A video filmed by Carnegie Mellon student and Pittsburgh activist Alborz Ghandehari in Bil’in recently. As he put it, “Hatred tastes like teargas.” Check out his blog Olives and Dust.
Related posts:
- Firms Constructing Israeli Settlements Sued In Canada
- Syria Tastes the Sweetness of Revenge On Israel… Kind Of
- Israeli Products Deshelved At Trader Joe’s
- Why Didn’t You Wear a Seatbelt
- Bardot the Bigot Could Be Fined For “Race Hatred Remarks Towards Muslims”
Serious overacting going on in there.
Posted by programmer craig | August 8, 2009, 6:35 pmIt doesn't matter if the Palestinians resist violently or non-violently. The result is the same:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4BsEWiavYI
In any case, getting hit with tear gas sux alot. But hey, protesting the theft of half your village is a crime in Israel. Israeli manifest destiny triumphs over all.
Posted by Arayus | August 9, 2009, 1:25 amThe result is the same…
Yes, you are right, but you posted the wrong link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHjdTZ-myCU
There. I fixed it for you.
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 7:18 amMaybe this version works better, though. Considering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7Ig2JJRpdo
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 7:19 amNon violence will not work…for it to work you must have a country made up of a moral majority that will be shocked by their own violent reaction to non violence. BUT, in Israel the majority are bloodthirsty childkillers who ACTUALLY enjoy KILLING. And in the US, well we know that the media is controlled by the Martians so not a single story about Pals non violence. Young "Jews" from all over the world look forward to joinning the IDF so they can go on Arab killing safari. Israel is a very sick society. Just look at the abuse they heap on righteous, good people like Gideon Levy, Haggai Matar, etc. I am so sad for the Palestinian people, they just did not understand the EVIL that come down on them.
Posted by Chauncey | August 9, 2009, 2:18 pmNon violence will not work..
60 years of violence, 0 years of non-violence. So how's the violence working out there for ya?
BUT, in Israel the majority are bloodthirsty childkillers who ACTUALLY enjoy KILLING.
Pretty appalling departure from reality you've got going on there, Chauncey. Especially if the Israelis are compared and contrasted to HAMAS. Or to Arab culture in general. I don't recall any Israelis doing what Samir Kuntar did. And I don't remember the Israelis treating any Jewish murderers of children the way Samir Kuntar has been treated by Arabs. And that's only one example, of hundreds. But all that advocacy of hate and murder isn't really happening, is it? It's just a zionist plot.
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 4:49 pm"I don't recall any Israelis doing what Samir Kuntar did"
Thats a joke right?
"So how's the violence working out there for ya? "
Most Palestinian resistance has been non-violent. Boycotts, demonstrations, sit-ins, and just surviving a brutal military occupation has been the way that most Palestinians have NON-violently resisted the occupation of their land.
"Or to Arab culture in general. "
Are you implying that Arab culture promotes violence and murder? How racist can you get.
Posted by Arayus | August 9, 2009, 6:25 pmThats a joke right?
That's my line.
Most Palestinian resistance has been non-violent.
Could have fooled me.
Are you implying that Arab culture promotes violence and murder?
I certainly am! Should I dig up some polls about the popularity in the Arab world of Hezbollah or Al Qaida pre-2005? Should I dig up some YouTube videos of violent street protests in the Arab world that were calling for violence? Or some videos of prominent Muslim clerics where they were calling upon massive crowds to do violence? Or some videos of Arabs right here in the US where the crowds were chanting "Death to Jews"?
How racist can you get.
You can take that race card and shove it where the sun don't shine. If you don't like the violent nature of Arab culture then why do you work so hard at feeding the fire? You seriously expect me to witness people ON THIS BLOG advocating that Arabs should do violence and preaching hate for the enemies of Arabs, and I shouldn't say anything about it out of fear of being called a racist? You are talking to the wrong guy. Go tell it to Jillian. She already admitted she doesn't even mind when her friends are racist against American whites even though she's American and white. She's just the kind of ally you need. But me? Hell no. If Arabs are hell bent on violence, I say let them have it. That's the only known cure for the malady. It fixed the Germans, and it can fix Arabs too. You don't expose your throat to the pathologically violent and expect them not to kill you.
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 6:38 pmAnother lovely post from PC.
Got any more racist and/or bigoted comments you want to add?
Posted by Arayus | August 9, 2009, 7:20 pmNot until you cry another river for me.
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 7:21 pmBy the way, I take it you aren't interested in reviewing the evidence?
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 7:22 pmJust wanna claim "racist" and shut the discussion down? There aren't any "teaching moments" to be had here? You don't want to show me how wrong I am?
Posted by programmer craig | August 9, 2009, 7:23 pmYou're not giving an occupied people even an ounce of credit. While violence has been a part of Palestinian resistance – as its been a part of any and most forms of resistance (even those which later became non-violent) – Palestinians have also done a great deal of non-violent resistance which has consisted of the creation of a strong civil society, boycotts, refusal to pay taxes, protests, etc (See: First Intifada).
http://qumsiyeh.org/palestiniannonviolentresistan…
& It's just unfair for you to label them as a violent people. I'm not here to justify anything, but I do know that there is no one in this world who cannot be pushed to their lowest without thinking of some sort of resistance. Even Gandhi, heralded for his non-violent philosophy, advocated use of violence before his move to India from South Africa and even during his life in india (he had asked his son to kill anyone who would attempt to take his life). I don't agree with violent resistance but I acknowledge the need for resistance, of any kind, and that I cannot tell people living in conditions I hopefully will never face how to or how not to conduct their fight against oppression. It's arrogant and ignorant of me to do so. We can only account for ourselves at the end of the day.
And its disturbing that you think that the only cure for violence is more of it. That's precisely the mentality which perpetuates the circlejerk of violence around this forsaken world. Good job, PC.
Posted by SanaKF | August 10, 2009, 7:54 amSana, I don't give people credit for occasionally resorting to non-violent methods, while their objective is to win a war. That's not a peaceful ideology. It's a short term tactic.
And its disturbing that you think that the only cure for violence is more of it.
And what do you suggest is the proper response to violence, Sana? Submission?
So why aren't you calling for Palestinians to submit to Israeli violence, then?
I'm sorry but once somebody initializes a violent confrontation, all bets are off. There is no moral imperative to react to violence non-violently. Never has been, never will be.
That's precisely the mentality which perpetuates the circlejerk of violence around this forsaken world.
Yeah, OK. What do you think the Taliban would have done to Ghandi, if he'd been Paksitani and alive today? I have to admit I find it a bit amusing to see Muslims trying to use Ghandi against Westerners, in order to encourage US to be non-violent. As if we're the ones with the problem, right? Ghandi succeeded with his non-violent resistance precisely BECAUSE he was dealing with Westerners. If Muslims used Ghandis methods, maybe they succeed too, instead of constant "epic fail".
Posted by programmer craig | August 10, 2009, 8:50 amWhat the? So you're saying Palestinians SHOULD resort to violence? And you know I'm not saying that Palestinians should submit themselves to the violence of Israelis – I don't believe in what you were implying, that the only way the Arabs will learn that violence isn't the answer is by receiving more of it themselves. That's absurd. The opposite can be said and I still wouldn't support it.
And dang son, you're way off on your South Asian history. Contrary to popular belief, the Brits didn't leave because Gandhi's non-violence won out, they left because they realized they were fighting a losing battle. Muslims required a state of their own given the economic and social marginalization they had faced at the hands of the majority, and look – they got their state. Jinnah and co. weren't going around exactly promoting violence, you know.
And don't think that non-violence was the winning ideology. Unfortunately, the reality was otherwise. There were violent Muslims as there were violent Hindus. The migration of Muslims into Pakistan and Hindus into proper India is considered the bloodiest mass migration of modern times; over a million killed.
And Gandhi didn't get what he wanted; he was for the British leaving, as was everyone, but against partitioning. Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence has just been used in textbooks as the winning ideology to detract attention from the unfortunately real and bloody face of the partition. It's a taint in British history, as it marked the ultimate defeat of it as a world empire and power.
———————————————————————
Ghandi succeeded with his non-violent resistance precisely BECAUSE he was dealing with Westerners.
———————————————————————
What the? You mean the same Westerners who colonized and oppressed the people of the subcontinent for almost 100 years? Right. Okay.
Posted by SanaKF | August 10, 2009, 9:44 amSana, I asked you a simple question. What is the proper response to violence, in your opinion? You called it "foolish" of me to say that the proper response was violence in return. So what else is there? I suggested the alternative is submission. I don't see any other alternative. Do you?
What the? So you're saying Palestinians SHOULD resort to violence?
No, rational people submit when they lose a war. If Arabs were rational, they would have acknowledged their defeat in 1948 and gotten the best terms from the Israelis they could (which would have been far better than anything they can hope to get now) and made the best of a bad situation.
That's what happens when you lose wars. Unless you are Arab. Or Muslim, I suppose. So now here we are 60 years later and things just keep getting progressively worse. And you are telling me that the traditional methods of ending wars are silly. What's silly is to keep fighting even after you have already lost – numerous times.
And dang son, you're way off on your South Asian history.
Undoubtedly, considering I don't know much about South Asian history.
Contrary to popular belief, the Brits didn't leave because Gandhi's non-violence won out, they left because they realized they were fighting a losing battle.
Can you explain that in a way that makes sense? Because, it really doesn't.
Muslims required a state of their own given the economic and social marginalization they had faced at the hands of the majority, and look – they got their state. Jinnah and co. weren't going around exactly promoting violence, you know.
I didn't even say anything about that. I asked how the Taliban would treat a Pakistani Ghandi, today.
Posted by programmer craig | August 10, 2009, 10:46 amIf you need your opponents to produce a Ghandi, then you are obviously on the wrong side.
Posted by spuxx | August 11, 2009, 2:08 amYeah, obviously, because the side that believes violence is the answer is always the right side. See, Sana? Everyone disagrees with your non-violent ways.
Posted by programmer craig | August 11, 2009, 7:10 amyeah, because people EAT teargas
Posted by Tracy | August 11, 2009, 6:20 am