« Online Debate: Has Merkel Tamed the German Media? | Main | Islamofascist Killer Blown Apart »

Comments

Suppose some individuals started firing rockets from border towns in France into Germany -- maybe it killed some people, maybe not. Suppose occasionally some folks along the border in Holland and/or Poland lobbed some rockets Germany's way, too. Suppose this went on for years. Suppose these actions represented the wishes of a large part of the French population. What would be an appropriate response from Germany? What would be a *legitimate* response from Germany? And, how might that differ from Israel's response?

Just wondering...

It's not correct that the German media as a whole report the matter as the Berliner Zeitung does.

I took a look into the Bildzeitung recently, a per with much higher circulation than the Berliner Zeitung, and they said that Israel has the right to strike back.

Note from David: So glad to have the old Oberlehrer back... Ralf, you should inform our readers that BILD is part of the Axel Springer publishing house which is always strongly pro Israel. We have mentioned that before. That BILD would support Israel therefore goes without saying.

Arno Widmann is one of so many in Europe (@WhatDoIKnow: :-) You have them also in the US!) who don't worry about terror but about the war against terror. What a pity that they get protection too. I wish the ambassador of Israel in Germany would write him, as the Ambassador in Switzerland did:

"(ap) Der israelische Botschafter in der Schweiz, Aviv Shir-On, schreibt in einer am Donnerstag verbreiteten Stellungnahme, es sei bedauerlich, dass die Schweiz Gewaltakte der Palästinenser nicht ebenso verurteile wie die israelischen Aktionen.

Speziell bemängelt er, dass das Departement für auswärtige Angelegenheiten (EDA) auf den Raketenbeschuss einer israelischen Schule in Ashkelon nicht reagiert hat.

Kritik äusserte auch der Schweizerische Israelitische Gemeindebund (SIG). Er warf Calmy-Rey in einem Brief vor, in den Stellungnahmen ihres Departements jeweils nur die Folgen der israelischen Aktionen zu erwähnen, nicht aber deren Ursachen. Die Reaktionen des EDA seien einseitig und würden jeweils Israel die alleinige Verantwortung für die Verschlechterung der Situation anlasten, schreibt SIG-Präsident Alfred Donath. Die Schweizer Juden könnten diese Parteinahme nicht verstehen und das EDA leiste damit auch keinen Beitrag zum Frieden. Donath schliesst seinen Brief mit der Hoffnung, dass sich das EDA künftig objektiver verhalten werde.

Das EDA hat seit der jüngsten Eskalation im Nahostkonflikt zwei Mal schriftlich Stellung genommen. Es warf Israel dabei Völkerrechtsverletzungen vor und appellierte an beide Konfliktparteien, ihren humanitären Pflichten nachzukommen."

http://www.nzz.ch/2006/07/06/il/newzzEPB8J6CF-12.html

Spirit of Entebbe has also a great example: "Das Schweigen Europas
Ein Plädoyer im Interesse Israels"
By Judith Bernstein
June, 2006
http://spiritofentebbe.blogspot.com/

There is always the same pattern. They never react when the Palestinian terror happens. They would never demonstrate against suicide bombings. Deep in their heart they are cowards who deal with the enemy to be not a target.

Arno Widmann sagte auch das:

„Der Krieg der USA hat nicht die Probleme des Irak, aber doch das Problem Saddam Hussein gelöst“. Der Krieg George W. Bushs sei „harmlos im Vergleich zum Regime, dem er den Garaus machte. Es gibt Kriege, die helfen die Welt zu verbessern. Sie stellen ein Übel ab, das ohne sie weiterwirken würde.“ „Der Irak sieht nach diesem Krieg - der nicht beendet, dessen Ende aber schon in Sicht ist - deutlich besser aus.“ (April 2003)

Auch das sagte Arno Widmann, der sich dafür aussprach, daß die NPD am Brandenburger Tor demonstriert. Er nannte das Meinungsfreiheit.

"Durch die Einführung des Straftatbestandes
der Holocaustleugnung
haben wir die Zahl der Holocaustleugner
nicht reduziert. Wir sollten
aufhören, Meinungen und Gesinnungen
unter Strafe zu stellen. Wir sollten
uns darauf konzentrieren, den
Tätern in die Arme zu fallen.
Aufgefallen: Berliner Zeitung. –
61(2005)42 vom 19./20. Februar 2005.


Wie fällt man denn Tätern in die Arme?????? Was meint er da?

For this to appear in a newspaper is not at all surprising as it reflects the hidden attitudes of many Germans. One of the reasons it appeals to so many is the Palestinians and many Germans both view themselves as victims.

The implication is if Berlin was attacked daily by rockets, its citizens kidnapped and murdered by a neighboring nation who had as its stated goal the destruction of Germany, Germans would not react. That seems to be asking a lot for us to believe when there is nothing in German history that would indicate they would probably not react more violently than the Israelis.

This is but one more example of the moral hypocrisy on daily display in Germany.

War guilt is easily shed by dumping it onto Jews and Americans. How refreshing it must be for Germans, to off-load simultaneously onto one's conquerors and victims. (Though I haven't heard too much anti-Russian sentiment from Germany, despite the fact that Soviets killed and raped their way through eastern Germany.) Was für ein Leben.

Morgenmagazin im ARD/ZDF, 8.40Uhr: Terror und Verteidigung - das ist für den Moderatur kein Unterschied, es ist ein ewiges Hin und Her. Ein zu Tränen rührender Beitrag über ein 14jähriges Mädchen, dessen Hamas-Vater vor 10 Monaten verhaftet worden ist. Ein Onkel fehlt schon seit Jahren. Sie schreibt einen Brief an die Eltern des entführten Soldaten, sie mögen doch endlich etwas tun, dann, ja dann wäre Frieden möglich.

Warum hören die Palästinenser nicht mit dem Terror auf und erkennen Israel an. Glaubt dieses kleine Mädchen tatsächlich, Israel könnte irgentetwas tun, um diesen Haß zu stoppen. Sich freiwillig abschlachten lassen, damit der Haß aufhört. Die Palästinenser hassen sie wegen der Besatzung? Das ist das Märchen, was dieser Moderator glaubt, weil sein Verstand dieses grenzenlose Terrorgewalt nicht begreifen kann.

Morgenmagazin hilft mit, den Mythos vom Terror als Reaktion auf Besatzung zu erhalten.

Once upon a time, a country existed that rocketed its neighbors indiscrimately, kidnapped noncombatants for later execution, and whose population sought to conquer as much territory as possible and reduce the rest of the world to slavery.

That country was Nazi Germany. And when avenging Allied tanks encountered resisting German villages, they reduced the buildings to mere memorials, and the villagers to penury.

No one seems to consider these actions a crime today. What would be wrong if Israel levelled Gaza and drove its inhabitants away tomorrow?

"Sure, the Hamas government wants to eradicate Israel from the face of the earth. But what can you do - the government was democratically elected."

It seems that the disconnect here must be obvious to anyone who doesn't belong in an insane asylum. How is it that it always seems to escape the European MSM? Apparently Israelis should simply soak up all the bombings, rocketings and cross-border attacks and meekly allow themselves to be butchered, because, after all, Hamas was democratically elected. The right to self defense suddenly evaporates if the person trying to murder you has been duly assigned to his mission in accordance with all the accepted democratic forms.

Objectively, the European MSM agrees with the president of Iran when it comes to Israel. They want Israel to disappear, replaced by a "democratic" government in the region. In this ideal state, the lion would lie down with the lamb, and universal peace and brotherhood would prevail. Of course, the reality is that the Jews who couldn't escape from this "ideal" state would be, sooner or later, massacred. Many of them cannot simply return to the states they came from, because those states are under Muslim control, and will either block their return entirely, or subject them to lives of insecurity and humiliation if they are allowed back. The only workable solution under the circumstances is to separate the two groups in different territories. Israel certainly got the short end of the stick when it comes to territory, but they are willing to live with their share. If they were simply left in peace, conflict in the Middle East would end tomorrow. Israel is not causing the conflict. It is being caused by Arab fanatics who are determined that they will have everything, and the Jews nothing.

