REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Israelis Create Warsaw Ghetto in Gaza

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, January 28, 2008 15:09
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7188
PAGE 2 of 4

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:23 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Why is he the one that is being bonkers? Just a question here? From his standpoint he's the owner and from yours you are. Depending on point of view you are both right. So why is his view bonkers? Surely it can be no more bonkers than yours?


Was in reference to his refusal to negotiate, not his viewpoint.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:48 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:

Why is he the one that is being bonkers? Just a question here? From his standpoint he's the owner and from yours you are. Depending on point of view you are both right. So why is his view bonkers? Surely it can be no more bonkers than yours?


Was in reference to his refusal to negotiate, not his viewpoint.

-F



Well in the end you both claim absolute rights to the same thing, so unless you plan to cohabit or timeshare I'm assuming that the negociation would involve someone buying the other out, which works only if you live in a society that places a monitory value on things. If your society doesnt, if this is scared lands not saleable at any price then there could be a problem. Within it's context it's no more bonkers than yours.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 2:59 PM

FREMDFIRMA


"His "answer" is to encourage new generations of Arabs, Jews, and Christians to learn together and play together, so that when they grow up, they are less likely to kill each other."

Sort of a new Medina Compact, started with kids not old enough to have been taught to hate each other - not a bad idea, although I'm not sure how he'd pull it off.

I try to point out to folks emotionally invested in hating one side or the other.. two things.

1. They're ALL the Children of Ibrihim/Abraham, this makes them "brothers".

2. All THREE beliefs have some strong words about fratricide.

How they rationalize around that, just plain escapes me.

-Frem

While not a perfect document, the Compact of Medina shows that historically the three faiths can and HAVE gotten along.
http://www.constitution.org/cons/medina/con_medina.htm

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:01 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Point acknowledged -

I am just of the opinion that anyone who prefers NOT to negotiate when negotiation is offered, knowing the outcome in that case is likely violence... isn't quite right in the head.

But that's just my opinion.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:18 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by Kirkules:
Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Palistinians had their land took from them- in recent, living memory- and they deserve to get some back, period.
How peeps cannot see this is just lack of logic skills.
Or meanness.




Ehud Barack and Bill Clinton offered Arafat exactly what you say the Palestinians "deserve" and Arafat turned it down. The reason he turned it down is because it's not land they want, they want to kill all the Jews or remove them from the region.


F'in A!...100% CORRECT!!!!!!!!!
Good to know that many, if not most here, are sane, smart people who don't draw moral equivalencies on this issue. And for Siggy Heil to use the Warsaw Ghetto reference really indicates how hopelessly demented and obtusely fucked-up some idiots truly are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:19 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Point acknowledged -

I am just of the opinion that anyone who prefers NOT to negotiate when negotiation is offered, knowing the outcome in that case is likely violence... isn't quite right in the head.

But that's just my opinion.

-F



It's only going to be violent because you've decided to defend your view with violence, there would be no need for negociation or violence if you chose to just give up which again is the same for both of you.

This is not to say that you should give up just pointing out that this will escallate to violence only if you defend your position with violence not because the negociation itself didn't work.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:23 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Jongstraw....

Just a quick question. Are you jewish? Is this why you insist on taking such a personal offense against anyone disagreeing with Israel?

It might help to have a better discourse with you if people understood your motivations....


How 'bout you take your "motivation understanding need" and stick it where the sun don't shine? Hope that helps clear things up for ya.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:09 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
not a bad idea, although I'm not sure how he'd pull it off.



Well, not without problems. But at least he's trying something besides throwing bombs, ya know?

Quote:

1. They're ALL the Children of Ibrihim/Abraham, this makes them "brothers".

2. All THREE beliefs have some strong words about fratricide.

How they rationalize around that, just plain escapes me.

Precisely why his book is called "Blood Brothers."

--------------------------
You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.
--Robert Heinlein, Logic of Empire (1941)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 5:13 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn- the whole "They started it" belongs in kindergarten.

