This guy was an amazing speaker whether you agreed with him or not. Best quote of the night was his "we'll breed them out" speech.

The discrepancy is between what Hassassian says and what the Palestinians are actually doing. I wish the Palestinians rejected violence as he himself says he does, but the reality is that both their elected political parties- Hamas and Fatah state in their charters that the destruction of Israel is their goal. Conversely no party in Israel has the destruction of the Palestinians as their goal.

I thought the following comment just showed the ignorance and clear lack of knowledge of the history of this conflict: "With the Annapolis conference in November last year seeing both sides formally discuss a two state solution to the problem FOR THE FIRST TIME"

The first time a two state solution was discussed was in 1948 when it was proposed to divide the country amongst the Jews and the arabs (who didn’t call themselves Palestinians till 1968 btw) that lived there. The Jews accepted the proposal but the Arabs rejected it stating they had a right to it all, and proceeded to launch several wars of annihilation against the Jewish state in which their stated intention was "to drive the Jews into the sea!" NICE! That’s the first time they rejected a two state solution. During the Oslo accords, another peace initiative, Palestinian terrorist attacks against civilians reached a record high, again underscoring what Palestinians thought about peace with Israel. Then in Camp David in 1999, they were offered 99% of the territories they asked for, all their holy sights and the Arab half of Jerusalem as per their requests. Arafat didn’t even stay to negotiate and so the Palestinians scuppered their chance for statehood for the third time! When you offer your enemy everything they demand in return for peace and they don’t even stay to negotiate, you know that they probably don’t really want peace with you at all!

Whenever Israel takes steps towards peace it is rewarded with yet more visceral violence. Israel is not occupying Gaza it has long since cleared all its settlers and military personnel from there, but the Palestinian response has been to launch endless barrages of rockets against Israeli civilians in order to try and provoke an Israeli military response and portray Israel as the aggressor. The reason why many Palestinian civilians are killed is because Palestinian terrorists launch rockets at Israeli civilians, and base themselves in and amongst their own civilian populations so that if they are hit back by Israel they can claim a propaganda victory and say "look at how monstrous Israel is it is murdering civilians for no reason". The truth however, is that we are simply taking the bait. We are essentially giving a pat on the back for the cowardice of those who engage in acts of terrorism against civilians whilst at the same time deliberately putting their own civilians in danger.

It is the fundamental duty of every state to defend its citizens, and the fact that we accept the universality and legitimacy of this principle for every state in the world except Israel just underscores the moral bankruptcy we are seeing more and more of. I find it ridiculous that the UN spends so much of its time issuing condemnations of Israel. Thomas Friedman rightly stated- "Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic. But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction- out of all proportion to any other party in the middle east- is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is DISHONEST!"
Here's proof of this:
Number of U.N. Security Council resolutions on the Middle East between 1948 and 1991: 175
Number of these resolutions against Israel: 97
Number of these resolutions against an Arab state: 4

Furthermore, Israel has been the only party in this conflict to initiate every single peace initiative with the Palestinians. If Israel simply hated Arabs, in the same way that Palestinians hate Jews they would not have made peace with both Egypt and Jordan. This is a country the size of Wales surrounded by a billion Arabs, it is in its interest to make peace, but for now on the Palestinian side there is no one to really talk to. Not only are Hamas refusing to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, but they are refusing to acknowledge it actually exists at all! You cannot negotiate and make peace with an enemy who believes you have no right to exist! Fatah also seeks the destruction of Israel, and is not a reliable partner for peace, both based on its past record as well as the fact that it only controls half of the Palestinian territories and so cannot promise to abide by a “ land for peace offer” even if it wanted to. The indoctrination of Palestinian youth and society has to stop in order for there to be any chance for peace. When a class of children is asked, “how many of you want to become martyrs?” and the whole class puts their hands up, you know that there is something seriously wrong and that these children have been brainwashed to hate Jews from a young age. When Palestinian TV has a children show in which kids sing songs like “the Zionist enemy will burn in a volcano of rage” you know that this is a society configured to kill, and that this is something encouraged and propagated by the Palestinian establishment.

