[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference taveng::bagels

Title:BAGELS and other things of Jewish interest
Notice:1.0 policy, 280.0 directory, 32.0 registration
Moderator:SMURF::FENSTER
Created:Mon Feb 03 1986
Last Modified:Thu Jun 05 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1524
Total number of notes:18709

747.0. "The "Kidnapping" of the "Clergyman"" by BXB005::BERNSTEIN (Thinking of captions for stupid paintings...) Tue Aug 01 1989 02:31

    I'm pretty surprised that no one started a discussion on this, and I
    suppose some here will be surprised at my sympathetic leanings right
    now towards the Israeli government, but here goes...
    
    This incident involving the arrest of Sheik Obeid has put Israel on
    the ropes.  There was an interesting session on Nightline tonight that
    discussed this current situation.  One thing I noticed is that the
    self-serving posturing of the American government is preposterous.
    Publicly condemning Israel for their actions and privately applauding
    the Israelis is disgustingly two-faced, and I expect no better from
    that ba$tard Bob Dole et. al.
    
    Surely the US doesn't have the balls to "kidnap" any of them themselves.
    "Let the Massad do it" is the attitude.  Bush makes me sick - at least
    if you sanction something, be honest enough to admit it.
    
    The worst part is that the media, for the most part, has taken a very
    anti-Israel approach by portraying this sheik as a clergyman that has
    been kidnapped, whereas in reality, he is a masterind of terrorism who
    has publicly stated his actions.  When America hears "clergyman", they
    think of a fairly meek person that does "no harm to nobody".   And 
    how can it be called a kidnapping?  It seems more like an arrest of
    a person outside one's jurisdiction.  The Israeli diplomat on
    Nightline pointed out the US's attempt to take terrorists out of 
    commission, and no one complained.
    
    Worse yet, they can't be sure if this Colonel is dead.  And if he is 
    dead , he could have been dead for months now.  And if this isn't a
    "real" revenge, the bus attack three weeks ago can count for that.  It
    is stupid to allow the discussion to become a tit-for-tat argument.
    
    I may regret saying this later, but it seems that "kidnapping" scores
    more of these terrorists on their home turf might just disassemble
    the network of groups that are conspiring to make Israel look bad
    in America's eyes.
    
    I'm often critical of the Israeli's barbaric treatment of innocent
    people (and to me, yes, a 8-year-old Palestinian child with a rock
    IS innocent), but arresting known criminals doesn't seem to be out
    of line in a dangerous society.  
    
    These terrorist groups have no regard for human life.  
    
    Thomas Friedman on Nightline tonight stated that Israel is
    schizophrenic in that it feels it has to play by the harsh rules
    of the Middle East at the same time as it tries to live up to 
    Western standards of morality.  That really sums things up.
    
    Well, folks, get the discussion going...
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
747.1Examples exist...SUTRA::LEHKYI'm phlegmatic, and that's cool.Tue Aug 01 1989 04:4110
    Seems to be a rather efficient way to deal with terrorism. Examples
    already exist: several years ago, a Russian was kidnapped in Lebanon.
    The next day, the KGB killed one (or was it two?) family member of the
    responsible terrorist leader. The Russian went free the same day...
    
    Inhuman? Sure. But so is terrorism...
    
    Rememberingly yours,
    
    Chris 
747.2PR cloud and silver lining?ULTRA::ELLISDavid EllisTue Aug 01 1989 09:3218
The Israelis are vulnerable on the public relations front.  Already Senator 
Bob Dole, Representative Lee Hamilton and some Bush staffers are blaming 
Israel for the death of the (presumably) executed American hostage, with more 
to come.  And when the British, French and German hostages are lined up for 
execution, it will only get worse.

There may be a way to improve the situation.  I think Israel should put Obeid 
*immediately* on trial for murder and conspiracy.  Projected sentence:  life 
imprisonment, not execution.  This trial should be handled scrupulously 
within the letter and spirit of the law and publicized as much as possible.

This would serve two purposes.  First, it would place the public spotlight on
Hezbollah and their heinous operations.  It would put the lie to the public
misconception that Israel kidnapped an "innocent" cleric and is holding him
hostage just like the terrorists on the other side do.  Second, it would 
leave the door open for an exchange of prisoners, which is in the common 
interest of Israel, the US and the other Western nations.

