History is always revisionist, as it is written by the victors.

I'm jewish, and personally i'm totally disgusted with how the US and Israel run their militaries. when you have billions of dollars in targeting sattelites, it probably isn't a good idea to be lobbing bombs across the desert without taking aim. there is absolutely no excuse for killing inoccent people at the beach. I'm sure international law was violated somewhere during this shelling.

i prefer to read history as a story. if history tells a story that matches reality then theres a good chance the history is somewhat accurate...

The violence in Israel comes out of both sides promoting their respective causes from selected facts and myths. The eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is leaving these people more than just blind and in need of dentures. It's going to take some major major work and extreme patience to get the Israelis and the Palestinians to end this cycle of horrific violence. And, ya, some of that revisionist history is what will be taught - along the way, and when it's over.

gypsy sister, the violence is a natural by-product of an foreign oppressor who occupies the lands of others illegally by military aggression.

Only 10% of Israeli Jews in the 1940s are descended from ancestors who had lived in the Middle East. The rest were from Europe, many of them illegal immigrants to Palestinean lands.

Does it matter who or where they came from? What either side is doing is not right. You know this to be true yet some how you defend or ridicule both sides?

The sand in Israel is the same in Palestine.

Although I abhor quite a bit of Isreali policy, I'd like to see more evidence before blaming either side in this. It is just as likely that an angry young man thought "this peace process is us selling out to the jews" and thought a nice Day At The Beach gone wrong would re-ignite the fight against the Isrealis.

Could be anybody. It does suck in a large way, however.

Kes,

While I agree with you 100%, it should be noted that every inch of inhabited land (aside from Antarctica) had been fought over and won by blood. Most every race has been a slave to another in some way at some time.

This is not an excuse, but an observation. I am curious how some of these acts are OK and some are not. If you live in a house, who used to own this land and by what means did your ancestors kill the people who used to own it? How do you feel about that? Does only time make it right?

Sick and sad thought, I know, but I get sick of everyone rehashing the past and restarting hate and death. No easy answers there though. -c

First, if this story is accurate, which it seems to be, Israel's actions should be condemned. There is no excuse for killing an innocent family like this. It's shameful.

Second, there goes kes again. Really your logic is impressive in its idiocy and simplicity. You wrote: "Only 10% of Israeli Jews in the 1940s are descended from ancestors who had lived in the Middle East. The rest were from Europe, many of them illegal immigrants to Palestinean lands."

Actually you're wrong. Very wrong. 50% of Israeli Jews are in fact "descended from ancestors who had lives in the Middle East," countries like Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Syria, Arab countries that expelled three quarters of a million Jews in the 50s and 60s (my family included). So the majority of Israelis are 'middle eastern', not European. Find another irrelevant comment to make, because that one doesn't quite cut it.

Hi Zak, you are the wrong who is wrong. I'm talking 1940s, not 1960s.

I'm basing my figures based on UN documents on the population census in the Arab Palestinean lands in the 1930s-40s, as well as illegal Jewish immigration

Kindly note that the Arabs outnumber the Jews in the region of Palestine by 80-10 at the turn of the century.

The Arab Plaestinieans were the local indigenous majority population until the Jews in present day Israel expelled more than 2 MILLION Palestinians in 1949 who still live in refugee camps in the neighboring Arab countries as well as overseas.

As for what happened in the 50s and 60s, as a Jew, you have to ask yourself whether this is a case of what goes around comes around.

Especially when Jewish supremacists were the ones who started public bombings in Palestine as a politico-terror tactic.

Get your facts straight.

Kindly note that Asian trained history students are resistant to Jewish attempts to whitewash Israel's efforts at aggression and illegal occupation.

Why do we in the U.S. care so much about this conflict? Religious fascination? Oh the Holy land! The Holy land! It’s a miserable peace of arid land.

Is it just Jewish lobbyists that keep our government involved or is it our collective religion that keeps us rehashing this rancid dish?

