Comments on: The Ni’lin Shooting http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/ Commentary about Zionism, anti-Zionism, antisemitism and the conflict in the Middle East Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:16:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5-RC1.1 By: Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-989 Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:28:48 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-989 Oh, I see, now, <b>andrew r</b>: you were quoting from the article, not endorsing it. My apologies. I fully agree with you, by the way. As for the Palestinians lynching Israeli soldiers, there's absolutely no difference between that and the Israeli Shin Bet killing handcuffed prisoners in the Bus 300 affair. If anyone is unduly wagging his self-righteous finger, it's Wainstein, not the Italian journalists. Oh, I see, now, andrew r: you were quoting from the article, not endorsing it. My apologies. I fully agree with you, by the way.

As for the Palestinians lynching Israeli soldiers, there’s absolutely no difference between that and the Israeli Shin Bet killing handcuffed prisoners in the Bus 300 affair. If anyone is unduly wagging his self-righteous finger, it’s Wainstein, not the Italian journalists.

]]> By: andrew r http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-964 andrew r Sun, 10 Aug 2008 21:58:08 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-964 Well, you don't seem to object to his hogwash. He's saying it all over the article, just not in one sentence. "We are superior, so superior that the revelation of immoral conduct came from us" contrasts nicely with "noble fighter for liberation holding a piece of liver between his teeth" and "something they rejected in 1947 and continue to reject". We are morally superior to the Palestinians who lynch our soldiers because when we shoot them, marginal members of our society condemn it. Okay. Well, you don’t seem to object to his hogwash.

He’s saying it all over the article, just not in one sentence. “We are superior, so superior that the revelation of immoral conduct came from us” contrasts nicely with “noble fighter for liberation holding a piece of liver between his teeth” and “something they rejected in 1947 and continue to reject”.

We are morally superior to the Palestinians who lynch our soldiers because when we shoot them, marginal members of our society condemn it. Okay.

]]> By: Eamonn McDonagh http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-963 Eamonn McDonagh Sun, 10 Aug 2008 21:12:36 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-963 I didn't write the article, I translated it, I think that's reasonably clear in the introduction. In any case Wainstein is not talking about being morally superior to Palestinians, he's talking about finger-wagging foreigners like the Italian journalists he mentions. I didn’t write the article, I translated it, I think that’s reasonably clear in the introduction.

In any case Wainstein is not talking about being morally superior to Palestinians, he’s talking about finger-wagging foreigners like the Italian journalists he mentions.

]]> By: andrew r http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-962 andrew r Sun, 10 Aug 2008 20:10:03 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-962 Sorry you got that impression. I'm trying to explain to Eamonn that the existence of B'Tselem does not make Israelis morally superior to Palestinians, a point he makes in no uncertain terms. If anything, my point contains the implication that the occupation is the main obstacle to peace. Sorry you got that impression. I’m trying to explain to Eamonn that the existence of B’Tselem does not make Israelis morally superior to Palestinians, a point he makes in no uncertain terms. If anything, my point contains the implication that the occupation is the main obstacle to peace.

]]> By: Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-960 Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:40:39 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-960 I see your tactic, <b>andrew r</b>. Since you can't deny that Israel has approved another settlement, or that it will be a further obstacle to peace, you try to divert the discussion to something else. The morality of a country is not determined by the freedom to expose its wrongs, but by the will to redress them. I see your tactic, andrew r. Since you can’t deny that Israel has approved another settlement, or that it will be a further obstacle to peace, you try to divert the discussion to something else.

The morality of a country is not determined by the freedom to expose its wrongs, but by the will to redress them.

]]> By: andrew r http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-956 andrew r Sat, 09 Aug 2008 07:47:49 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-956 <i>I believe that this is how things are and that you are right. We are superior, so superior that the revelation of immoral conduct came from us, not from you, from an Israeli and Jewish NGO called and, and not by chance, B’Tselem...<i> In order for B'Tselem to do their work, they must be able to travel from their office to the occupied territories. As Israeli Jews, they are privileged by the state to do this. Palestinians can not travel from their hometowns without passing check points, so to lay blame on the lack of Palestinian human rights work, you have your army to thank. I believe that this is how things are and that you are right. We are superior, so superior that the revelation of immoral conduct came from us, not from you, from an Israeli and Jewish NGO called and, and not by chance, B’Tselem…

In order for B’Tselem to do their work, they must be able to travel from their office to the occupied territories. As Israeli Jews, they are privileged by the state to do this. Palestinians can not travel from their hometowns without passing check points, so to lay blame on the lack of Palestinian human rights work, you have your army to thank.

