PDA

View Full Version : Possible suspect for Tuesday's events - ISRAEL?


The Guvnor
14th Sep 2001, 18:58
Tuesday's events have left much of the world's intelligence services in confusion. Who was behind these outrages? Osma bin Laden is the most likely suspect - but these events demonstrated a sophistication he has never shown before.

Could this be a 'false flag' operation by another country - attempting to put the blame on bin Laden or other Muslim extremists for their own benefit?

If so, there's only one nation that would wish to do that - and has demonstrated many times previously the capability of doing it; as well has having the motivation to do so.

That country is the State of Israel.

Increasingly becoming isolated because of its draconian response to the Palestinians who have somewhat understandably been rather upset by Israel's refusal to abide by the terms of the various peace settlements, America had been threatening to cut off financial and military support if they didn't toe the line.

This would not be the first time that the Israelis have deliberately attacked and killed Americans. On the 8th June 1967, a US Elint ship, the USS Liberty was attacked and badly damaged by Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats with the loss of 34 lives and 171 woulded. This ship was US flagged and known to the Israeli Navy as being in their waters - yet it was rocketed, napalmed and machinegunned by them - even though it was 23 miles off the Sinai coast in international waters. Subsequently, Israel claimed that it was a case of "mistaken identity" and very curiously there was no Senate Inquiry into the event (unlike with the Pueblo and the recent capture of the US Orion). In fact, aircraft were launched by the USS Saratoga in response to the Liberty's distress calls - yet were inexplicably recalled.

Western Intelligence agencies have long suspected Israeli involvement in the current spate of Palestinian attacks and there appears little doubt that the Israeli military response to stone throwing youths with tanks, helicopter gunships and wholesale clearances of neighborhoods is excessive to say the least - and some say designed specifically to provoke ever more extreme responses from the Palestinians.

It is also telling that the television coverage of Palestinians apparently celebrating Tuesday's events were broadcast so quickly on the world's media. This seemed specifically designed to predjudice the world - and especially the Americans - against both the Palestinians and Islamic groups in general; and at the same time reinforce the perception that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists were to blame.

Why would Israel do this? First, and most importantly, it would prompt the Americans to allow a 'gloves off' approach with the Palestinians. Secondly, it would ensure the financial and military security of Israel; and thirdly, it would put paid to the recent friendly overtures being made by the US government to various Middle Eastern countries - being brokered in large part by King Abdullah of Jordan, who was due to travel to the US this week to meet with President Bush.

A good example of an Israeli 'false flag' operation was the Hindawi affair in 1986.

Two years after Yvonne Fletcher's murder outside the Libyan Embassy in London, and 18 months before Pan Am 103 exploded en-route for New York, a young Irish woman was arrested while trying to smuggle a bomb on board an Israeli El Al airliner at London Airport Heathrow. British anti-terrorist authorities managed to work out that the visibly distressed young woman knew nothing about the bomb, and the hunt was on. Predictably perhaps, a Syrian diplomat was soon in the frame, and subsequently sentenced to 45 years imprisonment for terrorism. Things were not as they seemed however, and the following text is an extract from the book Profits of War (Allen & Unwin 1992), written by former Israeli Intelligence deputy chief Ari Ben-Menashe.

In 1986 Radi was involved in another slush-fund black operation - the well documented attempt to blow up an El Al plane. Or at least what was publicly perceived to be an attempt. In fact, it was a cold, calculated plan conceived by Rafi Eitan [the chief of Israeli Intelligence] to discredit the Syrians.

At a secret meeting in Paris, Eitan told Radi that he wanted to implicate the Syrian Embassy in London in terrorism and have all the Syrian diplomats thrown out of England [which had been exactly what happened to the Libyans after Yvonne Fletcher's murder outside their London Embassy in 1984]. Radi had a 35-year-old cousin, Nezar Hindawi, living in London, who had two things going for him - he was friendly with the Syrian Air Force intelligence attache in London, and he had a problem with an Irish girlfriend who told him she was pregnant.

Radi went to his cousin and offered him $50,000. At the same time he told Hindawi he wanted him to do some work on behalf of Palestine that would also rid him of his troublesome girlfriend. "This money I am offering to you," Radi told Hindawi, "is from our Syrian brothers on behalf of the Palestinians. We want to blow up a Zionist plane. All you have to do is make sure the girl gets onto an El Al plane with explosives in her bag". Radi arranged for his cousin to meet the Syrian intelligence officer, and Hindawi later came away with the clear impression that what he was doing was for the Arab cause.

In accordance with his briefing, Hindawi told his 32-year-old girlfriend, Anne-Marie Murphy, a chambermaid at the Hilton Hotel on Park Lane, that he loved her and wanted to marry her. He was eager to introduce her, his future bride, to his old Palestinian parents who lived in an Arab village in Israel. He told her to go and visit them and receive their blessing. Then, when she arrived back in England, they would get married. Overjoyed, she agreed to go, not realising the address he gave her in Israel was bogus.

As far as Hindawi knew, the woman was going to be sacrificed. All he had to do was tell her that he wanted her to take a bag of gifts to his parents. But because he didn't want to risk her being stopped for having too much carry-on luggage, he would arrange for a 'friend' who worked at the airport to pass her the bag when she entered the El Al departure lounge. She would walk through the regular Heathrow security checks and then be given the package containing the bomb. Hindawi had been told that a Palestinian cleaner would pass the deadly package to Anne-Marie. In mid-April 1986, he kissed her goodbye and watched her walk through passport control to what he expected would be her death, along with that of all the other 400-plus passengers on board the El Al jumbo.

In the El Al departure lounge an Israeli security man dressed in casual clothes - the 'Palestinian Cleaner' - passed the girl the parcel. She took it. But within seconds she was asked to submit to a search. The security people, who were in on Rafi Eitan's plan, could not afford any accidents. When the bag was opened, plastic explosives were found in a false bottom.

Anne-Marie was rushed off to be interrogated by British security. Sobbing, she told the story of the rat of a boyfriend. Police arrested Hindawi at the London Visitors Hotel, between Notting Hill and Earl's Court, after his brother convinced him to give himself up. He spilled the beans and told them that a Syrian intelligence officer had asked him to carry out the task. But Radi was not implicated. He was under MI5 protection. As a result, Margaret Thatcher closed down the Syrian Embassy in London. Rafi Eitan had had his way; Hindawi was jailed for 45 years, and Anne-Marie went home to Ireland where she gave birth to a daughter. These were the kinds of black operations our [Israeli] slush fund was financing.

Ben-Menashe's revelations in Profits of War came as no great surprise to the British Security Service, which had long suspected Israeli control of the "attempted" El Al bombing, so why did he go to such lengths to detail each and every step of the false flag operation? Perhaps to reinforce the public belief that "Arab Terrorists" can and do blow up passenger aircraft. His use of emotive language indicates this is the most likely case, by including passages like "As far as Hindawi knew, the girl was to be sacrificed", and "...he watched her walk through passport control to what he expected would be her death, along with that of all the other 400-plus passengers on board the El Al jumbo." In other words, those "Dirty Ayrabs" will kill anyone...

Not so. Careful analysis of the operation shows the Israelis deliberately picked a religious man caught in an illegitimate pregnancy trap, who was known to be desperate. At no time was Hindawi asked to source or purchase explosives, make bombs, or plant them on El Al jumbos. Without exception, the Israelis took care of all technical matters personally. There is also the matter of the target in question, the El Al jumbo. Like it or not, most Arabs see Israel (and thus El Al jumbos) as legitimate targets, which cannot be conveniently and emotionally extended to include American, British and other aircraft.

If there is a lesson for us after Tuesday's terrible events, it is that the Israelis will go to any lengths to achieve their goals - no matter who, or how many, people are killed or injured in the process. The welfare of the State of Israel is at all times paramount over mere lives.

Remember where Ben-Menashe wrote "But within seconds she [Anne-Marie] was asked to submit to a search. The security people, who were in or Rafi Eitan's plan, could not afford any accidents."? The Israelis had good cause to be worried about what Be-Menashe called "accidents". There was a need to convince the British Security Service and forensic experts that this was a serious bombing attempt using a very serious weapon. Accordingly, the bag Anne-Marie was handed contained not only a large amount of Semtex plastic explosive, but also a very live detonator and a timer.

The real lesson from this true story, is that a bunch of fanatical Israeli intelligence operatives deliberately introduced a large block of primed high-explosive into an El Al departure lounge containing 400-plus passengers, most of them Israeli citizens. One tiny mistake and the 400-plus passengers
would have been killed or horribly maimed. Though the compliant mainstream media would have automatically blamed "Arab Terrorists" for any such "accident", the reality is that the 400-plus Israeli passengers in the departure lounge, would have been killed or maimed by members of their own intelligence service.

Did they do the same thing on Tuesday? Let me put it this way: I wouldn't bet a penny against it.

[ 14 September 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]

Evo7
14th Sep 2001, 19:06
Nurse! He's escaped again.....

:rolleyes:

VFE
14th Sep 2001, 19:40
Will you give it a rest Guv?

ExSimGuy
14th Sep 2001, 20:53
Guv,

I must admit that the same thought had passed through my mind on Tuesday. But I dismissed it as even a very slight chance of it going wrong and the Israelis being caught out could well result in the total destruction/dissolution of the Israeli state.

But it is strange that nobody has "claimed responsibility" for it - or have the perps, who perhaps hoped that maybe one of their attempts would succeed, realised that all 4 did (more or less) and resulted in ten times the carnage that they hoped for, suddenly realised that they had "gone over the top"

Too much evidence pointing to Arab connections to now believe that fleeting thought that many of us must have had.

Constable Clipcock
14th Sep 2001, 22:42
My advice to you, Guv is SHUT THE ***** UP!

Do you have any idea how many among the dead/missing were Jewish themselves?

(So am I)

Loc-out
14th Sep 2001, 23:56
Can't see it Guv.

There is a ME state that has suggested this, but when you realise which one, then you know there heads are stuck so far up their own a---s, it's hardly a surprise. :D :D :D

BmPilot21
14th Sep 2001, 23:57
Guvnor, this is not the appropriate forum. Danny has made it quite clear that political discussion should be on jetblast. Can't you post this on: http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=005008&p=3

If you've got the guts....

Winston Smith
15th Sep 2001, 00:41
Now even I, being an inconvenient "thought-criminal", wouldn't have dared to post that! Respect for your courage, Guv...

While this was one of the theories I considered upon hearing of the disaster, I don't think it a very probable one - mainly for the reason cited by Constable Clipcock.

However, there's one thing that I found very odd about the news covering:

In the first hours after the attack, there were still some contradicting reports about the types of aircraft involved and other basic facts (as can be seen from the title of the first major thread in R&N: "737 crashes ..."). Now if the media/governmental authorities didn't even manage to get those easily observable/researchable things right, I find it all the more surprising that they "knew" almost immediately who the perpetrators were! Furthermore, it was just too "easy": Boeing Manuals in Arabic found in a hired car... And finally that ridiculous claim that it necessarily had to be someone with considerable financial and organizational resources!

Well, in the unlikely, but not impossible, case that the Mossad/CIA has anything to do with it, we have to recognize that they have achieved their objective: I'm frightened by the sudden outbreak of hostility against Arabs/Muslims and support for even more carnage - and I certainly include many reactions on PPRuNe in this observation (see the link above...).

The Guvnor
15th Sep 2001, 01:43
I should add that I have a number of Jewish and Israeli (including Sabra) friends and my own sister converted to Judiasm so I am far from being anti-Jewish or anti-Zionist.

In fact, the suggestion of Israeli involvement was put to me by a very old friend, now living in Tel Aviv, who many years ago was a Mossad operative.

Very disturbingly - bearing in mind the recent events in Belfast - I heard that a mob attacked a Muslim school in Adelade today.

BmPilot_21 - if the moderators want to move this over to JB I have no problems with that...

[ 14 September 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]

Flap 5
15th Sep 2001, 13:41
Guvnor,

Interesting theory however where it falls down is that the authorities would have stopped these people. Having done so they would have found no evidence other then pen knives and razor blades. So if it were a set up there would be no way of controlling it. Not a very good set up.

Winston,

My immediate reaction to the second aircraft hitting the tower (the first to be shown on television) was that it was a 737 - and I fly them. The shear scale of the tragedy is made clearer when a 767 looks so small.

fudpucker
15th Sep 2001, 14:01
If anybody SERIOUSLY thinks that Mossad or the CIA have ANYTHING to do with last tuesdays appalling murder of over (probably) 5000 human beings, they need some form of help.

gravity victim
15th Sep 2001, 14:12
Well, whoever did it, we know it was nothing to do with the Guvnor - after all, they did manage to get some jets into the air!

The Guvnor
15th Sep 2001, 17:36
Flap5 - no, I'm not saying that this attack was intended to be detected in the same way that the El Al one was. To obtain the full effect, it had to go ahead.

