Heroism in the Holy Land

[hahn]

http://www.sfbayview.com/100604/heroism100604.shtml


Heroism in the Holy Land: Chris Brown beaten for walking children to school

by Alison Weir
San Franciscan Chris Brown was beaten by Israeli settlers with a bat and chains and his head smashed with a rock simply for walking Palestinian children to school.

There are a small number of people around the world who exhibit extraordinary courage. An even smaller number commit repeated acts of heroism. San Francisco resident Chris Brown is one of them.

On Wednesday morning, Brown, with his colleague Kim Lamberty, was on the other side of the world walking children to school. The children were like any other children – except for one thing. They were scared. Not that they would fail a test, not that their teacher would call on them with a difficult question, not that they would lose a schoolyard game. These children were scared that adults would physically try to attack them.

They were right.

It was a bright morning. There were two girls and three boys, and they ranged in age from 6 years old to 11. Chris, 39, and Kim, 44, were there to protect them. The children were Palestinian.

Chris and Kim are volunteers with an organization called Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), which provides nonviolent intercession in areas of violence. They serve in the West Bank city of Hebron, where Palestinian civilians are frequently attacked and harassed by Israeli settlers. The presence of such international witnesses often reduces this violence.

Children in a small village outside of Hebron, Tuba, attend school in the neighboring village of Tuwani. The problem is, Israeli settlements lie between Tuwani and Tuba. The route around these settlements is over 6 miles – too long for small to children to trek twice a day. There is an alternative route between settlements that reduces the journey to a little over a mile. Villagers asked CPT to accompany the children on this shorter route.
To get to their school in Hebron, children must pass Israeli soldiers.

Last Wednesday, Chris and Kim picked the children up from their village at 6:30, and all began walking to school. Part of the way there, settlements on either side, Kim and two of the children had gotten a little ahead and were just turning a bend in the road, when Chris saw them suddenly stop and begin running back, screaming.

Then he saw why.

“I saw men with black masks on, dressed all in black, wielding chains, one carrying a bat, most of them wearing black.” As the five men rushed at them, Chris called out, “Please don’t hurt the children, please don’t hurt the children.”

The men smashed a rock to his head, knocking him to the ground, and began beating and kicking him with steel-toed boots. The attackers tried, unsuccessfully, to break his left wrist and dislocate his shoulder.

“I said, ‘Why are you doing this? All we’re doing is walking children to school – we’re nonviolent,” Chris told them. “We’re Americans.” An attacker laughed, and Chris heard a man say, in a heavy Israeli accent, “They’re Americans.”

Kim, meanwhile, lay face down, not moving as the men kicked and beat her. She says much of the attack is a blur – “It’s almost like for a moment you leave reality … I just remember thinking, ‘If I just lie here like I’m unconscious, maybe they’ll leave me alone.’”

Finally, the men sauntered away, stealing Kim’s waist-pack containing her money, passport and cell phone. Unable to walk, she crawled over to Chris, who still had his phone and was able to call for help.

Upon receiving Chris’s call, two CPT members rushed over immediately, despite fear that the attackers might still be nearby. They called for an ambulance on the way, and arrived to find Chris and Kim bleeding and in enormous pain.

Twenty-five minutes later, Israeli officials, who, according to international law, are responsible for the safety of all civilians under their occupation, finally arrived, having taken half an hour to cover the 10-minute distance. The officials took statements, provided an ambulance to transport Chris and Kim to an Israeli hospital, but made no effort to find their assailants.

At the hospital, Kim was found to have a broken arm, a severely injured knee, and bruises across her head and body. It is still difficult for her to move. Chris has a punctured lung and broken ribs and is similarly covered with cuts and body-wide contusions. He is still in the hospital. The children, who were able to flee immediately, are largely unhurt, physically.

Who committed this vicious assault? Why? What kind of people try to prevent small children from going to school?

It is unlikely that non-Israeli Americans will ever learn the names of the attackers, since Israel rarely shares this kind of information with its “ally.” We do know, however, the type of people who attacked Chris, Kim and the children. And we do know why.

To answer this, it’s necessary to first take a lightning trip through Israel’s strange history. The nation of Israel was created only a little over 50 years ago, and its purpose was to be “Jewish state.” While people throughout the world were profoundly sympathetic to this goal, there was one major problem: two-thirds of the inhabitants were Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

As a result, Israel’s creation entailed the forcible expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians. Many of these people ended up in the West Bank and Gaza.

In 1967, the situation worsened, when Israel expanded its borders in the Six-Day War, capturing the West Bank and Gaza. Immediately, the Israeli government began confiscating Palestinian land in these newly occupied areas to build Jewish-only settlements.

As might be expected, such actions are illegal – both because a government cannot just take other people’s land, and also because the acquisition of territory by conquest has been deemed illegal by the international community. The United States cannot decide – simply because we have the military might - to kick Canadian farmers off rich farmland and give the farmers’ land to Americans – and then say that this is American land for all eternity. Yet, this is what Israel is doing to Palestinians.

Many Israelis oppose these settlements, considering them illegal, immoral and bad for Israel. Many of those who go to live in them are economically disadvantaged Israelis simply availing themselves of subsidized homes.

A significant portion of these settlers, however, are a far different story, and these are the settlers that the villagers around Hebron, in particular, are facing. This group is made up of religious fanatics who believe that only Jews have the right to live in “Eretz Israel.” They move onto Palestinian land, they say openly, to “redeem” it and to “cleanse” it of Christians and Muslims. These settlers are notorious in Israel for their extremism, violence and deeply racist religious beliefs.

For Palestinians around Hebron, it is like living next to KKK members who can kill you with impunity. Murders of Palestinians are rarely prosecuted, and when they are, little results. For example, three years ago, when a settler was found guilty of killing an 14-year-old boy by breaking his neck, the punishment meted out was a fine and six months community service.

“It’s just like South Africa,” Chris Brown says, “only worse.” South Africa, many point out, didn’t use F-16s against its Bantustans.

Brown should know, having spent the first eight years of his life under South African apartheid, and then returning to fight apartheid as an adult, being imprisoned, largely in solitary confinement, for a year and a half.

Brown went to Palestine to oppose such a system and to reduce the violence costing so many lives – both Israeli and Palestinian. From the very beginning of the current uprising, Palestinians called for an international presence that would reduce the violence. While the U.S. government, at Israel’s behest, blocked United Nations efforts to provide this, nonviolent activists from around the world, including Israel, have tried to fill this need.

Long before the attack on him, Brown knew what he was getting into. Israeli forces and settlers are not gentle in their treatment of peace activists. In June 2001, Israeli peace activist Neta Golan joined Palestinian villagers in a nonviolent march. An Israeli soldier twisted her arm until it snapped. In March 2003, Rachel Corrie, 23, participated in a tiny sit-in to prevent a Palestinian home from being demolished. An Israeli military bulldozer two stories high crushed her to death. Two weeks later, Tom Hurndall, 21, tried to help Palestinian children away from Israeli gunfire. An Israeli sniper shot him in the head.

Yet the need for the world to do something has continued to grow. While Americans are well informed about the tragic deaths of Israeli children, very few realize that approximately six times more Palestinian children have been killed, and that their deaths occurred first.

For three and a half months, Palestinian children were being killed – often by gunfire to the head – and the world’s governments did nothing. If this had been stopped, it is quite likely that not a single Israeli child would have died.

While Chris’s knowledge of this situation compelled him to do something about it, most Americans have little awareness of these facts, because so little of all this is reported in the American media.

The attack on Chris, Kim and the children is a case in point. While the BBC, Agence France Presse, Israeli newspapers and a wide variety of other international media reported this attack on American citizens immediately, the Associated Press, inexplicably, sent out no report on it for a day and a half – and this only after numerous people had called complaining.

A six-month study of the San Francisco Chronicle’s coverage of children’s deaths reveals a similar pattern of omission. Analysis of their headline stories found that the paper had reported prominently on Israeli children’s deaths at a rate 30 times greater than Palestinian ones. While 150 percent of Israeli children’s deaths had resulted in headline coverage - some deaths generated multiple stories - only 5 percent of Palestinian children’s deaths received parallel coverage.

Chris feels that Americans have an intimate connection to this carnage, because it is American tax money to Israel that is fueling the violence. While most Americans are unaware of this connection – again, studies show that news media rarely report it – the fact is that U.S. taxpayers give Israel over $10 million per day, far more than to any other nation on earth. This is more money than that allotted to all of Sub-Saharan Africa. Israel’s population is approximately the size of the greater Bay Area.

Meanwhile, Chris Brown recovers in a hospital bed in Israel. Numerous Israeli friends come to visit, outraged at the actions of their government, and grieving with him at the escalating violence. His Palestinian friends are not allowed into the area, but they send their support, prayers and thanks. And wait for the next assault.

In Gaza in the past week, there has been massive carnage. Dozens of Palestinian men, women and children have been killed, hundreds injured. By the time this piece is printed, it is possible some innocent Israeli lives will be lost as well. Over 140 Palestinians were killed before the first suicide bombing; now the violence seesaws back and forth, with the Palestinian death rate approximately three times greater than the Israelis. All these deaths, Chris feels, are tragic.