I’m glad you finally figured that out, now maybe you’ll shut up about the “founding” of Israel. But it has nothing to do with what I said. You have this naïve view that Israel should treat the Palestinian territories as a “foreign Power?” But what good would that do? Evidently you can’t think that far ahead. Because if Israel treated the Palestinian territories as a “foreign power,” they would be doing the same thing they’re doing now. Defending themselves from invasion by Hamas suicide bombers and rockets.
Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
What part of "England gave Palestinian land ... land that was not theirs to give... to the Zionists. And the Palestinians didn't roll over and accept it" do you fail to understand?

The part where it was Palestinian land. There was no nation of Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire, which collapsed following defeat in WWI and fell into British and French control. The British, in 1921, then created the first Palestinian nation of Jordan since Biblical times, while reserving one fifth of the Palestinian Mandate under British control and opened to immigration. But I suppose it’s easier for lazy people to buy into this moronic argument that Israel “stole” land, and when confronted, deny the “they started it” argument.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 5:27 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"If a Wyandot or Huron native wanted his home back which included your present day house, would you give it back?"

Well, Canada ceded a large portion of land to the Innuit. It's called Nunavut. So I guess the answer is - some people do that kind of thing.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 5:38 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"hopelessly demented and obtusely fucked-up some idiots truly are"

Now that's what I like to see - rational and sane discussion of the issues.

***************************************************************
he he he he he he he he ....

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:51 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
"Democratically elected"...ha ha ha..just like Saddam used to get 99.9% of the vote? Very democratic I'm sure.




Actually Hamas really doesn't have to fix any elections, they essentially provide just about every public service in most of the camps. They are the guy's that give you fuel, water, food, clothes and educate your kids. In a culture where people feel obligated to those that help them Hamas is a shoe-in.

It's a classic example of the application of soft power. In most cases you can do more by winning hearts and minds than by threatening violence.







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:47 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:

Now that's what I like to see - rational and sane discussion of the issues.


Well hey Rue, so nice to hear from you. Been way too long. It's a bit thrilling to know that you still read my posts. Yes, certainly the "Israel Creates Warsaw Ghetto" thread title was meant to stimulate "rational and sane discussions". Anybody could clearly see that it was just an innocent selection of a subject matter with no predjudice intended.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 3:39 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But I suppose it’s easier for lazy people to buy into this moronic argument that Israel “stole” land, and when confronted, deny the “they started it” argument.

It doesn't matter that there was no Palestinian state when Jewish immigrants stole land from local Arab landowners. They still stole land.

Case in point. Elias Chacour, in his book Blood Brothers, describes how armed Jewish immigrants (most likely the Irgun) came into his village, demanded that they all run into the hills from an oncoming slaughter. So they all ran and hid in the hills. After weeks passed, they came back down into their village, to find that the land has been claimed by Jewish immigrants. The olive orchard that had been in his family for 3 generations was now owned by someone else. His father hired himself out to this new landowner to continue to care for his own orchard.

Now, if that's not stealing, I don't know what is.

--------------------------
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs.
--Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi's Collected Works, Vol 74 (1938)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 4:40 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Yes, certainly the "Israel Creates Warsaw Ghetto" thread title was meant to stimulate "rational and sane discussions".


If it looks like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and lays siege on people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and kills people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," then maybe calling it a "Warsaw Ghetto" will stimulate a rational discussion on whether or not it is in fact a "Warsaw Ghetto."

Here are some examples of this siege.
Quote:

3 Jan 2008: ‘Azzun ‘Atmah gate still closed at night, despite army’s promise: Two women forced to give birth in a car....

B'Tselem has twice contacted the military authorities and warned them of the danger inherent in closing the gate at night. The first warning came following the death of ‘Adel ‘Omer, a young man from the village who was seriously injured when a tractor overturned. Soldiers waited more than an hour and a half before opening the gate so he could be taken to hospital.

http://www.btselem.org:80/english/Separation_Barrier/20080103_Azzun_At
mah_Enclave.asp



Quote:

At around 2 A.M. this morning [5 December], I was woken by hard pounding on the door at the entrance to our building....The soldiers explained that they were looking for weapons. I told them we didn't have any weapons, and that they wouldn't find anything.... I saw them damaging the furniture as they searched. I protested, in Hebrew, and told one of the soldiers that they could search without destroying things. The soldier told me to shut up and said that if I didn't, he would cause more destruction,...We are a well-off family. We had quality furniture that we carefully chose piece by piece, which cost tens of thousands of shekels. Within an hour, the soldiers destroyed it. The soldiers also frightened the children a lot.
http://www.btselem.org/english/Testimonies/20071205_Destruction_of_Pro
perty_During_Search_in_Yata.asp



