Poll: 75% of Palestinians support Haifa restaurant attack

[drdon326]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1066287147759

75% of Palestinians support the suicide bombing of the Maxim restaurant in Haifa in which 23 people were killed.

snip


The poll found that the popularity of PA Chairman Yasser Arafat has shapely increased from 35% last June to 50% in October, mainly due to Israeli threats against him, yet 82% believes the PA is corrupt.90% support internal and external calls for extensive political reforms. 89% of those polled thought Arafat's sudden increase in popularity was due to Israeli threats to kill or deport him. His popularity is at the highest in five years.

.....................................................

75% support the murder of innocents people eating in a
restaurant??

I find that hard to believe.

[bluesoul]

1. hmm

That is indeed troubling if it is true (I would though like to see the original source who made the poll and how representative it actually is), but tell me how much of the Israelis support the occupation, illegal settlements, IDF's killings and destruction. How many of them support Sharon and his policy?

[drdon326]

2. From the article..

"poll released by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in Ramallah."

"The center, headed by Khlail Shkaki, conducted the poll between October 7th-14th October 2003 in the Palestinian areas It has a 3% margin of error."

[bluesoul]

3. ok

Aha, ok thanks. It looks like it's credible enough, considering the rest of the results of the poll...

[drdon326]

5. So....

what do you make of the fact that "75%" support the

murder of 23 people eating in a restaurant ??

[bluesoul]

6. Well

Well as I said already, i find it troubling, but this does put the the whole thing into another perspective:

(85%) want a mutual ceasefire, according to a new opinion poll released by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in Ramallah.

Hmm...one negates the other

[Aidoneus]

8. I'd have to see the reasons given before reacting

if it was "ooh, blood!" I'd feel a bit sick, but I suspect it was the "right back'atcha" syndrome, which is reciprocal.

[rini]

4. As Americans we are

so naive. In most of the world corruption is expected and so is not an issue. Troubling is the cult of violence the weasel has nurtured. That will be his legacy, father of terror and murder.

[Aidoneus]

9. ok, I'll bite

if Arafat is the Source of All Evil(TM), explain the fidais of the 50s..

[Aidoneus]

88. ??

.

[teryang]

7. I don't find it hard to believe at all

It's a well known characteristic of human nature (as despicable as we may find it) to exact reprisals for violent acts.

[Cassandra]

61. So when Israelis fight back...

be it as self-defense or in reprisal, you have no particular problem with that, human nature being what it is.
There are some on this board, which may or may not include you, who think that Israelis are supposed to be able to transcend human nature in some way that other people can't and that if they can't live up to that standard, they have failed miserably and irredeemably.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[teryang]

84. Reprisals are a crime against humanity

If I were a combatant, I would stick to targeting capital infrastructure and military targets, rather than targets like restaurants and residential neighborhoods which the unacceptable targets the parties favor respectively.

The Israeli side also regularly violates restrictions on proportionality, using bombers to get one criminal, while the Palestinian organizations which are in some cases little more than proxies for countries with interests in the region, illegally murder civilians on a regular basis. This in my opinion has no effect on Israel other than to reinforce its exploitation by cynical parties who feed of the increased resolve of its people. Believe it or not, people who are not in leadership positions are not really a significant target in terms of armed conflict. The bombings are therefore purposeless except to feed the fires of revenge and reprisal.

I'm not really interested in the value laden recriminations, this is how I was trained to view it. It is the unnecessary provocations and the reprisals that mystify me because the consequences are so easily foreseen. Laws against reprisal are based on common sense and self interest but that went out the window a long time ago in this region. Some people just want to keep fanning the flames.

[bemildred]

81. Yep.

What would be surprising would be if they did not approve.
I know that drives the proponents of either side nuts, but
that's the way people are, you kill them, they like to see
you die too. One can see the same dynamic on both sides.
Bloodthirst is as human as can be.

The expectation that this sort of thing will lead to a sudden
epiphany of peace and submission, by either side, is ludicrous.
The Hutsi and the Tutsi still hate each other, and they will still
try to kill each other, given a clear shot.

What really makes me want to puke here is watching the political
leadership on BOTH sides exploit this predictable hatred for
their own ends.

