The Beautiful People Who Support Terrorists

Israel & Palestine Forum

The Beautiful People Who Support Terrorists
By Steven Plaut
December 30, 2003


That the media gets its facts wrong when reporting the Middle East is hardly news, but the ways in which the media reports its mistaken statistics tells us a lot about their bias. For example, you will hear the media say that 904 Israelis have died since the beginning of the (misnamed) "al-Aqsa Intifada," but that count is intentionally deflated. The media begins the count in September 2000, seven years after the Oslo carnage actually began. This is yet another effort by the media to lead people to believe the entire bloodbath was caused by Ariel Sharon going for a stroll on the Temple Mount in September 2000, a stroll almost as provocative as would have been a similar stroll in the Vatican by an Italian politician.

The victims of the Oslo Peace Bloodbath should be counted beginning at the time of the handshake on the White House lawn. That event marked the signing of the Oslo Agreement by Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres with Yasser Arafat in 1993. The actual number of Israeli dead is 1,261 as of today, not the 904 (and counting) that is being reported. A much better accounting can be found here.

I have long suspected that the deflation of the number of Israeli victims of Palestinian terror is done to obscure the fact that the carnage was caused by the imposition of the Oslo "peace process" on Israel by its domestic Left and by hostile forces overseas.

Those hostile forces were at work again this past weekend. The college students (and professors, and other domestic liberals), the "beautiful people" who support terror against Jews, went on the warpath against Israel's "security fence." A group of members from the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) joined some Palestinians and Israeli far-leftists in physically attacking a portion of the fence in the West Bank.

One wag suggested that ISM really stands for "I Support Murderers." But the Left responds, reflexively, by relying on their eyesight, rather than their insight. They cannot understand the charges leveled against their fellow leftists. They say, "But they are the beautiful people: They love peace. They pet cats. They sing Joan Baez songs and believe in the brotherhood of 'humankind.' How dare you slander them?"

All this ignores that fact that ISM members were on the West Bank to show their solidarity with mass murderers and suicide bombers. They understand that the security fence Israel is building is designed to make it harder for the terrorists the ISM supports to enter Israel and murder Jewish children and other civilians. And that is precisely why they believe it must come down.

The ISM marched on Saturday, gathering by a part of the Security Fence, a segment that is still chain link and has not yet been turned into towering concrete walls. There they attacked the fence, sabotaged it, vandalized it and ripped pieces from it (possibly including its electronic sensors). You see, they think the terrorists should be allowed to enter Israel to protest Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands, by which they also mean Tel Aviv and Haifa. They oppose anything Israel tries to do to protect its citizens, indeed, anything short of total capitulation to the progressive demands of the Palestinian fascists.

So it is predictable that their group got violent and tried to cut through the Israeli security barrier outside the Palestinian village of Masha near Qalqilya. And yes of course they admit that they were trying to damage the barrier of razor-wire fences, concrete walls and trenches that Israel says it needs to stop infiltrations by Palestinian suicide bombers.

One of the protesters described the mob's actions thus: "We began cutting the fence and shaking it."

"The Israeli army was waiting for us and shot live bullets directly at us," Liad Kantorowicz, one of the Israeli protesters, who described themselves as anarchists, told Reuters. They used wire cutters to destroy this segment of the fence.

The crowd included the usual international provocateurs from the ISM, the International Solidarity Movement, the group that actively opposes Israeli anti-terrorism initiatives. Rachel Corrie, the young supporter of terror from Washington State who played a fatal game of chicken with an Israeli bulldozer (which could not see her), had been one of these.

In short, these are people who believe that 1,300 murdered Israelis are not enough. They will not tolerate any attempt by Israel to defend its children. And that is why they violently attacked the security fence Saturday.

Yet the international Left cries in horror, "How dare those soldiers shoot one of these pro-terror vandals in his leg? So what if he was wearing a mask while valdalizing the fence? And how dare they injure one of the ISM provocateurs from overseas showing her support for terrorism? So what if she was using wire cutters at the time on the fence? So what if the crowd would have been mowed down with gunfire had they been trying to use wirecutters on, say, the fence of any U.S. military facility on earth? So what if the ISM people injured had signed a contract promising not even to enter the West Bank if allowed to disembark in Israel? So what if Israel's Police Minister described the 'protesters' as 'collaborators with terrorism,' and so what if parliament member Yuri Stern described them as 'barbaric criminals'?"

No, the international Left now demands an investigation -- of the Israelis! The Left wants to arrest all those who cheered the troops who fired at these "demonstrators," who suggested that the troops be awarded medals, who suggested an official commission of investigation be set up to see why only one hooligan was shot and charge them with incitement. And maybe libel.

