I don't know what to make of this... but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hefIti-uFUo

I would say that sometimes it takes one ******* with a big mouth to make everyone look bad.

I do not know what to make of you for posting this, except to say that you are rather brave, and that is good.

The below is only my opinion...

In every nation and among every race, there are people who hate others. As long as humans have existed, this has been the case, and as long as we do exist, this will be the case.

Some even make a “game” of hate, as the below link indicates (if it opens, you will see in blue, Racists Games Available on the Internet).

http://www.bcpl.net/~rfrankli/hatedir.pdf

It took me a grand total of 2 minutes to find the above link, so one can only imagine what could be found with a lengthy search of the Internet.

I applaud your courage, criminal. Most people would not have posted this, for a great many reasons.

I only watched a bit of it, but all I have to say is - let's get real here. The palestinians and extreme Islamists are the ones who have hated Jews with a passion for a long time - enough to strap bombs to their kids and send them out to kill innocent civilians just because they are Jews.

They are the ones who teach their very young children (toddlers) to hate Jews and that Jews should be dead. They indoctrinate their children to be vicious, murderous Jew haters, and they do not want peace, they just want Jews dead, how anyone does not see this by now is beyond me.

I've said this before, but I lived in the Middle East for a couple years (when I was younger) I know it is the Muslims who are the haters and the Jews who are the hatees. (for the most part, of course there are always exceptions to the rule) The 'palestinian side' has been caught many times before in lies and propaganda, so as far as i'm concerned they can't be trusted. Unless you think people who strap bombs to teenagers to target innocent women and children are somehow virtuous and trustworthy. :rolleyes: Wake up.

The individual in the vid that says "gog gave him that land" is mentally ill. That is what is dangerous about this entire scenario. Sure the Islamofacists are crazy, but the Zionists are just as crazy.

The individual in the vid that says "gog gave him that land" is mentally ill. That is what is dangerous about this entire scenario. Sure the Islamofacists are crazy, but the Zionists are just as crazy.

He's being honest.

That is the issue me neega jojo. That mentally ill kid honestly believes the ridiculousness that the Yahweh deity "gave" land to a specific tribe. It seems quite obvious that concept was nothing more than a primitive war monger tactic used by barbarians to motivate them to kill natives. Such insanity was excusable hundreds of years ago, but it has no place in an age of literacy and universal humanity. The kid is delusional and needs help.

I applaud your courage, criminal. Most people would not have posted this, for a great many reasons.
I thank you.

I actually wrestled with the idea because some may think its anti-semetic to post this. But I believe that the video should be seen for what it is, two hateful *******s mouthing off about stuff.

I do not necessarily think this is indicitive of all Israelis. But sometimes it takes one schmuck (Hebrew word for.... never mind) to **** thinks up.

But remember that sometimes individual jags with an axe to grind will enter Mosques and shoot everyone in sight. It happens on both sides.

BTW:If it were a Palestinian saying this sort of stuff the media would probibly be all over it.

This was supposed to be a new post. It got screwed up. Sorry.

A terrorist state is a state which practices terrorism, even if it pretends (or rather, lies) to the world that it does not. It hardly needs to be pointed out that Israel is a terrorist state. Brutal repression of, and bloody attacks on, Palestinian civilians with the official Israeli aim of causing a change in the policies or actions of the Palestinian leadership is a clear case of terrorism.

that vid didnt make much of a case for the pov that israels are the real terrorists-just some angry cussing and rudeness..

I thank you.

I actually wrestled with the idea because some may think its anti-semetic to post this. But I believe that the video should be seen for what it is, two hateful *******s mouthing off about stuff.

I read a lot of right wing Israeli stuff, and Arutz Sheva at least once a week; I can find worse. I have no problem with people posting this stuff, as long as they don't pass it off as mainstream. And Lily is right; the mainstream Arab media bombards Arab countries 24/7 with the most vile propaganda you can imagine. The occasional Israeli crackpot is almost nonexistent in comparison.

BTW:If it were a Palestinian saying this sort of stuff the media would probibly be all over it.

No, they wouldn't, or they have to report just what is slathered on Arab TV every single day and devote an entire news channel to it. They in fact ignore the overwhelming amounts of Arab and Muslim stuff like this.

I actually wrestled with the idea because some may think its anti-semetic to post this. But I believe that the video should be seen for what it is, two hateful *******s mouthing off about stuff.

Personally, I do not consider someone who would bring this issue up as being anti-Semitic. Bigots and racists usually “hide in the shadows,” imho. They profess to be open-minded when, in fact, they are not.

Israel as a subject should not be a sacred cow. We should not fear to criticize their polities if we choose to so do.

A terrorist state is a state which practices terrorism, even if it pretends (or rather, lies) to the world that it does not. It hardly needs to be pointed out that Israel is a terrorist state. Brutal repression of, and bloody attacks on, Palestinian civilians with the official Israeli aim of causing a change in the policies or actions of the Palestinian leadership is a clear case of terrorism.

Israel does not pretend (or lie) concerning their actions, imho. They simply care very little about what the world thinks about what they do or do not do. There are exceptions to this, I believe (such as Jenin).

My problem with modern Israel is simple (probably, too simple): They do not need our help. Not our $$. Not our military equipment. Not our protection from big-bad Iran or any of their Islamic foes. They can take care of themselves.

It just so happens that the first comprehensive history of the settler movement, its lawlessness and undermining not only of the Palestinian polity but of Israeli society, has just been published in english:

Lords of the Land by Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar.

http://www.amazon.com/Lords-Land-Settlements-Territories-1967-2007/dp/1568583702/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195936297&sr=8-1

These people are a blight on humanity.

I've said this before, but I lived in the Middle East for a couple years (when I was younger) I know it is the Muslims who are the haters and the Jews who are the hatees. (for the most part, of course there are always exceptions to the rule) The 'palestinian side' has been caught many times before in lies and propaganda, so as far as i'm concerned they can't be trusted. Unless you think people who strap bombs to teenagers to target innocent women and children are somehow virtuous and trustworthy. :rolleyes: Wake up.

Why is it more virtuous to strap a bomb to a plane or a clinic and kill innocents than it is to strap it to yourself? Since that is the only distinction you seem to need to embrace one set of murderous principles over another. The Israeli side has been caught many times in lies and propaganda. I don't trust either side. They've both demonstrated there is no amount of civility in them for the other side, and they both claim it is the other side's fault.

When do these Isreali settlers represent all Isreali settlers?


And when do Isreali settlers represent all Isrealis?

And when do Isrealis represent all Jews?

If this post was titled A couple of hateful Isreali settlers it would have been accurate,but a post titled Hateful Jewish settlers is [at the very least] misleading.

But to the crowd who romanticize everything Palestinian [including Palestinian atrocities] all Irealis/Jewz are evil and all Palestinians are saints.

Yeah,right.:rolleyes:

These people are a blight on humanity.



The Ku Klux Klan and the Nazi Party agree with you Guido.

When do these Isreali settlers represent all Isreali settlers?


And when do Isreali settlers represent all Isrealis?

And when do Isrealis represent all Jews?

If this post was titled A couple of hateful Isreali settlers it would have been accurate,but a post titled Hateful Jewish settlers is [at the very least] misleading.

But to the crowd who romanticize everything Palestinian [including Palestinian atrocities] all Irealis/Jewz are evil and all Palestinians are saints.

Yeah,right.:rolleyes:

The settler movement is based on a totalitarian ideology (Gush Emunim) that is explicitely lawless and anti-democratic and deeply racist. The goal of settling the occupied territories is to purge the land of non-jews and thereby "redeem" it. In that sense, the hateful settler represents a movement that entails hate as part of its essence.

The settler movement has dictated Israel's public policies in the OT for the past 50 years, by means of deception, intimidation and defiance of the law. The result has been the undermining of the rule of law both within Israel and internationally and consequently, a loss of political legitimacy for the country as a whole.

And when do Isreali settlers represent all Isrealis?

Zionism is an ideology of settlement; to the extent that Israel is a zionist country, settlers express the essence of Israel.

The Ku Klux Klan and the Nazi Party agree with you Guido.

Zertal, Eldar, Gorenberg, along with Eyal Wiezman (author of the recent intellectual masterpiece Hollow Land, regarding the architecture of the settlements and the occupation) certainly agree with me, and that's what matters.

When do these Isreali settlers represent all Isreali settlers?


And when do Isreali settlers represent all Isrealis?

And when do Isrealis represent all Jews?

If this post was titled A couple of hateful Isreali settlers it would have been accurate,but a post titled Hateful Jewish settlers is [at the very least] misleading.

Well, the settlements are always built in areas that are occupied, not part of Israel. If they were part of Israel, then all of the people living there should be allowed to vote and receive all social services. So, any person moving into a settlement knows going into it that they are taking land from someone who lived there before it was taken from them at the point of a gun. If a man gets mugged, and the mugger offers to split the man's money with you, then you are in a position to either be a willing participant in the mugging, or not take the money. The settlers have chosen the former.

When do these Isreali settlers represent all Isreali settlers?


And when do Isreali settlers represent all Isrealis?

And when do Isrealis represent all Jews?

If this post was titled A couple of hateful Isreali settlers it would have been accurate,but a post titled Hateful Jewish settlers is [at the very least] misleading.

But to the crowd who romanticize everything Palestinian [including Palestinian atrocities] all Irealis/Jewz are evil and all Palestinians are saints.

Yeah,right.

:nice::nice:

If the settlements was THE problem here, I'd be all for not having any, however, the PROBLEM was WAYYY before any "settlements" or the so-called occupation of 1967 land.

In 1948, and even in 1920's, the palestinians and arab countries already wanted to push the Jews into the sea and destroy Israel and that was WAYY before any "settlements", so the whole controversy with them doesn't mean SH!T other than another excuse to kill Jews, that was at least semi-approved by many people:rolleyes:.

The Ku Klux Klan and the Nazi Party agree with you Guido.

He's in a great company:p.

The settler movement is based on a totalitarian ideology (Gush Emunim) that is explicitely lawless and anti-democratic and deeply racist.

