No allies at all [Archive]

Moskal'

01-06-2003, 02:21 PM

to The Indian:
This may be a possibility. I remember reading a statement by Putin that he envisioned a closer cooperation between Russia, China and India to counter islamic terrorism, and balance Nato policy. I believe this is the direction where Israel has to seek new allies, even if they are not traditionally friendly to it.

to takeo:
Strange, your worldview somehow repeats the soviet imperialist politics.
A question: what is your view on soviet invasion of Afghanistan?

An explaination to India's voting in the UN - India was pro-soviet, although not under heavy influence. Threatened by China and pro-american Pakistan alike, it had to side with the USSR and take their side in decisions not crucial to India. Today, as there is a new Russia, and a new China is emerging, nothing but obsolete traditions stands in the way of cooperation.

Christian Democratic Union is the second largest party in germany. They've got about a 40% of the seats in the Bundestag. Oh my. Didn't know I live in a demi-fundamentalist state.

to formula:
If USA cared for democracy around the globe, it would not have supported Pinochet for decades. It would not tolerate the governments of the arab world and call them "allies". Idealism is a forgotten word in modern world. And that USA toppled communist and hostile governments lies in the nature of imperialism.

to danholo: He may think that is Israel is as religious as Iran, or even worse. He has read somewhere that there are religious fractions in Knesset, and as this perfectly fits his worldview, he tells Israel is fundamentalist-fascist state. He would not be reconvinced even if we took him by hand and lead him into one of the flourishing non-kosher supermarkets. He would call any comparisons of Israel to it's neighbours or even Turkey, Italy, Spain, or any Latinamerican country irrelevant. He will not aknowledge that in India religion is as important as in Israel.

danholo

01-06-2003, 02:23 PM

But takeo's been to Israel so he knows how racist and facist the country is! I didn't experience that there but he did, I guess.

minusthejihad

01-06-2003, 02:35 PM

I tend to believe the theory that Takeo is paid to sit in here and spew anti-Israel propaganda. How else would someone with a history of being debunked and proven incorrect as many times find it in themselves to bash their head aainst a wall, if it weren't for money.

And I don't believe for a minute that he has been to Israel. Its just the internet, shees, I've been to the moon then. Do you believe me?

takeo

01-06-2003, 02:39 PM

Religion and state are as much entwined in Israel as in Finland for example and almost every state in the world. Here we have the "Christian union" party and even the president is the head of church and state.

there's a difference, isn't being jewish a requirement for immigrating to israel? Does finland only allows protestant immigrants? can non-protestant citizens serve in the army? are conservative protestants exempt from paying taxes? etc.
How would you compare the israeli treatment of its arab minority to the finnish treatment of its Swedish minority?

How aren't Arabs and other non-Jews "real equal citizens" in Israel? What discrimination are you talking about? Street level or that described in law?

both, we had this discussion some months ago, in another treat. of course their situation is much better than the situation of palestinians in the ot, or the Kurds in Turkey, but still unacceptable for a Western democracy.

Hey Takeo,

Since you are such an activist for the oppressed, why don't you waltz over to the police station in Paris investigating the stabbing of the Rabbi who subsequently had his car torched the next night, and offer your help to find the perpetrators. You can also donate some money to the synagogue as well, I'm sure there are even hospital bills to pay, even in socialist France. Just please, stop being such a hypocrite, everyone sees it.

jews aren't oppressed in France, on the contrary, they are overrepresented on the high levels of society, because of their highstanding intellectual tradition.

to The Indian:
This may be a possibility. I remember reading a statement by Putin that he envisioned a closer cooperation between Russia, China and India to counter islamic terrorism, and balance Nato policy. I believe this is the direction where Israel has to seek new allies, even if they are not traditionally friendly to it.

those countries will never cooperate with Israel, which is nothing but a vasal-state of the us. The only thing they have in common is their adversion for islamic fundamentalism, a aversion shared by myself and most Europeans as well by the way.

to takeo:
Strange, your worldview somehow repeats the soviet imperialist politics.
A question: what is your view on soviet invasion of Afghanistan?

yes, possibly, the soviet-union was necessary to balance us-influence in the world. But i do not agree with the soviet-invasion of Afghanistan, in fact there was a communist government in Afghanistan which was reversed by the soviets because he wasn't enough pro-soviet. That's imperialism, not so much different from the us-policy in the middle East or Latin America, and provoked a heavy anti-soviet reaction.

An explaination to India's voting in the UN - India was pro-soviet, although not under heavy influence. Threatened by China and pro-american Pakistan alike, it had to side with the USSR and take their side in decisions not crucial to India. Today, as there is a new Russia, and a new China is emerging, nothing but obsolete traditions stands in the way of cooperation.

yes, India is still member of the non-alligned government, and has excellant relations with many Arab and thirth world-nations. shared ennemies do not necessarily mean a strong band. (iran and the us for example had their shared dislike for iraq and the taliban, still the us called iran a part of the "axis of evil")

Teacake

01-06-2003, 02:41 PM

Minus, I have never believed for one second any of takos claims. The only sincere thing about him is how much hate he expresses against Israel.

danholo

01-06-2003, 02:44 PM

takeo:

there's a difference, isn't being jewish a requirement for immigrating to israel?

No.

Does finland only allows protestant immigrants? can non- protestant citizens serve in the army? are conservative protestants exempt from paying taxes? etc.

No, no and no.

But these don't apply to Israel either.

takeo

01-06-2003, 02:50 PM

jihad, you can believe whatever you like, I've been to israel, and yes i've seen and heard discrimination, altough not everything was negative, there is a large group of young israeli who oppose the policy of their government and it's a rather nice country with excellent weather.
actually i continue posting on this site because it's not difficult to expose the arguments most of you use to defend israeli policies, and because they make me angry. I'm sure many readers will agree with me or at least think about the arguments of both sides. And it's a fun way to try to enhance my english language skills. Insults can only touch me if they come from peoplethat i care for and that i respect.

unfortunately nobody pays me for posting here, it would be welcome....... ;)

takeo

01-06-2003, 02:52 PM

yes they do danholo

danholo

01-06-2003, 02:54 PM

danholo

01-06-2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by takeo
yes they do danholo

So why do I read about killed Israeli Bedouin soldiers if they aren't allowed to serve in the IDF?

Why did my tour group meet a Finnish Christian woman in Israel who lived on a Kibbutz and was an Israeli citizen if they only allow in Jewish immigrants?

Why does an Israeli Palestinian man, who is married to a Finnish/Israeli Jew, pay taxes in Israel if he is exempt from them?

Rob

01-06-2003, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by takeo

perhaps israel could start to make friends among their neighbours too instead of only ennemies, so that they wouldn't need any longer the us-protection.

More of your Israels to blame garbage. How about the arabs make friends with Israel? No that is out of the question. It's for Israel to get down on it's knees right?

but religion and state should be separated in israel, and arabs and other non-jews should become real equal citizens. Religious parties should not be allowed in the government

Except in Arab countires right takeo. Never see you complain about the religious nature of Arab countries

I'm sure many readers will agree with me or at least think about the arguments of both sides.

Yea, Commie Nazis and Arabs. Great company you keep.

takeo

01-06-2003, 05:01 PM

So what kind of discrimination? On a street level or official government policy? Why don't the discriminated Israelis speak out that much if there is so much discrimination? They could and would. I bet they do if they are.

There are numerous publications of Amnesty International and other organisations about discriminations of israeli palestinians, both official and on the street.
They speak out, for example in the israeli parliament, but few people listen to them in israel. Two years ago a peacefull israeli palestinian protest was bloodily oppressed by the israeli army.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/media_reports/1161195.stm

http://www.arabhra.org/

Why did my tour group meet a Finnish Christian woman in Israel who lived on a Kibbutz and was an Israeli citizen if they only allow in Jewish immigrants?

perhaps she was married to a Jew, if not i don't know how she gained israeli citizenship.

Why does an Israeli Palestinian man, who is married to a Finnish/Israeli Jew, pay taxes in Israel if he is exempt from them?

he isn't exempt from them, the orthodox Jewish organisations are.

More of your Israels to blame garbage. How about the arabs make friends with Israel? No that is out of the question. It's for Israel to get down on it's knees right?

They are ready to make friends with Israel, even its harsh ennemy Syria, of course on the condition that Israel returns the stolen property and give freedom to the palestinians.

Except in Arab countires right takeo. Never see you complain about the religious nature of Arab countries

than you didn't read my posts or very selectively. I strongly condamn the mix of politics and religion is some Arab countries.

Yea, Commie Nazis and Arabs. Great company you keep.

people with a moderate view on the matter aren't necessarily commies or Arabs, in fact many Americans and most Europeans think as well that Israel is at least partly to blame for the current situation.

Rob

01-06-2003, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by takeo

people with a moderate view on the matter aren't necessarily commies or Arabs, in fact many Americans and most Europeans think as well that Israel is at least partly to blame for the current situation.

What do you know about people with moderate views? Your views are so extreme. Even your home country Russia rejects your views.

I do hope you will answer my other post to you http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=2048&goto=lastpost

takeo

01-06-2003, 05:28 PM

My views are shared by russia, Russia has always rejected the occupation of the occupied territories, and still does so.

MichaelC

01-06-2003, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by minusthejihad
I tend to believe the theory that Takeo is paid to sit in here and spew anti-Israel propaganda. How else would someone with a history of being debunked and proven incorrect as many times find it in themselves to bash their head aainst a wall, if it weren't for money.

And I don't believe for a minute that he has been to Israel. Its just the internet, shees, I've been to the moon then. Do you believe me?

Earlier today, I had considered posting much the same observation as this, although in my view, I had more envisioned the possibility that Takeo is, in reality, a composite Ã¢â‚¬Å“personageÃ¢â‚¬Â registered here by the Forum administration with the intention of creating an easy target for refutation. You'd think though that we'd be tired by now after all this kicking the dead horse of his simplistic ideology.

Nobody could actually be so blind without great effort.

Rob

01-06-2003, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by takeo
My views are shared by russia, Russia has always rejected the occupation of the occupied territories, and still does so.

Russia rejects your marxist views.

takeo

01-06-2003, 05:34 PM

it is shocking to you that anyone dare to question your ideology and your view of the world. Get used to it!

takeo

01-06-2003, 05:38 PM

not entirely, Rob. As you know, the ancient stalinist anthem has been reintroduced, and many old KGB-agents are back in the secret service and administration. Putin recently also made a speech about the great past of the soviet-union as a super-power and blessed the soviet-victory over the nazi's. besides, the die hard communist party of the Russian Federation is still by far the largest party in parliament and the most popular party in Russia.

Rob

01-06-2003, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by takeo
not entirely, Rob. As you know, the ancient stalinist anthem has been reintroduced, and many old KGB-agents are back in the secret service and administration. Putin recently also made a speech about the great past of the soviet-union as a super-power and blessed the soviet-victory over the nazi's. besides, the die hard communist party of the Russian Federation is still by far the largest party in parliament and the most popular party in Russia.

I bet you're just creaming in your jeans hoping for the good old day eh comrade? Must have been great to be a Commie Nazi Jew Hater roaming free in that big country, sending people to their death in the gulags.

takeo

01-06-2003, 05:58 PM

don't tell me what i think, i have my doubts as well about the Soviet-Union but certainly won't share them with such narrowminded one-sided people as you.

you don't know **** about Eastern Europe or the Soviet-Union.

Rob

01-06-2003, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by takeo
don't tell me what i think, i have my doubts as well about the Soviet-Union but certainly won't share them with such narrowminded one-sided people as you.

you don't know **** about Eastern Europe or the Soviet-Union.

Oh, what don't I know? Eastern Europe was a hole under the Commie Nazis. The Soviets were no different than the Nazis. What's to know. Both the German Nazis and the Soviet Nazis sent Millions to their death.

Mediocrates

01-06-2003, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by takeo
don't tell me what i think, i have my doubts as well about the Soviet-Union but certainly won't share them with such narrowminded one-sided people as you.

You literally have a one note hymnal. That is the icon of narrowminded. You don't even vary your language anymore. I know a bunch of people like you on other boards. You can't argue with people who really don't have a limit to how far left they lean. They'd be suspicious of Marx himself. But none of that is here or there. It's just become your unquestioned religion. That's fine. Enjoy your piety, your faith. Let us know your doings at the antiIsraeli divestiture protest though, will you?

danholo

01-07-2003, 02:21 AM

takeo:

perhaps she was married to a Jew, if not i don't know how she gained israeli citizenship.

For once, you could admit that you're wrong.

Acquisition of Nationality by Naturalization

Adults may acquire Israeli citizenship by naturalization at the discretion of the Minister of the Interior and subject to a number of requirements, such as:

they must have resided in Israel for three years out of the five years preceding the day of submission of the application.
they are entitled to reside in Israel permanently and have settled or intend to settle in Israel;
they have renounced their prior nationality, or have proved that they will cease to be foreign nationals upon becoming Israeli citizens.

Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00mz0)

It's like you know nothing about Israel or its laws, yet you think it is like this because you "know" how facist and racist the country is. I admit that you know a lot but sometimes you let your imagination run amock when it comes to Israel.

The Indian

01-07-2003, 07:34 AM

I think we're going off-topic of this thread.

Isreal does have allies and there are people who feel Israel's pain. Since Sep 11, 2001 thousands of Israelis have lost their lives to Islamic suicide bombers and shooters. Similarly, thousands of Indians have also lost their to Islamic terrorists.

In the west, there isn't much attention paid to these lives lost and the people who are facing the barbarians at the gate.

Just keep in mind Israel is not alone.

Micah

01-07-2003, 07:47 AM

Well, a prophecy in Judaism states that in the end times there will be a war. A war of Edom vs Ishmael. The 3 kings vs the 5 kings. Then after they win, the 3 kings go after Israel.

So any allies of Israel should not be relied upon to a great extent. The sooner Israel becomes independent (although it is almost impossible to be completely independent economically) the better.

takeo

01-07-2003, 09:22 AM

danholo, i sincerely didn't know this. But tell me, how many non-Jewish people are permitted to stay in Israel?
i talked to people from Thailand and Romania and they are not permitted to become Israeli citizens, not even after they stayed there 6 years. Don't know how that is possible legally, but that's what they told me.

Why am i narrowminded? because i refuse to accept defeat? I believe in my convictions, so do you, it doesn't make you nor me narrowminded. narrowminded people are people who refuse to make even the slightest criticism to the side they defend and never doubt about the "truth" they think they defend, you can't say that i defend Arabs whatever they did, nor communists.

But i have to hear the first word of criticism towards Israel from you or rob for example...

MichaelC

01-07-2003, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by takeo
Why am i narrowminded? We all wonder at that. But, whatever the reason, it is continually demonstrated by your absolute refusal to take into account any version of reality but your own.

takeo

01-07-2003, 02:18 PM

We all wonder at that. But, whatever the reason, it is continually demonstrated by your absolute refusal to take into account any version of reality but your own.

I could make exactly the same observation about you. In fact you didn't even read the rest of my post, which prooves that you only read what you want to read, and just ignore the parts of the reality that don't fit in your narrowminded view.

Evgeny

01-07-2003, 05:15 PM

Discrimination in Israel is a sure thing

The long history of attempts to establish a safe Jewish state in Palestine within the scope of the colonial inheritance of Great Britain and France is over. The Palestinian intifada has finished off this illusion. So many dreams shattered!

The Jews went to Palestine, hoping that they would have a quiet life in their historic fatherland. They had only one wish: to live well in the country that swore to protect them, yet this was during the 1970s and 1980s of the past century.

Now, the situation in Israel is different. The country is waging war with the Arab world, and defeat in this war means death. Israel is spending millions on arms, building a defensive wall to protect itself against terrorists, ect. The Jews are threatening Arabs with nuclear weapons, but the Arabs have a little something going their way as well.

Israeli sociologists have calculated that Jews will make up only 45% of the entire population of Palestine by 2020. Eight million Arabs will live in Israel by that time, on the West Bank, and in the Gaza Strip. The expected number of the Jewish population will not exceed 6.3 million people. This is connected both with one of the worldÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s highest birth rates among Palestinians and with the reverse immigration from Israel. Israeli Jews are decreasing in their numbers each year.

The state has forgotten its promises. Furthermore, the state is limiting its own citizens' rights. This concerns immigrants from the former USSR.

Here is a recent example. A group of young Israelis, Russians by nationality, wanted to organize a Slavic union in their new fatherland. However, Israeli officials refused to register such an organization. The initiators of the Slavic union claimed that nobody gave them a reason to explain why there cannot be a union of Slavs in Israel. They said that there were thousands public organizations in Israel, including ones based on ethnic principles.

There are Jews, Arabs, and immigrants from the East and West living in Israel. They all have their own organizations, both political and public. However, there is not group to stand up for the interests of Slavs, despite of the fact that there are so many Russian Jews living in Israel.

It is common knowledge that over a million people immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union. But how many gentiles are there among them? About 250 thousand. The spiritual leader of the ultra-religious Shas party, Rabbi Ovadja Joseph, said that there are very few "real" Jews among the Russians. The rabbi definitely means those Jews that have Jewish mothers. Jewish fathers or even Jewish grandfathers give a person the right to "return" to Israel. Nevertheless, this person will not be considered a Jew in Israel.

These facts were a true revelation for many people who moved to Israel from the former USSR being Ã¢â‚¬Å“Jews because of their fathers.Ã¢â‚¬Â They were very surprised to find out that their nationality was Ukrainian, Russian, Belarussian, etc, depending on the nationality of their mothers.

Those gentiles in Israel (there are up to 600 thousand of them there) have "Slavic" roots, even if they came to Israel from Moldavia, Azerbaijan, or Kazakhstan (non-Slavic nations). Gentiles in Israel suffer from discrimination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why cant the slavs have a group? i think it is because of fear and RACISM on the Israeli side. What is Israel going to do about the kidnapping of woman from East europe to ack as slaves in israel?

Rob

01-07-2003, 05:28 PM

Oh, please takeo. Cry me a river.

narrowminded people are people who refuse to make even the slightest criticism to the side they defend and never doubt about the "truth" they think they defend,

Now that is you to a T. Say anything about Marx or Chomsky and you defend both of them like they are both God.

You once said I was biased. I said you're right. I am biased. I also said the difference between me and you is I admit I'm biased and you lie about it. You want people to think you are insightful with wisdom and that you don't let you bias color your thinking. You are a fraud. You are as biased as anyone. You are also as narrowminded as anyone.

Be a man takeo. Admit you failings.

takeo

01-07-2003, 06:03 PM

yes, evgeny, former Soviet-citizens are still considered foreigners in Israel.

Rob, i admit my bias, i never said that my words are the undisputed truth as you did, they are my interpretation of reality, from a certain point of view and education.

Rob

01-07-2003, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by takeo
yes, evgeny, former Soviet-citizens are still considered foreigners in Israel.

Rob, i admit my bias, i never said that my words are the undisputed truth as you did, they are my interpretation of reality, from a certain point of view and education.

I'm sure to a lot of French you are a foreigner too. Quit your whining.

You've always act like your words are the undisputed truth.

You are the biggest liar.

takeo

01-07-2003, 07:11 PM

WHATEVER

ok, i'm the biggest lier and you're the messenger of the truth, right?

People do not consider me as a foreigners, except maybe people who don't know me and only know my name.

danholo

01-07-2003, 09:39 PM

takeo,

Yes, that is the law but of course discrimination is seen like you said. This is one of the things I wish would be fixed and enforced for the better. Israel has many flaws but it doesn't mean that it's necessarily bad. The conflict is much to blame and Israel's extreme right-wing. (I think.)

Did these people apply for citizenship? Or did they just come to Israel and stay there illegally?

Some legal work permits should be issued out more though.

Teacake

01-07-2003, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by takeo
WHATEVER

ok, i'm the biggest lier and you're the messenger of the truth, right?

Bull artiste is more like it.

takeo

01-07-2003, 10:01 PM

you or me? :p

danholo seems like a more reasonable person, all the others can do in this treat is just shout and insult. I agree with you that the israeli rightwing is to blame for most of the current problems, as well as the palestinian rightwing. (that's why all those people in here insult n shout, they are part of the problem, they know that with their mentality peace will be improssible, that's why they shout "death to the arabs" "send them back on their camels" etc. it's because, in their ideas, they have no alternative).

yes they applied for citizenship, and were already some years legal immigrants in israel.

Rob

01-07-2003, 10:23 PM

"death to the arabs" "send them back on their camels"

I have not seen one person say that. You have made similar claims about me that I want to ethnically cleanse the palestinians. More made up lies. You do your share of insults but not one complains or goes running to the moderator like you do.

You say here it's a right wing problem but you know you don't believe that. You blame Israel for 1967 and it was a left wing government then. The fact is it wouldn't matter what wing it was. You would still say the same thing. As long as Israel defends itself (and lets face it you dont really think Isael has a right to exist) you will criticize everything Israel does.

MichaelC

01-08-2003, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by takeo
There are numerous publications of Amnesty International and other organisations about discriminations of israeli palestinians, both official and on the street.
They speak out, for example in the israeli parliament, but few people listen to them in israel. Two years ago a peacefull israeli palestinian protest was bloodily oppressed by the israeli army.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/media_reports/1161195.stm

http://www.arabhra.org/

I was going back through this thread to clarify my mind on a couple of points when I decided to check your links to see what they had to say about the part of your statement that accused Israel of bloodily quelling a peaceful protest by "Israeli palestinians". A strange concept there. Perhaps you meant, "Arab Israeli" citizens.

The contents of the first link had nothing to do with your statement. It dealt with a voluntary abstention from voting by Arab citizens of Israel (try to imagine saying, "Jewish citizens of Jordan or of Syria, or of Iraq". Not likely to ever hear that, now, are we?). Anyway, no mention at all of any bloody dealings with peaceful protestors of any kind in that link.

What the article actually said:

BBC Article cited
Press seeks new deal for Arabs

Israeli Arabs' mass abstention from voting in Tuesday's election has prompted calls for them to be brought in from the cold and properly integrated into Israeli society.
The Israeli business daily Globes said the root cause of their disaffection was not the killing of 13 Israeli Arabs last October after the Intifadah started, but ideology and economics.