Americans, Chris points out, have a responsibility to work to bring this to a stop. He asks people back in San Francisco to “put pressure on (Congresswoman) Nancy Pelosi, (Sen.) Barbara Boxer and (Sen.) Dianne Feinstein to demand that Israel remove the settlements.” He points out that all three have “a notorious record of always voting for everything that Israel wants. This is unacceptable.” All three receive massive pro-Israel PAC funding. Chris believes that enabling the Israeli government to continue actions that result in escalating violence, “is not being a friend to Israel.”

Regarding the attack, Brown says that he wants “to hear statements from the floor of the House and the Senate that this kind of thuggery is not accepted in any democratic society.”

“The settlement that the attackers came from, Ma’on, isn’t even supposed to be there,” Chris points out. “It was supposed to be dismantled,” according to a plan presented to the U.S. months ago.

Chris says that as soon as he’s recovered, he’ll return to Hebron, to escort Palestinian children to school. He hopes to be back on the job by the end of the month. Asked whether he worries that next time he may be killed, he thinks it over and then replies: “Yeah, probably one day they’ll succeed, if I keep going on the path that I will go.” He explains that he’s “not looking for martyrdom” and insists that he’ll take “as many precautions as possible” while he’s in Palestine, but finally concludes, “If I have to die to see this country free, I’ll do it …

“I like to quote Archbishop Oscar Romero,” Chris says: “‘If I die, my spirit will rise up in the lives of the other people, and they’ll keep going on.’”

****************

Just so my intentions are clear, my point in posting this isn't that Israelis=bad, Palestinians=innocent victims. It's just to post a story that gives an example that cruelty isn't particular to any one race or nation, and that a lot of our views are skewed by unequal representation of information. Do we expect the Palestinians to NOT be hateful when their children are being threatened? Would you be any less angry if it were your own children?

[Cancer Man]

*pulls up a stool*

-popcorn-

This is gonna be a interesting thread...-biggrin-

[classicman2]

Note of Caution: Check-up on 'If America Knew.'

[VinVega]

Both sides hate each other equally. That's why I realistically don't expect a peace settlement in the foreseeable future.

[JasonF]

Keep in mind that the settlers are the most jingoistic of Israelis, the ones that are convinced that Israel has a divine right to large swaths of the Middle East. Most Israelis want to live in peace with Palestinians, just as most Palestinians want to live in peace with the Israelis.

That said, there are a number of inaccuracies or omissions in the article designed to make Israel look worse than it is -- chief among them, the description of the Six Days War as an Israeli war of conquest.

[classicman2]

http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/ifamericansknew.html

[Pharoh]

Keep in mind that the settlers are the most jingoistic of Israelis, the ones that are convinced that Israel has a divine right to large swaths of the Middle East. Most Israelis want to live in peace with Palestinians, just as most Palestinians want to live in peace with the Israelis.

That said, there are a number of inaccuracies or omissions in the article designed to make Israel look worse than it is -- chief among them, the description of the Six Days War as an Israeli war of conquest.



It's where I stopped taking anything in the article seriously.

[classicman2]

I stopped taking it seriously when I found out who the author was.

[nemein]

I'm wondering how the guy who was attacked could be so sure who he was attacked by if they were masked? All it seems he has to go by is something that was heard (while he was being beaten up so that could effect his hearing/concentration), and it's not like accents are all that hard to imitate. I assume there are some Israelies who are as militant as some of the the Palestinians so something like this happening is not completely impossible. It just seems like the person is jumping to conclusions based on personal bias.

[maxfisher]

While 150 percent of Israeli children’s deaths had resulted in headline coverage - some deaths generated multiple stories

If nothing else, the author's a shitty writer.

The nonsense likening the 67 war to American taking parts of Canada pretty quickly eliminates any illusion of objectivity. From skimming the article, it seems like the main 'evidence' that the men in mask were Isreali were an accent and the fact that it took 30 minutes for an ambulance to respond. Don't suppose there's any possibility the ambulance took it's time for fear of being attacked? I mean, Palestinians would never do something like that...

[kiddk1]

That said, there are a number of inaccuracies or omissions in the article designed to make Israel look worse than it is
this is where I stopped taking it seriously

[movielib]

Both sides hate each other equally. That's why I realistically don't expect a peace settlement in the foreseeable future.
If that alleged equality of hatred is true, it still stems far more from Palestinian/Arab aggression than from any Israeli aggression. Has there been any time in the last 58 years that Israel would not be content to simply exist if it were just left alone?

[wendersfan]

If that alleged equality of hatred is true, it still stems far more from Palestinian/Arab aggression than from any Israeli aggression. Has there been any time in the last 58 years that Israel would not be content to simply exist if it were just left alone?That's a somewhat disingenuous question, since one could argue that Israel was given land that wasn't 'theirs'. Of course, it was never really the Palestinians' either, but that's a different discussion. I wonder what would have happened if the surrounding Arab nations hadn't attacked in '48? Would we have something more closely approximating peaceful coexistence?

[sjrab16]

Why would Hamas and Islamic Jihad was a deal reached, the only reason they get support now is because of the violence that is happening in the area. If peace was reached, then who would care about the two groups.

[movielib]

That's a somewhat disingenuous question, since one could argue that Israel was given land that wasn't 'theirs'. Of course, it was never really the Palestinians' either, but that's a different discussion.
Since Jews (who wanted a State of Israel), by and large, legitimately purchased most of the land that would become the State of Israel, they weren't exactly "given land that wasn't theirs." And some Jews already lived there before the whole mess started.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761588322/Arab-Israeli_Conflict.html

...
[In the 1890s] Palestine was already inhabited, however. The countryside was home to Arabs, most of them Muslims, while the larger towns contained both Arabs and Jews. Some of the Jews were long established there, while others were religious pilgrims from Europe who had come to live near the holy sites in Jerusalem and other cities.
...
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries the Zionist movement gained strength in Europe, and large numbers of Jews immigrated to Palestine. The movement focused on self-reliance through agriculture, and many immigrants settled in the countryside. To do so, Jews had to buy land from local Arab holders of small tracts and from absentee Arab landlords of large areas. As a result, Jews and Arabs came into increasing contact; at times, Jewish purchases led to the displacement of Arab peasants from the land.
...
Initially, Britain took several steps to aid the Arab side. For example, before World War II (1939-1945) the British did not allow large numbers of Jews to come to Palestine from Europe, where they were often persecuted. Nonetheless, Zionists gradually gained the upper hand through steady land purchases, slow but continual immigration, and community organization.
...
No, the aggression is not totally one-sided but it's not anywhere near equal either.

I wonder what would have happened if the surrounding Arab nations hadn't attacked in '48? Would we have something more closely approximating peaceful coexistence?
One would think so.

[wendersfan]

Since Jews (who wanted a State of Israel), by and large, legitimately purchased most of the land that would become the State of Israel, they weren't exactly "given land that wasn't theirs." And some Jews already lived there before the whole mess started.The 'given land that wasn't theirs' comment was imprecise, but it served its purpose. I guess a more accurate way of putting it was that a country was carved out by fiat. This of course happens all the time, especially in the wake of a major war. My view is, generally, that the Palestinian Arabs living there got fucked over royally by all the countries involved, but most egregiously by the surrounding Arab countries, and Jordan in particular, who used the idea of a Palestinian homeland as a pretext for a land grab.

[dave-o]

The irony of posting an article like this is that it does exactly the opposite of what the orginal poster intended. How can there be a peace process when the historical facts about the land and these two cultures are continually misrepresented and distorted by one side (andits supporters).


If the OP (and more so, the writer of the article) wanted to point to examples of violence done by Israelis on Palestinians, there are plenty of examples that don't need embelishments or a rewriting of history to get the point across. However, that is not the point of this article, and anyone who knows the history of the region can see through it quite easily.

As others have said, to try and put forth the idea that both sides are equally aggressive and violent in this conflict is just not accurate. The question then becomes, why is it so important for some people/groups to put forth these distorted notions?

[eXcentris]

As others have said, to try and put forth the idea that both sides are equally aggressive and violent in this conflict is just not accurate.

Correct. Four times more Palestinian deaths than Israeli deaths since the beginning of the 2000 intifadah. :)

[classicman2]

To someone who is anti-Israel & pro-Palestinian that figure might mean something. ;)

[Myster X]

We all know by now where Ex's position is. ;)

[classicman2]

We all know by now where Ex's position is. ;)

From post, after post, after post :lol:

[Tommy Ceez]

Correct. Four times more Palestinian deaths than Israeli deaths since the beginning of the 2000 intifadah. :)

That just proves that Israel is more ACCURATE and PROFESSIONAL...it does not prove that they are more violent

[classicman2]

eXcentris is a good guy. He's right on about some of the evils and limitations of capitalism. He just needs a little help in some other areas. :D:

[Myster X]

That just proves that Israel is more ACCURATE and PROFESSIONAL...it does not prove that they are more violent

You're evil

[eXcentris]

Hahahaha! You see to me Palestinians = bad, Israel = bad. Americans on this issue are obviously biased. ;)

[eXcentris]

eXcentris is a good guy. He's right on about some of the evils and limitations of capitalism. He just needs a little help in some other areas. :D:

Ahhhh, but you see I'm the centrist on this issue, not you. :p

[Myster X]

Hahahaha! You see to me Palestinians = bad, Israel = bad. Americans on this issue are obviously biased. ;)

Wishful thinking :lol:

[eXcentris]

Wishful thinking :lol:

Nope. The hardline pro-Israeli opinion we find on this forum is mostly an American one and is heavily biased in favor of Israel. Heck it's probably more hardline that that of most Israelis. :lol:

[Goldblum]

Nope. The hardline pro-Israeli opinion we find on this forum is mostly an American one and is heavily biased in favor of Israel. Heck it's probably more hardline that that of most Israelis. :lol:
It's not pro-Israel as much as it's anti-terrorist. :)

[Geofferson]

Reminds me of poll taken of Canadian high school students on the world's two worst evils. The result: US and Israel

:lol:

[eXcentris]

I failed high school. :(

[Bushdog]

hit and run, Hahn?

