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.
This isn't the case of a "sweet young thing" walking innocently down the street, unaware of the effect the sight of her clean young limbs has on the raincoat-clad winos.
We have taken sides, blatantly so, in the Middle East conflict for years, when there was no good reason for us to do so. None. Our interests have never been served there, merely the interests of a small but influentially wealthy lobbying group in Washington.
I don't think BTW that this is the primary reason that we were attacked--I think that our leadership in the Gulf War (which had nothing to do with Israel but, ironically enough, with protecting one Arab state from the predations of another).
But it IS one big reason that we are hated in the Arab world, and I can't for the life of me figure out what we have gotten out of it.
What are you talking about? Who did they sell them to? And what's the answer to my previous question - give me a documented instance of indiscriminate killing of Palestinians. Or are you making things up?
Many, if not most, radical Islamist movements "hate Israel" but that agenda item is far down their list.
What's number one on the agenda for these movements whose hatred for Israel is far down their list? Give an example. Is that true of the group that attacked us on Sept. 11? What's number one on their agenda?
On June 8, 1967, the fourth day of the Six-Day War, the Israeli high command received reports that Israeli troops in El Arish were being fired upon from the sea, presumably by an Egyptian vessel as they had a day before. The United States had announced that it had no Naval forces within hundreds of miles of the battle front on the floor of the United Nations a few days earlier; however, the USS Liberty, an American intelligence ship assigned to monitor the fighting, arrived in the area, 14 miles off the Sinai coast, as result of a series of United States communication failures, whereby messages directing the ship not to approach within 100 miles were not received by the Liberty. The Israelis mistakenly thought this was the ship doing the shelling and war planes and torpedo boats attacked, killing 34 members of the Liberty's crew and wounding 171.
Numerous mistakes were made by both the United States and Israel. For example, the Liberty was first reported — incorrectly, as it turned out (it was later recalculated to be 28 knots) —to be cruising at 30 knots. Under Israeli (and U.S.) naval doctrine at the time, a ship proceeding at that speed was presumed to be a warship. The day fighting began, Israel had asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of U.S. vessels.1 The Sixth Fleet was moved because President Johnson feared being drawn into a confrontation with the Soviet Union. He also ordered that no aircraft be sent near Sinai.
According to Israel's Chief of Staff, Yitzhak Rabin's memoirs, there were standing orders to attack any unidentified vessel near the shore.2 The sea was calm and the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry found that the flag was very likely drooped and not discernible; moreover, members of the crew, including the Captain, Commander William McGonagle, testified that the flag was knocked down after the first or second assault.
A CIA report on the incident issued June 13, 1967, also found that an overzealous pilot could mistake the Liberty for an Egyptian ship, the El Quseir. After the air raid, Israeli torpedo boats identified the Liberty as an Egyptian naval vessel. When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack, which killed 28 of the sailors.
The argument that the attack was a tragic mistake is further reinforced by a new biography of Yitzhak Rabin (Dan Kurzman, Soldier of Peace: The Life of Yitzhak Rabin. NY: HarperCollins, 1998), who was Israel's Chief of Staff during the war, which says the Israelis initially were terrified that they had attacked a Soviet ship and might have provoked the Soviets to join the fighting. The Israelis were relieved when they learned it was an American ship, though Rabin remained concerned the mistake might jeopardize American support for Israel.
Once the Israelis were sure what had happened, they reported the incident to the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv and offered to provide a helicopter for the Americans to fly out to the ship and any help they required to evacuate the injured and salvage the ship. The offer was accepted and a U.S. naval attaché was flown to the Liberty.
Many of the survivors of the Liberty remain bitter, and are convinced the attack was deliberate as they make clear on their web site (http://www.ussliberty.com/). In 1991, columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak trumpeted their discovery of an American who said he had been in the Israeli war room when the decision was made to knowingly attack the American ship.4 In fact, that individual, Seth Mintz, wrote a letter to the Washington Post on November 9, 1991, in which he said he was misquoted by Evans and Novak and that the attack, was, in fact, a "case of mistaken identity." Moreover, the man who Mintz originally said had been with him, a Gen. Benni Matti, does not exist. Also, contrary to claims that an Israeli pilot identified the ship as American on a radio tape, no one has ever produced this tape. In fact, the only tape in existence is the official Israeli Air Force tape, which clearly established that no such identification of the ship was made by the Israeli pilots prior to the attack. It also indicates that once the pilots became concerned about the identity of the ship, by virtue of reading its hull number, they terminated the attack. The tapes do not contain any statement suggesting the pilots saw a U.S. flag before the attack.
