To Thread - Forum Home

The Mudcat Café TM
https://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=118089
92 messages

BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce

27 Jan 09 - 03:41 PM (#2550403)
Subject: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: John on the Sunset Coast

I previously posted that I thought the truce might last perhaps 12 months. I thought that Hamas might pretend to play well with others while they rearmed and re-fortified. I was wrong. They killed one Israeli soldier, wounded 3 others, breaking the truce within a week..

Israel has retaliated, and, it appears will retaliate for each breach. No mulligans this time 'round. (For you non-golfers, a mulligan is the equivalent of a free pass or a free shot.)

27 Jan 09 - 03:49 PM (#2550406)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Barry Finn

So far the BBC has just reported this afternoon (their onsite Chief) that they don't know yet weither or not the device that exploded was newly placed or left over. Please wait before you jump the gun.

Barry

27 Jan 09 - 03:49 PM (#2550407)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Barry Finn

I should say that like you the Israeli's didn't wait to find that out either.

Barry

27 Jan 09 - 03:58 PM (#2550417)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: John on the Sunset Coast

"The incident near the border was the first deadly attack carried out by Palestinian militants since a cease-fire went into effect in the coastal strip 10 days ago."

This from Haaretz, your basic Israel opposition newspaper.

Perhaps the BBC isn't the be-all, end-all of reporting!

27 Jan 09 - 04:52 PM (#2550452)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Q (Frank Staplin)

Over and over and over again- a people in despair, frustrated and without hope, is fertile ground for anarchy, terrorism and suicidal revenge. Israeli's occupation and scorched earth policies guarantee the rise of more groups like Hamas, who have nothing left to lose but their lives.
History will condemn the Israelis for their own brand of genocide.

27 Jan 09 - 05:10 PM (#2550463)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

"The incident near the border was the first deadly attack carried out by Palestinian militants since a cease-fire went into effect in the coastal strip 10 days ago." This from Haaretz, your basic Israel opposition newspaper.

What Haaretz wrote there would be quite compatible with it being u known whether the bomb had been placed prior to the ceasefire.

In any case if it were all post ceasefire, that wouldn't necessarily indicate that Hamas was breaking the ceasefire. After all the most deadly bomb explosion in the Irish troubles took place at Omagh after the ceasefire was in operation; fortunately the British government didn't respond to it as an IRA act - which it wasn't.

I note that the Israeli government did not hesitate in order to investigate these kind of considerations before carrying out a reprisal attack.

Moreover before this bomb Israel had already broken the ceasefire on several occasions according to this Press Association report :

"In the days immediately following the ceasefire there was shelling by Israeli gunboats and some gunfire along the border - including the killing of two men Palestinian officials identified as farmers - but there were no serious clashes."

Could it possibly be that the expression "no serious clashes" means the only deaths or injuries incurred were Palestinian farmers and suchlike?

27 Jan 09 - 05:17 PM (#2550466)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

The northern part of Africa is regarded as The Arab World by its inhabitants. The Arab World has about 340 million people, the same as the United States and Canada combined.

The semi-official Israeli total for Gaza is about 1 million residents. They are 99.4% Arab. Nothing special, just Arabs. Arabs claim 21 countries (Israel does not exist to these people...they call the area Palestine, a Moslem country).

The best thing that can happen is for the 1 million unhappy Arabs to go some place else. They have at least 20 Arab-speaking countries to choose from. Israel ain't going away any time soon.

27 Jan 09 - 05:21 PM (#2550471)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: GUEST,Hugo

I think you have it wrong John!

Hamas,a week ago, said it would stop its military operations for a week to give the Israelis time to pull out.However,it also said that the military and economic blockade of this city of around a million and a half residents was intolerable and if the blockade was not lifted military operations would resume at the end of this period.
.
During the past week there have been Israeli flyovers above Gaza and the blockade has not been lifted.

Apparently, the Israelis will not even allow a bag of cement into the city and is also maintaining its naval blockade firing even at the very smallest of fishing craft a few hundred metres of the Gaza beach.

Despite all its massive military superiority Israel cannot bend the Palestinians to its will.
Hugo

27 Jan 09 - 05:30 PM (#2550482)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

"Nothing special, just Arabs."

That says it all. "Nothing special, just Arabs."

27 Jan 09 - 05:31 PM (#2550483)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Little Hawk

If only it was that easy for them to "go somewhere else", pdq! I don't think it's easy at all for most of them to do so. If it was, they'd go.

Too bad all the people in your state couldn't get a similar reason to also want to "go somewhere else". Perhaps some day the Chinese will militarly occupy the areas all around it, seal it off from the outside world with their armed forces, and you will have a chance to contemplate such a moving option yourself...and see how you feel about it.

27 Jan 09 - 05:33 PM (#2550486)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Richard Bridge

Surely the vehicle that suffered the explosion was a Landrover. Why is even the BBC calling it a Jeep?

27 Jan 09 - 05:37 PM (#2550491)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

"Arab" as it is used today simply means someone who speaks Arabic. There is no such thing as "just an Arab" any more than there is such a thing as "just an English speaker". To suggest that just because people have the Arabic language in common means that there aren't any different ethnic groups or cultures within the category of people who speak Arabic is a pretty racist thing to suggest. The Palestinians have their own culture and form their own ethnic group, which is not the same as all other people in the world who speak Arabic. There are many, many different cultures and ethnic groups among the people in the world who speak Arabic. The idea that an entire group of people ought to be removed from their place of origin and moved somewhere else just because they speak the same language as those in the area to which they would be moved is a profoundly racist idea.

27 Jan 09 - 05:45 PM (#2550500)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Little Hawk

I don't think pdq's statement about "Arabs" is the result of what can be precisely termed "racism", Carol. I think it's more the result of narrow-minded arrogance, thinking in vague stereotypes about people one knows little about, having a grand sense of entitlement, and being just plain culturally ignorant. ;-) To use the word "racism" to specially label such an attitude is to overlook the essential banality and commonness of it and clothe it in more portentious terms than it really deserves...

But I say that with a certain deapan humour. You can call it "racism" if you want, I guess.

27 Jan 09 - 05:46 PM (#2550502)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

Here is a map...(you might want to mute your sound do to a strident advertisement):


                                           puts things in perspective

27 Jan 09 - 05:57 PM (#2550509)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

...the result of narrow-minded arrogance, thinking in vague stereotypes about people one knows little about, having a grand sense of entitlement, and being just plain culturally ignorant.

I think that sums up most racism rather well.
.................................................

Do we take it that pdq's solution to the difficulties in Northern Ireland would have been to ship all the Catholics off to other English speaking places such as Australia, the United States, and Jamaica?

27 Jan 09 - 06:02 PM (#2550516)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Little Hawk

How do those million and a half Gazans go "somewhere else", pdq? And why ought they to? And how would you go about it if you were one of them?

Remember how a large boatload of European Jews tried to go "somewhere else" in 1939? No one would take them either. Similar problem, but a different powerless victim, that's all.

I'll tell you who causes these problems. An aggressive, ruthless political/military power that is bent upon land robbery and imperial conquest causes these problems. It can even be a political/military power built by the direct descendants of a former lot of victims of such a policy.....and it frequently is.

One lot of really bad political karma tends to eventually deliver another lot of the same, but sometimes in a completely different location.

27 Jan 09 - 06:06 PM (#2550518)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Sorcha

So, pdq, the Arabs should just LEAVE their homes, property, belongings, and 'go' somewhere?????? I think NOT

27 Jan 09 - 06:06 PM (#2550519)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

This discussion is about Gaza, the Jews and the Arabs. It ain't about me.

Those who try to turn it in to a discussion about me can shove it.

27 Jan 09 - 06:14 PM (#2550527)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

The discussion isn't about pdq. But racist remarks and racist suggestions should not be allowed to pass without comment.

27 Jan 09 - 06:15 PM (#2550528)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Sorcha

No, I wasn't trying to, but YOU suggested that the Arabs in Gaza should just pack up and move.....Look, Israel will NEVER accept a one state solution because they KNOW they will be outnumbered by the Palestinians.

