Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


Palestine (continuation)

GUEST,livelylass 25 Oct 11 - 09:40 AM
artbrooks 25 Oct 11 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,livelylass 25 Oct 11 - 10:11 AM
McGrath of Harlow 25 Oct 11 - 10:13 AM
GUEST,livelylass 25 Oct 11 - 10:28 AM
GUEST,livelylass 25 Oct 11 - 10:31 AM
GUEST,Don Wise 26 Oct 11 - 06:36 AM
MGM·Lion 26 Oct 11 - 06:45 AM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Oct 11 - 02:22 PM
Stringsinger 26 Oct 11 - 03:38 PM
robomatic 26 Oct 11 - 04:21 PM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Oct 11 - 05:45 PM
Mrrzy 26 Oct 11 - 07:25 PM
pdq 26 Oct 11 - 07:33 PM
Mrrzy 27 Oct 11 - 12:30 PM
pdq 27 Oct 11 - 12:47 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Oct 11 - 01:37 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Oct 11 - 01:45 PM
MGM·Lion 27 Oct 11 - 01:46 PM
jennbrooks 27 Oct 11 - 02:42 PM
pdq 27 Oct 11 - 02:55 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Oct 11 - 02:59 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Oct 11 - 03:22 PM
MGM·Lion 27 Oct 11 - 03:31 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Oct 11 - 03:54 PM
GUEST 27 Oct 11 - 04:24 PM
artbrooks 27 Oct 11 - 05:36 PM
MGM·Lion 28 Oct 11 - 01:31 AM
MGM·Lion 28 Oct 11 - 03:16 AM
GUEST 28 Oct 11 - 04:18 AM
MGM·Lion 28 Oct 11 - 04:22 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Oct 11 - 02:39 PM
Mrrzy 28 Oct 11 - 06:34 PM
GUEST,mg 28 Oct 11 - 06:52 PM
MGM·Lion 28 Oct 11 - 11:51 PM
GUEST,Teribus 29 Oct 11 - 02:24 AM
Lox 29 Oct 11 - 06:48 AM
MGM·Lion 29 Oct 11 - 07:00 AM
McGrath of Harlow 29 Oct 11 - 07:58 AM
MGM·Lion 29 Oct 11 - 08:45 AM
McGrath of Harlow 29 Oct 11 - 09:19 AM
Lox 29 Oct 11 - 09:50 AM
artbrooks 29 Oct 11 - 11:24 AM
Mrrzy 29 Oct 11 - 11:31 AM
Stringsinger 29 Oct 11 - 11:42 AM
McGrath of Harlow 29 Oct 11 - 12:10 PM
MGM·Lion 29 Oct 11 - 12:21 PM
MGM·Lion 29 Oct 11 - 12:27 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 29 Oct 11 - 12:30 PM
artbrooks 29 Oct 11 - 09:59 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 11 - 11:34 PM
GUEST,Teribus 30 Oct 11 - 04:07 AM
GUEST,Teribus 30 Oct 11 - 04:32 AM
Lox 30 Oct 11 - 07:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Oct 11 - 09:04 AM
McGrath of Harlow 30 Oct 11 - 09:06 AM
pdq 30 Oct 11 - 11:08 AM
GUEST,Teribus 30 Oct 11 - 12:16 PM
bobad 30 Oct 11 - 01:21 PM
pdq 30 Oct 11 - 02:06 PM
Lox 30 Oct 11 - 08:44 PM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 02:36 AM
Jim Carroll 31 Oct 11 - 04:23 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 04:41 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 04:47 AM
Jim Carroll 31 Oct 11 - 04:58 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 05:10 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 05:17 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 06:15 AM
Lox 31 Oct 11 - 06:32 AM
Jim Carroll 31 Oct 11 - 06:36 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 06:51 AM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 08:21 AM
McGrath of Harlow 31 Oct 11 - 08:22 AM
Lox 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 AM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 08:54 AM
McGrath of Harlow 31 Oct 11 - 09:36 AM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 10:31 AM
Mrrzy 31 Oct 11 - 11:54 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 11:58 AM
MGM·Lion 31 Oct 11 - 12:03 PM
Lox 31 Oct 11 - 12:50 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 31 Oct 11 - 01:53 PM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 03:01 PM
GUEST,mg 31 Oct 11 - 03:23 PM
GUEST,mg 31 Oct 11 - 03:59 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 31 Oct 11 - 04:07 PM
GUEST,mg 31 Oct 11 - 04:08 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 31 Oct 11 - 04:32 PM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 05:19 PM
GUEST,Teribus 31 Oct 11 - 05:35 PM
Keith A of Hertford 31 Oct 11 - 05:52 PM
McGrath of Harlow 31 Oct 11 - 06:17 PM
McGrath of Harlow 31 Oct 11 - 06:28 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 31 Oct 11 - 06:52 PM
artbrooks 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 PM
GUEST,mg 31 Oct 11 - 09:40 PM
GUEST,Teribus 01 Nov 11 - 01:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM
Jim Carroll 01 Nov 11 - 04:40 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 04:51 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 04:53 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 05:48 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 06:02 AM
GUEST 01 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM
GUEST 01 Nov 11 - 06:52 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 06:58 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 07:00 AM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Nov 11 - 07:22 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 07:28 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 07:50 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 08:46 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 08:52 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 09:09 AM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 09:23 AM
GUEST 01 Nov 11 - 09:43 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 10:09 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 10:34 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 10:39 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 10:45 AM
Jim Carroll 01 Nov 11 - 10:48 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 10:51 AM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 11:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 12:05 PM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 12:12 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 12:14 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 12:28 PM
GUEST,livelylass 01 Nov 11 - 12:29 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 12:46 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 12:49 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Nov 11 - 02:11 PM
GUEST 01 Nov 11 - 02:26 PM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 02:27 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 02:57 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Nov 11 - 03:00 PM
Stringsinger 01 Nov 11 - 03:07 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM
MGM·Lion 01 Nov 11 - 03:28 PM
GUEST,mg 01 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 03:41 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 04:03 PM
GUEST,mg 01 Nov 11 - 04:06 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 04:18 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Nov 11 - 04:34 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM
artbrooks 01 Nov 11 - 05:22 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 05:48 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 05:51 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 05:58 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 06:00 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 06:09 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Nov 11 - 06:32 PM
Mrrzy 01 Nov 11 - 06:38 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Nov 11 - 07:14 PM
artbrooks 01 Nov 11 - 07:27 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 08:50 PM
Lox 01 Nov 11 - 09:24 PM
GUEST,livelylass 02 Nov 11 - 02:12 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 02:17 AM
GUEST,livelylass 02 Nov 11 - 02:44 AM
Lox 02 Nov 11 - 05:54 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Nov 11 - 06:39 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 06:52 AM
Lox 02 Nov 11 - 07:11 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 08:01 AM
Lox 02 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 10:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 10:33 AM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 12:32 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Nov 11 - 01:16 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Nov 11 - 01:19 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Nov 11 - 01:37 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Nov 11 - 02:09 PM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 02:43 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Nov 11 - 02:56 PM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 03:32 PM
Jim Carroll 02 Nov 11 - 04:02 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Nov 11 - 04:24 PM
Jim Carroll 02 Nov 11 - 04:25 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM
Lox 02 Nov 11 - 05:03 PM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Nov 11 - 06:25 PM
GUEST,livelylass 03 Nov 11 - 04:39 AM
GUEST,livelylass 03 Nov 11 - 04:50 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 05:18 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 06:04 AM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 06:34 AM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 06:34 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 06:46 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 06:49 AM
MGM·Lion 03 Nov 11 - 07:06 AM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Nov 11 - 07:35 AM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 08:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM
MGM·Lion 03 Nov 11 - 08:58 AM
GUEST,livelylass 03 Nov 11 - 09:46 AM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Nov 11 - 11:27 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 12:10 PM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Nov 11 - 03:03 PM
GUEST,mg 03 Nov 11 - 03:09 PM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Nov 11 - 03:22 PM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 03:33 PM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Nov 11 - 04:17 PM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 04:40 PM
Lox 03 Nov 11 - 04:46 PM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 05:14 PM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Nov 11 - 05:37 PM
Jim Carroll 04 Nov 11 - 03:50 AM
McGrath of Harlow 04 Nov 11 - 06:28 PM
Lox 04 Nov 11 - 06:59 PM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 05:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 06:20 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 06:31 AM
McGrath of Harlow 05 Nov 11 - 07:02 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 07:37 AM
Lox 05 Nov 11 - 07:40 AM
Jim Carroll 05 Nov 11 - 07:58 AM
MGM·Lion 05 Nov 11 - 09:44 AM
Jim Carroll 05 Nov 11 - 10:06 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 10:16 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 10:19 AM
McGrath of Harlow 05 Nov 11 - 11:23 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 11:27 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM
McGrath of Harlow 05 Nov 11 - 01:51 PM
Jim Carroll 05 Nov 11 - 01:52 PM
Mrrzy 05 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM
Jim Carroll 05 Nov 11 - 04:14 PM
McGrath of Harlow 05 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 02:09 AM
Jim Carroll 06 Nov 11 - 03:44 AM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 04:28 AM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 05:17 AM
Jim Carroll 06 Nov 11 - 07:05 AM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 07:16 AM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 07:20 AM
Jim Carroll 06 Nov 11 - 08:19 AM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 12:09 PM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 12:20 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 12:26 PM
Jim Carroll 06 Nov 11 - 01:03 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 01:38 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 01:46 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 02:32 PM
Jim Carroll 06 Nov 11 - 02:47 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 03:34 PM
Lox 06 Nov 11 - 03:43 PM
Lox 06 Nov 11 - 03:48 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Nov 11 - 04:04 PM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 05:40 PM
McGrath of Harlow 06 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM
Stringsinger 06 Nov 11 - 05:54 PM
Mrrzy 06 Nov 11 - 06:36 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Nov 11 - 06:43 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Nov 11 - 07:02 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Nov 11 - 07:30 PM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Nov 11 - 01:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Nov 11 - 04:43 AM
GUEST,mg 07 Nov 11 - 01:42 PM
McGrath of Harlow 07 Nov 11 - 02:04 PM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM
McGrath of Harlow 07 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Nov 11 - 05:00 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Nov 11 - 06:02 PM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Nov 11 - 12:56 AM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Nov 11 - 12:58 AM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Nov 11 - 01:18 AM
MGM·Lion 08 Nov 11 - 04:54 AM
Lox 08 Nov 11 - 06:12 AM
GUEST,Teribus 08 Nov 11 - 08:06 PM
Jim Carroll 09 Nov 11 - 03:18 AM
MGM·Lion 09 Nov 11 - 04:26 AM
MGM·Lion 09 Nov 11 - 04:36 AM
Lox 09 Nov 11 - 04:39 AM
Jim Carroll 09 Nov 11 - 05:08 AM
MGM·Lion 09 Nov 11 - 05:16 AM
Jim Carroll 09 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM
MGM·Lion 09 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM
Stringsinger 09 Nov 11 - 01:56 PM
Keith A of Hertford 09 Nov 11 - 03:35 PM
GUEST,Teribus 09 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM
Lox 09 Nov 11 - 05:34 PM
Lox 09 Nov 11 - 05:35 PM
Lox 09 Nov 11 - 05:42 PM
Teribus 10 Nov 11 - 01:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 01:07 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 02:50 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 03:11 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 04:23 AM
Lox 10 Nov 11 - 04:56 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 05:44 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 05:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 05:53 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 06:50 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 09:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 09:37 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 09:58 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 11 - 10:01 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 10:37 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 11 - 10:50 AM
GUEST,beardedbruce 10 Nov 11 - 11:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 11:26 AM
Stilly River Sage 10 Nov 11 - 11:35 AM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 10 Nov 11 - 01:11 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 11 - 01:46 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 10 Nov 11 - 02:04 PM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 02:10 PM
GUEST,Teribus 10 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM
GUEST,Teribus 10 Nov 11 - 03:08 PM
Lox 10 Nov 11 - 03:17 PM
Jim Carroll 10 Nov 11 - 03:18 PM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Nov 11 - 04:21 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Nov 11 - 05:12 PM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Nov 11 - 02:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Nov 11 - 02:09 AM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 03:24 AM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 04:42 AM
Lox 11 Nov 11 - 04:55 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 05:01 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 05:51 AM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 06:32 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 06:40 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 06:54 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 07:13 AM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 07:52 AM
MGM·Lion 11 Nov 11 - 08:28 AM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 09:08 AM
McGrath of Harlow 11 Nov 11 - 09:33 AM
GUEST,Teribus 11 Nov 11 - 11:38 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM
McGrath of Harlow 11 Nov 11 - 04:39 PM
Jim Carroll 11 Nov 11 - 04:57 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Nov 11 - 05:59 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Nov 11 - 06:15 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Nov 11 - 06:37 PM
Lox 11 Nov 11 - 07:15 PM
Jim Carroll 12 Nov 11 - 03:31 AM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 04:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 04:44 AM
Jim Carroll 12 Nov 11 - 04:55 AM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 05:14 AM
Jim Carroll 12 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 06:08 AM
Lox 12 Nov 11 - 06:56 AM
Mrrzy 12 Nov 11 - 12:24 PM
Jim Carroll 12 Nov 11 - 03:16 PM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 03:42 PM
Keith A of Hertford 12 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM
McGrath of Harlow 12 Nov 11 - 05:51 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 12 Nov 11 - 06:38 PM
Mrrzy 12 Nov 11 - 07:11 PM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 12:13 AM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 02:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Nov 11 - 02:56 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 13 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 05:20 AM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 06:33 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 08:50 AM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM
MGM·Lion 13 Nov 11 - 09:06 AM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Nov 11 - 11:14 AM
McGrath of Harlow 13 Nov 11 - 12:25 PM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 12:40 PM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Nov 11 - 01:33 PM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 02:01 PM
Keith A of Hertford 13 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM
Jim Carroll 13 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM
McGrath of Harlow 13 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 01:19 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM
Jim Carroll 14 Nov 11 - 03:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 03:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 03:26 AM
Lox 14 Nov 11 - 05:06 AM
Lox 14 Nov 11 - 05:17 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 05:35 AM
Jim Carroll 14 Nov 11 - 06:20 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 06:59 AM
Lox 14 Nov 11 - 07:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 07:34 AM
Jim Carroll 14 Nov 11 - 07:39 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 07:45 AM
Lox 14 Nov 11 - 10:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 10:37 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 10:40 AM
Jim Carroll 14 Nov 11 - 10:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 12:04 PM
Jim Carroll 14 Nov 11 - 04:26 PM
Keith A of Hertford 14 Nov 11 - 04:37 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Nov 11 - 06:06 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Nov 11 - 06:39 PM
MGM·Lion 14 Nov 11 - 07:28 PM
GUEST,Teribus 15 Nov 11 - 12:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 01:42 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 03:59 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 04:32 AM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 05:15 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 05:34 AM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 05:43 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 06:36 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 08:05 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 10:13 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 10:23 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 10:33 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 11:35 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 11:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 12:11 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 02:53 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 03:51 PM
MGM·Lion 15 Nov 11 - 03:59 PM
Jim Carroll 15 Nov 11 - 04:20 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Nov 11 - 04:44 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Nov 11 - 05:17 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Nov 11 - 05:40 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Nov 11 - 05:47 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Nov 11 - 05:57 PM
Lox 15 Nov 11 - 08:01 PM
MGM·Lion 16 Nov 11 - 01:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 01:32 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 03:43 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 04:01 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 05:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 06:49 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 07:27 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 07:33 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 07:37 AM
beardedbruce 16 Nov 11 - 07:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 07:45 AM
bobad 16 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 07:58 AM
beardedbruce 16 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 09:52 AM
beardedbruce 16 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM
beardedbruce 16 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM
GUEST,keith A 16 Nov 11 - 10:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 10:48 AM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 01:47 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Nov 11 - 02:38 PM
Jim Carroll 16 Nov 11 - 03:49 PM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM
Keith A of Hertford 16 Nov 11 - 04:08 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Nov 11 - 05:53 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Nov 11 - 06:08 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Nov 11 - 06:15 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Nov 11 - 06:36 PM
Lox 16 Nov 11 - 07:10 PM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Nov 11 - 01:31 AM
Jim Carroll 17 Nov 11 - 03:52 AM
GUEST,keith A 17 Nov 11 - 04:05 AM
Jim Carroll 17 Nov 11 - 07:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Nov 11 - 07:43 AM
beardedbruce 17 Nov 11 - 08:09 AM
beardedbruce 17 Nov 11 - 10:40 AM
beardedbruce 17 Nov 11 - 10:44 AM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Nov 11 - 02:49 PM
Jim Carroll 17 Nov 11 - 03:23 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Nov 11 - 06:46 PM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 01:41 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 03:04 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 03:18 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 05:12 AM
MGM·Lion 18 Nov 11 - 05:36 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 06:06 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 06:17 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 06:42 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 06:47 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 06:50 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 07:43 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 08:16 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 08:24 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 08:40 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 08:41 AM
MGM·Lion 18 Nov 11 - 09:16 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 09:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM
Jim Carroll 18 Nov 11 - 10:54 AM
beardedbruce 18 Nov 11 - 11:13 AM
MGM·Lion 18 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 12:00 PM
Keith A of Hertford 18 Nov 11 - 12:03 PM
McGrath of Harlow 18 Nov 11 - 05:50 PM
Keith A of Hertford 19 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 19 Nov 11 - 02:52 AM
Keith A of Hertford 19 Nov 11 - 04:33 AM
Jim Carroll 19 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM
Jim Carroll 19 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 19 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM
MGM·Lion 19 Nov 11 - 10:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 19 Nov 11 - 11:33 AM
MGM·Lion 19 Nov 11 - 12:28 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM
MGM·Lion 20 Nov 11 - 01:31 AM
Keith A of Hertford 20 Nov 11 - 04:22 AM
McGrath of Harlow 20 Nov 11 - 07:42 AM
Jim Carroll 20 Nov 11 - 08:36 AM
GUEST,Teribus 20 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM
MGM·Lion 20 Nov 11 - 09:42 AM
Lox 20 Nov 11 - 12:56 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Nov 11 - 01:37 PM
Jim Carroll 20 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM
Keith A of Hertford 20 Nov 11 - 04:36 PM
Lox 20 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 01:36 AM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 04:11 AM
Jim Carroll 21 Nov 11 - 04:13 AM
GUEST,keith A 21 Nov 11 - 04:31 AM
Jim Carroll 21 Nov 11 - 05:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM
Jim Carroll 21 Nov 11 - 08:06 AM
GUEST,keith A 21 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM
McGrath of Harlow 21 Nov 11 - 09:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 10:47 AM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 11:31 AM
MGM·Lion 21 Nov 11 - 12:58 PM
Jim Carroll 21 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM
MGM·Lion 21 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 04:44 PM
McGrath of Harlow 21 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM
Keith A of Hertford 21 Nov 11 - 05:41 PM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM
MGM·Lion 22 Nov 11 - 02:53 AM
Keith A of Hertford 22 Nov 11 - 03:06 AM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 22 Nov 11 - 05:13 AM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 09:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 22 Nov 11 - 10:14 AM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 10:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 22 Nov 11 - 01:02 PM
Keith A of Hertford 22 Nov 11 - 01:04 PM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 01:21 PM
MGM·Lion 22 Nov 11 - 02:12 PM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 02:59 PM
MGM·Lion 22 Nov 11 - 03:47 PM
Jim Carroll 22 Nov 11 - 04:19 PM
MGM·Lion 22 Nov 11 - 05:07 PM
Lox 22 Nov 11 - 07:10 PM
Jim Carroll 23 Nov 11 - 03:42 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 05:48 AM
Jim Carroll 23 Nov 11 - 07:01 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM
Jim Carroll 23 Nov 11 - 08:40 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 08:53 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 08:59 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 09:05 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 09:06 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 09:09 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 09:26 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 09:40 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 10:05 AM
Lox 23 Nov 11 - 10:14 AM
Jim Carroll 23 Nov 11 - 10:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 12:08 PM
Jim Carroll 23 Nov 11 - 03:12 PM
Keith A of Hertford 23 Nov 11 - 03:42 PM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Nov 11 - 01:30 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Nov 11 - 02:47 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 04:48 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 04:59 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Nov 11 - 05:45 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 07:35 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 07:46 AM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 08:29 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 08:56 AM
GUEST,keith A 24 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 09:48 AM
GUEST,beardedbruce 24 Nov 11 - 10:10 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 12:25 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 24 Nov 11 - 01:00 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 24 Nov 11 - 01:02 PM
Jim Carroll 24 Nov 11 - 01:29 PM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Nov 11 - 03:26 PM
Stringsinger 24 Nov 11 - 06:26 PM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 12:17 AM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 03:25 AM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 03:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 04:22 AM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 04:45 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 04:59 AM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 06:29 AM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 06:41 AM
The Sandman 25 Nov 11 - 08:06 AM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 08:54 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 10:10 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 10:21 AM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 10:49 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Nov 11 - 11:25 AM
MGM·Lion 25 Nov 11 - 11:40 AM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 11:51 AM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 12:02 PM
Jim Carroll 25 Nov 11 - 03:16 PM
Keith A of Hertford 25 Nov 11 - 04:15 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Nov 11 - 06:05 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Nov 11 - 06:12 PM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Nov 11 - 01:51 AM
Jim Carroll 26 Nov 11 - 03:12 AM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Nov 11 - 04:11 AM
Jim Carroll 26 Nov 11 - 08:02 AM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Nov 11 - 11:53 AM
Jim Carroll 26 Nov 11 - 12:39 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 26 Nov 11 - 01:29 PM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Nov 11 - 07:28 PM
Keith A of Hertford 26 Nov 11 - 07:45 PM
The Sandman 27 Nov 11 - 12:30 PM
Keith A of Hertford 27 Nov 11 - 12:42 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Nov 11 - 02:27 PM
Keith A of Hertford 27 Nov 11 - 03:18 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Nov 11 - 03:51 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 27 Nov 11 - 05:37 PM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 01:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 01:59 AM
Jim Carroll 28 Nov 11 - 03:44 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 04:04 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 04:07 AM
Jim Carroll 28 Nov 11 - 05:13 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 05:52 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 06:09 AM
Jim Carroll 28 Nov 11 - 06:40 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 06:48 AM
Jim Carroll 28 Nov 11 - 08:12 AM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Nov 11 - 08:38 AM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 08:42 AM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM
GUEST,keith A 28 Nov 11 - 08:57 AM
GUEST,keith A 28 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 09:04 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Nov 11 - 09:14 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Nov 11 - 09:54 AM
GUEST,keith A 28 Nov 11 - 10:09 AM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 12:00 PM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 12:57 PM
Jim Carroll 28 Nov 11 - 02:14 PM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 02:29 PM
beardedbruce 28 Nov 11 - 03:17 PM
Keith A of Hertford 28 Nov 11 - 04:37 PM
GUEST,Teribus 28 Nov 11 - 04:56 PM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 03:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 03:51 AM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 06:02 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 06:09 AM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 06:33 AM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 07:11 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 07:21 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 07:23 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 07:44 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 07:55 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 08:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 08:44 AM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 08:58 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 09:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 29 Nov 11 - 09:31 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 29 Nov 11 - 12:50 PM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 01:26 PM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 01:47 PM
Jim Carroll 29 Nov 11 - 03:32 PM
beardedbruce 29 Nov 11 - 03:47 PM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 01:36 AM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 04:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 04:13 AM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 05:28 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 05:33 AM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 05:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 05:52 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 06:43 AM
beardedbruce 30 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 09:52 AM
beardedbruce 30 Nov 11 - 10:27 AM
beardedbruce 30 Nov 11 - 10:31 AM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 10:51 AM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 12:33 PM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 01:28 PM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 02:03 PM
beardedbruce 30 Nov 11 - 02:13 PM
Jim Carroll 30 Nov 11 - 03:31 PM
Keith A of Hertford 30 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 30 Nov 11 - 05:48 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 30 Nov 11 - 06:01 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 12:56 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 02:48 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 03:28 AM
Jim Carroll 01 Dec 11 - 04:04 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 04:15 AM
Jim Carroll 01 Dec 11 - 09:59 AM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 11:10 AM
Jim Carroll 01 Dec 11 - 12:18 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Dec 11 - 12:34 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Dec 11 - 12:37 PM
Jim Carroll 01 Dec 11 - 01:15 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 02:44 PM
Jim Carroll 01 Dec 11 - 02:57 PM
Keith A of Hertford 01 Dec 11 - 03:36 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Dec 11 - 05:10 PM
MGM·Lion 02 Dec 11 - 01:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 01:26 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Dec 11 - 04:06 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 04:09 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Dec 11 - 05:35 AM
MGM·Lion 02 Dec 11 - 05:43 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Dec 11 - 05:49 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 06:10 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 07:11 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Dec 11 - 07:44 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 07:56 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Dec 11 - 08:00 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Dec 11 - 08:28 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Dec 11 - 11:08 AM
Jim Carroll 02 Dec 11 - 11:29 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Dec 11 - 02:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Dec 11 - 02:37 AM
MGM·Lion 03 Dec 11 - 04:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Dec 11 - 04:57 AM
Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: Hopefully about Palestine
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 09:40 AM

Please forgive the start of a fresh thread, but the two or three most voluminously prolific posters on the other one are evidently not interested in discussing the supposed topic whatsoever. As such perhaps it is best to let them have it. I have my doubts as to how long Mods will see fit to allow the continuance of this thread, but live in hope!

Anyway, serious issues for UNESCO and other subsiduary bodies of the United Nations following a recent vote on Palestinian admittance (yet to continue to go before the UNESCO general assembly), in the form of likely severance of all financial support from the US - a not inconsiderable sum, as it comprises something over 20% of all UNESCO funding.

Isn't Democracy (or perhaps that should more rightly be Plutocracy) a grand thing?

"if UNESCO admits Palestine as a member, the United States will be forced to effectively withdraw from the organization. That would be a huge financial blow to UNESCO, which receives 22% of its budget ($80 million) in dues payments from the United States. With that money, UNESCO promotes world press freedom, is the lead UN agency for the implementation of the Millennium Development Goal number 2 (universal primary eduction) and administers the World Heritage site program, among other things."

http://www.undispatch.com/beyonce-knowles-and-the-looming-crisis-at-the-un


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: artbrooks
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:02 AM

As a commenter on that article very correctly responded: "Is it really necessary to point out that the PLO is NOT the Palestinian Authority?" In fact, the latter cannot even be considered to be a successor organization, since the PLO is still alive and very active. I don't really see any reason for those laws, if they do function as a trigger for US withdrawal, to be implemented.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:11 AM

Good point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:13 AM

Nobody ever gets "forced" to act as a bully.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:28 AM

It all depends whether or not Obama IS indeed legally bound (caveat as noted by ArtBrooks above) by prior legislature or not.. Though sadly (and without wishing to indulge in "US bashing" here) it does appear that the current Obama administration is failing - and failing dismally - to make good pre-election promises regards Palestinian statehood.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:31 AM

Make that the "pre-election declared position", rather than "promises".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,Don Wise
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 06:36 AM

Surely this belongs in the 'BS' section?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 06:45 AM

But there is already a thread of identical title to this one down there. Isn't it a bit confusing that two threads of the same title should be ongoing anyhow? Lively Lass, could you not just have entitled this one 'Palestine 2' or some such to obviate our all being driven doolally!

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 02:22 PM

Good idea. Maybe some clone can oblige. That way there could be a discussion along side the tennis match which the original thread has developed into.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Stringsinger
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 03:38 PM

It's good to know that American so-called leaders can't buy the UN.   The recognition of Palestine by the UN represents a world-wide acceptance and repudiation of American and Israel exceptionalism. Obama and Netanyahu are on the wrong side of history and basically take an undemocratic stand, remembering that Hamas, whether we agree with their policies or not, was democratically elected. The UN in their wisdom followed a democratic tradition in their decision to accept Palestine.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 04:21 PM

American leaders aren't choosing to buy the UN. Arab oil money is doing that. The democratic conduct of Hamas as you term it extends to summary street executions and waging war on its neighbor Israel in all but name.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 05:45 PM

That kind of thing isn't "undemocratic", however unpleasant they may be.

"Democratic governments" are quite capable of doing vile things - torturing people, waging murderous illegal wars, bankrolling tyrants... Stuff like that doesn't make the USA and the UK governments undemocratic. Israel has a "democratic government" for that matter and that doesn't stop it acting illegally and tyrannically.

Democracy is only a first step in a long journey.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 07:25 PM

Maybe it could be titled Palestine, really.

Anyway, I was trying to rise above it by talking under them but this is a fine alternative...

I'm waiting to see what the Arab Spring Fling Thing will do for the statehood question, too.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: pdq
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 07:33 PM

This is all about a name!

If the term "Palestine" were replaced by another name such as Arabiana, everyone would see that there is no "palestinian people", just Arabs who live in and around the traditional home of the Jews which was incorrectly called Palestine by the Romans and (I believe) called Philistia by the Greeks. Jews have a right to name their homeland and not have others do it for them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Mrrzy
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 12:30 PM

Nobody's arguing with the name of Israel, pdq.

And Palestine as a name for the place where the semites lived predates the split between them into arabs and hebrews, which predates the conversion of hebrews to jews, which happened in historical times.

If you mind the name Palestine for the Arab half, what would you prefer? Isn't the word Israel hebrew for something? What would the same word be in Arabic?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: pdq
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 12:47 PM

Israel is sovereign country recognized by the United Nations. It was formed in 1948.

The traditional Jewish homeland dates back about 5772 years and has been variously been called Canaan, The Holy Land, the Promised Land, and yes Palestine, a name applied by the Romans about 2000 years ago as an afront to the Jews. The Greeks used a similar name: Philistia.

I suggested Arabiana for Gaza and perhaps a few other Arab pockets in and around Israel.

This fight is a PR masterpiece by the Arabs. They never were the rightful owners of the Jewish homeland (Canaan/Palestine/etc.) and they are recent squatters who have poured into the area in the last 900 years or so.

The Arab World consists of 20 countries now. The Arab leaders call Israel Palestine and count it as their 21st Arab World Country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 01:37 PM

"They never were the rightful owners of the Jewish homeland"
This is the worst possible argument anyone could put up for the Israeli case in Palestine - that the Palesinians have no right to Palestine at all.
It confirms the worst suspicions of those who oppose Israeli behaviour; that the Arabs are expected to vacate an area that they have occupied for 2 and a half centuries largely on the basis of a myth to make way for a "chosen people" - a recipe for centuries of bloodbath which I doubt if anybody but the most extreme Zionists support.
Jim Carroll

Palestine
by Matt Giwer, © 2005 [Sep]
We know for a fact all of the common knowledge of the origin of Palestine is false. We also know the common knowledge has been deliberately falsified by redneck Christians and their murderous zionist brethren.
We do not know how long Palestine has existed. It first appears in the written record in the books Herodotus wrote of his travels in the region in the 5th c. BC. There he refers to the region as Palestine Syria seven times. And that is the spelling he used. All relationship of Palestine of the biblical Philistines is bible speculation and not based in fact. So far as anyone can tell the Philistines were as invented as the biblical Jews.
The name Palestine for the region ceased to be used for about one century under Roman rule when it was broken into several administrative regions. The name was restored for the single administrative region restored after the 134AD revolt in Judea. So Palestine and the Palestinians have existed for at least 2500 years.
It is noteworthy that Herodotus mentions no people in or around Palestine Syria which could be the Judeans or Israelites of the Old Testament. He also prepared lists of peoples who practiced circumcision and had related genital mutilation customs. There are no Old Testament people on this list either. There is no mention of Philistines either.
So at the time of Herodotus we know the Palestinians existed but have no evidence of the people of the Bible existing. This is consistent with the creation of the first "old testament" as the Septuagint some two centuries after Herodotus by Juda Macabe.
So lets say Herodotus happened to miss them. After all he was only one man and inventing his methods as he went along. After Alexander conquered the region and later all the way to the Indus valley, he had inventories made. They were to list the lands and peoples he ruled. There is no mention of any people who could have been the Jews or Judea on either inventory. Today we can more or less confirm the accuracy of the inventories but no Jews or Judeans.
Of course this is not something Zionists want to hear as their political ideology is based upon the fiction of the Old Testament. The Christian literalists are not interested in any allegorical reading of the bible. Even the moderate bible "scholars" are believers and have an interest in putting the date of the first writing of the Old Testament as far back as possible.
The so-called scholars are the most annoying of all. They make no credible attempt to actually date the creation of its books. There are facts of archaeology which must be shown false or accepted. They most uniformly hold it was created shortly after the most recent documented time they could not have been written. They have great scholarly debates over a few decades "shortly" after this time. They do not consider how late they could have been written nor when they were likely created.
We can date them by simply applying the rule of the oldest external mention of them. By that rule the original was the Greek Septuagint towards the end of the 3rd c. BC. The Septuagint also uses Palestine. Philistine comes from the Hebrew version of the Septuagint which is first mentioned at the beginning of the 1st c. BC. The first mention it is a translation is by Josephus towards the end of the 1st c. AD. In his claim he cites the forged letter of Aristeas which recounts a magical, inspired translation. Josephus is a priest of this religion. The best "evidence" he knows of is a forgery.
By all the physical evidence and by all the principles which apply to everything other than the Bible, the Palestinians long predate anyone calling themselves the people of the Old Testament.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 01:45 PM

Did I say 2 and a half centuries? - I meant millennia of course
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 01:46 PM

Who, out of interest, is this Mr Matt Giwer, and what his qualifications for so positive a polemic?

Where do the books of Moses, c C13-12BC, or of Solomon {esp Song of Songs, "Daughters of Jerusalem"}, about C9BC, fit into this conceptualisation?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: jennbrooks
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 02:42 PM

Would the haters care to back off - or continue on the other thread - so that the issue raised by the OP can continue to be discussed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: pdq
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 02:55 PM

This thread was started because Jim Carroll poisoned the other thread.

Now he is posting crap from Matt Giwer, and insane Holocost denier.

Too bad the initial poster's wants are not being honored by allowing Carroll's drass to stay.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 02:59 PM

"Where do the books of Moses,..."
About 2 centuries after Herodotus??
Not making a case for the Israelis pulling out of the Middle East, as apparently pdq is for the Palestinians - just perhaps that after all this time they should all learn to accept that we are in the 21st century and learn to live with the realities that that brings.
"Would the haters care to back off "
Am trying to stay on topic and discuss it without the hate...
You don't like it, either ignore me or get me expelled.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 03:22 PM

Cross-posted;
I know nothing of Giwer and his holocaust denying, but the view put forward rings true as far as my undarstanding goes - though I am willing to be corrected.
As for my participating in this thread - the other one was polluted by a number of people, myself included - I left it to the flatulents and the incontinents a while ago.
Ban one of us and you must ban us all and not just select those that agree with your viewpoint.
Otherwise - message as in previous post.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 03:31 PM

Googling Matt Giwer, I found the following, which I copy here without comment, other than wondering if this can be one with whom the notoriously ever-progressive Mr Carroll is happy to be associated ---

Israel declares there was no Holocaust Extermination: 27 million Jews survived the holocaust
by Matt Giwer, © 2007 [June]
.,,.,.
Is Matt Giwer an Antisemite?
You be the judge~~

    You pathetic, primative bastards are all alike.
    You folks should get your sociologic parallels straight. David and Montezuma were equals. Today's Jews are adhering to a social form that died out in the civilized world thousands of years ago. By any definition today's Jews are a living anachronism that should be preserved under some endangered species act.
    Just as we do not disturb the strange tribes of the Amazon we should not disturb the strange tribes of Juda or David. (March 23, 1996)
   I don't know how to indentify jews. Why don't you tell me?
    The nose, the funny hats, the names, the beards, the "I want a Mercedes" whine? How are they identifiable? What identifies them? Ask three jews what is a jew and you get four opinions. Maybe you can do better. .......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 03:54 PM

Thanks for that information - I really didn't know who Matt Giwer was but the argument I put forward was one I had been given some time ago, and if it is wrong than please correct it.
I have no more time for holocaust deniers than I'm sure you have.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 04:24 PM

Matt Giwer appears to be an anti Semite Holocaust denier - mortified at quoting him and apologise to those I have given offence to for doing so.
But it doesn't alter the fact that the Arabs have been in Palestine for millennia and only the acceptance of that fact will bring lasting peace to that area.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Oct 11 - 05:36 PM

What is an Arab? A significant percentage of the Israeli population are Jews who are physically indistinguishable from, for instance, Christian or Muslim citizens of Lebanon or Jordan.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 01:31 AM

In obedience to Joe's injunction to continue in this thread: without wishing to stir up previous hostilities which we have to a considerable extent been done to deah in the old one ~ a worrying recent report [extracts & URL below] on current Italian antisemitism forwarded by a Californian Jewish friend who much concerns himself with such matters (which I don't myself in the normal course of events) saeems so germane to much we had to say there as to be worth a reference:

~M~

Runaway Anti-Semitism Trampling Italy
by Soeren Kern 
October 27, 2011 at 5:00 am

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2538/anti-semitism-italy

A jarring 44% of Italians are prejudiced or hostile towards Jews, according to a new research study released by the Italian Parliament on October 17.
The inquiry found that nearly half of all Italians say they feel no sympathy whatsoever toward the Jews. There has also been an exponential proliferation of anti-Semitic Internet websites and social networks in Italy. Moreover, the level of hatred against the State of Israel in many cases passes the limits of legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and aims at the destruction of the Jews.
(12% of Italians) holds "contingent" anti-Semitic views such as "Jews use the Holocaust to justify Israeli policy;" "Jews talk too much about their own tragedies and disregard the tragedies of other people" and "The Jews behave like Nazis with the Palestinians."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 03:16 AM

In interests of fairness, I feel I must also reproduce this supposed example of the antisemitism rubricated in above report

"Jews are more faithful to Israel than to the country of their birth"

as I regret to say that I believe it true of many Jews. Many of my own relations have always looked a bit uncomfortable when I have broached such a topic to them, and it was just one of the tendencies which caused me to question my own identification with my own ethnic heritage early in my adolescent/adult life.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 04:18 AM

I don't care about Israel.

I care about their repressive actions in curtailing and controlling peoples who have lived in Palestine/Israel for thousands of years before 1948--when the USA and Europe so "generously" gave someone else's homeland to European Jews.

Am I angry about this? I am. Israel is on the same losing side of history as Nazi Germany, South Africa, Soviet Russia, and the string of little dictatorships strung out elsewhere.

We won't see it in our lifetime, but there will be vindication for the citizens of Palestine.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 04:22 AM

Perfectly tenable view, Guest, certainly; but why are you ∴ so proud of it as to remain anonymous? Why not come out & identify yourself?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 02:39 PM

While it is not antisemitic to believe the statement "Jews are more faithful to Israel than to the country of their birth", that is of course a statement that an antisemite would be likely to agree with.

The same is true of criticisms of Israel's behaviour, and of the way that the Palestinians were dealt with at the time of Israel's establishment and since. Such criticisms are not an indication of antisemitism but antisemites can be expected to have these views.

I am sure there are people who genuinely get confused about this. However basic logic sorts out the false syllogism involved.

All antisemites believe A
This person believes A
Therefore this person is an antisemite.


Equivalent to:

All monkeys have eyes
John has eyes
Therefore John is a monkey.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Mrrzy
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 06:34 PM

But what does the word Israel mean?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 06:52 PM

I was just thinking about what Palestine means..it obviously is a great-sounding name (to me) for a country..some countries have great=sounding names in English, and some fall flat..Belgium?? flat to me. Great country, of course. Turkey..flat..but Istanbul..great name. Of course in their own languages they would have better names I am sure. But Palestine means something..like Ireland means something. Like America means something. South Africa..flat. Zimbabwe..great name. ALl of this is to my ears only. Other people would hear things differently.

Greenland..flat.
Ethiopia..great name

mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Oct 11 - 11:51 PM

Mrrzy

Israel was a sobriquet of Jacob, meaning 'the man who fought God', from the story of Jacob and the Angel ~~

"Israel is a Biblical given name. The patriarch Jacob was given the name Israel (Hebrew: יִשְׂרָאֵל, Standard Yisraʾel Tiberian Yiśrāʾēl; "Struggled with God") after he wrestled with the angel (Genesis 32:28 and 35:10)" - wiki

The Twelve Tribes of Ancient Israel were named after the twelve sons of Jacob; hence the name Children Of Israel sometimes portentously used of the Jews. And so 'Israel' as a collective name for the Jewish race, whence the name of the state ~ called in the early days of immigration, 1880s+, Eretz Yisrael = the Land Of Israel.

This simply factual: no inferences to be drawn from this answer to Mrrzy's question as to whether I think it was all a good idea or not: laRGELY BECAUSE, AS WILL HAVE BEEN GATHERED, I AM NOW PROFOUNDLY AMBIVALENT ON THE MATTER. {not emphasis ~ sorry for imadvertent caps lock}

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 02:24 AM

"I care about their repressive actions in curtailing and controlling peoples who have lived in Palestine/Israel for thousands of years before 1948--when the USA and Europe so "generously" gave someone else's homeland to European Jews. - ANON

Written by someone who has not got the faintest clue about the subject he/she has chosen. Or even worse is insulting everyone's intelligence here by attempting to fence in history.

For the attention of our GUEST:

1948 - The USA and Europe gave away nothing - "generously" or otherwise. Neither did the United Nations, who having accepted the reality that the Arabs of Palestine could not peacefully co-exist in a single state with the Jews of Palestine, proposed and offered a two state solution.

Records show that:

1 - The Jews of Palestine accepted this solution and on the ending of the period of the League of Nations Mandate in 1948 declared the existence of their independent sovereign state which they called Israel.

2 - The Arabs of Palestine totally rejected the United Nations proposal and elected to go to war with the complete and utter destruction of the state of Israel and the annihilation of its people as their declared aim. They lost that war and Israel having successfuly defended itself endorsed its own right to exist.

3 - That the United Nations immediately recognised the State of Israel and welcomed the newly declared state into the International Organisation as a full member. Shortly after this recognition by the UN the State of Israel was independently recognised by the U.S.S.R and by the U.S.A

"European Jews"?? Here our anonymous contributer elects to ignore the fact that Jews have always lived in the region commonly referred to as Palestine.

During the Arab initiated riots of 1929 the Arabs of Palestine murdered, robbed and forcibly ejected the majority Jewish population of the town of Hebron - That Jewish population of that town could be traced as having lived there for over 800 years (They apparently have no rights).

Modern day Jewish migration to what we commonly refer to as Palestine (There is no such country, nation, race or state) began around 1847 while the territory was part of the Ottoman Empire. The Jews who returned to the area bought land, and improved it, either by agriculture or commercially. This created employment which brought people in most of whom were Arab - a simple examination of the demographic history of the period shows this to be true.

The greatest influx of Jews to the area was not caused by the events of the Second World War or indeed its aftermath. The greatest influx of Jews to the area was caused by the war that the Arabs elected to fight in 1948. After their humiliating defeat the Jewish populations of a great many Arab countries, populations who had lived in those countries for centuries, were dispossessed and extradited - the ONLY place for them to go was ISRAEL.

Since their defeat in 1948 the Arabs have on several occasions attacked Israel and each and every time they have resorted to arms they have lost. Each and every time that ceasefires have been brokered and agreements entered into the Arabs have failed to comply or honour those agreements.

Arab violence towards the Jews of Palestine was initiated by a lie deliberately told by an Arab in 1920 and the same continues to this day. Over the intervening years all the Jews of Palestine have learned to do and learned to do well is how to defend themselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Lox
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 06:48 AM

PDQ writes of poisoning threads.

And also writes this piece of toxic filth.

"This fight is a PR masterpiece by the Arabs. They never were the rightful owners of the Jewish homeland (Canaan/Palestine/etc.) and they are recent squatters who have poured into the area in the last 900 years or so."

Apart from being wrong it shows us exactly what language PDQ like to use to dehumanize human beings he views as less deserving of life and human rights than him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 07:00 AM

In what way does that 'dehumanise' anyone, Colostolox?

Neither agreeing nor disagreeing with pdq's formulation; just can't see why it should be denounced as 'toxic filth'* simply because The Great You questions its accuracy, or how any demographic is 'dehumanised' by any gloss placed on the accuracy or otherwise of their supposed history.

~M~

*{a topic you know much of, Colosto-me-dear: your stock-in-trade, one might say},


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 07:58 AM

I'm sure that you actually do disagree with "pdq's formulation", MtheGM.

"...recent squatters who have poured into the area in the last 900 years or so" is both distasteful and daft.

"...squatters who have poured into the area" is every bit as unpleasant when targetted at Palestinians as it would be when referring to Jews; and "recent" as a term for "the last 900 years or so" is unusual, to say the least.

Sometimes in these discussions we find some pretty disconcerting "allies", and I think it is better to refrain from lining up alongside what they say things we disagree with.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 08:45 AM

Well, maybe, Kevin: but 'toxic filth'; 'dehumanise'? Oh come on.

Typical of old Colostolox, mind. No sense of restraint or proportion. Tyoical of his chronic tendency to otiose overstatement and ill-natured aggressiveness. He is a piece of dehumanised toxic filth, if you like.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 09:19 AM

He is a piece of dehumanised toxic filth

I think there might be a case for suggesting that that is an example of posting with "No sense of restraint or proportion...otiose overstatement and ill-natured aggressiveness"...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Lox
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 09:50 AM

I guess the above does indeed illustrate the need for restraint, and possibly even the need for restraints ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 11:24 AM

All of the Israel vs. Palestine positions have been gone over so many times before. Does anyone want to discuss the OP's issue, or are you just interested in crapping on each other?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 11:31 AM

Well, how would you say He Who Fought God, or maybe He Who Fought People, in Arabic?

And this is the thread for actual discussion, not the ad hominem attacks, no?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Stringsinger
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 11:42 AM

What records show that........? Whose records?

Whether Jews lived there historically doesn't give them the right to eject Palestinians or occupy their lands.

The myth that Palestinians would like to see Israel go into the sea still prevails. Actually, the Palestinians just want the right to exist in an oppressive Jewish state which is becoming less secular and democratic by the day.

I get where these records are coming from.......AIPAC.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 12:10 PM

Trying to distinguish historically between Palestinians and Jews 2,000 years ago is a bit futile, because 2000 years ago you are basically talking about the same people. The distinction today that underlies the conflict isn't about genetics, it's about history, ownership of territory, accompanied by largely shared religious traditions that have diverged over the years which provide a marker for the two sides.

Here's an interesting piece making these points, by an English medical writer, coming to the conclusion The shared genetic heritage of Jews and Palestinians :

"Jews and Palestinian Arabs are blood brothers - although this close genetic relationship probably stems from pre-Judaic times, rather than any more recent conversion of Palestinian Jews to Islam.

And the bad news? Well, this basic story has been known for the best part of a decade now. But, perhaps unsurprisingly, it hasn't lead to the warring sides laying down their weapons and engaging in a group hug. This is a religious conflict, not a genetic one.
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 12:21 PM

Fat lot of restraint you have always shown in your dealings with me, Colosto you drivelling heap of piggiturd...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 12:27 PM

... tho you have recommended restraints throughout which sez a fair bit about your mindset & preoccupations, Shitbag-Shouter...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 12:30 PM

""Written by someone who has not got the faintest clue about the subject he/she has chosen. Or even worse is insulting everyone's intelligence here by attempting to fence in history.

For the attention of our GUEST:

1948 - The USA and Europe gave away nothing - "generously" or otherwise. Neither did the United Nations, who having accepted the reality that the Arabs of Palestine could not peacefully co-exist in a single state with the Jews of Palestine, proposed and offered a two state solution.

Records show that:

1 - The Jews of Palestine accepted this solution and on the ending of the period of the League of Nations Mandate in 1948 declared the existence of their independent sovereign state which they called Israel.
""

A somewhat sanitised version of events during that period.

Leaving out, of course, the actions of Menachim Begin et al, of "Irgun Zwai Leumi", who were murdering British soldiers with gay abandon and the tacit approval of the aforementioned Jewish community. So much so that Begin, like many other terrorists, went on to lead his country.

Funny how apologists for Israeli intransigence gloss over such relatively significant events.

On topic, the Arab Spring should, but probably won't redound to the benefit of those (both Arab and Jewish) who would like to see peaceful co-existence.

That will only come when the belligerents on both sides lose the power to make decisions for their respective populations, and Palestine becomes, and is recognised as, a soverign state.

In other words, it will require not only an Arab, but also a Jewish Spring.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: artbrooks
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 09:59 PM

Jewish and Israeli are too very different things.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Oct 11 - 11:34 PM

I thought guests could not start threads, has there been a policy change ?
    LivelyLass has been part of our community for quite some time now, and is no longer considered a guest.
    -Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 04:07 AM

"What records show that........? Whose records?" - Stringsinger

What an idiotic question - the documented records of that highly biased and ultra pro-Israeli organisation - THE UNITED NATIONS - they good enough for you Stringsinger

Odd thing is those "myth" following Palestinian Arabs (excluding Hamas and Hezbollah) who have been attacking, robbing, bombing and murdering the Jewish population of Palestine for about ninety-one years now, have just recently put forward the fiction that they would now be prepared to accept the two-state option originally proposed by the UN based on the pre-Six Day War borders (which in fact were no borders at all because those self same "myth" following Palestinian Arabs did not recognise them) - Damned shame that they didn't do that in 1948 it would have saved everyone a great deal of grief.

It does however beg the question that if the deal was no good then why is it acceptable now? The answer of course lies in the Arabs of Palestine's track record on previous agreements, they did not honour those - they will not honour this one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 04:32 AM

Apologies - hit the wrong key:

Records show that:

1 - The Jews of Palestine accepted this solution and on the ending of the period of the League of Nations Mandate in 1948 declared the existence of their independent sovereign state which they called Israel. - Teribus


Elicited the following comment by Don T

A somewhat sanitised version of events during that period.

Leaving out, of course, the actions of Menachim Begin et al, of "Irgun Zwai Leumi", who were murdering British soldiers with gay abandon and the tacit approval of the aforementioned Jewish community. So much so that Begin, like many other terrorists, went on to lead his country.

Funny how apologists for Israeli intransigence gloss over such relatively significant events.


Complete and utter red-herring which has nothing whatsoever to do with the UN, or their proposed two-state solution.

But in stating the above Don is being very selective himself.

From 1920 until 1948 both Jews and Arabs attacked and murdered British troops in Palestine, prior to the start of the Second World War it was predominantly Arabs doing the killing and during the "Great Arab Revolt" (1936 to 1939) the Jews actually helped the British in order to defend themselves. It was only as the British tried to enforce restrictions to immigration that one of the Jewish Defence organisations turned against the British.

This mind you comes from the source of a comment on the other "Palestine" thread about the deplorable presence of IDF troops in Gaza. Don T deplores the presence but ommitted to mention the reason for that presence - the indiscriminate firing of over 8,000 missiles, rockets and mortar bombs at Israeli civilian targets from territory that had been handed over to the Arabs of Palestine on the understanding that such attacks would not be launched - (Yet another example of the Arabs of Palestine not being capable of honouring any agreement they enter into).

To put the scale of these attacks into perspective in the 2003 US invasion of Iraq there were only 804 missiles fired, there were only 505 bombing missions flown. The fact that the 8,000+ Hamas missiles fired into Israel resulted in so few casualties was pure good fortune, the death toll was low but not for the want of Hamas and their fellow travellers trying to kill as many innocent civilians as possible.

Very pleased however to see that Don T does not refute what the UN's records do in fact say - That the Jews of Palestine accepted the 1947-UN Plan and that the Arabs of Palestine rejected it - elect to go to war and you are automatically condemned to accept the consequences.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 07:22 AM

Actually it is prettyt well established by now that the Gaza Massacre of the end of 2008 beginning of 2009 was not the result of a breach of the ceasefire by Hamas, but in fact it was the Israelis who broke it.

For a more thorough analysis check out the following lecture by Jewish academic Norman Finkelstein.

Finkelstein

If Teribus's shouting and impotent machismo intimidate you, Finkelstein is the perfect antidote.

Teribus' bark is a lot worse than his bite.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 09:04 AM

How ever would you justify "pretty well established" Lox?
In your house?

The missiles continued after the cease fire.
They were no less deadly because "rogue groups" launched them.
Israel was no less justified in trying to prevent them.

The blockade did not prevent the import of missiles.
They could have imported more of their actual needs instead of missiles.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 09:06 AM

...elect to go to war and you are automatically condemned to accept the consequences.

If that means that you should not be surprised at the the consequences, that may be true enough.

If it means that the consequences are justified, it would imply that terrorism is justified in many or even in most of the circumstances in which it takes place.

I do not think that Hamas or Al Qaeda would quarrel with Teribus on that particular point, even if they might disagree on the definition of "elect to go to war" some of the time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: pdq
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 11:08 AM

It has been mentioned many times, but the League of Nations Mandate was divided is such a way that 77% went to the new country of Jordan, one of the current 20 states of the informal Arab World.

Jews were supposed to get a viable homeland, but got only 6.7% of the Mandate's land as inhabited territory for Jews, plus the Negev Desert to control. That is the "home" of the nomadic Beduin and has been an expensive proposition in terms of Israeli money invested.


The British Mandate: Overview

"In 1920, following the defeat of the Turks, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the peace conferences after World War I, the British Mandate for Palestine was created by the League of Nations. The Mandate was international recognition for the stated purpose of "establishing in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people."

The area of the Mandate was originally 118,000 square kilometers (about 45,000 square miles). In 1921, Britain took the 91,000 square kilometers of the Palestine Mandate east of the Jordan River, and created Trans-Jordan (later the Arab country of Jordan) as a new Arab protectorate. Jews were barred by law from living or owning property east of the Jordan river, even though that land was over three-fourths of the original Mandate.

In 1923, Britain ceded the Golan Heights (another 1,176 square kilometers of the Palestine Mandate) to the French Mandate of Syria. Jews were also barred from living there. Jewish settlers on the Golan Heights were forced to abandon their homes and relocate inside the westerb area of the British Mandate.

The total remaining area of the Mandate for Palestine, after these land deductions, was just under 26,000 square kilometers (about 10,000 square miles). The southern part of the Mandate – the desert of the Negev – was also closed by the British to Jewish settlement. The area was inhabited by 15,000 roaming Bedouins, and had no Jewish or Arab settlements in it.

The balance of the Mandate, the inhabited part of Palestine, and only the part west of the Jordan, was just 14,000 square kilometers. Jewish immigration was limited by the British from time to time, especially after the periods of Arab riots and severely restricted after 1939. At the same time, Arab immigration was not restricted or even recorded. By 1948, when the State of Israel was founded, 1.8 million people lived the western area of the Mandate, estimated to be 600,000 Jews and 1.2 million Arabs. Following the war between the Jews and the Arabs in 1948, the inhabited areas of the 14,000 square kilometers were divided along cease-fire lines between Israel and Jordan/Egypt. 8,000 square kilometers, or 57% of the reduced area (which is only 6.7% of the original Mandate territory), became Israel. The rest of the area of western Palestine, 5,700 square kilometers of historic Judea and Samaria, was annexed by Jordan – and renamed the West Bank – while 360 square kilometers were occupied by Egypt and called the Gaza Strip."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 12:16 PM

Last 24 hours:

40 rockets/mortars fired into Israel from Gaza

IDF response - air strikes resulting in the deaths of at least 10 militants.

When a "ceasefire" brokered by Egypt is supposed to be in effect.

Yet another example of how incapable the Arabs of Palestine are of honouring any agreement entered into.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: bobad
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 01:21 PM

"The Palestinian president, in a remarkable assessment delivered on Israeli TV, said Friday the Arab world erred in rejecting the United Nations' 1947 plan to partition Palestine into a Palestinian and a Jewish state."

Huffington Post


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: pdq
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 02:06 PM

"... the Arab world erred in rejecting the United Nations' 1947 plan to partition Palestine into a Palestinian and a Jewish state."

More correctly stated: "...into an Arab and a Jewish state".

There are already 20 states in the Arab World recognized by the United Nations.

What was called "Palestine" in the 1920 Mandate is now divided into at least three Arab countries plus Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 30 Oct 11 - 08:44 PM

Keith,

Pay attention.

The assertion was made that Palestinians break their agreements and can't be trusted.

This assertion was false.

You may twist and turn and filibuster as much as you like as to whatever excuse you think is best, but Hamas stuck to their side of the Bargain.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 02:36 AM

There is no doubt that Palestinians launched anti personnel missile attacks on the ordinary people and children of Israel, from Gaza, in breach of the cease fire, and of international law.

You may assert that it was done without Hamas connivance, but not that it is "pretty well established."

Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation.

We know they exert tight control over tunnel imports, because they impose taxes on them.
We also know that they have never criticised or condemned a single one of the thousands of launches since signing the cease fire.
(And neither has Jim.
"Every little helps." Right Jim?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:23 AM

"right Jim?"
Do you really want to add my voice to this Keithy - I'd have thought.... never mind.
Bit busy at present, but compared to the massacres (that didn't happen) the well-armed and trained forces with their tanks, and heavy artillery (not forgetting the chemical weapons) against a poorly armed and untrained third world people.....
Unlike you and your pro-Zionist apologists, I have sided with nobody and believe (along with the U.N (apart from the US and UNESCO) that a peaceful solution will only be arrived at when the Palestinians are dealt with at the conference table as equals rather than waving bits of paper and hiding behind an ancient pseudo-historical myth to dislodge an entire people from their homeland (starting with the Bedouins - or maybe that was made up as well).
In the meantime, as Turpitude has pointed out, everyone has the right to defend themselves, especially against religious fanatics with nuclear capability.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:41 AM

They were not poorly armed nor untrained in 1948. They were the embodied regular armies of 6 [count them ~ SIX] hostile Arab states who all simultaneously invaded the newly declared, UN-authorised, sovereign state of Israel from different directions ~ including the British-trained [by Brigadier Glubb "Pasha"] Arab Legion of Transjordan: & got their backsides well & truly kicked right back out again from Dan to Beersheba by what was indeed a not that highly trained or well armed, but dedicated, defending army all the way from Dan to Beersheba. And they and their pathetic antisemitic sympathisers like Carroll, who wished they had succeeded in rendering the area Jüdenrein, have been squealing like stuck pigs ever since.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:47 AM

... which is not, I say again, to say that Israel in its present form is other than a grievous disappointment to those of us who rejoiced then. We are not rejoicing now at the state, in both senses, that Netanyahu & his like have reduced it to. But they have been driven to it regrettably. As even Carroll-the-Prejudice has admitted {not ignoring his doctrinaire & tendentious qualifications, however}

"everyone has the right to defend themselves".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:58 AM

"They were not poorly armed nor untrained in 1948. "
No they weren't, but it is no longer 1948 and unless we want our children's children to be struggling with the bloodbaths, it's about time this is recognised.
Nobody comes out of this mess with a clean track record and nit-picking about who did what to whom when solves nothing.
Do we have to continue this "Carroll-the-Prejudice" "Mike the racist apologist, hypocrite" childishness - it gives these discussions a decidedly schoolyard flavour?   
But maybe you are more comfortable in your colostomy/flatulent mode!
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:10 AM

---religious fanatics with nuclear capability.---

& he seems to mean Israel here; and there is some truth in the charge ~ hence some of our disappointment: the religious parties are far too influential and sufficiently popular (in a democratic process, do not forget however) to have to be included in any coalition; which is a great shame.

BUT they have none of the official standing of the Mullahs in those countries - you know which they are -where Sharia is established by government decree or popular acclaim. When was the last adultress stoned in Israel? Under King David IIRC ~ or perhaps under Pilate; I don't expect the one Jesus rescued was the only one.

But that was then: the daily RIGHT NOW stonings and beheadings and amputations and floggings in Riyadh and Dahran and Jeddah have not their counterparts in Tel-Aviv or Haifa.

No thanks to Carroll, mind. They would soon be back if he & his antisemitic mates had their way.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:17 AM

X-posted

"Do we have to continue this "Carroll-the-Prejudice" "Mike the racist apologist, hypocrite" childishness - it gives these discussions a decidedly schoolyard flavour?"
.,,.
No we don't, Jim; happy to drop it if you are.

But, even tho this is no longer 1948, the Sharia-abuses I rubricate above are ongoing in too much of the present Arab world, are they not ~ so-called "Spring" notwithstanding? And do you not even consider the danger of their adoption in any state with a Hamas Hezbollah influence elected by the will of the populace that might be established?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:15 AM

Jim: And let us now try to recover this halcyon time ~~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Backwoodsman - PM
Date: 27 Feb 11 - 01:41 AM

The recent posts by Jim and Michael are a perfect example of how two people with diametrically opposed viewpoints, a firm grasp of the English language and decent writing skills can carry on an intelligent, civilised discussion which, whilst probably never leading to agreement between them, at least stands a chance of coming to a successful accomodation. A pleasure to read.

Certain other contributors should also read them.........and learn


No reason we cannot recapture that sort of relationship, with a bit of goodwill both ways. Apologies, so far as called for, for my excesses. Shall hope for, and assume, the same from your side.

Best

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:32 AM

"Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation."

Funny, because the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs stated that:

"Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire" and "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success"

You will find this at 7.50 in the Finkelstein lecture that you have ignored.

So who is making shit up ...

1. The Israeli foreign ministry?

2. A Jewish doctor of political science with special expertise in the Israel/Palestine conflict who earned his doctorate at princeton, whose parents were both Jewish concentration camp survivors (his father was in Auschwitz)?

3. Or Keith?


Who do catters know to have the worst track record of making shit up ...

Hmmm .....

... I'm getting a nagging sense of Deja Vu ... this reminds me of a thread about Pakistanis cultural tendency to paedophilia where someone was making shit up ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:36 AM

"Jim: And let us now try to recover this halcyon time"
Would very much apprciate it - as much as we disgree on some issues, I very much value and respect your input on this forum.
Really not able to become too invoved in this Traveller talk to write (plus temprmntal keyboard)
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:51 AM

-I very much value and respect your input on this forum- ~~

Thank you: & likewise as you know.

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:21 AM

Lox,
"Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire" and "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success"

I listened well past that bit Lox.
I would like to know the context of the first quote.
Sarcasm?
And also the second quote. How can hundreds of missile launches be described as "a great deal" of "success" in maintaining a ceasefire.

It is certainly not "pretty well established" as you claim Lox.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:22 AM

A ceasefire in one conflict at any rate...

Let's hope it's less fragile than too many other ceasefires.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 AM

The context of the first quote was a foreign office report.

I don't know of foreign office reports from any nation that are written in a sarcastic way.

If you are suggesting that the Israeli foreign office writes reports in a sarcastic way, then you are either accusing the Israeli foreign office of being irresponsible and childish or you are ...

... ta daaaa ....

... making shit up to cover your ass.


So keith - are you accusing the Israeli foreign ofice of telling lies?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:54 AM

Put up the quote in context Lox and we will see.

Jim, how can firing missiles loaded with ball bearings at civilians possibly be construed as "self defence" ??!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 09:36 AM

Surely by the same peculiar logic by which the assault on Gaza which led to the death of so many non-combatants was presented as "self defence" by Israel.

The two sides seem to have a remarkably similar way of justifying what they do. It's just that one side has far more weaponry and kills far more people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 10:31 AM

Not the same logic at all.
The Israelis claimed that their incursion was in response to the rain of missiles, and did succeed in reducing the number of launches.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 11:54 AM

Hey, we're in! Anybody see the news?

And you ad hominem folks, use the other thread, please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 11:58 AM

Mrrzy ~ out of interest ~

who "we"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 12:03 PM

... and who, pray, is going to tell Hamas that indiscriminately firing missiles into populated areas is neither Educational, Scientific, nor Cultural?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 12:50 PM

You know what Keith,

I'll trust the accuracy of a Jewish Doctor of Political science with a list of credentials and peer reviewed research papers as long as as my arm,, whose special expertise is the Israel Palestine conflict over Keith A from Hertford any day of the week.

One is a serious, proven and recognized academic, and the other is prone to making mistakes and generalizing about people of various races in a disparaging way.

In this case Keith has taken to supporting the view expressed by teribus that Palestinians are untrustworthy people who break agreements.

Previously he defended the view that Pakistanis are perverse people with a propensity for pedophilia.


I recommend a good watch of the video I posted folks - it is a lot more informative than anythng said by teribus or keith.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 01:53 PM

""Jewish and Israeli are too very different things.""

I agree with that, but I am responding to those who have insisted that Israel is a "Jewish State", indicting their belief that Jews are a racial rather than a religious grouping.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:01 PM

Previously he defended the view that Pakistanis are perverse people with a propensity for pedophilia.

That is a malicious lie Lox.


Your doctor had an agenda, and he may have taken something out of context.
I make no claim but would like to see the quotes in context.
That is all I said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:23 PM

Do the Palestinians have an anthem? That is first order of business if not..something proud but peaceful of course. Singable, beautiful anthems are very important (ours is unfortunately neither).

Next..a logo..with olive trees or branches and oranges perhaps.

Next..some letterhead.

Next an official website, which I presume they must have.

Ready for business. mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:59 PM

It seems they ahve a very nice unofficial perhaps anthem..most words are not at all offensive..some are a little militaristic perhaps...this is from the one on you tube with lyrics. There are other songs that are also said to be an anthem that are way more militaristic...hopefully those will nto be used as an anthem.

They also need a P.O. (oops...) box somewhere and some flagships registered in other countries. Do they have a soccor team? That always helps. mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:07 PM

""Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation.""

An assertion which you soundly castigated when it was made concerning certain massacres which the Israelis chose not to prevent.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:08 PM

Good news. Soccer team..played Thailand ..first game in 50 years in some regard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxN8v6-a2cc


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:32 PM

""The fact that the 8,000+ Hamas missiles fired into Israel resulted in so few casualties was pure good fortune, the death toll was low but not for the want of Hamas and their fellow travellers trying to kill as many innocent civilians as possible.""

Not only disingenuous, but factually inaccurate.

1. The missiles, having no guidance beyond being pointed in the direction of Israel, cannot be said to be targetted at anything or anybody in particular.

They were, in point of fact, so inaccurate that 8000+ managed to cause, I believe, 11 fatalities in about eight years.

2. Unguided missiles would seem to be a very inefficient way of attempting to kill "as many innocent civilians as possible", given the number of willing suicide bombers available.

Those missiles for the most part landed in open fields and at best scared a few goats.

All in all, hardly sufficient justification for the bloody and violent responses. If you want to bring up the slaughter of large numbers of innocent civilians, take another look at those responses.

I would be less disgusted if Israel were just once to express regret for that collateral damage, but all I hear is excuses and rationalisations for the (so called) "necessity".

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:19 PM

The missiles were accurate enough to aim at towns, and they all were.
They have killed and maimed people of all ages.
No country on earth would allow that to happen without taking action.

The number of Jews killed (not "Zionists" just Jews) is not large compared to the number of missiles fired, but as Jim put it, "every little helps."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:35 PM

Don T I am impressed with the equanimity and total disregard to safety, of not only yourself but your family and loved ones, you would undoubtedly display in the face of such a barrage. Ah but of course Don you are not in the firing line are you, so you can dismiss them as harmless fireworks.

The UN don't though do they Don, they decry the firing of these weapons into Israel indiscriminately as a war crime. Tha fact that the death toll is so light as I stated was not for the want of trying on the part of the Arabs of Palestine.

The suicide bombers and snipers have been kept from killing Israelis and out of Israel by the Wall and the check points which is why they exist Don.

If someone fired even one rocket into the UK (let alone 8,000) I would expect the UK to respond forcibly in such a manner as to deter those responsible from any further firing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:52 PM

From BBC .
"Since 2001, when the rockets were first fired, more than 8,600 have hit southern Israel, nearly 6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005. The rockets have killed 28 people and injured hundreds more. In the Israeli town of Sderot near Gaza, 90% of residents have had a missile exploding in their street or an adjacent one.

The range of the missiles is increasing. The Qassam rocket (named after a Palestinian leader in the 1930s) has a range of about 10km (6 miles) but more advanced missiles, including versions of the old Soviet Grad or Katyusha, possibly smuggled in, have recently hit the Israeli city of Beersheba, 40km (25 miles) from Gaza and brought 800,000 Israelis into range."

Three of the dead were infants, and many of the hundreds of injured are children with life-changing injuries.
"Every little helps."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:17 PM

The Israelis claimed that their incursion was in response to the rain of missiles.

I can't see how that claim if the Israeli government to have been acting in self defence in response to attacks differs in any significant way from the reasons that would be given by those within Gaza who have fired those missiles.

The difference lies in the scale of the violence and the number of civilians who died as a consequence. It's also relevant that the violence from Israel is carried out by government forces, whereas the responsibility for the missiles during the ceasefire is less clear, and the Hamas administration claim to have been trying to stop this happening. (I too would like a source for that quote "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success")


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:28 PM

Breaking News UNESCO recognises Palestine as a full member


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:52 PM

""Ah but of course Don you are not in the firing line are you, so you can dismiss them as harmless fireworks.""

Much as you dismiss White Phosphorus aimed into civilian areas as "illuminations or smoke screens".

Ever had a phosphorus burn T?.........I have, albeit in a laboratory situation, but I can still feel that burning through my wrist to the bone.

""6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005.""

So who are all those people still in disputed residence in 2011?

""Three of the dead were infants, and many of the hundreds of injured are children with life-changing injuries.
"Every little helps."
""

And how many dead or maimed children are there in Gaza Keith, or are they not as important in your scheme of things, as whitewashing anything the IDF does, as justifiable defence?

Until people like you stop trying prove that all blame attaches to the Palestinians, and recognise the indefensible ruthlessness of the IDF, progress toward peace remains a pipe dream.

At bottom this is the David and Goliath story with Goliath armed with nuclear missiles.

As I said earlier, both sides have to want peace for this to end, and it won't happen without compromise on the part of Israel, as well as Palestine. And there is no evidence to support that the word "compromise" is in the Israeli vocabulary.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: artbrooks
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 PM

Returning to the original topic, after the UNESCO vote admitting Palestine, the US State Department said that US funds would be withheld:

"Today's vote by the member states of UNESCO to admit Palestine as member is regrettable, premature and undermines our shared goal of a comprehensive just and lasing peace in the Middle East," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 11 - 09:40 PM

That is nuts. mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 01:49 AM

WP not used as an incendiary only as smoke (If you are talking about the mnitions used in Gaza December 2008/January 2009)

Why was it fired again Don T? Oh yes because Hamas were using their own population as human shields, and deliberately sighting military units in sensitive civilian locations - a war crime, another one that you see fit to ignore.

No rockets = No attacks

No Israelis killed = No Palestinians killed

Hamas founding charter says what about the State of Israel and the Jews?

The Israeli constitution says what about the Arabs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM

Kevin, I can not accept your comparison of the incursion and the missiles.
The missiles came first and as indiscriminate attacks on civilians were war crimes and recognised as such by Amnesty and UN.

The incursion was launched to attack and destroy the missile facilities, which were cynically sited in densely populated areas, another war crime.

In accordance with the Law of Armed Conflict, the Israelis sacrificed the advantage of surprise by giving warnings to residents of the areas where attacks were going to be made.
There were no indiscriminate attacks on civilians at all.

The smoke is not supposed to be deployed in civilian areas, but Hamas was not supposed to fight from such areas.
IDF accepted the local commander was wrong to use it, and should have accepted additional deaths to his own people.
If I lost a son or daughter for want of screening from their enemies I might have stronger views.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM

First 100!

Don, you posted,
""6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005.""
So who are all those people still in disputed residence in 2011?


Do you deny that Israel used troops to force all its settlers out of Gaza (at gun point) in 2005?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:40 AM

"Previously he defended the view that Pakistanis are perverse people with a propensity for pedophilia."
Sorry Lox - he didn't - He single-handedly put forward the view that ALL MALE Pakistanis are culturally implanted with a tendency towards paedophelia
Get it right
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:51 AM

Malicious lie Jim.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:53 AM

--That is nuts. mg ~~~
,.,
Wowie, mg, that's telling 'em. I can feel the Pentagon quiver as the State Department quake from here!

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:48 AM

Not My doctor Keith, Princeton University's doctor - his research is impeccable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:02 AM

If anyone wishes to question the credibility of Finkelstein oor ask Finkelstein what his sources are they should write to him.

Beyond that, his proven track record of peer reviewed accurate and expert research at the highest and most rigorous level is enough of a guarantee for me.

He is Jewish, his parents were holocaust survivors and most of his family on his fathers side were murdered in concentration camps, so there is simply no question of any agenda other than a desire, (once again, proven by peer review at the very highest and most rigorous level) too report information accurately and truthfully.

There is nobody on this forum who has the academic or moral authority to question either his integrity or accuracy.

If you wish to pursue that line of thought, you should either contact him, or look up the source which he very explicitly gave - the Israeli foreign ministry's report on the ceasefire.


Aside from this, I am still laughing at Keiths absurd idea that the Israeli foreign ministry report was written iin sarcastic language.

Sorry but what a twat!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM

"Malicious lie Jim."
Then help us out and cut'n paste who else said that "All male Pakistanis...cultural implant".
I can't find it
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM

I was pleased to see the results of the UNESCO vote yesterday, less pleased to see the US response. But surprised by neither. The question now in this unfolding game of chess, is where from here? As said previously there has already been talk of an Israeli annexation of the West Bank, though I haven't seen such talk repeated in news thus far. As for now, one wonders what the consequences of withdrawal of US aid shall mean for stability and peace in the area however?

A thoughtful, and I believe unusually sympathetic, opinion piece in the Jerusalem Times on the potentially damaging consequences of US/Israeli economic punishment of the Palestinian bid for UN recognition:

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=243936

"Palestinian logic to go to the UN was based on their sound assessment that no negotiated agreement could be reached with the current Israeli government.
...
The US, with support of the Israeli government, is using a diplomatic "stick" against the Palestinian Authority. US Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the House Committee on Foreign Relations, is using her prerogative to put a hold on more than $200 million already approved to be allocated to the Palestinians. Most of that money has already been authorized and contracted out through the auspices of the USAID mission in Tel Aviv responsible for supporting Palestinian state-building and economic development in the West Bank and Gaza.
...
The immediate impact of this is the firing of many young Palestinian academics working for various US contractors and for Palestinian nongovernmental institutions. The USAID mission is also in the process of immediately scaling down, and soon many of its staff are likely to receive notices that their employment is suspended or canceled.
...
The Palestinian economy is already in a fragile state. Losing over $200 million in one blow, with the extra burden of increased unemployment of young academics, could cause considerable social unrest.
...
This would be a disaster; it would make the Palestinian security services look entirely like an arm of the Israeli occupation, delegitimizing their very existence.
...
The US legislator holding back the funds to the Palestinian Authority is playing with fire that could easily erupt inside of Israel. There is no desire in the West Bank for a deterioration of the situation into another round of violence. President Abbas remains fully committed to a non-violent approach to achieving statehood. No, he does not do what Israel would like him to do, but he is acting as the Palestinian president in Palestine's best interests, as he and his colleagues understand it. US and Israeli punishment of Abbas for not "behaving" is dangerous and foolish."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:52 AM

Yesterday the "land of the free and the home of the brave" (bank-roller to some of the worst dictators, terrorist states and organisations in history) has voted to withhold a $60m dollar paymrnt it was due to make next month to UNESCO following a democratically held vote (107 for 14 against, 54 abstentions) to admit Palestine as a member.
Funny old world!!
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:58 AM

Jim, the cultural explanation for the offending came from others.
I merely reported it.
It was not my explanation.
I do not have the knowledge to produce such an explanation.
There was no mention of paedophilia at all.

You have had this explained to you many times.
You know you are lying, and the motive is malice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:00 AM

Are these two twats going to be allowed to hijack this thread as well as the one they already got closed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:22 AM

The crazy thing is that Palestine's membership of UNESCO, and its proposed membership of the UN, actually amount to a formal recognition of Israel.

Israel and the US are more or less on the same side as Hamas in this particular dispute.

I don't think anyone has found a coherent reason for the Israeli position on this, which of course determines the position of the USA in falling in line.

...................
"The missiles came first" - there is no clear "first" in this conflict, Keith. Both sides can always point to some action of their opponents as the justification for every "response". You seem to seem to see this as justified so far as Israel's actions are concerned. I see it as unjustified from either side.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:28 AM

JimC: "Yesterday the [US] has voted to withhold a $60m dollar paymrnt it was due to make next month to UNESCO following a democratically held vote (107 for 14 against, 54 abstentions) to admit Palestine as a member."

This action will have twin consequences, including the loss of US voting rights and influence within UNESCO. If the US continues to make good threats of withdrawal of monies from all subsiduary bodies of the UN (and Abbas will be presenting the Palestinian application for membership, to as many of those as exist I believe) which vote to admit Palestine, it risks alienating itself - and diminishing it's international influence - further and further from the international community. In fact such concerns have been voiced from within the Obama administration itself (can't recall source offhand).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM

Jerusalem Post, lively lass, not Jerusalem Times. I feel strongly about this error because my father spent a year as the paper's News Editor!

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM

---Yesterday the "land of the free and the home of the brave" (bank-roller to some of the worst dictators, terrorist states and organisations in history) has voted to withhold a $60m dollar paymrnt it was due to make next month to UNESCO following a democratically held vote (107 for 14 against, 54 abstentions) to admit Palestine as a member.
Funny old world!!
Jim Carroll---

.,,.

For once I agree entirely, Jim. In fact, not even 'for once'. Another example of the Israeli intransigence which has driven me from any sort of support for, or identification with, that State ~~ with the sole exception of an unavoidable distaste for having the words Nazi or Holocaust used in any context in its regard... But this sort of US/Israeli bullying is likely, as that Jerusalem Post article points out, to be thoroughly counter—productive & invocative of the Unintended Consequences Law.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:50 AM

If by hijack you mean call you out for sticking up for a racist and inaccurate generalization about palestinians, then I don't think anyone is likely to have a problem.

Perhaps making unsupported assertions about the character of palestinians, or defending them is the hijack and the expert testimony pointing out the lie in those assertions is another passenger telling the hijacker to sit down and shut up.

And yes Keith, unlike Jack Straw, Normal Finkelstein is an "expert" and his testimony qualifies as "expert testimony".


But how typical anyway of Keith to use any tactic he can to silence his political opponents when they provide information which shows he is wrong.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM

Re my last post in support of Jim's denunciation of the US action in withholding UNESCO funds ~~ I had better made clear that this is not to be read as unqualified support for the concept of Palestinian statehood and UN membership, which is a far more problematic issue on which I am thoroughly ambivalent. The older I get, the more I find myself bedevilled and up to a point mentally paralysed by a horrible ability to 'see both sides'of so many questions, of which this-here is an example...

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 08:46 AM

Further to the conversation between Jim and MtheGM


US decision to blackmail UNESCO


It seems that America is happy to be a part of a democratic organization, but only so long as it does what America says.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM

Kevin, taking the starting point as the cease fire, the rockets came before each reprisal strike.
Lox, I am not aware that I am "sticking up for a racist and inaccurate generalization about Palestinians"
I would like you to justify that outrageous slur.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 08:52 AM

But how typical anyway of Keith to use any tactic he can to silence his political opponents

I have never done this either.
Try to justify it Lox.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM

Yes you are keith, I pointed it our earlier - I joined this thread on one single point - Teribus' claim that Palestinians break their agreements and implication that they can't be trusted.

Thats it - plain and simple.

You have taken issue with my rebuttal of this point and are desperately trying to find fault with my rebuttal.

When you have been unable to find a rebuttal, you have expressed skepticism of it.

In other words, you doubt that Teribus is in error.

In other words, you are sticking up for his assertion.


It ain't rocket science and anyone can see it because they have eyes and a brain and they aren't prejudiced against palestinians.

Even Teribus knows better than to stick up for his own assertion, though his silence says that he still wouldn't trust a palestinian ...

... cue list of reasons why palestinians are dishonest etc etc etc


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:09 AM

Lox, Dr. F made some points.
There are people of similar calibre taking the opposite view.
That was not the case for my experts.

I am making no claims about Palestinian people.
Are you claiming that no Palestinian organisation has ever broken an agreement?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:23 AM

"That was not the case for my experts."

I didn't notice you referring to 'your' experts ...

"Are you claiming that no Palestinian organisation has ever broken an agreement? "

Why not read my posts and find out.

I don't think anyone could have specifically explained their purpose more clearly than I explained mine in my last post.

You're just spouting hot air now I'm afraid - not even lies ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:43 AM

"It was not my explanation."
Still no cut-'n-paste - didn't think so.
Forget it Keith - you've dug deep enough
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM

Seriously, Jim ~~ On this one, why don't you 'forget it'? You don't have to have the very last word, you know ~~ you are not Keith's mother-in-law!

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:09 AM

I have not dug at all Jim.
How many threads have you raised this in now, after the original was closed because of your obsessions?
How many apologies have you made for doing it??
Here is your last one again.

: 21 Oct 11 - 07:12 AM

livelylass
As far as I'm concerned I have said what I have to say on this matter, I see nothing to change my mind and stand by all I have said
As far as I'm concerned - it is finished here and I apologise that it has interrupted this thread
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:34 AM

Now that the US has indeed made good its threats of severancing monies both to UNESCO and Palestinian state-building projects, wondering how far this story below will go?

No fresh reports as yet, that I could source from a cursory search, so linking to this old Haraaretz article from mid September.

Meanwhile I've no idea whether or not this bill has yet to be passed .. anyone?

U.S. Republicans submit resolution supporting Israel's right to annex West Bank

PS:

"Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MtheGM
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM
Jerusalem Post, lively lass, not Jerusalem Times. I feel strongly about this error because my father spent a year as the paper's News Editor!
~Michael~"

Jerusalem Post, quite so M!
Apologies for the error.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:39 AM

Blast, make that 'Haaretz'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:45 AM

Ah, further to my comment below in reply to Jim, just noted this recent article in Haaretz.
After UNESCO, Abbas will be approaching sixteen further subsidiary bodies of the UN.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/with-unesco-membership-granted-palestinians-seek-to-join-16-more-un-agencies-1.393


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:48 AM

"Seriously, Jim ~~ On this one, why don't you 'forget it'"
Sorry Mike - and all"
I really am too busy at present to be involved with this, as much as it interests me.
Tried to get on with what I have to do but I was dragged back in by a question aimed directly at me by Keith - should have let sleeping grumps lie.
I really have finished with this side of things - for now.
Sorry once more - it won't happen again
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 10:51 AM

How dare you blame me for your deranged obsession interrupting yet another thread!
My question to you was about your comment on the Israeli casualties in the missile attacks, valid and relevant to this thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 11:00 AM

And, actually, Keith ~ equally seriously:~ You don't have to have the very last word either, do you? You are no more Jim's mother-in-law than he is yours, eh?

Regards to Keith & Jim

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM

Lox, I force myself to read your posts.

Why not just answer the question?
Are you claiming that no Palestinian organisation has ever broken any agreements?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:05 PM

Couldn't find the source for my earlier statement that concern has been expressed from within the Obama administration that the severance of funds -and consequently loss of paid-up membership voting rights- to UNESCO and potentially all sixteen fellow UN subsidiary agencies, could promote both increasing alienation of the US from the wider international community, and corresponding diminishment of political influence over same. However, one Professor Julian Cole makes some quite interesting observations on the matter, on his Middle East blog here*:

http://www.juancole.com/2011/11/unesco-palestine-vote-isolates-us-further.html


"Since a law passed by Congress in the 1990s forbids the US from funding UN bodies that recognize Palestine, the Obama administration has no choice but to withdraw the $80 million a year it gives UNESCO, which is a fifth of the agency's budget. But what this step really means is that the US loses influence over UNESCO, and indeed, it might well lose its membership in the organization. UNESCO may have to close some offices and lose employees. Or someone else, such as Saudi Arabia or China, might pick up the $80 million, gaining influence over UNESCO at US expense.

If the move becomes common, the US could end up further and further isolated and helpless. What if the International Atomic Energy Agency recognizes Palestine as a member? If the US cuts it off, it loses a key arena within which it has been pressuring Iran over its nuclear enrichment program. And so on and so forth."


* personally making no claims here as to either this bloggers academic credentials or his stated 'impartiality'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:12 PM

Starting to make a habit of this sloppy accreditation..

Please note: Prof. JUAN Cole - NOT Julian!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:14 PM

US influence was ineffective in preventing the recognition.
What is it worth to US.
UNESCO will miss its cash more than US will miss its "influence."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:28 PM

"Are you claiming that no Palestinian organisation has ever broken any agreements? "

Why I won't answer this question?

Because it has nothing to do with Teribus' assertion that palestinians are untrustworthy.

Unless you are trying to argue that Teribus is right and hoping that an answer to that question will serve as evidence that he is right.

It obviously matters to you to defend the notion that palestinians are untrustworthy.

Why?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:29 PM

"UNESCO will miss its cash more than US will miss its "influence.""

Perhaps..

Personally my opinion is the US is in a lose lose situation right now and it's huge debts and increasing international alienation, mean it's only a matter of time before it's position as a (or indeed 'the') primary world power is entirely sunk, thus forcing a withdrawal from the world stage.

Arguably, this would only be a good thing for USAians.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:46 PM

l.lass, I agree that is the way it is heading anyway.

Lox, I told you I make no claims about the people of Palestine.
What exactly is your issue with my contribution here?
Please be specific.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 12:49 PM

Lox, refusing to answer a question is an admission of inadequacy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:11 PM

""Lox, Dr. F made some points.
There are people of similar calibre taking the opposite view.
That was not the case for my experts.
""


Since Dr. Finkelstein is Jewish, for that statement to have any credibility at all, "people of similar calibre" would, of necessity, have to include at least one Palestinian supporting Israel's actions.

Do you have that Palestinian up your sleeve Keith?

I thought not.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:26 PM

Israel and the Apartheid Slander

Op-ed from today's New York Times by Richard J. Goldstone, a former justice of the South African Constitutional Court, who led the United Nations fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-9.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:27 PM

""Lox, Dr. F made some points.
There are people of similar calibre taking the opposite view.
That was not the case for my experts.""
Since Dr. Finkelstein is Jewish, for that statement to have any credibility at all, "people of similar calibre" would, of necessity, have to include at least one Palestinian supporting Israel's actions.

.,,.

The logic of this statement eludes me ~~ no new phenomenon, mind, re Don's posts.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:57 PM

"Lox, I told you I make no claims about the people of Palestine.
What exactly is your issue with my contribution here?
Please be specific. "

Are you senile?

I responded to Teribus.

You questioned my response to him.

It turned out you don't have any grounds for questioning my contribution.

Yet we are still talking.

So I should be asking you.

What is your issue with my contribution here?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:00 PM

The US, by its actions over the UNESCO vote has done itself no favours.

1. By actually supporting Israel's intransigence, it has made it very difficult, if not impossible, for peace talks to proceed.

2. It has removed its capacity to influence UNESCO proceedings for the foreseeable future.

3. It has seriously damaged its pretensions to be the most democratic society on the planet.

4. By all of the above, it has lost any credibility as a champion of democracy world wide.

A great pity and an affront to the founding fathers.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:07 PM

"The democratic conduct of Hamas as you term it extends to summary street executions and waging war on its neighbor Israel in all but name."

You might say the same for Israel and the US which is waging war on Palestine.
Summary street executions? Wasn't that done to bin Laden and Gadafi? What ever happened to the democratic position of habeas corpus where as we did in the Nurenberg Trials, put the criminals up before an international court? Now we just assassinate them.

By summary street executions, Israel is exempted? This is specious.

Hamas was duly elected and this is a democratic process regardless of how they operate today.

The US is no longer capable of being an honest broker to the peace process here.
The UN's decision underscores that point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM

""The logic of this statement eludes me ~~ no new phenomenon, mind, re Don's posts.""

No suggestion of the same rapprochment recently offered to Jim then.

If Keith decides that Finkelstein, who is Jewish and opposed to Israel's actions and intransigence, has merely ""made a few points"", but is cancelled out by others' opinions, surely it is not unreasonable to suggest that one of those others would need to be a Palestinian opposing Palestinian attitudes and/or actions.

If that is not the case, just how does Keith's offhand dismissal of an acknowledged expert have any credibility.

Now do you understand?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:28 PM

Don ~ Rapprochement by all means if agreeable to you. I hate being on permanent bad terms with anyone. Despite any poss appearances to contrary I am not a naturally contentious person...!

Re your putative pro-Israeli Palestinian; it would clearly be desirable for the resolution of the situation if one could be produced, and would indeed provide a fine balance to Finkelstein's contribution. But that hardly SFICS makes it an absolute sine-qua-non for Keith's point to which you were responding to have any validity; 'twas therein I found the deficiency in logic.

Best wishes

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM

I disagree that refusing to answer questions is an admission of anything. I personally do not answer questions on demand. I decide if and when and to whom. mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM

Don, I do not regard the race of the expert as significant.
My point was that experts on both sides of this dispute are ten a penny.
Lox imagines that by finding one anti-Israel "expert" he has ended the debate.
It would not take many minutes to find a pro-Israel "expert"

Lox, I still do not know why you are angry with me.
What have I posted, specifically, that was wrong?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 03:41 PM

mg, I think that refusing to answer suggests you have no answer.
I never refuse a question.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:03 PM

Keith,

The only reason we are talking is because you questioned my rebuttal of Teribus' assertion that Palestinians can't be trusted.

If you have finished sticking up for him then there is nothing more to say.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:06 PM

I also could mean you could be tolerating abuse in some cases, or you prefer to not correspond with someone who is rude or overbearing. Do as you prefer. mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:18 PM

No Lox.
You posted this, (30 Oct 11 - 07:22 AM )
"Actually it is prettyt well established by now that the Gaza Massacre of the end of 2008 beginning of 2009 was not the result of a breach of the ceasefire by Hamas, but in fact it was the Israelis who broke it."

I then asked you how you could justify your assertion that it is "pretty well established"

A perfectly reasonable response.
Just normal debate.
What is wrong with you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 04:34 PM

What is wrong with you?

Now that is a question which might challenge anyone who has promised to ask any question...

I'm not quite sure how it would ever be possible to prove that anything is "pretty well established" to the satisfaction of anyone who firmly disagrees. Look at climate change, after all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM

I agree your second para Kevin.

Re first part, in the context of why he was in such a stew about my contributions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: artbrooks
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:22 PM

With the most recent announcement that Canada has also cancelled its contribution to UNESCO, I assume that one can now insert 'Canada' everywhere "the US' is mentioned above?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:48 PM

"I then asked you how you could justify your assertion that it is "pretty well established""

And I answered by providing you with expert testimony from norman finkelstein who in turn quoted the Israeli foreign ministry.

... here we go round the mulberry bush ... tra-la-la-la-laaa ... or should I say the vortex into keiths ego ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:51 PM

PS - I'm not in a stew - I'm laughing at your vain attempt to wrestle yourself out of a straightforward situation by way of distraction, obfuscation and your usual disingenuous posturing as a neutral party.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:58 PM

Artbrooks,

Disappointing as it may be that Canada should have such contempt for democracy and international institutions, you are completely right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:00 PM

McGrath,

Or Evolution.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:09 PM

"UNESCO will miss its cash more than US will miss its "influence." "

mm hmmm?

It seems to me that that influence was worth regular payments, the next of which was meant to be about $60,000,000.

Obviously UNESCO thinks that that level of influence can't be bought.

Obviously they are sticking to their own constitution in which member votes count more than bribes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:32 PM

Lox, I am baffled by your wild posting.

Whatever did this mean?

"I responded to Teribus.

You questioned my response to him.

The only reason we are talking is because you questioned my rebuttal of Teribus' assertion that Palestinians can't be trusted.

If you have finished sticking up for him then there is nothing more to say."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 06:38 PM

I'm very happy they were recognized by *somebody*, and I think it's about time the US learned that money can't buy everything.

Anybody who wants to talk about what someone said about the Palesteins should be said in this thread.

Anybody who wants to talk about what someone already said about *them* should say, I'm rebutting in the other thread, and then do so. Please. That is why there are two threads.

And anybody who wants to be the first to say something about somebody rather than about what they have said should say, I have a personal comment in the other thread, and then put it there. Please and ditto.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:14 PM

Those sound like good ground rules, Mrrzy. However the other thread has been closed for posting purposes...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: artbrooks
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 07:27 PM

Perhaps we need a PermaThread entitled "Ad Hominem insults and snarky responses".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 08:50 PM

Let me take you by the hand Keith.

Why did i post to this thread?

I posted to rebutt Teribus' implied assertion that Palestinians cannot be trusted.

So once I did that why did I keep posting?

Because you questioned the soundness of my rebuttal and I had to justify it, which I did with an expert witness.

So why am I still in discussion with you now?

Good question - you have said nothing to add to our discussion since you failed to find fault with my rebuttal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 09:24 PM

To clarify,

my comments at 5.48PM and 5.51PM on 1/11/11 re not Aimed at Artbrooks, but at Keith.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:12 AM

"From: artbrooks
Date: 01 Nov 11 - 05:22 PM
With the most recent announcement that Canada has also cancelled its contribution to UNESCO, I assume that one can now insert 'Canada' everywhere "the US' is mentioned above?"


Most certainly!

Particularly as Canada has long identified itself as one of the world's staunchest supporters of Israel.

At least Harper (and importantly unlike Obama, considering the supposed US's position as an 'honest broker' in all of this) makes no play or pretense of being in any way neutral or unpartisan however.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:17 AM

Lox, I am sorry if I am keeping you in the thread against your will.
Just go mate.
No-one cares.

Do you believe that "expert witnesses" can never be challenged?
Get over yourself!
There are many "experts" on both sides of this, and yours came with no sources for his assertions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:44 AM

I have read repeatedly that Israeli feeling is not in tandem with US actions. Indeed does Israel really need an ideologically based confrontation spear-headed by it's supposed allies right now?

Is this really Netanyahu and the Israeli right pulling the strings or to what extent is the US right (and a fully complicit Obama administration) escalating the situation all by itself? Or is it Folie a deux?

Israel now vigorously upgrading its illegal settlements program: the very issue which stalled peace talks in the first place. Considering combined factors of the Arab Spring, a growing international consensus and the US's increasingly weakened position as a leading world democracy, one wonders if Israel & the US are committed to a form of mutual suicide.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 05:54 AM

"There are many "experts" on both sides of this, and yours came with no sources for his assertions. "

Yes he did - you are genuinely exhibiting signs of dementia - This has been said 3 times at least - his source was the Israeli Foreign Ministry report on the ceasefire.

And as for your experts? I still haven't seen you refer to them.

You can challenge who you like, I urge you to contact him.

So far you haven't challenged him - what you have done is question the authority of his assertion - and you have not provided any grounds for this other than 'the Israeli report might have been sarcastic'.


This is extraordinary - I believe you have a genuine problem, if you are serious then something is causing extraordinary myopia. If you are doing this for fun, then you have extraordinary persistence that indicates a whole other problem.

But one thing is for sure - you are adding nothing to our discussion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 06:39 AM

US response to UNESCO's democratically accepted decision to agree to Palestine's membership = attempts to blackmail into submission to the tune of $60m
Israel's decision is to speed up the building of 2,000 houses on The West Bank
A matched pair I think
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 06:52 AM

Lox, Israel's position is that it was Hamas who broke the cease fire.
That is why Kevin and I were surprised that such a report might exist and asked to see the comments in context.
Can we please?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 07:11 AM

No experts then eh?

Didn't think so.

Finkelstein is an impeccable researcher and academic whose accuracy and method have been proven time and time again at the highest and most rigorous level.

I have seen him say in an interview, when asked his opinion, that he did not see his opinion as important. His job as a researcher was to investigate the facts and present them accurately.

So I have no reason to doubt him.

If you doubt him, then it is up to you to go and verify his sources.

That is why he gives them, so that people can check them out if they doubt them.

That is how academic research works.

I don't doubt him, you do. So it is up to you to challenge him yourself if you wish to persist.

Til then, unless you have something else to add (like your alleged expert witnesses), his expert testimony stands as the authoritative view on this thread, not yours or teribus'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 08:01 AM

http://www.danielpipes.org/blogPlenty of experts like this.
Here are his credentials.
Daniel Pipes is president of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. His bi-weekly column appears regularly in the National Review and in newspapers around the globe, including the Jerusalem Post and Yisrael ha-Yom (Israel), Al-Akhbar (Iraq), Die Welt (Germany), La Razón (Spain), Liberal (Italy), National Post (Canada), and the Australian..

His website, DanielPipes.org, offers an archive of his work and an opportunity to sign up to receive e-mails of his current writings. With 60 million page visits, it is of the Internet's most accessed sources of specialized information on the Middle East and Islam.

CBS Sunday Morning says Daniel Pipes was "years ahead of the curve in identifying the threat of radical Islam." "Unnoticed by most Westerners," he wrote, for example, in 1995, "war has been unilaterally declared on Europe and the United States." The Boston Globe states that "If Pipes's admonitions had been heeded, there might never have been a 9/11." The Wall Street Journal calls Mr. Pipes "an authoritative commentator on the Middle East" and the Washington Post deems him "perhaps the most prominent U.S. scholar on radical Islam."

He received his A.B. (1971) and Ph.D. (1978) from Harvard University, both in history, and spent six years studying abroad, including three years in Egypt. Mr. Pipes speaks French, and reads Arabic and German. He has taught at the University of Chicago, Harvard University, the U.S. Naval War College, and Pepperdine University. He served in various capacities in the U.S. government, including two presidentially-appointed positions, vice chairman of the Fulbright Board of Foreign Scholarships and board member of the U.S. Institute of Peace. He was director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute in 1986-93.

Mr. Pipes discusses current issues on television on such U.S. programs as ABC World News, Crossfire, Good Morning America, News-Hour with Jim Lehrer, Nightline, O'Reilly Factor, and The Today Show. He has appeared on leading television networks around the globe, including the BBC and Al-Jazeera, and has lectured in twenty-five countries. He has publicly debated leading figures, including Noam Chomsky and Ken Livingstone.

Mr. Pipes has published in such magazines as the Atlantic Monthly, Commentary, Foreign Affairs, Harper's, National Review, New Republic, Time, and The Weekly Standard. More than a hundred American newspapers have carried his articles, including the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post. His writings have been translated into thirty-six languages and have appeared in such newspapers as ABC, Corriere della Sera, The Daily Telegraph, Le Figaro, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, and The Sydney Morning Herald.

Mr. Pipes has written twelve books.

Four deal with Islam: Militant Islam Reaches America (2002), The Rushdie Affair (Birch Lane, 1990), In the Path of God (Basic Books, 1983), and Slave Soldiers and Islam (Yale University Press, 1981).

Three books concern Syria: Syria Beyond the Peace Process (1996), Damascus Courts the West (Washington Institute, 1991), and Greater Syria (Oxford University Press, 1990).

Four deal with other Middle Eastern topics: The Hidden Hand (St. Martin's, 1996) analyzes conspiracy theories among Arabs and Iranians. An Arabist's Guide to Colloquial Egyptian (Foreign Service Institute, 1983) systematizes the grammar of Arabic as spoken in Egypt. The Long Shadow (Transaction, 1989) and Miniatures (2003) contain some of his best essays.

Conspiracy (Free Press 1997) establishes the importance of conspiracy theories in modern Europe and America.

Mr. Pipes edited two collections of essays, Sandstorm (UPA, 1993) and Friendly Tyrants (St. Martin's, 1991). He has edited two journals, Orbis (1986-90) and the Middle East Quarterly (1994-2001).

Mr. Pipes sits on five editorial boards, has testified before many congressional committees, and worked on five presidential campaigns. Universities in the United States and Switzerland have conferred honorary degrees on him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM

Great he sounds like a serious academic ...

... you've omitted to show any of his expert opinions on who broke the ceasefire between Hamas and the Israeli Government in Nov 2008 though ...

Or perhaps we should have a "list famous researchers credentials" competition ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM

Follow the link Lox.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 10:26 AM

Jim, "UNESCO's democratically accepted decision" ignores the built in anti-Israel bias in UNESCO and other UN bodies.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-slams-absurd-unesco-decision-on-jerusalem-west-bank-holy-sites-1.321868

l.lass, an ideologically based confrontation spear-headed by it's supposed allies right now?

..is the US right (and a fully complicit Obama administration) escalating the situation all by itself? Or is it Folie a deux?


Remember, this dispute was engineered by the Palestinian movement.
US is only responding to it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 10:33 AM

Efforts to delegitimize Israel have also been part of the record of the specialized agencies, especially UNESCO, the UN's Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. In the 1970s, the Arabs in UNESCO raised questions about archaeological excavations in Jerusalem. Director-General A.M. M'Bow sent a specialist, Belgian Professor Raymond Le Maire, to investigate. Le Maire found the digs were carried out in accord with established international standards. Muslim holy places were protected, and archaeological relics from all periods of antiquity were preserved. Le Maire's report was suppressed by M'Bow, and UNESCO voted sanctions against Israel.

UNESCO again displayed its double standard towards Israel when it refused to criticize archeological and other digs conducted by the Muslim Waqf in the Temple Mount area during the early fall of 2000. Despite UNESCOs criticism of Israel, going against the investigation by their own expert, when the Waqf engaged in work which may have destroyed priceless archeological artifacts relating to the Second Temple, the same UN body remained silent.
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_faq_palestine_un_anti_israel_bias.php


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM

But what on Earth is there "anti-Israel" in supporting membership of UNESCO, which would appear to be in Israel's interests, since it involves accepting being a fellow member with Israel?

Disagreeing with a self-defeating and stupid policy of tyhe current Israel government is not the same as being "anti-Israel". Is it "anti-American" to be against the death penalty? Or "anti-Arabia" to be in favour of women being allowed to drive cars?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 12:32 PM

Israel opposed the move.
Votes always go against Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 01:16 PM

""Lox imagines that by finding one anti-Israel "expert" he has ended the debate.
It would not take many minutes to find a pro-Israel "expert"
""

You illustrate my point rather well Keith, when you say ""Don, I do not regard the race of the expert as significant.
My point was that experts on both sides of this dispute are ten a penny.
""

You do not find any significance in a Jew objecting to Israel's attitude and actions, and assert that his race is irrelevant and experts who disagree are ten a penny.

Dirt cheap experts, and not one Palestinian among them. Certainly makes Finkelstein's evidence more credible to me, and his integrity likewise since he rises above the old mantra of both US and Israeli governments "My country, right or wrong", and says "NO1 That isn't right.

You could learn something from him, if you opened your mind to the possibility that Israel is neither honourable, nor truthful in this matter.

Don T,


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 01:19 PM

Mike, thank you.

Rapprochment it is then.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 01:37 PM

""Israel opposed the move.
Votes always go against Israel.
""

If I were in that position, I'd be examining the reasons for my unpopularity with a view to improving matters, not exacerbating the situation by going around kicking shins.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:09 PM

Voting against a policy of Israel counts as "anti-Israel" - then presumably voting with Israel in this case would have counted as being anti almost everyone else...

Still waiting for anyone to suggest some reason why the policy of Israel in regard to UN and UNESCO membership for Palestine makes any sense at all, or why Palestine membership would do anything to harm the interests of Israel.

And while we are about it, is there anyone who thinks that the prospects of peace or the interests of Israel are helped by the extension of illegal settlements in occupied territory?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:43 PM

Don, a Palestinian who supported Israel might find it more healthy to keep his views to himself.

Don, why Israel is so unpopular, from my last link.
Worth a read, this just an extract.

Since 1948, when a UN resolution set the State of Israel on its way, the UN has has been a part of the on-going evolution of the struggle between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs with binding and non-binding resolutions, peace keeping forces, peace conferences and investigations. Unfortunately, an alliance between Arab states, third-world countries hostile to the developed world, and Cold War politics backed by the former Soviet Union, have created a UN environment that is uniquely hostile to Israel. While Tibet, Cambodia, Rwanda and other world problem areas have come and gone, often without significant comment or action by the UN, Israel has been repeatedly targeted, investigated, denounced, and condemned by one-sided UN agencies or committees with no scintilla of objectivity while at the same time Israel has been denied full participation in UN functions. Meanwhile, nations with horrible human rights violations such as Iraq, Libya, Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria have escaped criticism from any UN forum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 02:56 PM

I note you said you always answer questions, Keith - so take that last post of mine as addressed to you for that purpose.

......................
The regimes in power in all those countries you mentioned there, Keith have indeed been guilty of human rights violations towards their own citizens - however none of them are in occupation of foreign territories, including imposing settlements with hundred of thousands of settlers, and rigidly restricting the freedom of travel of the native inhabitants to move around within their own land.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 03:32 PM

Blimey Kevin.
I was only asking for a yes or no answer.

Why Israel and US are so opposed to Palestine becoming a member of UN, I am ashamed to admit I am not sure.
If no-one else can help I will look it out.

Your list of Israeli abuses.
I think those other states are much worse offenders, and Israel would make a case for why it feels it needs to restrict some movements.

The "occupied territories" were not occupied in any imperialist invasions, but in a desperately fought battle for survival that was nearly lost.
Vast amounts of such have been handed back already.

The settlements are a big issue.
A couple of posts will not cover it.

Not ducking the question, but that is the best I can do.
Happy to discuss in more detail.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 04:02 PM

"Jim, "UNESCO's democratically accepted decision" ignores the built in anti-Israel bias in UNESCO and other UN bodies."
There is now bias on the part of UNESCO - it does not exist nor act as a single unitary body - it is made up of representatives of various states. The vote was 107 for 14 against, 54 abstentions - that is 107 nations supporting the statehood of Palestine compared to 14 against.
A similar situation exists in the United Nations - neither act as a single unit, but as a representatives of nations opposed to US and Israeli policy
Weaseling out of this opposition by a majority of world representatives by crying "bias" is nonsensical
If there is any 'bias' it is that of the world against the expansionist behaviour of Israel and the blackmailing and political and economic bullying of the United States.
As Livelylass pointed out, the US would do well to recognise this fact.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 04:24 PM

So no identified reason why membership of the UN and UNESCO for Palestine would be against the interests of Israel, but voting for it counts as being "anti-Israel".

I don't know how oublic opinion breaks down over this in Israel - butr it's interesting to see that in the USA, it appears that it actually runs runs in favour of Palestinian statehood. What Keith might call "anti-Israel. From this Israeli source: "The US and the Philippines showed the highest rates of opposition to UN recognition with 36% each. However, 45% of those surveyed in the US and 56% of those in the Philippines cast their vote in favor."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 04:25 PM

Should have been "no bias" of course
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 04:45 PM

Here's what Noam Chomsky had to say about Alan Dershowitz:

Dershowitz is not only a remarkable liar and slanderer, but also an extreme opponent of elementary civil rights. That is crystal clear from the correspondence, reproduced below. Dershowitz flew into a fury over the exposure, and ever since has produced a series of hysterical tirades and lies concerning some entity in his fantasy world named “Chomsky,â€쳌 who lives on “planet Chomsky.â€쳌

That is his standard style when he is exposed, reaching truly grotesque levels in his efforts to discredit Norman Finkelstein (and even his mother, probably a new low in depravity) after Finkelstein’s meticulous documentation of Dershowitz’s astonishing lies in his vulgar apologetics for Israeli crimes.
(From here)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 05:03 PM

I followed the link.

I typed 'control+F'

I searched for the words "ceasefire", "november" and "2008".

None of those words appeared anywhere in the article.


I read the article.

It said nothing about the Ceasefire of 2008.


So yet again you have failed to offer anything of any relevance or interest.



When you find some expert testimony or evidence that contradicts the Israeli Foreign ministry report, be sure and let us know.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Nov 11 - 06:25 PM

Lox, you must have missed the first sentence.
Extract-
"..murders and abductions carried out by Palestinians, and as the Israel Defense Forces enter Gaza in response to these acts as well as rockets landing on Israeli towns.."

That describes the most serious possible breaches of the ceasefire Lox, and not by Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 04:39 AM

Somewhat off-topic but pertaining to Israel and the current Middle-East situation:

Israel test-fires missile capable of reaching Iran


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 04:50 AM

Keith A: "Remember, this dispute was engineered by the Palestinian movement.
US is only responding to it."


That is certainly a perspective.

I'm more inclined to agree with Baskin's assessment in the Jerusalem Post which I previously linked to on this thread - but I'm not here to 'win' any arguments on the matter:


"The Palestinian logic was soundly based on their assessment that there was no possibility of reaching a negotiated agreement with the current government of Israel. Every day, Israeli settlement building progressed, taking away more land from what they believe is part of the future Palestinian state. More than 18 years of failed peace processes convinced them that they need to create a "game changer" so that they could preserve the chances for creating a real Palestinian state in the future."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 05:18 AM

but I'm not here to 'win' any arguments on the matter:

Just so ll.
What some here can't see is that this is not the enlightened v the ignorant.
There really are two sides to this dispute and there are informed, intelligent people, including "experts" on both sides.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 06:04 AM

Re the missile, some kind of action against Iran by the West is looking increasingly likely.
See Iran/Korea thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 06:34 AM

I see - so which particular dispute is he referring to ...

... none - its a general comment ...

So where is the specific assertion that Hamas broke the ceasefire of 2008?

Where is the Government report supporting this?

You said Finkelstein had given no source ...

You haven't even shown me Pipes saying that Hamas broke the 2008 ceasefire, let alone refer to any documentation official or otherwise.

Teribus was wrong to say that Palestinians can't be trusted, and I was right to call him out on it.

And you have provided no reason or evidence that remotely begins to deal with my response to him.

Your comments are so far beyond farcical that I can only conclude that you are suffering from a compulsive disorder.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 06:34 AM

200


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 06:46 AM

Lox, he said "Israel Defense Forces enter Gaza in response to these acts "

"These acts were thus prior to the incursion but after the ceasefire.

We both know that the cease fire broke down without needing to consult experts anyway.

When after the ceasefire were Finkelstein's quotes made Lox?
It was not broken at once.

A year later?
A week?
The next day?
Later the same afternoon?

We do not have the quotes in context or any idea when they were made, so they shed no light at all.

Finding an "expert" for or against Israel does not further this debate one inch Lox.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 06:49 AM

Pipes' piece is 2006, so you are right, it does not refer to the 2008 ceasefire.
My other comments stand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 07:06 AM

Keith ~ I early learned that trying reason against the entrenched, dont-confuse-me-with facts, assumptions of Colostolox the ShitbagShouter is a waste of effort. IIWY I shouldn't waste another moment on him,

~M~

Note to Al, Kevin and some others who appear ill-at-ease with my mode of referring to this gadfly-Catter: OK, I drop the piggidroppings bit; but considering the time and emphasis and pertinacity he has expended,unapologetically & motivelessly SFAICS,(if any motive he consistently refuses to divulge it despite frequent enquiries) on accusing me, inaccurately, of stinking due to an ill-fitting colostomy bag, and explicitly expressing his delight at its having irritated me, I feel my "Colostilox the ShitbagShouter" to be a completely concise, compact, coherent, congruous, convenient, correct, compatible cognomen. Any objections to that one ~~ tough-ɷɷ!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 07:35 AM

I think it has to be assumed that one purpose of many of the actions of the Israel regime (extending settlements, carrying out some military actions) is to ensure that the conflict is continued.

The same would appear to be the case for those firing missiles from Gaza. Whether these are under the control of Hamas has never been satisfactorily proved.

It takes two to tango. Two partners.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 08:26 AM

There is only one source of factual evidence here on the subject of the 2008 ceasefire and that is The Israeli Foreign office report on the ceasefire, as reported by a proven expert in the field.

Those are the facts.

MtheGM is busy stirring his bitter soup and as such remains a waste of time.

And Keith says the following.

"We both know that the cease fire broke down without needing to consult experts anyway."

Mm hmm ... and who broke it?

Well according to the only evidence on here it was not Hamas.


Oh no ... wait ... keith posted some 'expert testimony' ... but it turned out to be irrelevant ... at which point he decides conveniently that we don't need any ...

"When after the ceasefire were Finkelstein's quotes made Lox?"

He has provided this information in many speeches including the one posted and has also published it, every time quoting his source as the Israeli foreign ministry report.

"Finding an "expert" for or against Israel does not further this debate one inch Lox. "

Oh really? But I guess it did when Jack Straw and Lord Ahmed supported your views about Pakistanis eh? ...

... but then of course you were only reporting their "expert" testimony weren't you ... impartially like ...

...Despite their having never been recognized as having any expertise ...

As for 'pro Israel/anti Israel', Finkelstein is a Pro Israeli Jew - who recognizes that current Israeli Government policy is damaging Israels interests in an unprecedented way whilst also engaged in the murder of palestinian civilians including thousands of children.


I am astonished at your double standards and farcical dishonesty.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM

So when were Finklestein's quotes made Lox?
Exactly how long after the ceasefire?

Who first broke the ceasefire?
It depends what actions you consider a breach.
There will never be agreement on it.

I did put up a number of experts on the prejudice thread.
They knew about BP culture because they were part of it.
I was not aware of anyone contradicting them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 08:58 AM

This, from Lox, is a perfectly tenable view
~~As for 'pro Israel/anti Israel', Finkelstein is a Pro Israeli Jew - who recognizes that current Israeli Government policy is damaging Israels interests in an unprecedented way whilst also engaged in the murder of palestinian civilians including thousands of children.~~

But as to this otoh
~~MtheGM is busy stirring his bitter soup and as such remains a waste of time.~~

Well, see what I mean? Al, Kevin ~ you've been busy defending the little ShitbagShouter: let's hear it for him again, shall we? ···


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,livelylass
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 09:46 AM

Lox: "As for 'pro Israel/anti Israel', Finkelstein is a Pro Israeli Jew - who recognizes that current Israeli Government policy is damaging Israels interests in an unprecedented way"

Quite. Which is precisely the same position maintained by Chomsky likewise (influential to Finklestein's own perspective and work). But those who denounce both as 'leftist traitors' or 'self-hating Jews' or invoke some other form of ad hominem abuse, never acknowledge this clearly stated 'pro-Israel' position.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 11:27 AM

I dislike stuff like "MtheGM is busy stirring his bitter soup" as much as I do "little Shitbag Shouter", and I would never dream of defending either.

But that quote from Lox does indeed seem tenable to me, though expressed in an inflammatory way. Israel's Government policy does indeed damage the interests of the Israeli people, Jewish or non-Jewish (and I note that you, MtheGM has indicated that you judge it that way), and it has indeed led to the death of thousands of children over the years.

The crucial difference here should be between those who think that violence in this conflict is justified, at least by one side which they favour, and those who do not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 12:10 PM

The crucial difference here should be between those who think that violence in this conflict is justified,

Some would say that violence is never justified.
I believe it is not justified by hate or revenge.
I think that the rocketing of towns, and suicide bombing of buses full of people going to school and work, are motivated by hate and revenge.

I believe that violence can be justified in self defence.
I believe a degree of violence is acceptable to prevent or reduce such attacks ,though not indiscriminate violence.
You can argue that Israel's action have been disproportionate, and we could debate that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 03:03 PM

Talk of self-defence in this context is misleading. The violence is self-defeating to ordinary people on both sides. It serves to ensure that the violence by the other side continues. I suppose it is possible that that is not the intended outcome, but the longer this process continues the less likely that seems likely to be true.

That is particularly true when it comes to acts which appear deliberately intended to ensure that a ceasefire breach is escalated.

Non-violent resistance by Palestinians can be a real threat to the status quo, which is why those who attempt to act in this way,including Israeli supporters.

It does not seem like a matter of disproportion, but of calculation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 03:09 PM

I don't have all the facts, but putting those settlers in as human shields is wrong wrong wrong. Some are from other countries, if I understand correctly, and their hyperenthusiasm is being exploited. If you need a DMZ, use it for grazing or national parks or green space or water storage or something but not for something designed to get people, especially children, killed.   mg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 03:22 PM

I accidentally deleted a bit if my last post. Here goes again:

Talk of self-defence in this context is misleading. The violence is self-defeating to ordinary people on both sides. It serves to ensure that the violence by the other side continues. I suppose it is possible that that is not the intended outcome, but the longer this process continues the less likely that seems likely to be true.

That is particularly true when it comes to acts which appear deliberately intended to ensure that a ceasefire breach is escalated.

Non-violent resistance by Palestinians can be a real threat to the status quo, which is why those who attempt to act in this way, including Israeli supporters, meet a brutal response.

It does not seem like a matter of disproportion, but of calculation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM

Indded it is hard to see how evicting residents of East Jerusalem and housing settlers there, or indeed evicting farmers on the west bank and building settlements there constitutes self defence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 03:33 PM

As for the notion that the Gaza Massacre of 2008-2009 was self defence, Finkelsteins collection of Israeli Soldiers eyewitness testimonies pretty clearly demonstrates what an utter nonsense that idea is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 04:17 PM

Bloody Sunday was "self defence" too. So was the Iraq War.

I'm trying to think of a war that wasn't claimed to be "self-defence" by whoever started it...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 04:40 PM

Funny - Keith supports those notions as well to the absolute bitter end ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 04:46 PM

The Guardian today reported on the possibility of a war in Iran.

Lets not be under any illusions as to the reason why though.

Here's US Spokesman John Bolton Admitting All Of These Wars Are For Oil


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 05:14 PM

Kevin, I am not aware of anyone claiming Bloody Sunday was self defence.
I am surprised you thought it helpful to open that can of worms.

When Israel removed its troops and settlers from Gaza, the rain of missiles began.
Would you deny them the right to take action to reduce the attacks on their citizens?
How is it not self defence, provided it is not indiscriminate or disproportionate?
How is launching a missile loaded with ball bearings indiscriminately at a town self defence?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Nov 11 - 05:37 PM

I'm trying to think of a war that wasn't claimed to be "self-defence" by whoever started it...

Do Hamas claim that their operations against the people living in Israel are "self defence" Kevin?
I think they claim it is to further their stated aim of destroying the state of Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Nov 11 - 03:50 AM

"Kevin, I am not aware of anyone claiming Bloody Sunday was self defence."
For decades the excuse given for the slaughter of 13 unarmed civil rights demonstrators, (plus 14 wounded), by British troops was that some of the demonstrators were armed and that there were IRA snipers in the vicinity - now admitted to be a lie.
I believe you've even put forward similar excuses for the massacre yourself (another lie, no doubt).
Not surprised you don't want to open that particular "can of worms".
It is common for belligerant and agressive forces to make such claims and treat civilian casualities as 'expendable' - the Americans have even invented a phrase for it - "collateral damage".
You have also attempted to excuse this in the past by describing the Gazans as 'Hamas hostages' who 'got in the way of Israeli fire'.
The deliberate targeting of civilians by Israeli troops has bacome commonplace - one Israeli ex-minister has been declared a war criminal and is unable to enter Britain because of such actions.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 11 - 06:28 PM

I imagine that Hamas would say that they were defending the people of Palestine against the Europeans invaders who have displacd them and who continue to subjugate them, or something like that.

It's always "self defence". Settlers in America were engaged in self defence against the Native Americans. And the Native Americans were engaged on self-defence when they attacked the settlers.

In the cobntext of America the imbalance of power and numbers was so great that the "self-defence" of the settlers pushing west was able to be "successful." But in the context of Palestine/Israel and the Middle East that is not the case. "Self defence" can pretty certainly be recognsed to be self-defeating in the long run - for both sides.

Peole who support the violence carried out by either side are no true friends to that side. People who oppose it are no enemies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 04 Nov 11 - 06:59 PM

You don't have to imagine it McGrath - there is a mountain of evidence all over the net showing that people in Gaza view the rockets as the only alternative they have.

I am not commenting on whether this is right or wrong, I am just saying that it is what people living in Gaza say - they are defending themselves.

Do I feel its right to fire rockets at civilians? No I don't. I think it is unacceptable.

But from an academic point of view, I tend to be inclined to see it the way finkelstein does - that it is a form of protest where there are no alternatives that work, and the only other apparent option is to bend over and take it.

Peaceful protest happens every day in Gaza and is met with violence every time, yet both the large scale peaceful proesting and the disproportionate and often lethal response generally goes unreported.

Violence is inflicted against palestinians by settlers every day in East Jerusalem and on the west bank against farmers and their property and crops, and the IDF stands by and watches and allows it, and it goes unreported.

If you are slowly being strangled and nobody is helping, you will eventually start kicking.

