Studies in Demopathy: Inside the Haifa U. Muslim Apartheid Speech

I have often written here about the problem of demopaths” — people who have no respect for the human rights of others, but complain bitterly about others not respecting their human rights. Recently a the head of the radical Islamic Movement‘s northern branch spoke at Haifa University at the bequest of the Muslim students there.

saed
Sheikh Raed Salah, the leader of the Islamic Movement’s northern branch.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski

In order to prevent violence, Jewish students were excluded from the talk.

One student, however, slipped in unnoticed and reported back to the rest of the world. With his permission, I post his remarks. (HT: Steve Antler)

A Case for Democracy
Nir Meital

One of my father’s favorite jokes is the following. A man is driving down highway number one, when his wife calls and says in great concern, “darling, the news channel has reported that there is a crazy maniac driving in the wrong direction on highway One!” The man laughs and answers, “One maniac? I see at least a hundred!”

Listening to the ongoing criticism about Israel, I sometimes feel like the man on highway number one. While attempting to drive with its fellow nations down the road leading west, all Israel can see looking out the window in its warm and humid middleastern highway, is the license plates of countries racing by, turning their backs on every western value imaginable, and honking their horn towards the one country that at present time rejects the tendency in the Middle East to shoot protestors to death on the street or insist that women travel with a male guardian.

Sheikh Raed Salah, leader of the Islamic movement’s extreme northern branch spoke at the University of Haifa today, and toyed with this rather worn out mantra. The University that has learned its lesson from previous Jewish-Arab riots has raised concerns for the safety and peace of its students, and thus decided to separate the two camps. I must note that after witnessing the heated spirits on both sides, I found myself grateful for this rather superficial and seemingly absurd separation.

The result of the separation was the following. A large corridor filled with members of every political group from within the Jewish student body, waving flags, pounding on the floor and making every effort to disturb the speakers in the downstairs hall. One protestor told me, that if Salah has achieved one good thing in his speech, it was the momentary “shalom Bait”, peace and unity, between the Jews. Any other day, this student body would be divided into camps and parties identifying with Yisrael Beitenu to Chadash, and anything in between. Today they stood united. Amazing how far a slight delegitimization of one’s right to sovereignty can go.

To get into the assembly hall, where no seat has been left empty in light of this festive occasion, one had to merely prove that he’s, well, Arab. Guards and security companies funded by the University physically stopped Jewish students from approaching the doors, creating a human shield around the Sheikh who then had the luxury of calmly condemning the undemocratic violation of his freedom of speech by this academic institution, a representative of the mouth-shutting, minority-oppressing, human-right abusing, State of Israel.

After standing amongst my fellow students, all wishing to be a fly on the wall of the large Zefadia assembly hall, I decided to muster every bit of persuasion and deceit I had in me, and sneak into one of the chairs in the back of the room. And there I was, the only Jewish fly on the wall during Raed Salah’s speech.

First spoke the leader of the IQRAA student organization affiliate with the Islamic movement. As soon as the Allahu Akbar chants died down, he yelled into the microphone, that this is a time that calls for courage and strength. “The University of Haifa does everything in its power to pose obstacles and hardships on the Arab student, from the moment of enrollment and at every stage until graduation.”

The kosher fly that I am, I was rather curious to hear these remarks. Since I know for a fact that the audience consists of Arab students who received a podium and microphone in one of the largest assembly halls the University has to offer, who are protected by several security companies while skillfully bashing the institute that provides them, who quite often receive full scholarships and free dormitories, who are (rightfully) entitled to an additional thirty minutes after my time is up in every exam, I was very curious to discover that the appropriate reaction to this remark was to clap in unity and end with a spontaneous reciting of praise to Allah.

It’s not clear whether Nir is being intentionally naïve here, or he really was surprised. What he witnessed with the insatiable appetite for “rights” that demopaths possess. “Rights,” even affirmative action rights — the extra 30 minutes in the exam — are not enough. Rights are based on the principles of equity. These Islamists and their audience want dominion. So you cannot expect appreciation for what a democratic state offers them. Rather, they’ll usurp your language of rights and complain that theirs — not yours — are still being violated.