The entire state of Israel is an Artifical Creation of the British Government...Balfour Declaration, 1948. RELIGIOUS Jews are NOT Zionists, and do NOT approve of all this stuff. Religous Jews believe that God will create Zion in His Own Time, and it is NOT now....

Meanwhile, Home is HOME....and nobody is moving out. Well, according to THIS, maybe the Jews are....

"Maariv newspaper reported that approximately a quarter of the Israeli population was considering emigration.



Almost half of the country's young people were thinking of leaving the country, the report said. Their reasons included dissatisfaction with the government, the education system, a lack of confidence in the political ruling class and concern over the security situation. "

http://stlouis.ujcfedweb.org/page.aspx?id=144274

27 Jan 09 - 06:15 PM (#2550529)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Q (Frank Staplin)

My city (in Canada) has a colony of displaced Palestinians, who managed to emigrate because they had special skills (medicine, engineering, construction, etc.) and/or money. The average Ibrahim without specialized schooling need not bother to apply. Probably only 2% of Palestinians would be able to get landed status.

The same is true of most other countries.
And in the process their culture is lost.

27 Jan 09 - 06:19 PM (#2550531)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

It's a false dichotomy to say the Jews and the Arabs, since there are Jews who are Arabs. Arabs are just people who speak Arabic. The "Arab world" simply refers to the part of the world in which the Arabic language predominates. The term Arab doesn't have anything whatever to do with anyone's religion or any other characteristic besides language. Although I know it is convenient to try to lump all Arabic speakers into one big generic group when one is trying to justify theft.

27 Jan 09 - 06:25 PM (#2550535)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Sorcha

AND the Jews WERE 'Arabs' to being with!!!! Let's all blame Abraham for taking a 2nd wife, OK?

27 Jan 09 - 06:27 PM (#2550539)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

Jews had a special cultural heritage in parts of Russia for many years. They still had to move.

The Jews in Persia, Germany and Spain each had some unique cultural heritage that was lost when they were forced to leave.

About 5 million Jews have managed to migrate to Israel. The 1 million unhappy Arabs who have elected a terrorist group to lead them in Gaza should think about either changing to peaceful people or moving to another Arab country. They have 20 such countries to choose from.

27 Jan 09 - 06:32 PM (#2550543)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Sorcha

Go read this article....from 2003... and tell me it's not tragic. 2003!!! It's worse now, and the United States doesn't even GET this news.....we are supposed to just blindly support Israel, the perpetual Underdog....

27 Jan 09 - 06:36 PM (#2550547)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Sorcha

"The phenomenon is seemingly clear-cut: More young, educated "Russians" are emigrating from Israel in search of a better future in western countries and in Russia than native-born Israelis. In a well-functioning country, such a phenomenon and its ramifications would concern the decision makers and would oblige them to immediately treat the problem at its source. But not in Israel."

http://www.idi.org.il/sites/english/OpEds/Pages/EmigrationfromIsrael.aspx

Seemingly, the Russian youth don't want to be in Israel either!

27 Jan 09 - 06:39 PM (#2550550)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

The Palestinians are not the people who forced the Jews to leave Russia, Germany, Persia, or Spain. The suggestion that the Palestinians have an obligation to leave or to submit themselves to being subjugated by the government of Israel and give up their rights as human beings as payment for something that was done to Jews by other people has no legitimacy whatever. The Palestinians have a right to remain where they are with the same rights to freedom and equality as anyone else.

27 Jan 09 - 07:04 PM (#2550572)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: John on the Sunset Coast

Sorcha says that Israel is an artificial creation of the British government. If that is true (it isn't) then Jordan is an artificial creation of the British, as is Pakistan. Bangledesh is an artificial creation, having seceded from Pakistan. Azerbaijan was created from the Muslim part Armenia. There are many countries that weren't always countries which are today, but no one questions their legitimacy.

Only Israel, which was a country, and has always had a Jewish presence since early historic times is deemed illegal or artificial, in spite of being adopted by the United Nations. Several countries actually have the word Islamic in their name...Mauritania, Iran, Iraq (at least during the time of SH), Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Egypt and Syria once were in a loose federation, the United Arab Republic. But Israel can't be Jewish. How hypocritical!

Israel will never accept a single state solution for obvious reasons. Despite the 60 Minutes Jeremiahad it is possible for a two state solution. Israel will need to get a lot tougher on the settlers, but those who stay must then consider themselves under the just laws of a Palestinian state.

The real sticking point for Israel is going to be Jerusalem. As I have said before, when Jordan controlled Jerusalem, Jews were denied access to holy sites. That will not fly again.

27 Jan 09 - 07:22 PM (#2550585)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: bubblyrat

The point that many of you seem to be missing, and which the totally biased BBC signally fail to mention (every time !!), is that the Israelis, only a few short years ago, offered to accede to ALL ,yes ALL, of the Palestinians' demands and conditions----happily and willingly. And who said "NO" ???? Why, it was Yasser Arafat, PLO leader & International Terrorist Extraordinaire. Because all the Palestinians care about is eradicating Israel,and killing all the Jews .How sad !!!

27 Jan 09 - 07:22 PM (#2550587)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Charley Noble

The video provided by Palestinians to ABC News this evening clearly shows an ambush of a jeep-like military vehicle, with a massive explosion followed by small arms fire.

Charley Noble

27 Jan 09 - 07:39 PM (#2550599)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere

pdq "Jews had a special cultural heritage in parts of Russia for many years. They still had to move.
The Jews in Persia, Germany and Spain each had some unique cultural heritage that was lost when they were forced to leave"

You're right pdq. But doesn't that only reinforce the point? The Jews who left the above mentioned places, losing their cultures etc., did so because they were persecuted. Then you go suggesting the same thing for palestinians??? Don't you see the implications of your parallel?

I suggest visiting the Maisel (if I remember correctly, it was one of a group of 3 or 4 near each other) synagogue in Prague before suggesting any 'peoples' are just shoved aside. The Nazis set it up as a museum to "A Vanished People" as they called it, and allowed a committee of local Jews collect there artifacts important to Jewish culture from all over the wider region. Ironically this was to ensure the preservation of these items at a time when they were being systematically pilfered and destroyed.

27 Jan 09 - 08:16 PM (#2550623)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

Israel will never accept a single state solution for obvious reasons.

A single state solution in which Eretz Israel/Palestine would continue to be the Jewish Homeland, but in which there was not any built-in guarantee of a permanent Jewish majority, offers the best hope for the longterm wellbeing and security of all the communities with a claim on that territory - perhaps most especially the Jewish community. The present situation in which Israel is immeasurably stronger than its neighbours is hardly likely to continue for that long.

No one questions the special position of Mormonism in Utah, and yet Mormons make up only just over half the population, with no guarantee that this will always be the case. It is hard to imagine that their situation would be too rosy if in the 19th century they had been of a mind to insist on their independent national status, and in a position to maintain that in arms for a period, subordinating or expelling non-Mormons.

27 Jan 09 - 08:28 PM (#2550631)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: John on the Sunset Coast

Few if any Mormons live in Palestine, and if they tried to proselytize they might not live anywhere. If Muslims find it hard to live with other sects of Muslims, how much worse it will be for Jews living within a Muslim majority. Also, Lebanon had a workable government which included Christians and Muslims (but no Jews) from its founding until Fatah and other Palestinian groups took over the south of the country, set up their state within a state, and harassed Israel in the 1970s. Lebanon has not been the same since. I do not see Israel acceding to a one state solution. Not in any time we'll see.

27 Jan 09 - 09:09 PM (#2550655)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

"...if in the 19th century they had been of a mind to insist on their independent national status" of course meant, in Utah. (And Mormons seem pretty keen on proselytising, hence the guys in suits that go round knocking on people's doors.)

The term "state" is of course ambiguous. There's the normal meaning, and the meaning you've got in America, which might even offer a possible model.