It's extremely interesting that the head of Europol is on record as saying that he doesn't believe that bin Laden is responsible - and he knows a lot more about the investigation than anyone here.

I agree with you about the 767 looking like an Airbus or 737... incredible. :( :(

Fudpucker I don't think anyone has attributed anything to the CIA ... yet. Apart, of course, from a certain amount of incompetence - but then they even managed to miss the collapse of both the Iron Curtain and the fall of the Soviet Union... :D :D

Now, back to the El Al incident - why did it happen? Simple. The Israelis needed to discredit the Syrians in the eyes of the world after the disastrous PR they received following the Sabra and Chatila refugee camp massacres. The Syrians, it will be recalled, were their primary opponents in the Lebanon.

And as for the (wholly erroneous) assumption that they wouldn't do anything to harm the USA or inadvertently kill Jews or fellow Israelis - one only has to look at the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin (which involved officers of the General Security Service) or the activities of Jonathan Pollard, who betrayed more US secrets than did Aldrich Aimes.

[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]

Whiskery
16th Sep 2001, 03:31
Guv - send me some of that sh!t you're smoking will ya! I thought Vic Bitter was the only silly stick brew.

Slasher
16th Sep 2001, 05:24
Guv your theory had alreadey been postulated by some fanatic islamic arabs alreadey. While I have no love for bloodey Israel, the fact the [email protected] bleated this theory to distract the U.S. from soon blowing the sh!t out of them means it just doesnt carry any weight.
In any case the following theory is gaining evidence:
* bin laden planned it with the Talibans knowledge
* saddam H funded it. No guesses how the funds were raised.
* Egyptians carried it out. Mubarak wouldnt know sh!t about how the average Egyptian feels about the U.S.
* Evidence of direct or indirect palestinian involvment or any other arab State has yet to surface.

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Slasher ]

Toilet Porpoise
16th Sep 2001, 08:24
Guv...

Thanks for the laugh, after all the tears I've shed the past few days I needed it... :rolleyes:

mutt
16th Sep 2001, 14:15
Just to give you an idea of what newspapers in the Gulf are saying.

1 People in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States said no true Moslem could have carried out these attacks as terrorism was against their religion.

2 Its too well planned for and Arab or Muslim group, not to mention that Arabs and Muslims would never do such a thing

3 It must be the doing of Israel, they are using Arabs as agents to hit the Palestinian cause

4 But some Gulf Arabs said that the United States should consider a change of foreign policy to avoid such attacks.

5 Ordinary Saudis and other Gulf Arabs expressed incredulity, dismay and sympathy yesterday over the attacks in the United States, but urged Americans to explore why their country’s foreign policy made them a target.

6 This is actually from an Arabic editorial. The beneficiary of this all is of course Israel who has not been slow to exploit the tragic circumstances

7 So Is this one. We hope that the investigation will reveal the direct involvement of the Mossad which has no aim but to create hatred against Muslims and Arabs and to bury the Palestinian cause forever. Neither American investigators nor any other intelligence service should overlook the possible involvement of Mossad. Its history is full of attempts at sabotage and plots to destabilize.


I really dont know if i should laugh or cry!

Mutt :(

BAE146
16th Sep 2001, 14:34
hey Mutt,this one will break you up. Some of our male cabin crew ride the whores in BKK bare back, no worries.

Why ? because it is said:-


A good muslim will never contract AIDS!

Just an other number
16th Sep 2001, 16:41
BAE146:
But Thai girls are Buddhists, not Muslims.
Try www.dhammathai.org. (http://www.dhammathai.org.)
May need to check out your facts.

Velvet
16th Sep 2001, 22:13
Just another number, I think he means that the cabin crew are muslim, not the 'whores'.


Saddam H wouldn't need to fund Osama - he has a personal fortune reckoned to be approx $300million. It may have taken some planning, but the only co-ordination would be between ensuring all hijackers boarded planes which were in the air at their targets approximately the same time. They were not skilled pilots, just fanatically determined to achieve their aims, at whatever cost.

Will the perpetrators be brought to justice? What good is supreme military might, if all that is needed to bring a country to a halt are a few determined evil men, armed only with razor blades and craft knives.

Can you protect and defend against the enemy within, those who would use the very freedoms and rights we have fought so hard to achieve against us.

How can you fight people who are not only prepared, but willing to die - even welcome it as proof that they are right in their beliefs and ideals.

This is not the work of a country or a nation, but of a network of small groups, connected only by their hatred of what they see as 'others'. They had no thought for anyone, neither Christian, Jew, Muslim nor atheist. All are fodder for their war against humanity.

BAE146
17th Sep 2001, 02:47
thankyou Velvet ;)

Jackonicko
17th Sep 2001, 05:24
It would be a high risk strategy, wouldn't it? Mount a high-profile terrorist attack against your only major international ally in the hope that the Arabs would be blamed. Inviting the question as to whether US support for Israel hadn't contributed to the incident, and whether it shouldn't therefore be scaled down. This incident could still lead to Israel being forced into making concessions and compromises with the Palestinians (I naively hope), in order to keep the Arab world on side while retaliation is carried out elsewhere, so not a great thing for Mossad to do, IMHO.

Also, while they will car-bomb political opponents and shoot rioting children, or rocket blocks of flats, the Israelis do have a moral code, and have always limited their excesses to those who are their mortal enemies. They've done dreadful things (and only in recent years have these not been entirely justified by the evil done to them) but I don't believe them to be capable of evil like this.

Token Bird
17th Sep 2001, 15:24
Guv,

Interesting hypothesis. I personally find it a bit far-fetched, as a Fortean I try to apply Occam's razor to most problems .The principle of Occam's razor, for those unfamiliar, says that the simplest explanation is probably correct. Therefore, it probably was Muslim extremists and was much less likely to be Mossad-controlled, or homegrown US fury.

However, it is important to consider all possibilities and I think that those of you who are jumping on the Guv for presenting another viewpoint are being unnecessarily (searches vocabulary for appropriate word) erm, unnecessary,

TB

upperecam
17th Sep 2001, 15:56
Of all the sadness and tragedy of these past days this man still has to have his say. Should we not rename "Prune" the Neil Robertson forum. This Guy is as sick, as evil and as cunning as the men behind The New York atrocities. If they offered him money for some crazy harebrained Walter Mitty scheme he'd be there on his knees, spectacles misting over with the joy of greed fulfilled and the thought of all those young things he could partake in corrupting. Anyone who takes this man seriously is against all decent people and normal society.
I am astounded that with his awful and disreputable background and history he has the gaul to continually corrupt this forum. Freedom of speech carries resposibility and a need for care in recognising someone for the ABSOLUTE inhuman moron they are. I would like to see a campaign on Prune to drive this idiot off the forum once and for all.

God bless America in it's hour of grief.

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: upperecam ]

Token Bird
17th Sep 2001, 18:11
upperecam and others,

I'm not that familiar with the Guvnor, although I gather he is not a well-liked character on the forum. As I am unwilling to do a 2am search and read all his past posts to find out just how much of a wind-up merchant he is, I base my replies purely on his post at the top of this forum. I can see absolutely nothing offensive about it whatsoever. The man is quoting from a book. As I said before it sounds a bit far-fetched and someone else mentioned that it would be too high-risk for the Israelis, but it is not completely implausible. Those of you who think that Israelis are lilly-white and incapable of doing anything wrong obviously have fallen for the propaganda. I don't care if he's winding us up or not. The attitudes of people on this forum suck. For upperecam to suggest that the Guvnor is evil merely because he posted a slightly fantastical viewpoint? You have to be kidding!

TB

Trinflight
18th Sep 2001, 02:23
To the PPRuNe mangement,

I salute you for putting a stop to the crap OCB was spreading, howerver,I find this thread as offensive as the one OCB was banned for.

And before anyone starts, I do not support Israel or the Palestinians.

Trinflight

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: Trinflight ]

Capt PPRuNe
18th Sep 2001, 03:57
Well, Trinflight, I am beginning to get a little tired of the hypothesis that is being proposed by the Guv and the antismitic line that Token Bird seems to take and the 'unqualified' support for her by neutral99.

Before I lose my temper though I will give you all a little bit of insight into my background that may influence the way you make postings on my website in future. I have nothing against reasonable discussion on many topics on these forums and I allow anyone to have a say as long as they keep it within certain moral bounds and do not break any laws. Those moral bounds are my own and some people do not like that but as far as I am concerned, until I give control of my website to someone else then it is my own moral code that will prevail.

For those of you who are not aware of it I am jewish by birth and atheist by choice. I was brought up in a secular environment and also spent several years as the only jewish boy in a catholic boarding school run by priests in Spain when I was seven and also learnt a lot about christianity and catholicism at an early age. I also spent many years living in Israel during the mid 70's and again for a short period in the early 80's. I used to have dual British and Israeli citizenship and was conscripted into the Israeli Defense Force when I was 19 and served for 3 years in a combat unit.

My experiences have formed my views and as far as I am concerned I have no problem with anyone no matter what their race, religion or creed. I find it fascinating in my job as an airline pilot going to all the different countries around the world and learning about the different cultures. I do object to anyone who preaches hatred towards any other race, religion or creed.

My experiences during my years living in Israel during my youth, especially during my service in the IDF have left me the ability to maybe comment with a bit more authority on some issues than some of the other 'regular' commentators here. I have also witnessed the twisting of information by parties and then watched it re-broadcast 180 degrees to the way it was filmed or reported originally.

I have seen how the Palestinians have learnt from some of their mistakes in the past and over the last few years observed how they use the media to to their advantage and how the media can be easily led, especially these days where the moral side of an issue is secondary to the 'picture' or 'sound bite' value of a 'package'. I am not saying the Israelis are lily white in everything they do or have done but it ceases to amaze me how quickly people forget the recent past.

Many people will remember how Yasser Arafat's PLO was the umbrella organisation for many terrorist groups including those that perpetrated many attacks on innocent civilians and children in their nurseries back in the 70's and the attack on the Israeli athletes at the Olympics as well as the numerous hijackings and bombings of aircraft during those years. The reasons for Israels occupation of the West bank and Gaza are also conveniently forgotten but are used as the excuse for most of the violence and up until very recently the PLO had the destruction of Israel and the death of all its Jewish population as part of its covenant.

Israel is a democratic country governed through an elected parliament and has a judicial system based originally on English law. It has all the institutions of a western society. There is free speech and similar laws to the UK and US on incitement and slander. There is freedom of religious expression and anyone can follow their religion there. It is a country steeped in history going back many thousands of years. What some people do not realise that it is about the size of Wales.

Modern history shows Israel being built up through a large influx of Jewish refugees from Europe and other Arab countries. My own mother, a refugee from Germany where her parents were murdered by the Nazis tried to get into what was still Mandated Palestine in early 1947 and was arrested by the Britsh on a refugee ship as she tried to run the gauntlet and was sent to a British Concentration camp in Cyprus for a year before she was finally allowed to Israel. There she married my father and my older sister was born there in 1948.

Seven years later I was born in England. I grew up believing in no god and formed my own opinions of religion in general and believe that there is too much hypocracy behind the scenes for it to provide a solution to any problems. On one side there is the positive moral side and on the other there is the negative tribal side.

What I see in this thread started by the Guvnor is a discussion but he feels he has to justify his posting of what I believe to be an incitement to racial hatred and anti-semitism is the fact that his sister has converted to Judaism and some of his friends happen to be Jewish. All too often we see how easy it is to instill the element of doubt in an argument by bringing in the conspiracy theory. There is an underlying current of anti-semitism in many of the threads and articles but many refuse to come clean with their admissions. From my perspective it appears to be a message to the USA to abandon the only democratic country in the middle east, Israel, and to leave it to fend for itself, knowing that it is almost impossible to do so without American support as it is vastly outnumbered by its hostile neighbours.

The recent conference on racism showed how much these countries have managed to twist history and fact when they tried to have Israel demonised and their real anti-semitic hatred revealed itself. Those that advocate abandoning Israel to the venomous hatred that is indoctrinated by its neighbours are simply trying to help with the final solution that the nazis tried to implement 60 odd years ago. Look up in your history books and see which side of the 'axis' most of the countries in that region aligned themselves. I will not let those people use my website for their racial hatred and venomous incitement.

The problems of the middle east are not simply about Israel and the Palestinians. Should they ever solve their problems and come to a solution there would then be another twenty problems elsewhere in the world that would take their place. There is no justification for the mass murder of civilians, anywhere but to equate the IDF taking on attackers who choose to operate behind the cloak of children and within heavily populated centres to the mindless, mass murder of civilians in aircraft and office blocks shows how twisted some peoples logic can be, just as twisted as the logic used by those same terrorists who flew those aircraft into the WTC.

Be very careful about incitement with articles and theories such as your apparently overdeveloped sense of conspiracy Mr Robertson. I think I am fairly generous in the way I allow these forums to be used and topics to be discussed but this latest one causes me much concern and has overtones of Goebbels style propaganda! You are very adept at lifting and plagiarising the content of your posts and this one is no different but your agenda raises my suspicions.

[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: Capt PPRuNe ]

ArielSharon
18th Sep 2001, 08:49
Capt PPRuNe:

Just to let you know that everything the Guv has said is correct. We did it with the aid of the Illuminatti and Rosicruceans as part of a plan to take over the world. Now that the secret is out I can reveal all here.

This book he cites is also obviously true. Why would someone publish a book if it weren't all true. I was recently reading a book by a man named Charles Berlitz. It is all about the Bermuda Triangle. As a pilot, I'm sure you would be interested in what causes the problems there.

As to the Guv's statement his sister is a convert to Judaism and some of his friends are Jews, I'm sure it is true. Afterall, I don't dislike Arabs, some of my best friends are Arabs.

Happy New Year!

-Ariel "Arik" Sharon

[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: ArielSharon ]

Virgin_that_BLEW
18th Sep 2001, 10:36
This was emailed to me today !

NEWS EMBARGO AFTER ISRAELI LINK LEAK
Stern-Intel
September 12th, 2001

A US military intelligence source revealed details
of an internal intelligence memo that points to the Israeli Mossad
intelligence service having links to the World Trade Center and
Pentagon attacks. The intelligence source, who requested his name be
withheld, confirmed the internal US intelligence memo circulated four weeks
ago described information that pointed to the threat of a covert Israeli
operation on US soil to turn mass public opinion against Palestinian
Arabs via an apparent terrorist attack on US interests that would give
Israel the green light to implement a large scale military onslaught
against the Palestinian Arab population.

The 11 September attack has been described by experts as being too
sophisticated for a lone terrorist group to execute. "This attack
required a high level of military precision and the resources of an advanced
intelligence agency. In addition, the attackers would have needed to
be extremely familiar with both air force one flight operations, civil
airline flight paths and aerial assault tactics on sensitive US
cities like Washington, Stated David Stern an expert on Israeli
intelligence operations. The attacks targeted the Pentagon, World Trade
Center
towers, with the white house and air force also being targets according to
the FBI.
"The attacks have certainly turned US public opinion firmly back in
Israel's favor after 11 months of Palestinian uprising, heavy
criticism of Israel over war crimes allegations and racism by a UN
conference in
Durban. The attacks serve no Arab group or nation's interests but
their timing came in the midst of international condemnation of
Israel for its policy of death squad assassination of Palestinian
political and police figures", added Stern.
If verified, the news of Israel's involvement in the US attack will
come as no surprise to intelligence experts. The state of Israel has a
long history of covert operations against Western targets with attacks on
the King David Hotel, USS Liberty, murder of a Scandinavian UN envoy as
well as espionage against the US during the Jonathan Pollard case.
On Wednesday the US defense department issued a warning to its
officials to halt the leak of information on the investigation which it says
is happening on a daily basis since the attacks occurred.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

OneWorld22
18th Sep 2001, 11:12
The idea that somehow Israel was involved in the terroist attacks last week is ludicrous and people posting these theroies are at best being mischevious and at worst, venting their blatant anti-semitism.

Israel has no long term benefit after the US attacks. If these attacks brought a world wide religious war between Arabs and the west, how would Israel benefit from that? They would certainly be the one western country that the whole of the Arab world would savagely target and they would have everything to lose. I find it ridiculous the notion that some people have, that Israel is just itching to go to war.
The whole raison d'etre for the IDF is exactly what it means, one of defense, they have struggled long and hard for the tiny country that they now have and they want to keep it that way. They have no desire to risk a global conflict that could see their country evaporated. Do you really think Israeli parents like seeing thier kids go off to do mandatory service, almost certainly seeing some action along the way? Do you not think that they crave for peace? Dealing with an uprising of Palestinians is one thing, dealing with the wrath of millions of Muslims is quite another.

But the bigest threat to Israel from these attacks is American public opinion. These attacks will focus Americans attention on foreign policy and they will pay more attention to the outside world, with this closer scrutiny, they may start asking,

"why does our country continue to give so much resources and diplomatic support to this tiny country, thousands of miles away, where they play out religious battles that are alien to us and our way of life, and now our support for Israel threatens our very lives and the freedoms that we cherish."

That question is one many Americans will begin to ask, they will ask their elected representatives, who in turn may start debating it in congress and start a whole new political thinking about the US's role in the middle east. I hope that this doesn't happen, I fully support Israel's right to exist and I also fully support American support for Israel. But American support is crucial for Israel and any new thinking on this will not be good for them.

So no, I firmly believe that these attacks have no benefit for Israel in any way, in fact I think it's quite the opposite.

Evo7
18th Sep 2001, 11:13
This was emailed to me today!

<snipped>



So it must be true, then....

[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: Evo7 ]

Token Bird
18th Sep 2001, 12:59
Capt PPRuNe,

I'm upset that you should call me antisemitic. I happen to disagree with Israel's expansionist policies, and the US blind support of them. Even though your position differs from mine, I'm sure you can see that my position is a far cry from hating millions of people on the basis of religion. I disagree with the Israeli government, but I have no problem with Jews.

If you re-read my post you will see that I found the Guvnor's postulation highly unlikely also. What I took issue with was the people who jumped down his throat simply because he presented an idea that would be hard for many to swallow if it did turn out to be true. I have no problem with people diagreeing with him with reasoned arguments, but one poster referred to him as 'evil' simply because he suggested it. It is that kind of reaction I take issue with,

TB

Golden Monkey
18th Sep 2001, 14:44
I'm not posting this in direct relevance to any particular conspiracy theory put forward on this thread, nor am I going to enter into the somewhat heated debate on Israeli issues at this juncture as I do not profess to have any first hand knowledge.

However, this does appear to be the most relevant place to air this. This is, as far as I am able to ascertain, genuine, but I make no guarentees of it's authenticity.

Even if it is true, there were undoubtedly scenes similar to those depicted on the cable networks regardless (plenty of first hand witnesses and unquestionably live reports, for instance) - and this is probably just a case of terribly lazy journalism.

Still, it helps no-one and is inexcusable in the current climate.

-------------------

Márcio A. V. Carvalho- a Brazilian's opinion

All around the world we are subjected to 3 or 4 huge news distributors, and one of them - as you well know - is CNN. Very well, I guess all of you have been seeing (just as I've been) images from this company. In particular, one set of images caught my attention: the Palestinians celebrating the bombing, out on the streets, eating some cake and making funny faces for the camera.

Well, THOSE IMAGES WERE SHOT BACK IN 1991!!! Those are images of Palestinians celebrating the invasion of Kuwait! It's simply unacceptable that a super-power of communications as CNN uses images which do not correspond to the reality in talking about so serious an issue.

A teacher of mine, here in Brazil, has videotapes recorded in 1991, with the very same images; he's been sending emails to CNN, Globo (the major TV network in Brazil) and newspapers, denouncing what I myself classify as a crime against the public opinion. If anyone of you has access to this kind of files, search for it. In the meanwhile, I'll try to 'put my hands' on a copy of this tape.

------------------

[Edited to try and make my personal position a bit clearer, as this thread seems to be a prime one for A-grade misinterpretation]

[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: CZBB Is Full ]

Jackonicko
18th Sep 2001, 14:46
Danny,

1) Firstly, I have many Jewish friends.
2) Secondly, I must admit that I do believe in some racial stereotypes - in my experience, Jews are outgoing, eager-to-help, warm-hearted, generous, lively and kind - these traits seem so common among those I know, for me to think that they are charactaristic. As a race, I'm therefore inclined to view them as 'top blokes'. It's not that I 'don't have a problem with Jews' as one poster said. I like them a great deal.
3) I condemn anyone who preaches hatred towards Jew or Arab, and I believe that after all they went through, the Jews have an inalienable right to exist in their own nation state. Danny's story of his own family's troubles is entirely representative of what his race have had to go through - although many Jewish families were not so fortunate. Who could deny them a homeland where they might be free from persecution and terror. (But because of what they did go through, I believe that to criticise the Israeli government does lay one open to unjustified charges of anti-semitism).
4) I believe that, however much Arabs may not like it, that Jewish nation state should consist of parts of the biblical kingdom of Israel - but not all of it. The idea of Eretz Israel preached by some Zionists is monstrous and evil. The indigenous Palestinians have an equal right to share the same territory, either as a whole, or in a separate partitioned state.
5) I understand that throughout the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, Israel was engaged in a war of survival, and that extreme measures were necessary. All of the country's neighbours were bent on its destruction. Israel's response to the threat, though harsh and sometimes illegal was entirely understandable and justifiable, although I wonder whether the Palestinian's cause would have attracted such support had the original UN partition plan (giving both sides a share of the territory) been implemented. How much did Israel's ruthless ethnic cleansing in the late 1940s sow the seeds for the next decades. Palestinians were driven from their homes (and sometimes massacred) by the very people who had suffered similar fortunes from the Germans. Dispossessing and ethnically cleansing the indigenous Palestinian inhabitants was always going to be morally wrong, and was always likely to be the source of trouble and war.
6) For many years the PLO represented the unacceptable face of arab nationalism, and were no more than savage terrorists, responsible for a succession of unjustifiable atrocities.
7) I believe that times have changed, and that this fact should be recognised. Since Sadat and Hussein started the process, the PLO has been won over to a peaceful rapprochement with Israel, and its demands now seem almost tragically modest. They now want a state consisting of the Gaza strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank (the latter two areas having been Arab until taken by force of arms in 1967). They want the Palestinian state to be without Israeli army checkpoints and illegal settlements. They want their own homeland. What reasonable person would deny them that? What Jew would not find some resonance in what they are begging for? ~Most of Israel's neighbours are no longer driven by a desire to exterminate Israel, and without the Palestinian issue, would be friendly neighbours (especially Jordan and Egypt), though not Iraq, of course. Even Syria has become less implacably opposed to Israel per se.
8) The PLO has embraced the peace process and Oslo, even though they have gained so little from it.
9) There has been Palestinian terrorism from extremist groups, and by Western standards, the PLO itself does not always bear close scrutiny. But Israel's response to even mild unrest has often been brutal and disproportionate, and a nation which has earned our sympathy, understanding and support has done much to cause us to lose faith in it, including a campaign of illegal assassination (sometimes of peaceful politicians), and the use of helicopter gunships against civilian targets.
10) I do not equate what Israel, the IDF or Mossad do with what Bin Laden and other terrorists have done. But I do condemn any indiscriminate and illegal operations against innocent civilians, whoever is responsible, and I do recognise that the death toll among Palestinians (including such a heart-rending number of foolish teenage boys) is simply unacceptable and unjustifiable. Arab casualties far outweigh those who suffer at the hands of misguided Fatah terrorists and suicide bombers.
11) Those who claim that Israel is a democracy may be technically correct, though they are also disingenuous. Huge numbers of indigenous Arabs were forced from their homes into refugee camps in neighbouring countries, and although a handful of Arab Israeli citizens have the vote, to pretend that the country is a truly representative (of all its people) democracy is laughable.
12) One World 22 stated his belief in Israel's right to exist, which I endorse whole-heartedly, though he would doubtless disagree with my equally fierce conviction that Israel cannot be allowed to exist indefinitely in its present form. On moral grounds, the Palestinians must have justice. On practical grounds, it is only by reaching an accomodation and by compromising that the Jewish people will ever have the security and peace they so richly deserve. The debate which One World fears may (in the long term) actually bring Israel a solution to the Palestinian issue, and thereby bring peace.

I've said before that I reject the idea that Israel was in any way involved in last week's terrorism, though I do believe that it has benefeited already. There has been an explosion in hatred of the Arab world, fundamentalism and anyone remotely associated with Arab terrorism or even vocal Arab nationalism, while Israel's opposition to these forces has increased its popularity. Sympathy for the Palestinians has (understandably) nose-dived since we saw images of a handful of Arabs celebrating the tragedy. With world attention focused elsewhere, Israel has already engaged in ruthless and brutal suppression of the Palestinians, sending tanks and troops back into Palestinian areas. I find it deeply upsetting that the present Israeli government should be doing so much to harm the image and the long term interests of a marvellous and admirable people.

Does that make me anti-semitic?
Anti Zionist, sure, maybe even anti-Israeli in terms of its government. I have a number of Israeli friends, who I admire, respect and love, and I applaud the growing number of courageous Israeli teenagers who refuse to be drafted to serve in an army which they see as unjustly oppressing the Palestinians).

But PLEASE can we get away from the simplistic notion that to criticise the Israeli regime is in itself anti-semitic, or racist, or that Israel should somehow be above the law we set for all other civilised nations?

And I say that with the greatest respect to you, and to Jews everywhere. The world is a poorer place while Israel is isolated like this.

Capt PPRuNe
18th Sep 2001, 17:24
Jacko, Token Bird and neutral99, if I have offended you with my comments then I apologise for them as they were made in the heat of the moment and were meant to highlight out where my point of view comes from regarding the situation between Israel and the Palestinians.