Ideology was commonly cited, but the economic factor was often overlooked, Itamar Levin said in an opinion piece calling for positive discrimination in favour of Israeli Arabs, who form about 20% of the country's population.

"The economic factor is also known, but many try to push it aside or ignore it altogether; specifically, the deliberate and blatant discrimination against the Arab community in all walks of life," Mr Levin wrote.

"The discrimination begins with the sewerage systems, through schools and ends up in economic and political representation. It is sufficient to note that most of the unemployment centres in Israel are Arab towns."

He condemned as "facile and dangerous" the common argument that the Israeli Arabs were much better off than their counterparts in other Arab countries.

"It is precisely those people who want the State of Israel to be democratic and Jewish who must immediately see to the welfare of the country's Arab citizens.

"Affirmative action, increased budgets, job preferences and investments are essential to eliminate the serious discrimination against hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens as soon as possible."

Alienation
Writing in Haaretz, Ori Nir said the "pride" Israeli Arab citizens felt in their collective election boycott "is both servile and painful".

"It reflects their protracted dissonance - they are interested in, but incapable of, becoming active participants in Israeli society and having an impact on it."

"The lessons to be learned from the boycott - not only according to Israeli Arab leaders trying to introduce political sophistication in their analyses, but also according to ordinary Israeli Arab citizens - are that Israeli Arabs must be properly integrated into mainstream Israeli society," Mr Nir said.

"They must be given the opportunity to be active partners in that society, they must be brought into the centres of Israeli decision-making."

But he warned that many Israeli Jews would interpret the Israeli Arab decision not to vote "as a form of self-seclusion, of severing ties with mainstream Israel".

"The boycott has led a significant number of Israeli Jews to question the degree to which the Arabs have an emotional link to their country." Usually when someone includes a link with their post, it has something to do with the post. The article referred to discusses palestinian grievances in the same manner that any minority might discuss its needs. No where is any bloody, or otherwise, "confrontation" mentioned.

The other link you provided simply connects one to the website of the Arab Human Rights Association, and though there was a photo of a man with blood running down his face, it was only identified as having been included in a report entitled, "Silencing Dissent". Again, no mention of Israelis bloodily oppressing any peaceful Israeli arabs protesting for their rights.

Having made reference to Amnesty International and also to some non-existent peaceful protest in which you allege Israeli brutality, you include links as if to bolster your claim when those links have nothing to do with your contention.

Are all your links like that?

Wait a minute! Don't bother answering that. I already know the answer you will give and it will be disengenuous once again. May even have links to Disney World or SuperBowl Dot Com as supportive evidence.

Miriam

01-08-2003, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by takeo

danholo, i sincerely didn't know this. But tell me, how many non-Jewish people are permitted to stay in Israel?
i talked to people from Thailand and Romania and they are not permitted to become Israeli citizens, not even after they stayed there 6 years. Don't know how that is possible legally, but that's what they told me. Off-topic here, but for the record, Takeo: I guess we are both well acquainted with naturalization and deportation policies of many Western countries. Israel is well in the middle of the "cruelty scala" on this, as we both know, so why on the earth do you write such nonsense?

takeo

01-08-2003, 09:43 AM

miriam, it was in the context of the discussion that non-Jewish people would have the same rights as jewish ones to immigrate to Israel.

mickael, the links where not to support the AI-report or the oppression of a peacefull demonstration, but the links to show the discrimination of the Israeli palestinians or Arab israeli, as they asked me.

but ok, if you want i'll provide some links to the two events mentioned above.

"I find myself also compelled to refer to the tragic events in Israel itself. In recent days, Israeli Arabs have been protesting in demonstration of their solidarity with the Palestinian people. The Israeli police have responded to this with fatal brutality, which has resulted in the killing of 10 Israeli Arabs and the injuring of hundreds."

http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/0aad6036b6377e6d0525672e0058609e/e3032b288abf2e6d852569700049358f!OpenDocument

"

Israel Upgrades Probe Team on Arab Citizens' Clashes with Police
Israeli security cabinet decided November 8 to upgrade its current investigation committee on Israeli Arabs' clashes with police early October to a full state commission of inquiry, a cabinet official announced.

A state inquiry committee will replace the public investigation commission, which was set up on October 22 to look into the violence, according to the official.

The committee will probe the sequence of the clashes, during which 13 Israeli Arab citizens were killed by police and Israeli Jews, and decide whether the police had used "excessive and discriminatory forces against Arab citizens" as some Arab leaders had accused, the official added.

The violence in Arab communities in northern Israel broke out early October after their Palestinian brothers were engaged in bloody clashes with Israeli soldiers.

The Israeli-Palestinian clashes have lasted for nearly six weeks since September 28, killing over 180 people and wounding thousands more, most of them Palestinians.

Analysts said over 1 million Israeli Arabs used demonstration as a weapon to express their embarrassment toward discriminating policies on job markets and community development in the Jew-dominated society.

To pacify the Arab sector, Prime Minister Ehud Barak agreed last month to create the public investigation team to hear claims of "brutality against Arab citizens in the disturbances."

The committee was headed by retired judge Shalom Brenner, former president of the Jerusalem District Court, and comprises former president of the Nazareth Magistrate Court Khalil Aboud, former Israel Defense Forces Chief of General Staff Dan Shomron, and two professors Ehud Shpinzak and Gavriella Shalev.

Barak hoped then that such a committee could "make every effort to achieve peace, equality and partnership with Israeli Arabs."

However, the decision got cold shoulders from Arab communities, which demanded the establishment of a state inquiry commission that has more judicial power than the current one. The communities announced that they will boycott the current investigation until the government met their demands.

After that, probe panel head Shalom Brenner recommended Barak to upgrade the authority of the committee, and Barak accepted the suggestion, cabinet officials said Wednesday.

In response to the dramatic concession to Israeli Arabs, Arab lawmaker Mahmoud Barakeh said he was encouraged by the decision but that "it didn't come soon enough." Other Arab leaders also urged the police to immediately release Israeli Arabs who were still under arrest because of the demonstrations.

But the right-wing Likud lawmaker, Uzi Landau, blasted the decision, accusing Barak of making the judgment out of political expediency. "

Moskal'

01-08-2003, 10:00 AM

there's a difference, isn't being jewish a requirement for immigrating to israel?
No. It is as easy to become a citizen of Israel as of France. It is just much, much easier for the jews, who almost instantly gain citizenships. That is not unlike in other countries. In Germany, ethnical Germans from Russia and Kazakhstan rather gain citizenships then other immigrants. I know many christian immigrants who went to Israel for religious reasons and absolutely have no connections to jews.

Does finland only allows protestant immigrants? can non-protestant citizens serve in the army? are conservative protestants exempt from paying taxes? etc.
How would you compare the israeli treatment of its arab minority to the finnish treatment of its Swedish minority?
Could you compare swedish behaviour with arab behaviour? I guess not. I personally have seen a bedouin who serves in the army. Please do not lie that there are none. You have been often provided with facts that show your words are wrong, so please stop repeating this over and over.

of course their situation is much better than the situation of palestinians in the ot, or the Kurds in Turkey, but still unacceptable for a Western democracy.
BS, there are arabs in Knesset, what do you want more? They equally take part in the elections, they CAN become full members of the society, if they wish. Unfortunately, radicalist feelings are widely spread amongst the arabs of Israel, and I do not necessarily mean those who support Hamas and other murderers. In their schools arab children are taught that there is no such state like Israel. Tell me, is something like that possible, say, in america, where even Indian(Native American to avoid confusion) children are taught to love the state they live in. There must be a major change in Israeli arab society before they can be fully integrated. Indeed the government does to little to integrate them. So, for example, a programme of scholarships for talented arab children would be useful.

jews aren't oppressed in France, on the contrary, they are overrepresented on the high levels of society...
Over-representation in high levels of society is not a sign for good integration, in Weimar republic and in USSR jews were also highly represented on top of the society, but were still discriminated. I am reading in papers about vandalism on synagogues in France, I see that Jean-Marie Le Pen almost gets 20% in the elections, as much as Hitler had. That says more then every representation.

those countries will never cooperate with Israel, which is nothing but a vasal-state of the us...
Only few countries in this world can oppose orders of the United States, but as the americans seem to be wanting to forget their vassal, leaving it in times of need, Israel may well look eastwards to seek other patrons. There is almost no hate anymore between Russia and USA, so americans will not necessarily oppose an alliance between the nations.

shared ennemies do not necessarily mean a strong band. (iran and the us for example had their shared dislike for iraq and the taliban, still the us called iran a part of the "axis of evil")
But remember that Iraq and Taliban are former allies of USA, and thus shared American dislike for Iran and USSR, but as major changes occured 1986-1992, America did not need them anymore, and was, in fact, trying to get rid of them. Besides, economic and geopolitic interests will soon leave behind the old division of the world in two fractions.

yes, but still there is discrimination, it is certainly better than pakistan,
Yes, it is better, and I am sure this isn't new to you. So, why did you open your mouth and compared them then?

but religion and state should be separated in israel, and arabs and other non-jews should become real equal citizens. Religious parties should not be allowed in the government.
What you propose is not even existant in Germany, as here there are deep religious christian parties, nazi parties, and communist parties. Only two parties are forbidden - NSDAP and KPD, but both exist under other names (NPD and DKP). Most non-jew citizens (and it is not impossible to become a citizen) have equal rights in Israel. It is hard to separate religion and state in Israel, as the country was concepted as one wich should allow jews to practise their religion freely. As in jewish (esp. ashkhenazi) communities it was customary that religious and political "head" was one person, the rabbi, it does not surprise me that religious parties are popular.

There are numerous publications of Amnesty International and other organisations about discriminations of israeli palestinians, both official and on the street.
I personally do not trust Amnesty as they have biased views, seeing the weak necessarily as the right.

They speak out, for example in the israeli parliament, but few people listen to them in israel.
They have the freedom to speak on highest levels, but nobody listens? Is this the problem? This is not related to oppression but to irrelevacy and plain stupidness of their speaches.

Two years ago a peacefull israeli palestinian protest was bloodily oppressed by the israeli army.
That is how the defenders of Israeli arabs speak"...once upon a time...think it was two years ago...they violently surpressed some people, while the others were ABSOLUTELY PEACEFUL." Tell me exactly, wich event you mean. Then, it can be discussed.

he isn't exempt from them, the orthodox Jewish organisations are.
Tell me, why isn't the church paying taxes in Germany? Why do, instead, german citizens pay taxes for to support the church?

They are ready to make friends with Israel, even its harsh enemy Syria, of course on the condition that Israel returns the stolen property and give freedom to the palestinians.
They should 've been ready 1948 and 1967. Today, Israel does not desperately need their "friendship" or recognition. You offer Israel to give up Golans for no benefit but to have pleased syrians instead of angry syrians for a while? What does it matter if Syria does not like Israel? It will, whatever happens, never dare to attack Israel. If it funds terrorists, then Israel has the right to demand it to stop, or start taking measures. Remember german scientists who helped to develop egyptian missiles?

than you didn't read my posts or very selectively. I strongly condamn the mix of politics and religion is some Arab countries.
But it is mixed in EVERY arab country, Takeo, not just in some. There are no religious political parties because there is hardly a democracy in the arab world. Even in the laicist Iraq, the leader wrote a copy of Qaran with his blood. Even in the west-fashioned Turkey the religious party won the elections. There is no muslim country where the religion is unimportant in politics. So, you say the life of a muslim in Israel is miserable? But isn't the life of a jew in Iran or Syria or else far, far worse?

people with a moderate view on the matter aren't necessarily commies or Arabs, in fact many Americans and most Europeans think as well that Israel is at least partly to blame for the current situation.
Yes, especially Rabin's government.

My views are shared by russia, Russia has always rejected the occupation of the occupied territories, and still does so.
Yes, unfortunately, under Putin imperialism is alive once again.

As you know, the ancient stalinist anthem has been reintroduced,
Very sad.

and many old KGB-agents are back in the secret service and administration.
Very sad.

Putin recently also made a speech about the great past of the soviet-union as a super-power
Very sad. I'm very glad I've left that country before this hell broke out. And you, why do YOU live in a capitalist France?

besides, the die hard communist party of the Russian Federation is still by far the largest party in parliament and the most popular party in Russia.
By far largest? KPRF has 25%, "Edinstvo", the governmental party also 25%. Recently, "Edinstvo" fused with "Otechestvo", wich gave them another 9% and brought them to 34%. Still, KPRF has the largest membership count, but almost every of the members joined in times of the USSR. Most of their members are brainwashed old men. Their electorate is dying. 1996 they got over 30%, 1999 only 25%. You are a true optimist.

you don't know **** about Eastern Europe or the Soviet-Union.
Well, Rob's post gave me an impression of that he did know enough of it.

i talked to people from Thailand and Romania and they are not permitted to become Israeli citizens, not even after they stayed there 6 years. Don't know how that is possible legally, but that's what they told me.
I knew Bosnians that were living in Germany for years, but were almost all deported about a year ago. It is well known that no country takes every immigrant that wants to become citizen. In Israel, especially, many are being sent packing after coming by marrying a jew but have a divorce after a year or two. Things happening in Israel are happening in France, USA, Germany, Russia, and many other targets for poor immigrants. I'm in Germany for almost 10 years, but can't have a citizenship.

it was in the context of the discussion that non-Jewish people would have the same rights as jewish ones to immigrate to Israel.
No one disputed that jewish people can freely immigrate to Israel, as the country was concepted as a homeland for jews, wich were aliens everywhere. For others it is like to immigrate to any other country. As I mentioned above, Germany has the same policy for ethnical germans.

Moskal'

01-08-2003, 10:01 AM

to Evgenij
I've read in the paper that many ethnical Russians in Israel would have strong antisemite feelings, so it is reported that some of those were shouting antisemite paroles and painting swastikas on walls. The officials feared that the "Slavic Union" would be the embodyment of this.

I think there are powers representing the new repatriants in the government, especially Sharansky's party. They do not really differ if one is a russian jew or a russian, as both are facing same problems and thus need same solutions.

Moskal'

01-08-2003, 10:06 AM

Indian
-I think we're going off-topic of this thread.

Isreal does have allies and there are people who feel Israel's pain. Since Sep 11, 2001 thousands of Israelis have lost their lives to Islamic suicide bombers and shooters. Similarly, thousands of Indians have also lost their to Islamic terrorists.

In the west, there isn't much attention paid to these lives lost and the people who are facing the barbarians at the gate.

Just keep in mind Israel is not alone.
Not since Sep 11, but for decades...it is only that the world started noticing the problem and awakened when they've blown two of the highest buildings in Manhattan. And I get the impression that it is falling asleep again.

MichaelC

01-08-2003, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by takeo
miriam, it was in the context of the discussion that non-Jewish people would have the same rights as jewish ones to immigrate to Israel.

mickael, the links where not to support the AI-report or the oppression of a peacefull demonstration, but the links to show the discrimination of the Israeli palestinians or Arab israeli, as they asked me.

but ok, if you want i'll provide some links to the two events mentioned above.

"I find myself also compelled to refer to the tragic events in Israel itself. In recent days, Israeli Arabs have been protesting in demonstration of their solidarity with the Palestinian people. The Israeli police have responded to this with fatal brutality, which has resulted in the killing of 10 Israeli Arabs and the injuring of hundreds."

http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/0aad6036b6377e6d0525672e0058609e/e3032b288abf2e6d852569700049358f!OpenDocument

"

Israel Upgrades Probe Team on Arab Citizens' Clashes with Police
Israeli security cabinet decided November 8 to upgrade its current investigation committee on Israeli Arabs' clashes with police early October to a full state commission of inquiry, a cabinet official announced.

A state inquiry committee will replace the public investigation commission, which was set up on October 22 to look into the violence, according to the official.

The committee will probe the sequence of the clashes, during which 13 Israeli Arab citizens were killed by police and Israeli Jews, and decide whether the police had used "excessive and discriminatory forces against Arab citizens" as some Arab leaders had accused, the official added.

The violence in Arab communities in northern Israel broke out early October after their Palestinian brothers were engaged in bloody clashes with Israeli soldiers.

The Israeli-Palestinian clashes have lasted for nearly six weeks since September 28, killing over 180 people and wounding thousands more, most of them Palestinians.

Analysts said over 1 million Israeli Arabs used demonstration as a weapon to express their embarrassment toward discriminating policies on job markets and community development in the Jew-dominated society.

To pacify the Arab sector, Prime Minister Ehud Barak agreed last month to create the public investigation team to hear claims of "brutality against Arab citizens in the disturbances."

The committee was headed by retired judge Shalom Brenner, former president of the Jerusalem District Court, and comprises former president of the Nazareth Magistrate Court Khalil Aboud, former Israel Defense Forces Chief of General Staff Dan Shomron, and two professors Ehud Shpinzak and Gavriella Shalev.

Barak hoped then that such a committee could "make every effort to achieve peace, equality and partnership with Israeli Arabs."

However, the decision got cold shoulders from Arab communities, which demanded the establishment of a state inquiry commission that has more judicial power than the current one. The communities announced that they will boycott the current investigation until the government met their demands.

After that, probe panel head Shalom Brenner recommended Barak to upgrade the authority of the committee, and Barak accepted the suggestion, cabinet officials said Wednesday.

In response to the dramatic concession to Israeli Arabs, Arab lawmaker Mahmoud Barakeh said he was encouraged by the decision but that "it didn't come soon enough." Other Arab leaders also urged the police to immediately release Israeli Arabs who were still under arrest because of the demonstrations.

But the right-wing Likud lawmaker, Uzi Landau, blasted the decision, accusing Barak of making the judgment out of political expediency. " I don't know WHO you are or WHAT exactly you are doing on this board, Takeo. There is an ongoing speculation that you must be a poster working for al jazeerah or that the site administration has concocted your identity in order to keep the conversation going, even if it must become rancorous due to your ignorance of the facts, your refusal to EVER admit that you are not all-knowing, and your blase dismissal of anything that anyone says to you. Added to this, it appears, is your intrusion into the conversation of links which have little or no meaning to the course of the conversation.

It occurs to me that there are probably forum followers who do not actually post and who may only read the body of the text, given the press of other concerns, without accessing and perusing the links which posters provide. It occurs to me that there may be some who do not have time to wade through every link provided to see if it supports the argument.

Regular posters here DO, for the most part, follow links which accompany the text of a post, but even we may find it inopportune at times to follow every link provided. There are times when the flow of the conversation may cause us to deal with the text of the post only. This is why I did not discover your "link protocol" until after the fact.

You have now offered this link:

http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/0aad6036b6377e6d0525672e0058609e/e3032b288abf2e6d852569700049358f

to bolster your previous post accusing Israel of "bloodily oppressing peaceful demonstrators". The link which you now offer refers to a letter sent to the UN which was written by Nasser al-Kidwa, the "Permanent Observor of Palestine", whatever that may mean. This letter is two years old and makes reference to events from one side with no context offered as to the situations in which the events took place. It is as though the author of the letter might be suggesting that the IDF just went out and started shooting people because....well, they felt like it. THIS is bad journalism, to say the least. This letter to the UN lacks credibility in that it omits the context of the occurrences to which it refers. The only reason that I include it at all is to impeach your use of "links" which you appear to use in order to give your posts an air of "authenticity".

Moskal has rightly pointed out that the tread has gotten "off topic", but I think clearing the air concerning such use of links is an important item to consider when viewing the posts of those who include them.

The Text of the Letter to which your link refers:

General Assembly
Fifty-fifth session
Agenda items 36, 40, 41 and 85
Bethlehem 2000
The situation in the Middle East
Question of Palestine
Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories

Identical letters dated 4 October 2000 from the
Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General and to the
President of the Security Council

In follow-up to my two recent letters dated 29 September 2000 and 2 October 2000 (A/55/432-S/2000/921 and A/55/437-S/2000/930), I regret to inform you once more that Israel, the occupying Power, has intransigently persisted in its campaign against the Palestinian people, continuing to massacre and injure even more Palestinian civilians.

On 2 and 3 October, Israeli security forces killed 17 more Palestinians, bringing the total number of dead to 45. The majority of those killed were civilians and a number of them were children, including a baby girl of one and a half years of age. (The names of the martyrs are annexed to the present letter.) The forces also injured hundreds more Palestinians, many of whom remain in critical condition. It was starkly horrific to realize that, among the severely injured, several had been hit in the eyes, causing loss of sight in most of them.

In addition to the information I conveyed to you in my previous letters regarding the use of lethal power by Israel, the Israeli security forces have continued to increase their presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, have reoccupied parts of the areas under Palestinian jurisdiction, and yesterday, actually used tanks to fire against Palestinian targets.

I find myself also compelled to refer to the tragic events in Israel itself. In recent days, Israeli Arabs have been protesting in demonstration of their solidarity with the Palestinian people. The Israeli police have responded to this with fatal brutality, which has resulted in the killing of 10 Israeli Arabs and the injuring of hundreds.

Once again, we call for immediate action by the Security Council to ensure the cessation of all illegal Israeli actions and measures against the Palestinian people, including its use of all kinds of lethal military power; the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Al-Haram Al-Sharif and from the vicinity of Palestinian cities and towns; and an investigation into the bloody events of recent days.

I would be grateful if you would arrange to have the text of the present letter distributed as an official document of the General Assembly, under agenda items 36, 40, 41 and 85 and of the Security Council.

(Signed) Nasser Al-Kidwa
Ambassador
Permanent Observer of Palestine
to the United NationsThe letter refers to unspecified generic events with no substantiating information. There is no depth to the accusation nor references to processes of proof regarding the incident.

The other text that you provide is not identified and no link is provided. I could tell it was not written by you as I am familiar with your posts.

takeo

01-08-2003, 11:56 AM

yes, some of my sources are biased, as MOST of your sources, if you ever provide some.