A "two state/one country" federal solution in which there was a Jewish majority state, with a sizeable non-Jewish minority,and a non-Jewish state with a sizeable Jewish minority might well be a more viable solution than anything else. With Jerusalem as a kind of District of Columbia, not in either state, but capital of the whole country.

27 Jan 09 - 10:03 PM (#2550680)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: John on the Sunset Coast

McGrath, I don't see a federal solution as working. It is in realty a single state solution when the Arab/Muslim population of the Jewish part becomes a majority and decides it is better to have a single Palestine with an Arab majority. The force of history is anti-federation: Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the USSR for example.

Jews would then be in the position they were in prior to 1948, subject to anti-Jewish laws, perhaps ghettos and loss of religious freedom in the Arab world...perhaps the world at large.

I can visualize an economic union between Israel (a Jewish country) and Palestine (an Arab Muslim country) if Palestinian leaders would decide to work toward that end. Jews, of course, would have to give up settlements under Israeli protection. Those Jews remaining in Palestine would have to live, as I said above, under Palestine law. In my opinion Palestine should make provision for the citizenship and religious rights of Jews, as the converse is in Israel.

I know many Jews who were born in various Muslim countries, Lebanon, Palestine (they're in their sixties and seventies), Egypt, Iraq, and Turkey. Jews largely flourished in pre-Khomeini Iran. Some would really like to return someday, although they know they won't.

27 Jan 09 - 11:13 PM (#2550702)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

Israel was not willing to accede to any of the Palestinians' demands. They were not willing to end the occupation of the West Bank, and Gaza, and the land that they said they might consider letting the Palestinians keep (they never actually said what the final borders would be under their plan) was divided up into little bantustans that were isolated from each other, and that the Palestinians had to go through interminable numbers of checkpoints just to travel from one to the other.

And it was Ehud Barak who stopped participating in the negotiations (not Arafat), because he had to campaign for the upcoming election. Netanyahu didn't want anything to do with the negotiations, so that was the end of them. Arafat wanted them to continue.

28 Jan 09 - 12:23 AM (#2550712)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Peace

Hamas in action, huh?

And the usuals making excuses for Hamas breaking the truce yet again. Fuck.

28 Jan 09 - 01:23 AM (#2550726)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

Jimmy Carter being interviewed on NPR...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99875313

28 Jan 09 - 01:23 AM (#2550727)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

Oops. I meant to put that in the Jimmy Carter thread.

28 Jan 09 - 05:46 AM (#2550816)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Keith A of Hertford

EU envoy blames Hama for Gaza destruction.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7851545.stm

28 Jan 09 - 08:02 AM (#2550879)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

I know many Jews who were born in various Muslim countries, Lebanon, Palestine (they're in their sixties and seventies), Egypt, Iraq, and Turkey. Jews largely flourished in pre-Khomeini Iran. Some would really like to return someday, although they know they won't.

My imnpression is that making it possible for such people and their children to do so, and seeking to reestablish the historic Jewish communities in such countries is not seen by the Israeli authoriries as either a priority, or even as desirable. It seems quite possible that putting it on the table as a negotiating goal might be a very positive step.

28 Jan 09 - 08:40 AM (#2550914)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: theleveller

Here we go again; yet another attempt to justify the genocide being perpetrated by Israel, coming, of course, from America – a country with a far from illustrious history of supporting fascist regimes.

Loss of life is always to be regretted but the death of one combatant should be seen in the context of the hundreds of innocent civilians slaughtered by the Israeli army.

Perhaps it would be pertinent to remember that the state of Israel was, itself, born from terrorist activity and is still illegally occupying large tracts of land that it has no right to.

28 Jan 09 - 08:58 AM (#2550929)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Keith A of Hertford

If you are referring to my post, it is about the EU not US envoy, though they have confusingly similar names.
The EU is the main donor to the Palestinians.
He says Hamas bore "overwhelming responsibility."

28 Jan 09 - 09:06 AM (#2550937)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: theleveller

No, I was referring to the original post.

28 Jan 09 - 09:23 AM (#2550951)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: goatfell

aye and ther's people that are memebers of mudcat that back israel in no matter what they do.

28 Jan 09 - 11:02 AM (#2551019)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Peace

Not on this one, Goatfell. I recognize that Hamas started it and they are gonna pay heavily for their stupidity--rather, the Palestinian people will. Where was your voice of protest when Hamas started the shit yet again? YOU were srtrangely quiet, you and your ilk. Have a nice day.

28 Jan 09 - 11:08 AM (#2551030)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

…the most deadly bomb explosion in the Irish troubles took place at Omagh after the ceasefire was in operation; fortunately the British government didn't respond to it as an IRA act - which it wasn't." – MGOH

Who was responsible for the Omagh Bomb then Kevin if not the IRA??? I mean there are a few of them aren't there. You have the "Official" IRA, the ones who had the good sense to stay out of "The Troubles". You have the "Provisional" IRA, the ones who decided to get stuck in and managed to murder around 2500 of the very people they said they were "protecting". You have the "Real" IRA who actually did claim responsibility for the Omagh bomb, which sort of has me mystified as to why you would say that it had nothing to do with the IRA. Then finally last but by no means least you have the "Continuity" IRA. Of that lot Kevin only two have renounced violence, disarmed and disbanded.

"The Palestinians have their own culture and form their own ethnic group" – Carol C

Utter crap the term Palestine was only brought into prominence about 80 years ago. Tell me what "ethnic" group comes from Palestine – Tell me even what Palestine is? I know what it was and I know how the name came into being – you obviously don't. What is this Palestinian culture and where did it come from? The "Palestinians" were invented/created by Yasser Arafat as a vehicle for making money in the early 1970's – It's a thing that Tosser Arafat's family have a gift for, exploiting the poor and helpless in order to accumulate wealth. As someone on this thread asked – Wonder what did happen to Arafat's $300,000,000.

"The entire state of Israel is an Artifical Creation of the British Government...Balfour Declaration, 1948." – Sorcha

I would advise you Sorcha to go away and do some reading, get your facts straight then come back and retract that complete and utter fabrication. If you do you will find no mention of "Israel" from 1920 until the time that the Jewish Settlers in Palestine declared their country of Israel and independent state in 1948 – that Sorcha was AFTER the British left – creation of the British Government indeed, the Mandated territory of Palestine was the creation of the League of Nations – not the British Government. The Arabs – yes "just Arabs" – refused a single state solution for Palestine from 1920 until 1936 by demonstrating clearly that could not live peacefully with their Jewish neighbours. In 1937, during the Great Arab Revolt, the Peel Commission proposed a two-state solution. That two-state solution was taken up by the United Nations and was proposed in 1947 towards the end of the old League of Nations Mandate. The Israelis accepted the plan but the Arabs – yes those not so special just Arabs again – rejected the proposal.

"So, pdq, the Arabs should just LEAVE their homes, property, belongings, and 'go' somewhere?????? I think NOT" – Sorcha

Well that was the OK thing to do as far as 820,000 Jews were concerned after those Arabs lost their war in 1948 Sorcha. You see having failed to wade in Jewish blood and drive the Jews into the sea while conquering Israel; they deported 820,000 Jews from Arab countries that they had lived in peacefully for centuries. No choice was involved Sorcha they got 24 hours if they were lucky, had all their money and possessions taken from them and were booted out. The only place for most to go to was – yep you've got it in one – Israel. Now when they arrived in Israel they were made welcome and integrated into society, there was no fencing them up in camps and keeping them in poverty to suit the political agendas of others.

Bit different for the Arabs of the former Palestine wasn't it Sorcha. Because at the end of the 1948 war, Palestine had ceased to exist hadn't it? You had the Jewish section of Palestine according to the UN plan of 1947 which was now called Israel, but what about the "Arab" parts of Palestine?? Well Egypt had invaded and taken the bit known as Gaza, while Jordan had invaded and taken the bit known now as the West Bank. Did the Arabs of Egypt and Jordan make the Arabs of Palestine welcome on let's face it was their own land – Hell as like they crammed them into refugee camps – now you tell me Sorcha just how the hell do you become a refugee in your own country??

