NationStates Jolt Archive

In the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the anti-Israeli crowd often cites the fact that more Palestinians have been killed in x amount of time than Israelis. This much is true. What they often fail to relate is the fact that the majority of Palestinians killed are militants/terrorists, and the fact that a large portion of Palestinians killed are actually killed by other Palestinians as a result of the conflict.

The Institute for Counter-Terrorism's records state that 406 out of the 3179 Palestinians killed during the Arab-Israel conflict between 2000 and 2005 were killed by other Palestinians. This article, which I was surprised to see at all in the Western media, highlights one of the main reasons why Palestinians are killed by one another - conflict with terror groups.

A Palestinian couple was murdered by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, the militant wing of Fatah. They were murdered for giving the Israeli military intelligence regarding wanted fugitives and terror cells in Palestine. This article, and the statistics, just goes to show that the conflict is not as black and white as many would like to perceive it. Not only is there an Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but there is a Palestinian-Palestinian conflict.

Sex, lies, videotape and death in the West Bank (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-06-25T041442Z_01_L19105205_RTRUKOT_0_TEXT0.xml&pageNumber=0&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage5)

By Megan Goldin

NABLUS, West Bank (Reuters) - The young woman's brother shoved her out of a car, tied a black blindfold around her face and shot her repeatedly in the head and chest.

Wedad Abu Mustafa, a 26-year-old mother of four, was killed hours after her alleged illicit lover Jefal Abu Srour was dragged by Palestinian gunmen into the center of the Balata refugee camp, thrown to the ground and riddled with more than 40 bullets.

Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, a militant group whose stronghold is in the camp near Nablus where Wedad and Jefal lived, accused the couple of breaking the biggest taboo in their society -- collaborating with the Israeli enemy.

"If it was just a matter of love and romance then we would not have interfered but they were also traitors," said Abu Ahmed, an al-Aqsa member involved in executing the supposed lovers.

Why weren't the Israeli military protecting them? That's stupidity on their part too, if they were really such a valuable source of information.

Why weren't the Israeli military protecting them? That's stupidity on their part too, if they were really such a valuable source of information.


Because the IDF is not actually actively CONTROLLING anything inside the territories. All they do is protect the settlers and man the checkpoints, both on the border between Israel and the PNA and inside the PNA itself.

To actually run routine police operations such as 'protecting' informants is not within IDF operations.

Also, a lot of the people executed by the palestinians for the crimes of 'cooperating with the IDF' or 'selling their homes to Jews' are actually innocent even of that.

Why weren't the Israeli military protecting them? That's stupidity on their part too, if they were really such a valuable source of information.

Actually they may not have even been a source of information at all. If you've ever lived in a poor neighborhood or in the Caribbean, you might be able to relate to the social stigma against informers in Palestine. Like the article stated, its a taboo, and innocent people are routinely killed over false accusations of violating that taboo.

The article stated that we really don't even know if they were informing to the IDF. They were tortured by these Palestinians first, forced to confess, and then executed. In places with strong social stigmas against informing, its guilty until proven innocent, and someone simply accusing you of informing makes you instantly guilty.

Less black and white than who thinks?

Not everyone has a simplistic reductionist view of the situation. I dont see why a less than 15% Palestinian to Palestinian death toll is startling. Whatever did you expect in such a context? That there wouldnt be Palestinians killing each other for various reasons including 'colluding with the enemy'? Are you really that naive?

This much is true. What they often fail to relate is the fact that the majority of Palestinians killed are militants/terrorists, and the fact that a large portion of Palestinians killed are actually killed by other Palestinians as a result of the conflict.

The manner of your wording conflicts with the results here.


The Institute for Counter-Terrorism's records state that 406 out of the 3179 Palestinians killed during the Arab-Israel conflict between 2000 and 2005 were killed by other Palestinians.

I will not defend or decry any actions here, either by Palestine or Israel, but I will point out the slight disparity between your statements and approximately 12-14% indicated here.

I will not defend or decry any actions here, either by Palestine or Israel, but I will point out the slight disparity between your statements and approximately 12-14% indicated here.

A 12% "friendly fire" rate in a conflict that is suppossed to be between two parties is huge. Contrast it to the 22 Israelis killed by the Israeli side out of 1010, about 2%. I think you'll find similiar statistics when evaluating other conflicts as well. The Palestinians kill a dispreportionate number of their own people for a conflict that is claimed to be between two parties, the Palestinians and Israelis.

So.. The situation that's supposed to shock, is something like this, right?

A newly-formed nationality, that has suffered through multiple wars & a generation of occupation, who're struggeling with extreme poverty & forign powers directly & indirectly manipulating & funding extremist political movements, are... TafrigginDa! Not all that peaceful.

Know what? I am shocked.. I really thought Palestinians were all lovable, blind old basket-weaving women. I really did.

The Institute for Counter-Terrorism's records]

Thats the one run by an ex-chief of Mossad (according to their own website )and financed by the Israeli government.


A Palestinian couple was murdered by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades,]

Ideally they'd be tried and imprisoned for treason. However, I fail to see what point you are trying to get across. The French, Russians and others executed those who colloborated with their occupiers out of hand, and for far less reason than actually passing on tactical information.