[Goldblum]

hit and run, Hahn?
I predict he'll be back with another fun thread soon. :banana:

[Breakfast with Girls]

Well, this might have been a compelling article if not for the fact that

a) it was written by Alison Weir,
b) it was full of so much bullshit, and
c) there were articles on the main site with titles like, "The AmeriKKKan police state"

[Jason]

Well, this might have been a compelling article if not for the fact that

a) it was written by Alison Weir,
b) it was full of so much bullshit, and
c) there weren't articles on the main site with titles like, "The AmeriKKKan police state"

I think it needs a picture of a little undernourished Palestinian school boy getting kicked in the balls by a rabbi too.

[hahn]

hit and run, Hahn?

Some of us actually have to work during the daytime. :p Nice to see you back in politics though, Bushdog. Admit it - you missed me. ;)

I thought I made myself fairly clear with my statement at the end of the post. I don't know Alison Weir so I can't comment about her as a person. Does she hold an opinion and is it completely favoring only the Palestinians? I don't know. Perhaps. That doesn't mean that the story isn't true. I'm merely trying to add some balance to constant stream of Palestinian bashing around here. My point is simply that there are plenty of irrational extremist acts committed by both sides. That these situations are far more complicated than these online debates make them out to be. What else do you want me to say?

[Breakfast with Girls]

I don't know Alison Weir so I can't comment about her as a person. Does she hold an opinion and is it completely favoring only the Palestinians? I don't know. Perhaps. That doesn't mean that the story isn't true. I'm merely trying to add some balance to constant stream of Palestinian bashing around here.I'm all for posting legitimate articles to attempt to balance the debate, but this only detracted from your argument.

My point is simply that there are plenty of irrational extremist acts committed by both sides.Yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're morally equivalent or that they occur in equal amounts.

[dave-o]

I thought I made myself fairly clear with my statement at the end of the post. I don't know Alison Weir so I can't comment about her as a person. Does she hold an opinion and is it completely favoring only the Palestinians? I don't know. Perhaps. That doesn't mean that the story isn't true.


No, but the fact that there were so many blatant historical errors and distortions in that article make it really hard to accept the main story of it as true. I wouldn't be surprised if it actually was not true. However, I understand what you were trying to do (and can respect that), but a simple reading of that acrticle can tell you much about the author without having to even lift a finger and do any research.

Choosing sources beocmes even more important when dealing with such hot button issues. When I read an article like that, I wonder to myself, what is the message that the OP is trying to convey by posting it? I understand now that your intention was nothing more than what you said it was, but given the article you can't be surprised by the reponses it received.

[hahn]

No, but the fact that there were so many blatant historical errors and distortions in that article make it really hard to accept the main story of it as true. I wouldn't be surprised if it actually was not true. However, I understand what you were trying to do (and can respect that), but a simple reading of that acrticle can tell you much about the author without having to even lift a finger and do any research.

Choosing sources beocmes even more important when dealing with such hot button issues. When I read an article like that, I wonder to myself, what is the message that the OP is trying to convey by posting it? I understand now that your intention was nothing more than what you said it was, but given the article you can't be surprised by the reponses it received.

The thing is, I see a lot of protests of bias and historical inaccuracies, and yet, I'm not sure I've seen anyone point out specific details which are DEFINITELY wrong. I haven't done fact checking, so indulge me. You claim you don't even have to do research to know it's wrong. Ergo, the entire story is probably false. So let's get specific - exactly what is false? Not questionable or opinionated, but FALSE. What are these "blatant historical errors and distortions"?

[Giantrobo]

http://www.sfbayview.com <---- Wow, just...wow. -ohbfrank-

It seems that -EVERYTHING- bad in the articles over there happened because of racism.

[Goldblum]

Does she hold an opinion and is it completely favoring only the Palestinians? I don't know. Perhaps. That doesn't mean that the story isn't true.
It certainly brings its accuracy into question at the very least.

I'm merely trying to add some balance to constant stream of Palestinian bashing around here.
Please :rolleyes:

My point is simply that there are plenty of irrational extremist acts committed by both sides.
True, but your article doesn't seem to take such an even-handed approach.

That these situations are far more complicated than these online debates make them out to be. What else do you want me to say?
That the article is a piece of crap perhaps. :)

[hahn]

It certainly brings its accuracy into question at the very least.

Please :rolleyes:

True, but your article doesn't seem to take such an even-handed approach.

That the article is a piece of crap perhaps. :)
When you're able to give me some specifics, then we'll talk. Otherwise, I'm just going to take your response as the typical "I'm don't know how to argue the point, so I'm just gonna have to play the bias card." response.

[wildcatlh]

When you're able to give me some specifics, then we'll talk. Otherwise, I'm just going to take your response as the typical "I'm don't know how to argue the point, so I'm just gonna have to play the bias card." response.

So you're denying that the author (and the article itself) has a rather extreme one-sided bias? :hscratch: And you don't think said bias just might play into the author's writing? I'll put it to you another way. Do you accept what's written at sites like NewsMax and WND at face value, or do you, because of their bias, question them?

Besides, even assuming the truth of every word in the article, there's zero evidence it was even an Israeli or a settler that perpetrated the actions described therein.

[wildcatlh]

I do, however, find it humorous how the idiot who wrote this article described fellow idiot Rachel Corrie.

In March 2003, Rachel Corrie, 23, participated in a tiny sit-in to prevent a Palestinian home from being demolished. An Israeli military bulldozer two stories high crushed her to death.

[hahn]

So you're denying that the author (and the article itself) has a rather extreme one-sided bias? :hscratch:

Besides, even assuming the truth of every word in the article, there's zero evidence it was even an Israeli or a settler that perpetrated the actions described therein.
I'm not denying anything. But in order to know that she is biased (more precisely, incorrectly biased), we should know that she is basing her opinion (whatever they are) on something false. No?

So I'm simply asking, what is false? Maybe I missed something, so show me. I would think that from the number of people who are questioning the truths of the article that this should be fairly easy to do.

[wildcatlh]

I'm not denying anything. But in order to know that she is biased (more precisely, incorrectly biased), we should know that she is basing her opinion (whatever they are) on something false. No?

So I'm simply asking, what is false? Maybe I missed something, so show me. I would think that from the number of people who are questioning the truths of the article that this should be fairly easy to do.

well...

http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/ifamericansknew.html

[dave-o]

The thing is, I see a lot of protests of bias and historical inaccuracies, and yet, I'm not sure I've seen anyone point out specific details which are DEFINITELY wrong. I haven't done fact checking, so indulge me. You claim you don't even have to do research to know it's wrong. Ergo, the entire story is probably false. So let's get specific - exactly what is false? Not questionable or opinionated, but FALSE. What are these "blatant historical errors and distortions"?


It seems that quite a few posters in this thread have already pointed out some of the inaccuracies and distortions. Honestly, I don't even know where to begin, because the distortions seem so obvious to me. And I really don't feel like being a h history teacher. But if your honestly interested, a good start would be to identify any of the historical information provided in the article and compare it to actual historical fact (i.e. who the Palestinians were when Israel was created, how many of them were Christian Jewish, Muslim, what role did the other Arab countries play in their ejecion from their homeland, what actually was their homeland, the wars of 1948 amd 1967, what caused these wars and who were the aggressors, etc.).

I will try and find a good historical article to post, because if you honestly don't know about the history of this region, you will probably be surprised by what you read (and I say this based on the fact that you are wondering what makes this article distorted and biased).

EDIT TO ADD: I just finished reading through the link that classicman provided and it seems to be a very good rebuttal of the type of distortions in this article. I think that reading that link may answer many of your questions about what was innaccurate or distorted in the article.

[maxfisher]

I'm not denying anything. But in order to know that she is biased (more precisely, incorrectly biased), we should know that she is basing her opinion (whatever they are) on something false. No?

So I'm simply asking, what is false? Maybe I missed something, so show me. I would think that from the number of people who are questioning the truths of the article that this should be fairly easy to do.

Let's look at the facts in the story that this article centers around.

1. 2 American volunteers were walking kids to school from one Palestinian town to another
2. The area they were walking in contained a dismantled Israeli settlement
3. The Americans were assaulted
4. One of the Americans thought 1 line spoken by an attacker sounded like it had an Israeli accent

There's no evidence here to justify stating that the attackers were Israeli. The author admits as much when she says:

Who committed this vicious assault? Why? What kind of people try to prevent small children from going to school?

It is unlikely that non-Israeli Americans will ever learn the names of the attackers, since Israel rarely shares this kind of information with its “ally.” We do know, however, the type of people who attacked Chris, Kim and the children. And we do know why.

To answer this, it’s necessary to first take a lightning trip through Israel’s strange history.

