On 2 April 2002, upon the entry of IDF forces to Bethlehem, many wanted suspects from all the Palestinian terrorist organizations forced their way into the Church of the Nativity and have barricaded themselves inside the church ever since. The number of terrorists who took over the church is estimated to be around 250, a few of them injured.

I call upon the fathers of the Church not to let this affront to humanity continue. Those whose hands are bloodied and do not repent should not use the Church as thier staging ground. Two soldiers were just killed by a sniper shooting from the Church tower. The desecation of the holy place of christ should not be allowed to continue. I pray that all of you would sent letter to your priests asking for those whose hands are bloodied to be jugded and if found guilty imprisoned by the Jewish state of Israel.

Following is a list of the leading wanted suspects who are inside the church: Fatah and Tanzim: 1. Ibrahim Musa Salem Abyat "Abu Galif": born 1973, resident of Bethlehem, is a prominent Tanzim operative who heads a military cell. He is the successor of Hasin and Atef Abyat (deceased), involved in the firing of mortars at the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo. He was responsible for the following terrorist attacks: - June 2001: the murder of IDF officer Yehuda Edri. - September 2001: the murder of Sarit Amrani. - January 2002: the murder of Avi Boaz. 2. Abdallah Daud Mahmud A'a-Kader/Tirawi, born 1962, heads the Palestinian general intelligence service in Bethlehem. Originally from the Balattah refugee camp in Nablus, he is a very close disciple of Tawfik Tirawi. A'a-Kader has been involved in the organization and execution of multiple terrorist attacks, as well as produced explosives, was involved in the smuggling of weaponry and provided shelter to operatives of other terrorist organizations. A'a-Kader fully collaborates with senior Tanzim operatives, mainly Ibrahim Abu Gali`f. Both are responsible for the shooting attacks against Gilo and the Bethlehem bypass roads. 3. Jihad Yousouf Halil Ja'ara: Born in 1971 and a resident of Bethlehem, Ja'ara is a Tanzim operative and member of the Palestinian security forces. He has been continuously involved in terrorist attacks targeted at IDF forces and Israeli civilians. Regularly firing at IDF forces and targets in Gilo, Ja'ara is also a dealer of weaponry to Tanzim operatives in the Bethlehem area, as well as responsible for sheltering wanted suspects. He has condoned the suicide attacks in the media and has even provided his cell phone for the use by terrorists. 4. Ismail Musa Muhammad Hamdan: Born 1968 and a resident of Bethlehem, Hamdan is a Tanzim operative and a member of Ibrahim Abu Gali`f's cell. Hamdan was involved in dozens of shooting attacks against Gilo. He perpetrated some of the most heinous terrorist attacks, including: - June 2001: the murder of IDF officer Yehuda Edri. - September 2001: the murder of Sarit Amrani. - January 2002: the murder of Avi Boaz. 5. Nidal Ahmad Isa Abu Gali'f: Born 1973, Abu Gali'f is a resident of Bethlehem. He perpetrated shooting attacks against Gilo and the Bethlehem bypass roads and was involved in the production of explosives. Abu Gali'f is currently the senior assistant of Yihia Da'amsa, who is responsible for many terrorist attacks, such as the suicide attacks in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Israel and the supermarket in Kiryat Yovel. 6. Muhammad Sai`d Attallah Salem: Born 1979 and a resident of the Dehaishe refugee camp, Salem is senior Tanzim operative under the command of Yihya Da'amsa. Salem was involved in planning and dispatching suicide attacks in the neighborhood of Beit Israel on March 2, 2000 and the supermarket in Kiryat Yovel in Jerusalem, on March 29, 2002. 7. Kamel Hassan Hamid: Born 1963 and the Fatah General Secretary in Bethlehem; Hamid is responsible for the financing of the Tanzim operations in Bethlehem, including the purchase of weaponry and explosives. Hamid is in direct contact with Marwan Barguti and responsible for disbursing funds to the terrorist operatives.

Hamas: 1. Ibrahim Muhammad Salem Abyat: Born 1961 and a resident of Bethlehem, Abyat is a senior Hamas operative; is in charge of organizing terrorist Hamas activity. 2. Basem Muhammed Ibrahim Hamud: Born in 1972 and a resident of Bethlehem, Hamud is a Hamas terrorist operative. He was involved in the preparation of explosives and dispatched Taleb Harmes and Ahmad Abada, who intercepted en route to committing a suicide attack in Jerusalem's Binyanei Hau`ma Convention Center. 3. Aziz Halil Muhammad Abyat Jubran: Born 1971, and a resident of Bethlehem, Gubran is a Hamas operative. He works with Basem Hamud; produces explosive charges and was also dispatched Harmas and Abda in the aforementioned foiled Jerusalem suicide attack..

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@umn.edu), April 09, 2002

Answers

Yaakov, Thanks for your information. I do not know how you can think that Christians are allowing terrorists to use the church - it was taken at gunpoint, you know. If you are correct as to the identity of the gunmen, then I'd say, "Bomb it.". We can always rebuild.

-- Bob Hennessy (bobhenn@hotmail.com), April 09, 2002.

Bob writes:

"If you are correct as to the identity of the gunmen, then I'd say, "Bomb it.". We can always rebuild. "

Bob,

I don't know about the details of this situation; but I doubt that destroying the church is a necessary step to ridding it of terrorists. Thankfully, the IDF has plenty of alternatives that it would more likely choose than what you recommend. My belief is that the IDF isn't that trigger-happy.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 09, 2002.

Mateo, It isn't that I don't care about the Church of the Nativity, but there's a battle going on. I once took my kids to Pearl Harbor and had an interesting conversation with an old vet who had been there on Dec. 7, 1941.

I told him that it puzzled me that my father had said so little about his combat experience but this old vet had spent years there as a volunteer telling people about the day that lives in infamy.

He told me, "I wasn't really in combat that day. I was just a kid on the beach who was scared shitless with bombs coming down all around me. The things I did later, in combat, I never talk about. That's because combat is what happens when all the conversation is over. And now I'm going to kill you."

That's the real polotik of what's coming down at this moment. We have the luxury of blah, blah, blah, yaddah, yaddah, yaddah. Over in Israel, the conversation is over. God save and guide or president and Colin Powell.

-- Bob (bobhenn@hotmail.com), April 09, 2002.

Bob,

I hear exactly what you're saying. I'm with you 100%. It's easy for you and me to be arm-chair generals when we (at least I) have never been involved in a military combat operation. It's difficult to be rational in battle when your next breath may be your last.

That said, I know that the Israeli Defense Forces are extremely capable, and they are able to use means (like stun-grenades) that are either non-lethal or purely anti-personnel weapons. I only say this because I believe this to be their mode of operation, not just a hypothetical possibility.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 09, 2002.

Non-lethal weapons are in the realm of the police, and those aren't police around the Church of the Nativity. In America, it's the job of the Commander In Chief/Chief Executive to determine where police work ends and military action begins, but Israel has their own way of doing things.

If Yaakov is correct about who is in that church, then they are command and controll of the terrorist infrastructure. Here's another one of my (unpopular) predictions: bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-click.

-- Billy Pilgrim (madhack@mail.md), April 09, 2002.

Both the Israeli's and the Palestinians have suffered, both are responsible for horrific acts ...war is a horrific act, as is terrorism.

To take sides about who is right or wrong, is about as useful as a fly swatter in an elephant stampede. If folks would instead invest their energy in 'ONLY' taking the side of peace, and what each needs to bring them to such a plateau, much less air would fan the fire of hate, past anger, and future aggression. I would think followers of Jesus would be the peacemakers.

War/Terrorism.... interchangeable terms in today's world are only temporary fixes. Violence begets violence, and so it goes. We cannot kill every terrorist or every would be terrorist. We can't kill every terrorist because we can't even define what terrorism is or who is a terrorist.

There are other ways to have those Palastinians leave the Church besides force. It is time for the peacemakers of the world to step forward and to let their voices be heard. Maybe the Pope should come to the Church of the Nativity to say Mass, maybe he can be a true peacemaker. Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 09, 2002.

It´s been some time I have not posted here, but just reading the title of this thread, combined with something I read 5 minutes ago, make me feel urged to speak off.

Please read march´s issue of the "Inside the Vatican" magazine, a publication I think every orthodox catholic should subscribe. It is marvellous. I have subscribed it for three years, though it is very expensive when international delivery fees are included (combined with our much unvalued exchange rate against US dollars, here in Brazil).

I admit I have not read all that was written in this thread, as I have no time. Sorry.

I was baffled and shocked that an opinion poll in the US revealed that more than 50% of americans think that Ariel Sharon´s nazi atack against palestines is right. This only comfirms what I have allways suspected: that american people are so far away from the world´s reality as to be frightful.

Sharon is a heinous criminal, once comdemned for war crimes BY ISRAEL´S TRIBUNALS !!! By a demonic device he became Israel´s Prime Minister, and now he is the number one candidate to succeed Milosevic in the international court to be prosecuted for crimes agians the humanity. What he is doing is being condemned by every single country in the free democratic western world, including UNO and the Vatican. With the only exception of the United States (perhaps because of Sept. 11?).

No, the church is not "letting terrorists hide", she is shielding people from a real terrorist state which Israel allways was and is increasingly turning into more and more since Sharon took office. Is is to be remembered that Israel is occupying a foreign territory, ignoring all UNO´s resolutions since 1967. It is very interesting to notice that one that disobeys UNO´s resolutions and is at the same time an enemy of US imediatly gets bombed by NATO and the US (such as Milosevic and Saddam). When the rebel happens to be a "friend" of the US, he can get along and disobey and ignore it as long as he wishes, being sure that nothing will hapen. This has been the case with Israel since 1948 (and specially after 67) and nowadays.

Huge Jew money is used to elect Presidents and Representatives in the US. Hollywood, owned by jew money, produces year after year films about the holocaust, showing how the jews are essentialy saints and were the only victims of Hitler (a role model for Sharon, by the way). This may explain the great simpathy americans show for jews, which have no parallel in Europe an Latin America (not to mention Muslim countries, needless to say).

Just look at the infamous and absurd campaign jew organizations are promoting (together with "liberal" catholics. it should be remembered) against the memory of Pius XII (and against their ancestors, which have praised him just after the war, and are therefore being called idiots by today´s jews).

Please, brothers americans, wake up!

God save us in this miserable time.

Atila

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 09, 2002.

Bush has crated a monster (Sharon). Now, I hear at the tv news, he is furious that Sharon ignores his plea for disoccupying palestine. This, after letting him get along with all the absurds he commited after taking office.

It is like the father who gets furious when he learns his son is using drugs, after having been a relapse parent (drunk, absent, violent) for the boys´s life.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 09, 2002.

Dear Atila , You have the right to your opinion. I too believe Sharon ..AS WELL as Arafat have done much damage to their people and each others people. But when you use terms such as.."jew money, etc., etc, you cross the line. The line of bigotry, the line of inciting hatred, the line of anti-semitism.

It is one thing to feel drawn to the plight of the Palestinian but another to attack the Jewish people in the manner you have. Not only is it anti-christian but it is self-defeating in your argument. You become what you hate and criticize.

Certain descriptive words such as f_ _ k are not acceptable to this forum, I would think that anti-semitism or anti- any race would be even more unacceptable.

Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 10, 2002.

P.S. Atila, Bush hasn't created a monster...he(bush) is one himself. :-) Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 10, 2002.

Ok, Joan, I had not the intention of generalizing Sharon´s attitudes toward all jew individuals. On the contrary, the jews here in Brazil show much more good sense than those jew leaders in the US. Many jew leaders in Brazil are condemning Sharon as well. Indeed, things seemed much better when Rabin was prime minister of Israel.

What shocks me is that what Sharon is doing is a genocide, and I can hear almost no voice coming from jew leadership to oppose him. A Nobel Peace prize judge said last week that he regrets having voted for Perez to win the prize, as he is showing condescendence (toghether with the whole labour party) with Sharon. He said that he would take back the prize if possible.

The sad irony is that the "liberal" jew leaders who are completely "silent" about this genocide (when not positively supporting Sharon) are the same that accuse (falsely) Pius XII of being "silent" about the holocaust on the II War.

Zionists (not jews in general) are one of the most racists people in the world. Let put things straight: although this is no excuse for christians to be racists against them, it is easy to undestand that anti-sionism is flourishing again.

Please notice that I said "anti-sionism" and not "anti-semitism". This latter term is one more evidence that some jewish leaders are eager to take care of more that what was entitled to them. Is is only necessary to remember that palestines are semites themselves.

By the way, I desagree that Bush is a monster. For me, he is only the dumbest western leader that appeared in the last many decades. But then I may be being too forgiving to him... :-)

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 10, 2002.

... An idiot (Bush) advised by real monsters (I concede), such as Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice...

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 10, 2002.

The only guy with some sense in his head (Powell) is being consistently ignored and silenced.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 10, 2002.

<"The church is [...] is shielding people from a real terrorist state"? You're twisting facts. It was Palestinians that invaded the Church of Nativity, taking priests and religious as hostages.

Atila, you're talking like German right-wing extremists: indicating that there may be a worldwide Jewish conspiracy to control the media, that 'the Jewry' wishes to control worldwide finances, that they exploit the Shoah for their own good... calling the IDF policing a 'nazi attack' is heinous. You should apologise to Yaakov for equating his people to the world's leading anti-Semitists.

Yaakov, I'm sorry that your contribution has baited a few monsters. They're not typical Catholics.

Shalom,

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 10, 2002.

Atila - Your anti semite showing itself far too strong for modern Catholics. As to Pius' involvement in WW11 that is understood and known as history.

-- Jean Bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), April 10, 2002.