A 12% "friendly fire" rate in a conflict that is suppossed to be between two parties is huge. Contrast it to the 22 Israelis killed by the Israeli side out of 1010, about 2%. I think you'll find similiar statistics when evaluating other conflicts as well. The Palestinians kill a dispreportionate number of their own people for a conflict that is claimed to be between two parties, the Palestinians and Israelis.
Who said a 12% friendly fire rate? I expect there is very little friendly fire involved. I expect most of the deaths are the result of collateral damage ([Palestinian] non-participants not intentionally aimed at), power struggle/infighting (the intentional assassination/removal of [Palestinain]people for political/ideological/strategic/power reasons), and retribution ([Palestinian] persons who are suspected of being 'enemies').

If you honestly believe what you are saying and are not just being disingenious, then I can only suggest your 'understanding' of the situation is far too simplistic and reductionalist to bear any useful resemblence to the reality.

The IRA, UFF/UVF/LVF et al did/do this all the time. Why is this a surprise to you? Because they're Palestinian?

I don't think anyone here is that naive.

A 12% "friendly fire" rate in a conflict that is suppossed to be between two parties is huge.

There is friendly fire and there is deliberate fire. This couple was an incidence of deliberate killing. Were the other 400+ deaths the same? That, we don't have information on. To assume that this incident is the main indicator of all other deaths is foolish at best.


Contrast it to the 22 Israelis killed by the Israeli side out of 1010, about 2%. I think you'll find similiar statistics when evaluating other conflicts as well. The Palestinians kill a dispreportionate number of their own people for a conflict that is claimed to be between two parties, the Palestinians and Israelis.

Statistics without correlation is worthless. Also, you have to understand the context that it occurs in. Generally, there are no Israelis in the area when Israel performs it's modus operandi, which is generally strikes into the Palestinian areas via remote strikes or demolition teams. The low incidence of friendly fire issues here are more or less understandable.

However, let us look at what the Palestinians use as their weapons. Qassam rockets and suicide bombers. Both cases use at best, home made weaponry with neither the reliability or precision of properly machined factory produced weaponry. Qassam rockets have been noted to actually fall into Palestinian territory, resulting in unintended deaths. Suicide belts have been reported to go off prematurely sometimes, again also noted to occur within the same territories.

What does this mean? Presumably, if Palestinian terror groups were to somehow acquire both the assets and skills of the IDF, it is not unreasonable to postulate that the number of incidental Palestinian deaths caused by friendly fire would be reduced.

Of course, this does nothing to stop executions, but overall, there would be a reduction in incidental deaths.

A 12% "friendly fire" rate in a conflict that is suppossed to be between two parties is huge. Contrast it to the 22 Israelis killed by the Israeli side out of 1010, about 2%. I think you'll find similiar statistics when evaluating other conflicts as well. The Palestinians kill a dispreportionate number of their own people for a conflict that is claimed to be between two parties, the Palestinians and Israelis.
you are failing to account the fact that the violence between israeli and palestinian is polarising both sides. also, you say that the majority of the dead in palestine are militants, not innocent civillians. could you provide numbers to support your arguments please? (i'm not saying this isn't the case, just saying that you have not provided data to support your arguments).

and why were you surprised to see that article in the western media? i would be more surprised if i saw an article in the western media throwing mud at israelis, instead of palestinians.

We don't kill journalists from the New York Times for ratting out the NSA. We don't even put them in jail.

Interesting to note the extreme difference in approach.

We don't kill journalists from the New York Times for ratting out the NSA. We don't even put them in jail.

Interesting to note the extreme difference in approach.

I wonder what usually happened to Soviet spies during the cold war when the US found them out in their territory and vice versa. Some were deported to my knowledge. The others, not so sure.

In this case, we don't really know how far the collaboration actually went or if was just a case of McCarthyism today.

I wonder what usually happened to Soviet spies during the cold war when the US found them out in their territory and vice versa. Some were deported to my knowledge. The others, not so sure.

In this case, we don't really know how far the collaboration actually went or if was just a case of McCarthyism today.

The difference between milk and cheese. The Cold War era was a long time ago.

Wow, Terrorists kill people who they think are collaborating with their enemy. I've seen the light - I never even dreamed these people could do this!

Oh, wait, I'm not that stupid, it's just TS scraping the barrel for his/her daily "Palestinians are teh sux0rz" rant.:rolleyes:

We don't kill journalists from the New York Times for ratting out the NSA. We don't even put them in jail.

Interesting to note the extreme difference in approach.

Not the same thing. Giving tactical information would have led to deaths. Theres no debate or buts about it. And the Palestinians are occupied. Its the same as the French, Russians or Irish did.

Its certainly got more of a leg to stand on than the executions of the Rosenbergs.


Because the IDF is not actually actively CONTROLLING anything inside the territories. All they do is protect the settlers and man the checkpoints, both on the border between Israel and the PNA and inside the PNA itself..

They man the checkpoints, conduct raids, assasinations, aid the confiscation of land the building of "bypass" roads. They are militarily occuping the area. And why the fuck are the settlers there? The bonhomie?

The difference between milk and cheese. The Cold War era was a long time ago.

And the point being? Spies and traitors generally have never been protected by any law and the only reason why countries send them back rather then killing them is either because they don't want to worsen relations or there's something they want in exchange.

Are you telling me that if an American citizen was found sending state secrets to the Kremlin or Beijing today, they would get off with a light slap on the wrist?

Either way, like I said, we don't know the extent if any, of these people's collaboration. Either it was justified or it wasn't. It depends on what they were doing. To accuse one either way without sufficient evidence is nothing more than rashness.