I wasn’t aware there was a cease fire. Did they actually cease firing?

That was a horrible film to watch, but it seems the girl screaming must have been staged. She waited for the news cameras to arrive before coming in from water? Sirens blaring all the while? It looks like it was filmed with a steady cam. Can ordinary cameras correct for a running camera man that well?

Maybe I’m crazy. Sometimes my cynicism amazes even me.

"I wasn’t aware there was a cease fire."

Have you heard of any suicide bombs or attacks by Palestinians in Israel between the Hamas victory and the beach massacre?

No, because there was a ceasefire in place.

The skirmishes in Gaza and the West Bank were between Fatah and Hamas. That will likely end as a result of the massacre... theres nothing more effective to bring rival militant groups together then a thirst for vengence towards a common enemy.

And as far as it being stage... is it any more staged then standing on rubble with a bullhorn surrounded by firefighters?

first of all there is no jewish lobby. the reasson we are still involved in this conflict is because radical christians believe that for the masiah to come, the jews must be occupying the holy land or some shit like that. and also kes, when the jews first went to Israel, it was a barren wasteland, and after irrigating the countryside it became an object of arab desire. and the nomads who lived there at the time were offered compensation in the form of housing, but were told by the leaders of arab militant groups that they would be killed if they went into the homes. i think that this entire issue stems from racism that makes people unable to except eachother. in the end religion is bullshit, and people need to learn just to live life together.

"I'm jewish, and personally i'm totally disgusted with how the US and Israel run their militaries."

I always here the same sort of thing: "I'm Jewish but..." "Even though I'm Jewish..."

It's ridiculous that American Jews have to address Israel like this. I know that the connection between the country and the religion is perpetuated by many synagogues and organizations in the U.S. but they still don't speak for all Jewish people. I for one wish that Israel and Judaism were viewed as two entirely separate entities. Because when Italy adopted a fascist government it didn't mean that all Catholics were pro-Mussolini. And even today most intelligent people know that Al-Queda does not represent all Muslims of the world. Yet, Jews and Israel have to be synonymous. And what about the Israelis who oppose their current government? Obviously most of us who read this blog are opposed to the current U.S. administration and we don't support their actions. There are quite a few Israelis who feel the same way about their political situation. Sorry to rant but this is just something that really gets under my skin. I'm tired of defending my religion against practices and policies I have nothing to do with.

Hi saturnalia9, no worries. People do make the distinction between Zionists or pro-Israel Jews and normal jews.

On closer examination I think the whole beach scene was staged.

The unconscious girl is lifted, but her unsupported head doesn’t tilt back. The dead father with nothing, but a spot of blood on his shirt, no dust or sand on him. did the artillery not kick up any dust or did he walk around for a while, brush himself off then lay down to die?

A little gut shot wound like that isn't likely to kill you too quickly.

Maybe there was no strike at all. Just an excuse to resume bombing while Israel is the one condemned.

To me, this video suggests just that.

I dont see a difference of killing innocents in the beach, from killing innocents in their home in Iraq (watching TV or else). The problem is not what they do with their leisure time while being killed, its that they are innocent and they are killed. If you show outrage for one, you should be outraged by the other.

Also, she was said to have been in the water at the time, but she's wearing sweatpants or something. Maybe that's just a modesty thing though. Of course, even if that scene was 'reenacted' she still deserves sympathy for losing her family

The ceasefire was a unilateral one on Hamas's part in the first place. At no point did Israel ever cease its shelling of Gaza.

beowulfkg, I don't decry your cynicism but I heard it reported that the film was taken by someone on the beach.

I dont see a difference of killing innocents in the beach, from killing innocents in their home in Iraq (watching TV or else). The problem is not what they do with their leisure time while being killed, its that they are innocent and they are killed. If you show outrage for one, you should be outraged by the other.

I agree and I do.

Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq Min Max 38355 42747
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

The Israelis might have been a bit too quick to say they fired the shell. Current IDF investigations have questioned if the explosion was caused by the Israelis - there any many inconsitencies that have not be answered.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035838991&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

It is entirely possible that it was a stray Israeli shell (i refuse to believe Israelis intentionally target civillians). However the explosion on the beach while tragic does not seem to resemble what the effects I have seen of 155mm artillery fire.

I agree that Israelis don't intentionally target civilians, but they do fire artillery shells into areas where non-combatant civilians live. They do drop one-ton bombs on apartment buildings. They do use F-16s and helicopter gun ships all to target individuals who are in areas where there are innocent civilians. They do it, I suspect, for the same reason I believe the United States does. They value the lives of their soldiers more than they value the lives of the innocent. They prefer the inevitable result of excessive force to what they consider excessive military casualties. All in violation of provisions of the Geneva conventions. Whether it turns out that they are responsible for the deaths on the beach , they are certainly responsible for similar deaths.

155mm arti? Is it self-propelled? I've been attached to a 155 mm artilery unit b4 during military service.

Hmm the shell that exploded may be a dud btw. I will agree that there should be more casualties if a functional 155mm shell went off.

I'll check with my gunner friends in the arti unity later this week.

Kes, it should either be 155mm or 105mm, most likely 155. You are correct, it might have been a dud, but then they should have found more of the shell shouldn't they. It could also have been an airburst which might explain lack of a crater. It is very possible that it might have been a stray Palestinian Kassam missle. It would be interesting to see what arty guys say. An Update: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150035838991&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Norm, You are correct, killing civillians is not acceptable. However in the eyes of the military there is a difference between the intention to target non combatants and the accidental targeting of non combatants. It would be much easier if the target individuals would not hide amongst civillians, but that's not going to happen. Civillian deaths are not right, but that's an unfortunate reality that can be blamed on both sides of the conflict.

Kes, Slight clarification - if the arillery was Israeli ground artillery it would most likely be 155/105mm. However if it was from a naval ship, it would be 76mm.

The Israelis sources are now saying the explosion was caused by a Palestinian mine.

According to the internal review by the IDF (which I'm sure many here will immediately dismiss), it was not artillery that was fired by Israel that caused the deaths on the beach, but probably a Palestinian laid mine.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html

I am wondering if the majority of these 40,000 or so civilian "casualties" were Americans, if there would not be more outrage? Is this reported on the main television networks much?

Lev, I hope that this story is false for the sake of peace in this area.

AP:

JERUSALEM - Defense Minister Amir Peretz said Tuesday that Israel was not responsible for a blast that killed eight Gaza beachgoers, rebuffing Palestinian accusations that blamed an Israeli artillery round.

An Israeli inquiry concluded that the blast was caused by an explosive buried in the sand, not from Israeli shelling on the afternoon of the Palestinian family's beach picnic.

It was not clear how the explosive got there, or whether it might have been an unexploded Israeli shell from an earlier military barrage. Peretz did not address that issue in his remarks. Israel has been claiming that Hamas militants planted a device to set off against Israeli commandos.

"We have enough findings to back up the suspicion that the intention to describe this as an Israeli event is simply not correct," Peretz said at a Tel Aviv news conference on the inquiry's findings. "The accumulating evidence proves that this incident was not due to Israeli forces."

John, I have to say that killing civillians is not acceptable under any circumstances. There is no difference between the intention to target non combatants and the accidental targeting of non combatants. If one accept that as a reasonable risk to kill the militant, one is deliberately putting civilains in the line of fire.

During the armed occupation of Nazi Germany over Europe or Imperial Japan over East Asia, resistance fighters hide among civilains attacking at these illegal occupiers in every way imaginable as they could not win in a frontal assault as the occupiers have overwhelming military power.

Same thing with the Palestinians. After millions were chased by the Israelis off their ancestral lands, they had to see their nation's economy hampered by the Israeli occupation, land grab and unilateral division of Palestinians lands into separate entities. They were also deprived of the ability to build a credible military force to fight the Israelis.