The propaganda war in the region is a very complex one and over the last few years the PLO have been gaining the upper hand. Having lived in the region though, and even served in the armed forces there I do know that there is no policy of 'expansionism'. There is a policy of no compromise when it comes to security though, especially when you consider the size of the country and that of its neighbours and their plans for the country over the years.

I was in Israel when Sadat came and signed a peace treaty. He was one of the few wise men in the region who was unadulterated by some of the more fanatical/fundamentalist groups although he paid a high price for his beliefs.

No one who has lived in the region wants to have to go to war. I too have met many arabs who live in the region, from both sides of the border and the majority do want peace and prosperity. Also, I know that the vast majority of muslims do not believe what the hijackers have done is right as do the rest of us. There are extremists on both sides as we have seen by the assasination of Rabin.

What I do not accept though is the indoctrination of people by religious leaders who twist their beliefs and instil racial hatred and incite martyrdom through suicide bombing. If these people are allowed to do this openly by their leaders then those leaders are morally corrupt and need to be seriously looked at by whatever coalition is formed to fight terrorism.

Israel today has many problems, none of which are more serious than its security and until the Israeli government can rid itself of its minority religious components and the Palestinians stop the religious incitement of hatred to jews in their mosques then the situation is unlikely to improve.

Once again I believe that it boils down to religious bigotism based on extremist views that that hightem all the tensions and prevent the majority of decent human beings on both sides of the conflict from sitting down together and hammering out an accord that both sides can live with. No one ever said it would be easy and it has proven to be so but who would have believed that either side had at least gotten this far just a few years ago.

Unfortunately the extremist fundamentalists have shown that they do not have any respect for any human life, not even their own and until we can prevent the bigots who indoctrinate these beliefs from continuing to do so we are going to have serious problems. To fall for the propaganda from either side is dangerous as that in itself causes so much of the polarisation that prevents any progress being made to solve the problems.

Token Bird
18th Sep 2001, 18:38
By the way, Capt PPRuNe, I noticed from your electronic logbook that you just passed the 5000 hours mark. Congratulations!

TB

Jackonicko
18th Sep 2001, 23:07
No need for apology Danny boy!

CZBB: What's the source of this incredible Brazilian story?

SG Walker
19th Sep 2001, 02:48
If this story about images from 1991 being passed off as contemporary is true, it is incredibly important that it is made public -although it was a short clip, it is having a great influence on certain people.

I suspect, however, that it is in fact a contemporary scene (feel free to prove me wrong). The inaccuracy in it comes from the fact that the journos did not make it clear that only a tiny minority of Palestinians behaved in this way.

[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: Chicken_hawk ]

IFollowRoads
19th Sep 2001, 04:57
I'm very hestitant about posting anything in this thread, as it seems that there are some whose ideal is maybe to incite the sort of conflict that is now under discussion. IAC, there are others who feel that it may not be the bin Laden camp responsible, for example: http://www.kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/12/news1.htm , and no doubt there will be others. Whoever it or they is/are, the solution for all involved is not the killing of others, but an understanding
and tolerance of difference; after all, the only thing that 'an eye for an eye' will achieve is blindness if carried through to its final conclusion.

In the same way we can accept those that dislike the sun, or chocolate (or whatever trivial item you can think of), to have to obliterate them for their belief is surely a sledgehammer for a nut; the premature and deliberate ending of one life involuntarily by another can questionably ever be excused. If what is being promised by our politicians of this world were carried through, would it be excusable for a soccer fan of team A to kick the living daylights out from a fan of team B, even though it was the performance of team C (and possibly team A) that caused them to get relegated? Similar to the school child who when asked 'why did you hit him/her' responds 'because he/she hit me', the escalation of intolerance starts and frequently escalates out of all proportion from the original misdemeanor.

One of the things so precious to us all is that we are not all the same, we take pride in the fact we can talk and agree our differences. If we all practice a zero tolerance to our own ideals, we will either make ourselves extinct, or in essence become clones.

Food for thought I hope, and not in any way condoning the events of the 11th, but not entirely sure that the currently promised action will achieve anything positive in the longer term either.........

ArielSharon
19th Sep 2001, 07:21
CZBB Is Full

I wonder why the teacher's name is not mentioned. Our intelligence sources saw this email earlier and tried to track it down.

We would love to have this tape broadcast in Iraq. Perhaps the Iraqis would then stop backing the Palestinians. I'm sure you know that Iraq invaded Kuwait in August of 1990. The PLO, and Palestinians in general, sided with Iraq.

When the Americans reinvaded and the Kuwaiti royal family was restored they expelled 200,000 Palestinians there. If the Palestinians were celebrating that then maybe it was all just a big understanding and they didn't really side with the Iraqis. What do you think?

[ 19 September 2001: Message edited by: ArielSharon ]

ArielSharon
19th Sep 2001, 07:36
Token Bird-

What is all this talk of expansionist policy? Why are you insulting my waist line? Obviously you can't be talking about the State of Israel.

I mean we have been giving land back to the Egyptians, giving a little bit of land to the Jordanians, withdrawing to the UN recognized borders with Lebanon and handed over much of what you call the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinian authority, so you must be referring to my waist line.

We can have our differences but personal attacks should not be used. I am on a diet now and you will see the difference soon.

ArielSharon
19th Sep 2001, 08:21
Jackonicko-

An absolutely brilliant post! Would you like to come work for Israel. I have never seen a more cleverly written piece of propaganda.

You start off by stating how much you like and admire Jews before slowly starting to misstate the facts more and more until it is pure propaganda. Well done.

It isn't until point #4 which starts off by stating that Israel has a right to exist that you then attach the words "monstrous" and "evil" to "some" Zionists. Point 5 is even more clever. You begin with how Israel was under constant attack and then ignore the 1980s and 1990s. I mean what's daily rocket attacks from the PLO in Lebanon that causes a large part of the population of your Northern cities to live in bomb shelters?, nothing. What's SCUD missile attacks from Iraq and the threat of chemical warfare?, nothing.

Point #6 is even better. You begin by stating how bad the PLO *used* to be but how they've changed in point #7. Their "tragically modest" demand for a return just to the internationally recognized borders is not enough. They really should have Haifa and Tel Aviv under their control, shouldn't they?

You mention in point #7 that until 1967 the "West Bank" and Gaza were Arab. Can you explain to me why the Palestinians weren't given a state by their Arab brethren? Why on most maps was Gaza referred to as Egypt and the West Bank as Jordan? I mean the UN voted for partition in 1947 and the armistice lines of 1949 were recognized as the international boundaries. Why did datelines from Bethlehem on Christmas, prior to 1967 say Jordan and not Palestine?

Point #8 and # 9could be your most masterful ones. You state that the PLO has embraced the peace process even though they still have not changed their charter calling for the destruction of Israel and continue to incite their population to violence. Israel "overreact" to things like discos and pizza parlors being blown up. We really should be arresting those responsible not killing them. I think the Taliban are going to turn over Osama bin Laden to the US government, don't you?

Point #10 almost brought tears to my eyes. I mean when you wrote about all those teenage Palestinian boys who have died it almost made me forget about those teenagers dancing in a disco. Obviously, a partying Israeli teenager is much more of a threat to the Palestinians than a Molotov cocktail throwing Palestinian is to the Israelis.

Point # 11 is interesting as well. I mean you admit Israel is a democracy BUT... I mean out of a population of around 6 million, that there are over 1 million Arab citizens is really just a "handful", isn't it? It is a shame more Arabs living in Jerusalem don't take the opportunity to apply for Israeli citizenship. Do you think it's because many who have, have been branded as traitors and killed by their own people?

You end by stating you "reject the idea" that Israel was involved in last weeks terror attack and therefore appear to be rational and unbiased, and further relate about how you have many Israeli friends etc. All in all a masterful bit of propaganda. You have my respect and admiration for your skill in crafting it.

Happy New Year-

Ariel

heloplt
19th Sep 2001, 08:33
Well now lets really confuse this issue....with the news the Italians are investigating evidence that shows Osama Bin Laden....invested heavily into the US Stock market by taking a "sell short" position, then this may actually be a commerical crime and not political. He stands to make tens of millions of dollars off the collapse in share prices as a result of the attack. Now wouldn't that twist the clerics bandanna's? Maybe the Israeli folks are not the only ones with a gift for financial issues?

Really though....years ago as an investigator for the government....we had the saying..."Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck....might just be a duck!"

But it makes sense the Mossad would kill 5,000 Americans....knowing how that would cement a perfect relationship if it ever got out? Got a bridge to sell if you are interested? :p

ArielSharon
19th Sep 2001, 08:34
Attention All:

Anyone interested in how much the Palestinians are really interested in compromise should check out this web site:

http://home.birzeit.edu/dsp/surv4/results.html

Check out the response to questions#7 and #13-18. Read some of the past polls which indicate the Palestinians are not willing to share Jerusalem. The question was asked on previous versions of the poll 'If East Jerusalem was under Palestinian sovereignty would you accept Israeli sovereignty over West Jerusalem' and would you believe less than 30% said "yes"? Check out all the polls here:
http://home.birzeit.edu/dsp/

[ 21 September 2001: Message edited by: ArielSharon ]

Token Bird
19th Sep 2001, 14:44
Ariel,

Hope your diet is going well and I think it's very sweet that you're giving the land back that you stole :rolleyes:,

TB

TowerDog
19th Sep 2001, 16:45
Sweden stole a good size piece of Norway a while ago. (Jĉmtland and Herjedalen)
You don't see Norwegians blowing up buses and throwing rocks to get the land back.

Perhaps some people have spent too much time in the sun and got hot tempers?

The Guvnor
19th Sep 2001, 18:46
Danny, I too was deeply insulted that you would regard my theoretical hypothesis as something you "...believe to be an incitement to racial hatred and anti-semitism" - something I took great pains in a subsequent post to point out that I am not. However, I am quite prepared to put it down to the heat of the moment, jet lag etc.

The purpose of my original post was merely to try to stimulate debate and to show that there are other options out there - and to be blinkered at this, the most dangerous time since August 1945 - is to invite potential disaster upon us all.

Do I really think that this attack would have been carried out with the knowledge and approval of the government of Israel? No, I don't.

Do I think that it could have been carried out by a group within that government, acting covertly and in what they see as the best interests of the State of Israel? Absolutely.

After all, it's not that long ago that the same thing happened in the United States. Remember the Iran-Contra affair?

There is a rising tide of well-informed opinion that Osama bin Laden was not directly involved and certainly was not the principal behind the attacks. One such person is the head of Europol, Jurgen Storbeck (see Europol Has Doubts on Bin Laden Conspiracy (http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=005024))

Over the last five or so years, Israel has become increasingly isolated in large part due to their treatment of the Palestinians - a process started under Benjamin Netanyahu's government.

It could well be the case that a group of renegade securocrats may have put together an 'armaggeddon' or 'all-or-nothing' strategy to strengthen immesurably Israel's present situation. Remember, renegade securocrats were implicated in the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin so there is no question that if they were prepared to murder their own Prime Minister, they would be prepared to ensivage something like this.

South Africa was in a similar situation in the late 1980s when its forces, operating in Angola supporting UNITA in Operations Modular and Hooper, were routed by Cuban ground forces and East German piloted fighters. An ultimatum was given to the Angolan government - remove the Cubans and East Germans, or we'll go nuclear. I have no doubts whatsoever that they were completely serious in these threats - as indeed were the Angolans. This threat was made despite the possible consequences on the rest of the world.

As everyone should be well aware, religions - which all teach peace, love and happiness - are the primary cause of war and suffering pretty much since the dawn of recorded history. Not liking another person's beliefs has long been an excuse to kill him - all in the name of God.

There seems to be little recognition of the fact that Judiasm, Christianity and Islam all grow from the same roots - we are all "People of the Book". However, fundamentalists of all creeds seem to work on the basis that "God's on my side, not yours - and to prove it, I'm going to kill you". Such people have not the faintest concept of religion or its teachings.

So, to summarise: now is the time for us all to keep an open mind; and most importantly of all not over-react. The meek, it is said, shall inherit the earth - let's make sure it doesn't become a radioactive carbonated cinder.