Billy Pilgrim wrote:

"Non-lethal weapons are in the realm of the police, and those aren't police around the Church of the Nativity."

Billy, you are incorrect. Non-lethal weapons are used by military. In particular, they are used by the US military and the Israeli military.

Atila

"Sharon is a heinous criminal, once comdemned for war crimes BY ISRAEL´S TRIBUNALS !!!"

If you all saw Sharon addressing the Knesset on Monday, you'd see that not only were the Arabs in the Knesset upset with his actions; but, you'd see the Jewish members were not terribly supportive of his actions. My opinion is that each side's action (Palestinian and Israeli) is a response to the other. Each action only provokes more retaliation.

I believe in his book "In the Land of Israel," Amos Oz quoted a Palestian who said, "I have nothing against the Jewish people, it's the Israelis that I don't like." This comment reflects a few inconsistencies with Israel:

1) Many of the "Jews" of Israel simply don't believe in God. They are Jewish because of ancestry and not because of a belief in God.

2) For all the steps that they've taken toward making a democracy, the Israelis will never have a true democracy until their laws and government actions are not prejudiced against non-Jews.

I fault Jews for the first problem more than the second. When taken together though, the laws are biased toward a "race" of people, and not a "religion." Other problems in Israel include the terrible treatment of African Jews from Ethiopia. When the Israelis uprooted these people from Africa to "bring them to the Promised Land", their societal bonds didn't do too well in the transplantation. They also haven't experienced Israel as true "equals" in their society.

Before everyone comes down on me as a nut because of my opinions, I'd be happy to let everyone know that I think Israel is much closer to being a democracy than most or all of its neighbors. Most Arab countries are prejudiced against non-Muslims in their countries, both in culture and law. The US's closest allies in the Arab world don't even have elections--they are monarchies that have laws against non-Muslim practices, women, and they stifle dissenting opinion. In contrast, the only reason that I can imagine that dissent occurs in Israel is because their law protects free speech.

If we could just transplant the US Bill of Rights and democracy into these countries and make it stick, what world of change we would see! That's just the American in me talking...

Pray for peace,

Mateo.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 10, 2002.

"It was Palestinians that invaded the Church of Nativity, taking priests and religious as hostages."

Who is twisting things here?

Do the friars consider themselves hostages?

Who is going outside to take water and food?

They are in permanent telefonic contact with the international press and the Vatican. Never did they defined their situation as being "hostages". Much to the contrary, thay are calling themselves "besieged" by Israeli army.

What is the Vatican, the UNO and the EU saying? "Please, arab terrorists, free the friars!" No! What they are saying is "For God´s Love, make any effort to make Israeli Army go away!" Every international body is pressing Sharon, not the "terrorists". None of them, including the Vatican, never even called the "terrorists" to surrender. On the contrary, what they are proposing in an "international observed" corridor which would permit the palestines inside the church to leave. The need for international observation is obvious, given that Sharon, with his much democratic vocation, expelled the press from Palestine.

You may think of the friars as hostages if you wanto to deceive yourself. The Vatican, the UNO, the EU, all christians in Palestine (including the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and last but not least, THE FRIARS THEMSELVES call them as besieged.

Now, perhaps you know and Sharon know better than the pope, the UN and even Bush (who, by the way, never asked the "terrorists" inside the church to surrender, it must be noted).

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 11, 2002.

It´s interesting for me to have my words taken as Nazi.

Sharon´s attitude have been likened to the Nazi´s many time by the international press recently (no, not in Al Qaeda´s newsletter). A Israeli Rep., a son of survivers from concentration camps, denounced that Sharon´s police and army were even NUMBERING PRISONERS! Wow! I prefer ten times having my word described as Nazi than acting like one, just as Sharon is doing, day in and day out.

Sharon is supported by the ultra right-wing parties of Israel, who are expansionist, dream of the "big Israel" chimera, and consider the Palestines an "inferior race" (like anyone else, for that matter) that shoul be destroyed or, at least, expelled.

Expansionism, prisoner numbering, execution of prisoners, "superior- race" talk... Now, who is Nazi here?

One thing is to be made clear, as I have already told Joan, but it seems some people here either did not read or decided to ignore: I am not saying that ALL jews are like this. But it seems clear that those (possibly few) who are in command nowadays are. This is no anti- semitism (a distorted phrase, as I have already explained), but recognition of fact.

Thousands of people like to bash the Catholic Church (the frequenters of this forum know quite well) blaming to the Church the sins of individual christians. I am not falling in this trap. I know very good jews and some are close friends. However, the "midia conspiracy" has been able to insert the criticism of jew individuals or organizations in the "politically correct index". If you point to the crimes of a person, and it just happens that he is a jew, than you are anti-semite.

Sorry, who likes theories of conspiracy are some jew organizations (such as those who like to say that Pius XII was "Hitler´s Pope"). Not me.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 11, 2002.

Now to Matteo:

"I believe in his book "In the Land of Israel," Amos Oz quoted a Palestian who said, "I have nothing against the Jewish people, it's the Israelis that I don't like.""

I much agree with this point of view.

"1) Many of the "Jews" of Israel simply don't believe in God. They are Jewish because of ancestry and not because of a belief in God."

This has much more implications than you can think of at first sight. I have allways been impressed by the fact that almost all jews that I have had the pleasure to interact (no irony here, they were very good friends) were atheists. This is impressive because of two reasons: 1. "jew" is expected to be an adjective related to religion; 2. 99% (a recent research revealed) of brazilians believe in God, so, it cannot be acounted for by saying that "brasilian jews are atheists as everyboby else".

In a recent issue of Inside The Vatican (I again recomend this magazine), a scholar said what I had in my mind for a long time. The issue was, why today jew organizations are so eager to destroy Pius reputation, when these same organizations had so much praised him after the war, even giving him the title of "Friend of the Jews" something they do to very few people?

The answer is: Jews, once upon a time, were a religion. Now, thay are only a race. Their organizing principle was the faith in Jahveh. Now this is gone, and they needed a new organizing principle. This came to be the Holocaust. The issue now is to put forward the idea that jews were the only victims of the II War. Then, confronted with the fact that tons of chistians were martired in the War, they feel uneasy. The pursuit and defense of the Israeli State became an obsession. There are even jew theologians that say that the Messiah is the State of Israel (sic!) This fact could be seen when jew organizations spoke off outraged when polish catholics tried to plant crosses in Auschwitz (fact: 50% of the people martired in Auschwitz were catholics; if a person´s idea of history comes from hollywood, his "fact" will be that all people murdered by Hitler were jews).

In fact, speaking of Hollywood, instead of "jew media conspiracy", the facts are that:

- Almost all studios in Hollywood were founded and are until today run by jews. - Almost all films about the holocaust are directed by jews; no surprise that only jews are depicted as victims. - Every year, one or two films are released with the explicit intention of bashing the church (such as stigmata etc.) Now this is interesting. Concerning religions, Hollywood films have basically two stances: jews are universal victims and catholics are murderous conspirers, greedy for power etc etc etc it bores)

This "monopoly of victimization" is an affront to history, and it is what is behind the recent attacks against Pius.

"2) For all the steps that they've taken toward making a democracy, the Israelis will never have a true democracy until their laws and government actions are not prejudiced against non-Jews."

very true

"I fault Jews for the first problem more than the second. When taken together though, the laws are biased toward a "race" of people, and not a "religion." Other problems in Israel include the terrible treatment of African Jews from Ethiopia. When the Israelis uprooted these people from Africa to "bring them to the Promised Land", their societal bonds didn't do too well in the transplantation. They also haven't experienced Israel as true "equals" in their society. "

The case of ethiopian jews only makes clear how Israel is a racist state. They discriminate even jews! It is only sufficient that they be black.

"Before everyone comes down on me as a nut because of my opinions, I'd be happy to let everyone know that I think Israel is much closer to being a democracy than most or all of its neighbors. Most Arab countries are prejudiced against non-Muslims in their countries, both in culture and law. The US's closest allies in the Arab world don't even have elections--they are monarchies that have laws against non- Muslim practices, women, and they stifle dissenting opinion. In contrast, the only reason that I can imagine that dissent occurs in Israel is because their law protects free speech. "

That is exactly why I blame Israel. Israel is made up by western, intelligent, cult people. They may in no way be considered primitive or ignorant. Jews are Orchestra Maestros, Nobel Prizes in all fields, great scientists, writers, artists etc. The arab country stationed in the middle ages. They cannot be judged by the same meter, as avery historian (or confessor priest for that matter) knows. If arabs behave like barbarians, this is undestandable, because barbarians much of them are. Israel has no such excuse.

If we could just transplant the US Bill of Rights and democracy into these countries and make it stick, what world of change we would see! That's just the American in me talking...

Pray for peace,

Mateo.

We are...

Atila

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 11, 2002.

Dear Atila, I see you have chosen your internet name with great care. Your words regarding the "Jewish controlled media" and "Jewish controlled Hollywood” and regarding your hate for Israelis betray what you really are and what you think. I pray for god that I am wrong and that your sugar coated hate does not drip with poison on other occasions.

Israel is a democratic state struggling for survival. Every man, women and child in Israel is fighting for his life. I have no idea why you think the Jews of Israel are without faith, I see great faith and belief among my people and I do not believe in a "Jewish race" only in a Jewish nation, the same one that Jesus Christ was part of. Even the holy roman empire in times of great strife would turn to a strong man, a dictator, this man is now Sharon. As you may know, Sharon was voted for four years and with his approval rates in Israel dropping he will soon be replaced by someone saner. However, Sharon and other Israelis are not Nazis or racist. True, Israel had some problems integrating Arab and Jewish minorities into the fabric of life but much less then other nations, and especially under the threat of war. The 15% Arab minority is represented by 10% of the parliament including an Arab minister. The recent immigration from Ethiopia has only in recent years been fully integrated into Israel, but what did you expect? Bringing 20,000 people from a backward state in Africa integrated into a fully industrialized western society in less then five years ?! Give Israel a chance to raise a generation of educated people bringing the rest of the Ethiopian society up with them. Similar dynamics occurred when Yemen Jews came to Israel, it just takes time. Especially with a multiethnic society like Israel. Don't quote me statistics and facts spawned by Muslim propaganda, ask people living in Israel. There is an Ethiopian party in the parliament. Ahamric is one of the national languages right now, as well as Russian. All in all, Israel is truly a democracy. Yasser Arafat Palestinian Authority is something else. There has been 30,000 Christians living in Bethlehem under Israel rule, then the Palestinian Authority took over (1993). There are less then 7,000 Christians living in Bethlehem right now. Most of them fled, those that didn’t and dared to speak against Yasser Arafat were declared “accomplishers” shot in the head and dragged through the streets of Bethlehem. Amnesty international reports more then 450 Palestinians shot by the Palestinian Authority. What are the priest in the Church of Nativity to do ? When the IDF moves out they are going to be left with the Palestinian Authority. The same Palestinian Authority that wants to build a Mosque on the same area even though the Vatican objects, loudly. Like most of the people of Israel, I am a person of faith, and I pray for peace. I would love to see the holy sites of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (the tomb of Abraham, Josef, and Jerusalem) turned into a holy city like the Vatican. I would also like to see the Palestinian people in their own country, living beside mine. But I know that Palestinian freedom would come in spite of terrorism and the murder of innocents and not because of it.

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 11, 2002.

Yaakov, I have no hatred against the jew people or individuals. As I have said, I have myself jew friends.

My problem is with Sharon, his ultra-right-wing supporters and with some jew organizations which I believe do not represent the majority of jews. These organizations pursue a political agenda and betray the memory of their own ancestors and predecessors, as they do when they call the after-war jews idiots for thanking Pius XII for saving their lives.

I had much respect and admiration for Yitshak Rabin. He and others (Shimon Perez at that time... No wonder the Nobel Peace Prize judge wants to take Perez´s prize back) advanced much the peace process. Now, Sharon destroyed in few months a work which took decades to build. It is incredible that the average jew may agree with this. Many, in fact, don´t.

I (toghether with almost any olitical analyst in the world, joined in the las few days even by US government) have no illusion that any peace can be obtained while Sharon is in office. Arafat, although no saint, has a much better record in that. After all, it was him who led all the peace process up to the point of almost getting there. Of course, he was dumb to insist in the return of the refugees, but now all this is history. Because of Sharon´s actions, peace in middle east has become very very far away...

That Sharon is a criminal of war is not my word or palestine propaganda. He was convicted in court martial in a Israeli Tribunal. He wants no peace. He is a warior, an old and evil one, and has personal hatred for Arafat. What he is doing is not politics, is personal vendetta. It is incredible that only certain jews cannot undertand that, as even Bush has already understood it.

The new "intifada" began when Sharon, in a very well calculated move, prafanated Muslim sacred places. He wanted to destroy the peace process, toghether with the "Big Israel" people, and there he got.

Palestines are no saints, but that Sharon has crossed every conceivable limit is obvious by the unanimous condemnations he is receiving. Until two or the days ago, the US (for political, not ethical reasons) was the only country or body in the world to support him. Now, even US has changed sides. Is every conceivable country and international organization wrong and only Israel right? This question is not mine, is Koffi Anan´s.

Palestines have as much right to have their country as jews. Why deny them their country ad infinitum? Israel ignores UNO´s resolutions since 1967, and Sharon is affronting them as very few Israeli leaders have dared to do.

Say to me, Yakoov, why does Israel have the right to disobey UNO´s resolutions and nobody ense can? Why when Saddam or Milosevic ignore UNO´s resolutions they get bombed by the US, and Israel, doing the same, get supported by the US? These are questions based in facts, not in propaganda or hatred. How to solve this mystery?