Quote:


According to B'Tselem, two themes clearly emerge from examination of the spectrum of human rights concerns in 2007. The first is the use of security justifications for virtually every Israeli action in the Occupied Territories . There is no doubt that Israel faces serious security threats, and is entitled and even obligated to do its utmost to protect its population. However, far too often, Israel fails to appropriately balance its security needs with equally important values, including protecting the rights of Palestinians under its control. In addition, Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests, such as perpetuating settlements and effectively annexing them to Israel .

The second theme arising from the report is the lack of accountability of Israeli security forces, in all matters relating to human rights. This can be seen clearly in the reluctance of the state to thoroughly investigate violations and to prosecute those responsible for them. The lack of accountability can also be seen in the denial of most Palestinians' right to compensation when they are injured through no fault of their own by Israeli forces.

In 2007 (up to 29 December), Israeli security forces killed 373 Palestinians (290 in Gaza , 83 in the West Bank ), 53 among them minors. By comparison, in 2006, 657 Palestinians were killed, including 140 minors: 523 in Gaza , 134 in the West Bank . In 2007, about 35 percent of those killed were civilians who were not taking part in the hostilities when killed. This is a reduction in comparison with the number of casualties who did not participate in the hostilities in 2006, which was 54 percent, (348 persons).

Palestinians killed seven Israeli civilians (three in a suicide attack in Eilat, two in Sderot by Qassam attacks, and two by gunfire in the West Bank ). This is the lowest number of Israeli civilian casualties since the beginning of the Intifada. Palestinians also killed six Israeli security forces. In 2006, Palestinians killed 17 Israeli civilians.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Press_Releases/20071231.asp


Quote:

A survey conducted by the Israeli military and published by leading Israeli daily, Yedioth Ahronoth, found that a quarter of soldiers serving at checkpoints in the West Bank perpetrated or witnessed abuse of Palestinians. ...

According to B'Tselem, most soldiers who harm Palestinians are never held accountable. Law enforcement authorities place numerous obstacles on Palestinians who try to complain against security forces personnel and only a small minority of complaints result in charges against those responsible for abuse.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Press_Releases/20071216.asp



--------------------------
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands. -- Douglas Adams

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 8:34 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

If it looks like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and lays siege on people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and kills people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," then maybe calling it a "Warsaw Ghetto" will stimulate a rational discussion on whether or not it is in fact a "Warsaw Ghetto."

WHY... YOU... YOU... JEW HATER!!!!

I'm sorry CTS, but your post is just too factual for Jongsstraw.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 8:43 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The British, in 1921, then created the first Palestinian nation of Jordan since Biblical times

...and Israel keeps sending "settlers" in and that's not taking land away from the Palistinians how...?
I just don't see something here...

At a loss Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:16 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:

If it looks like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and lays siege on people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and kills people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," then maybe calling it a "Warsaw Ghetto" will stimulate a rational discussion on whether or not it is in fact a "Warsaw Ghetto."

WHY... YOU... YOU... JEW HATER!!!!

I'm sorry CTS, but your post is just too factual for Jongsstraw.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.



HA!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:25 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
WHY... YOU... YOU... JEW HATER

Funny thing is, Btselem is an Israeli human rights organization, which means it is comprised largely of Jewish activists.

Courage to Refuse ( www.seruv.org) is also Jewish, since they are all members of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). I can't see how anyone could call them Jew-haters.

If Jewish people are protesting the immoral actions of their government, I think we oughta listen.

Edit to add: Read these articles and tell me again that Gaza doesn't sound like a Warsaw Ghetto.

http://www.seruv.org/english/signer_article.asp?sid=1

http://www.seruv.org/english/signer_article.asp?sid=6

http://www.seruv.org/english/signer_article.asp?sid=16

Quote:

The most critical question that arises is "what exactly is an illegal command?" What is immoral as opposed to just inconvenient or unpleasant, and into which category does the current situation in the territories fall?

