Palestinian party posts, pulls image of skulls with Jewish stars

donsutherland1 · Jan 2, 2015

From CNN:

The political party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas posted a drawn image online showing a large pile of skulls and skeletons with Jewish stars on them.

Palestinian party posts, pulls skulls with Jewish stars - CNN.com

Although Fatah later "disavowed" the posting, such a disavowal rings hollow, as this is not the first such incident where similar reprehensible content was posted. For example, the above article reported:

It's not the first time Fatah Facebook images have sparked anger. After three Israeli teens were kidnapped and killed last year, "The Facebook page for Fatah, the Palestinian Authority's main party, had a number of cartoons, including one showing the three teenagers as Jewish rats, wearing yarmulkes, caught on a fishing line," world affairs columnist Frida Ghitis wrote on CNN.com.

Given such sentiments, it is no surprise whatsoever that President Abbas and his Fatah faction have not made any meaningful attempts to reach peace with Israel and later partnered with Hamas. President Abbas and Fatah are part of the problem that has precluded Israeli-Palestinian peace. They are, almost certainly, not part of the solution.

MMC · Jan 2, 2015

donsutherland1 said:
From CNN:

The political party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas posted a drawn image online showing a large pile of skulls and skeletons with Jewish stars on them.

Palestinian party posts, pulls skulls with Jewish stars - CNN.com

Although Fatah later "disavowed" the posting, such a disavowal rings hollow, as this is not the first such incident where similar reprehensible content was posted. For example, the above article reported:

It's not the first time Fatah Facebook images have sparked anger. After three Israeli teens were kidnapped and killed last year, "The Facebook page for Fatah, the Palestinian Authority's main party, had a number of cartoons, including one showing the three teenagers as Jewish rats, wearing yarmulkes, caught on a fishing line," world affairs columnist Frida Ghitis wrote on CNN.com.

Given such sentiments, it is no surprise whatsoever that President Abbas and his Fatah faction have not made any meaningful attempts to reach peace with Israel and later partnered with Hamas. President Abbas and Fatah are part of the problem that has precluded Israeli-Palestinian peace. They are, almost certainly, not part of the solution.

You are calling it correct there DS. :2wave: Moreover Israel shouldn't listen to anything else he has to say. Let the Palestinians run to the Hague and then let them discover why they will pay the price.

Would you say there is a feeling that things are going to amp up here? What if ISIS decides that the Palestinians are easy Prey. Like most others know them to be?

Apocalypse · Jan 2, 2015

Charming.

X Factor · Jan 2, 2015

Interesting quote from the article;

Fatah is considered the more moderate of the two major Palestinian political parties. Hamas, which controls Gaza, has engaged in repeated battles with Israel in recent years. Fatah controls the West Bank.

("Fatah may not be moderate, but relative to Hamas, it is restrained," Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute said in congressional testimony in 2013.)

So because Fatah may not be quite as out there as Hamas, Isreal should do what exactly? Embrace it?

Hyena · Jan 3, 2015

Who needs extremists when you have these moderates? :roll:

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

This is hardly news and a poor attempt of discrediting the PA for the sake of it. Here is an example of a group of terrorists celebrating the anniversary of the fact
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1524552/Israel-celebrates-Irgun-hotel-bombers.html

Apocalypse · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
This is hardly news and a poor attempt of discrediting the PA for the sake of it. Here is an example of a group of terrorists celebrating the anniversary of the fact
Israel celebrates Irgun hotel bombers - Telegraph

From your article:

This week, former Irgun fighters and current Right-wing politicians unveiled the plaque at the hotel, which read: "The hotel housed the Mandate Secretariat as well as the Army Headquarters. On July 22, 1946, Irgun fighters at the order of the Hebrew Resistance Movement planted explosives in the basement. Warning phone calls had been made urging the hotel's occupants to leave immediately. For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated and after 25 minutes the bombs exploded, and to the Irgun's regret and dismay 91 persons were killed."

Quite the celebration it is, having regret over the deaths and the Brit's unwillingness to evacuate the hotel after being warned three times.
You do realize that many Jewish civilians have also been killed in this incident right? And that the hotel was an HQ for British troops hence the biggest military target in the area?
This isn't a celebration what you brought up, it is simply a quick description of an historic event.

But let's not stop you from spreading empty propaganda in an attempt to divert attention and cover up for the joy of the bloodthirsty Fatah members over the murder of Jewish innocents, eh? Carry on doing good work fighting the good fight - the Jew-targeting terrorism fight.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

I was carrying out the good work of Jew targeting terrorism ? by mentioning a historical act of celebrating terrorism to perhaps put this ridiculous thread In context ? I think your reaction is a bit harsh, thought this was a discussion forum, not a practice range for law students.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

I appreciate your quote but you left the bottom section for the rest of the public to see. Why do such a blatant thing?

