The Glass Box for Friday
The Glass Box is the place where you can comment on what you heard on PM, interact with other listeners and get responses from the people who make the programme.
Just click on the "comment" link.
The Glass Box is named after the booth outside the PM studio where we all discuss the programme at 18.00 every weeknight. We try to be honest and constructive. Sometimes there is criticism, and the criticised get a chance to explain themselves.
The people who make PM will read the comments posted, and will sometimes respond. But as it's Friday they may just go home..... Only joking.
RSS feed
Email us
Listen to PM
Excellent report, as usual from Hugh Sykes.
W
Ach! The Powers have determined I'm Malicious, but my department is The Truth!
On the most tenuous of links the editors managed to relate the extreme islamicist violence in Gaza to Hugh Sykes' mild inconvenience at a West Bank checkpoint.
Are we missing the main story perhaps or is this a deliberate yet flimsy attempt at pointing the finger at Israel rather than facing up to the real menace of fundamentalism and rejection of secular nationalism.
Such editorialisation does a great disservice to the Palestinian nationalist cause
The Foreign Secretary's statement is not illogical,
even though Hamas won the election. The Democrats won
the congressional elections in the US, but not the
presidency. Hamas's moves in Gaza are similar to the Democrats taking over presidential institutions by force and executing presidential aides. In other words partial coups detat.
What fun to be quoted in the letters bit! Thanks, Sequin. I don't mind being just 'Chris', but I wouldn't have thought 'Ghoti' was that difficult to work out for someone who speaks English so beautifully.
It's pronounced 'Fish'.
Maybe I ought to change it to 'Featherstonehaugh', only that's such a bore to type. :-)
Listening to the six O'clock news, it seems the Quartet haven't learned anything from the results of their boycott of Hamas.
Sad, isn't it?
xx
ed
I was startled by the arrogance of one of your bloggers referring to Welsh as a "dead language". He obviously hasn't spent much time in the pubs of Llanberis or Carmarthenshire. He also criticised Welsh for borrowing words from other languages. All languages do this, including English e.g. bugalow, khaki, etc. The English have even found it useful to borrow from our Celtic neighbours by adopting "galore", "slogan", etc.
I would be interested to know why Hamas soldiers wear facemasks? We know what they are, so why are they afraid to show themselves?
I agree RS Proctor.
I was smiling for a good while after hearing the blogger's comments on the programme this evening.
He described English as the "Lingua Franca" of the world and then berated the Welsh language for borrowing words from other languages!
Pot?
Kettle?
Harry (7),
I think you'll find it's the Fatah (so-called moderates) in masks
xx
ed
Ed
(9) I was hoping for a more informative reply to my question. .
Call me thick, but it is very easy to get the impression that the Middle East consists only of Israel and the West in terms of aid. Why are the Palestinians so dependent on Western aid? Where are the Arab counties in this huge mess. Do they contribute Aid? Do they contribute anything? Land, rescources of any description. Please enlighten me?
Harry (and all interested parties),
From the 91热爆, 14 May 2007, a good summary on Fatah & Hamas:
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Harry,
My earlier post with numerous links seems to have been rejected by the moderators/software.
I'll post it immediately at:
where you can peruse it at your leisure
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Ed (12) Thanks Ed. But, I still do not understand. For example, in this country people attempt to escape poverty by leaving sink estates when possible. They do many things in order to improve their lot. Why don't the Palestinians (who have many Syrian Arabs in their midst) try to improve their lives?
Why do they present so helpless? Is it some sort of determinism? Do they have to stay in one spot from generation to generation. I'm afraid there are so many issues here which leave me baffled.
Why do Hamas soldiers wear masks? Surely, if they are as you suggest seeking peace? Wearing masks gives such a negative impression.
Harry (14),
"They do many things in order to improve their lot. Why don't the Palestinians (who have many Syrian Arabs in their midst) try to improve their lives?"