1. You are obviously smoking crack...since it is NOT POSSIBLE to be both totalitarian and lawless:p. So decide which one do you wanna accuse the Jews of...being lawless or having too much laws (totalitarian). Your anti-semitic comments would be tollerated if only they were half-way consistent:p:rolleyes:.

2. They are no more "anti-democratic" than any of their barbaric enemies, so if you are so against invading the arab culture (when it comes to freedom and democracy), why would you invade their culture? Or is it because they are Jews?:p

3. Again, you are smoking crack, because religious fundementalism (not that it is great or anything) and racism are TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS!! Jewish settlers come from ALL kinds of ethnicities...from Europe, Arab countries, Africa, Asia, and those people are of ALL colors, therefore, there's nothing "racist" about them. You cannot be Jewish by religion and believe in racism, or any kind of blood monopoly.

The goal of settling the occupied territories is to purge the land of non-jews and thereby "redeem" it. In that sense, the hateful settler represents a movement that entails hate as part of its essence.


Their goal is to live their lives in peace and security and for everybody else to leave them alone and let them live next to their holy places.

Enough with the Jewish conspiracy theories:p.

The settler movement has dictated Israel's public policies in the OT for the past 50 years, by means of deception, intimidation and defiance of the law.

The settler movement has been treated like SH!T by Israeli government and a big part of Israeli public, and I know because I lived there for 8 years.

They have NO power, but the couple of soldiers that protect them against islamic terrorists who murder their children for being Jewish and living in the "wrong place":rolleyes:.

The result has been the undermining of the rule of law both within Israel and internationally and consequently, a loss of political legitimacy for the country as a whole.

I'll be more than glad to remove them and every other Jew from ANY Arab territory, as soon as Israel can remove all of the non-citizens from THEIR land, ESPECIALLY all the muslim palestinians in Jerusalem who are not citizens...or else, let EVERYBODY live next to their holy places, INCLUDING Jews in the West Bank.

The rules must apply to both sides one way or another.

Zionism is an ideology of settlement; to the extent that Israel is a zionist country, settlers express the essence of Israel.

Again, why is it ok for so many non-Israeli Arabs to live in Jerusalem and other parts of Israel, while it's so wrong for Jews to live next to their holy places that happen to be on the so-called "palestinian land"?:confused:

Why are you so exceptionally racist against the Jewish people?:confused: Were you raised that way?:confused:

Zertal, Eldar, Gorenberg, along with Eyal Wiezman (author of the recent intellectual masterpiece Hollow Land, regarding the architecture of the settlements and the occupation) certainly agree with me, and that's what matters.

Certain ethnically Jewish people have even worked for Hitler (who was quater Jew as well, possibly), and that sure didn't save the 6 millions.

So if Israel were to listen to the people above, it wouldn't matter what nationality they are when Israeli Jews are pushed into the sea by arab terrorists...the result would still be the same. You can always find a self-hating Black person to have him justify segregation, but that doesn't change the picture of it:rolleyes:.

Well, the settlements are always built in areas that are occupied, not part of Israel.

But WHY are they "occupied"? Is it because Israel attacked Jordan and tried to push it into the sea?:confused: Is it because Israel never even offered to give that land back to Jordan and the Palestinians?:confused:

If they were part of Israel, then all of the people living there should be allowed to vote and receive all social services.

They do...where the f#ck do you think those savages get their electricity, gas and water from, if not with Israel's help:rolleyes:. Palestinians are surviving partially because of the Israeli taxpayers, ironically:rolleyes:.

And they ARE allowed to vote...in the elections of Jordan, since they are citizens of Jordan, and why Jordan does not want to claim the land and the people back is beyond me:p.

So, any person moving into a settlement knows going into it that they are taking land from someone who lived there before it was taken from them at the point of a gun.

Not anymore than non-Israeli arabs living on Israeli land.

If a man gets mugged, and the mugger offers to split the man's money with you, then you are in a position to either be a willing participant in the mugging, or not take the money. The settlers have chosen the former.

No, because they can claim that money from 2000 years ago and since. In fact, Jews have been living on that land for much longer and have at least just as many holy places there, and their religion should be respected too.

Their goal is to live their lives in peace and security and for everybody else to leave them alone and let them live next to their holy places.

Elon Moreh was the first settlement, built on stolen land, explicitly based on Gush Enumin principles. According to their website, settling Elon Moreh and similar places is important not for "peace and security," but specifically in order to undermine the possibility of a Palestinian state.

"Since the settlements on the mountaintops around Shechem, of which Elon Moreh is the biggest and therefore the central one, are the only Israeli presence from Natanya to the Jordan River, these communities now present the only barrier to a Palestinian State in Samaria."

http://www.shechem.org/elon-moreh/eng792.html

Your post demonstrates a complete ignorance of the political and strategic goals of the settlement movement, which are fully documented in several recent books written by Israeli scholars and cited in my earlier post. Once again, the main question raised by your post is whether you are just ignorant, or dishonest; either way, there's no excuse.

Moshe Ben-Yosef (Hager) wrote in Nekudah (the settlers' official publication), no. 109, April 14, 1987, that "evacuating the land of its inhabitants is a Zionist goal of the first rank, no less and perhaps even more than settling the land with Jewish inhabitants.....the slogan, 'no rights fo the Arabs to the Land of Israel' is the only possible slogan because without it, our right itself does not exist and we are all war criminals that are sentenced to death by a court for crimes against humanity."

[Cited in Zertal and Eldar, Lords of the Land, p. 219]

Elon Moreh was the first settlement, built on stolen land, explicitly based on Gush Enumin principles. According to their website, settling Elon Moreh and similar places is important not for "peace and security," but specifically in order to undermine the possibility of a Palestinian state.


1. Only a small % of settlers has anything to do with those people. They don't represent everybody there by any means. I have relatives who are EXTREME-leftists (some are even in the Peace Now movement and work for extreme left political parties) and they technically live inside the territories. Now, I personally think they are being hypocrites in many ways, but there are many of those type of liberal Jews who just want to live in peace and security and are very supportive of creating a Palestinian state. Some Palestinians sell their land to Jewish people (many get killed by the palestnian government, of course, for that), and actually there is a large minority of Palestinians that really has no problem with the Jews, and I've been personally told by people about Hamas members threatening their families to force them to help their terrorism.


2. What they feel is irrelevant because the Israeli goverment doesn't give a f#ck about them one way or another, where the left wing parties are honest about removing settlements, while the right wing parties are lying that they won't (and use that to win elections) and remove a bunch of settlements anyways as they have done many many times before. Israeli goverment wants to give the palestinians a state, and if the palestinians only stopped the terrorism, that would have happened, and it wouldn't matter some of those so-called "settlers" say.

Moshe Ben-Yosef (Hager) wrote in Nekudah (the settlers' official publication), no. 109, April 14, 1987, that "evacuating the land of its inhabitants is a Zionist goal of the first rank, no less and perhaps even more than settling the land with Jewish inhabitants.....the slogan, 'no rights fo the Arabs to the Land of Israel' is the only possible slogan because without it, our right itself does not exist and we are all war criminals that are sentenced to death by a court for crimes against humanity."


Most of the Jews inside the territories do not feel that way, and DEFINATELY most Israelis don't feel that way. Therefore it doesn't matter what a couple of idiots say.

Your post demonstrates a complete ignorance of the political and strategic goals of the settlement movement, which are fully documented in several recent books written by Israeli scholars and cited in my earlier post. Once again, the main question raised by your post is whether you are just ignorant, or dishonest; either way, there's no excuse.

1. Most Israelis have nothing to do with the "settlements", much less the so-called "settlement movement". The Israeli government has never done them any good usually either.

2. Most settlers have nothing to do with the "settlement movement".

3. Even the so-called "settlement movement" is known to "sell out" those "priniciples" that you've accuse them of, therefore, it only represents their extreme part.

They do...where the f#ck do you think those savages get their electricity, gas and water from, if not with Israel's help:rolleyes:. Palestinians are surviving partially because of the Israeli taxpayers, ironically:rolleyes:.
Ahh.. savages. OK, you are simply racist... that will make convincing yourself of anything a lot easier.

And they ARE allowed to vote...in the elections of Jordan, since they are citizens of Jordan, and why Jordan does not want to claim the land and the people back is beyond me:p.

Israeli tanks are in their streets, Israeli guns are pointed at their children, Israel controls their borders, and arrests their people under Israeli law. They should be allowed to vote in Israeli elections. They are a protectorate of Israel. If you don't want them as your citizens, get off the land they live on.

Not anymore than non-Israeli arabs living on Israeli land.

Yes, lots of Arab bulldozers knocking down Jewish homes to make room for Arab settlements.... good analogy.

No, because they can claim that money from 2000 years ago and since. In fact, Jews have been living on that land for much longer and have at least just as many holy places there, and their religion should be respected too.

Your argument here is that you should be allowed to take land by force if it ever might have belonged to an ancestor. By that argument, the Arabs have every right to drive your people into the sea. (No doubt you will take that out of context.)

To be a settler is to embrace the idea that you have the right to steal from another. Whether you base that on racism (they are savages) or on fanatical religion it has no more validity. You can not take the house built on the bulldozed home of another who was removed without remorse or recompense and pretend to be innocent or a victim.

Most Israelis have nothing to do with the "settlements", much less the so-called "settlement movement". The Israeli government has never done them any good usually either.

In fact, the Israeli government has in innumerable cases, confiscated private property as "state land" and then turned it over to settlers, given them infrastructure, tax benefits, and huge housing subsidies, waste IDF resources by providing them with security, not to mention sponsor the entire enterprise.

WASHINGTON - The Israeli government spent well over US$533 million in sustaining Jewish settlements in the occupied territories in 2001, more than half the amount provided it by the United States as direct economic assistance during the same year, according to a report released Thursday by the Israeli Peace Now movement.

The report, which was based on publicly available data, said that the total amount of government support for the settlements in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, including the costs of providing military protection for the settlers, is actually significantly higher. But how much higher cannot be determined because a breakdown of the defense budget, for example, is a state secret.

"Peace Now has found that Israel unfortunately continues to pour hundreds of millions of dollars each year into the settlement movement, money that could otherwise be spent on Israel's more pressing security and economic needs," said Debra DeLee of the group's U.S. affiliate, Americans for Peace Now (APN).