747.3LDP::GOLDJack E. Gold, MRO4Tue Aug 01 1989 10:0717
    Typically, when one country wants to try a criminal from another
    country, they ask for extradition from the government where the criminal
    resides. Since there is presently no government in Lebanon to ask
    for extradition, it seems to me that Israel was perfectly within
    its rights to exercise an alternate means of "extradition" of the
    criminal.
    
    I agree that Israel should immediately try the "cleric" in a very
    public trial, and sentence him to life in prison if found guilty.
    Executing him would just produce another martyr.
    
    As an alternative suggestion, I think Israel should offer to extradite
    Obeid to the US, to stand trial under US law for complicity in the
    murder, as well as the kidnaping. I wonder what the Bush government
    (and Mr. Dole) would say about bringing him before American justice?
    
    Jack
747.4Cool Heads Should Prevail In This OneABE::STARINThe Attentive EarTue Aug 01 1989 11:0124
    Re all:
    
    While I'm glad that Israel apprehended the Moslem holy (?) man who
    apparently was the brains behind the kidnappings, I was concerned
    that the looney tunes holding the other hostages might do something
    dumb like execute them.
    
    To be fair to Israel, as someone pointed on CNN yesterday, Israel
    is in the front-line of terrorism. If you manage to snag one of
    the bad guys, you don't stop the operation, call up the White House,
    and ask the Prez if you can haul him in. You bring him in.
    
    I think what we're seeing now is another attempt to drive a wedge
    between Israel and the US and make it even tougher for the US to
    conduct foriegn policy in the Middle East. I think Bush is doing
    the right thing in first determining the facts (like did the terrorists
    really hang LTC Higgins *as a result* of the Israeli apprehension
    or was he already dead or was it all an elaborate ploy) before going
    in an taking out some Shiites.
    
    BTW, I think Dole et. al. were a little irresponsible with their
    criticism of Israel.
    
    Mark
747.5Give the terrorist the punishment he deservesDECSIM::GROSSThe bug stops hereTue Aug 01 1989 13:5412
RE: .3
A USA court would probably let the guy off Scott free because noone read him
his rights at the time of arrest. Keep him in Israel where they know what to
do with terrorists.

RE: .1
Boy! Do I wish we (USA) could emulate the Russian treatment of terrorists but
murdering members of a terrorist's family, while tempting, is morally
unacceptable. Perhaps we could extradite those family members to a suitable
unfriendly destination? Any other diabolical suggestions?

Dave
747.6Piece offeringsVAXWRK::ZAITCHIKVAXworkers of the World Unite!Fri Aug 04 1989 18:0011
>Boy! Do I wish we (USA) could emulate the Russian treatment of terrorists but
>murdering members of a terrorist's family, while tempting, is morally
>unacceptable. 

Am I right in recalling that the Russians did not merely kill the ?-in-law
of the terrorist leader who kidnapped their guys but actually started
returning him to his family limb-by-limb, day by day?

-Zaitch

PS/ I am NOT suggesting that the same be done with Obeid, just ... well....but..
747.7Almost rightHPSTEK::SIMONCuriosier and curiosier...Sun Aug 06 1989 00:014
    Well, you are almost right.  As the US News reported at the time, the
    KGB killed the terrorist leader's relative, cut off his penis and send
    it to the family.  This one mailing did the job, the Russians were let
    go.
747.8M(D?)isinformation?SUTRA::LEHKYI'm phlegmatic, and that's cool.Wed Aug 16 1989 16:2614
    One Russian died by mistake, though...
    
    While we're at it: at "that" time, I had a discussion with a Russian
    official on the hypothetical issue on what would happen if the Iranians
    would occupy the Russian Embassy. 
    
    His answer (I can't verify the validity of content): "Teheran would
    cease to exist the next day". The only objective fact supporting this
    statement is that the "Revolution Guards" actually entered the Soviet
    Embassy, one day, and left it some 12 hours later.
    
    Hypothetically yours,
    
    Chris
747.9CorrectionHPSTEK::SIMONCuriosier and curiosier...Thu Aug 17 1989 16:497
    Re: -.1
    
    The Russian was killed, he didn't die by mistake.  It was after
    this fact that the KGB acted.
    
    Even More Pointingly Yours :-)
    Leo
747.10Turning friends into enemies: Rise of Hizbollah.OLDTMR::ASHRAFGone today, here tomorrowMon Aug 21 1989 13:37267
          [Background in Hizbollah in south Lebanon.  Excepts from the book,

                L E B A N O N : D e a t h   o f   a   N a t i o n
                                   by
                              Sandra Mackey

          Quotations limited only to happenings in south Lebanon, whch is
          relevant to the discussion here.]

          "If you really want to know about Lebanon, ask Ben.  He's
          been here longer than any of us and speaks Arabic like an Arab."
          I turned to the quiet man by the far wall.  After some prompting,
          the Reverend Benjamin Weir, Presbyterian missionary for
          twenty-eight years, began to speak modestly about Lebanon.

          "We all talk about the Maronites, and the Druze and the Sunnis,
          but no one talks about the Shiites.  They are the forgotten ones
          in this war. ... The people there have so little, not even roads
          to move their produce market in Beirut.  And now they are caught
          between the PLO and Israel.  Someday we may all feel their
          anger."

          In 1968, Palestenian commando raids against Israel began from
          southern Lebanon.  ... Palestinian commandos scattered, leaving
          the Shiites as the targets of Israeli bombs.  As a result, the
          image of a woman in a  colorful dress squatting on the ground in
          front of her collapsed house, wailing over her dead husband's
          body, became the caricature of south Lebanon.

          In the wake of the Israelis' low-flying bombing raids, merchants
          and farmers piled their battered luggage into old Mercedes taxis
          or on beds of pickup trucks for the desperate flight to Beirut.
          But many stayed, for there was really nowhere to go.  Although
          Ahmed Hadi Ayub, a farmer, lost his house and two of his nine
          children in one bombing raid, he remained.  The plot of ground
          on which the rubble of his house stood was all he had.

          In 1980 ... When Berri took over Amal, the movement's actual
          membership relative to the number of its sympathizers was
          incredibly small.  In one major Shiite village, only ninety men
          out of an active male population of fifteen hundred even held
          membership. ...  But a new chapter in Shiite politics was about
          to unfold, and again the catalyst would be the ill-fated Israeli
          invasion of 1982.  No other facet of Israel's gross misadventure
          in Lebanon presents a clearer case of bad judgment and
          self-defeating policy than Israel's mishandling of the Shiite
          population of south Lebanon that turned a confederate against
          the Palestinians into a formidable adversary of the State of
          Israel.  Even before Israel moved in 1982, a Shiite warned
          Israeli Arabist Moshe Sharon, "Do not join those who murdered
          Husain, because if you bring the Shi'is to identify you with the
          history of [their] suffering, the enmity that will be directed
          at you will have no bounds and no limits.  You will have created
          for yourselves a foe whose hostility will have a mystical nature
          and a momentum which you will be unable to arrest."

          Initially the Shiites had welcomed the Israelis into south
          Lebanon.  As tank-led columns rolled through the villages,
          smiling Shiites tossed flowers to Israeli soldiers and ran
          alongside open personnel carriers offering cold fruit juice
          while murmuring words of praise for their deliverance from the
          PLO.  But soon Israeli arrogance, as had PLO arrogance, drove a
          searing wedge between the Shiites and their erstwhile saviors.
          The Israeli "iron fist" slammed down on the Shiites, turning the
          south's liberation into occupation.  Sweeps through villages
          gathered up Shiites suspected of sympathies with the PLO.  Some,
          in violation of the Geneva Convention, were marched across the
          border to detention in Israel.  Grieving women clutching their
          weeping children clustered in nervous knots watching their
          houses being systematically blown apart by demolition teams
          because the Israelis had accused their husbands or sons.  Whole
          villages suspected of harboring the PLO were reduced to
          pulverized concrete.  From June to August, the Shiites of Beirut
          lived through the merciless siege, and it was they who were
          massacred along with the Palestinians in Sabra.  The words of
          Musa al Sadr came ringing back: "Israel is the very embodiment
          of evil."

          Civilian casualties were high in an operation that drew no
          distinction between the enemy and the innocent.  Surgeons worked
          around the clock performing what they dubbed the "Begin amputation"
          of limbs shattered by the cluster bombs provided to Israel by
          the United States.  Others were wounded by shells whose exploded
          casings buried in apartment walls carried the message "Made in
          the USA."  To everyone  except the Phalangists and some of their
          Christian supporters, this hell was being delivered as much by
          the United States as by Israel.  To the Lebanese Muslims,
          Israel's silent partner in carnage was the United States.  It
          was American shells, American money, and American political
          support that had created the Israeli monster.

          The pummeling of Beirut went on and on.  To speed up the city's
          surrender, Israel ordered saturation bombing on the scale of the
          World War II attack on Dresden.  Known as "Black Thursday", it
          began at dawn on August 12 and continued uninterrupted for
          eleven hours.  They city burned and there was no water to quench
          the flames for the Israelis has shut off the flow.  In West
          Beirut, where only about one in eighty people was a Palestinian
          guerilla, five hundred civilians died. [Total casualties during
	  the Israeli invasion included 20,000 Palestinians and Lebanese 
	  killed, mostly civilians.]

          The utter despair that the Israeli invasion had thrust upon the
          Shiite community gave fundamentalism an appeal that more
          moderate political leaders were unable to match.  In a
          compelling litany, the militants cried that the Shiites had
          suffered at the hands of the Ottoman Empire, the Western
          colonial powers, the Christian and Sunni Lebanese, the
          Palestinians, and now the Israelis.  ... Out of Iran, the Shiite
          spiritual heartland, the words of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
          washed over Shiite Lebanon: "Thus we have seen that aggression
          can be repelled only with sacrifices and dignity gained with
          sacrifices of both heart and soul."  In the complexity and 
          confusion of Lebanon,  Shiite fundamentalism offered a simple and
          comfortable message.

          By the fall of 1982, the groups coalesced under a fluid
          organization call Hizbollah, the party of God.  ... Each
          Hizbollah group essentially set and executed its own agenda.  As
          a result, Hizbollah has never achieved the cohesion of even the
          most formless political party.  It is but a movement, an
          ideological umbrella under which autonomous groups wage their
          own version of the Islamic revolution.  Although all of
          Hizbollah's clerics are fanatically committed to the concepts of
          the Islamic revolution, few unquestioningly toe the line for
          Iran.  All the groups can be influenced by Iran, but none is a
          lackey.

          Hizbollah did not introduce terrorism into the Lebanese civil
          war.  Acts of terror played an integral part in the war from the
          very beginning.  Camille Chamoun, with a characteristic flick of
          his well-manicured hand, once said, "Cutting innocent throats to
          propagate terror is nothing new in the mentality of the Middle
          East."  Karantina, Tel Zaatar, and Damour were all instances of
          terror directed against communities.  Kidnaping was rampant.
          Victims were seized at roadblocks, in their homes, and on the
          street for no reason other than that they were "suspicious 
          persons."..  Children were abducted simply to extort ransom 
          from parents.

          Common citizens subjected to wanton acts of terror remained lost
          in the media coverage of the war.  Only noted foreigners and
          Lebanese celebrities rated mention in the newspaper or on the
          international wire services.

          Of all the miscalculations in America's misadventure in Lebanon,
          the decision to shell tiny Souq al Gharb was the single act that
          would keep coming back to haunt the United States.  When its
          military might inflamed the hills of the Shuf, the United
          States, along with France, created a new symbol for the Shiites.
          Besieged and embattled Muslims facing the firepower of a mighty
          battleship fit the Shiites' image of their centuries-old
          struggle against their enemies.  The highly dubious military
          advantage the United States delivered to the Gemayel government
          in the operation against Souq al Gharb became lost in the
          imagery that the action created for the Shiite militants and
          their followers. ...

          From their positions off the coast, the cruiser Virginia, and
          the destroyer John Rogers, and the battleship New Jersey sent
          six hundred rounds of seventy-pound shells zooming over Beirut
          and crashing into Muslim village in the Shuf.  French aircraft
          streaked in after the shells in aerial mop-up operation. ...
          The tragedy of America's operation against the Shut was that
          from the viewpoint of the United States the strikes were never
          intended as an attack on the Shiites.  Rather, the United States
          had meant to send an unmistakable message to all factions in the
          Lebanese war that the Multi- National Force would protect
          itself.  Ever since it arrived in Lebanon, the MNF had been harassed
          by the Druze, the Amal, the Palestinians, and even the Israelis
          and the Lebanese Forces. ... The Marine command reported to
          Washington, "The fire support situation was best described by
          the American Ambassador as being unclear as to who was doing
          what to whom and why."

          Israeli fears about the Palestinians in south Lebanon have been
          real, and response to those fears predictable. ... The
          Palestinians, joined by Hizbollah launched punishing attacks on
          the Southern Lebanon Army.  For the first time, Israel responded
          to attacks on the security zone than on Israel proper.  In May
          [1988], the Israeli army moved roughly ten miles beyond the zone
          to sweep Lebanese villages as far north as Maydoun.  And once
          again it was Shiites who paid the price.  On suspicion that the
          occupants were aiding guerilla forces, Israeli demolition crews
          leveled more than sixty houses within Maydoun under the gaze of
          the families who once called them home.

          For Israel, the torment of Lebanon is that, as a staging area
          for the PLO, it cannot be ignored.  Yet what Israel regards as
          legitimate operations carried out in the name of Israeli
          security simply add to the Shiites' corrosive hatred of Israel.
          Militant Shiism feeds on Israel's tough tactics against civilian
          populations.  Villages where children cannot go to school
          because fear of Israeli reprisal raids keeps teachers away and
          where farmers can work their fields only in sight of soldiers of
          UNIFIL are the most fertile ground for Hizbollah enlistment.
          With their recruits pulled from these villages, the militants
          strike Israeli troops and units of the SLA in a passionate mission
          to drive them out of Lebanon.  Periodically they are joined by
          Amal, forced into action by an alarming loss of support in the
          south.  With the groups as bitterly hostile to each other as
          ever, the limited cooperation between Amal and Hizbollah rises
          from the apprehension that the "security zone" is about to be
          incorporated into Israel.

          As if the situation were not chaotic enough, the Israelis use
          south Lebanon as the dumping site for the Palestinian exiles of
          the intifidah.  There they join those driven by a loathing of
          Israel.  Thus grappling with the Palestinians, the Israelis have
          created new enemies, forging an alliance between radical,
          fatigue-clad Palestinian commandos and the fighters of Hizbollah
          often wrapped in the blood-soaked rags of their own martyrdom.
          ...

          Even more than the West, the Israelis condemn Arabs to an
          inferior status.  For years, the powerful Israeli propaganda
          machine succeeded in portraying the Arabs to the West first as
          rough, semi-educated zealots and later as inhuman "terrorists".
          Within Israel itself, a kind of apartheid exists between the
          Jewish and Arab populations.  And even before the 1987
          Palestinian uprising or intifadah, Israeli policy in the
          occupied territories ground the Arabs into a distinct underclass.

          The whole Palestinian issue created by the 1948 war for
          Palestine fits what Arabs see as the pattern of Western
          exploitation of the Arabs.  The West, particularly the United
          States, has never addressed the moral issue of the Palestinian
          diaspora.  By refusing to acknowledge the Palestinian cause as
          represented by the PLO until late 1988, U.S. policy contributed
          to the process by which an increasingly angry population was
          dumped on its neighbors...  Lebanon was the least able of all
          the countries in the region to absorb the Palestinians.  Yet
          they came, and from Lebanese territory they struck Israel.  And
          Israel struck back with such force that it speeded Lebanon's
          demise, all at the sufferance of the West.

          Regardless of the nature of Israeli actions, American support
          for Israel never seemed to flinch.  Step by step Israel and the
          United States marched together until it appeared they stood as
          one against the Arabs.  When Israel dropped its deadly bombs on
          Lebanon, the United States restocked the Israeli arsenal.  When
          Israeli raids into Lebanon were condemned by the United Nations,
          the United States vetoed the resolution.  While the Israelis
          ruled southern Lebanon with their "iron fists", the United
          States signed an agreement formalizing its strategic alliance
          with Israel.  Non of this was lost on the Arabs, especially
          those of Lebanon, who had suffered the brunt of Israelis' hard
          deeds.  It all came to rest in the virulent anti-Western
          campaign of the Hizbollah.

          Hizbollah has melded the Arabs' deep hostility to the West and
          the Shiites' fury against Israel into a powerful weapon.  ...
          Israel's "security zone" in south Lebanon has become an arena
          where the zeal of the Shiites and the anger of the Palestinians
          push against the Western-armed military might of Israel.  It is
          a conflict Israel may pay a high price to contain, one that may
          call into question once again the wisdom of building American
          strategic concerns in the Middle East almost exclusively around
          Israel.

          The war in Lebanon is far from over.  Yet, for the West, it has
          already ended.  A broken Lebanon has established its Arab
          identity and in so doing has closed the West's gateway to the
          Arab world.  The tragedy of Lebanon is also a tragedy for the
          West.