The rockets have succeeded in keeping the issue in the news and the world is paying attention to the debate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 05:49 AM

We will have to disagree on that.
I do not accept that indiscriminately firing rockets specifically constructed to cause damage to people, in their homes and schools, is a legitimate form of protest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 06:20 AM

I would have posted this reply here, but the thread had been closed.

04 Nov 11 - 04:57 PM

there were IRA snipers in the vicinity - now admitted to be a lie.

Now known to be true.

I believe you've even put forward similar excuses for the massacre yourself (another lie, no doubt).

No, I have never claimed it was self defence.
Who here ever has?

The deliberate targeting of civilians by Israeli troops has bacome commonplace

I am not aware of this, please substantiate.

The deliberate targeting of civilians by Palestinian fighters has been a commonplace for years.
Do you need that substantiated?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 06:31 AM

From BBc site yesterday, why Britain France and Germany will not support application.

The UN diplomat said Britain, France and Colombia stated their positions in a private meeting of the Security Council committee dealing with the Palestinian application.

The diplomat said Germany also declared it could not support the Palestinian bid, without clarifying whether it would abstain or vote against.


In real terms this does not matter, because the Americans have already made it clear they would veto the Palestinian request.

But in political and moral terms it does: the Palestinians were hoping to show they could isolate the Americans by getting majority support on the Security Council. That looks unlikely now.

A source in Britain's Foreign Office says William Hague will explain the decision to parliament on Wednesday.

Britain and France support Palestinian statehood in principle.

But they have expressed concern that a Palestinian bid to become a UN member state right now could harm chances of reviving the peace process.

There is also general concern here that a Palestinian confrontation with the Americans on this issue could ignite violence in the Middle East.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 07:02 AM

If David Cameron and William Hague say something, it must clearly be correct...
.....................
"No, I have never claimed it was self defence.
Who here ever has?"


It is completely irrelevant what you or anybody there might have said or failed to say. What is relevant is that the British Government did repeatedly back the claim that the soldiers on Bloody Sunday were defending themselves.

The point I was making is that "self defence" is always used to justify violence. It may well be that this is a perfectly sincere claim - but that does not mean it is an accurate expression. "Self defence" which results in continuing and escalating violence in response is no defence. And that is the situation in the Holy Land.

It is true that, as Lox wrote their, non-violent resistance by Palestinians (often with the backing of Israeli sympathisers) is met by violent repression, and goes unreported. But that does not mean that violence is a better alternative. The rockets fired at random merely provide a useful diversion which takes attention away from more relevant forms of resistance, and provides an opportunity for Israel's revanchists to strike once more, and so guarantee that the conflict continues to be carried out in their language


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 07:37 AM

We agree that claims of self defence are sometimes spurious.

It is spurious claim it is self defence when you commit atrocities against ordinary families.

It is reasonable to claim that actions taken to prevent atrocities being committed against your people, are self defence.
(IMO)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 07:40 AM

Well Keith,

Once again, you have neglected to read before responding.

I didn't say Rockets were a legitimate form of protest - I recognized that it may be the only action available to Palestinians.

As I said, "Do I feel its right to fire rockets at civilians? No I don't. I think it is unacceptable."

But I am at a loss to suggest an alternative given that negotiation and peaceful protest, not to mention sticking to the terms of the ceasefire and according to Israel doing their very best to uphold it, seem to be doing nthing to either win sympathy or to release the stranglehold that Israel is inflicting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 07:58 AM

"there were IRA snipers in the vicinity - now admitted to be a lie."
Stop editing out what I said.
"For decades the excuse given for the slaughter of 13 unarmed civil rights demonstrators, (plus 14 wounded), by British troops was that some of the demonstrators were armed and that there were IRA snipers in the vicinity - now admitted to be a lie."
It was a lie that the presence of snipers was the reason for the massacre - that's what I said and that's what I meant - and that's what the Saville report said.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 09:44 AM

"demonstrators were armed and that there were IRA snipers in the vicinity - now admitted to be a lie."
It was a lie that the presence of snipers was the reason for the massacre - that's what I said and that's what I meant - and that's what the Saville report said."""""
.,,.
Without getting too much involved in this particular aspect of the controversy, which is one of my 'can see both sides' comment-inhibitory situations; I think in interest of justice that it was, to say the least, a bit ambiguous as to what part of it you were denouncing as a lie, Jim.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 10:06 AM

Without taking this too far off thread - the presence of 2 snipers (one of them possibly Martin McGuinness) - it has been a long-running issue in defence of the Bloody SUNday massacre; - would have been a bit daft to suggest, particularly in the light of past arguments.
It's all in one sentence, which Keith chose to cut in half - nowt ambiguous about it.
Having dismissed the massacres and human rights atrocities carried out by Israel as lies, turning chemical weapons into fireworks, ignoring Israel's proposal to drive the Bedouins out of their homeland..... Keith appears to e going through a straw-grasping stage.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 10:16 AM

If David Cameron and William Hague say something, it must clearly be correct...

How glibly you dismiss this information.
It is fair to say, Kevin, that you, Lox and Jim have given unequivocal support for the membership application.

A couple of days ago, you admitted that you had no idea what reasons Israel was putting forward against it, and not one of your team was able to enlighten you either.

You did not need to know.
If Israel is against it, you are for it, and vice versa.

How can we not see this as blind, irrational prejudice against Israel?

I am sure that the governments and diplomatic corps. of Britain, Canada, France and Germany have looked at both sides, and guess what?
They agree with Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 10:19 AM

"Having dismissed the massacres and human rights atrocities carried out by Israel as lies, turning chemical weapons into fireworks, ignoring Israel's proposal to drive the Bedouins out of their homeland..... Keith appears to e going through a straw-grasping stage."

I have no reply!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 11:23 AM

So far as I can see the only reason presented by Hague or anyoner else for opposing Palestrinian membership of the UN is that the Israeli government are against it.   

However a recent public opinion poll indicated that as much as 70 per cent of Israelis would be willing to accept such statehood.

So that counts as "blind, irrational prejudice against Israel"...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 11:27 AM

I imagine those Israelis have looked at both sides and come to a rational decision based on the evidence as they see it.
Unlike those here.
Hague has not given his reasoning yet.
Wednesday in Parliament.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 11:30 AM

However a recent public opinion poll indicated that as much as 70 per cent of Israelis would be willing to accept such statehood.

Please clarify if the poll was about this issue of UN membership.
Statehood is the long term goal of everyone isn't it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 01:51 PM

You must have some reason for opposing Palestinian statehood over and above the fact that the present Israeli government is opposed to it, Keith.

Or rather, if that is your only reason, it would seem to indicate a measure of blind, irrational prejudice.
............................

As for "Statehood is the long term goal of everyone isn't it?" The continued\extension of the illegal settlements in the West Bank would appear to throw doubt on that. It would appear the the Israeli government may be hoping to achieve something on the lines of pseudo-states comparable to the Bantustans, or the Native American reservation, in patches of the West Bank divided by expanded settlements.

This would have the advantage over straight annexation of the West Bank that it would keep the Palestinian population out of the electorate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 01:52 PM

"Statehood is the long term goal of everyone isn't it?"
Statehood should be left to the UN - not 2 self-interested nations Israel (aggressively expansionist) and the US (financially and politically predatory) especially as the human rights records of both leave much to be desired.
United Nations responsibilty should never be allowed to be hi-jacked by financial, political and military bullying
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM

You said it, Jim Carroll!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 04:14 PM

Just seen that Israel has arrested 2 aid ships (1 Irish) attempting to break the blockade - probably the crudest and earliest form of repression is trying to blackmail the population as a whole (men, women and children) into submission by cutting off everyday essentials for living. At least they haven't killed anybody, like they did last time, but it's early days yet.
No what were people saying about Palestinian aggression!!!
"It is reasonable to claim that actions taken to prevent atrocities being committed against your people, are self defence."
Yeah - right!!!!
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM

actions taken to prevent atrocities being committed against your people, are self defence

But not when the effect is to make such atrocities more likely to happen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 02:09 AM

You must have some reason for opposing Palestinian statehood over and above the fact that the present Israeli government is opposed to it, Keith.

Or rather, if that is your only reason, it would seem to indicate a measure of blind, irrational prejudice.


I have no opinion about it.
I would need to know more, because I am not driven by blind, irrational prejudice


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 03:44 AM

"because I am not driven by blind, irrational prejudice"
Sabra and Shatila and other massacres, white phosphorus, murderous incursions into Gaza, maintaining a cowardly blockade, expulsion of the bedouins....... (not to mention cultural implants)
Hmmm
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 04:28 AM

Jim, on all those issues I simply put the Israeli side of the story.
The side you do not want to know, hear or think about.

Sabra and Shatila for instance.
I asked you what evidence you had for your assertions, and I posted the Israeli version of events.
Where is the prejudice?
I also reminded you of another massacre at the camps carried out by a Muslim militia, but you expressed no opinion about that one.

White phos. for instance.
I merely provided factual information, and the only opinion I expressed was to deplore its use in Gaza.
Where is the prejudice?


Kevin, that survey was absolutely nothing to do with the issue of membership, but you dropped it in as if it was.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 05:17 AM

The survey appears to indicate that in opposing recognition of Palestine as a member state of the UN and UNESCO the Israeli government (and the USA etc) are not acting in accordance with majority Israeli opinion.
...........................

I have no opinion about it. I somehow think you deceive yourself there, Keith.

It would still be interesting to have some suggestion of any grounds for the Israeli government's opposition which hold water. "We want to be able to use the issue to negotiate with" is not a very good argument, especially in the context of extensions of settlements, which appears to be a way of blocking negotiations.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 07:05 AM

"Jim, on all those issues I simply put the Israeli side of the story.
"
You now appear to be moving into "Itwasn't me that said it but some eminent expert" mode
You have conistently argued Israels case, you have defended massacres facilitated by Israeli "a failure to prevent", have openly denied that documented massacres even happened, you have downgraded and ignored the effects of chemical weapons used on civilians as smokescreens, you have ignored the fact that an Israeli minister has been found a war criminal and us unable to enter Britain, you have ignored the attempts to starve the Palestinians into submission, you have defended the US veto at the Untited Nations
Don't you dare claim that I don't want to know the Israeli case - I know it and I believe them to be a terrorist state committing atrocities against civilians for over sixty years - and unlike you, I find that fact unaccebtable.
I don't give a toss for either Israeli or Palestinian extremeism - unlike you, I have never supported either, though I have at one time or another, tried to understand both.
My main concern is ending this bloodshed, and that will not be achieved by backing one side against the other
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 07:16 AM

Kevin, I can assure you I have no opinion on the membership.

Jim,
You have conistently argued Israels case,
I have tried to put the Israeli case to provide a measure of balance.
you have defended massacres facilitated by Israeli "a failure to prevent",
No I have not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 07:20 AM

The survey appears to indicate that in opposing recognition of Palestine as a member state of the UN and UNESCO the Israeli government (and the USA etc) are not acting in accordance with majority Israeli opinion.

I do not agree that the survey about future statehood can be extrapolated to prior membership.

The Israeli government is answerable to its people, and will have to seek re-election by them, unlike certain other governments.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 08:19 AM

"No I have not."
Oh for ****'* sake - YES YOU HAVE
You've even gone as far as to say that there were "no massacres"
Want me to dig that one out?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM

When stuck in a hole, stop digging...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 12:09 PM

The massacres are well documented.
You posted the Wiki piece about them, but deleted the warnings that there was no evidence for some of the accusations.
I pointed out your deception, and posted the Israeli version of events.
An unprejudiced person would be happy for both sides of the story to be told.
You were not happy though.
Oh my goodness you were unhappy.
You are steeped in prejudice.
You are a very prejudiced person.

Kevin, I do not understand your comment about digging.
Please explain.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 12:20 PM

Here's a clue...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 12:26 PM

Please be specific how it relates to me Kevin, so that I have something to reply to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 01:03 PM

"You posted the Wiki piece about them, but deleted the warnings that there was no evidence for some of the accusations."
All the accounts of Shatila and Sabra have been verified as having be facilitated by the Israelis driving the killers to the site, opening the gates to let then in, standing by and letting them get on with the slaughter, and providing illumination so they could see who they were killing that is a matter of historical record
What was (but is no longer) in doubt is whether the Israelis actually took part in the slaughter; Robert Fisk's evidence indicates that there was a strong possibilty that they did; and he produced eye-witness accounts that they were actually inside both of the camps while the slaughter was going on; they watched the refugees being taken away to be murdered and saw the women being raped - that is what you have described as "failing to prevent".
Begin was in line to be tried for the Israeli part in the massacres, but was made Prime Minister instead.
This is what you have given your support to.
All the other massacres that you have had pointed out to you, also a matter of historical record you have supported by your "no massacres" claim.
I deleted nothing deliberately (that was your practice when you tried to prove Pakistanis to be cultural perverts still no cut-'n- paste - this has always been a matter of historical record, accepted by all - except you.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 01:38 PM

How can you state that something is "a matter of historical record"
If it is why has Wiki been waiting so long for someone to provide citations for the claim?
Can you put up anything that justifies your assertion and refutes Israel's version of events.

I read Fiske's pieces on this and they do not provide it.

This is what you have given your support to.
I have not.

Fiske's "eye witnesses" were produced years after the event and were to enable a prosecution in Belgium.
Why did that never happen?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 01:46 PM

Israeli version

The Lebanese Christian Phalangist militia was responsible for the massacres that occurred at the two Beirut-area refugee camps on September 16-17, 1982. Israeli troops allowed the Phalangists to enter Sabra and Shatila to root out terrorist cells believed located there. It had been estimated that there may have been up to 200 armed men in the camps working out of the countless bunkers built by the PLO over the years, and stocked with generous reserves of ammunition.

When Israeli soldiers ordered the Phalangists out, they found hundreds dead (estimates range from 460 according to the Lebanese police, to 700-800 calculated by Israeli intelligence). The dead, according to the Lebanese account, included 35 women and children. The rest were men: Palestinians, Lebanese, Pakistanis, Iranians, Syrians and Algerians. The killings came on top of an estimated 95,000 deaths that had occurred during the civil war in Lebanon from 1975-1982.

The killings were perpetrated to avenge the murders of Lebanese President Bashir Gemayel and 25 of his followers, killed in a bomb attack earlier that week.

Israel had allowed the Phalange to enter the camps as part of a plan to transfer authority to the Lebanese, and accepted responsibility for that decision. The Kahan Commission of Inquiry, formed by the Israeli government in response to public outrage and grief, found that Israel was indirectly responsible for not anticipating the possibility of Phalangist violence. Israel instituted the panel's recommendations, including the dismissal of Gen. Raful Eitan, the Army Chief of Staff. Defense Minister Ariel Sharon resigned.

The Kahan Commission, declared former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, was "a great tribute to Israeli democracy....There are very few governments in the world that one can imagine making such a public investigation of such a difficult and shameful episode."

Ironically, while 300,000 Israelis demonstrated in Israel to protest the killings, little or no reaction occurred in the Arab world. Outside the Middle East, a major international outcry against Israel erupted over the massacres. The Phalangists, who perpetrated the crime, were spared the brunt of the condemnations for it.

By contrast, few voices were raised in May 1985, when Muslim militiamen attacked the Shatila and Burj-el Barajneh Palestinian refugee camps. According to UN officials, 635 were killed and 2,500 wounded. During a two-year battle between the Syrian-backed Shiite Amal militia and the PLO, more than 2,000, including many civilians, were reportedly killed. No outcry was directed at the PLO or the Syrians and their allies over the slaughter. International reaction was also muted in October 1990 when Syrian forces overran Christian-controlled areas of Lebanon. In the eight-hour clash, 700 Christians were killed-the worst single battle of Lebanon's Civil War.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 02:32 PM

This is a another of your silly backward leaps Jim.
We are repeating exactly our previous exchange, and the events you have brought up yet again are from 30 years ago anyway.

What do you think of Israel's objections to the UN membership.
Do you even know what they are yet.
Of course, a prejudiced person does not need to know any facts.
Israel is just always wrong.
Right Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 02:47 PM

I didn't do it guv - 'onest!!!
Fisks witnsses said exactly what I claim they said - Fisk even pointed out (from eyewitness statements) that the bodies were buried under the stadium which was dekliberately built.
The independant enquiry said exactly what I claimed they said.
The press and news reported at the time that it happened as I said it happened.
Historical records describe it as happening the way I described it happening.
But the Israelis say they didn't do it - so they couldn't have done it.
Henry Kissenger!!!! Tricky Dicky Nixon;'s poodle - we are scraping the bottom of the barrel for our witnesses.
Having previously claimed that you did not reduce Israels part in the massacres to 'failing to stop them' you are now claiming that Israel's part in the massacres was 'failing to stop them'.
You haven't even referred to the other massacres you claim didn't happen.
This becomes farcical.
I'll leave you to your lies and distortions in defence of war criminals (not mentioned the Israeli minister who can't enter Britian becaues she has been found to be guilty of presiding over war crimes).
You are a real piece of work Keith; do you think you might have a cultural; impalnt?.
Jim Carroll
BTW the final estimated body count was around 3,500


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM

Fisks witnsses said exactly what I claim they said - Fisk even pointed out (from eyewitness statements) that the bodies were buried under the stadium which was dekliberately built.

Not the ones he reported at the time.
The ones that turned up 10 years later maybe.

The independant enquiry said exactly what I claimed they said.

What "independent enquiry?!!
I have asked you many times now.
You have never once replied.

The press and news reported at the time that it happened as I said it happened.

Show us Jim.
Fiske was the only journalist who was there in the immediate aftermath.

Historical records describe it as happening the way I described it happening.

Produce one then please Jim

I am not saying you are wrong Jim.
I am saying that it is disputed and you have no actual evidence at all.
And yet you are certain!
Prejudice?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 03:34 PM

What do you think of Israel's objections to the UN membership.
Do you even know what they are yet.


No reasons that I can understand. The USA appears to object because they see it as getting in the way of negotiations because it's opposed by the Israeli government. But why the Israel government sees it as blocking negotiations, that's a bit of a mystery. But I've repeatedly asked if someone could come up with some reasons. Maybe they actually exist.

The only other objection I've heard is the Hamas one, that it involves accepting the partition of Palestine, and recognising the existence of Israel. And I somehow don't think that is an objection shared by the Israeli government.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 03:43 PM

"Lox [has] given unequivocal support for the membership application."

Keith,

You're on drugs or something mate - Total fabrication.

I expressed an issue with US contempt for the United Nations.

You clearly share that contempt, as you have stated that the world (with the exception of the 7 or so US puppets who have fallen dutifully in line) is biased against Israel.

Clearly none of those countries can be trusted any more then palestinians. Only Americans, Israelis and their band of terrified aid recipients are unbiased and can be trusted and this is the only rational explanation for everyone elses horror at the massacre of the inmates of the Gazan Ghetto, and their outrageous biased sympathy for the 350 children who were killed and the hundreds of children who were maimed.

Yes Keith - those are the views you sell.

Snake oil is useless on a thread cos people can go and see for themselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 03:48 PM

For keith the saying would be better described as follows:

When in a hole, deny the existence of the hole.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 04:04 PM

Lox, I did include you as having "given unequivocal support for the membership application."

I am sorry if I got that wrong.
For the record then, Lox does not unequivocally support the application.
Like me, he is keeping an open mind.

Kevin, will you keep an open mind until you know, or will you continue to give unequivocal support for the membership application anyway?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 05:40 PM

I've looked for reasons why Israel should see Palestinian membership as a threat, and I haven't found any. If you have found some, Keith state them. In their absence their seems no are to disagree with the wishes of most Palestinians, and of most countries. And it would appear, most Israelis.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 05:43 PM

've looked for reasons why Israel should see Palestinian membership as a threat, and I haven't found any. If you have found some, Keith state them. In their absence there seems no reason to disagree with the wishes of most Palestinians, and of most countries. And it would appear, most Israelis.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 05:54 PM

Israel wants to bomb Iran. World War III could come out of this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 06:36 PM

WW III is already happening, or haven't you heard of terrorism ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 06:43 PM

""Don, a Palestinian who supported Israel might find it more healthy to keep his views to himself.

Don, why Israel is so unpopular, from my last link.
Worth a read, this just an extract.""

Firstly, there are many Palestinians who live outside the reach of Hamas, so that comment is nonsense.

Secondly, why is it that you only read the output of pro Israel sources, and remain wilfully unaware that there are others of equal, or even superior credibility, with very different experiences to recount?

Your bias is so patently obvious that it robs you of any vestige of objectivity.

While the rest of us are saying that both Palestine and Israel need to change their stance, you are fanatically supporting every instance of Israeli aggression and decrying any Palestinian action, right or wrong. In fact, I'm having difficulty in finding any acknowledgement on your part of Palestine's right to exist.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 07:02 PM

""There really are two sides to this dispute and there are informed, intelligent people, including "experts" on both sides.""

Well, the only one you have found to counter the Israeli Foreign Office report quoted by Finkelstein is Dershowitz, who is ""....not only a remarkable liar and slanderer, but also an extreme opponent of elementary civil rights......his standard style when he is exposed, reaching truly grotesque levels in his efforts to discredit Norman Finkelstein (and even his mother, probably a new low in depravity) after Finkelstein's meticulous documentation of Dershowitz's astonishing lies in his vulgar apologetics for Israeli crimes.""

If that's the best example of a voice in opposition that you can manage, you really are up to your hocks in the poo.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Nov 11 - 07:30 PM

""A couple of days ago, you admitted that you had no idea what reasons Israel was putting forward against it, and not one of your team was able to enlighten you either.

You did not need to know.
If Israel is against it, you are for it, and vice versa.

How can we not see this as blind, irrational prejudice against Israel?
""

A couple of days ago you were insisting that Israel had accepted the "Two State Solution". Now that Palestine wants that status, all of a sudden Israel doesn't.

Israel doesn't want two states, and never has wanted it.

The reason is simple. As long as Palestine has no voice in the UN, Israel can do pretty much what it likes and Palestine cannot stop it.

No wonder the Palestinians have been driven to violence.

At least if Palestine were a member, both would be bound to interact on a diplomatic level, and that is the last thing the Israeli government wants. Wilful, deliberate Israeli prejudice against Palestine?

Yes. I think so.

Don T.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 01:26 AM

Kevin,
I've looked for reasons why Israel should see Palestinian membership as a threat, and I haven't found any. If you have found some, Keith state them. In their absence their seems no are to disagree with the wishes of most Palestinians, and of most countries. And it would appear, most Israelis.

You may not have found any, but USA, Britain, Canada, Germany and France have, and find them compelling.
Not being prejudiced myself, I am keeping an open mind until the reasons are known.(Wednesday for UK)

On what grounds do you state that most Israelis disagree with their elected government on this?

Don, it is true I have only given the Israeli side of the argument.
I think that there are more than enough of you giving the other side.
What is wrong with considering both sides of any debate?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 04:43 AM

BTW, I have never, ever mentioned Dershowitz!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 01:42 PM

Paying for justice? http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/ap-exclusive-palestinians-face-steep-court-fees-14897794


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 02:04 PM

I have only given the Israeli side of the argument.

But you haven't, Keith, so far as UN/UNESCO membership is concerned. You say you are "keeping an open mind".

To quote GK Chesterton "Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM

What else can an unprejudiced person do but keep an open mind until the facts are known.
Whereas, you and Jim have made your minds up already.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM

What kind of "facts" are you talking about Keith? The government of Israel (along with Hamas)is opposed to recognition of Palestine as a state. That is a fact.

Meanwhile its actions in continuing to extend illegal settlements on occupied territory would appear to indicate that it wishes to avoid any genuine negotiations. Those illegal settlements are what is called "facts on the ground".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM

Kevin, I was discussing the application for UN membership.
I thought we all were.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 05:00 PM

Yosi Klein Alevi, BBC site.



Twice in the last decade Israeli leaders - Ehud Barak in 2000 and Ehud Olmert in 2008 - have accepted Palestinian statehood.

Dozens of settlements would have been uprooted and others concentrated in blocs along the border, in exchange for which Palestine would have receive compensatory territory from within Israel proper.

The result would have been a contiguous Palestinian state in the equivalent of the territory taken by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War, with Jerusalem as a shared capital.

Palestinian leaders effectively said no.

That's because the deal would have required one significant reciprocal concession: confining the return of the descendants of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war to a Palestinian state.

Internal collapse

The main obstacle to an agreement, then, is not territory or settlements but the Palestinian insistence on the "right" to demographically destroy the Jewish state. Absurdly, the Palestinian leadership is demanding that Palestinians immigrate not only to a Palestinian state but also to a neighbouring state, Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM

""Furthermore, as Gideon Levy accurately wrote in Ha'aretz – as Dershowitz surely discovered in his Google search -- the IDF kidnapping of civilians the day before the capture of Cpl. Shalit strips away any "legitimate basis for the IDF's operation" -- and, we may add, any legitimate basis for support for these operations.""

Example above of Israeli "self defence".

The kidnapping of two civilians (identified by non Hamas neighbours as a doctor and his brother named Muamar) and subsequent claims that they were terrorists, apparently in retaliation for the "kidnapping" of Corporal Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured by the Palestinians twenty four hours LATER!!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Nov 11 - 06:02 PM

""Don, it is true I have only given the Israeli side of the argument.
I think that there are more than enough of you giving the other side.
What is wrong with considering both sides of any debate?
""

Another example of your inability to read what others say, choosing instead to reply to what you would have preferred them to say.

Check back on my posts in this thread (which you obviously could not be arsed to read fully), and you will find that in almost all of them I have been saying that both sides in this conflict will need to change their attitudes if peace is to be achieved. Jim and Lox have both posted in similar terms, and even Mike has expressed misgivings about Israeli actions, while deploring also Palestinian excess.

This is what you call anti Israel bias?

Yet your input is predominately anti Palestine, and you don't recognise even the possibility that Israel might be partly responsible for the Palestinians' attitude.

I truly do not believe that you have the capacity to understand balanced argument, let alone present one.

As to your other comment, I know that YOU didn't bring Dershowitz into the conversation, but thus far he is the only one who seems willing to take on Finkelstein, and between Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky he is taking a thorough shellacking.

Your ten a penny opposing "experts" seem to consist of just one noted liar, against two PRO Israel genuine experts, who believe that Israel is taking the wrong path.

You do seem to be rather outnumbered. Could it be that you need to re-think.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 12:56 AM

I have provided the Israeli perspective which no-one else has provided for some time.
Why do you object to me doing that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 12:58 AM

....and what makes pipes a liar?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 01:18 AM

I had forgotten about the Muammar brothers.
FWIW here is what Wiki says.

An Israeli spokesman confirmed the detentions, said that both men were members of the militant group Hamas intending to carry out imminent attacks on Israel and stated "These Palestinians were transferred to Israel where they will be questioned".[3][2] A spokesman for Hamas confirmed that the brothers were sons of a member but denied that the men detained were involved in Hamas.[2][3]

This event was followed by capture of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit on June 25, 2006 and further incidents in the 2006 Israel-Gaza conflict.

This is claimed by Noam Chomsky[4] and Jonathan Cook for the Media Lens website[5] to be the first incident in the 2006 Israel-Gaza conflict and the following 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 04:54 AM

DonT ~~ Why "even" Mike? I have been emphatic throughtout that, despite my genetic ancestry and my youthful activities, I hold no brief for present-day Israel: the greatest disappointment of my life, probably; a betrayal of all those youthful hopes.

But I feel bound nevertheless to point out yet again that it was the Arab world that rejected, with violent aggression most hardly repelled by valiant and dedicated resistance, the 1948 settlement that the provisional and then actual government of Israel had accepted; & that I fear there are influential elements among the Palestinians that would not honour any settlement reached by their 'leaders', but would persist with their openly declared aim of 'driving Israel into the sea'. And that Jim, whom you cite as an ally, really does appear to me to object to the very existence of Israel absolutely ab initio and has never AFAICS denied this, & is ∴ full as biased in the anti-Israel direction as you are all joining together in chorus to accuse Keith of being in the pro.

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 06:12 AM

Talking of Liars ...

... here's a turn up for the books ...


Sarkozy and Obama bitch about Netanyahu ...



"I can't stand him anymore, he's a liar," Mr Sarkozy said in French.

"You may be sick of him, but me, I have to deal with him every day," Mr Obama replied.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 08 Nov 11 - 08:06 PM

Why should the members of the United Nations reject the application of Palestine for full membership? Simple.

What other members of the United Nations have joined the organisation with the clearly stated political mandate and aim that dictates the total destruction of another member state? I can think of none.

The United Nations exists as an organisation to promote peace, understanding and reconciliation amongst its members. Israel and the Arabs of Palestine must bi-laterally reach an accommodation that guarantees peace, understanding and reconciliation BEFORE Palestine can become a full member. If not, then all you guarantee is a war. The two sides for some 63 years have squandered every single opportunity given them. By all means grant Palestine full membership, then as a state responsible for the actions of its citizens, when attacks against Israel occur launched from Gaza, or the West Bank (as undoubtedly they will) then Israel will retaliate as it has done in the past, except that now it will launch its attack, justifiably, against an enemy STATE - and this time no-one should intervene until it is settled once and for all. Your Palestinians will lose as they have done in the past, except that this time there will be no turning back the clock to resume the game at the beginning as has happened for the last 63 years.

I am heartily sick of it, chose war and violence as the Arabs of Palestine have done since 1921 - Then accept the consequences. As an independent sovereign state chose aggression and you are totally unprotected and open, quite rightly, to censure from the rest of the world.

Choose any nation, or race, in the world and threaten it with annihilation, or extinction and they will laugh and think that you are joking, not so Israel because that nation was born out of just such an attempt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 03:18 AM

"And that Jim, whom you cite as an ally, really does appear to me to object to the very existence of Israel absolutely"
Please do not resort to Keith's tricks of misrepresenting what people say and believe Mike - that really would be beneath you - you've done enough damage to your 'reasonable' image by underwriting his racist vomitings.
I have never at any time opposed the existence of the State of Israel - my objection has always been the viciously aggressive and expansionist nature of that state, its proven war crimes and its treatment of the Arab population as a whole - all of which you have chosen to praise with faint damns, despite your lip-service criticism.
I have always been a supporter of an Israeli State and am appalled to see it degenerate into a terrorist one in order to push out its borders.
If that is not been my argument from the outset, please point out where it has been otherwise.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 04:26 AM

Indeed, Jim; I think I have misrepresented you and I apologise.

To explain: I have been right back over both threads (!); and find I was disputing with you and Richard simultaneously last September on the previous one; and I have a feeling that my memory might have confused some of his posts at that time with yours; and that he, and not you, was the one who was disputing Israel's very right to exist; which I have managed to find no example of your having done, much as we might have disagreed as to proportions of blameworthiness &c.

I repeat ~~ sorry. Most inefficient of my memory, which has been severely reprimanded and told to do better in future!

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 04:36 AM

Not that I accept, mind you,Jim, that my criticisms have been 'lip-service' or merely 'faint damns'. I repeat that Israel is one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, disappointment[s] of my life, and I hold no brief for it since ~ the straw that broke my back some years ago ~ the uprooting of those olive-groves: a symbol to me of the way that the state I had devoted so much of my youth working to bring into being and to support in its infant struggles was no longer worthy of ANY support or approval on my part whatever. Not 'faint damns', not 'lip-service': just that.

Which is in no way contradicted, that I can see, by my deploring of the reaction of the surrounding Arab world in 1948; or my doubts as to the putative outcomes of the present Arab population's achieving the 'statehood' it seeks. These attitudes are not incompatible, so far as I perceive the matter.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 04:39 AM

Well Teribus,

Coming from you, who stated that settlements were a legitimate way of dealing with the expanding population problem of Israel, which you described as living room, (the german for which is Lebensraum)such comments are meaningless.

So Israel defends itself by annexing land and by massacring civilians.

What a perfect candidate for your peaceful UN.

Only that UNESCO don't agree with you - they see the palestinian state as being a legitimate participant in the UN ... but that of course is because the whole world hates Jews right? They don't have brains and hearts, they just spend all their time thinking about how to annihilate Jews.

What other reason could there possibly be right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 05:08 AM

Apology accepted Mike - but I really dont think "great disappointments fits the bill here.

Apropos of nothing really:

From the Irish Times this morning.
Jim Carroll
SWASTIKAS SPRAYED ON HOME OF ISRAELI PEACE CAMPAIGNER
HARRIET SHERWOOD
in Jerusalem
The home of a prominent Israeli peace campaigner has been vandal¬ised. Death threats and swastikas were spray-painted on walls and a nearby vehicle, amid alarm among human rights groups about increasingly hostile and violent actions against them.
Police confirmed they were investigating the attack on the Jerusalem home of Hagit Ofran, who works for Peace Now, an Israeli organisation which moni¬tors settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The graffiti included the words "Hagit Ofran RIP"; "Rabin is waiting for you", a reference to the fate of assassinated Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin; and "price tag", the signature of extremist set-tlers who carry out operations in revenge for moves to demolish unauthorised West Bank outposts. The names of two recently disman¬tled outposts were also sprayed on walls.
It is the second such attack on Ms Ofran's home in two months. On Sunday, Peace Now's offices were evacuated after a telephone call warned of an imminent bomb attack.
"The building will explode in five minutes," the caller said. Staff found the words "price tag" had been sprayed on the building.
"We are looking at who could be behind this action," police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said yesterday. Extremist settlers were among the suspects, he added.
Ms Ofran said the perpetrators were trying to intimidate activists. "The discourse in Israel has become truly dangerous," she told Haaretz newspaper.
In a statement, Peace Now said: "The responsibility for price tag attacks is [prime minister Binyamin] Netanyahu's. The incite¬ment and the harsh words of the coalition members in favour of illegal outposts and against the jus¬tice system and left-wing organisa¬tions is seeping into the ground and giving support to the price tag vandals."
The attack came as Mr Netan¬yahu announced he was sup¬porting two parliamentary Bills to curtail the foreign funding of Israeli human rights organisa¬tions. Groups targeted by the Bills have said the legislative move is an attempt to silence them and restrict their work.
A human rights worker who asked not to be named said: "There is a public atmosphere of trying to stop human rights activity. You see it in the Knesset [Israeli parliament] in these Bills and statements from politicians who claim these organisations are actually helping terror." - (Guardian service)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 05:16 AM

What would you prefer to "disappointments", Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 07:48 AM

Not for me to tell you how to debate Mike - I was "disappointed" not to win the pub quiz last night.
And don't think for one moment that you are the only one to see some of your lifelong dreams and beliefs disappear round the U-bend
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM

Life is full of disappointments great & small, Jim ~ of course. But to rubricate something, as I have done here, as the greatest one of my life ~~ well, what more could I add to that?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 01:56 PM

So the UN in its wisdom has recognized Palestine and the US is having a tantrum over UNESCO. This isn't new.

Israel has hardened it's arteries and it's interception of a peace flotilla is just another example of Netanyahu dictatorship.

As Chomsky says, it's the US playbook. Support a dictator until they go over the top and then decide to go against them. How long will it take for Netanyahu to go over the top?

Will he start WWIII by nuking Iran?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 03:35 PM

UN has not recognised Palestine.
UNESCO, where tin-pot dictatorships outnumber liberal democracies, has.
Peace flotilla?
Was that the one full of activists hoping to die killing Jews?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 04:51 PM

"Well Teribus,

Coming from you, who stated that settlements were a legitimate way of dealing with the expanding population problem of Israel, which you described as living room, (the german for which is Lebensraum)such comments are meaningless."
- Lox

Care to provide the quote from any of my posts where I have stated that Lox.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 05:34 PM

no worries teribus - it was a previous thread and I called you out on it at the time, but you slunk off and ignored it.

It shouldn't take too long - thankfully we have "control+F" to help us find these things.

All I have to do is load a thread and search for 'lebensraum' and I'll find it ...

... lets see how long it takes me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 05:35 PM

PS ... 300


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 09 Nov 11 - 05:42 PM

5 minutes




Subject: RE: BS: Hamas rockets fired into Israel.
From: Teribus - PM
Date: 11 Aug 10 - 12:19 AM

Mousethief you have not answered my questions at all:

Question 1: for all those chattering on about stealing land every three months: "Why not what are the Palestinians doing with it? Sweet FA as far as I can see."

Answer 1: If you're not using your back 40 acres, I can steal it from you? Sweet. That's just fucked up, dude.

Well no it is not actually Dude, if you live in a very small country with an increasing population, there is no land that can be allowed to go to waste.




In other words, Teribus, in your view Israel are justified in annexing more land on the basis that they need more room, more living space ... the german word for which is lebensraum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 01:00 AM

Troubled with English Comprehension Lox??

"if you live IN a very small country with an increasing population, there is no land that can be allowed to go to waste."

You talk about annexation and throw in the German term "lebensraum" both require that a country increases in size. You cannot annex something that is already located within your borders (famous example from modern History Germany's annexation of Austria or the Sudatenland - did Germany become greater in size or remain the same size Lox?)

Taken in context of the period of time being referred to in the post you are currently gloating over and patting yourself on the back about (1948 to 1952) Israel did not in fact increase in size, Palestine on the other hand did shrink but that land was stolen from Palestinian Arabs by Egypt (Gaza) and by Jordan (East Jerusalem & the West bank) and on that stolen land the Egyptians and the Jordanians shut the Palestinian Arabs up in refugee camps.

Hit you Control+F again Lox and do a search and come up with the German terms for robbing people of their property, their businesses, their goods and forcibly removing them by deportation. In the wake of their losing the 1948 war with the fledgling state of Israel 820,000 Jews suffered exactly that fate at the hands of Arabs. The Israelis did not shut them up in refugee camps and whine about the loses suffered, they welcomed them in (largest influx of Jews into Israel/Palestine ever - all caused by the actions of the Arabs of Palestine and their neighbouring Arab allies) and the country prospered.

Also look at the maps of Palestine around 1947 and look at the areas that belonged to no-one it is described as being "Government Land".

Prior to 1918 any land in what became known as Palestine was held on sufferance from the Ottoman rulers who could take it over as and when they wished.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 01:07 AM

It shouldn't take too long - thankfully we have "control+F" to help us find these things.

All I have to do is load a thread and search for 'lebensraum' and I'll find it ...


Are you still searching for "lebensraum"??
How long now Lox?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:50 AM

"UN has not recognised Palestine."
The UN would recognise Palestine if it was allowed but is prevented from doing so by the US who has declared it will veto any such decision - there's democracy for you.
I suppose it's a step up from napalming them into submission (or "bombing them back into the Stone Age, as General Westmorland once put it in reference for another 'fight for freedom and democracy'"
"UNESCO, where tin-pot dictatorships outnumber liberal democracies"
And yet another three cheers for peace and co-operation.
"Was that the one full of activists hoping to die killing Jews? "
And another excuse for continuing to starve the Palestinians into submission.
Suppose it's a waste of time asking for examples of any aid ships setting out to "die killing Jews" - so far it's been the Israelis killing the aid-bringers?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 03:11 AM

If, as reported earlier, Canada, France, Germany and UK all oppose, US will not need to use its veto.
Jim, do you deny that many activists on the Marmara declared their intention to die killing Jews?
Do you deny that Israel delivered all the aid to Gaza anyway, but it turned out to be junk that the Gazans did not want or need.
So "another excuse for continuing to starve the Palestinians into submission" hardly applies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 04:23 AM

"Do you deny that Israel delivered "
Yiou are delivering Israel's message again -as you have been from the beginning
The aid workers who were killed by Israeli troops were armed with what you and your apologist friends have described as weapons of "self defence"
We have mett some of the Irish aid workers - ordinary Irish people whose only concern is a humanitarian one.
That there maybe terrorist nutters who will attempt to hijack these events ifs always the case - that there is a government of terrorist fanatics who will attempt to acquire land by military suppression is a far greater crime against humanity - and yes, starving the Palestinians into submission very much applies - and that's the way the civilised world views it.
"US will not need to use its veto"
The fact that they have stated that they are prepared to use it is an indication that they will need to - let's see shall we.
Giving the right to veto to a country like the US with its human rights record is a farce anyway, which puts into context your accusation that bodies like the UN and UNESCO are biased against Israel.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 04:56 AM

What a load of cobblers.

Teribus, you stated that if someone else isn't using their land and you need more, then you have a right to go and take a piece.

Your comments came in this context.

Mousethief said "Let's talk about the Israelis, too. Do they want peace? The Palestinians aren't encroaching on a new piece of Israeli land every 3 months."

referring to CURRENT settlement issues.

So in the context of CURRENT settlement issues, the following exchange took place:

"Mousethief you have not answered my questions at all:

Question 1: for all those chattering on about stealing land every three months: "Why not what are the Palestinians doing with it? Sweet FA as far as I can see."

Answer 1: If you're not using your back 40 acres, I can steal it from you? Sweet. That's just fucked up, dude.

Well no it is not actually Dude, if you live in a very small country with an increasing population, there is no land that can be allowed to go to waste."

In other words Teribus, you stated that the settlements are fine because Israel needs to expand.

And that, in German, is called Lebensraum.


Nice to see the tough guy plead "context" when he's banged to rights - but tough luck, guy, the context was very clear.

Unless perhaps your English comprehension needs work ... hmmmm?


And now here comes Keith to save the day - Richard Hammond to Teribus' Jeremy Clarkson ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 05:44 AM

Yiou are delivering Israel's message again -as you have been from the beginning

I know.
Sorry Jim.
You would prefer only one side of the story was presented.
Much less challenging and confusing to your simplistic, leftist paradigm.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 05:49 AM

"And now here comes Keith to save the day"
Complete with his hackneyed support for the inhuman targetting of non-combatants yet again by Israel - 'aid bringers are terrorists' -'goods not wanted by besieged Palestinians' - I'll bet the same arguments were being put forward at Troy
And the veto isn't needed because Israel will win the vote anyway...
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 05:53 AM

support for the inhuman targetting of non-combatants yet again by Israel
Not true.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM

"Not true. "
What's not true - Israeli atrocities or your supporting them (as is your wont)
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 06:50 AM

I do not accept that civilians are targeted, and I certainly would not support such a crime.
(You do not object to rocket attacks on civilians though.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM

I do not accept that civilians are targeted

I presume by that you mean that though the weapons have indeed aimed at targets who were civilians(including many many children) , you believe the claims of the people who fired them that they were intending to kill people who were not civilians.   I somehow doubt that you would accept similar claims by people directing weapons at Israelis...
.....................
A suggestion for a more constructive discussion. Jim writes a post fairly summarising the case for Israel as he understand it, and Keith writes a post fairly summarising the case for Palestine. "Fairly" being the operative word.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 09:03 AM

"I do not accept that civilians are targeted, and I certainly would not support such a crime."
The filmed and press releases of the Gaza incursions have made it quite clear that civilians have been targeted; this includes attacks on hospitals and schools. You in fact defended this on previous threads by claiming that Hamas had taken refuge in civilian areas and were using civilians as "hostages", as if the killing of hostage was in any way acceptable at any time - which it was by you (and the Israelis of course).
You have not only defended lethal attacks on civilians and relief workers, but you have now trivialised the blockade by claiming that the aid being brought at the risk to the lives of the volunteers, was unwanted and useless - which makes the Israelis' efforts to oppose the aid a rather stupid waste of time, effort, a risk to the lives of Israeli troops - and incredibly bad press to the whole of Israel - all a bit of a mess really, don't you think?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 09:37 AM

It was not a hostage situation, but was a military action under the Law of Armed Conflict.
Under that law, it is a crime to make defensive positions in civilian areas.
The attacker must give prior warning of the attack, which Israel did, and must seek to minimise civilian casualties.

The particular aid brought by the flotilla was delivered to a border crossing where the Gazans left it for months.

The Gazans were desperate for cancer and heart drugs, but were brought only out of date tamiflu which, long after the winter epidemic, could not be given away.

Deny any of that Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 09:58 AM

"It was not a hostage situation, but was a military action under the Law of Armed Conflict."
It was a miliary incursion aimed at driving Palestinians out of their homes and then buldozing entire streets to the ground - as was shown by the BBC documentary earlier this year - Hamas offered resistance to this as was their duty as an elected leadership). If the Israelis can take measures in self-defence, so can the Palestinians.
Even if it had been "armed conflict", the deliberate killing and putting at risk of civilians in the prevailing circumstances was inexcuseable - as was the use of white phosphorus (non- chemical of course!!) in the confines of a hospital (and backed up by photographed evidence of horrific burns - including to the faces of children)
So at last, we have it right, from the ass's mouth - hostages are expendable?
"The particular aid brought by the flotilla was delivered to a border crossing where the Gazans left it for months."
Then the Istarelis are eejits for continuing with a blockade of rubbish goods?
The fact that "The Gazans were desperate for cancer and heart drugs" is proof of the inhumaity of the Israeli blocked - surely this is something they could have assisted with rather nany (at best) delaying them with a blockade - assuming that they would be let through anyway - the Israeli record indicates otherwise.
Not going to fast for you - or using too many words, am I?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 10:01 AM

Of course under your interpretation of the Law of Armed Conflict, Keith, the Warsaw Ghetto Rising, and the Warsaw Rising itself were both criminal actions. Not to mention a lot of the stuff that was done on the ground during the Battle of Britain.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 10:37 AM

Then the Istarelis are eejits for continuing with a blockade of rubbish goods?

They did not.
They only insisted on checking it for war materiel before delivering it to Gaza.

Kevin, the Warsaw rising was a rising of the people against an occupying army.

The Battle of Britain was centred on the RAF aerodromes.
Civilians would have been evacuated from defended towns and cities if the invasion had happened.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 10:50 AM

I'm not the one saying the Warsaw Rising or the Warsaw Ghetto Rising were criminal because they involved "defensive positions in civilian areas".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 11:07 AM

Note the DATE: The Warsaw Rising or the Warsaw Ghetto Rising were BEFORE 1949, right???


But I note that not ANY of Jim's comments address the fact that the Palestinians have violated the same rules , by statements of the UN, that Jim is claiming without reasonable cause that Israel violates. I have to presume that Jim does not consider Israelis or Jews to be human beings that these laws apply to, but ONLY the Palestinian are to be considered such.



The Geneva Conventions comprise four treaties, and three additional protocols, that establish the standards of international law for the humanitarian treatment of the victims of war. The singular term Geneva Convention denotes the agreements of 1949, negotiated in the aftermath of the Second World War (1939–45), which updated the terms of the first three treaties (1864, 1906, 1929), and added a fourth treaty. The articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) extensively defined the basic rights of prisoners (civil and military) during war; established protections for the wounded; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war zone. The treaties of 1949 were ratified, in whole or with reservations, by 194 countries.[1] The Geneva Convention defines the rights and protections of non-combatants, thus:
"        Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall, at all times, be humanely treated, and shall be protected, especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity. Women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of indecent assault. Without prejudice to the provisions relating to their state of health, age and sex, all protected persons shall be treated with the same consideration by the Party to the conflict in whose power they are, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, religion or political opinion. However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war.        "
—— Article 27, Fourth Geneva Convention (1949)
Moreover, because the Geneva Conventions are about people in war, the articles do not address warfare proper — the use of weapons of war — which is the subject of the Hague Conventions (First Hague Conference, 1899; Second Hague Conference 1907), and the bio–chemical warfare Geneva Protocol (Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, 1929).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 11:26 AM

I'm not the one saying the Warsaw Rising or the Warsaw Ghetto Rising were criminal because they involved "defensive positions in civilian areas".

The defenders WERE the civilians in that instance Kevin.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 11:35 AM

Keith, you're arguing in a vacuum. Israel has been a bad neighbor for a long time in the Middle East and the general American population is finally waking to that fact. It's no longer "Israel Good, Arabs Bad" like the old cowboys and Indians: Americans have been the main enablers in this, an awful thing to have to admit, but many of us have been saying so for a long time now.

A subset of Americans - American Jews - offer mixed support of Israel now - they're no longer One Voice supporting the Jewish state. It won't be long before Israel loses a lot of funding that seems to only go to prolonging the state of near-war. If the Israeli political leaders don't control their radical conservatives who stir up the hornets nest (new settlements, the egregious placement of a "security wall" through fertile Palestinian orchards, etc.) there never will be peace.

The Palestinians also have to get their hotheads in line. Elect a workable government. But world opinion is shifting and they're now viewed more as victims than aggressors.

People offer you evidence and you just stand on your old hackneyed soap box parroting the same stuff. I don't know why they bother to argue with you at all. You're not discussing this, you're a broken record.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 01:06 PM

"They only insisted on checking it for war materiel before delivering it to Gaza."
You've seen the list of banned good as well as I have - it is spitefully targeted at the civilian population to make life as unbearable as possible of them - parhaps you'd like to put it up and prove e wrong?
And the deliberate targeting of civilian women and children - have we finished with that one
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 01:11 PM

"And the deliberate targeting of civilian women and children - have we finished with that one ?"


Yes, how about the deliberate targeting of civilian Israeli Jews and Arabs by Hamas rockets???

You have NEVER condemned that, I notice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 01:46 PM

So can we take it that those condemning the Hamas (or the non-Hamas) rockets for being directed at targets where civilians live extend the same condemnation to missiles shells and bullets aimed at places where civilians live? My impression is that we cannot.

Whichever side does it the violence is unjustifiable and harmful to the side which indulges in it. It is possible and important to try to understand why it happens, but that does not mean we should try to justify it. People who claim to be sympathetic to Israel should also recognise this in the same way as people who are sympathetic to Palestine.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:04 PM

McGrath,

In general I agree with you. However, there are points that are NOT addressed the differentiate the two sides. IF you are going to apply the "Both sides the same" rule, then let us look:

The Mandate Palestine was formed in 1921, as a Homeland for the Jews. Arabs were to be given equal rights. By 1923, the Mandate Power decided that it was not practical, nd DIVIDED the Mandate into TransJordan ( 77% of the land, for the percentage of population of the Mandate that was Moslem,) and the remainder, the Palestine that was to be the Jewish Homeland. Jews were forbidden from settling in TransJordan, but were in settlements throughout the West Bank.

Those were the LAST borders that the Arab nations have ever acknowledged as valid. The Peace treaty between Jordan and Israel AFTER 1967 acknowledges them.


When the Arabs attacked Israel in 1947-48, the land was occupied BY THE ARABS and the Jews removed. In total 820,000 Jews, basically all of those in Arab lands, were driven from their homes, and (mostly) settled in Israel. 640,000 Arabs had fled from Israel- which was not even the majority of the Arab population in Israel.

In 1967, Israel reclaimed the land TAKEN BY MILITARY FORCE from the Mandate territory. Any settlements on the West bank can be considered as resettlements of those driven out in 1948.


The Palestinians have attacked the civilian population of Israel directly (IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW), while the Israelis have attacked the military target (According to International Law) that the Palestinians PLACED IN CIVILIAN AREAS ( In violation of International Law)


So tell me now WHY DO YOU THINK THE PALESTINIANS are not being treated fairly? Do you want Israel to treat Palestinians as they have treated the Jews under Palestinian control, or worse, as the OTHER Arab nation have treated the Palestinians???


Or are you saying that there is one set of rules for Arabs, and a different set for Jews???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:10 PM

I do not accept that civilians are targeted, and I certainly would not support such a crime.

You've seen the list of banned good as well as I have - it is spitefully targeted at the civilian population to make life as unbearable as possible of them - parhaps you'd like to put it up and prove e wrong?
Israel abides by international humanitarian rules on this.
For instance, it is obliged to supply the irrigation pipes that are used for the bodies of the qassam rockets used to attempt the murder of children going to school and mothers hanging their washing.

Stilly River Sage.
you just stand on your old hackneyed soap box parroting the same stuff.
It is true I am repeating myself, because I am responding to the same old challenges.
Why single me out for your opprobrium?

You say I am arguing in a vacuum.
If you check my posts, they are not expressing opinions at all.
They are factual information refuting the opinions expressed by others.
I would never claim "Israel Good, Arabs Bad"
I am just putting Israel's side of the story.
You make no complaints against those who only put the opposing view and just demonize Israel.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM

Very well put BB


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 03:08 PM

"Teribus, you stated that if someone else isn't using their land and you need more, then you have a right to go and take a piece." - Lox

No I didn't. I said that in a small crowded country you do not allow land to go to waste - different thing entirely. If you cannot make the differentiation then you Sir are a blithering idiot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 03:17 PM

BB,

You've used this line of argument before - that nobody is condemning the palestinians.

And it was as disingenuous then as it is now.

There is nobody here defending the rockets.

So it follows that there is no discussion.

There is only one side to that argument.

We all deplore the use of rockets.

The only subject being argued is that concerning Israels wildly disproportionate murder of palestinians.

Most of us are against all the murder.

You think Israeli murder of palestinian civilians is justified.

Hence - a discussion.


DUH!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 03:18 PM

So you've now added the reported killing and maiming of civilians - to your list of "never happened", along with "massacres".
How on earth was the foreighn minister ever found guyilty of war crimes, I wonder!!!
"Israel abides by international humanitarian rules on this."
Prohibited Items
Sage, cardamom, cumin, coriander, ginger, jam, halva, vinegar, nutmeg, chocolate, fruit preserves, seeds and nuts, biscuits and sweets, potato chips, gas for soft drinks, dried fruit, fresh meat, plaster, tar, wood for construction, cement, iron, glucose, industrial salt, plastic/glass/metal containers, industrial margarine,tarpaulin sheets for huts, fabric (for clothing), flavor and smell enhancers, fishing rods, various fishing nets, buoys, ropes for fishing, nylon nets for greenhouses, hatcheries and spare parts for hatcheries, spare parts for tractors,, dairies for cowsheds, irrigation pipe systems ropes to tie greenhouses, planters for saplings, heaters for chicken farms,musical instruments, size A4 paper, writing implements, notebooks, newspapers, toys, razors, sewing machines and spare parts, heaters, horses, donkeys goats, cattle, chicks.

And if thet were not enough!
"The Land of Israel Lobby has called on Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz to close air and sea ports to Palestinian goods following a boycott on products from settlements issued by the Palestinian Authority. "We are convinced that such a step, which is legal and legitimate, would cause Palestinian Authority leaders to think again about the terrorist economic policy they have adopted," a statement issued by the lobby and Knesset members Zeev Elkin and Arieh Eldad noted. (Shmulik Grossman)"
"For instance, it is obliged to supply the irrigation pipes"
So they aren't prepared to kill them off through lack of water or starve them to death by killing off their crops - BIG DEAL
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 04:21 PM

There is nobody here defending the rockets.

Jim Carroll, is Lox right?
Is that true?
Answer please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 05:12 PM

So name someone here who has justified the rockets by Palestinians.

I won't say that's impossible (I haven't read all the posts on all then threads)- but I rather doubt if that can be done.

However when it comes to naming people who have justified the violence carried out by Israel that is a whole different thing...

And that is where a very significant difference lies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 02:00 AM

So name someone here who has justified the rockets by Palestinians.

Jim Carroll has, but some time ago.
(Lox started a thread specifically asking the question)
What is your answer now Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 02:09 AM

However when it comes to naming people who have justified the violence carried out by Israel

If you mean me, it is true I have argued that it has been within International Law, or not established.
Otherwise, I condemn it absolutely.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 03:24 AM

"Jim Carroll, is Lox right?"
No he isn't - I think that they are an inevitable consequence of State military aggression, expansionism, massacres, blockades, inhuman and degrading treatment of civilians, chemical attacks on hospitals and schools, deliberate destruction of homes in order to colonise, the forced eviction of entire cultural groups.... all of which you either support, claim are not happening or ignore completely.
The well armed and trained Israelis are aggressively vicious towards its impoverished, virtually undefended Palestinian neighbours - the Palestinian leadership would be negligent in its duty if it didn't show some resistance - it is the Israelis who are the open and vicious aggressor here - and it has been condemned world-wide because of it.
I give no support to any group of religious fanatics Jewish, Muslim, Christian... whatever, I leave that to you, but, as you rightly say, people have a right to defend themselves.
You - on the other hand have given your vigorous and dishonest support to a country whose former foreign minister has been condemned for war crimes (a fact you have yet to address)
I assume we are finished with the blockade aimed directly at the everyday life of civilians, as proved by the list of banned goods, as we are with the proven military targetting of civilians - which you continue to defend by denying the documented evidence?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:42 AM

"Otherwise, I condemn it absolutely. "
Where?
By denying it happened you have supported it
By demoting White phosphorus used against hospital patients to "smokescreen" you have supported it (in spite of the horrific photographs)
By claiming the part played by the Israeli's in the Shatila/Sabra massacres was just "failing to stop it" (they at least providing the transport, opening the gates to let the killers in, providing illumination so they could carry out the killing and rape, and probably actually watching it happen and helping to bury the bodies) - you have supported it.
By claiming "there have been no massacres" you have supported it.
By denying that civilians were not deliberately targeted, despite independent eye witness medical staff accounts and media reporting (or don't you believe the BBC to be independant?) you supported it
By ignoring the forced eviction of Palestinians, the destruction of their homes, the proposed expulsion of the Bedoins - you have supported it
By continuing to ignore the fact that a former Israeli foreign minister has been found guilty of war crimes - you have supported it.
These and all the other human rights abuses and crimes against humanity you have supported with your mealy-mouthed excuses, your lies and distortions and your deliberate self-imposed ignorance YOU ARE A SUPPORTER OF A VICIOUS, ABUSIVE AND EXPANSIONIST REGIME THAT IS NOT ONLY A THREAT TO ITS THIRD-WORLD, IMPOVERISHED NEIGHBOURS, BUT ALSO, BECAUSE OF IT'S NUCLEAR CAPABILITY, TO WORLD PEACE - TO ALL OF US
You are probably the most goose-stepping right-wing sieg hieler I have ever come across, certainly on par with Bluesman - apart from your bullying and bullshitting friend Terrapin - but nobody takes him seriously anyway.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:55 AM

"No I didn't. I said that in a small crowded country you do not allow land to go to waste"

mm hmm ...

... in response to points made about settlements forcibly built on palestinian land ....

Your resort to the usual macho crap to augment your alleged rebuttal is as telling and as impotent as always.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 05:01 AM

"a former Israeli foreign minister has been found guilty of war crimes" ---

You use the formula 'found guilty' rather loosely here, Jim. Found guilty by whom? On what evidence and after what procedure? If you mean that a warrant for her arrest if she visited UK was issued by that notable international authority, Westminster Magistrates Court, at the request of a group of impartial, disinterested , and objective - er - Palestinian militants ~~ you should say so. Otherwise, what are you on about, with your "found guilty"? Under our law of innocent-until-proved-guilty, which you have apparently forgotten, a warrant for arrest [subsequently withdrawn in any event when diplomatic protocols were properly re-established] does not by any means constitute a 'finding of guilt', or anything resembling it.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 05:51 AM

... or did you mean the earlier Barak incident? If so, see here ~~

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/14/tzipi-livni-israel-gaza-arrest

There was nothing resembling any "finding of guilt" in either case, and it is , to put at its mildest, mischievous to employ the term in this context.

Surprised at you ~~ or at any rate wish I could be...

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:32 AM

Tzipi Livni.
"Livni, head of the opposition Kadima party, played a key role in decisions made before and during the three-week offensive. Palestinian officials and an Israeli human rights organisation say about 1,400 people, mostly civilians, were killed in the Gaza offensive. Israel says 1,166 Palestinians died and claims most were combatants. Israel says it acted in self-defence against Hamas rockets from Gaza. Thirteen Israelis died."
You mean this Mike (you've kidy put up the whole article for anybody to reference to)
What's your point - have I misread something, if so, please cross this off Keith's large enough without list?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:40 AM

My point is that you say she has been "found guilty of" war crimes. "Found guilty" implies a judicial process. By whom has she been so convicted, please, Jim? By Jim Carroll? And where, pray, does his writ in such matters run?

The worst that has happened to her is that a warrant for her arrest on arrival in this country was issued by the international might and hegemony of the Marylebone Magistrates Court, at the instance of the undisputed authority of a self-appointed group of lippy expatriate Palestinian militants.

"Found guilty", your ɷ, Mr Carroll.

Happy 11.11.11 justa-same!

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:54 AM

Sorry ~ Westminster Mag Ct ~~

Accuracy matters...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 07:13 AM

"Found guilty", I would add, with its legalistic overtones, is definitely defamatory, in a moral sense; and possibly [one of our lawyers please advise] in a legal one also.

However much one may deplore her actions {& I join you in that, however much you may mutter 'lip-service' & whatever the other phrase was that you found to belittle my disgust}, she has not, in any meaningful sense, been 'found guilty' of anything. You merely make yourself look both more stupid, more malevolent, & more prejudiced, by persisting in asserting so, Jim.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 07:52 AM

As I say - if you feel I have misrepresented her crimes (for which she has been unable to enter Britain, unless the new regulations regarding entry have altered that situation) please feel free to exclude her from the list. It was never my intention to mislead; I put as link in when I referred to her earlier.
If her guilt is of my imaginings, I am at a loss to understand why an arrest warrant was issued - but there you go!!
The other items will serve just as well to make my point regarding the dishonest and reacionary nature of Keith's bais - which he accuses others of.
All this still has a whiff of "praising with faint damns" - but that's probably due to my over-active imagination too
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 08:28 AM

"If her guilt is of my imaginings, I am at a loss to understand why an arrest warrant was issued"
.,,.

Please, Jim: FOR CRYING OUT BLOODY LOUD! ~ Do you really not know, or respect, the principle vital to out law of Innocent Until Proved Guilty? An arrest warrant merely means that someone in authority - in this case the Overwhelming Worldwide Recognised Majesty of the Westminster Bench of Magistrates - considers there might be a case to answer. IT IS NOT A FINDING OF GUILT. So what 'GUILT' are you constantly on about? Nobody has been "found guilty" of bloody anything ~~ except in J Carroll's wishful, prejudiced, maundering, diseased imaginings.

Not like you to be so uncharacteristically bloody THICK, for heavens sake: I say again, it can only attributed to PREJUDICE in this instance.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 09:08 AM

"except in J Carroll's wishful, prejudiced, maundering, diseased imaginings."
Then why "However much one may deplore her actions {& I join you in that" are you joing me in that.
As you appear to wish to defend the lady's honour (at the same time as deploring her actions) I apologise unreservedly for mistaking the situation before one of us bursts a blood vessel.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 09:33 AM

So if there is a case to answer, then if she comes here she ought to answer it. If she doesn't wish to answer it in court she needn't come here. But it should be no business of the British Government to give her immunity from court proceedings if she does come here.

I would hope that the same kind of consideration puts restraints on the world travels of Tony Blair and sundry other politicians of many countries.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 11:38 AM

Pssst Lox - The Jews of Palestine are as Palestinian as the Arabs of Palestine.

Take a good look at the map of the Palestine Mandate 1920 - compare that to the Palestine Mandate created by hiving off 77% for exclusive settlement by the Arabs of Palestine in 1923. The first recognised borders of "Palestine"

That Palestine disappeared in 1949 but no borders were ever established - The Jews accepted the 1947 UN Plan the Arabs didn't, therefore no borders were ever agreed.

"Palestine" as it existed and was recognised in 1923 did not come back into being, with all invaders ejected and it's borders officially recognised, until 1994 (Egyptian Peace Treaty 1979; Oslo Peace Accords 1993 & Jordanian Peace Treaty 1994)

The Arabs of Palestine cannot have it both ways, they cannot insist that others observe and adhere to borders which they themselves do not recognise, nor ever have recognised.

Jews may settle anywhere within the borders of what defined Palestine in 1923.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 03:39 PM

I assume we are finished with the blockade aimed directly at the everyday life of civilians, as proved by the list of banned goods, as we are with the proven military targetting of civilians - which you continue to defend by denying the documented evidence?

I am not denying "documented evidence" Jim.
I have never seen any!
Show some to us please.

Israel is within its rights to impose a blockade.
It allows through that which is required under International Law.
Why should they go further?
Gazans elected a government whose stated aim is the destruction of Israel, launch deadly attacks on ordinary Israeli people, and expect Israel to be nice to them in return.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:39 PM

If something is not actually against existing codes of International Law it's quite OK, Keith? That's a line of defence that didn't work too well in the Nuremberg Trials...

(And no, MtheGM, that doesn't mean I'm saying Israel is a Nazi state!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:57 PM

"Show some to us please."
Why Keith? - you don't read what others write - you've had numerous examples put up which you've either contradicted without evidence or totally ignored; "there have been NO massacres" - no civilians targeted. Do your own ****** homework and prove there have been no massacres - there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.
There is plenty of evidence presented to you of heavy artilery and chemical weapons have been used on civilians - produce your own evidence that the reports are lies as you have claimed.
You've seen the squalid list of banned goods aimed directly at civilians - stop hiding behind what is legal and justify why any country should even want to debase the everyday life of an already impoverished people other than "that's what the law allows them to get away with".
The number of times you have denied having claimed things that you yourself have written convince me that you don't even bother to read these - you're noted for it on this forum.
Mc Grath has just summed it up perfectly "If something is not actually against existing codes of International Law it's quite OK, Keith?"
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 05:59 PM

""The United Nations exists as an organisation to promote peace, understanding and reconciliation amongst its members. Israel and the Arabs of Palestine must bi-laterally reach an accommodation that guarantees peace, understanding and reconciliation BEFORE Palestine can become a full member.""

Maybe, just maybe, the UN will achieve by talking to the new Palestinian STATE, what the IDF have FAILED to achieve by bombing it back to the Stone Age, starving it of essential supplies with a coastal blockade and annexing huge tracts of its territory.

None of which indicates ANY desire to talk peace to the Palestinians.

What you really advocate is an abject and unconditional surrender to IDF aggression and occupation.

THAT IS NOT PEACE!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:15 PM

""Do you deny that Israel delivered all the aid to Gaza anyway, but it turned out to be junk that the Gazans did not want or need.""

Do you have ANY evidence that the useless junk that was delivered was in fact the cargo removed from the Marmara?

Oh, of course, the Israelis said it was so that must be true, RIGHT?

After all, the Israelis wouldn't lie!

Are you really dumb enough to believe that those who loaded the Marmara wouldn't know what was most needed in Gaza?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:37 PM

""Yes, how about the deliberate targeting of civilian Israeli Jews and Arabs by Hamas rockets???

You have NEVER condemned that, I notice.
""

Another LIE!

We have all condemned the use of those rockets, but, while the Israelis continue to steal Palestinian territory with impunity, thanks to their vastly superior military capability, and their complete willingness to kill without hesitation and interrogate the corpses later to ascertain whether or no they are civilians, it is hardly surprising that they are used.

You can't have it both ways. Either this is or is not armed conflict. If yes, both sides have an equal right to attack the other, if no, then neither has that right.

The problem is the inequality of the two parties' capabilities. Israel will, in the fullness of time (if allowed to continue), annihilate the Palestinians, and the only question that matters right now is this: "When are we going to stop them?"

Because, if we don't, we are complicit in their genocide.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 07:15 PM

Gee thanks Teribus ...

... Thanks for trying to justify your notion that if you need to expand you have the right to annex other peoples land ...

... But I'm afraid their is never a good justification for theft - let alone theft facilitated by murder.

But you just keep on sticking up for it if that's what makes you feel good.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:31 AM

"Do you deny that Israel delivered all the aid to Gaza anyway, but it turned out to be junk that the Gazans did not want or need."
Can we just clear this load of viciously unpleasant (and rather typical of Keith) nonsense up about what is sent as relief.
The volunteers who collect the goods to break the blockade are ordinary people who collect what they can in donations - they send what they collect and what they can give themselves. Their actions are as much a gesture of solidarity with the Palestinian people as anything else, and in the circumstances created by the viciousness of the Israeli regime, it's a huge, life - risking gesture, as the Israelis have made it quite clear that they are not averse to killing volunteers to maintain their squalid blockade.
Keith says he is "only putting the Israelis case" (and he accuses the rest of us of being "prejudiced!!!). I have no doubt whatever that the Israelis are happy for us to believe that "it turned out to be junk" - they would say that, wouldn't they?
I'm sure the Palestinians need the medicines Keith mentioned; the Israeli 'wonderfully humanitarian behaviour' in setting up this blockade is aimed at creating the maximum suffering and inconvenience as possible to the men, women and children of Palestine, an already greatly impoverished and deprived people; we've all seen the inhumanly selected list of banned goods (yet to be acknowledged by Keith). Unfortunately the the volunteers' meagre resources don't run to such expensive items, assuming that the 'humanitarian' Israelis would allow such useful and necessary items through. If Keith would like to make a donation to relieve the suffering, we are hoping that one of the volunteers will be here next week at our singing week-end - she and her two young daughters are very fine Irish language singers who have sung here before.
But I'm sure he would rather stand on the sidelines and sneer in support of yet another inhumanly terrorist regime - as is his wont.
There still remains the unanswered question of why Israel should expend manpower and expense - not to mention continuing to receive the incredibly bad publicity - if these goods are such "junk".
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:10 AM

Jim, Israel denies and refutes those accusations you make.
It is disputed.
You are certain they are guilty, so just share with us that convincing evidence you must have.
Or is it just prejudice?
Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it

Kevin, are you accepting that Israel complies with International law on these issues?
That is all I am suggesting.

Don, a manifest of the cargo would obviously have been supplied to Hamas.
There would have been some complaints if anything went missing.
The Gazans knew exactly what they were getting, but did not bother to collect it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:44 AM

There still remains the unanswered question of why Israel should expend manpower and expense - not to mention continuing to receive the incredibly bad publicity - if these goods are such "junk".

It was junk.
I am sure Israel was supplied with a manifest too, but to impose a blockade you have to check all cargoes.

Kevin, Nuremberg was a trial for war crimes.
The Nazis did break International Law.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:55 AM

"Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it "
You've had the evidence and continue to ignore or deny it - waste of time and effort digging it out again only to be told "it didn't happen"
I take it that's a "no" for a contribution to Palestinian aid then?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:14 AM

I have seen no evidence and have failed to find any.
I do not believe it exists Jim.
I think you are making it up, and are driven only by prejudice.

Post it now and make me look silly, why don't you?
You could start with that oft. mentioned but never produced "independent enquiry" into the camp massacres.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM

"I think you are making it up, and are driven only by prejudice."
You are the one who has said he is only putting the Palestinian case.
And the aid - can you tell us why the people on the convoys are risking their lives and the Israelis are exposing themselves as the inhuman bastards they are - FOR JUNK?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:08 AM

And the aid - can you tell us why the people on the convoys are risking their lives and the Israelis are exposing themselves as the inhuman bastards they are - FOR JUNK?

The flotilla was a politically motivated stunt.
The actual cargo was not important, but the Israelis had to check it.

No evidence to support your hysterical charges then.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:56 AM

"Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it "

Actually it isn't Jim who is witholding the evidence.

The IDF confiscated all recording equipment, audio and video, and all cameras and they have refused to let anyone see the evidence that they confiscated.

The only evidence that did come to light was that which was smuggled out by captives.

Why the cover up?

Could it be the same reason that they released a load of faked videos and radio communications?

So they told lies and fabricated evidence, and published that, but won't let anyone see the actual evidence, of which there was a lot since a sizeable proportion of the people on the Marmara were journalists with cameras, mp3 recorders and video cameras.

How much credibility does that give the Israeli side of the story keith?

And as for Jims alleged racism, it seems more the case that you are prepared to side with the Israeli story despite the fact that the above information shows that they are not only set on making sure that we don't know the full extent of what happened, but they have an extensive track record of lying about it.

To say that Jim is discriminating on grounds of race requires you to close your mind to the above and requires you to remain loyal to lies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 12:24 PM

OK, bck to the topic: What about today's developments?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:16 PM

Humanitarian aid a politically motivated stunt - did they really give you access to young people's minds? You rally are a sicko!
Posted this earlier, but it seems to have gone astray; sorry it's from such a biased source as the UN.
Jim Carroll

Gaza: UN official reports horrific hospital scenes of casualties

In a UNICEF warehouse in Zarka, Jordan, workers review boxes of supplies for shipment to the Gaza Strip
12 January 2009 – Appalled that fighting was still continuing in Gaza despite the Security Council's ceasefire resolution, senior United Nations officials said today they were horrified at the human costs amid reports that over 40 per cent of the nearly 900 Palestinians killed in the Israeli offensive, and almost half of the 3,860 wounded, were women and children.
"Behind those statistics that we read out every day is really profound human suffering and grave tragedy for all involved and not just for those who are killed and injured but for their families as well," UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) Director of Operations John Ging told a news conference in New York, speaking by video link from Gaza, where he had just visited the main Al Shifa hospital.

"(It) is the place of course where you see the most horrific human consequences of this conflict. Among the tragic cases that I saw were a child, six years of age, little or no brain activity, people don't have much hope for her survival; multiple amputee – another little girl; and a pregnant woman who'd lost a leg," he said, as the Israeli offensive went into its 17th day with the stated aim of ending Hamas rocket attacks into Israel.

"The hospital is really full of patients whose lives have been in many instances really destroyed, and they're alive."

Mr. Ging paid tribute to "the heroes," the Palestinian hospital staff who have been working round the clock and have lost track of time, and the 40 expatriate medical staff who have joined them from Norway, the Netherlands, Egypt and Jordan, among other places.

He said the sense of fear in Gaza was all pervasive among a battle-hardened population of 1.5 million that had already seen many years of conflict. "In my three years here I have never witnessed anything like the scale of fear that is there," he stressed. "We have to recognize that there's no safe place in Gaza and that continues to be the case and the casualty figures speak to that."

Speaking in New York, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes told the news conference the UN had been unable to independently verify the casualty figures given by the Palestinians but they seemed plausible. As of today, there were 884 dead, 275 of them children and 93 women (42 per cent), and 3,860 wounded, 1,333 of them children and 587 women (49 per cent).

"I am appalled that violence on this scale is still continuing in Gaza and horrified at the human cost of all this," he said. "What continues to be worrying is that the Palestinian civilian casualty rate appears to be still increasing."

On a more positive note, the two officials reported that UN food delivery and other operations, suspended after a fatal attack on an UNRWA driver last week, have resumed following Israeli reassurances and aid is now moving around Gaza as much as possible. Mr. Ging said he was very satisfied with the more effective system put in place in high-level talks with the Israelis.

Mr. Holmes said more food supplies were getting through and power supply had improved because of infrastructure repairs and some fuel getting through, but the situation was still not satisfactory even if better than before. Some 500,000 people still lack water as Israel's daily three-hour lull in fighting was insufficient for carrying out repairs and other UN operations, he added, urging Israel to extend the time period.

The UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) has appealed for $16 million to provide families and children with emergency supplies. "We desperately need more resources," Director of Emergency Operations Louis-George Arsenault said, calling on Israel to increase the daily three-hour window for deliveries.

Asked what would happen if Israel escalated its operations deeper into Gaza's cities, Mr. Holmes said UNRWA, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) and others would want to continue their activities insofar as they can. "The fear is that any escalated operations would produce even more casualties, especially when operating in these densely populated urban areas and this would compound what is already a very dramatic humanitarian crisis," he added.

Mr. Ging said 35,000 Gazans had now fled their homes for shelter in 38 UNRWA locations, and many more had sought refuge with relatives in other parts of the Gaza Strip. In answer to questions, he said he had no evidence that Shifa hospital was being used for Hamas military purposes and reiterated his call for an independent investigation amid conflicting reports on deadly Israeli shellings near an UNRWA school and a housing complex in Zaitoun last week.

"I hope that those who are dealing with this issue [the conflict] at the political level will have the same courage and humanity as I've witnessed here at Shifa hospital with the doctors who have come from abroad to help. They can only deal with the consequences in the terms of the injuries," he concluded. "The solution here is to stop the fighting, stop creating the casualties, that's what we want."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:42 PM

Actually it isn't Jim who is witholding the evidence.
Yes it is Lox.
He says he has lots of evidence to substantiate his wild accusations against Israel, but he will not share it with us!

What is there still to know about the "aid" flotilla Lox?
There are enough eye witnesses from both sides.
Some lied though.
The "nurses" who saw piles of bodies.
The ones who saw IDF throwing bodies overboard.
All lies.

Humanitarian aid a politically motivated stunt
If it was, why did the gazans leave it at the crossing for months?
Because it was not "humanitarian aid."
Just worthless junk.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM

"Meanwhile, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said the Islamic militants have refused to accept any aid from the Israeli-intercepted flotilla. "We are not seeking to fill our (bellies), we are looking to break the Israeli siege on Gaza," he said"

"break the seige"
Political motivation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:51 PM

When Israel prevents people having their basic needs meet by preventing that list of banned goods, that is a political act - and a disgusting one, as many decent Israelis continue to remind us.

Yes, there are many decent Israelis - and people who support the actions of the Israel through thick and thin are no friends to them.
........................
Today I was shopping and was looking at the fruit stand.
Two sorts of oranges were on display, one lot came from Israel, the other from South Africa. It's funny how times have changed that kind of choice... I remember an Aldermaston march, and there were a couple of young men selling oranges to the marchers - "These aren't from South Africa, they're Jaffa oranges."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:38 PM

""Don, a manifest of the cargo would obviously have been supplied to Hamas.
There would have been some complaints if anything went missing.
""

And who, pray, do you suppose would have supplied such a manifest after the Marmara had been, with some loss of life, prevented from getting anywhere near its destination?

The Israelis of course, and they wouldn't lie to Hamas, would they?

Your naivete is absolutely astounding.

Don T


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 07:11 PM

Meanwhile, back to the thread - what do we think of what happened with the UN today?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:13 AM

'On a more positive note, the two officials reported that UN food delivery and other operations, suspended after a fatal attack on an UNRWA driver last week, have resumed following Israeli reassurances and aid is now moving around Gaza as much as possible. Mr. Ging said he was very satisfied with the more effective system put in place in high-level talks with the Israelis.'
,..,
Anyone else feel that this report is strangely silent as to who attacked & killed this UNWRA driver? It doesn't seem SFAICS to have been Israelis, who were, it appears, co-operating with the operation.

Anyone else think we should be told?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:22 AM

I assume that we have now finished with the idea that the Israelis have not targetted civilians and have moved on to junking humanitarian aid as a political stunt?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:56 AM

Don, a manifest would have been provided by the Turkish authorities before the Marmara sailed.

Numerous people and organisations, including Hamas, would have known exactly what was on board.
There was never any suggestion, by anyone, of a switch.
You really are clutching at straws.

Kevin, Israel legally imposes a blockade because it suffers deadly military attacks and threats from Gaza.
They allow through such humanitarian aid as required by International Law.
They have relaxed the blockade considerably over the last year.

Jim.
I assume that we have now finished with the idea that the Israelis have not targetted civilians and have moved on to junking humanitarian aid as a political stunt?
In any army, individuals may commit crimes, but I do not accept that Israel has deliberately targeted civilians, and would condemn it absolutely as a war crime if they did.
I am just waiting for someone to provide evidence of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM

""They allow through such humanitarian aid as required by International Law.""

How very strange.

Perhaps you would point us to the relevant clauses in international law which permit the banning by Israel of all the essential items on the list recently put up on this thread, which includes basic foodstuffs?

Back on topic, I don't believe for one minute that the recognition of Palestine as a Sovereign state will make the slightest difference to the arrogance and intransigence of Israel's government.

The only thing that would do that, would be loss of the support of the worlds biggest bully. the US government, and that ain't gonna happen, given that it is also the worlds largest concentration of "Pro Israel whatever it does" lobbyists.

That situation is gradually moving the Middle East region toward all out war, and if that happens, there will be damn all the West can do to stop it. The attitude displayed by some posters here (Israel can do no wrong and Palestinians are all terrorists and therefore legitimate targets) is multiplied manifold in the US, and those of that mindset cannot countenance the idea that Israel MUST moderate its attitudes.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:20 AM

Don ~ Does it not occur to you that there might just, perish the thought, be the minutest touch of reverse tu-quoque-dom in your posts and responses?

Just asking. Might ask Jim the same, but he seems completely & incorrigibly in mind's·made·up·please·don't·confuse·with·facts mode on this one so I have given him up as completely beyond the reach of à propos rationality ~~ I mean, when a man of his intelligence goes confusing a putative arrest warrant with an irreversible finding of guilt...: I am sure you will see what I mean!.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM

"In any army, individuals may commit crimes, "
A move away from "it never happened" I suppose, but still mealy-mouthed apologism for the slaughter of civilians.
The troop movement and the bombardments were directed at civilian areas - if you are suggesting that any army moves without orders from above and any command operates independently from government directives - you're crasser than I took you for.
I seem to remember this was your defence of Bloody Sunday - that the ordinary soldier was entirely at fault and the officers in charge were in no way to blame for the massacre (and of course, the Government didn't try to cover it up)
"I am just waiting for someone to provide evidence of it."
No you're not - you're waiting for another set of facts that you can deny ever happened - which is ample reason, as far as I'm concerned, not to bother providing them to someone who seems quite comfortable lending support to atrocities aganst civilians by war criminals - as I said earlier.
Please don't ask for them again.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 06:33 AM

" I mean, when a man of his intelligence goes confusing a putative arrest warrant
Still protecting the lady's honour I see - another step and you'll be right out of your Zionist closet
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM

Can you really not see, Jim, that it is not the bloody lady's 'honour' I am defending ~~ I am quite prepared to believe she is a horrible bit of work ~~ but that it is the integrity of the language, concept of using it in relation to the law with a reasonable degree of precision with which I am engaged? To confuse an arrest warrant with a finding of guilt is a SEMANTIC, not a moral, solecism. The person who is the subject of the confusion thus provoked is of no relevance whatever. Horrible as she might be, she has not been "found guilty", in any viable or meaningful sense, of anything whatsoever, except in your wishful & fevered rantings and imaginings!

Sorry ~ but you really are in a mental mess with regard to this one. You can usually think more clearly than this. I am resisting the overwhelming temptation of reverting, in response to your most unworthy last conclusion, to the question of what closet this might indicate you are almost out of. We have had enough of that topic; please, I beg you, do not revert to it.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM

Jim: Do you know the Grimms' story of The Jew In The Bush? ~~ he is not in fact a Jew at all; rather a sort of ogre lying in wait to murder travellers. With that sort of folktale tradition, one can see well where Hitler came from.

Please beware of transforming Ms Livni into a Grimmian bush-dweller. As my cousin Michael Winner might remark, "Relax, dear. She's only a politician."

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM

Mike
" Do you know the Grimms' story of The Jew In The Bush?"
Stop hiding behind accusatins of Anti Semitism - it really doesn't become you.
Ms Livni is a politician, therefore pretty unlikly to come to trial for any crimes she may have committed while in office - even she recognised that by wisely not keeping her apointment in the UK.
The civilised world recognises Augusto Pinoche as being implicated in mass murder, despite the fact that he never came to trial (thanks partly to the good offices of a British ex Prime Minister)
Tony Blair should have ben banged up for leading Britain into an illegal war.
Many British member of Parliament escaped retribution for crims the rest of us would have been jailed for.
Technically, none of these are criminals; we have no control over what priveleges our 'betters' protect themselves with - don't take away our right to express an opinion on it.
"Sorry ~ but you really are in a mental mess with regard to this one."
And I think you are in a moral mess in what amounts to defending inhuman behaviour while paying lip-service to being opposed to it.
It seems to me you are using my attitude to the Livni case to score points.
As far as I am concerned she is a war criminal who will probably never be tried.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:50 AM

Becomes me as well as your of continued influence of Zionism, Mr Pots'n'Kettles Carroll!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM

"Mr Pots'n'Kettles Carroll!"
Do you have to be so ******* childish?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM

I would have no objection if she were tried, Jim. Get it into your head, please: it is not your attitude to her enormities I am distressed by, it is your misuse of our most precious resource, the English language. Leave it alone if you can't use it properly, and stop persecuting and torturing those who can. My point being, that you generally can; rather well. But your hysteria over this present topic is robbing you of your powers of cogent expression, which can only undermine your arguments.

"Technically, none of these are criminals; we have no control over what priveleges our 'betters' protect themselves with - don't take away our right to express an opinion on it."

Nobody's trying to stop you expressing opinions, Jim; but they are undermined, I say again, by the crass inaccuracy of the terms in which you are expressing them. Remember Backwoodsman that time ~~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Backwoodsman - PM
Date: 27 Feb 11 - 01:41 AM

The recent posts by Jim and Michael are a perfect example of how two people with diametrically opposed viewpoints, a firm grasp of the English language and decent writing skills can carry on an intelligent, civilised discussion which, whilst probably never leading to agreement between them, at least stands a chance of coming to a successful accomodation. A pleasure to read.

Certain other contributors should also read them.........and learn.


That was a delightful compliment to us both, was it not? Do you feel your recent posts deserve what he said of us in his first sentence? Because I don't, & I consequently feel let down by you. & you are letting down Mudcat too, IMO, with this hysterical and inaccurate ranting on topics, like the application of our laws, where you should know better.

Be ashamed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 09:06 AM

And if that's 'childish' I shall have to live with it. What, anyhow, is childish about the use of Pots'n'Kettles when you are accusing me of faults similar to those that you are committing yourself? Try "motes'n'beams" if you prefer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 11:14 AM

Don,
Perhaps you would point us to the relevant clauses in international law which permit the banning by Israel of all the essential items on the list recently put up on this thread, which includes basic foodstuffs?
International Law does cover this situation.
Israel does keep within the law Don.
I am stating that as a fact.
What part do you dispute?

Jim.
The troop movement and the bombardments were directed at civilian areas
Only because Hamas, in contravention of International Law, placed military facilities in those civilian areas.
Israel was then acting within International Law to attack them, having given all the required warnings and attempting to minimise civilian casualties.

Jim.
Bloody Sunday - that the ordinary soldier was entirely at fault and the officers in charge were in no way to blame for the massacre
That is the established facts of it Jim.
Yes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:25 PM

Of course there is no question of "innocent till proved guilty" or trials when it comes to the execution of alleged terrorists/militants well away from any kind of war zone by assassin squad or drone... Or plain-clothes policemen in the London Underground, for that matter.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:40 PM

"Only because Hamas, in contravention of International Law,"
Hamas was fighting from a defensive position against invaders from outside - where do you think they come from - Mars - they are Palestinians
What should they have done, run away and left their families and neighbours to the tender mercies of the Israeli army - they were defending their people - friends and neighbours?
Supposing for a second your description is right, you seem now to be defending the killing of "hostages" - something you denied not long ago - MAKE UP YOUR MIND - AGAIN.
The United Nations strongly condemned Israelis action against civilians and considered prosecuting Israel for war crimes - so perhaps they don't understand "International Law" either.
"That is the established facts of it Jim."
I understand that it is the responsibility of the officers on the spot for anything that takes place under their command. Whatever happened to "the buck stops here - or doesn't that apply in the British Army? It seems incredibly spineless to blame the men for what was ultimately the responibility of the officers in charge
If the men had acted against orders they should, at the very least, have been disciplined, if not tried for mass-murder - neither happened.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 01:33 PM

What should they have done, run away and left their families and neighbours to the tender mercies of the Israeli army

Accepted practice is to evacuate civilians from military installations when hostilities are imminent.

to be defending the killing of "hostages"
However distasteful, it is accepted that civilian casualties will be incurred when one side uses them as living sandbags.
The crime is theirs.
The other side must give prior warning, as Israel did, (negating the advantage of surprise) and must try to minimise civilian casualties.
UN did not find Israel to have acted illegally.
The rockets were declared illegal.

On Bloody Sunday a couple of soldiers fired on the demonstrators.
They acted without orders.
They should have face prosecution as happened in subsequent incidents


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:01 PM

"Accepted practice is to evacuate civilians from military installations when hostilities are imminent.
"Have you taken a look at how tightly packed Gaza is - there is nowhere for them to go, and had all sides adhered to accepted practice the Israelis would not have bombarded and used heavy artillery on densly populated areas.
"The other side must give prior warning, as Israel did, (negating the advantage of surprise) and must try to minimise civilian casualties."
Then why did the UN consider prosecuting Israel for war crimes - prejudice I suppose.
You are presenting a scenario that runs counter to eye witness accounts - giving the "unbiased" Israili point of view as admitted
At least we seem to have got an honest answer at last about the "expendibility" of hostages - which you denied strenuously.
"They acted without orders."
Which still makes the offficers in charge responsible and exposes the total lie of Bloody Sunday on the part of various Governments since
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM

"Have you taken a look at how tightly packed Gaza is - there is nowhere for them to go
Yes, have you?
140 square miles (363 square km).

Then why did the UN consider prosecuting Israel for war crimes - prejudice I suppose.

And why did they reject it?
Objectivity I suppose.

Speaking of objectivity and prejudice, why do you never miss an opportunity to attack Britain and Israel at great length, but have never criticised PIRA who claim not to have targeted civilians, but killed thousands


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM

The only claim that advance warning was given for the Gaza attack comes from the Israelis - once again - they would say that, wouldn't they.
This appears to give a cross section of contrary opinions on the legitimacy and conduct of the attack from 'Lawyers Without Borders'
Jim Carroll

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/02/israels-attack-on-gaza-legitimate-self-defense-or-war-crime/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM

The violence carried out by whoever was firing those primitive rockets in the general direction of places where civilians were living was criminal, as well as foolish.

The violence carried out by the IDF in attacking civilian areas throughout Gaza with hi-powered and hi-tech weapons was criminal on a far larger scale.

Selective justification of such violence is shameful.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 01:19 AM

Jim, leaflets were dropped all over Gaza, as numerous correspondents and others reported.
Missiles criminal and foolish?
They also caused deaths and maimings of ordinary people, who demanded their government do something about it.
No government in the world would allow that to continue.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM

Kevin, I absolutely refute the jibe of "selective justification" and "shameful."

The motivation for the missile launches was a murderous hatred of Jews, and cannot be justified.
It is "shameful" that Jim does justify them.
I challenge you to state that McGrath of Harlow.

The motivation for the incursion was to stem the tide of missile attacks on homes, schools and families.
That is entirely justifiable.
You can argue that the response was disproportionate, and I might agree, but the fact remains that only a small reduction in the missile attacks was achieved.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:10 AM

Leaflets - to evacuate a whole city!!
There is no evidence whatever that any warning was given that the attack was to take place - except claims by the Israelis - if that is not the case, produce your evidence - I've produced mine, and once again you choose to ignore it.
"No government in the world would allow that to continue. "
And no CIVILISED government would target civilians - hospitals, schools..... to the extent that they were accused of war crimes by the United Nations.
You have been making claims here that simply are not backed up by facts - rather like your 'cultural implants', they come out of your own imagination.
EVIDENCE PLEASE Until you come up with some, here's a little to be going on with - with some pictures if you find there are too many words to cope with!!
It would appear that it was the Israelis using civilians as "human shields"
Jim Carroll

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes

Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human shields by soldiers.
With the death toll from the 17-day Israeli assault on Gaza climbing above 900, pressure is increasing for an independent inquiry into specific incidents, such as the shelling of a UN school turned refugee centre where about 40 people died, as well as the question of whether the military tactics used by Israel systematically breached humanitarian law.
Link to this audio The UN's senior human rights body approved a resolution yesterday condemning the Israeli offensive for "massive violations of human rights". A senior UN source said the body's humanitarian agencies were compiling evidence of war crimes and passing it on to the "highest levels" to be used as seen fit.
Some human rights activists allege that the Israeli leadership gave an order to keep military casualties low no matter what cost to civilians. That strategy has directly contributed to one of the bloodiest Israeli assaults on the Palestinian territories, they say.
John Ging, head of the UN Palestinian refugee agency in Gaza, said: "It's about accountability [over] the issue of the appropriateness of the force used, the proportionality of the force used and the whole issue of duty of care of civilians.
"We don't want to join any chorus of passing judgment but there should be an investigation of any and every incident where there are concerns there might have been violations in international law."
The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.
Israeli military actions prompted an unusual public rebuke from the International Red Cross after the army moved a Palestinian family into a building and shelled it, killing 30. The surviving children clung to the bodies of their dead mothers for four days while the army blocked rescuers from reaching the wounded.
Human Rights Watch has called on the UN security council to set up a commission of inquiry into alleged war crimes.
Two leading Israeli human rights organisations have separately written to the country's attorney general demanding he investigate the allegations.
But critics remain sceptical that any such inquiry will take place, given that Israel has previously blocked similar attempts with the backing of the US.
Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".
"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.
"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."
Israel's most prominent human rights organisation, B'Tselem, has written to the attorney general in Jerusalem, Meni Mazuz, asking him to investigate suspected crimes including how the military selects its targets and the killing of scores of policemen at a passing out parade.
"Many of the targets seem not to have been legitimate military targets as specified by international humanitarian law," said Sarit Michaeli of B'Tselem.
Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.
"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said.
While there are growing calls for an international investigation, the form it would take is less clear. The UN's human rights council has the authority to investigate allegations of war crimes but Israel has blocked its previous attempts to do so. The UN security council could order an investigation, and even set up a war crimes tribunal, but that is likely to be vetoed by the US and probably Britain.
The international criminal court has no jurisdiction because Israel is not a signatory. The UN security council could refer the matter to the court but is unlikely to.
Benjamin Rutland, a spokesman for the Israeli military, said an international investigation of the army's actions was not justified. "We have international lawyers at every level of the command whose job it is to authorise targeting decisions, rules of engagement ... We don't think we have breached international law in any of these instances," he said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:21 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/10/abbas-gaza-israel-truce http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7822049.stm


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:26 AM

Returning to the subject, Palestine has failed to get Security Council support for its membership bid.
US did not need to use its veto.

BBC said, "The Palestinians never expected to win at the Security Council, as the US has said it would veto the request, our correspondent reports.

But she says the Palestinians hoped to muster the nine votes needed to pass a resolution, and so to expose the US as the main obstacle to their bid.

Although European states in the council sympathise with the Palestinians, our correspondent adds, they share Washington's concern that the bid could harm chances of reviving US-led Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and ignite violence in the region. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:06 AM

Keith,

You are in no position to get high and mighty with Kevin.

His last post was as subtle and profound as anything I have ever read, and for you to attempt to diminish any part of it as a "jibe" is pathetic in the extreme.

Mendacious, disingenuous, jingoistic - these are all terms that describe you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:17 AM

PS - 400 ...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:35 AM

Not "high and mighty" Lox.
I just challenged him to show his unbiased, liberal credentials.

BTW, you were wrong about Jim when you said, "There is nobody here defending the rockets." but you chose not to comment.
I challenge you to state your opinion of Jim's position.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:20 AM

As I said - leaflets to clear a city???
Like to comment on the atrocities?
"Colostolox!?
Still in the schoolyard Mike?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:59 AM

The whole city was not attacked.
Installations were, as per the warning.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:26 AM

That's not how IDF soldiers described it Keith.

Not that you care.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:34 AM

You bottled the challenge then Lox.
Disappointing but not surprising.
The Gazan incursion has been debated to bits on old threads.
What about the membership application?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:39 AM

"The whole city was not attacked."
You've had the descriptions - these were massacres
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:45 AM

Whose descriptions?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 10:10 AM

"You bottled the challenge then Lox."

What are you on about you freak.

You want me to speak for Jim?

Thank you but I think that honour is his.


And what is this nonsense ... you see my failing to speak on jims behalf as somehow failing to meet some kind of challenge, while you weasel out of an argument you have lost by trying to suddenly change the subject.

Its all falling apart for you mate - I've enjoyed watching Kevin patiently disintegrate your position ... assuming there was ever any integrity to begin with.


"whose descriptions"

Israeli soldiers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 10:37 AM

Lox, I did not ask you to speak for him.
I said, "BTW, you were wrong about Jim when you said, "There is nobody here defending the rockets." but you chose not to comment.
I challenge you to state your opinion of Jim's position. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 10:40 AM

OK Lox.
I'll bite.
What IDF soldiers and what did they describe?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 10:49 AM

""There is nobody here defending the rockets." "
I have made my position clear on the rockets - I have never supported violence in any form from any group, but I have agreed with you that "everyone has a right to defend themselves"
You, on the other hand, continue to support massacres of civilians by war criminals
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 12:04 PM

How do you construe firing missiles loaded with ball-bearings at people's homes and schools as "self-defence"???
It is not.
It is offensive.
It is murder.
Trying to stop it is self-defence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 04:26 PM

"It is offensive - It is murder."
Of course it's offensive - but if it is murder it is a fraction of what Israel has done to the civilians of Palestine - which you continue to ignore.
Israel came into being through acts of terrorism - as with the measures Palestine is adopting to defend itself.
Israel's present terrorism is directly related to expansionism - this includes the mass expulsion of whole cultures.
You've seen the casualty figures for the Gaza incursion, including women, children and hospital patients - self defence - I don't think so.
You accused Hamas of hiding behind hostages, yet refuse to comment on the Israeli 'human shields' - war crimes, plain and simple.
And the deliberate chemical attacks mentioned in the Guardian report - self defence?
Don't accuse anybody here of bias while you go on giving your uncritical support to state terrorism directed at civilians
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 04:37 PM

"Israel came into being through acts of terrorism - as with the measures Palestine is adopting to defend itself."

I am no expert, but Teribus and Michael both utterly refute that claim.

"Israel's present terrorism is directly related to expansionism - this includes the mass expulsion of whole cultures."

You have made that one up all on your own!

"You've seen the casualty figures for the Gaza incursion, including women, children and hospital patients - self defence - I don't think so."

If only they had not fired those murderous missiles, day after day, week after week, year after year, IT WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED!

"You accused Hamas of hiding behind hostages, yet refuse to comment on the Israeli 'human shields' - war crimes, plain and simple."

If it happened it was a war crime, plain and simple.

"And the deliberate chemical attacks mentioned in the Guardian report - self defence?"

You made that up too Jim.
None are mentioned.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:06 PM

""Don ~ Does it not occur to you that there might just, perish the thought, be the minutest touch of reverse tu-quoque-dom in your posts and responses?""

No Sir, it does not, and for good reason.

I have repeatedly condemned the rockets, while remaining of the opinion that the actions of those Palestinians, while reprehensible, are perhaps understandable.

At no time has Keith stated, or even hinted, that Israel too is acting in a thoroughly reprehensible manner.

At no time has Keith stated, or even hinted, that the Palestinians too might feel that they are defending their country.

The difference between us is that I believe that both sides need to wind their necks in, and Keith, along with the Zionist lobby in the US, believes that Palestine must roll over and permit Israel to treat it as a overspill for housing surplus Israelis.

My concern is that Israel's refusal to give a single inch will give rise to a conflagration which might well result in the annihilation of the Palestinians, or the Israelis, or both and a lot more besides.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM

""Accepted practice is to evacuate civilians from military installations when hostilities are imminent.""

Now you are really scrabbling around underneath the barrel.

Schools, shops, homes, hospitals and UN depots are now "military installations" because the IDF want to pour incendiaries and heavy artillery into them.

And with the IDF running riot in the area, where do you suppose the civilians would take cover?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 06:39 PM

"""Israel came into being through acts of terrorism - as with the measures Palestine is adopting to defend itself."

I am no expert, but Teribus and Michael both utterly refute that claim.
""

You are no expert! That at least is one true statement from you.

It is only five years since I attended the funeral of an uncle who was based in Palestine after WW2. People used to turn away when they caught sight of his face, and he suffered agonies all his life after one of the Irgun Zwei Leumi action groups headed by Menachim Begin poured petrol over the tent where he and five comrades were sleeping.

He was closest to the opening, and the only survivor, and remarked on several occasions that his mates were the lucky ones.

Teribus and Michael don't know everything.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 07:28 PM

--Teribus and Michael don't know everything.--
.,,.,..,.,
I certainly make no claims to know everything; but I think Keith does not entirely understand my position. I do, however, know that the activities of the Stern Gang & Irgun in the late days of the Mandate were indeed explicitly terrorist, as I have in fact never denied, Keith. The great disappointment was that, after the successful defence of 1948, they consolidated as respectable politicians [no novelty in post-colonial situations after independence ~ cf Kenyatta, e.g.] with enough electoral support to have to form part of every government coalition; and eventually to emerge as the dominant party under Begin & his successors, leading to the present lamentable situation.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:45 AM

Let us take a look at what Lox regards as so subtle and profound

McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM

The violence carried out by whoever was firing those primitive rockets in the general direction of places where civilians were living was criminal, as well as foolish.

The violence carried out by the IDF in attacking civilian areas throughout Gaza with hi-powered and hi-tech weapons was criminal on a far larger scale.

Selective justification of such violence is shameful.


Of course Kevin is wrong isn't he, he is deliberately canting the table to covince everyone that apples are oranges.

In what respect is Kevin wrong?

Well the first part is correct, Hamas and those who share their views do deliberately target and launch missiles, rockets and mortar rounds at civilian areas with the deliberate intent of causing as many deaths as they possibly can - That is criminal and has been condemned as a crime against humanity by the UN and other Humanitarian Agencies.

The second bit is where Kevin deliberately misrepresents:

The violence carried out by the IDF in attacking civilian areas throughout Gaza

The IDF did not attack civilian areas throughout Gaza, they attacked psoitions within civilian areas where Hamas and their allies chose to hide, but the IDF attacks were directed against combatants - had things actually been described as stated by the likes of MGOH; Carroll and Lox then surely the casualty lists would have been much higher.

As to warnings issued, the IDF used every means possible to warn the civilian population of Gaza of intended attacks and operations. Such means included telephone, SMS, radio, loudspeakers and yes leaflets. Now were they (the IDF) deliberately attacking civilians and civilian areas as Kevin is trying to convince us of - then nothing would have been done.

Not that subtle or profound at all Lox, just typical misrepresentation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 01:42 AM

Haaretz, 2 Jan 2009
The Israel Defense Forces has unveiled a new tactic meant to reduce civilian casualties, calling houses before they are to be targeted in order to give inhabitants time to flee the attack.



Palestinians reported that in some cases, the caller leaves a message on their voice mail warning that the IDF will bomb any house where weapons are rockets are found and the owners of the houses will be the ones to suffer the consequences.

The IDF has also used a sound bomb to warn civilians before striking homes.

The IDF has also used what they are calling "roof knocking" operations, in which they inform the residents of suspected buildings that they have 10 minutes to leave the premises. In some cases, residents of suspected houses have been able to prevent bombing by climbing up to the roof to show that they will not leave, prompting IDF commanders to call off the strike. In these cases, Channel 10 reported Thursday, the IAF sometimes launches a relatively harmless missile at the corner of the roof, avoiding casualties but successfully dispersing the crowd.

It appears that the "roof knocking" technique was used in the assassination of Hamas leader Nizar Ghayan Thursday, but Ghayan decided to stay indoors with his family, and the army opted to bomb the house anyway.

Sources familiar with Ghayan's record said he was one of the people who encouraged Gazans to climb on rooftops to prevent bombings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:59 AM

Michael, are you saying that this is an accurate statement?
"Israel came into being through acts of terrorism"

Given that the were acts of terror committed by Jews and Arabs.
Don's story is indeed one of very many.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 04:32 AM

Keith - you are the only one here who had continually defended the deliberate and long term killing of civilians - both by denying that it has taken place, then (somewhat contradicting yourself) by admitting it had but it was all Hamas' fault for being in the area.
Nobody has gone to the lengths you have to defend war crimes; not even Terrytoon, (who sometimes comes ofver as a latter day Mr Chips in his efforts to talk down to people - or talk them down).
I wonder which particular moral code you claim to subscribe to!!

"You made that up too Jim., None are mentioned. "
Another report for you to ignore!
Jim Carroll

Israel and the white heat of justice
A political solution for Gaza must not preclude the investigation of war crimes, including Israel's use of white phosphorus
John Palmer guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 21 January 2009 12.30 GMT

Article history UN secretary general visits Gaza Strip and city of Sderot, in southern Israel, as part of Middle East peacekeeping tour Link to this video Amnesty International has now joined the United Nations and Human Rights Watch in accusing the Israeli government of breaking international law outlawing the use of white phosphorus shells in the middle of highly populated areas of Gaza. The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon, has condemned Israeli attacks on UN humanitarian centres in Gaza as "outrageous" and has called for an independent, international inquiry.
Meanwhile a senior minister in the Israeli government has been quoted in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz as saying that when the full extent of the destruction brought on Gaza becomes known "I will not be taking my holidays in Amsterdam". This possibly "humorous" observation referred to the possibility that leaders of the Israeli government may yet be arraigned before the International Criminal Court in The Hague – or a similar tribunal - to answer charges of war crimes.
Indeed some 300 human rights organisations have already prepared an initial 37-page dossier to be presented to the court. At the same time, in a move which could be equally damaging to the international standing of the Israeli government, a number of United Nations humanitarian agencies have insisted that there must be an independent, internationally approved, legal inquiry into the prima facie evidence of crimes committed. It is clear now that Israeli shelling and missile attacks – including those on UN facilities used as shelters for civilians during the war – have taken many hundreds of innocent civilian lives.
There is one obvious problem with taking steps to ensure that those responsible for the horrific massacres of civilians in Gaza are held accountable for their actions: Israel is not a member state of the ICC. The initial reaction of the ICC has been that it is therefore not open to the court to examine these charges. According to some senior French jurists, however, it should still be possible for the ICC to pursue named individuals for alleged crimes committed in Gaza.
There is also a precedent for the ICC to be asked by the United Nations to conduct such a trial – namely the current hearings into crimes against humanity allegedly committed by forces under the control of the government of Sudan in Darfur. It may be possible for the UN to establish a specific war crimes tribunal to hear the charges arising out of the actions of the Israeli forces in Gaza. After all, something very similar happened after the atrocities committed during the wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Rwanda genocide.
The Israeli government has denied that it was responsible for any war crimes committed during the course of its three-week campaign in Gaza. Interestingly, however, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert has expressed "remorse" for what happened to the civilian population of Gaza. One obvious question is: what does he feel guilty about? Some Israelis may also argue that Hamas has also committed crimes worthy of international condemnation. But, of course, it open to them to present such a legal dossier to the ICC authorities in the Netherlands.
Obviously, a UN mandate for a legal inquiry into alleged Israeli war crimes would only come about if the Obama administration decides not to use its veto in the UN Security Council. But by allowing a legal investigation to proceed, the US would send the clearest possible signal that it intends to exercise far greater even-handedness between Israel and the Palestinians than it has ever done in the past. Moreover, the incoming administration is under growing pressure to sanction an inquiry into possible criminal action by the Bush administration in its use of torture.
No doubt, the British government, among others, will say that the priority of the international community must be to underpin the current ceasefire with a permanent peace agreement which provides for a two-state solution. But there is no reason why the push for a permanent agreement should exclude the rule of law from operating without inhibition. After all, this was the case in the former Yugoslavia.
According to Israeli opinion polls, the present coalition government is heading for defeat in the general election in three weeks' time. The responsibility for negotiating a permanent peace settlement is likely to fall to an even more right-wing government, led by Binyamin Netanyahu.
That said, an inspiring feature of the feature of the worldwide demonstrations against Israel's Gaza offensive has been the prominent role played by Jews and Jewish organisations in the protests. Organisations like Jews for Justice for Palestinians, along with a small but heroic opposition to the massacres in Israel itself. Israeli human rights activists have also now launched a website to identify alleged Israeli war criminals and assist their transfer to the jurisdiction of the ICC.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:15 AM

Keith: It would be idle to deny that such "acts of terrorism" as the murder of Lord Moyne, the British representative minister, & his unfortunate non-politically involved driver, a simple corporal of the RASC, by two members of the Stern Gang [Lehi], on 6 Nov 1944; and the blowing up of the King David Hotel, then a mandatory Govt HQ, in Jerusalem by Irgun Zvai Leumi on 22 July 1946 with loss of 91 lives; were important factors in the complex of incidents which led up to the ending of the British Mandate and British withdrawal, the UN partition decision, and the declaration of the State in 1948.

These are only two of the most blatant and memorable examples of the violent campaign that some of the Jews of then Palestine waged during the 30s & 40s. The extent that the State came into being 'through' such acts is an imponderable; but, I repeat, they are among the factors that historians and political analysts will have to take into consideration regarding the emergence of Israel as a geographical and political entity.

Arthur Koestler's novel "Thieves In The Night"(1946 - pre-Israel & set back in late-30s), though a work of fiction, gives something of an account of the background of events which led some to feel that such means were necessary if the British were ever to be dislodged from the Mandatory stranglehold which many saw them as keeping on the region: with its turning away of 'illegal' Jewish refugee immigrant ships ~ some even sent back to what by then was known to be the Nazi persecution occurring in Europe, or, later, the passengers and crew interned in camps in Cyprus. It was a complex situation, from which few emerged with credit. Koestler gives a reasonably balanced view (tho my then prominent in the Zionist movement father always denied this) of what went on in the late-30s — early-40s, leading to various sorts of impasse. Worth a read if you can get hold of a copy.

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM

Michael, I did know about the acts of terror, but it is wrong to say they created Israel.
Israel came into being through acts of UN, not terror.

Keith - you are the only one here who had continually defended the deliberate and long term killing of civilians - both by denying that it has taken place, then (somewhat contradicting yourself) by admitting it had but it was all Hamas' fault for being in the area

Not true Jim.
If the act is denied by Israel I have asked for evidence.
You were unable to provide any.

I accept that civilians were killed in the Gaza incursion, but believe that Israel acted within International Law.
That is disputed, but again hard evidence from your side was not provided.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:34 AM

I might add the hanging by Irgun of two British sergeants on the night of 11th/12th July 1947, Clifford Martin and Mervyn Paice; + the booby-trapping of their bodies resulting in serious injuries to those cutting them down. And the killing by a postal-bomb of the brother, Rex, of Major Roy Farran, whose initial was the same so the wrong one opened it, 3 May 1948; followed on 11 May 48 by a letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, being detected in the nick of time by his wife.

They meant business, you know. There are plenty in Israel now, Keith, I wouldn't mind betting, who will maintain that it was "through" such activities that the State came into being.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:43 AM

I did not maintain that they, alone, 'created" Israel, Keith; but they can't be disregarded as an important element in the complex of events leading up to its "creation". In particular, I repeat, they were important factors in bringing about the British withdrawal, without which the UN resolution would arguably never have happened.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 06:36 AM

To be pedantic, attacks on military targets are not acts of terror.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 07:38 AM

"If the act is denied by Israel I have asked for evidence."
You have been constantly given evidence which you deny outright (or ask for again thne deny) or totally ignore) such as the direct use of White phosphorus on civilians.
You might believe that Israel acted within International law, others, including the UN think different - perhaps they should defer to you!
You keep claiming ignorance on these subjects - what knowledge do you possess to reject those involved in on-the-spot decision making
As I said, you are alone in your defence of atrocities.
Arthur Koestler's novel "Thieves In The Night"
As did the more recent televised novel 'The Promise' earlier this year.
Terrorism as part of national liberation is common - South Africa, Ireland, even the US.... state terrorism is different.
Thanks for the heads up about 'Theives in the Night' - recently acquired a copy but not got round to reading it yet.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:05 AM

I did not deny "the direct use of White phosphorus on civilians"

As your own cut/paste confirmed it was not in weapon form.
It was a smoke munition.

I asked for evidence of the camp massacres.
You provided nothing despite repeated requests.
You will not even tell us who is suuposed to have produced the "independent enquiry" you kept claiming exists.
A figment of your imagination I think.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM

I have tried and failed to think of any actual evidence provided by you.
I believe you are driven only by prejudice.

From "Canada Free Press" on UN membership.

, the committee members considered whether the existing Palestinian governing entity met the criteria for statehood, was peace-loving, and was willing and able to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter.

By all objective measures, the Palestinians fail on all counts. But the UN is anything but objective when it comes to the Palestinian issue.

For example, regarding the criterion of statehood, the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States is generally considered as the best source for defining the international law standard. It is referenced in the admissions committee report.

The Montevideo Convention declares that in order for an entity to be considered a state under international law it should possess a permanent population, a defined territory, effective government control and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.

Given the prevailing support in the United Nations for a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 lines, with East Jerusalem as the capital of the independent state of Palestine, there was little discussion in the report about the lack of secure and recognized boundaries agreed upon with Israel pursuant to negotiations, as called for by Security Council Resolution 242. This failure to meet the defined territory statehood requirement should be enough to disqualify the Palestinian UN application since it does not meet the first threshold of statehood. Instead, according to the report, the committee members "stressed that the lack of precisely settled borders was not an obstacle to statehood."

Some committee members did express doubts regarding the Palestine Authority's control over all current Palestinian territory and governance of the entire Palestinian population, in light of the fact that Hamas is the de facto authority in the Gaza Strip and is in control of forty percent of the population of Palestine. However, other committee members were reported to be of the view that "the Israeli occupation was preventing the Palestinian government from exercising full control over all of its territory." In other words, this point of view held that Hamas's bloody coup in Gaza, throwing out the members of Abbas's government and Fatah Party, was somehow all Israel's fault. By laying the blame on Israel, the Palestinians get a free pass for their own inability to demonstrate the capacity for self-government under a single authority.

With regard to the UN Charter's requirement that an applicant be "peace-loving," the view was expressed, according to the report, "that Palestine fulfilled this criterion in light of its commitment to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." However, this was disputed by some committee members who pointed to Hamas's refusal to refrain from the threat or the use of force in the conduct of its international relations.

The Palestinians' supporters dismiss the relevance of Hamas's actions because they were not those of the Palestinians' recognized governmental authority - the Palestinian Authority or PLO. This circular reasoning ignores that attempts are underway to bring Hamas into a unity government without requiring it to first renounce all acts of terrorism and recognize Israel's right to exist.

The majority of UN members fall hook, line and sinker for the Palestinians' victimhood narrative, casting Israel as the villainous oppressor. The truth is precisely the opposite. The Palestinians want a state of their own with the inalienable right of self-determination to decide its character, but continue to reject the Israelis' own inalienable right of self-determination to live securely in the manner they choose to live - as a Jewish state.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 10:13 AM

"I have tried and failed to think of any actual evidence provided by you."
And there is perfect evidence that you atre totally prejudiced and why it is a total waste of time putting up anything - you either don't read it or taotally ignore it.
It is you who has claimed that you are only prutting forward Israel's case - an acceptence of prejudice
"It was a smoke munition."
And the photos of horrific burns to childrens faces provided were cause by them playing with matches - smoke munitions my arse!
More evidence of your self imposed ignorance in order to support war crimes
You're a immoral mess Keith
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 10:23 AM

Smoke munitions are dangerous, though obviously far, far less so that weapons.
YOU provided an expert statement that they were smoke munitions not weapons.

We disagree on what constitutes "evidence"
You posted a Guardian piece on 14th Nov. as evidence, but the first sentence gave it away.
It was about "allegations" against Israel made in the immediate aftermath of the incursion.
These were never substantiated, so you could produce no actual evidence.

I dismiss nothing, but being objective, open minded and unprejudiced, I need some evidence before making up my mind on disputed issues.
Obviously, it is much simpler for you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 10:33 AM

Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 03:54 AM
.
.
The M825A1 rounds, which are the kind identified as being fired by Israeli forces, are made primarily for use as a smokescreen in a way that limits their effect as an incendiary weapon, experts say.
Neil Gibson, a technical adviser to Jane's Missiles and Rockets magazine, said the shells did not produce high-velocity burning fragments like conventional white phosphorus weapons once did.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 11:35 AM

"primarily" being the operative word - pointed at human beings, they cause horrific injuries.
You claim everybody who opposes your defence of Israel (which is just about everybody) to be prejudiced yet you have conceded no wrongdoing on the part of Israel whatever - despite the evidence placed before you.
You even continue to defend the use of white phosphorus by attempting to give the impression it is harmless - this despite the horrific photographs of maimed children with faces "burned to the bone" - to quote a description by a Gazan doctor.
What kind of sicko are you?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 11:45 AM

The doctor in question pointed out to the BBC interviewer that the White Phosphorus was being used within the confines of a hospital - you've been told this before - yet still you persist on claiming this shit harmless.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM

It is a lie that I have described it as harmless.
You did not mention that I deplored its use and said it may have been illegal.

I only accuse people of prejudice if they reach conclusions about disputed issues without any rational reason or evidence for it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 12:11 PM

Yet you continue to present it as;
"primarily for use as a smokescreen in a way that limits their effect as an incendiary weapon, experts say.
Neil Gibson, a technical adviser to Jane's Missiles and Rockets magazine, said the shells did not produce high-velocity burning fragments like conventional white phosphorus weapons once did."
Why????????????????
A baseball is a piece of sporting equipment - smash somebody around the head with it and it becomes a deadly weapon - White Phosphorus pointed at humans is "A POTENTIALLY DEADLY WEAPON - ESPECIALLY USED IN THE CONFINES OF A HOSPITAL - WHICH ONCE AGAIN YOU MAKE NO REFERENCE TO
You continue to argue for it as a smokscreen
Why??????????????
You are a sicko in the extreme
ARE YOU DENYING THE USE OF IT AGAINST CIVILIANS AS HAS BEEN CLAIMED CONTINUOUSLY - BY HUMAN RIGHTS GROUPS AMONG OTHERS -IF SO, WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU OFFER THAT THEY ARE LYING - PREJUDICE?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 02:53 PM

The munitions were not weapons, as your expert confirmed.
I do not accept they were "used against civilians."
I believe they were used to provide a smoke screen.
That is entirely consistent with the evidence.

It should not have been used for that in a civilian area.
That would be illegal, but because Hamas had illegally positioned itself in a civilian area, it is not straightforward.

I deplore the fact that they used it, but might feel differently if a son or daughter of mine died because they could not be screened from their enemies.

You have claimed without evidence that it was used against civilians.
Prejudice.
You have described it as a chemical weapon when it was not a weapon at all.
Demonization.
I think you even described it as genocide.
Wild, hysterical hyperbole.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM

""Israel came into being through acts of terrorism"

Given that the were acts of terror committed by Jews and Arabs.
Don's story is indeed one of very many.
""

Who did the Israeli voters put in power at the first election of that state Keith?

Begin and his coterie of fellow terrorists!

In what way then is it inaccurate to state that the State of Israel was born out of terrorism?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM

OK Don, but Gazans elected the internationally recognised terrorist organisation Hamas.
What does that make them?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:51 PM

No they did not, Don ~~ they put in Ben Gurion, succeeded by Golda Meir. Begin came much later.

You have a good enough case without indulging in such gross inaccuracies.. easily avoidable by minimal checking.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 03:59 PM

You can see from this wiki list that Begin was the 6th Prime Minister, 1977 ~~ 29 years after the State's declaration ~~

1.David Ben-Gurion
‎דוד בן-גוריון
2 Moshe Sharett
‎משה שרת
3 Levi Eshkol
‎לוי אשכול Mapai 26 June 1963

4 Golda Meir
‎גולדה מאיר Alignment

5 Yitzhak Rabin
‎יצחק רבין Alignment

6 Menachem Begin
‎מנחם בגין Likud 20 June 1977


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 04:20 PM

And still you do not acknowledge maimed and slaughtered and maimed women and children (and old people if we are talking about hospitals) - you presumably think the medical staff are lying and the photographs are faked
Even if what you say about Hamas is true, you also sanction sanction the deliberate slaughter of hostages.
Well done that - whoops; nearly said man.
At least we have cleared up who's prejudiced

Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 04:44 PM

I told you I accept there were heavy civilian casualties.
The Haaretz piece I provided explains the extraordinary efforts of the IDF to minimise them.
But for the missiles, none of it would have happened.
The illegal use of human shields by Hamas was the cause of all those "maimed and slaughtered and maimed women and children (and old people if we are talking about hospitals)"

Whatever colour text you use, Israel was driven to act by the murderous rain of missiles on its people, and had to fight those responsible as they hid behind their own civilian population, and who then cynically exploited for propaganda their broken and burned bodies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:17 PM

""To be pedantic, attacks on military targets are not acts of terror.""

Sheer sophistry Keith (as usual).

Irgun Zwai Leumi and the Stern Gang were not the standing army of any state, but rather civilian insurrectionists carrying out a prolonged and murderous campaign of terrorism against what was at the time the legitimate authority.

To talk about military targets is both inaccurate and disingenuous.

Those were YOUR countrymen burned to death in their tents.

Have you no shame?....Silly question really, as we already have ample evidence to the contrary.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:40 PM

""Instead, according to the report, the committee members "stressed that the lack of precisely settled borders was not an obstacle to statehood.""

Nor should it be, since that lack is engendered by Israel's refusal to accept any limit to their continual incursions into what should be Palestinian territory.

""The majority of UN members fall hook, line and sinker for the Palestinians' victimhood narrative, casting Israel as the villainous oppressor. The truth is precisely the opposite. The Palestinians want a state of their own with the inalienable right of self-determination to decide its character, but continue to reject the Israelis' own inalienable right of self-determination to live securely in the manner they choose to live - as a Jewish state.""

The first sentence really supplied the best laugh I've had in weeks. The Israelis have been playing the "victim of oppression" card for so long that they have come to believe that it gives them the right to oppress whomever they choose, so the truth is emphatically NOT the opposite.

The last sentence is stunning in its lack of comprehension of the way things work.

If the UN agreed to Palestinian Statehood within a defined border it would give protection to the whole of Palestine, including the Gaza strip.

It would also give the same degree of protection to the State of Israel on the other side of said defined border.

Why is it that those who are anti Palestinian statehood cannot see what is right under their noses.

I know why Israel is against it......It would deprive them of the opportunity to annexe more territory for Israeli settlers to colonise.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:47 PM

""I believe they were used to provide a smoke screen.
That is entirely consistent with the evidence.
""

Tell us O Wise One, what is the reason for a smoke screen inside buildings, especially inside a hospital?

Are the Israelis so lacking in basic military skills that they inadvertently fired WP into the interior of buildings?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 05:57 PM

""No they did not, Don ~~ they put in Ben Gurion, succeeded by Golda Meir. Begin came much later.""

Please accept my apologies Mike. I try hard not to equal Keith in the realm of false claims, but this time I did not research before posting. Begin was the 6th.

My only excuse is that I am getting very fed up of Keith claiming moral superiority, when he is the only poster on this forum who is still refusing to even countenance the possibility that there is fault on both sides.

The fact that Begin came to power at all is a sufficient indicator of the mindset of Israelis at the time and later. I believe that is a fair point, or at least worthy of sensible discussion.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Nov 11 - 08:01 PM

"The Haaretz piece I provided explains the extraordinary efforts of the IDF to minimise them."

Testimony of IDF soldiers flatly contradicts this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:22 AM

Apology accepted, Don; and I agree with you that it is a great shame that Israeli opinion ever swung Begin-wards & has pretty well consistently remained there since; which accounts for my present attitude of intense disappointment in the way the place hes developed and what it has turned into ~~ an aggressive olive-grove uprooter and hence oppressor of ordinary Arabs just trying to make a decent living with no particular political axe to grind. & note too my disagreements with Keith above as to the extent that actual terrorism was instrumental in bringing about Israel's very existence.

I cannot help feeling even so, however, that the small but intransigent Palestinian element, their equivalent of those erstwhile Stern & Irgun perpetrators, would maintain even after statehood their influence, and their determination to bring about Israel's complete destruction; and most probably would, as Begin's lot were not, be the first government elected for the new state. Statehood would surely constitute, to put it quite mildly, a most extreme danger to Israel, and to the peace of the area and the world?

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:32 AM

Lox. What soldiers? What testimonies?
Don, I share your disgust at the attacks on mostly young conscripts who were just trying to do their best for everyone.
I know a veteran in the Hertford branch of my Regimental Association.

It was cruel, unjustified and a betrayal, but let us save the word "terrorism" for those cowardly murderers who attack helpless civilians for some political objective..

The smoke was dispensed from air-burst shells.
It would not penetrate roofs or walls.
In the video it can be seen bouncing off roofs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 03:43 AM

You have been a mealy-mouthed apologist for Israeli massacres of non-combatants throughout these threads and here you continue to attempt to trivialise the deliberate use of chemicals on civilians, including hospital patients, women and children - do you have nothing to say about the horrific injuries inflicted by your 'smoke bombs'?
"But for the missiles, none of it would have happened."
Unfortunately, without the missiles the Palestinians would have been driven out of Palestine altogether by the same type of ethnic cleansing that is proposed for the Bedouins - something else your Israiliphobia has prevented you from condemning.
A another piece of sordid blackmail from yesterdays Irish Times aimed at starving the Palestinians into submission, an act of revenge because a democratically taken vote didn't go Israeli's way.
Explain away - or ignore, as you usually do
Jim Carroll

ISRAEL CRITICISED FOR KEEPING PALESTINIAN TAX FUNDS
MARK WEIS: in Jerusalem
ISRAEL HAS decided to continue withholding tax funds it collects on behalf of the Palestinians which were frozen last month after the UN cultural organisation Unesco accepted Palestine as a full member.
Yesterday's decision by the security cabinet to keep the €73 million collected in October came despite warnings from defence minister Ehud Barak and intelligence officials that the cash-strapped Palestinian Authority may be forced to withhold salaries from its security forces, endangering West Bank stability.
Israel decided to withhold the transfer of tax revenues, which it collects monthly on behalf of the Palestinians under the terms of the Oslo peace agreements, after denouncing the Unesco membership bid as a "unilateral Palestinian manoeuvre that further removed chances of reaching peace through direct negotiations". Israel also accelerated construction of 2,000 West Bank homes. The Israeli punitive measures were condemned by Washington and the EU. (my emphasis).
Yesterday's move came as the quartet of peace mediators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN -failed to get Israel and the Palestinians to renew direct peace talks.
Former British prime minister Tony Blair "called upon the parties to create a conducive environment for restarting talks and urged them to refrain from provocative actions", the quartet said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:01 AM

Where " massacres" are denied, not being prejudiced, I need evidence.
You have been unable to find any, and I suspect there is none.
That does not make me "a mealy-mouthed apologist."

It is a lie that I have trivialised injuries.

"Unfortunately, without the missiles the Palestinians would have been driven out of Palestine "

Such an absurd claim deserves no serious reply!

The democratic vote elected a group who took Gaza to war with Israel.
Israel is entitled to impose a blockade, providing it continues to allow humanitarian supplies as required by International Law


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:26 AM

"I need evidence"
Who the hell do you think you are to "need evidence" of what has been long established by independant enquiries carried out by international bodies - for someone who is a self-confessed ignoramuous on the subject, you seem to have an extremely inflated opinion of yourself.
You have been given page after page of solid evidence you have ignored.
Tou could take classes in holocaust denial
Not that you'd be interested - a view from biased Vermont   
http://www.vtjp.org/background/gazaweapons.php
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:16 AM

long established by independant enquiries carried out by international bodies

I challenge that it has.
I would regard that as good evidence if true.

without the missiles the Palestinians would have been driven out of Palestine altogether
A serious reply.
The missiles are just hate weapons, to terrorise ordinary Jewish families in nearby towns.
Parents put their children to bed, and send them to school, knowing that someone will try to kill them and might get lucky today.

They serve no strategic, or even tactical purpose.
Not even Hamas would make the claim you did.

McGrath and Lox might lack the guts to contradict Jim Carroll, but they will not support such a claim.

Making such a claim shows that you are so deranged by hate that you can not be rational where Jewish people are concerned.
Not even murdered ones.
Not even children.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:49 AM

Jim, your Vermont piece was written during the conflict before the facts about the munitions were established.

Here are UK's reasons for not supporting membership.
Al Jazeera

William Hague, the British foreign secretary, said on Wednesday that his government had decided to abstain from voting in the hope that it would help bring Palestine and Israel back to the negotiating table.

"We will not vote against the application because of the progress the Palestinian leadership has made towards meeting the criteria," Hague said, speaking to the British parliament.

"But nor can we vote for it while our primary objective remains a return to negotiations through the Quartet process and the success of those negotiations."

Hague said the Palestinian Authority "largely fulfills the criteria for UN membership," but granting it the status would impede its "ability to function effectively as a state".

The Palestinian campaign, launched with a dramatic speech by President Mahmoud Abbas at UN headquarters in September, has fallen onto hard times in recent weeks.

While the speech was warmly received, the Palestinians have struggled to muster the nine votes needed in the 15-member Security Council to approve their bid for membership as a state.

Britain's announcement comes a day after a similar statement by France.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:27 AM

And still you act as apologist for the slaughter of civilians
Try this one
Jim

Israelis Forbid War Crimes Investigation in Jenin
The nation founded on exploitation of a martyr complex over war crimes, now blocks investigation of its own crimes against humanity
Compiled by Michael A. Hoffman II
Worried that a UN investigation could form the basis for war crimes prosecutions against Israeli soldiers, the Israeli government announced April 30, 2002 that it wouldn't allow a U.N. investigation in Jenin, a Palestinian refugee camp that is overseen by UN agencies, within occupied territory that by treaty is controlled by the governing Palestinian Authority. Nonetheless, the Israeli security Cabinet--led by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon--voted against letting the investigation proceed.
The UN investigators were to be led by former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari. The 20-member UN commission was charged with assessing the civilian death toll from the April 2002 Israeli attack on Jenin, where hundreds of civilians were killed during three weeks of assaults by jets, helicopters and bulldozers in a "zone" closed to the media by the Israeli army.
"There are lots of accusations, lots of rumors, and we don't know what is true and what is not, and I really thought it was in everyone's interest to clarify this matter as soon as possible," said UN Secretary General Koffi Annan.
John D. Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to the world body, said the United States is opposed to the Jenin war crimes inquiry. Though the United States was the original sponsor of the Security Council resolution endorsing the Jenin investigation, American diplomats had come to view the UN inquiry as "a divisive and potentially dangerous distraction."
From the Israeli viewpoint, cancellation of the U.N. investigation would be preferable to an investigation it feared would reveal the extent of the war crimes committed by Israeli forces while the media and aid groups were banned from the area.
"Whatever penalty Israel will pay (in terms of lost prestige) is less than the cost of a report that is one-sided and uses terms such as 'war crimes," said Gerald Steinberg, a political scientist at Bar Ilan University in Tel Aviv.
Annan sent a letter to the Israeli government April 27 assuring the Israelis that their soldiers and others interviewed by the fact-finding team would be guaranteed anonymity, and that there would be no transcripts that might be used in war crimes prosecutions.
In recent weeks the Israelis also refused entry into Jenin by a team of U.N. human rights investigators led by former Irish President Mary Robinson, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, and Felipe Gonzalez, a former Spanish prime minister.
The Israeli cabinet decision reflected a consensus among Israelis that the United Nations is biased against the Jewish state and that any U.N. inquiry into war crimes in the Jenin camp would inevitably end badly for Israeli public relations and Israel's image. One senior Foreign Ministry official said Israel had been wary of the war crimes investigation from the start. "We have every right in the world to be extremely suspicious about anything that comes out of the U.N.," said the diplomat. "We may be paranoid, but we have good reason to be."
As the U.N. undersecretary-general for political affairs, Kieran Prendergast, noted to the council April 30, the investigation was originally endorsed "on the basis of assurances of full Israeli cooperation" from the Israeli foreign and defense ministers. But when the UN named a team dominated by specialists in international law and war crimes, the Israelis retracted their promise of support. Israeli officials were also outraged by the remarks of Terje Roed-Larsen, the U.N. envoy to the Middle East, who described "horrifying scenes of human suffering" at the Jenin camp. Prendergast said that "with every passing day it becomes more difficult to determine what took place on the ground in Jenin."
In Jerusalem, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said he feared that the UN Security Council would "interpret our refusal as if we were scared that they might discover something." In an interview with Israeli radio, Peres said he told Secretary of State Colin Powell by telephone on April 29: "Our army is still fighting....What do you want, for us to put them on trial? Tell our soldiers that they should show up [to testify] with a lawyer?' We have no intention of letting [Israeli] soldiers be investigated or even give testimony..."
Saeb Erekat, a Palestinian official said, "I think this is equivalent to giving Sharon the license to do it again, to kill again and to commit slaughter again." On April 30, the group Physicians for Human Rights issued a preliminary forensic assessment of Jenin's dead and wounded, referring to the deliberate targeting of Palestinians civilians and blocked access to medical care.
Sharon, who was found by an Israeli commission to have been "indirectly responsible" for a 1982 massacre at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camp, took a defiant tone. To him and other senior Israeli officials, the United Nations inquiry is a case of selective investigation, to be followed by spurious prosecution. "No attempt to tarnish our name or to put us on trial before the world will succeed," Sharon said.
The Israelis sought to have American Major-General William Nash, of the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), appointed to head the U.N. probe. The position of the CFR is that the Israelis should have been allowed to determine the make-up of the commission: "There should have been more consultation with the host government (Israel) before appointing the members," said David Philips, Nash's deputy at the CFR. "The composition of the initial group created the impression that the mission was being politicized."
Numerous war crimes investigations were conducted in Germany, Poland and Japanese colonies after World War Two, and more recently in the Balkans with regard to ethnic cleansing; and in Rwanda where genocide was determined to have been committed. War crimes investigations held in Germany and Japan after World War II set the standard for such proceedings, establishing the principle that soldiers must be held responsible for atrocities committed during war. Since then, a series of Geneva conventions have defined violations in three categories:
WAR CRIMES, such as mistreatment of prisoners and targeting civilians.
CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, such as deportation and murder of civilian populations, and racial, ethnic and political persecution.
GENOCIDE, defined as "deliberately inflicting on a group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
Several Western governments have also established permanent tribunals for the investigation of elderly persons, many of them refugees from Communism, accused of having committed war crimes against Jews 60 years ago. For example, in the US, the Office of Special Investigation (OSI), was established in 1979 as part of the Department of Justice to investigate "war criminals living in the United States."
The OSI drove Andrije Artukovic, former minister of the interior of Croatia back to Communist Yugoslavia. The OSI deported Catholic Bishop Valerian Trifa back to Communist Romania. Arthur Rudolph, the distinguished NASA rocket scientist, was also investigated and driven out of the US as a "war criminal." In the cases of Alfred Deutscher and Michael Popczuk, the men committed suicide after being targeted by the OSI.
Claims that these war crimes investigations were politicized and tainted by pro-Communist or Zionist bias were dismissed out of hand as an obstruction of human rights and humanitarian and international law.
The traditions about war crimes committed against Jews is central to the maintenance of the Israeli state, a sly tool for obtaining Palestinian land and for portraying a nuclear power with a penchant for pulverizing dark-skinned civilians as a "victim of intolerance." Billions of dollars have been paid by Europeans--and continue to be paid-- to the Israeli government and its agencies as "war crimes reparations."
The Israelis, however, regard themselves as immune from international prosecution for war crimes or responsibility for reparations to Palestinians. On April 28, 2002 the Associated Press reported Foreign Minister Shimon Peres as declaring, "Israel won't sit in the place of the accused. Israel will sit in the place of the accuser."
The AP dispatch added that the Israeli foreign minister described charges of Israeli war crimes in Jenin as,"baseless blame, almost a blood libel, on Israel."
Very few Americans would support "incursions" into the predominately black ghetto of Los Angeles by tanks, helicopter gunships, D-9 armored bulldozers and F-16 jet fighters if a minority of African-Americans were planting suicide bombs in white areas. If the US military were to bulldoze and bomb black ghettos into a moonscape of rubble, with whole families buried beneath the wreckage, as collective punishment of all blacks for the actions of a few terrorists, most Americans would revolt at the injustice and virtual genocide such attacks would represent.
But so warped is the distorting prism of Jewish supremacy in the American media, that the monstrous Israeli policy of collective punishment of the entire Palestinian people is repeatedly upheld by Congress and the White House, in defiance of the Geneva Convention and the definition of war crimes imposed by the Americans themselves after WWII.
The current propaganda line describes a war against the Palestinian people in terms of a struggle against "terrorists," with the racist implication that all Palestinian people are terrorists, men, women and children. A similar racist innuendo was maintained by the American media with regard to the Vietnamese people during the early days of the American war in Southeast Asia.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:33 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1937387.stm
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:37 AM

Jim, how about providing some evidence, like those "independent enquiries" you keep inventing, for all the "massacres" you have already accused Israel of, before dredging up yet another bit of ancient history to demonize them with.

Any thoughts on the membership application at all Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:41 AM

Jim,

Please note the date of the claim in your post- an be aware that the report WAS made, clearing Israel.

Now, please address MY questions of


"Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:04 PM

McGrath,

In general I agree with you. However, there are points that are NOT addressed the differentiate the two sides. IF you are going to apply the "Both sides the same" rule, then let us look:

The Mandate Palestine was formed in 1921, as a Homeland for the Jews. Arabs were to be given equal rights. By 1923, the Mandate Power decided that it was not practical, nd DIVIDED the Mandate into TransJordan ( 77% of the land, for the percentage of population of the Mandate that was Moslem,) and the remainder, the Palestine that was to be the Jewish Homeland. Jews were forbidden from settling in TransJordan, but were in settlements throughout the West Bank.

Those were the LAST borders that the Arab nations have ever acknowledged as valid. The Peace treaty between Jordan and Israel AFTER 1967 acknowledges them.


When the Arabs attacked Israel in 1947-48, the land was occupied BY THE ARABS and the Jews removed. In total 820,000 Jews, basically all of those in Arab lands, were driven from their homes, and (mostly) settled in Israel. 640,000 Arabs had fled from Israel- which was not even the majority of the Arab population in Israel.

In 1967, Israel reclaimed the land TAKEN BY MILITARY FORCE from the Mandate territory. Any settlements on the West bank can be considered as resettlements of those driven out in 1948.


The Palestinians have attacked the civilian population of Israel directly (IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW), while the Israelis have attacked the military target (According to International Law) that the Palestinians PLACED IN CIVILIAN AREAS ( In violation of International Law)


So tell me now WHY DO YOU THINK THE PALESTINIANS are not being treated fairly? Do you want Israel to treat Palestinians as they have treated the Jews under Palestinian control, or worse, as the OTHER Arab nation have treated the Palestinians???


Or are you saying that there is one set of rules for Arabs, and a different set for Jews???"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:45 AM

From Wiki.

Israel denied charges of a massacre, and a lone April 9 report in the Israeli press stating Foreign Minister Shimon Peres privately referred to the battle as a "massacre"[75] was immediately followed by a statement from Peres expressing concern that "Palestinian propaganda is liable to accuse Israel that a 'massacre' took place in Jenin rather than a pitched battle against heavily armed terrorists."[76]

Subsequent investigations and reports by the United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Time Magazine, and the BBC all concluded there was no massacre of civilians, with estimated death tolls of 46–55 people among reports by the IDF, the Jenin office of the United Nations, and the Jenin Hospital.[77] A team of four Palestinian-appointed investigators reporting to Fatah numbered total casualties of 56,[65] as disclosed by Kadoura Mousa Kadoura, the director of Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement for the northern West Bank.

The UN report to the Secretary General noted "Palestinians had claimed that between 400 and 500 people had been killed, fighters and civilians together. They had also claimed a number of summary executions and the transfer of corpses to an unknown place outside the city of Jenin. The number of Palestinian fatalities, on the basis of bodies recovered to date, in Jenin and the refugee camp in this military operation can be estimated at around 55."[2] While noting the number of civilian deaths might rise as rubble was cleared, the report continued, "nevertheless, the most recent estimates by UNRWA and ICRC show that the number of missing people is constantly declining as the IDF releases Palestinians from detention."[2] Human Rights Watch completed its report on Jenin in early May, stating "there was no massacre," but accusing the IDF of war crimes,[78] and Amnesty International's report concluded "No matter whose figures one accepts, "there was no massacre."[3] Amnesty's report specifically observed that "after the IDF temporarily withdrew from Jenin refugee camp on April 17, UNRWA set up teams to use the census lists to account for all the Palestinians (some 14,000) believed to be resident of the camp on April 3, 2002. Within five weeks all but one of the residents was accounted for."[79] A BBC report later noted, "Palestinian authorities made unsubstantiated claims of a wide-scale massacre,"[13] and a reporter for the Observer opined that what happened in Jenin was not a massacre.[80]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: bobad
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:49 AM

"Israelis Forbid War Crimes Investigation in Jenin
The nation founded on exploitation of a martyr complex over war crimes, now blocks investigation of its own crimes against humanity
Compiled by Michael A. Hoffman II"

"Michael Anthony Hoffman II, (born 1954, New York), is an American journalist, conspiracy theorist and Holocaust denier who describes himself as a "heretical writer." Hoffman is the managing editor of the newsletter Revisionist History."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_A._Hoffman_II


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:58 AM

And still you act as apologist for the slaughter of civilians
Try this one
Jim


We did Jim, and there WAS NO MASSACRE.
Your frantic Googling for any evidence of Israeli massacres only produced an old bit of propaganda, which you swallowed without question as usual, and you are again revealed as a hate filled, demented bigot.

Well done Jim!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 09:47 AM

fyi...

"The United States extended de jure recognition to the Government of Transjordan and the Government of Israel on the same day, 31 January 1949.[30] Clea Bunch said that "President Truman crafted a balanced policy between Israel and its moderate Hashemite neighbours when he simultaneously extended formal recognition to the newly created state of Israel and the Kingdom of Transjordan. These two nations were inevitably linked in the President's mind as twin emergent states: one serving the needs of the refugee Jew, the other absorbing recently displaced Palestinian Arabs. In addition, Truman was aware of the private agreements that existed between Jewish Agency leaders and King Abdullah I of Jordan. Thus, it made perfect sense to Truman to favour both states with de jure recognition."[31]"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 09:52 AM

"propaganda"
Piss off ho;ocaust denier - examples of attacks on civilians in abundance in all the exaamples provided which yo continue to suppport
AND STILL YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN IN THIS
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM

Jim,

Please address either the thread topic, or the questions directed at you.

Otherwise, we will have to think that you care nothing for the people of either side, just your own bigotry.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM

should have been "peoples", ie, Palestinians and Israelis.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:14 AM

It was propaganda Jim.
The Palestinians just lied.
There was no massacre.
See the independent reports by international bodies.
Unlike your ones, these do exist.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 10:48 AM

'twas me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 01:47 PM

""Michael Anthony Hoffman II,"
And by emulating the Hoffmans of this world's behaviour of holocaust denial by denying proven massacares by Israelis, the point you are making is that basically there is no difference between your stance and his.
His descriptions match the official ones - the enquiries into the massacres, the trustworthy news reprots from The Times, the Guardian, the BBC, the United Nations - all of these are not holocaust deniers. Scumbags like him don't have to make it up any more - you are doing their job for them.
You can't complain about their holocaust denying if you are doing exactly the same thing yourselves.
I picked my example directly off Wikipaedia without having any idea who Hoffman was - it was one of many I could have chosen - I've already given quotes from The United Nations which Keith dismisses out of hand (I doubt if he even read it.
You people in your support for State terrorism have made as great a contribution to Anti-Semitism as a thousand Hoffmans ever could.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 02:38 PM

"There was no massacre" - which massacre is that, Keith? It gets copnvoluted trying to ffollow this. There have undoubtedly been more than enough massacres which have indubitably taken place, signed sealed and delivered, and links to information about these have been propvided.

And please don't pretend ("might lack the guts to contradict Jim Carroll,") that I have not stated on several occasions in this thread that I think the use of missiles is wrong, and also tends to hurt Palestinians, since it helps the Israel government to justify its own reliance on far greater levels of violence than the Palestinians have ever been able to deploy. I disagree with Jim on this point.

I suppose, insofar as the use of the missiles may have encouraged this behaviour on the part of Israel, behaviour which I believe threatens the future survival of the country, it might be possible to argue that, in the long run, the missiles will turn out to have damaged Israel rather than helped it - but obviously I wouldn't see that as "justifying" such use. "In the long run" we are all dead, after all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 03:49 PM

"Please address either the thread topic, or the questions directed at you."
Well addressed - I seem to remember you are the clown who suggested that the Palestinians had nor right to live in Palestine legally - have I got the right eejit?
Take your pick from below.
Jim Carroll

The King David Massacre
The Massacre at Baldat al-Shaikh
YEHIDA MASSACRE
KHISAS MASSACRE
QAZAZA MASSACRE
The Semiramis Hotel Massacre
The Massacre at Dair Yasin
NASER AL-DIN MASSACRE
THE TANTURA MASSACRE
BEIT DARAS MASSACRE
THE DAHMASH MOSQUE MASSACRE
DAWAYMA MASSACRE
HOULA MASSACRE
SHARAFAT MASSACRE
Salha Massacre
The Massacre at Qibya
KAFR QASEM MASSACRE
Khan Yunis Massacre
The Massacre in Gaza City
AL-SAMMOU' MASSACRE
Aitharoun Massacre
Kawnin Massacre
Hanin Massacre
Bint Jbeil Massacre
Abbasieh Massacre
Adloun Massacre
Saida Massacre
Fakhani Massacre
Beirut MassacreJibsheet Massacre
Sohmor Massacre
Seer Al Garbiah
Maaraka Massacres
Zrariah Massacre
Homeen Al-Tahta Massacre
Jibaa Massacre
Yohmor Massacre
Tiri massacre
Al-Naher Al-Bared Massacre
Ain Al-Hillwee Massacre
OYON QARA MASSACRE
Siddiqine Massacre
AL-AQSA MOSQUE MASSACRE
THE IBRAHIMI MOSQUE MASSACRE
THE JABALIA MASSACRE
Aramta Massacre
ERETZ CHECKPOINT MASSACRE
Deir Al-Zahrani Massacre
Nabatiyeh (school bus) Massacre
Mnsuriah Massacre
The Sohmor Second Massacre
Nabatyaih Massacre
Qana Massacre
Trqumia Massacr
Janta Massacre
24 Of June 1999 Massacres
Western Bekaa villages Massacre:


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM

"There was no massacre" - which massacre is that, Keith?

The latest massacre Jim has accused Israel of.
Just this afternoon.
Massive cut and paste job.
You can not have missed it.
He was looking for evidence against Israel, and thought he had finally found some.
But it was all just another lie told to discredit Israel.

Jim, I read all your stuff but can not remember a UN piece supporting your view of a disputed issue.
I doubt I am alone.
Can you remind us please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 04:08 PM

Jim, how about providing some evidence, like those "independent enquiries" you keep inventing, for all the "massacres" you have already accused Israel of, before dredging up yet more disputed bits of ancient history to demonize them with.

Any thoughts on the membership application at all Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 05:53 PM

No problems with the other massacres then, Keith? A bit hard sorting through the pile and working out which one it is you don't think can be proved to have happened.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:08 PM

""I cannot help feeling even so, however, that the small but intransigent Palestinian element, their equivalent of those erstwhile Stern & Irgun perpetrators, would maintain even after statehood their influence, and their determination to bring about Israel's complete destruction; and most probably would, as Begin's lot were not, be the first government elected for the new state. Statehood would surely constitute, to put it quite mildly, a most extreme danger to Israel, and to the peace of the area and the world?""

It is worth pointing out, I think, that there is no real evidence that the authors of the rocket attacks have any more political influence than, for example the "Real IRA" in Northern Ireland, and it is also a fact that Hamas only controls the Gaza strip, and as yet their writ doesn't run in the whole of Palestine.

IMHO it is very unlikely that Hamas will ever control the whole country, and statehood confers both benefits and responsibilities.

Palestine as it is now really has little to lose in its efforts to survive. As a recognised state its actions would be much more severely circumscribed by the likelihood of sanctions.

I see more benefits than problems in recognising it as a sovereign state, and the greatest,again IMHO, would be the prevention of further provocative acts by the IDF.

The simplest and best way to stop the rockets is to remove any reason or excuse for their continuation.

After all, Israel too would feel the benefit of THAT.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:15 PM

""The smoke was dispensed from air-burst shells.
It would not penetrate roofs or walls.
In the video it can be seen bouncing off roofs.
""

How then did it burn patients within the Hospital, which has been attested to by doctors and other eye witnesses?

And killing those young (as you pointed out National Servicemen aged between 18 and 20, and totally lacking in combat experience) was indeed terrorism, however much YOU may disagree.

The British government thought so too, and called it such. I reckon they knew more about it than you.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 06:36 PM

""Jim, how about providing some evidence, like those "independent enquiries" you keep inventing, for all the "massacres" you have already accused Israel of, before dredging up yet another bit of ancient history to demonize them with.""

That piece of ""ancient history"" is newer than my car Keith, and given the sources of the comment very relevant to your demands for evidence.

You will of course dismiss it (in fact you already have) because no evidence will ever penetrate your hard wired inability to see both sides of the matter (more an inability to recognise that there are two sides in fact).

Israel's government and military want no part of any peace with Palestine. They want to provoke a situation in which they can claim justification for taking it over at whatever cost.

If you don't believe that, how about showing one shred of convincing evidence that Israel wants a peaceful settlement.

Now there's a challenge you'll never be able to meet.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:10 PM

BB - you corrected yourself by replacing "People" with "Peoples".

In fact, you would have been more acurate the first time.

They are all just people.

Even the palestinians.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 01:31 AM

Don, these events may be recent compared to your car, but not to the subject of this or the original thread.
This one came with a special plea, but Jim has his own agenda on this forum and makes every thread into Jim propaganda.

Kevin, why don't you and Jim start a "massacres" thread?

Besides making up your mind on the application without evidence, you do the same with "massacres" because of your prejudice.
You and Jim were certain about the camp massacres but have put up NOTHING (despite Jim's bluster) to refute Israel's version.

Gaza is on the list, but no evidence Israel acted illegally.

It is easy to put up a list of 20 allegations, but much harder to provide evidence, never mind proof.

If you want to debate "massacres" put up one at a time with evidence for and against.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 03:52 AM

"Jim, how about providing some evidence, like those "independent enquiries" "
You've had your evidence 100 time over Keith; you don't read most of what other people put up and you reject what little you do read out-of-hand if it doesn't happen to fit with your own twisted bigotry and racism - you're noted for it - it has been pointed out to you a dozen times over by others.
Massacres such as Sabra and Shatila are enquired into, published and proven beyond doubt - they are an established part of history. If you are going to dispute such events without debate, without, qualification, without even knowledge of the subject in hand (which you admit, as you have on other subjects when you have resorted to false claims that "I didn't say it - it was somebody else") I can't see why anybody should waste time trying to change the yawning gap that passes for "your mind".
As I said - do your own homework.
Your classic, also out-of-hand dismissal of the international bodies, the UN and UNESCO, representatives of a large slice of the civilised world, as "biased" stand as a monument to your own viciously narrow way of looking at life.
As far as I'm concerned, it is enough that your support for the use of chemical weapons in built-up areas, for ethnic cleansing, for the destruction of homes and annexation of land, for starving a whole, already impoverished population into political submission, for the expulsion of an entire ethnic group, for the slaughter of women and children, for the acceptibility of the killing of hostages, for the day-to-day humiliation and persecution of the citizens of an entire city..... is added to your "all male Pakistanis are cultural perverts", "Travellers are prominent in keeping slaves", "there is nothing wrong with holding inflamatory sectarian marches in the middle of peace negotiations".... right down to your hint that maybe immigrants with aids should not receive medical treatment.... are now an archived and accessible part of your C.V. - just like Sabra and Shatila are part of Israel's.
As far as I can see, you've summed up your attitude to all debate with your also classic "I'm just putting Israel's" point of view, and then going on to accuse those who oppose you (just about everybody here) as "prejudiced" - YOU REALLY COULDN'T HAVE MADE THAT ONE UP IF YOU WERE A SCRIPTWRITER FOR MONTY PYTHON!!!
In your defence, I don't think I've ever come across anybody who is prepared to put the time and effort into your racism, bigotry and xenophobia that you have shown yourself willing to - keep up the good work.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 04:05 AM

You have NOT provided evidence for any of your claims.
I do not call all opponents prejudiced, only those who make up their minds without evidence.
I did not dismiss UN Gen. Council or UNESCO., I just pointed out that liberal democracies are hugely outnumbered and outvoted on those fora.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 07:07 AM

All lies again then Keith - thank you for making my point so succintly
Have a good rally
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 07:43 AM

Not ALL lies Jim.
It is true I have only put the Israeli position.
There are plenty of you busy putting only the Palestinian view.
That alone does not demonstrate prejudice.

Remember how you and Kevin decided Israel was wrong to oppose membership without even finding out their reasons?
Prejudice.
Similarly there is nothing I have seen, certainly nothing produced by you, to refute Israel's version of Sabra and Shatila
But you "know" they did it!
Prejudice.

(Last post was me)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 08:09 AM

Ni, Jim.

I am the person who pointed out that your post of

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:27 AM

ignored the fact that the UN DID conduct the investigation, and found NO MASSACRE.

I am also the person who asked if you wanted the Israelis to treat the Palestinians as the Palestinians have treated the Jews in their territories, and gotten no reply.

I am also the person who asked if you wanted the Israelis to treat the Palestinians as the Arab nations have treated them ( from 1948 to present), and gotten no answer.

I am also the person who asked why the ethnic cleansing of Jews form the West Bank ( 1948-1967) gave them NO right to go back, but the Palestinians who left Israel ( a minority) get the right that YOU deny to Jews?

I am also the person who thinks that you are a blatant bigot who could not care less about the Palestinian people, or anyone else, as long as you can demand that Jews be killed. Otherwise, you would acknowledge that SELF_DEFENSE ( that you calim is OK) would let the Israelis randomly bombard Gaza with antipersonnel rockets directed at the civilian population- WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DONE.

Israel has acted, in general, in accordance with the laws of war: When they have not they should, and generally HAVE, been taken to task over those actions.- The Palestinians have repeatedly violated those laws AS STATED BY THE UN, yet you say that is OK as long as Jews get killed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 10:40 AM

Lox,

"
From: Lox - PM
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:10 PM

BB - you corrected yourself by replacing "People" with "Peoples".

In fact, you would have been more acurate the first time.

They are all just people.

Even the palestinians."

True.

A pity Jim does not believe that the same rules he puts on Israel do not apply to the Palestinians- If there were not attacks ON Israel, there would be none on Gaza.


As for the Palestinians, they have chosen to smuggle ( into Gaza) rockets and material to make them, rather than food and medicines. IMO, Israel has no responsibility to give them what they have chosen NOT to bring in themselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 10:44 AM

Still waiting on your twist of what happened in 1949...



"The United States extended de jure recognition to the Government of Transjordan and the Government of Israel on the same day, 31 January 1949.[30] Clea Bunch said that "President Truman crafted a balanced policy between Israel and its moderate Hashemite neighbours when he simultaneously extended formal recognition to the newly created state of Israel and the Kingdom of Transjordan. These two nations were inevitably linked in the President's mind as twin emergent states: one serving the needs of the refugee Jew, the other absorbing recently displaced Palestinian Arabs. In addition, Truman was aware of the private agreements that existed between Jewish Agency leaders and King Abdullah I of Jordan. Thus, it made perfect sense to Truman to favour both states with de jure recognition."[31]" "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

Remember how you and Kevin decided Israel was wrong to oppose membership without even finding out their reasons?
Prejudice.


Since most countries see Palestinian statehood as right and proper, the onus for coming up with reasons why they are allwrong rests with those who oppose membership. In the absence of such reason to oppose statehood would appear to involve prejudice.

The only reason you have indicated for opposing statehood appears to be that the Israel government is opposed to it. That's not in itself a reason.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 02:49 PM

I did not express an opinion on UN membership, and I do not oppose statehood.

Israel was known to be against it.
You admitted not knowing their reasons, but you said they were wrong anyway!

We now know UK, Europe and Canada do not support membership, and they are certainly not prejudiced against Palestine.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 03:23 PM

"ignored the fact that the UN DID conduct the investigation, and found NO MASSACRE."
I know that massacres did take place in Palestine in 1948 - back in the late sixties we recorded an old WW1 soldier in Liverpool and following the interview his son told us that he and his mates were on the point of embarking for Britain from Palestine when word came that Jewish freedom fighters were rampaging through some villages and clearing out the occupants by throwing hand grenades into the houses. There was a near mutint because some of the soldiers wanted to go back to stop what was happening, but were ordered on board ship by the officers - which pretty well fits in with the Wiki account of Deir Yassin - and also the fictionalised sequence in the television serial 'The Promise' earlier this year.
You want to prove that these were not massacres - feel free.
But to be frank - I have no interest in re-fighting battles that were fought when I was seven years old - I only raised the matter because some arsehole claimed that there had been NO MASSACRES WHATEVER
I am more concerned with the killings that are taking place now, and in seeing peace brought to the Middle East in my lifetime.
I don't think this is going to be achieved by slaughtering non-combatants, the use of chemical weapons and heavy artillery indiscriminately in built up areas, building Berlin-type Walls, starving people already impoverished into submission, stealing taxed gathered under an international agreement, ethnically cleansing a country of entire communities..... or, for that matter, seizing land on the say-so of a two thousand year ild fairy story.
"as long as you can demand that Jews be killed."
Don't you dare pull the "anti Semite" stunt with me - its already been tried on this thread to the disgrace of the person/people who used it - it's hard nosed pricks like yourself who have disgraced the Jewish people by your strutting Zionism and skulking behind the dead of Auzchwithz - you shame the six million by your very presence - you disgrace to the people you claim to support - piss off you twisted perv.
Jim Carroll   

The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948, when around 120 fighters from the Irgun Zevai Leumi and Lohamei Herut Israel Zionist paramilitary groups attacked Deir Yassin near Jerusalem, a Palestinian-Arab village of roughly 600 people.[1] The assault occurred as Jewish militia sought to relieve the blockade of Jerusalem during the civil war that preceded the end of British rule in Palestine.[2]
Around 107 villagers were killed during and after the battle for the village, including women and children—some were shot, while others died when hand grenades were thrown into their homes.[3] Several villagers were taken prisoner and may have been killed after being paraded through the streets of West Jerusalem, though accounts vary.[4] Four of the attackers died, with around 35 injured.[5] The killings were condemned by the leadership of the Haganah—the Jewish community's main paramilitary force—and by the area's two chief rabbis. The Jewish Agency for Israel sent Jordan's King Abdullah a letter of apology, which he rebuffed.[2]
The deaths became a pivotal event in the Arab-Israeli conflict for their demographic and military consequences. The narrative was embellished and used by various parties to attack each other—by the Palestinians to besmirch Palestine's Jewish community and subsequently Israel; by the Haganah to play down their own role in the affair; and later by the Israeli Left to accuse the Irgun and Lehi of violating the Jewish principle of purity of arms, thus blackening Israel's name around the world.[6] News of the killings sparked terror within the Palestinian community, encouraging them to flee from their towns and villages in the face of Jewish troop advances, and it strengthened the resolve of Arab governments to intervene, which they did five weeks later.[2]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Nov 11 - 06:46 PM

""Otherwise, you would acknowledge that SELF_DEFENSE ( that you calim is OK) would let the Israelis randomly bombard Gaza with antipersonnel rockets directed at the civilian population- WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DONE.""

True BB, they didn't ""randomly bombard Gaza with antipersonnel rockets directed at the civilian population-"", they used White phosphorus, heavy artillery and aerial attacks, all very deliberately and efficiently aimed.

Nothing the least bit random. They knew exactly who was collecting all that crap.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

""A pity Jim does not believe that the same rules he puts on Israel do not apply to the Palestinians- If there were not attacks ON Israel, there would be none on Gaza.""

There are other ways of attacking a neighbour than guns you know. Every time Israel expands its settlements in its neighbour's territory, that is an attack.

And that has not stopped even during ceasefires when no rockets were being fired. So Israel has never stopped attacking and shows no sign that she ever will.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 01:41 AM

to be frank - I have no interest in re-fighting battles that were fought when I was seven years old - I only raised the matter because some arsehole claimed that there had been NO MASSACRES WHATEVER
I am more concerned with the killings that are taking place now,


Not true Jim.
It was YOU who kept dragging us back to these events.
And, NO-ONE is claiming no massacres.

Your latest one.
An act of terror by terrorists, not IDF or Israel.
They only claimed to be acting for Israel, as all the IRAs claim to be acting for Ireland.

Sabra Shatila.
Fiske walked around the camps in the immediate aftermath talking to survivors.
Not one implicated Israelis.
Why?
He saw the remains of parachute flares, and wrongly thought they were dropped from aircraft.
Any soldier would tell him they never are.
They are from hand launched rockets and mortars, which the militia itself would have.