From these figures, researchers derived the total figure of $533.6 million, of which approximately $440 million could be considered money that would not have been spent on individuals or communities within the 1967 borders. Spending allocated to the settler groups was "immeasurably larger" than the three percent of the overall Israeli population that it represents.

In addition to the costs of defending the settlers, the study was not able to account for three other key components of the state budget that are allocated to settlers and the settlements, including government subsidization of nonprofit organizations that support the settled areas; the wages of teachers and other local education-ministry employees; and other settlement-related support by government ministries that could not be separated from their general budgets.

"This means that the findings in this report should be seen as only a partial reflection of spending in the occupied territories," according to APN. "The budgets actually being spent are much higher than those that can be pinpointed."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0127-05.htm

In a study prepared for Peace Now by economist Dror Tsaban, he notes that in 2001 the government allocated NIS 5.4 billion for assistance in purchasing housing. The sum included grants and interest subsidies as well as financing sources for mortgage banks. Some NIS 374 million of this sum was used to buy homes in the territories. This is 6.9 percent of the total, or 2.3 times the relative ratio of the settlement population to the general population in Israel. According to the 2002 state budget, loans to eligible settlers in the territories ranged from $54,000-$84,000 for 30 years at 3 percent interest. After 10 years, 75 percent of that loan becomes a grant. There are no such loan terms within the Green Line.

One of the ways Israeli governments, particularly but not exclusively Likud-led ones, granted benefits for the settlements and attracted more residents to them was to provide them with more public facilities, and of a higher quality. Adva found that the level of public construction (schools, synagogues, swimming pools) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the 1990s was an average of 63 percent higher than public construction inside the Green Line. Some 3.8 percent of the public facilities built in the 1990s were in the territories, while the Jewish population of the territories was just 2.5 percent of all Israelis. In addition, 4.3 percent of the total budget for public construction was spent in the territories.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=344396&contrassID=2&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Ahh.. savages. OK, you are simply racist... that will make convincing yourself of anything a lot easier.

Besides the minority of them that does NOT support Hamas and supports peace with Israel...YES, they are savages, and it's not because of their "race" (I'm from the same race as them for the matter of fact) but because 80% of them chose to be evil, as the rest 20% chose NOT to be evil.

That has nothing to do with racism, but with being against violent evil people.

Israeli tanks are in their streets,

Yes, whenever terrorists are hidding (or shooting) from those streets...what other choice do they have?:rolleyes:

Israeli guns are pointed at their children

Yes, when hamas terrorists are hiding behind those children and using them as human shields, or when the parents of those children send them to throw stones at Israeli soldiers:rolleyes:.

Israel controls their borders

That's because Jordan (and other arab countries) attacked Israel in 1967.

and arrests their people under Israeli law.

Yes, arrest islamic terrorists who murder innocent women and childrent, and EVEN THEN, they don't get death penalty or life sentences:rolleyes:.

They should be allowed to vote in Israeli elections.

No, they are citizens of Jordan. Are Israelis allowed to vote in Jordan's elections (assuming they even have them:p)?

They are a protectorate of Israel. If you don't want them as your citizens, get off the land they live on.

They are citizens of Jordan, and Jordan doesn't want to take that land back, nor its citizens who live there, so therefore, it's not Israel's problem because it was Jordan who attacked and didn't even want to gain back the land or the citizens that it lost:p. I wonder why:p:p.

Yes, lots of Arab bulldozers knocking down Jewish homes to make room for Arab settlements.... good analogy.

Israel only crushes the houses of terrorists, and settlements were usually built on territories that were separeted from major Arab population places, so hardly any Arab homes were strictly sacrificed for the Jews:rolleyes:.

Your argument here is that you should be allowed to take land by force if it ever might have belonged to an ancestor.

It's documented historical facts...it's not about "might have"...the Jews definately owned Israel 2000 years ago and there were always Jewish communities there ever since.

By that argument, the Arabs have every right to drive your people into the sea. (No doubt you will take that out of context.)


No, by that arguement you can argue that EVERYBODY ELSE can drive the Arabs back to Saudia and take over North Africa and Mid-East:p.

You could have looked more intelligent and said that the ancient nations that lived on the land of Israel before the Jews could drive them into the sea, however, those people no longer exist:p.

To be a settler is to embrace the idea that you have the right to steal from another.

Not if you believe that land belongs to you.

Whether you base that on racism (they are savages)

Their behavior has nothing to do with their race but rather with their choice of an evil culture, like Nazi Germans or Confederate Southerners.

or on fanatical religion it has no more validity.

They have been acting like savages even before Islam, while Turkey, Persia or the Moors in Spain have definately contributed to civilization, despite Islam, so you're right, it's not just about Islam.

You can not take the house built on the bulldozed home of another who was removed without remorse or recompense and pretend to be innocent or a victim.

That's not how it happens. Only people who have links to terrorism get their house bulldozed.

In fact, the Israeli government has in innumerable cases, confiscated private property as "state land" and then turned it over to settlers, given them infrastructure, tax benefits, and huge housing subsidies, waste IDF resources by providing them with security, not to mention sponsor the entire enterprise.

It has happened before for very short amounts of time, usually just to win elections, before f#ckin' the settlers over again and again.

Hell, they obviously couldn't even trust Sharon, and he was their BIGGEST defender...until, of course, he became the prime minister:p.

Besides the minority of them that does NOT support Hamas and supports peace with Israel...YES, they are savages, and it's not because of their "race" (I'm from the same race as them for the matter of fact) but because 80% of them chose to be evil, as the rest 20% chose NOT to be evil.
Wow, an honest revelation. Yes, you are the same race. And, both your houses treat the other identically, you just strap bombs to planes and not yourselves. Peace comes when one side is more interested in peace than victory.

That has nothing to do with racism, but with being against violent evil people.

Explain that in the context of invading Lebanon and killing hundreds, if not thousands of civilians because a soldier was captured.

Yes, whenever terrorists are hidding (or shooting) from those streets...what other choice do they have?:rolleyes:

Nothing says murder is wrong like committing more murder and blaming the victim. What again makes your side different?

Yes, arrest islamic terrorists who murder innocent women and childrent, and EVEN THEN, they don't get death penalty or life sentences:rolleyes:.
Once again, if they are subject to your laws they should have a vote in determining what those laws are.

No, they are citizens of Jordan. Are Israelis allowed to vote in Jordan's elections (assuming they even have them:p)?
If they are Jordanian then they are not subject to Israeli occupation or law and your presence and abduction of their citizens is a form of terrorism. You don't get to have it both ways, I don't care who you pray to.


They are citizens of Jordan, and Jordan doesn't want to take that land back, nor its citizens who live there, so therefore, it's not Israel's problem because it was Jordan who attacked and didn't even want to gain back the land or the citizens that it lost:p. I wonder why:p:p.
Then why put settlements there? If you don't want the land, why would you occupy it? Just leave if you don't want it.

Israel only crushes the houses of terrorists, and settlements were usually built on territories that were separeted from major Arab population places, so hardly any Arab homes were strictly sacrificed for the Jews:rolleyes:.
That is utter BS and you know it. Terrorist is a buzzword you use because you know that you have no evidence to back you up. It is the stain of criminal applied with no evidence. You only call them terrorists because you want to take their land. Much like the Nazis called you terrorists when they wanted to take away your wealth.


It's documented historical facts...it's not about "might have"...the Jews definately owned Israel 2000 years ago and there were always Jewish communities there ever since.

And I owned a Camaro about 10 years ago. That doesn't give me the right to go kill the man driving it now and take it back.


No, by that arguement you can argue that EVERYBODY ELSE can drive the Arabs back to Saudia and take over North Africa and Mid-East:p.

You could have looked more intelligent and said that the ancient nations that lived on the land of Israel before the Jews could drive them into the sea, however, those people no longer exist:p.

Any person who ever had a claim on that land has the right to kill to take it back according to your argument.


Their behavior has nothing to do with their race but rather with their choice of an evil culture, like Nazi Germans or Confederate Southerners.
Well, one of your societies is living in relative opulence while the other is treated like animals, killed with no regard, put into ghettos, and has their property taken because they aren't like you. Now which one of those two descriptions is more like the Nazis and which like the Jews of the 30's?

They have been acting like savages even before Islam, while Turkey, Persia or the Moors in Spain have definately contributed to civilization, despite Islam, so you're right, it's not just about Islam.
No, Jews also acted like savages throughout the centuries in that region. England did despicable things when they were there. And now the US is doing the same. I'm starting to think it is something in the water.

That's not how it happens. Only people who have links to terrorism get their house bulldozed.

Just keep repeating the big lie until it catches on enough for you to start your final solution. Lack of empathy is the evil that makes men into savages. You have no empathy for Arabs, they have no empathy for you. And so, your tribes will always be savages of one sort or another until one of you evolves.

It has happened before for very short amounts of time, usually just to win elections, before f#ckin' the settlers over again and again.

Hell, they obviously couldn't even trust Sharon, and he was their BIGGEST defender...until, of course, he became the prime minister:p.

I'm sorry, but having stolen goods taken back from you again after they were given to you in the first place when you knew they were stolen does not equal getting screwed over. This is like saying the Nazis were screwed over when they had to return Jewish property they confiscated during World War II.

It has happened before for very short amounts of time, usually just to win elections, before f#ckin' the settlers over again and again.

Hell, they obviously couldn't even trust Sharon, and he was their BIGGEST defender...until, of course, he became the prime minister:p.

Almost nothing you say is remotely accurate. Every single Israeli government (including Rabin's) since 1967 has actively participated in the expansion of the settlements, which of course is the reason why Israel can't have peace.

Gideon Levy:

Of the 40 years of occupation, only during three has construction been stopped despite all the agreements and promises to do so. There is no reason to believe that Israel will behave differently this time.

Of all Israel's iniquities in the occupied territories - the brutality, the assassinations, the siege, the hunger, the blackouts, the checkpoints and the mass arrests - nothing serves as witness to its real intentions than the settlements. Certainly for the future. Every home built in the territories, every light pole and every road are like a thousand witnesses: Israel does not want peace; Israel wants occupation. Whoever is serious about peace and a Palestinian state does not put up even a shed.