[drewb]

10. In the new rules I don't think we are supposed to post polls.

This article is based on a poll???

DrDon, you are such a rule breaker!

[Muddleoftheroad]

11. I think that means

That we can't post DU polls.

As for the article and the responses. Neither surprises me. We here a lot of explanations about why the Palestinian people or their government or the terrorists do X, Y or Z. But the reality is that many support the terror. That's the only way it could survive and flourish as it has done.

Until that changes, Israel should finish the wall and finish all dealings with the Palestinians except to retaliate after a terror attack. No commerce, no jobs, no travel, no diplomacy.

[Darranar]

13. You don't udnerstand them...

and hence, you fail.

You and rini and the rest assume that this is because of propaganda. You overestimate propaganda's effect on people. The only way to make people desperate enough to support something like this is through oppresssing them, killing them, or making them suffer - or making it seem like you do.

That's exactly what the Israelis are doing. Your solution will stop all those things permanently.

[Muddleoftheroad]

14. I understand damn well

I understand a bomb on a bus. I understand a murderer who sneaks in and kills women and children. I understand attacks on pizza places.

No, I don't assume it's because of propaganda. It's a lot because of leadership. Arafat and the rest of the Arab world leadership have used this conflict for their own personal and political gain. Most Arab leaders don't want this settled. They use it like the Romans used bread and circuses. They want their populations angry at Israel instead of angry at them.

But that doesn't excuse the average Palestinian for not standing up and being counted.

My solution is to simply say that the Palestinians can't be dealt with, not now, not until enough of them are ready for peace. Until then, wall them off and let them live on their own away from Israel. Any Palestinian coming into Israel would then be treated as a terrorist and dealt with in that manner.

Maybe one day, when corrupt boy Arafat dies somebody who cares about peace will take over there and actually promise to stop terrorism. Then they can talk.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. Again you ignore the blatantly obvious fact...

That Israel, especially under its current leadership of corrupt boy Sharon, isn't interested in peace, so who do you suggest the Palestinians talk to?

I wish you'd try to give the whole issue of why an oppressed people would support things that those of us sitting in our comfortable lives in our wealthy, affluent nations find abhorrent at least a bit of thought...

You understand bus bombings etc? What do you mean by that? Do you understand children being shot at and killed by troops when they're out playing or riding their bikes?


Violet...

[Muddleoftheroad]

19. Peace

Egypt and Israel found peace. Jordan and Israel found peace.

The Palestinians have NEVER offered peace. Peace means an end to fighting. That means an end to terrorism. Until the Palestinians show they can and will end that, there can be no peace.

So, instead, I simply advocate cutting off all interactions except actions against terrorists. That means, build the wall and generally stay on the Israel side of it.

How can you object to that?

[bluesoul]

22. Lies

"The Palestinians have NEVER offered peace!"

That is a lie! Or else one could say Israel NEVER offered peace and it would be just as true as what you said. Sharon "Man of peace" indeed...

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. Peace by definition means a lack of fighting

Yet that never gets offered.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Peace?

The Palestinians have offered peace before. What are you talking about, Muddle?

What Israel side of the wall? As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, the wall is cutting deep into Palestinian territory. Or do you think the West Bank is part of Israel?

Violet...

[Muddleoftheroad]

25. Peace

Peace means no more terror, not just an agreement.

The wall is where the wall is. Israel should finish it and stay on one side and make sure the Palestinians stay on the other. If the Palestinians dislike this plan, they should negotiate a peace.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Okay, so you believe in peace on Israel's terms...

As long as there's no more terror, that's peace? Bullshit. I believe in a peace that's fair to both Israelis and Palestinians and gives them both the respect and security they deserve....

How can Israel make sure the Palestinians stay on the other when it's being built deep inside the West Bank and some of those pesky Palestinians will end up on the 'wrong' side of the wall? Maybe they should all be forced out?

Again, how would the Palestinians negotiate a fair and lasting peace (not one on Israel's terms) when there is currently no Israeli leadership that wants peace?

And you didn't answer my question. Do you think the West Bank is part of Israel?

Violet...