28 Jan 09 - 11:19 AM (#2551041)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: theleveller

"I recognize that Hamas started it and they are gonna pay heavily for their stupidity--rather, the Palestinian people will. "

Perhaps your recognition is a little distorted, Peace.

The Jewish UK MP and holocaust survivor, Gerald Kauffman, condemned Israel for "acting like Nazis" and branded them "mass murderers and war criminals". He went on to add:

"My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza. The current Israeli Government ruthlessly and cynically exploit the continuing guilt among gentiles over the slaughter of Jews in the holocaust as justification for their murder of Palestinians. The implication is that Jewish lives are precious, but the lives of Palestinians do not count."

Now YOU have a nice day.

28 Jan 09 - 11:43 AM (#2551073)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: bobad

Well leveller, it seems that there are many in the Arab world who would disagree with the "Jewish UK MP" whom you cite.

Arab Leaders, Civilians Blame Hamas for Gaza Violence

Arab leaders such as Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak as well as other public figures continue to condemn Hamas for the violence in Gaza. They have issued statements stating that maintaining the truce could have helped the Palestinians avoid the Israeli raids and blame Hamas as fully responsible for the situation. Meanwhile Israel continues its defensive operations in order to stop Iran-backed Hamas from firing thousands of rockets, missiles and mortars on Israeli civilians.

If you go the site http://newsblaze.com/story/20090110065320zzzz.nb/topstory.html you can read what Arabs from Egypt, the Palestinian Territories, Iran, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia have to say on this subject.

28 Jan 09 - 11:45 AM (#2551078)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Peace

Looks like everyone's gonna have a nice day except the Israelis and Palestinians.

28 Jan 09 - 11:56 AM (#2551089)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

"... Israel continues its defensive operations in order to stop Iran-backed Hamas from firing thousands of rockets, missiles and mortars on Israeli civilians."

Yep, the country financing and motivating the violence in Gaza (and also Lebanon) is our old bud Iran. Please recall that Iran was our best ally in the Middle East until Jimmy "Peanut Head" Carter pulled the plug on the Iranian Monarchy and allowed the Islamists to start their reign of terror. 30 years of Hell. Thank you, Jimmy Carter (who helps support the saying ("the good die young").

28 Jan 09 - 12:29 PM (#2551127)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

Jimmy "Peanut Head" Carter pulled the plug on the Iranian Monarchy and allowed the Islamists to start their reign of terror.

You seriously think the USA could have crushed an extremely popular revolution and reinstated the Shah who was detested by the oiverwhelming mass of Iranians?

It would have been a bigger operation than the Vietnam War and probably with even less hope of success. Reagan's ally Saddam Hussein, with massive military forces right next door to Iran, wasn't able to do the job, even using poison gas.

Like many popular revolutions, Iran's went seriously wrong in all kinds of ways, but its mass support at the time, and later, is beyond doubt.

28 Jan 09 - 12:45 PM (#2551140)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

McWrath's post is so confused and rediculous that it is not even possible to respond to it.

Iraq was our blood enemy beginning in 1967 when we helped Israel fight the Arab World. The US did an amazing job of maintaining neutrality in the Iran-Iraq war. We did supply arial photographs to Iraq of Iranian incursinons but only after the Iranian government changed policy from "defensive" to "offensive". We never did supply Iraq with weapons although about 1 1/2 % of Saddam's were US-made, their sale to Iraq was mostly through illegal arms dealers.

28 Jan 09 - 01:52 PM (#2551201)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

...it is not even possible to respond to it.

Evidently.

28 Jan 09 - 03:00 PM (#2551254)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere

Teribus, the Officials have not actually disarmed at all. They have been on a kind of ceasefire since the 1970s and it's assumed they are no longer active. Yet it was Provo weapons that were decommissioned.

Also, regarding numbers, the various republican militant groups - Provisional, Official, INLA, etc., were responsible for around 1,950 of the 3,500 or so deaths during the Troubles. Loyalist militants were responsible for about 800 with the remainder divided between the RUC (Northern Police Force) and the British Army. The Irish army and police contributed neglible numbers.

The Real IRA (a splinter group from the Provos which didn't agree with the 1998 agreement) claimed responsibility for the Omagh bomb. Thankfully the British didn't regard this bombing as "a bombing by an Irish terrorist group" and decide to bomb the southern half of the country into a car park (thanks guys, BTW).

28 Jan 09 - 03:17 PM (#2551271)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere

Another aside, there was something of a feud between the Provos and Real IRA in the late 90s over the divergence in directions

28 Jan 09 - 03:20 PM (#2551274)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere

I really like this one "The US did an amazing job of maintaining neutrality in the Iran-Iraq war"

One of the most effective ways of doing that was to sell weapons to both sides.. maybe they'd even wipe each other out. Irangate......

28 Jan 09 - 04:34 PM (#2551357)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

The term "Palestinian" is just the name people use for the indigenous people of the area at this time. And it is completely irrelevant to the question of the culture and identity of those people. In the US, we call the indigenous people of the land that is now the US, "Indians", but that term is irrelevant to who they are and were, and to their culture and identity.

The indigenous people of the area we now call Israel and the Palestinian occupied areas have their own identity and culture that goes back thousands of years, and is irrelevant to and independent of any names we would apply to them.

28 Jan 09 - 04:38 PM (#2551360)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

I notice none of the people who are blaming Hamas were living in Gaza under the blockade. In one of the interviews of Jimmy Carter, he mentioned the fact that most Gazans were subsisting on one meal a day under the blockade. If the blockade isn't an act of war, and also terrorism, I don't know what is.

29 Jan 09 - 02:10 AM (#2551680)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

Looks like it wasn't Hamas who broke the ceasefire after all...


Timeline of Cease-fire Breaches & Important Events

Sunday, Jan 18 - After a 22-day assault on Gaza in which over 1,300 Palestinians were killed and approximately 9 Israelis were killed, Israel and Hamas each declared a ceasefire. Within several hours, the first breach took place, when Israel killed a Palestinian civilian:

The UN reports: "One Palestinian farmer was killed on the morning of 18 January in Khuza'a east of Khan Yunis following the Israeli-declared cease-fire." [3]

Monday, Jan 19 - Once again the ceasefire was breached when Israel killed another Palestinian civilian. Palestinian militants did respond, but caused no damage or injuries:

The UN reports: "On 19 January, a Palestinian farmer was killed by Israeli gunfire east of Jabalia. The same day, Palestinian militants fired a number of mortars towards Israel and also shot at Israeli troops still inside the Gaza Strip. No injuries or damage were reported." [4]

Wednesday, Jan 21 - Israeli naval boats fired at the Gaza coastline, causing some damage.

IMEMC reports: "On Wednesday, the boats fired shells at the coast line, causing damage but no injuries." [5]

Thursday, Jan 22 - A Palestinian child was wounded by gunfire from Israeli troops, between 4 and 7 Palestinian civilians (fishermen) were injured when they were fired upon by Israel's navy, and a home was set fire by shells from the Israeli navy:

The UN reports: "Four Palestinians were injured on 22 January by a shell fired from an Israeli gunboat off the Gaza coast. The same day, a house was set on fire by a shell fired from an Israeli gunboat. No injuries were reported. Also on 22 January, IDF troops shot and injured a child east of Gaza City near the border." [6]

IMEMC reports: "On Thursday of last week, Israeli Navy forces opened fire at Palestinian fishermen just off the shore of Gaza City, injuring seven civilians." [7]

Saturday, Jan 24 - Israeli tanks fired on the border town of Al Faraheen, causing damage to homes and farms. Also, Aid agencies call on Israel to finally open all crossings into Gaza:

IMEMC reports: "On Saturday, the Israeli army opened fire at residents homes and farmlands located in Al Faraheen village located in the southern part of the Gaza strip. Local residents said that Israeli tanks stationed at the borders opened fire at their homes and farms; damage was reported but no injuries." [8]

Maan News reports: "A coalition of international aid agencies urged the Israeli government on Saturday to open the Gaza Strip's border to allow vital goods into the territory… The agencies, including Oxfam, Save the Children, and the Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO) held a news conference on Saturday at the intensive care unit of Gaza's Ash-Shifa Hospital to point up an ongoing humanitarian crisis stemming from Israel's blockade." [9]

Sunday, Jan 25 - Israeli F-16s flew over Gaza, causing schools, government offices, and banks to close and causing Egypt to rapidly evacuate all of its personnel from the Rafah crossing in fear that an attack was imminent.