The killing of suspected collaborators takes place under any occupation, and afterwards. There is not one country in Europe which did not see it during the Second World War, and my grandfather was likely involved in some score-settling operations in the Baltic states afterwards. Shit happens.

In this regard, the Palestinians are not doing anything jews didn't do in the ghettos of Nazi-occupied Poland.

the majority of Palestinians killed are militants/terrorists, and the fact that a large portion of Palestinians killed are actually killed by other Palestinians as a result of the conflict.

The Institute for Counter-Terrorism's records state that 406 out of the 3179 Palestinians killed during the Arab-Israel conflict between 2000 and 2005 were killed by other Palestinians.[/URL]

You should watch a show called the Sopranos. When the FBI turn someone into a "stool pigeon" and the "baddies" find out, they end up sleeping with the fishes. So when the Mossad force someone into being a spy the spies life expectancy goes way down.

Also who are these people producing the numbers, well oh my if it isn't a bunch of propagandists. The Institute for Counter-Terrorism a division of Viacom.

What are you some kind of easily startled clown?

What everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that those who are collaborating with Israel are actually the REAL freedom fighters of the Palestinians. They are the ones who are against the MURDERERS that target civilians and murder Jews in the streets. They are the ones who are speaking out against the terrorism orchestrated by the Palestinians in power that are simply perpetuating the conflict. They are not traitors, but rather the true Palestinian patriots; who wish to see a peaceful Palestinian state living side by side with Israel.

What everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that those who are collaborating with Israel are actually the REAL freedom fighters of the Palestinians. They are the ones who are against the MURDERERS that target civilians and murder Jews in the streets. They are the ones who are speaking out against the terrorism orchestrated by the Palestinians in power that are simply perpetuating the conflict. They are not traitors, but rather the true Palestinian patriots; who wish to see a peaceful Palestinian state living side by side with Israel.

Which is what everybody here wants. However, both Israel and Palestine aren't helping themselves much, methinks.

They are not traitors

To be technical, when you betray a particular group, you are a traitor, regardless of whatever reasons you had behind it.


but rather the true Palestinian patriots; who wish to see a peaceful Palestinian state living side by side with Israel.

The label patriot is tricky really. Normally it would be best applied to people who have done something to uphold the ideals of their nation. And even with established nations, that's an easily argued thing. With the stateless Palestinians, how do you argue that they are patriots when they don't even have a unified national ideal?

Also, we don't really know what these people wanted in the first place. It could have been mundane as food on the table and another day alive. Does that make them worse? No. Does it make them patriots? Not really.

So unless we can identify what they really wanted, which is rather impossible, calling them patriots for Palestine or traitors to Palestine is rather baseless.

Certainly, they were traitors to the terror groups, but traitors to Palestine? We don't know that.

The difference between milk and cheese. The Cold War era was a long time ago.
Funny how you are so sensiyive to the difference between now and the cold war era, yet supposedly as oblivious to the difference between the situation with reporters and NSA, and the Palestinian militant groups and their percieved [Palestinian] enemies....:rolleyes:

What everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that those who are collaborating with Israel are actually the REAL freedom fighters of the Palestinians. They are the ones who are against the MURDERERS that target civilians and murder Jews in the streets. They are the ones who are speaking out against the terrorism orchestrated by the Palestinians in power that are simply perpetuating the conflict. They are not traitors, but rather the true Palestinian patriots; who wish to see a peaceful Palestinian state living side by side with Israel.

Yeah because history has always loved narcs. That's like saying the real hero of the bible is Judas because without his narcing JC would never have been tortured to death by the invading forces. Yet somehow noone seems to have much time for Judas and his thirty pieces of gold.

Certainly, they were traitors to the terror groups, but traitors to Palestine? We don't know that.

Right, traitors to the terror groups who are keeping their own people down. For example, the fact that Arafat and his wife kept quite the nice pad in Paris while they kept their people in squalor and conitnued to purchase shiny new missiles.

I think we agree on this one, not all Palestinians are terrorists, but those who are in power are. So, the ones who are helping Israel to stop these terrorists are actually the ones who are truly fighting for Palestinian statehood and peace.

The killing of suspected collaborators takes place under any occupation, and afterwards. There is not one country in Europe which did not see it during the Second World War, and my grandfather was likely involved in some score-settling operations in the Baltic states afterwards. Shit happens.

In this regard, the Palestinians are not doing anything jews didn't do in the ghettos of Nazi-occupied Poland.

The short version: an informant knows that the job is dangerous when he takes it.

Remember it's okay if they do that but god forbid we do wiretaps on suspected terrorists.

Funny how you are so sensiyive to the difference between now and the cold war era, yet supposedly as oblivious to the difference between the situation with reporters and NSA, and the Palestinian militant groups and their percieved [Palestinian] enemies....:rolleyes:

The level of paranoia in the US today is NOWHERE near as virulent as it was in the 1950s - early 1960s.

The short version: an informant knows that the job is dangerous when he takes it.
Yeah, and they shouldn't be surprised if they get caught and killed either.

Yeah, and they shouldn't be surprised if they get caught and killed either.
Of course, that's the same rationalization for:

"well, if a few of them are planting IEDs in the road, the locals shouldn't be surprised if we round up a few people and kill them..."

Of course, that's the same rationalization for:

"well, if a few of them are planting IEDs in the road, the locals shouldn't be surprised if we round up a few people and kill them..."

"well, if a few of them are planting IEDs in the road, the locals shouldn't be surprised if we round up a few people and question them..."