[bluesoul]

28. Me too

I would also LOVE to hear those questions answered. Because they may tell so much..

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. Giving peace a chance

Peace is a compromise, like every other agreement in life. So neither side will get what they want entirely. But some things are musts from the Israeli side, including an end to terror. A must from the Palestinian side is a Palestinian state. That state hinges on the former.

But it is not about respect, that's a schoolyard term. It's about settling a longstanding war.

Nearly all of the Palestinians are on the other side of the wall. Those that are on the Israeli side of the wall can stay much like all of the other people who live on the Israeli side of the wall. Are you suggesting Israel should throw them out? I sure as hell am not.

To negotiate a peace, all the Palestinians need to do is act. If Arafat (yeah, like this will happen) attacks the terrorists and shuts them down in a bid for peace, Israel will respond. Either it will be Sharon or his replacement.

I don't think the West Bank is one sovereign entity. I think Israel should retain Jerusalem. Beyond that, I couldn't care less how they sort out the border whenever that happens.

[Equinox]

86. Muddle....

Nearly all of the Palestinians are on the other side of the wall. Those that are on the Israeli side of the wall can stay much like all of the other people who live on the Israeli side of the wall. Are you suggesting Israel should throw them out? I sure as hell am not.



Can make Israel make these Palestinians citizens and disrupt the "Jewish Character" of the state?

If not, how would that be remotely democratic?

For your other comment about the Arab World never wanting peace....you must have forgotten about the Arab League's call for normalizations with Israel in exchange for withdrawal out of the OTs...but Sharon (the man you think wants peace) flipped his finger at that unprecedented initiative.

Your version of things is severly off kilter.

[Cassandra]

70. While it is true that...

Sharon doesn't want peace, or wants it only on his terms, Arafat has had multiple opportunities to talk peace with other Israeli leaders. They were offering peace and a better deal than Arafat is likely to get now, but Arafat wasn't interested. Arafat's position, one which was supported by many here, was all or nothing. I understand how much he found the offers inadequate, but there was no negotiating coming from him at all. He was like Bush in his "my way or the intifada highway" attitude.

[bluesoul]

18. Oh yeah

And Sharon and the current Israeli policy wants it settled? Give me a break Muddle!

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. Israel has made peace before

With its enemies. When have the Palestinians done that?

When peace is offered either Sharon will accept or his replacement will. Until then, if there can be no peace then there can be no interaction.

[edzontar]

36. It's amazing to me that someone with MLK in their sig-line...

Would promote the imprisonment of a population of occupied people in a large-scale concentration camp.

I would bet that if you polled a sample of ANY people under conditions of brutal, sustained occupation and continuous bombings, house-demoltions, and general slaughter--that they would say something very similar about an attack on the "other" side.

Its a tragedy that people become so embittered and dehumanized, but it is hardly restricted to "Arabs" or to any other ethnic or religious group.

But you'd have to read history or something to know that.

That aside, I'll bet THE ORIGINAL POSTER looked far and wide for this story and felt really HAPPY and VINDICATED when he/she discovered it...since it so helpfully serves his/her own deep prejudices and hatred for Palestinians and "Arabs."

I believe that you have dishonored Dr. King with your postings here.

[Muddleoftheroad]

37. That is not what I am saying and you know it

I have no interest in imprisoning anybody but the terrorists. But blocking a de facto border is not imprisonment. If the U.S. seals the border to Mexico, is it imprisoning Mexico? Not hardly.

And to clarify, I don't hate either Arabs or Palestinians. I have made it repeatedly clear I support a full-scale, peaceful Palestinian state. Not a bantustan as some would have it. But to get to that point, the Palestinians must fight terror. Why is THAT so much to ask?

Dr. King, all to acquainted with the terror of the men in sheets would understand.

[edzontar]

43. OH, I guess I just misunderstood the part where you said:

"Until then, wall them off and let them live on their own away from Israel. Any Palestinian coming into Israel would then be treated as a terrorist and dealt with in that manner."

I guess I just misread that as a call to imprisonment and summary execution.

EXCUSE ME....

ML King practised non-violence and opposed racist oppression.

With the lines quoted above, you present yourself as an advocate FOR both violence AND oppression.