How else is the Palestinian resistance fighters are going to fight? Besides using the traditional methods of armed resistance and the public bombings that was pioneered by Zionists or imperalists Jews in the 1940s to chase the British colonial powers from the region of Palestine.

Karma is evidently at work here.

if the target individuals would not hide amongst civillians, but that's not going to happen. Civillian deaths are not right, but that's an unfortunate reality that can be blamed on both sides of the conflict.

Update: investigation concludes that the explostion may have been caused by a Hamas mine:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/israelgazaexplosion;ylt=AhoDP4KBiZq9Fm66CypZMfgDW7oF;ylu=X3oDMTBhcmljNmVhBHNlYwNtcm5ld3M-

That sound plausible, but the "staged attack" doesn't.

"I wasn’t aware there was a cease fire. Did they actually cease firing?" Yes there was a cease fire and it was largely complied with my Hamas groups. Other groups conducted some attacks but the last 18 months or so have been relatively quiet ones. The intifada was long recognized as foolish by anyone with a brain, even Hamas people (but as usual, it takes warring parties quite a while to find the "right time" to stop an absurd conflict). The ultimate dilemma of the Palestinian movement since Oslo is that violence has achieved virtually nothing, but refraining from violence hasn't achieved much either. It is no wonder to me that sometimes people choose the supposedly more 'honorable' of two futile alternatives.

This just in:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060613/aponremiea/israelblastprobe;ylt=Al1sp9elRRvD89w3oQTcrEFn.3QA;ylu=X3oDMTA4NTMzazIyBHNlYwMxNjk2

"Human Rights Watch battle damage assessment expert Marc Garlasco said he examined the shrapnel on the beach, saw the civilians' injuries and concluded the blast was caused by an Israeli shell. He held open the slim possibility that it was planted there by Palestinian militants, although fragment patterns did not back that.

Unexploded ordnance left over from the current conflict as well as from wars over the past century has been a problem in Gaza, where there are several incidents a year of Palestinians wounded in blasts.

"Our information certainly supports, I believe, an Israeli shell did come in," Garlasco said, ruling out a land mine. Garlasco, formerly of the U.S. military, was the first neutral specialist to inspect the scene. Israel is often critical of the human rights group's findings.

According to Israeli findings, shrapnel taken from two wounded Palestinians who were evacuated to Israeli hospitals showed that the fragments were not from the 155-millimeter shells used by Israeli artillery."

I think the question is who you want to believe : >

kes--thanks for the heads up on the HRW report.

"I think the question is who you want to believe : >"

I'm not sure what this means--I don't want to believe that Israel tried to do a targeted killing with artillery on a beach. I'd rather believe that it was some kind of accidental activation of a mine.

If you mean who I think is more credible, between Palestinians and Israelis I'm not sure who to pick. But I've kept up with HRW research for some time and I do trust their research. I don't believe that they don't have any anti-Israel bias. Almost every HRW report I get is full of human rights accusations against Israel's enemies.

What bias? HRW is not an Arab NGO.

Can these so-called Israeli biases come from the fact that the Israelis are guilty?

I would certainly think so especially after the Israelis destroyed the Palestinian town of Jenin with civilizations still in the town a few years back.

The Israeli refusal to allow neutral UN investigators into Jenin speaks volume about Israeli atrocities.

Kindly note that Israel is the one who condemns suicide bombings while Jewish Zionists pioneered this tactic in the 1940s.

It talks about terrorism from the Palestinians but mention nothing about its state terrorism of targeting Arab leaders with rocket attacks, which kills a lot of civilians as well.

Israel accuses neuighbouuring nations of military aggression when it is the a rogue state that attacks countries with no declarations of war in premptive strikes and illegally occupaying conquered territory.

It speaks of the Jewish Holocaust but mentions nothing about the Palestinian holocaust it created since the 1940s, which has driven millions of Palestinians off their ancestral lands into refugee camps.

It talks about democracy but yet it has driven off the Arab indigenous majority from the land to form a Jewish state on their lands and at their expense.

It is against the Middle East countries in gaining nuclear weapons but remained silent and mysterious about its own anuclear bombs.

I will agree that there is a bias alright. From the Israelis.

Israel must understand that the Israeli Jews do not have any special priviledges based on Biblical prophecies or Holo-caust-funded emotional blackmails.

The rest of the world will continue to hold it accountable to agreed universal values of state, democracy and humanity, regardless of the US veto that has shileded Israel from UN's 22 censures, which are 5 more than Iraq.

Kes, I hear you - just as Ben M'Hidi said in Algiers, "Of course, if we had your airplanes it would be a lot easier for us. Give us your bombers, and you can have our baskets."

However in my honest opinion the best tactics for the Palestinians is not to fight at all. Violence has done all it can - they will not gain large concessions from the Israelis by launching rockets into civillian areas or sending suicide bombers. So what should they do?

At the end of the first intifada, there was a very effective peaceful palestian resistance movement - these included Palestinian female activists who could show the world through non-violence how legitmate their cause was/is. Israel was hit hard economically through peaceful boycotts - unfortunately the opportunity for further peaceful resistance is all but over. The female peace activists are no longer able to voice their concerns, crushed by male dominated militancy.

Hamas does not want peace. They just rejected a proposal by Palestinian prisoners on whether or not they should recognize Israel. How can Israel respond to those who do not want peace?

Suicide bombing and the targeting of Israeli civillians can be used as an excuse for being militarily weaker, but it is not one that holds up morally nor does it help the future of the Palestinian people.

Sigh, just in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/world/middleeast/14mideast.html?th&emc=th

Israeli Missiles Kill 10 in Gaza

GAZA, June 13 — Eight Palestinian civilians were killed and more than 40 wounded Tuesday by an Israeli missile strike on Islamic militants riding in a van that Israeli officials said was carrying rockets to launch at Israel. Two men in the van were also killed, including a man the Israelis consider an important rocket maker.

Victims from a house in Gaza that was hit by an Israeli missile. A rocket maker was also killed.

The officials said the strike had prevented more of what has been a rising number of Palestinian missile attacks launched from Gaza. But the civilian casualties further inflamed Palestinian rage over eight deaths last week on a beach from what residents said was an errant Israeli shell. Seven of the dead were from one family"

Kes, Take a deep breath and consider the following: 1. While the Jews living in Pre-Partition Palestine did use bombings to drive the British out, they were not suicide bombings and were in the context of similar Arab violence. 2. Although the Palestinians have been treated horribly and I'm appalled by what I'm currently seeing, there is no comparison between the Holocaust in which 6 million people were killed and many more displaced and a conflict were thousands have been killed. This is not a justification, but consider the weight of what the Holocaust is to Jews before you try to turn it around and say that Israelis are committing a Holocaust against the Palestinians. You could draw legitimate analogies between what happened in Rwanda and what is happening in Darfur and the Holocaust, but as terrible as the situation in the territories is, it isn't the same.

Lev, if you were a Palestinian, a part of the Palestinian "diaspora", might you give more weight to the plight of the Palestinians? It's true that the Israelis are not sending Palestinians to death camps. Still, it is because of the Israelis that there are so many Palestians with no homeland. Why would the Israelis do to other people the very thing that was done to them in this respect? Of all people, I would think that the Israelis would be most sensitive to the situation of having no country to call your own.

Jo Ann, I understand the plight of the Palestians. I've been to Israel and the territories and strongly disagree with the Israeli government's stance. You must however look at the whole historical picture. The Palestians have been betrayed by not only the Israelis but the Arab world as a whole, who have made it a cottage industry to blame Israel for all of their problems. I'm not someone who will jump up and say "they were offered a state at Camp David", because there were significant problems with Barak's offer, but I'm not going to let Arafat and the PLO off the hook for resorting to violence when they thought they could get more that way than going with political discourse.

You have to view it not from the perspective of "The Jews experienced the Holocaust so therefore they should be the world's most understanding people", but instead see it as the Israeli government's view everything as an existential threat and are going to overreact because they feel that they are the sole protectors of 1/3 of the Jewish population on this planet and they are the only ones who can through self-determination guarantee that.

Blame should be placed on Israel's shoulders because they have done a lot of terrible things, but we shouldn't let their neighbors off the hook for stoking this conflict. The Jordanians are responsible for thousands of Palestinian deaths during Black September, the Kuwait expeled most of its Palestinian population after the Iraq invasion in the early 1990s, and in many Arab countries, Palestinians have not been given full rights (largely I suspect to keep up the illusion that someday they will all go back to Israel).

There is enough blame in this conflict to go around and then some.

Lev, I disagree with you with all my heart on your first point.

1] The Jewish Zionists started the political terrorist tactic of public bombings, which escalated in the following decades into rocket attacks which killed civilians in targeted assasinations, while bulldozing over entire palestinian settlements.

The Palestinians' tactics copied them and followed them in escalation.

So you are dead wrong on your first point. No matter, since someone else is doing the dying

===

I agree with your second point that the Palestinian holocaust is not the same as the Jewish version because it is a lot worse.

The Palestinian Holocaust saw:

• the expulsion of millions of Arab palestinians from lands that their ancestors has lived for at laeast 1400 years

• thousands of Palestinian Arabs killed by Israeli miilitary actions against palestinian towns such as Jenin where its civilan populations was destroyed along with the buildings, not to mention Sabra and Chatra.

• millions of Arab Palestinians losing their rights of self-determination in their home land.

• Israeli land grab that exceeded the territorial conquest of Kuwait by Saddam.

==========

What's wrong with reminding Israelis of the Golden Rule that one should not do to others what others should not to do one.

Why allow Israel to use the Israeli Holocaust as global emotional blackmail to get countries to agree with its illegal invasions, clandestine nuclear programms, military aggressiona and disenfranchement of millions of people.

States that enage in just one such activity would be censured with sanctions from UN or invaded by US? Why is Israel given a free pass?

You tell me.

I was referring to Sabra and Shatila. In June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon with the declared intention to eliminate the PLO. A cease-fire was arranged. PLO troops withdrew from Beirut and were transferred to neighboring countries after guarantees of safety were provided for thousands of Palestinian refugees left behind. Subsequently, a large-scale massacre of refugees took place in the camps of Sabra and Shatila.

Israelis have never shown any real regard for Arab palestinians lives or tolerance for Palestinians' right to fight for self-determination.

in December 1987, a mass uprising against the Israeli occupation began in the occupied Palestinian territory (the intifadah). Methods used by the Israeli forces during the uprising resulted in mass injuries and heavy loss of life among the civilian Palestinian population.

Kes, seriously, how can you say that the mass extermination of 6 million Jews and the displacement of the remaining Jewish population is somehow better than what has happened to the Palestinians? Couple that with hundreds of years of molestation in Europe leading up to WWII and you have one of the worse human tragedies in history. I'm not going to deny what has happened to the Palestinians is horrific, but there is just no comparison. On one hand I can list worse attrocities than that have befallen the Palestinians in Rwanda, Armenia, China, etc, etc, etc, but when you fail to comprehend the driving force of historical anti-semitism that culmunated in the Holocaust, you fail to understand something fundamental about the Jewish world view and something fundamental about history. It is not 'emotional blackmail' as you call it. I don't think that Israel should get a free pass, but if it weren't for US intervention in the UN, Israel would be treated worse than other countries with worse human rights abuses, soley because it is Israel.

Where should have the Jews of Europe gone after the Holocaust? Should they have left their fates to a world that turned their back on them again (the United States included)?