But Israel's celebration of its "freedom fighters" remains highly controversial at a time when it continues to pound Palestinian "terrorists".
Tzipi Livni, Israel's foreign minister, has found herself deeply embroiled in the debate - her father, Eitan, was Irgun's chief operations officer.
Simon Macdonald, the British ambassador to Israel, and consul general John Jenkins, wrote to the mayor of Jerusalem protesting at the plaque. "We don't think it's right for an act of terrorism to be commemorated," their letter read.
The embassy said: "There is no credible evidence that any warning reached the British authorities." The plaque has subsequently been amended, dropping the implication that Britain ignored any warnings.

spud_meister · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
This is hardly news and a poor attempt of discrediting the PA for the sake of it.

You're saying it's acceptable for Fatah to advocate killing Jews?

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

spud_meister said:
You're saying it's acceptable for Fatah to advocate killing Jews?

Did you read the article?

"Fatah did not design this image," Mahmoud al-Aloul said. The person who posted it to Fatah's page "is currently being asked to remove it. The image and the text do not reflect the opinions of Fatah." The image was then pulled from the page.

Are you saying I am a Fatah spokesman? Point is this is not news and a trivial argument.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

spud_meister said:
You're saying it's acceptable for Fatah to advocate killing Jews?

For you to suggest that I am saying that it is acceptable for Fatah to kill Jews is either an issue with your reading comprehensive skills or an ad hominem attack.

Apocalypse · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
For you to suggest that I am saying that it is acceptable for Fatah to kill Jews is either an issue with your reading comprehensive skills or an ad hominem attack.

Or, or.... wait for it... it's because you've implied so by defending the piece in the OP.
Just a thought there.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

Are you saying either with you or against you?

joG · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
I appreciate your quote but you left the bottom section for the rest of the public to see. Why do such a blatant thing?

But Israel's celebration of its "freedom fighters" remains highly controversial at a time when it continues to pound Palestinian "terrorists".
Tzipi Livni, Israel's foreign minister, has found herself deeply embroiled in the debate - her father, Eitan, was Irgun's chief operations officer.
Simon Macdonald, the British ambassador to Israel, and consul general John Jenkins, wrote to the mayor of Jerusalem protesting at the plaque. "We don't think it's right for an act of terrorism to be commemorated," their letter read.
The embassy said: "There is no credible evidence that any warning reached the British authorities." The plaque has subsequently been amended, dropping the implication that Britain ignored any warnings.

When the Israeli fought back then, the region was a mess, with security up in the air. They were fighting a colonial power for freedom in what was, if I remember correctly a rather poor, underdeveloped and sparsely inhabited area of near desert. What was bad about taking the area and developing it?

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

joG said:
When the Israeli fought back then, the region was a mess, with security up in the air. They were fighting a colonial power for freedom in what was, if I remember correctly a rather poor, underdeveloped and sparsely inhabited area of near desert. What was bad about taking the area and developing it?

What was bad about using terrorist activities to bomb the occupying force? Are you defending terrorism?

joG · Jan 3, 2015

spud_meister said:
You're saying it's acceptable for Fatah to advocate killing Jews?

It's not very nice of them and will lend credibility to the Israeli defense in The Hague. After all, everything the Israeli have done falls under self protection except the settlements. They might not be such a good idea. But I am still undecided on that.

joG · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
What was bad about using terrorist activities to bomb the occupying force? Are you defending terrorism?

It is like any instrument. It is not the instrument but the cause. Get real.

joG · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
Are you saying either with you or against you?

In many cases that is the very real question that, if one forgets it, will cost your life.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

joG said:
In many cases that is the very real question that, if one forgets it, will cost your life.

If you think that you have to entirely agree or you are an enemy, then where is freedom? You have been scared in to consent at all costs. I hope you take the opportunity to reflect on this and look at other opinions. It will give you a better understanding of how you can defend your interests

Serenity · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
Did you read the article?

"Fatah did not design this image," Mahmoud al-Aloul said. The person who posted it to Fatah's page "is currently being asked to remove it. The image and the text do not reflect the opinions of Fatah." The image was then pulled from the page.

That picture is beyond disgusting. Irrespective of who posted it it was posted on their page by someone. If Fatah don't have control over what's being posted in their name on their Official FB site then they need to close it down or at the very least find some Administrators who are prepared to do their job properly.

I've never had the desire to check it out before but i had a look at their facebook page as a result of this article. I wasn't impressed, too much propoganda for my liking.

joG · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
If you think that you have to entirely agree or you are an enemy, then where is freedom? You have been scared in to consent at all costs. I hope you take the opportunity to reflect on this and look at other opinions. It will give you a better understanding of how you can defend your interests

Other opinions are a way of life and fun. But there are the binary questions around with freedom only for the survivors. In Palestine this has been the case for some time.

spud_meister · Jan 3, 2015

Common_good said:
Did you read the article?

"Fatah did not design this image," Mahmoud al-Aloul said. The person who posted it to Fatah's page "is currently being asked to remove it. The image and the text do not reflect the opinions of Fatah." The image was then pulled from the page.

Are you saying I am a Fatah spokesman? Point is this is not news and a trivial argument.

Fatah has control of their own Facebook page, one would hope, by allowing the image to remain up for over 17 hours, they gave it their support.

Common_good said:
For you to suggest that I am saying that it is acceptable for Fatah to kill Jews is either an issue with your reading comprehensive skills or an ad hominem attack.

You simply dismissed it without condemnation and then tried to change the subject. :shrug: Action speak louder than words.

Common_good · Jan 3, 2015

spud_meister said:
Fatah has control of their own Facebook page, one would hope, by allowing the image to remain up for over 17 hours, they gave it their support.

You simply dismissed it without condemnation and then tried to change the subject. :shrug: Action speak louder than words.

I had two conversations going on so did not respond. The cartoon is distasteful, which I condemn, and does not serve the benefit of anyone. Neither does using it as an example to dismiss all peace efforts as was stated in the original post. My point is that this is not news and the whole thread is based on using a selected observation to argue a wider point.

alexa · Jan 3, 2015

joG said:
if I remember correctly a rather poor, underdeveloped and sparsely inhabited area of near desert. What was bad about taking the area and developing it?

Certainly poor as was most of the world. However you are wrong on sparsely inhabited, again by how populated places were then and also the desert idea.

Dealing with the idea you put of sparsely populated which I imagine came as your desert idea from the phrase of a land without a people for a people without a land.

The earliest published use of the phrase appears to have been by Church of Scotland clergyman Alexander Keith in his 1843 book The Land of Israel According to the Covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.[6] Keith was an influential evangelical thinker whose most popular work, Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion Derived from the Literal Fulfillment of Prophecy,[7] remains in print almost two centuries after it was first published. As an advocate of the idea that Christians should work to encourage the biblical prophecy of a Jewish return to the land of Israel, he wrote that the Jews are "a people without a country; even as their own land, as subsequently to be shown, is in a great measure a country without a people."[8] Keith was aware that the Holy Land was populated because he had traveled to Palestine in 1839 on behalf of the Church of Scotland and returned five years later with his son, George Skene Keith, believed to be the first photographer to visit to the Holy Land.

In July 1853, British statesman and social reformer Lord Shaftesbury wrote to Foreign Minister George Hamilton Gordon, Lord Palmerston, that Greater Syria was "a country without a nation" in need of "a nation without a country… Is there such a thing? To be sure there is: the ancient and rightful lords of the soil, the Jews!"[9] Shaftesbury elaborated in his diary that these "vast and fertile regions will soon be without a ruler, without a known and acknowledged power to claim dominion. The territory must be assigned to some one or other. There is a country without a nation; and God now in his wisdom and mercy, directs us to a nation without a country."[10] A subsequent Shaftesbury biography sold well and exposed a wider audience to the phrase.[11]

"A Land without a People for a People without a Land" :: Middle East Quarterly

The Church of Scotland in it's pamphlet The Inheritance of Abraham in 2013 accepts it may have been him and discloses what was meant by that.

The mores of the colonial and imperial age pervaded all aspects of life, including the Church of Scotland. It may well have been a Kirk minister, the Rev Alexander Keith, who coined the phrase “a land without people, for a people without land.” This view of the land of Palestine was linked from the 1840s to a literalistic view of Hebrew Bible prophecy being fulfilled and the widely held attitude that European colonialism meant that a land was ‘empty’ if western power and culture was not present. This attitude, repugnant to our thinking today, was widely accepted. It was taken up by the 7thEarl of Shaftesbury’s evangelical circle with dreams of restoring the Jewish people to the Holy Land. This
in turn led to the Balfour Declaration of 1917, wen the British Government agreed to a policy of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Interestingly, some Jewish leaders, like Ahad Ha’Am (active at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the
20thcenturies) resisted this literalist view, and recognised the need for Zionist Jews moving to Palestine to treat the indigenous Palestinians with respect and good judgement

http://www.sizers.org/inheritanceofabraham.pdf

As far as barren – well this account says the areas which were barren then still are.

Isn't it true that Palestine was destitute until Israelis made its desert bloom? - Palestine Remembered

Have a good day

Palestinian party posts, pulls image of skulls with Jewish stars

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Anti-Socialist

Active member

Member

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Member

Member

Veni, vidi, dormivi!

Member

Member

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

Member

Member

Member

Stay Human

Veni, vidi, dormivi!

Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency