Criticizing Israel [Archive] - Armageddon Online Forums

LC Jeffries

May 21st, 2004, 11:18 AM

Israel Expands Gaza Operations After UN Condemnation

Let us recap...

1. Israel is defying the UN.
2. Israel is killing and torturing its own people.
3. Israel has weapons of mass destruction.

In short, Israel actually IS all those things that Iraq was supposed to have been that justified the invasion. By openly defying the United Nations, Israel has totally undermined the US and Great Britain's legitimacy for the rest of the operations across the middle east.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=alFHWM_OHhEY&refer=top_world_news

That sounds alot like a bunch of Anti Semitic :bs:

Do you mind showing me proof of Israel torturing it's own people? Israel has had children blown up on school bus's and restaurants. Israel has shown more restraint then any other nation. Ever since 1948 when Israel became a nation, they have been brutally attacked and Arab countries have tried to invade the nation several times. Israel even gave back the Golan Heights to Syria to try to make peace. They have bent over back-wards to make peace with the Philistines. Then what happens. The terrorist attack innocent civilians even during peace talks.

Tell me if your children where on a school bus on their way to school and a truck packed with explosives where to drive up next to the bus and the driver blow's itself up along with many children and other riders, would you not want to go after the people who did this or would you say...

"Well, it's my fault that my child died, not theirs."

Who cares if they defy the UN. The UN has committed more destruction and ignored more destruction then any other group in the World. They are out to disarm sovereign nations so that they can have control of all weapons. They even want the right to go into any nation and take any person out of their nation and put them on trial because they don't go along with what they believe. Only when a country does something that they don't like, that's when they take action

Well then that's a whole different kettle of beans.

The WMD's are the only thing that is preventing Arab Nations from Invading Israel. They can easily wipe out all the Arab nations and not have to worry about her people being threated or blown up by Terrorist anymore. To me it seem's that the terrorist are supported by the UN.

:shot:

MetalMilitia

May 21st, 2004, 12:14 PM

That sounds alot like a bunch of Anti Semitic BS

I defer you to one of my (sarcasm) favorite key figures in US politics.

"It is not anti-Semitic to criticize the policies of the state of Israel" -Colin Powell

...ad I'm not even demonizing them. I simply want to know why they can continuously get away with doing whatever they want in the face of the international community.

Who cares if they defy the UN

Please stop, you're making my favorite brutal dictator laugh.

The WMD's are the only thing that is preventing Arab Nations from Invading Israel. They can easily wipe out all the Arab nations and not have to worry about her people being threated or blown up by Terrorist anymore. To me it seem's that the terrorist are supported by the UN.

That makes me feel much safer.

-MM- :crs:

Emerald_Dragon

May 21st, 2004, 4:20 PM

>Seriously though, is it a religious thing that keeps us from stopping them?

i think so. Most of America is Christian. Most of our politicians are too [ref Shrubya]. Israel's governing body is Jewish, the root religion of Christianity. Therefore, its only natural, IMO, that our politicians condone/ignore, the genocide of non-affiliated religions. Its the same on the other side, The Muslims, turn a blind eye, to their own fanatics, who chose to rid their regions, of non-affliated religions. You can say its a holy war, depending on your POV.

>As i said before. No one will touch/stop/convince Israel.

i [reluctantly] agree.

>Do you mind showing me proof of Israel torturing it's own people?

they did conquer alot of territory[Jenin?]. the people within their expanded borders are technically under their rule due to their conquests. so yeah, the denizens are their own people. We could use Iraq as a precedent. SH killed his own people, the Kurds, who did not accept his rule and sided with Iran. So he gassed them [Halabja].

They are not only killing their own people, they are killing anyone that happens to stand in the way. of their bulldozers. of their troops. of their expansion. reporters. anyone.

>Ever since 1948 when Israel became a nation,
>they have been brutally attacked and Arab countries have tried to invade the nation several times.

err, i thought they we given the land by people who had no rights to it? that they expanded their borders and those Arabs that are attacking them, are the people who used to live there trying to get their land back? How many homes were bulldozed? What's this 'fence'? Looks to me more like the Great Wall of Israel.

>Who cares if they defy the UN.

so you're saying if Iraq could defy the U.N., so should the Israelis? Didn't they just pull back from Rafah today after the UN passed an un-vetoed resolution?

>They can easily wipe out all the Arab nations and
>not have to worry about her people being threated or blown up by Terrorist anymore.

true, but who wants to live in a wasteland after its done?
that's their way of saying, take us out, and we'll make sure you and your ancestors never live here either. nuclear blackmail.

Moishe3rd

May 23rd, 2004, 3:24 PM

The UN is anti-semitic, specifically anti-Israel. It has over 56 members that are Muslim dictatorships, with an large additional number who support Islam due to political considerationsm, which includes most of Europe nowadays.
The UN has chosen Israel to repeatedly condemn and castigate for over fifty years. It has done so a the behest of the majority, whicha are anti-Israel.
There is no moral or ethical value whatsoever in the UN's condemnation (or support for that matter.) It is a powerless organization that caters to the lowest common denominator of criminal, murderous despots.
For Israel to accept anything the United Nations proposes would mean that they accept the destruction of Israel that the Arab / Muslim Fascist Death Cults desire.
That would be stupid.

Please read the following:

The U.N.'s Dirty Little Secret
The international body refuses to condemn anti-Semitism.

BY ANNE BAYEFSKY
Monday, December 8, 2003 12:01 a.m. EST

Last week, the U.N. once again proved itself incapable of rising to the moral challenges embraced in its founding Charter: "tolerance," "the dignity and worth of the human person" and "equal rights." A draft resolution on anti-Semitism--which would have been a first in the U.N.'s 58-year history--was withdrawn in the face of Arab and Muslim opposition.

Daily incidents of anti-Semitic violence around the globe are reported in the media. Yet while leaders of the Free World condemn synagogue bombings in Turkey, firebombings of Jewish schools in France, and the hate speech of Malaysia's president who now heads the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the U.N. moves in the opposite direction, encouraging the proliferation of this centuries-old hatred.

In marked contrast, other forms of intolerance continue to consume the U.N.'s attention and resources. A special rapporteur mandated by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights reports regularly to the U.N. on "discrimination against Muslims and Arab peoples in various parts of the world" including any "physical assaults and attacks against their places of worship, cultural centers, businesses and properties." An entire 2003 Commission resolution "combating defamation of religions," mentions only prejudice against Muslims, Arabs and Islam.

Condemnation of anti-Semitism--which ought to be axiomatic--engenders controversy and intransigence at the U.N. At this year's General Assembly, Ireland assumed the role of gatekeeper, slamming the door in the face of a resolution to protect Jewish victims. Ireland has shepherded resolutions on religious intolerance through U.N. bodies for nearly 20 years without introducing anti-Semitism. In mid-November current events prompted demands in the Irish Parliament for an explanation of this omission from Foreign Minister Brian Cowen. The shabby excuse offered at that time was to sacrifice Jewish rights on the U.N.'s alter of "consensus and a wide level of co-sponsorship."
In plain language, to Ireland, Arab and Muslim opposition to condemning anti-Semitism meant . . . cut and run! Irish unwillingness or inability to stand up for principle at a time when it is assuming the Presidency of the European Union, does little to enhance the credibility of either the U.N. or the EU as honest brokers in the Middle East peace process.

The behind-the-scenes story of this Machiavellian plot involves an Irish breach of a deal struck between Foreign Minister Cowen and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom only two weeks ago. Israel agreed to drop efforts to include "anti-Semitism" in the religious intolerance resolution in exchange for a promise from Ireland to introduce a new resolution specifically on anti-Semitism. But after the General Assembly's Third Committee adopted the resolution on religious intolerance minus any reference to anti-Semitism, Ireland refused to carry out its side of the bargain.

From the common era to the modern age, genocidal persecution of Jews has been justified by whichever label has served the perpetrator's interests: Religion, race, ethnic origin or nationality have all functioned, at one time or another as grounds for anti-Semitism. Ironically, the U.N. today can find none of these grounds sufficient to launch the vital campaign required to prevent the atrocities this hatred inspires. Instead, U.N. diplomats use the multiplicity of alleged Jewish crimes to place anti-Semitism between the stools. When the U.N. passed a major treaty on racial discrimination in 1965, they omitted "anti-Semitism" on the grounds that it "was out of place." Yet, a matching treaty on religious intolerance, promised by the General Assembly in 1962, was never acted upon.

Now, Mr. Cowen and company are claiming that anti-Semitism is, indeed, a matter of racial discrimination rendering it unsuitable for the resolution on religious intolerance. This self-serving reversal has been perversely justified in the name of the U.N.'s infamous 2001 Durban Racism Conference, which actually served as a platform for anti-Semitism.

The Durban Declaration excluded virtually all references to anti-Semitism and the Holocaust when it came to the specifics of taking action, and in a devil's bargain between the European Union and Arab states permitted a minimal reference to anti-Semitism in exchange for including a condemnation of alleged Israeli racism. Last week the U.N. General Assembly permitted reference to anti-Semitism in a resolution on follow-up to the Durban Conference, knowing that the United States and Israel would be forced to vote against.

At the heart of the U.N.'s problem with anti-Semitism lies rejection of the very idea of Jewish victimhood. Instead of ensuring that victimhood brooks no discrimination, on Nov. 26 a resolution condemning terrorist attacks on Israeli children failed to make it through the General Assembly while one on Palestinian children was adopted with only four states opposed. Israel was forced to withdraw its resolution because Egyptian amendments deleting "Israeli" before every mention of the word "children" were guaranteed an automatic U.N. majority.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan--who has occasionally paid lip-service to the problem of anti-Semitism--ignored the requests of both NGOs and the state sponsors of the anti-Semitism resolution to weigh in on the importance of the issue with U.N. members, or to press the point with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, just as he has never convened a conference or written a report dedicated to anti-Semitism. The unwillingness of the U.N.'s principal organs and its secretary general to confront and take meaningful action against this scourge, including its Muslim and Arab sources, is not merely a sin of omission.

The U.N. is an organization founded on the ashes of the Jewish people, and whose core human rights principles were drafted from the lessons of the Holocaust. The inability of the organization to address seriously one of the very evils it was intended to prevent is a scandal of global proportions. In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declared, "disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind." Fifty-five years later the outrage is gone, the silence of the U.N. when it comes to anti-Semitism is deafening, and the only ones benefiting are those planning future barbarous acts against Jews everywhere.

Ms. Bayefsky, an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School and professor of political science at York University, Toronto, is a member of the governing board of UN Watch.

Moishe3rd

May 23rd, 2004, 3:26 PM

There are thousands of these resources regarding what the UN has tried to do to Israel.
Here's another:

The U.N.'s Israel Obsession
by David Tell, for the Editors
05/06/2002, Volume 007, Issue 33

IN 1948, when the armies of five surrounding Arab dictatorships invaded tiny, newborn Israel--in what the secretary general of the Arab League announced was a "war of extermination" against "the Jews"--the United Nations sat on its ass. And did not send a fact-finding mission.

But, oh, how the U.N. has been making up for that oversight ever since. For more than 50 years now, the Jews have been its favorite subject.

Among the nearly 200 nations represented at the U.N., only Israel has ever been assigned special--reduced--membership privileges, its ambassadors formally barred, for 53 straight years ending only recently, from election to the Security Council. Meanwhile, and right up to the present day, that same Security Council has devoted fully a third of its energy and criticism to the policies of a single country: Israel. The U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which regularly--and unreprovingly--accepts delegations from any number of homicidal tyrannies across the globe, has issued fully a quarter of its official condemnations to a single (democratic) country: Israel.

There has been a genocide in Rwanda, an ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia, periodic and horrifying communal "strife" in Indonesia's East Timor, the "disappearance" of a few hundred thousand refugees in the Congo, a decades-long and culturally devastating occupation of Tibet by the People's Republic of China . . . but none of those U.N. member states has ever been subjected to the rebuke of a General Assembly "emergency special session." Israel has, though, repeatedly, simply for refusing to surrender in the face of terrorist attacks that have killed hundreds and injured thousands of its citizens--murders that no U.N. resolution has ever so much as mentioned.

No fewer than four separate administrative units within the U.N.--two of them directly supervised by Kofi Annan's governing secretariat--do nothing but spend millions of dollars annually on the production and worldwide distribution of propaganda questioning Israel's right to exist. The "Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and other Arabs of the Occupied Territories," for example, "investigates" Israel's continued "practice" of "occupying" not just the territory taken in the 1967 war, but also the land within its internationally recognized, pre-1967 borders.

And then there is the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, an operation originally established in December 1949 to assist those Palestinian refugees created by the Arab world's botched attempt at a second Final Solution. UNRWA, as it happens, is centrally relevant to its parent organization's latest outburst of naked Israelophobia. Because UNRWA wholly funds and largely administers the West Bank refugee camp in Jenin where the Israeli army is purported--by various Palestinian militants and local U.N. officials--to have just perpetrated a "massacre" of "unarmed civilians." It is to the site of this alleged "atrocity" that Kofi Annan now intends to dispatch a commission of inquiry chaired by Yasser Arafat's favorite European diplomat, former president Martti Ahtisaari of Finland, and seconded by Cornelio Sommaruga, retired chief of the International Red Cross, a man who once likened the Star of David to a swastika.

All by themselves, Annan's personnel choices here are a genuine scandal, and as this issue of The Weekly Standard goes to press, Israel's understandable objections, to Sommaruga in particular, have left it a still open question when and whether the secretary general's designees will ever be allowed to reach their destination. And if, at the end of the day, they aren't? That will be perfect justice, we think. The "world community" will howl, of course, and Israel's many enemies will believe the worst. But they believe the worst already. And they will continue to believe the worst no matter what. And, quite apart from the controversy over what its staff should look like, the whole idea of a U.N. fact-finding mission to Jenin is scandalous to begin with, it seems to us--an assault on Israel's honor, even its basic legitimacy as an independent nation, that no similarly situated democracy would ever be expected to endure.

Assuming Annan's investigators do eventually make their way to Jenin, is it possible they might actually find the "facts" they are looking for? No, almost certainly not. Media accounts of Israel's incursion into a football-field-sized sector of the camp have bubbled over with lurid details worthy of a medieval peasant's worst anti-Semitic fantasies. And the peasant-in-chief has been a U.N. official, UNRWA commissioner general Peter Hansen, who has given dozens of lip-smacking interviews recounting "wholesale obliteration," "a human catastrophe that has few parallels in recent history," "helicopters . . . strafing civilian residential areas," and "bodies . . . piling up" in "mass graves." Some of this carnage Hansen even claims to have seen "with my own eyes." But he is a bald-faced liar. The Israelis have been out of Jenin--and foreign journalists and other international observers have been back in--for more than a week. And no evidence, literally nothing that would indicate the presence of a civilian "massacre," has yet emerged.

Quite the contrary, rescue workers in Jenin have so far recovered the bodies of six--not the rumored six hundred, but six--women, children, and elderly Palestinians. This, in a now ruined central area of the camp where countless armed gunmen rained days of nonstop sniper fire on Israeli foot patrols from the windows of still-occupied residences they had booby-trapped with high explosives. This is a "massacre"?

And why, even if its death toll had proved a hundred times higher, would it warrant a U.N. fact-finding mission? In 1993, just after the events lately made famous by Hollywood's "Black Hawk Down," a two-week U.S. bombing campaign against Mogadishu killed a thousand Somali civilians. During the whole of the present intifada, now six months old, far fewer Palestinians than that have died as Israel has attempted to rescue itself from a national security threat far graver and more immediate than any America faced in East Africa. But did it ever occur to the United Nations to convene an inquest into the "human catastrophe" that was Somalia? It did not.

Maybe the U.N. picks on Israel simply because it can. Or maybe, just maybe, there is a darker impulse at play.

Which would explain why the U.N. has spent decades, in the guise of refugee assistance, providing active, organized, and enthusiastic auxiliary services to the most delusional and violent strains of Jew-hating Palestinian irredentism. It bears mentioning, though one rarely hears it mentioned, that the UNRWA camp at Jenin has been for years what the Palestinians call a'simat al-istashidin, the "suiciders' capital," from which dozens of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, Al Aksa, and Tanzim terrorist attacks have been launched, killing hundreds of Israelis.

UNRWA funds and staffs the schools of Jenin, where, from fall through spring each year, children are taught that all of "Palestine," from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, belongs to them. During summer vacation, those very same schools host training camps in which those very same students are instructed in the arts of kidnapping and rock-throwing and bomb-manufacturing and martyrdom. UNRWA rents the buses that regularly take residents of Jenin on tours of the Israeli countryside--where "their" property, "stolen" by the Jews, is carefully pointed out. UNRWA allows its food warehouses in Jenin to do double duty as munitions dumps. UNRWA pretends not to know that explosives and counterfeit currency factories are housed in the public shelters it has constructed in Jenin. UNRWA cannot understand how it might be that its own administrative offices in Jenin are festooned with graffiti celebrating some of the world's most notorious terrorist organizations. Or how some of the world's most notorious terrorists might have found their way onto the agency's payroll--to the point where the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, extreme even in the context of Palestinian extremism, now openly controls the UNRWA workers' union.

This same United Nations, the blood of Israeli civilians still wet on its hands, now dares to question the morality of a modest, defensive, and long-overdue Israeli reprisal?

In curricular materials published by the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Education, "Objective Five" for high school history teachers reads as follows: "The student will understand why the people of the world hate the Jews." It is a question for the ages. Zionism may no longer be racism at the United Nations. But anti-Semitism is forever.

--David Tell, for the Editors

© Copyright 2004, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.

Rusti

May 23rd, 2004, 4:02 PM

The UN isnt worth the paper it prints its resolutions on. Personally we are better off with out them.

Also i dont trust the Arabs or Muslims at all, i dont hate them, i dont know enough personally to hate, but trust. Thats different and thats a big no.

humanhybrid

May 23rd, 2004, 4:38 PM

Rusti

May 23rd, 2004, 6:16 PM

But the muslims keep hiding behind their koran, whose the worse?

Moishe3rd

May 23rd, 2004, 7:36 PM

humanhybrid poppyock,
You did not read the articles? Or you found them uninteresting?
And confess I to misunderstandering the expression
UN ladies and gentleman is an institution of man "woman".
Expression odd this is which means Wot?

Emerald_Dragon

May 24th, 2004, 9:11 AM

>The UN is anti-semitic, specifically anti-Israel.

Is it anti-Semitic to make note internationally of the wrongs being committed by a member nation?
If they are doing something wrong, shouldn't they be written up for it? Should they be excluded because they are Semitic?

>The UN has chosen Israel to repeatedly condemn and castigate for over fifty years.

So you're saying all those resolutions against Israel are "trumped up charges". Meaning they have no basis in fact when investigated?

> It has done so a the behest of the majority, whicha are anti-Israel.

So you're saying that Democracy doesn't work?

>IN 1948, ...--the United Nations sat on its ass.

So you're saying the the U.N. has been effective then, as it is now.
I guess you can say, "It is, as it was".

>You did not read the articles? Or you found them uninteresting?

I found them heavily biased. I'm sure there exist 1000s of articles saying the opposite.

>And confess I to misunderstandering the expression

>>Quote:
>>UN ladies and gentleman is an institution of man "woman".

>Expression odd this is which means Wot?
That was vague, but your response to it was equally cryptic.
I could only guess English is not your native language. French maybe?

Moishe3rd

May 24th, 2004, 12:33 PM

ED,
You found the articles above "heavily biased." In what way? Can you present anything to contradict the FACTS laid out by these articles?
Fact: Israel is constantly rebuked by the UN for its actions as opposed to those nations mentioned such as China; Yugoslavia; Rwanda; Indonesia etcetera. - You find this biased in what way?
Fact: The UN has never condemned the Israel's Arab neighbors, including the Palestinians, for proclaiming and attempting to carry out the elimination of Israel. - This is biased how?

What UN resolutions have condemned either Arab countries or Palestinians for slaughtering Israelis and murdering innocents?

If the majority wants you dead, ED, do you call that Democracy? Do you protest their "will?" Or, unlike some, does your head get sawed off quietly, as you bow to a Democratic death?

LC Jeffries

May 24th, 2004, 12:43 PM

Sudan who enslaves children,and according to recent news, millions of people both Christian and Moslem are going to die by August. Several African nations such as Rowanda tribes have murdered millions of innocent people wiping out entire villages. White Farmers in South Africa are having farms in which have been in families for generations are being forced off their land by tribes of terroist.

Yet the UN has not said a word, or done anything about these events. I believe they are allowing this to happen as a form of their Population Control Plans.

Emerald_Dragon

May 24th, 2004, 3:40 PM

>Can you present anything to contradict the FACTS laid out by these articles?

I didn't say they weren't "factual". I said they were biased. To be biased, you merely leave out facts that don't support your argument. Like causality.

>Fact: The UN has never condemned the Israel's Arab neighbors, including the Palestinians,
>for proclaiming and attempting to carry out the elimination of Israel. - This is biased how?

IMO, it leaves out why they are doing so. Like, trying to get their land back.
When you take something by force, chances are good, force will be used to try and retrieve it.

I don't condone the Palestinians for doing what they've done. Neither do I believe the Israelis are wholly innocent in the matter. Which, the articles, seem to want to convey. Hence, bias.

Here's another article that could be said to be biased in the other direction.
http://www.counterpunch.org/gaffney11292003.html
"
I think it is time Israel and Palestine recognise that this is not
a religious conflict. It is not a conflict between Muslims and Jews
or followers of Judaism. It is a territorial problem. Palestine had
lots of Arabs living there together with Jews when the Europeans
decided together with the Zionists to create the state of Israel.
"---Mahatir Mohammmed

I couldn't find the source of these words, but its a summary. I don't agree that its "hate" speech. Its been labelled as such by American media. Far from it, IMO.

>IN 1948, when the armies of five surrounding Arab dictatorships invaded tiny, newborn Israel--

this statements makes it sound like a Lord of the Rings scale, five armies in an epic battle. but the reality was far from it. the Balfour Declaration [written on a napkin(?)], does not a country make. neither does hounding Harry S. Truman for months to recognize Israel as a state to the U.N., harping the horrors and wrongs of the Holocaust to justify it.

I think you've been reading too many www.camera.org articles. Vary it up, read both sides, come to your own conclusions about what is being said and what you're supposed to believe.

Moishe3rd

May 24th, 2004, 5:09 PM

>Fact: The UN has never condemned the try and retrievIsrael's Arab neighbors, including the Palestinians,
>for proclaiming and attempting to carry out the elimination of Israel. - This is biased how?

IMO, it leaves out why they are doing so. Like, trying to get their land back.
When you take something by force, chances are good, force will be used to e it.

This is your "causality?"
And this justifies the UN only condemning Israel and never condemning the heinous crimes of other nations.... How???
You have no arguement. You state your bizarre opinions and throw out odd advice to read more - as if some more reading will change the FACTS.
Give me a fact where the UN has evenly remotely chastised another nation such as Sudan or Rwanda or Iraq or China, blahdeblahdeblah for literally murdering millions, decimating other sovereign nations, etcetera, etcetera ad nauseum.
What are you "supposed to believe?"
I believe in facts.

Moishe3rd

May 24th, 2004, 5:27 PM

ED,
This silly article is predicated on a deliberate lie. Mr Gaffney's statement:

Mahathir deserves criticism for several of his statements. But his claim that Israel relies on others to do its bidding was an apt description of the present US-Israel relationship. Within the context of its larger strategy of world domination, the US is now assisting Israel to achieve its goal of regional hegemony in the Mid East. This is reflected in current US policy toward Syria and Iran, which bears a striking resemblance to the priorities of Israel's hard-line prime minister, Ariel Sharon.

is a lie.

What Mahathir actually said was:

We are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.

You are free to believe in this absurd statement. It is a stupid and anti-semitic statement, but people believe many stupid and anti-semitic things. Too bad.
However, what Mr. Gaffney bases his whole biased piece upon is not what Mahathir said....

Gaffney's piece (edited at the end for too long a post)

Weekend Edition
November 29 / 30, 2003

Passing the Sanctions Bill
US Congress Does Israel's Bidding, Again
By MARK GAFFNEY

On October 16 a Muslim leader, Mahathir Mohammed, delivered the keynote address before an all-Islamic Summit Conference in Malaysia. In his speech Mahathir called for Muslim unity. He condemned terrorism. And he urged the Muslim world to focus on cultural and economic development. All in all, the tone of the speech -- and I read the text -- was remarkably restrained, given the recent US attack on Iraq and Israel's continuing brutal treatment of the Palestinians. Yet, the reaction of the western press was to excoriate Mahathir for making anti-semitic remarks, for example, his claim that Israel finds proxies to do its bidding.

Mahathir deserves criticism for several of his statements. But his claim that Israel relies on others to do its bidding was an apt description of the present US-Israel relationship. Within the context of its larger strategy of world domination, the US is now assisting Israel to achieve its goal of regional hegemony in the Mid East. This is reflected in current US policy toward Syria and Iran, which bears a striking resemblance to the priorities of Israel's hard-line prime minister, Ariel Sharon.

Consider the evidence. On October 15 the US House passed a bill that would impose a variety of sanctions on Syria. The vote was overwhelming: 398-4. On November 11 the US Senate passed a nearly identical bill by a similarly lopsided margin, 89-4. The final wording will give President Bush considerable leeway to impose a wide range of sanctions against the Assad regime in Damascus.

Members of Congress described the bill as necessary to punish Syria for allowing infiltration across the border into Iraq, for pursuing weapons of mass destruction (notice, the same charge leveled against Saddam Hussein), and because of Syria's military adventures in Lebanon and its support of terrorism.

The problem with these stated reasons is that they fail to withstand closer scrutiny. On October 29 the Washington Post ran a follow up story about alleged infiltration across Syria's 300-mile border with Iraq. The Post interviewed US military commanders with the 101st Airborne Division, guarding the northern portion of the frontier, and officers with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, currently watching the southern part of the line. The US commanders flatly denied that any significant infiltration was occurring across the border into Iraq.

They conceded that a 60-mile stretch of border north of the Euphrates River remains unpatrolled by U.S. ground forces or Iraqi border police. However, the line is being constantly monitored by air, under a project the US military refers to as Operation Chamberlain. The project involves sophisticated Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) planes that gather information about vehicle movements and relay it to US forces.

If nothing of any consequence is getting through to trouble US forces in Iraq, why did members of Congress cite border infiltration to justify the sanctions bill?

This brings me to the second stated reason, Syria's alleged pursuit of weapo ns of mass destruction. It's no secret, the world has known for many years, that Syria has chemical weapons mounted on an aging Soviet era missile force. All very true. The problem is that no one in the House bothered to mention that Syria's decrepit missiles are its deterrent, markedly inferior I should add, to its neighbor Israel's larger and vastly more advanced arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The current balance of military power between the two states is weighted so heavily in favor of Israel that to cite Syria's weaker deterrent as a justification for sanctions is almost laughable. The fact that Israel's weapons of mass destruction were never mentioned in the discussion about the sanctions bill must have perplexed the many inhabitants of the Mid East who follow US politics more closely than do most Americans, and who live with the constant threat of their presence.

But let us now consider the third stated reason for the sanctions bill, namely, Syria's military occupation of Lebanon, and terrorism. The problem with this should have been obvious to anyone who follows the news. Ten days prior to the House vote Israeli war planes bombed a site near Damascus. It was a flagrant act of war, an attack deep inside Syria, something Israel had not done for thirty years. Of course, the US media did not portray the attack as terrorism. Whatever we do (and this includes our ally Israel) is not terrorism, but counter-terrorism. To the people on the ground in Syria who were bombed, of course, the attack was surely viewed as Israeli terrorism. It is true that Syria's military adventures in Lebanon and its support for radical Palestinian groups like Jihad deserve sharp criticism. But sanctions? Did the US impose sanctions on Israel in 1982 when the Israeli army invaded Lebanon and slaughtered as many as 20,000 people, mostly civilians? The invasion was unprovoked. As the Israeli military historian, Ze'ev Schiff, pointed out in his book Green Light Lebanon, the border had been quiet for nearly a year. In the end, Israel had to stage an incident to create the necessary pretext for the attack, which was planned and led by none other than Ariel Sharon; just as the US was forced to stage an incident in the Gulf of Tonkin to â¤justify" the planned massive US bombing of North Viet Nam in the 1960s; and just as Adolf Hitler was compelled to stage a border incident as a pretext for his historic invasion of Poland in September 1939. All similar cases.

When Israel's 1982 war ended badly, did the US impose sanctions on Israel for occupying southern Lebanon for many years? No, of course not. Israel received a light slap on the wrist, after which the flood of US aid continued. Indeed, it increased.

Obviously, the reasons given by Congress for sanctions against Syria are nothing but smoke and mirrors. But why the ruse? I would argue that deception was deemed necessary because of the sensitive nature of the policy. If the American people understood the actual reason for the sanctions bill they might not support it. And what was the actual reason? It was given last April, as US forces were invading Iraq, in a public statement by Daniel Ayalon, the Israeli ambassador to Washington. Ayalon called for regime change in Syria and Iran, to be achieved by "diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions, and psychological pressure." The Israeli ambassador noted that the US invasion of Iraq and overthrow of Saddam Hussein had helped create great opportunities for Israel but it was "not enough." "We have to follow through," Ayalon told a conference of the pro-Israeli Anti-Defamation League. â¤We still have great threats of that magnitude coming from Syria, coming from Iran."

Ayalon stated the real reason. And, notice, this means that Mahathir Mohammed had it exactly right. The US is currently doing Israel's bidding in the Mid East. Nor is the policy solely that of the conservative Bush administration. The overwhelming votes in the House and Senate show just how deep the support for Ariel Sharon is in Congress. The Bush administration had opposed the House bill, initially. Bush only signed on whenthe bill's overwhelming passage became inevitable.

Emerald_Dragon

May 25th, 2004, 6:37 PM

>You are free to believe in this absurd statement.

like i said,
"Here's another article that could be said to be biased in the other direction."

contact him and let him know what you think at MHGaffney@aol.com

>This is your "causality?"

As i see it, the condemnations of Israel by the U.N. have been more like notifications of, you shouldn't be bulldozing peoples homes while they're living in them, you shouldn't be indiscriminately killing Palestinians because they happen to be in front of your guns, you shouldn't be tearing down olive orchards hundreds of years old. Resolutions passed against the governing body when the US doesn't veto them first.

Whereas in third world countries like Sudan, Rwanda and such, correct me if I'm wrong, the governing bodies change every couple years due to revolutions, which are the causes of the mass killings. Are the gov'ts of these small countries capable of combatting the warlords in their country? Are these warlords the governing bodies of their countries?

Now howbout answering some of the questions I've posed?
According to you, the UN resolutions are anti-Semitic, could they apply to any other country?
Should Israel be excluded from resolutions because doing so, would be anti-Semitic?

playmaker88

May 26th, 2004, 7:22 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3748011.stm

Moishe3rd

May 28th, 2004, 12:12 AM

I find it odd to equate destroying zoo animals' homes or destroying Palestinian homes with murdering human beings in Israel and elsewhere.
If destroying home is the same to you as murdering babies, then I suspect that you and I will never see eye to eye.

It's not the same. And it never will be.

Most of the most heinous perpetrators of mass slaughter, destruction and invasion such as Sudan, Rwanda and China all have very stable governments.
Saddam Hussein, who started the Iraq/Iran war and the invasion of Kuwait, sending the death toll over a million, was in power for what? 25 years? Long time for dictator of the month.
No, the fact is that Russia can wipe out tens (hundreds?) of thousands in Grozny; or China can wipe out Tibet; or the long time Muslim Arab rulers in Sudan can wipe out a million southern Sudanese Christians; or Indonesia can wipe out East Timor; or France can permanently invaded the Ivory Coast and its other former African colonies; or India / Pakistan can invade Pakistan / India on a regular basis, killing hundreds of ordinary non - Indian / Pakistani villagers each year; etcetera, etcetera, ad infinitum
And the United Nations says, does, proclaims, resolves, absolutely nothing.
However, if Israelis are attacked and Israel invades Rafah, the source of weapons for the attacks against Israelis and removes the houses that hide the tunnels that smuggle in the weapons to attack Israelis, then the United Nations condemns Israel. As it has for the last 50 years as Israel attempts to survive.

According to you, the UN resolutions are anti-Semitic, could they apply to any other country?
Should Israel be excluded from resolutions because doing so, would be anti-Semitic?

Yes, the United Nations could condemn many, many countries for similiar violations that it claims against Israel.
It is not the resolutions that are anti-semitic, it is the fact that ONLY Israel is ever condemned that is anti-semitic.

For the sake of clarification, I will simply list a few resolutions, either passed or vetoed by the U.S. (that is to say, they would have passed if not vetoed).

"called for a fact-finding mission on abuses against Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands..."

Has the UN called for a fact finding mission against Sudanese; Hutus; Russians; Chinese; etcetera on abuses against Sudanese; Tutsis; Chechnians; Tibetans; etcetera in occupied lands?? NO

Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.

Has the UN strongly condemned deportations in China; Ethiopia; Russia; France; Canada; the United States; etcetera..... NO

Resolution 520: "...'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"

Condemnation of attacks into Liberia; Chad; Chechnya; Tibet; India; Pakistan; blah blah blah.... NO

"deplored Israel's repression of the Palestinian intifada and called on Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians..."

Any other human rights supposed to be respected by ANYONE??? ANYONE???
NOOOO!! :mad:

How about respecting the human rights of the Israelis?? Duh?

Look at the UN resolutions and then tell me that there is any other nation on this planet that has ever been even vaguely villified as intensely as has Israel.

Why do you suppose that is??

LC Jeffries

May 28th, 2004, 11:01 AM

Isreali's would like to be able to go about their life and live like everyone else.
They can't do that because they are surrounded by Arab countries who want to take what little land they have. The countries want to wipe out every Jewish person for miles around. Islamic countries stretch for millions of square miles or klicks(kilometers). Yet for some reason, it's not enough. Isreali's have made a beautiful fertile land and the Arab nations can't stand it.

humanhybrid

May 28th, 2004, 12:44 PM

Yes! they are taking other peoples land to make fertile! and killing, destroying and tortureing in the process. As humans they are merciless terrorists with military hardware.

Moishe3rd

May 28th, 2004, 6:11 PM

Have you any words of Wisdom regarding the UN?
Is there some counter evidence that the UN is not anti-Jewish?
Anything?

humanhybrid

May 28th, 2004, 8:32 PM

http://www.unfoundation.org/about/about_intro.asp Its not about being anti Jewish! Its all about human rights! And that is what Isreal does not show. Its anti human rights, the Jewish people are confused. There is no wisdom to speak such simple observations my dear freind. The United Nations is a foundation. It is a foundation of the human for the human. Is it perfect? Are you? a very good day to you! "the Budell"

Moishe3rd

May 29th, 2004, 11:06 PM

Dear hh,
Your (and others) claim that Israel
dominating or killing anything that stands in the way! and
How can Israel contunually get away with defying the UN and 'terrorizing' everybody else?

I have attempted, through factual examples, to attempt to prove that those premises are incorrect.
I have shown, through factual examples, that the United Nations has condemned Israel far, far more than they have condemned any other nation on Earth and, that other nations have committed far, far more egregious acts of murder and destruction than has Israel.
I have suggested that this is because the United Nations is not a "democratic" assembly of nations, but a group of countries of whom the largest bloc (57 countries) are Muslim "dictatorships" and, that due to the dependence of the rest of the 187 countries that comprise the UN on many factors such as oil; freedom from being menaced by their own Muslim minorities or neighboring countries; or simple dislike of Jews; that the majority of the UN condemns Israel because it is convenient for them to do so, not because Israel is in the wrong.
The majority of UN countries have adopted an anti-Jewish attitude because the Islamic cause of the day is the destruction of the State of Israel.
Therefore the United Nations, as a body politic, is anti-Israel and anti-Jewish.

Your counter arguement is your expressed opinion that Israel does not exhibit a regard for human rights and that the UN was founded on the principles of human rights.
This is not a counter arguement as to whether the UN is, in fact, prejudiced against Israel.
You have yet to offer a simple shred of evidence that demonstrates that the UN is not biased against Israel; or that almost every single Islamic country on the planet is not far more guilty of violating human rights than Israel; or that most other nations such as Russia, France, China and India, all ostensibly non-Islamic countries, are not far more guilty of violating human rights than Israel.

So, if the majority of the UN is "anti human rights," then what right have they to condemn Israel, which, if you bothered to actually study up on their policies, actually supports the human rights of their enemies far more than most countries in the UN do....??

Do you have any evidence at all?
I thought not...

LC Jeffries

May 30th, 2004, 9:15 AM

Stand strong Moishe' :thumbs:

dutchie

May 30th, 2004, 9:55 AM

57 out of 187? It might influence what is going on in the UN, but my simple equasion sure puts them in the minority benches..

Why Israel gets away with it? Simple. Veto. And we all know which (always conveniently forgetting to pay their contribution) nation does that, don't we?

There are two things that are the basis of why they get away with it:

1.) The burden of conscience, for interfering late in WWII, letting most of the intended wipe-out of the jews take place (why no-one ever takes 20 million russions in account during any discussion about the conduct of that country in history is still a mistery to me), intended or not, still (yes, after 60 years) troubles some influencial western governments.

2.) The second reason would be in the jewish business lobby. No, I am not anti-jewish, on the contrary, I am just in favor of justice and equality. I think Israel shows not to have learnt anything from their past. Tolerance could have made a difference in that region. Don't forget Rabin was shot by one of his own coutrymen, not by a palestinian.

Just another way of looking at things.

Moishe3rd

May 30th, 2004, 10:30 AM

The problem is, dutchie, that your reasoning doesn't take into accounts the facts.
Your opinions are based on your emotional evalution of the way you perceive the world. Fine. So are mine.
But the facts dictate that the United Nations is extremely predujiced against Israel.

Which would then lead to the conclusion that
Why Israel gets away with it? Simple. Veto. And we all know which (always conveniently forgetting to pay their contribution) nation does that, don't we?
is an erroneous premise to begin with. The paradigm is false.

Israel gets away with violating UN resolutions because UN resolutions mean nothing regarding Israel due to the fact that the UN, as a whole, is prejudiced against Israel.

So far, I have seen nothing factual that proves this FACT incorrect.

:dunno:

dutchie

May 30th, 2004, 12:48 PM

I'll give you credit for detecting that my emotions play a roll (mainly despair). Maybe its my jewish ancestry playing havoc on me... The same is true for the conduct of Israel since intifada #2. The UN has no real power, and all of its resolutions would play a better part when the paper on which they're printed would be put to a better use (arsewiping). But guess who's to blame for that...

Moishe, why adressing my first point and conveniently skipping any reaction to the other two? Was that driven by emotion too?

humanhybrid

May 30th, 2004, 1:39 PM

So, if the majority of the UN is "anti human rights," then what right have they to condemn Israel, which, if you bothered to actually study up on their policies, actually supports the human rights of their enemies far more than most countries in the UN do....??

Do you have any evidence at all?
I thought not... Evidence?? Its on practically every night on national TV. And the UN is on the web. Its good that human rights exists within Isreal, but you cant deny that Isreal is plundering the land of the Palestinians. And stop deverting the things that Isreal does to the UN being biased. I will puke if I hear it again. I would vote against Isreal in the UN not because their Jewish but because of what they are doing. "ISREAL DOES NOT ADHERE TO HUMAN RIGHTS" Perhaps their human rights only are for the jewish people. After all their god has chosen them as favorites. Who says then that they are not justified in taking anything that they feel or want. :pray: Do not condemn Israel, but condemn their action and policies against their neighbors.

Moishe3rd

May 30th, 2004, 1:45 PM

And the premise is wrong.
That is the main point which no one (including yourself) seems to want to acknowledge.
However, even though it is not relevant to "why does Israel get away with it?"......

The burden of conscience, for interfering late in WWII, letting most of the intended wipe-out of the jews take place (why no-one ever takes 20 million russions in account during any discussion about the conduct of that country in history is still a mistery to me), intended or not, still (yes, after 60 years) troubles some influencial western governments.

I personally think it would be GREAT if nations were still burdened by the fact that they wiped out half of the Jewish population on this planet. I am not sure that they are, but if you believe that, wonderful. The world should be totally mortified that they let this happen and they should be totally supportive of a Jewish state that was founded to not let this ever happen again.

20 million Russians is a little high for a death estimate as a result of WW II (it is estimated that over 40 million were murdered by Stalin's regime before and after WW II), but even at that, it would be ten to twenty percent of all Russians. And, Hilter's purpose was not to make Russia "RussoRein." Hilter simply wanted to conquer all the lands he could - and wipe out whomever stood in his way. In the case of the Jews - he didn't want their "land," he wanted them dead.
However, the world should? could? does?, I don't know - regret and attempt to never let 20 million Russians be wiped out again. I totally agree. I even think that Russians should have their own independent sovereign nation to ensure that they can defend themselves against such wanton aggression. I'm all for it. Oh wait, they have one.... :grin
(Of course, this still has nothing to do with Israel).

The second reason would be in the jewish business lobby. No, I am not anti-jewish, on the contrary, I am just in favor of justice and equality. I think Israel shows not to have learnt anything from their past. Tolerance could have made a difference in that region. Don't forget Rabin was shot by one of his own coutrymen, not by a palestinian.

You make about five different points here - and the explanatory four points following the first have nothing to do with explaining the first point. Jewish business lobby??? :wlink: Give me a break!!
The Jewish/Zionist/banker/political/ruling oligarchy/blahdeblahdeblah :drool: is the reason that
"Israel contunually get away with defying the UN and 'terrorizing' everybody else?"
That is absurd. Give a rational connection and I will try and address it, but what you are positing is fantasy.

As Israel has the most tolerant and generous policy possible when dealing with nations and peoples who have categorically VOWED TO ELIMINATE ISRAEL AND THE JEWS, more so than any other nation on Earth, including the United States, I find your second disconnected point that "Israel shows not to have learnt anything from their past" also without merit.
Again, based on what evidence?

The past of Israel for the last two thousand years has been to be ruthlessly murdered by the nations of the world. This is still going on without cease. I think Israel has learned quite well from its past.

Moishe3rd

May 30th, 2004, 2:08 PM

Evidence?? Its on practically every night on national TV. And the UN is on the web. :bs:

Evidence?? I realize that nobody ever sees it on national TV; And the UN never says anything, but c'mon!!!! Its good that human rights exists within China, but you cant deny that China is plundering the land of the Tibetans. And stop deverting the things that China does to the UN being biased. I will puke if I hear it again. I would vote against China in the UN not because their Chinese but because of what they are doing. "CHINA DOES NOT ADHERE TO HUMAN RIGHTS" Perhaps their human rights only are for the Chinese people. After all the size of their population has made them favorites. Who says then that they are not justified in taking anything that they feel or want. Do not condemn China, but condemn their action and policies against their neighbors.

Absurd.... :alien:

humanhybrid

May 30th, 2004, 2:19 PM

Evidence?? I realize that nobody ever sees it on national TV; And the UN never says anything, but c'mon!!!! Its good that human rights exists within China, but you cant deny that China is plundering the land of the Tibetans. And stop deverting the things that China does to the UN being biased. I will puke if I hear it again. I would vote against China in the UN not because their Chinese but because of what they are doing. "CHINA DOES NOT ADHERE TO HUMAN RIGHTS" Perhaps their human rights only are for the Chinese people. After all the size of their population has made them favorites. Who says then that they are not justified in taking anything that they feel or want. Do not condemn China, but condemn their action and policies against their neighbors.

Absurd.... Just like a human who has been programmed to be a Jew, who knows he is wrong. Puts a spin on the subject to devert responsability. Remember, I dont see ethinicity or religious denomination. I see humans being humans.

dutchie

May 30th, 2004, 2:22 PM

no, of course you are right... The way the Israeli are finishing off anyone that comes in their way is always a "correct" and "justifiable" kill. All palestinians are murdering terrorists; the israelis are just defending themselves (with a weaponry arsenal 50 times that of the other side)...

Now give ME a break. And denying the lobby is plain head in sand sticking.

humanhybrid

May 30th, 2004, 2:33 PM

Now give ME a break. And denying the lobby is plain head in sand sticking. Dutchie, please tell me what this means!

Moishe3rd

May 30th, 2004, 2:46 PM

I confess. I don't seem to be making the point. I am obviously a poor communicator because I cannot, for the life of me, understand what you all are missing.
I find the idea that Israel "gets away with things" because of the "Jewish business lobby" not a realistic idea.
You all apparently do believe that Israel gets away with things because of this Jewish business lobby.
I don't know boys (or girls, whatever). We apparently come from far different sides of the issue.
But, I will ask one small favor. Could anyone post a factual reference to back up anything that anyone has posited?

(hh posted a fictious reference, that is to say, a lie, to attempt to prove that Bush has censured Israel. I find that when a person tries to back up their arguement with outright lies, it tends to weaken their case. Just a thought.)

humanhybrid

May 30th, 2004, 2:57 PM

(hh posted a fictious reference, that is to say, a lie, to attempt to prove that Bush has censured Israel. I find that when a person tries to back up their arguement with outright lies, it tends to weaken their case. Just a thought.) Another knife! in my back. There is no lie what Isreal is doing Moishe3rd nor is it a lie that the USA vetos in support of Isreal. Please dont posture your case in this manner. The people in this forum knows what Isreal is doing. To simple for you isnt it. good day my freind!

dutchie

May 31st, 2004, 2:40 AM

I agree. And excuse my poor communication powers too: sticking you hand in the sand is a translated dutch expression. It's what ostriches do. It means turning a blind eye to reality. And asking for a factual link is like saying "give me a factual link about CIA involvement in JFK's death.

If you are just going to be in heavy denial about anything it is no use having a discussion with you.

FactsOverFiction

May 31st, 2004, 9:50 AM

Okay lets put things in context, America took her land from Native Americans correct? We put them on reservations and treated them as second class citizens. Now lets say we are Israel and Native Americans (NA) are Palestinians. If the NA decided they wanted there land back and said they where gonna send us into the ocean, used suicide bombers in our clubs, malls, buses, trains. America is not going to give in America would crush them with zero tolerence. Israel is only doing the same. Not saying its right or wrong but its the way the world works. Great Britain would do the same, Australia would not allow there Natives have all there land back would they? Its not a matter of right or wrong its just the way the world works. You cannot live in peace in a place where the other party swears they will kill every last single man, woman and child. One way or another one group or another is going to have to be eliminated before peace can be achieved in Israel. The other Middle Eastern states do not give a rats ass about the Palestinians, Syria, Jordan put them in squalor as sub citizens as well. They use Israel as a scapegoat to keep there citizens eyes off there corrupt regime and focused on the menace of Israel. It boils down to human nature whats mine is mine go get your own.

MetalMilitia

May 31st, 2004, 2:33 PM

Just scroll through the history of the country, involving UN resolutions.

Here is a list of UN resolutions that Israel has not complied. As far as I know they have ignored every single resolution. But the situation is far worse than would at first appear, it involves the serious distortion of the official Security Council record by the profligate use by the United States of its veto power.

Israel?s, defiance goes back to its very beginnings. This collection of resolutions criticizing Israel is unmatched by the record of any other nation.

http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm

-MM- :crs:

substand

Jun 1st, 2004, 11:44 PM

Very simple. Israel has not "complied" with any UN resolutions because none of the resolutions have been "binding" (ie from the Security Council).

There is no reason to comply. There are no benefits for compliance. There are no detriments for noncompliance. The resolution vs. Israel mean nothing eany way you look at them.

One can argue all he/she wants. Typically, one argument goes along the lines of (not that you mentioned it here) "why are we so strict on X (again, typically Iraq), but not on Y (typically Israel) when Y has defied more UN resolutions than X?"

Legally- Y's resolutions were not binding or legally enforcable while X's were.
Politically- Way back in the day Truman (if I remember correctly it was him) went against his advisors' advice and backed Israel. Other than that, nowadays there are the fact that
1) Judism is "closer" to Christianity that Islam is.
2) Israel is the only democracy (or close to it) in the ME.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 1:32 AM

Interesting that Israel fits the description of "terrorist" yet is not called into account for it.

dcookcan

Jul 14th, 2004, 10:51 AM

DN, you spew out all kinds of accusasions, rhetoric, propaganda and lies in your post without a shred of evidence:
http://forums.armageddononline.org/showthread.php?p=43676#post43676

You think that by supplying a link to a protest group that you have proof of all that dribble. Like just because you saw it on the internet, it must be true.

I doubt that you can provide credible proof of the rhetoric, prove me wrong.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:20 AM

DN, you spew out all kinds of accusasions, rhetoric, propaganda and lies in your post without a shred of evidence:
http://forums.armageddononline.org/showthread.php?p=43676#post43676 Actually, most of what I posted can be easily found at your local library since it appears you wouldnt trust anything off the net. I learned about Einstien speaking out against the Jewish occupation in high school. Look his letter up at the Library of Congress website if you doubt me. Of course, that would be on the internet now wouldnt it? There have been many books published on this topic and many of them by Jewish people.

You think that by supplying a link to a protest group that you have proof of all that dribble. Like just because you saw it on the internet, it must be true. It must have escaped you that in my post I specifically state WHY I have posted those links. No where in my post did I even insinuate that those links had anything else regarding the historical truth and fact of the rest of it. Since you seem capable of thinking for me and putting words "in my mouth" then it should also be possible for you to know where I have gotten my information from.

I doubt that you can provide credible proof of the rhetoric, prove me wrong. Since you have already convinced yourself that I am posting lies and therefore wrong, I dont see any need to be doing your homework for you. If you doubt me so much look it up yourself since you have convinced yourself I am a liar. It hardly seems worth posting other information when it appears you may be posed to shoot holes in it too regardless of its factual base. Why not find out that my information is factual before posting ignorance because you dont like it?

dcookcan

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:45 AM

dutchie

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:59 AM

YOU are NOW leading me into temptation, dcoockan. :blazing:

repentantsinner

Jul 14th, 2004, 12:08 PM

dcookcan

Jul 14th, 2004, 12:16 PM

YOU are NOW leading me into temptation, dcoockan.

Why? Did I offend someone? Or is it because I have spoken favourably about Jews?

substand

Jul 14th, 2004, 3:09 PM

But the situation is far worse than would at first appear, it involves the serious distortion of the official Security Council record by the profligate use by the United States of its veto power.

I missed this the first time and a major part of my post assumed you had also missed it... so i apologize for glossing over it.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 6:01 PM

There is always two sides to a story and your info is completely one sided. From the dribble you posted, I am curious if you also believe that Jews eat Palestinian babies at there Passover cerimonies? This is also something that has been written in textbooks and letters and could probably be found on the internet. It is propaganda.Since I am not the one who brought up that kind of "dribble", then one might suspect that I would not believe it. However, since you are bound and determined to use juvenile ignorance I will give you this...I am no where near the level, education or expertise of the Dr of Theology with a Masters in Divinity that I learned a major portion of that information from. Oh yeah, hes a Jew but he is NOT a Zionist. Im in no position to argue facts with him since his most of his family were victims of the Holocaust and slave traders before that. Hes got shelves and shelves of books, papers, thesis, you name it from countless sources including the nefarious ones regarding Jewish history.

Aren't we touchy. No need to put words in your mouth, it's already full. :rolling: Im glad someone is pleased with their own arrogance and expertise in using immature behaviour and words. Im glad your childish endeavor is entertaining to you. Keep it up. I enjoy immensely the fact that the more you post about this, the more immature you become.

I'll look some more. I have studied Israel's history and I know there is a lot of written truth and lies. I have yet to find some credible evidence of what you are claiming. The Jews have suffered a great deal due to Christianity's arrogance, much like the natives (and muslims). I would have expected a little more compassion from someone who obviously is at odds with christianity. That would be like having compassion for a murderer because he was robbing a store to feed his kids and killed someone in the process. Do I agree with what the Christians have subjugated the Jews with? Oh hell no. However, since you brought it up...I would think that Jews would be more compassionate towards the Palestinians after what the Nazi's did to them.

I have been told by Jewish people that Indians cant use the term "holocaust" as in "American holocaust" because Jews own it. Its also no secret that Israel brags of controlling the US. The Jewish government in Israel is no different than Hitler, they are just taking longer to attempt to complete their mission of genocide and have more backers than Hitler did. :deal:

Now since I am not a Jew, I can understand where someone might question where my information comes from. But since you posted in such an immature way for someone who claims intelligence on the matter, how am *I* to believe YOU? Just because you may know something what proof do you have besides being capable of acting like a bratty little school bully? You expect ME to cater to your requests when you act so disrespectful?

By the way, obviously you understand the term "it takes one to know one" since you method of posting one sided is no different.

Ill tell you what, when you grow up and post in a more mature manner, I will answer all your questions and I might even include where the information came from. You go ahead and look into it. There have been many Jews who have written the information I posted that did so in order to stop the "Jewish Nazism" from occuring. They do not make any claims to being Zionists, another fact I posted which in your self congratulatory glee failed to miss.

Ill even answer questions about Indians, in my Indian thread where it wont be OT. Now you run along and play nice.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 10:28 PM

When i was in the millitary we had some people from our unit that were peacekeepers in the sinai. they went to isreal and sais people walk around the streets with their millitary rifles. Isreal is surrounded by enemies calling for their destruction and are constantly fending off terrorist from within. In short Isreal considers itself in a constant state of war. I understand that you are posting from what you have heard. However, there is much in the way of historical texts, scholarly journals and even more recently, new articles that can be easily found that tells a different story. Since the US in general is "pro Israel", its not to difficult to find much information in a more positive light regarding Israel. Unfortunately, Israel was built on the subjugation and blood of the Palestinians. So, it brought having it's back against a wall upon itself.

As for Israel being an upstanding religious state entity, did you know that there are no laws against prostitution in Israel as long as the prostitutes and sex slaves arent Jewish? Israel has a booming sex slave trade using naive woman from Eastern European countries for the core of their business. Israel has been condemned frequently for it and does little if anything about it. Look it up yourself if you doubt me. Its easy enough to find. I was tipped off to it by a Jewish person but you can easily find the same information using Google. I used "white slave trade", Jews as well as Einstein, Jews.

Or wait until dcookcan comes to his senses and realizes that I have not posted any lies or propaganda and posted the truth. I did not post the truth as he wants to see it, I posted factual and easily verifiable truth.

substand

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:41 PM

DN- you sound a lot like my dad when talking about israel... in the interest of closer ties with him, can you post some sources (hopefully nonarab/nonmuslim)? I'm not trying to argue here, really... but while he is more "antisemite" (for lack of a better term, esp. considering arabs are semites), i would like to read some sources of yours to better understand where he is coming from... would be a nice addition to your posts...

dutchie

Jul 15th, 2004, 2:36 AM

Why? Did I offend someone? Or is it because I have spoken favourably about Jews?
No, I am of jewish ancestry myself. That does not mean I can not see the wrongdoings of the state of Israel, but that's something else.. But let's keep attacks on a debating level, and not stoop to personal attacking. That's all.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 5:25 AM

Heya subs, Ill email you some of the info. I want the above mentioned person to actually do some work here. If he is as educated on the topic of Jewish history as he is alluding to, his learning is very one-sided. Im waiting to see if he was willing and how much work he put into looking up verifiable sources.

I already posted a hint above in a response to someone else. But Ill email you the rest. Virtually all my sources are Jewish or come from Jewish owned sources.

Moishe3rd

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:14 AM

Actually, most of what I posted can be easily found at your local library since it appears you wouldnt trust anything off the net. I learned about Einstien speaking out against the Jewish occupation in high school.

"Even Albert Einstien condemned the "state" of Israel and compared it to Nazi Germany."

DF,
I can only assume that you are talking about this letter: The 1948 Letter of some Eminent Jews to New York Times (http://globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/einstein/nyt_letter.html)

He does not compare the State of Israel to Nazi Germany in this letter.
Einstein does however disparage the State of Israel elsewhere in his writings and his speeches.

The point being, if it is your intention to be "generally" accurate and make your point because "we are able to understand your intention and the implications behind what you are stating," then fine, I have no problem with your accusations and explanations.

But, as this thread has been picked up again, maybe you could go back and reread what I wrote and perhaps answer my problem in the same vein:

Give me a fact where the UN has evenly remotely chastised another nation such as Sudan or Rwanda or Iraq or China, blahdeblahdeblah for literally murdering millions, decimating other sovereign nations, etcetera, etcetera ad nauseum.

Look at the UN resolutions and then tell me that there is any other nation on this planet that has ever been even vaguely villified as intensely as has Israel.

What UN resolutions have condemned either Arab countries or Palestinians for slaughtering Israelis and murdering innocents?

These are just a few of the questions I asked. And my posts give evidence that the UN is anti-semitic.

So, rather than telling me how bad Israel is, maybe someone could give me some sort of proof that the United Nations is not anti-semitic.
The way to do that would be to demonstrate that the UN has condemned other "criminal" nations for savage crimes to the same extent it has condemned Israel.
If that is not a fair comparison, then maybe someone could tell me what is a fair comparison?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 11:35 AM

He does not compare the State of Israel to Nazi Germany in this letter.
Einstein does however disparage the State of Israel elsewhere in his writings and his speeches. I stand corrected, you are right in that he did NOT compare it to Nazi Germany. Sorry for leaving that in. Thanks for that link. Beats reading dusty journals in library archives or hours on the LoC website. The companion article about Einstein, Zionism and Israel was a good read too.

The point being, if it is your intention to be "generally" accurate and make your point because "we are able to understand your intention and the implications behind what you are stating," then fine, I have no problem with your accusations and explanations. I dont make any accusations. All of what I posted is easily found and verifiable although I did try to cover alot of ground, yes. What I dont get is all the elevation Israel is placed in when it is no better than any other occupied nation. Why is it so hard to see that Israel has become no different than any other rogue nation? Why is it so hard for people to see that Israel is resorting to terror and has become a terrorist Nation? This isnt anti-semitism from me, its fact. Fact I learned from Jewish people who at least have the courage to condemn the sex/slave trade and the violence commited by Israel.

1)The UN is virtually powerless, it talks and talks and does nothing while Israel drives bulldozers over Palestinian houses that people are too afraid to come out of because they will get shot. Africa is not in Israel and I cannot comment on why the UN has lost its collection of testicles over the years. Its weak, its mindless and I think the only reason people attain the top positions is grease.

2) I agree that the UN has virtually nothing nice ever to say about Israel and I also agree that the UN has helped create this mess. If the UN would have gone in and trounced the Jewish uprisers in the first place instead of letting it grow and fester into a gigantic boil of a country, it wouldnt be dealing with these problems today.

What UN resolutions have condemned either Arab countries or Palestinians for slaughtering Israelis and murdering innocents? None and I have no idea why. However, if the Jews wouldnt have gone in and muscled out the Palestinians, they wouldnt be having these things committed against them. Mind you, its completely WRONG, I dont care who's doing the killing. However, as long as Israel exists, there most likely will be violence. There is no way possible that I can look at an occupier/terrorist country who's people make money off the sale of women for sexual slavery, who's government has used chemical and bioligical warfare against another and who treat Palestinians in a racist manner similar to what the Nazi's inflicted upon them, and have any kind of compassion or sympathy.

When Israel gets off its arrogant school bully ass and holds itself just as accountable for the violence in the ME, and does something constructive about it instead of pouting and finger pointing, then I would have some respect.

So, rather than telling me how bad Israel is, maybe someone could give me some sort of proof that the United Nations is not anti-semitic.
The way to do that would be to demonstrate that the UN has condemned other "criminal" nations for savage crimes to the same extent it has condemned Israel.
If that is not a fair comparison, then maybe someone could tell me what is a fair comparison? My answer is contained at the top of this thread....Armageddon Online Forums > Serious Discussion > Politics and Current Events > Criticizing Israel

Your right though, we can start with the crimes the US has committed against Indigenous people. Then we could start with all the crime that the US has sponsored against other nations. Like sponsoring Israel in its takeover of Palestine.

I will say this, I am grateful to the many, many Jewish people who over the years have educated me about this and hold the people responsible for the violence accountable. They are not afraid of the truth.

dcookcan

Jul 15th, 2004, 11:43 AM

Still no source. (other than "Someone told me and he was a post hole digger - I mean Ph.D.")

But I am just being childish for requesting that. :drool:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 11:56 AM

Still no source. (other than "Someone told me and he was a post hole digger - I mean Ph.D.")

But I am just being childish for requesting that. :drool: Read above, find your source and dont accuse me of lies when you post your own. Again, you post ignorance AND you use immaturity in putting down a very learned and scholarly person whom you dont even know. Since you have the mentality and respect of not much more than 3, why should I give you anything? If Moishe is capable of acting in a dignified manner and being mature enough to ask questions on a VERY touchy subject, certainly you might be capable of it yourself. Im not doing your work for you. Go play nice and grow up while you are at it.

dcookcan

Jul 15th, 2004, 12:42 PM

Who's insulting who here?

You claim to have all this information, yet you won't share it. You are simply hiding behind your emotions.

You are right, though. This has become a childish debate.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 12:05 AM

Twisting around what I post wont get you anywhere. Since Moishe knew of the Einstein letter AND posted a link to a site its on, are you going to just post your tears because I wont give in to your infintile rants? I post another way to look up the information so it was more easily found than posting books and journals you cant read here and you are going to gripe? You post offensively towards me and then expect me to cater to you? Please excuse me, I have you wrong, you act like a child saying "gimee" and then complain when I wont.

If you cant look up the information, use the Library of Congress or go to your local library then thats your problem. Others havent had a problem asking me for the info and doing so respectfully so its on you. :wlink: :Bott:

humanhybrid

Jul 16th, 2004, 12:28 AM

Who's insulting who here?

You claim to have all this information, yet you won't share it. You are simply hiding behind your emotions.

You are right, though. This has become a childish debate. Its no wonder dcookcan! Anybody who disagrees with Defiant Noquisi will find themselves being demeaned and called all sorts of things. But Defiant Noquisi is certainly a thinker and can rationalize morality. Right Defiant Noquisi?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 3:28 AM

Its no wonder dcookcan! Anybody who disagrees with Defiant Noquisi will find themselves being demeaned and called all sorts of things. But Defiant Noquisi is certainly a thinker and can rationalize morality. Right Defiant Noquisi? This coming from someone who has easily cornered the market on avoidance when asked respectfully for explanation or proof then resorts to repeating the same information if any at all and resorts to all sorts of wild verbal nonsense. Not to leave out mindless mimicry, stab and dash posting and award winning theatrics. Oh yes, and not answering at all the queries posed quite frequently.

I suppose you think it perfectly acceptable that upon ones first post to you in a thread, they call you a liar rather than checking for facts first. Since to my recollection I have not done that to you, of what benefit to this thread is your post other than engaging in nefarious and immature behaviour?

Had dcookcan simply asked me to prove the information I had posted without all the dramatics, I would have given that information readily. Since that did not occur and I was accused of all sorts of nonsense, I am in no way willing to cater to that behaviour. There have been several posts regarding some of the information if one would only take a moment to look. If I cannot find the information myself, I will put in a request for it. It's really not all that difficult. However, there is some information that I cannot just post on here since it came from collegiate doctorate journals available only through inter-library exchange. I do however, have the information one would need to look it up. Since I did not see it impossible to do this, I dont see it as impossible for dcookcan. Also, you must have missed the post where dcookcan was going to do some research on it and didnt ask for information.

You see HH, the difference between you and I is that I am willing to do a little extra digging in order to check my resources. Your heavy reliance on Information Clearinghouse does nothing to prove your intelligence about any particular topic. The fact that you have taken exception to my posting about your reference inadequecies and/or not answering at all is irrelevant to this and any other thread.

And since you have accused me of being off topic, you must certainly see that you have been doing the same regularly which now includes here. Your very good at pointing out the "bad" in others posts without looking in the mirror at yourself. If you dont like these things pointed out, either dont do it in the first place or dont get all bent out of shape when its pointed out. I was certainly not the first person to point this out to you and I seriously doubt I will be the last. In any event you are just spreading your lack of intellect further. :wlink: :Bott:

humanhybrid

Jul 16th, 2004, 1:06 PM

This coming from someone who has easily cornered the market on avoidance when asked respectfully for explanation or proof then resorts to repeating the same information if any at all and resorts to all sorts of wild verbal nonsense. Ok what explanation are you needing?
You see HH, the difference between you and I is that I am willing to do a little extra digging in order to check my resources. Your heavy reliance on Information Clearinghouse does nothing to prove your intelligence about any particular topic. The fact that you have taken exception to my posting about your reference inadequecies and/or not answering at all is irrelevant to this and any other thread. And your sources of information does nothing to prove your intelligence about any particular topic either!
And since you have accused me of being off topic, you must certainly see that you have been doing the same regularly which now includes here. Your very good at pointing out the "bad" in others posts without looking in the mirror at yourself. If you dont like these things pointed out, either dont do it in the first place or dont get all bent out of shape when its pointed out. I was certainly not the first person to point this out to you and I seriously doubt I will be the last. In any event you are just spreading your lack of intellect further Like I said dcookcan! Anybody who disagrees with Defiant Noquisi will find themselves being demeaned and called all sorts of things, as the example above proves clearly! good day

repentantsinner

Jul 16th, 2004, 3:00 PM

The state of isreal was created may 15 1948 by the UN. Probobly because the world had a guilty conscience about the world war 2 holocaust. It is true that in the early days of Isreal the jews had many right wing terrorists. The jews however believe that Isreal is their God given land and Nobody has the right to kick them out. When i was 11 to 13 years old my father worked for the UN, UNRWA to be exact which deals with refugees. So we lived in Beirut Lebanon where most Palastian refugees live. The camps are awful. I've been wxposed the the average palastinian and have been to isreal to interact with jews. The menbers of my family used to say "ANNA PHILISTINI" to each other. That is arabic for "Iam palastinian", sort of like JFK saying " Ich bin ein Berliner". The jews i belive are there to stay and will fight to the death at any given moment. I'm reminded of the story of MASADA where jewish zealots commited suicide rather than surrender to the romans. The torah says the land south of lebanon is Isreal, thousands of years of history say it is Palastine. Apparently there is no end in sight. I remember going to an arabs house, they have about 20 packs of ciggarettes just to make sure they have your bramd. if not they feel bad. Also, don't look at something too many times or they will give it to youand be insulted if you say no. They make loyal freinds and are very emotional. They just can't seem to be efficiant enough or oranized enough to conquer isreal.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 4:42 PM

Ok what explanation are you needing? And your sources of information does nothing to prove your intelligence about any particular topic either! Like I said dcookcan! Anybody who disagrees with Defiant Noquisi will find themselves being demeaned and called all sorts of things, as the example above proves clearly! good day Again, off topic, emotionally driven and nothing factual. Youre really good when you think you call the shots but still cant perform in the same manner you expect of others. Youve added nothing to this topic except whining. At least dcookcan while abrasive and accusatory, is capable of posting in regards to the topic. I think you need some time off, or at the very least a time out until you can act with more respect. :bs: :wlink:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 5:14 PM

The jews i belive are there to stay and will fight to the death at any given moment. I'm reminded of the story of MASADA where jewish zealots commited suicide rather than surrender to the romans. I dont doubt that in the least. Their capacity to fight and hang in for the long haul is stellar. It is unfortunate the historical turn of events that have taken place over the years there. It's only my opinion but I do believe that had things moved much more slowly and calmly, there may have been opportune time and moments to have worked both sides in in some way without completely elbowing one or the other out. Unfortunately they nor the rest of the world will never know.

Israel's reliance on its own arrogance will eventually cost them. I still cannot fathom how they cannot be considered as terrorists when their actions have left very little if any doubt that they are anything but. Fencing in the Palestinians, then bulldozing their houses and picking them off if they try and run from them is not an act of war, it is torture. And regulating where and when the Palestinians can work is not an act of generosity or humanitarianism.

The torah says the land south of lebanon is Isreal, thousands of years of history say it is Palastine. Apparently there is no end in sight. I remember going to an arabs house, they have about 20 packs of ciggarettes just to make sure they have your bramd. if not they feel bad. Also, don't look at something too many times or they will give it to youand be insulted if you say no. They make loyal freinds and are very emotional. They just can't seem to be efficiant enough or oranized enough to conquer isreal. Ive gotten that treatment here too. Ive always made sure to have everything I needed and brought extra to share just in case. We gab culture for hours. :D

substand

Jul 16th, 2004, 9:41 PM

And your sources of information does nothing to prove your intelligence about any particular topic either

no, but it does make you beleivable and show that your attempt at persuasion is rooted in fact.

humanhybrid

Jul 17th, 2004, 3:42 AM

no, but it does make you beleivable and show that your attempt at persuasion is rooted in fact.
Thank you! and that is believable, even without verification.good day! :abduct:
I think you need some time off, or at the very least a time out until you can act with more respect. Youll get respect from me when you deserve it! OK!

humanhybrid

Jul 17th, 2004, 3:55 AM

repentantsinner, I thought your post was very very good. I appreciate the way you brought me to their house and described the Palistianian hospitality. It dignifies them as who they are and their everyday life. Hope you like the link. Is worth the wait. good day! http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/israel_flash_quiz.htm

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 9:13 AM

no, but it does make you beleivable and show that your attempt at persuasion is rooted in fact. True, however it would also depend on one's almost complete reliance on a source that may not be very centered in it's publishings. I could completely rely on Fox news for my sources but all that would prove is that I know the information they feed me, not that I have learned all sides or that I have actually researched what I am posting about. Cmon subs, you didnt learn poli sci out of one book in college.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 9:17 AM

Youll get respect from me when you deserve it! OK! You want respect where none is due. You are again off topic as you have accused me of and posting like a spoiled child not getting their way. If you have nothing to say about Israel, go pout in another corner as this one has people in it who are discussing it. :bs:

humanhybrid

Jul 17th, 2004, 12:57 PM

BLAH BLAH GOOD day! And Your off topic please stay focused! What and Who is Information Clearing House? An independent media source bone head. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/who.htm

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:00 PM

BLAH BLAH GOOD day! <snip> bone head. Can you supply anymore proof?

For those who care...Israel Wont Apologize To New Zealand..

http://www.iht.com/articles/529798.html

VegasRonin

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:36 PM

An independent media source bone head. NO NAME CALLING HH! It doesn't reinforce your position one bit.

knac1055

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:39 PM

http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/

The History and Meaning Of "Palestine" and "Palestinians"
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian Arab nation . . . Palestine is a name the Romans gave to Eretz Yisrael with the express purpose of infuriating the Jews . . . . Why should we use the spiteful name meant to humiliate us?
"The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation's supposed ancient name, though they couldn't even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin a fictional entity."

-- Golda Meir quoted by Sarah Honig,
Jerusalem Post, 25 November 1995
Palestine has never existed . . . as an autonomous entity.
There is no language known as Palestinian.
There is no distinct Palestinian culture.

There has never been a land known as Palestine
governed by Palestinians.

Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians
(another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.

Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today . . . No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough.

-- from "Myths of the Middle East", Joseph Farah,
Arab-American editor and journalist,
WorldNetDaily.Com, 11 October 2000
From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries..
-- Professor Bernard Lewis,
Commentary Magazine, January 1975

Talk and writing about Israel and the Middle East feature the nouns "Palestine" and Palestinian", and the phrases "Palestinian territory" and even "Israeli-occupied Palestinian territory". All too often, these terms are used with regard to their historical or geographical meaning, so that the usage creates illusions rather than clarifies reality.

Is Jordan Palestine? Here are two Jordanian State Stamps. On the left, one from 1949 with a picture of King Abdullah of the kingdom of Jordan and bears the label of Palestine in English and Arabic. On the right, a 1964 stamp bearing the likeness of King Hussein and pictures Mandated Palestine as an undivided territory including both present day Israel and Jordan.

MetalMilitia

Jul 17th, 2004, 8:35 PM

US is obliged to support its 'old friend' Israel - Bush

The US has a responsibility to defend the State of Israel, which is "an old friend" and a "democratic country," US President George W. Bush told the French daily Le Figaro in an interview published Saturday.

Bush's affirmed commitment to Israel came in response to a question about whether successive "US presidents are obliged to defend Israel at every occasion."

Asked if this is worth the cost ? increasing international criticism of the US for its "pro-Israel policy" ? Bush reminded his interviewer that he was "the first US president to stand before the UN and announce to the whole world a commitment to creating a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1090045861433

Before this is over Kerry will be pledging to give Israel the Statue of Liberty! Meanwhile, I want to know the exact nature of this "obligation" the US had towards Israel? Just what "obligates" the American people to shell out so much cash for Israel, now totally four times the entire cost of the Apollo Moon program? Why are we "obligated" to spend our children's blood for Israel's security? Usually when there is an obligation, the terms are made clear for all to understand the exact nature of the barter involved. We are not being told something here. We are told we are obligated, but not why. And I for one refuse to be obligated without knowing what it is that obligates me, especially to a foreign government.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 8:38 PM

And I for one refuse to be obligated without knowing what it is that obligates me, especially to a foreign government. And especially one that says it controls us. :bs:

VegasRonin

Jul 17th, 2004, 10:34 PM

Meanwhile, I want to know the exact nature of this "obligation" the US had towards Israel? Come on guys. You know the answer to this. The one thing that Dems and Repubs have in common is their belief in the Bible (Whether heart felt or fabricated). The Bible states that the Israelites are God's chosen people,and the Battle of Armageddon will begin in Israel. Now our politicians can't be good 'ol bible thumpers if they let Israel get that ass waxed now can they?

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 12:00 AM

Sigh.....

I stand corrected, you are right in that he did NOT compare it to Nazi Germany. Sorry for leaving that in. Thanks for that link. Beats reading dusty journals in library archives or hours on the LoC website. The companion article about Einstein, Zionism and Israel was a good read too.

I dont make any accusations. All of what I posted is easily found and verifiable although I did try to cover alot of ground, yes. What I dont get is all the elevation Israel is placed in when it is no better than any other occupied nation. Why is it so hard to see that Israel has become no different than any other rogue nation? Why is it so hard for people to see that Israel is resorting to terror and has become a terrorist Nation?

Okay, DF: Could you give me some sort of examples here of what I have outlined in bold? I would really, really like to disagree with this, but I need to know what it is that you are writing about - specifically. Okay?
This isnt anti-semitism from me, its fact. Fact I learned from Jewish people who at least have the courage to condemn the sex/slave trade and the violence commited by Israel.
The sex/slave trade? (Yes, I read your previous post). Are you claiming that the Israeli government - Prime Minister; cabinet; parliment; Mossad; Army; etcetera, are involved in slave trading? I find this canard a bit more sickening, but I again ask you for a reference to back up this accusation. As in - Prove It?

1)The UN is virtually powerless, it talks and talks and does nothing while Israel drives bulldozers over Palestinian houses that people are too afraid to come out of because they will get shot.

Again, evidence. What evidence or article or anything do you have for these weird and outrageous accusations? Please post.

Africa is not in Israel and I cannot comment on why the UN has lost its collection of testicles over the years. Its weak, its mindless and I think the only reason people attain the top positions is grease.

The UN never had any testicles. The United States and occaissionally some European nations have tried to give the UN backbone in the past. But it is an exercise in futility. It is a corrupt cesspool of incestual bottom licking... to put it mildly

2) I agree that the UN has virtually nothing nice ever to say about Israel and I also agree that the UN has helped create this mess. If the UN would have gone in and trounced the Jewish uprisers in the first place instead of letting it grow and fester into a gigantic boil of a country, it wouldnt be dealing with these problems today.

I apologize for my extreme reaction aforehand....
ARRRRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHH!!
Okay, DF - Jewish uprisers????? Explain what that means, please.

None and I have no idea why. However, if the Jews wouldnt have gone in and muscled out the Palestinians, they wouldnt be having these things committed against them.

In what way have "the Jews gone in and muscled out the Palestinians?" Please explain this.

Mind you, its completely WRONG, I dont care who's doing the killing. However, as long as Israel exists, there most likely will be violence. There is no way possible that I can look at an occupier/terrorist country who's people make money off the sale of women for sexual slavery, who's government has used chemical and bioligical warfare against another and who treat Palestinians in a racist manner similar to what the Nazi's inflicted upon them, and have any kind of compassion or sympathy.

This is painful. I addressed some of your slander, but maybe you could also define the chem and bio and the racist Nazi thing. Examples. People. Anything to back up what you are writing???

When Israel gets off its arrogant school bully ass and holds itself just as accountable for the violence in the ME, and does something constructive about it instead of pouting and finger pointing, then I would have some respect.

What violence would you like to hold Israel accountable for? Anything specific?

My answer is contained at the top of this thread....Armageddon Online Forums > Serious Discussion > Politics and Current Events > Criticizing Israel

I could not find the above answer. Could you be more specific?

Your right though, we can start with the crimes the US has committed against Indigenous people.

Okay, what crimes and what would you like the U.S. to do about them?
Then we could start with all the crime that the US has sponsored against other nations.
Same question.
Like sponsoring Israel in its takeover of Palestine.
As you made a definitive statement here, I can safely tell you that it is totally false. Please give some evidence that it is true.
I will say this, I am grateful to the many, many Jewish people who over the years have educated me about this and hold the people responsible for the violence accountable. They are not afraid of the truth.

DF: I am also not afraid of the truth. But I vehemently disagree with your statements.
I can only prove what Israel is doing and has done with data, facts and verifiable information. I cannot prove a negative.
The burden of proof is upon you to give some sort of verifiable information about your accusations. I find them distasteful to say the least.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 18th, 2004, 9:18 AM

[B][SIZE=2]DF: I am also not afraid of the truth. But I vehemently disagree with your statements.
I can only prove what Israel is doing and has done with data, facts and verifiable information. I cannot prove a negative.
The burden of proof is upon you to give some sort of verifiable information about your accusations. I find them distasteful to say the least. Ok, first the initials to my nic would be "DN" not "DH". I am unsure from where the "H" came from or the "DF" from an earlier post.

Secondly, distasteful, yes. I completely agree and I felt that way myself when my Jewish freind first told me of them. I couldnt believe what he was telling me and I thought it was a joke since it was him telling it. However, he is completely against ZIONISM which has been the basis of my entire postings. ZIONISM, not EVERY JEW IN EXISTENCE. I have repeatedly stated that.

Now having said that yet again, he also did the same to me....he told me to go and find out for myself which I did and was shocked that what he said was in fact true. I dont mind sharing what I find with anyone that places value in it. However, I find it equally distasteful to cater to those who use accusations and personal attacks to try and label me a liar. Since you have asked without reducing yourself to a whiny, complaining name caller, I am posting a very small portion of it.

If you had used the library and Google as I had mentioned in previous posts, you would have found virtually the same things I did. I cannot share the entire library my freind had but I can give you a couple of the materials he shared with me.

Which also means that those who would use MORE EFFORT in immature antics rather than looking for the proof themselves will also have it.

As far as my information,

Moses the Microbiologist: Judaism and Social Hygiene in the Work of Alfred Nossig a journal article by Mitchell Hart published in Jewish Social Studies, Vol. 2, 1995 “involvement in white slave trade was widely acknowledged.”

Prostitution and Predjudice: The Jewish Fight Against White Slavery by Edward J. Bristow, published by Oxford University Press 1982 and Schocken Books 1985
Describes in detail the slave trade of white European women which still continues today.

My mention of “40,000 Ukranian women taken each year” came from Jewish owned “New York Times” in an article about the white slave trade, published Jan 11, 1998
http://www.seanbryson.com/articles/michael_specter_times_contraband_women.html

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=238653

http://www.iofa.org/news/news5.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/world/main541762.shtml

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/fullnewsbottom/page.cfm?objectid=13763172&method=full&siteid=106694

http://www.rense.com/general32/jewsandwhiteslavery.htm

As far as Zionism goes, I did not keep a record of what I had read for some reason. However, I did find a few pages on a website that are very similar to what I read.

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/mideast/obrien.htm

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/bookauth/zionism/gwint.htm

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/bookauth/zionism/steinbrg.htm

Again, ZIONISM not EVERY JEWISH PERSON ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET.

And since you have posted the Einstein letter, I dont need to repost that.

Thank you for remaining respectful Moishe even though how you posted indicates frustration to me and I apologize. However, I dont care much for just freely handing out information to others who are too lazy to see it for themselves and resort to mindless rhetoric if they dont get their way. For all intensive purposes it wouldnt have mattered what I posted, they probably would have expended energy attacking it as lies rather than researching and proving it to themselves.

I also find it equally amusing that I am attacked as well as being called a liar yet they do not provide ANY PROOF THEMSELVES that would indicate that I have not posted fact. Instead, they prove how mindlessly immature and ignorant they can be.

I indicated none of that from your posts. Thank you again.

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 2:51 PM

[QUOTE]Ok, first the initials to my nic would be "DN" not "DH". I am unsure from where the "H" came from or the "DF" from an earlier post.

Oops, sorry. I don't know where I got it from either.

Okey dokey. I read all of your references. Thank you.
What they say is that there are disgusting, immoral, horrible, criminal elements in Israel, as there are in most countries, of which your articles mention the Ukraine and Russia in particular, (there are worse places such as Thailand and the Sudan where prostitution slavery is even worse, if one could imagine...) that enslave women (and boys, by the way, not too much mentioned in your articles) in a hideous fashion.
Nowhere do these articles claim, including the one condeming Israel by Amnesty International, that the Israeli government or body politic condone, approve of, or have anything to do with these horrific crimes.

Therefore, my very antagonistic and frustrated question is: why do you insist on blaming ISRAEL for prostitution slavery? Why not South Africa where it literally kills hundreds of thousands of South Africans each year? Or all of the rest of the nations on Earth, including Russia and China and France and the United States and Holland, where although prostitution is LEGAL, slavery prostitution is still a problem, or all of the Muslim countries which advocate and practice literal slavery in all forms? Why Israel?

This is what I find disturbing. It goes along with the anti-semitic nature of the UN.
It works like this: There are thousands of Palestinians held in Israeli Jails!!!
Yes, but there are also thousands of Palestinians in Jordanian jails and Syrian jails and Egyptian jails and there more than thousands of foreign nationals in French jails and British jails and American jails.... etc.
But the Israelis are criminals!!!!!
Uhhhh??? Why are they different from all the rest of the countries that are doing this?
Because the people being held are Palestinians!!!!
Sigh. How does that change what I just said?
Because the Israelis are criminals!!
Sigh...

Why single out Israel?

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 3:36 PM

Defiant Noquisi Wrote:

As far as Zionism goes, I did not keep a record of what I had read for some reason. However, I did find a few pages on a website that are very similar to what I read.

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/mideast/obrien.htm

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/bookauth/zionism/gwint.htm

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/bookauth/zionism/steinbrg.htm

Okay. I read your articles.
They are opinion pieces which raise and discuss many valid points. They seem to be quite even handed and intelligent.
Nowhere do these articles even imply that Israel is a "terrorist nation" or that it is acting unjustly or criminally towards the Palestinians.

To quote from the very end of the first article you mentioned:

Israeli leaders, as Eric Silver suggests, have been at least to some extent sobered and chastened by some of the results for Israel of Sharon's hubris over Lebanon. It may be that a similar process is going on among Palestinian leaders, where it matters most: on the West Bank itself. If so, the illusory and highly publicized pursuit of "territory for peace" is likely to be paralleled by quieter talks about how to make the sharing of the territory somewhat less uncomfortable and less dangerous for Israelis and Palestinians alike--as well as for the Jordanians. If so--and on the other relatively optimistic hypotheses discussed above--we will witness a considerable abatement of the siege of Israel as the century draws to a close. But the possible abatement depends on Arab recognition of superior Israeli military strength and adjustment to that fact, which is not likely to be accepted as a permanent fact. And so "abatement" implies suspension, not necessarily an approaching termination. What is not in sight is an end to the siege.

What is enlightening about this last paragraph is that this piece was written in 1985.
Since that time:
Israel indeed did condemn "Sharon's Hubris over Lebanon."
As a result of Lebanon and the Israeli distaste for attacking other countries, and the assassination of Rabin by a right wing Israeli terrorist, Leftist, Labor governments were put in place to try and Give the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinians.
Israel did try and give "territory for peace" via the Oslo Accords.
The Palestinians categorically rejected all and every such peaceful accomodations.
Jordan completely repudiated its claim on the West Bank completely due to the intrangience of the Jordanians, now called Palestinians, who lived there.
"Sharing the territory" has been completely rejected by the Palestinians as a possible avenue for peace.
Arabs have refused to this day (with the possible exceptions of Jordan and Egypt, who both have peace treaties with Israel) to recognize "superior Israeli military strength and adjustment to that fact," which, unlike the author proposes, has become a permanent fact thus far.
And there is still no end to the siege.

The examples you have given me are examples of justified caution on the part of Israelis in trying to deal with their enemies. And justified pride in their efforts to be fair. You have shown me a country that is bending over backwards to try and accomodate its enemies. You have shown me Arab nations that are intent on wiping out every last Israeli.
What you have not shown me is any reason whatsoever for your condemnation of Israel or even of Zionism.

And I am truly puzzled.

In attempting to answer my questions about why it is that you condemn Israel, you have praised Israel.

This is a common enough phenomenon in the Torah (Bible - google Bilaam :grin ), but somehow, I do not think that was your intention.

Again to quote one of your articles:

The Jewish question has not disappeared. Zionism has changed and complicated the Jewish question, but it has quite plainly not wound it up.

I would respectfully ask again, from where does your condemnation of Israel come from??

humanhybrid

Jul 18th, 2004, 3:46 PM

This is what I find disturbing. It goes along with the anti-semitic nature of the UN.
It works like this: There are thousands of Palestinians held in Israeli Jails!!!
Yes, but there are also thousands of Palestinians in Jordanian jails and Syrian jails and Egyptian jails and there more than thousands of foreign nationals in French jails and British jails and American jails.... etc.
But the Israelis are criminals!!!!!
Uhhhh??? Why are they different from all the rest of the countries that are doing this?
Because the people being held are Palestinians!!!!
Sigh. How does that change what I just said?
Because the Israelis are criminals!!
Sigh...

Why single out Israel? Very good question Moishe3rd And your right! It doesnt matter if your jewish, american, etc. The point is that these things exist, No? Lets just say humans being inhumane and violating human rights. Now it wouldnt say that Im anti sematic would it? Alot of resentment comes from the arrogance and terroristic behavier that the jewish people have done against the palestinian people to regain the anscestoral land they once occupied. Its no wonder that the United Nations and the councils feel the way they do, its not towards the jew but the behavier against the human against the human. Isreal is a dangerous nation that seeks not to answer to nothing. Do you condone the actions of Isreal to take back the land at what ever cost? Is that a YES or NO ?? Its one or the other without an explanation PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 3:57 PM

Alot of resentment comes from the arrogance and terroristic behavier that the jewish people have done against the palestinian people to regain the anscestoral land they once occupied. Its no wonder that the United Nations and the councils feel the way they do, its not towards the jew but the behavier against the human against the human. Isreal is a dangerous nation that seeks not to answer to nothing. Do you condone the actions of Isreal to take back the land at what ever cost? Is that a YES or NO ?? Its one or the other without an explanation PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your premise is incorrect.
Please give me a source that demonstrates:
terroristic behavier that the jewish people have done against the palestinian people to regain the anscestoral land they once occupied
Please give me a source that shows:
Isreal is a dangerous nation that seeks not to answer to nothing
Please give me a source where it shows the:
actions of Isreal to take back the land at what ever cost

I cannot disagree with you if your stated premise is untrue.
It is a "When did you stop beating your wife" question.
The basic premise is false.
Give me some data and we can argue. :boxer:

humanhybrid

Jul 18th, 2004, 4:15 PM

I cannot disagree with you if your stated premise is untrue.
It is a "When did you stop beating your wife" question.
The basic premise is false.
Give me some data and we can argue. I have already gave you data, and their is no reason to argue because we both know what is happening as well all of us here at this forum, does that make us antisemetic here at this forum? Do you condone the actions of Isreal to take back the land at what ever cost? and then build walls to keep the "terrorists" out! Is that a YES or No? :eww: Ya I can drag out info regarding all that is happening, but then Id be antisemetic. I wouldnt want to give you the chance at it. good day my human freind that is a jew.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 18th, 2004, 4:30 PM

Nowhere do these articles claim, including the one condeming Israel by Amnesty International, that the Israeli government or body politic condone, approve of, or have anything to do with these horrific crimes.

Therefore, my very antagonistic and frustrated question is: why do you insist on blaming ISRAEL for prostitution slavery? Because, Israel is itself at fault for its sex slave and prostitution trade.....

The 1998 New York Times article noted that more than 1,500 Slavic prostitutes -- mostly from the Ukraine -- have been deported from Israel for residence infractions in the past three years. (Israeli oppression knows no end: "Unlike many countries, Israel does not pay airfare for deportees." [LINZER, D., 6-13-98]) Prostitution is not illegal in Israel and clients include foreign workers, "Israeli soldiers with rifles on their shoulders," business executives, and tourists. If Israel had better laws and stronger prosecution, the problem would not exist as it does. Since it doesnt, Israel is responsible for its own problems by supporting this type of activity by not cracking down on it harder.

Why not South Africa where it literally kills hundreds of thousands of South Africans each year? Or all of the rest of the nations on Earth, including Russia and China and France and the United States and Holland, where although prostitution is LEGAL, slavery prostitution is still a problem, or all of the Muslim countries which advocate and practice literal slavery in all forms? Why Israel? Because this thread is called "Critisizing Israel". Had the thread been just about prostitution, or just sex slaves, Id have posted as much as I could have that was relevant about any country including the US. My post does include references that make known the involvement of others countries in collaboration.

The Times noted that

"The networks trafficking women run east to Japan and Thailand, where thousands of young Slavic women now work against their will as prostitutes, and west to the Adriatic Coast and beyond ... The routes are controlled by Russian gangs based in Moscow ... In Ukraine alone ... as many as 400,000 women under 30 have gone in the past decade ... Israel is a fairly typical destination ...

Why single out Israel? The thread is about Israel. I would like to know why (and I am not accussing you) virtually anything negative in regards to anything Jewish is considered anti-semetism. Seriously, I have posted factual information that goes far back into history. The information I have posted and commented on was mainly written and/or published by Jewish people. I purposely sought out information by Jews because it is my belief that Jewish people active in Jewish culture and educated in Jewish history would know Jewish history better. I believe this in regards to my own culture.

If a Jewish person said it, is it still considered anti-semitism, or is that saved only for people who are non-Jewish? And since I am not the one who wrote or published these materials, why are Jewish people singling out Israel?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 18th, 2004, 5:28 PM

Defiant Noquisi Wrote:They are opinion pieces which raise and discuss many valid points. They seem to be quite even handed and intelligent.Nowhere do these articles even imply that Israel is a "terrorist nation" or that it is acting unjustly or criminally towards the Palestinians. That is correct. I want readers to realize than when researching a topic and making an assessment, all sides must be considered. I wanted to show you that the information I read was not neccessarily negative towards Jews and/or Israel. It is also true with the journal article I referenced and the book. These things are not Jewish negatory but contain information about Jewish history in which the activities presented are socially unacceptable and crimes against humanity. I am not Jew hater nor anti-semetic. I also speak out against my own people if it would be of benefit to the community and not to self serving individuals or groups.

What is enlightening about this last paragraph is that this piece was written in 1985.Since that time:

The Palestinians categorically rejected all and every such peaceful accomodations.

"Sharing the territory" has been completely rejected by the Palestinians as a possible avenue for peace.