An order to fire on a child standing before a roadblock is clearly illegal. But if the order is to shoot above his head to chase him from the roadblock, does the emotional damage the shooting causes the child make the order illegal? Is it illegal to continually enter Palestinian citizens' homes in the middle of the night? Is it illegal to prevent the free movement of Palestinian citizens? Aren't the searches, the humiliation, our many mistakes, an indication that our treatment of the Palestinian population under our rule is clearly illegal?

Military law does not define what a clearly illegal order is, but leaves it to the soldier. My interpretation of the law does not limit it to orders involving attacking, killing or injuring people. Rather, it includes any command that, when obeyed, leads to humiliating human beings, robbing them of self-respect, and depriving them of the basic human rights protected under the UN declaration of human rights, a document signed by Israel.

http://www.seruv.org/english/signer_article.asp?sid=22


Read all the articles written by the signers on why they refuse.

http://www.seruv.org/english/signers.asp


--------------------------
Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward.
--Henry David Thoreau

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:33 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
and Israel keeps sending "settlers" in and that's not taking land away from the Palistinians how...?
I just don't see something here...

Well first of all, why is it Palestinian land? Until 1967, this land was under the control of Jordan - there was no limit on settlements then. Israel acquired the West Bank as part of the 1967 War. So the West Bank is Israeli territory. Now it may be disputed by some, but it is not occupied; it is Israeli territory under military administration, and it has been since 1967. Israel is not a big country - they don’t have a lot of land to be tying up in red tape until crazy terrorist leaders decide to negotiate in good faith, because that will probably never happen. With no end in sight to Palestinian terrorist groups, Jihads and Intifadas, Israel simply can’t reserve this land indefinitely. There are Israelis, both Arabs and Jews alike, who want to build houses and make families. So typically speaking, settlements are not stealing anything from anyone.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:53 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Well first of all, why is it Palestinian land?

It's just that there's this group of people, and they live where they do, and if other peeps draw lines on maps and tell them to move, they should have a place for them to move TO that's not prison-like, in my view.

Hmmm...
Radical Palestinian:
I think I'll send some missiles into a Jewish hospital, that will get them to be sympathetic to my cause...

Israeli Government:
I think we'll cage and starve peeps not directly responsible for that hospital attack, that should get the missiles to stop...

I just don't see no sense here...



Confounded Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:00 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Well first of all, why is it Palestinian land?

It's just that there's this group of people, and they live where they do, and if other peeps draw lines on maps and tell them to move, they should have a place for them to move TO that's not prison-like, in my view.

But that’s not what’s going on. Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements. The Israelis are building settlements in suburbs or undeveloped land, just like we do here. They aren’t kicking Palestinians off their land. Now the Palestinians face a lot of hardship, but that has to do with the Palestinian government, not the Israelis. Palestinians living in Israel outside of the disputed territories live very well compared to Arabs in other Middle Eastern countries. If you get rid of the terrorist warlords strong-arm control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinians would be living very well in all of Israel.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:23 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But that’s not what’s going on. Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.

So would you say that this is a mischaracterization?:
Quote:

Since 1967 Israel has imposed its control over the Palestinian territories in the manner of a colonizing power, under the guise of occupation. It has permanently seized the territories' most desirable parts — the holy sites in East Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem and the fertile agricultural lands along the western border and in the Jordan Valley — and settled its own Jewish "colonists" throughout the land.

Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories has many features of colonization. At the same time it has many of the worst characteristics of apartheid. The West Bank has been fragmented into three areas — north (Jenin and Nablus), center (Ramallah) and south (Hebron) — which increasingly resemble the Bantustans of South Africa.

Restrictions on freedom of movement imposed by a rigid permit system enforced by some 520 checkpoints and roadblocks resemble, but in severity go well beyond, apartheid's "pass system." And the security apparatus is reminiscent of that of apartheid, with more than 10,000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and frequent allegations of torture and cruel treatment.

Many aspects of Israel's occupation surpass those of the apartheid regime. Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.


http://www.countercurrents.org/pa-dugard011206.htm


(?)Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:30 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But that’s not what’s going on. Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.

So would you say that this is a mischaracterization?:

Yes. Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Yes. Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel
Wow, talk about splitting fucking hairs! Thanks Finn, you made my day.