Was that for us?
20th Sep 2001, 09:54
Somewhat Tardy, but credit where its due, a jolly good yarn and food for thought.
Ever thought of writting for a living, I mean like Tom Clancy, you have got what it takes to build a good story and get it across.Leave him alone the "Rest of You"

DESERTLAD
20th Sep 2001, 20:12
4000 Israeli Employees in WTC Absent the Day of the AttackManar TV - Sept 17, 2001http://www.manartv.com/With the announcement of the attacks at the World Trade Center in New York, the international media, particularly the Israeli one, hurried to take advantage of the incident and started mourning 4000 Israelis who work at the two towers. Then suddenly, no one ever mentioned anything about those Israelis and later it became clear that they remarkably did not show up in their jobs the day the incident took place. No one talked about any Israeli being killed or wounded in the attacks. Arab diplomatic sources revealed to the Jordanian al-Watan newspaper that those Israelis remained absent that day based on hints from the Israeli General Security Apparatus, the Shabak, the fact which evoke unannounced suspicions on American officials who wanted to know how theIsraeli government learned about the incident before it occurred, and the reasons why it refrained from informing the U.S authorities of the information it had. Suspicions had increased further after Israeli newspaper Yadiot Ahranot revealed that the Shabak prevented Israeli premier Ariel Sharon from traveling to New York and particularly to the citys eastern coast to participate in a festival organized by the Zionist organizations in support of the "Israel". Aharon Bernie, the commentator at the newspaper, brought up the issue and came up with a negative conclusion, saying no answer. He then asked about the clue behind the Shabaks position in preventing Sharons participation, and again without giving an answer. Bernie added that Sharon, who was delighted for having his speech on top of the festival agenda, asked the head of the organization to mediate and convince the Shabak to change its position, but his attempts were in vein. The next day after Sharons secretary officially announced that Sharon would not participate the incident took place. For its part, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper revealed that the FBI arrested five Israelis four hours after the attack on the Twin Towers while filming the smoking skyline from the roof of their companys building. The FBI had arrested the five for puzzling behavior. They are said to have been caugh tv ideo taping the disaster in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery. Contact Us : [email protected]

:confused:

OneWorld22
20th Sep 2001, 21:42
DESERTLAD, go back to Sinai and bury yourself in your Koran, keep believing the hype and the propoganda and blame Israel for everything.

I supose the Jews created Auschwitz and Dachau themselves and killed their own people just to create sympathy and to justify the creation of Israel to the guillable west...

You weren't in Durban recently were you?

DESERTLAD
20th Sep 2001, 22:23
oneworld22 ... im neither a muslim or support any terrorists activities no matter who does it.. with my post i only wanted the ppruners to know wht the media has to say in this part of the world .....
well i guess i shud hv metioned earlier ..
i didnt mean to offend anyone ..
:confused:

Capt PPRuNe
21st Sep 2001, 03:28
What a load of crap!

Precisely the kind of total bullshit propagana that I mention in my earlier post. Exactly the kind of rubbish that stir up and incites the kind of hatred that spawns more of this kind of terror.

I've yet to see one piece of propaganda that eminates from 'that' part of the world that doesn't have a government sponsored line aimed at inciting the kind of bullshit that that caused the fanatics to perform the kind of suicide attack in the first place. It will be interesting to see how this 'coalition' which will include countries that allow some fundamentalist group to have camps and training centres for terrorists in their country. I have yet to see mention of Syria who have at least 30 different radical groups who have known links to terrorist attacks in many parts of the world.

What about Suadi Arabia where the religious fanatics are allowed to have their organisations that indoctrinate so many of the people that perform these suicide mass murders. As long as they don't cause trouble in the Kingdom then it is alright. Hypocritical or what?

That is exactly the kind of propaganda that is meant to feed the population of whatever country you are in but it doesn't wear over here where we are allowed to be much more free thinking. Most likely UAE which is allegedly an ally but allows groups within their bit of desert or supports them indirectly.

[ 20 September 2001: Message edited by: Capt PPRuNe ]

tony draper
21st Sep 2001, 03:55
Don't see the logic in all this don't do anything or you will only produce more terrorists. Those camps and those organisations have been churning out thousands of the b*ggers for decades,if not a single a single new terrorist/ fanatic graduates after today, there's enough to last for the next fifty years.

[ 20 September 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

jazzi
21st Sep 2001, 04:33
Here in Aus:

Fottage was shown on A Current Afair of a news cameraman entering the "supposed" residence of suspected terrorists.

I am now HIGHLY suspicious that we are being fed propaganda.

Firstly the flat(appartment) they entered was still littered with the "supposed" terrorists belongings, Which the reporter then proceeded to handle. NOT something I would expect the FBI to do. I would assume every fibre in the place would have been cleaned out.

THEN...get this..the phone rang int he appartment and THE NEWS REPPORTER answered it. NOT something the FBI or any security service would miss...a phone call to the would be terrorists.

I Thought about this broadcast for about 10 seconds and wrote it off as totally fake.

Are they smokescreening us while they concentrate on someone else all together? or is this an elaborate set up to make it look as if Islam extremists have committed this act?

Check 'Six'
22nd Sep 2001, 02:28
Who Killed JFK?

Beausoleil
22nd Sep 2001, 04:13
"Many people will remember how Yasser Arafat's PLO was the umbrella organisation for many terrorist groups..."

Bombs in cafes, hotels, buses, embassies, massacres of women and children. I wonder where they got the idea...

Terrorism in the 1940s (http://www.cdiss.org/terror_1940s.htm)

(http://www.cdiss.org/terror_1940s.htm)

Let's hear a complete comdemnation of all people who have used or now use terrorist tactics. Who ran the Irgun back then?

Whiskery
22nd Sep 2001, 04:59
Check 'Six' - JFK is not dead. Saw him and Elvis having a beer at the Three Magpies last Friday night!

HugMonster
22nd Sep 2001, 05:02
You may have done - but I am reliably informed that he was drinking with Draper... :eek:

Whiskery
22nd Sep 2001, 16:42
So Huggy - which one was disguised as Draper ? JFK or Elvis !

HugMonster
22nd Sep 2001, 17:08
Neither, but Draper was disguised as Shergar. Not an easy feat, as I'm sure you will agree, and he would have carried it off quite well but for one rather large detail - the problem, of course, is that no man can quite match the - ummm - physical dimensions of part of a stallion's anatomy, and therefore one was left with the impression that Shergar was a gelding.

But for that, and the butcher's knives that fell out of his saddlebag when he absent-mindedly stood up to see over the bar, and he could have carried it off...

The Guvnor
22nd Sep 2001, 23:30
Grizzly Bare - actually, MKULTRA was a CIA 'mind control' operation that resulted in the invention of LSD.

As far as any of my own posts on this thread are concerned, I think you'll find that I have said that I didn't think that this operation was officially sanctioned by any intelligence agency; however a reasonable case could well be made to attribute it to rogue Israeli agents.

It's happened before and doubtless will happen again.

tony draper
23rd Sep 2001, 02:13
Read this and weep.

Sorry, the link doesn't appear to work , will see if I can find another.

[ 22 September 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

The Guvnor
23rd Sep 2001, 13:20
Interesting story here in an Israeli (not a dodgy, biased Arab paper, Danny!) paper (Ha'aretz) about the Israelis who were detained for 'puzzling behaviour' (ie videotaping the attacks and "shouting what in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery").

Ha'aretz Article (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=75266&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&lis tSrc=Y)

Sunday, September 23, 2001 Tishrei 6, 5762 Israel Time: 11:43 (GMT+3)

5 Israelis detained for `puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy

By Yossi Melman

Five Israelis who had worked for a moving company based in New Jersey are being held in U.S. prisons for what the Federal Bureau of Investigation has described as "puzzling behavior" following the terror attack on the World Trade Center in New York last Tuesday. The five are expected to be deported sometime soon.

The families of the five, who asked that their names not be released, said that their sons had been questioned by the FBI for hours on end, had been kept in solitary confinement for three days, and had been humiliated, stripped of their clothes and blindfolded.

The mother of one of the young men explained the chain of events as she understands it to Ha'aretz:

She said that the five had worked for the company, which is owned by an Israeli, for between two months and two years. They had been arrested some four hours after the attack on the Twin Towers while filming the smoking skyline from the roof of their company's building, she said. It appears that they were spotted by one of the neighbors who called the police and the FBI.

The mother said that the families and friends of the five in Israel had known nothing of the men's whereabouts for a number of days.

"When they finally let my son make a phone call for the first time to a friend in the United States two days ago, he told him that he had been tortured by the FBI in a basement," the mother said. "He was stripped to his underwear; he was blindfolded and questioned for 14 hours. They thought that because he has citizenship of a European country as well as of Israel that he was working for the Mossad [Israel's secret service]."

Seven FBI agents later stormed the apartment of one of the Israelis, searched it and questioned his roommate. The Israeli owner of the company, who has U.S. citizenship, was also questioned. Both men were subsequently released.

The families here complained that the Israeli consulate in New York and the situation room set up by the Foreign Ministry there to locate missing Israelis had done nothing to help their sons. The Foreign Ministry told the families that the FBI had denied holding the five and that the consulate had chosen to believe the FBI, the mother said.

The five were transferred out of the FBI's facility on Saturday morning and are now being held in two prisons in New Jersey by the Immigration and Naturalization Services. They are charged with illegally residing in the United States and working there without permits.

The Foreign Ministry said in response that it had been informed by the consulate in New York that the FBI had arrested the five for "puzzling behavior." They are said to have had been caught videotaping the disaster and shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery.

Velvet
23rd Sep 2001, 20:25
This report could be right, but since the world and his wife seemed to video this event and take photographs from every imaginable angle, including from inside as it happened, I fail to see the significance. I would be interested in who interpreted the cries as mockery rather than horror.

The Guvnor
23rd Sep 2001, 20:58
Velvet, I'm quite sure that if their behaviour was - pardon the pun - kosher, then they would have been released rather than being held and deported? The FBI obviously views them with a fair amount of scepticism!

Velvet
23rd Sep 2001, 21:06
Your faith in an unbiased and just FBI is touching Guv :)

The Guvnor
23rd Sep 2001, 21:26
Considering that the FBI is out there trying to harass every Muslim it can find at the moment, I think that they'd be leaving the Israelis alone for a bit - especially as they've always been considered a bit 'royal game' - the arrest of Jonathan Pollard was delayed almost six months as the FBI, State and the White House agonised over the potential fallout!

Grizzly Bare
23rd Sep 2001, 21:44
Now you're starting to sound like an anti-semite to me govnor. Sickening.

The Guvnor
23rd Sep 2001, 21:59
Good grief, Grizzly Bare! Don't you read the papers, even up in Manitoba?? :eek: :eek:

Mac the Knife
23rd Sep 2001, 23:01
"....actually, MKULTRA was a CIA 'mind control' operation that resulted in the invention of LSD."

No so Guvnor! Albert Hoffmann in Basel (with Prof. Arthur Stoll at Sandoz) was working with ergot derivatives (in attempts to find an effective circulatory stimulant) and synthesised LSD in 1938. It lay forgotten until 1943 until Hoffmann accidentally ingested a microscopic quantity. Intrigued he then deliberately took 250 micrograms. After WW2 Hoffmann and his Sandoz associates published data drawn from the LSD experiments and even the chemical composition of the drug in open scholarly journals. See http://www.flashback.se/archive/my_problem_child/chapter1.html

Intelligence agencies (and thriller writers) had been searching for years for a "truth serum" and the LSD publicity drew the attention of the newly created CIA's in-house scientists. Tt was extensively tested but judged too erratic in its action to be of much use.

Project MK-Ultra didn't have to invent LSD. They did try to develop a "super-hallucinogen" codenamed (I think) BZ (which may have been ALD-25).

lumbalund
23rd Sep 2001, 23:18
This may not be of any importance to everybody on this forum but not every ARAB is a muslim .There are ARAB who are christians and jews , and being arabs they are fluent in written and spoken ARABIC. :cool:

Velvet
24th Sep 2001, 01:29
And surprisingly, there are non-arabs are fluent both in spoken and written Arabic. And Farsi, Kurdish and Hebrew, Coptic and Turkic.

Tartan Gannet
24th Sep 2001, 01:52
As a staunch supporter of Israel and "Eretz Israel" if it comes to that I was at first very offended by the topic of this thread then I thought about how the Germans just before the start of WWII set up a raid on a wireless staton at Glewitz (sp?) and made it look as if Polish forces had been to blame as an excuse to start hostilities against the Poles. Anything is possible I suppose but I really doubt if Israel would attack its greatest ally and the nation who was first to recognise it back in 1948 and who has helped it ever since. Also many Jews live in New York and were likely to have been working in the WTC on Tuesday 11th September.

This is an interesting hypothesis but, as with Winston Smith's thread, its really not a suitable time.

Capt PPRuNe
24th Sep 2001, 05:30
As mentioned in the article "...interpreted as cries of joy and mockery". So Guv, before you start to make even more excuses for your reasons to post all this information and distortion you so magnificently manage to dredge up and you know about my feelings and persuasion you should think very hard about any further postings on any forum on PPRuNe. You can continue to antagonise everyone but continue to antagonise me and I will do a lot of people here a great favour and block you out of this website.

I am getting fed up with all the people who use this website as their own soapbox and I end up getting all the grief whether from reading some of the tripe or defending everyones right to make a point. In your case though Guv, I find your methods extremly odious and machiavelian.

I will make a statement here and then I will close this thread because I feel like it. PPRuNe is not a democracy and I am in the mood to be despotic. If you don't like that then feel free to find yourself another website where you will be more welcome. I am just fed up to the back teeth with putting in every spare minute of my free time to provide a website for professional pilots and associated workers to have to deal with all the facetious crap that this forum and many of the other hangers on decide to post.

Maybe I should just allow pilots, air traffic controllers, line engineers and cabin crew on here. It would surely make my life a lot easier and provide a bit more exclusivity.

I will post two articles I read today in The Sunday Times (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk). One which makes a point about religion and the fanatics who distort it and another which shames the chattering classes who blame America for the terrorist attacks on the 11th September. They are self explanatory and express my feelings and views in a much more eloquent manner than I am able.

Jews and Muslims must reject their lunatic fringes

Melanie Phillips

Islamic fundamentalism is now an indivisible entity in the public mind. At the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, terrorists declared war on western values in the name of Islam. So the faith is linked with fundamentalism and terror, graphically illustrated by the scenes of jubilation in the Muslim world at the carnage.

Some claim that such pursuit of violent conquest is intrinsic to Islam, presented as a faith of ancient barbarism. Many Muslims are desperately anxious to distance their religion from such a murderous profile. So Dr Zaki Badawi, principal of the Muslim College, has listed the Koranic precepts against murder and revenge and for the rule of law and the unity of the human race. The mainstream Muslim Council of Britain has denounced the "tiny lunatic fringe" of Muslim extremists in Britain who supported the American atrocities and dismisses them as "dangerous clowns".

Dry theology does not tell us much about what a religion is like. Better to look at how it is lived. Despite its theoretical militancy, during the centuries of the Ottoman empire Islam was extremely tolerant of its Christian and Jewish minorities. Indeed, one could say that, of the three great faiths, Christianity has been the most threatening, seeking to convert the world through mission, crusades and colonialism.

Moreover, fundamentalism has not been confined to Islam. Christianity and Judaism are also being profoundly altered by the recent rise of those who take literally the words of the sacred texts, allowing no room for modification. As Gilles Keppel has so persuasively argued in his book The Revenge of God, this was a widespread response to secularism which, in trying to suppress faith altogether, has disrupted social and moral connections and provoked disillusionment with modernity.

Moderate clerics of all faiths have a duty to draw a clear line in the sand against extremism. Jews have a duty to denounce as inimical to Jewish values the fanatics who want to blow up the mosques on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, as well as those rabbis who support them. If Islam does stand against violence, then its clerics have to make it clear that those who so defame its values can have no place within it. They should surely tell all who practise fanatical hatred that those who have told them they will go to paradise have told them a lie.

Fundamentalism does not inevitably lead to violence. Many who take sacred texts as the literal truth live lives of blameless order. But for those who seek power through violence, fundamentalism is a potent call to arms. The eminent Islamic scholar John Esposito, editor of the Oxford History of Islam, says fundamentalist Islam has a pathologically distorted vision of its own victimhood. Beleaguered by the advance of western values, it translates everything that the West does as an assault on Islam and so, since the faith permits self-defence, the West becomes a legitimate target for attack.

This is surely the root of the tragedy of Israel. Resentment at a Jewish state being imposed on Arab land became twisted into the belief that Arab self-determination, pride and honour were being trampled underfoot by America and Israel.

The reality was that the Arabs rejected the two-state solution from the start. They refused to make room for Jewish self-determination in a land to which the Jews had a strong ancestral connection. The reality was that this land was not taken by force of conquest, or because the King David hotel was blown up, but because, after the Holocaust, the United Nations decided that this was the only solution to the fact that the Jews needed a refuge from a world that did not want them and that hundreds of thousands of Jews had already settled in the Holy Land and were even a majority in Jerusalem.

That battle is still being fought. That is why a just solution to the Middle East conflict is central to the ending of Islamic terror. Sure, the animosity against the West by Muslim fanatics goes far wider and deeper. But Israel is the focus for those hated western values. It is a deadly symbol of the humiliation of Islam by America, standard-bearer of the West.

Many Muslims have come wearily to accept Israel's existence. They support a two-state solution and are enraged with Israel for policies seen to prevent that from coming about. But this itself is a distortion of reality. The Arab world, whom it has suited to use the permanent Palestinian dispossession as the most deadly form of propaganda, wants one state, not two. The right of return, the core demand of the Palestinians at the heart of the rejection of Ehud Barak's peace deal last year, would mean the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. The justification for that was on grotesque display at the Durban anti-racism conference earlier this year, where the Arab world attempted to resurrect the libel that Zionism equals racism.

This is not to say that Israel is blameless, by any means. Its attitude to its Arab minority is often appalling; Ariel Sharon's history is repellent; and the settlements are morally wrong and tactically inept and should be dismantled, not least because of the way they have poisoned Israel's values and sapped her self-belief. There is room for legitimate criticism of all these things, and more. But such critics pass beyond the pale when they say the very existence of Israel itself is synonymous with oppression, ignoring altogether the fact that Israel's excesses are overwhelmingly the outcome of 50 years of fighting a war of survival.

Acceptance of Israel's right to live in peace, along with a just solution for the Palestinians, is a litmus test for decency. That is why moderate Muslims should stand up and be counted - not just against global terrorism but also against those who want Israel destroyed and who preach anti-Jewish hatred. The Muslim Council may denounce terror in America but won't similarly denounce the suicide bombers and shootings in Israel; instead, it demonises Israel for trying to stop the violence.

Even worse, some mainstream Muslims openly call for Israel to be dismantled. In The Guardian earlier this year, Faisal Bodi said Israel should not exist. Two years ago, the so-called Muslim parliament heard a speaker express joy that the peace process had failed "thanks to our brothers in Hezbollah and Hamas", and congratulate the Swiss banks for holding out against Jewish claims relating to the "so-called Holocaust". A recent article in Q-News, a fortnightly newspaper for Muslim youth, consisted of a farrago of anti-Jewish group libels, such as that Jews think themselves more valuable than gentiles because they are the chosen people. And if anything was racist at the Durban conference, it was the Nazi-style cartoons of monstrous and rapacious Jews distributed by something called the Arab Lawyers' Union.

Because of the terror in America, British Muslims need protection from attack. They thus join British Jews against whom physical and verbal attacks, desecration of cemeteries and threatening phone calls have soared since the intifada started. If minds could only be untwisted, moderate Jews and Muslims could make common cause against the pincer movement of secularism and its unholy counterpart, fundamentalism. If only.

The USA saved Europe from the Nazis, defeated communism and keeps the West rich. Bryan Appleyard analyses why it has become the land of the loathed

Why do they hate America?

We have seen Pakistanis waving pictures of Osama Bin Laden and wearing T-shirts celebrating the death of 6,000 Americans. We have seen Palestinians dancing in the streets and firing their Kalashnikovs in glee. We have heard Harold Pinter and friends pleading with the West to stop a war we didn't start. A few of us have read a New Statesman editorial coming perilously close to suggesting that bond dealers in the World Trade Center had it coming.

Or consider what Elisabetta Burba, an Italian journalist, reported for The Wall Street Journal from Beirut. She saw suited, coiffed professionals cheering in the streets. Then she went into a fashionable cafe. "The cafe's sophisticated clientele was celebrating, laughing, cheering and making jokes, as waiters served hamburgers and Diet Pepsi. Nobody looked shocked or moved. They were excited, very excited," she writes.

"Ninety per cent of the Arab world believes that America got what it deserved," she is told. "An exaggeration?" she comments. "Rather an understatement."

It is horrifying but not entirely surprising; we have seen it before. I, certainly, have always lived in a world suffused with savage anti-Americanism. In my childhood the grown-ups were all convinced that the apparently inevitable nuclear holocaust would be the fault of the Americans. In my student years I saw the Vietnam war used as an excuse for violence and intimidation that would have made Mao Tse-tung proud - indeed, my contemporaries were waving his Little Red Book, his guide to mass murder, as they attempted to storm the American embassy. I saw many of those who now weep like crocodiles burning the Stars and Stripes.

How strange, I thought, even then. They wore Levi jeans, drank Coke, watched American television and listened to American music. Something inside them loved America, even as something outside them hated her. They were like fish that hated the very sea in which they swam - the whisky, in Samuel Beckett's words, that bore a grudge against the decanter. Like the Beirut elite, they wanted to have their hamburgers and eat them, to bite the Yankee hand that fed them.

But there is something more terrible, more gravely unjust here than 1960s student stupidity, more even than the dancing of the Palestinians and the Lebanese.

Let us ponder exactly what the Americans did in that most awful of all centuries, the 20th. They saved Europe from barbarism in two world wars. After the second world war they rebuilt the continent from the ashes. They confronted and peacefully defeated Soviet communism, the most murderous system ever devised by man, and thereby enforced the slow dismantling - we hope - of Chinese communism, the second most murderous. America, primarily, ejected Iraq from Kuwait and helped us to eject Argentina from the Falklands. America stopped the slaughter in the Balkans while the Europeans dithered.

Now let us ponder exactly what the Americans are. America is free, very democratic and hugely successful. Americans speak our language and a dozen or so Americans write it much, much better than any of us. Americans make extremely good films and the cultivation and style of their best television programmes expose the vulgarity of the best of ours. Almost all the best universities in the world are American and, as a result, American intellectual life is the most vibrant and cultivated in the world.

"People should think," David Halberstam, the writer, says from the blasted city of New York, "what the world would be like without the backdrop of American leadership with all its flaws over the past 60 years." Probably, I think, a bit like hell.

There is a lot wrong with America and terrible things have been done in her name. But when the chips are down all the most important things are right. On September 11 the chips went down.

The Yankophobes were too villanously stupid to get the message. Barely 48 hours after thousands of Americans are murdered, we see the BBC's Question Time with its hand-picked morons in the audience telling Philip Lader, the former US ambassador, that "the world despises America". The studio seethes with ignorance and loathing. Lader looks broken.

Or we have the metropolitan elite on Newsnight Review sneering at Dubya Bush. "So out of touch," Rosie Boycott, the journalist, hisses, "there was no sense of his feeling for people." Alkarim Jivani, the writer, wades in by trashing Bush's response when asked how he was feeling: "Well, I'm a loving guy; also I've got a job to do." Jivani thinks this isn't good enough, no emotion.

Hang on; I thought the bien- pensant left wanted restraint from Bush. And that "loving guy" quote was the most beautiful thing said since September 11. Poetically compressed, rooted in his native dialect, it evoked duty and stoicism. But these are not big values in Islington.

Or here's George Monbiot in The Guardian: "When billions of pounds of military spending are at stake, rogue states and terrorist warlords become assets precisely because they are liabilities." I see; so the United States, the victim of this attack, is to be condemned for somehow deviously making money out of it. I'll run it up the flagpole, George, but I suspect only the Question Time audience will salute.

Or here's Suzanne Moore in The Mail on Sunday: "In this darkest hour my heart goes out to America. But my head knows that I have not supported much of what has been done in its name in the past. As hard as it is, there are many who feel like this. Now is not the time to pretend otherwise." So, Suzanne, how many corpses does it take for it to be a good time to pretend otherwise? Do you laugh at the funerals of people with whom you disagreed?

Or here are two more venomous voices, both quoted in The Guardian. Patricia Tricker from Bedale: "Now they know how the Iraqis feel." And Andrew Pritchard from Amsterdam: "If the US's great peacetime defeat results in defeating America's overweening ego as the world's sole remaining superpower, it will be a highly productive achievement." Would that achievement be the dead children, Andrew, or the crushed firemen?

Anti-Americanism has long been the vicious, irrational, global ideology of our time. "It combines," says Sir Michael Howard, the historian, "the nastiest elements of the right and left." It is dangerous and stupid and, in the days after September 11, shockingly distasteful.

In the name of God, more than 6,000 noncombatants are dead, more than 6,000 families bereaved. From what dark wells of malevolence springs this dreadful reflex desire to dance on their graves?

From history, says Michael Lind, senior fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington: "There's an anti-bourgeois, anti-capitalist and ultimately anti-modern theme that always emerges to criticise the dominant power of the day. It was directed at the cities of northern Italy, then in the 17th century at the Netherlands, then at Britain when she picked up the torch of capitalism, and now it's the US."

So at the most basic level America is loathed simply because she's on top. The world leader is always trashed simply for being the leader. The terms of the trashing are remarkably consistent. Nineteenth-century Germans, Lind points out, responded to Britain's dominance by saying, in effect, "they may be rich but we have soul". That is exactly what many Europeans and all anti-Americans are now saying: we're for God or culture or whatever against mammon. This is inaccurate - America has more soul, culture and a lot more God than any of her critics - but it is the predictably banal rhetoric of envy.

This form of "spiritual" anti-Americanism has close links with anti-semitism. "Anti-Americanism and anti-semitism are closely interwoven historically," says Tony Judt, professor of history at New York University. "Not because there are so many Jews here - there weren't always - but because both are in part about fear of openness, rootlessness, change, the modern anomic world: Jews as a placeless people, America as a history-less land."