Arabs have refused to this day (with the possible exceptions of Jordan and Egypt, who both have peace treaties with Israel) to recognize "superior Israeli military strength and adjustment to that fact," which, unlike the author proposes, has become a permanent fact thus far. And there is still no end to the siege.
Very true, including what I have snipped. However, Israel has never accepted the Palestinians right to self-rule unless it has had its finger in the pie. Both sides have had an all or nothing attitude in regards to the holiest parts of the lands. The view towards Palestinian people by mostly Zionist zealots has been that the Palestinians are an obstacle to a greater Israel. The "security wall" that Israel was building in the West Bank is nothing more than an "Apartheid Wall". The settlements Israel has been building in the West Bank are eerily similar to the ghettos of holocaust days, fenced in communities surrounded by hostile territory. UN Resolution 242 called for Israel to remove itself from the land it took during the war in 1967, which it has refused and instead built settlements. Israel will never have peace as long as it racist towards Palestinians and uses bullets and bulldozers to talk with. Im not saying that the Palestinians are innocent, their own terrorist groups are as much to blame. However, I dont think they (Palestinian terrorist groups) would have been created in the first place if Jews hadnt elbowed them out of land they had already been living on.

Israel has purposely divided up territories that were supposed to have been Palestinian, keeping the Palestinians seperated. Israel also wants to have checkpoints run by Israeli's between these territories which would subject Palestinians to inspections by Israeli's in traveling to other territories. This is the same thing that the US and Canada did to Indigenous people, the same thing Australian Parliment did to Aboriginals, the same thing New Zealand did to Maoris and I cant leave out the sponsored seperation and terrorism committed by "democratic" countries towards Indigenous people in South America. Not one of these countries, which includes Israel, is innocent. Does this make any of it right? Do you think that this kind of action and treatment furthers peace?

The examples you have given me are examples of justified caution on the part of Israelis in trying to deal with their enemies. And justified pride in their efforts to be fair. You have shown me a country that is bending over backwards to try and accomodate its enemies. You have shown me Arab nations that are intent on wiping out every last Israeli. I cant control what you make up in your own mind but I have done nothing of the sort. What I have shown you is that even Jewish people can recognize the crimes against humanity that its own people have committed. I cant see where running into houses with bulldozers and anyone escaping the blade to run out and get picked off by the awaiting soldiers bullets is anything but terrorism. Especially since it is land that Israel is not supposed to be occupying in the first place.

What you have not shown me is any reason whatsoever for your condemnation of Israel or even of Zionism. If you have a romantic view in regards to what I have posted rather than seeing it for the human rights violations and terrorism that it is, I cannot help you. While I try to show a balanced array of information, nothing changes the fact that Israel supports terrorism and crime unless it is directed at itself.

I would respectfully ask again, from where does your condemnation of Israel come from?? It comes from recognizing the truth and looking at Israel with a critical eye rather than a romantic one. It took years for me to realize this, but I could not ignore the truth that Israel has yet to let go of the holocaust and instead now commits it.

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 5:57 PM

I have already gave you data, and their is no reason to argue because we both know what is happening as well all of us here at this forum, does that make us antisemetic here at this forum? Do you condone the actions of Isreal to take back the land at what ever cost? and then build walls to keep the "terrorists" out! Is that a YES or No? :eww: Ya I can drag out info regarding all that is happening, but then Id be antisemetic. I wouldnt want to give you the chance at it. good day my human freind that is a jew.
Hmmmm.
:vbroll:
My apologies, but I am not scrolling through this forum to try and find your "data."
Just give me one little piece of information that I can argue with.
Please?

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 6:10 PM

Because, Israel is itself at fault for its sex slave and prostitution trade.....

If Israel had better laws and stronger prosecution, the problem would not exist as it does. Since it doesnt, Israel is responsible for its own problems by supporting this type of activity by not cracking down on it harder.

Because this thread is called "Critisizing Israel". Had the thread been just about prostitution, or just sex slaves, Id have posted as much as I could have that was relevant about any country including the US. My post does include references that make known the involvement of others countries in collaboration.

The thread is about Israel. I would like to know why (and I am not accussing you) virtually anything negative in regards to anything Jewish is considered anti-semetism. Seriously, I have posted factual information that goes far back into history. The information I have posted and commented on was mainly written and/or published by Jewish people. I purposely sought out information by Jews because it is my belief that Jewish people active in Jewish culture and educated in Jewish history would know Jewish history better. I believe this in regards to my own culture.

If a Jewish person said it, is it still considered anti-semitism, or is that saved only for people who are non-Jewish? And since I am not the one who wrote or published these materials, why are Jewish people singling out Israel?

:vbroll: Okay. Fine. Criticize Israel for Slavery. Sigh....
It is not the negative things about Jews or Israel that is considered anti-semmitic. It is concentrating solely on Israel and the Jews to exclusion of the rest of the world, in terms of negativity, that is considered anti-semitic.

If you read every day about drunken, thieving Indians and the UN condemned drunken, thieving Indians; and the state governments were making laws about the drunken, thieving Indian problem; and Minnesotans were constantly shooting and killing drunken thieving Indians; and France thought that drunken, thieving Indians were the biggest threat to world peace; and the Muslim nations decided it was okay to murder drunken, thieving Indians because they, after all, were descended from apes and pigs; and they believed that drunken, thieving Indians murdered white babies to smoke their blood in their pipes; etcetera; etcetera; ad nauseum....
And NOONE ever stood up and said - HEY! What the Hell is the Matter with you People?? Sure there are drunken, thieving Indians, but not most, not many, and what about your own drunken thieves? Why is it only Indians? What is WRONG with you People??
I imagine, if this were the case, you would feel like most people were anti-Indian.
No?

humanhybrid

Jul 18th, 2004, 7:51 PM

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 8:22 PM

WOW you lost me with the drunken analogy. Now PLEASE answer my question first. Do you condone the actions of Israel to take back the land at what ever cost? and then build walls to keep the "terrorists" out? ANSWER! YES or NO! Or else :evbat: And then Ill give you whatever info you ask DEAL????? I know that I can provide rock solid info, but you on the other hand are afraid of revealing your position. WHY?
Okeydokey HH: As I was just writing a beautiful and informative response to Defiant which I lost.... Arghhh, and now I have to do it again...
In the meantime, I will try and help you along some more.

Your
Premise
Is
False.

I will break it down for you.

Do you condone the actions of Israel to take back the land at what ever cost? is your question.
At whatever cost is part and parcel of your question.
I do not accept that Israel is trying to take back the land at whatever cost.
It is a false statement.
I cannot answer a false statement.
Do you accept that the large hole in your head prevents you from comprehending this?
You might see this as a false statement because you may believe that you do not have a large hole in your head.

Is this making any sense to you?

Or do you accept that the large hole in your head prevents you from understanding me?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 18th, 2004, 9:16 PM

:vbroll: Okay. Fine. Criticize Israel for Slavery. Sigh.... No Moishe, Im criticizing Israel for ITS role in white slavery, not for all of it. Cant you see that? I want Israel to hold itself accountable for the problems IT creates and continues. If we were talking slavery in general Id be bashing Christopher Columbus for starting it and then everyone else for continuing it today including my own people for owning slaves back in the day. But, Im trying to keep on topic without going too far astray. Go look at the threads where I bash US policy, you will see.

It is not the negative things about Jews or Israel that is considered anti-semmitic. It is concentrating solely on Israel and the Jews to exclusion of the rest of the world, in terms of negativity, that is considered anti-semitic. So by your definition, this thread would be anti-semetic even though most of the information I posted had been researched and published by Jewish people, no? This is where my confusion lies.

I have responded to the Indian portion of this in my Indian thread. It is located here......

http://forums.armageddononline.org/showthread.php?p=44439#post44439

Moishe3rd

Jul 18th, 2004, 10:29 PM

All right Defiant. You have given me something solid to argue against. Thank you.
I am only going to be able to do the first part here, due to time constraints, because I stupidly wrote this whole thing out and then lost it…. Sigh.
Okay. Let’s begin.

Defiant Noquisti wrote:

Israel has never accepted the Palestinians right to self-rule unless it has had its finger in the pie.
100% Correct. Israel will never accept Palestinian self-rule without setting up the conditions and terms.
Jordan and Egypt were part of an Arab coalition that tried to eradicate Israel.
Jordan and Egypt lost the war.
Israel took the West Bank from Jordan and Egypt.
The Jordanians and Egyptians who lived there became the Palestinians after Jordan and Egypt both rejected these territories.
Jordan and Egypt made peace with Israel. Israel made concessions to them including giving back land taken from them.
The Palestinians have not made peace with Israel.
They lost the war. They will get self-rule when they make peace.
That is the way it has always worked. That is the way it will always work.

Both sides have had an all or nothing attitude in regards to the holiest parts of the lands.
Jerusalem and Israel have been holy to the Jews for over three thousand years.
Jerusalem and Israel have never been holy to the Moslems.
Jerusalem and Hevron (which is both a Moslem and Jewish holy site) have always been open to the Moslems for worship.
The only time Jerusalem and Hevron and other Jewish Holy sites have not been open to Jews for worship is when they were under Moslem rule from 1948 to 1967.
This is proof that the Moslems are the only ones who have “an all or nothing attitude towards the holiest parts of the lands.”

The view towards Palestinian people by mostly Zionist zealots has been that the Palestinians are an obstacle to a greater Israel.
Zionist zealots assassinated Yitzach Rabin. The vast, vast majority of Israelis HATE Zionist zealots. (I may be misunderstanding who you are defining as “Zionist zealots,” but I can only assume you are comparing them to a counterpart “Palestinian suicide/murder type.”)
Your comparison is the same as saying “The view towards American Indians by White Supremacists has been that the Indians are an obstacle to a White America.
It may be true, but it has nothing to do with customs, actions, Laws, etcetera by the American (Israeli) government.
Other than, in both cases, the government being forced to take police or military action against the “zealots” (supremacists).

The "security wall" that Israel was building in the West Bank is nothing more than an "Apartheid Wall".
Apartheid is the racial separation practiced by the government of South Africa. You are using a nonsensical adjective. Find another comparison.
There are over one million Arab/Palestinian/Muslim Israeli citizens who like Israel very much, thank you….
Your comparison is ridiculous.

Please read the following articles on the fence:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/krauthammer_2004_07_16.php3
http://jewishworldreview.com/0704/tobin_2004_07_14.php3
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/netanyahu_2004_07_14.php3
http://jewishworldreview.com/0704/security_fence_arab_.php3
http://jewishworldreview.com/0704/dershowitz_hague_ruling.php3

I have more articles if you want...

The settlements Israel has been building in the West Bank are eerily similar to the ghettos of holocaust days, fenced in communities surrounded by hostile territory.
Ghettos were areas where Jews were forced to live.
Palestinians who live near Israeli towns in the West Bank WANT TO Live near Israelis. It benefits their lives in every way – safety; family; education; economics; business; Palestinian/Israeli relations; Everything.

Yes, there are hostile Palestinians out there. But you stating this is eerily similar (again with the American Indian analogy) to my living here in Minnesota on what was once “Indian Lands” surrounded by hostile Indians.
There is a grain of truth in that but really? No.

UN Resolution 242 called for Israel to remove itself from the land it took during the war in 1967, which it has refused and instead built settlements.
The pertinent part you are referring to of UN Resolution 242 (http://www.mideastweb.org/242.htm) is:

Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

So far, two belligerent states have made peace with Israel - Jordan and Egypt. "Palestine" has not. (Neither has Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, or Yemen, all of which are "at war" with Israel according to UN 242).
Let "Palestine" fullfill its requirement. Israel will fullfill its requirement.

Israel will never have peace as long as it racist towards Palestinians and uses bullets and bulldozers to talk with.
Israel uses bulldozers instead of bullets. It could far more easily and far more cheaply simply send fighter jets to blow up whole neighborhoods that were giving them trouble. Israel bulldozes houses as a NON LETHAL form of punishment for people who attack them OR as a method of security to keep people from attacking them.
NO other nation on this planet is as benign. No place. Nowhere.

Israel uses bullets to take out those who would murder them.
As do ALL other nations on this planet.

Im not saying that the Palestinians are innocent, their own terrorist groups are as much to blame. However, I dont think they (Palestinian terrorist groups) would have been created in the first place if Jews hadnt elbowed them out of land they had already been living on.
Oy.
Please.
What land did Israel elbow the Palestinians out of?
I suspect what you want to write is about is? 1947? 1948? 1967? If this is not what you are writing about, let me know.
Israel was attacked by several Arab nations, including Syria, Jordan and Egypt, in 1948 and in 1967 (yes, Israel was attacked in 1967 – for real) with the intention to murder every last Jew that lived in Israel.
The Arabs LOST. They did not succeed in wiping out Israel. They lost the battles. They lost the wars. They lost.
After attacking with the intention of murdering every Jew in Israel (this is what they said they wanted to do – their words, not mine) and losing, Egypt finally sued for peace. The Egyptians murdered Sadat for doing so.
After the Jordanian Palestinians tried to overthrow the Jordanian government with the help of Syria, Jordan kicked those violent Palestinians out of Jordan (the ones they did not kill or imprison); repudiated the West Bank, filled with these same violent Palestinians and made peace with Israel.
The now stateless “Palestinians” left in the West Bank and Gaza did not make peace with the Israelis. Hundreds of thousands of individual Palestinians made their own peace with Israel, or at least tried to when they were not murdered or terrorized or intimidated by their fellow Palestinians, but the “leadership” of the “Palestinians” refused peace with Israel.
After they were kicked out of Jordan, they moved to Lebanon where they devastated and totally destroyed that once peaceful and beautiful country. After the Israelis kicked them out of Lebanon, they moved to Algeria.
After the Oslo accords the Israelis invited the Palestinian “leadership” back into Israel and gave them limited self rule (ARRRRGGHHHHHHH –Stupid, stupid Israelis!!!!). In the meantime, Syria invaded and took over Lebanon, which is still destroyed and the Palestinians attempted to murder countless Israelis.
When the Palestinians make peace, they will get peace and land.
If they continue to murder, they will be SHUT OUT and their leadership will be killed.

humanhybrid

Jul 19th, 2004, 12:32 AM

Israel uses bulldozers instead of bullets. It could far more easily and far more cheaply simply send fighter jets to blow up whole neighborhoods that were giving them trouble. Israel bulldozes houses as a NON LETHAL form of punishment for people who attack them OR as a method of security to keep people from attacking them.
NO other nation on this planet is as benign. No place. Nowhere.

Israel uses bullets to take out those who would murder them.
As do ALL other nations on this planet. Yes I do understand your position CLEARLY! NOW! 100% Israel will never accept Palestinian self-rule without setting up the conditions and terms. You try bringing your barbaric way of coming in on my property and tell me how to manage my life and expences I WILL RETALIATE! in every way I could.
Let "Palestine" fullfill its requirement. Israel will fullfill its requirement Whats that?? Give up and surrender everything? haha [QUOTE]John Pilger : 16 Sep 2002

LAST October, in the early hours of the morning, a young expectant mother called Fatima Abed-Rabo awoke with intense labour pains; and she and her husband Nasser set out in a friend's car for the hospital in Bethlehem, in Israeli occupied Palestine.

The couple had been trying for a second child for three years and had undergone fertility treatment. "The news of the pregnancy had made us so happy," said Nasser, "that we celebrated by replacing the tin sheeting on our home with a concrete roof."

The couple were stopped at the Israeli military roadblock just outside their village. The soldiers turned them back, even though Fatima was now haemorrhaging. They got a taxi, hoping that would be allowed through. Again, they were turned back. No explanation was given; one soldier mimicked Fatima's moans.

Fatima gave birth to her baby in the taxi. She remembers the soldiers hurling her husband's ID into the blood on the floor.

"We cut the umbilical cord with a razor blade," she said. "My husband wrapped the tiny boy in his jacket, and eventually one of his relatives found a back route."

Barely three pounds in weight, blue and in a critical condition, the baby was dead by the time they arrived at the hospital.

We don't know why they did this to us," she told me in my film on ITV tonight. "It wasn't personal. This is how they treat all Palestinians. I'm sorry to say this, but they would rather help an animal than an Arab."

STORIES like Fatima's are rarely news in Britain, yet they are typical of the everyday treatment of the Palestinians. Human rights groups run by Israelis have recorded hundreds of instances of pregnant and seriously ill Palestinians being turned back at Israeli checkpoints, including ambulances.

"We don't know how many have died like this," said a spokeswoman for the Israeli Physicians for Human Rights, "because many people don't even bother to set out for hospital, knowing the soldiers will stop them. "These people offer no threat to Israel. Those who do, like the suicide bombers, of course never go through roadblocks, which exist only to control, subjugate and humiliate ordinary people. It is like a routine terrorism."

Fatima's remark about being treated worse than an animal is apposite. It is always easier to harm or kill people who, in the eyes of the powerful, do not matter: be it in Afghanistan or occupied Palestine.

Israeli soldiers enforcing the illegal occupation of Palestinian land can cause the death of babies and other innocents, or kill them outright, and words such as murder and terrorism are almost never used. The same immunity has been enjoyed by those politicians who design and permit this "routine terrorism," which is the product of a form of colonialism.

Indeed, to understand both the roots and the double standards of Bush's "war on terror," whose propaganda the Israeli regime of Ariel Sharon has adopted almost word for word, you need to come to Palestine, where one of the longest military occupations in modern times is now in its 36th year.

When I was passing through Israeli checkpoints last May, there were several of these routine murders. A nurse was one of them. Nine-tenths of Palestinians killed by the Israelis are civilians; 45 per cent are teenagers and children. In Gaza, five years ago, an amusement park opened beside the sea. It was the only one in a deeply impoverished place populated mainly by refugees whose families were forced off their land or out of their villages by the Israelis.

"At first, it was very successful," said Walid Al Dirawi, who looks after the deserted ruin of rusting rides and dodgem cars. "Then the shooting started from across the road. The Israeli settlers and soldiers shot it up every weekend, and of course people stayed away." Behind the dodgems is a wall pock-marked with bullet holes, like a shooting gallery.

THE "settlers" are mostly religious Israelis or immigrants from Russia, America and elsewhere, who are subsidised by the government to live in what are colonial fortresses in the midst of Palestinian communities, guarded by the Israeli army.

They have no right to be there under international law, and the United Nations says they should get out. Their justification is usually Biblical.

For the Israeli state, they serve a practical purpose; they occupy and encroach upon more and more Palestinian land, while allowing the military to control the Palestinians with more and more roadblocks and restrictions. Many Palestinian villages are surrounded by barbed wire, and people require a special permit even to travel to the next one. Gaza, where 800,000 are trapped, is surrounded by an electrified fence.

When Archbishop Desmond Tutu came here recently, he said: "The way the Palestinians are treated is the way we were treated in apartheid South Africa."

Trapped by checkpoints and arbitrary curfews the Palestinian economy is in ruins. According to a US government survey, more than half of all Palestinian children suffer from malnutrition, including chronic malnutrition defined as stunted growth.

CONTINUED

humanhybrid

Jul 19th, 2004, 12:34 AM

CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS People struggle to live on less than £1 a day. One of the most moving sights I have seen are the kites that reach for the sky every dusk, displaying the colours of the Palestinian flag, flown by terribly thin children from their open prison in refugee camps.

Cutting a swathe through this poverty and despair are the Israeli "settlements": surreal, middle class suburbs that are armed fortresses with watchtowers. From here, the "settlers" shot up the amusement park. I visited one of these fortresses. What struck me was the lushness: the constant sound of running water: sprinklers nourishing hothouse crops and manicured gardens. On the other side of what looks like the Berlin Wall, in impoverished Gaza, standpipes trickle and often run dry.

These illegal, provocative enclaves, and their surrounding security areas, control almost 42 per cent of occupied Palestine - a fact that, on its own, makes mockery of the popular myth that two years ago the Israelis made a "generous" offer to return 90 per cent of the occupied territories, which the Palestinian Authority rejected.

The truth is very different. Following peace negotiations in America in 2000, President Clinton's National Security Adviser Robert Malley, who was there with Clinton, revealed that, although the Palestinians rejected certain Israeli proposals, "it could also be said that Israel rejected the unprecedented two-state solution put to them by the Palestinians, including the following provisions: a state of Israel incorporating some land captured in 1967 and including a very large majority of its settlers; the largest Jewish Jerusalem in the city's history (and) security guaranteed by a US-led international presence."

Shortly after it was founded in 1948, Israel controlled, mostly as a result of a United Nations partition and partly by force, a total of 78 per cent of historic Palestine. The Palestinians, who were the majority, fled in an orchestrated campaign of fear and terror, or they were expelled. These days, this would be known as "ethnic cleansing".

When he retired, General Moshe Dayan, Israel's military hero, said: "Jewish places were built in the place of Arab villages. There is not one single place in the country that did not have a former Arab population."

DURING the Six-Day War in 1967, the Israelis occupied the remaining 22 per cent of Palestine. Today, the Palestinians, seeking to form their own independent state, want only that 22 per cent back.

Little of this background is known or understood widely in Britain, even though the region is constantly in the news. Last May, the Glasgow University Media Group, famous for its pioneering media analysis, published a study that found TV viewers in particular were rarely told that Palestinians were the victims of an illegal and brutal military occupation. Only nine per cent of those interviewed were aware that the Israelis were the occupiers. For years, representing the Israelis as oppressors has been a taboo with always the threat of slurs of anti-Semitism (a bleak irony, as Palestinians are Semites, too).

This has been manipulated by the Israeli government and its foreign lobbies, especially in the United States where the lobby commands most of the Congress and the White House.

Many Israelis, like many Jews in Britain and other counties, condemn this intimidation, just as they condemn the occupation and are fearful of its deeply corrupting effect on Israeli society. Recently, the Chief Rabbi of Britain, Jonathan Sacks, said he had long believed that Israel should give back the Occupied Territories. When I was in Israel in May, some 50,000 Israelis crowded central Tel Aviv, demanding that the government of Ariel Sharon made peace.

They are still a minority. The Palestinian suicide bombers and their mass murder of innocents have hardened Israeli public opinion, but what is seldom reported is that they are a relatively recent phenomenon.

For much of their resistance, the Palestinians have fought back courageously with slingshots - against a modern army, equipped with tanks, fighter aircraft and helicopter gunships.

Britain has a historic responsibility towards the Palestinians. The 1917 "Balfour Declaration" promised Jews a homeland provided it would not prejudice the rights of the non-Jewish communities. The British famously reneged on this. Britain administered the League of Nations" Mandate for Palestine until the partition that created Israel in 1948, which the Palestinians call al-Nakba, "the catastrophe."

AS a permanent member of the UN Security Council, successive British governments have pledged to support the resolutions that have called upon Israel to end its occupation.

In the General Assembly, there have been an estimated 450 resolutions calling, in one form or another, for justice for the Palestinians. This is a world record. No country has incurred the opprobrium of the world community as often as Israel and no country has been excused its "rogue" behaviour so consistently, thanks to its backer, America.

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, it was ordered to withdraw by the United Nations Security Council. When the Iraqis failed to comply, they were attacked with such force that tens of thousands were slaughtered. When Israel seized the West Bank of the Jordan and Gaza, it was ordered to withdraw by the same UN Security council. That was 35 years ago, and the occupation goes on.

