Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (3108)	9/4/2001 5:45:38 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 23908

So much for Europe's purportedly pro-Arab bias.... European partnership - a halfhearted process Fahed Fanek jordantimes.com Excerpt: Evidently, the Euro-Med planned arrangement will work, if at all, with extreme difficulty as long as every measure or amendment needs the consent of 15 independent countries in Europe, which don't treat the subject with due urgency, perhaps because they are not convinced of its feasibility and priority anymore. By no means does this mean that the problems and hurdles are confined to the European side only. There are lots of troubles on the Arab side as well, where the economic and social gap separating Arab countries from Europe is getting wider: democracy is progressing at the speed of a tortoise, corruption and lack of transparency are still in place, human rights are violated at will by authoritative regimes, and Arab governments are unwilling or unable to upgrade their educational and financial systems, thus allowing unemployment to rise, poverty to spread and the underdeveloped human resources to be neglected. Not to mention the breakdown in the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians, with possible threat to the stability of the region. Europe's continued hands off policy even after the failure of American endeavours to attain peace became obvious. At one time, Europe looked at the Mediterranean region as its southern flank, or its strategic backyard. The logical result was that Europe could not afford to turn its back to what was going on in this neighbouring region which has the potential to generate emigrants looking for jobs elsewhere or produce terrorism which can destabilise Europe. Now the Europeans are perceived to have kept clear of the situation, pretending that they are giving up hope to adjust the Arab economies and their out-of-date political regimes. They refrain from helping Arab countries to become qualified to open up to Europe and deal with the Europeans on an equal footing. Europe is called upon to reconsider its position and its role, to demonstrate more seriousness in dealing with Arab governments and to come up with coherent policies and plans to help the peoples of the area within the Barcelona framework. Otherwise, the Europeans should admit that they are losing interest, backing off and abandoning the partnership idea which they themselves produced to serve their own best interests in the first place at the minimum financial and trade cost. _____________________

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (3108)	9/4/2001 7:23:34 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

What Mani was referring to was the distinct bias Israeli courts hold against Palestinians, in their rulings. Also, it is virtually impossible for non-Jews to acquire land in Israel. On the other hand, it is very easy for Jews to acquire land in Palestine. This action is subsidized by the Israeli government, to encourage displacement of Palestinians, as well as fragmentation of their population. From where does this racist attitude arise? The Talmud and the Torah, of course. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Halakhah forbids Jews to sell immovable property - fields and houses - in the Land of Israel to Gentiles. In Syria, the sale of houses (but not of fields) is permitted. Leasing a house in the Land of Israel to a Gentile is permitted under two conditions. First, that the house shall not be used for habitation but for other purposes, such as storage. Second, that three or more adjoining houses shall not be so leased. These and several other rules are explained as follows: ... 'so that you shall not allow them to camp on the ground, for if they do not possess land, their sojourn there will be temporary.'52 Even temporary Gentile presence may only be tolerated 'when the Jews are in exile, or when the Gentiles are more powerful than the Jews,' but when the Jews are more powerful than the Gentiles we are forbidden to let an idolator among us; even a temporary resident or itinerant trader shall not be allowed to pass through our land unless he accepts the seven Noahide precepts,53 for it is written: 'they shall not dwell in thy land'54 that is, not even temporarily. If he accepts the seven Noahide precepts, he becomes a resident alien (ger toshav) but it is forbidden to grant the status of resident alien except at times when the Jubilee is held [that is, when the Temple stands and sacrifices are offered]. However, during times when Jubilees are not held it is forbidden to accept anyone who is not a full convert to Judaism (ger tzedeq).55 It is therefore clear that - exactly as the leaders and sympathizers of Gush Emunim say - the whole question to how the Palestinians ought to be treated is, according to the Halal,;hah, simply a question of Jewish power: if Jews have sufficient power, then it is their religious duty to expel the Palestinians. All these laws are often quoted by Israeli rabbis and their zealous followers. For example, the law forbidding the lease of three adjoining houses to Gentiles was solemnly quoted by a rabbinical conference held in 1979 to discuss the Camp David treaties. The conference also declared that according to the Halakhah even the 'autonomy' that Begin was ready to offer to the Palestinians is too liberal. Such pronouncements - which do in fact state correctly the position of the Halakhah - are rarely contested by the Zionist 'left'. In addition to laws such as those mentioned so far, which are directed at all Gentiles in the Land of Israel, an even greater evil influence arises from special laws against the ancient Canaanites and other nations who lived in Palestine before its conquest by Joshua, as well as against the Amalekites. All those nations must be utterly exterminated, and the Talmud and talmudic literature reiterate the genocidal biblical exhortations with even greater vehemence. Influential rabbis, who have a considerable following among Israeli army officers, identify the Palestinians (or even all Arabs) with those ancient nations, so that commands like 'thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth'56 acquire a topical meaning. In fact, it is not uncommon for reserve soldiers called up to do a tour of duty in the Gaza Strip to be given an 'educational lecture' in which they are told that the Palestinians of Gaza are 'like the Amalekites'. Biblical verses exhorting to genocide of the Midianite57 were solemnly quoted by an important Israeli rabbi in justification of the Qibbiya massacre,58 and this pronouncement has gained wide circulation in the Israeli army. There are many similar examples of bloodthirsty rabbinical pronouncements against the Palestinians, based on these laws. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Israel Shahak abbc.com )