From Oslo through Camp David and on to the road map, Israel has not put an end to the most criminal enterprise in its history. A short memory refresher: In article 7 of the Oslo Accords, Israel promised that "no party would undertake unilateral steps to alter the situation on the ground, prior to the completion of negotiations for the final status." That really made an impression on Israel. During the 10 years that followed, the number of settlers doubled. What about the heroic peace efforts of Ehud Barak as prime minister? During the 18 months of his government, Israel began the construction of 6,045 residential units in the territories.

And why did Israel sign up to the road map two years later? "The government of Israel will freeze all its settlement activities, in accordance with the Mitchell report, except for natural growth in the settlements." And what happened in practice? Accusations that the Palestinians are not implementing the agreements, and a boatload of new settlers. This was also the case in 2005, another major "year of peace": the disengagement. And what did Israel do in its own backyard? Another 12,000 new settlers.

This terrible enterprise, whose purpose is to foil any chance for peace, is also a criminal enterprise. According to Peace Now, based on Civil Administration data that have been kept hidden for years, about 40 percent of the settlements were built on privately owned land of Palestinians helpless to safeguard what is in most cases their sole property that was robbed in broad daylight by an occupying state. This took place years after the Supreme Court ruled in 1979 that it is illegal to build on private Palestinian land. Indeed, while Israel is debating whether it is a state of laws, whether the prime minister was given a discount for the house on Cremieux Street, and whether we want a powerful Supreme Court, we should remember that what is happening in the territories is the real corruption that engulfs us.

Now we are on the eve of another peace event, yet during the past year another 3,525 new residential units were built in the territories, under the auspices of a government that talks incessantly about the end of occupation and two states. All the grandiloquent statements are void of substance when we read the data: Construction is at a peak in 88 settlements. Go to the territories and see for yourselves. When the construction firm Heftsiba imploded, suddenly hundreds of new settlers came to light, further proof of the magnitude of the "frozen" enterprise.

The mountains of excuses, "settlement blocs" and "natural growth," as well as "beyond the fence" and "inside the fence," cannot conceal the naked truth: The enterprise has not ceased for a moment. It will not stop now.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=14344

No, Jews also acted like savages throughout the centuries in that region. England did despicable things when they were there. And now the US is doing the same. I'm starting to think it is something in the water.


No. it's the heat and the sand getting up in your ass.

Just to get a little history in here...

The Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland

The Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland was established in 1899 to campaign for a permanent homeland for the Jewish people. At that time, Palestine was a distant and neglected province of the Turkish Empire with a Jewish population of approximately 50,000. Herzl was working towards obtaining permission for Jews to settle in Palestine but had reached deadlock in his negotiations with the Sultan. In the United Kingdom, the leaders of the Jewish Community had not shown support to the Zionist Movement and it was left to the few committed members of the Zionist Federation, men and women of faith and vision who were convinced that history and truth were on their side to support Herzl. It was from this narrow base that the Zionist Federation became the centre of which Chaim Weizmann and his small band of British Zionists waged their struggle for a Jewish State.

In 1917, the Balfour Declaration was communicated to Lord Rothschild and the letter from the British Foreign Secretary concluded "I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation".

During the next 30 years London became the centre of the World Zionist Movement. In the Zionist Federation's home at 77 Great Russell Street the Jewish Agency established its main political office and conducted government negotiations whilst the Zionist Federation secured Jewish and general support as well as financial assistance for the movement. Among others, it was the leadership of the Zionist Federation who founded WIZO, UJIA, JNF and Youth movements. After the establishment of Israel, many of the graduates of the Zionist Federation became leaders in the new State. In 1954 the Zionist Federation via the Zionist Federation Education Trust (now known as Scopus) created a network of Zionist Day Schools to educate Jewish children in the spirit of Zionism. The Zionist Federation Education Trust set up 14 schools with over 5000 pupils.

The British Zionist Federation was also the first in the world to set up its own office in Israel to assist in the integration of British Olim. The Zionist Federation today represents the UK Zionist Movement more than 120 organisations, and over 50,000 affiliated members.

http://www.zionist.org.uk/new/cms/

It doesn't seem to be kosher to me...

The British colonialists gave themselves the right to grant a national home for the Jewish people, in a territory the British conquered by force, without consulting with its Arab Palestinians who constituted 93 percent of its inhabitants. It was the cruelest act of colonialism. Lord Curzon wrote to Colonel French on August 4, 1919 that the terms of the Mandate for Palestine included the enforcement of the Balfour Declaration and “This should be emphasized to Arab leaders at every opportunity and should be impressed on them that the matter is a ‘chose jugèe’ and continued agitation would be useless and detrimental”.

No apology can make up for the suffering of the three generations of Palestinians who were driven out of their homes or treated as second class citizens and deprived of their human rights and dignity. But Britain should apologize to the victims of its colonialism for the injustice that it had inflicted upon them by erecting a racist colonialist state on the ruins of their society. Britain should acknowledge its major roll in making it possible for the Zionists to deprive the Palestinians of their land property and their human rights. Britain can prove its sincerity by making the necessary changes in its policy in the Middle East by supporting a just peace.

Balfour Declaration of 1917

The declaration, a typed letter signed in ink by Balfour, reads as follows:

Foreign Office,

November 2nd, 1917.

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely

Arthur James Balfour

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_1917

Ahh.. savages. OK, you are simply racist... that will make convincing yourself of anything a lot easier.


Anyone with an IQ of 0.02 can tell GF has made no reference to genetics,ethinicity, etc.,he is refering to how millitant Islamists behave.

In a recent issue of Rolling Stone ,Bono said that Islamic extremists [not the mainstream of Islam,but the extremists] can be compaired to National Socialisim [the Nazis] and to Stalinism,and that is what GF [in a less elloquent way than Bono] is saying.

If GF is a racist then Bono is a racist [and neither are racists]

Shame on you grimrebuke,I'd expect this kind of intellectual dishonesty from Guido,but not from you.




Israeli tanks are in their streets, Israeli guns are pointed at their children, Israel controls their borders, and arrests their people under Israeli law. They should be allowed to vote in Israeli elections. They are a protectorate of Israel. If you don't want them as your citizens, get off the land they live on.


All Palestinians have to do is say that Isreal has the right to exist and to agree to reasonable safegaurds to insure Isreal's exsistance and they have their state.

Instead they want to murder innocent Jews ,just like the Nazis did.



Yes, lots of Arab bulldozers knocking down Jewish homes to make room for Arab settlements.... good analogy.


The only homes bulldozed are those who harbor terrorists.

If you don't want your home bulldozed, then instead of letting terrorists hide in your home turn the terrorists into the police.:doh:


To be a settler is to embrace the idea that you have the right to steal from another.
[/QUOPTE]

I don't like the settlements,but this is way bigger than that and you know it.

Twice [the first time being in 1948] Jews agreed to two states,one Jewish,one Palestinian,the Palestinians selfishly said [in essance]"No,we'll let our Arab brothers take up where Hitler left off and take it all that way".

[QUOTE]
home of another who was removed without remorse or recompense and pretend to be innocent or a victim.


The land legally purchased by the Isrealis was basically swampland that the Isrealis built up from nothing,if anyone would deserve compensation it would be the Isrealis.

You define terrorist as anyone that doesn't support your agenda. Then you feel it is OK to kill or steal from terrorists. I've read my Bible, and my Talmud. Granted, the Talmud is a little muddier about right and wrong in dealings with goyim, but I do recall that killing is generally considered wrong. So is stealing. You are tossing out the word terrorist as an excuse to do things that would otherwise be wrong. That is exactly what the Germans did to the Jews in the 30's and 40's. They made up laws that made the people they wanted to steal from legal to steal from. They made up laws making people that they wanted to kill legal to kill. And then they pretended like its being legal made it moral.
It is ashame that you use the exact same tactics that were used on the Jews of that time. The same language. Words like "savages" are intended to dehumanize a people you do not want to have the rest of the world criticize your treatment of. It is used to dehumanize so you can do things to them and treat them in a way that you would not treat another human being.
You can not legally purchase something at the point of a gun. When the Nazis made laws forcing Jews to sell their homes and possessions did that make those items "legally purchased?"
This is not bigger than the settlements. There are bigger issues facing these two houses of one people, but a disagreement does not justify theft. You pretend like the Arabs are driving the Israelis off of their land, when it is Israeli tanks and bulldozers flattening the homes of civilians. The settlements are a simple theft, barbaric treatment of a poor people with no rights under the thumb of an outside government. That you can say "oh, well, I know it is wrong, but I condone it anyways because..." you have abandoned morality for moralizing. You seek to justify something that has no justification. If you act like a barbarian, you are a barbarian. Treat these people the way the Jews were treated by the Nazis, you become the Nazis.

Ahh.. savages. OK, you are simply racist... that will make convincing yourself of anything a lot easier.


If you didn't insist on jumping into topics you know nothing about except what you read from terrorist sympathizers, you wouldn't be reduced to the silly tactic of calling people 'Wacist!' by your second or third post in 90% of your 'commentaries' on this board.

It doesn't seem to be kosher to me...

The British colonialists gave themselves the right to grant a national home for the Jewish people, in a territory the British conquered by force, without consulting with its Arab Palestinians who constituted 93 percent of its inhabitants. It was the cruelest act of colonialism.

Jews began immigrating there in the late 1870's, long before the 'Zionist Movement' came along in the 1890's.

I agree a lot doesn't sound 'kosher' about British foreign policy. For instance, welshing on the Turkish government's agreements with Jewish settlement organizations, then followed by their own breaking of agreements after WW I, such as unilaterally lopping off some 80% of the Mandate to create a kingdom out of thin air as a reward to some bandit chief for his aid in fighting Turkey, and later on, doing the same thing by creating more kingdoms for bandit gang leaders, like Saudi Arabia to name one, along with other little 'Emirates' and miscelleania. Feckless British foreign policy is indeed a major reason for the current situation over there today, aided by the U.S.'s desire to protect Saudi Arabia from it's neighbors at the behest of U.S. oil companies so the Saudis can run around financing terrorism and racketeering and wagging their tongues at everybody while hiding behind Big Brother.

