Posted on 09/27/2001 9:04:30 AM PDT by Illbay
Sept. 26, 2001, 8:47PM
DAMASCUS, Syria -- A morgue assistant pulls out drawers holding the mutilated corpses of Palestinians killed in clashes with Israelis. Doctors pummel the chest of a dead Palestinian in a desperate attempt to revive him. The body of an infant, swathed in bloodied blankets, is held by a grieving parent.
These raw images -- aired almost daily on Arab television since the Palestinian-Israeli clashes erupted a year ago -- haven't lost the power to touch the hearts of Arab viewers.
Indeed, they have fed a buildup of Arab anger -- not only against Israel but also against the United States, its chief ally, already resented for imposing 11 years of sanctions and carrying out repeated airstrikes on Iraq.
That anger provides a potential base of support for the militants, who can use it to keep governments from cracking down on them. The outrage has also left many Arabs grappling with conflicting emotions over the Sept. 11 suicide attacks in the United States.
Some governments -- while decrying the deaths at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania -- have echoed murmurs in the streets that the United States brought violence on itself by angering Arabs. Others have made it clear they want to be sure U.S. retaliation doesn't target nations like Iraq or groups like Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas, who are heroes to some Arabs because of their anti-Israel stance.
"We feel outraged by what happened in the United States, but we want the world to feel the same about the daily Israeli killings of Palestinians, the demolishing of houses and the humiliation of the people," said Wafa Mohammed, a shop owner in Jordan.
"If the United States had sympathized with the Arabs, the destruction that took place in the United States wouldn't have happened," said Mohammed Tohami, 22, an Egyptian frame maker.
"There's a feeling among Arabs that the United States is totally responsible for what's happening in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict," said Imad Shueibi, a Syrian political analyst.
The Palestinian-Israeli clashes began one year ago Friday. The spark, the Palestinians say -- or the pretext, according to Israel -- was a visit by then-opposition Israeli leader Ariel Sharon to the holiest and most disputed site in Jerusalem, which Jews call the Temple Mount and Palestinians Haram as-Sharif.
Since then, 642 Palestinians and 177 Israelis have been killed. Many of the Israeli casualties were civilians who died in Palestinian suicide attacks against discos, restaurants, markets and train stations or shootings with machine guns and mortars.
The resulting resentment cannot be ignored as President Bush -- who has threatened to punish Afghanistan's Islamic rulers harboring suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden -- assembles U.S. forces for a retaliatory strike. Bin Laden has portrayed himself as the champion of Muslims and Palestinians.
Adding to the pressure on the mostly secular Arab governments are fatwas, or religious edicts issued by Muslim clergymen warning the governments against joining the anti-terrorism coalition.
Wake up! We have US military stationed in Saudi and I would guess Kuwait as well. We have our US Navy out there patrolling the sea lanes
Is there any doubt that these attacks were carried out by "Israel's enemies"?
"The enemy of mine enemy is my friend."
Israel has gained many new American friends. And Islam comes under the microscope of Western Civilization. It is good that you have the freedom in this country to dissent against prevailing opinion in this matter as you do. Your counterpart in Palestine would be brutally murdered for expressing views favorable to the enemies of Islam.
Depends on what you mean. Many, if not most, radical Islamist movements "hate Israel" but that agenda item is far down their list. By "Israel's enemies" I mean specifically Palestinian terrorists. You make a grave mistake if you believe they're ALL on the same page. It is much more complex than that.
"The enemy of mine enemy is my friend."
One of the most inane and senseless bases for foreign policy you could possibly imagine.
In fact, it is this idea that brought us Saddam Hussein (we supported him because Iran was our enemy) and Osama bin Laden (we trained and armed him and his crew to fight the Soviets).
I trust we NEVER act on this principle again. It comes back to bite us nearly every time, it seems.
You are 180 degrees wrong. Read some of my comments. It is BECAUSE I don't believe there are cut-and-dry "good guys" and "bad guys" in the Middle East that I have the opinions that I do.
You really must pay more attention. Don't simply rely on your mental template to get you through.
Depends on what you mean. Many, if not most, radical Islamist movements "hate Israel" but that agenda item is far down their list.
Says who? I say it is at the top of all their agendas.
By "Israel's enemies" I mean specifically Palestinian terrorists.
By "Israel's enemies" I mean specifically all terrorists who have attacked Americans.
You make a grave mistake if you believe they're ALL on the same page. It is much more complex than that.
I can only judge by the words of hate coming out of their mouths. Hate for Israel, America, Christians and Jews. Their words are clear enough to anyone who can hear or read.
"The enemy of mine enemy is my friend."
One of the most inane and senseless bases for foreign policy you could possibly imagine.
A necessity in times of War.
In fact, it is this idea that brought us Saddam Hussein (we supported him because Iran was our enemy) and Osama bin Laden (we trained and armed him and his crew to fight the Soviets).and our policies had positive results also.
I trust we NEVER act on this principle again. It comes back to bite us nearly every time, it seems.
It wasn't our principles that betrayed us but the scum that we tried to elevate to the level of humanity who turned on us.
Perhaps because it is on the top of YOUR agenda. It is really quite helpful to keep an open mind so that you don't miss reality.
By "Israel's enemies" I mean specifically all terrorists who have attacked Americans.
That makes no sense, except to reveal your own agenda. I refuse to allow Israel to determine what America's interests are. In so doing, I simply suggest that we be as focused on OUR interests as Israel is on hers.
Israel thinks nothing of attacking a U.S. Navy ship in international waters, in three separate attack waves, and killing American sailors.
Israel thinks nothing of coopting American citizens to spy for her, and selling American secrets to AMERICA'S enemies.
If America were as faithless to our friends as Israel is to her "friends," we'd have sold her down the river years ago, and the Palestinian flag would fly over Tel Aviv right now.
If the latter, why are you willing to coddle a state that is very often hostile to us, including not shrinking from killing U.S. servicemen?
We understand that __________ was killed on July 21, 2001. Please complete the following questionaire. Was he:
(a)Not in a clash ___
(b)In a clash? ___
Or maybe the questionaire is sent to the Palestinian authorities. Or Hamas. Or maybe Arafat's wife - you know, the one who says Israel uses poison gas against Palestinian women and children. Or some other reliable source.
And a lady in a mini skirt engenders rape?
I asked the same question of Kudzu Flats. She took a pass. But I take you to be a more serious person than her, so I have some cautious hope you might post something worthy of serious comment.
Meanwhile Larry Elder had on his show a piece about some employee in the UCLA library that got suspended because he emailed to 20 coworkers in response to some email to him, that he considered Israel an apartheid state (unfortunately, while I was listening, that term was not more precisely defined). UCLA declared that "harrassment." I guess they have rather thin skins in Westwood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.