Israeli-Palestinian prisoner exchange

[Hibrandenburg]

1 for 1000. Who got the better deal?

[Future17]

1 for 1000. Who got the better deal?

Impossible to know until the impact of the exchange is known in the long term.

[steakbake]

1 for 1000. Who got the better deal?

In PR terms, Netanyahu. One for the Israeli nationalists - one of our guys is worth a thousand of yours.

Suits both sides ultimately. Next stop: UN recognition for Palestine. This has "part of a deal" written all over it. Israel has never done anything it didn't want to or that didn't suit it.

[LiverpoolHibs]

A victory for the Palestinians and a victory for the Arab revolutions.

But the whole episode is one of those times that the entrenchment of racism in the political structures of Israel and in the world's media come into stark relief.

[Hibs Class]

A victory for the Palestinians and a victory for the Arab revolutions.But the whole episode is one of those times that the entrenchment of racism in the political structures of Israel and in the world's media come into stark relief. Any other examples of racism in this episode?

[yeezus.]

Yeah, UN recognition for a Palestinian state is needed, I don't see it with such a Zionist media however.:flag:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Any other examples of racism in this episode?

Well, it was mainly a reference to media oulets all over the world that have been all teary eyed about what Gilad Shalit may have been through without giving a solitary **** about the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli jails, who can name a single one of them?

I mean, has anyone seen it mentioned anywhere that as Shalit and the Palestinians were being transferred 3,000 Palestinians were in the middle of a hunger strike? Or that more than 750,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned by Israel since 1967? You'd have to have been living in a hole for the last few years not to know the name Gilad Shalit but who recognises the name Benan Oudeh? A fifteen year old boy who was beaten so badly in an Israeli prison that his testicles had to be surgically removed

Or the reams of media commentators who couldn't care less about malnourishment in the Gaza Strip until they see an Israeli soldier looking pale and thin.

[Hibs Class]

Well, it was mainly a reference to media oulets all over the world that have been all teary eyed about what Gilad Shalit may have been through without giving a solitary **** about the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli jails, who can name a single one of them?

I mean, has anyone seen it mentioned anywhere that as Shalit and the Palestinians were being transferred 3,000 Palestinians were in the middle of a hunger strike? Or that more than 750,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned by Israel since 1967? You'd have to have been living in a hole for the last few years not to know the name Gilad Shalit but who recognises the name Benan Oudeh? A fifteen year old boy who was beaten so badly in an Israeli prison that his testicles had to be surgically removed

Or the reams of media commentators who couldn't care less about malnourishment in the Gaza Strip until they see an Israeli soldier looking pale and thin.

Benan Oudeh, a victim of the situation whose name can rightfully be mentioned as an example of the suffering. As can Ofir Rahum's, an Israeli boy of 16 years who was seduced via the internet by a Palestinian, Mona Awana, and who when he agreed to meet with her was abducted and driven to his death, where he was machine gunned to the extent that his body was torn in two. He is at least as much a victim as Benan, and it does him a dis-service to present as black and white view as you do.

[Hibs Class]

Benan Oudeh, a victim of the situation whose name can rightfully be mentioned as an example of the suffering. As can Ofir Rahum's, an Israeli boy of 16 years who was seduced via the internet by a Palestinian, Mona Awana, and who when he agreed to meet with her was abducted and driven to his death, where he was machine gunned to the extent that his body was torn in two. He is at least as much a victim as Benan, and it does him a dis-service to present as black and white view as you do.

And I should add that Mona Awana is due to be released as part of this prisoner exchange. Rightly or wrongly this release torments Ofir's family and characterises the human suffering that occurs on both sides.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Benan Oudeh, a victim of the situation whose name can rightfully be mentioned as an example of the suffering. As can Ofir Rahum's, an Israeli boy of 16 years who was seduced via the internet by a Palestinian, Mona Awana, and who when he agreed to meet with her was abducted and driven to his death, where he was machine gunned to the extent that his body was torn in two. He is at least as much a victim as Benan, and it does him a dis-service to present as black and white view as you do.


And I should add that Mona Awana is due to be released as part of this prisoner exchange. Rightly or wrongly this release torments Ofir's family and characterises the human suffering that occurs on both sides.

You asked for clarification on what racism had been revealed during the swap deal. I gave it and you've responded with an example of a particularly unpleasant Palestinian attack completely unrelated to what we were talking about. I'm not sure why.

[Hibs Class]

You asked for clarification on what racism had been revealed during the swap deal. I gave it and you've responded with an example of a particularly unpleasant Palestinian attack completely unrelated to what we were talking about. I'm not sure why.