Haaretz reports: "On Sunday Israeli F-16s flew over Gaza, terrifying people who thought Israel was launching a new offensive. A number of banks, government offices and schools were closed, occupants running to their homes as the Israeli warplanes flew overhead." [10]

Maan News reports: "Egypt suddenly and rapidly evacuated its personnel from=0 Athe Rafah border crossing with Gaza on Sunday fearing a possible Israeli airstrike on the Palestinian side of the crossing, Egyptian security sources said." [11]

Violence on January 27th

What appears to have happened today is that a remote device was detonated near or under an Israeli patrol near the Kissufim crossing between Gaza and Israel. It is not clear on which side of the border the attack took place. One soldier was killed and three were injured.

(The New York Times is reporting this as "the first serious confrontations between Hamas and Israel since each declared a tentative cease-fire 10 days ago."[12] However, there is no indication that Hamas was responsible for the bomb and seems, despite all the Israeli violations, to be pushing for a cease-fire.)

http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/01/28/israel-violated-cease-fire-7-times-no-media-reports/

29 Jan 09 - 03:43 AM (#2551712)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

If Hamas and the Palestinian people want the border crossings open CarolC why are they attacking border crossings and planting IED's at them?

29 Jan 09 - 03:53 AM (#2551719)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

Maybe they're trying to blast them open. I wouldn't blame them if they were.

29 Jan 09 - 04:53 AM (#2551748)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

If they plant them just in order to blast the crossings open why don't they just do that? Why do they have to wait for people to pass where they have planted the explosives? Or is killing people, particularly Israeli citizens just as important as blowing open the crossings?

29 Jan 09 - 05:30 AM (#2551768)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: theleveller

For 'Israeli citizens' read 'invading army'.

29 Jan 09 - 06:51 AM (#2551803)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

In answer to the question of why they have targeted crossings...

The raid comes after Hamas-affiliated militants threatened to storm Gaza's borders with both Israel and Egypt in protest against a continuing international blockade imposed on the territory since the Islamists seized control of it last summer.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3714388.ece

If people want to show outrage about targeting civilians, they should note that the Israeli military was targeting civilians (including children) in its several breaches of the ceasefire this past week. I expect that the people who have shown such outrage about Palestinians targeting civilians will also show an equal amount of outrage about what Israel has been doing this past week.

29 Jan 09 - 08:31 AM (#2551872)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Oh CarolC, I think that is has been pushed way past the point of people showing or voicing outrage at the targeting and killing of "innocent civilians" its been done so long in that part of the world it now has absolutely no impact or meaning.

The leveller has put it very succinctly for one who views the conflict from the "Palestinian" side:

"For 'Israeli citizens' read 'invading army'."

OK that defines the rules of engagement and leveller it then works both ways. I am awfully surprised that the Israeli Government and the IDF haven't seized on the dictum of proportional response advocated on this Forum by Little Hawk, which if I remember correctly consisted of incoming fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip, response by Israeli forces should be counter battery fire on the original point of fire by long range artillery. He seemed to think that that would have sufficient deterrent effect - Oddly enough I don't, because Hamas's response to this would be to ensure that their original points of fire were located inside schools, hospitals and mosques, and they would ensure that those attacks were mounted when all of those locations were full of "innocent civilians" and the "butchers bill" would be enormous. Wouldn't matter a toss to Hamas and the likes of Islamic Jihad or whoever, they've never given a damn or cared about the "Palestinians" for as long as their arses have pointed downwards.

But as theleveller says if everybody on either side of the divide is considered a combatant, that makes things much simpler and the sooner the blast complete and utter hell out of one another the better, at least then the problem will be resolved one way or the other.

By the bye Hamas still sitting on all those millions of Euros?? Iran's "Rockets-'R'- Us" Store mustn't be open yet then.

29 Jan 09 - 09:23 AM (#2551932)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC

https://usacbi.wordpress.com/

30 Jan 09 - 07:46 AM (#2552777)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

In a way it is true that the slaughter of civilians, children included, is a side issue to the main question of this situation; though the comparing of a poorly-armed force firing rockets to a country whose military capability stretches to nuclear weapons seems more than a little disproportionate to me, and tit-for-tat arguments are far more at home in the schoolyard than in the adult world.
The main question surely is, should any country have the right to invade, and occupy a country and ghettoise, terrorise, humiliate and oppress the people of that country - especially when this behaviour is based on a two thousand year old myth.
I was born in the first half of 40s when the Holocaust was at its height. Images of these events formed my views on racism when I was growing up; these views were strengthened later with documentaries such as Shoah and books by authors like Primo Levi and Martin Gilbert.
When I lived in Manchester, a good proportion of my friends were working class Jews, nearly all of whom were disgusted at the militaristic and imperialistic behaviour of Israel following the Six-Day War. The few I am still in touch with continue to be appalled at their behaviour; an ex-girlfriend, daughter of a Holocaust survivor summed it up recently by saying "They are crouching behind the dead of Auschwitz to justify their actions".
All racism and State terrorism is appalling, but it is particularly distressing when the persecuted become the persecutors - for me, there is little to choose between the behaviour of the Israelis in Gaza and the Nazis at Lidice - only the protagonists have changed.
We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody.
Jim Carroll

30 Jan 09 - 11:24 AM (#2552956)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Guardian covered this today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks

Not only can the Palestinian Arabs not share a country with the Jews - they can't even manage to share it with one another, which sort of kills stone-dead the following aspirations:

- One State Solution
- Two State Solution

Maybe there should be a Three State Solution proposed with:

- Israel
- West Bank
- Gaza

If things continue as they are then Israel and West Bank will eventually iron out all their points of difference and rub along quite peacefully and a sort of mutual prosperity will evolve. Gaza on the other hand under the guiding hand of Hamas will remain the basket case it has been since 2005 and be reduced to a sort of live firing range and weapons testing ground, which would be no great change it's what Hamas have used it for from Day One.

"tit-for-tat arguments are far more at home in the schoolyard than in the adult world." - Jim Carroll

"The main question surely is, should any country have the right to invade, and occupy a country and ghettoise, terrorise, humiliate and oppress the people of that country - especially when this behaviour is based on a two thousand year old myth." - Jim Carroll

I would certainly like to hear from the Government of any nation on this earth who would stand by mute and inactive for seven years and submit to a barrage of over 8000 rockets and mortar bombs fired deliberately at centres of civilian opulation under their protection. Quite right Jim these tit-for-tat arguements go way beyond those of the school playground.

I do not know what two thousand year old myth Jim is referring to as for the first part of that quote from his post I note that he confers the status of nation upon Gaza. This is good because it does put things into a clearer perspective. When one country attacks another then the country that has been attacked has every right to protect itself and if that requires invasion, occupation and forcibly disarming your enemy and degrading their ability to further wage war then that is exactly what you do.

This I though was worth a good chuckle:

"We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody."

What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. The people of Northern Ireland voted it that way, because they did not want to be part of an independent Ireland. The only reason the people of Northern Ireland experienced an outcome that was "vicious and bloody" was because a crowd of complete and utter eejits took it upon themselves to try and impose their will on the people of Northern Ireland by force. They certainly had no mandate to unify Ireland in the manner they chose by the population of either Northern Ireland or Eire, that was abundantly clear to the PIRA in the all Ireland Referendum held at the same time as the one for the GFA where 94% voted to renounce Eire's Constitutional claim to Northern Ireland and declared that violence has no part in politics in Ireland.