Here is a quote from a Muslim voice- Abdel Rahman al- Rashed- general manger of the Al-Arabiya news channel to sum up this argument-
"We cannot clear our names unless we own up to the shameful fact that terrorism has become an Islamic enterprise, an almost exclusive monopoly, implemented by Muslim men&women. We cannot redeem our extremist youths, who commit all these heinous crimes, without confronting the sheikhs who thought it ennobling to reinvent themselves as revolutionary ideologues, sending other people's sons and daughters to certain death, while sending their own children to European and American schools and colleges." The fact is that by justifying terrorism in Israel you are justifying terrorism everywhere, and it is one of the main causes of the startling decline in European morality.

I'm not justifying the terrorism at all, but I can certainly sympathize to a certain extent when a large proportion of the Palestinian people are subjected to such gross abuses of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention whilst the major players in the international community idly stand by, or propose weak resolutions to the UN (only for the USA to veto them).

With regard to:

• "The reason why many Palestinian civilians are killed is because Palestinian terrorists launch rockets at Israeli civilians, and base themselves in and amongst their own civilian populations"

You might want to check your modern history books for the Jenin Massacre.

Although it's not been official policy to destroy Palestine, Sharon is also quoted as saying: "the Palestinians must be hit and it must be very painful: we must cause them losses, victims, so they can feel the heavy price".

Also, regarding the number of resolutions, God knows how you've counted those, but perhaps you should also take into account the number of resolutions that have been *adhered to* by each party.

>> Mitch now runs away quickly from the Israel debate <<

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 12:42am - Edited by the author

The erection of the Israeli security fence has resulted in an unprecedented drop in cross-border suicide attacks and thus is entirely justified. UN resolutions on this in my eyes are frankly meaningless 1) because the UN is inherantly anti-Israel and 2) becuase the alternative has worked so effectively.

On the wider problem, I don't want to get to deeply embroiled as always seems to happen with Irsael-Palestine. What I would say is that from the media and international community, Israel receive different treatment to other nation-states and that is wrong. Any country has a right to self-defence in the face of an enemy. Were our very own tactics in Dresden legitimate? I believe so. That is the price I am afraid, of war.

Palestinians have been their own worst enemy. The Arab League rejected a 2-state solution in 1947 and Arafat rejected 98% of his requested land, increasing to 99% over a decade, in 2001. He was a terrorist leader* and never accepted Israel's right to exist. Quite rightly, Israel should not negotiate with people who seek to deny their very existence. Rhetoric is one thing from the ambassador. Action from the governments he represents to root out terror and anti-semitism from the territories remains the starting block for any successful negotiations.

• The Fatah Al-Aksa Martyrs reported directly to Arafat. They were responsible for an attack on a hotel in Netanya (2002) and deliberately maiming 22 civilians- mostly all women, the elderly and children.

Dan Taylor

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 1:54am - Edited by the author
• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 1:56am - Edited by the author
• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 1:59am - Edited by the author (less)

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 1:59am - Edited by the author (2 more)

Just a few points in response, Dan T:

• "The erection of the Israeli security fence has resulted in an unprecedented drop in cross-border suicide attacks and thus is entirely justified."

Just as the banning of the sale of fertilizer and petrol may reduce the number of home-made bombs. The ends don't make it sensible, reasonable or just. There are also a significant number of negatives associated with the building of the "security fence" which can't be ignored. I suppose this is massive ethical debate in itself: "Is the freedom of many worth more than the lives of a few?"

• "the UN is inherantly [sic] anti-Israel"

Proof / justification for this comment please?

• "Any country has a right to self-defence in the face of an enemy"

So the Palestinians have the right to self-defence in the face of Israel? Or are you simply assuming that the Palestinians are the SOLE aggressors?

• "[Arafat] was a terrorist leader... [t]he Fatah Al-Aksa Martyrs [sic] reported directly to [him]."

Saying Arafat was a terrorist leader by that logic also implies that a whole string of U.S. presidents, British prime ministers and other world leaders are also terrorist leaders. I'm not saying the statement is wrong, but would you ordinarily say the same of all the others?

Also, these claims were made by the Israelis and are unsubstantiated.

I find it puzzling that you write “Quite rightly, Israel should not negotiate with people who seek to deny their very existence.” If someone expressed a desire to kill me, the very first thing I would do is attempt to dissuade them from this course of action i.e. negotiate.
If Israel does refuse to enter into constructive dialogue it is not only harming the interests of Palestinians but also those of its own citizens.

I’m not saying that Israel is the sole aggressor or that they are primarily responsible for the current situation, but neither can they be completely absolved from blame either. The leaders of both Israel and Palestine have been far too ready to turn to violence in response to problems and, often through sheer stubbornness and pride, have harmed the very people that they are supposed to represent.

Outside observers can often be just as intransigent as the leaders of these two nations. After discussion is begun, battle lines are rapidly drawn up and the debate very quickly becomes polarised. People attempt to focus attention on only one set of crimes and draw it away from the crimes of the other nation. Whether committed by Israelis or Palestinians, every murder and every human rights violation should be considered in itself and condemned in itself. The recent Israeli attack mentioned in the article was wrong, so is the firing of rockets into Israel. It’s a bit of a no-brainer really but if governments worldwide could take such a stance and make it known, rather than allowing themselves to be characterized as Pro-Israel or Pro-Palestine and thereafter ignored by those who fall on the other side of this unhelpful division, it would help get to the crux of the matter and forward the real goal; of stopping violence in the Middle East.

I also disagree with you about Dresden, I don’t think the deliberate targeting of civilians is ever acceptable. When the offence is so severe, no end can justify the means. Further, even if such attacks could in principle be justified on utilitarian grounds, I think they almost never would be and the attack mentioned in the article would certainly not be. All it will do is foster hatred for Israel in Palestine and reinforce the convictions of terrorists. Responding to violence with violence is not suddenly going to start working after causing nothing but reciprocal suffering in the region for decades. As well as the killing and maiming of civilians on both sides of the conflict, the almost dogmatic recourse to violence of both the Israeli and Palestinian governments and their dehumanizing of “the enemy” has poisoned several generations of minds in their respective nations and ensured that progress towards peace will be slow and fettered by mutual hatred and distrust. Ultimately, lasting peace in the Middle East will never come from force and the first steps towards it will not be taken until parties on each side are able to show the courage and moral character to reject the notion of violence as an acceptable response to one’s problems.

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 3:46am - Edited by the author

A few points to address here. Firstly, Bobbie (#3) I did chuckle at that one- “Demography is our nuclear weapon!”. Brilliant.

First of all, I have to agree with Coen's point on the charters of Hamas and Fatah, they both call for the destruction of Israel, and that is deplorable and abhorrent. Fatah should have taken attempts to amend their constitution seriously, as I believe it would be in their own interest to do so.

On the point about the two-state solution: In the article, I was merely referring to the fact that it was the first time that all sides had formally agreed to discuss a two-state solution as the way forward, something unprecedented in modern times. Coen brings up the history of two-state solution dialogue; yet he seems to forget that the Peel Commission, reporting during the Arab revolt of 1936-39, proposed partition of the British Mandate into Arab and Jewish areas, with Jerusalem under international control. Some Israelis consider the partition of 1922, in which 75% of the Mandate was separated to create Transjordan (now Jordan) as the actioning of a two-state solution.

Coen’s criticism of the global community and the U.N. as anti-Semitic is absurd, and betrays a lack of understanding as to what anti-semitism truly is: discrimination of, or prejudice and hostility towards, people of the Jewish faith. This does not mean Israel itself. The opinion that Jews should not have a home in modern Israel is anti-Zionism. And if you look into the history of anti-Zionism, it does not prescribe anti-semitism: Indeed some Jews we opposed to the idea of a Jewish state prior to the second world war, as it was considered counter-productive in efforts towards assimilation in their nations.

I accept that, as a Jewish state of 7 million people, 5.64 million of them being Jews (2006 figures), Israel can be considered ‘Jewish’. But blurring the line between criticism of Israel and its actions, and those of Jews acting independently, is oversimplifying a complicated landscape of opinion on the issue, even if a significant proportion of people criticising Israel are anti-semitic in themselves.

Coen’s point on the indoctrination of Palestinian youth and society to follow terrorism and applaud ‘martyrs’ is quite correct, and it is a serious problem. John Ware’s BBC Panorama investigation into the charity Interpal and Hamas in 2006 really highlighted this in detail, even if it has proved misinformed in linking the two organisations directly. The image of children aged 7-8 singing about murder and violence is a powerful one, and in my opinion reflects the power of Hamas in an area which no terrorist or political entity should stray: education. I have no idea how you would go about changing this though, aside from encouraging Hamas to reject armed struggle and terror (unlikely in the current climate).

Post #10 is right when he/she mentions that the debate is polarised, and that ‘picking sides’, either as a nation or an individual, is not going to solve the problem. Any violence from either side should be condemned for what it is: wrong and unacceptable.