On the contrary, Israel has since been rewarded with billions of dollars worth of aid and armaments, principally by the United States, which has helped it develop nuclear weapons and other so-called weapons of mass destruction.

Britain has nurtured the hypocrisy that reached its apogee in the United Nations General Assembly last week when George Bush, speaking and postulating like a Mafia don, and with the full support of Tony Blair, threatened the very existence of the UN unless it provided him with a figleaf from behind which he could attack Iraq.

But it was Israel's flouting of UN resolutions on Palestine that was the spectre in the General Assembly. Every delegate knew it, especially the British who are fully aware of the enduring destabilising effect of the illegal occupation.

They also know that it is being intensified by Ariel Sharon, a man whom a commission of his own parliament found indirectly but "personally responsible" for the massacre of more than 800 Palestinians in 1982 and who once boasted: "They (the Arabs) have the numbers. We have the matches."

With Bush and Blair about to ignite another war in the Middle East, justice for the Palestinians remains key to peace[/QUOTE]

humanhybrid

Jul 19th, 2004, 12:46 AM

Traces of poison

Israel's Dark History revealed.
Israel, not Iraq, holds that distinction of being the first country in the region to use weapons of mass destruction with genocidal intent. Salman Abu-Sitta digs into a dark history; http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1750.htm

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 19th, 2004, 7:30 AM

And thank you Moishe, you have never given me so much ammunition to prove mine as you have in this post. Im just going to use about half of your comments to prove my rebuttal but just because I have left them out doesnt indicate whether I agree with them or not.

In fact, for those of you who's attention is waning I can sum it up in a few words starting with Jewish arrogance, followed by the Jewish dehumanization of Palestinians and the Jewish belief that Palestinians never existed in the occupied territories and finally the Jewish terrorization of people who they claim didnt exist. Of course thats not to leave out the US's blind support of a terrorist nation but then I would be criticizing the US and not just Israel. Thats the entire Middle Eastern problem in a nut shell.

Lets begin with Jewish arrogance shall we?

100% Correct. Israel will never accept Palestinian self-rule without setting up the conditions and terms. Then it is not self rule, period. That is also why the Palestinians have resisted every policy and peace plan set before them. Thats like saying the Iraqi's have self rule. If the Palestinians are to have self rule then Israel should butt out.

They lost the war. They will get self-rule when they make peace. That is the way it has always worked. That is the way it will always work. Apparently they arent so sure of that since they keep fighting the occupation. They wont make peace until the Israeli's butt out so they can determine their own rule. That is noble, yet incredibly arrogant that Israel seems to think it can tell the Palestinians how they will get self rule, since again that is not self rule. The Palestinians are not stupid.

Jerusalem and Israel have never been holy to the Moslems. Partially correct. Israel will never be holy but what an incredibly ignorant and highly arrogant thing to suggest that Jeruselum their capitol isnt. I can hardly imagine how not even 50 years of Jewish rule is somehow more historically important than over a thousand years of continous Christian/Muslim rule.

So far, two belligerent states have made peace with Israel - Jordan and Egypt. And by whose definition are they "belligerant"? Again, arrogance.

Israel bulldozes houses as a NON LETHAL form of punishment for people who attack them OR as a method of security to keep people from attacking them. So its only lethal if they actually see the bodies right? Thats not to mention the ones picked off by the soldiers who wait for them to run from the houses. Remember, the link I posted describing this form of security came from a Jewish publication. Of course it would be secure, dead people cant kill anyone defending themselves let alone run.

After they were kicked out of Jordan, they moved to Lebanon where they devastated and totally destroyed that once peaceful and beautiful country. If it hadnt been for the Christians there not accepting Muslim's it wouldnt have gotten so ugly. If it wouldnt have been for the Jews taking much of the area in which Palestinians had already been living they wouldnt have been so many refugees running for Lebanon or anywhere else. This from my Lebonese co-worker who fled Lebanon because his Catholic religion does not espouse violence(his words, not mine).

After the Oslo accords the Israelis invited the Palestinian “leadership” back into Israel and gave them limited self rule (ARRRRGGHHHHHHH –Stupid, stupid Israelis!!!!). Wow! Stupid is right! Self rule cant be limited, it either is or it isnt. Again, thats like saying that Iraq has limited self rule, it doesnt. Why would they want to be invited to Israel? Since it seems ok for Jews to have their own country there is no reason why Palestinians cant have back land they were living on. I also dont believe that the Palestinians agreed to be caged in like animals either. I also cant find anything that said anything about Israel being in a position of power over Palestinians. All it says it that the two must live peaceablt together.

When the Palestinians make peace, they will get peace and land. If they continue to murder, they will be SHUT OUT and their leadership will be killed. So if they want peace, that peace has to be dictated and approved by Israel. If they dont like it, they get murdered. This smacks of a child throwing a temper tantrum. In this case its Israel thats throwing the tantrum and it is costing lives, How arrogant!

Moving onward. Lets look at dehumanization, terrorization and existance since the three walk together.

The Jordanians and Egyptians who lived there became the Palestinians after Jordan and Egypt both rejected these territories. They didnt reject these territories. Israel bombed the hell out of both countries plus taking the Golan Heights from Syria in the "6 Day War". The Palestinians who had been living there were displaced by Jewish greed. In addition, the second part of the Camp David agreement between Egypt and Israel in 1979 was that there would be autonomy for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This agreement has NEVER been followed through with by Israel since the accord was signed.

Please note, that agreement states they are "Palestinians" NOT Egyptians that didnt live in Egypt anymore.

Jordan and Egypt made peace with Israel. Israel made concessions to them including giving back land taken from them. Again, only because of the 6 Day War, the close proximity to each Nation's capital and the fact that the areas the Palestinians lived in that are now Israel were not that densely populated. Concessions were also made for the Palestinians but I notice those concessions seem to have been forgotten on the part of Israel. Please note there was NO agreement for Israel to return to the 1949/1967 borders.

Jerusalem and Hevron (which is both a Moslem and Jewish holy site) have always been open to the Moslems for worship. The only time Jerusalem and Hevron and other Jewish Holy sites have not been open to Jews for worship is when they were under Moslem rule from 1948 to 1967. This is proof that the Moslems are the only ones who have “an all or nothing attitude towards the holiest parts of the lands.” I notice you have conveniently left out Israel's pastime of bombing mosques.

Zionist zealots assassinated Yitzach Rabin. The vast, vast majority of Israelis HATE Zionist zealots. (I may be misunderstanding who you are defining as “Zionist zealots,” but I can only assume you are comparing them to a counterpart “Palestinian suicide/murder type.”) No, but I will compare them to their Nazi counterparts.

Apartheid is the racial separation practiced by the government of South Africa. You are using a nonsensical adjective. Find another comparison. Why? Does this one hit too close to home? I dont think I would have brought it up like that if an AFRICAN (who I cant remember who said it but they are/were prominant) wouldnt have already made the comparison and Jewish people werent using it themselves.

Ghettos were areas where Jews were forced to live.
Palestinians who live near Israeli towns in the West Bank WANT TO Live near Israelis. It benefits their lives in every way – safety; family; education; economics; business; Palestinian/Israeli relations; Everything. Yes, Im sure the ones fenced in at Gaza, have to have special permits to come and go and Israeli's controlling when and where they can go, even if its for medical aid really appreciate that. Im sure they want bulldozers parked in their backyards too. I suppose there is no "Declaration of Principles" either?

Yes, there are hostile Palestinians out there. But you stating this is eerily similar (again with the American Indian analogy) to my living here in Minnesota on what was once “Indian Lands” surrounded by hostile Indians.
There is a grain of truth in that but really? No. Your right when you typed no because I posted nothing of the sort.

"Palestine" has not. (Neither has Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, or Yemen, all of which are "at war" with Israel according to UN 242).
Let "Palestine" fullfill its requirement. Israel will fullfill its requirement. You better read it again. 242 says nothing about the countries not agreeing to it as being "at war". In addition, the Arab nations who voted against Resolution 194 did so because there were no provisions for Palestinian refugee return and because they would not recognize Israel. Since they wont recognize Israel, they cant sign or agree to anything. By the way, dont forget that the Royals of Saudia Arabia were bought and paid for by yours truly, the USA. Who's side of the fence is the US really on?

Im noticing as I read over these documents one thing is becoming very clear, the only one who says that the Palestinians are everything but Palestinians, is....you.

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 11:20 AM

Sure....
What the heck.
Once more, dear friends, into the breach!! :fencing:

Lets begin with Jewish arrogance shall we?

Defiant Noquisi Wrote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moishe3rd
100% Correct. Israel will never accept Palestinian self-rule without setting up the conditions and terms.

Then it is not self rule, period. That is also why the Palestinians have resisted every policy and peace plan set before them. Thats like saying the Iraqi's have self rule. If the Palestinians are to have self rule then Israel should butt out.

Quote:
They lost the war. They will get self-rule when they make peace. That is the way it has always worked. That is the way it will always work.

Apparently they arent so sure of that since they keep fighting the occupation. They wont make peace until the Israeli's butt out so they can determine their own rule. That is noble, yet incredibly arrogant that Israel seems to think it can tell the Palestinians how they will get self rule, since again that is not self rule. The Palestinians are not stupid.[/QUOTE
Okaaaaaayy....
So you are saying that Israel is unlike any other nation. And that the Palestinians are equally unique.
What you want is for Israel to set a new historical precedent where the loser gets to dictate terms to the winner.
It's cute, but it will never happen.

[QUOTE]Quote:
Jerusalem and Israel have never been holy to the Moslems.

Partially correct. Israel will never be holy but what an incredibly ignorant and highly arrogant thing to suggest that Jeruselum their capitol isnt. I can hardly imagine how not even 50 years of Jewish rule is somehow more historically important than over a thousand years of continous Christian/Muslim rule.
Hmmm. I did not claim that Jerusalem is not "holy" to the Christians.
However, are you claiming that conquering a city makes it holy?
Is Kiev holy to the Muslims? Is Granada, Spain holy to the Muslims?
Does that mean that Berlin is holy to the Americans and the Russians?
Jerusalem holds no place in the "holy sites" of Islam.

Quote:
So far, two belligerent states have made peace with Israel - Jordan and Egypt.

And by whose definition are they "belligerant"? Again, arrogance.
They are belligerent by defintion of the United Nations.
I will repaste the relevant document that you choose not to refer to:

The pertinent part you are referring to of UN Resolution 242 is:

Quote:
Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

Quote:
Israel bulldozes houses as a NON LETHAL form of punishment for people who attack them OR as a method of security to keep people from attacking them.

So its only lethal if they actually see the bodies right? Thats not to mention the ones picked off by the soldiers who wait for them to run from the houses. Remember, the link I posted describing this form of security came from a Jewish publication. Of course it would be secure, dead people cant kill anyone defending themselves let alone run.
Do you have any facts or figures? I do. If you would like, I will post them.
They do not agree with your assessment.

Quote:
After they were kicked out of Jordan, they moved to Lebanon where they devastated and totally destroyed that once peaceful and beautiful country.

If it hadnt been for the Christians there not accepting Muslim's it wouldnt have gotten so ugly. If it wouldnt have been for the Jews taking much of the area in which Palestinians had already been living they wouldnt have been so many refugees running for Lebanon or anywhere else. This from my Lebonese co-worker who fled Lebanon because his Catholic religion does not espouse violence(his words, not mine).
:grin
This one is really good.
You are saying that it is the fault of the Christian Lebanese for not taking in the rebellious Palestinian population of Jordan who wanted to take over the Lebanese government by military force?
Really?
Although, I do begin to understand you, based on this observation...
You are aware that over 80% of Jordanians are "Palestinians," aren't you?
You are aware that this has always been the case - before Israel became a state; before Jordan became a country, aren't you?
You are aware that Jordan was called Palestine before they renamed it Jordan, aren't you?
You are aware that the rebellion in Jordan was to violently murder the government of Jordan and establish a "Palestinian" government, aren't you?
You are aware that Syria attempted to help the Palestinians do this, aren't you?
But, they lost.
And then they wrecked Lebanon....

Gotta work :alcoholic

Emerald_Dragon

Jul 19th, 2004, 11:30 AM

Emerald_Dragon

Jul 19th, 2004, 11:33 AM

>And then they wrecked Lebanon....

:rolling:
was that before the Israelis came in and liberated Lebanon? And left after its residents fought against them?
:rolling:
:shot:

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 1:40 PM

>And then they wrecked Lebanon....

:rolling:
was that before the Israelis came in and liberated Lebanon? And left after its residents fought against them?
:rolling:
:shot:

Yes.
The PLO Black Septemberists were killed or driven out of Jordan in 1970.
They retreated to Lebanon. They "formally began" the Lebanese Civil War in 1975. I say formally, because there was some fighting before that.
Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 to drive the PLO out because the civil war had destroyed the government of Lebanon and the PLO was free to launch attacks against Israel from southern Lebanon.

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 4:43 PM

>Do you have any facts or figures? I do.
> If you would like, I will post them.
>They do not agree with your assessment.

does the name 'Rachel Corrie' ring any bells? Israeli bulldozers ignored she was there and ran her over.
No.
Intentionally.
No again
However, "official" reports say, the driver did not see her.
That's correct. As you are putting official in quotation marks, I can only assume you don't believe "official" reports.
So, you've got Area 51 aliens directing George Bush to rape and loot Iraq so that he can give all of the oil to the cartels that are trying to enslave you.
You can certainly believe any damn silly thing you want to.
There are many pictures and protesters who were witness to them.
I assume you mean reports with the picture of her and the eyewitnesses who said she was standing in front of a doctor's house trying to prevent it from being bulldozed?
Or, perhaps you mean another one. I would certainly like to be directed towards one of these reports, if the above is not the one you are writing about. But how did the Israeli papers report it?
The truth.

Please give me a link or something that I can follow that backs up your belief.
Thanks.
:bye:

humanhybrid

Jul 19th, 2004, 6:33 PM

A brief history

1895 - 1917

1895

The total population of Palestine was 500,000 of whom 47,000 were Jews who owned 0.5% of the land.

1896

Following the appearance of anti-Semitism in Europe, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism tried to find a political solution for the problem in his book, 'The Jewish State'. He advocated the creation of a Jewish state in Argentina or Palestine.

1897

The first Zionist Congress was held in Switzerland, which issued the Basle programme on the colonization of Palestine and the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO).

1904

Fourth Zionist Congress decided to establish a national home for Jews in Argentina.

1906

The Zionist congress decided the Jewish homeland should be Palestine.

1914

With the outbreak of World War I, Britain promised the independence of Arab lands under Ottoman rule, including Palestine, in return for Arab support against Turkey which had entered the war on the side of Germany.

1916

Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region into zones of influence. Lebanon and Syria were assigned to France, Jordan and Iraq to Britain and Palestine was to be internationalized.

1917

Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary sent a letter to the Zionist leader Lord Rothschild which later became known as "The Balfour declaration". He stated that Britain would use its best endeavors to facilitate the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. At that time the population of Palestine was 700,000 of which 574,000 were Muslims, 74,000 were Christian, and 56,000 were Jews.

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

1919 - 1967

1919

The Palestinians convened their first National Conference and expressed their opposition to the Balfour Declaration.

1920

The San Remo Conference granted Britain a mandate over Palestine and two years later Palestine was effectively under British administration, and Sir Herbert Samuel, a declared Zionist, was sent as Britain's first High Commissioner to Palestine.

1922

The Council of the League of Nations issued a Mandate for Palestine. The Mandate was in favor of the establishment for the Jewish people a homeland in Palestine.

1936

The Palestinians held a six-month General Strike to protest against the confiscation of land and Jewish immigration.

1939

The British government published a new White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years. This was rejected by the Zionists, who then organized terrorist groups and launched a bloody campaign against the British and the Palestinians. The aim was to drive them both out of Palestine and to pave the way for the establishment of the Zionist state.

1947

The United Nations approved the partition under which the Palestinian Arabs, who accounted for 70% of the population and owned 92% of the land, were allocated 47% of the country. (UN resolution 181)

1948

British forces withdrew from Palestine in May and the Zionists proclaimed the state of Israel without defining its borders. Arab armies moved to defend the Palestinians.

1949

A cease fire was finally agreed. The Zionists controlled 77% of Palestinian land and over 1 million Palestinians were forced to leave their country. The West Bank was put under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip under Egyptian control.

1964

The Palestine Liberation Organization was established.

1965

The Palestine 'Revolution' began on 1 January.

1967

Israel launched a new war against the Arabs and seized the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Syrian Golan Heights and the Egyptian Sinai peninsula.

1973 - 1988

1973

The October War between Israel and the Arab states broke out.

1974

The Arab Summit in Rabat recognized the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. At the United Nations General Assembly, the UN reaffirmed its commitment to an independent sovereign state in Palestine and gave the PLO observer status at the United Nations. Yasser Arafat, chairman of the PLO, addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations.

1978

Egypt and Israel signed the Camp David Agreement under the auspices of the United States.

1982

Israel invaded Lebanon with the aim of destroying the PLO. Tens of thousands were killed and made homeless in the wake of the invasion which culminated in the massacres of Sabra and Shatilla.

1983

The United Nations called for the convening of a Peace Conference with the participation of the PLO on an equal footing with the other delegates as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.

1987

The 18th Session of the Palestine National Council (PNC) supported the convening of a UN- sponsored conference. In December the Intifada-the Palestine Uprising - in the Occupied Territories began.

1988

Abu Jihad, Palestinian leader, was gunned down in his home in Tunis on 14April by the Israeli Mossad.

July 31

Jordanian disengagement - King Hussein of Jordan said he no longer considered the West Bank as part of his kingdom.

November 15

The PNC meeting in Algiers declared the State of Palestine as outlined in the UN Partition Plan 181.

December 9

British Junior Foreign Minister William Waldegrave met with Bassam Abu Sharif President Arafat's adviser, thus upgrading Britain's relations with the PLO.

Following the US government refusing President Arafat a visa to enter the US, the UN General Assembly held a special session on the question of Palestine in Geneva.

US/PLO dialogue began

1989 - 1996

1989

June 28: EEC Madrid Conference issued a new declaration calling for the PLO to be involved in any peace negotiations.

August 3: Fateh, the mainstream PLO organization, at their 5th Conference endorsed the PLO strategy adopted at the PNC in Algiers in November 1988.

1990

May 20: Seven Palestinian workers from Gaza were massacred by an Israeli gunman near Tel Aviv.

Yasser Arafat addressed the UN Security Council In Geneva after the massacre in which he called for the deployment of a UN emergency force to provide international protection for the Palestinian people to safeguard their lives, properties and holy places.

The US vetoed a motion which called for the Security Council to send a fact finding mission to the area. At the end of their hunger strike, Palestinian leaders in the Occupied Territories decided to boycott the US.

The Arab Summit in Baghdad pledged support fort he Palestinian Intifada and strongly denounced the settlement of Soviet Jews with in the Occupied Territories.

June 20: The US suspended its dialogue with the PLO after the PLO refused to denounce a military operation in the sea by the PLF.

June 26: The EEC in Dublin issued a new declaration on the Middle East which condemned Israeli human rights violations and the settlement of Soviet Jews in the Occupied Territories. It also doubled its economic aid programme to the Occupied Territories.

August 2: The Gulf Crisis erupted.

December 20: UN Security Council adopted Resolution 681.

1991

January 16: War in the Gulf started.

February 17: Cease fire agreed in War in the Gulf. - 23 September: The PNC met in Algiers and paved the way for the Palestinian delegation to participate in the Middle East Peace Conference.

October 30: The Middle East Peace Conference convened in Madrid.

December 3: The bi-lateral talks between Israel and the Palestinians, Syrians, Jordanians and Lebanese started in Washington.

1992

June 23: Israeli Labor Party won the election in Israel and formed a Labor coalition government.

August 24: The sixth round of the bi-lateral talks ,W.

1993

September 9-10: PLO Israeli recognition

September 13: Palestinian-Israeli Declaration of Principle

1994

May 4: Gaza strip and Jericho Agreement in Cairo

August 29: Transfer of the power Agreement.

1995

September 28: Palestinian Israeli Interim Agreement signed in Washington.

1996

January: Election in Palestine

Israeli soldiers re deployed from major cities in the West Bank, yet Hebron is still controlled by the Israeli soldiers

1997

January: Agreement of the redeployment from Hebron

February: Release of the women prisoners.

March: The construction of the new Israeli settlement of Jabal Abu Ghneim (Har Homa) started.

March: Cease of the peace talks because of the continuous of the settlements policy of the Netanyahu Government.

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 7:34 PM

Hybrid Wrote:

1920
The San Remo Conference granted Britain a mandate over Palestine and two years later Palestine was effectively under British administration, and Sir Herbert Samuel, a declared Zionist, was sent as Britain's first High Commissioner to Palestine.
:wlink:

Oops, but he forgot to write:

At the end of World War I, discussions commenced on the future of the Middle East, including the disposition of Palestine. On April 19, 1920, the Allies, Britain, France, Italy and Greece, Japan and Belgium, convened in San Remo, Italy to discuss a peace treaty with Turkey. The Allies decided to assign Great Britain the mandate over Palestine on both sides of the Jordan River, and the responsibility for putting the Balfour Declaration into effect. Arab nationalists were unsure how best to react to British authority. The two preeminent Jerusalem clans, the el-Husseinis and the Nashashibis, battled for influence throughout the mandate, as they had for decades before. The former was very anti-British, whereas the latter favored a more conciliatory policy.

One of the el-Husseinis, Haj Amin, who emerged as the leading figure in Palestinian politics during the mandate period, first began to organize small groups of suicide groups, fedayeen ("one who sacrifices himself"), to terrorize Jews in 1919 in the hope of duplicating the success of Kemal in Turkey and drive the Jews out of Palestine, just as the Turkish nationalists were driving the Greeks from Turkey. The first large Arab riots took place in Jerusalem in the intermediary days of Passover, April 1920. The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies' convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the Vaad Hatzirim (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929 ). The Vaad Hatzirim charged Ze'ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky with the task of organizing Jewish self-defense. Jabotinsky was one of the founders of the Jewish battalions, which had served in the British Army during the First World War and had participated in the conquest of Palestine from the Turks. Acting under the auspices of the Vaad Hatzirim, Jabotinsky lead the Haganah (self-defense) organization in Jerusalem, which succeeded in repelling the Arab attack. Six Jews were killed and some 200 injured in Jerusalem in the course of the 1920 riots. Had it not been for the preliminary organization of Jewish defense, the number of victims would have undoubtedly been much greater.

Hybrid also Wrote:

1922
The Council of the League of Nations issued a Mandate for Palestine. The Mandate was in favor of the establishment for the Jewish people a homeland in Palestine.
Oops again... He also forgot to write:

For some time, the 800 Jews in Hebron lived in peace with their tens of thousands of Arab neighbors. But on the night of August 23, 1929, the tension simmering within this cauldron of nationalities bubbled over, and for 3 days, Hebron turned into a city of terror and murder. By the time the massacres ended, 67 Jews lay dead and the survivors were relocated to Jerusalem, leaving Hebron barren of Jews for the first time in hundreds of years.