As Jon Ronson recently demonstrated in his book, Them: Adventures with Extremists, almost every crazed cult in the world believes there is a global Jewish conspiracy run from Hollywood and Wall Street. Those bien-pensant chatterers are, I'm sure, anti-racists all, but they are swimming in deeper, darker, crazier waters than they imagine.

Judt's word "openness" is important. The fanatic - in Islington or Kabul - hates openness because he finds himself relativised and turns on the very society which permits his freedom of expression.

George Orwell noted in 1941: "In so far as it hampers the British war effort, British pacifism is on the side of the Nazis and German pacifism, if it exists, is on the side of Britain and the USSR. Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is pro-Nazi." Elsewhere he wrote of the "unadmitted motive" of pacifism as being "hatred of western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism".

So bog-standard anti-Americanism in the developed world is a dark, irrational combination of hate-the-father/leader and infantile fantasies of rebellion and control. It is a reflex hatred of home - the place that provides succour or, in this case, Levi's. But of course there are local nuances. The French have, in contrast to the British, been consistently anti-American at governmental and diplomatic levels.

"It is a long-standing resentment born of 1940," says Judt. "A sense that France was once the universal, modern reference or model and is now just a second-class power with a declining international language to match. There is a lose analogy with British complexes about the US - us in decline, them over-mighty - but in France it is complicated by a layer of hyper-revolutionism among the intelligentsia in the years between 1947 and 1973, precisely the time when the US rise to world domination was becoming uncomfortably obvious."

In Britain we did not have the Sartres and the Derridas leading us to political and philosophical extremes. But members of the British left had something simpler: a burning hatred for America for disproving almost everything they ever believed. They so wanted rampantly capitalist America to be wrong that even Stalin hadn't quite turned them off Russia.

There was, admittedly, a pause in this crude British form of anti-Americanism. When Bill Clinton was elected president, the British left suddenly constructed a fantasy America as co-pioneer of the Third Way. The new mandarins - Martin Amis, Salman Rushdie - said that America was where it was all happening. It was a fantasy because Clinton, even to himself, was window-dressing. Capitalist, religious America had merely put on this smiling mask. When Bush was elected the left felt betrayed.

Much of the present wave of anti-Americanism, and especially the awful contempt for Bush, springs from this sense of betrayal. It also springs from an inability to escape from post-cold war attitudes. "The anxiety about American behaviour now," says Hugh Brogan, research professor of history at Essex University, "is a hangover from cold war anxiety about nuclear war."

Fear of the bomb was such that it provoked in some an abiding belief that at any moment we would be fried or irradiated because of the miscalculation of some mad American in a cowboy hat - an image burnt into many brains by Stanley Kubrick's apocalyptic film Dr Strangelove.

Somehow the Soviet Union, probably because of ignorance, escaped our disapproval. It was all wrong, if

just about understandable, then. Now it has become a pernicious and destructive failure to know a friend when we see one.

With the cold war confrontations gone, the anti-capitalism, anti- globalisation movements abandoned potentially rational, cultural and environmental anxieties in favour of a monstrous random bag of anti-American loathing. And, of course, the Middle East seemed to provide a clear case of the arrogant, bullying superpower persecuting the poor.

The idea of the bully fits neatly with one of the most grotesquely enduring of all anti-American beliefs: that Americans are all dumb Yanks. This is a delusion of the right as much as the left and it began with Harold Macmillan's absurd aspiration, later taken up by Harold Wilson, that somehow Britain should play Athens to America's Rome.

The idea was that America was this big, blundering lummox and we were these terribly refined deep thinkers. Precisely the same attitude inspires the raised eyebrows and condescending tut-tutting of leftish dinner party opinion. They're so naïve, say the chatterers, so innocent - and this, sadly, leads them to do such terrible things.

Well, I've spent some time among the American intelligentsia and I have been awestruck and humbled. They are, without doubt, the best educated, most cultivated and cleverest people in the world. They are also the most humane. There are 30 or more American universities where our best and brightest would be struggling to keep up. Apart from that, how could we be so dumb as to accuse the nation of Updike, Bellow, Roth, DeLillo, Ashbery, Dylan, of Terence Malick, The Simpsons, Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola of stupidity, let alone innocence?

The roots of this are obvious. We want the bully to be thick for the same reason as we want the beautiful model to be thick. We can't bear the possibility of somebody having strength or beauty as well as brains.

In fairness, the stupidity charge is partly fuelled by one of the odder forms of anti-Americanism: American anti-Americanism. There has always been, within the US, cultivated East and West Coast elites who take the charge of stupidity seriously and feel they have to apologise for the embarrassment of the unsophisticated masses of the Midwest or deep South.

At its best this produces the brilliant satire of Randy Newman, at its worst the mandarin, Europhile posing of Gore Vidal. The masses bite back with their own form of anti-Americanism - a hatred of the elites. The Rev Jerry Falwell has already made common cause with the terrorists by blaming the attack on "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays, and the lesbians". To Falwell modern America really is the Great Satan.

However, it is Middle Eastern anti-Americanism that is the burning issue of the moment. Again this is deeply misunderstood by the chatterers of the West. For them it is simply a matter of Israel, apparently a clear case of a surrogate bullying on America's behalf, and of oil, a clear case of American greed swamping all other human considerations.

In fact, America has always had more allies in the region than it has had enemies - although, this being the Middle East, allies become enemies and vice versa with bewildering rapidity. In the 1950s and 1960s, the US and her allies worked to subvert the secular Arab nationalist power of President Nasser of Egypt by backing Islamicist groups. Good idea, bad tactics. These groups started out pro- American and became anti. The unwelcome result was the more or less total destruction of nationalism and the creation of the powerful religious movement that now haunts Arab politics.

Israel forms a part but not the whole of this picture. Islamicism makes it a larger part because of an ancient enmity that goes back to the story of the prophet's betrayal by Jewish tribes and, more recently, to the defeat and expulsion of the Moors from Christian Europe.

In this context, Arab hardliners see Israel as a further Christian-backed offensive against the Islamic world. Even without Israel, the idea of such an offensive would still be a powerful imaginative force.

People who suggest September 11 would never have happened if America had pulled back from her support for Israel are almost certainly wrong. Israel is not even in the foreground of Bin Laden's murderous imagination. The Palestinians have actually complained that he cares nothing for them. For Bin Laden and for many more moderate Muslims, the turning point was the Gulf war in 1990-91.

"Contrary to popular belief that was the first real build-up of American military force in the region," says Dr Clive Jones at Leeds University. "This was in Saudi Arabia, a country with the holiest sites in Islam at Mecca and Medina. This created a new form of anti-Americanism that cannot in any way be related to Israel."

To these newest and most savage anti-Americans, Israel is secondary. The primary crime is blasphemy against the holiest Islamic soil. One widely circulated picture of two women GIs in a Jeep, their shirts unbuttoned to their waists, driving across the Arabian desert, was enough to inflame the sensibilities of thousands of devout Muslims and to fling the most unstable of them into the arms of the extremists. They had a point but not one that justifies murder. Islam, at heart, is as peaceful a creed as Christianity.

The truth about the Gulf war was that the Americans saved an Arab state, Kuwait, from Saddam Hussein, the most savage oppressor in the region. They would have been as surely damned for not doing this as much as they are now damned for doing it. Now they are also damned by the chatterers for keeping the pressure on Saddam. Do the chatterers know what Saddam is still doing? I do and I'm with the Americans.

Of course America has made terrible mistakes in the Middle East. Much resentment would have been and may still be prevented by a humane settlement with the Palestinians. But America was usually trying to do the right thing, always with the collusion of large sections, if not the majority, of the Arab population. As Winston Churchill said, the Americans usually do the right thing once they have tried all the alternatives.

Yet anti-Americanism has become the savage reflex of the entire region. It is the result of cynical manipulation by, mostly, appalling Arab governments and by extremists who wish to relaunch a medieval war of civilisations between Christianity and Islam.


This is the anti-Americanism that informs the ignorant dinner party guests of the West who, in their comfortable stupidity, pretend to have more in common with fanatical theocrats than they do with the land of The Simpsons and John Updike.

Perhaps worst of all is the deep vacuity of this reflex malevolence. In truth there is little that can be said about the attack on America. Our "thinkers" are trapped in a history they do not understand. They can grasp global conflict only as a series of confrontations between competing humanist ideologies - most obviously capitalism and communism. But this is something different. It is a confrontation between civilisation and an atavistic savagery that has no time for the delicate ways of life we have, at such terrible cost, constructed. Unable to see this, the chatterers must search for something to say.

"It's not for nothing they're called the chattering classes," observes Brogan.

So they blame the victim. It is a heartbreaking spectacle of delusion turned to savagery. What has America done wrong? In the days since September 11, its president and people have done nothing but demonstrate dignity and restraint. Bush will lash out, the chatterers said. But he hasn't yet. Bush is a bumbling hick, they sneered. But he isn't. Even CNN, that usually incomprehensible tumult of undigested events, has been steady and calm, devoid of all trace of prejudice, xenophobia or empty emotion.

Civilisation? It lies exactly 3,000 miles to the west of where I write and some of it is in ruins. I just wish it was closer.

I am sick of my generation's whining ingratitude, its wilful, infantile loathing of the great, tumultuous, witty and infinitely clever nation that has so often saved us from ourselves. But I am heartened by something my 19- year-old daughter said: "America has always been magic to us, we don't understand why you lot hate it so much."

Anti-Americanism has never been right and I hope it never will be. Of course there are times for criticism, lampoons, even abuse. But this is not one of them. This is a time when we are being asked a question so simple that it is almost embarrassing - a question that should silence the Question Time morons, the sneering chatterers and the cold warriors, a question so elemental, so fundamental, so pristine that, luxuriating in our salons, we had forgotten it could even be asked. So face it, answer it, stand up and be counted.

[ 24 September 2001: Message edited by: Capt PPRuNe ]

DC Meatloaf
24th Sep 2001, 06:45
Thank you for posting those, Capt.

flapsforty
24th Sep 2001, 10:36
If only the word were more powerful than the sword...........

Thanks for posting these 2 articles Danny.

tony draper
24th Sep 2001, 11:45
Roger that Captn, 13 days after the obscenity
inflicted on us all in the west, I repeat all of us, not only anti American feeling in the east, but also swelling in the west.
A new sound echoes throughout the land, the sound of heads being hidden in the sand, and in the east, the sound of Dishdashha sleeves being laughed up.

[ 24 September 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

[ 24 September 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

Whiskery
24th Sep 2001, 13:19
Ahhh...yes Tony and soon the sounds of our Special Air Service regiments quietly moving through Afganistan eradicating every small terrorist camp of bin Laden. Reporting back intel to HQ on the larger camps which will be neutralised by the louder sounds of the F16 and F18 jets screaming into range to blast the cowardly,scumbag martyrs of bin Laden (NOT Islam) into their long awaited paradise.

Then when we have rid the world of this scum of the earth and they have all met Allah, we can get back to living our lives in peace.

Keep the faith:]

I. M. Esperto
24th Sep 2001, 20:27
Anything is possible.

I recall the Lavon Affair, where PM Lavon was forced to resign after it was revealed that he was behind an Israeli plot to turn the USA against Egypt by destroying certain US assets in Eqypt, and blaming the Egyptians on it.

The MOSSAD boys were caught red-handed.

Then there was the SS Patria, loaded with Jewish refugees, blown up in Haifa harbor in 1940 by the Zionists, who managed to blame the British for it. 250 Jews murdered.

[ 24 September 2001: Message edited by: I. M. Esperto ]

Jackonicko
25th Sep 2001, 19:43
Tartsand Gannets

After our disagreements on vigilanteism, you'll be astonished to know that I agree with you, at least partially. Israeli complicity in the outrage? Possible I suppose, (but only theoretically), but most unlikely (that's not strong enough - I need a word just short of impossible!), and very offensive and insensitive to suggest it. However much we may condemn Israel for its apartheid and racist policies towards the indigenous population, and however brutal the Israeli government may have been (and even taking into account the illegal campaign of assassination waged recently) to compare Israel with Nazi Germany is grotesque and unjustifiable.

But I'm intrigued that you should proclaim yourself to be a staunch supporter of Israel and "Eretz Israel". Would you be offended if I ask how anyone can support Eretz Israel? (The idea that the biblical lands of Israel should all be incorporated in the Jewish nation state). What would the borders be? Isn't that inherently racist (the indigenous population have to be written off as being 'lesser' humans, with lesser rights and needs)? Isn't it irresponsibly aggressive and inevitably provocative and destabilising? How about the rights of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc? Won't adherence to Eretz Israel destroy the legitimacy of Israel's claims to statehood at all?

I'm genuinely fascinated as to how an educated man (whether you are a jew or a non-jew) could so strongly express such support for such a concept. Please enlighten me - whether here or by E-mail.