That's more correct in your scenario.

Informers get shot. What's the surprise?:confused:

"well, if a few of them are planting IEDs in the road, the locals shouldn't be surprised if we round up a few people and question them..."

That's more correct in your scenario.

Informers get shot. What's the surprise?:confused:

I'm not surprised if people get shot in either case.

As an example, traditionally, in infantry combat, if you are in pitched battle, and someone tries to individually surrender, the surrender is almost never accepted (it's too dangerous to take a few prisoners in the midst of a melee) and everyone is very excited. And if individuals try to run away, they are usually the first to get shot (because they're easy).

To me, if you're in the equivalent of a war (as the Palestinians are, and insurgents are, and US soldiers are), getting hurt and hurting others is what you're there for.

Collaborators have a long history of being killed in occupations.

The US kills couples it thinks are traitors too, look at julius and ethel rosenberg.

Collaborators have a long history of being killed in occupations.

The US kills couples it thinks are traitors too, look at julius and ethel rosenberg.

The trial for the Rosenbergs seems to have been a tad longer than what the Palestinian collaborators got. Perhaps that's what the OP is upset about.

The trial for the Rosenbergs seems to have been a tad longer than what the Palestinian collaborators got. Perhaps that's what the OP is upset about.


Im sure when the israeli occupation is over and they have a stable country the palestinians will be more inclined to hold lenghty trials.

Im sure when the israeli occupation is over and they have a stable country the palestinians will be more inclined to hold lenghty trials.
ah, when pigs have wings...

Im sure when the israeli occupation is over and they have a stable country the palestinians will be more inclined to hold lenghty trials.


Maybe if Israel had the guarantee of safety and life without terrorism they would be able to pull out of all the terrorities and a Palestinian state could be formed. In wake of the most recent escalation, the attack on an Israeli outpost that took the lives of two Israeli soldiers, Mahmoud Abbas met wiht top terrorist group leaders to negotiate with them the safe treatment of the captive Israeli soldier. If Abbas can sit down in his OFFICE and meet with these people, what is holding him back from bringing them in more often and calling for an end to the violence and terror they orchestrate?? If the Palis stop terror, there will be a state.

Maybe if Israel had the guarantee of safety and life without terrorism...

That's a guarantee no one has anyway.

That's a guarantee no one has anyway.


But you can't argue that Israel sees an exorbitantly larger amount of terrorism than other nations and face this terror from the Palestinians in particular. So, since Israel already is surrounded by enemies on all fronts, why should Israel give away land that will become another terrorist state on their border.

Israels enemies are already camped out in Israels backyard, why should Israel then give control of this bacyard to terrorists that hav eno intention of living peacefully.

What everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that those who are collaborating with Israel are actually the REAL freedom fighters of the Palestinians.


No, they're traitors. Most likely for money and privelges. The only thing a pacifist Palestinian will get from Israel is evicted quicker.


For example, the fact that Arafat and his wife kept quite the nice pad in Paris while they kept their people in squalor and conitnued to purchase shiny new missiles.

Arafat never set foot in it, as far as I'm aware. He was confined to his HQ in Gaza by the Israelis for the last two years of his life and would not go into exile. And where are these "shiny new missiles"? The Palestinians have nothing but home-made rockets.


So, the ones who are helping Israel to stop these terrorists are actually the ones who are truly fighting for Palestinian statehood and peace..

A la Benedict Arnold et al.


The trial for the Rosenbergs seems to have been a tad longer than what the Palestinian collaborators got. Perhaps that's what the OP is upset about...

Rather a seperate situation re conditions for holding and detaining suspects etc. From previous experience we can say that the OP is permanently upset.


Maybe if Israel had the guarantee of safety and life without terrorism they would be able to pull out of all the terrorities and a Palestinian state could be formed....

O yes..its all about safety and a life without Terror. Thats why they're building civillian housing outside their own borders. At the site of a semi-detatched with a nice garden, any tank or "horde of muslims" will stop, think "what have we become?" and turn around, slightly shame-faced that they were talked into such a thing.


But you can't argue that Israel sees an exorbitantly larger amount of terrorism than other nations and face this terror from the Palestinians in particular.....

Because its occupying them......

But you can't argue that Israel sees an exorbitantly larger amount of terrorism than other nations and face this terror from the Palestinians in particular. So, since Israel already is surrounded by enemies on all fronts, why should Israel give away land that will become another terrorist state on their border.

Israels enemies are already camped out in Israels backyard, why should Israel then give control of this bacyard to terrorists that hav eno intention of living peacefully.

Because the fact that they don't have control of their own backyard is driving people to terrorism, if anything?

you are failing to account the fact that the violence between israeli and palestinian is polarising both sides. also, you say that the majority of the dead in palestine are militants, not innocent civillians. could you provide numbers to support your arguments please? (i'm not saying this isn't the case, just saying that you have not provided data to support your arguments).

Simple, all you have to do is look at the statistics. If the IDF was concentrating on civvies, you would have a near equal death rate between males females and children. Instead the death rate is extremely biased towards males 14 and older. As such, the IDF concentrates on militants.

No, they're traitors. Most likely for money and privelges. the only thing a pacifist Palestinian will get from Israel is evicted quicker.

I don't recall any Palestinians being evicted by Israelis. What are you talking about?


Arafat never set foot in it, as far as I'm aware. He was confined to his HQ in Gaza by the Israelis for the last two years of his life and would not go into exile. And where are these "shiny new missiles"? The Palestinians have nothing but home-made rockets.