It's complex. For one thing, Israel controls all access and egress for the occupied territories. For another, Most countries, including Arab ones, are reluctant to accept Palestinian refugees, sometimes for demographic reasons, sometimes they are perceived as troublesome, etc. They are also a convenient stick for the Arab countries to beat Israel with.
The creation of almost a million refugees by Israel, and her continued refusal to honour their Geneva-backed right of return has resulted in several millions of 'stateless' people crowded into refugee camps in Gaza, Lebanon, etc. and the occupied territories.
The Israelis, who decry any form of denial of the Holocaust, are mostly in a state of denial regarding (the catastrophe), which began with expulsion and destruction of Arab villages before and during the violent creation of Israel.
These people have remained in exile for several generations and watched as the Israelis have bulldozed and re-occupied their homes and farms, re-drawn the maps, removing the green line and all traces of the former villages, etc.
There is much more to be had from, for example mideastweb.org or the link at my name above.
Salaam/Shalom
ed
"English doesn't just borrow words; on occasion, it has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." (James Nicoll)
Harry,
As to the masks, it may have something to do with the Israeli practice of targeted assassination:
Palestinians killed during the course of a targeted killing 340
Palestinians who were the object of a targeted killing 210
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Harry @11
This is only from looking at what has been going on for the past few months, and it lacks the deep study that some have given to this matter, but allowing that I simply look at what has been put before me this year here's my take on your question.
Given the fact that Israel has been able to withold the money due to the Palestinian Authority from revenues everyone freely admits belong to Palestine but are payable via Israel, it seems somehow very likely that any attempt to give aid to Palestine has to be filtered through Israel -- in which case I don't see those in power in Israel allowing countries they quite reasonably regard as hostile, to give money to a group of people they regard as being so undeserving that they will refuse to give them even money that belongs to them.
Land wouldn't be much help: if you were in the position of the ordinary Palestinian family, would you really want to leave what was at least land you knew and had been born on and felt entitled to, to go to what would amount to a refugee camp in a foreign country? I wouldn't. That's even allowing that you could get out past the Israeli border controls, or had the means to escape in terms of money for the journey.
Water is only of any use if you can get it to the place where it is needed, on the roots of the vines or fig-trees or whatever, and doing that by bringing it in trucks isn't practicable. Food aid, again, would have to come in past Israel and be distributed, and on present form there wouldn't be a lot of co-operation for such a scheme. Why let in food if you are refusing to give the people the money that is their own? The same for medical aid. If they had the money to run them, the Palestinians do *have* hospitals and power generators and things, and they have medics and teachers too, they just can't pay them to do their jobs.
So really, it looks just from that as if the Arab countries of the area might feel that their hands are tied. Whether they have offered to help and been refused permission, or whether they haven't offered because they know the offer would be refused, I haven't any idea. Probably the latter, by now: this has been going on in one form or another for more than my lifetime.
Ed @17
An individual wearing a mask is 'a member of Hamas/Fatah' rather than being 'Sid Jones who lives in my street', to the people who see him. Given a society in which vengeance for murder is the way to go, because the courts don't have the power or the will to deal with murders, it might be quite sensible for an armed gunman to keep his personal identity literally under wraps, if only to ensure that someone who wants to get him doesn't take revenge by killing his brother/father/son/wife at his home.
That's leaving any reference to anything the Israelis may do right out of the picture, which I think perhaps we should. Being stabbed or shot by the bloke who lives down the road is a risk you can avoid, so you avoid it; the Israelis will be trying to kill the important members of the organisation with targetted assassination, rather than spending that effort on the small fry, and there is not a lot you can do about that as one of the small fry apart from not standing next to the important people during a raid.