---------------------------------
It's not murder. Because we didn't kill people, just foreigners.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:46 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:

Yes. Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel
Wow, talk about splitting fucking hairs! Thanks Finn, you made my day.

It’s not splitting hairs at all. These just a huge difference between actions taken to further security or defense and actions taken on a basis of racism. These are two completely different things.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:49 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel.


Let me re-phrase: Is this what has happened or is happening?:
Quote:

[Israel] has permanently seized the territories' most desirable parts — the holy sites in East Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem and the fertile agricultural lands along the western border and in the Jordan Valley — and settled its own Jewish "colonists" throughout the land.

Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.






There. Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 11:09 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Let me re-phrase: Is this what has happened or is happening?:

No. Israel has not “seized” the West Bank, since the 1967 War. The West Bank is Israeli territory under a military administration. The land in the West Bank that is subject to settlement are lands that has been privately bought and developed. Israelis are usually better off then Palestinians living in the disputed territories, so they can afford larger houses and more amenities - as a result it may often appear to some that Israelis are “seizing” the “most desirable parts,” but that’s not really what is happening. And the violence instigated by Palestinian terrorists has taken a heavy toll on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

I’ve never heard of the IDF leveling agricultural lands, but it may have happened for some reasons. They do destroy the homes of terrorist warlords, military incursions and targeted assassinations. And these things would seem to exceed the violence commonly found under Apartheid in South Africa - but that’s a mischaracterization, because this isn’t Apartheid, it’s a civil war, and civil wars are like that.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 11:20 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And the violence instigated by Palestinian terrorists has taken a heavy toll on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.


So the PLO, anti-faddahs (I must have spelled that wrongish), terrorism, stone-throwing and violence in general is all because the Israelis can afford bigger and better houses, and not because of oppression and/or mistreatment of Palestinians? Colours them a right petty bunch, by that reckoning....

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 11:49 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And the violence instigated by Palestinian terrorists has taken a heavy toll on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.


So the PLO, anti-faddahs (I must have spelled that wrongish), terrorism, stone-throwing and violence in general is all because the Israelis can afford bigger and better houses, and not because of oppression and/or mistreatment of Palestinians? Colours them a right petty bunch, by that reckoning....

No. It’s about Palestinian war lords living high on the hog, like mafia dons over their own little piece of “Sicily” and the longer they can keep the violence and hatred going the longer they can hold their power.

The Israelis aren’t racists out to stick it to the Palestinians. They’re just like you and me - they’re trying to build a prosperous life and they’re doing a good job of it. Israel is one the wealthiest and freest nations in the Middle East and has one of the highest standard of living, and Israelis, whether Jewish or Arab, do very well, because of that. It doesn’t make them bad guys.

And the word I think you’re looking for is intifada.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:05 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s about Palestinian war lords living high on the hog, like mafia dons over their own little piece of “Sicily” and the longer they can keep the violence and hatred going the longer they can hold their power.

But why would the average Palestinian go along with that? Unless they were REALLY poor, or oppressed or something...something about this still don't make sense to me. You don't get the support of a people who are basically content and fed to rise against an otherwise benign government... or do the warlords operate without support?
Quote:


The Israelis aren’t racists out to stick it to the Palestinians. They’re just like you and me -

Totally, just like the Palestinians.

So is it basically the Israeli Gov't VS evil warlords with innocent bystanders on both sides in the crossfire, in your view?



Trying to harden the targetisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:30 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

These just a huge difference between actions taken to further security or defense and actions taken on a basis of racism.
That depends on the action, doesn't it? Because there you go again, confusing "intent" with results. See, it's not aparthied because I have nothing against a persons' race. I just stole his land and built a wall 'cause I don't like his religion.

*smacks forehead*
Of course! How could I have not seen that before!


Killing people for good reasonsisall.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:47 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
But why would the average Palestinian go along with that? Unless they were REALLY poor, or oppressed or something...something about this still don't make sense to me. You don't get the support of a people who are basically content and fed to rise against an otherwise benign government... or do the warlords operate without support?