30 Jan 09 - 12:30 PM (#2553014)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

Perhaps you'd like to tell me when the 'people of Ireland'got the opportunity to vote on the partition of Ireland?
Jim Carroll

30 Jan 09 - 02:21 PM (#2553119)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom.

It certainly has not. There was no United Kingdom of any sort prior to James I and VI. There was no United Kingdom of Great Britain prior to the Act of (Scottish) Union in 1707. There was no United Kingdom that included any part of Ireland prior to the Act of (Irish) Union in 1800. The present "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" has only existed since the Government of Ireland (Partition) Act in 1920.

30 Jan 09 - 02:33 PM (#2553131)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

Teribus,
I've been musing over your spectacular ignorance of Irish history. I have no particular wish to see you make a fool of yourself again, as you did with your support for the Royal racists, so to put the record straight:
The whole of Ireland was a full colony of Britain (it's oldest) up to 1922. Following an incredible own goal by Britain with the extremely brutal mishandling of the Easter Week uprising, which turned the actions of a few revolutionaries into a nationwide opposition to British rule, a treaty was signed creating The Irish Free State. At first it was proposed that 9 counties remain under colonial rule, but realising that this would leave the Protestant Settlers (that's what they were) in a minority, the proposal was changed to 6 counties.
This led to a vicious civil war in Ireland, not over whether she should have remained a British colony, but rather, whether the six counties should have been signed away in the first place.
Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here.
The parallels between what happened in Ireland in 1922 and Israel in 1948 are inescapable.
Jim Carroll
PS Your real name isdn't David Irving by any chance?

30 Jan 09 - 03:04 PM (#2553163)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq

On Mudcat, one could start a thread on wildflowers or birdwatching and someone would twist it into a discussion about what the English have done in Ireland.

30 Jan 09 - 03:18 PM (#2553174)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

You mean you have no idea what we did to the birds and flowers here?
Jim Carroll

30 Jan 09 - 03:35 PM (#2553180)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Talking of ignorance of Irish History. I said the following and I will stand by it with the exception of three days in 1922:

"Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom." - Teribus

"For three days from midnight on 6 December 1922 Northern Ireland stopped being part of the United Kingdom and became part of the newly created Irish Free State. This remarkable constitutional episode arose because of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and the legislation introduced to give that Treaty legal effect.

The Treaty was given effect in the United Kingdom through the Irish Free State Constitution Act 1922. That Act established a new Dominion for the whole island of Ireland but also allowed Northern Ireland to opt out. Under Article 12 of the Treaty, Northern Ireland could exercise its opt out by presenting an address to the King requesting not to be part of the Irish Free State. Once the Treaty was ratified, the Houses of Parliament of Northern Ireland had one month to exercise this opt out during which month the Irish Free State Government could not legislate for Northern Ireland, holding the Free State's effective jurisdiction in abeyance for a month.

On 7 December 1922 (the day after the establishment of the Irish Free State) the Parliament demonstrated its lack of hesitation by resolving to make the following address to the King so as to opt out of the Irish Free State:

" "MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN, We, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Senators and Commons of Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, having learnt of the passing of the Irish Free State Constitution Act, 1922, being the Act of Parliament for the ratification of the Articles of Agreement for a Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland, do, by this humble Address, pray your Majesty that the powers of the Parliament and Government of the Irish Free State shall no longer extend to Northern Ireland." "

On 13 December 1922 Prime Minister Craig addressed the Parliament informing them that the King had responded to the Parliament's address as follows:

" "I have received the Address presented to me by both Houses of the Parliament of Northern Ireland in pursuance of Article 12 of the Articles of Agreement set forth in the Schedule to the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922, and of Section 5 of the Irish Free State Constitution Act, 1922, and I have caused my Ministers and the Irish Free State Government to be so informed."

As an exercise in pedantry MGOH I think I said that Northern Ireland has always been part of the United Kingdon, therefore your masterpiece above on when the United Kingdom came into being was a bit pointless and corrected me on nothing. Now had I said that Northern Ireland has always been a part of Great Britain you might of had a point, as it stands it is just so much pointless waffle.

On the same subject some incoming for you. In all the dates and times you mentioned there was no such entity politically as Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland only ever came into being when it was established as a distinct region of the United Kingdom on 3 May 1921 under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920.

Jim if you are going to quote me then quote me correctly, I did not say that 'people of Ireland' voted for partition, what I stated put in its corrrect context was:

"Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. The people of Northern Ireland voted it that way, because they did not want to be part of an independent Ireland."

I take it that you now see the distinction "people of Northern Ireland" as opposed to "people of Ireland".

And just to put the record straight Jim-Lad the people of Northern Ireland have since that date solidly voted to remain within the United Kingdom and damn near every poll taken on the subject of leaving the UK and joining the South has resulted in a resounding confirmation in the status of Union with the UK.

You were as wrong about this as you were on some very weird perceptions you had with regard to the Royal Family, their rights, incomes and taxes.

30 Jan 09 - 03:43 PM (#2553188)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Oh forgot this piece of complete and utter Bullshit from you Jim:

"This led to a vicious civil war in Ireland, not over whether she should have remained a British colony, but rather, whether the six counties should have been signed away in the first place.
Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here."

First bit rather like Hamas and Fatah isn't it. De Valera put Collins in an impossible position then shat all over him - My opinion Eamon De valera wasn't fit to lick Collin's boots. Britain did not partition Ireland as can be seen from my post above what came into being was a UNITED Ireland, but the six counties making up Northern Ireland had an opt out clause whiich THEY chose to exercise - THEY CHOSE Jim, got that!! Nothing whatsoever to do with Britain, the people of Northern Ireland through their legal and duly appointed representatives made the decision.

30 Jan 09 - 05:12 PM (#2553225)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Stringsinger

Schlomo Zand

Check this out. Zand has opened a can of worms.

30 Jan 09 - 05:13 PM (#2553226)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Stringsinger

Zand suggests that Palestinians and Jews are historically related.

30 Jan 09 - 05:14 PM (#2553228)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

"Always" does not mean "continually since 1920".

30 Jan 09 - 05:38 PM (#2553248)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Pointless pedantic waffle on your part Kevin and hopelessly incorrect.

Northern Ireland first came into being when it was established as a distinct region of the United Kingdom on 3 May 1921 under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920. Apart from the three days as part of the The Free Irish State in 1922, in the time it took the elected Government of the North to exercise their right to opt out of the Irish Free State, Northern Ireland has always been part of the United Kingdom.

And "always" Kevin, as far as Northern Ireland is concerned, started when it decided to be part of the United Kingdom on 13th December 1922. If anybody referred to you in the absolute meaning of the word "always", that "always" could only ever start from your date of birth.

30 Jan 09 - 06:23 PM (#2553272)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

30 Jan 09 - 07:08 PM (#2553296)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

I take it then that he read the Guardian too

31 Jan 09 - 03:50 AM (#2553481)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

There has never been a vote on the question of whether to remain as part of Britain,
Ireland was a colony until 1922, then it was partitioned and six counties were retained as part of Britain - that's what the 'troubles' were about.
Catholics, who made up one third of the country, had no say in its running.
"Sir James Craig, later Lord Craigavon, was prime minister from 1921 until his death in 1940. J. M. Andrews, his successor, had been in cabinet since 1921 and Lord Brookeborough was prime minister from 1943 to 1963.
Craig had unambiguously declared that the Northern Ireland government would be 'a Protestant parliament for a Protestant people' and partition had indeed guaranteed a large in-built Protestant majority. Catholics made up about one third of the population, but with the removal of proportional representation, the Unionist Party soon came to dominate both local and central government. Where necessary, as in Derry, blatant gerrymandering was employed to ensure that there would always be a unionist-controlled council, despite the city's Catholic nationalist majority."
Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule.
Jim Carroll

31 Jan 09 - 04:53 AM (#2553505)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

"Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule." - Jim Carroll.

