I cannot bring myself to disagree with a grieving mother. To do so would be an insult to the sacred bond of motherhood that God created.

I guess all I can say is that there are many Christian and Muslim Palestinian mothers who are also grieving for their dead children. I just hope that leaders on both sides can take actions and make decisions that can stop more mothers from shedding tears.

I sympathise with Ms Roth's loss of her daughter and I sympathise with those affected by the loss of lives throughout the world which result from wars and conflicts.

The comparison of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with the Irish/British conflict however is neither new nor useful.

Resulting from a dmocratic process the 26 Counties of Ireland chose to secede from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the 6 Counties that now make up Northern Ireland chose to retain the status quo with their connection to Great Britain.

As we know the situation in what was Palestine could not be any more different - with the State of Israel constantly expanding its borders and denying the Palestinians the hope of a viable Palestinian State.

I can see no hope for Israel, the Middle East, or the world, so long as Israel remains intransigent and with the huge financial and moral support of the USA continues to disadvantage the Palestinian people and to vilify Moslems and Arabs.

Stan Potter

The article writer makes some fair points. Other people, and not she, propose to justify the release of prisoners from Israel's jails. She correctly points out that the comparison is misleading for the reasons she suggests.

Regarding Stan Potter's point, it's far from clear that the Arab/Israel conflict will end when Israel stops "constantly expanding its borders", as he puts it.

The facts, to those who pay attention to them, are quite different.

The UN partition resolution of 1947 determined Israel's first borders. Israel captured additional territory in a series of defensive wars and has withdrawn from these areas time after time for peace.

As part of the 1974 disengagement agreement, Israel returned territories captured in the 1967 and 1973 wars to Syria. In the 1979 Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, Israel withdrew from the Sinai for the third time.

In September 1983, Israel withdrew from large areas of Lebanon to positions south of the Awali River. In 1985, it completed its withdrawal from Lebanon, except for a tiny security belt immediately north of the Israeli border. This too was abandoned, unilaterally, in 2000.

In the 1994 Oslo accords, Israel agreed with the Palestinians and Jordan to withdraw from most of the West Bank previously occupied by Jordan (in 1967).

Israeli PM Barak offered to withdraw from 95 percent of the West Bank and 100 percent of the Gaza Strip in a final settlement. PM Yitzhak Rabin and his successors offered to withdraw from virtually all of the Golan Heights in exchange for peace with Syria. Under the Oslo agreements, Israel withdrew from more than 40 percent of the West Bank and 80 percent of Gaza. Negotiations continue regarding the remaining 6 percent (about 1,600 square miles) of the disputed territories in Israel's possession.

Territorial concessions for security suggest Israel's goal is peace, not expansion. (For anyone interested, my historical review is based on http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf10.html#a )

Irfan, while Palestinian mothers do mourn for their dead children, Palestinian terrorists and suicide-homicide bombers all to often have a say in when they die. Palestinian civilians, on the other hand, are never deliberately targeted by the IDF. Did Frimet Roth’s daughter get a say in whether she wanted to die, or how?

Stan, the US also contributes financial resources to the Palestinians for education and other necessities- however, it also does the right thing by revoking aid when it goes to schools named after terrorists, or is distributed to those who glorify suicide-homicide bombers and target Jews. The US does not ‘disadvantage the Palestinian people’, they often do this themselves. As for your claim Israel is expansionist, you would do good to read Brigid’s post or ask why an ‘expansionist’ Israel would forcefully pull settlers out of the occupied territories.

Hopefully Israel will reconsider its prisoner release program.

In my short contribution to the issues raised by Irfan, I wanted to draw attention to points of view rarely heard in our popular media.

Rather than giving a point by point rebuttal of some of your contributors’ offerings, I would like to make my final comment in a much more positive way.

What are the causes of Palestinian/Arab attacks on Israel? What are the causes of Islamist terrorism? What were the causes of 9/11 and the more recent attacks on London?