]]> By: Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-924 Ibrahim Ibn Yusuf Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:10:29 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-924 While I agree with the first part of Wainstein's analysis, of course I don't agree with the second. Wainstein places the full blame for the lack of a peace process on the Palestinians, because "the current government, a majority in the current Knesset and a majority of Israelis accept the creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank, side by side with Israel." But what kind of Palestinian state do they accept to create? In today's <a href="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215331200875&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull" rel="nofollow">Jerusalem Post</a> we learn that Defense Minister Ehud Barak approved last week plans for a new settlement in the Jordan Valley. If Israel truly wants to give the Palestinians a viable state, why does it look like it wants to retain the Jordan Vally? Would denying the building permit for that settlement be tantamount to "taking a step forward on the edge of the abyss"? Would national security be jeopardized by not adding yet another illegal community in the West Bank? And what about the Wall? In September 2007 the High Court ordered the State to re-route it so as not to affect the Ni'ilin villagers, but the State is completely <a>disregarding</a> the guidelines of the ruling. Again, would Israel's security be compromised by redrawing the wall so as not to hit the Palestinians so hard? And what about the settlers? Please go to <a>this</a> page. Please watch the video included in it. Please be sure to notice, right at the beginning of the video, the kipah-wearing settler children stoning a Palestinian house, with the Israeli soldiers looking on. Yet again -- if Israel wants peace, why does it look like it condones violence against the Palestinians? So long as Israelis stick to those forms of violence that are not necessary for their own security, they won't convince us that the only problem is on the Palestinian side. While I agree with the first part of Wainstein’s analysis, of course I don’t agree with the second. Wainstein places the full blame for the lack of a peace process on the Palestinians, because “the current government, a majority in the current Knesset and a majority of Israelis accept the creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank, side by side with Israel.”

But what kind of Palestinian state do they accept to create? In today’s Jerusalem Post we learn that Defense Minister Ehud Barak approved last week plans for a new settlement in the Jordan Valley. If Israel truly wants to give the Palestinians a viable state, why does it look like it wants to retain the Jordan Vally? Would denying the building permit for that settlement be tantamount to “taking a step forward on the edge of the abyss”? Would national security be jeopardized by not adding yet another illegal community in the West Bank?

And what about the Wall? In September 2007 the High Court ordered the State to re-route it so as not to affect the Ni’ilin villagers, but the State is completely disregarding the guidelines of the ruling. Again, would Israel’s security be compromised by redrawing the wall so as not to hit the Palestinians so hard?

And what about the settlers? Please go to this page. Please watch the video included in it. Please be sure to notice, right at the beginning of the video, the kipah-wearing settler children stoning a Palestinian house, with the Israeli soldiers looking on. Yet again — if Israel wants peace, why does it look like it condones violence against the Palestinians?

So long as Israelis stick to those forms of violence that are not necessary for their own security, they won’t convince us that the only problem is on the Palestinian side.

]]> By: Human http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-923 Human Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:01:19 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-923 "demonstrations involving non-violent direct action are regularly held against the separation wall on village land." "The latter don’t attack people but they do attempt to damage the wall and the machinery being used to build it." These are lies. They are not non-violent and they do attack people. “demonstrations involving non-violent direct action are regularly held against the separation wall on village land.”

“The latter don’t attack people but they do attempt to damage the wall and the machinery being used to build it.”

These are lies. They are not non-violent and they do attack people.

]]> By: chanan http://blog.z-word.com/2008/08/the-nilin-shooting/#comment-916 chanan Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:40:37 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=200#comment-916 Excellent analysis...thanks. Excellent analysis…thanks.

]]>