None of Israel's accusers has been able to explain adequately why Israel would have deliberately attacked an American ship at a time when the United States was Israel's only friend and supporter in the world. Confusion in a long line of communications, which occurred in a tense atmosphere on both the American and Israeli sides (five messages from the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the ship to remain at least 25 miles &151; the last four said 100 miles &151; off the Egyptian coast arrived after the attack was over) is a more probable explanation.
Accidents caused by “friendly fire” are common in wartime. In 1988, the U.S. Navy mistakenly downed an Iranian passenger plane, killing 290 civilians. During the Gulf War, 35 of the 148 Americans who died in battle were killed by “friendly fire.” In April 1994, two U.S. Black Hawk helicpoters with large U.S. flags painted on each side were shot down by U.S. Air Force F-15s on a clear day in the “no fly” zone of Iraq, killing 26 people. In fact, the day before the Liberty was attacked, Israeli pilots accidentally bombed one of their own armored columns south of Jenin on the West Bank.
Retired Admiral, Shlomo Erell, who was Chief of the Navy in Israel in June 1967, told the Associated Press (June 5, 1977): “No one would ever have dreamt that an American ship would be there. Even the United States didn't know where its ship was. We were advised by the proper authorities that there was no American ship within 100 miles.”
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara told Congress on July 26, 1967: “It was the conclusion of the investigatory body, headed by an admiral of the Navy in whom we have great confidence, that the attack was not intentional.”
In 1987, McNamara repeated his belief that the attack was a mistake, telling a caller on the “Larry King Show” that he had seen nothing in the 20 years since to change his mind that there had been no “coverup.”
Israel apologized for the tragedy and paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations to the United States and to the families of the victims in amounts established by the U.S. State Department. The matter was officially closed between the two government by an exchange of diplomatic notes on December 17, 1987.
For the record.
"I'm really not SAYING anything. I'm simply trying to understand how the Arabs view us."
Not all that hard to do. Many Arabs like American culture but hate our policies, particularly our support of Israel. Others go much farther. They hate our culture too and want Westerners entirely out of what they call their lands.
"So what's the alternative to the genocide that you seem to think is a reasonable course of action?"
A less drastic solution that gets us what we want. That's what the administration is looking for now.
"My ONLY point in this entire debate is that there is NO clear-cut "good guy" or "bad guy" in the Arab-Israeli conflict."
I missed that on first reading. Sorry.
"Israel has a right to exist--this has already been determined."
Not in the minds of much of the Arab world. I hope you won't try to dispute this.
"But Israel also doesn't mind who it crushes in asserting that right."
Israel does what it feels is necessary to survive. Your judgement about that indicates your bias as mine does mine.
"Finally, I am tired of being told by the Israel "rah-rah" crowd that we, the U.S., has to support them no matter what. Israel is NOT a friend to the U.S. except as the we are useful to them. We have to be pragmatic and understand that."
I think our goverment, as well as the government of Israel, understands that quite well.
"... this socialist pesthole called the state of Israel?"
Hardly a neutral statement. Not even decent.
"I am going in a TOTALLY different direction, here. I am ready to allow Israel and the Palestinians to work this thing out all by their lonesomes, with NO U.S. aid or interference."
You don't mention aid to the Palestinians from other countries. Since your a clever fellow I don't believe you failed to notice.
Would you let your daughter dress that way, and see her off, unaccompanied, into the roughest part of town?
Repeatedly.
We are not Israel, and have no right to dictate Israel's policies toward anyone. So that's my opinion about that.
Regarding the Palestinian issue: Our policy ought to be...that it isn't any of our business.
It isn't our business in East Timor, it isn't our business in Sri Lanka, it isn't our business in Northern Ireland, it isn't our business in Chiapas, Mexico, it isn't our business in the Phillipines. And it most CERTAINLY wasn't any of our business in "the former Yugoslavia."
In short, wherever U.S. interests aren't served in any way, shape or form, we don't need to be involved AT ALL.
Here's where we DO need to be involved: We need to skrag the Taliban, Osama's crew wherever they may be found, and Saddam's Iraq. THEY ARE OUR ENEMIES. Israel has nothing to do with it. If Israel benefits, well, how nice for them.
But already Netanyahu's the designated agitator to try to get the U.S. Congress (notice that's where Bibi went; he knows where AIPAC dollars have done the most good) to decide that it is the PLO that is the focus of world terrorism.
Well, sorry, Bibi, that's YOUR department. You couldn't even get your own people to listen to YOU instead of Clinton's sock-puppet Carville when you were up for reelection. Maybe you'd better stick to your own knitting.
The U.S. needs to focus on OUR interests, PERIOD. ANY and ALL people and organizations that directly threaten us, need to be hounded until they are kaput. But Israel's desires are IRRELEVANT.