I'd also agree with #10, whilst it may seem that I've sided with Palestine in earlier comments, I was merely countering the arguments of Coen and Taylor (perhaps in the vain hope that they'd see both sides). To be frank, both are as bad as each other. Both governments habitually "educate" their populaces in the evils of the other and directly or indirectly attack each other both politically and violently.

.#9 - I wasn't familiar with that, thanks for pointing it out. It all depends of course on their definition of "Zionism" but I'll be sure to read into that when I get chance.

Mitch:

Tonight, news has come in that a Palestinian gunman killed 8 childern at a school in Jerusalem. The reaction to this sickening act of violence from the Hamas administration was to describe it as "heroic".

Now, I am not Israeli and recognise and a budding military historian that their tactics are not always the most successful in what is essentially anti-insurgency. However at no point, do they indiscriminately target civilians. If they ever have done, then the correct channels of accountability and punishment are persued and the perputrators brought to justice. They are certainly not described as being "heroic" by any government.

Don't compare British/US PM's to Yasser Arafat. Self-flagelation is not popular with me and thus holds no credibility in its content. I shall let people's own intelligence recognise that the terrorist instincts of the boulder to M.Eastern peace bear no relation to the acts of UK/US PM's. If you think we are such promiscuous backers of terror, how is it that your conscience allows you to continue living here. The answer to that is simple. You would hate to live in a true terror-supporting country as an outsider and rightfully so.

The wall is successful. It prevented the deaths of many Israelis and, I would put out into the debate, many Palestinians. Suicide attacks resulted in Israeli dead which in turn resulted in an Israeli response- probably an incursion into one of the territories resulting in many more dead. For the first time in Israel's history, it has some form of secure border.

The UN sees Israel as a Zionist state. It has passed 97 resolutions AGAINST Israel and only 4 AGAINST Arab nations in the region. The balance of power outside the UN security council is vehmently anti-Israel and this is based on many of the AU countries hating Israel because of their support for the RSA (South African) nuclear project in the 1960's. Right or wrong, this is no reason to deny a countries existence or prevent it defending itself. Then one has to look at Europe and their weakness in the face of terrorism. The French have interests in Lebanon and Algeria and the Germans in Turkey. Being seen to support Israel to closely at the UN would be electoral suicide for most of those nations.

This debate has taken the usuall lines of argument, but one thing we can all agree on is that peace is the only suitable outcome. However in striving for this, loss of life is inevitable. Peace will come to the region when Hamas and the terrorist-supporting backers of Hamas recognise Israel's right to exist, renounce terror and COMBAT the terror threat through actions and not words. Who in their right mind would go to the negotiating table with someone launching rockets at you on a daily basis?

Dan Taylor

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 8:15am - Edited by the author

I agree that Hamas and Fatah are not moving in the right direction, but the Israeli government are also to blame to some extent too - I won't go into details for the sake of brevity.

• "If you think we are such promiscuous backers of terror, how is it that your conscience allows you to continue living here"

To quote Barry Crimmins when told to love his country or leave it: "What? And be a victim of our foreign policy?"

I love my country, what I don't love are the things done by Government in my name. Besides, no state has a clean slate, not even the Swiss (probably).

There are massive amounts of evidence that the U.S., the U.K., Russia, etc. have all funded and actively supported terrorism on a much greater scale than in Palestine, and continue to do so. If you want to read more on this, I can happily recommend (although it is presented in a very leftist manner) "Web of Deceit" by Mark Curtis. If you can skip over the liberal propaganda, it is a very informative read with regard to the U.K.'s history of active support of, or general apathy towards specific terrorism.

Also perhaps it's worth considering that the disproportionate number of resolutions passed is possibly, partly a reflection on which nations require resolutions to be passed against them, rather than active discrimination. Then again it could also be a reflection on the fact that until recently, Palestinian insurgency could not be linked directly to the state.

But then if Israel had adhered to resolution 242 way back in 1967, maybe a lot of these issues would have been put to bed already.

I will deal with these misguided comments one by one.

1)A Classic from Mitch:
“You might want to check your modern history books for the Jenin Massacre”
Mitch I’m staggered by you bringing up the jenin “massacre”. It just proves you are scarcely bothered about facts, but merely use whatever fabrications you can to feed your identity as part of the left wing anti-Israel vanguard. It is acknowledged by every single media station as being one of the biggest fabrications in Middle East history! It is more aptly known as the Battle of Jenin.