I don’t know that they are going along with it. Most Palestinians are not suicide bombers, but in the disputed territories they are certainly very poor and oppressed probably wouldn’t be a bad word either. What is there not to make sense? Crime bosses have held entire cities hostage in the US, where we aren’t subject to the chaos of civil war. In the disputed territories, militia warlords control everything - the food, the fuel, what you can think or say. Palestinians in the disputed territories are caught in the middle of war most of them would just as soon be over. They prefer the stability and prosperity of Israel to the poverty and oppression imposed on them by nationalist and religious fanatical militias and they zealous wars they fight, but they don’t have any way out.

I don’t know how to get rid of the destructive elements in the Palestinian culture. A lot has been tried. Destroying houses and targeted assassinations for instance are attempts to take the fight away from the impoverished Palestinians caught in the crossfire and directly to the warlords who instigate the whole mess. In theory it should work, but I don’t know that Israel can practice it enough to make an effect. As soon as they do, some loon in the media reports on how they’re destroying poor Palestinians homes and then people, who are largely ignorant of the whole affair, start accusing Israel of being Nazis. Another thing they could try is to annex the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, thereby making the Palestinian government illegal. The action would eliminate much of the wealthy crust from which Palestinians warlords spring, and it would make Palestinians officially Israeli-Arabs, subject to full Israeli citizenship and all the benefits thereof, but it would also strain the Israeli economy and piss off a lot of Arab nations and all those ignorant people would still accuse Israelis of being Nazis for “stealing” Palestinian land.

I sometimes wonder if the real problem in this whole affair is the degree of ignorance with which the world views it, then anything local to Israel. Palestinian and Lebanese warlords have figured out that as long as they can keep the world’s attention on the poor Palestinian and IDF violence taken out of context, they can be some of the most successful crime bosses in the world. The Palestinian territories are the only place on earth, that I know of, where once you rise to the level of supreme terrorist lord, you’re rewarded with a seat on the General Assembly and a Nobel Peace Prize.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:50 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
That depends on the action, doesn't it?

No. Apartheid is racial segregation. That’s not what's happening in Israel.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:53 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Wow, talk about splitting fucking hairs! Thanks Finn, you made my day.

My "wow" came when he said this:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn:
So the West Bank is Israeli territory.

Funny, members of the Israeli Defense Forces call it the "Occupied Territories." (See quote below.) Here's some hair-splitting rationalization that even the Israeli's don't do.

And then another "wow" when he said this:
Quote:

Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.
(Yeah, cause they were made to leave back in 1967.) Talk about precision hair-splitting.

-----Footnote on the "Occupied Territories"------
Quote:


http://www.seruv.org/english/combatants_letter.asp

We, reserve combat officers and soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces, who were raised upon the principles of Zionism, self-sacrifice and giving to the people of Israel and to the State of Israel, who have always served in the front lines, and who were the first to carry out any mission in order to protect the State of Israel and strengthen it.

We, combat officers and soldiers who have served the State of Israel for long weeks every year, in spite of the dear cost to our personal lives, have been on reserve duty in the Occupied Territories, and were issued commands and directives that had nothing to do with the security of our country, and that had the sole purpose of perpetuating our control over the Palestinian people.

We, whose eyes have seen the bloody toll this Occupation exacts from both sides,

We, who sensed how the commands issued to us in the Occupied Territories destroy all the values that we were raised upon,

We, who understand now that the price of Occupation is the loss of IDF’s human character and the corruption of the entire Israeli society,

We, who know that the Territories are not a part of Israel, and that all settlements are bound to be evacuated,

We hereby declare that we shall not continue to fight this War of the Settlements.

We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.

We hereby declare that we shall continue serving the Israel Defense Force in any mission that serves Israel’s defense.

The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose – and we shall take no part in them.


-------End footnote---------


--------------------------
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.
--Courage to Refuse, IDF soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:01 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Funny, members of the Israeli Defense Forces call it the "Occupied Territories." (See quote below.) Here's some hair-splitting rationalization that even the Israeli's don't do.

The correct term is disputed territories.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:29 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1201070775918&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Just a little something to try help balance the anti-Israel links supplied thus far.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:19 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Wow. Finn splits another.

Take the beam out of your fucking eye, Finn.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:28 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is disputed territories.

And who decides that is the correct term?

Cause you know, everybody else outside of the government of Israel (and its sympathizers) calls it "occupied territories." This includes, as I mentioned, members of the IDF who served in said territories.