I know that many jews are not Zionists. I think you can agree with me that Zionism is a form of racism no better than any other. What I defend is that good, religious jews that support this kind of thinking are sinning at least by ommision, the same way as we catholics sin by ommision when we see "catholics" attack the pope or our faith.

I think that the good jews (and I am sure they are the vast majority of jews) should not be trying to defend Sharon. They should be the first to condemn him, to move any possible political weapon to make him resign (no peace will come with him there), and to put someone sensible as prime minister. Instead, what do I see? Jews around the world taking a defensive position, saying that "alright, he is not the prime-minister of my dreams, but..." I undestand that everybody is like that. We catholics are these days tempted to defend the pedofile priests, but it is as wrong as a jew defending Sharon. I wanto to see no pedofile priests in the ranks of my church. I think jews should do likewise concerning Sharon.

Shalom Atila

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 11, 2002.

"There has been 30,000 Christians living in Bethlehem under Israel rule, then the Palestinian Authority took over (1993). There are less then 7,000 Christians living in Bethlehem right now. Most of them fled, those that didn’t and dared to speak against Yasser Arafat were declared “accomplishers” shot in the head and dragged through the streets of Bethlehem. Amnesty international reports more then 450 Palestinians shot by the Palestinian Authority."

Yaakov, I don´t know what your sources are, but I think this is difficult to believe.

As you yourself have said, the Vatican allways speaks loud when Christians (or every other people) are being made victims by whoever may be. It is so in China, India, Africa, Vietnam and elsewhere. And I have neve heard the Vatican shout about chritians being persecuted by Arafat. On the contrary, political analysts frequently stress that Arafat is received by the pope two to four times a year, more than any other political leader, and they have very good relations. On the other side, what I am seeing is the Vatican shouting to Sharon to go back. Just go to EWTN and you will see it many times a day.

The only time I saw the Vatican struggle with the Arabs was about the Sinagogue case you mentioned. And, in this case, the struggle was not with Arafat, but with Israeli government! It was Israel who was permitting fundamentalist muslims go on with this. The Palestinian Authority had nothing to do with it.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 11, 2002.

Atila wrote:

"Yaakov, I don´t know what your sources are, but I think this is difficult to believe."

I have heard that the Christian population of Bethleham has drastically fallen from a healthy majority to ~30% of the town's population.

Although tensions exist between Palestinian Christians and Muslims, I don't believe that the Palestinian Authority is just going around murdering Christians. Yaakov, are you suggesting that the Amnesty International report shows that 450 Palestinians were killed because they were Christian?

Just to add some context, here are some words from the Palestinian Authority cabinet member Hanan Ashrawi (herself a Christian):

"To us being Christian is part of our historical authenticity and national Palestinian identity. So we do not view ourselves as a minority or as any way different from other non-Christian Palestinians since Palestine has always been a country that celebrated pluralism and practiced tolerance in all aspects of life. "

Inside Israel, the Christians are just as much second-class citizens as the Muslims. The news reports of Israelis taking over Christian and Muslim homes inside of Jerusalem seems to be a frequent occurrence. Yaakov, what are is your knowledge of this? Is this simply biased reporting?

Yaakov, do you think that a country can simultaneously be a democracy and enact laws that value citizens less because they do not share the State's recommended religion? Honestly, Yaakov, I pray that everyone (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) in the Middle East have a just resolution that provides peace and freedom for everyone. Hopefully, Arab countries will demand democracy and freedom over monarchy and tyranny.

Peace,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 12, 2002.

By the way, the "theory of jew mass-media conspiration" for which I have been accused of being Nazi, is not mine, neither Goebbel´s nor Arafat´s.

It is from a Jew: Norman G. Finkelstein, in his book "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering"

Here´s a brief excerpt of a review at Amazon:

"In an iconoclastic and controversial new study, Norman G. Finkelstein moves from an interrogation of the place the Holocaust has come to occupy in American culture to a disturbing examination of recent Holocaust compensation agreements. It was not until the Arab- Israeli War of 1967, when Israel's evident strength brought it into line with US foreign policy, that memory of the Holocaust began to acquire the exceptional prominence it enjoys today. Leaders of America's Jewish community were delighted that Israel was now deemed a major strategic asset and, Finkelstein contends, exploited the Holocaust to enhance this newfound status. Their subsequent interpretations of the tragedy are often at variance with actual historical events and are employed to deflect any criticism of Israel and its supporters."

(complete text at amazon.com; please search for the book)

The "Anti-Defamation League", one of the most outspoken jew organizations in the World, has, in recent years, adopted defamation as their principal weapon. The case with Pius XII is emblematic. The irony is that this same organization honoured, thanked and even donated a great sum of money to Vatican, thanking Pius for the jew lives he personally saved, a few years after the War. The exact same thing occured with "World Jewish Congress", other such large, powerful and very wealthy organzation. Now, it seems, they changed their mind. Why? Mistery...Perhaps, in their multimillion offices in New York, they know better than the italian jews that were hidden in convents in Rome, while Hitler turned the city upside down after them? (I think I have recently read about people hiding in a convent protected from an army... where?).

I think any decent jew should denounce this absurd, the calumnies against Pius and against the memory of the jews who were there, who are having their memories exploited and their inteligence insulted. Fortunately, some are, like New York´s chief Rabbi, that man who is a friend of the pope since school, and others.

Unfortunately, they are too few... at least until now. Yaakov, why don´t you join them?

Shalom

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Mateo wrote:

"Yaakov, do you think that a country can simultaneously be a democracy and enact laws that value citizens less because they do not share the State's recommended religion?"

Mateo, don´t forget to add free press to this equation...

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Mateo, my brother. I have no idea what your sources are regarding Israel preferential laws regarding Jews. All citizens of Israel are equal to the law as can be seen represented in the Israeli parliment, Jews, Christians and Muslims, Arabs and Israelis. There is a single law that is usually quoted by the Palestinians in being racist which is "the law of return". Which states, if you, your parents or any of your grandparents were jewish then you may automaticly recive an Israeli citizenship. Everybody else goes through doe process. The reason for this law is simply if you, your parents or any of your grandparents were jewish then the Nazis wouls send you to the death camps. Israel just reversed the Ninnberg laws, for it was founded as a home for the jews after and maybe becuase of the holocust. Israel is a democracy. If you want to hear about Palestinian treatment of Christians please refer to the Lebanese civil war. In May 1985, when the PLO attacked the Shatila and Burj-el Barajneh Palestinian refugee camps. According to UN officials, 635 were killed and 2,500 wounded. During a two-year battle between the Syrian-backed Shiite Amal militia and the PLO, more than 2,000, including many civilians, were reportedly killed. No outcry was directed at the PLO or the Syrians and their allies over the slaughter. International reaction was also muted in October 1990 when Syrian forces overran Christian-controlled areas of Lebanon. In the eight-hour clash, 700 Christians were killed-the worst single battle of Lebanon's Civil War. I have some palestinian christian friends over here at the states that would love to speak with your about this exact topic, but I can't bring them online. But you can check these testemonies online. I do know for a fact that the first one, Walid does exsist since I personaly talked with him. The others I can not vouch for. Why don't you read his story instead of taking my word for it and try to send him an email and give him a call. http://answering-islam.org/Testimonies/walid.html http://answering-islam.org/Testimonies/jjibran.html http://members.aol.com/GOSPEL911/testimony.html

Atila, I critisze Sharon and I don't like him but I don't think he is a war criminal and I know that my friends at the Israeli army will not lift their arms to harm innocents. My gods love and grace be upon us all.

And Atila, please stop talking about Jews money and Jews world domination, it sounds like you actually belive the nazies. You don't see me talking about Saudi Arbaia control of the CNN do you ?

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 12, 2002.

You want to see exactly how democratic Israel is, don't take my word for it. Take my enemies words

A Syrian Reader Writes to Al-Hayat: Arab Media Do Not Comprehend; Israeli 'Conscientious Objectors' Prove Israel's Strength - Not Its Weakness The London Arabic-language daily Al-Hayat[1] recently published a letter to the editor from a Syrian reader, Isma'il Dabaj, criticizing the Arab media for their miscomprehension of the phenomenon of 'conscientious objectors' in Israel. Following are excerpts of the article:

"Arab treatment of Israeli issues often fails to reach the level of real knowledge."

"Perhaps the best example of this was a discussion on a well-known talk show on an Arab satellite channel[2] about the phenomenon of 'conscientious objectors' refusing to serve in the Israeli army. One of the guests, [described as] an 'expert' on Israeli affairs [3]... proved how ideology kills knowledge... Barely a few minutes into the program, [he stated that]: Zionist society... is disintegrating and suffers from atomization... [T]he 'conscientious objectors' movement reflects psychological defeatism.... There is no democracy in the Zionist entity or its military establishment... All this... [in addition to] other issues, such as the proliferation of drugs in Israel and the theft and sale of weapons in the Israeli military [etc.]. His final conclusion was that the Israeli military was facing disintegration."

"The truth is that each of these unequivocal conclusions is inaccurate."

"The term 'Zionist society'... does not accurately describe the reality. Zionism is a political movement that established the State of Israel. It does not apply to a society... Not everyone in Israel is a Zionist."

"Often, rhetoric exposes the cultural traits of the speaker... more than those of whom he speaks:

"Israeli society speaks openly and publicly of its disagreements and contradictions, and allows them to become institutionalized in one way or another. Claiming that the disagreements in Israeli society and the contradictions among the groups that comprise it reflect disintegration and atomization reveals... political culture that always... conceals or rejects differences and pluralism within it, and therefore sees every phenomenon of this kind as disintegration and atomization."

"...[W]e hope for [the disintegration of Israeli society in our dreams]... But the reality is the opposite. I am not trying to make the enemy look good… but at the same time, I object to our creation of illusions about this enemy."

"[We have] an ideological school of thought that specializes in amassing the 'flaws' of Israeli society and presenting them in an exaggerated fashion, so as to imply that this society is heading for a fall – and soon."

"Perhaps, in our minds, there is conjecture that this society, or this country, which has brought us defeat after defeat, must be utopian, perfect, and lacking any of the shortcomings [that exist]... in every human society. [So, when] anything that sullies this illusion falls into our hands, we hasten to make it public, and to state that this is the beginning of [Israel's] end. Has any country, at any time in history, ever collapsed for these reasons?"

"No one can deny that Israel has internal contradictions, but we must examine these contradictions reasonably. We should see how the political establishment in that country accepts these contradictions and handles them [within] the... existing unity."

"What is most distressing is that this program [on Al-Jazeera] and this guest emphasized that there was no democracy in Israel. If they were referring to the known fact that this democracy does not include the Palestinians, there would be no argument with them. But the discussion centered on the absolute absence of democracy in Israeli life."

"If this is the case, how can the changeover of governments, the institutions of civil society, and the [activities of] pressure... groups... in Israeli society be accounted for? How can the existence of [the Israeli] press and other media... and the right to expose and criticize be explained? What about the existence of an independent [Israeli] judicial system (for internal Jewish matters) and [other] supervisory apparatuses? What is democracy if not all these things?"

"Is it our job to criticize the flaws of Israeli democracy? If only it were all true. If only Israel did not have a democratic political system...! If this were the case, we would eliminate the entire [Zionist] enterprise, or at least it would not be as robust and as developed as it is today, and it would be easier for us to confront and eliminate it."

"We must admit that the existence of the... internal Israeli [democratic] system is what gave [Israel]... its power.... This is what made the State of Israel what it is. Our strategic goal should be to weaken this democracy – not censure its shortcomings."

"...If the Israeli army is really afflicted by psychological defeatism, and if [Israeli] society is really suffering from disintegration and atomization, and if the entire country is on the verge of collapse, what are we waiting for? Why don't we attack?"

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

[1] Al-Hayat (London), February 22, 2002.

[2] "Opposite Direction" on Al-Jazeera television (Qatar), hosted by Faisal Al-Qassem, February 12, 2002.

[3] Majed Abu Diyak, introduced as "an expert on Israeli affairs."

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 12, 2002.

n an article that appeared in the London Arabic-language daily Al- Hayat titled "Condoleezza, the Arab street, and the Allies," columnist Salamah Na'mat wrote: "It will go down in history that the largest protest demonstration against the Israeli massacres was organized by the Israeli 'Peace Now' movement!"

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 12, 2002.

Atila, just some information regarding Anti-Zionisim in the Arab world. Saudi Government Daily: Jews Use Teenagers' Blood for 'Purim' Pastries

In an article published by the Saudi government daily Al-Riyadh[1], columnist Dr. Umayma Ahmad Al-Jalahma of King Faysal University in Al-Dammam, wrote on "The Jewish Holiday of Purim." Following are excerpts of the article:

Special Ingredient For Jewish Holidays is Human Blood From Non-Jewish Youth "I chose to [speak] about the Jewish holiday of Purim, because it is connected to the month of March. This holiday has some dangerous customs that will, no doubt, horrify you, and I apologize if any reader is harmed because of this."

"During this holiday, the Jew must prepare very special pastries, the filling of which is not only costly and rare – it cannot be found at all on the local and international markets."

"Unfortunately, this filling cannot be left out, or substituted with any alternative serving the same purpose. For this holiday, the Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare the holiday pastries. In other words, the practice cannot be carried out as required if human blood is not spilled!!"

"Before I go into the details, I would like to clarify that the Jews' spilling human blood to prepare pastry for their holidays is a well-established fact, historically and legally, all throughout history. This was one of the main reasons for the persecution and exile that were their lot in Europe and Asia at various times."

"This holiday [Purim] begins with a fast, on March 13, like the Jewess Esther who vowed to fast. The holiday continues on March 14; during the holiday, the Jews wear carnival-style masks and costumes and overindulge in drinking alcohol, prostitution, and adultery. This holiday has become known among Muslim historians as the "Holiday of Masks."

How the Jews Drain the Blood From Their Young Victims "Who was Esther, and why the Jews sanctify her and act as she did, I will clarify in my article next Tuesday,[2] Allah willing. Today, I would like to tell you how human blood is spilled so it can be used for their holiday pastries. The blood is spilled in a special way. How is it done?"

"For this holiday, the victim must be a mature adolescent who is, of course, a non-Jew – that is, a Christian or a Muslim. His blood is taken and dried into granules. The cleric blends these granules into the pastry dough; they can also be saved for the next holiday. In contrast, for the Passover slaughtering, about which I intend to write one of these days, the blood of Christian and Muslim children under the age of 10 must be used, and the cleric can mix the blood [into the dough] before or after dehydration."

The Actions of the Jewish Vampires Cause Them Pleasure "Let us now examine how the victims' blood is spilled. For this, a needle-studded barrel is used; this is a kind of barrel, about the size of the human body, with extremely sharp needles set in it on all sides. [These needles] pierce the victim's body, from the moment he is placed in the barrel."

"These needles do the job, and the victim's blood drips from him very slowly. Thus, the victim suffers dreadful torment – torment that affords the Jewish vampires great delight as they carefully monitor every detail of the blood-shedding with pleasure and love that are difficult to comprehend."

"After this barbaric display, the Jews take the spilled blood, in the bottle set in the bottom [of the needle-studded barrel], and the Jewish cleric makes his coreligionists completely happy on their holiday when he serves them the pastries in which human blood is mixed."

"There is another way to spill the blood: The victim can be slaughtered as a sheep is slaughtered, and his blood collected in a container. Or, the victim's veins can be slit in several places, letting his blood drain from his body."

"This blood is very carefully collected – as I have already noted – by the 'rabbi,' the Jewish cleric, the chef who specializes in preparing these kinds of pastries."

"The human race refuses even to look at the Jewish pastries, let alone prepare them or consume them!"[3]

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

[1] In an October 24, 2001 online article, "Saudi mufti bans killing non-Muslims," the BBC referred to Al-Riyadh as a "government- controlled newspaper.

[2] In the second part of the article (March 12), the columnist tells the story of the Book of Esther and concludes, "Since then, the Old Testament, the Jewish holy book, requires the Jews to glorify this holiday and show their joy. This joy can only be complete with the consumption of pastries mixed with human blood."

[3] Al-Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), March 10, 2002.

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 12, 2002.

Yaakov, are you not reading what I have with much effort written?

Please scroll up your computer screen and read my quotation about Finkelstein´s book. It was from him that I learned about this. Is Finkelstein a Nazi?

Well, perhaps your friends in the Israel Army may not lift their hands against innocent people, but what about others who are not your friends? Or are you not reading the international reports of dozens of civilian people (incluiding children and women) that have already been murdered by Israel Army? International Amnesty reports are only to be trusted if they denounce the PLO? Is this Palestine propaganda? Or Nazi propaganda, perhaps? Why has Sharon forbiden the presence of the press over there?

Some retired Israeli Army officials with sense in their heads tried to push a movement of resistance against the occupation. Unfortunately, they did not succeed. How could them, if Sharon is outside even of Bush´s reach?

Your description of palestine-christian relations seems inconsistent with the quotation Mateo brought. If that were true, why would a christian be in the cabinet, and why would she talk like that? Why wouldn the Vatican abstain to protest, when it never does?

Sorry, Yaakov, you seem deluded of what is really going on. Not for not knowing the facts, but for looking at them from only one side. Israel lost in a few weeks much of the favour it amassed in decades with the international community. Is everybody dumb? Wow, now THIS must be a big conspiracy, a few underground poor devils were able to delude, with their propaganda, the whole world, the Pope, the Vatican, all bishops in the world, the Orthodox Churches, all countries of Europe and America, the United Nations and so forth...

I pray that you open your eyes and join the many jews who are denouncing it.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Yaakov, about the Saudi article: So what?

When have I said I read or care about arab propaganda? Where did I say muslims are saints?

On the contrary, I said just the opposite. Muslim countries are so far behind our level of development that nothing that comes from there may be considered absurd enough. They are theocratic monarchies, with no democracy, sometimes with wild customs, frequently denounced by the Church, as in the case of the African countries that are trying to institute the Shariah Law. They stopped in the middle ages.

For me, the conflict in the middle-east is like a 200 pound 7 feet man struggling with a 5 years boy. If you saw such scene in the street, would you stop to ask who was guilty, or who began the fight? It is Israel who is western, developed, rich, powerful. It was to be expected that they conducted themselves as the gentlemen they are (or try to show they are). Not like barbarians, which is what Sharon is doing. This is not MY opinion, is the reading the whole world is doing now.

Is is strange that you do not consider Sharon a war criminal, as this is exactly what he was considered when convicted in court martial after Sabra & Shatilla, by a jew tribunal. Now, he is only repeating his methods, in a much wider scale.

It is pointless to say that bomb-men terrorists kill innocent lives, as Israel´s army not only do the same as they do in a much greater scale (just compare the numbers of deceased in both sides). Israel, disobeying the UN, has been humiliating the palestines for decades, and illegally setting up colonies in the (also illegally) occupied territories. Is this Saudi propaganda too? Perhaps the arabs control the UN?

The fact is that terrorist atacks had stopped for years during the good times when the peace process was going forward. When did the attacks begin again? Perhaps one day an ex-terrorist woke up and said to his friend "You know, I long the times when we were terrorists... let´s go to Jerusalem and explode ourselves!" Well, no. The atacks began again after Sharon began his way to power, provoking the muslims (not by chance).

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

There´s one more thing.

Israel is a State, and should behave with respnsibility.

Palestine terrorists are a bunch of maniacs ready to explode themselves. How can one expect Arafat to be able to control them? If they don´t obbey the most basic instinct of self-preservation, why would they obbey Arafat? What can Arafat offer them for them to stop? Israeli tanks?

With any attack from Israel, the hatred of palestinian increases. Palestines who are moderate become radical. Those who are already radical, turn into self-exploding terrorists. The attacks from Israel would be a very dumb indeed idea to stop terrorism and reach peace. But Sharon is no dumb. Problem is, he wants no peace.

Every single leader in the world (includind the late-commer Bush) has understood it already. There is no possibility of peace before Israel leaves the occupied territories.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

And now I am going to sleep.

Good night to all.

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Yaakov,

You're stuff is in bold.

"Mateo, my brother. I have no idea what your sources are regarding Israel preferential laws regarding Jews. All citizens of Israel are equal to the law as can be seen represented in the Israeli parliment, Jews, Christians and Muslims, Arabs and Israelis. There is a single law that is usually quoted by the Palestinians in being racist which is "the law of return". Which states, if you, your parents or any of your grandparents were jewish then you may automaticly recive an Israeli citizenship. Everybody else goes through doe process. The reason for this law is simply if you, your parents or any of your grandparents were jewish then the Nazis wouls send you to the death camps. Israel just reversed the Ninnberg laws, for it was founded as a home for the jews after and maybe becuase of the holocust. Israel is a democracy."

I know the history of the immigration law as it relates to Nazi Germany. This is a universal law for all Jews. Immigration regulation is a tough nut for all countries (including the US); but I think it's a little troublesome to say "It's OK, this is the only preferential law." One law is all it takes to show preference.

I would say that the uprooting of Palestinians from their homes in Jerusalem is proof that their rights to enjoy a full citizenship was compromised. There is a saying: "Everyone here is equal; but some of us are more equal than others." Maybe, the unwritten laws are just as important as the written ones.

"If you want to hear about Palestinian treatment of Christians please refer to the Lebanese civil war. In May 1985, when the PLO attacked the Shatila and Burj-el Barajneh Palestinian refugee camps. According to UN officials, 635 were killed and 2,500 wounded. During a two-year battle between the Syrian-backed Shiite Amal militia and the PLO, more than 2,000, including many civilians, were reportedly killed."

From http://www.sabra-shatila.be/english/

"In the evening of September 16th 1982, a group of the Lebanese christian militia of the Falange, entered the Palestinain refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila (near Beirout). During the following 36 hours, they murdered between 800 (official Israeli figures) and 3.500 (according to the investigations of the Israeli journalist Kapeliouk) people, including women and children. On the previous day, the Israeli army had entered this part of the city during its campaign in Lebanon. It sealed the camps from the outside world and stood by to observe the events of 16, 17 and 18 September.

This website of Sabra-Shatila Belgium gives some more background information at the slaughter of 1982. The context is the complaint against Ariel Sharon, filed by the victims at a court in Brussels, Belgium. Nowadays, Sharon is prime minister of Israel, but at the time of the events he was minister of defence. Therefore, he is political responsible for what happened to the people in the camps of Sabra and Shatila."

Sadly, Neither Christians nor Muslims are sinless in Lebanon. You put me in a strange place when I have to show you that Christians and Jews weren't saints either. The Lebanese Christians are natural allies of Israel. I have hoped that two things would happen in Lebanon--the Israelis would withdraw and the Syrians would withdraw. Well, the Israelis' small presence in Southern Lebanon is now gone; but now, Lebanon still has 40,000 (I think) Syrian troops through most of Lebanon! I don't think the Christians in Lebanon are too happy about this crushing influence of Syria over Lebanon's government.

My list of countries whom I blame for fighting their wars on Lebanese soil: Iran, Syria, Palestine, and Israel. Each country brought guns and/or people to use them.

"No outcry was directed at the PLO or the Syrians and their allies over the slaughter. International reaction was also muted in October 1990 when Syrian forces overran Christian-controlled areas of Lebanon. In the eight-hour clash, 700 Christians were killed-the worst single battle of Lebanon's Civil War."

The media black-outs are a terrible fact.

"I have some palestinian christian friends over here at the states that would love to speak with your about this exact topic, but I can't bring them online."

I don't doubt for a minute that other Arab Christians have problems with Muslim Arabs. I have problems with them, too! :-)

It's great that you have Palestinian friends. As crazy as it sounds, those friendships and bonds that you have with Palestinians are the seeds of peace for Israelis and Palestinians. We all need a human face to associate with other groups, lest we forget their humanity. We are all created in the image of God.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 12, 2002.

If you haven't noticed, Atila, we didn't talk about the so-called "Holocaust industry" but were referring to your beliefs that Jews try to control all the world's media and the world's finances, and have (to paraphrase you) already come a long way in doing so. This conspiracy theory is about as old as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

"I know very good jews and some are close friends"; "I have myself jew friends". These are your words, Atila. You're betraying your real thinking.

To the other participants: I suggest that we ignore Atila from now on. You can get rid of people like him only by not answering their comments.

Shalom,

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 12, 2002.

Dear Oliver:
Many years ago, when Hollywood was pure, the great Jewish personalities who provided the whole world with good entertainment also treated the Catholic Church with deference. The Church was depicted in a good light.

You and I know that today, in the U.S. all the major outlets are filled with good, bright, hard-working and talented Jews. Most of these in high positions, especially the producers. I think the Church is no longer seen as a natural ally by the new movers and shakers. There is lots of bias evident against the ''religious right'', that popular buzz-word. A word that immediately arouses distrust and animosity even in the consumer mainstream. Today our entertainment is not free of anti-Catholic, anti-Christian propoganda. It runs like a bright thread through all the networks.

Not in conspiracy, Oliver. We aren't saying it calls for paranoia. But all we see is daily castigation or worse, denigration of the ''right-wing'' Christian ''bigot'', and ''homophobic'' religious influence, in every media outlet. In almost all our film and TV productions. There is NO respect given to a Christian anymore. Is this on account of a Jewish influence?

I know that for instance in New York, a Christian will never defeat the Democrat and leftist candidates, no matter how tainted they may be. Juliani was a freakish exception, and he was not pro-life. Is it because Jews instinctively identify a right wing candidate with the ancient oppressor, the Christian?

When we had a ''right-wing militia'' scare in the news a few years back; my great friend Mr. Levine, friend and collaborator of mine, was appalled. It was a nightmare coming true for him. The Christian Right was arming!!! He thinks of Christians as ''the Religious Right; and the ''militias'' are the army of the Christian right! I believe much the same mentality is evident these days, in Jewish circles around our country. Do anything, but don't give aid and comfort to the Religious Right. And that includes the Catholic Church. How is it now that Pius XII is well-known to have been ''HITLER'S POPE?'' Why are they promoting trash like that? Am I being too militant? --I love the Jews. My Holy Lord and Saviour is a Jew, and so is my Blessed Mother in heaven! (Of course, i didn't have to state it.) I can't help seeing what is before my eyes every day here, though.

Love is reserved only for the LEFT in the United States today. Particularly in the news media and entertainment industry. It's very sad.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 12, 2002.

Eugene, as in many other times, you captured the essence of what I am saying. Thank you.

I was missing the participation of the old-timers, like you, John, Chris and Frank, to name a few.

I entered this thread to discuss the issue with my catholic brothers and sisters, as you know is my custom. I rarely enter in polemics with anti-catholic bigots, who come here again and again. These apologetic issues are very well handled by you, John and Chris, besides others. I really prefer to participate in discussions between Catholics, as a means of sharing points of view and strengthening our faith. I leave the apologetics to others more competent (and with more time) than me.

However, it turned out that I ended up in a polemic with Zionists (which, I believe, are a minority in the Jew community), alone with Mateo and, now, with you. I cared to respond to Yaakov because he seems to be an intelligent, civil and honest guy, although it seems that his sources and thinking is biased, as Mateo´s comments and facts make clear. His arguments are interesting and deserve answer. The other one, Oliver, it seems, is only capable of parroting “Atila is a Nazi”, as he never cares to answer even only one of my many questions. Disqualifying the opponent with “ad honinem” attacks is typical of bigots without arguments, of whom we are much experienced in this forum.

However, I really miss the participation of other old-timers in this thread, and I ask them to come and voice their opinions. If I have said something wrong, I would like to be corrected. Until now, both Mateo´s and Eugene´s interventions only support my position. Of course, I will accept no “correction” from Zionists who think that every criticism to Israel is “anti-semitism”. I am as anti-semite as Finkelstein, a Jew who had almost all of his family murdered in Nazi concentration camps. By the way, this talk of “you criticize a Jew, then you are a racist nazi anti-semite” is an ideological weapon much used by fanatic Zionists denounced in Finkelstein´s book.

I don’t think this is an “off-topic” issue. Abortion, divorce, birth- control and sola scriptura, to name a few “hot issues” here, are all very important subjects, but they do not exhaust the themes Catholics must think, pray and speak of. The Pope has always been very vocal in peace, justice and human rights issues, and I think they are discussed in this forum less that they should. The most critical issue in the justice, peace and human rights fields now is the middle- east crisis, and I think we Catholics should discuss it more.

I think that Mateo is relatively new here, aren’t you? After a long time far away, I came and saw that you are a new “all-thread” presence. You write and think marvelously, thank you. Welcome, brother!

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

From the New York Times website:

"Calling the Palestinians in the church terrorists, Israeli officials contend that it is impossible for unarmed monks, priests and nuns surrounded by gunmen to speak freely. But Father Parthenios, a Greek Orthodox monk in the complex, said of the Palestinians: "We just greet them, that's all. They are respectful of the church. We are not hostages.""

Complete article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/12/international/middleeast/12BETH.html

So much for Israeli x palestine propaganda.

Or perhaps NY Times is also an instrument of Arab / Nazi propaganda?

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Here is a very interesting article from The Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,681673,00.html

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

From a today´s report from Amnesty International:

"According to reports received by the organization Israeli troops are shooting at ambulances with people in them and tanks crushing empty ambulances, distrupting urgent medical services.

Amnesty International continues to repeat its call to the Israeli authorities to cease violations of human rights and humanitarian law and for international observers with a clear and transparent human rights mandate to be deployed in the region.

The organization also continues to condemn all deliberate attacks on civilians by Palestinian armed groups which have left scores of Israelis dead or injured, and calls on the armed groups to cease targeting Israeli civilians and end unlawful killings of Palestinians suspected of "collaborating" with Israel."

Complete text here: http://web.amnesty.org/web/news.nsf/WebAll/C0F976809244A8A280256B97005 6697A?OpenDocument

Please go to the site and read the complete article, as it shows well what´s going on in Palestine.

I quote this report because it seems that Yaakov trusts Amnesty International, as he has already quoted them to support his position.

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

More from the same report:

"The IDF's conduct raises concern that the main aim of the operation is to collectively punish all Palestinians," the organization's delegates declared, stressing that the Israeli army took actions which were not clearly or obviously justified by military necessity and which breached international human rights and humanitarian law.

The IDF killed and targeted medical personnel, ambulances and medical facilities, and fired randomly at houses and at people in the streets, even when curfews were lifted. Mass arbitrary arrests have been carried out in a manner designed to degrade those detained.

"In any army of the world, soldiers who behave like the IDF, destroying property and looting, should be immediately court martialled," added David Holley, an independent military adviser who was part of the delegation. "

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

From "Le Monde":

"(...)A eux se sont mêlés des civils, des jeunes "armés pour quelques- uns" et, "peut-être", des militants du Front populaire de libération de la Palestine (FPLP), du Fatah et du Hamas. Il y a aussi Mohammed Al-Madani, gouverneur (préfet) de Bethléem, nommé il y a quelques mois par Yasser Arafat. Mais "les Israéliens ne font pas le détail", assure le Père Amjad. Ils ne distinguent pas les civils des policiers ni des "résistants". "Pour eux, tout le peuple palestinien est terroriste".

Complete text here:

http://www.lemonde.fr/article/0,5987,3210--270962-,00.html

(for french readers)

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 12, 2002.

Atila,

Thank you for the kind words. I also think that it is unfortunate that you get the label "nazi" because you don't have a pro-Israel viewpoint.

Yaakov, I really hope that this discussion allows you to see this terrible conflict with more objective eyes. As an outsider, it's pretty easy for me to see that no party is truly innocent in the conflict. We've got "good guys" and "bad guys" on each side. While ignorant people rationalize tomorrow's violence as a response to yesterday's violence, the peacemakers reach out and get to know their "enemies."

To put things in perspective, one hundred years ago under the Turkish Ottoman Empire, things weren't much better for Christians in the Middle East. Many emigrated from their homelands. They were marginalized for three reasons:

1) They were Christians (not Muslims)

2) They were Arabs (Not Turks)

3) Most were poor.

Three strikes, they left. Arab Christians still deal with the same problems under Israeli control.

I pray that one day soon, Jerusalem will provide a peaceful setting for all of its citizens to live. The complexities of the conflict require a heroic effort from all people to make a lasting peace. Neither violence by the most advanced means nor the most primitive means gets us any closer to resolution.

Matthew 5:7-9

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

Please pray for the innocent Israelis and Palestinians who have lost their lives, as well as all those who live under the real threat of violence each day.

Mateo.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 12, 2002.

Jmj

Hello, Atila. Welcome back, and thanks for the nice things you said about me and others.

You stated: "I really miss the participation of other old-timers in this thread, and I ask them to come and voice their opinions. If I have said something wrong, I would like to be corrected."

Yes, this thread is five days old, and I have not contributed. One reason is that I just read the entire thread, from top to bottom, today. I have been given a very big and complex project at work, and it has been causing me to devote very many hours to it, making it impossible for me to spend much time here. Besides this, I went out of town for a couple of days on Easter. So I am trying very hard to get caught up.

I must tell you that, if I had been following this thread from the beginning, I may not have contributed to it anyway -- for a couple of reasons.

1. This is a Catholic forum, and I have sometimes asked the Moderator (at least a couple of times, with success) to delete threads that belong on other forums. I consider the opening message of this thread to have nothing really to do with Catholicism. I am not saying that I am against Yaakov and his point of view, but only that he should have wanted to discuss this elsewhere, in my opinion.

Very, very little about Catholicism has come up in this long discussion. What has been said about Pope Pius XII being heroic is definitely true. What has been said about the dwindling Christian population in Israel and the Palestinian territories is definitely true. For years, I have been reading about the tremendous emigration of Christians from the Holy Land, because of their status as third-class citizens (below Israelis and Moslems), inability to get housing, jobs, etc.. Fr. Peter Vasko of the Franciscan "custos" (guardianship of hundreds of Christian sanctuaries in the Holy Land) has been begging for help on EWTN for a few years now. The Franciscans try to convince the Christians to stay, by helping them build homes, educating them, etc..

2. Atila, the other reason I probably would not have spoken up on this thread is that I do not consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable on the details of the long history of conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. It would not have been appropriate for me to speak out much. I am learning more and more as time goes by, but I am still too ignorant. Of course, this makes me somewhat of an impartial observer while reading this thread. I must say that I could see some reasonable, believable things in the posts of all the friends and foes here -- Yaakov, Mateo, Oliver, Eugene, and you, Atila.

Atila, you said, "If I have said something wrong, I would like to be corrected."

I will not try to correct you factually, but only on a point of style in the English language. Some people here were (and may still be) unaware that you are a Brazilian and that English is not your first language. Atila, you have repeatedly been using a certain unfortunate "construction" that has undoubtedly come across to various people as an anti-Judaic slur -- even though you did not intend it as one. In polite English, we never use the following phrases, which you have used repeatedly: jew organization, jew individuals, jew leaders, jew friend, jew theologian, jew tribunal, etc.. You see, in English, "Jew" is a noun, not an adjective. In English, the adjective is "Jewish" (con jota mayuscula). So, you can speak respectfully of a "Jewish organization" or "Jewish leaders" or a "Jewish tribunal." But when you try to use "jew" as an adjective in English, it comes across as an insult, as in "Hey, jew boy!" Also, there is a great sensitivity in the Jewish community against being perceived as greedy, money-hungry, and incredibly wealthy. (This was one of the Hitlerian slurs used in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s.) Therefore, to avoid offense, one would not even use the phrase, "Jewish money," in English.

God bless you.
John
PS: I felt empathy toward you, Atila, when someone leveled a "cheap shot" at you by linking you to Attila the Hun. He or she assumed that you chose an alias of "Atila," when it is your actual baptismal name, is it not?

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 14, 2002.

It would be better to retire this thread; since no one can answer Yacov's original post.

I'm very much insympathy with the Palestinian Christians; and have little sympathy for th Israeli state.

Nevertheless, why make concessions to any faction, if there's not much we are able to do? Not only that, but in the discussion of these problems, two people had a potshot at President Bush; for whatever their private reasons. One, Atila said ''Bush has created a monster in Sharon.'' That's plain dumb. Bush didn't elect Sharon, nor enable him to start the present conflagration. Everything Sharon has been guilty of is his own fault, not America's nor Bush's.

Joan Storey chimed in with her own, ''Bush is a monster, as well.'' No one knows what her aim is. Let her make all the dumb remarks her heart desires. Bush is neither to blame, nor does he have the authority to change what others have started in the middle east. I give him an E for effort; and I only hope he'll make the American people more aware of the great risks we take backing the Israelis like we have till now.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 14, 2002.

Fat Boy intrudes again; a Mole on the Jewish warpath!!! Never say he lacks compassion for the underdog.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 14, 2002.

Dear Atila, You probably want to know why I thought you were racist. This is why: “Huge Jew money is used to elect Presidents and Representatives in the US. Hollywood, owned by jew money, produces year after year films about the holocaust, showing how the jews are essentialy saints and were the only victims of Hitler (a role model for Sharon, by the way).” And then you said “Zionists (not jews in general) are one of the most racists people in the world”. This is your world perspective as stated in this forum. You try to curve your words by saying that “I had much respect and admiration for Yitshak Rabin. He and others (Shimon Perez at that time... No wonder the Nobel Peace Prize judge wants to take Perez´s prize back) advanced much the peace process” and quoting Norman Finkelstien. But you forget that Rabin was a Zionist and truly believed in the state of Israel and the lessons of the holocaust doesn’t that mean he is a racist as well ? Regarding Norman Finkelstien and his book, the new York Times Sunday Book Review as the new "Protocol of the Elders of Zion," a notorious anti-Semitic work, and called its author "indecent," "juvenile," "self- righteous," "arrogant" and "stupid." http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/08/06/reviews/000806.06bartovt.html The fact that he is Jewish does not mean he will not sell his nation for 30 pieces of silver, just as the fact someone is Christian does not prevent him from being anti-Semitic. Neo-nazi groups in Germany and fundamentalist Islamic groups in France have used his book extensively. Apparently it reached Brazil as well. These were my reason for thinking you are racist. If I am mistaken I do apologize and I will extend an explanation to the list.

Koby

-- Koby Nahmias (nahm0002@umn.edu), April 14, 2002.

Dear Atila, First let me apologize in front of the whole list for equating you with Attila the Hun, I let anger take the best of me and I am sorry. When first posting this thread I wanted to know the opinion of Christians to what is happening in Bethlehem. I myself could see no reason why the pope did not call for the terrorists to hand themselves over peacefully to the hands of Israel. Even extend the church power to see that they are not harmed but given a fair trial, though I have to say they would have one even without control of the church. Instead this thread has become an attack on Jewish control of the US government, Jewish control of the media, Zionism being racism, and Sharon being a war criminal. I felt obligated to defend my country and my people, one of whom if you might remember is Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior. In his life, Jesus was not only born Jewish but also born in Israel as an Israeli. I believe with all my heart that god wants the state of Israel to exist as it did before 137ad, otherwise its miraculous emergence and continuing existence, in spite all attempts to destroy it defy all logic. Israel today exists because of the Zionist movement, the name Zion is just the biblical word for Israel. I see Zionists therefore as the agents of god will, but some I have to agree stray from the path. Zionism has never claimed that Jews are a race or even some kind of chosen people, it referred to Jews as a nation a nation that like all other nations need a home. Zionism then went about to secure that home by international law (Balfor declaration, UN resolution) and by settlement. Immigration of Jews to Israel started in 1822 and wave continued to arrive until the British government tried to stop immigrates in 1939 white papers due to the pressure of the Arab street. The Jewish cities of Tel Aviv, Afula, Natania, etc’ were not built on Arab villages but on the sand dunes of the Mediterranean sea and on the swamps of the Galilee. But at some point something went wrong and the Arab population rose in arms in 1936 and 1939 forcing the Jewish settlements to arm themselves. The states finally separated in 1948 but not before seven Arab countries invaded vowing to kill the infant state before it learned to walk. Since then Israel has been under siege. I can’t possibly convey the feeling of growing up knowing that you have to go to the army and that at every moment Arab armies can roll across the borders and “throw you all to the sea” like they promised to do so many years ago. Siege mentality leads to extreme reactions and sometime to obsessed individuals, like Ariel Sharon. Nobody likes Sharon, as Atila said Sharon approval rates are very low which shows the moral character of Israel. But when Sharon led his tank battalion against the Egyptians in 1973 and won the war against overwhelming numbers, he was needed, wanted and sent from god to save Israel. Dear Atila, Israelis went to Sharon only after Barak has failed to bring peace. First Israelis tried to give the Palestinians a state for the first time in their history (no Arab state has ever done that even when they held the West Bank and Gaza before 1967), and then Arafat said no. He didn’t even give a counter proposal, just flamed the second Intifada. What would you do in Israel’s stead ? When Christ said to turn the other cheek, he meant that when someone comes to slap you, you shouldn’t hit back but take the slap. I do not believe he meant that when someone comes to kill your wife and children you should let him. The same principle applies when someone is sending suicide bombers to kill your women and children, it has to stop. There was and still is an alternative to Sharon, but it is not available to the people of Israel. The only alternative is if we all ask our governments to help stop the violence in the Middle East, not only Israel response to suicide bombers but those same suicide bombers as well. We need NATO forces in the West Bank and Gaza doing what Arafat doesn’t do, stopping terrorists. We need to protect the state of Israel to enable Israelis to leave this siege mentality behind. When someone is threatened and repeatedly attacked he cannot think strait his action are more extreme, especially when the entire world is shouting at him to be a better person when someone else is beating him. Please help, help separate the combatants and restore calm to the region. For if calm were not restored, Sharon would become one of the moderates, it would get much worse.