Besides, how do you define the borders of "Israel" in this passage?

Does this include the land that has been STOLEN from the West Bank and Gaza by a systematic programme of colonization and ethnic-cleansing since 1967?

The old borders?

What about the million or more Palestinains living in Israel now?

Should THEY all be shot too?

What about Palestinain Christians?

Should we have a commission like the Nazis had to decide who is and who is not a Palestinian, or should we just shoot and ask questions later?

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. Blocking them OUT of Israel is not imprisonment

What right to be in Israel do they have?

So, when are terrorists in Israel summarily executed? Some die trying to commit heinous deeds, but most are arrested and jailed. Where did I say what you claim?

As for non-violence, don't you think blocking off terrorist access to Israel would limit the violence those same terrorists can do?

There are about one million Arabs living in Israel right now as citizens. They are not Palestinians, they are Israelis. Why do you segment them or claim otherwise?

Anyone trying to cross the border illegally would be treated as a terrorist. That is a non-racist statement. Israel remains at a state of war and has a right and obligation to protect the border.

[Aidoneus]

48. so would Palestinians control their own borders with Egypt/Jordan?

.

[Muddleoftheroad]

50. Why not?

Where else could they go?

[Aidoneus]

68. interesting

at last, I've noticed you radically deviate from mainstream Israeli policy--a pleasant surprise.. :toast:

[Muddleoftheroad]

74. Thanks

I don't always agree as I have said before.

[Saudade]

85. Doubtful

"I understand a bomb on a bus. I understand a murderer who sneaks in and kills women and children. I understand attacks on pizza places."

You understand "damn well," eh? No you don't. YOu understand nothing.

You show no evidence whatsoever of understanding history, reality, common sense, humanity, human rights, politics, in fact, you show no evidence of understanding anything other than mouthing sentimental platitudes and mindless propaganda, and you especially don't understand anything about Martin Luther King.

I think you are completely and hopelessly ignorant about every aspect of the middle east except what you see on TV.

You wrote:

"My solution is to simply say that the Palestinians can't be dealt with, not now, not until enough of them are ready for peace."

"Your solution?" Is that a final solution? When you mouth the ridiculous platitude "ready for peace" what you really mean is "ready to submit," but you don't have the courage or honesty to say it, so I'll do it for you. However, "your solution" doesn't matter and the only solution that matters is that of the Palestinians, who, like every other national liberation movement in history -- such as the ANC in So. Africa, who were, of course, called "terrorists" by the apartheid government -- will never submit and never ever accept your mealy mouthed cowardly version of "peace" which amounts to suicide.

"Until then, wall them off and let them live on their own away from Israel."


This statement shows complete and total ignorance (apart from its morally repulsive tone) of reality. In case you don't understand, the wall is not intended to let the Palestinians "live on their own away from Israel" because Israel will continue to torment them despite the Wall and control every aspect of their lives.

You don't even understand that, do you? You understand nothing.

"Any Palestinian coming into Israel would then be treated as a terrorist and dealt with in that manner."

Here we have basic racism and a genocidal wish (because you are in no position to make threats) that an entire group of people "be dealt with in that manner," by which the poster means death.

It is difficult to express the absolute repulsion I feel at this sort of ignorance and hate-mongering and I hope that I have not violated any DU rule with this post. If I have, please let me know so I can edit this post. Thank you.

[Cassandra]

66. I think the rules mean...

that we can't CONDUCT a poll in I/P, not that we can't report timely news of an outside poll.

[Darranar]

12. It isn't so surprising, if true, to me...

these people have been forced to endure a horrible occupation and incursions for years now.

The same way that the majority of Israelis aren't willing to make concessions. It isn't because they're bad people, but because they've been forced to endure a horrible campaign of terrorism.

They're two sides of the same coin, and it won't stop until either the extremists in the GOI or the extremists in Hamas decide to stop their inhumanitarian tactics.

[GabysPoppy]

15. A very bold statement sir

"The same way that the majority of Israelis aren't willing to make concessions."

I would be very interested to see your source for this statement

[drdon326]

17. Cue in the Jeopardy theme song

.

[Darranar]

21. I see proof...

in 36 seats for Likud in the last election. More convincing then any poll.

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. A response to the ongoing Intifada

Is a more accurate statement.

[Darranar]

29. EXACTLY!

You hit it exactly, Muddle!

Now just wait a second and apply the same logic to the Palestinians, who have been enduring oppression and occupation for so long.

[Muddleoftheroad]

34. By choice

The Palestinians are the only ones who can make peace happen here and their leadership has chosen not to do so.

[Darranar]

38. I see that you haven't done so...

and until you do, you'll remain as one-sided as you are now.

[Muddleoftheroad]

39. You complain about one-sided?

Pot meet Mr. Kettle.

[Darranar]

41. Oh, sorry...

I just realized that because I'm on the side of peace and not continued war I'm therefore one-sided. :eyes: Er, right...

What logic do I use in reagrd to the Palestinians that I don't use in reagrd to Israel? What do I excuse for the Palestinains that I don't excuse for Israel?

[Muddleoftheroad]

42. I want peace

You just want it the way the Palestinians do. You want everything for them and nothing for Israel.

Fortunately, that's not how it works.

[Darranar]

83. Uh... okay...

You clearly don't know what you're talking about now.

[bluesoul]

30. Cycle of violence

That's the same as saying that Palestinian actions are response to Israeli occupation, settlements, IDF killings and assasinations etc The cycle of violence goes on. Who started it? When?...

[Darranar]

32. Neither side really started it...

and even if one did, that doesn't excuse the other side for responding with atrocities.

[Violet_Crumble]

31. Yet you refuse to think about the reasons behind Palestinian attitudes...

And a more accurate statement is that the election was won by using a platform of fear-mongering and identity politics...

Violet...

[Muddleoftheroad]

35. Actions speak louder than attitudes

The Palestinians want a state, so they need to take action against terror. Otherwise, such a state won't happen.

[edzontar]

40. The right to self-determination is not something GRANTED by others....

According to out own country's founding documents, it is an INALIENABLE RIGHT!!!!!

When the Italian partisans blew up German convoys while they were under occupation, did that make them UNWORTHY of self-rule?

When the Vietnamese NLF foughtagainst the US incursion, did they then surrender their right to independence?

When the American patriots of 1776 shot at the British occupation forces, did that disqualify them from self-government?

When the Sioux and Apaches fought against the white cavalry and setlers, and committed many brutal acts, did that disqualify the Native population of any RIGHT to self-rule?

The answer in all of these cases is no!!!!

And it is RACIST to suggest anyhting else as far as the Palestinians are concerned.

I hate the suicide-bombings. And I hate the continuous Israeli policy of helicopter raids, colonization, and ehtnic cleansing.

But I do NOT hate Israelis of Palestinains, and believe that both people have the RIGHT to self-determination.

Can YOU make the same claim?

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. A Palestinian state

As we know, no rights are absolute. Can I declare a state of Tomas today because I am angry at Virginia or the U.S.? No. Can my family and I do so? How about black America?

I support a Palestinian state, but in the REAL world, they need Israel's help to make it happen. That means they need to work WITH Israel and not against it.

Like you, I don't hate anyone but the terrorists in all this. And I do believe in a Palestinian state. But to get that which they want, they have to give up the terrorists. And I don't see that happening.

[edzontar]

47. The terror we all oppose is a product of the situation...

The people in the territories have no hope.

It is NOT something unique or unusual about the "Arabs" that they fight back desperately with the only weapons they have.

I think they are wrong when they do this, and that non-violent resistance of the sort advocated by MLK would be a more effective tool.

THAT combined a much more sincere and united effort to negotiate the peace.

That said, I still belive that Israel is more culpabalbe in the present situation.

The one thing Israel has NOT tried is what every other nation in the world except the US advocates...ENDING the OCCUPATION and DISMANTLING the ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS.

[Muddleoftheroad]

51. There is always hope

Terror is not the only weapon the Muslims have. I agree that non-violent resistance would have resulted in a Palestinian state long ago. But they took not that path.

The problem with your idea of ending settlements is that it gains Israel nothing. It doesn't settle the situation, nor does it stop the terror groups. It emboldens them.

Moving out of the settlements as part of a peace agreement is great. Doing so on Israel's own without any change in the current climate is foolish.

[Aidoneus]

52. then explain the previous intifada

it was largely non-violent, with demonstrations and economic resistance. they received a bloodbath in response and little else.

[Muddleoftheroad]

55. Stoning is not nonviolent

Nonviolent is nonviolent. Rock throwing was the popular tool of Intifada I.

I am suggesting the tools of the Civil Rights movement instead of the tools of terror.

Suppose all the Palestinians and Arabs in Israel simply stopped work and sat down wherever they were. In the streets. In the villages, etc. Over time, this would frustrate any attempt to arrest or detain.

This would turn ISRAELI support to the Palestinians. Most people can't object to a sit-in, but any sane person objects to a terror bombing. At the same time, Arafat or whoever would move to shut down the terror groups.

Ah, what a fantasy. Actual peace.

Gandhi was a brilliant man. He knew there were ways to bring about change that didn't include bombing babies.

[Aidoneus]

59. neither was Shamir/Rabin's "Force, might, beatings" policy in response

PM Shamir thought of them as grasshoppers to be smashed and some other pseudo-genocidal ravings on occasion (that old "terrorist" made Sharon look composed and fair by comparison), and there was indeed a lot of smashing done, but I don't hear you condemning Israel for that. In that period alone some 175,000 Palestinians were arrested, hundreds killed, tens of thousands beaten, to say nothing of the continued use of disproportionate force (in the so-called "peace process") then and later in the 90s and especially lately. You then suggest submission and passivity in response?!

Suppose all the Palestinians and Arabs in Israel simply stopped work and sat down wherever they were. In the streets. In the villages, etc. Over time, this would frustrate any attempt to arrest or detain.

Yeah, they did general strikes too. That was met with bullets, beatings, and detentions. Not an inch of compromise. Read up on the past intifada if you really want your perception of Israel smashed, that's what did it for me.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluesoul]

62. Exactly

Excellent point Edzontar!

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. If you read my posts

You would know I do NOT blame the Palestinians for everything.

Actually, for much of this I blame the UN and the Arab world. The UN for not enforcing its plan. The Arab world for attacking Israel and using the Palestinians.

But peace, at this point can only be accomplished by an action of the Palestinians. If they don't stop the terror, we'll never have peace.

Can't you see that?

[edzontar]

69. OH-so the seizing of land in 1948 had nothing to do with it?

Etc, etc.

I mean, historical arguments can go both ways.

What's done is done, in any case...the challenge now is to find a peaceful solution.

Your proposal of a wall and shooting Palestinian border-crossers on sight does not seem like a very promising one to me.

[Muddleoftheroad]

75. Again not what I said

I said those who crossed would be treated as terrorists, most of whom are actually jailed in Israel, not shot. Only those who try to commit acts of violence get shot.

I will agree, what's done is done on all sides of this conflict. History is, well, history.

[bluesoul]

71. aha

Yes, Palestinians the UN and Arab world are to be blamed. Just not Israel. Very objective no doubt about that..

[Muddleoftheroad]

76. Read what you want

But since I have made numerous posts on this point of late, I feel little need to remind you that all sides of this conflict share blame.

[Equinox]

87. Rabin, as courageous as he was...

ordered the IDF to break the arms of any Palestinian throwing stones.

Just for perspective....

[bluesoul]

49. Aha

The Palestinians surely do not need the Israel's help to have their own state, certainly not headed by people like Sharon that have no real desire of peace. Sharon has done everything to not make peace and war is the only situation where he benefits. Just as in Sabra and Shatila and before being a general. Just as you say that the Palestinians will have to give up terrorists, so will the Israelis have to give up illegal settlements, occupation, IDF forces in Palestinian territories and denying the right of return all the the same time as Palestinians settle their own things. All the rest is expecting one side to do something while giving the other side a free ticket..

[Muddleoftheroad]

53. Wanna bet?

Try and declare a Palestinian state WITHOUT Israel's help and find out how easy it would be.

Of course I know your post is just a rant because anytime anyone really talks about the right of return like it will happen, I know it is just PR.

[bluesoul]

54. What?

"Try and declare a Palestinian state WITHOUT Israel's help and find out how easy it would be."

What are you trying to say? That the Jewish lobby will do anything do stop that? Or are you implying something else?

[Muddleoftheroad]

60. I'm saying it won't happen

Israel does still control the territory in question. Declare a state in that area and Israel won't allow it.

What are you talking about with the "Jewish lobby" comment?

[edzontar]

58. I support the right to return,,,

I believe the UN does too, though i may be mistaken.

In any case, its at least as valid as the present Israeli immigration policy.

[Muddleoftheroad]

63. It won't ever happen

It is a poison pill, designed to prevent Israel from swallowing any agreement with that in it. It would destroy Israel, which is why many support it. Others are just naive about it.

Also, it will never happen.

[edzontar]

67. Don't be so sure....

The demographics are moving the Palestinains' favor.

[Muddleoftheroad]

77. Not true

The demographics count the territories, most of which will eventually find themselves part of a Palestinian homeland.

[edzontar]

79. Or not? We are not exactly making progress here...

nt

[Muddleoftheroad]

82. Welcome to the Mideast. They aren't making progress there either.

nt

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

57. Gee I'm pretty sure THAT'S a personal attack

How long would it survive if I said you talk like crap? Which is about the same thing.

[edzontar]

64. OK, I apologize, but point was meant to be....

That talking on and on about TERROR TERROR TERROR like Bush does tend to become a mantra that obliterates any remotely nuanced effor to understand and try to solve these conflicts.

And I am really offended by your brandishing of King in this context.

I am not sure how old you are or how familiar you are with his career and views, but I think it is safe to say that King would NOT have supported the present occupation or the containment and wall-building type policies that you have advocated.

Is that clearer?

[Muddleoftheroad]

73. Terror

But it IS about terror. There can't be peace until Israel is no longer fearing attack.

As for Dr. King, I couldn't care less if you are offended. He's my avatar, not yours. I am equally sure he wouldn't have liked baby killing terrorists. He would have advocated for non-violent protest.

[edzontar]

78. But not ONLY terror....

And terrorist acts are committeed by both "sides" in this conflict.

And of course by the various factions within the "sides"--its not a clealy divided, 2-sided conflict in any case,

Finally, of course King would oppose these brutal and insance attacks on civilians.

But he certainly understood the appeal of violence among the oppressed--he stood against it, of course, but he understood WHY people would want to shoot back at the KKK and police-brutalizers in the South,

I think you should read some of his writings a little more to see what he had to say about this.

[tinnypriv]

80. I'm not sure what you can really draw from this poll

Except the obvious fact that quite a large majority support the suicide attack in Maxim.

You'd have to ask (leading) follow up questions, for example: "do you support the suicide attack in Maxim bearing in mind 21 innocent people were killed"?

Or, "do you support the suicide attack in Maxim bearing in mind the resturant was jointly owned by Israeli's and Arabs"?

I'd be extremely surprised if after this attack there were vivd descriptions on PA TV given by the relatives of the dead or evocative photographs of the scene etc, as displayed in the Israeli and Western media.

Without the follow ups, you can't really determine whether or not the 75% simply have a bloodlust for innocent people (highly unlikely, given the other numbers in the poll), or whether they wanted "retaliation" of a kind, for Israeli attacks.

Of course, neither of those options are particularly good. They'll only get worse as the conflict spirals downward into a tribal-style conflict.

As the poll questioner himself says:

"The results of this poll point to a degree of contradictions in Palestinian public attitudes"

And they do.

For example, support for Islamist organisations is only at 29% (it has been at over 35%).

64% support the two-state solution (it could probably be raised to at least 70% with confidence-building measures, easily comparable to the Israeli public attitudes on this subject, if not better).

85% support a mutual cessation of violence.

As usual, people suffering under a harsh military occupation are a big bag of contradictions in their political viewpoints. No surprise there really.

drdon326, if you want to really read something shocking, try Yediot Aharonot today. They have a report on the Maxim attacker - apparently she sat down and paid for her meal before deciding to detonate. Her actual target was also supposedly a nearby hospital.