Regardless if he himself was there, someone was paying for his wife to live the highlife in her penthouse. Arafat was a terrorist extraordinaire and never did an honest days work in his life....but he was apparently starving like his people in "Palestine."

A la Benedict Arnold et al.

So fighting for Palestinian freedom in a way that doesn't advocate the butchering of civilians in suicide bombings but rather facilitates bringing and end to terorism is traitorous?

O yes..its all about safety and a life without Terror. Thats why they're building civillian housing outside their own borders. At the site of a semi-detatched with a nice garden, any tank or "horde of muslims" will stop, think "what have we become?" and turn around, slightly shame-faced that they were talked into such a thing.

Israel took the land from JORDAN...not palestine, after a defensive war in order to secure its borders and security. Israel has been willing to give the land up in order to ensure a just peace but that has not happened yet because the Palestinians have never accepted the prospects of recognizing Israel and accepting peace. Israel is also willing to remove Jews from this land, some of which have been in these territories for a long time, excluding the times when Jews were not allowed to live in the West Bank during the time Jordan controlled it (48-67)...ps Arabs were always allowed to live in Israel and be a part of society.

Settlements are built and maintained because it is a reminder to the Arabs that they can't be hostile forever, and that if they really want peace and their own state, they should put their weapons down and work with Israel to build a peaceful Middle East; that time is not on their side.

Because its occupying them......

Becasuse Israel was the victim of a series of wars of aggression and could no longer accept that way of life, of constantly having to sacrifice the lives of its citizens from aggressors. Stop trying to destroy Israel (as is the HAMAS goal and is part of its charter, so don't try to deny that this is their goal).
and there will be a state and the Palestinians will no longer be living like dogs in the camps their Arab brothers put them in.

Because the fact that they don't have control of their own backyard is driving people to terrorism, if anything?


People there aren't driven to terrorism, they are bred with it engrained in their minds. They are taught at a very young age why they live the way they do; because the evil Jews and the Zionist entity Israel is murdering and butchering their people, and that blowing themselves up in the streets and fighting israel is the only way to get out of this situation. These people were put there by their own Arab brothers who have been using them as a propoganda tool since Israel became a state.

Simple, all you have to do is look at the statistics. If the IDF was concentrating on civvies, you would have a near equal death rate between males females and children. Instead the death rate is extremely biased towards males 14 and older. As such, the IDF concentrates on militants.

Given the fact that being a "militant" may mean breaking a lockdown to get water (because the IDF cut it off) or throwing stones at a Merkava, you'll pardon me saying thats a pile of shite.


I don't recall any Palestinians being evicted by Israelis. What are you talking about?.

I'll say this much - at least you have a sense of humour.


Regardless if he himself was there, someone was paying for his wife to live the highlife in her penthouse. Arafat was a terrorist extraordinaire and never did an honest days work in his life?.

He was a (flawed) but well intentioned leader of his people for decades.

I suppose if he had brought his wife to the Compound in Gaza in his two rooms, and she had been killed when the Israelis bulldozed a few sections of it, he would have been "hiding amongst civillians".


So fighting for Palestinian freedom in a way that doesn't advocate the butchering of civilians in suicide bombings but rather facilitates bringing and end to terorism is traitorous??.

No, but giving information to the IDF most certainly is. There are a number of groups that advocate non-violent methods. None of them are stupid enough to believe telling the occupiers where the resistance is will help anything but the occupiers.


Israel has been willing to give the land up in order to ensure a just peace but that has not happened yet because the Palestinians have never accepted the prospects of recognizing Israel and accepting peace.

The PLO recognised the right of Israel to exist. The result? Increased settlement building.


Arabs were always allowed to live in Israel and be a part of society..

The ones who werent expelled in 1947-48.


Settlements are built and maintained because it is a reminder to the Arabs that they can't be hostile forever, and that if they really want peace and their own state, they should put their weapons down and work with Israel to build a peaceful Middle East; that time is not on their side...

O thats a good one. Fair play to ye. Thats like the way Apartheid was there to show the "blacks" the joys that awaited them when they turned white.....my fucking arse. Its colonisation.


Becasuse Israel was the victim of a series of wars of aggression and could no longer accept that way of life, of constantly having to sacrifice the lives of its citizens from aggressors. ...

By Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc. two of whom they now have treaties with. And you can see how they don't have to "sacrifice the lives of its citizens" anymore by todays news.


These people were put there by their own Arab brothers who have been using them as a propoganda tool since Israel became a state....

You're even funnier that the Sands lad. They were put there by the foundation of the state of Israel. That could be put down to "shit happens" but expecting them to get fucked over twice is a bit much.

And the point being? Spies and traitors generally have never been protected by any law and the only reason why countries send them back rather then killing them is either because they don't want to worsen relations or there's something they want in exchange.

Are you telling me that if an American citizen was found sending state secrets to the Kremlin or Beijing today, they would get off with a light slap on the wrist?

It seems that this thread has been derailed in comparing terrorist groups to soverign states. That is a fallacious analogy.

Terrorist groups, like Fatah in this instance, do not have the military authority or soverignity to take prisoners of war, to try them, or to execute them. This is identical in legality to a drug kingpin taking "snitches" and executing them.

In contrast, if a person gets arrested for spying in another country, they have violated the laws of that soverign state and are subject to the laws of that state.