Koby

-- Koby Nahmias (nahm0002@umn.edu), April 14, 2002.

John, thanks for your support.

Indeed, this is my baptismal name, although the priest felt it was not acceptable, not being a Christian name. So he added “Joseph” to it, and I was baptized as “Atila Joseph”, though it does not appear in my documents :-). My name comes from the fact that my mother is Hungarian, and this is a very common name in Hungary (because it is connected to that Country´s history).

You are quite right, although I knew the word “Jewish”, I was not aware of the difference, both grammatical and connotative, you spoke of, between it and “jew”. I am sorry for that and apologize for my bad English and possible insults.

John, I have to disagree with you when you say that this subject has little to do with Catholicism. I will try to explain why in the new thread I am creating. Please read it and honour me with your comments. You too, Eugene, Matteo, Chris, Frank and others.

Eugene, when I said that Bush created a monster, I did not intend to say that Bush actively promoted Sharon´s election or something. As you know well, we can sin by act, words, thoughts or omissions. As you yourself said, Bush deserves an “E” for his inaction. Sharon would never have gone so far if Bush had put limits on him from the beginning. He “created” a monster by omission, by letting him act like a monster for not restraining him when all this nonsense began. It is well known that Israel government always went as far as US government let it to go. So…

You, Eugene, are so right when you say “I only hope he'll make the American people more aware of the great risks we take backing the Israelis like we have till now.” That´s exactly what I reprove in Bush´s attitude: not only he is not doing what you say he should, but he is effectively supporting Sharon´s attitude by his inaction, and making American people believe that the “right” attitude is to support Israel no matter what they do.

I pray that Bush be illuminated so that he can put up a foreign policy which is consistent with human dignity and the Church´s teachings.

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 14, 2002.

Dear Koby,

Now it seems we can discuss the issue rationally, without emotionally charged mutual accusations.

I agree with much of what you said. I do not know if you are aware, but the State of Israel was approved by Oswaldo Aranha, the brazilian representative at UNO in 1948 who was the Minerva´s vote to it.

I am told that “Zionist” is a word that can be interpreted in two ways: one is this that you are talking about, the movement to create the Israel State. Other is the one that has racist connotations (there is no reason to believe that there are no Jewish racists, as racists are present in any country, culture and ethnic group). As I understand it, these “Zionists” are no better than the Muslim fanatics that want Israel to be “shoved back to the sea”, as they dream of the “Big Israel” chimera which virtually ignores the fact that palestines live there for centuries and it is not right to think they should be gone or submit to Israel´s rule.

Now I will comment the things you said.

” Dear Atila, First let me apologize in front of the whole list for equating you with Attila the Hun, I let anger take the best of me and I am sorry”

Apologies accepted. I too must apologize if I sounded anti-semite. So much as you are angry, I too am very angry that the US government does nothing to stop Sharon´s shameful attitude, not respecting basic human rights and even Geneva’s Convention, such as when he permits that his army shoots ambulances.

“I myself could see no reason why the pope did not call for the terrorists to hand themselves over peacefully to the hands of Israel.”

There are two things to this. First, it is well known that, together with terrorists, there are many civilians inside the Basilica. I think (and it seems that the whole international community thinks as well) that Sharon´s government is not trustworthy as to give “fair judgement” to those inside the basilica. They could perhaps be handed over to an international tribunal, without bias. After all, Amnesty International delegates are convinced that Sharon considers all palestines (perhaps even Christians included) as “terrorists”. The pope has no wish to hand them over to Sharon. They could be executed before even getting to a tribunal.

Second, by international law, Nazareth is NOT Israel´s territory. If terrorists were caught inside Israel territory, Israel´s tribunals could judge them. Israel can make no claim to imprison and judge people caught outside of it´s frontiers. If a brazilian criminal is in Paraguay, for instance, brazilian police is not allowed to invade Paraguay´s territory and catch him. Our country has to seek his extradition. The fact that Israel acts as if the whole Palestine was Israel´s territory goes against international law and the UN´s rulings. The fact that Israel does not recognize a Palestinian state, in this case, works against Israel´s interests. If Palestine were a state, Israel could make diplomatic pressure upon it. I know this is a rather strange distinction for an American, Jewish or not, because the US is used to ignore international law anyway. But it must be remembered that every time the US do this, they receive the reproval of the international community, beginning with European countries.

“I felt obligated to defend my country and my people”

I think you have all the right in the world to do this. I just do not agree with you that to defend your country you have to be condescending with the fact that Sharon is ignoring basic human rights and Geneva´s convention, as the international media is showing every day. On the contrary, I believe that the most effective way you have to defend your country is to do everything at your reach to stop Sharon casting shame over Israel´s honour.

“(…) one of whom if you might remember is Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour”

I never forget it for a single time. I learned this with a priest who is being canonized this year.

“Since then Israel has been under siege”

I think this is a rather exaggerated statement. While there are many Muslim countries which for decades tried to destroy Israel, Israel is a formidable war machine. To claim that it is defenseless does not reflect reality. Israel has a very sophisticated army, not even comparable with its surrounding states (which were supported by the faded USSR) and even less with “hand gun and pebble stones” Palestine people.

“I can’t possibly convey the feeling of growing up knowing that you have to go to the army and that at every moment Arab armies can roll across the borders and “throw you all to the sea” like they promised to do so many years ago.”

This may have been true a lot of years ago. Now, with the exception of Iraq and some political groups in Syria, I do not think Arab states think like that. Indeed, the Saudi peace proposal explicitly speaks of recognizing the State of Israel. Two of the most important Arab countries already recognize Israel, Jordania and Egypt.

“Nobody likes Sharon, as Atila said Sharon approval rates are very low which shows the moral character of Israel.”

Unfortunately, although it may be true that the Jewish community outside Israel does not like him, it seems that Israeli people do support him. After all, he is the prime-minister of a parliamentary democracy. If people were not supporting him, his cabinet would fall. I read yesterday (in The Guardian) that a Labour Representative of Israel was ashamed of herself for her party to have to support Sharon. She said they had no alternative, because if they quitted Sharons´s cabinet, the people would not forgive them.

“First Israelis tried to give the Palestinians a state for the first time in their history (no Arab state has ever done that even when they held the West Bank and Gaza before 1967), and then Arafat said no.”

The article I read Yesterday in The Guardian (cited above) said that Israel´s offer was truly unacceptable. Basically, the territory offered excluded all farmable land (secured for the Israel settlements), leaving to Palestine deserts and land that is used today by Israel as a toxic waste dump. It said that Clinton, wanting to clear himself from the shameful affair with Monica Lewinsky, tried to leave a more honorable legacy, but, as his term was approaching the end, he tried a “quick” solution rather than a just one. Brazilian analysts have been saying, on the other hand, that Arafat should not insist in the return of the refugees, as it would be unacceptable to Israel.

“He didn’t even give a counter proposal, just flamed the second Intifada.”

This is debatable. Although Israel says this, most international observers credit the new intifada to Sharon´s walk on the Mosques´ Esplanade. I am until now to see a non-Israeli analyst to say that the second intifada was started by Arafat. Most occidental analysts and governments credit the second intifada to Sharon himself, as a calculated move to win office (which he actually assured).

“I do not believe he meant that when someone comes to kill your wife and children you should let him.”

Although this is understandable, Sharon and his supporters are the only ones to believe that this massive attack upon Palestine will solve the problem of Israel´s security. Everybody else can see clearly that Sharon´s course of action only brings the possibility of full blown war and many many more Israeli victims in its wake. The only possibility of peace and security for Israel is to the army to withdraw, recognize the Palestinian state and let it be a viable state (something absent in Barak´s proposal, according to The Guardian). Palestine and Israel have the possibility of growing together, as their economies are complementary. This war will only lead to more deaths and incredible suffering. In the present state of things, there is no possibility of the Palestinian Authority having means to stop self-exploding terrorists.

“The only alternative is if we all ask our governments to help stop the violence in the Middle East, not only Israel response to suicide bombers but those same suicide bombers as well.”

I fully agree with you. Problem is that I don´t think Arafat (or any other Palestinian leader for that matter) is in position to stop suicide bombers without unleashing a civil war in Palestine. Palestine leaders need to have something to offer to their people so that they do not support and hide terrorists. With Israel tanks firing randomly in their cities it is absolutely impossible.

“We need NATO forces in the West Bank and Gaza doing what Arafat doesn’t do, stopping terrorists.”

Here is something I do not only agree with, but that I think is absolutely urgent. NATO forces would be able to stop suicide bombers AND Sharon´s army arbitrarieties (if controlled by the UN, not by the US; I think UN “blue helmets” would be much more effective, especially because palestines tend not to trust NATO forces, identified with the US). Unfortunately, Koffi Anan has been preaching this gospel to the walls, as neither Sharon nor Bush heeds him.

“Please help, help separate the combatants and restore calm to the region”

We are all praying for it. But the decisive hand to do this is Bush´s. As Eugene said, I am afraid he deserves, at most, an “E” for his efforts.

Shalom Atila

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 14, 2002.

Dear Atila,
I have no reason to believe the United States can obtain any true concessions from Israel through political means. But I can tell you almost unequivocally, Bush was barely elected to the American Presidency and it was not with help from the American Jewish community. If anything, he would have lost to Gore depending on any Jewish vote. For us at this point to ask if he could have enforced any policy AT ALL in the Holy Land is presuming too much. Would Bush have much effect on Brazilian daily life, by making some quick phone calls? I doubt it. Put yourself in his place then. Israel is at a point of no return; no outside influence is about to convince the government of Israel to desist anymore. Even the Pope appealed to Sharon, and was ignored completely. Why say Bush created a monster? Maybe our Holy Father created a monster, not condemning Israel during the last century; after they levelled one of the world's most beautiful cities to dust. Beirut, you may recall.

The saddest thing about all this, is that unless God is merciful as never before, the Israelis will someday be a nation of paraplegics and cripples. The enemy is determined to use one suicide a week to kill up 12 or 18 Israeli citizens at one blow with a bomb.

Ask any general what it means to lose 12 of your soldiers in a battle, at the cost of one of your enemies, and to leave another 25 or 30 maimed or disabled. This is a high rate of casualties; and it isn't going to stop. It's going to become routine, because it works. It inflicts enormous pain and killing on the Israelis, and gives the Palestinians a weekly morale-boost. It may never end, no matter what Sharon does. Where is Bush going to make a bit of difference? Forget it.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 14, 2002.

Eugene, both America and Europe have weapons to make Sharon stop. Indeed, any time that Bush presses him, he backs a little. Israel receives a subsidy in money from the US, and the US and Europe are their prime trade counterparts. The European Parliament, last week, has urged the European Comission to freeze commercial relations with Israel. Many European countries have already suspended military agreements with Israel (France and Germany come to my mind, but I think there are more) in the last weeks.

All of Israel´s weapons are acquired from the US. If the US suspended the selling of weapons to Israel, I bet Sharon would think twice. The problem is that Bush´s pressure upon Sharon is restricted to "words, words, words", as Shakespeare would say. The US boycott economically every country when they think they should, like South Africa in the Apartheid times. Many times, the US succeds by using this kind of pressure. Why not use this today?

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 14, 2002.

Atila, sensless one sided condemnation of Israel and maybe even embargo would only serve to make Israel more radical not complicent. How about some pressure on the Palestinian side as well ? Do you expect Israel to live with daily suicide attack with no responce ? Regarding the United Nations troops in the West Bank, I think it is a horrible idea. I saw the UN do nothing in Lebanon when rocket after rocket smashed into Israeli villages. I also saw them do nothing to stop the Hizbulla at Cafar Kana and then blame Israel for responding. A peace keeping force can stop Israel responce and military actions but it just proved useless when trying to deal with terrorists. Only NATO fully deployed and willing to fight terror will stop this madness.

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@umn.edu), April 14, 2002.

Yaakov:
NATO can't do a thing. The fanatics are not after peace! They have to drive Israel out of the middle east or die trying.

NATO can post soldiers at every street corner. A single suicide bomber will kill them all in a 30 yard radius. In so doing, he will be the sole casualty.

Truly Satan is their general; and he is winning this war. When is Israel going to collectively go down on their knees and invoke the Lord? He is their only hope, not weapons. Jesus said to the women of Jerusalem: ''Weep not for me. Weep for yourselves and for your children.''

Christ alone is the answer, Yaakov. You'll understand someday.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Eugene writes:

"NATO can't do a thing. The fanatics are not after peace! They have to drive Israel out of the middle east or die trying."

I'm with Yaakov on this one. NATO is the most appropriate and capable military force for the task of restoring order to Palestine.

"Truly Satan is their general; and he is winning this war."