The summer of 1929 was one of unrest in Palestine. Jewish-Arab tensions were spurred on by the agitation of the mufti in Jerusalem. Just one day prior to the start of the Hebron massacre, three Jews and three Arabs were killed in Jerusalem when fighting broke out after a Muslim prayer service on the Temple Mount. Arabs spread false rumors throughout their communities, saying that Jews were carrying out "wholesale killings of Arabs." Meanwhile, Jewish immigrants were arriving in Palestine in increasing numbers, further exacerbating the Jewish-Arab conflict.

Hebron had, until this time, been outwardly peaceful, although tension hid below the surface. The Sephardi Jewish community in Hebron had lived quietly with its Arab neighbors for centuries. The Sephardi Jews (Jews who were originally from Spain, North Africa and Arab countries) spoke Arabic and had a cultural connection to their Arab neighbors. In the mid-1800s, Ashkenazi (native European) Jews started moving to Hebron and, in 1925, the Slobodka Yeshiva, officially the Yeshiva of Hevron, Knesset Yisrael-Slobodka, was opened. Yeshiva students lived separately from the Sephardi community, and from the Arab population. Due to this isolation, the Arabs viewed them with suspicion and hatred, and identified them as Zionist immigrants. Despite the general suspicion, however, one yeshiva student, Dov Cohen, still recalled being on "very good" terms with the Arab neighbors. He remembered yeshiva boys taking long walks late at night on the outskirts of the city, and not feeling afraid, even though only one British policeman guarded the entire city.

On Friday, August 23, 1929, that tranquility was lost. Arab youths started throwing rocks at the yeshiva students. That afternoon, one student, Shmuel Rosenholtz, went to the yeshiva alone. Arab rioters later broke in and killed him, and that was only the beginning.

Friday night, Rabbi Ya’acov Slonim’s son invited any fearful Jews to stay in his house. The rabbi was highly regarded in the community, and he had a gun. Many Jews took him up on this offer, and many Jews were eventually murdered there.

As early as 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, Arabs began to gather en masse. They came in mobs, armed with clubs, knives and axes. While the women and children threw stones, the men ransacked Jewish houses and destroyed Jewish property. With only a single police officer in Hebron, the Arabs entered Jewish courtyards with no opposition.

Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jewish population, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community. Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students and was killed on the spot. In the end, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered.

A few Arabs did try to help the Jews. Nineteen Arab families saved dozens, maybe even hundreds of Jews. Zmira Mani wrote about an Arab named Abu Id Zaitoun who brought his brother and son to rescue her and her family. The Arab family protected the Manis with their swords, hid them in a cellar along with other Jews who they had saved, and found a policeman to escort them safely to the police station at Beit Romano.

The police station turned into a shelter for the Jews that morning of August 24. It also became a synagogue as the Orthodox Jews gathered there and said their morning prayers. As they finished praying, they began to hear noises outside the building. Thousands of Arabs descended from Har Hebron, shouting "Kill the Jews!" in Arabic. They even tried to break down the doors of the station.

The Jews were besieged in Beit Romano for three days. Each night, ten men were allowed to leave to attend a funeral in Hebron’s ancient Jewish cemetery for the murdered Jews of the day.

When the massacre finally ended, the surviving Jews were forced to leave their home city and resettled in Jerusalem. Some Jewish families tried to move back to Hebron, but were removed by the British authorities in 1936 at the start of the Arab revolt. In 1948, the War of Independence granted Israel statehood, but further cut the Jews off from Hebron, a city that was captured by King Abdullah's Arab Legion and ultimately annexed to Jordan.

When Jews finally gained control of the city in 1967, a small number of massacre survivors again tried to reclaim their old houses. Then defense minister Moshe Dayan supposedly told the survivors that if they returned, they would be arrested, and that they should be patient while the government worked out a solution to get their houses back. Years later, settlers moved to parts of Hebron without the permission of the government, but for those massacre survivors still seeking their original homes, that solution never came.

Stay tuned, there's more.... :wlink:

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 7:43 PM

And then Hybrid wrote:

1948
British forces withdrew from Palestine in May and the Zionists proclaimed the state of Israel without defining its borders. Arab armies moved to defend the Palestinians.
:liar:
I really like this one. :grin Arab armies moved to defend the Palestinians....

Let's see what really happened, shall we?

Violence in the Holy Land broke out almost immediately after the UN announced partition on November 29, 1947. Jamal Husseini, the Arab Higher Committee's spokesman, had told the UN prior to the partition vote the Arabs would drench "the soil of our beloved country with the last drop of our blood . . . ."

Husseini's prediction began to come true after the UN announcement. The Arabs declared a protest strike and instigated riots that claimed the lives of 62 Jews and 32 Arabs. By the end of the second week, 93 Arabs, 84 Jews and 7 Englishmen had been killed and scores injured. From November 30*February 1, 427 Arabs, 381 Jews and 46 British were killed and 1,035 Arabs, 725 Jews and 135 British were wounded. In March alone, 271 Jews and 257 Arabs died in Arab attacks and Jewish counter*attacks.

The chairman of the Arab Higher Committee said the Arabs would "fight for every inch of their country." Two days later, the holy men of Al-Azhar University in Cairo called on the Muslim world to proclaim a jihad (holy war) against the Jews.

The first large-scale assaults began on January 9, 1948, when approximately 1,000 Arabs attacked Jewish communities in northern Palestine. By February, the British said so many Arabs had infiltrated they lacked the forces to run them back. In fact, the British turned over bases and arms to Arab irregulars and the Arab Legion.

In the first phase of the war, lasting from November 29, 1947 until April 1, 1948, the Palestinian Arabs took the offensive, with help from volunteers from neighboring countries. The Jews suffered severe casualties and passage along most of their major roadways was disrupted.

On April 26, 1948, Transjordan's King Abdullah said:
[A]ll our efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Palestine problem have failed. The only way left for us is war. I will have the pleasure and honor to save Palestine.

On May 4, 1948, the Arab Legion attacked Kfar Etzion. The defenders drove them back, but the Legion returned a week later. After two days, the ill-equipped and outnumbered settlers were overwhelmed. Many defenders were massacred after they had surrendered. This was prior to the invasion by the regular Arab armies that followed Israel's declaration of independence.

Arabs Take Responsibility
The UN blamed the Arabs for the violence. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council:

Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.

The Arabs were blunt in taking responsibility for starting the war. Jamal Husseini told the Security Council on April 16, 1948:
The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight.

The British commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb admitted:

Early in January, the first detachments of the Arab Liberation Army began to infiltrate into Palestine from Syria. Some came through Jordan and even through Amman . . . They were in reality to strike the first blow in the ruin of the Arabs of Palestine.

Despite the disadvantages in numbers, organization and weapons, the Jews began to take the initiative in the weeks from April 1 until the declaration of independence on May 14. The Haganah captured several major towns including Tiberias and Haifa, and temporarily opened the road to Jerusalem.

The partition resolution was never suspended or rescinded. Thus, Israel, the Jewish State in Palestine, was born on May 14, as the British finally left the country. Five Arab armies (Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq) immediately invaded Israel. Their intentions were declared by Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

The United States, the Soviet Union and most other states immediately recognized Israel and indicted the Arabs. The United States urged a resolution charging the Arabs with breach of the peace.

Soviet delegate Andrei Gromyko told the Security Council, May 29, 1948:

This is not the first time that the Arab states, which organized the invasion of Palestine, have ignored a decision of the Security Council or of the General Assembly. The USSR delegation deems it essential that the council should state its opinion more clearly and more firmly with regard to this attitude of the Arab states toward decisions of the Security Council.

:amaz:

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 10:04 PM

Hey there campers, More Fun with Facts :D Okay? Let'sGo!

Defiant Noquisi Wrote:

Quote:
The Jordanians and Egyptians who lived there became the Palestinians after Jordan and Egypt both rejected these territories.

They didnt reject these territories. Israel bombed the hell out of both countries plus taking the Golan Heights from Syria in the "6 Day War". The Palestinians who had been living there were displaced by Jewish greed. In addition, the second part of the Camp David agreement between Egypt and Israel in 1979 was that there would be autonomy for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This agreement has NEVER been followed through with by Israel since the accord was signed.
Please note, that agreement states they are "Palestinians" NOT Egyptians that didnt live in Egypt anymore.

ARGHHHH, :eek: Ya got me... Palestinians they were named.

You mean this agreement?
A. West Bank and Gaza
Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the representatives of the Palestinian people should participate in negotiations on the resolution of the Palestinian problem in all its aspects.

This agreement that says Israel also gets to decide what happens to the Palestinians???? Is this the agreement you're talking about???
To achieve that objective, negotiations relating to the West Bank and Gaza should proceed in three stages:

Egypt and Israel agree that, in order to ensure a peaceful and orderly transfer of authority, and taking into account the security concerns of all the parties, there should be transitional arrangements for the West Bank and Gaza for a period not exceeding five years. In order to provide full autonomy to the inhabitants, under these arrangements the Israeli military government and its civilian administration will be withdrawn as soon as a self-governing authority has been freely elected by the inhabitants of these areas to replace the existing military government. To negotiate the details of a transitional arrangement, Jordan will be invited to join the negotiations on the basis of this framework. These new arrangements should give due consideration both to the principle of self-government by the inhabitants of these territories and to the legitimate security concerns of the parties involved.

Egypt, Israel, and Jordan will agree on the modalities for establishing elected self-governing authority in the West Bank and Gaza. The delegations of Egypt and Jordan may include Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza or other Palestinians as mutually agreed. The parties will negotiate an agreement which will define the powers and responsibilities of the self-governing authority to be exercised in the West Bank and Gaza. A withdrawal of Israeli armed forces will take place and there will be a redeployment of the remaining Israeli forces into specified security locations. The agreement will also include arrangements for assuring internal and external security and public order. A strong local police force will be established, which may include Jordanian citizens. In addition, Israeli and Jordanian forces will participate in joint patrols and in the manning of control posts to assure the security of the borders.

When the self-governing authority (administrative council) in the West Bank and Gaza is established and inaugurated, the transitional period of five years will begin. As soon as possible, but not later than the third year after the beginning of the transitional period, negotiations will take place to determine the final status of the West Bank and Gaza and its relationship with its neighbors and to conclude a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan by the end of the transitional period. These negotiations will be conducted among Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the elected representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. Two separate but related committees will be convened, one committee, consisting of representatives of the four parties which will negotiate and agree on the final status of the West Bank and Gaza, and its relationship with its neighbors, and the second committee, consisting of representatives of Israel and representatives of Jordan to be joined by the elected representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza, to negotiate the peace treaty between Israel and Jordan, taking into account the agreement reached in the final status of the West Bank and Gaza. The negotiations shall be based on all the provisions and principles of UN Security Council Resolution 242. The negotiations will resolve, among other matters, the location of the boundaries and the nature of the security arrangements. The solution from the negotiations must also recognize the legitimate right of the Palestinian peoples and their just requirements. In this way, the Palestinians will participate in the determination of their own future through:

The negotiations among Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza to agree on the final status of the West Bank and Gaza and other outstanding issues by the end of the transitional period.
Submitting their agreements to a vote by the elected representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza.
Providing for the elected representatives of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza to decide how they shall govern themselves consistent with the provisions of their agreement.
Participating as stated above in the work of the committee negotiating the peace treaty between Israel and Jordan.

All necessary measures will be taken and provisions made to assure the security of Israel and its neighbors during the transitional period and beyond. To assist in providing such security, a strong local police force will be constituted by the self-governing authority. It will be composed of inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. The police will maintain liaison on internal security matters with the designated Israeli, Jordanian, and Egyptian officers.

During the transitional period, representatives of Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and the self-governing authority will constitute a continuing committee to decide by agreement on the modalities of admission of persons displaced from the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, together with necessary measures to prevent disruption and disorder. Other matters of common concern may also be dealt with by this committee.

Egypt and Israel will work with each other and with other interested parties to establish agreed procedures for a prompt, just and permanent implementation of the resolution of the refugee problem.

Do you actually read any of this stuff before you quote it??
Sigh....

Moishe3rd

Jul 19th, 2004, 10:10 PM

Defiant Noquisi Wrote

I notice you have conveniently left out Israel's pastime of bombing mosques.
Come on, get with the program here. Link; source; anything? Or are you just making it up as you go along now?
:ohmy:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 19th, 2004, 11:04 PM

So you are saying that Israel is unlike any other nation. And that the Palestinians are equally unique. What you want is for Israel to set a new historical precedent where the loser gets to dictate terms to the winner.
It's cute, but it will never happen. No, that is not what I said but go ahead and continue to twist around what I say. This wouldnt be any different than what Israel is doing. Your continual dehumanization of Palestinian people is arrogant and also leaves a wide open chasm for you to conveniently misinterpret. On one hand you say they are "losers" and that Israel gets carte blanche to tell them what to do, fence them in like cattle and run them over with bulldozers. On the other hand you say there were no "Palestinians", they are anything but Palestinians, and they never recognized the holy cities as holy to them, in other words they have little history in YOUR opinion. Again, the only one saying these things is you.

Hmmm. I did not claim that Jerusalem is not "holy" to the Christians.
However, are you claiming that conquering a city makes it holy?
Is Kiev holy to the Muslims? Is Granada, Spain holy to the Muslims?
Does that mean that Berlin is holy to the Americans and the Russians?
Jerusalem holds no place in the "holy sites" of Islam. Jewish arrogance! Who are you to dictate what is holy or not to Muslims? Why is it that Jewish people can know that Jeruselum is holy to Muslims but you cannot? If you want to live in a world of Jewish utopia great, but dont expect respect from anyone as long as you think you are better and more deserving of things than anyone else.

They are belligerent by defintion of the United Nations.
I will repaste the relevant document that you choose not to refer to: I did not chose to not do anything except I asked you where it came from. Actually I asked by whose definition. It is your choice that you do not post it.

This one is really good.
You are saying that it is the fault of the Christian Lebanese for not taking in the rebellious Palestinian population of Jordan who wanted to take over the Lebanese government by military force? Again, I said nothing of the sort and even posted as such. Do you really read anything straight or do you let emotions override when you post?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 3:38 AM

Defiant Noquisi Wrote

Come on, get with the program here. Link; source; anything? Or are you just making it up as you go along now? :ohmy: Get with your own program. I havent made anything up, I gave you my sources and now you wont look at them, instead barraging me more. You asked, I gave, now go look. I think you wont since you deny the terrible things instead likening them to justified actions.

You being in denial of recorded history that was recorded by Jewish people themselves is not my problem. You not looking up information in the resources I gave which YOU asked for is not my problem. All you want is for me to continue posting stuff not for information purposes but to make yourself feel good while you go about blindly thinking that Israel has never and is not doing anything wrong. Your blind ignorance is your problem.

I notice that since I have answered all of your inquiries about Indian people in a more apporpriate thread you have not answered. I have made time for you, much more than I should have and yet you cannot give me the same.

Blind, unjustifiable arrogance. Someday, someone is going to put Israel over its knee just like the US is going to get.

Moishe3rd

Jul 20th, 2004, 8:08 AM

Defiant Noquisi,
Actually, I enjoy debating the Israel points with you. It gives me a chance to understand where you are coming from (not that I particularly like that place) and always a chance to do more research.
I admit that much of what you write makes no sense to me, but apparently you have the same problem with what I write.
I am pleased that your most severe condemnation is "arrogance." This is much better than what many believe about Israel.

I have made time for you, much more than I should have and yet you cannot give me the same.
I apologize for that, but I do not have that much time. The only reason that I do not try to answer every single thing you post is that I find some of it irrelevant. My references to Indians in this thread were merely analogies that I thought you might relate to as you have written about being an American Indian.
I was not trying to "accuse" American Indians of anything.

The irrelevent parts of posts that I do not respond to go something like this:
You wrote:

Quote:
They are belligerent by defintion of the United Nations.
I will repaste the relevant document that you choose not to refer to:

I did not chose to not do anything except I asked you where it came from. Actually I asked by whose definition. It is your choice that you do not post it.
I don't respond to this kind of thing because I am confused. I did post the document I am referring to - twice. So, I don't understand your point. Sorry.
The rest of my missing responses is simply a lack of time.

That all being said, let's go into this one, shall we? :vbroll:
You wrote:

Quote:
Hmmm. I did not claim that Jerusalem is not "holy" to the Christians.
However, are you claiming that conquering a city makes it holy?
Is Kiev holy to the Muslims? Is Granada, Spain holy to the Muslims?
Does that mean that Berlin is holy to the Americans and the Russians?
Jerusalem holds no place in the "holy sites" of Islam.

Jewish arrogance! Who are you to dictate what is holy or not to Muslims? Why is it that Jewish people can know that Jeruselum is holy to Muslims but you cannot? If you want to live in a world of Jewish utopia great, but dont expect respect from anyone as long as you think you are better and more deserving of things than anyone else.
I am not dictating what is holy to Muslims. Islam dictates what is holy to Muslims.
Before 1967, there was absolutely NO mention of Jerusalem as a holy site to Muslims. Not for the previous 1,300 years. Not in the Koran. Not in the Law. Not in the mosques.
No Iman; Cleric; Shiek; Religious Leader; Head of an Islamic state ever made "pligrimage" to Jerusalem while Jordan controlled it from 1948 to 1967, or when it was under Islamic rule before that.
No one cared. No one noticed. It was simply unimportant.
Unlike, for instance, Hevron, which is a holy site to both Jews and Muslims.

The mosque on the Temple Mount is a notable historic site to Muslims. As are many other mosques and cities and battefields. And that's fine. The Israelis have placed the mosque under complete control of Muslim authorities. (Well, except when they try to murder Jewish worshippers at the Wall. Then the police have to go up there and stop them...)

But, until after 1967, it was not a "Muslim holy site."
Fact.

And, I really am puzzled about your "Israeli's bombing mosques" comment.
I have never heard of this particular accusation.
I don't know of anyone else who has either, including Moslems.
That is why I was so incredulous. And, I still am.
I would be interested to see some sort of data that backs this up.

Be well.

mickydoolittle

Jul 20th, 2004, 8:29 AM

Someday, someone is going to put Israel over its knee just like the US is going to get.

Yeah, this is going to happen when pigs fly and cows generate fresh chocolate milk.

We are far too big and far too powerful for any country to think of taking us on--instead we get a few popshots like bin laden and his type--nothing too serious, but horrible enough to be a wake up call that we should go out and attack a country that has pissed off the rest of the world for sometime.

BTW world, you're indeed welcome you bunch of damn ingrates.

It was eiter Iraq or Cuba, and Cuba just doesn't have the charisma it once did.

Moishe3rd

Jul 20th, 2004, 10:19 AM

And not to ignore:
Humanhybrid:

a brief history....
History is usually the attempt to relate what actually happened in the past.
Your weirdness that you posted does not do that.
However, if you do have any questions about what actually happened on such and such a date in the history of Israel, I will be more than happy to give you that information - both the good and the bad, if that should be the case.
I actually enjoy studying history.
You should try it.
:D

ConspiracyTheorist

Jul 20th, 2004, 12:12 PM

The reason why noone will touch this problem with Israel is because if they do, they will spark a Holy War, or more.

1. If the U.N. steps in, Israel's partner in crime, the United states government will eventually intervene on their behalf to the U.N. Security Council, vetoing any action taken against them.

2. If the U.S. does not intervene, they will be seen as siding with the Palestinian forces, and Israel will take that as offensive, and may even start to divulge some covert activities the U.S. is doing, and has done over the years.

3. With the fact that the Israeli army seems to have no fear in both combat, and in the idea of using high-yield weapons to kill innocent lives, they would have problem in using them.

4. Finally, the Israeli government strikes me a regime that will take everybody with them should they feel threatened.

I don't blame anyone who moved away from Israel and never wanted to return, because they are going to start the most devastating war mankind will ever see.

But here is another question for you.....

Israel has been known in the past to atempt to create fake passports, give them to their elite army members in order to carry out assassination attempts. New Zealand is just the newest member of the club, inducted by the Israeli army.

Why don't those countries do anything about that?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 12:47 PM

Yeah, this is going to happen when pigs fly and cows generate fresh chocolate milk. Rome was considered to big and powerful too dear. It imploded with help from freinds. Man's arrogance hasnt changed, just the faces that it belongs to, in this case Israel and the US.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 12:49 PM

The reason why noone will touch this problem with Israel is because if they do, they will spark a Holy War, or more. Thank you! Wonderful post. :D

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 1:04 PM

They have no right to be there under international law, and the United Nations says they should get out. Their justification is usually Biblical. Im unsure of this since 242 states that if they choose to they can live amongst each other as long as it is peaceful. It also states that Israel had to move out of "territories" without drawing actual lines as to where they were to retreat or removes themselves to.

For the Israeli state, they serve a practical purpose; they occupy and encroach upon more and more Palestinian land, while allowing the military to control the Palestinians with more and more roadblocks and restrictions. Many Palestinian villages are surrounded by barbed wire, and people require a special permit even to travel to the next one. Gaza, where 800,000 are trapped, is surrounded by an electrified fence. Yes and also subject to search each time as well.

When Archbishop Desmond Tutu came here recently, he said: "The way the Palestinians are treated is the way we were treated in apartheid South Africa." This is who made the comparison, thanks. I knew I had heard it before. There is a Jewish website for Palestinian rights that is using "Aparthied Wall".

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 2:39 PM

The truth is very different. Following peace negotiations in America in 2000, President Clinton's National Security Adviser Robert Malley, who was there with Clinton, revealed that, although the Palestinians rejected certain Israeli proposals, "it could also be said that Israel rejected the unprecedented two-state solution put to them by the Palestinians, including the following provisions: a state of Israel incorporating some land captured in 1967 and including a very large majority of its settlers; the largest Jewish Jerusalem in the city's history (and) security guaranteed by a US-led international presence." Neither one of them is going to agree to anything as long as they believe the other is trying to one up them. The important thing to understand here is that they BOTH do it and Israel is not the big compassionate country that it is made out to be. Just some brief checking in historical background can give you that information. Israel is NOT completely innocent.

Shortly after it was founded in 1948, Israel controlled, mostly as a result of a United Nations partition and partly by force, a total of 78 per cent of historic Palestine. The Palestinians, who were the majority, fled in an orchestrated campaign of fear and terror, or they were expelled. These days, this would be known as "ethnic cleansing". Like I said in another post, there is not much difference between Israel and it old counterpart Nazi Germany.

published a study that found TV viewers in particular were rarely told that Palestinians were the victims of an illegal and brutal military occupation. Only nine per cent of those interviewed were aware that the Israelis were the occupiers. For years, representing the Israelis as oppressors has been a taboo with always the threat of slurs of anti-Semitism (a bleak irony, as Palestinians are Semites, too). Perfect, exactly what I have been trying to say all along. Most people are blind to the truth and most are blind by choice. It doesnt take being an Einstein to figure out and spend the little amount of time that I did to learn the truth. I had no clue that Palestinians were Semites. Now I know. That must mean that Israeli's can be ANTI-SEMITIC too.