Brigid states that the facts (“to those who pay attention to them”) are quite different to the ones I stated. (Pity about the snide comment Brigid.) I read the Jewish Virtual Library comments with interest and learned much.

Perhaps Irfan, Brigid, and wrighta may like to consult the following references with an open mind:

The Australian Arab Councilhttp://www.aac.org.au/media.phpartID=68

Antony Loewerstein http://antonyloewerstein.blogspot.com/

for an alternative point of view.

A couple of short quotes will give an idea of the flavour:

The Australian Arabic Council issues strong condemnation of the London attacks but adds this:

"The war on terror must address the root causes of terror – injustice, poverty, disenfranchisement and genuine grievances of many about the militaristic power exerted by Western nations led by the US, Britain and Australia. Policies such as the blind support of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan feed fundamentalism and have established fertile breeding grounds for extremism. It is not unreasonable to assume that Australia, as the prime mover behind the US and Britain, is next in line for an attack on our shores...
"While terrorism will never succeed, the current strategy in confronting it will also not succeed. We need to break the cycle of violence."

Loewerstein:
Israel is little more than a US client state, totally reliant on American government handouts. If this seems unnecessarily harsh, consider this. Israel is now asking for hundreds of millions of dollars to assist in August's proposed Gaza withdrawal. Israel already receives the greatest amount of US aid annually.

Israel is not an independent nation.

Stan's original comments above made me think there were some interesting issues to discuss without our necessarily reaching agreement. I misjudged.

Unfortunately, from experience, hearing rhetorical nonsense like "Israel is not an independent nation" and "Israel is little more than a US client state" changes everything. Stan's is the kind of doctrinaire factless know-nothingness that makes dialogue hopeless. The author of the piece on which we're commenting is making some points about the release of unrepentant convicted murderers that ought to have gotten people thinking even before the terror that fell on London last week. Instead of addressing her ideas in a thoughtful fashion, Stan rehashes a facile strong-versus-weak analysis that does him no credit.

I have visited Israel (where Arabic language and culture are routinely taught in secular and state-religious schools), and several Arab states and kingdoms as well (where you can be quite certain nothing positive is ever taught about the Jews). So that when I read Stan's totally unfounded comment that Israel villifies Moslems and Arabs, I know with whom I am dealing. And I know that debating issues with a card-carrying stereotyper is pointless.

The message of London is that terrorism needs to be on everyone's agenda.

i once read a letter published in an arab newspaper. it was from the father of a suicide bomber. it was addressed to the HAMAS leadership.

the faither simply asked: "why does my son have to be a martyr? why can't i enjoy his company in my old age? why don't you ever send your sons to die?"

i think the words of ms roth and the palestinian father say it all. a soltion has to be found. it requires compromise on both sides. otherwise, people will continue dying.

My previous posting was going to be my last on this subject but I was very surprised and puzzled by the torrent of personal abuse it brought down on me from Brigid –

“doctrinaire”, “factless”, “know nothingness”, “card-carrying stereotyper”, “facile”.

Read my posting again and work out where all that came from!

I posed some questions on the causes of conflict.

I also provided a couple of quotes to give the flavour of views different from the ones expressed. Perhaps Brigid launched her personal attack on me because she did not like the Loewerstein quote about Israel’s dependency on the USA.

Is this a microcosm of war? Put forward an alternative view that someone doesn’t like and be personally attacked. Come on Brigid, open up your mind and heart, and dialogue won’t be as hopeless as you suggest.

Incidentally, to save Brigid sitting up ‘til the wee small hours again conjuring up epithets, I am not a Moslem or a Jew or a Christian, just an impartial enquirer who likes the Socratic approach to inquiry.

Terrorism needs to be on everyone's agenda, and discussing the causes rationally and calmly would be a good start.

Stan's viewpoint is well summed-up in the last line of his contribution: "Israel is not an independent nation."

Along the way, he 'calmly and rationally' (to borrow his suggested mode of conduct for us contributors) accuses Israel of "constantly expanding its borders", "denying the Palestinians... hope", "remains intransigent", "continues to disadvantage the Palestinian people" and continues to "vilify Moslems and Arabs".

All of this in response to a short and impassioned essay from a bereaved mother decrying the release of unrepentant, self-confessed murderers.

With the events of London and 7/7 still in the headlines, 'calm' and 'rational' get trumped by 'good sense', 'plain logic' and 'abhor terror in all its manifestations'.

Stan: I'm sincerely sorry if you detect some sort of unreasonable tone in my voice. It's not there, believe me.

I'm even sorrier that you feel the need to establish your non-Moslem, non-Jew, non-Christian credentials. As if those in our democratic Australian society who can't make the same claim are somehow incapable of rising to your heights of logic and insight.

Terror is not someone else's problem, but our's. It's not a distant threat, but here and now. It's not going to be neutralized by understanding or tolerance. Some will hold that a solid dose of "Socratic approach" will prevent the next bus bomb. I have my doubts.

Terror is the immediate issue confronting all of us who live in civilized societies, and we absolutely have to agree on what to do about it. I greatly prefer Frimet Roth's concerns to your's. I sincerely do not mean to offend you by saying so.

Stan, unfortunately the Loewerstein (is it Lowenstein?) link did not work. Perhaps its something on my end, but if you could check the address I would be grateful. He sounds familiar, I wouldn’t mind taking a look.

The AAC site however was disappointing. The recommended articles included many (too many) by Edward Said.

Yes wrighta, I had the same difficulty with the Loewenstein link so I emailed him. He couldn’t understand the problem either. The next time I tried it worked. Here it is again: (Incidentally I know nothing about him and don’t necessarily endorse his comments – he is very outspoken!)

http://antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com/

I agree with you about the AAC link but I found another one on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict which I found useful. It’s pretty basic but seems to be balanced and clear:

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/

The London bombings have raised some interesting speculation on the causes of terrorism.

There seem to be utilitarian or self-interest consequences to humanitarian/investigative approaches to many problems. Canceling debts to third world countries seems to be another example of what appears to be a humanitarian approach with results which could be beneficial to everyone.

Thanks Stan, the Loewenstein blog is working for me now.

The other link also appears to be very good.

Unfortunately I can't share Frimet Roth's concern about the release of Palestinian prisoners.

Most Palestinans in Israeli jails are simply political prisoners. They were arrested in arbitrary military sweeps and have been denied a fair trial or in most cases a trial at all. Anyone who believes Sharon, the butcher of Sabra-Shatila and father of the Occupation/Settler movement, would ever release a single guilty Palestinian is dreaming.

Perhaps now OnlineOpinion will publish a piece by one of the 54 Palestinian mothers who have had their children murdered by the Israelis since March 2004. Incidentally, 4 Israeli children have been killed in the same period see:

http://www.oz.net/~vvawai/mideast/children-killed.html

Some of those children have died because of the PLO's policy of not allowing Palestinians to use Israeli hospitals, not always because of the IDF.

And Sharon's 'war crimes':

"In 1982, Moslem Arabs, directed by Syrian intelligence, killed the Christian president of Lebanon. Christian Arabs retaliated by entering the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in Beirut and massacring several hundred Moslems. This was a case of Arabs killing Arabs -- yet Ariel Sharon is implicated in your article as if he was the one who pulled the trigger or ordered the massacre.

In truth, Sharon was blamed by the Kahan commission for not having the foresight to realize that one group of Arabs would so brazenly massacre another group of Arabs. Today, Sharon is calling for the release of all classified documents from the Kahan commission, insisting that he would be vindicated if they were released.

I would appreciate a reply to explain why you allow such inaccuracies to appear in your publication."

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/The_Demonization_of_Ariel_Sharon.asp

But I’m done posting defences of Israel here. You'll only hear what you want to anyway, which apparently doesn’t include Frimet Roth's article.