You're even funnier that the Sands lad. They were put there by the foundation of the state of Israel. That could be put down to "shit happens" but expecting them to get fucked over twice is a bit much.

Actually the majority of refugees were kept in Arab refugee camps. Even today, most Palestinians in refugee camps are kept in those controlled by Arab states.

Palestinian refugees were not allowed to become citizens of Jordan or Egypt, either. Yet, Israel seems to be singled out for not letting the refugees become Israeli citizens.

Nor was the displacement of Palestinians in the War of Independence something that resulted strictly from Israel putting them there. Rather, Israel was attacked. The moral burden of the displacement of Arabs as a result of this war falls on the aggressors, the Arab states who attacked, not the Israelis.

Then again, I can't think that someone who presents a known terrorist as a "well intentioned leader" would hold an accurate view on the subject. That is, by definition, terrorist sympathizing.

The level of paranoia in the US today is NOWHERE near as virulent as it was in the 1950s - early 1960s.
And the situation with reporters and the NSA is nothing whatsoever even remotely like the situation in Palestine. Like I said, funny how you have no trouble spotting difference when it suits you...

It seems that this thread has been derailed in comparing terrorist groups to soverign states. That is a fallacious analogy.

Terrorist groups, like Fatah in this instance, do not have the military authority or soverignity to take prisoners of war, to try them, or to execute them. This is identical in legality to a drug kingpin taking "snitches" and executing them.

In contrast, if a person gets arrested for spying in another country, they have violated the laws of that soverign state and are subject to the laws of that state.


Because palestine is a war-zone and is occupied, these peace-time conventions of stable countries do not apply.

Apples to oranges.

Because palestine is a war-zone and is occupied, these peace-time conventions of stable countries do not apply.

Apples to oranges.

I don't think anyone ever said anything about peace-time conventions. Nor does being an occupied war zone mean that certain things don't apply. Terror groups operating in a war zone does not make them anything less than criminal. Nor is it legally a 'war zone.' Israel is occupying land that does not belong to a soverign state, currently there is no actual declared war. Its about as real a war as the war on drugs, and terror groups fighting against Israel are in the same boat as drug cartels fighting against the Columbian government. Israeli law and that of the PA both apply, and both have declared terrorist acts illegal.

The acts of these terror groups, thus, remain criminal acts rather than legitimate military operations.

I find it funny, TS, how you use every one of your posts/threads to make Palestinians look evil or like animals. Wait, not funny whats the word.....oh yeah, sad.

I find it funny, TS, how you use every one of your posts/threads to make Palestinians look evil or like animals. Wait, not funny whats the word.....oh yeah, sad.

Its actually funny that the anti-Israeli crowd on NSG has avoided the actual article and attempted to create red herrings like this.

I bet if it was an Israeli or American soldier who did this instead of a Palestinian terror group, the response would be quite different. Yet, the blind support and sympathy for Palestinian terror leads people to find ways to justify this, rather than to express the outrage they would if it were another group.

Its actually funny that the anti-Israeli crowd on NSG has avoided the actual article and attempted to create red herrings like this.

I bet if it was an Israeli or American soldier who did this instead of a Palestinian terror group, the response would be quite different. Yet, the blind support and sympathy for Palestinian terror leads people to find ways to justify this, rather than to express the outrage they would if it were another group.

Why would an American soldier shoot an informer?

Its actually funny that the anti-Israeli crowd on NSG has avoided the actual article and attempted to create red herrings like this.

I bet if it was an Israeli or American soldier who did this instead of a Palestinian terror group, the response would be quite different. Yet, the blind support and sympathy for Palestinian terror leads people to find ways to justify this, rather than to express the outrage they would if it were another group.
So you dont deny my point then, thats what I thought. Face it, you hate Palestinians and most likely all Arabs and will do anything to make them look bad to push your zionist agenda. As to your point, I havent looked at the article, and will most likely not as it is probably Israeli propaganda and if I want that I will just watch the US media. But I will say this, Palestinians helping the enemy(the occupation forces) is unacceptable and they should expect whatever happens to them. It would be like Israelis giving troop movements of the IDF to a Palestinian resistance group so they could attack them and expect the Israelis to not be upset and take action against the traitors.

So you dont deny my point then, thats what I thought. Face it, you hate Palestinians and most likely all Arabs and will do anything to make them look bad to push your zionist agenda. As to your point, I havent looked at the article, and will most likely not as it is probably Israeli propaganda and if I want that I will just watch the US media. But I will say this, Palestinians helping the enemy(the occupation forces) is unacceptable and they should expect whatever happens to them. It would be like Israelis giving troop movements of the IDF to a Palestinian resistance group so they could attack them and expect the Israelis to not be upset and take action against the traitors.

Actually, since it was a red herring (which is a logical fallacy), I didn't really respond to it. I don't think I'm obliged to deny it, but I can say "Oh no, I don't hate Palestinians" if that makes you feel better. I don't hate them.

Now, you instantly jumped to respond to this thread without even reading the article. That says something by itself. I'm not sure if you believe in the vast Jewish media conspiracy, since you think that this article on Reuters is most likely Israeli propaganda.

And, since you're justifying a Palestinian terror group, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades killing other Palestinains by saying "they should expect whatever happens to them", without reading the article and assuming that it is Israeli propaganda in the mainstream media, its ironic that you would jump to accuse me of hating a single group or having an 'agenda.' Its the pot calling the kettle black.