The BBC states that Israel perpetrated no massacre. Here’s a transcript of the article disproving Palestinian blatant lies that 500 civilians were massacred in Jenin:
“In a report released on Thursday the UN said the overall number of Palestinians killed was 52 - around half of whom may have been civilians - while Israel lost 23 soldiers there.

“It says Palestinian militants sought by the Israeli military were placed in heavily populated areas, putting civilians at risk.”
"Palestinian groups are alleged to have widely booby-trapped civilian homes, acts targeted at IDF personnel but also putting civilians in danger," the report adds.”

If you still don’t believe it here’s the view from Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch.

Amnesty International
Derek Holley, a military advisor to Amnesty International, corroborated that there was no massacre:
"Talking to people and talking to witnesses, even very credible witnesses, it just appears there was no wholesale killing."
Human Rights Watch
Human Rights Watch found no evidence for a massacre and criticized Palestinian militants for having endangered the lives of Palestinian civilians in part by "intermingling" with them. According to the BBC “Human Rights Watch says at least 52 Palestinians died of whom 22 were civilians.” This corroborates the UN’s accounts of the battle of Jenin. Many Israelis will tell you they could just have bombed Jenin from the air if they really wanted to massacre Palestinians. The fact that infantry troops were risked is evidence of Israel's concern for civilians. If Israel wanted to annihilate the Palestinians it would not need to risk any of its troops it could press a few buttons and the deed would be done. But it does not and has never stated or attempted to annihilate the Palestinians. Now in view of the fact that both Hamas and Fatah are dedicated to Israel’s destruction, and that when the Arab armies had the upper hand they attempted “to drive the Jews into the sea”, who do you think is showing more restraint here? Israel provides the Palestinians with most of its electricity and water. Considering that Arabs used to shoot at food convoys driving to Jerusalem in order to try and starve the Jews there to death, there seems to be a difference of approach! Do you really think that the Palestinians would give it a second thought if they could kill every Jew in Israel? See further down where I will give you a link to Palestinian authority media in which Palestinians are told that their goal is to kill every Jew in Israel.

2)"the UN is inherently anti-Israel"
Well this quote is proved by the fact that there are many Islamic countries in the world 44 in fact, and nearly all of them barring Turkey, Egypt and Jordan (in which anti-Semitism is still very much present) have no diplomatic relations with Israel and view it as an enemy. And to revisit an old cliché an organization is the sum of its parts. Here are some more facts if you want to nitpick further.
Percentage of U.N. Commission on Human Rights resolutions condemning an Arab country for human rights violations: 0
Percentage of U.N. Commission on Human Rights resolutions condemning Israel for human rights violations: 26
Number of U.N. Security Council resolutions on the Middle East between 1948 and 1991: 175
Number of these resolutions against Israel: 97
Number of these resolutions against an Arab state: 4
Number of Arab countries that have been members of the U.N. Security Council: 16
Number of times Israel has been a member of the U.N. Security Council: 0
Number of U.N. General Assembly resolutions condemning Israel: 322
Number of U.N. General Assembly resolutions condemning an Arab country: 0

2 B)“Also perhaps it's worth considering that the disproportionate number of resolutions passed is possibly, partly a reflection on which nations require resolutions to be passed against them, rather than active discrimination.”

The above facts completely dismantle this point because clearly the UN spends an inordinate amount of time criticizing Israel whilst it says nothing about the vast amount of human rights abuses in Arab countries with everything from killing and repression of minorities, executing gays, female circumcision and the thousands of women murdered in so called “honour” killings (in Pakistan 2women a day are killed in this way). It also said nothing about Jordan’s notorious ‘Black September’ in which more Palestinians were killed in one incident than in any one of Israel’s operations against Palestinian terrorists. The Palestinian death toll in ‘Black September’s 11 days of fighting in Jordan was estimated at 3,400, though Arafat claimed that 20,000 had been killed. If you are going to portray the UN as the moral compass of the world what about the fact that its so-called aid workers in Africa have been found to have conducted ‘a sex for food’ scheme with children as young as 8. Don’t believe me? Here's the article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1842512.stm
The fact that China, Libya and North Korea all sat on its human rights commission also shows how much it cares about human rights! The fact is that it doesn’t criticize countries if they are too powerful- the Chinese invasion of Tibet and its murder of 2million Tibetans being a classic example. Are you still going to stand here and tell me its morality is in tact after all that? And that it drafts resolutions against the countries that deserve it? Its nonsense and you know it!