There might also be an element of solidarity with the rest of the group, a sort of 'I am not just Sid Jones: when I am wearing this mask I am a member of Hamas/Fatah, and as such I have an identity greater than one individual, I am part of a greater whole'. That would accord with the behaviour of gangs anywhere -- in his leathers and crash-helmet he's a Rocker, out of them he's just a council worker. Yes, I know it's a less serious matter being a Mod or a Rocker, but the pattern is similar. I think I may have noticed that Hamas, when they wear masks, wear black masks, whereas Fatah wear patterned scarfs of the traditional Arab sort, pulled so as to conceal their faces? Or have I got that wrong?
Ed
Chris
I take all the points you make. Some stretch the imagination a little. I read earlier that the 250,000 original inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza now number 1,400,000 due to their policy on increasing their numbers simply in an attempt to outnumber the Israeli's. Isn't this irresponsible? If Iran is backing Hamas shouldn't they be contributing financially to the Palestinians? If some in the Arab world consider the Palestinians to be troublemakers, perhaps that's the reality for Israel. On the news it has been mentioned that Hamas are negotiating towards Alan Johnstone's release. Why wait till now to get involved?
I find it difficult to place all the blame firmly at Israel's door becuase as with any legitimate country the citizens cannot be held to account for how the Jewish state was implemented in the first place.. Also, this situation isn't replicated anywhere else in the world with Jewish people, they seem to want a quiet life, so to speak. I would also suggest that the Government of Israel has a duty to protect it's citizens from suicide bombings or indeed, any terrorist threat.
I think i'm going to pondering these issues for some time. Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply to my questions.
Kind regards
Harry
Ed @17
An individual wearing a mask is 'a member of Hamas/Fatah' rather than being 'Sid Jones who lives in my street', to the people who see him. Given a society in which vengeance for murder is the way to go, because the courts don't have the power or the will to deal with murders, it might be quite sensible for an armed gunman to keep his personal identity literally under wraps, if only to ensure that someone who wants to get him doesn't take revenge by killing his brother/father/son/wife at his home.
That's leaving any reference to anything the Israelis may do right out of the picture, which I think perhaps we should. Being stabbed or shot by the bloke who lives down the road is a risk you can avoid, so you avoid it; the Israelis will be trying to kill the important members of the organisation with targetted assassination, rather than spending that effort on the small fry, and there is not a lot you can do about that as one of the small fry apart from not standing next to the important people during a raid.
There might also be an element of solidarity with the rest of the group, a sort of 'I am not just Sid Jones: when I am wearing this mask I am a member of Hamas/Fatah, and as such I have an identity greater than one individual, I am part of a greater whole'. That would accord with the behaviour of gangs anywhere -- in his leathers and crash-helmet he's a Rocker, out of them he's just a council worker. Yes, I know it's a less serious matter being a Mod or a Rocker, but the pattern is similar. I think I may have noticed that Hamas, when they wear masks, wear black masks, whereas Fatah wear patterned scarfs of the traditional Arab sort, pulled so as to conceal their faces? Or have I got that wrong?
(I don't know what's going on about posting, this having sat there for about ten minutes with nothing happening, so I am trying another preview and posting again. If it appears twice, I apologise, but it didn't *say* it had been held for any reason...)
Chris (19),
You're probably right on the mark in matter of masks as 'badges'. I don't know the codes involving scarves, etc., but Iranian contacts tell me there's a white turban / black turban distinction between 'arabs/mullahs' and 'Persians'.
The complete imprisonment of the occupied territories includes Israeli control of the 'electromagnetic spectrum' as well as land, sea and air:
This is from the Israeli 'reservations' to the "Roadmap to Peace" and clearly illustrates just how little is on offer to the Palestinians.
Just how much licking of the iron boot is required?
Salaam/Shalom
ed
(from Ami Isseroff's introduction to the pages containing the 'roadmap' documents):
"The Palestinian Authority accepted the roadmap, but so far has not implemented key provisions such as combating terror effectively (May 2005). The Israeli government accepted the roadmap, but with the fourteen reservations below, and has likewise not implemented key undertakings of its own for Phase I, especially the freeze on settlement activity and removal of illegal outposts (detailed in the Sasson Report on illegal outposts)."