I agree, the attack was a response to our general presence -- Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq -- in the Mid-East. But did we deserve to be attacked??
Depends on your definition. Read the article again. See the dead baby in its mother's arms (and don't give me that "eye for an eye" bit. It cuts not much ice in a Christian nation).
As to the balance, I take it your view is that the US should not extend foreign aid of any kind anywhere. Is that correct?
Number one is domination of their own region. For example, Israel was the farthest thing in Saddam's mind when he occupied Kuwait. The ONLY reason he lobbed SCUDs at Israel was to provoke an Israeli response that he could exploit in the greater Arab world.
Saddam's Ba'ath Party is Pan-Arabist. That's NUMERO UNO on their agenda. Israel is way down the list, only as an exploit for cannon fodder.
The Taliban don't care about Israel. They want to rule Afghanistan, free and clear. Same with the radical Islamists that rule Iran.
The U.S. stands in their way, obviously. Look what happened to Saddam's dreams of ruling a Pan-Arabic world when the U.S. got into the game.
You people really DO need to get out more. It would help, for starters, if you'd stop bowing toward the East (and Israel) every time you wake up in the morning. Israel is CHICKEN-FEED in terms of the realpolitik of the Middle East and the Islamic world.
Number one is domination of their own region. For example, Israel was the farthest thing in Saddam's mind when he occupied Kuwait. The ONLY reason he lobbed SCUDs at Israel was to provoke an Israeli response that he could exploit in the greater Arab world.
Saddam's Ba'ath Party is Pan-Arabist. That's NUMERO UNO on their agenda. Israel is way down the list, only as an exploit for cannon fodder.
The Taliban don't care about Israel. They want to rule Afghanistan, free and clear. Same with the radical Islamists that rule Iran.
The U.S. stands in their way, obviously. Look what happened to Saddam's dreams of ruling a Pan-Arabic world when the U.S. got into the game.
You people really DO need to get out more. It would help, for starters, if you'd stop bowing toward the East (and Israel) every time you wake up in the morning. Israel is CHICKEN-FEED in terms of the realpolitik of the Middle East and the Islamic world.
Bullsh*t. THREE ATTACK WAVES? THREE HOURS?
You are so blind no wonder you cannot see. Israel did NOT want the U.S. to see and possibly interfere with what they were doing (mainly shooting Egyptian prisoners in contravention of the Geneva accords).
Israel apologized for the tragedy and paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations..
First of all, a "tragedy" is an act of nature, like a tornado or an earthquake.
A deliberate military assault on a naval vessel is not a tragedy. The attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon were not "tragedies", so let's get that straight.
Secondly, peeling off some chump change out of the Billions Per Year that we send to Israel isn't exactly what I call "reparations."
You call youself christian and say we should not murder but then you go to say we should hunt down killers amd ELIMINATE them. Sound like double speak to me.
Tricking Christians into "Turning the other cheek" has the most successful of the Leftist (Marxist) deceptions. Problem is, you lefties were not able to fool all of us. Soon your hateful world will be gone. A new day is dawning, and you are not part of it.
BTW, my solution to our nation's security problem at home is to deport all who are here on visa's, all who are here illegally, and all naturalized citizens who have shown even the flimsiest support for Satan's Islamic allies. Natural born citizens who support terrorist organizations, directly or indirectly, shall be charged with treason.
My solution abroad is to nuke all terrorist camps, and all governments who support those mangey, terroristic, Islamic dogs.
Have a nice day.
This is pretty much the case if my interaction with Arabs in school and at work is any kind of indication. Arab men in particular have an incredible capacity for "cognitive dissonance" where the West is concerned.
I'll never forget the Jordanian student with whom I attended engineering school. He thought all American women were "whores" (which he defined as "they wear short pants.")
And knowing that he was very grateful that he could persuade one of them to shack up with him so he didn't have to be so lonely while he was so far from home.
They would go to strip clubs, and get falling-down drunk, then rail about how wicked we are to allow strip clubs and public drinking establishments.
They are a very, very strange lot (at least the ones I've had personal experience of).
You are correct in your assumption that some of the nephilim resurfaced after the flood. Goliath and his four brothers are one example. The tribe of Anak another. There are others but they do not come to mind right now.
What is this BS? You sound like Clinton. The meaning of "indiscriminate killing" is quite clear. It's the deliberate targeting of civilians. It's killing them for no reason other than that they're there. What dead baby in its mother's arms? What incident are you referring to? What happened? Did an Israeli soldier just walk up out of the blue and put a bullet in a baby?
When and if the Palestinians stop their agression against Isreal, and the Israelies continue to attack the arabs then I might listen.
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.