My personal opinion: though the fanatics may quote from the Koran, they recruiting efforts are aided by one of Satan's strongest weapons for inciting evil: despair. When a Palestinian has lost hope, why should he care about losing his life to kill their enemies? How can someone in utter despair (financially, politically) be taught to value the humanity of anyone other than the people who share his plight?

Getting rid of despair will destroy the efforts of radicals to recruit young Palestinians to join their ranks.

OK, so now I'm becoming a liberation theologian! :-)

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 15, 2002.

Actually I am totally with Mateo on this one. I do belive depair is leading Palestinians to commite suicide bombing. For the past 9 years (since Arafat took over and an Autonomy has been declared) the situation in the territories has been going from bad to worse. Money donated world wide was going to Arafat swiss bank account, hospitals were under staffed, universities crumbled and terror caused Israel to close its job market to Palestinians. There is 60% unemployment in Palestine right now and all Arab countries have stopped support to the PA becuase of all the curraption. Add that to the fact that Palestinians are not willing to leave thier refugee camps (no to lose thier rights in Israel) and the situation is really horrible. We (I mean you as well) have to solve the situation, NATO and some good christian minnesioneric work will help a lot. The Jewish organizations that are trying to help are not very welcomed in the territories, but christian ones might be once the fighting has been curbed by NATO.

Koby

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@umn.edu), April 15, 2002.

Well, Yaakov, indeed UN peacekeeping forces not always are effective as we would expect. Perhaps the NATO forces would help.

I think the Saudi peace proposal must be taken very seriously by all sides.

I fully agree with Mateo in the "despair" thing. I have read yesterday an interview in "Inside the Vatican" with our (Brazilian) ambassador to the Holy See. He said, about US efforts against terrorism in Afghanisthan:

"We hope that the stage of military operations will end and that a new stage of cooperation and aid to poorer countries may begin. Then we can go to the roots of the problem.

ITV: Are you refering to poverty?

MAIA: Yes, the fight against poverty is in my view an important front in that war. Terrorism thrives on ignorance and cultural isolation, and those circumstances are linked to poverty."

I much agree with him.

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 15, 2002.

When I say pray, I don't mean pray for an end to dire poverty, nor even to despair in Palestinian territory. I mean pray for an end to hate. Poverty and despair may lead to suicide bombings; but hatred is the main reason these people want total destruction for Israel.

Even middle eastern Christians have an axe to grind with Zionist Israel. They are displaced persons. Unjustly displaced. This, added to the diabolical fanaticism of Islam is why the Israeli government can never see peace. If Muslim Palestinians were NOT living in poverty and despair, they would likely assume the same posture as Syria and Iraq. Implacable enemies, able and willing to rain destruction on the Zionist. Giving them more leeway to express their hatred is not a solution. And that's why America doesn't dare end aid to Israel. That would accomplish all of what Muslim fanatics are trying to achieve. And may yet achieve. God must intervene; or Armageddon is coming into reality.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Eugene wrote:

"If Muslim Palestinians were NOT living in poverty and despair, they would likely assume the same posture as Syria and Iraq."

This is debatable. Although I believe some Muslims would continue to hate Israel and seek it´s destruction, this must not be generalized to all palestinian Muslims. After all, there are many Muslim countries which may not like Israel, but are not "Implacable enemies, able and willing to rain destruction on the Zionist", like Egypt, Jordania and even Saudi Arabia.

Many palestinians may hate Israel out of pure fanatical religion reasons, but I believe many hate Israel simply because they are poor, were ouched out of their homes and have been having their loved ones massacred by Sharon´s Army.

God Bless Us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 15, 2002.

Dear Atila, --I'm more than willing to think the best of these two adversaries; and what I represented is the actual stage-- where things are now. If Israel were abandoned to its own resources, and a militant Islamic Palestinian state were powerful enough, Israel would be destroyed. Maybe not this year, or next year. But all that keeps Israel mobilized for war is what economical or foreign aid it receives from America and other western countries. It's a tiny country surrounded on all sides by guns pointed at it. You know very well the situation for this little country has been Draconian from the very beginning. The Balfour Declaration was an injustice to all Arabs, and has brought Israel nothing but grief. But, it happened. You cannot separate coffee from the cream once they're stirred together in a cup.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Yes, I agree with you.

I am not saying that the US should withdraw their support forever. Israel is an ally of the US and yhe US are free to support any ally they see fit, as long as Justice is not shattered. We in Brazil also receive US military halp sometimes, as a long term ally. As our geopolitical importance is very small, this help does not amount to much, however.

What I suggested is that just the threat of withdrawing economic / military aid would make Sharon think twice. Western countries could, for exemple, put conditions on this help, such as "We help Israel if it´s Army respects human rights" or something like this. As I have said, what I am against is *unconditional* support for Israel, no matter what it´s current government does. If Israel behaves as a civilized country, I see no reason why it should not be supported.

God bless us.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 15, 2002.

It seemed for some weeks now, every time Sharon might have listened to outsiders, a new bomb went off in some market place or on a bus. Another dozen killed and 18-20 maimed. One Palestinian Muslim martyr, in exchange for a score of dead or injured. Very good return on investment, just right for the Will of Allah. Where is he going to turn? He pulled the cork out; now he can't put the Genie back in his bottle! --Well, let's blame Bush.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Jmj

I would like to ask the various people in this conversation to address something that seems to me to be the (potentially) biggest problem to overcome in this conflict -- provided I understand the situation correctly.

As I said yesterday, I do not know enough about the history of the Israeli/Palestinian problem to be able to speak with authority, but my impression is that the following is true:

1. For many decades (centuries?), the entire area that is now called "Israel" was part of a larger nation (or territory or colony?) known as Palestine. I have seen postage stamps (from the 1920s, I think) that say "Palestine" on them, and I know that there was never a postage stamp saying "Israel" until 1948.

2. I think that I have heard that, today, there are groups of Palestinian (or other Arab) extremists who totally reject the existence of a State of Israel. As I understand it, they want all Jews expelled from the "Holy Land" -- or at least they want the restoration of the old pre-1948 nation that had been called Palestine (all the land from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River and beyond).

3. Now let us suppose that a miracle occurs and that, over the next few months, there is a cease-fire, negotiations, and a fully agreed-upon and implemented settlement between the Israeli leadership and the Palestinian leadership. Let us assume that the Palestinians recognize the State of Israel, and Israel recognizes a Nation of Palestine, with full trade, diplomatic relations, etc..

4. My question for you is this: Will the extremists that I mentioned in #2, above, reject the settlement, ignore the Palestinian leaders, and proceed to continue terrorist acts against Israel, including suicide/homicide bombing -- in order to seek a return to a pre-1948 full-sized Palestine? If the answer is, "Yes, the bombing will continue," what in the world is the solution? Track down the extremists and put them out of business? Is such a thing possible? Perhaps there will be a never-ending stream of them, coming from such places as Saudi Arabia, etc.?

[I'm sorry that I have to raise such pessimistic ideas.]

God bless you.
John
PS: Atila, when I first saw your name a couple of years ago, the first word that came into my mind was "Hungary," because I attended school with Catholic, Hungarian brothers whose names were Ferenc (Frank) and Attila.

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 15, 2002.

John,
Sad to say; nothing will make Israel safer by conceding a Palestinian state, full equality of neighbors, or other arranged negotiation between Palestine and the Israelis. That's my private opinion. It is evident to me by the fact Arrafat and the PLO did not desist in their terrorist activity, never agreed with the west at all during the so-called peace process of the Clinton administration, even when Peres and later Barak handed over Golan and parts of the West Bank to them. They still insisted on everything for the Palestinians, nothing for the Jews.

Their final insult was demanding a partitioned Jerusalem as well, which is never going to be acceptable to the Jewish right-wing. Or to anybody, really.

I hesitate to make derogatory remarks about Clinton and his self-serving interference in that mess. Let me just say that probably the two most ridiculous and impotent representatives ever sent to the Holy Land by an American president have to be Warren Christopher first, and darling dumpling Madeleine Albright later. Two less imposing specimens to send to deal with chauvinist and despotic Muslims could never have been dreamed up in a Marx Brother's wacky comedy!

That's why the Muslims see us as nothing but decadents and fools. With friends like those and another like Sharon; what does the U.S. need enemies for?

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Israel is one of the few nations built on the ideal of a world community. The central purpose of the state, according to its founders, was to bring the Jewish People into the Family of Nations, and to carve out a place for them in the mosaic of today's world cultures. Their slogans resound with international overtones, referring to Israel as "A Nation Like All Others" and a "Light Unto the Nations."

In part, this may have stemmed from the worldliness of the Israeli people. Nearly every language and nationality is represented in the state. Each day the marketplaces of Tel Aviv echo with greetings in Polish and German, songs melding Arabic and Spanish, or the high- pitched cheers of Ethiopian, Kurdish and Russian children playing handball while their parents shop together. Hebrew is not simply a language in Israel, but a meta-language, a dialogue ringing with the shared values that, at the core, unite people no matter how different their backgrounds.

The ingathering of such divergent streams of Jewry into their original homeland, after 2,000 years of dispersion, could not be ignored by the international community. The League of Nations proclaimed its "recognition" of the "historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their homeland in that country."

Notice that the text of the League recognizes, rather than bestows, these grounds -- affirming, in other words, that the Jewish people had a pre-existing right to their land. But it was the United Nations, in the wake of the Holocaust, that confirmed not just the right but the necessity of a Jewish homeland in the land of Israel.

The UN proudly declared its intent to carry on the principles and the spirit of its parent organization, the League of Nations. Thus was born a historic link between the Jewish state and the United Nations that would endure for years to follow.

That is one of the reasons Israel invests its time, energy and ingenuity in the organization, and tries to participate where it can. As one of the few democracies in the world, as well as a leader in technological, legal and intellectual expertise, Israel has much to contribute in the fight against world suffering. Thus Israel sent doctors to Rwanda, relief agents to Bosnia, and most recently, medical teams to treat the injured in the wake of earthquakes in India and El Salvador.

Yet in the UN, Israel's participation has been abruptly curtailed in recent years. In fact, the UN underwent a transformation some two decades ago, as new political currents swept the world body into a cauldron of regional competition and anti-Western politics. Much to our dismay, the UN has since come to reflect -- and sometimes escalate -- outside animosities rather than transcend them. Politicization and cronyism have forced Israel out of many central organs, punishing it almost without regard to its policies, positions or attempts to contribute.

In a cruel and bitter irony, Israel's advancements in the world community outside the walls of the UN, its overtures for peace and reconciliation, have coincided with a kind of unswerving, ritualistic rejection inside the world forum. This perverse exclusion remains blind not only to Israel's actions on the ground, from the Camp David Accords to the Madrid peace talks in 1991 that started today's peace process, but even to Israel's very statehood.

The UN Charter professes "equality for nations large and small." Yet, until very recently, Israel nation in the world not represented in a regional group. No regional group means no representation in the Security Council, the most powerful UN body, and a host of others; in short, almost none of the influence guaranteed every other nation.

In May of 2000, a major development occurred in the struggle to alleviate this long-standing and discriminatory situation. After seeking for years to overcome Arab objections to Israel’s admission to its natural grouping, the Asian group, Israel succeeded in attaining temporary membership in the Western European and Other States Group (WEOG) in New York. As a member of WEOG, Israel will become eligible for candidatures for major UN organs beginning in 2002.

This is a major step, albeit only a first step, towards rectifying an anomaly which has affected no other nation in the world and which flies in the face of the principles of the UN Charter. Still much remains to be done. Israel’s admission to WEOG only applies to UN bodies head-quartered in New York. UN bodies located in Geneva, Nairobi, Bonn and other locations still prevent Israel’s full participation.

Still, Israel's link to the UN predates this clash of ideals with reality. Israel was, after all, borne out of the UN's Golden Age, the early years. No matter what has happened since then, the UN will forever be central in the story of Israel's creation.

The UN and the Creation of the State of Israel

That story begins in the late 1800's, when small groups of Jews began taking up the pilgrimage to Palestine, following their hearts on an ancient dream of returning to the land of their heritage. Though their long-term goals varied, if they had any, the early Jewish immigrants were all drawn to the idea of a center in their ancient land, which would restore concrete, rooted identity to their nomadic, persecuted existence. That proved unacceptable to the Arabs dwelling beside them, in the decaying province of the Ottoman empire.

Periodically, Jewish encampments were burned and their residents slaughtered. As the unstable Palestine passed into the British Mandate, tensions peaked, culminating in 1929, when bands of rioters massacred Jewish men, women and children throughout the land. As more Jews, nevertheless, took up camp in the ill-defined province, Arab leaders continued to echo their view that any Jewish homeland -- no matter how peaceful -- must be driven out of what they deemed "Arab land."

The Holocaust saw modern history's chilling instance of a drive to systematically and brutally wipe out an entire people. The world could no loner ignore the pressing need for a Jewish homeland. Now it was not a dream but a matter of survival. Thus the United Nations took over "the Question of Palestine" from the British, adopting what US President Harry S. Truman termed "the kind of problem we had the UN for."

After studying the problem, in November, 1947, the UN voted to partition Palestine into an independent Jewish State and an independent Arab state. The Jews of Palestine and the world erupted in uncontrolled joy. But the Arabs flatly refused, opposing any official Jewish presence in the land. On the day that the UN, the United States and most of the world recognized the newborn State of Israel, Arab armies stormed in on all fronts, vowing to "drive the Jews into the sea."

The fighting was long and bloody; Israel lost fully one percent of its entire population in the War of Independence. The UN's head of Palestine affairs, Ralph Bunche, tried to convince the parties to accept a cease-fire.

But despite international efforts, and regardless of UN resolutions, one reality persisted: the Arab neighbors -- indeed, the entire Arab world -- categorically refused to accept Israel's right to exist. They continued calls to "drive Israel into the sea." The Arab countries sent delegates to the Palestine Liberation Organization, then a multinational group, and further echoed calls for Israel's destruction. Periodically, guerrillas from Syria, Jordan and Lebanon would cross the borders and snipe at Israeli civilians, killing hundreds over the years.

With larger standing armies, warplanes and missiles on all sides declaredly aimed at their annihilation, the Israeli people could never truly rest. The positions of the Arab countries effectively forced Israel into a permanent state of war, a fact that still scars its population and livelihood.

In June 1967, the Middle East powder keg again began to stir. The forces of Egypt's pan-Arabist leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, advanced on Israel's southern border, and expelled the UN peacekeeping units that were meant to act as a buffer. That coincided with renewed calls for Israel's destruction, not only from Nasser but from other Arab countries.

One after another, Israel's neighbors pledged to support Nasser in the impending war. Israel did not wait. Beginning with a surprise attack, the Israelis -- outnumbered and underarmed -- proceeded to rout the surrounding Arab armies on all sides, shocking the region and the world as they took victory, and the territory from which the enemy had advanced, in a mere six days.

In response, the UN Security Council passed the historic Resolution 242 on November 22 of that year. As a precondition for peace and compromise, the Resolution called for "acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats and acts of force."

For all the ambiguities of Resolution 242, it was emblematic of the United Nations' proudest era, a time when it strove to maintain peace and human rights without bias or begrudgment.

Then a dramatic shift overtook the UN, beginning with numbers. Through the 60's and 70's a flood of newly formed small states had burst into the General Assembly.

As they settled into their new roles, these developing nations discovered they had much in common. First, they all abhorred the West and the industrialized countries, and dreamed of somehow reversing the international balance of power and economic influence that made them feel downtrodden. Second, and far more importantly, in the arena of the United Nations General Assembly, they were a majority.

If they could only agree to vote without ambivalence as a bloc, on all major issues, they could dominate the GA. They could form a tyranny of the majority, and reinvent the United Nations in their image.

They formalized the plan in Algiers, in 1972. Calling themselves the Group of 77, though they numbered well over a hundred, these emboldened nations vowed to show a united front against the others, no matter what the individual issues on the agenda. In the years that followed, not a single concern so affected GA resolutions and decrees as whether they sided with - - or against -- this new ruling bloc. No consideration, no UN Charter clause, international precedent or legal philosophy ever guided the UN General Assembly as much as the collective will of the Non-Aligned group.

That meant a regime like Burundi, when it quietly and coldly killed off 150,000 of the majority Hutu tribe, could stand without a hint of UN condemnation or reproach, while only Western nations were criticized month after month for much milder "abuses." It meant that Field Marshal Idi Amin Dada of Uganda, an unabashed murderer and admirer of Adolf Hitler, could be received as a statesman in speeches on the plenary floor.

If there was any doubt that this was no longer the UN of the 40's and 50's that had created Israel and negotiated key cease- fires, such doubt was put to rest in 1975. The Group of 77, bolstered by the Soviet Union, introduced a resolution at a prelude session to the General Assembly which amounted to an attack on Zionism, the belief that Israel has a legitimate right to exist. It passed.

This was, after all, within weeks of a plenary speech in which Idi Amin had called for "the extinction of the State of Israel," and got a standing ovation from the General Assembly audience. On November 10th, the 30-year anniversary--to the day--of Kristallnacht, the infamous night when the Nazis wreaked bloody havoc on the German Jewish community, the UN General Assembly resolved overwhelmingly to condemn Jewish statehood.

The US Ambassador to the UN, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, announced that "as this day will live in infamy...the terrible lie that has been told here today will have terrible consequences."

In fact, it was just the beginning. Attacking Israel soon became the cause celebre of the GA. In the decades that followed, Israel grew to be the target of more annual GA resolutions and even whole investigating committees than any other single nation. Emergency sessions -- rarely invoked even for war and major international disasters -- have been called twice to discuss Israel. Every year, Israel's credentials as a UN member have been challenged. Events and conventions routinely exclude Israel from participation.

The influential Human Rights Commission, meant to focus on nations "with a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights," renews Israel, a democracy, as the top item on its agenda year after year, while states like Iran, Syria and Libya rarely merit a single citation. In the year that Syria sent its tanks to wipe out all life in the dissenting city of Hama, it merited not a word of criticism in the HRC. Israel kept its first place on the agenda.

In the years marking the most vicious genocide and "ethnic cleansing" in Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, Israel again remained at the top of the agenda. In all, 39 percent of the Commission's resolutions have concerned Israel. Considering Israel's small size and its distance from a majority of the world's bloodiest conflicts, this proportion defies not only moral but mathematical sense, as well.

The situation improved somewhat after the Oslo Accords of 1993. The number of anti-Israel resolutions decreased slightly, and were supplemented with a few resolutions saluting the Israeli-Arab peace talks. But the anti-Israel undertone of the GA sessions remained more or less constant. In the HRC, for example, Israel is still item number one, and is in fact the only single country consistently meriting an entire agenda item of its own. The proportion of anti- Israel HRC resolutions, for that matter, remains the same.

In addition, anti-Semitism has found a dark refuge in the UN General Assembly. Some instances are subtle: A 1995 declaration on the lessons of World War II was blocked from including the word "Holocaust." A 1993 World Conference on Human Rights declaration, attacking racism, was prevented from also attacking anti- Semitism; a representative called such an addition "controversial."

Not since medieval times have the notorious blood libels infected world discussion of the Jews; that is, until a UN General Assembly forum in 1991: A Syrian envoy openly accused Israel of using Gentile blood to make Matzah for Passover. Not a word of renunciation or censor came from most of the international community. So, too, when a Palestinian envoy in 1997 accused Israel of deliberately infecting Palestinian children with the HIV virus -- a 90s twist on the blood libel. So there it was, a style of ugly canard long thought buried in the dark annals of history, resurrected at the end of the 20th Century in the central forum of the United Nations. One can only imagine the uproar that would have ensued had such charges been leveled against another ethnic group.

Principle over Politics

It is possible to despair in the face of such opposition. It is possible to give up on the conventional diplomatic channels for ending conflict; in effect, to reject the rejecters.

Israel dares not. Placing principle over politics, Israel refuses to dilute its existential struggle to end the conflict, refuses to pick and choose from among the paths to peace. It has continued a policy of remaining as professional, courteous and ready for reconciliation in the UN forum as outside it.

It must be said, however, that the outside channels were more receptive. Under Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Israel launched the Madrid talks with the Palestinians in 1991, while insisting on checks and balances to back up the dialogue with a guarantee of safety. History well recorded these steps, enshrined in the Oslo Accords of 1993.

All this took place far from the UN. Indeed, while world leaders took steps to change the cycle of history, the UN remained caught up in history's backlogs, echoing the cant of mind-numbing condemnations against Israel year after year, deaf to the progress outside. In the Middle East, as with the Cold War and the Berlin Wall, the UN found itself having to catch up with history, rather than making it. That is not how Israel would have liked it.

We remember the promise and the hope that accompanied the founding of the UN. The idea of equality for nations large and small, of a safeguard of the universal values that transcend borders -- the rights of children to be safe from armed conflict, the rights of nations to have legitimate and defensible borders, the right to nourishment and basic freedoms -- are rooted not only in the UN Charter but in our most sacred texts. Indeed, our heritage teaches us to stand on principle even where reality doesn't live up.

And so we return, year after year, to the UN with open arms beseeching peace and participation. And though that participation is severely curtailed, Israel actively participates in the few areas where it can. Its commitment to the ideals of human dignity, transcending nation and ethnicity, leads Israel to invest its best and brightest legal talent in its seat on the Human Rights Committee, for example, as well as the international tribunal, Committee on the Rights of the Child, and the preparatory work for the International Criminal Court. Israel will continue to seek to further involve itself in the UN organization, whatever the obstacles.

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 15, 2002.

Sorry, Yaakov. I don't have time right now to read such a long article. And at this forum, we have a problem with quoting a large text (without giving credit to the author) as though one had written it. What you copied here came from an "Israel-UN" site -- http://www.israel-un.org/Israelun/model/story%2001.htm

Yaakov, I was hoping for replies to my speculation about what Arab extremists would do if a peaceful settlement were reached between the current Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Thanks, Gene, for replying to that.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 17, 2002.

John. I think that unfortunately you may be correct. The creation of a Palestinian state may not stop completely the terrorist atacks.

However, this is no reason for such state not to be created. First, it is a matter of justice. Second, if Palestine becomes a viable state, with economic growth etc. their people will be less and less supportive of terrorists. Terrorists, like anybody else, have to sleep, eat hide etc. In the present situation, they may very well be being covered by non-terrorists, because people are in great anger because of Sharon´s massacre. Every time a tank destroys their mother´s home, otherwise moderate muslim young men may become terrorists. As people have said, in the desperate situation they find themselves, it is very easy to understand that many boys become terrorist there everyday.

This is why the operation Sharon is conducting is only going to make things worse. He is an intelligent man and knows very well that no amount of tank gunfire is able do find and kill all terrorists. On the contrary, each day those tanks remain there, more terrorists are being created.

That´s why a great part of international analysts say that the terrorists are Sharon´s best allies, and vice-versa. Neither want peace. They feed one another. Palestine moderates and Israel´s labour party want peace. Sharon and the terrorist not. The terrorists want "Israel shoved back to the sea". Sharon wants "the Big Israel". For both, war is the only course of action.

That´s why Sharon´s plea that Arafat "stop terrorists" is false and hypocritical. How can Sharon stop terrorist in his situation? They do not obbey him. They think Arafat is a traitor, someone who dared to negociate with the US and Israel, instead of pushing Israel to the sea. To contend that Arafat can stop them is either naiveté or outright hypocrisy.

Even civilized countries, like Spain and Ireland, have problems to stop terrorists, in a much better economic and political situation. How can we believe that Arafat is more powerful than the government of these countries? Come on...

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 17, 2002.

"How can Sharon stop terrorist in his situation?"

I meant Arafat...

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 17, 2002.

It´s up to you all to decide if Bush is being naive or hypocritical when he supports Sharon´s plea for Arafat to stop suicide terrorists.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 17, 2002.

John, both Ferenc and Attila are very common names in Hungary. Other are János (John), Imre (no translation I know of), Peter, Pál, András, Gábor etc (exercise: find yourself the translations :-). Female common names are Agnes (my mother´s), Eva, Judith, Magdalena (my grandma´s). As you see, most names come from Judeo-Christian tradition, only Attila is an exception, because the Hun Realm (of Atilla the Hun) was located there.

I am pursuing Hungarian citizenship, now that communist regime is out. With Hujngary near to enter EU, I´ll be able to restore my european citizenship, which will be very useful in my planned post- doctoral studies, which I intend to do in Rome.

Of which order were the brothers?

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 17, 2002.

I have just seen the TV news and I must say that I am disgusted...

Something that is being said throughout the world:

"Sharon obtained in a few months what Arafat was not able to obtain in decades: unanimous worldwide support for palestinians".

The only exceptions are Bush and some alienated americans...

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), April 17, 2002.

Hi, Atila.

"Imre ..., Peter, Pál, András, Gábor ... Agnes (my mother´s), Eva, Judith, Magdalena (my grandma´s)."
Emery/Amerigo [the name from which comes "America"], Peter, Paul, Andrew, Gabriel ... Agnes (my mother's TOO), Eve, Judith, Magdalena (my GREATgrandmother's).

Good luck with your overseas studies.
I would like to try your mother's chicken paprikas, wiener schnitzel, szekely goulash, and dobos torte. (Will you air-mail me some?)
The "brothers," Ferenc and Attila, were biological brothers, fellow students of mine.

John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 18, 2002.

To Atila "To contend that Arafat can stop them is either naiveté or outright hypocrisy. Even civilized countries, like Spain and Ireland, have problems to stop terrorists, in a much better economic and political situation. How can we believe that Arafat is more powerful than the government of these countries? Come on..." Atila, I think the main problem is not that Arafat is not doing enough to stop the terrorists. The main problem is that he is suppling them with weapons, educating his young people to hate, and using them as a political tool. In any case, just several months ago Arfat had a 20,000 people strong force armed with weapons varying from AK-47's to anti tank missiles, against all oslo agreements. He could have stopped the 3000 strong Hamas and Islamic Jihad if he wanted to. Regarding the ability of countries to defeat terror, well it happened in Israel when Ben Gurion attacked the Irgun and the Stern in 1948. And it happened in Irland when Michael Collins reigned in most of the IRA even tough he didn't get the republic he wanted and lost northen Irland. Finally lets not forget that most of the recent attacks were carried out by the Fatah, Arfat own political movment and the cornerstone of his power. Regarding you comments about Sharon I have to agree, he has made a huge mistake in not having a political plan to give the Palestinians some sort of state after this military campaign. It could only stop if NATO moves in to take control.

Koby

-- Yaakov Nahmias (nahm0002@tc.umn.edu), April 18, 2002.

Greetings,

All of you guys are looking at this thing from one point of view, which is "extreme", when looking at an issue we should always look at it at both points of view. Having no where to hide those palestinians "SNIPERS", had to go to the church for protection, otherwise they will have to be judged "KILLED" by the Jewish State "There Enemy". Does that sound right, when there is a war going between two groups of people should we always condem one & leave the other, I personally do not think So.

-- Aziz Saleh (Aziz2598@yahoo.com), May 22, 2002.

i am a jew and want to know about arab, and christian, and jew holidays.

Baby!!!!!!!!!!!

-- Lucy Mcbeth Turner (Lucy@the bar.come baby), October 17, 2002.