No Jim every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to Irish stupidity on both sides of the divide and an "absolutist", no compromise mentality in both camps that adopted the creed, "My way or no way".

At the last gasp it took thirty years to bang heads together, when (as was noted by the Official IRA in 1970) by just letting things take their course the same outcome could have been achieved without the resutant loss of life in six months to a year.

31 Jan 09 - 03:09 PM (#2553867)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

"is down to Irish stupidity on both sides of the divide"
Make up your mind - you were busy telling us that the 'Northern' (sic) Irish were British, and have voted to be such.
Are you then saying that it is down to Irish and British stupidity?
"At the last gasp it took thirty years to bang heads together,"
Your attitude smacks of the Imperial arrogance which caused that bloodshed in the first place. - I understand that a visit from the queen is being contemplated at present and that one of the items on her agenda will be a speech apologising for British misrule.
Jim Carroll

31 Jan 09 - 05:57 PM (#2553988)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

No Jim just Irish stupidity.

Best put by a Dutch friend of mine one night in the mid 70's down in Kinsale when he was verbally assaulted by a self proclaimed "quartermaster-sergeant" in the IRA who castigated my dutch friend about how useless the dutch were and how Hitler had gone through them in a week.

My Dutch friend's answer was classic. He looked this prat straight in the eye and said, "When God allocated the different races their countries he gave the Irish Ireland, a struggling country divided by sectarian strife. He gave the Dutch the Netherlands. Now if by some quirk of fate God had given the Dutch Ireland it would now be an independent, unified country, hard working, prosperous and enjoying one of the best standards of living in Europe if not the world. If by that same quirk of fate God had given the Irish the Netherlands it would have disappeared beneath the waves about five hundred years ago."

You are as bad as Mugabe - you were handed everything on a bloody plate and still f**ked it up. Northern Ireland and Eire have had self-government and independence respectively for more than 80 years - and still it Britains fault - Grow up, you wanted it, you got it, if you screwed it up you have no-one to blame but yourselves - live with it.

01 Feb 09 - 04:01 AM (#2554229)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

"You are as bad as Mugabe "
Teribus,
It is hard not to notice that when confronted with facts you resort to invective - a common tactic with intellectual bullies (minus the vital ingredient, of course).
Your fascinating anecdote proves - what? - that you have a friend, nothing more (surprising enough in itself, I suppose).
So far we have exchanged opinions on Royal racism, genocide in Palestine and similar behaviour by Britain in Ireland (sorry to all innocent bystanders for that; it was my intention to use Ireland as an example of the outcome of Imperialist occupation, not to hi-jack this thread).
Whenever you find yourself in a corner, you wave your arms and shout. You have emerged as a racist (albeit closet), a supporter of countries who invade and occupy others, and an apologist for genocide and mass murder of civilians, one third of whom were children.
Please go away, count to ten slowly, and come back when you have something intelligent to say.
Best wishes,
Jim Carroll
"you were handed everything..."
Oh, and by the way, if you had read my posts properly you would have been aware that I'm not Irish, but a Brit.

01 Feb 09 - 05:57 AM (#2554269)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Aw Jim!! How predictable, attack the poster and ignore the points raised.

From your side of this discussion it would actually have been rather nice to have been presented with facts, instead what you came up with were tired old myths, half-truths and lies. Want a list of them Jim??

Example 1:
"We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody."

What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? The question is as yet unanswered by Jim the "Brit" - Jim don't you find being referred to as a "Brit" offensive? Aren't you outraged?? Terribly racist you know just as bad as referring to somebody from Pakistan a "Paki".

Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. So tell me Jim over the last three decades what country persisted in occupying what country? - How can a country "occupy" itself??

Example 2:
"The whole of Ireland was a full colony of Britain (it's oldest) up to 1922."

Really Jim?? Not according to our mutual friend Kevin who signs himself as MGOH. Can you dredge though your fantasy book of history and explain to everybody how Ireland could achieve the status of integral part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (1801 Act of Union) and still be a "colony" at one in the same time??

"Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here."

But as we have seen and as is recorded and documented as historical fact, the British did not partion Ireland did they?? That was the choice of the people of Northern Ireland. Or perhaps you feel as though Britain should have ignored the wishes and desires of that section of people? If they had done so the "civil war" that the South exerienced in 1922 would have looked like a pub brawl compared to the one that would have been fought had the South tried to force the North into a united independent Ireland in 1922. The prospect of this happening was fully realised by all parties in the negotiations that led to the creation of the Irish Free State and that is why the opt out was included in the treaty and ALL parties agreed to it.

Example 3:
"There has never been a vote on the question of whether to remain as part of Britain,
Ireland was a colony until 1922, then it was partitioned and six counties were retained as part of Britain - that's what the 'troubles' were about."

Every time the people of Northern Ireland go to the Polling Station there is a vote on whether or not Northern Ireland remains part of Britain.

We've dealt with the "colony" crap up above, and chapter and verse has been provided to show quite clearly that Northern Ireland came into being because that is what the majority of people living there wanted at the time and all polls taken on the subject indicate that they still prefer the status quo.

Oh and Brit Jim the "Troubles" much as you would like to think of them as having to do with the "struggle" for the unification of Ireland they had more to do with the Northern Irish Human Rights Movement which the bulk of the population in the UK totally supported. The Official IRA recognised that and stayed clear, the eejits of the Provisional IRA jumped in to pour petrol on the fire and set about murdering those they were purportedly "protecting". As to blood being on anybodies hands then the PIRA and the other paramilitaries must shoulder responsibility for the major portion of it.

"Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule." Utter nonsense, one set of clowns decided to impose their views and visions on the general population by force of arms, they were countered by another set of clowns with the opposite point of view. All the Governments of both the UK and Ireland ever tried to do was end the carnage. I've asked this before Jim maybe you can give me an answer - name one member of any paramilitary group involved in the "Troubles" who sacrificed his or her life to save the life of an innocent by-stander in Northern Ireland - There are numerous examples of precisely that among members of the armed forces, security forces and emergency services.

Example 4:
"I understand that a visit from the queen is being contemplated at present and that one of the items on her agenda will be a speech apologising for British misrule."

Now I wonder if that did actually occur would it work?? Would that be it? Would a line be drawn under it?? Somehow doubt it, don't you?

As a "Brit" Jim, where does this total ignorance of our constitutional monarchy, its powers and restraints come from??

One minor point Jim-Lad - As a Constitutional Monarch the Queen cannot make such a speech as you refer to, the Prime Minister can, the Queen cannot, she's not allowed to.

So there are instances of British misrule are there Jim - Hardly surprising that, quite human, I know it must be hard living in a world where no-one is as perfect as yourself. Can you give us any examples of Governments that have never made mistakes Jim?? I'd be very interested in reviewing that list.

01 Feb 09 - 03:59 PM (#2554723)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

Terribus,
First let me thank you for your last posting – it couldn't have come at a better time to illustrate the childish nastiness you appear to adopt to those who deem to disagree with you – please feel free to continue doing so.

"What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? "
Whatever way you partition it or govern, Ireland – all 32 counties of it - is a single country with its own language and culture. It has been held as a colony of Britain by repressive laws and force of arms for many centuries . When it was partitioned six counties remained part of Britain and continued to be held so by force of arms and manipulated laws. The bloodshed that occurred, both before and after that partitioning was due to that continuing occupation.