And again, you've slipped into anothe fallacy when you compare the IDF to the terror group who assassinated Palestinians. The former is the military of a soverign state, the latter is a terror group whose terror actions have been condemned as illegal by even the Palestinian Authority. Thus, you've slipped into the fallacy of questionable analogy.

Actually, since it was a red herring (which is a logical fallacy), I didn't really respond to it. I don't think I'm obliged to deny it, but I can say "Oh no, I don't hate Palestinians" if that makes you feel better. I don't hate them.

Now, you instantly jumped to respond to this thread without even reading the article. That says something by itself. I'm not sure if you believe in the vast Jewish media conspiracy, since you think that this article on Reuters is most likely Israeli propaganda.

And, since you're justifying a Palestinian terror group, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades killing other Palestinains by saying "they should expect whatever happens to them", without reading the article and assuming that it is Israeli propaganda in the mainstream media, its ironic that you would jump to accuse me of hating a single group or having an 'agenda.' Its the pot calling the kettle black.

And again, you've slipped into anothe fallacy when you compare the IDF to the terror group who assassinated Palestinians. The former is the military of a soverign state, the latter is a terror group whose terror actions have been condemned as illegal by even the Palestinian Authority. Thus, you've slipped into the fallacy of questionable analogy.
You said a lot in this post and yet failed to respond to my point. Which is that you make it seem like the Palestinians are evil or murders for doing what they did, but if an Israeli group or the IDF did it you would call them heros or defenders of freedom or something. The bottomline is that if you give aid or intelligence to the enemy that kills your people you should expect to be punished. It is treason and in the US it is punishable by death. it wasnt murder, it was justice.

You said a lot in this post and yet failed to respond to my point. Which is that you make it seem like the Palestinians are evil or murders for doing what they did, but if an Israeli group or the IDF did it you would call them heros or defenders of freedom or something. The bottomline is that if you give aid or intelligence to the enemy that kills your people you should expect to be punished. It is treason and in the US it is punishable by death. it wasnt murder, it was justice.

They are murderers for what they did. According to both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority. If there was any treason against a Palestinian body here, it was treason against the Palestinian Authority. Yet, you seem to be supporting the radical terror group over the legitimate representatives of the Palestinians.

And, in the US, like in Israel, you get a trial before you get sentenced. There was no trial for this young Palestinian couple; they were shot dead in the street fourty times. But, to you, this is "wasn't murder, it was justice."

They are murderers for what they did. According to both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority. If there was any treason against a Palestinian body here, it was treason against the Palestinian Authority. Yet, you seem to be supporting the radical terror group over the legitimate representatives of the Palestinians.

And, in the US, like in Israel, you get a trial before you get sentenced. There was no trial for this young Palestinian couple; they were shot dead in the street fourty times. But, to you, this is "wasn't murder, it was justice."
So an Israeli who gives aid or support to say Hamas who then uses such support to kill Israelis should not be punished and you would expect their fellow Israelis to do nothing about it?

So an Israeli who gives aid or support to say Hamas who then uses such support to kill Israelis should not be punished and you would expect their fellow Israelis to do nothing about it?

If an Israeli gave aid to a terrorist group, I wouldn't support their brutal murder in the street. Thats barbaric and terrorist. Thats the type of thing you're supporting here, not me.

I would support that they be tried and charged for the appropriate crime - aiding a terrorist group. We support things like democracy and fair trials, not the gangland style murder that you called "justice."

If an Israeli gave aid to a terrorist group, I wouldn't support their brutal murder in the street. Thats barbaric and terrorist. Thats the type of thing you're supporting here, not me.

I would support that they be tried and charged for the appropriate crime - aiding a terrorist group. We support things like democracy and fair trials, not the gangland style murder that you called "justice."
Just because a courtroom is not involved doesnt make it less than justice

What about when the state sponsors terrorism

http://www.scottishloyalists.com/paramilitaries/stone.htm

Uniforms don't impress me much.

So an Israeli who gives aid or support to say Hamas who then uses such support to kill Israelis should not be punished and you would expect their fellow Israelis to do nothing about it?

It's only treason if it's bad for your side.

If an Israeli gave aid to a terrorist group, I wouldn't support their brutal murder in the street. Thats barbaric and terrorist. Thats the type of thing you're supporting here, not me.

I would support that they be tried and charged for the appropriate crime - aiding a terrorist group. We support things like democracy and fair trials, not the gangland style murder that you called "justice."

So when a bomb goes off under a car or a missile strike hits a few "miliants" in an apartment block, the Judge, Jury and defence lawyer were in the Chopper? Fierce big helicopter that. Where does the stenographer sit?


Palestinian refugees were not allowed to become citizens of Jordan or Egypt, either. Yet, Israel seems to be singled out for not letting the refugees become Israeli citizens. ."

Efforts are always made to repatriate refugees to the country from where they came. This has happened in Kosovo, Rwanda and is happening now in Pakistan. To do otherwise is to reward ethnic cleansing. However, had Israel not held on to their territories illegally occupied since 1967, and begun building colonial settlements in them, it might well have faded by now. However expelling a people twice in the same century is bit much.


Nor does being an occupied war zone mean that certain things don't apply. Terror groups operating in a war zone does not make them anything less than criminal.."

Perhaps they should police themselves and work with their occupiers...like the Vichy regime.....

I bet if it was an Israeli or American soldier who did this instead of a Palestinian terror group, the response would be quite different..."