She then uses a very biased look at Israel to imply it's a nation that houses people that would attack children. In other words, without any real evidence, she says "Look Israel is bad because the people accompanying these kids were attacked by people that we know were Israeli because Israel is bad." Nevermind the fact that the attackers didn't go after the Palestinian children who were the ones that supposedly needed protection in the first place. I could just as easily put together a flimsy, biased argument that the attackers were radical Muslims, given their views of both Christians and Americans. The simple fact is, unless she's got evidence she's not sharing in the article, assuming the attackers were from one group or another is an act of bias in and of itself.

Additionally, I'd qualify her assessment of the legality of Israel's actions in the Six-Day War as factually wrong. Her hypothetical comparison to the US taking land from Canada is absurd and obviously a ploy to influence those who are ignorant of history.

[Southside]

http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/ifamericansknew.html


that site is just as biased as weirs' article. it reads more as a blog than a 'factual' site; any serious, credible information page would not include a smiley face in the text. lol.

i'm not going to comment on the whole site, but i do want to say something about this line:
"What Weir doesn't mention on the site is the only times a Palestinian house would be demolished is when the house belongs to a terrorist or a family member of a terrorist or if the house was used to promote terrorism. Israel NEVER randomly bulldozes houses just for fun as this site implies." (fourth paragraph down)

i am not going to even try and be p.c., so i am just going to say bullsh*t. jenin anyone? yeah, i am sure everyone single one of those houses destroyed belonged to a terrorist or a family member of a terrorist or promote terrorism. to me, it was more like, eh lets just wipe out a lot because we don't know for sure which is what. i might also add that if my cousin was a terrorist and my family is absolutely not, destroying MY house wouldn't be fair now would it because of the actions of my cousin? it's writing like the above quote that annoys me because it as as much opinion as anything, but tries to come accross as fact.

i'm not being pro-palestine, rather just trying to make a comment that 'facts' these days are so skewed and stretched that i wish people would objectively look at more than one side of an argument and, at least try, to decipher what is fact.


=) lol

[classicman2]

I cited that one, because it's the first one I came to.

I thought more people would know Ms. Weir and her organization. Apparently not.

It's garbage.

[bhk]

I do, however, find it humorous how the idiot who wrote this article described fellow idiot Rachel Corrie.


Now I've got this strange urge to eat pancakes.

[hahn]

It seems that quite a few posters in this thread have already pointed out some of the inaccuracies and distortions. Honestly, I don't even know where to begin, because the distortions seem so obvious to me. And I really don't feel like being a h history teacher. But if your honestly interested, a good start would be to identify any of the historical information provided in the article and compare it to actual historical fact (i.e. who the Palestinians were when Israel was created, how many of them were Christian Jewish, Muslim, what role did the other Arab countries play in their ejecion from their homeland, what actually was their homeland, the wars of 1948 amd 1967, what caused these wars and who were the aggressors, etc.).

I will try and find a good historical article to post, because if you honestly don't know about the history of this region, you will probably be surprised by what you read (and I say this based on the fact that you are wondering what makes this article distorted and biased).

EDIT TO ADD: I just finished reading through the link that classicman provided and it seems to be a very good rebuttal of the type of distortions in this article. I think that reading that link may answer many of your questions about what was innaccurate or distorted in the article.


Thanks for your advice, but I'm not only from the region (and no, I'm NOT Arab), but I have done very extensive reading about the history. Try BBC's chronologic maps (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_israel_palestinians/maps/html/default.stm) and timeline (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_ip_timeline/html/default.stm) . If you're one of the people who think that BBC is so pro-Palestinian that they are lying about their historical facts (:rolleyes: ), then try Wikipedia's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict) entry on the topic. And please point out to me where in any of the articles, it is clear to you that in this whole situation, Israel is clearly in the right, and Palestine is clearly in the wrong.

When you decide you can stop making general statements about lies and biases and can focus on ONE specific thing (I'm even giving you a choice to pick the topic) to talk about that is flat out false, or that PROVES that Israelis have done no wrong, then we might have more to discuss. Otherwise, I'll just have to brush off your general comments as an opinion without basis in any facts.

[hahn]

that site is just as biased as weirs' article. it reads more as a blog than a 'factual' site; any serious, credible information page would not include a smiley face in the text. lol.

i'm not going to comment on the whole site, but i do want to say something about this line:
"What Weir doesn't mention on the site is the only times a Palestinian house would be demolished is when the house belongs to a terrorist or a family member of a terrorist or if the house was used to promote terrorism. Israel NEVER randomly bulldozes houses just for fun as this site implies." (fourth paragraph down)

i am not going to even try and be p.c., so i am just going to say bullsh*t. jenin anyone? yeah, i am sure everyone single one of those houses destroyed belonged to a terrorist or a family member of a terrorist or promote terrorism. to me, it was more like, eh lets just wipe out a lot because we don't know for sure which is what. i might also add that if my cousin was a terrorist and my family is absolutely not, destroying MY house wouldn't be fair now would it because of the actions of my cousin? it's writing like the above quote that annoys me because it as as much opinion as anything, but tries to come accross as fact.

i'm not being pro-palestine, rather just trying to make a comment that 'facts' these days are so skewed and stretched that i wish people would objectively look at more than one side of an argument and, at least try, to decipher what is fact.


=) lol

What he said.

Unfortunately, that's what passes for a legitimate argument around here. "That's an opinion that doesn't mesh with my own version of reality, therefore the author's intent is questionable, therefore everything that is written IS wrong. And THAT'S a fact."

And what is wrong?

"Everything of course! If you can't see that, I can't help you!"

[Vandelay_Inds]

And please point out to me where in any of the articles, it is clear to you that in this whole situation, Israel is clearly in the right, and Palestine is clearly in the wrong.

In my opinion, Israel has amply demonstrated its capacity for producing civilization. On the other hand, the Palestinians seem utterly unable to engage in any productive enterprise, and appear to have a very high propensity for violence and cruelty. Ultimately, since they both cannot have the same land, let it go to the most deserving side.

[hahn]

Let's look at the facts in the story that this article centers around.

1. 2 American volunteers were walking kids to school from one Palestinian town to another
2. The area they were walking in contained a dismantled Israeli settlement
3. The Americans were assaulted
4. One of the Americans thought 1 line spoken by an attacker sounded like it had an Israeli accent

There's no evidence here to justify stating that the attackers were Israeli. The author admits as much when she says:
Here's a link to a discussion (http://justworldnews.org/archives/000904.html) in which a similar argument is pointed out and the subsequent rebuttal. Regarding the issue of proof, I would also like to point out that one could also claim that there is no proof that Osama Bin Laden planned or carried out 9/11. That he simply used that event to his advantage to shore up opposition to the U.S. That's not what I believe, but I can't say for sure because there's no proof.

She then uses a very biased look at Israel to imply it's a nation that houses people that would attack children. In other words, without any real evidence, she says "Look Israel is bad because the people accompanying these kids were attacked by people that we know were Israeli because Israel is bad." Nevermind the fact that the attackers didn't go after the Palestinian children who were the ones that supposedly needed protection in the first place. I could just as easily put together a flimsy, biased argument that the attackers were radical Muslims, given their views of both Christians and Americans. The simple fact is, unless she's got evidence she's not sharing in the article, assuming the attackers were from one group or another is an act of bias in and of itself.That was not the implication. That was your inference and it came from your quickness to broadly categorize people. My inference was that there ARE factions of Israel who would commit as heinous a crime as Muslim terrorists would. Specifically certain settlers, particularly in this region. Google "israel hilltop youths". The prevalent view by many right wingers on this board seems to be that Israel is completely within their rights and that the Palestinians deserve their exile. I am NOT taking the opposing view and saying that Palestinian terrorists have been justified in their actions, but there IS another side to the story and I do not believe that Palestinians as a people deserve the villain role that so many of you have placed them in. Equally despicable acts HAVE been committed by many Israelis. Even within Israel, many disagree with the actions of the settlers and oppose their goals. As JasonF said previously, I also believe that more Israelis and Palestinians want peace than those who do not. But as long as we continue to cast the Palestinians in a villain role and disregard any legitimacy to their gripes, that will not happen.

[wildcatlh]

What he said.

Unfortunately, that's what passes for a legitimate argument around here. "That's an opinion that doesn't mesh with my own version of reality, therefore the author's intent is questionable, therefore everything that is written IS wrong. And THAT'S a fact."

And what is wrong?

"Everything of course! If you can't see that, I can't help you!"

I believe that several people have:

a) pointed out true inaccuracies, and
b) pointed out the folly in the entire article

You, however, due to your own biases, which you don't seem to want to admit, choose to act like you didn't see any of it, so you can continue to make your silly little argument.

[wildcatlh]

That was not the implication. That was your inference and it came from your quickness to broadly categorize people. My inference was that there ARE factions of Israel who would commit as heinous a crime as Muslim terrorists would. Specifically certain settlers, particularly in this region. Google "israel hilltop youths". The prevalent view by many right wingers on this board seems to be that Israel is completely within their rights and that the Palestinians deserve their exile. I am NOT taking the opposing view and saying that Palestinian terrorists have been justified in their actions, but there IS another side to the story and I do not believe that Palestinians as a people deserve the villain role that so many of you have placed them in. Equally despicable acts HAVE been committed by many Israelis. Even within Israel, many disagree with the actions of the settlers and oppose their goals. As JasonF said previously, I also believe that more Israelis and Palestinians want peace than those who do not. But as long as we continue to cast the Palestinians in a villain role and disregard any legitimacy to their gripes, that will not happen.