I suspect that many Americans support the fantasy that these territories are not occupied because they have never been occupied themselves. But anyone who has been subject to occupation KNOWS what occupation is and when one has been occupied. And those refuseniks understood and were honest enough to acknowledge that this is an occupation.

--------------------------
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.
--Courage to Refuse Combatant's Letter, signed by Israeli Defense Forces soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:32 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Just a little something to try help balance the anti-Israel links supplied thus far.

I supplied most of the links so far on this thread, and all the links I supplied are Israeli links.

So they are hardly anti-Israeli.

Unless you would call an American website criticizing American govt or policy (be it left or right) anti-American.

--------------------------
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.
--Courage to Refuse Combatant's Letter, signed by Israeli Defense Forces soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:42 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I sometimes wonder if the real problem in this whole affair is the degree of ignorance with which the world views it...

Do you think Israeli human rights organizations and Israeli soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories day in and day out, ripping up IDs and shooting at people who cut lines, are ignorant too?

--------------------------
We hereby declare that we shall continue serving the Israel Defense Force in any mission that serves Israel’s defense.
The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose and we shall take no part in them.
--Courage to Refuse Combatant's Letter, signed by Israeli Defense Forces soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 3:46 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


BDN: Your link starts with this quote:
--------------------
The crisis in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel had escalated dramatically since 15 January, due to daily rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli civilian residential areas by several militant groups from Gaza, and regular military attacks by the IDF on and into Gaza. There were also tight Israeli restrictions on crossings into Gaza to end rocket fire. IDF entered the Gaza Strip on 15 January and had been engaged in heavy battle by Hamas militants, including IDF air and tank operations. Hamas claimed responsibility for sniper and rocket attacks against Israel. Since then, more than 150 rocket and mortar attacks had been launched at Israel by militants, injuring 11 Israelis, and a sniper attack killed an Ecuadorian national on a kibbutz. Forty-two Palestinians had been killed and 117 injured by the IDF, which had launched eight ground incursions, 15 air strikes and 10 missiles this past week. Several Palestinian civilians had been killed in ground battles between IDF and militants, and in Israeli air strikes and targeted killing operations.

----------------

So IDF (Israel Defense Force):
Bottled up Gaza, blocked FOOD and FUEL to everyone.
Left the entire population of Gaza without sewage and water, and reduced electricity.
Militarily attacked in eight ground incursions (using tanks), 15 air strikes and 10 missile launches.
Killed 42 Palestinians and injured 117.

Meanwhile, Hamas:
Launched 150 rocket attacks against Israel
Injured 11 Israelis.

So... how does that make this "better" for Israel?

FINN_ The only naiton that is "disputing" the territories is... why, it's Israel! Huh. Who'da thunk?
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 4:23 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Here is a video of the exodus out of Gaza, for anyone who hasn't seen it.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/266.html

And interesting commentary from people who are there or have been there.

http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2008/01/must-read-this-is-why-israel
-wants-to.html


(These are the first non-Israeli links I've posted, BTW.)

--------------------------
We have the best government that money can buy.
--Mark Twain

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 5:38 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is disputed territories.

And who decides that is the correct term?

Cause you know, everybody else outside of the government of Israel (and its sympathizers) calls it "occupied territories." This includes, as I mentioned, members of the IDF who served in said territories.

Actually it’s the other way around. The UN doesn’t refer to the West Bank as “occupied territories.” Just like no one refers to Kashmir as an “occupied territory.” Most who are educated enough to understand the situation and impartial enough to evaluate it fairly don’t refer to these territories as “occupied,” because they are not. In order for a territory to be occupied it must have firsts had a permanent recognized government, and that last time that was true was WWI. The correct term is “disputed.” It’s what it is. Now you can call it “occupied” if you want. Most people who understand the situation have heard the term, so they’ll probably understand what you’re saying, but bare in mind, that it is a less accurate term, then “disputed.”



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 5:40 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
FINN_ The only naiton that is "disputing" the territories is... why, it's Israel! Huh. Who'da thunk?