Your earlier post referred to "the whole episode is one of those times that the entrenchment of racism in the political structures of Israel and in the world's media come into stark relief". I would suggest that the brutal murder of Ofir Rahum and the release of his killer (or his killer's accomplice) was a part of "this episode", and that his killing was racially motivated and deserved condemnation, or at least acknowledgement. I take no sides in the middle east situation, and I'm sure I have less knowledge of it than you, but when you post in such right v wrong terms then it deserves challenge. I would also hazard that the crimes of (at least some of) the 1000 Palestinians released (and I assume you acknowledge them as crimes, but if you don't then please clarify) are as worthy of condemnation as anything Shalit personally did.

[Future17]

In PR terms, Netanyahu. One for the Israeli nationalists - one of our guys is worth a thousand of yours.

Suits both sides ultimately. Next stop: UN recognition for Palestine. This has "part of a deal" written all over it. Israel has never done anything it didn't want to or that didn't suit it.


Well, it was mainly a reference to media oulets all over the world that have been all teary eyed about what Gilad Shalit may have been through without giving a solitary **** about the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli jails, who can name a single one of them?

I mean, has anyone seen it mentioned anywhere that as Shalit and the Palestinians were being transferred 3,000 Palestinians were in the middle of a hunger strike? Or that more than 750,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned by Israel since 1967? You'd have to have been living in a hole for the last few years not to know the name Gilad Shalit but who recognises the name Benan Oudeh? A fifteen year old boy who was beaten so badly in an Israeli prison that his testicles had to be surgically removed

Or the reams of media commentators who couldn't care less about malnourishment in the Gaza Strip until they see an Israeli soldier looking pale and thin.

I think the example of alleged racism you provide is actually an example of the PR victory referred to by SB. Exchanging 1 for 1000 is always going to bring the media focus onto the one for several reasons, not least:

a) a whole nation was talking about Shalit and it was, therefore, impossible to report the exchange without a focus on him.

b) for outsiders, or those with little knowledge of the politics of the situation, the question being asked is "who is this person who is worth 1000 prisoners for his return?"


Benan Oudeh, a victim of the situation whose name can rightfully be mentioned as an example of the suffering. As can Ofir Rahum's, an Israeli boy of 16 years who was seduced via the internet by a Palestinian, Mona Awana, and who when he agreed to meet with her was abducted and driven to his death, where he was machine gunned to the extent that his body was torn in two. He is at least as much a victim as Benan, and it does him a dis-service to present as black and white view as you do.

Good point. :agree:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Your earlier post referred to "the whole episode is one of those times that the entrenchment of racism in the political structures of Israel and in the world's media come into stark relief". I would suggest that the brutal murder of Ofir Rahum and the release of his killer (or his killer's accomplice) was a part of "this episode", and that his killing was racially motivated and deserved condemnation, or at least acknowledgement. I take no sides in the middle east situation, and I'm sure I have less knowledge of it than you, but when you post in such right v wrong terms then it deserves challenge. I would also hazard that the crimes of (at least some of) the 1000 Palestinians released (and I assume you acknowledge them as crimes, but if you don't then please clarify) are as worthy of condemnation as anything Shalit personally did.

However much you might like to think so, there's no such thing as neutrality on the issue.

And you haven't challenged anything I've said.


I think the example of alleged racism you provide is actually an example of the PR victory referred to by SB. Exchanging 1 for 1000 is always going to bring the media focus onto the one for several reasons, not least:

a) a whole nation was talking about Shalit and it was, therefore, impossible to report the exchange without a focus on him.

b) for outsiders, or those with little knowledge of the politics of the situation, the question being asked is "who is this person who is worth 1000 prisoners for his return?"

But the media spotlight wasn't just on Shalit in the past few weeks. It's just been a ramped-up continuation of the coverage since he was taken prisoner.There's no reason for the amount of coverage Shalit has had or the manner of this coverage and the lack of coverage given to the huge numbers of Palestinians illegally detained in Israeli jails except for the fact that lots of people, particularly powerful people, value the life of an Israeli higher than that of a Palestinian. The Palestinian prisoners are consistently just an amorphous, unidentifiable mass - because no-one cares.

[Sir David Gray]

I'll begin by saying that I am absolutely delighted for Gilad Shalit and his family and friends that his time in captivity in the hands of terrorists is now over, however I fear that Israel has made a very big mistake in negotiating this deal.

Even as the swap was taking place, a spokesman for the terrorist Hamas organisation has said that this will allow them to kidnap more Israeli soldiers in the future so that more Palestinian criminals can be freed.

Let's be blunt here, this was not an ordinary capture of an enemy soldier. This was a kidnapping and his treatment breached the Geneva Conventions. People on here often quote things like that when criticising Israel but these same people seem to be awfully quiet on this issue.

I wonder why?

The people released from prison are some very dangerous individuals who have committed some very serious crimes against Israel. A lot of them are murderers and involved in various atrocities. They are unrepentant and I have no doubts whatsoever that they'll already be planning their next deadly attack on Israeli soil.

Fair play to Israel, there's not many countries who would have released so many dangerous criminals, particularly ones who are hell-bent on causing the destruction of that nation, in return for the release of one kidnapped soldier but they have done just that and I hope that they don't live to regret it. However, I fear that is exactly what will happen.

[Sir David Gray]

Well, it was mainly a reference to media oulets all over the world that have been all teary eyed about what Gilad Shalit may have been through without giving a solitary **** about the thousands of Palestinians in Israeli jails, who can name a single one of them?

I mean, has anyone seen it mentioned anywhere that as Shalit and the Palestinians were being transferred 3,000 Palestinians were in the middle of a hunger strike? Or that more than 750,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned by Israel since 1967? You'd have to have been living in a hole for the last few years not to know the name Gilad Shalit but who recognises the name Benan Oudeh? A fifteen year old boy who was beaten so badly in an Israeli prison that his testicles had to be surgically removed

Or the reams of media commentators who couldn't care less about malnourishment in the Gaza Strip until they see an Israeli soldier looking pale and thin.

I can.

Walid Abd al-Aziz Abd al-Hadi Anajas-Took part in the Cafe Moment bombing in Jerusalem in 2002, in which 11 civilians were murdered and 54 were injured.

Nasir Sami Abd al-Razzaq Ali al-Nasser Yataima-Planned the Passover Massacre in Netanya in 2002, in which 30 civilians were murdered and 140 were injured.

Maedh Waal Taleb Abu Sharakh, Majdi Muhammad Ahmed Amr, Fadi Muhammad Ibrahim al-Jaaba-Responsible for the bombing of a bus in Haifa, in which 17 civilians were murdered and 53 were injured.

Tamimi Aref Ahmad Ahlam-Carried out a bombing on a restaurant in Jerusalem in which 15 civilians were murdered and 130 were injured.

Abd al-Aziz Yussuf Mustafa Salehi-Took part in the 2000 lynching of two IDF members in Ramallah.

I think that sort of puts to bed any kind of notion of the poor, downtrodden Palestinians who are harshly imprisoned under the brutal Israeli regime.

Being a civilised and democratic nation, I can bet that the Palestinians who are in Israeli jails are looked after and treated a whole lot better than Gilad Shalit would have been during his time in captivity under Hamas.

[Future17]

However much you might like to think so, there's no such thing as neutrality on the issue.

What are you basing this on?


But the media spotlight wasn't just on Shalit in the past few weeks. It's just been a ramped-up continuation of the coverage since he was taken prisoner.There's no reason for the amount of coverage Shalit has had or the manner of this coverage and the lack of coverage given to the huge numbers of Palestinians illegally detained in Israeli jails except for the fact that lots of people, particularly powerful people, value the life of an Israeli higher than that of a Palestinian. The Palestinian prisoners are consistently just an amorphous, unidentifiable mass - because no-one cares.

Can you provide examples of the media you are referring to?

I know you've previously referred to "media oulets all over the world" but I don't think your preposition is accuarate with regard to the UK mainstream media.

[Dashing Bob S]

It could bring back that time-honored institution 'player exchange.'

Why does that not happen anymore?

[The Green Goblin]

I can.

Walid Abd al-Aziz Abd al-Hadi Anajas-Took part in the Cafe Moment bombing in Jerusalem in 2002, in which 11 civilians were murdered and 54 were injured.

Nasir Sami Abd al-Razzaq Ali al-Nasser Yataima-Planned the Passover Massacre in Netanya in 2002, in which 30 civilians were murdered and 140 were injured.

Maedh Waal Taleb Abu Sharakh, Majdi Muhammad Ahmed Amr, Fadi Muhammad Ibrahim al-Jaaba-Responsible for the bombing of a bus in Haifa, in which 17 civilians were murdered and 53 were injured.

Tamimi Aref Ahmad Ahlam-Carried out a bombing on a restaurant in Jerusalem in which 15 civilians were murdered and 130 were injured.

Abd al-Aziz Yussuf Mustafa Salehi-Took part in the 2000 lynching of two IDF members in Ramallah.

I think that sort of puts to bed any kind of notion of the poor, downtrodden Palestinians who are harshly imprisoned under the brutal Israeli regime.

Being a civilised and democratic nation, I can bet that the Palestinians who are in Israeli jails are looked after and treated a whole lot better than Gilad Shalit would have been during his time in captivity under Hamas.


And the other 995...I suppose every one of them is a "terrorist" too?

I condemn the crimes of the 5 you mentioned, and those that do likewise, because the actions of those individuals in taking lives in the circumstances you detail in your post are reprehensible.

I also condemn the ongoing crimes of Israel; the destruction of homes, the daily persecution of the people who live under their occupation, the murder of over 400 children out of the 1600 civilians butchered in the bloodletting in Gaza in 2008 and so on.

The whole "it's not a crime if Israel does it" logic is a blind and perversely biased stance that does you no credit whatsoever.

GG