Paterbrat
25th Sep 2001, 20:26
The most reasoned logical argument presented with care and dignity can still be met with a trite statement that betrays the inability of stubborn hatefilled simpletons to either listen, read, consider or comprehend any argument other than the belief they cling so desperately to.
Your submission Danny was one of belief in the honest efforts of good men to try and help others around them. America has for Centuries been a magnet for men and women of every race creed or colour simply because the ideals that were present in it's creation were simple bright beacons of hope to a world full of people who were seeking a better life in a place that espoused freedom.
It is also alas a target of hate and envy. It like every other Country Goverment and social system is flawed. There is injustice and predjudice there are mistakes in foreign policy but it's ideals are still held high and actively persued. It tries and tries to do the best it can with genuine effort to help the weak and needy. It does try and support the weak, and due to it's present pre-imminence it is looked to by a large percentage of the world to be the arbiter of it's problems, worlds policeman if you like. And human nature being what it is, not everyone will be in agreement with the solutions it offers. Throughout history various nations have held this position in our time it is them. Fact!
The thing though I found most disturbing about this thread is that it is a microcosm of the world around us. While the world shudders, the economy rocks and cracks, while our particular industry in which we are all so intimiteley involved, is crumbling, we all rush around volubly pointing fingers of accusation in all directions blaming everyone but ourselves.
If we tolerate this abomination, if we do not see that the terror networks of organisations that kill indiscriminately and seek only to destroy are at a stage now where their actions will bring our world as we know it tumbling about all our heads, then we deserve our fate, for it is our own tolerance and acceptance of the various terrorist organisations around the world to exist within, and exploit the freedoms and protections we all take so much for granted.
We all seem to have our own 'freedom fighters ' that we support, we have allowed ourselves to become blind to the increasingly violent excesses such groups are resorting to to 'put their particular message across'.
Violence has begat violence and unfortunately as the violence ratchets up increasingly draconian methods are having to be resorted to and indeed needed to combat it.
Ousama Bin Ladin, even if he did not do this last obscenity, is still wanted on enough other evidence that had resulted in a UN resolution for his aprehension. If as a part of the global effort to eradicate and check terrorism worldwide the US is seeking his extradition and his present host country refuses to give him up because he is a "guest" then the US at least deserves the support of all people who believe in the rule of law and order. For Afghanistan is perhaps simply a starting point in a worldwide effort to do something about the scourge in our midst. ie the co-ordinated efforts of all rightthinking people to contain and neutralise the nihilistic hatefilled extremists that are present in society as a whole who will coldbloodedly destroy anything kill anybody, anywhere at anytime to without any regard to achieve their goals

Jackonicko
26th Sep 2001, 02:00
"We all rush around volubly pointing fingers of accusation in all directions blaming everyone but ourselves."

So shouldn't the USA, Israel, and yes, Britain all accept some share of the blame for creating the climate of mistrust, hatred and fear which presently characterises relations between Islam and the West, and which has provided such fertile soil in which extremist Wahhabi-dominated Islamic fundamentalism has grown, and in which this outrage was possible? And having accepted that guilt shouldn't we be trying to deal with the underlying causes while also taking legitimate action against those directly responsible?

You also bemoan the cycle of violence and then advocate bombing Afghanistan (whose leadership I find repugnant, and who we should arguably have declared war on years ago, for their suppression and persecution of their people, and for the wanton destruction of our cultural heritage (the statues at - I forget where). But if we stick by civilised standards we must acknowledge that they've asked for proof of Bin Laden's guilt, and even without having received that have asked him to leave. Should we really still be declaring war on them?

Before Danny takes me to task for my previous post decrying Eretz Israel, could I just point out the uncomfortable parallels between that concept and the ugly philosophy of 'Lebensraum' as espoused by the Nazis, or with any other example of racial supremacists whose aim is to create some kind of exclusive 'homeland' for their kith and kin.

Criticising the Israeli state, Israeli politicians (such as the loathsome Sharon) or Zionism generally is not the same as anti-semitism, and should not be misinterpreted as such. The Jews deserve better representatives than the present Israeli government, for they are a great nation and a great people. They are presently lions led by scorpions, however.

The Guvnor
26th Sep 2001, 02:34
Jackonicko - I'm sure I don't have to remind you about the following. Seems strange to me that we can arrest aged ex dictators such as General Pinochet for violations against human rights yet really nasty pieces of work like Sharon and Mugabe are feted by governments around the world. Peter Tatchell went a long way up in my estimation with his one-man war against Mugabe! What's the latest news on Norway(?) and their stated intention to arrest the Israeli Ambassador for war crimes?

Ariel Sharon is responsible for the massacre of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, on the southern outskirts of Beirut. The slaughter in the two contiguous camps at Sabra and Shatila took place from the evening of September 16, 1982 until the morning of September 18, 1982, in an area under the control of the Israeli armed forces. The perpetrators were members of the Phalange (Kata'eb, in Arabic) militia, the Lebanese force that was armed by and closely allied with Israel since the onset of Lebanon's civil war in 1975. Prior to the massacre, Sharon had meetings with the Phalange forces.

For over 60 hours - aided by an Israeli siege around the camps and guided by the light of Israeli flares - forces belonging to the Israeli-allied Phalangist militia went through the camps, killing Palestinian and Lebanese civilians. Some were lined up against walls and mown down by machine-gun fire. Others were left in heaps on the floors of their homes or on the streets of the camps. Children were shot dead, women and girls were raped and mutilated and men were disembowelled prior to being executed.

The precise number of victims of the massacre may never be exactly determined. The International Committee of the Red Cross counted 1,500 at the time of the massacre but by September 22 this count had risen to 2,400. On the following day 350 bodies were uncovered so that the total then ascertained had reached 2,750. Israeli military intelligence estimated that 700 to 800 were killed.

UN Resolution UNSC 521 (1982) of 19 September 1982 offered uneqivocal condemnation of the Sabra and Shatila Massacre, although it avoided naming any perpetrators at this early stage.

The question of direct Israeli involvement in the massacre is one that has never been fully resolved. However - despite denials - there is little doubt that Israeli troops surrounding the two camps were aware of what was going on inside:

From 5-5.30 am low level flights of Israeli planes over Sabra and Shatila took place, after which shelling promptly commenced.
(Source: The New York Times, 16 September 1982, quoting Dr. Witsoe, Gaza hospital)

The Israelis established observation posts on top of multi-storey buildings in the
north-west quadrant of the Kuwaiti Embassy. From these posts, the naked eye has a clear view of several sections of the camps, including those parts of Shatila where piles of bodies were found.
Source: Newsweek, 4 October 1982, Ray Wilkinson; The Guardian, 20 September 1982 and The New York Times, 26 September 1982

Throughout the night flares lit up the sky. They were fired at the rate of two a minute, as reported by an Israeli soldier from a mortar unit.
Source: The Jerusalem Post, 21 September 1982.

A Jewish-American registered nurse, Ms. Ellen Siegel, was working in Gaza hospital in the Sabra refugee camp in Beirut, where she and a medical team treated the first victims of the massacre. She and other health workers were lined up against a bullet-riddled wall by Phalangists who were about to execute them, with rifles aimed, when an Israeli officer came running to stop this possible execution.

She told The New York Times that:

"I spoke with Zeev Schiff [a military affairs correspondant for Ha'aretz newspaper] in person about this incident. The wall was located just outside the camp but obviously if the commander could see this, he could see other things. We were taken to the area of the FCP [Forward Command Post]. From there one could look down onto the camps. My understanding is that the IDF had sophisticated visual equipment.

"There was a BBC film made in '92 ("See No Evil"). In this film they interviewed Israeli soldiers who were at the camps. They clearly allude to knowing what was going on."

An official Israeli commission of inquiry - chaired by Yitzhak Kahan, president of Israel's Supreme Court - investigated the massacre, and in February 1983 publicly released its findings. The Kahan Commission found that Ariel Sharon, among other Israelis, had responsibility for the massacre, although it carefully sidestepped any accusation of direct involvement in the massacre and chose not to attempt to reconcile much of the contradictory testimony. The commission's report stated in pertinent part:

It is our view that responsibility is to be imputed to the Minister of Defence for having disregarded the danger of acts of vengeance and bloodshed by the Phalangists against the population of the refugee camps, and having failed to take this danger into account when he decided to have the Phalangists enter the camps. In addition, responsibility is to be imputed to the Minister of Defence for not ordering appropriate measures for preventing or reducing the danger of massacre as a condition for the Phalangists' entry into the camps. These blunders constitute the non-fulfillment of a duty with which the Defence Minister was charged.

The Commission also concluded:

[I]n his meeting with the Phalangist commanders, the Defence Minister made no attempt to point out to them the gravity of the danger that their men would commit acts of slaughter.... Had it become clear to the Defence Minister that no real supervision could be exercised over the Phalangist force that entered the camps with the IDF's assent, his duty would have been to prevent their entry. The usefulness of the Phalangists' entry into the camps was wholly disproportionate to the damange their entry could cause if it were uncontrolled.

The Commission further noted:

We shall remark here that it is obstensibly puzzling that the Defence Minister did not in any way make the Prime Minister [Menachem Begin] privy to the decision on having the Phalangists enter the camps.

Paterbrat
26th Sep 2001, 13:09
Yes Jacko the voluble finger pointing goes on and on and on and on, just see above. Yes Britain and the US do acknowledge the failures of foreign policy, yes there are aspects of it that have caused tensions. Just because the sight of a police uniform in Bradford and Brixton raise tension, do we ban the wearing of or appearence of police in those areas because of it. The Taliban have for years been supporting protecting and actively joining in the policies of Bin Ladin's movement, the various proofs concerning previous terrorist actions were presented ages ago resulting in UN reqests to the Taliban for his extradition and yet you and others would require yet more proof?
While I do indeed deplore the cycle of violence I also acknowledge a sad fact of life, that it is not yet possible to exist in our present state of humanity without it, unfortunately it is an inescapable fact of life that it is the only form of interaction that some extreme elements of human society understand.

Jackonicko
26th Sep 2001, 13:33
Paterbrat
"Just because the sight of a police uniform in Bradford and Brixton raise tension, do we ban the wearing of or appearence of police in those areas because of it?"

No, but you do adopt more sensitive policing procedures, you do try to fight the underlying urban deprivation, you do try to encourage greater recruitment of ethnic minority policemen, and you come down hard on racism within the police. In Brixton, you even turn a blind eye to those relatively minor and unimportant examples of criminality which may be of particular significance to the group you are trying to bring back within the law (use of cannabis). I hate the [email protected], but you follow Tony's dictum of being "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime."

What you don't do is deliberately provoke and inflame the situation by swamping the area with police, briefing them to come down hard on coloured locals, 'cos that just makes things worse. Nor do you deport them, nor do you beat them up.

Guv,
I am of course well aware of Sabra and Shatila, which may be entirely representative of the brutality and ruthlessness which the Israeli state has sometimes prosecuted the war against its perceived enemy, and which may have foreshadowed the hundreds of murders it has carried out during the Intifada, but I think that it's too great a leap to pretend that a country capable of Sabra/Shatila would also cynically attack its greatest international friend and supporter in a terrorist attack aimed predominantly at civilians. I see the tortuous logic of those who press this far-fetched theory, buit if Israel had wanted to awaken fear and loathing of Islamic terrorism, could it not have achieved it just as well by attacking one of the USA's close allies - eg us!

I have no truck with these murdering [email protected], but I don't believe them to be capable of this kind of evil.

[ 26 September 2001: Message edited by: Jackonicko ]

OzDude
26th Sep 2001, 15:53
Ho ho ho. I have just found this post and what do we see but none other than the lily white Guvnor spouting on about about others when he has his own skeletons to worry about. I do not know much about the middle east situation and I am sure than Mr Sharon is not a saint but I do remember there being a full judicial review in Israel about the massacres and he was found "indirectly" responsible for them for allowing the Phalange into the camps unsupervised.

Dont know how many Judical reviews there were within the PLO or Lebanon or Syria for that matter but I do know that for racist BNP members like the Guvnor to go on about issues in that part of the world is not suprising. If he is trying to make claims about mud sticking to people he should look at his own background in South Africa where he was arrested and investigated for child abuse and paedophilia. The child concerned was none other than his ex-girlfriends.

The Guvenors history also includes allegations about his dealings with one side or another in Rwanda and the massacres that took place there between the tutus and hutus. His dodgy banana boat airline where he was some sort of director were involved in gun running and he is often seen showing a piece of perspex with a 9mm bullet embedded in it where he likes to brag about an assasination attempt on his life and that is the piece of window that saved him only for him to end up here where he pontificates and bullshits his way through his sad life.

A paragon of innocence is our Guvnor. No ulterior motives but to be a beacon of hope for the rest of us working in "his" industry. The sooner he is taken out the better for the rest of us. Paedophiles not welcome here.