Can't see how you can say "that's not the implication" with a straight face.

And "equally dispicable acts"??? Spare me your moral equivalent bullshit. Talk to me when an Israeli straps a bomb on himself and blows up a bus full of schoolchildren.

[dave-o]

Thanks for your advice, but I'm not only from the region (and no, I'm NOT Arab), but I have done very extensive reading about the history. Try BBC's chronologic maps (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_israel_palestinians/maps/html/default.stm) and timeline (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_ip_timeline/html/default.stm) . If you're one of the people who think that BBC is so pro-Palestinian that they are lying about their historical facts (:rolleyes: ), then try Wikipedia's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict) entry on the topic. And please point out to me where in any of the articles, it is clear to you that in this whole situation, Israel is clearly in the right, and Palestine is clearly in the wrong.

When you decide you can stop making general statements about lies and biases and can focus on ONE specific thing (I'm even giving you a choice to pick the topic) to talk about that is flat out false, or that PROVES that Israelis have done no wrong, then we might have more to discuss. Otherwise, I'll just have to brush off your general comments as an opinion without basis in any facts.


Wow. I think we are done here. I thought you might be honestly interested in the history of the region. Yet you seem to be arguing with a phantom here, because I don't recall ever stating that Israel has never done anything wrong, in fact that wasn't even what this discussion was about (i.e Israel vs Palestine, right and wrong). You really have no idea what my opinion is on this matter, because I have been trying to stick with neutral facts. I was simply responding to a woefully distorted and inaccurate article that you posted (with honest intentions, so you said). But obviously that was not your intention from the beginning.

In fact, your intention has now become quite clear, trolling for a debate. If you are from that region, and if you are as well read on the history of that region as you seem to think you are, than the only conclusion that I can come to is that you knew from the start how distorted and biased that article was. I mean come on, lets be honest here shall we...it really was quite a transparent article. But anyways, good luck with your 'BBC' and your 'Wilkepedia' and your debate, I hope you win! :thumbsup:

And for the record, I listed several SPECIFIC things, as have many other posters in here, none of which have been picked up by you for some odd reason. Oh well...

[hahn]

Wow. I think we are done here. I thought you might be honestly interested in the history of the region. Yet you seem to be arguing with a phantom here, because I don't recall ever stating that Israel has never done anything wrong, in fact that wasn't even what this discussion was about (i.e Israel vs Palestine, right and wrong). You really have no idea what my opinion is on this matter, because I have been trying to stick with neutral facts. I was simply responding to a woefully distorted and inaccurate article that you posted (with honest intentions, so you said). But obviously that was not your intention from the beginning.

In fact, your intention has now become quite clear, trolling for a debate. If you are from that region, and if you are as well read on the history of that region as you seem to think you are, than the only conclusion that I can come to is that you knew from the start how distorted and biased that article was. I mean come on, lets be honest here shall we...it really was quite a transparent article. But anyways, good luck with your 'BBC' and your 'Wilkepedia' and your debate, I hope you win! :thumbsup:

And for the record, I listed several SPECIFIC things, as have many other posters in here, none of which have been picked up by you for some odd reason. Oh well...
No, but the fact that there were so many blatant historical errors and distortions in that article make it really hard to accept the main story of it as true. I wouldn't be surprised if it actually was not true. However, I understand what you were trying to do (and can respect that), but a simple reading of that acrticle can tell you much about the author without having to even lift a finger and do any research.

Choosing sources beocmes even more important when dealing with such hot button issues. When I read an article like that, I wonder to myself, what is the message that the OP is trying to convey by posting it? I understand now that your intention was nothing more than what you said it was, but given the article you can't be surprised by the reponses it received.
It seems that quite a few posters in this thread have already pointed out some of the inaccuracies and distortions. Honestly, I don't even know where to begin, because the distortions seem so obvious to me. And I really don't feel like being a h history teacher. But if your honestly interested, a good start would be to identify any of the historical information provided in the article and compare it to actual historical fact (i.e. who the Palestinians were when Israel was created, how many of them were Christian Jewish, Muslim, what role did the other Arab countries play in their ejecion from their homeland, what actually was their homeland, the wars of 1948 amd 1967, what caused these wars and who were the aggressors, etc.).

I will try and find a good historical article to post, because if you honestly don't know about the history of this region, you will probably be surprised by what you read (and I say this based on the fact that you are wondering what makes this article distorted and biased).

EDIT TO ADD: I just finished reading through the link that classicman provided and it seems to be a very good rebuttal of the type of distortions in this article. I think that reading that link may answer many of your questions about what was innaccurate or distorted in the article.

These are the 3 posts by you. :hscratch: I still don't see the "SPECIFIC" things you mentioned. I asked for something specific about this article that was factually incorrect. Go ahead and quote yourself on what it is that you pointed out as incorrect. I probably did miss it. The only thing that I've read so far that has legitimacy is the question of the identity of the assailants. This was brought up by nemein and maxfisher. I addressed that in my above post and with a link to a discussion in which it is fleshed out in further detail. The issue of proof is difficult in newsstories because ultimately, you could claim that nothing is provable (eg Osama Bin Laden carried out 9/11). But it's a matter of likelihood. The link discusses the region in depth and the history of attacks by the "hilltop youths" and that the settlers in that region have been particularly prone to physical harassment of Palestinians who venture too close to that area. It also discusses the fact (which I myself can attest to) that an Israeli accent is VERY different than an Arabic accent and easy for anyone who's heard them, to distinguish them. The CPT is there to assist the Palestinian refugees, therefore there is a dis-incentive for a Palestinian to attack them. The settlers there resent the CPT for assisting the Palestinians. That's a short insufficient summary of the more in-depth discussion in the link, which you can read or disregard (both sides are presented in there in a fairly rational matter).

YOU were the one to move onto the topic of the history of Palestinian/Israeli conflict. ("actual historical fact (i.e. who the Palestinians were when Israel was created, how many of them were Christian Jewish, Muslim, what role did the other Arab countries play in their ejecion from their homeland, what actually was their homeland, the wars of 1948 amd 1967, what caused these wars and who were the aggressors, etc.") If your implication was not that Palestine was at fault then I apologize for inferring that from the above sentence, because you are correct in that I do not know your opinions. But at the same time you claim to know mine by declaring what my intentions were. I'm merely saying there's plenty of blame to go around, but that doesn't seem to be sufficient for you. If I don't completely support Israel, I must be biased or unknowledgable about the history?

[dave-o]

These are the 3 posts by you. :hscratch: I still don't see the "SPECIFIC" things you mentioned. I asked for something specific about this article that was factually incorrect. Go ahead and quote yourself on what it is that you pointed out as incorrect. I probably did miss it. The only thing that I've read so far that has legitimacy is the question of the identity of the assailants. This was brought up by nemein and maxfisher. I addressed that in my above post and with a link to a discussion in which it is fleshed out in further detail. The issue of proof is difficult in newsstories because ultimately, you could claim that nothing is provable (eg Osama Bin Laden carried out 9/11). But it's a matter of likelihood. The link discusses the region in depth and the history of attacks by the "hilltop youths" and that the settlers in that region have been particularly prone to physical harassment of Palestinians who venture too close to that area. It also discusses the fact (which I myself can attest to) that an Israeli accent is VERY different than an Arabic accent and easy for anyone who's heard them, to distinguish them. The CPT is there to assist the Palestinian refugees, therefore there is a dis-incentive for a Palestinian to attack them. The settlers there resent the CPT for assisting the Palestinians. That's a short insufficient summary of the more in-depth discussion in the link, which you can read or disregard (both sides are presented in there in a fairly rational matter).

YOU were the one to move onto the topic of the history of Palestinian/Israeli conflict. ("actual historical fact (i.e. who the Palestinians were when Israel was created, how many of them were Christian Jewish, Muslim, what role did the other Arab countries play in their ejecion from their homeland, what actually was their homeland, the wars of 1948 amd 1967, what caused these wars and who were the aggressors, etc.") If your implication was not that Palestine was at fault then I apologize for inferring that from the above sentence, because you are correct in that I do not know your opinions. But at the same time you claim to know mine by declaring what my intentions were. I'm merely saying there's plenty of blame to go around, but that doesn't seem to be sufficient for you. If I don't completely support Israel, I must be biased or unknowledgable about the history?

All of the things I listed, the wars, what the population makeup was, what was the homeland. Those were the specific things I was thinking of in my post. True, I really didn't go into a lot of detail because many of them were already mentioned by other posters.

I didn't bring up these things because I wanted to make a point about one side being in the right and one side in the wrong. My intention was more to point out that the articles that mistate or distort basic historical facts cause us a great disservice (such as the way this article discusses the war of 1967 or the way this article decsribes the Jewish people as being only 1/3 of the total population of what was then Palestine, or how it fails to mention any historical role that the surrounding Arab nations played etc.).

I really get frustrated when I see these type of things, because how can there be any honest discussion if the starting point is so varied depending on who starts the discussion (I am not sure that is the clearest way to say that, but I can't think of a better way to describe it). The assumptions I made about your view point stem from the fact that I really have a hard time trying to figure out how a person with extensive knowledge on this subject could fail to see the problems with that article, it realy reads like propaganda. Like I said previuosly, there are many real instances that could be pointed to of Israreli right wing extremists causing some type of violence, that are described in accurate and straightfoward ways. So, that is why I concluded that you were only looking for a debate.