If that were true, then there wouldn’t be any problem. Israel would have annexed it a long time ago and everyone would be happy campers.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 5:44 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Do you think Israeli human rights organizations and Israeli soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories day in and day out, ripping up IDs and shooting at people who cut lines, are ignorant too?

Some of them. Just because you call yourself a Human Rights Organization or been in the IDF doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about or have an honest or fair assessment. In fact, some of these people become polarized because of the traumatic things they’ve seen or done, and it becomes more difficult for them to view the situation with a fair or impartial perspective.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:38 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is “disputed.”

Again, correct according to whom?
Quote:

The UN doesn’t refer to the West Bank as “occupied territories.”

Then how do you explain this? (And there's more where this came from.)
Quote:


UN Resolution 446
1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/ba123cded3ea84a5852560e50077c2dc?Op
enDocument


UN Resolution 465
Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/db942872b9eae454852560f6005a76fb/5aa2
54a1c8f8b1cb852560e50075d7d5!OpenDocument


UN General Assembly Resolution 60/104
Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/271d2c2cbc1ffd9185257106006ae89d?O
penDocument



In addition, these folks think the correct term is "occupied."
Quote:


A conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention concerning the application of international humanitarian law in the occupied Palestinian territories took place in Geneva on December 5, 2001.

The participating High Contracting Parties reaffirm the applicability of the Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and reiterate the need for full respect for the provisions of the said Convention in that Territory.
http://www.fmep.org/reports/vol12/no1/07-conference_of_high_contractin
g.html


Quote:


International Court of Justice
By fourteen votes to one,
The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law”;
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=71&p1=3&p2=1&case=131&p3=6&


Summary in Wikipedia
Quote:


Applicability of the term "occupied"
The United Nations Security Council (in Resolution 446, Resolution 465 and Resolution 484, among others), the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention[6], and the International Committee of the Red Cross[7], have each resolved that the territories discussed in this article are occupied and that the Fourth Geneva Convention provisions regarding occupied territories apply. In its decision on the separation barrier, the International Court of Justice ruled that the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem are occupied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories


So, pardon me if I don't understand where you have the authority to deem that "disputed" the correct term. I haven't seen anyone who agrees with you on the international stage besides (as I said) the government of Israel and its sympathizers.

--------------------------
We hereby declare that we shall continue serving the Israel Defense Force in any mission that serves Israel’s defense.
The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose and we shall take no part in them.
--Courage to Refuse Combatant's Letter, signed by Israeli Defense Forces soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:44 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Just because you call yourself a Human Rights Organization or been in the IDF doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about or have an honest or fair assessment. In fact, some of these people become polarized because of the traumatic things they’ve seen or done, and it becomes more difficult for them to view the situation with a fair or impartial perspective.

By this reasoning, just because some Jews survived the Holocaust doesn't mean they have a fair assessment of what happened in those times--they may be judging Germany too harshly. In fact, because of the traumatic things they've seen or done, it becomes more difficult for them to view the situation with a fair or impartial perspective. Their assessment of the Holocaust and Nazi Germany may be wrong and rooted in ignorance.

--------------------------
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.
--Courage to Refuse Combatant's Letter, signed by Israeli Defense Forces soldiers who refuse to serve in the Occupied Territories

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 7:14 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Thanks CTS.

Finn, I don't usually stoop to personal commentary, but... are you listening to yourself? Excusing occupation, murder, terrorism... I'm grown up enough to know that it's bad whenever anyone does it. Are you?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 24, 2008 7:25 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is “disputed.”

Again, correct according to whom?
Quote:

The UN doesn’t refer to the West Bank as “occupied territories.”

Then how do you explain this? (And there's more where this came from.)

You’re right. I guess I never noticed how often Israel gets labeled as “occupying” the West Bank. I think the term may come from a lack of language to describe the authority of a disputed territory, but it brings to mind a conversation I had with a friend at work several months about how often Israel is singled out and unfairly criticized by the United Nations. It does seem like from the excerpts you posted here that the UN might be inaccurately loading the argument by imposing the word “occupied” on a disputed territory. I’ve rarely seen such language applied to Kashmir, or Karabakh or the Western Sahara, so it’s possible there could be an anti-Israeli sentiment in the UN. That would certainly explain why a PLO terrorists like Arafat would get such privileged treatment.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 09:39 - 2070 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL