ķ
Or this quote on suicide bombings:
”She [first Hamas woman suicide bomber] is not going to be the last because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only over the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe.”
(Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar, at funeral of Reem Raiyshi, who murdered 4 people, January 15, 2004, AP)
How can any sane person say they believe in Jesus and agree with ANY of what Hamas is about???
“Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him‚Ķ
From the Hamas Charter:
“The so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad‚ĶSince when did the Unbelievers do justice to the Believers? ‘And the Jews will not be pleased with thee, nor will the Christians, till thou follow their creed‚Ķ.’ There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad‚Ķ.
“In order to face the usurpation of Palestine by the Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner of Jihad. This would require the propagation of Islamic consciousness‚Ķ We must spread the spirit of Jihad among the [Islamic] Umma‚Ķ introducing fundamental changes in educational curricula in order to cleanse them from all vestiges of the ideological invasion which has been brought about by orientalists and missionaries‚Ķ. ‘I swear by that who holds in His Hands the Soul of Muhammad! I indeed wish to go to war for the sake of Allah! I will assault and kill, assault and kill, assault and kill’‚Ķ.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:12 pm
I agree with the cohabitate part but I also believe that the past week shows that land for peace will never work. To say both sides are equally to blame I feel is a misstatement of past history. I won’t go into the 1967 war or the Yom kippur war where the Arab nations were together taking on Israel in an offensive action for no reason. We may be made in the image of God but God gave us freewill to make good or bad choices. Terrorism is the bad choice and i’m for anything that promotes the maximum number of lives from being killed. With Hamas and correupt Fatah you both got problems. For me the answer is Netanyahu.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
For me from Scripture the land given to the Palestinians and Arabs is Jordon the land of Hebron.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
I think there are always mistakes on both sides of anything.
For example, Lebanon is widely seen as a tacitcal mistake.
As was attempting to settle Gaza as a buffer against future attacks by Egypt.
Every country, Israel included is run by people and mistakes are made.
There is no intention of genocide however, and very few people have an issue with arabs as people.
Its just about trying to stay alive as a tiny minority in a region that is incredibly hostile.
A great many Jewish scholars doubt very much if Israel can survive another twenty years in the situation its in and I have to agree.
Most Israeli’s are very afraid of what will come from Iran now that Hamas is totally in power. When you have an group of people who believe in the idea that there is nobility in suicide bombings its only a matter of time before they nuke Jeruselum and Tel Aviv.
Israel is too small a country to survive this type of attack. And will anyone in the Arab world be better off without Isreal? Not really.
.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:38 pm
Callie, for me it is a matter of who has caused the greater amount of damage. As a group Hamas and Arab governments have done much against Israel than otherwise. I personally have no problem with Arabs as a people but I do feel at the same time that Israel should be the ones in control. Look at all of the Arab nations in comparison to Israel within the Middle East. The Jewish people are the super minority. There needs to be some positive things said about Israel rather than the hostility toward Israel. To have the heart of Israel bounded by only 1 1/2 miles (betweem the sea and the border with Palestine) makes the country more susptible to military attacks. We forget about Iran, Syria and all the minority groups outside of the leadership within Jordon and Egypt and to a lessor extent Saudia Arabia. These are to blame but the other side makes excuses and says “land for peace” or both are messed up when the facts show who has started this and done more to attack the other. It seems obvious that the Israelis are willing to give up land but to the Palestinians and the Arabs it is never enough. At some point the Israeli government has to say sorry we have done all we can. If we need a wall in Jerusalem so be it if suicide bombers continue to wreck havoc. Adam saying Jewish terrorist? look at the numbers it is obvious which groups are involved in terrorism Hamas and to a lessor extent corrupt Fatah.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Adam, you quote Al Jazeera and in the same breath say the US media is biased? I’m sorry I could point to so much bias from Al Jazeera it is ridiculous and I don’t even care if you have been over there the facts are just facts.
January 30th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
Cleave -
I feel an unshakeable sense of trepidation everytime I approach the Falls Rd. in Belfast knowing that I am going to see Palestinian flags fly side by side the Republican tri-color. It’s the same uneasiness in (London)derry as Israeli flags decorate the Protestant quarter. In No. Ireland harbingers of a timeless struggle are never far from view. Admittedly, the scene has improved drastically in the last ten years.
I’ve lived outside of Belfast for 6 months now. Before I arrived I had done copious amounts of research on Nationalism and Religious Identity in No. Ireland. In the time since I’ve talked with countless people about their experiences over the last 30 years.
There’s still no way that I can conclude definitively that one side of the conflict has the edge on the other.
Most of the time I feel that I should do everything in my power to resist forming an opinion about the issues: they belong to Northern Ireland and it’s pretty damn arrogant to think that a foreigner can see clearly in a few months where there has been 400 years of deep confusion. I can go so far as to unilaterally condemn violence as a means of resistance, but to choose a side in such a polyvalent struggle…I’m either not that brave, or not that foolish.
January 31st, 2006 at 12:02 pm
How can we say we can’t form an opinion of the Middle East. How long has the Arabs controlled the land of Israel over the past 2000 years in comparison to the Jewish people controlling the land, since 1948? For that is all that needs to be said in addition to the violence perptrated by Hamas and other problems (not violence) with the corrupt Fatah. Just in terms of numbers of hostilities, who was the original agressor and in terms of years of control of the land it seems clear that Israel should be Israel with no land for peace. The last two weeks confirm this as well.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:32 pm
It’s troubling to see just how far to the fringes the Left’s anti-Israel stance is forcing them to go. Is there any point at which you would say enough is enough? Or would you apologize for Satan himself if it could be proven he was anti-Israel? “Criticizing” Hamas does not mean you are not pro-Hamas (I criticize Israel–but I am pro-Israel). These are the people you apologize for:
Hamas demands return of Seville to “lost paradise” of Al-Andalus
http://www.spainherald.com/2414.html
For the historically challenged, Al-Andalus is what muslims called Spain when they conquered it back in 700 AD. Now they want it back. You see, once a land is conquered for islam, it remains islamic forever. That is Hamas for you.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:51 pm
DH, if your most recent comment is in reference to mine, then you a) neglected the fact that I addressed my comment to Adam and b) misunderstood the context in which I was writing.
I said that I can’t make a sound decision about the conflict in Northern Ireland based on my six months of living here. By a parity of reasoning I am asking Adam to consider whether his six weeks of life in Palestine is really enough time to qualify him a thoughtful interpreter of the entire cultural/political/religious struggle.
I will say one more thing about Northern Ireland - NOTHING was accomplished in the peace process until both sides decided it was time to lay down their arms.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:41 pm
Steven,
I wish what you said could be true for the Middle East.
I wish that laying down arms would be a solution.
However, its my belief based on the experience of my family ( some of whom by the way lived in Jeruselum for long long before WW2) that what groups like Hamas want is nothing less than total destruction of all Jewish people. This is what they claim in their own charter and what they have practiced.
I hope when the separation barrier is finished, Israel can live in peace inside its own borders and that Palestine can make some sense of who and what they want to be without Jewish people to blow up and organzise themselves around hating.
Lets hope for all our sakes that Hamas does not turn to Iran. Lets all pray thats not the next step.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:18 pm
I totally agree Callie. To Steve, the Israelis by nature of leaving the West bank were laying down their arms and still Hamas won. Callie is right Hamas would like nothing less than the total destruction of Jewish people. From speaking to the Jewish people they, on the other hand, wish no total destruction as evident by removing themselves from the West bank.
February 28th, 2006 at 11:10 am
how do you people live with yourselves?