But it is only the law-abiding who must play by the rules in the Left's universe. It is only the orderly, staving off attacks on innocent women and children -- on Western civilization itself -- who must be investigated, interrogated, harassed and forced to recant their ways. After all, if leftists had to obey laws, then how would they ever take power? Instead, they take it one chain-link at a time.

Ah the Joys of Game playing
Want to win an arguement?
Simply redefine the parameters of the arguement to suit yourself
Why establish the desireablee time as since the oslo accords|?
Not because thats when people startred dying of course. No the reason for 1993. is to tie the deaths into the oslo peace accord.
and why coincetrate on the lefts civil disobediance? if one is seriously interested in the rule of law one would point out Isrtaels illegal occupation of the West Bank to begin with
No that would be too even handed, too honesst!

Everything bad that happens in Palestine is Israel's fault. Everything! THe land was palestinians to begin with and then since the Jews recieved so much hatred from EVERYBODY from Hitler to Christians, they made their own land. NOw i think more ppl hate jews since they are the #1 threat to world peace. WIthout the USA help they would be dead! The mideast and north africa is a all muslim country, with Israel being the only one who is not muslim. But it doesnt matter if their muslim or not, what it matters is they way they treat palestinians like ****. Well, I say DOWN WITH ISRAEL, UP WITH PALESTINIANS, UP WITH JEWS.
P.S. ISRAEL, YOU WOULDN'T EXIST IF IT WERENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!

well theres 50 U.S states how many of those aere you plamnning to give away Merkava. The issue is who were the people actually living there when Britain the the U.n decided to give it awqaay without actually consulting them. and the U.S. was backing the Israelis in 1973. it was U.S. replacement s that enabled the Israelis to win in 1973.

ISRAEL CAN'T DO **** WITHOUT THE HELP OF USA. IT WOULD NO EXIST ONCE THE USA STOPS GIVING (NOT LENDING) BILLIONS OF YOUR TAXPAYERS MONEY TO ISRAEL. ONCE THE SUPPORT IS GONE, OH MAN, THE MUSLIMS WORLDWIDE WOULD KILL THAT SON OF A DOG COUNTRY. AND YES, 'EVERY NATION HAS ITS DOWN FALL' (QUR'AN)

This is a touchy subject. There are clearly wrongs on both sides of this issue. The forming of the state of Israel was done in 1948 by the UN we all know this. Since that time it would appear that Arabs would not rest until their destruction.

Arab countries chose to side with the Soviet Union & Israel chose the west. Initially the Soviets were allies of Israel until Israel chose to go with the west instead.

Israel acquired most of their military weapons initially from France. For their first 17 yrs in existance they receive virtually no support from the US. The Israeli/US relations chilled initially because the US pressured France, England & Israel to withdraw from the Suez Canal after they won the 1956 war with Egypt.

Israel did acquire some defensive Hawk anti-aircraft missles from the US in 1964, but that was it. The US's official position during the war of 1967 was that the US was neutral and offered no help what so ever during that war. Although US/Israel relations began to grow but only after Israel gave the US a MiG-21 Soviet Jet it acquired. This was the first time the US ever got any kind of look at the Soviet fighter craft and was extremely pleased, however Israel beat Egypt, Jordan, Syria, & Iraq in 6 days with French military equipment, a war that Israel initially called for peace and Arabs rejected because of the incredible overwhelming odds Arabs had which was rivaled only by their confidence. It was after this war the the US/Israeli relations strengthened and support from the US was given.

So to blame the US for Israel's continued success isn't entirely accurate. The Arab world now gripes about the lands lost in that 1967 war, a war in which they sought to annihilate Israel off the face of the earth. They lost the war, and now want the losses they suffered back. I find that amazing because every war with the exception of the Lebonnon invasion in 1981 was initiated by the Arab countries, and if they were successful, they would not even want to hear of giving up their gains acquired.

Arabs need someone to blame for their constant humiliations and they US is an easy target because we support Israel, but that support came mostly during the 70's and continues today. Arabs chose the USSR and it was the wrong choice obviously.

The conditions in Palestine are a direct result of Arab's refusal to compromise. Is Israel oppressing Palestinians today? Sure they are, but certainly Israel also have reason to feel animosity toward them as they do toward Israel. In the 21st century, it's hard to make a case for unjust treatment when you constantly bomb resturants, buses, malls, and nightclubs, none of which are military targets. It's the wrong approach and there needs to be a leader over there with a realistic vision for their people. Their gripes are legit, but the methods are not and until it changes, their condition will remain the same.

Look at that! An articulate, educated response!

What has the world come to?!

The actual number of Israeli dead is 1,261 as of today, not the 904 (and counting) that is being reported.
--No matter what year you start from, if you compare the number of Palestinians dead to Israelis is at the very least (often it is more) twice as much.
You also speak of restraint by the guards of the wall, when in fact Israeli troops don't seem to have any. Take for example many of their attacks on Palestinian Refugee camps-civilian refugee camps-these are full on seiges in which Palestinian women and children are killed. If Israel is so righteous, its army would not fight fire with volcanic eruptions...