Under the circumstances, I propose a third solution. End the illegal Arab occupation of the Middle East! The Arabs are not the original owners of the land, and have no inherent right to it whatsoever. They are there by right of conquest. Let them return to Arabia, whence they came. While they're at it, they should vacate Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and all of north Africa as well. Strange, isn't it, that this solution, which comes so naturally to those who wring their hands about the bitter fate of the American Indians, never occurs to them in the case of the Arabs. It would be nice if they could explain to us what fundamental principle they are defending. Does it somehow correspond to natural law that conquerors who have only occupied a land since 1492 are illegitimate usurpers, but conquerors who have occupied one since, say, 600 to 675 have been magically transmuted into the legitimate owners? When, exactly, did the transmutation take place? If the Indians managed to establish a state of their own in Florida, would it be the right of Americans of European descent, acting through the medium of their properly and legitimately elected democratic government, to indiscriminately bomb them, fire missiles into their territory, and subject them to constant terrorist attacks? What's the difference? I'd really like to know.

"Suppose some individuals started firing rockets from border towns in France into Germany -- maybe it killed some people, maybe not. Suppose occasionally some folks along the border in Holland and/or Poland lobbed some rockets Germany's way, too. Suppose this went on for years. Suppose these actions represented the wishes of a large part of the French population. What would be an appropriate response from Germany? What would be a *legitimate* response from Germany? And, how might that differ from Israel's response?

Just wondering..."

That is easy: We would try to fully ensure that there wont't ever come any terror anymore from that direction :)

Helien: "If the Indians managed to establish a state of their own in Florida, would it be the right of Americans of European descent, acting through the medium of their properly and legitimately elected democratic government, to indiscriminately bomb them, fire missiles into their territory, and subject them to constant terrorist attacks? "

The Seminole Tribe of Florida IS an independent nation.

They have total control of six territories through Florida. And they generally tell members of the American Indian Movement and other agitating groups to get lost.

The Seminoles, BTW, have NEVER signed a peace treaty with the US, and live in peace beside us.

An addendum to Helian... your point is well taken, however :).

After all, the Seminoles stole THEIR land fair and square from the Timacuas ;).

Addendum ad absurdum...

Come to think of it, the Timacuas stole Florida from the mastadons. How does that work out in the long run for environmentalists?

"After all, the Seminoles stole THEIR land fair and square from the Timacuas ;)."

You have to love any tribe that gets in the face of the politically correct zealots and insists that they, and not the professionally righteous, shall have the right to determine whether a college team can use their name or not. I, for one, come down strongly in favor of not suicide bombing them.

LOL! Yup, Helian... you've gotta LOVE those Seminoles :D. They have been known to toss out (literally!) members of the AIM, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and virtually anyone else who annoys them or tries to stir up trouble.

And one thing I really love... even though they ARE an autonomous nation, complete in itself, under the rule of NO ONE except their own Tribal Council, they CHOOSE to fly the US flag next to their tribal flag since their tribal members carry dual citizenship. And they're as patriotic as any cracker I've ever met :D.

Well I surely would rather have Israel have my back than the Germans or french.

I say it in German: Israel verteidigt sich mit aller Kraft gegen all den Terror, der das kleine Land umgibt. Das ist bewundernswert und wir sollten Israel mit aller Kraft unterstützen. Israel ist der Vorposten der Demokratie im Nahen Osten. In den Deutschen Medien wird immer wieder Verständnis für die Terrorakte der Palästinenser gezeigt. Das hat Tradition; es gibt nämlich auch einen linken Atisemitismus. Und, die Berliner Zeitung war dafür (und für latenten Antiamerikanismus) schon immer bekannt. Meine Empfehlung: einfach nicht kaufen.


Discovery. Life is good.

I have been reading about what has been going on in the ME in the last few hours. When I read this article a light bulb went off why the french never win anything.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19785011-2,00.html

Here is the money quote.


French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy called Israel's bombardment of Beirut airport "a disproportionate act of war", saying there was a real risk of a regional war.

So now we know, the french do not fight wars to win they fight proportionally. This has to do probably with the European social model.


re: Joe: "So now we know, the french do not fight wars to win they fight proportionally. This has to do probably with the European social model."

Yup. I guess that explains everything. Except how when their soldiers were attacked in Ivory Coast, they opened fire on a peaceful demonstration by unarmed civilians :/.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31