"Jim don't you find being referred to as a "Brit" offensive? The question is as yet unanswered by Jim the "Brit" – "
No it hasn't – it was never asked, apparently you've only just found out where I'm from and are now, in your unpleasantly childish way, trying to make something of it.
No, I have no objection whatever to being called 'Jim The Brit' – what a strange question.
Nobody is going to use it as a reason for pouring petrol through my letter-box, or terrorising my children at school, or daubing obscene and insulting graffiti on my walls, or sneering at my religion and customs, or trying to make me a third class citizen.
Nor will it cause me to worry about going out at night for fear of me or mine being beaten or murdered by racist thugs.
Nor will it be used by walking beer-bellies in order to insult me in the name of humour.
Nor is it going to be used to arrest me imprison me without charge, dress me in an orange boiler suit and put me in a cage where I will be beaten and humiliated.
Nor will it be the cause of my being shipped off to a country where I will be tortured – whoops sorry, 'specially rendered'.
Why on earth should I object – feel free.
In the forty-odd years of our association with Ireland, both as a regular visitor and as a resident, I have never once been insulted, persecuted or been made feel unwelcome because of my national origins. We have received nothing but friendship and hospitality from the Irish people – I wonder how many people emigrating to the UK, especially those of a different colour, can say that!

"Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here. - That was the choice of the people of Northern Ireland...."
No it wasn't – the people of ( the incorrectly called) Northern Ireland, the people of the republic, nor, for that matter, the people of England have never been consulted on the matter. In order for them to have been, a referendum would have to have been held – no such has ever taken place

"Every time the people of Northern Ireland go to the Polling Station there is a vote on whether or not Northern Ireland remains part of Britain".
No they don't; as I have just said, no referendum, no consultation- that's how parliamentary democracy works.

".. that is what the majority of people living there wanted at the time...."
Oh, there was a referendum then – sorry, must have missed it!
It is the duty of any government to act on behalf of the whole population – not just those who voted for them.

"So there are instances of British misrule are there Jim."
Of course there are – including a mismanaged famine that slaughtered and forced emigration and abject poverty on many millions (try Mrs Woodham-Smith's 'The Great Hunger'), the violent repression of the whole country by armed thugs, many of them dredged from English jails, massacres of civilians, manipulation of laws to disenfranchise and persecute the native population, the forcible seizure of homes, land and property and rapine and open murder.
I don't know where you get your 'facts', but I suggest you try fellow Brit, Robert Kee's, 'The Green Flag' history of Ireland, or his 'Ireland – a history – written to accompany if excellent BBC series.

By the way – who are the 'we' you keep referring to – I've never been asked to vote of the Irish question – have you?
Jim Carroll

01 Feb 09 - 04:04 PM (#2554730)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

Oh, nearly forgot - this appeared in the Irish Times as part of a petition for justice in Gaza - says everything taht needs to be said on the subject 9AS as does your arrogantly chosen name by the way Terribus - did you know that not only does it mean war-cry, but is also used by some Travellers to describe an uncontrollable, dangerously violent and unpleasant drunk - well done:
"Israel's bombardment of Gaza killed over 1,300 Palestinians, a third of them children. Thousands have been wounded. Many victims had been taking refuge in clearly marked UN facilities.
This assault came in the wake of years of economic blockade by Israel. This blockade, which is Illegal under international Humanitarian Law, has destroyed the Gazan economy and condemned its population to poverty. According to a World Bank report last September, "98% of Gaza's industrial operations are now inactive".
The most recent attack on Gaza is only the latest phase in Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people and appropriation of their land.
Israel has never declared its borders. Instead, it has continuously expanded at the expense of the Palestinians. in 1948, it took over 78% of Palestine, an area much larger than that suggested for a Jewish state by the UN General Assembly in 1947. Contrary to International Law, Israel expelled over 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. These refugees and their descendants, who now number millions, are still dispersed throughout the region. They have the right, under International Law, to return to their homes. This right has been underlined by the UN General Assembly many times, starting with Resolution 194 in 1948.
In 1967, Israel occupied the remaining 22% of Palestine: the West Bank and Gaza. Contrary to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel has built, and continues to build, settlements in these occupied territories. Today, nearly 500,000 Israeli settlers live in the illegal settlements in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and the number grows daily as Israel expands its settler programme.
Israel has resisted pressure from the international community to abide by the human rights provisions of International Law. It has refused to comply with UN Security Council demands to cease building settlements and remove those it has built (Resolutions 446, 452 and 465) and to reverse its illegal annexation of East Jerusalem (252, 267, 271, 298, 476 and 478). Since September 2000, over 5,000 Palestinians, almost 1,000 of them minors, have been killed by the Israeli military.
11,000 Palestinians, including hundreds of minors, languish in Israel jails. Hundreds are detained without
trial. In addition, Israel is breaking International Law by imprisoning them outside the occupied territories, thereby making it almost impossible for their families to visit them. Every year, hundreds of Palestinian homes are demolished. The Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza lives imprisoned by walls, barriers and checkpoints that prevent or impede access to shops, schools, workplaces, hospitals and places of worship. They are subjected to restrictions of every kind and to daily ritual humiliation at the hands of occupation soldiers and checkpoint guards.
Invasion, occupation and plantation of their land is the reality that Palestinians have faced for decades and still face on a daily basis, as their country is reduced remorselessly. Unless, and until this Israeli aggression is halted, and the democratic rights of the Palestinian people are vindicated, there will be no justice or peace in the Middle East. Israel's 40-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza must be ended.
The occupation can end if political and economic pressure is placed on Israel by the international community. Recognizing this, the Palestinian people continually call on the international community to intervene.

WE, THE SIGNATORIES, CALL FOR THE FOLLOWING:
The Irish Government to cease its purchase of Israeli military products and services and call publicly for an arms embargo against Israel.
The Irish Government to demand publicly that Israel reverse its settlement construction, illegal occupation and annexation of land in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions and to use its influence in international fora to bring this about.
The Irish Government to demand publicly that the Euro-Med Agreement under which Israel has privileged access to the EU market be suspended until Israel complies with International Law.
The Irish Government to veto any proposed upgrade in EU relations with Israel.
The Irish people to boycott all Israeli goods and services until Israel abides by International Law."
Jim Carroll

01 Feb 09 - 07:26 PM (#2554863)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus

Pssst Tosser Jim this is what the Arabs rejected in 1947:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png

This is what they SAY they are fighting for now:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/6daywar.html

OK now any rational sane logical thinking people out there - which was the better deal for the "Palestinian Arabs"?? Please remember that had they accepted this deal ther would have been no displaced Arabs and ther would have been no "right of return" question.

History records that they rejected the 1947 proposal - So having lost the war that they chose to fight, just what exactly are we supposed to do?? Give them another shot at it?? You have got to be joking. But seriously they did try to refight the war and lost it again three times. OK when do you stop, the former main supporters have vanished from the scene, you now have Iran and Syria. Current attrition figres run at for ever Israeli killed 130 Palestinian Arabs get killed. I am very please to heard that the Israeli PM has announced that in future any attack upon the civilian population of Southern Israel from the Gaza Strip will be met by "disproportionate force" the days of "tit-for-tat" are over - Good that is exactly what the situation demands. Personally I'd like to see that translated into counter battery fire at at least brigade strength for at least one hour in response to any rocket or mortar fired from Gaza. I could not care a toss about where that mortar or rocket was fired from, or what casualties resulted from the retaliatory fire was - that is entirely up to Hamas, their choice. And it is all a matter of choice.

What defines the boundaries of the United States of America?? Or any other nation for that matter?? Mutual agreement? Or conquest and treaty dictated by fortune of arms?? If it's good enough for our ancestors it's bloody well good enough for the Arabs of Palestine and their declared foes the citizens of Israel. The former, the Arabs of Palestine, attempted to destroy the Israelis by force of arms and lost, plain and simple - live with it and continue your lives - if you lose at the poker table you can expect no refund because you chose unwisely - lesson number 1, life is hellishly more cruel and unforgiving than poker, that is reality.

02 Feb 09 - 03:57 AM (#2555047)
Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll

Teribus
"Pssst Tosser Jim"
I am happy to discuss Ireland, Gaza - any subject with anybody on this forum, but I find you one of the most arrogant, ill mannered and childish individuals I have ever come across.
I suggest you go and get some help for your 'little social problem', then maybe you will be in a position to learn something about the world around you
Good luck with the search,
Jim Carroll