Not allowing me a spare moment to contemplate, Sheikh Raed Salah rose to the podium, and the hundred and fifty students, rose in turn, loudly chanting the popular chorus, “Allah is great, Praise Allah.” Though I am willing to agree that Allah seems pretty great and deserves to be praised, I found very less matters in common with the Sheikh after hearing him speak. “The Israeli courts harass the Arab population, and abuse the Arabs rights,” he said. I cannot say that this is a very original remark, but I did find it curious since Raid Salah’s speach was actually approved by the University as a result of the legal advisor’s statement, that if the University won’t allow the speech, it will have to deal with a court order awarding Raid Salah this right. Apparently, neither that nor the presence of an Arab judge in the Israeli Supreme Court, a body that regularly emphasizes the constitutional importance of the freedom of political speech, have fooled Sheikh Raed.

He went on to stating the goals of the Islamic movement, describing each one in a very tangible way. A celebration with five million Palestinian refugees, an Arabic Haifa, Jaffa and Ramle, Arabic control of Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and the seemingly optimistic and universal prayer, “we all love life and wish to live a happy life”. Unfortunately, every statement of the movement’s mission ended with a rather bitter taste, at least in this fly’s mouth, since his Holiness always insisted that these will be his objectives and goals from now and until Doomsday, and if these are not achieved he (we- the audience) will be happy laying in a cemetery underground.

I find it interesting that he spoke of “loving life and wishing to live a happy life,” since that’s precisely a despised Jewish value that radical Islamists have contempt for:

    Chief Palestinian Authority cleric Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri stated, “We tell them, in as much as you love life, the Muslim loves death and martyrdom. There is a great difference between he who loves the hereafter and he who loves this world. The Muslim loves death and [strives for] martyrdom.” Saudi Sheikh Abd Al-Muhsin Al-Qassem in Al-Madina added: “The Jews preached permissiveness and corruption, as they hid behind false slogans like freedom and equality, humanism and brotherhood… They are cowards in battle… they flee from death and fear fighting… They love life.”

So my guess is that the good Sheikh is either worried about what the “outsiders” will say, or he’s pitching to an audience of already partially Westernized Arab-Israeli students. How many of them understood the inversion and how many were dupes of the demopath?

Indeed — and here’s a question I pose to all the Arab students at Haifa — how many of you understand that Israel treats you commoners better than any Arab country including some putative Palestinian state, and that when you join in the cheers about Allahu akhbar, you are enjoying the short-term rush of honor-shame asabiyya — sense of Muslim solidarity around the prospect of conquest — at the cost of your long-term well-being?

Or is the thrill of planning the destruction of your hosts right under their own noses — after all, the reason that the room was all-Muslim was because of the fear of violence (from Muslims) — just too delightful to pass up?

And so, as popular as it is to point the anti-democratic finger towards Israel, I feel examples like Sheikh Raed Salah can shed a small light on the only functioning democracy in the Middle East. Israel deals with its complexities, not by building more gallows in town squares for homosexuals to hang by (Iran, Saudi Arabia), outlawing political assembly (Libya, Palestinian Authority, Syria) or allowing the abuse of religious freedoms (Egypt, Iran, Iraq), but by allowing every voice to be heard, even that of Sheikh Raed Salah.

It sounds nice, but on one level this performance is a perfect example of Israel’s democracy rushing to its own destruction, like the rest of the crazy drivers in the parable.

  • a legal advisor who interprets the law of civil rights in the strictest terms, to the disadvantage of the upholders of civil rights and the advantage of those who abuse them
  • an administration that – to their later regret – allows the meeting to take place by excluding the Jewish students, who more than anyone need to know just what their fellow Arab students are up to,
  • on the basis of a threat of violence the responsibility for which should have fallen on the shoulders of the Muslim student organization,
  • and a gathering of enemies, known for spouting paranoid lethal narratives — the Jews are tunneling under the Dome of the Rock to destroy it, blood libels, IDF soldiers with honors made from the skulls of martyrs — and cheering to the same cries that ushered from the lips of suicide terrorists as they blew themselves up…

… this does not strike me as a recipe for a long-lived democracy. Rather, it seems like the process whereby a democracy commits suicide by following the road of self-destructive righteousness. Maybe those secular Israeli progressives have a thing or two to learn from the rabbis about the limits to self-negation.

To the Israelis: If you are not for yourselves, who will be?
To the Arabs: If you are only for yourselves, what are you?
If not now, when?

Update: MKs admonish Haifa U. over Salah speech

66 Responses to Studies in Demopathy: Inside the Haifa U. Muslim Apartheid Speech

  1. [...] Excerpt from:  Augean Stables » Studies in Demopathy: Inside the Haifa U. Muslim … [...]

  2. Joanne says:

    Ye Gads! How many Western democracies would tolerate groups calling openly for the overthrow of their political systems and the displacement of their populations?!

  3. oao says:

    not to mention excluding their own citizens from it?

  4. RfaelMoshe says:

    Its just another cultural difference that Western people don’t understand. The culture of the Muslim Arab peoples is rather suremicist. It engenders a feeling of natural supremacy over Jews and Christians as dhimmi people, they also demonstrate an arrogant attitude of entitlement. When the early Zionists would not behave like traditonally subservient dhimmis, thats when the Arab hostility began, not as a result of any political aspirations. Similarly, the entire city of Mecca is segregated and restricted to Moslems only. If they ahd their way, the Temple Mount would be similarly segregated.

  5. nelson says:

    Ideally, Israel would have become independent immediately after WW1 because, then, it would have been able to save many or most of the threatened European Jews.

    However, the Jews’ self-determination came exactly when, after the Shoah, they didn’t seem to be anymore threatened elsewhere, but only in the Middle East itself. Thus, for most of the 20th century’s second half, Israel looked more and more as needless (because finally the Jews were safe all around the world, but particularly in Western Europe and North America), even dangerous for the Jews (at least for those who were living there.

    It might have been perfectly natural for most non-nationalistic Jews to ask why should they risk their lives to live in their own country when, with anti-Semitism dead and buried, living elsewhere became a highly attractive choice.

    Now we know that European and even American Judeophobia wasn’t exactly dead: it was changing. For me it is pretty plain that, even for those Jews who wouldn’t like to live there, Israel is the only life-insurance policy they have.

    But not only most American and European Jews ignore that — most Israelis also know very little about contemporary anti-Semitism, its nature and danger. My question is: will enough Jews wake up in time to try and save Israel (and, thus, maybe themselves too)or is it already too late in the day?

    From Obama and such fifth columnists as J-Street to the Europeans and Islamists, most enemies are in a hurry and things are accelerating.

  6. oao says:

    If they ahd their way, the Temple Mount would be similarly segregated.

    they HAD their way and it WAS segregated.

    will enough Jews wake up in time to try and save Israel (and, thus, maybe themselves too)or is it already too late in the day?

    no. the instinctive reaction is to try to convince the goys that they are just like them and integrated and “please accept us”.

  7. oao says:

    remember who told you not to expect much from netanyahu?

    Netanyahu folds under US pressure for pulling out of West Bank towns before peace talks
    http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6152

  8. Al says:

    oao –
    dont be so fast judging bibi.

    reducing idf presence in those towns is an important litmus test. if the palestinian successfully manage their terrorist problem then it lends hope in the long term to a viable two state solution.

    the more likely outcome is that they will fail miserably. in which event, bibi and co. have a better position at the table. also, dont think that just because the IDF isnt patrolling in town there arent a myriad of security measures in place to prevent any terrorists from getting to israeli areas.

  9. Don Cox says:

    The speech should have been made viewable by all the students, using a TV link to big monitors in other halls. Then the immediate audience would have been Arabs, but all of the student body could derive educational benefit from the lecture.

  10. oao says:

    The speech should have been made viewable by all the students, using a TV link to big monitors in other halls.>/i>

    nope.

    when israel complains that the arabs won’t agree to israel being a jewish state, giving a platform to terror inducing inside traitors while keeping the jews out at a jewish university which gives its arab citizens equal education opportunities is suicidal stupidity.

  11. RickD says:

    RL, That should be ‘request.’ Unfortunately it’s not a ‘bequest.’

    That guy driving the wrong way on the highway, I know him. They should take licenses away once alte-cockers reach 70. Or at least give them yearly driving tests ;-)

    In the country that the sheik imagines in his mind there will be no Jews having meetings or discussions or lectures behind closed doors. However, letting him rant and rave behind closed doors in today’s Israel isn’t a threat to Israeli democracy. I don’t see any reason why Jewish students couldn’t be present, but in the scheme of things I doubt that it will be a problem. He could just as well have had his lecture in his Friday prayers and invited the students to visit, if he wanted.

  12. E.G. says:

    oao,

    You were right:
    “If you see how big some of these settlements are, you will understand why the talk about a two-state solution is kalam fadi [nonsense],” commented Iyad Mansour, 55, of the Kalandia refugee camp, who has been working in Ma’aleh Adumim for the past three years.

    “These settlements are growing every day at a very fast pace,” he said. “One day you see empty land, the next day you see new buildings. They are really fast in planning and building. But who knows? Maybe these settlements will one day become homes for Palestinian refugees.”
    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1245924932645&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
    (please excuse me for being a bit O/T/)

  13. oao says:

    of course i was right. otherwise i wouldn’t have said it.

  14. E.G. says:

    oao,

    Evidently obvious ;-)
    The feather on my hat sweeps the floor while I reverently sway it in front of thy eminence.

  15. amyisroelchai says:

    pop quiz time – AUGEAN STABLES style!

    list the top 2-3 errors or distortions in the following article:

    BBC anti-Israel bias is a myth
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/26/bbc-anti-israel-bias

  16. oao says:

    i was joking.

    this was a statement by a prof of mine at — of all places — the u of haifa. he was very conceited, but he had the right — he was visiting, high above the other profs and he is the reason i got into collective choice/public goods theory.

  17. E.G. says:

    OK. Let me restate: you were left. ;-)
    That’s why you shared your obviously correct thoughts!

  18. E.G. says:

    amyisroelchai,

    What distortions? What errors? Der Stürmer has always been a good, comforting read.

  19. oao says:

    you were left. ;-)

    huh?

  20. Diane says:

    A few years ago, I read (in the JPost, I think) about a Jewish man who had scrawled a piece of anti-Arab graffiti (a pig named Mohamed, I think) on a wall somewhere in Israel. As I recall, he was tried and convicted of insulting Islam and/or religious incitement. This was cited as an example of how careful Israel is in not fueling the fire of Arab anger. It struck me as a singularly “undemocratic” practice, given that the reverse – Arab , Arab religious incitement – is the norm.

    On a purely legalistic level, how does a democratic state justify taking away free speech rights from the majority, and granting hate-speech rights to the minority?

  21. oao says:

    On a purely legalistic level, how does a democratic state justify taking away free speech rights from the majority, and granting hate-speech rights to the minority?

    if israel does not accept the concept of a jewish state, how does it except the goys and the genocidal arabs to accept it?

  22. Cynic says:

    On a purely legalistic level, how does a democratic state justify taking away free speech rights from the majority, and granting hate-speech rights to the minority?

    Under the guise of multi-culti diversity as we witness in Britain for example where the Muslims can say what they want to about Jews, but nobody can say anything even slightly disparaging about Muslims.
    I believe that even a joke about a Muslim if overheard by the wrong ears can get one up to 7 years in the slammer.

    In Canada, Mark Steyn quoting a Danish Imam’s words found himself accused of human rights violations.

    There’s nothing democratic. Just pandering to political correctness which is censorship and the first steps on the road to dictatorship.

    The difference in Israel is that they are not pandering to the Muslims but to the West.

  23. E.G. says:

    Either Israel lets Arabs talk and publish, in hope that most hatred is ventilated by verbal expression (rather than acts), or she risks being even more accused of being un-democratic. That’s the name of the game.

  24. oao says:

    Just pandering to political correctness which is censorship and the first steps on the road to dictatorship.

    i am willing to bet that a lot of that is not PC but fear, even if unconsciously couched in pc terms to others and even to themselves.

    The difference in Israel is that they are not pandering to the Muslims but to the West.

    only in part. but then what did the jews do during nazism? they pandered.

  25. oao says:

    Either Israel lets Arabs talk and publish, in hope that most hatred is ventilated by verbal expression (rather than acts), or she risks being even more accused of being un-democratic. That’s the name of the game.

    letting them talk and publish is interpreted as weakness, if not stupidity, and invites acts.

    it’s not entirely clear what’s the price of being accused of undemocracy: did you see iran pay some? it is true that they are not jews, but let them accuse — it’s safer than pandering.

  26. nelson says:

    I’d really like to know what the Arabs (or, at least, many of them) think about the Jews.

    Yes, I know: they hate and despise them, want to kill them all painfully. But we may hate an enemy and still recognize that its army and weapons are good.

    The Palestinians, for instance, know enough about the IDF to be able to foresee that if they shoot from behind school kids, the Israelis won’t massacre the children.

    Doubtlessly they take it as weakness, but what kind of weakness? Not even Hamas is so proud that it wouldn’t use Israeli weapons & ammunition or accept the help of Jewish leftists acting as voluntary human shields for them.

    What do they feel when they realize they have been had, when, for instance, they discover that a trusted member of their cell was actually a Jewish Sephardic spy? Do they feel shame, humiliation, anger? Do they feel dumb? Do they go home and beat up their wives and kids?

    What are they most afraid of? What can scare the …. out of them? How well do most Israelis understand them (Jewish Americans don’t seem to understand the basics about them), and what about the army, the secret services?

  27. E.G. says:

    letting them talk and publish is interpreted as weakness, if not stupidity, and invites acts.

    That’s one part of the demopathy game.

  28. E.G. says:

    Here’s what Israel’s former Supreme Court president thinks (and gets praised for, though not unanimously)):
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1096064.html

  29. Eliyahu says:

    Nelson, Israel has and has had many agents among the Arabs who were Arabs. This goes back to the 1930s, at least. So Israel had an agent or two among Arafat’s close circle. In Lebanon, Israel has had agents among high army officers. Unfortunately, many of these agents have been caught lately because of advanced counter-espionage technology supplied by the US to the Lebanese army. I only wish the US would support the principle of a Lebanon independent of Syria. The US has not been clearly on the side of an independent Lebanon since Kissinger approved of Syrian intervention there in the 1970s.

    Paradoxically, it was Jacques Chirac, I believe, who was most responsible –after the mass of Lebanese March 14 demonstrators– for getting the Syrian army out of Lebanon. Geo Bush II joined Chirac in the demand for Syria to get out but this was only after Chirac had symbolically left him no choice. And Chirac was not acting out of political principle so much but out of his personal friendship for and monetary attachment to billionaire Rafiq Hariri. With Obama of course the US has moved back to the old school State Dept policy of having Syria take over Lebanon, thus promoting militant Islam [I'm aware that the Assads are Alawis, viewed as Islamic heretics].

    The fact that the US and France and, I suppose, the UK reluctantly tagging along in the rear, were able to get Syria out of Lebanon in 2005 means to me that they could have done it much earlier, maybe like 1989 when Syria was bombarding Lebanese targets [esp. Gen'l Aoun, then anti-Syrian]. But then the Powers clearly wanted Syria to control Lebanon, James baker going so far as to demand that Israel stop providing air cover to Aoun.

    obama is a danger, inter alia, because he represents a very drastic return to the old State Dept Middle Eastern policy, which was to promote aggressive Arab & Islamic states/dictators/movements. Now, obama wants to make nice with the Iranian ayatollahs –the Iranian masses be damned– and subdue Israel for the sake of Abu Mazen and Hamas [yes, hamas!] and promote the Muslim Brotherhood in the name of — democracy, of all things.

    Nelson, Israel also had agents among the Arabs who came from Arabs countries and/or were native speakers of Arabic. But often the ones who were Arabs were more valuable.

    Diane, I believe you’re thinking of a young woman named Tatiana Soskin, who drew a caricature on a wall in Hebron of Muhammad as a pig, considered an unclean beast in Islam as well as Judaism. She was not deemed worthy of the freedom of expression or of speech and was sent to jail for a year or two.

  30. oao says:

    But we may hate an enemy and still recognize that its army and weapons are good.

    they do. that’s why they rely on the world to defeat israel, including pressure, money and weapons.

    Doubtlessly they take it as weakness, but what kind of weakness? Not even Hamas is so proud that it wouldn’t use Israeli weapons & ammunition or accept the help of Jewish leftists acting as voluntary human shields for them.

    weakness in the sense that they don’t fight ruthlessly to win, which is what arabs respect. that’s about the main factor that keeps arab dictators in place. the minute they hesitate to be ruthless they’re gone.

    Do they feel shame, humiliation, anger? Do they feel dumb? Do they go home and beat up their wives and kids?

    probably. but they likely fall back on islam which tells them that joos are satanic and shrewd and therefore it’s hard to win, but allah will provide.

  31. oao says:

    if it works in israel, why not in the US?

    Obama’s ‘Outreach to Muslims’ Prompts Mass Koran Distribution
    An American Arab group, buoyed by Obama’s “outreach to Muslims” will hand out 100,000 Korans to “educate” local, state and national officials.
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132112

  32. oao says:

    looks like there is evidence to support my claim:

    Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465013058/littlegreenfo-20

  33. E.G. says:

    oao,

    I guessed you’d be enthusiastic about the book but please read it first. And don’t hesitate to recommend it too.

  34. oao says:

    i have lived with this problem for more than 30 years.
    i left academia because itself it became unscientific.
    what will this book tell me that i dk?

  35. E.G. says:

    oao,

    My years in and out of academia taught me that titles are too often misleading.

  36. oao says:

    My years in and out of academia taught me that titles are too often misleading.

    true.

    but i have overwhelming evidence that my claim is correct, so the only reason i mention such sources is to demonstrate that I am not alone in the claim.

    now, either the book is consistent with its title or it is not. if yes, it tells ME nothing i dk; if no, then it’s highly questionable and the sheer gap between the title and content indicates that.

  37. E.G. says:

    oao,

    You’re not alone.
    Still, before putting another chickpea ball in the Pitta, better check it’s Fallafel and not Ersatz.

  38. oao says:

    Still, before putting another chickpea ball in the Pitta, better check it’s Fallafel and not Ersatz.

    that is something i used to do before my hair turned white. i’ve learned to use the little time i’ve got left more productively since.

  39. oao says:

    http://sandbox.blog-city.com/linkblog/jump/?i=510946

    tells you most of what you need to know about us academia and education.

    if this happens at a univ which used to be one of the best, imagine what happens to lesser ones.

  40. oao says:

    http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/947/The-First-Alienated-President-of-the-United-States.aspx

    i agree. but this does not negate cluelessness. it takes a lot of that to be with castro and chavez.

  41. Cynic says:

    oao,

    Many years ago I bought Carl Sagan’s The Demon Haunted World – Science as a Candle in the Dark for my son and even now we discuss it within the current context.

    Sad to say but the current generation is ripe for ripping off by the snake oil salesmen.

  42. oao says:

    Sad to say but the current generation is ripe for ripping off by the snake oil salesmen.

    the alibama election (and even bush’s and clinton and reagan’s) is due to the current generation.

  43. oao says:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/07/023937.php

    it’s supporting my argument that democracy has a built-in mechanism for self-destruction over time.

    where he is wrong, however, is in failure to see that even if huge inequalities are productivity based–which is certainly not true of current reality–they can still destroy democracy and freedom. indeed, those are an integral part of the destruction mechanism. so even if there were no inherent propensities in the political elites for control, the economic elites would do their part.

    as it is, they work together.

    i would call it the democratic/freedom dilemma and i don’t think there is a solution to it.

  44. oao says:

    and this:

    http://www.michaelshermer.com/2009/06/baloney-detection-kit/

    are ignorant, uneducated people aware of these questions? can they tell what is scientific and what is not?

  45. oao says:

    without solution, but a de-facto reality:

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/026795.php

  46. Eliyahu says:

    my argument that democracy has a built-in mechanism for self-destruction over time

    oao, I’m glad that you share this insight with us.
    Thanx

    But would you please, when you have a moment free on your crowded schedule, give some credit for priority in having this thought to an old, dead white feller who made that argument in a now forgotten book? It used to be called The Republic. His name was Silverplate or Hotplate or Plato [the name sounds rather jazzy, I know] or some such [אפלטון בעברית ]. All the same, he ought to be remembered for describing how democracy could turn into tyranny. And he didn’t even have the benefit of computers or game theory or behavioralism or Realism in the manner of walt&mearsheimer.

  47. oao says:

    well, 1st, i hope you did not think i was claiming it for myself.

    2nd, it must have been argued before because it is rather obvious and there is historical evidence for it: greece, rome, france in a way, germany, now the US. in fact, is there any case of a democracy which has NOT collapsed, given enough time?

  48. Cynic says:

    oao,

    The link in #51 shows just how blind the writer is to the behaviour of the UN and the International Community (what an oxymoron) given the goings on from Johnson and Wilson in the 60s to Lebanon, UNIFILth etc.

    The Israeli situation appears eerily like the one confronted by the British mandatory authorities after the Second World War. In 1947, following decades of trying and failing to find a compromise between Jews and Arabs, the British announced their imminent withdrawal and informed the UN that Palestine was now its problem.

    The British from after WW1 created their own problem with their dishonesty in handling the mandate along with the remains of the Ottoman Empire.

    Israel might do the same. It could tell the UN that it will be “consolidating” its settlements and retreating behind the separation wall (declaring it an armistice line and not a legal border).

    This is laughable given the International Community’s reaction to the 1967 lines which were the 1949 Armistice lines. The 67 border was not the legal international border.

    the United States would lead the Security Council to authorize a Chapter VII operation, working closely with the Palestinian Authority (thus giving the moderates considerable legitimacy), replacing the Israelis forces as they withdrew from the territories,

    Like the US, under Tenet, worked closely with Arafat’s thugs? Twice, once during Clinton’s admin and then again during GWB’s term.

    Can see UNIFIL type UN controlling rocket and mortar fire from the hills surrounding Ben Gurion airport, Tel Aviv etc. Yes. Just like the weapons build up in southern Lebanon under UNIFIL. Maybe the UN troops, ala UNIFILth will even supply a vehicle or two for cross border raids and kidnappings?

    Although we did not meet a representative sample of Palestinians or Israelis,

    What HolyLand Hotel guests and staff and taxi drivers?

  49. oao says:

    The link in #51 shows just how blind the writer is to the behaviour of the UN and the International Community (what an oxymoron) given the goings on from Johnson and Wilson in the 60s to Lebanon, UNIFILth etc.

    most people live with a picture of the ideal behind the creation of the UN and not with the reality of what the UN is. it is not very dissimilar to those who deem the govt some ideal entity to protect people, rather than a bunch of self-interested people which are nothing but also part of the same society it is supposed to protect.
    when you have such gaps between ideal and reality you spew nonsense.

    you have to consider the effect of the lack of a solution to the conflict: people flail around desperately trying to find some thing which does not exist and cannot accept that they can’t.

  50. oao says:

    Is a crushed Israel in America’s best interest?
    By Ari Shavit
    http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1097244.html

  51. oao says:

    It’s Official: “The JOOOOOS Killed Michael Jackson!”
    http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2009/07/its_official_th_1.html

  52. oao says:

    just fyi, which does not surprise me one bit:

    What happened to the “oral understandings” on settlements?
    http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/rosner/entry/what_happened_to_the_oral

  53. oao says:

    religion is religion is religion:

    Shoah victims – reincarnated sinners’
    Ovadia Yosef says calamities people of Israel suffer are punishments for previous generations’ sins.
    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443718416&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>