So much for 'good faith'
All (except those who would prefer to 'pass by on the other side'),
There is discussion on the amount of coverage being given to the conflict. on the Newsnight blog.
xx
ed
Harry (20),
The original figure for the number of refugees created in the violent seizure of what has become Israel is generally agreed at between 750,000 to 900,000. To this has been added several hundred thousand created in the '67 'six day war' (probably your 250,000). Israel continues to refuse their right of return, and it is for demographic reasons, as their return would totally negate the Jewish majority in the area of 'Israel' (behind the 'Green Line').
Israel received somewhere around 700,000 or more Jews 'expelled' from Arab countries following the expulsion of the Palestinian natives which helped to ensure a Jewish majority and justify her claim to be 'democratic'. The proposed partition (UN Res 181) was to grant the "Jewish State" 55% of Palestine with a 55% Jewish majority (contrived by separating out an "Arab Enclave" in Jaffa). She ended up seizing more than 77% of Palestine and expelling the bulk of the natives from that area.
At Oslo, the Palestinians agreed to recognise Israel in possession of this area in return for a return to the green line. Of course, this has yet to happen....see .
"as with any legitimate country the citizens cannot be held to account for how the Jewish state was implemented in the first place.."
Legitimate? The UN and the League of Nations had self-determination for indigenous peoples as a founding principle. 2/3 of the inhabitants of Palestine rejected partition, but the European majority over-ruled their wishes in abrogation of that principle. The 'legitimate' state of Israel stands in abrogation of dozens of UN resolutions and refuses to be bound by the fourth Geneva convention which requires the right of return for refugees.
I'm sorry if I seem obsessive on these matters, but I have been driven to discover the history in part because I began as an instinctive supporter of the plucky Holocaust survivors in their struggle against the nasty intolerant Arabs. I had read Exodus in School days.
The more I dug, the more I became disillusioned
try cactus48.com/truth.html for a good summary if you really want to learn.
In appreciation of your patience,
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Ed I take your points but, really to question Israel's legitimacy is out of order. It seems to me that Jews are still being scrapegoated for all the ill's in the region and beyond.
Again
Thanks for taking time and effort to reply.
Regards
Harry
Harry,
Legitimacy requires compliance with the accepted rules of civilised society:
Resolution 242 (part):
Just one example of the with which Israel has not complied.
Please also note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war", and remember just how Israel was formed.
Map of proposed Partition (1947) and outcome of Israeli aggression:
www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS/1947-un-partition-plan-reso.html
xx
ed
All,
The story of Palestine, illustrated with some telling
xx
ed
Ed. I think you've got some sorting out to do. I don't know how you get away with airing your views on this site, they're not moderate by any stretch of the imagination.
Try to examine your feelings with the intention of hopefully, gaining a more moderate outlook on life. I suspect that on this particular subject you veer towards the unknown.
It makes me feel uncomfortable just reading the stuff.
Harry, the thing that worries me, rather closer to home, is the scapegoating not of Israel but of anyone who might be perceivable as Islamist.
It seems to me that Islam, like Christianity and like Judaism, has many different faces, some benign and some quite otherwise. Just as it is folly to assume that every Israeli shares identical views, or that every Jew is pro-zionism (even in Israel!), it is very silly to assume that every member even of the same branch of what is a huge religious grouping, followers of the Prophet, agrees on any point.
Immediately after the bombing in central London on July 7th I had occasion to drive straight along the Marylebone/Euston Road. Some hours after that outrage, I had been being told by the media all day that Londoners were in a state of panicky worry (and warned on the motorway to avoid central London), and I expected to see anxious faces on the pavements, people scuttling as it were. I saw only one person who seemed to be what I would call in fear, and that was a young lady with a brown skin and a headscarf covering her hair, who was decidedly edgy. She was crossing the road as I stopped at the lights, and I gave her a smile (well, why not, she looked miserable) and I have rarely seen someone look so surprised. About three seconds later a white youth stepped very ostentateously to avoid being anywhere near her, and her face fell back into a sort of dull unhappiness. It was a horrible experience for *me*, and I felt shamed and distressed: how much worse must it have been for her, to be suddenly and through no fault of her own turned into someone to be shunned in such a way?
Is it not important to place blame where it properly belongs: not on *all* Israelis, but not on *no* Israeli either; not on *all* Palestinians, but not on *none*; and in the context of a previous conflict, not on *all* Roman Catholics or *all* Protestants... Some members of each religious group behave horribly, others are blameless.
I profoundly fear bigotry, and the judging of one person on the basis of a perception of the behaviour of a group to which he or she may or may not even belong. Even a member of Hamas or Fatah may be in that organisation for reasons we cannot know about, rather than because of a wish to kill every Jew in the world.
Harry advises me my views are far from 'moderate'
I recommend from Ami Isseroff et. al.
In peace and sadness
ed
And that is deemed to be malicious Harrrumph
In a post last night which seems to have disappeared into limbo, I replied to Harry that what he might have found painful to read was the truth.
I recommended (as I do to all who are interested) to look at B'Tselem, Gush-Shalom, Tikkun, Jews for Justice, and Mideastweb, all sources of fact and opinion based in the Jewish community.
I particularly recommended .
I apologise to all who may be disturbed by my seeming obsession with the situation in Palestine, but it is my sincere belief that a just resolution to this matter is the single most positive move towards world peace for which we can hope.
The bleeding, suppurating sore of forty years of occupation and illegal settlement/confiscation/dispossession lies at the heart of worldwide resentment of "the West", and the boil must be lanced.
Salaam/Shalom
ed
ED (31) WHAT I FOUND DIFFICULT TO READ WAS YOUR DISTORTIAN OF THE TRUTH.
lOOK AT ALL THE CONFLICT IN THE MIDDLE EAST IS IT ALL THE FAULT OF ISRAEL, AMERICAN THE WEST.
IT'S ABOUT TIME EVIL PEOPLE STARTED TAKING POSSESION OF THEIR OWN BEHAVIOUR
ED (31)
You state "I apologise to all who may be disturbed by seeing my obsession with the situation in Palestine, but it my sincere belief that a just resolution to this matter is the single most positive move to world peace".
Ed. You state clearly that you question Israel's right to exist and suggest that it is uncivilsed and not worthy of existing as a Jewish State.
This is my last word on the matter and I would suggest instead of adding the dubious links as you do quite often in your blogs that you come to terms with the fact that you cannot indoctrinate people with your views.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but, you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
You have a good forum here for peddling your views for the simple reason that the whilst 91热爆 give the pretention of being impartial it is not.
Goodbye.
Harry (if you're still there)
I repeat, once more, my request that you or anyone be specific as to where I have presented a 'dubious link' or distorted the truth.
I have used authoritative sources and provided links to them, and all you seem able to do is make unsubstantiated claims that I have distorted the truth and used dubious links.
Please substantiate your statements.
Adios, Adieu, etc.
ed
My thanks to whoever removed the duplications of my posts from last night! I had no intention of posting everything twice, and have now learnt that if I am told that something has not been posted because of error 502 this may not be true, and that I should on no account try to re-post for at least an hour.
Ed (34)
I think the problem is that what you have posted can be perceived as your having been selective in what you have written and selective in the links you have chosen to draw attention to. In simple terms, selection *can* be taken as a distortion of truth.
I can understand your strength of feeling, and that you are trying to present the other side of the question and prevent what you see as falsehood from being accepted unchallenged. Unfortunately the more strongly one pushes in a single direction only, the more strongly others will feel that they are being pushed, and the 'to every action an equal and opposite reaction' thing sets in. At that point if one single small detail in a claim can be disputed, the reaction is then 'See! it is not all true, therefore it is all not true!' This is not particularly fair, and not entirely logical, but it is very human.
You suggested (in 24, above) that your strength of feeling came in the first place from your having felt that you had been conned into a false position, or that was how I understood your explanation. Is it entirely unexpected if other people too react to pressure as you did then?
An entrenched position is a terrible place from which to get a wide view of anything: looking around from a hole in the ground simply isn't practical. :-( Personally, and on behalf of my cousins and friends in Israel, I have to say that I would be happier if you occasionally said 'some Israelis' or 'the Israeli government' instead of just saying 'the Israelis', when you are pointing out bad behaviour on the part of some members of a population of more than six million people -- many of whom are no happier about what is done in their name than you would be.
Chris (36),
I take your points to some degree, and apologise if you or any of your cousins ever feel I have ever referred to 'all Israelis'. In fact I try to refer to the 'Israeli state' or 'Israel', but may at times have used 'the Israelis', meaning the former. In fact, the bulk of the sources I quote are Israel-based, and this should illustrate that I'm certainly not tarring all Israelis with the same brush.
Other main sources are original official documents, British, American and a whole lot from the UN. I sometimes also refer to Palestinian and Christian sources, but selectively. There is an awful lot of horrible stuff from both sides.
"if one single small detail in a claim can be disputed, the reaction is then 'See! it is not all true, therefore it is all not true!'"
So far, despite repeated invitations, nobody has challenged the factual truth of any of my statements. I would be pleased to take such a challenge on-board and judge it on its merits.
My position is not disguised at all, but I believe it is based upon an almost obsessive study of a wide range of historical documentation and current affairs.
When I have cited opinion, I have usually quoted (and attributed) others, or it has been clear from context that it is my opinion, e.g. that the situation and history in Palestine is at the heart of much of the resentment felt towards the west and the justifiable perception that we are operating double standards.
The truth hurts, especially when it confronts deep-seated and entrenched denial, e.g. al Nakba.
Yours in eternal brotherhood
ed
(and again my apologies to all froggers for being so obsessive - it's what I do ;-))
I found all of these comments very interesting and those of Ed Iglehart and Chris Ghoti very informative as well. I would like to add my own contribution to trying to help the people of Gaza:
When the Palestinians were faced with the choice of electing a party of politicians they believed were corrupt (Fatah) or a party that had helped to alleviate the poverty in the region (Hamas), what were they supposed to do? What would each of us have done in the same circumstances? Why are they being punished for the very natural choice that they made? Are we trying to starve them to death or to drive them mad so that they end up tearing each other apart?
As to Hamas not being recognised because it refuses to accept the State of Israel . . .
the Arabs who lived in the British mandated territory of Palestine prior to the State of Israel being created were forced either to leave or to stay in Israel but without equal rights. Why should they also be forced to say 鈥淲e accept that Israel had a right to drive us out of our homes and to treat us as second-class citizens鈥 ? Surely they have a right to refuse to recognise the state of Israel? Does the People鈥檚 Republic of China recognise Taiwan as being an independent country? Is the West advocating cutting off all dealings with China because of it? We (Israel, the U.S. and now the E.U.) are bullying a downtrodden people to the point of torture and perhaps starvation. It is time we put an end to it and asked the Israelis to behave with magnanimity instead of trying to erase the Palestinians, while all the time pretending to be the victims.
How will history judge this episode and our part in it?
If Hamas were helping to alleviate the poverty of the region, why have they abandoned doing that to take over Gaza with violence? I was very annoyed to hear someone on AQ say there is a shortage of resources in Gaza. There cannot be any shortage of resources if so many charity workers have managed to obtain weapons of war. There was a good comment on "Today" this morning about resources from (Iran?) being put to bad use.
How many times do we hear people saying the British Government can always find the resources to fight a war but not for drugs like Herceptin? 'Sno different.
Chris (4): Don't blame Sequin - to understand the Ghoti conundrum, she'd either have to understand Klingon or be a G.B. Shaw fan - or just chanced upon it somehow. And there's no shame in not meeting any of these criteria.
