Why the Royal Australian Air Force went for Israeli Python-4 AAM's over US AIM-9L's

Which Came First - Terrorism or "Occupation"?

There were 3000 terrorist attempts before the '67 war.

The following is a partial list of documented acts of Arab
errorism, all occurring prior to the beginning of the Israeli
administration of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967:


snip for brevity

Uhmmm...you seem to have left out:

"The Massacre of Baldat al-Shaikh (Dec. 31, 1947) in which over 600
unarmed Palestinian men, women and children were slaughtered;

Never heard of it; never happened. When, where, proof. evidence of any
kind???

Never happened? Do a Google on it and you will come up with an amazing
number of hits for this "never happened" event. One sample:

Well, since there are over 50 ARabs for every Israeli Jew so I would
expect
to see their stories more represented than the ISraeli side of them. I
saw no
Jewish or Israeli references so the following is one of the many
dozens of
Palestinian claims I found regarding this alleged "massac"

"This massacre took place] following an argument which broke out
between Palestinian workers and Zionists in the Haifa Petroleum
Refinery, leading to the deaths of a number of Palestinians and
wounding and killing approximately sixty Zionists."

[My comment: Up to this point in the narrative, I read about an
argument
and sixty "zionists" being killed.]

"... A large number of the Palestinian Arab workers were living in
Baldat al-Shaikh and Hawasa, located in the southeast of Haifa.
Consequently, the Zionists planned to take revenge on behalf of fellow
Zionists who had been killed in the refinery by attacking Baldat
al-Shaikh and Hawasa.1
On the night of January 30-31, 1947, a mixed force composed of the
First Battalion of Palmakh and the Carmelie brigade (estimated at
approximately 150 to 200 Zionist terrorists) launched a raid against
the two towns under the leadership of Hayim Afinu'am.]2 They focused
their attack on the outskirts of Baldat al-Shaikh and Hawasa. Taking
the outlying homes by surprise as their inhabitants slept, they pelted
them with hand grenades, then went inside, firing their machine guns.3
The terrorist attack led to the deaths of approximately sixty citizens
inside their homes, most of them women, elderly and children.4 The
attack lasted for an hour, after which the Zionists withdrew at 2:00
a.m., having attacked a large number of noncombatant homes.5 According
to a report written by the leader of the terrorist operation, "the
attacking units slipped into the town and began working on the houses.
And due to the fact that gunfire was directed inside the rooms, it was
not possible to avoid injuring women and children."6}

[My comment: They say here that the resultant retaliatory strike COULD
NOT POSSIBLY AVOID hitting women and children. So they admit the
attack was not
specifically UPON women and children, but that they were collateral
damage.]
injuring women and children.


"The massacres started early: Major General R. Dare Wilson, who served
with the British troops trying to keep peace in Palestine before the
end of the British Mandate, reported that on Dec. 18, 1947, the
Haganah murdered 10, mostly women and children, in the Arab village of
al-Khisas with grenades and machine gun fire. Wilson also described
how on Dec. 31 the Haganah slaughtered another 14, again mostly women
and children, again using machine guns and throwing grenades into
occupied homes, this time in Balad Esh-Sheikh. [12]
Throughout 1948, the massacres continued: 60 at Sa'sa' on Feb. 15; 100
murdered in Acre after its May 18 seizure by the Haganah; several
hundred at Lydda on July 12, including 80 machine-gunned inside the
Dahmash Mosque; 100 at Dawayma on Oct. 29, with an Israeli eye-witness
reporting that "the children were killed by smashing their skulls with
clubs"; 13 young men mowed down by machine guns in open fields outside
Eilabun on Oct. 30; another 70 young men blindfolded and shot to
death, one after another, at Safsaf the same day; 12 killed at Majd
al-Kurum, also on Oct. 30, with a Belgian U.N. observer writing that
"there is no doubt about these murders"; an unknown number killed the
next day at al-Bi'na and Deir al-Assad, described by a U.N. official
as "wanton slaying without provocation"; 14 "liquidated," according to
the Israeli military's report, at Khirbet al-Wa'ra as-Sauda on Nov. 2.
[13]

Most of the above is bull, and upon closer examination of the facts,
it is
found that JEws were attacked FIRST, and in the retaliatory strikes,
civilians
caught up were collateral damage, often the immediate relatives of the
original
Arab attackers. It's all the usual Arab claims, that its okay for them
to
attack, but if the JEws hit back it's criminal.

A particularly repugnant method of killing employed by the Jewish
militias was the blowing up of houses with their occupants still
inside, often at night. The militia would place explosive charges
around the stone houses, drench the wooden window and door frames with
gasoline, and then open fire, simultaneously dynamiting and burning
the sleeping inhabitants to death. [14]"

That's only AFTER the hagana would order them to come out and
surrender,
and they refused. As everyone knows, the Arabs gleefully put up their
own
wives, children and aged as shields, and often dress up as women
(literally)
to try to fool the Israelis who are usually loathe to shoot women and
children,
and will often either escape or strike using such lowlife ruses. I do
feel
sorry for Arab children and wives to have such "men" as their heads of
households.


Source: http://www.mediamonitors.net/robinmiller3.html

His number at Baldat al-Shaikh (which he refers to by the alternative
Balad Esh-Sheikh) is quite different from that "five hundred" used in
the other report, but then that is just haggling over the *degree* of
guilt, not that it exists.

No, it is the *USUAL* Arab form of doing business: first exaggerate
the price
or story by a factor of 5 or 10 and then you can haggle down to a more
believable figure. The Arabs are shameless in this and see nothing
wrong with
it. At least the Leftist Jew who lied about the extend of Deir Yassin
only
DOUBLED the number actually killed. The Arabs always start their
exaggerations
or outright lies by an exaggeration factor of 5 to tenfold.


You might also do a Google on "Stern Gang" and "Irgun" if you are
interested in reading *the other side* of the story... the Israelis
(collective) are hardly innocent lambs when it comes to terrorism and
murder.

First of all, they came into being LONG after Arab terrorism began,
indeed
well into the late 1940s, long after the first Palestinian leader, Haj
Amin El
Husseini helped the SS murder thousands of Jews in the Balkans, and
after his
planning a concentration camp that he was ready to set up outside
Nablus as soon as Rommel broke through. At any rate, Jewish terrorism,
which
was really lightweight stuff for the most part compared to the Arabs,
was
late in coming and was condemned by BenGurion's Left-wing Jewish
Agency which
helped the Brits to round them up.

the
Massacre of Dair Yasin (Apr. 10, 1948) in which a whole village of 500
unarmed Palestinian civilians were slaughtered by Israelis;

EVen the Palestinians themselves don't use this lie anymore. I have a
BBC tape where the villagers were interviewed, and altogether, perhaps
114 died, including possibly 25 which indeed were executed ("massacred').
The original figure of 254 was made up by Jewish leftist in order to
discredit Begin and the Irgun which was a rival of the Ben Gurion and
the mainstreat leftists who controlled the zionist movement. And even
the old villagers affirm there were no rapes or mutilations as was
originally alleged and circulated for decade.

Gee, only 114? I guess that makes it OK then (sarcasm switch to "on"
position). By the way, at what point does an atrocity become an
atrocity, in your opinion? If 114 is good-to-go, then all of those
recent Palestinian suicide bombings don't count either?

Most were killed when they fired from the homes, and naturally, having
been
given an offer to surrender (though it is said the sound truck got
caught
in a ditch and so the offer may not have been heard by the Arabs), the
Irgun irregulars returned fire and lobbed grenades into the homes from
which
the men were firing from behind their women and children, as usual.
Many men tried to escape dressed as women, and fired on the IRgun
irregulars,
who admittedly were not well trained being most recently arrived
concentration camp survivors, who indeed went overboard in rounding up
some of these
snivelling Arab dogs who would dress as women and fire from behind
their
own children, and had them shot and thrown down wells. There were
about
25 such, with the rest having died in normal battle which they could
have
avoided had they surrendered.


BTW, I did not mention the massacres by Arabs of hundreds of Jews that occured
in the 1920s and '30s, not to mention during the '48 war.

Check out the founding date for the Irgun, if you want to be
completely fair about this issue. How about the killing of Bernadotte?
Was that OK as well?

When was the Irgun founded? I should think after 1939, certainly long
after
such atrocities as the cold blooded murder of 64 yeshiva students in
Hebron
in 1929 who weren't even zionists. As for Bernadotte, that is a tough
one.
He was using his "Jew savior" status from WWII to try to reverse the
Partition vote of NOvember 1947, which would have reversed the vote
and
quashed the idea of a Jewish state after the UN vote had been voted
on and passed. Should the Stern group have assassinated him for that?
I can't say. I know the Arabs assassinated people left and right for
much
less than that and I don't see why the JEws have to be THAT much
better than
the Arabs. If your opponent is a ruthless, soulless and bloodthirsty,
how
goody-goody can you be? I mean, the US bombed Japanese and German
cities to
rubble even though no US cities were bombed during WWII. Does that
mean
that Americans are more ruthless and bloodthirsty than the Germans or
Japanese? THe answer is, that when you are dealing with ruthless
creatures
you cannot be pristine and expect to win with the help of angels. Even
in the bible that's relatively rare.

(some more Arab fabrications and wild exaggerations deleted for
brevity).


Listen Kevin, most of the stuff you listed either never happened or
were WILDLY exaggerated,

Given that you think 114 is an OK amount of dead, or for that matter
the 25 that you acknowledge were executed, I am not surprised that you
find this all rather inconsequential.

In battle people get killed. If our troops are being fired upon from
houses in Baghdad, I should hope our troops will not overly risk their
lives.
Of course they ought to throw grenades into the houses and not overly
risk
their own lives trying to sneak inside and overly exposing themselves.
And if some women
and children that their fathers chose to hide behind are killed, well
whose fault is that? It's the fault of those shooting from their
houses,
of course. I mean, what are our troops supposed to do, stage
month-long
Waco siege around every house they are being fired upon from?
As for the 25 actually "massacred" afterwards, their craven
manner,using
women's clothing to disguise themselves, and fire on the Jews, and the
like,
warrant their summary removal from the gene pool.

Now, even though you acknowledge
at least one incident of cold-blooded executions, can you tell me how
many Israelis, in the entire history of the nation, have been
arrested, tried, and/or convicted of terrorist-type attacks on
Palestinians? Given that the Stern Gang and Irgun did really exist,
and did really do some rather nasty things, one would think that some
number of Israelis have been held accountable for acts which occured
over the last 50-plus years...but to my knowledge, the answer would be
along the lines of the Bernadotte murder, where the case remains
"unsolved"...but hey, that's OK, right? Israelis are to be applauded
for committing murders and executions, but
by-golly-those-Palestinians-better-cough-up-every-terrorist-RIGHT
NOW...?

Where are the Arab condemnations of Haj Amin El Husseini, Arafat's
uncle,
who worked with Hitler in Berlin in helping him with the Holocaust? A
declared war criminal, no less than any major Nazi SS bigwig, he
ultimately
escaped justice and died peacefully in Cairo in 1974. As a declared
war
criminal at the Nuremberg trials, no one in the Arab world seem to do
much
to help extradite him to justice.
But ISrael is not asking that every terrorist be "coughed up." Israel
is
demanding that the PA disband Hamas and all other terror groups in the
same way that the IRgun, Stern group and others were disbanded and
became
part of the singular IDF after 1949. There can only be ONE Palestinian
militia
and not a myriad of them operating independently, just as there is one
ISraeli army and not a dozen Israeli militias.


just like "Comical ALi's" assertions of no
US marines in Baghdad. Massive lying is an old ARab tradition.

And apparently a new Israeli one.

At any rate, if we want to go back to determine who spilled blood first,
Arabs or Jews, I can confidently assert that Muhammad the Prophet committed
a massacre of 600 Jews near Medina (Yathrib originally founded by Jews in
Arabia), enslaving their women and children, robbing them of their wealth, and
ethnically cleansing the remainder out of the Hijaz (northern Arabia and
what is now Jordan), an edict which stands to this day. ARabs drew FIRST
blood, both in the seventh century and in the 20th century. They put their
mosques on Jewish soil, not the other way round. THere are no synagogues
on ARabian soil. Arabs are the aggressors; Jews are the defenders.

No, it is not about who was first--it is about realizing that the
violence has gone *both* ways, instead of trying to portray all
Muslims as evil murderers and all Israelis as White Knights. But you
can't admit to that, because it would tarnish your "Israel is
good/Arabs are evil" foundation for this entire discussion.

I don't tarnish Americans by calling them evil just because they
killed more
German and Japanese civilians. I still maintain that in WWII, the
Japanese
and Germans were more evil than the Americans despite the latter.
....

Uhmmm...do you have anything a bit more concrete? And just how did
these Pakistanis manage to go 10-0 during a war where most Arab
airpower was destroyed on the ground or never got into the fight?
Lastly, why bother? Your point regarding alleged Pakistani pilots
involved in the 67 War would be germane to the present issues exactly
*how*?

I don't know how true it is, but the Israeiis did lose 50 planes in that
war, and Pakis have long proudly claimed that their pilots were among
the few Muslim pilots that downed ISraeli jets. They make the claim, and
I have no verification of it, one way or the other.
Is it germane? Well, it might have something to do with why the US is hesitating
to supply Pakistan with the F-16s it paid for long ago. That, and the fact
that I suppose they can carry nuclear weapons.

The first is a non-issue as regards the F-16's; they were embargoed
because of the nuclear program. The US frowns on proliferation...but
Israel? Different view, apparently, as backed up by their cooperation
with the former South African nuclear weapons program...

That was way back in the 1970s, and only because the Arabs had bought
virtually
all the black African states into going against Israel. This despite
the fact
that in 1958 Israel was the first country in the UN to condemn
apartheid,
and had the largest technical aid assistance program in Africa,
proportionately
speaking. SO it was the perfidy of the black states that forced Israel
to
go over to doing business with SA.


....

First of all, as I have often stated before, nukes are a Jewish invention and
that fact alone gives ISrael the right to have them.

Now that is perverted logic if I have ever heard it. Nerve gas was a
German invention--does that give Germany the right to posses it?

Was it? Or was it a British invention? At any rate, there is an
international
ban against anyone having nerve gas, whereas there is no such ban
against
nukes. What there is is the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty where
countries
that disavow making nukes are allowed to purchase nuclear materials on
the
world market. Since Israel is NOT a signatory, it may not purchase
nuclear
materials, such as reactors, on the world market. Contrary to popular
misunderstanding, the NPT and the IAEA do not make it illegal for
countries
to make nuclear weapons, PROVIDED they do not obtain any materials
abroad.
But if a country has EVERYTHING it needs to make nukes within its own
borders, it has the sovereign right to make nukes.

And all of the other
states in the region are recognized and no one is threatening to wipe them
off the map.

Except Israel, with its nukes, right?

Israel has not officially declared itself a nuclear state, and had not
officially threatened anyone. But Israel has always claimed the right
to
preempt, just as the US now officially does.

I don't think there is a nation on earth, including the US, that
has a greater right to nukes than does Israel. And Israel has the right to
preemptively strike at any state in the region that is hostile to ISrael
and seeking WMD to destroy Israel.

More perverted logic. The way you portray it, Israel is a purely
Machiavellian Institution, and whatever it chooses to do defines
"right", instead of having policies that follow "right".

In fact, i believe the main reason the
US went to war in Iraq was to avoid a possible nuclear strike by Israel on
Iraq.

You are joking, right?

No, I am not. I agree that Iraq did not really pose a direct threat to
the
US. Saddam did pose a threat to ISrael, and if the US did not get rid
of him
using its mighty conventional power, ISrael would have had to do so
eventually
using nukes if it thought Saddam was developing them again.

At any rate, no Arab or Muslim had anything to do with inventing
nukes as did Jewish scientists.

More warped reasoning. Israel had nothing to do with the invention of
either the motorcar or the airplane--so they have no right to them?

ISrael has failed as a major manufacturer of planes and automobiles

If Iran or any state in the region threatens
Israel with WMD it can expect a nuclear attack by Israel at any time. Israel
is too small to wait to absorb a first strike.

Puhlease...get real.

That's a REAL as I can get. ANd trust me,that's the MAIN reason why
Bush is
involved in the Middle East. It has little to do with oil or any
direct
threat to the US. It has mainly to do with avoiding an eventual
nuclear
war in the ME, if at all possible.

The reality is, that Israel is a tiny state comprised of mostly 5
million
Jews, most of the male population of whom serves for weeks annually
in the reserves for most of their adult
lives, and which faces not only 4 million Arab enemies internally,


Nope. I like the Taiwanese.

WE defend the Taiwanese more than we defend Israel.

LOL! Harken back to 73 and the DEFCON status that Nixon placed us at
in response to Soviet rumblings vis-a-vis the Yom Kippur War.

Rumblings? That was AFTER the war had already started and the Soviet
resupply of the Egyptians was already going on for days! Nixon didn't
want to be seen as not backing ISrael while the Russians were pumping
in resupplies to the Egyptians, and threatening direct intervention if
Sharon destroyed the Egyptian army! The US STOPPED Sharon from killing
the surrounded Egyptian armies in Sinai from thirst. Obviously, the
US
could not allow the Soviets to unilaterally intervene, but it did
pressure Sharon to let up. If not, SHaron would gone to Cairo and
forced
a surrender of Egypt.

Rcall
that US Patriots and crews went to Israel during ODS. And remember
that we are not giving Taiwan billions of bucks each and every year.
Consider those FACTS, and then you might begin to get a clue...

The Patriots were always of symbolic importance, and only recently of
some limited value, though they did shoot down a few friendly planes.

As for not giving Taiwan a few billion bucks, we actually gave Taiwan
a
HELLUVA LOT more INDIRECT aid than to Israel. How? After the Vietnam
war
we looked the other way as Taiwan and the other "Asian Tigers" knocked
off US goods left and right, such as clothing, Apple Computers,
software
in Singapore, etc., to the tune of possibly TRILLIONS of dollars! And
despite
outcries by Apple and scores of other domestic companies, we did
nothing
about the cloning, knockoffs, and intellectual property ripoffs! Why
not?
Because after our defeat in Vietnam, we WANTED the Asian countries
surrounding China to get rich as quickly as possible, to immunize them
against communist
influence. Our domestic producers took a trillion dollar hit, or more.
These
countries didn't just go from rice paddies to chip fabrication plants
like
that, ya know! And this strategy of turning a blind eye in the '70s to
Asian ripoffs of US goods worked like a charm! It's not by a pure
fluke
that Taiwan, with only 20 million people has a foreign reserve SURPLUS
of
something like $90 billion dollars, the largest in the world!
It has more foreign reserves than all the aid the US has given to
ISrael
in 50 years combined! It and it didn't get that way purely from hard
work
and good luck either!

....

At any rate, I reiterate, if the US sells Egypt and Saudi
Arabia modern equipment, why shouldn't Israel sell to China, Cuba or anyone
who can pay for it? Israel also sells to the US. So ISrael ought to do
the same as the US, and arms BOTH sides. Why is this wrong?

Because we are footing the bill. Can the aid to Israel, and they can
sell to whomever they darned well choose--but they should not be
allowed to have it both ways. Kind of like what my father used to tell
me--"As long as I pay the bills, you live by *my* rules." We are
paying the bills.

You've got that ass-backwards! We give ISrael aid in order to CONTROL
its
arms sales and its foreign policy, as well as competition with US
companies.
WE'd much rather give Israel $3 billion in aid than have it freely
sell to whomever it wanted to just as the US does,in order to earn its
own keep by itself.