You asked me to provide links to the incidents in october 2000, I did so.
the previous links were links to the discrimination of the israeli Arabs, as some people on this treat asked me to do so.

the last text comes from the people's daily

Here another link to the event, by an israeli group

http://taayush.tripod.com/new/manda.html

"It has been two years since October 2000
Two years since the killing of thirteen Israeli citizens by Israeli police
Two years since the violent treatment of civil protest

October 2000 saw the culmination of a process, which has since moved on to the next, more dangerous phase: An attack by the government on the civil rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel. This attack proceeds in multiple venues: The discrimination in national insurance children's allowance, house demolitions and the spraying of crops, the restrictions on family reunification, Stripping Israeli Arabs of their citizenship, measures against political and religious leaders' freedom of speech and right of protest, the tarring of the entire Arab population as "engaging in hostile activity", the resurrection of the "center for demographics" and public acceptance of the idea of deportation, both of Palestinian citizens of Israel and of Palestinians in the occupied territories.

takeo

01-08-2003, 12:56 PM

No. It is as easy to become a citizen of Israel as of France. It is just much, much easier for the jews, who almost instantly gain citizenships. That is not unlike in other countries. In Germany, ethnical Germans from Russia and Kazakhstan rather gain citizenships then other immigrants. I know many christian immigrants who went to Israel for religious reasons and absolutely have no connections to jews.

yes, but the difference is that Tatar s who can proove that their parents lived in Russia decades ago can return, while palestinians who can proove that their parents lived in Israel can't.

Could you compare swedish behaviour with arab behaviour? I guess not. I personally have seen a bedouin who serves in the army. Please do not lie that there are none. You have been often provided with facts that show your words are wrong, so please stop repeating this over and over.

No of course not, but than again the Swedish never received the treament of the israeli arabs...it's both ways round...
bedouins serve in the army, ordinary palestinian muslims can not, or in rare exception. i haven't said that non-jewish couldn't go in the army, but that their entrance was restricted.

BS, there are arabs in Knesset, what do you want more? They equally take part in the elections, they CAN become full members of the society, if they wish. Unfortunately, radicalist feelings are widely spread amongst the arabs of Israel, and I do not necessarily mean those who support Hamas and other murderers. In their schools arab children are taught that there is no such state like Israel. Tell me, is something like that possible, say, in america, where even Indian(Native American to avoid confusion) children are taught to love the state they live in. There must be a major change in Israeli arab society before they can be fully integrated. Indeed the government does to little to integrate them. So, for example, a programme of scholarships for talented arab children would be useful.

I think it's the israeli's who have to make the first effort, you can only expect people to integrate if they feel totally accepted by the israeli state and people as equal israeli citizens. They lived there longer than most other israeli, you can't consider them as some immigrants who have to integrate. i can't believe that arab israeli learn in their schools that there's no such state as israel.
besides, it's normal that they feel sympathy for their palestinian brothers, but very few of them have helped palestinian terrorists, have they? You wouldn't want to imagine what would happen if all israeli arabs would cooperate with the suicide-bombers, they would be a great help to them!

Over-representation in high levels of society is not a sign for good integration, in Weimar republic and in USSR jews were also highly represented on top of the society, but were still discriminated. I am reading in papers about vandalism on synagogues in France, I see that Jean-Marie Le Pen almost gets 20% in the elections, as much as Hitler had. That says more then every representation.

i'm still not convinced that the soviet-policy was anti-semitic, at least not at the higher levels, whereas, of course, some ordinary Russians continued and still continue to be anti-semitic, but it wasn't a state-policy.
there wasn't a lot of discrimination in the weimar-republic either, discrimination started when the nazi's took over.

Only few countries in this world can oppose orders of the United States, but as the americans seem to be wanting to forget their vassal, leaving it in times of need, Israel may well look eastwards to seek other patrons. There is almost no hate anymore between Russia and USA, so americans will not necessarily oppose an alliance between the nations.

hate no, but still a lot of opposing and conflicting interests. Russia has some friends in the Arab and Muslims world that would not want to see a strategic alliance between russia and Israel. What would be the benefit for Russia of such an alliance by the way? and for Israel? The Russians can't pay as the Americans can and can't deliver the most sophisticated weapons. There isn't much benefit for the Americans either, but it's the strong zionist lobby that pushes for such an alliance.

But remember that Iraq and Taliban are former allies of USA, and thus shared American dislike for Iran and USSR, but as major changes occured 1986-1992, America did not need them anymore, and was, in fact, trying to get rid of them. Besides, economic and geopolitic interests will soon leave behind the old division of the world in two fractions.

still it's strange that the us didn't embrace iran in it's fight against the taliban and iraq, it would have been an ideally situated ally. the clinton-administration tried so, but Bush blocked all efforts.

takeo

01-08-2003, 12:57 PM

What you propose is not even existant in Germany, as here there are deep religious christian parties, nazi parties, and communist parties. Only two parties are forbidden - NSDAP and KPD, but both exist under other names (NPD and DKP). Most non-jew citizens (and it is not impossible to become a citizen) have equal rights in Israel. It is hard to separate religion and state in Israel, as the country was concepted as one wich should allow jews to practise their religion freely. As in jewish (esp. ashkhenazi) communities it was customary that religious and political "head" was one person, the rabbi, it does not surprise me that religious parties are popular.

OK, but the German christian-democrats do not want to oblige christian rules to every German, do they?
of course jews should be able to practise their religion freely, but why does the Jewish religion has a preferable status in Israel? As far as i know, this isn't the case in germany, for the law all recognised religions in Germany are equal.
your last sentence is a very interesting remark, it could indeed be an important reason for the popularity of religious parties. (but than what about sephardim's religious parties?)

I personally do not trust Amnesty as they have biased views, seeing the weak necessarily as the right.

Not always, they just fight human rights abuses, whereever those occure, wether it is in israel, a communist or arab country or in the US.

They have the freedom to speak on highest levels, but nobody listens? Is this the problem? This is not related to oppression but to irrelevacy and plain stupidness of their speaches.

i don't think so. In my opinion their speeches are very important but israeli refuse to take those people serious as equal members of the israeli society, as they're still considered traitors and no real israeli somehow, it's just racism.

That is how the defenders of Israeli arabs speak"...once upon a time...think it was two years ago...they violently surpressed some people, while the others were ABSOLUTELY PEACEFUL." Tell me exactly, wich event you mean. Then, it can be discussed.

see above, the events of october 2000 in the streets of israel.

Tell me, why isn't the church paying taxes in Germany? Why do, instead, german citizens pay taxes for to support the church?

this isn't the problem, the problem is that religious PERSONS do not pay taxes and do not have to serve in the army if they don't want to, not institutions.

They should 've been ready 1948 and 1967. Today, Israel does not desperately need their "friendship" or recognition. You offer Israel to give up Golans for no benefit but to have pleased syrians instead of angry syrians for a while? What does it matter if Syria does not like Israel? It will, whatever happens, never dare to attack Israel. If it funds terrorists, then Israel has the right to demand it to stop, or start taking measures. Remember german scientists who helped to develop egyptian missiles?

israel has the legal and moral obligation to return stolen property if it ever wants to be taken seriously by the world community and ever want to live in peace in the region.
Cold war with syria is negative for israel, face it, a closed border and insecurity prevent local cooperation, trade and general peace in the region.

But it is mixed in EVERY arab country, Takeo, not just in some. There are no religious political parties because there is hardly a democracy in the arab world. Even in the laicist Iraq, the leader wrote a copy of Qaran with his blood. Even in the west-fashioned Turkey the religious party won the elections. There is no muslim country where the religion is unimportant in politics. So, you say the life of a muslim in Israel is miserable? But isn't the life of a jew in Iran or Syria or else far, far worse?

well, you're not totally right. in many former soviet countries Islam is totally separated from the state, as well as in Tunisia and Syria (in Syria not entirely but mostly, assad is a former Druz). in Turkey the islamic party is very moderate and wants European integration, in Turkey it is forbidden to wear scarfs or anything covering the head in the schools...

Very sad. I'm very glad I've left that country before this hell broke out. And you, why do YOU live in a capitalist France?

actually the hell broke out in Russia when yeltsin started to relinquish his country to criminals and maffia. Fortunately france belongs to the first class of the capitalist world, it is partly socialist and we're hoping to make it more socialist trough a constitutional way.

By far largest? KPRF has 25%, "Edinstvo", the governmental party also 25%. Recently, "Edinstvo" fused with "Otechestvo", wich gave them another 9% and brought them to 34%. Still, KPRF has the largest membership count, but almost every of the members joined in times of the USSR. Most of their members are brainwashed old men. Their electorate is dying. 1996 they got over 30%, 1999 only 25%. You are a true optimist.

Well, i didn't know Edinstvo and Otechestvo fused. Isn't Otechestvo the party of the moscow mayer lushkov or is it the maffia-party of right-wing forces led by the gangster Chubais??? The 1996 and 2000 elections were a far cry from real democracy, but still the communists managed to do well. actually in the former parliamantary elections they didn't gain 30% but close to 22%. during the presidential elections however they gained more votes. Still they have a lot of independant candidates and it appears they attract quite some young people too, desillusioned by the current state of affairs in Russia. as Putin extends his dictatorial powers over the media even more i'm not sure how fair the next elections will be.

I knew Bosnians that were living in Germany for years, but were almost all deported about a year ago. It is well known that no country takes every immigrant that wants to become citizen. In Israel, especially, many are being sent packing after coming by marrying a jew but have a divorce after a year or two. Things happening in Israel are happening in France, USA, Germany, Russia, and many other targets for poor immigrants. I'm in Germany for almost 10 years, but can't have a citizenship.

Yes, i recognise your problem, it's the same here for many people. France's policy in general is more liberal for people coming from the former soviet-union. Russia is more like a tranit-country for illegal immigrants and quite some russians decide to immigrate themselves, it's not the goal for a lot of immigrants.

Mike03

01-08-2003, 01:51 PM

Israel will never be alone as long as the U.S. survives--I don't understand the fear voiced on several threads that the U.S. is going to abandon Israel. This is highly unlikely. I also do not think it is fair to say that the U.S. has sold Israel out for oil, as one poster wrote. But I sort of agree in principle with what Takeo wrote, that Israel should make gestures that demonstrate its kindness as well as its fist. Maybe Israel is doing these things, but they are not being publicized. Instead, what I am reading is this article in the New York Times: "Killing of U.N Aide by Israel Bares Rift with Relief Agency" and I am wondering, what is going on? From the mainstream perspective, articles like this are far more damaging than stories about Israeli retaliation for suicide bombings and are far more likely to alienate people who generally have high regard for Israel but have not followed the conflict in great detail.

Rob

01-08-2003, 04:21 PM

takeo: yes, some of my sources are biased, as MOST of your sources, if you ever provide some.

Why is it only some of your sources are biased but MOST of everyone elses sources are biased? Are you trying to tell everyone that somehow you have some kind of LOCK on the truth. I submit that all of your sources are biased. In fact ALL sources are biased. There is no such thing as an Un-biased opinion or review of facts.

Why do you play these word games. This is not because you don't know english. You chose your worlds carefully. You play the same word game as the soviets did. There is some double meaning to your posts. Your words need to be parsed.

takeo

01-08-2003, 04:42 PM

ok, all of my sources are biased, as well as yours, but you are very articulate as well in the art of wordgames...
one example: "defensive war" , "pre-emptive strikes", etc.

Rob

01-08-2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by takeo
ok, all of my sources are biased, as well as yours, but you are very articulate as well in the art of wordgames...
one example: "defensive war" , "pre-emptive strikes", etc.

Okay but I don't think I've ever used those words. In fact just to set the record straight, there are a lot of things and views you've attributed to me which I've never commented on. So for the sake of further discussions let me set things straight.

I am a liberl not a conservative (although I am much further to the right than you)

I have never called for any ethnic cleaning of the WB or Gaza (although I have questioned how long Israel can take homicide bombers without exciling palestinians)

I did not support Sharon in 2001 and for the most part don't support him now (But I do support him more than the person from Labor running) I don't Sharon has been any kind of sucess but caving in to homicide bombers (which the person from labor wants to do) is worse.

I would rather see Israel go and arrest the tennants of an entire apt. buliding rather than bombing it to get one person.

I am all for destroying the houses of the families of homicide bombers. Many if not most do support the use of homicide bombers and should not profit from it.

I think the Palestinians got the best deal they will ever get back in 2000 and any deal they get in the future will not go beyond it.

Palestinians should not and will not be allowed to return. Give it up. It's not going to happen. Move on.

These are my views.

takeo

01-08-2003, 05:07 PM

Well, you're a bit more moderate than i tought, based on your posts, still your views are far from dovish and any leader with your views will not establish peace with the Palestinians, as Camp David does not garantee the Palestinians a real independant state in the occupied territories.

i think the new leader of Labour has a fair chance of establishing peace, if he can make up a government without extremists included.

Rob

01-08-2003, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by takeo
Well, you're a bit more moderate than i tought, based on your posts, still your views are far from dovish and any leader with your views will not establish peace with the Palestinians, as Camp David does not garantee the Palestinians a real independant state in the occupied territories.

i think the new leader of Labour has a fair chance of establishing peace, if he can make up a government without extremists included.

I will let someone else who is more knowledgeable about Camp David that I am take that on.

The Palestinians will never have a country where they can arm themselves. They will never be allowed a military that they can use to attack Israel with. Any Palestinian state will have to be disarmed and will be under certain restrictions. They can always move to Jordan if thats not good enough. This is realpolitik. No Palestinian state will be allowed to become another Iraq or Syria.

Mediocrates

01-08-2003, 05:15 PM

You say dovish like defending the extermination of innocent civilians on some abstract political basis of your own crafting is some kind of cry for peace.

MichaelC

01-08-2003, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by takeo
yes, some of my sources are biased, as MOST of your sources, if you ever provide some. It is obvious that I do not know when to quit, and it is also obvious that, with absolutely no prior indication of such a possibility, I continue to think you might understand a simple point.

I never said that your posts were biased. My point was that your links are essentially meaningless, and the only reason that they appear at all, as far as I am able to tell, is that for those who read only text and do not actually look into links, they establish an illusion that their author has provided evidence.

I really should follow Teacake's advice and put you on the ignore list, as communicating with you is too much like banging my head against the wall !

takeo

01-08-2003, 05:28 PM

i already explained to you the importance of the links i provided...

The Palestinians will never have a country where they can arm themselves. They will never be allowed a military that they can use to attack Israel with. Any Palestinian state will have to be disarmed and will be under certain restrictions. They can always move to Jordan if thats not good enough. This is realpolitik. No Palestinian state will be allowed to become another Iraq or Syria.

syria isn't a treal hreat to israel and would even be less a threat if israel would finally give back the golan-heights.
Even the hesbollah isn't a threat to israel, as it declared it will only attack israel in case israel attacks libanese civilians first, and won't attack israel during a possible war in iraq.
And for sure palestine wouldn't be a military threat to israel. any state should have the right to arm itself. Palestine is and will only be a danger to Israel if Israel refuses to give full independance to the palestinians. And palestinians won't move to Jordan, only in your dreams.
mediocrates, do you ever read my posts? I never defended the murder on innocent civilians, nor does any dove.

Rob

01-08-2003, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by takeo
i already explained to you the importance of the links i provided...

syria isn't a treal hreat to israel and would even be less a threat if israel would finally give back the golan-heights.
Even the hesbollah isn't a threat to israel, as it declared it will only attack israel in case israel attacks libanese civilians first, and won't attack israel during a possible war in iraq.
And for sure palestine wouldn't be a military threat to israel. any state should have the right to arm itself. Palestine is and will only be a danger to Israel if Israel refuses to give full independance to the palestinians. And palestinians won't move to Jordan, only in your dreams.
mediocrates, do you ever read my posts? I never defended the murder on innocent civilians, nor does any dove.

See this is why there is not Palestinian state. What you and the pals refuse to accept is Israels security will come before any palestinian state. Whether you chose to believe it or not, the arab world and the palestinian terrorist like hamas will never accept Israel. They will pay lip service (of course hamas won't even do that) that they will make peace with Israel but there is no reason to believe anything the arab world says. The only way there will ever be a Palestinian state is in the terms I described above.

richcrassus

01-08-2003, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Moskal'
No. It is as easy to become a citizen of Israel as of France. It is just much, much easier for the jews, who almost instantly gain citizenships. That is not unlike in other countries. In Germany, ethnical Germans from Russia and Kazakhstan rather gain citizenships then other immigrants. I know many christian immigrants who went to Israel for religious reasons and absolutely have no connections to jews.

Could someone please tell me NOT in great detail but just basically, what do u have to do to for example move from Australia to the USA?? WHat are the basic conditions??
thanks.

The Indian

01-08-2003, 06:20 PM

Rich,

To move to the USA, you need to do the following:

1. Have a company sponsor you on an H1-B visa. This is a work visa that will allow you to come to the USA and work immediately. However, the company needs to show proof it cannot find an American worker to fill the position. In the past it was relatively easy for those who had skills in information technology, engineering & science, now it is harder with the US economic slowdown. The company may or may not sponsor you for a immigration (Green Card). If your skills are valued, then you will be sponsored by the company.

2. Enter the US as a student for graduate studies in science or engineering. Upon the completion of an M.S. or Ph.D. degree your qualification is higher than most other college graduates and companies will hire you very quickly, and then they'll sponsor you for a Green Card. I suspect you will have no problem because I'm assuming you are white. Sad, but true. The good thing is that even if you aren't white and your qualifications are very good, you'll get picked up by some company.

3. Enter the US as a visitor or student and marry an American. Many people from Iran and Pakistan have done this because they feel that Islam allows them four wives (concurrently) and have no guilt about treating a woman badly. Unless you really love the woman, this is the most dishonest way of getting into the US. Under US law, you must be married for two years and living together during that time to get your Green Card.

4. Enter illegally into the US and claim political asylum or persecution, or work on a farm oicking fruits and doing labor - then wait for general amnesty from the US Govt. when it says those such people can now stay in the US. This happens every few years. To me this is the hardest route. I prefer option 1 followed closely by option 2.

Option 1 & 2 is how almost all two million Indians who came to the US entered.

takeo

01-08-2003, 09:02 PM

See this is why there is not Palestinian state. What you and the pals refuse to accept is Israels security will come before any palestinian state. Whether you chose to believe it or not, the arab world and the palestinian terrorist like hamas will never accept Israel. They will pay lip service (of course hamas won't even do that) that they will make peace with Israel but there is no reason to believe anything the arab world says. The only way there will ever be a Palestinian state is in the terms I described above.

see this is why there's no peace in israel. israel should accept that palestinians will not leave israel alone as long as they don't have their state.
if even the extremist hesbollah, in a very mighty position near israel, can leave israel alone, than for sure the palestinians will do so too, they have every reason to once they gained full independance. and the few radical opposers (hamas perhaps) will soon be delt with in the typical Arab way of dealing with opposition...

Rob

01-08-2003, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by takeo
see this is why there's no peace in israel. israel should accept that palestinians will not leave israel alone as long as they don't have their state.
if even the extremist hesbollah, in a very mighty position near israel, can leave israel alone, than for sure the palestinians will do so too, they have every reason to once they gained full independance. and the few radical opposers (hamas perhaps) will soon be delt with in the typical Arab way of dealing with opposition...

Except for one thing. Israel exists and Palestine doesn't. And Hezbollah has not left Israel along and there is no reason to believe they or hamas ever will. Why should they. They know the goal is the elimination of Israel. You can't see that? Well too bad. It doesn't change the facts. All palestinian publications that show the map of Palestine show everything including Israel. I hope Israel never listens to you. You only have the arabs well being in mind. I don't know if your just totally against Israel or an agent for the Palestinians.

You don't even believe arabs own words about refugees when it doesn't fit into you bias. You really are not worth talking to. Going round and round is getting borning.

Believe what you want. It doesn't matter anyway. Israel exists. Palestine doesn't.

Mediocrates

01-09-2003, 04:22 AM

takeo
A few radicals? A few radicals? In "Voice of Palestine: The New Ideology of Israeli Arabs" by Dan Schueftan (available at http://www.azure.org.il/14-schueftan.htm ) he puts forth the case that what you say is false. Even among moderates, the two state solution, is not. What it really means is a Palestinian state on one side and a non Jewish Israel on the other. I suspect this is what you earnestly wish for too.

Mediocrates

01-09-2003, 04:55 AM

And the follow up question to you sir would be this

In exchange for a greater share of 'rights' as Israelis would you require Israeli arabs to shoulder a greater share of responsibilities and indentity with the nation, like national service. Ahmed Tibi would say no. His formula is more control and fewer responsibilities.

Mediocrates

01-09-2003, 06:06 AM

"The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.

Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it. Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchmen. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese--and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel, the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.

Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis.

Other nations, when victorious on the battlefield, dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious, it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world.

Other nations when they are defeated, survive and recover; but should Israel be defeated, it would be destroyed.

No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam, or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews, no one remonstrated with him.

The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore, and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts, and Jewish resources. Yet, at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish, the holocaust will be upon us."

takeo

01-09-2003, 06:07 AM

i wish to both israel and the Palestinians a better life and more peace. Stop looking at the palestinians as some evil devils who are out there to get you. some are, but most aren't.