It is, however, a delicious joke.
Vyle (39),
"There was a good comment on "Today" this morning about resources from (Iran?) being put to bad use."
I'll just point out that far more resources (billions) of US aid to Israel being put to 'bad use'.
Either we can criticise Arab countries for not helping the Palestinians enough, or for helping too much.
Double standards are everywhere.
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Angela (38),
"How will history judge this episode and our part in it?"
Indeed. Thanks for giving us your take. You've stated some of my feelings rather better than I seem able to do.
Hope is a holy duty, Despair a classic Error.
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
xx
ed
Angela (@38)
Bless you and thank you, the word I wanted was 'magnanimity'. I know it is much harder to be great-hearted than it is to be mean-spirited, but it seems to me that in general it's the only way for things to be resolved in any long-standing conflict: the leaders have to be great-hearted men and women who are not afraid to accept that their opponents may have *some* reason for their behaviour (other than 'he's the Dark Lord and that's just what Dark Lords *do*'). Only when one has tried to see the reasons for things can one begin to sort them out. Not to mention that fear always makes people behave far worse than they do if they are not afraid, so it helps if the leaders are brave enough to look at things squarely instead of through a panic-haze.
On looking for reasons, VH @39 -- I don't know why members of a party that was the legally-elected government should have to take over a place by violence, and it does seem faintly ridiculous to stage a coup against one's own party. Maybe it was the combination of being kept from actually doing anything to help by having all their legitimate funds withheld so they couldn't pay the doctors' and teachers' salaries, and having lost too many of their elected representatives into prisons. If all you have left in the way of resources is guns, I suppose the urge eventually to use them must be very great. Perhaps the only 'leaders' they have left who aren't in prisons are the less moderate and more violent types, too.
I have a horrid feeling that desperation is the only actual reason for Hamas' behaviour, and that is something that is horrendously difficult to counter with reason, even given the best will in the world -- which I'm not sure is available any more, at government level where it is needed.
Big Sis @ 40, perish forfend that I should blame Sequin for not wanting to risk pronouncing Ghoti wrong. Just 'Chris' is heaps better than the 'Chris Goaty' someone mentioned was what got read out a few weeks back. :-)
There *are* bearded fish, but I don't think they are especially goaty.... and anyhow, *I* don't have a beard, not even slightly.
Mr Fish, I understood Fanshaw* to be spelled with a hyphen between the "Fan" and "Shaw" components. Is that not so? (*Forgive me, but you were right at 4 above -- it is a bore to type).
;-)
There are plenty of resources in the Arab world, unfortunately, those in power prefer to line their own pockets rather than share these resources. In addtion, those in power keep their citizens oppressed and disempowered by indoctrinating them with the standard hatred of Jews, Americans and the Western world.
It is objectionable that this or any Government should feel obligated to contribute financially to people who dismiss the notion of democracy and advocate intolerance and hatred.
Apologies for the delay in joining this thread - I've been in the Lake District for a colleague's wedding and had trouble finding a computer.
As duty editor for Friday's programme I'd wondered if having both Tim Franks' report on the dramatic developments in Nablus together with Hugh Sykes' piece looking at the everyday experience of Palestinian people at West Bank check points might be too much. But since we seem to have sparked off such an interesting discussion here on the blog, perhaps I shouldn't have worried.
Amanda Lewis
Aperitif @ 45 -- drat and drabbit, you're almost certainly right. Never mind: how's about this? Sounds friendly, no?
Amanda (46),
Thanks for dropping by, and never fear. As noted above, I feel this issue lies at the heart of much of our wider problems.
Sadly, the Establishment seem determined to ignore the lesson and once again try to exclude the people's choice. I wonder what will happen if Hamas wins the new elections, or will our Great Leaders make sure they can't stand?
Double standards is no way to convince the rest of the world of our leadership qualities.
In sadness,
ed
"Darling, I the farm!"
Amanda Lewis @46, it's good to know you weren't washed away by the floods -- we were getting quite worried about that possibility.
I don't think it was too much to juxtapose the 'normal' and the abnormal for Palestinian people.
I have to admit that I wondered how many British people would be happy to stand waiting for four hours a day to be allowed to go from say Bath to work in Bristol! Somebody on the blog described it as 'a minor inconvenience', but it seems to me to be just a little more than that, and I don't think it does any harm to be told these things, since they might explain the rising exasperation that eventually erupts into violence.
Sounds lovely Mr Fish (48), at least the way it is in my head does! How does it sound to you? I feel compelled to say, however, that I like Mr Fish best of all... :-)
Blasphemy! What century are we living in? Give me strength! Why this ludicrous law still exists at all is beyond me.
It must be difficult for any Western Democratic Government to stand by and watch while populations face the terror of Sharia law. Sadly, for some people (mostly females) they cannot escape it's terror even in this country.
Are you really happy with Carolyn Quinn's week and soft interview of Lord Ahmed? He was allowed to accuse Salman Rushdie of "having blood on his hands" and of "inciting violence". Carolyn did not even challenge him about this "blaming the victim".
When asked about the statement from the Pakastani Minister calling for suicide bombings if Rushdie's knighthood is not withdrawn, Ahmed only said that he "disagreed with it" - he should have been challenged to condemn this incitement and blackmail.
Want new Glass Box! Want new Furrowed Brow! Want somewhere to comment on *today's* news, I'm bored with living in Friday.
I've come to this rather late, but I sympathise with Ed's point of view. I read Exodus at school and wanted to fund raise for the plucky kibbutzim. I've not done the extensive research Ed has done, but gradually came to the conclusion that the murky doings over the setting up of Israel (in which the British played their part) damaged the life of the country and continues to do so. I don't see how the rights (and lives) of one group of people can be ignored to meet the needs of another group. The insistence of some religious Jews that God gave them the land is also difficult to accept if you do not share the religious belief. Claims based purely on biblical authority leave no room for debate.
It's sometimes the ongoing activity that reinforces my feelings about this. There has been a good deal written about how Palestinians (or non-Israelis) have been forced out of East Jerusalem, losing houses and livelihoods, not forced out by violence but by using laws, laws used, as I understand it, in a way that overrides customary procedure.
The violence used by some Palestinians and some Israelis engenders deep bitterness and revulsion on both sides, but the nibbling away at the possessions and the lives of non-Israelis within Israel suggests that mean-spiritedness rather than magnaminity is winning the day. I hope the magnaminous Israelis (and it is clear there are many) win in the end but it is a faint hope at the moment.
As for the struggle between Fatah and Hamas, there was an ordinary Palestinian who expressed his despair who seemed to say it all. The Palestinians who are not directly engaged in the struggle are losing more than anyone else.
Thank you, Ed, with persisting in putting a point of view that is not an establishment view.
Druck (46),
"It is objectionable that this or any Government should feel obligated to contribute financially to people who dismiss the notion of democracy..."
Then sure3ly we should refuse to contribute to the new 'emergency' PA government?
xx
ed
John (54) How right you are John. It seems to me that as a tolerant society we should not succumb to those who wish to dictate any form of policy based on their hatred.
The fact that Lord Ahmed was not challenged as you rightly points out clearly proves the point which has been made regarding the 91热爆 and impartiality. It has been noted by many that the 91热爆 does not confront individuals on the basis of rational argument but rather, on affiliation to a particular group.
Thanks Lurker,
A little perspective from
Well worth the reading.
Salaam/Shalom
With reference to pseudo-legal methods of depriving folk of their rights and property - "the nibbling away at the possessions and the lives of non-Israelis" - thanks Lurker!, there is no better example than the machinations surrounding the route of the (sorry- "Separation Barrier")
For a map, updated to September 2006, see the link at my name.
Salaam/Shalom
ed