3) “If someone expressed a desire to kill me, the very first thing I would do is attempt to dissuade them from this course of action i.e. negotiate. If Israel does refuse to enter into constructive dialogue it is not only harming the interests of Palestinians but also those of its own citizens.
I don’t think the deliberate targeting of civilians is ever acceptable”

That is exactly the kind of rational thinking Israel adopted and I adopted when I was a member of the ‘Peace Now’ organization which strongly advocated a two state solution. That’s why Israel offered a 2state solution in 1948 and in 1999! But despite acceding to all of their demands in 1999 the Palestinians rejected the deal (which if you actually read my previous post you would know already) - if someone says to you “give me your money or I’ll kill you and you offer them the money, but they then say: ‘well im going to kill you anyway’ unless you are a ludicrous individual you will take steps to defend yourself. That is exactly what Israel did and is doing still.

4) “Demography is our nuclear weapon!”- This just proves that the Palestinians are trying to destroy Israel by whatever means possible including out breeding the Jews there. It is a tactic that was also used in the once Christian country of Lebanon- it was once a 60% majority Christian country, now its more like 60% Muslim less than 40% Christian. So my Christian friends this same tactic can be used against you, has been in the past and definitely will be in the future.

5) “Coen’s criticism of the global community and the U.N. as anti-Semitic is absurd, and betrays a lack of understanding as to what anti-Semitism truly is: discrimination of, or prejudice and hostility towards, people of the Jewish faith.” What's absurd is your re-writing of the history of the region or omission thereof when you claim that Annapolis was the first time Israelis and Palestinians tried to negotiate a two state solution, I've already shown this to be patently untrue- at best its bad journalism research and at worse its rewriting history. If you think my criticism of the blatant anti-Semitism in the world is absurd, don’t take my word for it, how about the word of Rev. Dr.Martin Luther King:

"Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so.

"And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-Semitism.

"The anti-Semite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the anti-Semite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!

"My friend, I do not accuse you of deliberate anti-Semitism. I know you feel, as I do, a deep love of truth and justice and revulsion for racism, prejudice, and discrimination. But I know you have been misled--as others have been--into thinking you can be 'anti-Zionist' and yet remain true to these heartfelt principles that you and I share.

"Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--make no mistake about it." Martin Luther King.

6) “Both governments habitually "educate" their populaces in the evils of the other”- from being in Israel I know this is patently not true. There are no programs on TV in Israel that state that the Palestinians should be destroyed and if you ask Israeli children what they want to be when they grow up they’d probably say “a scientist, or an astronaut”. That’s why Israel is a leader in science- developed the first chip for a cell phone ever, made the Intel Pentium chip and publishes more books per capita than any other country second only to the US, so lets not be so quick to deride Israeli education or claim that it is in anyway a tool used by the government for religious hatred, as is the case in the Palestinian
areas.

In contrast here is proof of the Palestinian government’s ‘education of hate’ system:

This is a direct quote from the Acting speaker of the Palestinian legislative council Dr.Ahmad Bahar “Dr. Ahmad Bahar (acting Speaker, Palestinian Legislative Council): 
“our people was afflicted by the cancerous lump, that is the Jews, in the heart of the Arab nation… Be certain that America is on its way to disappear, America is wallowing [in blood] today in Iraq and Afghanistan, America is defeated and Israel is defeated, and was defeated in Lebanon and Palestine… Make us victorious over the infidel people… Allah, take hold of the Jews and their allies, Allah, take hold of the Americans and their allies… Allah, count them and kill them to the last one and don’t leave even one.”
[PA TV, April 20, 2007]”

Don’t believe me? Here is a link where u can see him saying it himself! Its a website that monitors and publishes footage from Palestinian authority TV, if you want to watch the videos go on the website on click on “TV-Video Library”. You will see what the Palestinian authority tells ITS OWN PEOPLE rather than the sugar coated version we get here in the west!