I've never seen any of the faux 'Peace Left' complain about the 'legitimacy' of these countries, but Israel is mysteriously the only one they obsess over as 'colonialist' and 'imperialist'.

If they wanted to prove their 'commitment to Peace and Justice', they would be calling for Jewish rights to settle in Jordan and the rest of the Mandate as well; of course being anti-semitic hypocrites and supporters of genocide, they never do.

'Palestinians' aren't a people, they're a fabrication set up in the 1960's after the 'Pan-Arab Nationalism' movement that began in the 1920's finally fell on it's ass due to Arabs being unable to do anything but fight each other, and the artificially established Arab bandit 'kingdoms' didn't want to share their oil wealth with the other bandit gangs who weren't backed by European armies. So much for 'Arab Unity'.

If you didn't insist on jumping into topics you know nothing about except what you read from terrorist sympathizers, you wouldn't be reduced to the silly tactic of calling people 'Wacist!' by your second or third post in 90% of your posts on this board.

If you had a real point or weren't merely trolling, you'd have made it instead of throwing out insults and hoping no one noticed you had no substance.

The Ku Klux Klan and the Nazi Party agree with you Guido.

You still read his posts? Kathaksung's are much more informed.

If you had a real point or weren't merely trolling, you'd have made it instead of throwing out insults and hoping no one noticed you had no substance.

You wouldn't be any kind of a judge on 'substance', and have thoroughly demonstrated that for months, so again you have no point. The trolls here are you, Guido, and your new VNN missionary buddy I responded to above.

Jews began immigrating there in the late 1870's, long before the 'Zionist Movement' came along in the 1890's.


They probably were moving in to that region continuously throughout modern history - this fact is insignificant.
What matters is the rate of influx, and this rate justifies Sheltercrow's reference to the Zionist movement. Without it, the background influx rate and slightly amplified background influx rate of circa 1870 would never have created a situation where Israel might stake claims to Statehood.

But you know this, right?

M

In a recent issue of Rolling Stone ,Bono said that Islamic extremists [not the mainstream of Islam,but the extremists] can be compaired to National Socialisim [the Nazis] and to Stalinism,and that is what GF [in a less elloquent way than Bono] is saying.

If GF is a racist then Bono is a racist [and neither are racists]

Maybe you wouldn't look so incredibly stupid when discussing Israel if you actually took the time to read a book or two (I've provided many references) instead of quoting idiot rock stars and radio personalities as if there had some kind of intellectual authority.

I'll never understand why it is that some people want to jabber about subjects of which they choose to remain completely ignorant. If you're not interested in something, why pretend?

You wouldn't be any kind of a judge on 'substance', and have thoroughly demonstrated that for months, so again you have no point. The trolls here are you, Guido, and your new VNN missionary buddy I responded to above.

It would be much too much to expect someone of your caliber to actually back up your clumsy, wooden, formulaic, redundant, tedious, boring and vacuous words, for example, by refuting something (anything) I've ever posted; therefore, I suggest that you sit with your legs crossed on the sidelines and that goofy smile on your face and wait for someone to run out of coffee.

Explain that in the context of invading Lebanon and killing hundreds, if not thousands of civilians because a soldier was captured.


1.That soldier was a human being and I'll bet if he was your friend or family member you wouldn't be making the same snide remark trivializing that.

2.It was about much more than the soldier.

The very person who started this thread [Criminal] said himself that Isreal was right to go into Lebanon because Hezbollah was unsing Lebanon as a launching pad to bomb Isreal from and the Lebanese government did nothing to even try and stop it.

3.Nations do have the right to defned themselves,what isreal did in Lebanon was legit self defense.


Once again, if they are subject to your laws they should have a vote in determining what those laws are.

That's as asinine as saying non-citizens should vote in US elections.




Terrorist is a buzzword you use because you know that you have no evidence to back you up.


You are either misinformed or lying.

A terrorist is a vigilante who deliberately kills innocent civilians for his political agenda.



You only call them terrorists because you want to take their land.


You sound like a White Nationalist when you espouse that "Jewish conspiracy" bullshit.:nonono:


Much like the Nazis called you terrorists when they wanted to take away your wealth.

Comparisons to the Holocaust are asinine ,if for no other reason than two-thirds of Palestinians have not been executed.:nonono:



Just keep repeating the big lie until it catches on enough for you to start your final solution.

Antisemitic cheap shot.:not:

You define terrorist as anyone that doesn't support your agenda.


No ,I define terrorist as vigilantes who deliberately murder innocent civilans in order to further their agenda.


I've read my Bible, and my Talmud.


Both GF and myself have said nothing about religion.

Speaking only for myself,there are so many more than enough secular reasons to back up my viewpoint that I don't need to bring religion into this.



You are tossing out the word terrorist as an excuse to do things that would otherwise be wrong.


Bullshit,agree or disagree you shouldn't dismiss GF ,he has more firsthand experience in this subject than anyone else on this thread.

And all Americans should remember that what we went through on one bad day [9/11] Isreal has had to go through every day for decades.

in fact I gained much more sympathy for Isreal after 9/11 and I'm not the only American who did either.


This is not bigger than the settlements.


Anyone who believes that is either misinformed or a fool.


If you act like a barbarian, you are a barbarian. Treat these people the way the Jews were treated by the Nazis, you become the Nazis.



What you obviously don't know [and GF can bear witness to] is that Isrealis have taught peace,tolerance and respect for Palestinians in their schools.

And you clearly don't know [or care]that Palestinians have taught blatant antisemitism in their schools [not only agaisnt Isrelais-as if that would make it right-but against all Jews period],the antisemitism taught in Palestinian schools surpasses Thrid Reich hatred.




I have met Isrealis and people who have been to Isreal and heard their side of the story [I'll bet you haven't],in doing objective,independent research I find what the Isrealis have told me is pretty much correct.

I have never met one single apologist for Palestinian atrocties who has ever met an Isreali or anyone who has ever been to Isreal ,much less tried too objectively look at any side other than the Palestinaian side .

You still read his posts?


I've finally given up on him and all grimrebuke does is parrot the same romanticism of Palestinian antisemitism and Palestinian atrocites that all "trust fund trendies" do because it's "Oh,so hip to do so,and it makes me look cool".:rolleyes:



They probably were moving in to that region continuously throughout modern history - this fact is insignificant.
What matters is the rate of influx, and this rate justifies Sheltercrow's reference to the Zionist movement. Without it, the background influx rate and slightly amplified background influx rate of circa 1870 would never have created a situation where Israel might stake claims to Statehood.

But you know this, right?

M



Look,whatever did or didn't happen centuries or decades ago has no real relevance to today.

Isreal is not going anywhere,all the Palestinans have to do is get a state is to say that Isreal has the right to exist,sign a treaty saying they will never attack Isreal and agree to reasonable safegaurds to insure Isreal's right to exist.

That is not unreasonable.

I despise Bush ,but I hope his conference this week will be successfull to finally hammering out a workable solution to this that all sides benefit from.

Isreal is not going anywhere,all the Palestinans have to do is get a state is to say that Isreal has the right to exist,sign a treaty saying they will never attack Isreal and agree to reasonable safegaurds to insure Isreal's right to exist.

Jeff Halper, Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) and a candidate, with the Palestinian peace activist Ghassan Andoni, for the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize, differs slightly from your shallow, hopelessly misinformed, cliche-ridden, Likud-talking points drivel:

The overriding question for the Israeli government, then, is not how to reach peace. If peace and security were truly the issue, Israel could have had that 20 years ago if it would have conceded the 22 per cent of the country required for a viable Palestinian state. Today, when Israel's control is infinitely stronger, why, ask the Israeli Jewish public and the government it elects, should we concede anything significant? We enjoy peace with Egypt and Jordan, and Syria is dying to negotiate. We have relations with most Arab and Muslim states. We enjoy the absolute and uncritical support of the world's only superpower, supported by a compliant Europe. Terrorism is under control, the conflict has been made manageable, Israel's economy is booming. What, ask Israelis, is wrong with this picture?

No, the issue for Israel is rather how to transform its Occupation from what the world considers a temporary situation to a permanent political fact accepted by the international community, de facto if need be or, if apartheid can be finessed in the form of a two-state solution, then formally. And here's the dilemma, and the source of debate within the Israeli government: does Israel continue with the strategy that has served it so well these past 40 years, delaying or prolonging negotiations so as to maintain the status quo, all the while strengthening its hold over the Palestinian territories or, at this unique but fleeting moment in history when George Bush is still in office, does it try to nail it all down, forcing upon the Palestinians a transitional state within the framework of the Road Map?

Olmert, following Sharon, is pushing for the former. Netanyahu, Lieberman, the right-wing (including many in Olmert's own party) and, significantly, Labour Chairman and Defence Minister Ehud Barak, always a military hawk, are resisting out of fear that even a process of pretend negotiations might get out of hand, creating expectations on Israel. Better, they say, to stay with the tried-and-true policy of status quo which can, if cleverly managed, extend indefinitely. Besides, Bush is a lame duck, and no pressure will be put on Israel until June 2009, at least six months after the next American president is inaugurated, Democrat or Republican. We're just fine until then; why rock the boat? The only tricky time for Israel is the two years in the midst of a presidential term. We can weather that. Annapolis? We'll try cautiously for apartheid, hoping that Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas], prodded by Quartet envoy Tony Blair, will play the role of collaborator. If that doesn't work, well, status quo is always a reliable default.

http://www.counterpunch.org/halper11272007.html

End note: You really should learn to spell "Israel" at some point.

End note: You really should learn to spell "Israel" at some point.


hSit happens.:shrug:

As usual, pointing out the atrocities of Israel = apologizing for Palestinian ones in your mind. It does not in mine. I despise violence against civilians, no matter who does it. You seem to think that any action taken by Israelis, be it killing, theft, etc. is perfectly fine and pointing out the error of this thinking is antisemitism. A word, I might add, that has no real meaning except to try to stop debate. Palestinians are, as of last count, Semites. So, calling someone a Palestinian antisemite is ignorant in addition to being the usual juvenile frothing at the mouth one does when they want an excuse for inexcusable actions.
Here's the thread in simple bullets -
1. reasonable person - this person had a house here and you bulldozed it, and then built a bunch of homes for other people. That's theft.
2. response - you're an antisemite terrorist apologist.