They have a secure state, funds, courts, prisons and all the benefits of modern western nations. They have no need to do that kind of thing. Nor are they occupied by a militarily superior power.

And the last time Israel wanted somebody out of the custody of the PA, they sent in a tank and helicopter convoy to get him, didnt they? Even the few institutions they have arent safe from the IDF.


. The former is the military of a soverign state..."

A state which employs same in a long running illegal action. A state which would be almost a pariah were it not for the veto of the US.

So when a bomb goes off under a car or a missile strike hits a few "miliants" in an apartment block, the Judge, Jury and defence lawyer were in the Chopper? Fierce big helicopter that. Where does the stenographer sit?

Trials can be held in absentia. In fact, in Israel they are callled "snap trials." But, I guess you'd leave that part out, since it alters the context of your non-point to absurdity.

Efforts are always made to repatriate refugees to the country from where they came. This has happened in Kosovo, Rwanda and is happening now in Pakistan. To do otherwise is to reward ethnic cleansing. However, had Israel not held on to their territories illegally occupied since 1967, and begun building colonial settlements in them, it might well have faded by now. However expelling a people twice in the same century is bit much.

This doesn't address the fact that the majority of Palestinian refugees were created by the invasion from Egypt and Jordan. Nor the fact that Jordan and Egypt still will not allow refugees to become citizens, even after displacing them, or the fact that the majority of Palestinian refugees that exist in camps today are kept in Arab camps. The least these Arab nations could do is let them go. But ignore those facts, and blame Israel.

They have a secure state, funds, courts, prisons and all the benefits of modern western nations. They have no need to do that kind of thing. Nor are they occupied by a militarily superior power.

And the last time Israel wanted somebody out of the custody of the PA, they sent in a tank and helicopter convoy to get him, didnt they? Even the few institutions they have arent safe from the IDF.

Having a state, funds, etc. does not exclude them from being morally accountable. You're applying a fallacious double standard in your judgment of Israel vs the Palestinians. That is exactly the type of thing that exposes your anti-Semitic bias. And yes, it is anti-Semitic. I think we've covered your rejection of Jewish authors based on their Jewishness, such as Mitchell Bard, Dershowitz, etc.

And, once again, make sure not to post the context of Israel getting people out of PA custody. A terror group had just come into power and intended to free the prisoners, the PA was requested to release them but wouldnt, etc. Not to mention that the Israeli tank was only used to tear down the wall, and virtually no one was injured.

A state which employs same in a long running illegal action. A state which would be almost a pariah were it not for the veto of the US.

This is a nice ad hominem. As much as you hate Israel, your response doesn't address the point at all. I'll go ahead and restate it for you - Israel is a soverign state, it has a military that is recognized under international law. Its military actions, thus, are covered by the rules of war. The terror groups are not - they are considered criminal, under the laws of Israel, the PA, and international law. They are identical to the gangs run by drug kingpins.

Now, its ironic that in the defense of these illegal terror groups you would accuse Israel of long running illegal action. The double standard is becoming clear again.

Trials can be held in absentia. In fact, in Israel they are callled "snap trials." But, I guess you'd leave that part out, since it alters the context of your non-point to absurdity..

And I suppose the address to which they can lodge an appeal is written on the nose cone of the missile.




This doesn't address the fact that the majority of Palestinian refugees were created by the invasion from Egypt and Jordan. Nor the fact that Jordan and Egypt still will not allow refugees to become citizens, even after displacing them, or the fact that the majority of Palestinian refugees that exist in camps today are kept in Arab camps. The least these Arab nations could do is let them go. But ignore those facts, and blame Israel...

As was pointed out before, they were directly created by Israeli forces. You may put some of the blame upon the action of the Arab states but to deny all responsibility is a non-starter.




Having a state, funds, etc. does not exclude them from being morally accountable. You're applying a fallacious double standard in your judgment of Israel vs the Palestinians. ...

No, its legitimate resistance to an illegitamate occupation. Such actions should never be taken lightly or if avoidable.


That is exactly the type of thing that exposes your anti-Semitic bias. And yes, it is anti-Semitic. I think we've covered your rejection of Jewish authors based on their Jewishness, such as Mitchell Bard, Dershowitz, etc....

I've never rejected an author based on their religon or ethnicity. You were unable to produce where I had done so when I asked. I also caught you falsely accusing somebody else of the same thing not a day or so ago. You are, as I said then, a dishonest and lying little man.



And, once again, make sure not to post the context of Israel getting people out of PA custody. A terror group had just come into power and intended to free the prisoners, the PA was requested to release them but wouldnt, etc. Not to mention that the Israeli tank was only used to tear down the wall, and virtually no one was injured.....

It was more to do with the Israeli elections. Two were killed and one died later. Over 20 were injured.


This is a nice ad hominem. As much as you hate Israel, your response doesn't address the point at all. I'll go ahead and restate it for you - Israel is a soverign state, it has a military that is recognized under international law. Its military actions, thus, are covered by the rules of war. The terror groups are not - they are considered criminal, under the laws of Israel, the PA, and international law. They are identical to the gangs run by drug kingpins......

Its occupation is also illegal under international law, but its ally has subverted the mechanisms to deal with this legally and in a non-violent way by its abuse of the veto to protect Israel from sanctions. This therefore legitmises armed and violent resistance.


Now, its ironic that in the defense of these illegal terror groups you would accuse Israel of long running illegal action. The double standard is becoming clear again.

I don't accuse, I state the fact. The occupation is illegal.