Yeah, I was right. People move for different reasons, in this Case, the Jews were forced out of their land by the Romans.
--The Diaspora occurred a long time ago, before that there were Jews on the land, but they weren't alone, they co-existed with the ancestors of the Palestinians, since then the Palestinians have remained-Palestinians have been there since the time of Jews and never left while the Jews were gone, now Zionists claim the Palestinians have no right to this land because they used to be there?

Also, the wars started by the Arab countries were a retaliation to actions taken by the UN against a fellow Arab land which they had rejected. You think it is greedy for Arabs to want their land back? Yes there are a lot of Arab countries, but you can say the same thing for white countries (Europe?) and Black countries (Africa?), etc... Each country has its own identity and heritage, you cannot simply group an entire people together under such a generalized label. As soon as the UN gives Israel half of Europe, the US, Africa, and Asia, arab nations will have nothing to complain about. Also, no-one seems to take into account that Israel was created violently, through massacres, unlawful removal of people from their homes, a complete disregard for civilian life, in fact, they went out of their way to kill civilians-actions which were commended by the Zionist leaders-Ethnic Cleansing anyone? It's like the holocaust that nobody paid attention to. Israelis say the Palestinians wish to toss them into the sea... funny, there are photographs of Palestinian townspeople being pushed into the sea in wooden boats by Israeli troops in 1948.
The wall Israel is in the process of erecting is being rejected because it serves as a symbol of oppression to many-think, the Berlin Wall. It is a physical separation between Israelis and Palestinians, condescending and a slap in the face.

PS: please, those of you replying to solid arguments with childish responses, try to change your methods, it only takes away from your crediblity.

Are you reffering to the the Canaanites?? They disappeared from the face of the earth three millennia ago! And so what if The Jews got forced out of their land 'a long time ago'. That's all subjective.
--I'm referring to the philistines, who were in fact ancestors of the palestinians. Also, the point is not that the Jews were forced from the land a long time ago, the point is that they are now returning to a land that has been inhabited by another people since the time they lived there and have not left since, and to come back and take that land from them is unfair, and to claim that they have no right to that land and no right to fight for it is even more unfair.

Retaliation for the UN voting on partitioning a Jewish state in British controlled Palestine?!
A) Yes, retaliation for an outside force voting to partition a land they have no rights to. The UN can't just partition a country like that, who gave them that power? The Palestinians had no say in the matter, nor did any arab country.
B) Want a picture? here's one: http://www.palestineremembered.com/...d/Story417.html
Scroll down to see it.
C) A country cannot protect itself with a wall, all walls fall, it's an impermanent solution that can only create more problems, thereby becoming anti-productive.

The Philistines were an Aegean, non-semitic people who have no connection at all with the Palestinians.

The Philistines migrated to that area before the Israelites did and were in fact ancestors of the Palestinians (as were the Canaanites, who were there long before the Israelites)-these are historical facts accepted world-wide, and to say that they are untrue would simply be a lie.

MYTH

“The Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites and were in Palestine long before the Jews.”

FACT
Palestinian claims to be related to the Canaanites are a recent phenomenon and contrary to historical evidence. The Canaanites disappeared from the face of the earth three millennia ago, and no one knows if any of their descendants survived or, if they did, who they would be.

Sherif Hussein, the guardian of the Islamic Holy Places in Arabia, said the Palestinians' ancestors had only been in the area for 1,000 years.9 Even the Palestinians themselves have acknowledged their association with the region came long after the Jews. In testimony before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, for example, they claimed a connection to Palestine of more than 1,000 years, dating back no further than the conquest of Muhammad's followers in the 7th century.10 And that claim is also dubious. Over the last 2,000 years, there have been massive invasions that killed off most of the local people (e.g., the Crusades), migrations, the plague, and other manmade or natural disasters. The entire local population was replaced many times over. During the British mandate alone, more than 100,000 Arabs emigrated from neighboring countries and are today considered Palestinians.

By contrast, no serious historian questions the more than 3,000-year-old Jewish connection to the Land of Israel, or the modern Jewish people's relation to the ancient Hebrews.

“...[the Palestinian Arabs'] basic sense of corporate historic identity was, at different levels, Muslim or Arab or - for some - Syrian; it is significant that even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine..”10a

I am an anti-zionist (as you might have guessed from my nickname!) However, I must confess that merkava is right on this one. There is absolutely no connection between the Palestinians and the Philistines. After the Romans crushed the Jews 2000 years ago, they renamed it Palestine to insult the Jews, as it reminded them of their bitter enemy the Philistines.

Antizionist2004, im glad to see that your personal beliefs don't get in the way of your ability to understand facts.

lol, remember merkava i do know - i am a jew after all