The Palestinians don't have to be right in order for Israel's actions to be wrong.

Look,whatever did or didn't happen centuries or decades ago has no real relevance to today.


I was merely showing Farny the error of his ways.
Regardless, history is ALWAYS relevant.

I am inherently distrustful of any approach which demands that I ignore the historical record. It is pretty much the definition of a white wash, and precisely the goal of such propaganda as the push for invasive intervention in the Middle East.


Isreal is not going anywhere,all the Palestinans have to do is get a state is to say that Isreal has the right to exist,sign a treaty saying they will never attack Isreal and agree to reasonable safegaurds to insure Isreal's right to exist.

That is not unreasonable.


Its also an unworkable simplification of the situation.
The right to exist has not really been the stumbling block in most instances: it has been the precise, myriad details of such an agreement. Where the borders will lie, will Israel remove all/some/none of settlements that have encroached further and further over the past decades, etc etc...


I despise Bush ,but I hope his conference this week will be successfull to finally hammering out a workable solution to this that all sides benefit from.

You and me both.

M

Quotes from:

Dark Hope: Working for Peace in Israel and Palestine
by David Shulman
University of Chicago Press, 226 pp., $22.00

...and reviewed the NY Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20856):

"This book aims," Shulman writes,

at showing something of the Israeli peace movement in action, on the basis of one individual's very limited experience.... I want to give you some sense of what it feels like to be part of this struggle and of why we do it.

Struggle with whom? Shulman explains:

Israel, like any society, has violent, sociopathic elements. What is unusual about the last four decades in Israel is that many destructive individuals have found a haven, complete with ideological legitimation, within the settlement enterprise. Here, in places like Chavat Maon, Itamar, Tapuach, and Hebron, they have, in effect, unfettered freedom to terrorize the local Palestinian population; to attack, shoot, injure, sometimes kill—all in the name of the alleged sanctity of the land and of the Jews' exclusive right to it.

His diary proceeds to show how this happens.

It began some two weeks ago when Palestinians from [the village of] Twaneh noticed a settler —almost certainly from Chavat Maon, the most virulent of the settlements in the area—walking deliberately through their fields in the early morning. Shortly afterward the animals got sick and the first sheep died. Then the shepherds found the poison scattered over the hills, tiny blue-green pellets of barley coated with... deadly rat poison from the fluoroacetate family.... The aim was clear: to kill the herds of goats and sheep, the backbone of the cave dwellers' subsistence economy in this harsh terrain, and thus to force them off the land.

Visiting the Arab settlement, Shulman writes:

After half an hour I start to wonder if we have come here for nothing. I stare hard at the rocky ground, the purple wildflowers, the thorns, the fresh sheep droppings. Still no poison. Then a surprise: bending low, with my face nearly touching the soil, I see two —no, three—of the blue-green grains of poisoned barley....

Five minutes later Judy [his companion] strikes gold—a huge cache of them.... The real art of this grotesque treasure hunt is to retrace the vanished footsteps of the poisoner; one pile of pellets should, in theory, lead to another. And so, indeed, it goes.

Shulman then observed that all the while, on the hill opposite, directly under the settlement,

one of these settlers, with his gun, is watching us, advancing...as we move; he is dressed in black, an ominous presence, an Israeli Darth Vader. Farther up, a set of army jeeps is also in place. Maybe this time, at least, they'll keep the settlers from attacking us.

I have always hated the symbolic. It is the cheapest, most meretricious act of the mind, and the furthest away from anything real. But today, as I sift through the brown, moist soil under the eyes of the settlers, even I cannot resist the sense of something horribly symbolic. [The settlers] claim to feel something for this land, yet they treat it—her—with contempt. It, she, interests them mostly as an object to be raped, despoiled, and above all stolen by brute force from its rightful owners. It belongs, in this wild, ravished, ravishing landscape, to the people of the caves.

This is not merely a matter of injustice, though flagrant injustice screams out, unmistakably, at every point. Nor is it a matter of madness, though the settlers here are truly demented. It is, in the most serious, most atrocious sense of the word, a crime—a crime against the land the settlers glibly call holy, against life itself. Who, what human individual, would deliberately poison a wild deer? What kind of man would poison a whole herd, and through this, the community of human beings who live off this herd?

What we are fighting in the South Hebron Hills is pure, rarefied, unadulterated, unreasoning, uncontainable human evil. Nothing but malice drives this campaign to uproot the few thousand cave dwellers with their babies and lambs. They have hurt nobody. They were never a security threat. They led peaceful, if somewhat impoverished lives until the settlers came. Since then, there has been no peace. They are tormented, terrified, incredulous. As am I.

As usual, pointing out the atrocities of Israel = apologizing for Palestinian ones in your mind.


First, I wasn't refering to you per se[more like Guido and others who have sympathy for his warped mindset].

Second,putting the whole load on Isreal and none on the Palestinians does make one a Palestinian apologist.




You seem to think that any action taken by Israelis, be it killing, theft, etc. is perfectly fine and pointing out the error of this thinking is antisemitism.


No ,I do think things have to be put into full context and this whole "Isreal is just another facist state propped up by a facist America " mindset is not reality but something spoken by rote by people who have never looked objectively at all sides of the story but instead repeat the rhetoric their peers tell them is "cool" in order to be trendy.



A word, I might add, that has no real meaning except to try to stop debate. Palestinians are, as of last count, Semites. So, calling someone a Palestinian antisemite is ignorant in addition to being the usual juvenile frothing at the mouth one does when they want an excuse for inexcusable actions.


Look up anti-semitism at www.dictionary.com,you will find that every defintion of anti-semitism means anti-Jew.

That is the way society has always used the term and it's probably the way society always will use the term.

This "Palestinians are semites too" argument is what George Orwell called "newspeak" in hs novel 1984.






this person had a house here and you bulldozed it,


If you do independent research by unbiased,objective sources you will find the homes bulldozed were done so because they housed terrorists.


The Palestinians don't have to be right in order for Israel's actions to be wrong.


The other way arouund is just as true my friend.

I was merely showing Farny the error of his ways.
Regardless, history is ALWAYS relevant.


Yes,but there has to come a time when all sides have got to put aside the rhetoric of the past and say "Regardless of what did or didn't happen in the past,let's move forward" or else we'll still be "living in the past" [as Jethro Tull put it].


I am inherently distrustful of any approach which demands that I ignore the historical record. It is pretty much the definition of a white wash, and precisely the goal of such propaganda as the push for invasive intervention in the Middle East.


I'm not saying that,I'm saying let's move forward.





The right to exist has not really been the stumbling block in most instances: it has been the precise, myriad details of such an agreement. Where the borders will lie, will Israel remove all/some/none of settlements that have encroached further and further over the past decades, etc etc...


Or will Palestinians [and others in the region] give up on their vow to "push Israel into the sea" and say that the nation of Israel and it's people have the right to exist and agree to safegaurds to insure Isreal's safety?


You and me both.

M


:nice:

Or will Palestinians [and others in the region] give up on their vow to "push Israel into the sea" and say that the nation of Israel and it's people have the right to exist and agree to safegaurds to insure Isreal's safety?

They did so already in 1988 when they accepted the two-state solution, at the outset of the Oslo process and repeatedly over the past two decades.

You're behind the times, because the new demand is that they recognize Israel not as a normal state, but as a "jewish state." The shell game continues.

As for the others in the region, the Beirut initiative, adopted by arab states in 2002, includes the following:

- Having listened to the statement made by His Royal Highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in which his Highness presented his Initiative, calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land for peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.

3. Consequently, the Arab Countries affirm the following: a. Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

b. Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/5a7229b652beb9c5c1256b8a0054b62e

This has been totally ignored by Israel and the United States -- which is a fateful and deliberate choice.

As long as your regurgitating right-wing propaganda, you owe it to yourself to keep current at the very least.

They did so already in 1988 when they accepted the two-state solution, at the outset of the Oslo process and repeatedly over the past two decades.

You're behind the times, because the new demand is that they recognize Israel not as a normal state, but as a "jewish state." The shell game continues.

As for the others in the region, the Beirut initiative, adopted by arab states in 2002, includes the following:

- Having listened to the statement made by His Royal Highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in which his Highness presented his Initiative, calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land for peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.

3. Consequently, the Arab Countries affirm the following: a. Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

b. Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/5a7229b652beb9c5c1256b8a0054b62e

This has been totally ignored by Israel and the United States -- which is a fateful and deliberate choice.

As long as your regurgitating right-wing propaganda, you owe it to yourself to keep current at the very least.



This ^ bullshit is yet another example of "newspeak" as Orwell put it.

The whole point about the state of Israel is that it is a Jewish state,so that victims of antisemitism can have a place to go to.

To not recognise Israel as a Jewish state is disingenuous.

If you do not recognise Israel as a Jewish state then you are not saying that Israel has the right to exist.

For what it's worth,I personally feel that Jerusalem should be a independent state,equally owned and ran by Jews,Christians and Muslems.

This ^ bullshit is yet another example of "newspeak" as Orwell put it.

The whole point about the state of Israel is that it is a Jewish state,so that victims of antisemitism can have a place to go to.

To not recognise Israel as a Jewish state is disingenuous.

If you do not recognise Israel as a Jewish state then you are not saying that Israel has the right to exist.

For what it's worth,I personally feel that Jerusalem should be a independent state,equally owned and ran by Jews,Christians and Muslems.

I was merely updating your mindless rightwing propaganda, the point being that in the shell game charade known as the "peace process," Israel has moved the goalpost (in order to avoid the implication of the Palestinians agreeing to Israel's demand for recognition) such that the demand is no longer for recognition as a normal state, and has become something else, as it always does.

Your ignorance of this subject continues to amaze and astound.

First, I wasn't refering to you per se[more like Guido and others who have sympathy for his warped mindset].

Second,putting the whole load on Isreal and none on the Palestinians does make one a Palestinian apologist.

I put the load of what Israel does entirely on Israel. I put the load of what Palestinians do entirely on Palestinians. We're talking here about the settlements, which is an action taken by Israel.


No ,I do think things have to be put into full context and this whole "Isreal is just another facist state propped up by a facist America " mindset is not reality but something spoken by rote by people who have never looked objectively at all sides of the story but instead repeat the rhetoric their peers tell them is "cool" in order to be trendy.
I'm not in that mindset, but I believe a nation is defined by its actions.

Look up anti-semitism at www.dictionary.com,you will find that every defintion of anti-semitism means anti-Jew.

That is the way society has always used the term and it's probably the way society always will use the term.

This "Palestinians are semites too" argument is what George Orwell called "newspeak" in hs novel 1984.

Really? OK, let's see here
Semite - from Webster's Dictionary - 1. a member of any of various ancient and modern peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including the Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs.

From the American New Heritage Dictionary - 1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.

Now, which one of us is engaging in newspeak?

If you do independent research by unbiased,objective sources you will find the homes bulldozed were done so because they housed terrorists.

I have, they weren't. Most of them were destroyed based on location, not on the occupants or use.

Really? OK, let's see here
Semite - from Webster's Dictionary - 1. a member of any of various ancient and modern peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including the Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs.

From the American New Heritage Dictionary - 1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.



I notice you gave those publications defintions to the word "Semite" but not their defintions to the word antisemitism[which is the actual word in question].

I'd expect this kind of pathetic intellectual dishonesty from Guido,but not from you.:nonono:

The rest even isn't worth responding to.

Until you have something of substance to add,I'll leave you and Gudio to your delusions.

I notice you gave those publications defintions to the word "Semite" but not their defintions to the word antisemitism[which is the actual word in question].

I'd expect this kind of pathetic intellectual dishonesty from Guido,but not from you.:nonono:

The rest even isn't worth responding to.

Until you have something of substance to add,I'll leave you and Gudio to your delusions.

Never in my life have I ever encountered anyone as ignorant of middle east politics as you. I've also never encountered anyone so completely indifferent to the facts and their significance.

It's as if you read a few right wing trash blogs (like David Horowitz or Daniel Pipes) and regurgitate their long-discredited slogans without realizing that even they don't believe the crap they spew. You're like some guy in the corner who just doesn't get the joke.

I notice you gave those publications defintions to the word "Semite" but not their defintions to the word antisemitism[which is the actual word in question].

I'd expect this kind of pathetic intellectual dishonesty from Guido,but not from you.:nonono:

The rest even isn't worth responding to.

Until you have something of substance to add,I'll leave you and Gudio to your delusions.

We'll add that anti- means opposed to. So antisemite would be "opposed to Semite(s)" and -ism is added to indicate a policy or concept.
But, if you want to be intellectually honest, then let's not forget the fact that this word is intended like the word "commie" in the 1950's, it is tossed at people who you want to discredit without having to speak to their statements or facts, and you want to discredit them in a way that stains anyone agreeing with or defending that person's facts and statements with the same brand.

Ten minutes of "independant research" is sufficient to demolish literally any of the right wing lies and cliches regurgitated by Truth Teller.

To take an arbitrary example:

If you do independent research by unbiased,objective sources you will find the homes bulldozed were done so because they housed terrorists.


B'Tselem says:

Palestinian homes are demolished in the context of a declared policy of strengthening and expanding Israeli settlement in the West Bank, and of creating permanent facts affecting negotiations over the final-status arrangements. Consequently, Palestinian houses are demolished to meet the following needs:

Construction of bypass roads: Bypass roads are intended to enable movement of settlers and of military forces protecting the settlements. Houses lying alongside an existing or planned bypass road are designated to be demolished.

Removal of Palestinians from areas adjacent to Israeli settlements: The Israeli authorities consistently demolish Palestinian structures that are perceived as hindrances to the establishment and expansion of Israeli settlement. The proximity of the houses to the settlements obviously is not raised as an official reason for the demolition in these cases.

Prevent transfer of land to Palestinians: Israel demolishes houses in areas located on land that it wants to keep for itself in the final-status agreement. By pursuing this policy, Israel is preventing the Palestinian Authority from demanding the land on the grounds that Palestinians live there. Demolition of houses is a convenient way to expel residents from the area.

Demolition of houses as an act of reprisal

Following the bomb attack in the Mahane Yehuda market, in Jerusalem, on 30 July 1997, the government's Political-Security Cabinet decided to implement several measures in reprisal, among them demolition of houses in the West Bank in general, and in East Jerusalem in particular. As a result, during the following month, Israel demolished twenty-nine houses, compared to seven houses that were demolished in the month prior to the attack. In no case did the authorities claim that the home owners had any connection to the bombings. All cases were justified on administrative grounds.

According to Israel, demolition of houses for "administrative" reasons, i.e., for building without a permit, is not a security measure, but the end of an administrative process. The decision of the Political-Security Cabinet and its implementation indicate that the planning considerations that were the basis for the large number of demolitions of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories were of secondary importance to considerations totally unrelated to building supervision and control.

Demolition of houses as a policy of discrimination

Broad-scale building without permits occurs in Palestinian villages and in Israeli settlements. In the Palestinian villages, the building is conducted by private individuals who are desperate because of the absence of planning schemes to meet their needs, the lack of permits to build on their land, or the refusal of the authorities to grant them building permits. When they have built, the authorities have responded aggressively, demolishing thousands of houses over the years of occupation without offering a meaningful solution to the housing shortage.

Israeli settlers built thousands of housing units, public facilities, and industrial structures without permits. Government ministries, primarily the Ministry of Housing, erected a high percentage of these structures. Private construction companies and individual settlers also built without permits in most of the settlements. The authorities take a forgiving attitude toward building without a permit in the settlements, and have refrained - except for one case, as far as we know - from demolishing houses built without a permit. Instead, the authorities retroactively approve plans validating such construction.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Planning_and_Building/Forbidden_Considerations.asp

"Truth Teller's" idea of "independant research" consists of reading interviews with washed up rock stars in Rolling Stone magazine, and copy/pasting crap he finds on right wing blogs like David Horowitz' Frontpage.

We'll add that anti- means opposed to. So antisemite would be "opposed to Semite(s)" and -ism is added to indicate a policy or concept.
But, if you want to be intellectually honest, then let's not forget the fact that this word is intended like the word "commie" in the 1950's, it is tossed at people who you want to discredit without having to speak to their statements or facts, and you want to discredit them in a way that stains anyone agreeing with or defending that person's facts and statements with the same brand.


Society has decided how the word antisemitism is defined in the dictionary,not me ,you're just blaming the messeneger because you don't like the message.

Society has decided how the word antisemitism is defined in the dictionary,not me ,you're just blaming the messeneger because you don't like the message.

Nope, I'm just pointing out exactly how it is used.

"Truth Teller's" idea of "independant research" consists of reading interviews with washed up rock stars in Rolling Stone magazine, and copy/pasting crap he finds on right wing blogs like David Horowitz' Frontpage.



I'll leave you to alone enjoy your mental illness in just a minute,but you give a source,yet no proof about how accurate or how objective it is?

I despise David Horowitz and have never seen his blog or anything else about him on the web [I also haven't copied or pasted anything in this thread,so you're wrong yet again]


You just repeat the same old partisan political propaganda that romanticizes the Palestinian victimhood myth,you're fooling no one.

I'll leave you to alone enjoy your mental illness in just a minute,but you give a source,yet no proof about how accurate or how objective it is?

I despise David Horowitz and have never seen his blog or anything else about him on the web [I also haven't copied or pasted anything in this thread,so you're wrong yet again]


You just repeat the same old partisan political propaganda that romanticizes the Palestinian victimhood myth,you're fooling no one.

I have cited numerous Israeli scholars in support of my views, along with the most reputable human rights organizations in Israel (B'Tselem). I have ruthlessly applied generally accepted principles of liberal political philosophy to generally recognized historical facts.

You keep jabbering about your "independant research" but the ONLY sources you've ever cited are a washed up idiot rock star called "Bono", an obese emotionally disturbed dead feminist called "Andrea Dworken," and some anonymous Israeli person you once met.

You haven't even attempted to refute anything I've posted; all you have done is (1) repeat a tiny number of idiotic right wing slogans and lies that a consensus of Israeli historians and human rights advocates have thoroughly discredited for at least the past 20 years; and (2) repeat the standard right-wing nonsense about "anti-semitism" which is transparently a totalitarian attempt to avoid discussion of facts and principles that condemn Israeli policies that are illegal and collectively amount to a disgrace to civilized humanity; and (3) insults.

You are an unprincipled sycophant who is literally incapable of the most basic form of moral reasoning, and who for reasons known only to you, persists in making pronouncements on a subject of which you are completely ignorant. I will continue to expose your stupidity for all the world to see as long as you persist in asserting it as if it were wisdom.

TT, while I think people are a bit too hasty to throw certain accusations at you, the assessment the two G's are making of Israeli settlement policy is spot on and they have documented it as well as can be expected here.

M.

Guido is nothing but a worthless,dishonest,trolling, as$hole who does nothing but deliberately start fights.

He has no good will or anything of any subtace to bring to this party,so it's time to put him on the ignore list for good.

This myth that Isrealis bulldoze houses only for fun is not true,ask GF and coral,they both have fristhand experience there grimrebuke,Guido or anyone else on this thread does not.

Pro Palestinian people repeat this myth to romanticize the Palestinian situation to people desperate to find a justification to Palestiniain violence against innocent people.

Guido is nothing but a worthless,dishonest,trolling, as$hole who does nothing but deliberately start fights.

He has no good will or anything of any subtace to bring to this party,so it's time to put him on the ignore list for good.

This myth that Isrealis bulldoze houses only for fun is not true,ask GF and coral,they both have fristhand experience there grimrebuke,Guido or anyone else on this thread does not.

Pro Palestinian people repeat this myth to romanticize the Palestinian situation to people desperate to find a justification to Palestiniain violence against innocent people.

One, never assume that others don't have first-hand experience.
Two, I never said they bulldoze the houses for fun, I said they bulldoze them to make room for the settlements, period.
Three, I'm not pro-Palestinian. I'm not pro-Israeli. I think both of these groups have the right to self-govern and live in peace. I would like to take the side of one of them in the long haul, but it just isn't possible because in the short-term they both keep doing things that are one part stupid, three parts hatred, and two parts inhuman with violence for a chaser.

Guido is nothing but a worthless,dishonest,trolling, as$hole who does nothing but deliberately start fights.

He has no good will or anything of any subtace to bring to this party,so it's time to put him on the ignore list for good.

This myth that Isrealis bulldoze houses only for fun is not true,ask GF and coral,they both have fristhand experience there grimrebuke,Guido or anyone else on this thread does not.

Pro Palestinian people repeat this myth to romanticize the Palestinian situation to people desperate to find a justification to Palestiniain violence against innocent people.

Once again, no argument, no facts, no concepts, just idiotic pathetic lies and distortions from DA's all time worst debater.

Israelis don't bulldoze houses for fun -- they bulldoze houses in order steal the land under the houses, and force the non-jewish owners to leave, i.e., to accept the domination of a particular ethnic group.

For example, "In June 1967, Israel annexed 70,500 dunams [4 dunams = 1 acre] of East Jerusalem and the West Bank and incorporated them within Jerusalem’s borders. From this annexed territory, Israel has expropriated about one-third of the annexed territory – 24,000 dunams – most of it privately-owned Arab property. Israel used this expropriated land for residential construction. By the end of 2001, 46,978 housing units had been built for Jews on this land, but not one unit for Palestinians who constitute one-third of the city’s population."

http://www.btselem.org/english/Jerusalem/Discriminating_Policy.asp

Statistics on the number of Jeruselum homes demolished on the basis of ethnic discrimination can be found here:

http://www.btselem.org/english/Planning_and_Building/Statistics.asp

"Palestinian homes are demolished in the context of a declared policy of strengthening and expanding Israeli settlement in the West Bank, and of creating permanent facts affecting negotiations over the final-status arrangements. Consequently, Palestinian houses are demolished to meet the following needs:

Construction of bypass roads: Bypass roads are intended to enable movement of settlers and of military forces protecting the settlements. Houses lying alongside an existing or planned bypass road are designated to be demolished.

Removal of Palestinians from areas adjacent to Israeli settlements: The Israeli authorities consistently demolish Palestinian structures that are perceived as hindrances to the establishment and expansion of Israeli settlement. The proximity of the houses to the settlements obviously is not raised as an official reason for the demolition in these cases.

Prevent transfer of land to Palestinians: Israel demolishes houses in areas located on land that it wants to keep for itself in the final-status agreement. By pursuing this policy, Israel is preventing the Palestinian Authority from demanding the land on the grounds that Palestinians live there. Demolition of houses is a convenient way to expel residents from the area."

http://www.btselem.org/english/Planning_and_Building/Forbidden_Considerations.asp

In short, the purpose is ethnic cleansing.

I never said they bulldoze the houses for fun, I said they bulldoze them to make room for the settlements, period.


Do you understand how much this theory of yours sounds like "Jewish conspiracy,ZOG,llluminati" crap espoused by White Nationalists,neo Nazis,KKK etc.?

You are saying that Israelis are so subhuman that they would knowingly displace innocent people just for land [not much different than for the fun of it]and I just don't buy it.

Israel is such an ethical nation in everything else [no capitial punishment,a humane prison system] that I just can't buy what you say without proof,and I mean real proof,not theory from the "All Israelis are evil ,Israel can do no good crowd" crowd of trust fund trendies.

Do you understand how much this theory of yours sounds like "Jewish conspiracy,ZOG,llluminati" crap espoused by White Nationalists,neo Nazis,KKK etc.?


Oh come off it will you?
We did the same and worse to the Native Americans. The British did this everywhere they went.
Why is it that when someone points out similar aspects of Israeli behaviour (that is historically rooted in a British-engineered mandate - there's that pesky history for you again), you talk of conspiracy theory?


You are saying that Israelis are so subhuman that they would knowingly displace innocent people just for land [not much different than for the fun of it]and I just don't buy it.


No less and no more subhuman than a wide array of other cultures who have done the same. Why do you have to resort to exaggerations of this sort?


Israel is such an ethical nation in everything else [no capitial punishment,a humane prison system] that I just can't buy what you say without proof,and I mean real proof,not theory from the "All Israelis are evil ,Israel can do no good crowd" crowd of trust fund trendies.

First off: you are no fool. You know VERY well that cultures can be and regularly are ethical to one portion of society, and completely unethical to others. I can't believe what I am reading from you here.

Secondly, they have provided evidence that would seriously compell you if this were any other topic. They have posted information from human rights organizations from within Israel: Israelis analyzing their own history of policy and action regarding the settlements.
The analysis, beyond the credibility leant by its Israeli origin, is SOUND. If you disagree, perhaps it would be appropriate for you to address how you feel it fails, instead of complaining that Israelis are just too nice to do this sort of thing?

M.

I've finally given up on him and all grimrebuke does is parrot the same romanticism of Palestinian antisemitism and Palestinian atrocites that all "trust fund trendies" do because it's "Oh,so hip to do so,and it makes me look cool".


Indeed. Like Holocaust deniers, it doesn't matter how many times their gibberish is refuted, they're right back next week with the same ole same ole. And, they think nobody notices, a true sign of cretinism and brainwashing.

Do you understand how much this theory of yours sounds like "Jewish conspiracy,ZOG,llluminati" crap espoused by White Nationalists,neo Nazis,KKK etc.?

You are saying that Israelis are so subhuman that they would knowingly displace innocent people just for land [not much different than for the fun of it]and I just don't buy it.

Israel is such an ethical nation in everything else [no capitial punishment,a humane prison system] that I just can't buy what you say without proof,and I mean real proof,not theory from the "All Israelis are evil ,Israel can do no good crowd" crowd of trust fund trendies.

So, as usual, a lot of ad hominem and pleads to emotion, and no substance. So, your argument is that every single house standing where the settlements and parking lots and roads were put in, all of those homes that were bulldozed, every last person living there was a terrorist? I see it is the typical Israeli argument that everyone not Israeli is a terrorist out to get them.

Indeed. Like Holocaust deniers, it doesn't matter how many times their gibberish is refuted, they're right back next week with the same ole same ole. And, they think nobody notices, a true sign of cretinism and brainwashing.

But their "gibberish" -- which is drawn directly from Israel's most reputable historians and human rights organizations -- hasn't been refuted, unless you think of this sort of meaningless mush as refutation:

You are saying that Israelis are so subhuman that they would knowingly displace innocent people just for land [not much different than for the fun of it]and I just don't buy it.

His sentimental preconception -- commonly known as a prejudice -- has rendered his poor addled mind completely inoperative, so that facts, no matter how well documented, no matter how redundant, no matter how painfully and ridiculously obvious, can be safely ignored, the only price being sheer idiocy.

Israel is such an ethical nation in everything else [no capitial punishment,a humane prison system] that I just can't buy what you say without proof,and I mean real proof,not theory from the "All Israelis are evil ,Israel can do no good crowd" crowd of trust fund trendies.

It would be quite bizarre if B'Tselem, Zertal, Eldar, Wiezman and Jeff Halper (Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions) are part of the "All Israelis are evil" crowd, given that they are all Israelis.

This myth that Isrealis bulldoze houses only for fun is not true,ask GF and coral,they both have fristhand experience there grimrebuke,Guido or anyone else on this thread does not.

Israel is such an ethical nation in everything else [no capitial punishment,a humane prison system] that I just can't buy what you say without proof,and I mean real proof,not theory from the "All Israelis are evil ,Israel can do no good crowd" crowd of trust fund trendies.

Most people would say that "targeted assassinations" are capital punishment -- without a trial.

As for home demolitions, Human Rights Watch notes that Israel is the only country in the world other than Iraq under Saddam Hussein that demolishes homes as a form of collective punishment.

Jeff Halper writes from Israel:

How many houses have been demolished since the Occupation began.

Since 1967, 18,000 houses Palestinian homes have been demolished in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem.

• At least 6,000 houses were demolished immediately following the 1967 war. Four entire villages were razed in the Latrun area (now known as “Canada Park”), while hundreds of ancient homes were destroyed in the Mughrabi Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City to create a plaza for the Wailing Wall.

• In 1971, Ariel Sharon, then Commander of the Southern Command, cleared 2,000 houses in the Gaza refugee camps to facilitate military control. (Since he was elected Prime Minister in early 2001 he has overseen the demolition of another 1500 homes in Gaza.)

• At least 2,000 houses in the Occupied Territories were destroyed in the course of quelling the first Intifada in the late 1980s and early ‘90s.

• Almost 1,700 Palestinian homes in the Occupied Territories were demolished by the Civil Administration during the course of the Oslo peace process (1993-2000)

• Since the start of the second Intifada in September 2000, about 5000 Palestinian homes have been destroyed in military operations, including hundreds in Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem, Hebron and other cities of the West Bank, more than 2500 in Gaza alone. Tens of thousands of other homes have been left uninhabitable. Altogether around 50,000 people have been left homeless (Human Rights Watch, Razing Rafah, October 2004). Hundreds of shops, workshops, factories and public buildings, including all the Palestinian Authority ministry offices in all the West Bank cities, have also been destroyed or damaged beyond repair. According to Amnesty International more as than 3000 hectares of cultivated land – 10% of the agricultural land of Gaza – have been cleared during this time. Wells, water storage pools and water pumps which provided water for drinking, irrigation and other needs for thousands of people, have also been destroyed, along with tens of kilometers of irrigation networks.

• During the same period (Sept. 2000-May 2007) about 1900 Palestinian homes have been demolished by the Civil Administration for lack of proper permits.

• More than 628 Palestinian homes have been demolished during the second Intifada as collective punishment and “deterrence” affecting families of people known or suspected of involvement in attacks on Israeli civilians. On average 12 innocent people lose their home for every person “punished” for a security offense – and in half of the cases the occupants had nothing whatsoever to do with the ac