This is one subject where more honest exchange of information and less trying to prove the other side wrong is sorely needed.

I didn't even get into the whole moral equivalency argument, because although I agree with what others have stated about the two not being equal, it seemed to me that making that point is useless when we can't even agree on basic historical information as a starting point.

[Cancer Man]

Posted by Vandelay Inds:
In my opinion, Israel has amply demonstrated its capacity for producing civilization. On the other hand, the Palestinians seem utterly unable to engage in any productive enterprise, and appear to have a very high propensity for violence and cruelty. Ultimately, since they both cannot have the same land, let it go to the most deserving side.

Oh, your going to pull the same racist card by denouncing a whole non-Hebrew people as an inherently barbaric people who know only hatred, cruelty and violence, then you praise the Israelis as a sacred and divine people who have more right to "their" land than the "Palestinians".

No wonder that kind of mindset from certain Zionists have garnered Israel not many friends and too many enemies in the world at large. Even though Jorden, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others are far worse in their human rights abuses than Israel ever was.

The situation in the middle-east is much more complicated than that and I am not really taking sides in this heated discussion. I honestly do not think Jews are superior people to the Arabs, even though Israel is a highly advanced and "civilised" nation.

I kind of see the Palestinians and Israelis as two brothers who were seperated birth, with Israel brought up in a stable familiy, while Palestine was brought up in a dysfunctional familiy with no real education. Israel held down a respectable job, while Palestine drifted into crime. Then their real parents passed away giving away their home to their two sons, Palestine and Israel.

The house was very big but Palestine and Israel, coming from two seperate backgrounds, started to squable over the house and it's garden grounds. Israel picked his own patch with well furnished rooms and finely manicured garden, while Palestine natually ran his own turf into the ground.

I'm more of a Nurture verses Nature kind of guy.

[mosquitobite]

I kind of see the Palestinians and Israelis as two brothers who were seperated birth, with Israel brought up in a stable familiy, while Palestine was brought up in a dysfunctional familiy with no real education. Israel held down a respectable job, while Palestine drifted into crime. Then their real parents passed away giving away their home to their two sons, Palestine and Israel.

The house was very big but Palestine and Israel, coming from two seperate backgrounds, started to squable over the house and it's garden grounds. Israel picked his own patch with well furnished rooms and finely manicured garden, while Palestine natually ran his own turf into the ground.

I'm more of a Nurture verses Nature kind of guy.

Genesis Chapter 16:
10 The angel added, "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count."

11 The angel of the LORD also said to her [Hagar]:
"You are now with child
and you will have a son.
You shall name him Ishmael, [a]
for the LORD has heard of your misery.

12 He will be a wild donkey of a man;
his hand will be against everyone
and everyone's hand against him,
and he will live in hostility
toward [b] all his brothers."
Genesis Chapter 17:

19 Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. [a] I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year."
And finally Genesis Chapter 21:
10 and she [Sarah] said to Abraham, "Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac."

11 The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 12 But God said to him, "Do not be so distressed about the boy and your maidservant. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring [a] will be reckoned. 13 I will make the son of the maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring."

14 Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba.

[eXcentris]

And "equally dispicable acts"??? Spare me your moral equivalent bullshit. Talk to me when an Israeli straps a bomb on himself and blows up a bus full of schoolchildren.

The "moral equivalency" argument is mostly used as a copout to deflect criticism. It sounds like "Israel does bad stuff but we'll only talk about it or acknowledge it when it becomes as bad as what the other side does".

[classicman2]

When the vast, vast majority of the world is opposed to Israel and supportive of the Palestinians ...............

[eXcentris]

When the vast, vast majority of the world is opposed to Israel and supportive of the Palestinians ...............

The fact that it's used (the "moral equivalency" defense") constantly on this forum pretty much nullifies that argument. :)

[VinVega]

The fact that it's used (the "moral equivalency" defense") constantly on this forum pretty much nullifies that argument. :)
I don't deny that Israel has done some bad things, but I don't think you can just dismiss the moral equivalency argument outright.

However, as I said earlier, the hate in their blood is equal and as long as that is there, I'm not hopeful for peace.

I support a 2 state solution. I don't think Palestine should be wiped off the map, but they have to stop targeting civilians. And despite what they would like us to believe, militants who blow up innocent civilians are not themselves civilians any more.

I don't equate a Palestinian being caught in the crossfire between militants and the IDF as targeting a civilian (nor do I consider it a targeted killing if an Israeli was caught in the crossfire), the Palestinians do, therein lies the difference in the whole moral equivalency argument. It goes for the Palestinian's side as well eX.

[eXcentris]

I don't deny that Israel has done some bad things, but I don't think you can just dismiss the moral equivalency argument outright.


I agree, as long as that argument isn't simply used to deflect criticism of one's actions. The same thing could be said about the counter argument, which would be the "higher standards" one. As in:

"These actions are not moraly equivalent"
"Yes but one would think that side A should be held to a higher standard"

This pretty much stiffles debate. One should be able to criticize and condemn actions (or discuss justification) without always bringing a comparison component into it. "We do bad things but not nearly as bad as they do" is a poor excuse for an argument.

[Breakfast with Girls]

The thing is, I see a lot of protests of bias and historical inaccuracies, and yet, I'm not sure I've seen anyone point out specific details which are DEFINITELY wrong. I haven't done fact checking, so indulge me. You claim you don't even have to do research to know it's wrong. Ergo, the entire story is probably false. So let's get specific - exactly what is false? Not questionable or opinionated, but FALSE. What are these "blatant historical errors and distortions"?I think most people just don't want to go to the effort because you're too lazy to find out yourself. But in the interest of furthering the debate, I'll underline any inaccurate parts or half-truths.

(Posts completely underlined article)

Just kidding.

Heroism in the Holy Land: Chris Brown beaten for walking children to school
by Alison Weir

<u>San Franciscan Chris Brown was beaten by Israeli settlers</u> <b>[unproven assertion based on circumstantial evidence stated as fact; your first clue as to Weir's journalistic integrity]</b> with a bat and chains and his head smashed with a rock simply for walking Palestinian children to school.

There are a small number of people around the world who exhibit extraordinary courage. An even smaller number commit repeated acts of heroism. San Francisco resident Chris Brown is one of them.

On Wednesday morning, Brown, with his colleague Kim Lamberty, was on the other side of the world walking children to school. The children were like any other children – except for one thing. They were scared. Not that they would fail a test, not that their teacher would call on them with a difficult question, not that they would lose a schoolyard game. These children were scared that adults would physically try to attack them.

They were right.

It was a bright morning. There were two girls and three boys, and they ranged in age from 6 years old to 11. Chris, 39, and Kim, 44, were there to protect them. The children were Palestinian.

Chris and Kim are volunteers with an organization called Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), which provides nonviolent intercession in areas of violence. They serve in the West Bank city of Hebron, <u>where Palestinian civilians are frequently attacked and harassed by Israeli settlers</u> <b>[I will accept this on faith, although she cites no examples]</b>. The presence of such international witnesses often reduces this violence.

Children in a small village outside of Hebron, Tuba, attend school in the neighboring village of Tuwani. The problem is, Israeli settlements lie between Tuwani and Tuba. The route around these settlements is over 6 miles – too long for small to children to trek twice a day. There is an alternative route between settlements that reduces the journey to a little over a mile. Villagers asked CPT to accompany the children on this shorter route.

To get to their school in Hebron, children must pass Israeli soldiers.

Last Wednesday, Chris and Kim picked the children up from their village at 6:30, and all began walking to school. Part of the way there, settlements on either side, Kim and two of the children had gotten a little ahead and were just turning a bend in the road, when Chris saw them suddenly stop and begin running back, screaming.

Then he saw why.

“I saw men with black masks on, dressed all in black, wielding chains, one carrying a bat, most of them wearing black.” As the five men rushed at them, Chris called out, “Please don’t hurt the children, please don’t hurt the children.”

The men smashed a rock to his head, knocking him to the ground, and began beating and kicking him with steel-toed boots. The attackers tried, unsuccessfully, to break his left wrist and dislocate his shoulder.

“I said, ‘Why are you doing this? All we’re doing is walking children to school – we’re nonviolent,” Chris told them. “We’re Americans.” An attacker laughed, and Chris heard a man say, in a heavy Israeli accent, “They’re Americans.”

Kim, meanwhile, lay face down, not moving as the men kicked and beat her. She says much of the attack is a blur – “It’s almost like for a moment you leave reality … I just remember thinking, ‘If I just lie here like I’m unconscious, maybe they’ll leave me alone.’”

Finally, the men sauntered away, stealing Kim’s waist-pack containing her money, passport and cell phone. Unable to walk, she crawled over to Chris, who still had his phone and was able to call for help.

Upon receiving Chris’s call, two CPT members rushed over immediately, despite fear that the attackers might still be nearby. They called for an ambulance on the way, and arrived to find Chris and Kim bleeding and in enormous pain.