Lev, I did not say the Jewish Holocaust is better than what happened to the Palestinian Holocaust. The plight of the palestinians is infinitely worse as it has gone on for over 50 years and is still happening.

I said that the Israeli Jews cannot use the Jewish Holocaust as emotional blackmail to stop people from criticising the Israeli Jews from doing something even worse to the Arab palestinians for the last 50 years.

This include the slaughter of thousands of Arab palestinians, destruction of entire Arab settlements and towns to mak way for chasing millions of Arabs from their ancestral lands, depriving millions of Arab of their right to self-determination in the region of palestine where their ancestors have lived as g

All I'm saying is that Israeli Zionists have no right to set up a state on the lands of other peoples, massacring those who stayed and chasing off millions fom the lands.

Such Jews deserve no sympathy if they inflict such horror on other people, despite their own experiences.

Their actions may be a bid factor why the world has turned their backs on them.

The Israeli Jews in the Arab region of Palestine in the 1940s who demanded for a state was largely an immiragnt population that owned just 14% of the land and these Jews were largely illegal immigrants.

The Arabs living in the region of Palestine in the 1940s composed over over 80% of the total population with over 50% of the lands. And their ancestors have CONTINUOUSLY lived there for almost 1400 years.

They have a lot more rights to the lands of Palestine than the largely European Jewish migrant minority in Palestine in 1949.

My point. A Jewish Holocaust does not give Israeli Jews to inclict a Palestinian Holocaust for the last 50 years.

Why give sympathy to to the Israeli Zioniss when they spare no sympathy to the Arabs from whom they have taken their lands, pride and nationhood?

As the the rest of the world turning back on Israel, that's Israel is a rogue state that enbarks on territorial aggression, illegal occupation and land grabs, genocide and clandestine development of nuclear weapons without any international supervision.

That's why Israel has received 22 censures from UN, compared to Sadam's Iraq which recived 17.

Hamas cannot recognise Israel as it is ultimately a state founded by a largely immigrant population who robbed the Arab indigenous majority of their lands.

There is no way any Palestinian leadership will legitimise Israel's rogue state actions without pissing on the sacrifices of the Arabs who fought for their dreams of Palestinian self-determination, an unalienable right that is recognised by the United Nations.

Israel is the one who does not want peace as it continues to build new settlements on land stolen from the local Arabs, built walls on Arab lands and unilaterally deciding which parts the Arabs they can live like a totalitarian ruler.

And contrary to what you believe, the armed resistance of the Hezbollah was instrumental in forcing the Israelis to withdraw from their illegal conquest and occupation of Southern Lebanon.

John, no one will stop fighting for one's freedom. Freedom is not given. It has to be earned by blood, tears and sweat.

That is why in every occupied country in history, its resistance fighters have been willing to sacrifice everything to fight for freedom and national self-determination.

Because what you can't defend, you don't own.

Why do I say this? I live in Southeast Asia, where the countries were occupied by colonial powers and then by the Japanese in WW2. Almost every fight to gain independence during WW2 and after the colonial powers came back involved bloodshed and sacrifice.

As a result of our history, the nations in Southeast Asia has a strict policy of non-interference in our neighbouring countries and military aggresssion is frowned on.

But the people still understand that freedom is worth fighting for because it is never free.

We live in a world where massive forces seem to be bent on death and folly. The fact is, I can't stop a massive force. I can't reason with a massive force. However, if I break the problem down into little pieces, then I can start to make a change at the grass roots level. If we all do this, will we have a chance of getting the folks with the guns to sit the hell down? I hope so.

My friend recently joined Doctors Without Borders and is currently in Gaza acting as a psychologist. He broke the problem down from the massive to the intensely personal and he is making a change. I'm trying to figure out how to do this myself. Let's hope this method of addressing seemingly unsolvable problems works.

Hi citizenkain, it is good to know that there are people who feel the way you do : >

To those who have a will, may them find a way.