But you still blame Israel in the absence of any evidence at all.
Just as you did the massacre at Jenin, which did not actually happen at all.
Just made up lies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 03:04 AM

"Not true Jim."
And it is you who persists on claiming that they never happened, ignoring the proof you are given here and that which is largely accepted by the world and demanding yet more - it is you, not me (nor anybody else who has had stood up to your 'dripping tap' style of argument, who has taken sides - the side of a terrorist state with ethnic cleansing in mind.
"And, NO-ONE is claiming no massacres."
"No massacres" were your EXACT WORDS. Or were you only "quoting reliable experts"?
"Not one implicated Israelis."
The Israelis ,DROVE THE KILLERS TO THE MURDER SITE, THEY OPENED THE GATES TO ALLOW THEM ACCESS TO THEIR VICTIMS, THEY PROVIDED ILLUMINATION SO THE KILLERS COULD CARRY OUT THEIR WORK EFFICIENTLY, THEY STOOD BY WHILE THE KILLING WENT ON KILLING AND THEY HELPED BURY THE BODIES UNDER WHAT IS NOW THE STADIUM. THERE IS EYE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE IN THE CAMPS WHILE THE SLAUGHTER TOOK PLACE - ONE WOMAN DESCRIBED HOW SHE SAW THE SOLDIERS STANDING BY WITNESSING THE WOMEN WHO WERE BEING HERDED AWAY TO BE RAPED THEN MURDERED. THE MASSACRE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE PLACE WITHOUT THE FULL AND ENTHUSIASTICE PARTICIPATION OF ISRAELI TROOPS - THAT IS THE VERY LEAST OF THEIR IMPLICATIONS IN MASS MURDER AND IT IS FULLY ACCEPTED THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY DID - WHICH OF THESE ACTIONS DO YOU CLAIM DID NOT TAKE PLACE ?
You remain a sordid little holocaust and ethnic cleansing supporter; once again, thanks fort the confirmation.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 03:18 AM

Jim, what is the source for that tale told in red capitals?
Tell us why we should believe any of it please.

"And it is you who persists on claiming that they never happened,"

Not true. I am just asking for the evidence you should have.

"ignoring the proof you are given here "

Sometimes posts go missing Jim.
None has appeared.

"and that which is largely accepted by the world"

I challenge that. Please justify.


" "No massacres" were your EXACT WORDS."

Lie.
I said "No massacre" about Jenin, which was true.
You were wrong to cite that massacre because it never happened.
Just made up lies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 05:12 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Palestine
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 19 Oct 11 - 08:38 AM

No chemical weapons at all.
No massacres at all.
Which illustrates perfectly why there is no point whatever in responding to your Zionist propaganda - you lie - this was a statement you made before the Janin massacre was even a twinkle....
I really can't see why you take part in these debates - you admit ignorance on the subjects yet you dont read what others have to say you appear not even to read your own posts in order to allay that ignorance.
You've lied about this - you lied about taking your information about culturally perverted Pakistanis from "experts" - you singularly have ignored requests to provide a quote of anybody else saying it - if this is not true - PUT UP YOUR QUOTE
It all seems a gigantic ego trip to you.
As far as the Sabra Shatila massacre massacre is concerned - it's been put up to you - they are the findings of everybody except the Israelis - which you have admitted is the case you are batting for - LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 05:36 AM

"a sordid little holocaust and ethnic cleansing supporter;" were words you used of Keith a couple of posts back, Jim. I have, as you will have observed, not contributed to this thread of late; but feel bound to remind you, yet again, that "holocaust" has become a word of very specific meaning, whatever its original connotation of sacrifice: and it is impolitic of anyone to use it of just any politically or racially motivated killing. This is especially the case on your part, considering the resentment expressed by you about some of BB's accusations, [and some of mine same way back, for that matter, since withdrawn]. You have seen before that flinging this word around unthinkingly, in particular in regard to Israeli actions, is liable to lay you open to certain suspicions which you have repeatedly stated do not apply to you: so why persist in giving further rise to them?

It is, note again please, widely regarded as an antisemitic act to use that word in relation to Israel. If you persist in doing so, conclusions as to your bona fides are bound to be drawn.

~Michael~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 06:06 AM

And I continue to remind you mike that you have been found supporting Keith's anti Pakistani racism while objecting to the same aimed against Jews.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 06:17 AM

As far as the Sabra Shatila massacre massacre is concerned - it's been put up to you - they are the findings of everybody except the Israelis

All you have put up to support this is a Wiki page.
That page warned that no citations had ever been provided for the claims of Israeli complicity.
You dishonestly and deceitfully deleted those warnings from your cut and paste.

There is no doubt the massacre happened.
Israel acknowledges it.
I gave their version an no-one has provided anything to refute any part of it.
If you have something now, post it!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 06:42 AM

No Keith - you've had it LOOK for IT YOURSELF
I assume that your silence on the other two issueds is an admission that you have lied and now intend to attempt the divert the topic onto another track
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 06:47 AM

I have made clear by repeated statements that I do not deny massacres, or even Israeli participation.
Being open-minded and unprejudiced, I ask for evidence.
That has been my case throughout.

The "NO MASSACRES" post (month ago different thread) was in the context of Israeli guilt for Sabra Shatila, as my very next post makes clear.
I only had time for a quick post. This was the clarification.

Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 19 Oct 11 - 07:39 PM

Jim, chemical weapons.
Everyone here now knows that wp smoke rounds, though dangerous, are not as dangerous as actual weapons, and wp is not classed as a chemical weapon in any form.
You calling it that is just lying propaganda to demonize Israel.
If you had a case you would not need to make that up.

The 2 massacres.
The Israelis should have anticipated what happened, and maybe could have stopped it sooner.
They deny participation.
You had to delete stuff from a Wiki page because it showed that there was nothing to support that claim.
Your action shows you have nothing.
You said their were "independent enquiries" and "official enquiries" that support you, but you made it all up.
A week later you have produced nothing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 06:50 AM

No Keith - you've had it LOOK for IT YOURSELF

I have looked.
There is nothing.
If there was you would attack me with it.
You lie.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 07:43 AM

Jim,

Not anly are you a bigot, YOU CANT READ!

"
I am the person who pointed out that your post of

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 16 Nov 11 - 07:27 AM

ignored the fact that the UN DID conduct the investigation, and found NO MASSACRE."

REFERS TO Jenin ONLY


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 08:16 AM

"made clear by repeated statements that I do not deny massacres, or even Israeli participation."
"No chemical weapons at all. No massacres at all. "
Is there any point whatever in proceeding with this farce?
Which of the above statements is really yours - the one where you claim there to have been "No massacres at all" or the one where you say you have "made clear by repeated statements that I do not deny massacres, or even Israeli participation."
One way or the other, you are lying in the face of your own statements.
Jenin
REFERS TO Jenin ONLY
I am not interested in nit-picking about individual massacres - there are plenty of others to replace "marginal" ones - The description of tese 'non-massacres' makes them fully-blown atrocities against civilians - if these are not massacres they certainly count as crimes against civilians.
Your bully thuggishness throughout these threads reflects those you support - take your Zionist cause and shove it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jenin
Sabra /Shatila massacres
Probably the most comprehensive eye-witness description of the massacre which corresponds to everything I have read and watched down the years
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0e0_1177434535
IDF and Christian milia massacre of sabra and shatila - Video #1
The Forgotten massacre of sabra and shatila . a crime against humanity committed by the Israeli soldiers and Christian militia against Palestinian families in southern Lebanon refugee camps " Sabra and Shatila in 1982 " ------------------ * Sabra-Shatila Massacre: In September 1982, just a few weeks after the Palestinian men had surrendered their weapons under an internationally brokered peace deal, and were deported from Beirut leaving their families under the protection of an international peace keeping force, the Israeli army invaded Beirut, violating the peace treaty, and some 3000 defenceless Palestinian women and children were rounded up in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila and systematically murdered in cold blood. (For a repeat of this tragedy see Srebrenica in 1995 - only that time it was 8000 Muslim men who were slaughtered after they had handed their weapons to the UN forces who had guaranteed them a "safe haven")................... The slaughter of unarmed children, women, the aged and the infirm was shocking. For me, I was doubly outraged that I had to discover the truth about a brave and generous people only through their deaths. Until then, I never knew Palestinian refugees existed. As a fundamentalist Christian, I had been a supporter of Israel, hated Arabs and saw the Palestinian Liberation Organisation as terrorists to be loathed and feared."

Extract from the back cover of her book "From Beirut To Jerusalem" ............

Timeline of the Massacre
This is a reconstructed timeline of the events leading up to the massacre in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, as well as the event itself. Most of the information is based on the findings of New York Times correspondent Thomas L. Friedman (as quoted in his article "U.S. PRESSES ISRAEL TO LET U.N. TROOPS MOVE INTO BEIRUT" in the September 20, 1982 issue of The New York Times), whose collection of credible personal witness-accounts as well as those of other reporters have greatly contributed to form this reconstruction of the actual timeline. In addition, information has been taken from Friedman's September 27th, 1982, New York Times article ("ISRAELI GENERAL IN BEIRUT SAYS HE DID NOT KNOW OF KILLINGS") as well as from the report issued by the Israeli Kahan commission of inquiry.
Tuesday, September 14th, 1982
Morning - President-elect Bashir Gemayel is assassinated
Ariel Sharon and Israeli Lt. Gen Eytan decide to send Phalange into camps
Wednesday, September 15th
Morning - Israeli tanks move into Muslim West Beirut
Eytan orders Phalange to mobilize
Afternoon- Area around Sabra and Shatila surrounded by Israeli troops
Israeli checkpoints are set up
First sightings of Christian militiamen heading into Beirut from the airport
Evening- Exchanges of gunfire and shelling in the camps (slight number of casualties)
Trucks carrying Phalange militiamen reported heading towards the airport
Thursday, September 16th
Morning- Constant shooting and shelling in Shatila
Phalange commanders meet with Israeli Gen. Drori to coordinate entry of militia
Afternoon - 1,200 to 1,400 Christian militiamen gathered together at the airport
Evening- Phalangist checkpoints are set up
Christian militiamen enter Sabra and Shatila refugee camps under command
Of Phalange chief Mr. Hobeika, encounter little resistance, round up dozens
Of civilians
Israeli forces receive information on atrocities from witnesses, intercepted
Phalange radio transmissions
First wounded and casualties arrive at area hospitals with gunshot and shrapnel
wounds in the head, chest and stomach; Patients specify Phalangist role
Night- Israeli forces light flares over camps to provide light to militiamen inside
Friday, September 17th
Morning- Over 1,000 Palestinians from Sabra and Shatila seek protection around Gaza Hospital
Hundreds of Palestinians are reportedly rounded up by Phalange militia in Shatila
Gen. Drori calls for halt of operations
Arriving Phalange turned back at airport
Afternoon- Gen. Drori meets Gen. Eytan, does not discuss killings, orders 5 A.M. withdrawal
Of Phalange militia
Trucks loaded with women and children leave camps
Bulldozers with scoops full of bodies are reported seen in camps
Israelis provide Phalange with provisions
Nurse on 8th Floor of Gaza hospital killed by sniper fire
82 Patients flee hospital, Red Cross evacuates 6 babies
Christian militia takes over Akka Hospital, Palestinian nurse raped and shot, Two
Palestinian doctors and one patient taken out of hospital by militia, Two doctors
And two nurses killed by grenade
Evening- Shooting still going on inside Shatila
Saturday, September 18th
Morning- Phalange leave camps at 8 A.M.
Christian militia enters Gaza hospital, orders everyone out, shelter-seekers are
Rounded up, 600 Palestinian civilians are forced to march main street of Shatila
At gunpoint
Reporters are allowed to enter the camps
Lebanese army moves into camps
Recovery efforts begin
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 08:18 AM

Don,


"True BB, they didn't ""randomly bombard Gaza with antipersonnel rockets directed at the civilian population-"", they used White phosphorus, heavy artillery and aerial attacks, all very deliberately and efficiently aimed."

AIMED at the rocket launch points- which any fair-minded person would consider a legitimate target. The FACT that these points were in civilian areas IS A WAR CRIME on the part of the Palestinians.




"Every time Israel expands its settlements in its neighbour's territory, that is an attack."

WHOSE territory???

I have shown, WITHOUT ANY ARGUMENT FROM YOU OR JIM that the West Bank is currently Israeli territory. Yes, ISRAEL has offered to give it up in trade for peace, BUT THE PALESTINIANS HAVE NOT AGREED TO THAT. Thus, it remains Israeli property.


So, since it is the Palestinians WHO ARE ATTACKING Israel's territory, with every rocket launch, Israel is justified in taking far harsher action than they have.





As for "ethnic cleansing,

HOW MANY ARAB MOSLIMS LIVE IN ISRAEL?
HOW MANY JEWS LIVE IN ARAB NATIONS?

Compare these numbers to the figures in 1940 or 1945, and THEN talk to me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 08:24 AM

Jim,

"I am not interested in nit-picking about individual massacres - there are plenty of others to replace "marginal" ones - The description of tese 'non-massacres' makes them fully-blown atrocities against civilians - if these are not massacres they certainly count as crimes against civilians."

As long as YOU continue to lie about SOME of them, YOUR posts about any have no validity- YOU ARE A LYING BIGOT WHOSE POSTS CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO BE TRUE.

As for massacres, how about those of Jews BY Palestinins??

BTW,

Still waiting...

"
I am also the person who asked if you wanted the Israelis to treat the Palestinians as the Palestinians have treated the Jews in their territories, and gotten no reply.

I am also the person who asked if you wanted the Israelis to treat the Palestinians as the Arab nations have treated them ( from 1948 to present), and gotten no answer.

I am also the person who asked why the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the West Bank ( 1948-1967) gave them NO right to go back, but the Palestinians who left Israel ( a minority) get the right that YOU deny to Jews?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 08:40 AM

Jim,

In addition, how about massacres of palestinians by other ARAB nations? THAT is fine by you, it seems- you just get unhappy if you think Jews might defend themselves.

As for brutish thuggishness, I have seen a lot of that here- BY YOU. If you have NO support for what you want to prove, attacking those who disagree with you is just a demonstration of that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 08:41 AM

"As long as YOU continue to lie about SOME of them, "
NO I DON'T LIE ABOUT them Keith is the liar here with his contradictory claims - and you dissemble wit your diversive tactics
Do I want Israelis to treat Palestinians....
I suppport no side in this argument - the barbarism of "an eye for an eye" belongs where it originated - in the Bible Book of Fables
Of course the massacre of anybody is wrong Jews, Muslims... and by denying it is happening will nly perpetuate it - and religious fanaticism of any brand is one guarantee that it will continue - so you may shove yours with your accusations of bigotry.
If there has been ethnic cleansing, which I doubt, it is no excuse for further ethic cleansing - and where do you thing the Bedouins feature in all this?
As I said - stick your Zionist bigotry as far as it will go - it kills people.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 09:16 AM

Jim: I supported Keith in no racism on that long-since Pakistani thread; I simply pointed out that you provided no convincing instance of his having expressed any, but were simply convicting him in your own 'made-up-so-don't-confuse-me-with-facts' mind on the grounds of some statements you had taken your doctrinaire exception to in earlier threads.

Your counter-warning to me about this is mere evasive 'whataboutery', in no way contradictive of my pointing out that it is no use your constantly denying being antisemitic while you persist in employing a usage which you know, because you have repeatedly been told so, is widely, even universally, accepted as antisemitic. Whatever misinterpretations you might have put on posts of mine on previous threads, only tenuously, if at all, related to this one, the fact is not altered that YOU PERSIST IN ADOPTING A USAGE WHICH YOU KNOW TO BE INTRINSICALLY ANTISEMITIC, and then come on all wounded 'poor-misunderstood-me' if accused of antisemitism.

You can't have it both ways, Jim. Stop using the word "Holocaust" in relation to Israel or we shall all KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are an antisemite. What Keith or I may or may not think of Pakistanis who interfere with girls in Bradford, like ♫the flowers that bloom in the spring tra-la♫ {W S Gilbert, The Mikado} has nothing to do with the case.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 09:30 AM

Jim,

The facts show that

1. There HAS been ethnic cleansing BY THE ARAB MOSLIMS from 1948 to 1967
1. The Fact of Israeli ethnic cleansing is not yet determined one way or the other. Looking at the Arab population of Israel vs the Jewish population of Arab nations, you are hard pressed to justify the claim, but feel free to try.If you have factual statements to make, rather than lying rants by known bigots, feel free to present them.

MY questions were NOT "an eye for an eye". I was asking if you thought it better for Israel to

1. Continue to treat the Palestinians the way they are presently
2. OR Treat the Palestinians the way the Arab Moslims have treated the Jews,
3. OR Treat the Palestinians the way the Other Arab Moslim States have treated the Palestinians.


I understand you may not want to consider answering a question, when you can rant about the person who disagrees with you, but I would like to know which YOU think is the best course of action for the Palestinians to hope for.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM

Jim, you are being dishonest.
When I posted, "no massacres" we had only ever discussed Sabra and Shatila in the whole thread.
That was the whole context, as made clear in my following post.
It was the shortest of posts followed by a clarification and only referring to Israeli invovement in massacres of Sabra and Shatila.

(You have now provided some evidence after over a month of asking and denying.
Thank you.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 10:54 AM

"Jim, you are being dishonest."
NO I AM NOT - WE HAVE CONSTANTLY DISCUSSED MASSACRES - WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WROTE WAS NO MASSACRES AT ALL indicating that you were referring to all of them that had been pointed out to you,
Is there no end to your lying?
And your lying about having a source for your " Male Pakistani implant" claim.....?
Mike,
I was just looking through your hysterical torrent of abuse at my observing similarities between the massacre of Jews and the massacre of Palestinians. I wuld have found it deeply insulting if it had not come from somebody who sees no racism in the claim that "All male Pakistanis have a cultural implant which makes them sexual threats to young girls"
The fact that you now write this off as "some statements you had taken your doctrinaire exception to" confirms me that you are both a hypocrite and a closet (highly selective) racist - so please feel free to regard me as an Anti-Semite if you feel it covers your own racism in any way.
Don't you take exceptioon to such blatent racist stereotyping - silly question, of course you don't!!
- I HAVE NEVER COMPARED LIKE WITH LIKE, nor would I, but the slaughter of any group of human beings because they are in the way of political or territorial ambition is bound to attract such claims of similarities as far as I'm concerned.
"1. Continue to treat the Palestinians the way they are presently"
You mean to continue the persecution, humiliation, attempts to starve them into submission...
How about treating them as the human beings they are....
Whatever the military and political problems, the Israelis claim to fame has been the deliberate slaughter and persecution of civilians - now apparently even accepted by Keith - albeit grudgingly.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 11:13 AM

Jim,

As usual, you fail to address the question, and make claims without any factual basis.

I take it you have nothing worthwhile to even say, from your reply.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM

... &, Jim, you miss, or deliberately avoid, my point with continued inaccurate counter-accusatory irrelevancies. You are clearly impressing nobody with your demagogic rants which fail to engage with any question you are asked or any point made to you.

You are doing yourself very little credit, I fear.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 12:00 PM

NO I AM NOT - WE HAVE CONSTANTLY DISCUSSED MASSACRES - WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WROTE WAS NO MASSACRES AT ALL indicating that you were referring to all of them that had been pointed out to you,

Not true Jim.
I read right through the old thread up to that post.
Only those 2 massacres discussed.
Deny that?
I did a quick 5 word post (not counting "at alls") and clarified when I had time next post.
It was just about those 2 massacres.

That was over a month of solid debate ago and I have never denied all massacres.

Deny that?

If you have to resort to dishonesty to make your case, is it worth making Jim?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 12:03 PM

Israelis claim to fame has been the deliberate slaughter and persecution of civilians - now apparently even accepted by Keith - albeit grudgingly.
I have accepted the evidence you have finally provided.
It is not as convincing as you suggest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 05:50 PM

There really is no question butbthat there have been numerous massacres carried out in this cobnflict iover the years. Some by Paletinians or their allies, but far more by Israeli forces, and these have resulted in far more deaths.

I remember putting up a link to a neutral source listing all of these up to the date it was produced, a list which provided links to information about all of them. I can't recall whether it was on this thread or its predecessor.

Unfortunately "there were no masscres" is pretty well never true, wherever you look, in any conflict, and much of the time when there isn't even a conflict. Here is a link to a list by country, with links to details..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM

No-one is claiming "no massacres"!

To make that claim against me, Jim had to go back nearly a thousand posts in two threads to find a hurried post where I appear to deny all massacres, but only if you ignore the context of the previous posts (just Sabra/Shatila), ignore the clarification I gave in the following post (just Sabra/Shatila), and ignore the fact that in the subsequent month of posting on the same subject I never made such a ludicrous claim again!

It was a false and dishonest attempt to deceive.
Like deleting "citation needed" warnings from a cut and paste.
Like his smear campaign against me as a person.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 02:52 AM

I do remeber Your List kevin, and I worked through a large number.

There is a striking difference between those attributed to Israel and Palestinians.

Israeli ones usually involve a possible over-reaction or disproportionate response to a genuine security challenge.

Palestinian ones tend to be planned and deliberate, like a bomber picking out a bus carrying many Jewish children.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 04:33 AM

Jim, in your 18 Nov 11 - 10:54 AM post you put something in quotes and attributed it to me.
I never made such a statement and never would.
It does not represent my views.
It is another lie.

If you have to be dishonest to make a case, it is not worth making Jim.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM

Keith - you continue to lie - somewhat desperately
"No massacres at all" mean exactly that -"No massacres at all"
You now appear to be inventing a context in which it means something else.
You have backed up your claim by denying every single Israli atrocity that has been placed before you.
Mike
A simple acid test:
Please replace Keith's "every make Pakistani" with "every Jewish male" and tell me that it is not offensive racism - look forward to your response with some interest.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM

PS By the way Keith - you originally claimed that yor "no massacres at all" referred to Jenin - cn't you even stick to your own script???
Back to the West Clare festival of Traditional singing
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM

Jim, when you accused me of saying it, I thought you meant recently.
I had recently said "no massacre" about Jenin.
How was I to know you had gone back to a previous thread and a previous month??
Do you suppose I meant there has never been a massacre in history?
Or even in the history of Palestine?

Why did you not challenge such an extraordinary and absurd statement at the time?
Answer, because we were just talking about Israel's guilt for Sabra and Shatila.
I had not time for a full answer that day, but the context was clear enough and anyway I clarified it IN MY NEXT POST.
Have I made such a ludicrous denial before or since?

You are a dishonest man.
For the sake of a debating point on a Mudcat thread you make a liar of yourself.

I remind you that you faked a quote yesterday.
You must know what I really said after all the arguments about it, but you need to lie to stand up your baseless smear.
Contemptible.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 10:03 AM

Jim ~~ Fair challenge. The quote you refer to is some time since. Can you copy/paste it for me to reconsider, with a date/time ref? If precisely as you word it, I should certainly find it objectionable; but it is so far of yore that I will need to have it presented back precisely. I am honestly not even sure on what thread to look for it. My recolleciton is that I was not supporting all Keith's views at the time, but endeavouring simply to confine the discussion to the particular news item as to some disproportion in certain offences brought to trial in specific locations, to the distress of several prominent people incl leading Muslims; but the thread kept getting muddied by accusations given rise by this, of a sort of general racism not applicable to the specific instances.

The quick answer to your question as you put it above is that of course I would not regard it as an acceptable proposition; but I shall need a bit more confirmation that precisely such terms were ever used of any demographic.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 11:33 AM

Here is the post Michael.
Please read previous posts to get it in context.
thread.cfm?threadid=135090&messages=2602&page=12#3094279


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 12:28 PM

Thank you, Keith. I still am a bit vague about it all; but I seem to recall, Jim, thanks to this reminder, that it was not just Keith who was trying to keep the thread on track in relation to a particular set of statistics recently published; but Lizzie, Bruce, and several others as well as myself; in the face of some point-missing (& in at least one case abusively inaccurate speculations as to my excretory arrangements on which I do not need to be more specific} denunciations of racism from some others. I can't see that anything was said particularly similar to the remark you think I should take exception to if it related to Jews rather than to Pakistanis: I am not aware of any Jewish activity resulting in a statistic of the sort we were addressing ourselves to having ever been referenced, except conceivably in Nürnberg in 1934 where the Will was Triumphant, or having ever featured in any news medium. If any such Jewish-based statistic had arisen for consideration then the case would be altered, would it not? I cannot know for sure in the abstract how I would react to any conclusion that might be drawn from consideration of such a phenomenon.

Hope that addresses your point, Jim.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM

""Stop using the word "Holocaust" in relation to Israel or we shall all KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are an antisemite.""

Michael, purely in the interests of balance in debate, do you not at times feel that the Israelis are much too inclined to use their victim status as a weapon to prevent criticism of their actions?

Whenever anybody attempts to take them to task for their arrogance and intransigence (both of which you have acknowledged to exist) they are likely to respond with a reference, direct or implied, to the Holocaust.

The phrase "What's sauce for the goose....etc" does tend to present itself, even to those of us who are not "anti" anyone.

We have a number of people on this thread who are, like myself and you, of the opinion that both sides need to give way to some extent, and ranged against us a few who cannot abide any criticism of Israel, and cannot countenance the idea of Israel being in the slightest responsible for the present hostilities.

This situation, expanded to the World at Large, explains why Israel feels empowered to do exactly as it wishes, regardless of the cost in human life, and call any and all objectors anti semites.

Perhaps you see it differently, but from where I sit Jim's comment, while undiplomatic, has some merit and is worthy of discussion rather than dismissal with accusations of anti semitism.

Perhaps if he had made the same statement using an alternative word?....but then that would have simply been a euphemism.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 01:31 AM

No, it wouldn't have been a euphemism, I don't think, Don: it isn't a euphemisable word IMO. We have had the precise connotations of 'Massacre' discussed to death[!] on this thread: that is no euphemism, but a perfectly apposite word to call on in the context. But "Nazi" & "Holocaust", with their overtones ~~ and in particular, re the latter of which we are speaking ~~ have a peculiar referent which is of peculiar offensiveness, and have for long carried definite implications as to the motivations of those using them re Israel ~ implications of which Jim is well aware. I am simply reminding him of the accusations he is purposefully, as it seems to me, inviting by his pertinacity in employing the term. I do not think he is really, consciously, antisemitic {any more than I know myself to be racist, howsomever much he may call on the term in a sort of aggressive self-defence}; but I reiterate that he is impolitic in the extreme to go on repeating this deliberate provocation and then hoping his motivations will not be denounced as such.

If one must find a figure of speech to define 'holocaust' here, I think hyperbole would do much better than euphemism. Think of the numerical scale of the Holocaust; remember the pictures of piles of corpses and hair and spectacles & children's shoes ~~ and one should be ashamed of letting a train of thought in the present discussion even letting one anywhere near such a usage.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 04:22 AM

Jim, re. Sabra and Shatila, your timeline has nothing to refute Israel's version of events, and your eye-witness did not witness any Israeli wrongdoing.
As I have said all along, it is disputed and I have still seen no evidence of Israel's guilt so I will keep an open mind.
(Unprejudiced!)

It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?

Most or all of the "massacres" in your list involve demonstrators.
Arab security forces routinely fire on unarmed demonstrators (Hamas 12th Nov 2007, Egypt Lybia Syria this year) with no outrage ever expressed by you.
Is this not another example of your prejudice?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 07:42 AM

The term "Holocaust" is also used in the context of the slaughter of Armenians in 1915 - which seems to have been used as a precedent by Hitler, who in face of questions about "Final Solution" is quoted as saying "Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?"

I do not think that when people in Turkey have been imprisoned for referring to this episode as "the Armenian Holocaust" it would be reasonable to infer that this happened because the words were seen as "antisemitic".

When the word is deployed it is intended to have shock effect, as an accusation that some action is comparable to that of the Nazis. I think using it in this way is generally a mistake, since it invites the response that the actions in question are not on the same scale as that of Nazi Germany, and thus can even tend to trivialise their actual horror by the comparison. However I do not think that it is correct to see it as an expression of antisemitism - a true antisemite might indeed be expected to see a comparison of Israel with Nazi Germany as unacceptable, because it would involve saying something favourable about the Jewish government.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:36 AM

Oh dear - pay attention class!!!
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Your argument appears to indicate that there is evidence of Keith's statements Mike - can you confirm this to be the case?
Stop digging Keith - you claimed there have been no massacres carried out by Israel, then you said that nobody had made such a claim.
Stop lying.
Now, in the face of an account placed before you of the Shatila Sabra massacres, you continue to deny there to be any evidence -
Stop lying.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM

"Oh dear - pay attention class!!!" - Jim Carroll

Not to you dear boy - you are plainly delusional.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 09:42 AM

... and hysterical. I have not the remotest idea what the following, apparently addressed to me


---"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Your argument appears to indicate that there is evidence of Keith's statements Mike - can you confirm this to be the case?---


is supposed to mean; and I frankly don't believe you know either, Jim. Nor what it is supposed to have to do with the topic of this thread. Nor what you are calling on me to 'confirm'. Just more of your demagogic hysteria, is all I can make of it.

Over & out...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 12:56 PM

"It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?"



All massacres deserve condemnation.

Some Mudcatters wish to justify and/or deny massacres committed by Israel.

Hence there is a discussion about those ones.

Keith is one of those catters that wish to let Israel of the hook for their massacres.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 01:37 PM

And, predictably, nobody felt inclined to make any response to my point about the Israelis cynically using the victim status conferred by that attempted genocide, to deflect any criticism of their oppressive behaviour.

For how long does historical victimhood grant the right to special consideration?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

" I have not the remotest idea what the following, apparently addressed to me"
You are acting as stupid as Keith, (only he isn't acting) - that is the statement you claimed was not racist (course it wasn't when it was addressed to Muslims!!!)
Having shrieked hysterically that anyone (me in particular) is a "Jew Baiting Anti Semite" for seeing a resemblence in the ethnic cleansing by the Israeli Zionists and that of the Nazis - you now appear to be attempting to support your previous claim that while it is permissable to write off a whole ethnic culture as sexual perverts, it would only be racist to make exactly the same claim about Jews - making you a racist hypocrite "Over & out..." totally lacking the bottle even to respond to your own racism - over and out indeed.
A matched pair, (I was forgetting Terrytoon and BB) - a full house I think.
"Israelis cynically using the victim status conferred by that attempted genocide, to deflect any criticism of their oppressive behaviour."
Isn't this what it is all about Don?
"It is not disputed that a Muslim militia.....)"
Well, it is actually -
The Lebanese Phalanges (Arabic: ÍÒÈ ÇáßÊÇÆÈ ÇááÈäÇäíÉ, Hezb al-Kata'eb al-Loubnaniyya), better known in English as the Phalange (Arabic: Kata'eb), is a traditional right-wing Lebanese political party. Although it is officially secular, it is mainly supported by Maronite Christians.

It is you and you alone who has attempted to absolve the instigators, and almost certainly, the active participants of the massacre - the Israelis - from blame
You have persistantly stated that you "only wish to present the Israeli case" for these and all other massacres.
Nobody else here (apart from your trio of friends) has attempted to excuse or support any human rights abuses or war crimes.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 04:36 PM

It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?

From Wiki
On May 19, 1985, heavy fighting erupted between Amal and Palestinian camp militias for the control of the Sabra, Shatila and Burj el-Barajneh camps in Beirut. Amal was supported by the predominantly Shiite Sixth Brigade of the Lebanese Army commanded by Major-General Abd al-Halim Kanj [1] and even by some units of the predominantly Christian Eighth Brigade loyal to General Michel Aoun stationed in East Beirut. Virtually all the houses in the camps were reduced to rubble.

In Shatila, the Palestinians only retained the part of the camp centered around the mosque. Burj al-Barajneh remained under siege as Amal prevented supplies from entering or its population from leaving. The death toll remains uncertain, but is likely to have been high.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM

Keith,

Once again,


All massacres deserve condemnation.

Some Mudcatters wish to justify and/or deny massacres committed by Israel.

Hence there is a discussion about those ones.

You are one of those catters that wish to let Israel of the hook for their massacres.

Show me where anyone else sticks up for, justifies or denies any other massacres ....

Nobody - just you and your pals justifying or denying the Israeli ones.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:36 AM

Not true Lox.
Not in this or previous thread.
Both were started to discuss the membership application, a discussion I have tried to keep going.

Jim's only contribution has been to assert that the Jews of Israel are monsters.
First he said they mistreat the Bedouin.
I countered by providing evidence that they treated them rather well, and certainly much better than Egypt who Jim did not criticise.

Then he said they massacred refugees at Sabra and Shatila.
I countered that there was no evidence that they did any such thing, but proof that neighbouring Arabs carried out a worse massacre there without reproach from Jim.

He then said that they massacred civilians at Jenin.
BB and I informed him that no civilians had been killed there at all!
It was just a made up lie.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:11 AM

Jim,
Now, in the face of an account placed before you of the Shatila Sabra massacres, you continue to deny there to be any evidence

Thanks for the account Jim.
It does not implicate Israelis in the massacre.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:13 AM

Are you really trying to absolve the Israelis from the leading part they played in the Sabra/Shatia massacres by claiming - they did it as well.
Apart from yourself, everybody here is deploring the violence in the Middle East and arguing for a peaceful solution - you are claiming consistently that Israel is innocent of any human rights violations whatever
You have supported massacres of civilians as "self defence", chemical weapons used in built-up areas as "illuminations", described the role of the Israelis in two of the largest massacres to have taken place since WW2 as "failing to stop them from happening," the killing of what you claim to be "hostages" as "acceptable in wartime"....
You have downgraded humanitarian aid as "junk" and the killing of unarmed aid-bringers by highly trained and well armed troops as "self-defence" - as well as the bringing of that aid as "politically motivated".
You have failed to comment on the mass expulsion of the Bedouins, the criminal (though as yet untried) supervision of war crimes by an Israeli politician, the prevention of use of land vital to to livelihood of an already impoverished people by a Berlin-type wall, the frighteningly Nazi-like humiliation and persecution of ordinary Palestinians on a daily basis
And you say we are ignoring human rights abuses and supporting killing
Give us a break
JIM Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:31 AM

Are you really trying to absolve the Israelis from the leading part they played in the Sabra/Shatila massacres

No. I am saying there is no evidence that they did.
You have failed to produce anything despite weeks of asking.

you are claiming consistently that Israel is innocent of any human rights violations whatever

No. I am not.

You have failed to comment on the mass expulsion of the Bedouins,
I am not aware that they have been expelled from Israel.
I have commented on their (rather good) treatment in Israel.

There has been no discussion here of issues like the wall.
Are you thinking of starting a thread about them?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:26 AM

ven Mike, with his racist double standards, hs expressed his disquiet of the behaviour of the Zionists in Israel - you have not and until you do you will remin an apologist for war crimes and acts of inhumanity against non-combatants.
You have even realised that you overstepped the mark by claiming "no massacres at all", but instead of accepting that as a mistake and withdrawing it, which would have been th sensible thing to do, you first denied that it had ever been claimed, and then attempted to lie your way out of it - which makes you not only an apologist for war crimes and abuses against civilians, but a rather clumsy liar.
Even now you are attempting to describe the stated intention by the Israelis themselves to expel a whole ethnic group as "(rather good) treatment" - are you not worried by your own fanatical behaviour - I would be?
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM

Confirming my last post.

Jim, your timeline provides evidence AGAINST Israeli complicity, but NO EVIDENCE FOR it.

Did you read it before posting it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM

the stated intention by the Israelis themselves to expel a whole ethnic group

You have made that up Jim.
(Nice colours and fonts though)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 08:06 AM

Your support for human rights abuses goes far beyond anybody elses here - and Mike objected to my describing it as comparable with holocaust denial!!!
jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM

I have supported NO human rights abuse.
Not one.
None.
0.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 09:30 AM

I am sure you actually believe that to be true, Keith.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 10:47 AM

Put one up and shame me Kevin.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 11:31 AM

Seth Freedman, The Guardian.
"Imagine a London where a sword of Damocles hangs over every street and every building. A London where the day is punctuated by missiles raining down indiscriminately on schools, homes, parks and gardens. A London where the difference between crossing the road or not could be the difference between having your face ripped to shreds by shrapnel from incoming rockets falling from the sky.

For the last seven years, and especially in the wake of the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, that has been the fate of Sderot, the beleaguered town on the edge of the Gazan-Israeli border."

Those people are suffering an abuse of their human rights OK.
How much worse an abuse can there be.
Jim supports that abuse of human rights, doesn't he Kevin?
Will you acknowledge that?
I support no such.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 12:58 PM

"a sordid little holocaust and ethnic cleansing supporter;"

were the actual words I took exception to, Jim ~~ or indeed, only one word thence, the 4th. You appeared to appreciate this fact at the time ~

Yet in a later post, you rendered this as

"Mike objected to my describing it as comparable with holocaust denial!!!"

which I didn't, because you didn't make any such comparison ~ or if you did, none that I noticed or responded to.

"ven Mike, with his racist double standards..."

you exclaim in a later post. I have none such, as you well know, for all your rhetoric.

I am in a state of constant puzzlement as to the identity of this non-existent entity, to whom you attribute my name but no views in any way resembling mine; and as to what point or points you are intending to make in doing so. This "Mike" you have created and keep invoking must be some other fellow entirely. He certainly shares none of my opinions, says nothing that I have ever said, and indeed bears no identifiable relationship to me whatsoever. He seems to be some avatar of your Aunt Sally that you have set up for the sole purpose of knocking down. Why you should have named him after me I cannot imagine.

I have tried to reply rationally to your irrationalities, but it has turned out to be nothing but pissing-in-the-wind so far as what I have written has penetrated your entrenched unsupportable assumptions as to what you think I might have meant ~ but didn't. You really are in a state of near-hysterical confusion, Jim; I should go & have a nice long lie-down if I were you, before you do yourself a mischief.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM

Then explain your underwriting of Keith's racism and tell us why what he claimed about Pakistanis is not applicable when referring to Jews?
You've had the quote you claimed not to understand - fire away.
One more time:
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM

Well, Jim, first show me an instance of any such case of grooming in disproportionate numbers [or indeed at all] having been made against Jews anywhere at any time, & I will address your challenge. Until then, it seems to me to make no sense whatever. I genuinely have not the remotest idea what you are on about here.

~M~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:44 PM

It would also require some prominent members of the Jewish community to be quoted at length without contradiction in all the media, saying that aspects of the culture they were brought up in give rise to those statistics.
Such that I might be convinced by them.

Would you then denounce me as a rabid anti-semite and hound me through every Mudcat thread for the next nine months Michael?
Jim would.
Jim did.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM

Refugees who have been forced to leave their homes in a conflict have the right to return to their homes when the fighting has ceased.

That human right has been consistently obstructed by Israel, in a continuing breach of human rights.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:41 PM

But Kevin, I have never expressed an opinion on that!

The people of Sderot are suffering an abuse of their human rights OK.
How much worse an abuse can there be?
Jim supports that abuse of human rights, doesn't he Kevin?
Will you acknowledge that?
I support no such.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM

"first show me an instance of any such case of grooming in disproportionate numbers"
So you do believe that Keith had a case when he claimed that "all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency" which tends them towards paedophelia - at least that's that one out of the way - both you and he are out and out racists.
We discussued at stomach-heaving length why what was happening in small pockets in the North of England regarding the abuse of underage girls was taking place. Keith claimed fairly early on that it was an inbuilt cultural flaw within an entire ethnic community, and refused to consider any other reason put forward. He put more effort into proving that male Muslims were a threat to our 'way of life' and to the safety and well being of our children, and only by curbing their 'cultural urges' could they prevent themselves from preying on young girls
Earlier on in this thread you defended someone who, to me, is obviously guilty of war crimes on the basis that she had not faced trial for those crimes - don't you extend the same right to "All make Pakistani Muslims"?.
The Nazis gave themselves permission to send six million Jews to the gas chambers on the basis that they were racially inferior and a threat to German society. Sorry - apart from the numbers involved (there are only one million Pakistanis living in Britain!) I find an extremely thin dividing line between those twin conclusions.
For me, it is not a good time to discuss racist generalisations while the retrial of racist thugs for killing a young man because he was the "wrong colour" is taking place - such is the consequences of such racist generalisations.
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 02:53 AM

I know perfectly well that I am not any sort of racist, out & out or otherwise.

Bluster away, Jim, with your back-refs to irrelevant longsince other threads, your provocations and overinterpretations.   You are just getting sillier & sillier; from the way the thread runs more & more of us have just stopped listening to you.

Me too

Tara


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 03:06 AM

Jim, I will once again knock down all those false accusations, but in a pm.
Mudcat has suffered enough.


<