Except for one thing. Israel exists and Palestine doesn't. And Hezbollah has not left Israel along and there is no reason to believe they or hamas ever will. Why should they. They know the goal is the elimination of Israel. You can't see that? Well too bad. It doesn't change the facts. All palestinian publications that show the map of Palestine show everything including Israel. I hope Israel never listens to you. You only have the arabs well being in mind. I don't know if your just totally against Israel or an agent for the Palestinians.

palestine doesn't exist yet, and that's why there's no peace in the middle east! Palestinians do not longer accept the military occupation, they want freedom, and that's a legitimate demand, as much legitimate as israel's demand for security.
the goal is NOT elimination or destruction of israel, you still couldn't quote any plo- or pa-offical saying this after oslo was signed. you will continue about flags used in schoolbooks and so on. I don't really believe that the maps used in schoolbooks don't mention israel, and if it's true, that seems like nostalgia to the old days, yet do you consider maps more important than the offical recognition of israel by the plo and the pa? at more than one occasion i gave you links where you could see that the pa and the plo recognise israel within the green line, it's internationally recognised borders.

only hamas and islamic jihad say so, and those radicals represent a minority among the palestinians.

even if palestinians recognise israel with a lot of pain in their heart and not really committed, once there's a palestinian state they will have every reason to leave israel alone, as they will not risk their new state. YES, hesbollah left israel alone, except some isolated incidents nothing happened since the israeli withdrawel, and, on the contrary to PLO or PA, the hesbollah does not recognise israel and is as radical as hamas. Libanon is a clear example that withdrawel will bring peace, even in the worst of circumstances and without a peace-treaty as in libanon.

takeo
A few radicals? A few radicals? In "Voice of Palestine: The New Ideology of Israeli Arabs" by Dan Schueftan (available at http://www.azure.org.il/14-schueftan.htm ) he puts forth the case that what you say is false. Even among moderates, the two state solution, is not. What it really means is a Palestinian state on one side and a non Jewish Israel on the other. I suspect this is what you earnestly wish for too.

his retorics are false and not sustained by evidence, he is a hawk. The moderates do recognise israel, if you like it or not. And the Israeli arabs did never endanger the state of israel, even in this hardest of times they do not cooperate with terrorists even if their help would be very usefull for the terrorists. israeli arabs are israeli citizens and israel will always remain a mostly Jewish state, even if some million refugees come to join israel. you are searching whatever excuse, even not related to the situation in the occupied territories, to exclude the possibility of a palestinian state.

And the follow up question to you sir would be this

In exchange for a greater share of 'rights' as Israelis would you require Israeli arabs to shoulder a greater share of responsibilities and indentity with the nation, like national service. Ahmed Tibi would say no. His formula is more control and fewer responsibilities.

well, than he's wrong. Both responsabilities and rights for the israeli arabs should be expanded, if you ever want to make them loyal israeli citizens. (what doesn't mean that they can not have an own totally independant policy and opinion, as every other israeli citizen)
And the question if israel should remain a jewish state is philosophical. in fact, when both jewish and non-Jewish citizens are equal citizens, israel is a multi-cultural and not an exclusively Jewish state.

Micah

01-09-2003, 06:33 AM

Hmmm, PLO officials need say nothing.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/media/slideshowimages/slide1.html

takeo

01-09-2003, 07:03 AM

that link is just biased:

this is from the official PLO-website:

"Summary of Palestinian Positions
Borders:

The Palestine Liberation Organization's position regarding the issue of borders is straightforward: the international borders between the States of Palestine and Israel shall be the armistice cease-fire lines in effect on June 4, 1967. Both states shall be entitled to live in peace and security within these recognized borders.
The primary bases for this Palestinian position are:
United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which emphasizes the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and calls for the withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the 1967 war; and
the internationally recognized Palestinian right to self-determination.
The West Bank and the Gaza Strip together constitute only 22% of historic Palestine. The PLO's acceptance of the June 4, 1967 borders represents an extraordinary compromise. Any further Israeli incursions into Palestinian territory will not only result in widespread disillusionment and disaffection, but will also diminish the viability of Palestinian statehood.
Statehood:

By virtue of their right to self-determination, the Palestinian people possess sovereignty over the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and, accordingly, have the right to establish an independent State on that territory.
The decision of when to declare that state and what the institutions of that state will be is a decision that rests solely with the Palestinian people. The PLO, as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, is the vehicle through which they express their political decisions.
While Israel has exercised control over the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since the 1967 war, the international community regards Israel as a belligerent occupant with no rights to the territory. "

http://www.nad-plo.org/permanent/sumpalpo.html

poll among the palestinians:

"The Peace Process:

54% support the peace initiative called the "road map," 42% oppose it

76% support a mutual cessation of violence by Palestinians and Israelis; last August only 48% supported a gradual ceasefire between the two sides.

56% support taking measures by the PA to prevent armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel after reaching an agreement on mutual cessation of violence even though 82% are worried that such measures may lead to internal Palestinian strife. This result is similar to the findings of the March 1996 poll in which 59% supported the measures taken by the PA against the Islamists who organized a series of suicide attacks inside Israel in February and March of that year.

73% believe that a return to the peace process would be impeded if the PA failed to take security measures to prevent attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel after reaching an agreement on mutual cessation of violence. This result too is similar to the findings of the March 1996 poll.

However, 66% continue to believe that armed confrontations have so far helped achieve Palestinian rights in ways that negotiations could not

As in our two previous polls in May and August, 53% support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel while 43% oppose them. But support for attacks against soldiers in the West Bank and Gaza reach 91% and against settlers 89%.

Only 16% expect a return to negotiations and an end to armed attacks soon"

"Reconciliation Between Israelis and Palestinians:

73% support reconciliation between the two peoples after reaching a peace agreement and establishing a Palestinian state. This is similar to our previous findings during the last two years.

After reaching a peace agreement, 83% would support open borders between Israel and Palestine and 66% would support joint economic institutions and ventures, but only 27% would support joint political institutions, 37% would support taking legal steps to prohibit incitement against Israel"

http://www.pcpsr.org/

Rob

01-09-2003, 07:59 AM

And the question if israel should remain a jewish state is philosophical. in fact, when both jewish and non-Jewish citizens are equal citizens, israel is a multi-cultural and not an exclusively Jewish state.

Thats what you hope for. You want Jews to disappear are a religion and a race. You want Jews to give up the Jewishness.

You are the classic Anti-Semite. Here are the warning signs of an Anti-Semite:

1) Consider the source. Is the speaker someone with a history of anti-Jewish attitudes?

2) Critics who habitually single out Israel for condemnation while ignoring far worse actions by other countries (especially other Middle Eastern countries) are anti-Semitic.

3) Likening Israel to Nazi Germany, or to traditional anti-Jewish stereotypical behavior is another sure sign of Jew-baiting.

4) Attacks on the merits of Israel's existence rather than individual government policies are anti-Semitic.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Anti-Semitism_&_Anti-Zionism.html

They could have been talking about you takeo. In fact they were.

Micah

01-09-2003, 08:05 AM

This is what I see, tell me if I am seeing things.

Originally posted by takeo
Blah Blah Blah You are biased and so is that link Blah blah blah I'm blind and can't see the pictures shown to me blah blah blah I can't think of anything better to say so I just attack the source rather then what the source is plainly showing blah blah blah

Did I get that right?

takeo

01-09-2003, 08:10 AM

absolutely BS.

Thats what you hope for. You want Jews to disappear are a religion and a race. You want Jews to give up the Jewishness.

that's your interpretation, Jews can continue to be Jewish in Israel, but the STATE wouldn't be any longer exclusively Jewish, as this means discrimination for all the non-Jewish minorities.

You are the classic Anti-Semite. Here are the warning signs of an Anti-Semite:

1) Consider the source. Is the speaker someone with a history of anti-Jewish attitudes?

i'm not, anti-israel attitudes perhaps, but never anti-jewish attitudes

2) Critics who habitually single out Israel for condemnation while ignoring far worse actions by other countries (especially other Middle Eastern countries) are anti-Semitic.

even more BS, condemning israel doesn't mean hating all Jews, it's like saying that anyone condamning Saddam is an anti-arab racist. In fact there are a lot of Jews who condamn israel, even within israel (gush shalom as an example) And by the way i have condamned actions by other middle eastern countries.

3) Likening Israel to Nazi Germany, or to traditional anti-Jewish stereotypical behavior is another sure sign of Jew-baiting.

on the contrary, people doing so show that Jews should learn lessons from the long history of anti-semitism, and not become racist themselves. real anti-semites will never compare anti-jewish discrimination to jewish discrimination, as for them there's no suich thing as undeserved anti-jewish discrimination.

4) Attacks on the merits of Israel's existence rather than individual government policies are anti-Semitic.

i always attacked specific israeli policies, but even people who condamn israel as a state aren't anti-semitic. Zionism is an ideology, it doesn't mean because you reject that idea that you hate all Jews, only liers who have no other defense will make this claim.

Micah

01-09-2003, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by takeo

i'm not, anti-israel attitudes perhaps, but never anti-jewish attitudes

This is what is commonly called a Freudian slip.

Rob

01-09-2003, 08:21 AM

that's your interpretation, Jews can continue to be Jewish in Israel, but the STATE wouldn't be any longer exclusively Jewish, as this means discrimination for all the non-Jewish minorities.

You want Jews to disappear. You are a liar and a fraud. I read your posts. I know what you say even as you deny your own words. Thats why you continue to use Marx as you hero. He wanted Jews to disapper too.

i'm not, anti-israel attitudes perhaps, but never anti-jewish attitudes

See above.

even more BS, condemning israel doesn't mean hating all Jews, it's like saying that anyone condamning Saddam is an anti-arab racist. In fact there are a lot of Jews who condamn israel, even within israel (gush shalom as an example) And by the way i have condamned actions by other middle eastern countries

BS. Your whole focus is Israel and blaming them for everything. Tell you lies to someone who believes you. I don't.

on the contrary, people doing so show that Jews should learn lessons from the long history of anti-semitism, and not become racist themselves. real anti-semites will never compare anti-jewish discrimination to jewish discrimination, as for them there's no suich thing as undeserved anti-jewish discrimination.

Pure turnspeak. You learned well from your communist handlers.

i always attacked specific israeli policies, but even people who condamn israel as a state aren't anti-semitic. Zionism is an ideology, it doesn't mean because you reject that idea that you hate all Jews, only liers who have no other defense will make this claim.

Absolutly false.

"Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend"

A selection from the writing of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.

"Antisemitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently antisemitic, and ever will be so.

"Why is this? You know that Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land. The Jewish people, the Scriptures tell us, once enjoyed a flourishing Commonwealth in the Holy Land. From this they were expelled by the Roman tyrant, the same Romans who cruelly murdered Our Lord. Driven from their homeland, their nation in ashes, forced to wander the globe, the Jewish people time and again suffered the lash of whichever tyrant happened to rule over them.

"The Negro people, my friend, know what it is to suffer the torment of tyranny under rulers not of our choosing. Our brothers in Africa have begged, pleaded, requested--DEMANDED the recognition and realization of our inborn right to live in peace under our own sovereignty in our own country.

"How easy it should be, for anyone who holds dear this inalienable right of all mankind, to understand and support the right of the Jewish People to live in their ancient Land of Israel. All men of good will exult in the fulfilment of God's promise, that his People should return in joy to rebuild their plundered land. This is Zionism, nothing more, nothing less.

"And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is antisemitism.

"The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!

"My friend, I do not accuse you of deliberate antisemitism. I know you feel, as I do, a deep love of truth and justice and a revulsion for racism, prejudice, and discrimination. But I know you have been misled--as others have been--into thinking you can be 'anti-Zionist' and yet remain true to these heartfelt principles that you and I share. Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--make no mistake about it."

(From M.L. King Jr., "Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend," _Saturday Review_XLVII (Aug. 1967), p. 76. Reprinted in M.L. King Jr., _This I Believe: Selections from the Writings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr._ (New York, 1971), pp. 234-235.)

Micah

01-09-2003, 08:24 AM

Seems takeo is in the habit of ignoring my posts :P

takeo

01-09-2003, 09:02 AM

i didn't understand your last post, micah, whatever

rob is clearly insensible to reasonable arguments and refuses to make discussions about the content, rather he prefers to repeat his prejudices and insults a little louder, as if trying to oppress all doubts about his own convictions.

M. L. King was a very outstanding anti-racist politician, but he was not exactly a specialist or outstanding in Middle eastern matters. His speech makes notice of religious rights AND he totally forgets the people living there before the arrival of the zionists.

Rob

01-09-2003, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by takeo
i didn't understand your last post, micah, whatever

rob is clearly insensible to reasonable arguments and refuses to make discussions about the content, rather he prefers to repeat his prejudices and insults a little louder, as if trying to oppress all doubts about his own convictions.

M. L. King was a very outstanding anti-racist politician, but he was not exactly a specialist or outstanding in Middle eastern matters. His speech makes notice of religious rights AND he totally forgets the people living there before the arrival of the zionists.

There is nothing sensible or reasonable to your arguements and your content has been well discussed. They rest of that paragraph is pure turnspeak psychbabble. M.L. King knew a lot more about the world than you do.

Why don't you find a nice Arab message board to post at?

Micah

01-09-2003, 09:14 AM

Some man of education you are.

You only arguement against that link is "It's biased." You ignore the fact that there were multiple pictures of a Palestinian state consuming all of Israel along with the WB and Gaza. You simply look at the last item which was a poll of the Palestinians, then you give a link for the PLO and expect them to say "Oh, end of occupation means end of Israel."

You respond to a "biased" link with an equally or greater biased link. Great job. You education serves you well.

takeo

01-09-2003, 09:14 AM

Because I like challenges, and Arab boards are even more filled with simpleminded people than this one.

minusthejihad

01-09-2003, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by Mike03
Israel will never be alone as long as the U.S. survives--I don't understand the fear voiced on several threads that the U.S. is going to abandon Israel. This is highly unlikely. I also do not think it is fair to say that the U.S. has sold Israel out for oil, as one poster wrote. But I sort of agree in principle with what Takeo wrote, that Israel should make gestures that demonstrate its kindness as well as its fist. Maybe Israel is doing these things, but they are not being publicized. Instead, what I am reading is this article in the New York Times: "Killing of U.N Aide by Israel Bares Rift with Relief Agency" and I am wondering, what is going on? From the mainstream perspective, articles like this are far more damaging than stories about Israeli retaliation for suicide bombings and are far more likely to alienate people who generally have high regard for Israel but have not followed the conflict in great detail.

Welcome to IsraelForum Mke03,

As you may have noticed, many members here have followed the conflict in great detail and long before most people in America even heard about the second jihadifada. Through Israel's short, but violent existance, there have been many times that America has turned its back on Israel (mainly before the Cold War, when there was no need to test our weaponry against the Russians' who were funding Israel's enemies), or times when America criticized Israel, only to admit later that Israel had greatly helped us (such as the bombing of Iraq'a nuclear reactor in 82). Mainly, the fear arrises when one looks and realizes that America (albeit, somewhat an altruistic country per say), is still a country with its own interests to protect, and those usually come before some promiss to Israel. Unfortunately, Islamist terrorism (which should have been crushed the day some believe it started - at the assisination of Meir Cohane) has come to our shores, and America seen first hand the evils Israel sees every single day, so now we identify more with Israel, but for how long? Granted, Israel is the only democracy in the Mid East and has many things in common with the US, such as technology, biosciences, freedom, etc. But America has shown that it likes to play both sides and that will always be a fear amongst Israelis.

However, you are very right about Israel's lack of the use of good PR in this war that is fought very much in the media. Another thing is that all American media shows about Israel is the fighting, when in fact, despite daily terror attempts and attacks, Israel maintains a great lead in the biosciences, aeronautics, and medical worlds, creating technologies and medicines that help cure people all over the world. Also, Israel is involved in many goodwilll operations that aren't publicized, even helping Palestinian farmers with the desalinization process which was pioneered in Israel and used worldwide. It would be good to see positive things about Israel in the media, I agree.

But, please don't forget what is happening there. A war. A war in which sometimes the UN workers (mostly Palestinian) themselves aid terrorists by hiding them or driving them or weapons in UN protected vehicles. All I can advise, if you are interested, is to dig deep and read between the lines, and you'll see that many fears in this forum have good reason. Or double standards, such as America's indiscriminate bombings in Afghanistan or targeted killings or profiling that no one complains about, but when Israel puts up a roadblock to prevent human bombs from entering, we hear "massacre, massacre". That is mainly everyone's gripe with American meddling I guess you would say.

Rob

01-09-2003, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by takeo
Because I like challenges, and Arab boards are even more filled with simpleminded people than this one.

Why don't you start your own board? You can spam you lies all day and night Adolf.

Moskal'

01-13-2003, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by takeo
yes, but the difference is that Tatar s who can proove that their parents lived in Russia decades ago can return, while palestinians who can proove that their parents lived in Israel can't.
Well, Meskhetine Turks can't return to russia, although they can prove that their parents lived there.

No of course not, but than again the Swedish never received the treament of the israeli arabs...it's both ways round...
bedouins serve in the army, ordinary palestinian muslims can not, or in rare exception. i haven't said that non-jewish couldn't go in the army, but that their entrance was restricted.
This is for safety, but I think this is wrong, as the benefits from arabs in the army would be larger then the negative stuff. Israel should experiment with this, although not on high scale.

I think it's the israeli's who have to make the first effort, you can only expect people to integrate if they feel totally accepted by the israeli state and people as equal israeli citizens.
Not that radical...full equalization should be the final step of integration...and something the arabs will look forward to.

They lived there longer than most other israeli, you can't consider them as some immigrants who have to integrate.
Today, there is no other choice. Rightful or not, it is the only way to bury the conflict forever without endangering the existance of Israel.

i can't believe that arab israeli learn in their schools that there's no such state as israel.
They do...

besides, it's normal that they feel sympathy for their palestinian brothers, but very few of them have helped palestinian terrorists, have they? You wouldn't want to imagine what would happen if all israeli arabs would cooperate with the suicide-bombers, they would be a great help to them!
Yes, but the merely fact that they feel sympathy towards cruel murderers is a danger for Israel. Many support them openly, and if any arab dares to oppose terrorists in public, he endangers himself and his family.

i'm still not convinced that the soviet-policy was anti-semitic, at least not at the higher levels, whereas, of course, some ordinary Russians continued and still continue to be anti-semitic, but it wasn't a state-policy.
Stalin was antisemitic for example. Jewish actors were told to change their names if they wanted to play main parts in movies, and this was state policy. Jewish people were not wanted to be seen at high ranks. This was weird, but this was their policy.

takeo

01-13-2003, 03:22 PM

Well, Meskhetine Turks can't return to russia, although they can prove that their parents lived there.

I didn't know, why not?

Not that radical...full equalization should be the final step of integration...and something the arabs will look forward to.

what are you waiting for? There isn't much time left, sooner or later there'll be another explosion as a result of internal discrimination and the excitement of external pressure.(the Intifadeh)

Yes, but the merely fact that they feel sympathy towards cruel murderers is a danger for Israel. Many support them openly, and if any arab dares to oppose terrorists in public, he endangers himself and his family.

i don't think so, not in Israel. Anyway, i talked to many of them, they don't feel sympathy for mass-murderers, who equally target israeli arabs by the way (the radical palestinians see them as traitors). They feel sympathy for the objectives of the palestinians, a free palestinian state in the occupied territories and an end to the oppression, which is normal and legitimate. they have the right to hold such an opinion, are not endangering israel by doing so (many leftwing israeli share their opinions)

Stalin was antisemitic for example. Jewish actors were told to change their names if they wanted to play main parts in movies, and this was state policy. Jewish people were not wanted to be seen at high ranks. This was weird, but this was their policy

perhaps in the early 50's yes, that's right to some extend, there was an anti-jewish campaign. But certainly not in the 20's or 30's when a lot of the upper establishment were Jewish, and much less so in the 60's 70's and 80's. This i know firsthand from my family.

cblanc

01-16-2003, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Moskal'
Israel is alone. Not Britain, not USA care for it. It is not of any interest to them, as they no longer have to oppose the USSR. Soon, after Iraqi campaign, USA will see that it is worthier to be friendly to arabs. Truely, they have nothing in common with Israel, and if they will make peace with the ayatollah, Qadaffi, and some other men, they will cease being targets of arab terrorism, as they will be allies. Oil prices will drop, and euroamerican economy will flourish like never before. Israel, on the other hand, will have massive problems with the USA, wich will back the arabs. Nobody really will help Israelis, if they won't help themselves. America will be deaf to the explosions of civil targets in Israel.

There are some reasons why nobody wants to bother with Israel. The state of Israel is extremely focused on maintaining its jewishness and therefore practices descrimintaion against foreigners. Another reason is the way they are treating the Palestinian people, who are the weaker population and a thorn to that mongrel Sharon and his right winged establishment.

Another reason is the complete disregard for UN resolution 242 which calls for Israel to withdraw from the 1967 borders. Israel is a defiant country that doesn't give a damn what the world thinks of it. It will do what it wants.

minusthejihad

01-16-2003, 10:37 AM

Originally posted by cblanc
There are some reasons why nobody wants to bother with Israel. The state of Israel is extremely focused on maintaining its jewishness and therefore practices descrimintaion against foreigners. Another reason is the way they are treating the Palestinian people, who are the weaker population and a thorn to that mongrel Sharon and his right winged establishment.

Another reason is the complete disregard for UN resolution 242 which calls for Israel to withdraw from the 1967 borders. Israel is a defiant country that doesn't give a damn what the world thinks of it. It will do what it wants.

Good, now that you understand that. Shut up!

Moskal'

02-03-2003, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by takeo
I didn't know, why not?

Government thinks that a return of thousands of meskhetine turks to that region would destabilize local situation, and create another incubator for islamic fundamentalism and terrorism.

what are you waiting for? There isn't much time left, sooner or later there'll be another explosion as a result of internal discrimination and the excitement of external pressure.(the Intifadeh)

You know just like anybody else that now, when 80% of local arabs support Arafat, giving them citizen rights would be equal to self-extermination. Work must be done. Only then equalizing rights will be possible.

i don't think so, not in Israel. Anyway, i talked to many of them, they don't feel sympathy for mass-murderers, who equally target israeli arabs by the way (the radical palestinians see them as traitors). They feel sympathy for the objectives of the palestinians, a free palestinian state in the occupied territories and an end to the oppression, which is normal and legitimate. they have the right to hold such an opinion, are not endangering israel by doing so (many leftwing israeli share their opinions)
I also sincerely think that elements like Merets or Hadash endanger existance of Israel.

There are some reasons why nobody wants to bother with Israel. The state of Israel is extremely focused on maintaining its jewishness and therefore practices descrimintaion against foreigners. Another reason is the way they are treating the Palestinian people, who are the weaker population and a thorn to that mongrel Sharon and his right winged establishment.

Another reason is the complete disregard for UN resolution 242 which calls for Israel to withdraw from the 1967 borders. Israel is a defiant country that doesn't give a damn what the world thinks of it. It will do what it wants.
Israel will defend itself indeed, even if the rest of the world will tell it not to.

perhaps in the early 50's yes, that's right to some extend, there was an anti-jewish campaign. But certainly not in the 20's or 30's when a lot of the upper establishment were Jewish, and much less so in the 60's 70's and 80's. This i know firsthand from my family. [/B][/QUOTE]

andak01

02-05-2003, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by The Indian
Not true.

India will be ally rain or shine because Indians know the pain Israel is facing. It doesn't make the news in the west, but Islamic terrorists kill several people every day in India. Its a war of attrition and at the end of the day the good guys (India+Israel) will win.

Israel will stand strong in the face of evil and not despair.

Truth shall prevail.

It is a war of attrition. Everyday Hindus kill several Muslims. On a day such as happened at Gujarat, they really go to town.

ibrodsky

02-05-2003, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by andak01

__________________
The first thing created by God was the intellect.
The most excellent jihad is the quest for one's self.
The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr.

Nice signature. Now go tell that to the thugs at the discussion board at ummah.com

MichaelC

02-05-2003, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Nice signature. Now go tell that to the thugs at the discussion board at ummah.com andak does not have the "nerve' to follow your advice. Ummah will chew him up and spit him out.

Of course, andak will consider that just "some sort of aberration of Islam". But, we can then send him on to the other Muslim boards, one by one, to see how they receive his, "holier than thou" approach.

andak01

02-06-2003, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
andak does not have the "nerve' to follow your advice. Ummah will chew him up and spit him out.

Of course, andak will consider that just "some sort of aberration of Islam". But, we can then send him on to the other Muslim boards, one by one, to see how they receive his, "holier than thou" approach.

Except that both my signature and my comments are based on the Qur'an and Sunnah. But then again I doubt that a moderate Zionist would last very long at Kahane.org. The difference is, while I don't make the assumption that all Jews think like the Stern Gang, you do make the assumption that I think like Bin Laden. If I deny it, either I'm the only one who thinks that way or I must be lying. I got news for you. 1) there are a lot of racist bigots on both sides. 2) there are a lot of other Muslims who think like me. 3) I don't claim to be holier than anyone. Its not my place to judge. And I don't like it when people judge me.

MichaelC

02-06-2003, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by andak01
Except that both my signature and my comments are based on the Qur'an and Sunnah. But then again I doubt that a moderate Zionist would last very long at Kahane.org. The difference is, while I don't make the assumption that all Jews think like the Stern Gang, you do make the assumption that I think like Bin Laden. If I deny it, either I'm the only one who thinks that way or I must be lying. I got news for you. 1) there are a lot of racist bigots on both sides. 2) there are a lot of other Muslims who think like me. 3) I don't claim to be holier than anyone. Its not my place to judge. And I don't like it when people judge me. I listened to all the "muslims are peaceful", "muslims would never do anything awful", "muslims are the salt of the earth", B.S. that you persuade the more genteel members of this board with.

But, I always witness your refusal to condemn Islamic evildoing. You bring out your brush and WHITEWASH everything that anyone says to you.

I can see your agenda. You can't. Hide in plain site, dude, we see you.

Northlander

02-10-2003, 01:16 AM

I witness your refusal to condemn Jewish evildoing too MichaelC. That goes for most pro israelis on this board. Myself and other palestine friedlies have to condemn bombings on civilians in basically every thread.

IDF is a holy cow here. It wouldnt matter what they did. You know as well as I do that houndreds of arab children have been shot and mutilated, still never any condemnations from anyone here. Instead its always their own faults. Their parents use them as pawns in this war. "stones are a leathal weapon" etc etc.
Defending it only reveals your true bloodthirsty nature. Keep that in mind.

Calling Takeo a nazi is very constructive Rob. Very.
Naming him Adolf was even better.

On-topic I can provide you with information. Evidently Israel have unexpected allies here in Sweden Im sad to say. All of us that try to boycott Israeli products have difficulties doing so since many stores hides the fact that some products are israeli. If the store managers do it from a economical pow or because of their political views are hard to tell but its very effective. Israeli oranges are suddenly from spain or egypt. Good for you and bad for us. But fortunately media found out and flaged for it so now people will be very aware. There will be no Banyas processors at my work for sure.

Just heard about the french/belgian veto in NATO. That is great news. Maybe its still possible with a peaceful sollution. France and Germany is really trying. All respect to them.

elke

02-10-2003, 02:18 AM

You are not reading very carefully, are you, Northlander? Where have you seen anyone, Michael or others, condoning the killing of civilians under any "sauce"?

However, IDF is, like any army - just that: an army. They make mistakes, like anyone else does. However, they do not get up in the morning thinking how many people they are going to kill today. THAT's the difference - and that's what you do not understand.

Mercury

02-10-2003, 03:55 AM

Dear Northlander,

with the strong feeling of shame I've read your post accusing the pro-israeli members of this board of partiality. I have to admit that I also often find myself looking onto facts only from the israeli point of view. However, I've decided that just admitting my own guilt on the matter wouldn't be enough and I also need to show others their error. The best way to do so, I think, would be to show them how selfish is their behaviour in comparison to persons such as you. To help me in this task, please, send the description of how you and you friends have helped to organize a boycott of Moroccan oranges in protest against its illegal occupation of Western Sahara, about your many demonstrations against subjuagation of black christians and animists in Sudan, about your relentless fight for equal rights for nonmuslims in islamic countries and about your other heroic and completely unselfish deeds.

With all respect,

Mercury

Northlander

02-10-2003, 03:58 AM

Are you kidding? Whenever we point at the numbers of dead palestinian children most on this forum start calling us names. The rest start defending IDF.
These are just from the first thread I looked into:

The IDF has been killing young Palestinian as long as the boys their Parents and Pal leaders have been using them as shock troops. Sending them out to Riot ineterspersed with PA 'policeman'/Killers. .... Your 'poor little boys:

Petronising tone, also children are here refered to as "shock troops". rest my case.

Isrealis are defending themselves. If the Palestinians want to use their own children as human shields for propaganda purposes.... so be it.... but blame no one else.

the palestinians are to blame for their own civilian casualties.
that makes sense.

If I were in a position where I had to serve and protect and someone threw a projectile at me theyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d be shot. How would I know that it isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t a grenade or explosive device being thrown at me? The age of the thrower is irrelevant!

What can I say? A three month old baby are indeed able to throw explosive devices far.
A man with these moral values could probably defend anything.

My point was that you pro-israelis have difficulties condemning violence from Jews while we on the contrary constantly condemn arab terrorism targeted at civilians. You cant really deny the facts.

The mistake arguement is very weak Elke. Its also naive.
First because of the large numbers of "mistakes". Second because a "ops, sorry we shot your child" doesnt mean anything to anyone. Damage is done.

Moskal'

02-10-2003, 04:17 AM

Tell me of three month old babies killed. Then this can be discussed.

Northlander

02-10-2003, 04:22 AM

I've read your post accusing the pro-israeli members of this board of partiality

Not entirely accurate Mercury. I just commented on the accusation from MichaelC towards someone else. I didnt start the accusations. The thread is full of them.
I just pointed out there are alot of whitewashing from the israeli side too. Which obviously you dont agree to which I find a bit surprising.

No, im not totally unselfish. I too are biased, however not to the point that I defend murder of children.
Your post would be clever had it not been for the fact that you know nothing about my eventual work for peoples rights elsewhere.

Mercury

02-10-2003, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
Not entirely accurate Mercury. I just commented on the accusation from MichaelC towards someone else. I didnt start the accusations. The thread is full of them.
I just pointed out there are alot of whitewashing from the israeli side too. Which obviously you dont agree to which I find a bit surprising.
Your post would be clever had it not been for the fact that you know nothing about my eventual work for peoples rights elsewhere.

I don't deny that there is a whitewashing from the israeli side too. Neither I claim that IDF was blameless in every single case when a palestinian was killed, though the terrorists tactics to use civilians as a human shield (both to tie the hands of IDF and to raise public outcry in case of casualties) is quite widespread.
However, I can't accept your claim that unlike you the israeli never critisize themselves. In fact some large political parties in israeli parlament (like Meretz) do almost nothing else all year long. Is there a single palestinian politician who publicly says that Arafat is too extreme and that he should have compromised more? Practically all statements condemning the terror attacks made by palestinian authority are made in english, while for the local audience the best Arafat can say is that they are inefficient or should concentrate on soldiers to avoid international criticism.

Partly I can justify this lack of self-criticism by fear the people feel for their lives. After all, Hamas and PLO nearly outnumbered IDF in killing their own people (those suspected in collaboration with Israel). This, however, can't serve as a good excuse for those living in the west.

Concerning you personally I'm prepared to take my words back, if the people whose rights you say you work for turn out to be non-muslims in muslim countries. Or is it the old good fight against bloodthirsty israelis, american imperialists and so on?

The Indian

02-10-2003, 07:50 PM

Andak01,

You are being fed propoganda from the Islamists. Hindus DO NOT KILL Muslims every day. Gujarat was a reaction to Islamic fanatics burning a train full of passengers and then the state govt. not quickly arresting the perpetrators. If what you state were true, then the killings would have spread to all other states in India, but it did not. Remember, not all Muslims are terrorists, but all Islamists are terrorists.

What do you say to the parents of young girls who are be-headed in their house for not wearing a hijab (burkah)?

Israel and India face a very similar threat. If suicide bombers ever popped up in the US, then America would wipe out Islam permanently. Thank your lucky stars for kind hearted Hindus and Jews who accept you as a brother.

elke

02-11-2003, 02:24 AM

No, Northlander: the "large number" happens to be because the terrorists live cheek by jowl within the civilian population. There have been specific instances, a few, where the IDF directly shot particular individuals when they thought that they were terrorists when they weren't. These incidents are highly unfortunate, are investigated, and are certainly mistakes. Other incidents have to do with civilians getting caught in the crossfire. These are equally unfortunate, but aren't "mistakes" in full sense of the word, since they are a direct result of a military operation.

Let me put it in legal terms: what the terrorists do is First Degree Murder: it's premeditated in its nature and is therefore subject to the severest penalty allowed under the law. What IDF does would be at worst, Third Degree Murder (so-called "passion killing") - but more often, Manslaughter.

Am Yisrael

02-11-2003, 03:00 AM

Yes its true. There have been specific instances where gunfights are initiated by terrorists within a populated civilian area. Most of the time soldiers do not fight back because civilians are there. But if there is a clear view of the terrorists, or there is a severe threat to the soldiers, then they will return fire. There has been only an extremely small cases where soldiers fire back "passionately". These small cases are ALWAYS in the headlines around the world when they do happen, and they are used by Arabs and Palestinians for justification of the Intifada. And by the way, these soldiers are nearly always trialed for their action.

Northlander

02-13-2003, 04:56 AM

8 year old palestinian boy killed a few days ago.

Some other kids were throwing stones. This child got shot.
No gunfight initiated by terrorists.
Stones against soldiers. In their own land.

No intelligent man can even try to excuse the soldier murdering him.

Is this on of those "extremely small cases"?

Mediocrates

02-13-2003, 05:02 AM

dunno. is this one of those "it happens thounsands of times an hour every dayof the the week for 315 years" kinds of things?

Northlander

02-13-2003, 05:10 AM

not at all, just for the last 60years.

Am Yisrael

02-13-2003, 05:11 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
8 year old palestinian boy killed a few days ago.

Some other kids were throwing stones. This child got shot.
No gunfight initiated by terrorists.
Stones against soldiers. In their own land.

No intelligent man can even try to excuse the soldier murdering him.

Is this on of those "extremely small cases"?

No intelligent child is going to throw stones at Israeli soldiers. Why do they do it? They throw stones because they know the soldiers are very unlikely to fire back on them. Not only do the kids throw stones, they also throw molotiv cocktails (when the cameras are switched off) given to them by terrorists.

Im not excusing the soldiers for killing the kid, but dont you see these children are presenting themselves to death. Instead of going to school, they are taught by "respected" individuals that they must kill and fight Jews and Israelis. They are also encourged to go and throw stones and become suicide bombers.

Northlander

02-13-2003, 05:17 AM

Am Yisrael

02-13-2003, 05:25 AM

If you lived under occupation would you not consider throwing stones at the occupiers? In my book they are quite brave.

Any grown man shooting an unarmed child deserves to be...educated about what is cowardly.

Thats what Palestinians want you to think. That they have no choice but to fight. That their kids have no hope. They, as most arabs, have succumbed to a seriously large amount of propoganda. The young generation, their parents and their grandparents have all been "breeding" of anti semitic material and becoming martyrs. This is the result. A "race" totally based on killing Israelis.

They had their chances for peace, and they choose to fight. They had their hopes for a better peacefull life, and they threw it away.

Mediocrates

02-13-2003, 05:38 AM

Last month a civilian patrol of middle aged women discovered a 1380 lb car bomb, alerted sapper teams who detonated it safely.

Using modern explosives, a bomb that size could be several times the yield of the Murrah building destruction in Oklahoma. In a contained area it would have ~ the same yield as a Scud.

danholo

02-13-2003, 05:40 AM

Fire bombs are lethal but I'd shoot the kid in the leg or arm. That'd at least make him/her disabled to engage in violence and teach a lesson but not kill him/her. But then again, after this kid grows up, he won't stop until "all of Palestine" is "liberated".

Mediocrates

02-13-2003, 06:43 AM

Standard operational protocol is

1 - Stand apart from the 'mob' approx 450 metres.
2 - Use of non lethal rounds is stipulated. These are standard issue 'rubber' or wooden rounds.
3 - If the mob rushes forward then pull back approx 150 metres while facing the mob.
4 - Second or optional volley of non lethal rounds
5 - If this is ineffective then switch to lethal rounds
6 - fire below the waist, at the legs wherever possible. This is significant because an 8 year old is physically in the kill zone for a below the waist shot for an adult.

Notes:

A mob can cover 450 metres in about 90 seconds and 150 metres in 30 seconds. Those are the hard decision parameters.

Standard nonlethal rounds are lethal about 1 out of 1000 firings.

A shot above the collarbone is significantly more dangerous. A shot to the solar plexus can be fatal the same way being hit by a pitched baseball can be.

Crowd control troops are usually heavily outnumbered, are firing from a running position, running backwards at a moving target under very high stress conditions. To demand that these troops work with cool sniper accuracy and efficiency shows a complete ignorance of real world field operations.

mosh

02-16-2003, 02:36 AM

I agree with the content of the thread - that we have no allies. Since we are on the right side of law and justice we can force them to act regardless of whether they hate us or not.

I am sick of being frustrated and wish to act.
I am a British and Israeli citizen.

My ideas at the moment are: taking court action in Britain over the failure to add al-aqsa martyrs brigade and the PFLP to its proscribed terror groups.
taking the BBC to court for not fulfiling its standards of normality in reporting.

any ideas on how to go about it?

Moskal'

02-16-2003, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
If you lived under occupation would you not consider throwing stones at the occupiers? In my book they are quite brave.

Any grown man shooting an unarmed child deserves to be...educated about what is cowardly.

Cowards are the arabs, brainwashing their children to die just for attracting the intl. community. What would American or British army do in the situation IDF is in? Measures must be taken.

Northlander

02-17-2003, 04:02 AM

American and probably british soldiers will be in a situation like that soon enough. After the Iraq war when the americans are going to run things in Baghdad we will se how they will deal with both angry crowds and more militant resistance.

I dont think for a second that they will act any better than IDF, probably worse. Im not after the israeli soldiers but rather the politics. Im not blind to the fact that IDF in many situations are more professional than other armys would.

American troops will not have a good time in Iraq after the victory. One more democratic country with a more or less permanent occupationforce. Its a shame.

Moskal'

02-17-2003, 06:32 AM

So, I assume that you do not find IDF guilty in the deaths of the children but rather condemn the stance of an armed force being where it is unwanted. Did I understand you correctly?

Northlander

02-17-2003, 06:58 AM

Well, I have to choose my words here.

Most IDF soldiers are not personally to blame. There are as always bad apples and good apples. I do think that many IDF soldiers are more professional, considering the obvious difficulties in just this conflict, than most other armys would be in a similar situation. As far as individual soldier and many commanders goes.

What I do not respect and what I absolutely cannot accept is as you point out the fact that they are there in the first place.
And I also condemn the means used by IDF is some cases.
The habit of using helicopters against Hamas leaders in populated areas and stuff like that. Also the amount of violence used in situations where there are no armed palestinians but rather ordinary riots. You know what situations I mean.

There are abit to many dead civil palestinians for me to say the IDF is without guilt. But I do think the guilt is higher up than the ordinary grunts. They are dealing with difficult situations and with another army in a similar situation the civilian casualties might have been even higher.

danholo

02-17-2003, 07:01 AM

I saw a picture on Ha'aretz web page's home page a couple of days ago with a Palestinian gunman and a man standing behind him. I tried to find it to post on this site just now but to no avail. I was going to put captions for the pic saying: "No wonder IDF inflicts innocent casualties." I mean come on, if a non-combatant is right behind a combatant, just standing there looking at the battle, what does he expect?

Northlander

02-17-2003, 07:18 AM

Hard to say really. Personally I would have been combatant in a situation like that in palestine so I cant really say what the bystanders expect. I sometimes find it hard to understand too. You are either in it or you are not.

One aspect might be the fact that the fighting take place where they live. There is a difference from an IDF soldier living an ordinary life in another place and then both mentally and physically prepare for a longer time of violent situations. For many palestinians there are constant threats and more or less a permanent combat zone. I imagine you see the threats somewhat different there than in helsinki or stockholm for that matter. Also when you support the gunman, its doesnt have the same symbolism as it has for you.
You see a violent murderous man, probably terrorist. That other guy maybe sees his neighbour. A man he knows. He also supports the act of fighting the occupiers. Different situation. Different ways of seeing threats. Doesnt have to be fundamentalism or fanatism even.

I think its harder than just claiming they should keep away. After all they live there. Children going to school and stuff like that.

minusthejihad

02-17-2003, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by mosh
I agree with the content of the thread - that we have no allies. Since we are on the right side of law and justice we can force them to act regardless of whether they hate us or not.

I am sick of being frustrated and wish to act.
I am a British and Israeli citizen.

My ideas at the moment are: taking court action in Britain over the failure to add al-aqsa martyrs brigade and the PFLP to its proscribed terror groups.
taking the BBC to court for not fulfiling its standards of normality in reporting.

any ideas on how to go about it?

Welcome to Israel Forum Mosh! I'm not a lawyer or schooled on this sort of activism, but I can tell you that writing letters does work. Keep active in here and you'll notice people taking action. Ask MGB8, he's a lawyer, he might help you out.

Second, you do have allies, the US and next, India. We all face the common threat of terrorism and their apologists (like Takeo and Franchermanygium). But you know what, there's only one way and that's forward and forward with confidence. My family lives in Israel and New York, and lately, I don't know who to worry about more. But I know one thing, this may take a while, but when its all said and done, Islamic Terrorism will be more like an annoyance than a real threat. One step at a time, Iraq, done, Hamas, done, France out of Nato, done, next....

wellofvow

02-19-2003, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
If you lived under occupation would you not consider throwing stones at the occupiers? In my book they are quite brave.

Any grown man shooting an unarmed child deserves to be...educated about what is cowardly.

Gee, I'm very glad that my children did not read "your book"!

Since the Oslo Accords, millions, if not billions, of dollars have been poured into the coffers of the PA to establish the infrastructure of a state, to create jobs, to build homes, to improve the standards of education, health and welfare, to educate the children.

This money has been "redirected" from these purposes into personal bank accounts, buying weapons, world-wide lobbying to "explain" mass murder of civilians, and so on.

Sorry, but I do not consider these children (or their parents) "brave". Instead of being taught democratic process, they have been taught that violence gets things done. Every 8 year old should be in school, and children in the PA SHOULD have been learning in the classroom how to compose letters and petitions to their government protesting the PA abuse of its citizens.

Every 8 year old should be taught the broader meaning of the concept that those who live by practicing violence will die by violence. An integral part of the Oslo Accords was that Palestinians accept the notion of peaceful negotiation and the notion of reciprocity. No beginnings of actualizing these concepts were carried out, and the PA had to start covering its tracks, and made sure to include teaching of hatred at the very youngest age.

And PLEASE, there is no "Palestinian occupied territory". This is but one of the Arab Big Lies. The territory under question has not been part of any sovereign state since the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. There is NO debate on this. This is legal international law. It is pathetic to buy into propaganda.

Explaining "humiliation" as an excuse for infiltrating a neighboring country and murdering teenagers, grandmothers, schoolchildren, toddlers cowering under their beds, is a concept that I find completely unacceptable. You are Swedish, Northlander? Would you consider for even a millisecond going to Brussels and bombing a teen disco or a neighborhood coffeehouse if a Belgian customs officer demanded that you open your luggage? If your son was made to write 100 times on the school blackboard "I will not talk during class", would you find it acceptable for him to stone the teacher?

Let's try to apply equal standards to all people. By expecting lower adherence to democratic principles by Arabs and Palestinians, for any reason whatsoever, is to appease, encourage and incite. It is, very simply, positive reinforcement.

Again, I remind you that an 8 year old Palestinian should be in school learning what the word democracy really means. The meaning of corollary words like "tolerance" would also be nice. American and Israeli 8 year olds are doing this, and I assume that Swedish ones are too. Why are Palestinians excused as being different - and do not argue "occupation" - this is a non-issue from every historical, legal and moral standpoint I can think of.

Northlander

02-19-2003, 12:47 AM

There is an occuption.

To demand all children in a occupied state would sit quietly in school is naive. French teenagers killed German soldiers in Paris during WWII.

Would you consider for even a millisecond going to Brussels and bombing a teen disco or a neighborhood coffeehouse if a Belgian customs officer demanded that you open your luggage? If your son was made to write 100 times on the school blackboard "I will not talk during class", would you find it acceptable for him to stone the teacher?

No I would not. I would not even bomb their discos if they invaded us. But I would kill every belgian I saw inside swedish borders.

If my sister died because she was keept pregnant at a belgian checkpoint during their occupation of us I dont know how I would react. Seriously.

Mediocrates

02-19-2003, 04:06 AM

Northlander

02-19-2003, 04:24 AM

Dunno, how would your doctors react if their ambulances were used to transport weapons instead of sick people?

Cant say. But they would probably be generally angry if the belgians already had taken more than half our country and still continued to build settlements in the few areas we had left.

Mediocrates

02-19-2003, 04:59 AM

That's a non answer but thanks all the same. See I actually can tell you how I'd feel because I've had to live through something somewhat similar. The simple truth Mr. Philosopher De Guerre is that it's all about process and not at all about politics. Borders are what they are and that's a fact of life. Checkpoints exist and that's a fact of life.

Why do you think terrorists chose to employ medical workers and their operations as tools of terrorism? Well there's a few reasons:

1 - The UN et al pays for it so it's relatively cost free, plus the equipment is generally in good repair. But importantly it's what's on hand. If there were Jews living in Sri Lanka or the Philippines and the PLO was operating there they would I suppose use the inumerable box trucks by cutting the roof off and retrofitting homemade propane tank mortar bombs (that's a real thing) and we would be having that discussion instead. But again, it would not play at all well to have Pal civilians killed by mistake.

2 - Hiding in plain site: No one expects an ambulance to get tossed specifically because it is an ambulance. I feel this was a grave miscalculation on the part of the PLO that the Army would simply waive them along, especially after it was known to be a generally employted tactic.

3 - Pity factor: What better way to strangle concessions out of someone then by insuring that 2% of the traffic could result in 50% of the delay (or use whatever numbers you wish). Especially when one fatality is trotted out and flashed on the news all day every day.

Tell me oh oracle of all things ambulatory - - how many delays resulted in nothing at all?

The PA's pressuring the 'world community' into shaming the Israelis or anyone else into tearing their own borders and security down because someone else might get hurt is I'm afraid, one of the most cynical, heartless and self serving ploys the PA has even engineered. Who is harmed by their crossborder violence and the counterterrorism it triggers?

Who? Not the army, not people generally who live in Tel Aviv or anywhere on the other side of the Green Line. No. It's the people who actually have to live with the checkpoints both on the Green Line and between and among the Jewish conclaves. That's the result of PA planning and UN cooperation.

wellofvow

02-20-2003, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
There is an occuption.

To demand all children in a occupied state would sit quietly in school is naive. French teenagers killed German soldiers in Paris during WWII.

No I would not. I would not even bomb their discos if they invaded us. But I would kill every belgian I saw inside swedish borders.

If my sister died because she was keept pregnant at a belgian checkpoint during their occupation of us I dont know how I would react. Seriously.

Dear Northlander: Please do your homework.

In legal, international law there was and is NO OCCUPATION. The land is "disputed territory". It does not matter how many times and who says that land is "occupied", when, according to THE international bodies DEFINING these matters, its true status is "disputed".

As to participation of children: I was not there, of course, when France was occupied by the Nazis. But I do not recall stories of members of the Resistance putting their children or pregnant women in harm's way. The Israel Defence Forces use deadly force to kill people who have murdered Israeli civilians. It is not Israel's responsibility if these murderers hole up in houses with young children. Even Bin Laudin and his merry band took to the hills instead of hiding in the homes of families with little kids....so what does this tell you about Palestinians who hide in civilian houses?

The French teenagers of the Resistance were not 8 years old if they were teenagers. The Palestinians use even their young children as weapons. This is against all understanding as to the Rights of the Child. I just took a course, master's level, which included Israeli law as to the rights of children. Children are to be protected, not used as weapons. Your calling this belief "naive" gives me chills. Think about what you think before you blurt something out.

If you want to be taken seriously as an outsider in a discussion forum, it would be wise to consider more than one side, especially when that side's propaganda has been repeatedly shown to be mendacious (that's a fancy word for lying). Remember the NON-"massacre" supposedly at Jenin? Why should you believe anything said by pro-Palestinians? I don't get it.

You would kill every Belgian you saw within Swedish borders???? Do you realize what you are saying? Every day, Palestinians come to work in Israel, even though some come to work in the morning and by afternoon have murdered 25 civilians. It would never enter my head to kill one. Any Israeli attacking a Palestinian working here would immediately be thrown into jail and given a stiff sentence. I have heard of a woman whose son killed a TERRORIST after he was captured by police after murdering I don't remember how many Israelis. This young man went to jail for over ten years. I can't believe you said that.

On the other hand, 2 Israelis were lynched and then disemboweled because they made a wrong turn and entered a Palestinian village. Another was invited to lunch in Gaza by a long-time friend and was butchered at the restaurant. The murderers were not arrested, but rather, declared heroes. What I'm saying is that Palestinians routinely, every day, enter Israel and then go home safe and sound. No Israeli dare enter a Palestinian city, town or village.

I find that story about the pregnant Palestinian woman extremely hard to believe. There are hospitals, doctors, and midwives in the PA. Do you have any idea what their birthrate is? Babies are born there every minute. Why was this alleged woman trying to enter Israel to give birth to a baby???? IMO, poor-quality propaganda at best. Probably pure hokum. Pity you fell for it. Try to think before getting hysterical.

And where is your pity for the Israeli woman murdered in a Jewish-Jerusalem street? She was carrying with her an ultrasound showing that she was pregnant with twins.

wellofvow

02-20-2003, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
Cant say. But they would probably be generally angry if the belgians already had taken more than half our country and still continued to build settlements in the few areas we had left.

I am becoming very tired of saying this, but I will again. The West Bank was never "Palestinian land", "Palestinian State", Palestine governed by Palestinian Arabs, Palestinian homeland, whatever spin of semantics you or anyone wants to give it.

Palestinian Arabs, or Arabs-living-in-Palestine-before-1948 did NOT have "their" country. Therefore, "their country" could not have been stolen from them. Arabs, as well as Jews, lived in disputed territory. In 1947 and 1948, the Brits and Jordan pulled a fast one on the Arabs living in the former Palestine. The Jews got their state, but the Arabs were - pardon me - "done the dirty" by their good friends the British and by their brother Arabs. Hey, my source for this is my kids' ancient (1975) Encyclopedia Britannica Junior!

Close your eyes. There are a few empty houses on your street. Nobody knows who they belong to. You move into one house and invite your relatives and friends to move in next door. A different family moves into another empty house. Can you scream that it belonged to you? Did this family really steal YOUR house and property?

It was and is disputed territory. Period. Get past this if you want to keep up.

Northlander

02-22-2003, 03:44 AM

Israel of course sees it as "disputed" territories. UN does not.

The fact that Israel does not comply to UN resolutions does not make the occupation legally right. You should do your homework.

If you think resolution 1441 against Iraq is legitimate I cant see why any of these wouldnt be:

Resolution 162: "...'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"

Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"

Resolution 280: "....'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"

Resolution 285: "...'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"

Resolution 444: "...'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"

Resolution 446: "...'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

Resolution 452: "...'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"

Resolution 471: "... 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

Resolution 476: "... 'reiterates' that Israel's claims to Jerusalem are 'null and void'"

Resolution 497: "...'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"

Should I go on?

The fourth geneva convention. What can I say? Its still there even though you dont comply.

Lets compare to Iraq and resolution 1441 now. they face war because they do not comply. Can you say there are interational laws that forbid them to have their own WMDs or are the UN rsolutions enough? If there are international laws against WMDs how come Israel can have them? The UN resolutions must be enough I recon.

That makes it even more interesting since the Resolution 279: "...'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
is very similar to resolution 660 and the following ones 668 for example against Iraq in 1990. If you can read and are a fairly moral man. A man that knows about justice and equality for all men you should see that either Iraq shouldnt been attacked that time OR Israel should.

"Get out of Lebanon or we will flatten you"? Why not?

Since there are international laws against occupation, even in "defensive wars" the occupation in West Bank and Gaza are indeed occupations. Wether the war was defensive or not can be argued. Israel did attack Egypt I dont think you can object to that. The Jordans might have started the barrage on Israel which initiated the Israeli attack but the war was nevertheless started by Israel. Jordan supporting Egypt is nothing stange.
Its like saying Britain started the war on nazi-germany which they technically did but the blame is still on the germans whom attacked Poland in the first place.

Ok, you left Lebanon I give you that but that is just one step in the right direction. Return ALL areas and you will earn the respect and gain status as any other western democratic nation. You will then have my full support and I imagine hundred of thousands of other europeans. We are not after Israel for any hidden dark anti-semitic reasons. I dont support Syria or prefer their violent regime before Israeli democracy and society. However right should be right. Israel too must comply.

BTW, we have discussed it before. I dont think you can say that the situation for Israelis have been worse with the Lebanese since the withdrawal. Hesbollah might still be a threat but nothing near what they were before. Sometimes security can be achived by compromising and back of. Both Israel and USA have alot to learn in that aspect. That not going to war and kill the enemy would be seen as a "reward for terror" and a sign of weakness is a very common opinion is both these nations.
If that was true, how come Israel and USA have so many more ruthless enemies that any other western nations? How come they are inceasing by the year? Why are people in Washington bying gasmasks and tape for their windows while the canadians or brasilians are not?
Because they are chickens and dont take the international responsibility the americans do? Shouldnt think so. In the most patriotic and heroic fantasies that might be true, not IRL.

People over the world are not stupid. They see whats going on. In the end truth always prevail. When al-qaeda consists of CIA trained fanatics most people start to think. "Wait a minute" what in the world went wrong here? When USA sells arms to BOTH sides in the Iraq - Iran war. People shake their heads in disbelive.
In USA things like this are not general knowledge, in other places it is. Saddam is a freak. A general wacko. But he is a wacko made in the US. So is Usama. Being strong a determined against the russians then, is sort of coming back today. Same thing will happen in the future when Israel and USA tries to be invincible today. Wont work in the long run.

danholo

02-22-2003, 07:29 AM

Northlander:

Since there are international laws against occupation, even in "defensive wars" the occupation in West Bank and Gaza are indeed occupations. Wether the war was defensive or not can be argued. Israel did attack Egypt I dont think you can object to that. The Jordans might have started the barrage on Israel which initiated the Israeli attack but the war was nevertheless started by Israel. Jordan supporting Egypt is nothing stange.
Its like saying Britain started the war on nazi-germany which they technically did but the blame is still on the germans whom attacked Poland in the first place.

Yeah. Well Poland didn't mass its troops on Germany's borders, nor did it vow to "explode the Germanic presence from the area". Secondly, Poland wasn't any threat to Germany to say the least. Why? They sent in the cavalry against tanks. So the comparison is wholly a false one.

Legally, Israel isn't occupying the Gaza and West Bank from any sovereign nation anymore. Jordan ceased its claim to it over ten years ago.
So giving Gaza, Judea and Samaria is plainly up to a peace deal and it's a completely unrealistic demand to give anything when Israel is still being attacked by the same terrorists that were attacking before "occupation".

Israel conquered the Golan because Syria was a major security threat when its troops were stationed there. They used the heights to constantly bombard Israel so there was a completely legitimate reason to invade that area and kick the Syrians out. I don't understand why Israel is demanded to return that area at all. Assad should swallow his pride and give it up. That's what you get for attacking a nation that in his eyes doesn't even exist.

Resolutions against Israel regarding Lebanon is completely absurd. The Arab block was probably behind these. The PLO used Lebanon to attack into Israel. You allow the PLO to attack Israel but do not allow Israel to defend itself. This is exactly what it was doing.

prasadkudva

02-22-2003, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by takeo
India always opposed Israeli policies in the UN, and still does so.
But i agree that pakistan is a terrible country and in the pakistan-indian conflict i have more sympathy for india, a multi-national state while pakistan, as israel, as a narrowminded oppressive untolerant one-religion state.

perhaps israel could start to make friends among their neighbours too instead of only ennemies, so that they wouldn't need any longer the us-protection. actually,i agree that india has supported the palestine in the u.n,but behind the scene diplomacy is different,we always had a secret relationship witn israel,and that has changed in to a special relationship now.
we undersatnd that india and israel share a common problem and we both can get together to solve those.
i support isreal's policy.

wellofvow

02-24-2003, 12:56 AM

Northlander: The UN long ago lost any and all logical moral right to so much as comment on Israel. Your long list is evidence of the moral bankruptcy of this organization. Try justifying the following without turning yourself into a pretzel:

1. In all the martial conflicts during its history resulting in refugees or displaced persons, the UN, within a very few years, resolved the problem, and there were no more refugees or displaced persons.... EXCEPT for the 1948 war in the Middle East, and following wars when Israel defended itself following an act of war.

The UN has made utterly no effort at any time to resolve the "refugee problem". The UN has allowed thousands of NON-Palestinians into the refugee camps, since they could survive there under the UN dole. The UN administered the camps with both eyes shut, allowing bomb factories to flourish.

2. When Egypt told UN Peacekeeping forces to leave Egypt, U Thant immediately complied, although it was obvious that Egypt was gearing up for war. If the UN was there as "peacekeepers", and the peace was being threatened, why would they leave??

3. Although on the books as a terrorist-supporting state, Syria was allowed to be in the Security Council of the UN. This defies all logical rationale.

4. A UN force near the Lebanese border filmed the kidnap/murder of 3 Israeli soldiers and refused to give the film to the Israeli government. This was not only immoral, but inhumane.

5. The UN consistantly ignores TRUE atrocities throughout the world without calling to responsibility the states guilty of murdering thousands, but when acts of war or murder of civilians takes place against Israel, and Israel defends itself as is her right as a sovereign state, there is a blizzard of UN condemnations and "resolutions".

It is ridiculous to state that the northern border with Lebanon is better since Israel's withdrawal. There are murders, shellings, incursions all the time. They are all conveniently ignored.

6. Oh, almost forgot. The UN had as its Secretary-General a man who was later shown to be a Nazi, and subject to being called to judgment for his war crimes.

These are just a few examples off the top of my head, since I am neither historian nor political scientist. I am a person who does not forget history. I keep looking for even-handedness and reciprocity. I keep waiting for the rest of the world to be judged on the SAME standards as Israel is judged. Maybe you should try this approach, Northlander.

Hisardut

02-24-2003, 02:33 AM

Some quick Info about U.N. bias vs israel

Of the 175 United Nations Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel. The U.N. was silent while 58 Jerusalem synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians destroyed 58 Jerusalem Synagogues and systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians prevented Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.

This anti-Israel stance of the UN is a natural consequence of its membership structure. 21 members of the UN are Arab countries, and 52 members represent Islamic countries. Since the Arab Israeli conflict is represented as a religious conflict Israel as the only Jewish state has no chance for a fair hearing in the UN.

http://palestinefacts.org/pf_faq_palestine_un_anti_israel_bias.php

http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict.asp#UN

http://www.mideasttruth.com/np5.html

Kapiti

02-24-2003, 02:33 AM

wellofvow

Quote
I am becoming very tired of saying this, but I will again. The West Bank was never "Palestinian land", "Palestinian State", Palestine governed by Palestinian Arabs, Palestinian homeland, whatever spin of semantics you or anyone wants to give it.

Palestinian Arabs, or Arabs-living-in-Palestine-before-1948 did NOT have "their" country. Therefore, "their country" could not have been stolen from them. Arabs, as well as Jews, lived in disputed territory. In 1947 and 1948, the Brits and Jordan pulled a fast one on the Arabs living in the former Palestine. The Jews got their state, but the Arabs were - pardon me - "done the dirty" by their good friends the British and by their brother Arabs. Hey, my source for this is my kids' ancient (1975) Encyclopedia Britannica Junior!

Close your eyes. There are a few empty houses on your street. Nobody knows who they belong to. You move into one house and invite your relatives and friends to move in next door. A different family moves into another empty house. Can you scream that it belonged to you? Did this family really steal YOUR house and property?

end Quote

Seems to me that your argument has big holes.

Yes history does tell us that the Palestinians never had the chance to raise the Palestinian flag and say that this land was uniquely theirs. The Jordinans saw to it that it would have been a Jordanian flag raised instead.

Does this mean as you contend that they cannot claim the whole of that land or more than this, does it mean that they cannot say that their land was not stolen from them. Lets close our eyes as you want to put it and see what appears.

You live in a house with a rich land lord who leads you to believe that eventually he will leave and because you have been living there for more than a thousand years you will get to take over the house. When he leaves he does indeed leave you the house and he leaves another house to another neighbour who had been living there, who was indeed your enemy. A second neighbour however thinks that because he is a mate of yours it would be better if he took over your house. This is inspite of the fact that you did not agree to it. However since he is similiar to you in his outlook it is not such a bad result.

The first neighbour and the second neighbour start to fight and indeed your first neighbour whom you have never liked takes over your house and kicks out your second neighbour. Indeed he says that it was because the second neighbour was going to attack him that he had to get in their first and kick him out.

On your analysis you say that you have no right to object to the first neighbour taking over your house. This is inspite of the fact that your first neighbour's right to his house is exactly as strong as your claim to your house. That is the landlord gave you both rights to your two houses.

Now here is the beauty. Your first neighbour cannot accuse you of attacking him because at the time of the attack you were not in control of the house. Rather it was neighbour two and since he has now been kicked out presumably you should have the right to live in the house the landlord gave you. Indeed you could not have attacked anyone because you were not in control of anything.

You claim and your final line is

"It was and is disputed territory. Period."

Your conclusion has the spine of a jelly fish and the intellect of a acorn.

Claims and disputes are cheap. Everyone can claim and dispute what ever they want. If you want you can still claim the earth is flat and dispute that it is round. Big deal.

What the analysis with the houses shows very clearly is this. The Palestinians claim to Palestine is every bit as strong as the Israeli's claim to Israel. The claims originated from the same body the UN. The issue of Jordan having grabbed the land before the Palestinians had a chance to raise their own flag does not destroy the Palestinians right to occupy the Gaza and West Bank in their own right and to call all Israelis, intruders or illegal occupiers.

It seems to me that the only way to attack the Palestinians claim to the Gaza and WB is to attack the authenticity of the Jews claim to Israel. By saying that the UN was able to give good title to the Jews you must say that they also gave good title to the Palestinians.

" Get past this if you want to keep up"

Northlander

02-24-2003, 03:38 AM

I think you have it there Kapiti. That is the whole problem.
The UN is a fine organisation for Israel and USA too for that matter, as long as it is working for their interests.

Israel will probably use resolution 1441 as an argument against Saddam but they would never accept any of those targeted at Israel.

Same goes for the claims the Arabs and the Jews have to palestine resp Israel.

Mediocrates

02-24-2003, 05:11 AM

does that mean anything? clearly if there were no Israelis on earth you would have to invent them.

danholo

02-24-2003, 05:37 AM

The issue of Jordan having grabbed the land before the Palestinians had a chance to raise their own flag

It's hard to raise a flag that doesn't exist.

Imagine this scenario. Someone steals your car and sells it to another person or this other person steals the stolen car. You finally find your car after a long search but another guy driving the car says it's his. Now, whose car is it?

wellofvow

02-27-2003, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by Kapiti
wellofvow

Quote
I am becoming very tired of saying this, but I will again. The West Bank was never "Palestinian land", "Palestinian State", Palestine governed by Palestinian Arabs, Palestinian homeland, whatever spin of semantics you or anyone wants to give it.

Palestinian Arabs, or Arabs-living-in-Palestine-before-1948 did NOT have "their" country. Therefore, "their country" could not have been stolen from them....

Close your eyes. There are a few empty houses on your street. Nobody knows who they belong to. You move into one house and invite your relatives and friends to move in next door. A different family moves into another empty house. Can you scream that it belonged to you? Did this family really steal YOUR house and property?

end Quote

Seems to me that your argument has big holes.

Yes history does tell us that the Palestinians never had the chance to raise the Palestinian flag and say that this land was uniquely theirs. The Jordinans saw to it that it would have been a Jordanian flag raised instead.

Does this mean as you contend that they cannot claim the whole of that land or more than this, does it mean that they cannot say that their land was not stolen from them. Lets close our eyes as you want to put it and see what appears.

You live in a house with a rich land lord who leads you to believe that eventually he will leave and because you have been living there for more than a thousand years you will get to take over the house....

Your conclusion has the spine of a jelly fish and the intellect of a acorn.

What the analysis with the houses shows very clearly is this. The Palestinians claim to Palestine is every bit as strong as the Israeli's claim to Israel. The claims originated from the same body the UN. The issue of Jordan having grabbed the land before the Palestinians had a chance to raise their own flag does not destroy the Palestinians right to occupy the Gaza and West Bank in their own right and to call all Israelis, intruders or illegal occupiers.

Kapiti,
First, I have no objection to debate - that is what a discussion forum is about. However, I find ad hominem attacks extremely distasteful. "Spine of a jelly fish and the intellect of an acorn"? I don't think so. This was over the top and extremely offensive. *I would like the moderator to review this.*

I found your analogy about neighbors moving in and out completely uncomprehensible. I simply could not follow it. My IQ is over 140, BTW.

What you said about "what history tells us" is simply not correct. After WWI, 1917, the Brits controlled the territorial land mass of what is now Israel, the "West Bank", and the country of Jordan. Their "Mandate" called for them to divide this total land area into a Jewish State and an Arab State after a 30 year occupation (i.e., 1917-1947), based on longstanding British "agreements" with both Arabs and Jews. With the Jews, it was the Balfour Declaration. I forgot the name of the agreement with the Arabs.

However, the Brits were pro-Arabists, and madly in love with the glamorous Bedouin. So they pulled a fast one. Shortly before the end of their Mandate period, they gave a Bedouin tribe (headed by Abdullah Hussein) control of all the land east of the Jordan River. They called it Transjordan. It was controlled by Hussein, who appointed himself king, but the vast majority of the residents of the land were not Bedouin, but **"Palestinian" Arabs**.

At the very end of the Mandate period, when it came to a vote in the UN, the Brits pretended that the sleight-of-hand with Abdullah had not occured, and that an "Arab State" had not ALREADY BEEN CREATED out of the Mandate territory. Thus, the vote in the UN was for, in effect, the creation of TWO Arab states and ONE Jewish one.

It is frivolous to say that the "Palestinians never had a chance to raise their flag". After the UN vote, the Arabs living in the West Bank and the land that had been agreed by the UN to give to the Jews were told by their Arab "brothers" to reject the UN decision, that the "brothers" (Egypt, Syria, etc.) would take care of the Jews, and the Palestinian brothers would have it all. This is VERY different from your sanitized version that they "never had a chance". They had their chance, but they blew it bigtime. And then they have continued to blow it bigtime by trusting their "brother Arabs" who have done the Palestinians much more harm than the Jews. It is their misfortune that they cannot recognize who their true enemy is.

Your sentence about the Palestinian claim to Palestine being as strong as the Israeli claim to Israel is confusing, at best.

The Palestinians say very clearly that *Israel* IS Palestine. So, are YOU saying that in spite of the fact that the UN has recognized the State of Israel since the 1940s, that Israel doesn't really exist? That the whole of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza is "Palestine"?

humus_sapiens

02-27-2003, 01:22 AM

It's amazing how some Israel-haters shyly pretend they are not anti-semites.

UN Planned State of Israel as a Still-Birth
By Emanuel A. Winston
July 11, 2002

There is every indication that the leaders of the United Nations never intended that the nation of Israel was to live very long after she declared her independence May 14, 1948. But, after the massacre of European Jewry, the nations of the world had a brief moment of self appraisal and were shocked at their complicity in the most massive Genocide this planet had ever known. They all recognized that they had participated.
...
...
Therefore, I would not be surprised to see the same nations who turned against the Jews 60 years ago, join the Arab/Muslims under the auspices of the United Nations. To paraphrase Ezekiel 39:3 p. 1224 (Stone Tanach) "The nations will gather from the North and assault the Jewish nations before they themselves will be destroyed".

Great article, read on at http://www.mideasttruth.com/EAW04.html

wellofvow

03-01-2003, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by humus_sapiens
It's amazing how some Israel-haters shyly pretend they are not anti-semites.

UN Planned State of Israel as a Still-Birth
By Emanuel A. Winston
July 11, 2002

Great article, read on at http://www.mideasttruth.com/EAW04.html

Hi, Thinking Chickpea. Fire-breathing article. And probably true.

I like your sign-off.

Did you notice that Forbes has Arafat, that poor "freedom fighter", dedicated to "his" people's plight, as being a millionaire 300 times over? If I were I Palestinian, I would want to tear him limb from limb. But, again, the Palestinians must have an inbred gene for choosing the wrong champion.

humus_sapiens

03-01-2003, 11:52 PM

Originally posted by wellofvow
I like your sign-off.

I also can do Weddings and Bar-Mitzvas :D

Did you notice that Forbes has Arafat, that poor "freedom fighter", dedicated to "his" people's plight, as being a millionaire 300 times over? If I were I Palestinian, I would want to tear him limb from limb. But, again, the Palestinians must have an inbred gene for choosing the wrong champion.

Hey, thanks for the tip!! I didn't know this info has reached the Forbes. Folks, it's official, so spread the word:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/0317/134.html

This list of Arab billionaires looks amazing together with the UN Arab Human Development Report 2002:
http://hdr.undp.org/reports/detail_reports.cfm?view=600

PS. The only thing I don't understand is the Forbes list dated 03.17.03 :confused:

wellofvow

03-02-2003, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by humus_sapiens
I also can do Weddings and Bar-Mitzvas :D

Hey, thanks for the tip!! I didn't know this info has reached the Forbes. Folks, it's official, so spread the word:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/0317/134.html

This list of Arab billionaires looks amazing together with the UN Arab Human Development Report 2002:
http://hdr.undp.org/reports/detail_reports.cfm?view=600

PS. The only thing I don't understand is the Forbes list dated 03.17.03 :confused:

Hi humus-sapiens. Well, I'm past bar mitzvot ( the boys are 26 and 23), but no signs of weddings in near future. 30 year old daughter wants degree in paramedics, the 26 year old is going with a girl with 3+ more years of med school, the 23 year old just started master's as did his girlfriend, and they won't get married until after PhDs.

Please, no cracks about Patient Penelope. Horror! Maybe I am your typical yiddische momma.

The info on Forbes revealing that Arafat is worth 300 million dollars was on front page of Friday, Feb. 28 Jerusalem Post, no big deal. I have no time for web-browsing. I do not listen to news (too depressing). I only read the Friday J. Post. In fact, I often forget to eat (but certainly don't look like it :( ).

Northlander

03-03-2003, 05:05 AM

I wonder how you feel as a parent about the 13 year old palestinian child in el-Bureij that was killed by IDF this weekend?

In Khan Yunes there was a nine-year old killed by IDF on sunday.
40 injured.

No PhDs for those kids. No proud parents. My guess is that you will blame it on the pals.

I wonder why Israel is having difficulties finding allies :rolleyes:

Justicator

03-03-2003, 07:06 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
I think you have it there Kapiti. That is the whole problem.
The UN is a fine organisation for Israel and USA too for that matter, as long as it is working for their interests.

Israel will probably use resolution 1441 as an argument against Saddam but they would never accept any of those targeted at Israel.

Same goes for the claims the Arabs and the Jews have to palestine resp Israel.

The United Nazis have never acted in favor of U.S. or Isreali interests . Though it was created as a platform for international interests it has become a defunct body of Anti-Semitism and Anti-American facists . If the U.N. was so interested in humane interests why do the genocides still continue to occur in Africa , why do despot governments of the U.N. starve and oppress thier people while they fret about the fate of a Mad Man whos just deserve is upon him . It is a den of vipers that needs to be abolished . Give up your sovereignty if you so choose through your own dissolution of it's merits as an international body . I for one ignore the pontifications of thier New World Order for I see it's results . Let us eat caviar at our great World Summit in South Africa while less than a mile away some child starves to death . Actions of mad men beheld in the body politic of atrocity fueled by morons whos philosophy is to go to the ends of the earth to save one spotted owl while the brutilization , starvation and genocide of millions of humans marches on ignored . I see later on down this post where there is so much concern for the loss of one Palestinian child is of such deep concern to you while you support on the other hand the death of millions worlwide at the hands of your sanctimonious U.N. . Your attempt of bringing any moral clarity is as defunct as the institutions you support . Show me your friends and I will show you yourself . Soap box off ......

Mr. Pumps

03-03-2003, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
I wonder how you feel as a parent about the 13 year old palestinian child in el-Bureij that was killed by IDF this weekend?

In Khan Yunes there was a nine-year old killed by IDF on sunday.
40 injured.

No PhDs for those kids. No proud parents. My guess is that you will blame it on the pals.

I wonder why Israel is having difficulties finding allies :rolleyes:

The reason Israel has no allies is because stupid people believe the Jewish people have "secret superpowers"....and then a television broadcast comes on showing after a suicide bombing just how brutally human and honest these people really are.

Israeli is a small 6 million people repulblic right next door to Syria and Egypt with near 100 million each and growing. I don't see who anyone with intelligence can blame a small , fragile, democratic, republic in the face of the huge threats beside her. THE ARABS HAVE TO TURN BACKS OF HATRED AND FOLLOW A PEACEFUL AND DEMOCRATIC COURSE FOR STABILITY AND PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST. Most of it is out of Israel's hands so we the west have give a hand for the Arabs to see the light.

Sure maybe blame Israel for some things.......But blame the Arabs for about 80% of the rest...they are huge, mean, aggressive...and if peace wants to be had they have to do the majority of the work because they are the big hostile element maybe through our help or doing it themselves over time......Israel will have to follow along....the Arabs have to decide for peace or not for this is there conflict no anyone elses. 90% Arab commitment, 10% Israeli commitment before peace is accomplished.

Northlander

03-03-2003, 09:17 AM

Have I denied Israels right to defend themselves towards aggression? No I have not. But when IDF roles into Gaza its not to defend from Syria or Egypt, those countries are not the problem. There are no arab unity against israel or anything.
You have american soldiers today over the whole arab world. Wake up please. How many israelis would have died last year if it werent from the conflict with the palestinians?

The United Nazis have never acted in favor of U.S. or Isreali interests

haha, never acted in favor of Israel? the UN have not been anyting BUT lenient towards Israel. Have Israel ever been forced to comply to any of the broken resolutions? Like other countries are forced to do. Ever?

Mediocrates

03-03-2003, 09:19 AM

Yet my Russian friend who has to go to the rehab clinic to visit her son who was mutilated by a bus bombing sees the world clapping and cheering for one more dead suicide bomber and a bus load of Jews.

Don't play the pity card - you can't murder your own parents and then throw yourself on the court's mercy because you're an orphan.

Northlander

03-03-2003, 09:21 AM

Well live as you learn and dont complain about terrorism then.

Mediocrates

03-03-2003, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
Well live as you learn and dont complain about terrorism then.

As long as the PLO never has to step up and take any responsibility then ~~~.

Northlander

03-03-2003, 09:34 AM

They are not to blame for a conflict in which they are occupied.
For sure.

minusthejihad

03-03-2003, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
Well live as you learn and dont complain about terrorism then.

Spoken by a true man. We have a word for people who talk so much ! A real hero like you right? Sitting safe in your little apartment, trying to impress your girlfriend with your big words. The fact is, you don't even possess the minimum ammount of bravery to step foot into the Mid East, let alone say anything that stupid to someone's face. Child. Chicken-hawk. Lemming!

Moskal'

03-03-2003, 09:50 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
They are not to blame for a conflict in which they are occupied.
For sure.
Yet if PLO and "Palestinian Authority" wouldn't exist, the life of Israelis and Arabs alike would be far better.
Tibet is occupied.
Can you imagine how the life there would be if they started nonsence like intifada?
"Palestinian" arabs are very lucky to have the occupants they have.

Northlander

03-03-2003, 10:03 AM

Feel free to come and visit europe when the war starts minusthejihad. I wouldnt recommend it to any american but for you I do an exeption. You will like the warm hospitable pacifistic climate where I live Im sure.

You know nothing about nothing. ME is not a problem visiting for me but I have a strong feeling it is for you. Have you even met an arab?

minusthejihad

03-03-2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
Feel free to come and visit europe when the war starts minusthejihad. I wouldnt recommend it to any american but for you I do an exeption. You will like the warm hospitable pacifistic climate where I live Im sure.

You know nothing about nothing. ME is not a problem visiting for me but I have a strong feeling it is for you. Have you even met an arab?

Yes Lemming. As a matter of fact, I grew up in Detroit, MI, you know, home to the second largest Arab diaspora outside the Mid East. And yes, most of my friends are of all cultures (America -greatest country and people in the world by the way), including many Muslims, Chaldeans, Persians, and even a Black Muslim. So I wouldn't rush to speculate like your 12 year old brain with its first internet connection does. I even met some nice Europeans here too, but there's a reason they live here now, because they like it more than there. And I wouldn't worry about visiting Europe, Old School, I plan on it very soon, and since many of your buddies are probably appeasers and trash talkers like you, I have faith I won't run into any problems.

cerulean

03-03-2003, 10:18 AM

humus_sapiens

03-03-2003, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
They are not to blame for a conflict in which they are occupied.
For sure.

North-sralla,
There is no use to argue with you, as your hatred is irrational, and feeds on arrogance and sick millenia-old bigotry. There is a little blood-thirsty pencil-necked nazi inside of you, blinded with this hatred. Your posts only validate the title of this thread.

Those who justify and defend terrorism must share the responsibility with those who perpetrate it.

Northlander

03-04-2003, 01:15 AM

Come on cerulean. Alot of europeans flied through the ceiling when they heard the BS about chicken europeans. I read american tourists were harrased and beaten in Paris. When the war starts and we get iraqi refugees in numbers and see pictures of dead iraqi children I dont think people will exactly applause american tourism. A guy like minusthejihad coming with nazi accusations publicly here would be eaten alive.

There is no hatred humus but there is anger. My anger is very rational. I have personal relations to people that suffered israeli aggression. And I have personal bonds to people still suffering from american bombings. I dont think you have.

If you support war you have to take responsibility for it.
Any american made bomb killing children is your responsibility.

Terrorism is war. War is terrorism. There is no clear line between it anymore and its not thanks to me. Stop calling everything terrorism yourselves and things wouldnt need to come to this.
All armed palestinians are called terrorists these days. The armed chechnyans are called terrorists. IRA are called terrorists in general, like they all blowed up civilians. Everyone that doesnt wear uniform has become a terrorist. Ridiculous invention from countries with traditionally offensive regular armys. People fight the way they can. Dont go around the world overthrowing governments and bombing countries if you dont like it. What did you expect? That people would accept it quietly?

I dont give a about al-qaeda. They are lunatics. It has nothing to do with the Iraq war and the boost that will have on terrorism. Im telling you know that it will result in more terrorism. Do you think I will condemn iraqis taking revenge after they get attacked? You know they will and I know it. We all know it will happen and still you will go to war. Then the Bush administation are partly responsible for any terrorism targeted against americans after this war. Clearly so. They know and still they go through with it. There are 25 million iraqis. All it takes are 20 persons and it could happen 10 years after. I wouldnt sleep well as american after that. You never learn.

Mediocrates

03-04-2003, 06:11 AM

But its unclear what kind of perfect world you think is good enough. Today for example 3 large bombs exploded in and around an airport in the Philippines. I'm lead then to believe that even talking about taking on terrorism is sufficient reason to kill people? So maybe anything we do, or in this case nothing at all will cause the terrorists to rise up. We hear about how we will see an 'enormous' rise in terrorist backlash.....compared to what?

L@mplighterM

03-04-2003, 12:31 PM

Northlander

03-04-2003, 11:48 PM

Im sure our police have better things to do than chasing people that react verbally on nazi accusations on the internet.

I really hope I get trailed for not recommending americans to go to europe after they start a war on Iraq. It would be the laugh of the day in swedish media. I think we might even see recommendations like that coming from some american department when protests against the war get really serious in europe. Dont forget to call the police when they do.
Some people tried go out with american flags in stockholm during the protests and the police had to protect them after they got beaten up. Im just telling the obvious.
There is alot of tension right now.

Also I would have to defend publicly with some of the racist fanatism posted on this forum about europeans and arabs in general and even swedes from time to time. Media would love to quote things here Im sure. Especially you Lomplighter with your racist fear of arabs and hatred of europeans. That would help boosting the sympathy for the palestininan cause better than anything Im sure.

My invitation for minusthejihad to come here and call me a nazi to my face stands. Interested? No I didnt think so.

humus_sapiens

03-05-2003, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
I have personal relations to people that suffered israeli aggression.

That explains it. One of those Arab terrorists that Europe hugged, kissed and called freedom fighter?

Also I would have to defend publicly with some of the racist fanatism posted on this forum about europeans and arabs in general and even swedes from time to time.

I find this forum very mild, compared to others. Yes, it's a shame, there are some extremist remarks popping here, mostly posted by you Israel-haters.

My invitation for minusthejihad to come here and call me a nazi to my face stands.

And threats too.

Some people tried go out with american flags in stockholm during the protests and the police had to protect them after they got beaten up.

But there was no public outcry for banners "Free Palestine" (obviously free from Jews!). There was no outcry for the EU still financing and supporting the corrupt terrorist PA. The rotten Europe is thirsty for Jewish blood again.

Mediocrates

03-05-2003, 04:39 AM

http://www.wiesenthal.com/social/press/pr_item.cfm?ItemID=7285

March 4, 2003

WIESENTHAL CENTER: NEW WALLENBERG REPORT CONFIRMS THAT SWEDISH GOVERNMENT'S COWARDICE SEALED HOLOCAUST HERO'S FATE

Ã¢â‚¬Å“The findings of the Swedish Commission on the disappearance of Holocaust hero, Raoul Wallenberg, confirm that in 1945 the Swedish government adopted a convenient and cowardly posture vis-ÃƒÂ-vis the kidnapped diplomat, that condemned Raoul Wallenberg to oblivion long before Stalin decided his fate,Ã¢â‚¬Â said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

"While Raoul Wallenberg, the most important Swede of the 20th century, was motivated by the highest sense of humanitarianism in heroically intervening for tens of thousands of Jews otherwise destined to join their six million brothers and sisters in the Nazi Holocaust, Swedish authorities were motivated by fear of their powerful neighbor and greed for the lucrative economic deals with the communist giant,Ã¢â‚¬Â he added.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Many other questions still remain, including what did Wallenberg's uncles, among the most powerful and influential bankers of the day say and do regarding their nephew's plight during those pivotal years," Cooper concluded.

The Wiesenthal Center is one of the largest international Jewish human rights organizations with over 400,000 member families in the United States. It is an NGO at international agencies including the United Nations, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe.

For more information, contact the Wiesenthal Center's Public Relations Department at (310) 553-9036.

Northlander

03-05-2003, 07:54 AM

What can I say? My government has been very cowardly when dealing with the russians, many times. Cant say I like it. Wallenberg is just one of the storys.
He is considered a hero by most swedes. Very brave man.
You could also look into the story of the russians shooting down one of our DC-3s during the cold war. There you will see some serious sucking up to the russians. Or when a drunk captain of a russain submarine drove up on our shores and got stuck in the 80th. No explanaition to why they were here in the first place. Doubt my government even asked.

I totally agree to the point you are trying to make if the point is not that the swedish governments position towards Wallenberg had anything to do with anti-semitism and the fact that he saved jews. That I do not agree to.

The russians were quite scary during the cold war as Im sure you know. Think that is reason enough.

minusthejihad

03-05-2003, 07:57 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
My invitation for minusthejihad to come here and call me a nazi to my face stands. Interested? No I didnt think so.

I specialy reserved an Iraqi quote for you, my dear Nazi friend:

minusthejihad

03-05-2003, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
The russians were quite scary during the cold war as Im sure you know. Think that is reason enough.

And you can thank the greatest country in the world, America, for helping you feel just a little safer today.

Mediocrates

03-05-2003, 09:04 AM

I guess north the point I'm making is that you want to paint this as some kind of monolithic battle for the mount of Valhallah between the forces of good, the arabs, the palestinians and the forces of evil, the US the Jews the Israelis. The other point is that from our perspective, you and yours have pretty consistantly let us down when it mattered. Whatever you and Greater Modern Europe think about Jews or Palestinians, be clear, you haven't really given anyone a good reason to trust you or believe you. Oh sure there's been a few moments of humanity and compassion and effort - such as Wallenberg and such as the evacuation of the Jews of Denmark but virtually everytime it's been a matter of our sheer survival in spite of your indifference, ignorance, hostility, neglect, hatred or self serving rationality.

Like I've said before, not one more word about what Israelis have to surrender, give up on, negotiate, rationalize, ignore or suffer with. Give me 50 years of arab attempts to meet anyone partway, 50 years of failed attempts to be both parties at the table at the same time, 50 years of ignoring one's own self interest for the sake of appearing fair and so on. Until then there is simply no point in discussing it.

Northlander

03-06-2003, 01:04 AM

Im sure there are some people that take into account the fact that israelis mainly are Jews. Im not one of them. I dont think you can say I have used negative remarks about Judaism ever in my posts about the conflict. In my opinion Israeli is a secular nation. Its should be seen and treated as a secular nation. I know things for you might be different but how could and why should I constantly see Israelis in a religious light when I dont do it in other issues? Had it not been worse if someone like me constantly came back to talking about jews when critisising Israels politics? I think that would quite easily come very close to rasism and probably in the greyzones of some neonazism.

Your last post mediocrates are devided in two parts. The first mention Jews and their history and our treatments of Jews. The second is about Israelis and the last 50 years of Israel. There you have it I think. I can see and understand why you constantly make the two things into the same issue, however I try not to. Even though we do not agree on much I still think you should try to understand that my stance against making Israel and its conflict into a Jewish conflict is nothing negative against Jews. Its not anti-semitic but rather the opposite. You say I see arabs as good and Jews as bad. Regardless if you mean arabs or muslims or anything its as far as from the truth you can get. For me its palestinians and israelis. Not Muslims and Jews. I can discuss it when its relevant sure, but its nothing that colors my opinions. I for one knows alot about the problems Islam has in general and some muslims in particular.
I want to make that clear. If Syria attacks Israel tomorrow I would support Israel. No more syrian goods, if there are any, I could even burn some flags if they have an embassy here. Belive me I do not think Syria has any more rights than USA to go into aggressive war towards another nation and a souvereign state. I recognise Israel as a nation and I dont care if Syria doesnt.
I would support Israel fully but it would have NOTHING to do with compassion towards Jews. Like it or not. I would see it positive if I were Jewish because it would mean that my culture and religion finally wasnt what people judged my for. My support of the palestinian cause would not for a moment change my opinions of an syrian attack.

If there is no point discussing it Mediocrates you are in dangerous waters. That is fanatism in a way. "We will not compromise and will not discuss it". Can you see what will come from that? You are talking about a total military victory for Israel or nothing else. Notice minusthejihad that I said ISRAEL and not JEWS. This was indeed my last attempt to try to defend against anti-semitism without supporting an aggressive Israeli government. I have no intention of defending from being anti-muslim for critisising Pakistan or S.Arabia either. If people on discussion boards and forums cant deal with non-religous non-fanatics fine by me. Well its not fine really but its no point taking part in discussions at all so on that we finally agree.

elke

03-06-2003, 01:43 AM

Northlander, what you need to understand is this:

for individuals, who we are and what we do is defined by both, our genetics and our life experiences. It is not clear yet just how the proportion works; but the most... ambitious should I say, estimates, place about 50% at "nature" vs. 50% "nurture".

Societies are comprised of individuals, and these individuals have the same - whatever it is - proportions of genetic predisposition and life experiences. In addition, societies have their common history that determines in part, what it does and how it does it. For societal units, the "nurture" is the history of that society. Therefore, you cannot separate Israel from Jews completely - as you cannot separate the components that make up Arab Muslims.

Mediocrates

03-06-2003, 04:54 AM

North - I never said you were an antisemite and frankly you literally have no idea what that term means to me anyway. But here's the rub.

It doesn't matter.

That's right. Whether you want to wave your arms over your head and tell me about 'legitimate targets' and self righteous murder it doesn't matter. Me and mine ran screaming from your hallowed land and whatever your rationale for justifying it doesn't matter. Fact is, and this is a fact that anitIsraelism or antizionism is just this year's model. Just like there were Court Jews and Conversos in centuries past - just like there was a 'good clean camp' in Theriesenstadt that got a great big Red Cross thumbs-up, just as its always been. Europe is not to be trusted or believed. They deal with the Israelis economically, for money and that's that, but otherwise they're barely let into the house. And the long boring explanation why you feel justified about it really don't matter either - that's strictly an issue between you and your concience.

We are rapidly coming to the end of Azkhenazism and in perhaps 2 generations there will be no significant Jewish communities in Europe with the possible exception of Britain. And when that happens there will no longer be any connection between the false piety of your hand wringers and the Jews. And then we can all 'call a spade a spade' as it were. You will no longer have to restrain yourself and we won't have to worry about European violence, repercussions, threats. You will simply be another outlet as culturally unattached from the Jews as you are from SE Asia or any of those other faraway places. And that's fine, I welcome it. In fact I'd like to see a fund developed to move and reconstruct major Jewish landmarks in Europe to other places - Israel and the US for example since otherwise they'll be lost forever.

Mercury

03-06-2003, 06:19 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
The russians were quite scary during the cold war as Im sure you know. Think that is reason enough.

When a small country has a big aggresive neighbour it has two available courses of action. First, it can search for allies to face the aggressor (e.g. allies vs Germany, NATO vs USSR). Second, it can leave the fight to others. If following the latter course bothers its conscience, it will find various justification. For starting, it will find many positive sides in the aggressor, which would otherwise be unnoticed. Correspondingly it will find new faults with the allies. It will also convince itself of the intrinsic values of neutrality, will accept as a dogma "violence breeds only violence" etc. To remove final doubts it might also search for countries with similar outlook to form a non-aligned movement.

wellofvow

03-08-2003, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by Northlander
Im sure there are some people that take into account the fact that israelis mainly are Jews. Im not one of them....

In my opinion Israeli is a secular nation. Its should be seen and treated as a secular nation. I know things for you might be different but how could and why should I constantly see Israelis in a religious light when I dont do it in other issues? Had it not been worse if someone like me constantly came back to talking about jews when critisising Israels politics? I think that would quite easily come very close to rasism and probably in the greyzones of some neonazism.

Your last post mediocrates are devided in two parts. The first mention Jews and their history and our treatments of Jews. The second is about Israelis and the last 50 years of Israel. If there is no point discussing it Mediocrates you are in dangerous waters. That is fanatism in a way. "We will not compromise and will not discuss it". Can you see what will come from that? You are talking about a total military victory for Israel or nothing else. Notice minusthejihad that I said ISRAEL and not JEWS. This was indeed my last attempt to try to defend against anti-semitism without supporting an aggressive Israeli government. I have no intention of defending from being anti-muslim for critisising Pakistan or S.Arabia either. If people on discussion boards and forums cant deal with non-religous non-fanatics fine by me. Well its not fine really but its no point taking part in discussions at all so on that we finally agree.

Northlander:

Attempts to separate "Israelis" from "Jews" is extremely problematic (your "Notice minusthejihad that I said ISRAEL and not JEWS."). Even Jews and Israelis have a lot of problems with this concept, and for "outsiders" it is not a useful thing to try to do. Not only is it not useful, it is foolish, since you simply do not know enough.

There have been and still are many, many Christians (look up Orde Wingate) who believe that the Old Testament is not only a "religious" writing defining Judaism, but also a secular history of a people and their land. There are many Israelis who believe this, too.

There are doctors who have written books about the Old Testament being a treatise on public health and medicine.

Besides, in these passionate times, most of the world intentionally blurs "Jews" and "Israelis" in order to confuse people and propagate the acceptability of antisemitism. Many have agendae to remove support from Diaspora Jews from Israel.

It is extremely difficult for non-Jews, for Jews ignorant of their history, and for self-hating Jews to accept that Judaism is very closely tied with what has come to be called "Zionism". "Zionism" is a very modern term, relatively. However, open a concordance for the Old Testament and see how many times "Zion" is mentioned. See how many times "Jerusalem" is mentioned. See how many times in this "religious" book that PLACES IN ISRAEL are mentioned.

Although I do not like the term, in this case, I have to accept the notion that Zionism is an intrinsic and irreplaceable part of the "racial memory" of all Jews. "Next year in Jerusalem", "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning", "On the shores of Babylon, we wept, remembering Zion".

Therefore, there is no real dotted line on which to cut in order to separate "Jew" from "Israeli". It is useless to take a poll among Jews and/or Israelis. Just leave this alone. As an argument for anything, it has no foundation.

Northlander

03-10-2003, 01:29 AM

You are probably right wellofvow. It is indeed a problematic and complicated subject and I do not know enough to have my mind set on this.

However, one would like to think that most israelis or jews for that matter, are aware that many outsiders have a worldview where society and religion are separate. Even where culture and society are in a way separate. Bearing that in mind, critisism towards Israel wouldnt necessarely have to be seen as anti-semitism.

In this particualar case I defended against the instant nazi and anti-semite accusations. Me automatically being anti-semite would mean I gave the cultural and religious history of the Jews significance to my opinions. That I so not true. I dont see the greeks in an orthodox light or the brasilians in a catholic either. I dont feel protestant even though we grow up with historylessons about the wars we have had with catolicism. The point Im making is that when accusing people for anti-semitism or nazism its not YOUR opinions on zionism or judaism that matters but rather the one you accusing. I dont think that many young europeans care at all about wether Israelis are Jews or not. If people like minusthejihad stops crying about nazism when he is refering to europe I dont think people will start to either.

BTW, I saw some of those infamous settlers on BBC, shouting "nazis" to IDF soldiers for some reason. The soldiers remained calm but didnt look glad. Some people never get what nazism is about it, do they minusthejihad?

No medicrates, you havent called me anti-semite and no, I do not know what the words means to you. Nor does it matter. Since the word has a meaning for me and its very far from how I live my life and how I see things I take the liberty to respond to any accusations. One sollution is that anyone using the word explain what he means about it instead of just throwing it in all directions.

wellofvow

03-13-2003, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
You are probably right wellofvow. It is indeed a problematic and complicated subject and I do not know enough to have my mind set on this.

However, one would like to think that most israelis or jews for that matter, are aware that many outsiders have a worldview where society and religion are separate. Even where culture and society are in a way separate. Bearing that in mind, critisism towards Israel wouldnt necessarely have to be seen as anti-semitism.

Ah, you are a Utopian! I only wish that the world would honestly think as you expressed above!

Only the deliberately blind have not noticed that, once Israel became the world's "bad boy", synagogue bombings, cemetery desecrations, even attacking Jewish schoolchildren by fellow students (who, not surprisingly, were reported to be Moslems), demonstrations where participants scream "Death to the Jews" (no mention of Israel), etc. ad nauseum, have seemed to increase exponentially - ALL OVER THE WORLD. These are not expressions of being unhappy with the policies of a country. These are attacks against Jews, wherever they live or visit. This is called antisemitism.

It would be very lovely if the world would "separate" these things, but they don't. A kibbutz which was more pro-Palestinian than pro-Israel was attacked some months ago, and several people killed. These were ultra-secular Israelis, who did NOT support the Israeli government. They were murdered because they are Jews. The members were in total shock. Just like the German Jews who went into shocked denial - "but I am a German, not a Jew!" Fat lot of good it did the German assimilationists, fat lot of good it did this left-wing kibbutz. Dead is dead.

Even if all the Jews in the world (probability less than zero) would agree on the separation of Israel as a secular state and Jews as members of a religion, it would simply not fly with most others in the world.

These are very hard times, and "happily ever after" probably is not going to be the signoff line in this movie.

Mediocrates

03-13-2003, 12:11 PM

.....just like all haters and all self professed racial experts. They would shoot you in the face and claim it's not because you're Jewish, it's because of zionist oppression.

Northlander

03-21-2003, 05:19 AM

The thing is Mediocrates that if you ever get shot in the face its probably because someone wants you car or just because of the simple fact that he has a gun. Doubt it will have anything to do with you being jewish.

Mediocrates

03-21-2003, 06:00 AM

That would depend. If I was in my old beat up car and I had my kippah on you might be right. It wouldn't be the first time I was threatened right here in the USA.

You remind me of a white middle class middle aged Southern Baptist suburbanite who looks around and says to himself "It's all good, I don't feel oppressed, I don't know what these people are complaining about."

Northlander

03-21-2003, 06:25 AM

Dont even go there. I know about your views of getting out of the pity wagon. The difference about being jewish and for example muslim is that alot of muslims are oppressed. Had minusthejihad been a Jew living in Sudan I could understand him being paranoid but he is not and no one is oppressing him.

You cant play the guilt card anymore. Get into your head my generation wasnt born during the holocaust.

I could easily get oppressed if I liked to. Im part of a minority group and can play victim regardless if I am or not.
We were afterall victims of one of the fastest and most effective conquest in history.
I have a feeling you are just as well equipped as far as education and money goes as I am. Blaming me for meing middleclass is not relevant. Maybe you should live here instead of in USA. Here you can go dressed however you like without being attacked for you religion or heritage.

Mediocrates

03-21-2003, 06:29 AM

you seem confused - here is what its about

Are you black?
Are you in a wheelchair?

then you probably have little direct experience about that too.

Northlander

03-21-2003, 06:32 AM

So whats the point? That you know nothing about being palestinian and they are free to call you anti-muslim?

Mediocrates

03-21-2003, 07:58 AM

no doubt but its not about pity. nor am unilaterally deciding for them what they must and must not be offended at.

minusthejihad

03-21-2003, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
So whats the point? That you know nothing about being palestinian and they are free to call you anti-muslim?

So NOW you're a Palestinian? Why have you lied for so long, saying that just your girlfriend was? Why be so dishonest? And by the way, go to www.adl.org to get specific accounts of anti-semitic (violent) acts against Jews, even in your country.

elke

03-22-2003, 04:46 AM

Northlander is a Laplander, based on what he said in previous posts. He is a minority in that regard.

You are right, Northlander, IMO: to some degree, people choose to feel oppressed or not oppressed. That's why terrorism is wrong altogether, regardless of what its goals may be - and that's why there is no distinction between "good terrorism" and "bad terrorism". It's ALL bad.

The reality of oppression has to be determined using factual examples of said oppression. In addition, the source of the oppression has to be determined as well - and that's the main point of disagreement here. You say that the Palestinians' oppression is the work of Israel; and I and others - that it's the work of the PA and other Arab states. Both you and I believe that Palestinians are oppressed, but the source of that oppression is the subject of disagreement.

yoyo

04-08-2003, 04:55 AM

Originally posted by takeo
there's a difference, isn't being jewish a requirement for immigrating to israel? Does finland only allows protestant immigrants? can non-protestant citizens serve in the army? are conservative protestants exempt from paying taxes? etc.
How would you compare the israeli treatment of its arab minority to the finnish treatment of its Swedish minority?

Rubbish! Most of the countries take economic migrants nowadays, that is a legitimate discrimination. Israel decided to take up Jewish migrants, and not only Jewish by birth because it is allowed to anyone with a Jewish grandparent. Whilst other make sure the poor and opressed don't really get to their shore, the Israeli society, with all its economic problem, accepts crippled, poor, old and sick jews. In term of welfare state Israel is a million light year in advance on anyone. Everyone pay their taxes in Israel I don't know where you get that rubbish from. Arab minority are well, very well treated and that does not make them loyal, but still they have the same rights in any Israeli Court.

Tell me something, did you know there is 18% arab in Israel, with arab party in the Knesset?

Originally posted by takeo
jews aren't oppressed in France, on the contrary, they are overrepresented on the high levels of society, because of their highstanding intellectual tradition.

Ho no they are not opress by the state, but the state let the arbo-muslim (them again for a change) burn synaguogues and kick the out of Jewish teenagers. Whilst jews get mistreatment from the arabs, Chirac stands and says "there is no antisemitism in France". Why do you think French Jews alyha (immigration to Israel) has doubled in a year?

Originally posted by takeo
those countries will never cooperate with Israel, which is nothing but a vasal-state of the us. The only thing they have in common is their adversion for islamic fundamentalism, a aversion shared by myself and most Europeans as well by the way.

Was it the US that protected Israel in 48 when they declared an embargo on arms in 47? Israel is a friend, not a "vasl state" to the US. But since allah is impotent to destroy a tiny state, it must be that a big power is helping them.

yoyo

04-08-2003, 05:02 AM

Originally posted by Northlander
So whats the point? That you know nothing about being palestinian and they are free to call you anti-muslim?

That wuestion was not addressed to me, but I'll answer what I know

1) I know 50% (on a good day) to 75% (on a bad day) wants to continue mass murder in Israel through homicide bombing

2) I know that 6 years old are incited to die on PATV programs and in the school curriculum.

3) I know that at the same time Israeli try to negociate the Piece by Piece Process also known as "Peace of the Grave", palestinian schools at no trace of Israel in their schoolbooks.

Now I am ready to learn, please advise.

humus_sapiens

04-20-2003, 12:52 AM

ISRAEL'S FATE: NOBODY CARES? (by Richard Shulman)

An erudite Orthodox Jew asked whether I thought that the US would force Israel to cede its Biblical Territories. He inadvertently tipped me off about his intellectual framework about this, when he put it, "Give the land back to the Palestinians."

I corrected him: "There is no such nationality as Palestinians. It is not a matter of 'giving back' our homeland to usurpers." "Shall we reward Jordan for its aggression in 1948, when it seized Judea and Samaria?"

He explained himself: "Israeli policy always had been to give Judea and Samaria to Jordan, so the Palestinian Arabs would be their problem, not Israel's."

Federate the P.A. with Jordan, and the PLO may take over Jordan, with its fine little army. Wouldn't that become Israel's problem? Farfetched? The PLO nearly took over Jordan once before.

I agreed that that withdrawal had been Israeli policy, at least until a couple of hundred thousand Israelis returned to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. It would be improper of Israel to cede part of the Jewish people's patrimony. Nor is it wise. As he knows, Judaism believes in fulfilling, not violating the Covenant to keep it.

He also said that Israel would have to give up the Territories, in order to be accepted by the other countries. (Israel was not accepted before it had the territories. That is because the territories are not the problem, jihad is.)

Acceptance? I reminded him of the Biblical injunction to be "a people apart." (There was no time to explain that demands for appeasement, especially to evil fanatics, are open-ended. Give in to appeasement, and more demands are raised.)

Contradictorily, he denied that Israel would cede the Territories. I said that its leaders, being weaklings and Quislings, have been trying to do it.

"Do you think that all those Prime Ministers were traitors?"

Said I, "They all are products of the political system -- the party heads pick hacks, and the people have no district representative to hold accountable. The system produces poor policies." I forgot to mention the cultural erosion of the Jewish state.

He argued that giving up the Territories would relieve Israel of the Arab problem.

I countered with, "Giving up the core of our homeland and the strategic, defensible borders and water source certainly would be Israel's problem." A mutual friend added, "If Israel gives up those areas, the Jewish people have no past and no future." He means there would be no mission to inspire them and less reason to fight for the remainder of their country.

"Well, with Arafat's Arabs in their own state, wouldn't terrorism end?"

"No, it would increase. A PLO state would bring in heavy weapons." He seemed aware of the PLO plan to use any area from which the Israeli Army withdraws, for mounting attacks on Israel. He just did not put 2 and 2 together and find PLO statehood unacceptable. Instead, he argued, "The new state would be demilitarized."

"Friend," I rebutted, "sovereignty means that no other country can tell it what to do." He had believed the false rationalization. My pointing out its falsity should have prompted him to reexamine his other notions, to determine how much he was being put upon. He was instead planning his next argument.

Next he supposed that Pres. Bush wouldn't insist upon statehood, he'd stick to his principles: eradication of terrorism and of incitement against Israel and democratic and financial reform. (That still does not justify giving that part of the Jewish patrimony to a non-people and losing the defensible borders that would stop invasion through Jordan.)

I pointed out that Pres. Bush enunciated those principles three-quarters of a year ago, but thereafter the State Dept. (and the rest of the Quartet) has been insisting upon statehood without safeguards. That means statehood with terrorism and without reform. He may believe in Bush, but without reason. Bush does not keep decent promises. The Quartet falsely would certify P.A. compliance with vague requirements, just as has the US, on which my friend was counting, under Oslo.

After months and years of US scheming to carve out those territories, reliance upon a single speech is not prudent. Let us Jews stop being suckers for an erasable smile! It would be wiser to remember that, except for Congressional aid, and even that sometimes is used to blackmail Israel, US policy has been anti-Israel since before statehood. One exception was for personal reasons, when Pres. Truman had the US vote yes for the UN General Assembly recommendation for Jewish statehood.

It wasn't the President plotting against Israel, my friend said, it was the State Dept.. "And what about the time Nixon saved Israel in 1973?"

Since the President has not called on the State Dept. to change its policy, one assumes that Bush is in harmony with it.

I had to explain that Kissinger deliberately let Israel get desperate in 1973 and suffer heavy casualties, so that it would be amenable to US importuning to release the trapped Egyptian army(ies) and entice Egypt from the Soviet orbit into ours, with Israeli withdrawal as bait. Kissinger waited excruciatingly overlong. When he was away, Gen. Haig unilaterally released the munitions Israel needed. It is a delusion to think of Nixon and Kissinger, quite the subtle enemies of Israel, as its heroes. We Jews were fooled about FDR, fooled about Truman, fooled about Nixon, and fooled about Clinton. I doubt the wisdom of trusting Bush II. We must become more self-reliant.

Did that shake my friend out of complacency? Probably not. He probably still doesn't realize how anti-Israel the US is. Few pro-Zionists do. They believe the assurances of a "special US relationship" with Israel. They have not drawn the proper inference from the US practice of stopping each Israeli military victory and demanding Israeli territorial retreat.

He suddenly challenged me, "What would you do with the Arabs?"

I objected. That is an improper debating ploy. "You try to put me on the defensive with another problem. First you should acknowledge that you ask how I would proceed, because you see that the Oslo/Road Map process is mischievous."

He acknowledged, and then asked what should Israel do now.

I related my program for gradually stiffening restrictions on Yesha and Israeli Arabs. The program would combine action with explanation. During the minor steps, the world would get used to Israeli initiative. Israelis would get used to exercising it. They would feel more independent by exercising independence. As attention focused on the later steps, the earlier ones would be forgotten. The initial steps would be so obviously legal and just, that, with propaganda defending them, Israel's position would be difficult to deny. After a number of such steps, economic conditions would become untenable for the Arabs, and they would move away. He didn't think they would move, but that has been their record.

"The world would not let Israel do those things." (Where is his faith in the God he worships?) His statement indicates lack of appreciation of the effect of gradual steps and propaganda explaining them. I said, "Israel should do what it must, but put the best face on it. Remember when the world objected to Israeli troops moving into the P.A.? Now the world has gotten used to it."

He thought that I am an idealist and himself a realist. I counter with, granting the unlikelihood of such a program having a Prime Minister or Messiah to launch it, that it is both practical and in line with my ideals. He, with his notion of trusting the rest of the world, is the misguided idealist. What he approves is out of alignment with his ideals. Worse, appeasement is not counter-productive.

A mutual friend wondered how pragmatic is partial surrender. In other words, appeasement of totalitarian fanatics having been found counter-productive, proposing appeasement of jihadists is folly. What is the point of going to synagogue three times a day, but abandoning major principles of Judaism, such as the centrality of the Promised Land and fighting enemies rather than giving in to them? Is Judaism just a formality? Is he so assimilated to the materialism of our secular culture, that he doesn't care or that he absorbs the false propaganda of the "NY Times?"

When you think of it, Zionism never was pragmatic, but it worked. Unfortunately, the leftists are spoiling and undermining it.

The great powers are preparing to amputate the key part of the Promised Land, and many Jews are pleased that it is the name of making peace. There is no peace at hand! If the Arabs ever do want peace, all they would have to do is stop making war. There is no reason to take the territory integral to Jewish identity (and defensibility) and give it to the Arabs who don't deserve it.

humus_sapiens

05-22-2003, 11:49 PM

U.S. demanding Israel formally accept road map

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/295704.html

...
As reported Wednesday night by Channel Two news, the U.S. administration has reversed its position in the last two days. Until now, the Americans have been saying there is no importance to a formal acceptance of the plan, and that the important thing is to start its implementation on the ground.

But the Palestinians have insisted that they won't start acting against terror until Israel declares its formal acceptance of the road map. The issue was at the heart of the meeting between Sharon and Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas during their meeting last Saturday night.

U.S. President George W. Bush told Sharon on Tuesday that it is important to proceed with the political process according to the road map. American officials told senior Israeli officials that they are under heavy pressure from Arab countries to make Israel accept the road map. They made clear that the issue of "acceptance" not become an obstacle to its implementation,
giving the Palestinians an excuse not to act against the terror groups. The administration has also rejected Israel's distinction between Bush's June 24 speech and the road map meant to implement it.

The road map, which was formally presented to the sides on April 30, calls for a three-phase process: calming the situation on the ground; establishment of a Palestinian state in provisional borders; and a permanent agreement by 2005. Israel has accepted the phases in principle, but has presented many reservations about the specifics of the plan, starting with a demand the process begin with the Palestinians dropping their demand for the right of return of refugees to the country.

The road map puts the refugee issue in the third phase of the process, during the final status negotiations. Israel is also against the road map's predication on the Saudi Arabian initiative, which calls for an Israeli withdrawal from all the territories captured in 1967. Sharon and Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom have told the Americans that the road map, in its current form, could not pass the current government coalition.

The administration is also demanding that Sharon dismantle the illegal outposts in the West Bank, in a move that is clearly seen by the world, immediately after the next meeting between Sharon and Bush. But the administration has accepted an Israeli distinction being drawn between "illegal" outposts and "legal" ones. For Washington, the issue has become a matter of Sharon meeting his commitments.