Twenty-five minutes later, Israeli officials, who, according to international law, are responsible for the safety of all civilians under their occupation, finally arrived, having taken half an hour to cover the 10-minute distance. The officials took statements, provided an ambulance to transport Chris and Kim to an Israeli hospital, but made no effort to find their assailants. <b>[Really? We don't know, since she never bothered to talk to any of these people. There are no opposing quotes at all. Given that, the last part ("made no effort to find their assailants") is especially ridiculous, and further shows Weir's journalistic integrity.]</b>

At the hospital, Kim was found to have a broken arm, a severely injured knee, and bruises across her head and body. It is still difficult for her to move. Chris has a punctured lung and broken ribs and is similarly covered with cuts and body-wide contusions. He is still in the hospital. The children, who were able to flee immediately, are largely unhurt, physically.

Who committed this vicious assault? Why? What kind of people try to prevent small children from going to school?

It is unlikely that non-Israeli Americans will ever learn the names of the attackers, since Israel rarely shares this kind of information with its “ally.” We do know, however, the type of people who attacked Chris, Kim and the children. And we do know why.

To answer this, it’s necessary to first take a lightning trip through Israel’s strange history. The nation of Israel was created only a little over 50 years ago, and its purpose was to be “Jewish state.” While people throughout the world were profoundly sympathetic to this goal, there was one major problem: two-thirds of the inhabitants were Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

<u>As a result, Israel’s creation entailed the forcible expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians.</u> <b>[See, this is an clear example of the bullshit oversimplified one-sidedness of this article. World War I is a complicated thing, and I won't go into a lot of detail. Suffice it to say, during the war when the Ottoman Empire attacked Russia, it invoked the mutual defense treaty that had been signed by Britain, France, and Russia. When the Ottoman Empire was defeated, the League of Nations gave Britain control of Palestine, among other places. I might note that the living conditions in the area improved quite rapidly in that time. During World War II many Jews desperately wanted to escape to Palestine, but Britain refused. After the war, there were a lot of Jewish refugees who wanted to return to their homeland (from which they were forcibly removed by both Babylon and, later, Rome). Zionists began committing terrorism against Britain in order to get them to withdraw their mandate, which they did, in 1948. In the lead-up to their extraction, the UN (to whom Britain gave authority to determine the future course of the area) offered Arabs two independent states -- Israel and Palestine. Arabs rejected the plan. The UN created Israel anyway, and in 1948 it became a state.

In the lead-up to Israel's creation, Arabs repeatedly attacked the Jews, and in the month before its creation laid seige to the area. In the days following the formal declaration of Israeli statehood, the entire Middle East attacked the state. To put it nicely, Israel wiped the floor with them. Toward the end of the war, after a ceasefire negotiated by the UN, Arabs resumed fighting and prompted Israel to forcibly expel the Arab inhabitants of some towns at gunpoint, at least partly out of security concerns.]</b> <u>Many of these people ended up in the West Bank and Gaza.</u> <b>[Because no Arab country wanted them.]</b>

<u>In 1967, the situation worsened, when Israel expanded its borders in the Six-Day War, capturing the West Bank and Gaza. Immediately, the Israeli government began confiscating Palestinian land in these newly occupied areas to build Jewish-only settlements.</u> <b>[There were wars between these two times, but here's a short summary of the Six-Day War: Egypt blockaded Israel's shipping lanes and positioned lots of troops near the border. Israel asked the US and the UN to do something. Negotiations failed; the US did nothing. Israel pre-emptively attacked Egypt, who had a mutual defense treaty with Jordan. Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and a couple other areas in order to secure its borders from Egypt, Jordan, and Syria... also probably to teach these countries a lesson. Egypt attacked again a few years later.]</b>

<u>As might be expected, such actions are illegal – both because a government cannot just take other people’s land, and also because the acquisition of territory by conquest has been deemed illegal by the international community. The United States cannot decide – simply because we have the military might - to kick Canadian farmers off rich farmland and give the farmers’ land to Americans – and then say that this is American land for all eternity. Yet, this is what Israel is doing to Palestinians.</u> <b>[Alison Weir, purveyor of bullshit. Given what I said before, I don't think I need to comment on this.]</b>

Many Israelis oppose these settlements, considering them illegal, immoral and bad for Israel. Many of those who go to live in them are economically disadvantaged Israelis simply availing themselves of subsidized homes. <b>[To be fair, the territory is more trouble than it's worth; but giving it to the Palestinians looks like it's giving in to terrorism, so it's a catch-22.]</b>

A significant portion of these settlers, however, are a far different story, and these are the settlers that the villagers around Hebron, in particular, are facing. This group is made up of religious fanatics who believe that only Jews have the right to live in “Eretz Israel.” They move onto Palestinian land, they say openly, to “redeem” it and to “cleanse” it of Christians and Muslims. These settlers are notorious in Israel for their extremism, violence and deeply racist religious beliefs.

For Palestinians around Hebron, it is like living next to KKK members who can kill you with impunity. Murders of Palestinians are rarely prosecuted, and when they are, little results. <u>For example, three years ago, when a settler was found guilty of killing an 14-year-old boy by breaking his neck, the punishment meted out was a fine and six months community service.</u> <b>[I would like a link to this.]</b>

“It’s just like South Africa,” Chris Brown says, “only worse.” South Africa, many point out, didn’t use F-16s against its Bantustans.

Brown should know, having spent the first eight years of his life under South African apartheid, and then returning to fight apartheid as an adult, being imprisoned, largely in solitary confinement, for a year and a half.

Brown went to Palestine to oppose such a system and to reduce the violence costing so many lives – both Israeli and Palestinian. <u>From the very beginning of the current uprising, Palestinians called for an international presence that would reduce the violence.</u> <b>[Really.]</b> While the U.S. government, at Israel’s behest, blocked United Nations efforts to provide this, nonviolent activists from around the world, including Israel, have tried to fill this need.

Long before the attack on him, Brown knew what he was getting into. Israeli forces and settlers are not gentle in their treatment of peace activists. In June 2001, Israeli peace activist Neta Golan joined Palestinian villagers in a nonviolent march. <u>An Israeli soldier twisted her arm until it snapped.</u> <b>[For his own pleasure, I'm sure. I would like a link to this, as well.]</b> In March 2003, Rachel Corrie, 23, participated in a tiny sit-in to prevent a Palestinian home from being demolished. <u>An Israeli military bulldozer two stories high crushed her to death.</u> <b>[Also for their own pleasure, of course. Read the news articles about this event.]</b> Two weeks later, Tom Hurndall, 21, tried to help Palestinian children away from Israeli gunfire. <u>An Israeli sniper shot him in the head.</u> <b>[Once again, for his own... yeah, link?]</b>

Yet the need for the world to do something has continued to grow. While Americans are well informed about the tragic deaths of Israeli children, very few realize that approximately six times more Palestinian children have been killed, and that <u>their deaths occurred first</u>. <b>[This should be obvious as bullshit to anyone, hahn. I shouldn't have to point this out.]</b>

For three and a half months, Palestinian children were being killed – often by gunfire to the head – and the world’s governments did nothing. <b>[Yep, and none of them were being used as human shields by Palestinian gunmen firing on Israeli soldiers.]</b> If this had been stopped, it is quite likely that not a single Israeli child would have died.

While Chris’s knowledge of this situation compelled him to do something about it, most Americans have little awareness of these facts, because so little of all this is reported in the American media.

The attack on Chris, Kim and the children is a case in point. While the BBC, Agence France Presse, Israeli newspapers and a wide variety of other international media reported this attack on American citizens immediately, the Associated Press, inexplicably, sent out no report on it for a day and a half – and this only after numerous people had called complaining.

A six-month study of the San Francisco Chronicle’s coverage of children’s deaths reveals a similar pattern of omission. Analysis of their headline stories found that the paper had reported prominently on Israeli children’s deaths at a rate 30 times greater than Palestinian ones. While 150 percent of Israeli children’s deaths had resulted in headline coverage - some deaths generated multiple stories - only 5 percent of Palestinian children’s deaths received parallel coverage.

Chris feels that Americans have an intimate connection to this carnage, because it is American tax money to Israel that is fueling the violence. While most Americans are unaware of this connection – again, studies show that news media rarely report it – the fact is that U.S. taxpayers give Israel over $10 million per day, far more than to any other nation on earth. This is more money than that allotted to all of Sub-Saharan Africa. Israel’s population is approximately the size of the greater Bay Area. <b>[Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. America supports Israel's right to exist. It should be no surprise that America is giving money to Israel.]</b>

Meanwhile, Chris Brown recovers in a hospital bed in Israel. Numerous Israeli friends come to visit, outraged at the actions of their government, and grieving with him at the escalating violence. His Palestinian friends are not allowed into the area, but they send their support, prayers and thanks. And wait for the next assault.

In Gaza in the past week, there has been massive carnage. Dozens of Palestinian men, women and children have been killed, hundreds injured. By the time this piece is printed, it is possible some innocent Israeli lives will be lost as well. Over 140 Palestinians were killed before the first suicide bombing; <b>[Sigh... maybe we should go back to the '60s, when Syria conducted state-sponsored terrorism against Israel.]</b> now the violence seesaws back and forth, with the Palestinian death rate approximately three times greater than the Israelis. All these deaths, Chris feels, are tragic.

Americans, Chris points out, have a responsibility to work to bring this to a stop. He asks people back in San Francisco to “put pressure on (Congresswoman) Nancy Pelosi, (Sen.) Barbara Boxer and (Sen.) Dianne Feinstein to demand that Israel remove the settlements.” He points out that all three have “a notorious record of always voting for everything that Israel wants. This is unacceptable.” All three receive massive pro-Israel PAC funding. Chris believes that enabling the Israeli government to continue actions that result in escalating violence, “is not being a friend to Israel.”

Regarding the attack, Brown says that he wants “to hear statements from the floor of the House and the Senate that this kind of thuggery is not accepted in any democratic society.”

“The settlement that the attackers came from, Ma’on, isn’t even supposed to be there,” Chris points out. “It was supposed to be dismantled,” according to a plan presented to the U.S. months ago.

Chris says that as soon as he’s recovered, he’ll return to Hebron, to escort Palestinian children to school. He hopes to be back on the job by the end of the month. Asked whether he worries that next time he may be killed, he thinks it over and then replies: “Yeah, probably one day they’ll succeed, if I keep going on the path that I will go.” He explains that he’s “not looking for martyrdom” and insists that he’ll take “as many precautions as possible” while he’s in Palestine, but finally concludes, “If I have to die to see this country free, I’ll do it …

“I like to quote Archbishop Oscar Romero,” Chris says: “‘If I die, my spirit will rise up in the lives of the other people, and they’ll keep going on.’”My point is not to say that Israel is blameless. It's not. Both sides have done some heinous things in an effort to get the results they want. But writing a story that pretends that that's not true -- that Israel is the <b>only</b> one to blame for the violence in the Middle East, as this article repeatedly asserts -- is ridiculous, and does not constitute journalism. This didn't even deserve to be dignified with half an hour of my time.

[eXcentris]

Frankly, I don't think there's any doubt that a fair proportion of these settlers are fanatic extremists.

Have fun. :)


Israel/Occupied Territories: Israeli settlers wage campaign of intimidation on Palestinians and internationals alike.

Israeli settlers in the Occupied Territories have stepped up attacks against Palestinians and are waging a campaign of intimidation against international and Israeli human rights activists. Their aim is to eliminate the presence of witnesses to their attacks, thereby depriving the local Palestinian population of this only form of limited protection.

Two US citizens, members of the Christian Peacemaker Team (CPT), were assaulted on 29 September by masked Israeli settlers who beat them with clubs and chains as they accompanied Palestinian children to school near the Tuwani village, South of Hebron. Kim Lamberty sustained a broken arm and knee and bruising to her face, while Chris Brown was left with a punctured lung and multiple bruises. Members of the CPT and other Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have been escorting Palestinian children to school to protect them from attacks by Israeli settlers.

A group of hooded Israeli settlers attacked Amnesty International delegates and members of the CPT and the Operation Dove NGO on 9 October as they returned from accompanying Palestinian primary schoolchildren back to their home. The attackers first threw stones at the five internationals and then attacked three of them with wooden clubs. An Amnesty International delegate sustained multiple bruises on her back, arm and leg and the Operation Dove member collapsed and had to be taken to hospital by ambulance. On both occasions, the attackers came from the nearby Israeli settlement of Havat Ma’on and returned there after the attacks.

Rather than taking steps to stop and prevent such attacks and hold Israeli settlers accountable, the Israeli army and security forces have responded by imposing further restrictions on the local Palestinian population.

After the attack, the Israeli army informed the Palestinian villagers that, if the children are accompanied by internationals on their way to and from school, no army patrol will be on site to protect them from Israeli settlers. The Palestinian villagers reluctantly accepted that the schoolchildren have make to the journey without their international escort, but, two days later, on 12 October, the children were again chased by Israeli settlers from the Havat Ma’on settlement while on their way to school. The Israeli army patrol, which was present, did not intervene. Israeli settlers again threw stones as the children passed near the settlement on their way to school on 17 October.

The only alternative is for the schoolchildren to avoid passing near the Israeli settlements by making a long detour that lengthens their walk from 20 minutes to more than two hours each way.

As in previous years around the time of the olive harvest, Israeli settlers have also stepped up attacks on the local Palestinian inhabitants and farmers throughout the West Bank, preventing them from harvesting their crops and destroying or damaging their trees. The Israeli army has done little or nothing to stop the settlers' attack and has, instead, banned the Palestinian farmers from going to their fields, ultimately helping the settlers to force the Palestinians off their land.

Throughout the West Bank, Palestinian farmers are increasingly worried that their olives, one of their few remaining sources of livelihood, are being stolen, destroyed or wasted as they are prevented from working in their fields.

In the northern West Bank region of Nablus, where Palestinian villages are surrounded by Israeli settlements and settlers’ roads, the Israeli army is only allowing Palestinian farmers between two and six days -- on set dates -- to go to their fields to harvest their olives. Palestinian farmers who have tried to go to pick their olives on days other than the set dates have been attacked by settlers and turned away by Israeli army patrols. In the meantime, Israeli settlers have been picking olives in Palestinian groves and have destroyed and burned olive trees in various areas.

Palestinian farmers, accompanied by internationals from the Ecumenical Accompaniment Program, were harvesting their olives in Yanun, near Nablus, on 7 October when two settlers and eight soldiers came and told them to leave. The soldiers did not intervene when armed settlers assaulted a Palestinian farmer, fired shots on the ground near him and tied his hands. The farmer was left handcuffed until a member of the Israeli peace group Taayush (Co-existence) arrived at the scene and intervened with the soldiers.

Palestinian villagers in Yanun have been subjected to attacks by Israeli settlers for years and several families have been driven from the village by repeated attacks against them and their property. All remaining inhabitants were forced to flee the village by Israeli settlers in October 2002. They were later able to return with the help of Israeli and international peace activists. Promises by the Israeli army to keep the Israeli settlers in check have produced no results and settlers have continued to attack and intimidate the villagers with impunity.

In the southern Hebron region, on 15 October, after Israeli peace activists from Rabbis for Human Rights had coordinated with the Israeli army that the Palestinian farmers harvest their olives on that day, the farmers were attacked by armed settlers. The Israeli army patrol responded by telling the Palestinian farmers to leave, claiming that they did not have sufficient forces to protect them from the settlers.

Two days later in Yassuf, near Nablus, Palestinian farmers, accompanied by Israeli and international peace activists, were once again evicted from their olive grove when Israeli settlers turned up. The soldiers, whose presence was supposed to ensure that the Palestinians could harvest their olives, told the farmers and their Israeli and International helpers to leave.

On 11 October, a 26-year-old Palestinian farmer, Hani Shadeh, was shot and seriously wounded in the neck by an Israeli settler as he was picking olives with other farmers in Asira al-Qibliya, a village near Nablus and near the Israeli settlement of Yitzhar. The day before, Israeli settlers had set fire to an olive grove near the Israeli settlement of Tapuach.

Israeli settlers responsible for attacks on Palestinians and their properties have not been brought to justice in the vast majority of cases. Such impunity encourages settlers to commit further attacks and abuses. In the rare cases when Israeli settlers have been brought to justice, they have been treated with a degree of leniency uncommon in other cases.
On 27 September, an Israeli settler from the Elon Moreh Settlement near Nablus shot a Palestinian taxi driver dead. Sayyed Jabara, father of eight, was driving his passengers between Nablus and Salem. The settler claimed that he shot Sayyed Jabara because he thought that he intended to attack him, even though Jabara was not armed. He was released on bail less than 24 hours after the murder.

Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories, established by Israel in violation of international law, are the main reason for the stringent restrictions imposed on the Palestinian population. Some three-and-a-half million Palestinians are prevented from moving between towns and villages; confined to isolated enclaves and cut off from their workplace, their land, health and education facilities and other crucial services.

This is done to keep Palestinians away from Israeli settlements and from the network of roads built for the exclusive use of some 380,000 Israeli settlers. Settlements also continue to be expanded and new ones to be set up on expropriated Palestinian land.

Israeli settlers who attack and harass Palestinian villagers frequently come from settlements established without formal government authorization and which the Israeli authorities have publicly pledged to dismantle. However, settlers are increasingly influential in the army, in government and in parliament. The rare attempts by the Israeli army and security forces to dismantle unauthorized settlements have been mostly half-hearted, with settlers simply refusing to leave or allowed to return to the site shortly after having being evacuated.

In recent months, the Israeli government has announced its intention to dismantle all Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip, one of the most densely populated places in the world where the presence of some 6,000 Israeli settlers has resulted in one-and-a-half million Palestinians being confined to less than 60% percent of the land. However, the Israeli government has no intention to evacuate more than 100 settlements in the West Bank, which take up some of the most fertile Palestinian land and best water resources. On the contrary, Prime Minister Sharon’s bureau chief recently confirmed that the planned pullout from the Gaza Strip is intended to strengthen Israel’s hold of large parts of the West Bank.

Amnesty International has repeatedly called on the Israeli authorities to take measures to evacuate Israeli settlers from the Occupied Territories and, in the meantime, to prevent attacks by Israeli settlers, to investigate the numerous attacks committed by settlers and to bring those responsible to justice. Amnesty International has also repeatedly called on Palestinian armed groups to stop targeting Israeli civilians both inside Israel and in the Occupied Territories.


http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGMDE150992004

[Breakfast with Girls]

As I have said (multiple times now), any number of these things might be true -- and yes, the settlers are generally much more extreme than most Israelis, I misread that paragraph initially -- but inserting some facts in the midst of a bullshit-ridden diatribe doesn't make the article true.

To borrow from Stephen Colbert, the article was written from the standpoint of truthiness, not truth.