Here’s a Hamas spokesperson saying that the genocide of Jews is still Hamas’ goal:
The Hamas spokesman, Dr. Ismail Radwan, PA TV, March 30, 2007:
“The Hour [Resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the rock and the tree will say: "Oh, Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him!"
“We must remind our Arab and Muslim nation, its leaders and people, its scholars and students, remind them that Palestine and the Al Aqsa mosque will not be liberated through summits nor by international resolutions, but it will be liberated through the rifle. It will not be liberated through negotiations, but through the rifle, since this occupation knows no language but the language of force… O Allah, strengthen Islam and Muslims, and bring victory to your Jihad-fighting worshipers, in Palestine and everywhere… Allah take the oppressor Jews and Americans and their supporters!”

Heres a transcript of a song on a popular Palestinian Authority TV show for kids,
"Shake the earth, raise the stones. 
You will not be saved, Oh Zionist, from the volcano of my country’s stones, 
You will not be saved, Oh Zionist, from the volcano of my country’s stones, 
You are the target of my eyes, I will even willingly fall as a Shahid [Martyr for Allah]. 
You are the target of my eyes, I will even willingly fall as a Shahid. 
Allah Akbar, Oh the young ones". 
The similar messages found in formal PA education and popular culture, together with the reported children’s participation in combat roles, are further indication of the child abuse by the PA leadership for political purposes, and the tragedy they have brought on their own children and the entire region. I challenge you to find any equivalent in Israeli television!

Tonight as you write in apparent condemnation of attacks against civilians, a Palestinian gunman has entered a Jewish religious school and murdered 7 young students, and injured dozens more. It really doesn’t get more heinous than this. The Israeli government never targets civilians directly (although Palestinian terrorists have a policy of using human shields which does of course causes death- but that of course is its purpose!) which is why they have a policy of searching houses with soldiers, putting their men at risk to avoid collateral damage a fact which the Palestinians use to booby trap houses as they did in Jenin. The Hamas government in contrast called the heinous and vile murder of these Jewish students “Heroic!” and celebrations involving thousands of people were seen all over Gaza. Hamas loves this kind of thing because it relies on its portrayal of the Palestinians as victims of Israel because their only policy is “Hate jews/ destroy Israel” (as I have proved above) They use the convenient old scapegoat so that they can avoid actually having to govern properly and provide their people with a better future. This attempt to avoid accountability will undoubtedly work, as Israelis understandably demand revenge for this attack and for the constant provocation by Hamas by incessantly firing rockets from Gaza which they started the second Israel evacuated its settlers and troops from the area , and Palestinians will again feel victimized. This cycle will continue until the Palestinians abandon their genocidal ambitions of destroying Israel they will continue to wage a war they cannot possibly win and their suffering will continue and will be their own doing! Hamas has successfully ensured its people will remain impoverished and that any chance of peace in the near or foreseeable future has now been comprehensively buried.

The Arab world has to stop blaming Israel and America for its massive list of failures to its citizens despite vast amounts of oil wealth. The blaming Israel mantra has been repeated in Muslim countries from Syria to Indonesia whilst in truth most people in these countries have probably never seen or met a Jew. And if Islamist terror attacks are a particularly Israeli-caused phenomenon, then how can we justify and connect the terror attacks in Madrid, Bali, Casablanca, Istanbul, Beslan, Philippines, Thailand, Kashmir, London etc. What gives Islamists the right to perpetrate these heinous acts all over the world? It is no small part the moral support and “understanding” we give to them. But remember my friends, if we justify terrorism in Israel we justify it everywhere. Terrorism that is justified anywhere is justified everywhere. (For a more comprehensive quote on this see my above quote from the manager of the Al-Arabiya TV station. ) See this video by Wafa Sultan a very brave Muslim woman speaking out on Al-Jazeera TV against Islamic radicalism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WLoasfOLpQ

• Fri, 7th Mar 2008 4:50pm - Edited by the author

Dan, give up trying to debate against such closed-minded fools. My solution would be to put 'Mitch' on the Orkney Islands and launch tomahawks at him and his family all day and see how he likes it. It is very easy for him spit and self-flagelate on freedom because he does not know what it is like not to have it.

"That's why Israel is a leader in science- [...] made the Intel Pentium chip" - that's not true, the original Pentium was the next evolution of the x86 processor line (which was designed by Intel in the US), of which architecture work was headed by Vinod Dham, an Indian working in the US. Israel's contribution to the Pentium architecture is limited to a single line of chips with the Pentium branding - the P55Cs, which have no relation to modern Intel processors (or even anything else that was branded Pentium).

I don't know enough to comment on anything else about the issue, but it's interesting to read the comments