Semite n.

1) A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
2) A Jew.

The next quote is highlighted because Id like it read again and again. There are many Jewish people out there who know the truth and are willing to speak out against it, even protest publically. Sadly, they are the minority.

Many Israelis, like many Jews in Britain and other counties, condemn this intimidation, just as they condemn the occupation and are fearful of its deeply corrupting effect on Israeli society. Recently, the Chief Rabbi of Britain, Jonathan Sacks, said he had long believed that Israel should give back the Occupied Territories. When I was in Israel in May, some 50,000 Israelis crowded central Tel Aviv, demanding that the government of Ariel Sharon made peace.

Britain has a historic responsibility towards the Palestinians. The 1917 "Balfour Declaration" promised Jews a homeland provided it would not prejudice the rights of the non-Jewish communities. The British famously reneged on this. Britain administered the League of Nations" Mandate for Palestine until the partition that created Israel in 1948, which the Palestinians call al-Nakba, "the catastrophe."

Here is the link to the Balfour Declaration/Yale Law (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/balfour.htm) website. Please note that even in 1917, the area was known as "Palestine". The British screwed up, just like it did with Iraq after WW2. It is worth noting that the Palestinians understandably did not agree with Balfour.

Please compare these next two paragraphs.....

In the General Assembly, there have been an estimated 450 resolutions calling, in one form or another, for justice for the Palestinians. This is a world record. No country has incurred the opprobrium of the world community as often as Israel and no country has been excused its "rogue" behaviour so consistently, thanks to its backer, America.

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, it was ordered to withdraw by the United Nations Security Council. When the Iraqis failed to comply, they were attacked with such force that tens of thousands were slaughtered. When Israel seized the West Bank of the Jordan and Gaza, it was ordered to withdraw by the same UN Security council. That was 35 years ago, and the occupation goes on. Does anyone see the difference between these two paragraphs? Im not sure of the "tens of thousands" number but why is it that Israel gets special treatment?

On the contrary, Israel has since been rewarded with billions of dollars worth of aid and armaments, principally by the United States, which has helped it develop nuclear weapons and other so-called weapons of mass destruction. It's okay for Israel to have them and no one else.

They also know that it is being intensified by Ariel Sharon, a man whom a commission of his own parliament found indirectly but "personally responsible" for the massacre of more than 800 Palestinians in 1982 and who once boasted: "They (the Arabs) have the numbers. We have the matches." Yep, another comment in a long line of arrogant comments made by Sharon. All he needs is the gas.

http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/toons/sharon.gif http://www.infowars.com/headline_photos/April/bush-hitler.jpg

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 3:32 PM

In order to provide full autonomy to the inhabitants, under these arrangements the Israeli military government and its civilian administration will be withdrawn as soon as a self-governing authority has been freely elected by the inhabitants of these areas to replace the existing military government. To negotiate the details of a transitional arrangement, Jordan will be invited to join the negotiations on the basis of this framework. These new arrangements should give due consideration both to the principle of self-government by the inhabitants of these territories and to the legitimate security concerns of the parties involved. Id like you to pay particular attention to what you have highlighted. Notice that it doesnt say that Israel has the right to bulldoze people or their homes. Notice how it says "military government" not fascist, racist dictatorship. Notice how it also says that the new government is to be freely elected to replace the old yet it doesnt say anything about a requirement that Israel give final approval. Notice "legitimate security concerns of the parties involved". Would this mean that Israel will stop bulldozing families inside their homes? In fact, I dont think there is anywhere that reads it was okay to kick the Palestinians out of E. Jeruselum. I also dont see anywhere that "legitimate security concerns" equals being fenced into ghettos and split up. What about the Palestinians security concerns?

Please note where it says "full autonomy". Now we have full autonomy and self-governing authority in the same paragraph. Yet Israel wants to stick its nose in. If I am reading it the same was as the Palestinians probably are, I would reject every plan the UN ever came up with and tell Israel to go to hell myself.

Do you actually read any of this stuff before you quote it??
Sigh.... I would ask the same of you since you are the one who asked me why and how. You are the one who dehumanized Palestinians by not even recognizing them until I obviously pointed it out. Maybe someday you will realize that Palestinians have an equally valid opinion even if you dont agree with it. You dont have to agree with it to respect that they have one. If Sharon wasnt so belligerent and arrogant (which seems to be quite common) maybe things would be different.

mickydoolittle

Jul 21st, 2004, 6:55 AM

Rome was considered to big and powerful too dear. It imploded with help from freinds. Man's arrogance hasnt changed, just the faces that it belongs to, in this case Israel and the US.

Naw, it imploded because they were far too fascinated with buggery and pooftery to be concerned with actually running an empire. The only saving grace for AMERICA is that we are not the empire--however, Britain is.

Doom Doom Doom

Moishe3rd

Jul 21st, 2004, 7:31 AM

Again, it seems that between the unreasoning hatred of Defiant and the really weird bieng hooman of Hybrid, I shall once again crawl back into my world and retire for apace.

But, just for jollies, I leave y'all with Psalm 83, written by King David about 3,000 years ago.
Orthodox Jews worldwide began saying this everyday about four years ago, specifically because of what is going on in Israel and the world.
3,000 years and nothing has changed....

83:1 A Song, a Psalm of Asaph.

83:2 O God, keep not Thou silence; hold not Thy peace, and be not still, O God.

83:3 For, lo, Thine enemies are in an uproar; and they that hate Thee have lifted up the head.

83:4 They hold crafty converse against Thy people, and take counsel against Thy treasured ones.

83:5 They have said: 'Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.'

83:6 For they have consulted together with one consent; against Thee do they make a covenant;

83:7 The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites; Moab, and the Hagrites;

83:8 Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre;

83:9 Assyria also is joined with them; they have been an arm to the children of Lot. Selah

83:10 Do Thou unto them as unto Midian; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook Kishon;

83:11 Who were destroyed at En-dor; they became as dung for the earth.

83:12 Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, and like Zebah and Zalmunna all their princes;

83:13 Who said: 'Let us take to ourselves in possession the habitations of God.'

83:14 O my God, make them like the whirling dust; as stubble before the wind.

83:15 As the fire that burneth the forest, and as the flame that setteth the mountains ablaze;

83:16 So pursue them with Thy tempest, and affright them with Thy storm.

83:17 Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek Thy name, O the Lord.

83:18 Let them be ashamed and affrighted for ever; yea, let them be abashed and perish;

83:19 That they may know that it is Thou alone whose name is the Lord, the Most High over all the earth.

dutchie

Jul 21st, 2004, 9:00 AM

bbbv3.5

Jul 21st, 2004, 9:46 AM

When someone says they hate Isreal they criticize the country...not their religion. Dont be mr. anti mel gibson :rgrgrg:

I think its unfair to the rest of the people in this world to be criticized but we cannot criticize Israel because we will be considered "nazis" because they only have on religion.

Moishe3rd

Jul 21st, 2004, 10:41 AM

bbbv3.5

Jul 21st, 2004, 11:16 AM

Quote: Good days my human friends....

Wat the hell were we before...aliens :confused:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:17 PM

Naw, it imploded because they were far too fascinated with buggery and pooftery to be concerned with actually running an empire. The only saving grace for AMERICA is that we are not the empire--however, Britain is. We arent the empire because you arent running it ....yet. :Blbl:

Doom Doom Doom Im picturing James Earl Jones dressed in black with snakes upon his helm. :D

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:33 PM

Again, it seems that between the unreasoning hatred of Defiant and the really weird bieng hooman of Hybrid, I shall once again crawl back into my world and retire for apace. I actually really dislike people who cant spell, people who think they can read my mind, people who are historically blind and people who walk upon the earth in a dream like state living in utopia.

I HATE people who commit crimes against children.

I would not go as far as saying that a child molester is comparable to your level of arrogance and ignorance. I imagine that you might if it will serve your agenda but I hope I would be wrong.

Here is where my real hatred is...... anyone who thinks that things like bulldozing women and kids is somehow acceptable is a disgusting excuse for life breathing oxygen that someone else deserves. Notice I posted "anyone", not just Jews and not just Israel....... anyone.

dutchie

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:47 PM

Hey, hey dude. Back off, eh?

Have you gone completely nuts?!? I AM NOT YOUR "DUDE" AND I WON'T ACCEPT BEING TOLD TO BACK OFF!! If you really want to piss me off, you should start like that. :crs:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:57 PM

I can not for the love of Jeebus understand why you mix up criticism with hatred. Look at the title of the thread, man. Nobody HATES Israel or the Jews. There are just members that think Israel can not do just anything it pleases without any regard for fundamental human rights, or UN resolutions. Thank you Dutchie. I believe that you will be wasting space though since it will matter not where my information came from and it will matter not that it is factual. No, what will matter is that I was "bad" by picking on poor little slighted Israel. Poor Jewish people that got the shit spanked out of them by the Nazi's so bad that they demanded a country in retribution and got it, GOT IT. But they dont like sharing the holocaust spotlight and almost completely ignore all the Polish that were also stuffed into and murdered in the concentration camps. Now they want to whine and snivel about details and bulldoze women and children. Thats what gets me, they got a country and all the military backing it needed to intimidate the other Arab countries but somehow it wants people on their knees in worship to it. I have yet to see any humbleness and gratefulness coming from Israel and I sure aint going to be kissing anyones arse just because they got a country.

Maybe all us Indians should get the backing that has been offered from other countries and lay waste on everyone. We can reclaim all our lands and then make every country in the world bow down to us and cry if we dont get our way. We can bulldoze the white people's homes because they dont share the same ideals and dont want to stay behind the fences and walls weve rigged up to keep them seperate. Does this not sound familiar to you Moishe? Do you know that Navajo homes were recently being bulldozed in Arizona in the last few years? Do you remember the seperatist and racist crap that led to the civil rights movements here? Do you not see how ridiculous this kind of thinking is?

Criticism of America is OK, criticism of North Korea is OK, only criticizing Israel is straight away translated into racism. Get a life. You just WANT to see this as anti-semitism. Pathetic. :confused: :yes: :Bow:

Emerald_Dragon

Jul 21st, 2004, 1:03 PM

>Please give me a link or something that I can follow that backs up your belief.
>Thanks.

Here's one that tells her story
http://www.rachelcorrie.org/

its a good start for researching why and how she died.

you're too biased to consider it plausible, IMO.

> and the responsibility for putting the Balfour Declaration into effect

have a link to that official document?
how's this one?
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~wldciv/world_civ_reader/world_civ_reader_2/balfour.html
"
His Majesty's Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
"

And if their actions do "prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities"?
Would that be considered a breach of contract?

>Come on, get with the program here. Link; source; anything?
>Or are you just making it up as you go along now?

...reciting history that you aren't not open to, or bothered to consider.
:dork:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 21st, 2004, 1:04 PM

You are saying that Defiant doesn't hate Israel??
If this is true, then you are correct, I have misread everything she has written. Where have you been?

I just have not seen a shred of evidence that the particular criticisms that have been written here are valid exclusively to Israel and I have seen much evidence that most of the criticisms are invalid as applied to Israel. I cant help that you choose not to see any validity in what I have posted. Just the fact alone that you seem to not accept anything coming from Jewish writers tells me volumes about what kind of person you are.

The bulldozing thing though, your opinion of it, I cant get over it and I feel nauseous just thinking about it. :eww:

humanhybrid

Jul 21st, 2004, 1:10 PM

Perhaps what drives this human arrogance is the idea that the nation of Zion feels that they must fullfill a prophecy. It primarily deals with the lands that they consider as sacred. After all if god has chosen a particular race to accomplish a goal then anything and everything could be justfied. http://www.rense.com/general53/theJesuslandingpad.htm Comments please! good day
The bulldozing thing though, your opinion of it, I cant get over it and I feel nauseous just thinking about it. Me Too! :nono:

mickydoolittle

Jul 21st, 2004, 4:49 PM

Here's one that tells her story
http://www.rachelcorrie.org/
its a good start for researching why and how she died.

What's to research? Another one bites the dust. . .to paraphrase Freddy Mercury, may he rest in peace.

I remember her. She PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution is indeed ongoing.

If one is too stupid to sit in front of a bulldozer, one is obviously not going to be able to contribute one's gene's into the gene pool. Peaceful protest. . . psshhaw. She deserved to be run over. She had it coming--she practically begged for it.

Survival of the fittest and all. . .

This is not something AMERICA nor its leaders should address as she was there on her own volition. She was there not representing AMERICA, but representing the stupidity of todays AMERICAn youth.

Yes. . .the absolute and complete stupidity of todays AMERICAn youth.

She is not a hero. She is not an icon of protest. She is however, a complete and total waste of DNA--and she proved as much by her ignorant behavior.

I am only too happy now as I was then, to know that there is one less idiot to screw up the gene pool on my planet.

Moishe3rd

Jul 21st, 2004, 5:53 PM

>Please give me a link or something that I can follow that backs up your belief.
>Thanks.

Here's one that tells her story
http://www.rachelcorrie.org/

its a good start for researching why and how she died.

you're too biased to consider it plausible, IMO.

Thanks for the link.
Now, if you could just tell me which news story I am supposed to believe, we could discuss this further.
:vbroll:

Is it this one:

Israeli soldiers this evening killed an American peace activist from the Grassroots International Protection for Palestinians (GIPP)/ISM in the Al-Salam neighbourhood of Rafah city, in the south of the Gaza Strip.
The girl, Rachel Corey, 23 years old from the state of Washington, was killed while she was trying to prevent Israeli army bulldozers from destroying a Palestinian home. Other foreigners who were with her said the driver of the bulldozer was aware that Rachel was there, and continued to destroy the house. Initially he dropped sand and other heavy debris on her, then the bulldozer pushed her to the ground where it proceeded to drive over her, fracturing both of her arms, legs and skull. She was transferred to hospital, where she later died. Another foreigner was also injured in the attack and has been hospitalized – at this stage his nationality is unknown.
Dr. Mustafa Barghouthi, from the Palestinian non-governmental network (PNGO) which spearheaded the GIPP campaign said, “The killing of Rachel is a tragedy. We express our sorrow, anger and disgust at this cold blooded murder and we call for international condemnation of this event, and the ongoing Israeli policy of indiscriminate killings of Palestinians and internationals.

Or this one:

Israeli bulldozer kills U.S. student

Associated Press

Gaza City, Gaza Strip — An American college student in Gaza to protest Israeli operations was killed Sunday when she was run over by a bulldozer while trying to block troops from demolishing a Palestinian home.

At least one Palestinian also was killed.

The killing of the student by the Israelis — the first of a foreign activist in 29 months of fighting — came as Israelis and Palestinians wrangled over the terms of a U.S.-backed plan to end the violence and establish a Palestinian state.

Rachel Corrie, 23, of Olympia, Wash., had been with U.S. and British demonstrators in the Rafah refugee camp trying to stop demolitions. She died in the hospital, said Dr. Ali Moussa, a hospital administrator.

"This is a regrettable accident," said Capt. Jacob Dallal, an army spokesman. "We are dealing with a group of protesters who were acting very irresponsibly, putting everyone in danger."

There was no immediate reaction from Washington.

Greg Schnabel, 28, of Chicago, said four Americans and four Britons were trying to stop Israeli troops from destroying a building belonging to Dr. Samir Masri.

Israel for months has been tearing down houses of Palestinians it suspects in Islamic militant activity, saying such operations deter attacks on Israel such as suicide bombings.

"Rachel was alone in front of the house as we were trying to get them to stop," Mr. Schnabel said. "She waved for the bulldozer to stop. She fell down and the bulldozer kept going. It had completely run over her and then it reversed and ran back over her."

She was wearing a brightly colored jacket when the bulldozer hit her.

Several Palestinians gathered at the site, and troops opened fire, killing one Palestinian, witnesses said. The army had no comment on that report.

Ms. Corrie was the first member of the Palestinian-backed "International Solidarity Movement" to be killed in a conflict that has claimed more than 2,200 Palestinian lives — about three times the toll on the Israeli side.

A student at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Ms. Corrie would have graduated this year, Mr. Schnabel said.

Or perhaps this one:

Israeli bulldozer kills American protester
Israeli bulldozer runs over 23-year-old woman
Tuesday, March 25, 2003 Posted: 4:19 PM EST (2119 GMT)

RAFAH, Gaza (CNN) -- An Israeli bulldozer killed an American woman Sunday who had been protesting its use to destroy Palestinian houses in Rafah.

The woman, Rachel Corrie, 23, of Olympia, Washington, was taken to a hospital, where she died of her injuries.

"This morning, when she was killed, she was attempting to prevent the Israeli military from destroying Palestinian civilian homes," Arraf said.

"She was raising her hands and yelling at the bulldozer driver to stop," Arraf said. "The bulldozer driver paid no attention. ... He buried Rachel with dirt, which ended up, obviously, knocking her down. Then he ran over her, and then reversed and ran over her again."

Other witnesses, however, reported that Corrie had scaled a pile of dirt but then lost her footing and fell backward behind it, out of sight of the bulldozer operator. The bulldozer continued moving forward, covering Corrie with dirt and then crushing her.

It was not clear whether the bulldozer operator could hear protesters' yells over the sound of the machine.

or perhaps this one:

American peace activist killed by army bulldozer in Rafah
IDF expresses `regret'; State Department `assessing' reports
By Haaretz Staff

A 23-year-old American woman, Rachel Corrie, a college student from Olympia, Washington who belonged to the International Solidarity Movement in the territories, was killed yesterday by an IDF bulldozer during a house demolition in Rafah.

Israeli officials expressed "regret" over the incident to American officials, sources in Jerusalem said, and in Washington, a State Department statement said it had received reports of the incident, and was "assessing the situation."

The ISM activist was taking part in protest efforts yesterday afternoon in Rafah, to prevent the army from demolishing houses in a strip of land a few hundred meters wide between the Rafah refugee camp and the nearby Egyptian border, in an effort to block smuggling from Egypt.

According to eyewitnesses, a routine IDF demolition operation was underway in the area, with two D-9 bulldozers and a tank as protection. They destroyed three buildings that were already partially destroyed and a number of walls. The ISM activists then deployed in the area and used bullhorns to call on the drivers to stop. According to ISM activists, at one stage the IDF forces left the area and took up positions near the border, a few hundred meters away.

But around 5 P.M., the force returned, and the activists assumed the bulldozers were on their way to other houses. "They began demolishing one house," said an ISM activist, who said his name was Richard. "We gathered around and called out to them and went into the house, so they backed out. During the entire time they knew who we were and what we were doing, because they didn't shoot at us. We stood in their way and shouted. There were about eight of us in an area about 70 square meters. Suddenly, we saw they turned to a house they had started to demolish before, and I saw Rachel standing in the way of the front bulldozer."

According to the ISM activist, Corrie was wearing a bright jacket and climbed onto the bulldozer shovel-plow and began shouting at the driver. "There's no way he didn't see her, since she was practically looking into the cabin. At one stage, he turned around toward the building. The bulldozer kept moving, and she slipped and fell off the plow. But the bulldozer kept moving, the shovel above her. I guess it was about 10 or 15 meters that it dragged her and for some reason didn't stop. We shouted like crazy to the driver through loudspeakers that he should stop, but he just kept going and didn't lift the shovel. Then it stopped and backed up. We ran to Rachel. She was still breathing."

Choose.

Emerald_Dragon

Jul 21st, 2004, 6:17 PM

>Now, if you could just tell me which news story I am supposed to believe,
>we could discuss this further.

i'm not one to tell anyone what to believe. you are free to believe as you wish.
just know, that others don't necessarily believe, what you believe.
i still don't believe that 30 million Muslims want me dead because I'm non-Muslim.
But you can say it as much as you want.

>Choose.

they all say the same thing. an Israeli bulldozer killed her.

and in the context of my original response...

Quote by Moishe:
Israel bulldozes houses as a NON LETHAL form of punishment for people who attack them OR as a method of security to keep people from attacking them.

Quote by DN:
So its only lethal if they actually see the bodies right? Thats not to mention the ones picked off by the soldiers who wait for them to run from the houses. Remember, the link I posted describing this form of security came from a Jewish publication. Of course it would be secure, dead people cant kill anyone defending themselves let alone run.

Quote by Moishe:
Do you have any facts or figures? I do. If you would like, I will post them.
They do not agree with your assessment.

so i provided a link to a fact, that Israeli bulldozers are in fact, not "NON LETHAL". The victim suffers a few hours before they die.

humanhybrid

Jul 22nd, 2004, 4:09 AM

What's to research? Another one bites the dust. . .to paraphrase Freddy Mercury, may he rest in peace.

I remember her. She PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution is indeed ongoing.

If one is too stupid to sit in front of a bulldozer, one is obviously not going to be able to contribute one's gene's into the gene pool. Peaceful protest. . . psshhaw. She deserved to be run over. She had it coming--she practically begged for it.

Survival of the fittest and all. . .

This is not something AMERICA nor its leaders should address as she was there on her own volition. She was there not representing AMERICA, but representing the stupidity of todays AMERICAn youth.

Yes. . .the absolute and complete stupidity of todays AMERICAn youth.

She is not a hero. She is not an icon of protest. She is however, a complete and total waste of DNA--and she proved as much by her ignorant behavior.

I am only too happy now as I was then, to know that there is one less idiot to screw up the gene pool on my planet. I am happy too! because for every one protester there are three idiots who listen to Bush and Blair about WMD and then join the military to be patriotic and two bite the dust. So figure, it evens out! It insures my gene pool and my pool is a large one.Your not a war monger, WHO follows blindly are you? good day! :dead:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 26th, 2004, 10:29 PM

She deserved to be run over. She had it coming--she practically begged for it. Thats pretty disgusting but not surprising coming from you. I suppose that anyone who believes so much in a cause that they would give up their lives for it deserved it. Id do the same thing if it happened here in a similar manner just as I would for my own people. So everyone give it up for every idiot that ever stood up for a cause and removed themselves from the gene pool because they practically begged for it.

She died a warrior, she died for believing in peace even though most people would have considered her being on the wrong side of the fence. That was in and of itself a brave act just to leave her family and try to prevent the callous murder of innocent people in a country that wasnt hers. It was very brave of her to stand up to the majority that believe in Israel's "innocence" while standing in front of a bulldozer. This had nothing to do with teenage stupidity, how ignorant. What she did had everything to do with what was "right".

Ive had handguns and rifles pointed at my chest because I believed. Ive been spit on and tossed to the ground because I believed. I was nowhere near begging for it but I will not stand by and rubberneck like a spineless jellyfish!

Oh yes, lets not forget to mention all the brave individuals who stood up for building a better country because they believed. Im not talking about crooked bastards, Im talking about the good people who came here who believed in a noble and higher purpose when this country was built. The ones who shed blood for the United States of America which you so boldly and arrogantly defend.

Yeah, they just stood there begging for it too. Using your own opinion, they proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they deserved to die because they were a complete and total waste of DNA, correct? Instead of brave people who fought and died for the idea and honor of living in a free country. You are so much smarter than what you posted here.