Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Israel You Won't See On FOX CNN CBS ABC NBC ETC watch!
youtube.com — Graphic: the images speak for themselves. The song, "Don't Drink The Water" is by Dave Matthews Band, and it speaks for itself as well. Spread the word and overcome the bury brigade who wishes to stifle only the truth.
beatles901- 95 diggs
- digg it
- MarkEarhart, on 07/27/2008, -17/+29An excellent view of the real Israel.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/27/2008, -17/+11You're a bastard.
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -9/+10Why, because he doesn't turn a blind eye to the truth so you can be accomplice to the murderers in Israel putting bullets in children's head for the sake of your "nationalism"? If you want to be nationalistic, start with your last name -- it's European.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -5/+9I guess that means your denying that Jews are an ethnic group...
- Maximilian000, on 07/28/2008, -7/+7No he's just saying you're a coward
- DrDreyfus, on 07/27/2008, -17/+11You're a bastard.
- joshmoney, on 07/27/2008, -24/+21"The images speak for themselves." Um, no they don't, unless you're prone to relying on emotional, uninformed, knee-jerk reactions. Not to mention that quite a few of were already proven to be staged/faked photo ops...
- xs11ax, on 07/27/2008, -9/+12so submit the proof
- DrDreyfus, on 07/27/2008, -9/+15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Durrah
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -4/+11"Three days later, the Israeli army chief of operations said an internal investigation showed that "the shots were apparently fired by Israeli soldiers"; he issued an apology, expressing sorrow and calling the incident "heartrending"; at the same time accusing the Palestinians of the "cynical use" of children in the conflict"
Even then, "The neutrality of this article is disputed."
This is just one instance where there is actually a dispute. The other photos are undisputed. Don't try to mislead people.
- xs11ax, on 07/27/2008, -9/+12so submit the proof
- tufftugg, on 07/27/2008, -15/+25 Where are the pictures of all the suicide bomber victims.
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -16/+9They were on CNN, Fox News, NBC, ABC, etc. -- where the Zionists and AIPAC controlled media made sure you saw it.
Just so you know the statistics, there were less casualties (injuries included) in Israel from these so-called terrorist attacks than in one excursion into Gaza last Summer that killed over 70 Palestinian civilians.
Shame on you. - card51short, on 07/28/2008, -10/+10yeah we NEVER hear about suicide bombs lol
- HumanCattle, on 07/28/2008, -6/+6homicide bombs, don't you watch fox news?
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -16/+9They were on CNN, Fox News, NBC, ABC, etc. -- where the Zionists and AIPAC controlled media made sure you saw it.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/27/2008, -15/+23This is barbaric. The reason these pictures aren't shown on CNN or NBC or ABC or FOX is because we live in a modern country.
In Israel they don't show these gory pictures after a suicide bomb attack.
What the ***** is wrong with all of you? You guys are ***** animals.- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -15/+10Wrong. The reason the pictures aren't shown is because the media is sanitized and there is documented pressure from AIPAC lobbyists to keep that information from Americans. In the 60s, the Vietnam war showed that giving the media liberal access demoralized the people's resolve to fight a war that did not need to be fought. During the Iraq war, there were several overt political manipulations of media footage by the army and the administration to make sure that didn't happen again.
The IDF is notorious for controlling what media is disseminated. - SatoriSeeker, on 07/27/2008, -12/+12This is reality. To deny it only makes you ignorant of the entire story. Stop relying on the mainstream media to paint an accurate picture of the world for you.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -12/+19Wow.
I know that this goes on in the world.
I know there is killing and bloodshed.
I know there are victims.
However:
I don't need to see dead limbless babies to know what happened.
I don't need to see children with their faces bashed in to know what happened.
I don't need to see bloody corpses strewn across the ground to know what happened.
Is that how you all convince others of your moral superiority? You show blood and gore on television and say "See? Do you see now? Do you see what these monsters have done?".
Do you understand what that does to the victims?
It turns them into tools for furthering your propaganda war.
It shows a lack of respect for their suffering.
It makes them unwilling whores to further your own twisted goal.
In Israel, after a suicide bomb goes off, the Israeli media doesn't swarm in and try to get as many video clips as it can of victims and dead bodies.
Do any of you bastards know why that is?
Because Israel gives a damn about THE ACTUAL _PEOPLE_ THAT DIED OR WERE WOUNDED. Not the mere fact that they were killed or wounded.
They have respect for the victims.
Why do you think Israel finds it necessary to put up checkpoints?
Because the culture that they are dealing with has no respect for life.
What's a Palestinian teenage boy's life so long as they can martyr him?
What's a Palestinian father so long as they can martyr him?
What's a Palestinian daughter so long as they can martyr her?
What's a Palestinian mother so long as they can martyr her?
It's ignorant to think that all Palestinians think like this. I feel terrible for those that wish to end the cycle of violence and are forced to endure the harsh treatment from the Israeli side - just because some of their brethren are violent.
However, I can't fault Israel. The Israelis are fighting for their lives and the very existence of the Jewish people.
If Israel loses just one war - that's it.
They are going to do whatever it takes to secure their people's security and if those radical "freedom fighters" want to ***** it up for their peaceful brethren then that's their choice.- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -2/+7Not new. Know what was the Palestinian leaders response when Rachel Corrie was killed?
"Too bad that we couldn't tape it". I'm paraphrasing here, but you can find the quote on google.
- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -2/+7Not new. Know what was the Palestinian leaders response when Rachel Corrie was killed?
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -15/+10Wrong. The reason the pictures aren't shown is because the media is sanitized and there is documented pressure from AIPAC lobbyists to keep that information from Americans. In the 60s, the Vietnam war showed that giving the media liberal access demoralized the people's resolve to fight a war that did not need to be fought. During the Iraq war, there were several overt political manipulations of media footage by the army and the administration to make sure that didn't happen again.
- urik88, on 07/27/2008, -12/+21You do acknowledge that these kids die because terrorists shoot missiles from their houses, schools, and living zones, so they get hit when Israel shoots the terrorist. Right?
Or that many of those detained kids are detained because they were throwing stones at soldiers. Why were children throwing stones at soldiers? Would you allow your son to throw stones at armed people? If I was there and there was an incursion in my neighborhood, I'd tell my kid to hide under the bed or in the bathroom. Not to ***** attack soldiers.- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -9/+6No we don't acknowledge this.
See this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6fn5NZ6LBk- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -3/+11How's that video connected to the topic?
As the Israeli spokeswoman said, there are pics and proofs that they shoot from civilians zones, and that Israel is sorry for the innocent deaths.
- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -3/+11How's that video connected to the topic?
- card51short, on 07/28/2008, -7/+5are you freaking serious?! they were throwing stones?
KILL THEM ALL!!!
Why didn't Israel just drop a nuke on the whole city?
Some kids were freakign throwing rocks, man!!!!- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -3/+9card51short, you should work on your reading comprehension skills.
- beatles901, on 07/27/2008, -9/+6No we don't acknowledge this.
- m2garand, on 07/27/2008, -13/+17I believe in America first. The question is whether supporting Israel is a benefit or a liability to the U.S. not who is right in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is obviously a liability, the U.S. gives Israel tons of money and military support. The Zionist neocons supported the Iraq war because they thought it would benefit Israel and they are pushing the U.S. to war with Iran for Israeli interests. In return we get all of Israels enemies, Israel has not made any military commitments to either Afghanistan or Iraq to assist the U.S., Israel constantly spies on the U.S. and has even attacked the U.S.S. Liberty. There is no benefit to the U.S. in supporting this bunch of malcontents.
- SatoriSeeker, on 07/27/2008, -11/+9Agreed. It is time for Israel to pay their own way in the world they are suckling at the teet of america and trying to use us to do their dirty and I for one am SICK OF IT!
- fadeout, on 07/28/2008, -7/+10You have made your views quite clear in other threads, particularly the time you linked to a neo-nazi website. You don't believe in "America first," you believe in bigotry.
- card51short, on 07/28/2008, -9/+8fadeout, am I a bigot for not wanting to support Israel (or any other country)?
In that case, why are you such a bigot for not supporting Nigeria? Should America protect Nigeria's interests? Why do you hate black people?
- jcm267, on 07/28/2008, -20/+17So how many of these kids were throwing rocks at soldiers? How many of these kids were human shields sitting besides the family rocket launcher in their living rooms? How many of these kids were shooting at the IDF?
Do you honestly believe that Israel wants this? If the Palestinians wanted peace, they'd have it. In another time those of you scumbags who are in America would be jailed for your seditious acts. Buried as pro-terrorist propaganda.- HumanCattle, on 07/28/2008, -13/+10Look, Israel doesn't ENJOY torture and humiliation and ethnic cleansing. Trust us, it's horrible, but we have no choice! The terrorists are forcing us to take these extreme measures!
That's how evil they are - they force our fine upstanding snipers to shoot small children through the head. They force our bulldozer drivers to run over peace protesters. They've got us by the balls. Animals! - card51short, on 07/28/2008, -10/+7so it's all Palestine's fault, right?
It's can't be both sides' fault?- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -6/+15Sure. But Israel made a lot of attempts at making peace, such as the 2000 camp david agreements, or the disconnection from Gaza.
How many attempts did the Palestinians do? - Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -8/+4Urik - The same can be said for the Palestinians - that they have tried for peace. Both sides, or rather extreme aspects of both sides - have been undermining the peace process for decades. Many get power, from the current situation - they will not let that go without a fight.
Both sides. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -6/+9"The same can be said for the Palestinians - that they have tried for peace."
When? When they rejected the Peel Commission report? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission
When they rejected the UN partition plan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War Or when Arafat walked out of the 2000 Camp David negotiation rejecting Barak's offer of statehood without even making a counter-proposal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summi ...
Each time Israel agreed to a solution, the Palestinian leadership responded with a new wave of violence. Please give some examples of the Palestinians trying for peace, and agreeing to a compromise. While you are at it, please review the Hamas Charter, which calls for genocide of the Jews. http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm - AchaIemoipas, on 07/28/2008, -8/+6Do you even realize what you're saying wpi97?
The peel commission report was also rejected by the Zionist Congress. It involved exchange of land and population transfer to accomodate the tiny minority of jews living there.
The UN partition plan was just Israel drawing a line in the sand. Why the hell would they accept it?
Camp David negotiations were so ***** lop-sided, even I was insulted. Israel refused to give the right to return to the 4 million Palestinian refugees they created.
Tell me when Israel accepts to revert back to it's original territory, described in the UN partition plan that was already an injustice in the first place. That's what Palestinians want, that's what international law want. The right of SELF-DETERMINATION. Sound familiar? - Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -7/+3Card - take a look at all the Israeli themed threads. It is absolutely inconceivable to the usual suspects that both sides have done horrible things. That is what causes me to be so "anti" Israel, it is like complete vacuum to the reality of life. "They", on both sides, see only them as just, and the other side less than human...
The usual suspects, etc have no interest in solving the issues(Too be fair though there are others on the other side equally obtuse- they just aren't as organized) if it doesn't wind up being Israel gets whatever they want, and to hell with anyone else. People in the west are waking up to it, and obviously, they are worried about how much information gets out about that region, and how well they can control it. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -5/+8"Do you even realize what you're saying wpi97?"
Yes I do. Do you? I have asked for examples of the Palestinians trying for peace. Got any?
"The peel commission report was also rejected by the Zionist Congress."
"The Arab leadership rejected the plan, while the Jewish opinion remained heatedly divided. The Twentieth Zionist Congress in Zurich (3-16 August 1937) announced "that the partition plan proposed by the Peel Commission is not to be accepted, [but wished] to carry on negotiations in order to clarify the exact substance of the British government's proposal for the foundation of a Jewish state in Palestine". "
In other words the Zionist Congress agreed to use the proposal as a basis for further negotiations, while the Arabs flatly rejected it to even consider the Jews having a state on two tiny disjoint pieces of land.
"The UN partition plan was just Israel drawing a line in the sand."
Not at all. According to the plan, Israel would get the areas where Jews were the majority, plus the non-arable Negev desert, resulting in three tiny disjoint pieces of land. Jerusalem, where Jews had lived for centuries, and which had a Jewish majority since at least 1910 was to be an "international city". Why the hell would the Arabs reject this proposal, and start a genocidal war?
"Camp David negotiations were so ***** lop-sided, even I was insulted."
How was it lop-sided? The Palestinians would get an independent state, including all of Gaza, and over 90% of the West Bank, including parts of Jerusalem" They would have got almost everything they wanted. "Compromise" means you get some of what you want, not all of what you want.
"Israel refused to give the right to return to the 4 million Palestinian refugees they created. "
First, there were about 700,000 Palestinian refugees in 1948. This is the only group in the world, for which the _descendants_ of refugees are still considered refugees by the UN, which is unheard of. The vast majority of these "refugees" have never set foot into Israel, to use your own argument.
Second, under the 2000 proposal some limited number of them would be allowed into Israel under family reunification, and offered compensation to the rest. An influx of 4 million hostile people into Israel, a country of 7 million would be equivalent to the destruction of the country, making that an unreasonable demand.
Third, do you have anything to say about the 900,000 Jewish refugees expelled from the Arab countries? Their descendants must also number in the millions. Any thoughts on that issue?
And finally, speaking of who created the refugees:
http://digg.com/world_news/Even_the_ARABS_Admit_th ...
"Tell me when Israel accepts to revert back to it's original territory, "
When party A accepts a compromise, and party B starts shooting, I think that means that party B has just lost any right to demand the original compromise.
"escribed in the UN partition plan that was already an injustice in the first place."
That's the crux of the problem. Unless you accept the validity of the Jewish claim to the land of Israel, there is very little to talk about.
"That's what Palestinians want, that's what international law want. The right of SELF-DETERMINATION. Sound familiar?"
Wrong. If the Palestinians wanted a country they could have had it for 60 years already. Unfortunately, what their leadership wants is the destruction of Israel, not the establishment of Palestine. And destruction of Israel is clearly not self-determination. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -4/+8@Waiting2awake
"It is absolutely inconceivable to the usual suspects that both sides have done horrible things. "
Yes, both sides have done horrible things. However, for one of the sides doing horrible things is the exception, while for the other side it is the norm.
Both Germany, and the allies, have done horrible things during WWII. Would you conclude that the responsibility for the horrors of WWII lies equally with both sides? - AchaIemoipas, on 07/28/2008, -6/+5"you accept the validity of the Jewish claim to the land of Israel"
Do you at least realize the Palestinian claim to the land of Israel is at least equally valid? You know, them being a majority.
And funny you should talk about descendants of Palestinian refugees as being unjustified, because that's the argument for the influx of jews to Israel, that it's their motherland, because they sort of controlled small parts of it 2,000 years ago.
You still couldn't explain the validity of the jewish claim. You can only compare your apples to oranges like France and Kosovo.
Why don't you just come out and say it? "God said so". You know that's the real reason. - Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -6/+5WPi - Once again you are looking at the two sides differently. You are claiming that when Israel does something violent it is an accident. How many people, including Canadians, have been killed by Israeli mistakes? Sorry - has happened far too many times, to too many different people - for it to be anything other than a complete lack of respect to anyone other than Israeli's. History seems to back this up.
I see it, as many others increasingly are seeing it. The news, that at one point in time kept the nasty side of allies(We all have them ;-) ) silent are losing control of the information and more and more of it is coming out. That clearly scares people on both sides that have used these problems to advance their political goals.
Enough is enough. 1 Palestinian is equal to 1 Israeli. People are people. I can't defend what too many Palestinians have done, I won't even try. They are criminals, pure and simple. As are the Israeli's who have collectively punished the region for the actions of, relatively, few people. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -4/+7"Once again you are looking at the two sides differently"
How so? I am looking at both sides, and I see one side repeatedly attempt to reach a peaceful resolution, and I see the other side respond with more violence each time.
"You are claiming that when Israel does something violent it is an accident."
Where did I claim that? I said: "However, for one of the sides doing horrible things is the exception, while for the other side it is the norm."
There is a war going on, commonly referred to as the Arab-Israeli conflict. In this war, the goal of the Arab side is the destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jews, as stated repeatedly by Arab governments and terrorist groups. The goal of the Israeli side, on the other hand is survival. Not expansion, not imperialism. Survival. If expansion were the goal, Israel would not have been the size of Massachusetts.
Israeli violence is a response to the attacks on Israel. Israeli military is subject to the rule of law, and the oversight by the civilian authorities, including Israeli supreme court, which routinely prohibits operating procedures, which put civilians in danger, even at the expense of the increased risk to Israeli soldiers. The MO of the Arab armies and of the terrorist groups, on the other hand, has always been to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible.
This is not to say that Israel is a country of saints, and that the IDF can do no wrong. This is to say, though, that when an Israeli soldier or an officer oversteps his or her rules of engagement and commits a crime, it is an exception, which is investigated and prosecuted. When a Hamas terrorist detonates a bomb in a dance club full of teenagers, he is hailed and honored as a hero.
In order to judge anything fairly one needs to take the context into account. Look at the situation objectively, and give me an example of a modern military of a country under a constant existential threat behaving better toward its enemy's civilians. Look at the wars fought by the US, Russia, Britain, or anybody. Chechnya comes to mind, where the Russian military carpet-bombed the area and killed over 200,000 civilians over the course of several years, according to some estimates. Simply look at comparable situations, and compare the tactics and casualties objectively.
By the way, I asked you to give examples of the Palestinians trying for peace. I am still waiting...
"1 Palestinian is equal to 1 Israeli."
What exactly does that mean? Every time a person dies, it is a tragedy. However, what exactly is the Israeli government supposed to do, after a terrorist blows up a bus full of people, or a crowded shopping mall? What is Israeli government supposed to do when Hamas rocket fall on Israeli towns every day?
When one is attacked, one responds. It is that simple. Turning the other cheek in this case will get you killed. Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, resulted in renewed violence from Hamas. The security fence resulted in virtually no suicide bombers getting through. See the pattern? - DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -3/+7"Why don't you just come out and say it? "God said so". You know that's the real reason."
That is probably one of the biggest misconceptions about the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Jews' yearning and right to live in Israel.
I am an atheist. I am Jewish.
These two things are not at odds with one another.
Did "God say so"?
I don't know. I don't care.
What I do know is that my people has had a presence in Israel since the formation of Judaic culture. Similarly (I'll get to why), my people have been persecuted under the law of the reigning power.
The fact is that in this 2000 trial run of living without a physical nation Jews have been subject to pogroms not just organized by the people but sanctioned and endorsed by the government finally culminating in the unabated and uncontested slaughter of 6,000,000 of them.
It's an undeniable truth that Jews will never be safe unless they are the masters of their own domain.
Why Israel?
The answer isn't difficult - it's the justification that is.
There aren't many cultures that have survived for so long so I'll see if this modern allegory makes sense.
Would you put Spaniards in Africa?
Would you put Tribal Africans in Canada?
Would you put Australians of Aboriginal decent in Mexico?
When Jews were given the chance to reform their physical nation there's no other place that it could be.
The fact is that not much land was "stolen" from the Palestinians. Early Zionists had been buying up the land from Arab land owners since the early 1700's. (Hope Simpson Report)
Similarly, there would be zero Palestinian refugees had Israel's neighbors decided not to attack the first day of Israel's existence. Israel kicked the Palestinians (that stayed - many left) out because they didn't want a fifth column within their country. Similar to the internment camps proposed and executed in America during WW2.
Hope that cleared some things up. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -1/+7@DrDreyfus
I would just like to point out that a vast majority of Palestinian refugees left the area without ever seeing an Israeli soldier, because they were told to do so by the advancing Arab armies. Some were expelled, which is IMHO is an embarrassing chapter in Israeli history, even though _all_ Jews were expelled from the areas occupied by Egypt and Jordan, including the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.
The point is that there was no "campaign of ethnic cleansing" conducted by Israel. The other point is that not one, but two groups became refugees as a result of the combined attack of 5 Arab countries on Israel: 700,000 Palestinian Arabs and almost 900,000 Jews from Arab countries. Effectively, what took place was a population exchange.
The Arabs who stayed in Israel became Israeli citizens, and now they number over 1 million (over 20% of Israelis). They have full citizenship rights, and they are represented at all levels and branches of government, including the parliament, the cabinet, and the supreme court. Arabic is an official language of Israel, together with Hebrew. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/28/2008, -4/+2"I am an atheist. I am Jewish.
These two things are not at odds with one another."
QUIT ***** SAYING JUDAISM = ZIONISM.
I am jewish, I am atheist, I am French Canadian, I am caucasian, I am a lot of things, but I sure as hell am not a zionist.
Zionism is not Judaism. It's nationalism with a name that comes from ZION. Even the ***** name tells you what it is.
You do not put me in that group. I ***** hate groups. Last time we were all grouped in the same category 6,000,000 of us died. - DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -2/+6Yes. 6,000,00 of us died. Do you know why?
Nobody gave a damn enough to stop it.
The world has proven time and time again that to survive as a culture - as a people - we have to fight our own battles and look out for ourselves because nobody else will.
That is why in 1896 Theodor Herzl pronounced the advent of Zionism in his book Der Judenstaat - The Jewish State. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/28/2008, -3/+2I'd rather die alone than kill as a jew.
- wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -1/+5"I am jewish, I am atheist, I am French Canadian, I am caucasian, I am a lot of things, but I sure as hell am not a zionist."
If as you claim Jews are the followers of Judaism, i. e. a religious but not an ethnic group, than how can you be both a Jew and an atheist?
"Last time we were all grouped in the same category 6,000,000 of us died."
I have news for you. We have been grouped in the same category for the past 3000 years. And no matter what any of us do or say, we will continue to be grouped. There is a Russian saying: "a baptized Jew is like a forgiven thief." Ponder that one for a bit.
Most Jews in Germany believed they were Germans of Jewish faith. I am sure some of them went to the gas chambers believing that. Too bad, those who put them there disagreed.
In the USSR many Jews managed to change the "nationality" listed in their passports (internal ids) from "Jewish" to "Russian". The joke there was that when you get beat up for being a Jew, they punch your nose, not your passport.
I hope push never comes to shove for you, but if it ever does, good luck explaining how anti-Zionist you are. - wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -1/+6Getting back to the point, I still haven't seen any examples of Palestinians trying for peace. Anybody?
- AchaIemoipas, on 07/28/2008, -4/+2http://lh3.ggpht.com/_eaN7jCUDjzw/RxNKszW8osI/AAAA ...
- decafmatan, on 07/28/2008, -0/+6Dead link. Just like your evidence.
- JohnReb, on 07/28/2008, -1/+4In fairness to Achale, the link worked for me.
Ironically, considering your comment, it's a photo of a cemetery.
I guess he can't find any evidence of Palestinians trying for peace. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -4/+2It's a photo of a Palestinian cemetary.
And Palestinians "tried for peace" just as much as Israelis did: 0.
Israel refuses, at every accord, to allow them self-determination, among many other things. Less then normal human rights is not acceptable to a people that is owed a country.
If trying for peace is lying down and accepting whatever is offered, I suppose the same is true for Israel, right? SO all Israel has to do is meet the demands of Palestinians. Relativist fallacies don't actually work you know. - JohnReb, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5Trying for peace means when the first offer made to you is unacceptable, you don't walk out and start fighting, you make a counter-offer. And you keep that back and forth going until you have an acceptable offer.
What was the counter-offer made in 1948, or in 1967, or 2000, or today? - wpi97, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"And Palestinians "tried for peace" just as much as Israelis did: 0."
Lie.
"Israel refuses, at every accord, to allow them self-determination, among many other things."
U-huh... Accepting the UN partition plan in 1948 did not allow Palestinians self-determination? Offering them a state in 2000 did not allow them self-determination? "War is Peace" "Freedom is Slavery". Why you keep repeating demonstrably false statements is beyond my comprehension.
"If trying for peace is lying down and accepting whatever is offered, I suppose the same is true for Israel, right?"
No, trying for peace means going to war every time a compromise is offered. (rolls eyes).
"SO all Israel has to do is meet the demands of Palestinians."
You mean the Israelis should collectively hang themselves? Yup, that would certainly resolve the conflict.
"Relativist fallacies don't actually work you know."
I couldn't agree more. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -5/+2A counter-offer? Of what?
WTF? What do you want them to offer? They had demands, Israel didn't want to meet these demands. And their demands were already a compromise. In fact all the concessions came from the Palestinian side when you consider international law.
Israel was only giving back territories they had no right to occupy in the first place, and not all of them.
And you say you agree with the relativist fallacies: everything you say is a relativist fallacy.
Jews have the right to return to a place their family hasn't been affiliated to for centuries but second generation palestinians shouldn't.
Palestinians have to accept all Israeli compromises but Israel doesn't have to accept any Palestinian compromise.
It's ridiculous. Not surprising from a racist nationalist supremacist, err I mean zionist.
I don't know why I'm still responding, it's clearly useless. You're insane and you can't make a logical argument. - wpi97, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"You're insane and you can't make a logical argument."
Ha-ha-ha! ROFLMAO! You have just made my day. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"They had demands, Israel didn't want to meet these demands. And their demands were already a compromise. In fact all the concessions came from the Palestinian side when you consider international law."
Can you cite some examples? (Total destruction of Israel doesn't count and neither does "right of return" - it would undermine the Jewish majority thereby effectively nullifying the point of Israel's reformation.) - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -4/+1"it would undermine the Jewish majority thereby effectively nullifying the point of Israel's reformation."
And the huge influx of jews effectively nullified the point of Palestine's reformation.
Why do you keep using the relativist fallacy? You talk as if Palestinians had absolutely no legitimate rights.
The majority was artificially created, returning the natural balance of the region is only natural.
And the right of return is an international law. The UN sanctionned ISrael I don't how many times for it.
And this other guy even says they gave them the right of self-determination in the same sentence he says palestinians shouldn't have the right to go HOME, and GOING "HOME" is the entire point of Israel for jews. And there was only a few thousand of them in Israel 100 years ago.
That's why I ***** hate nationalism. UNEQUAL TREATMENT. Everything that's good for Israel means ***** for Palestinians.
And the right of return is why Palestinians refused the accord. They accepted the terriorty concessions even they were 23% less than the green line borders, which is OCCUPIED TERRITORY, AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW.
Israelis wanted Jerusalem, Palestinians wanted an OPENED city with cooperation on municipal services, not even control of it. Just the ***** right to be there.
And of course, they wanted sovereignty on Muslim holy sites like that mosque... forgot the name in east jerusalem.
And the refugees, the country that was made for refugees, built on the principle of the right to return, refuses the right to return.
And even if they had accepted, they would still have been controlled by Israel. Israel wanted "Early warning stations inside the Palestinian state; Israeli control of Palestinian airspace; the right of Israel to deploy troops in the Palestinian state in the event of an emergency; the stationing of an international force in the Jordan Valley. Furthermore the Palestinian state was to be demilitarized."
That's the equivalent of nothing. It's a state that has no rights. It's a pretend state.
And they would've accepted it for the right of human beings to return where they come from. - wpi97, on 07/29/2008, -1/+4"neither does "right of return" - it would undermine the Jewish majority thereby effectively nullifying the point of Israel's reformation."
Never mind the Jewish majority. How is it physically, logistically, and financially possible for a country the size of Massachusetts of 7 million people to absorb 4 million people without going completely bankrupt? This is without taking into account the fact that these 4 million people would like nothing more than for Israel to cease to exist.
And why is it ok for the Arab countries to treat their Palestinian brethren like ***** for the past 60 years, instead of integrating them into their societies, like Israel did with the Jewish refugees from the Arab countries?
By the way, call me when Poland and the Czech Republic allow the descendants of millions of Germans they expelled after WWII to return. Or when the Arab countries absorb or compensate the descendants of 900,000 Jews they expelled after 1948. Oh, wait, that would mean judging Israel by the same standards as other countres... Nope, we can't do that on digg... - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -4/+2Moral relativism and the relativist fallacy, again.
It was perfectly fine to displace a majority for a minority, it's completely unacceptable to repair it. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"Moral relativism and the relativist fallacy, again."
Can you clearly spell out what you mean by this?
"It was perfectly fine to displace a majority for a minority, it's completely unacceptable to repair it."
Did you even read wpi97's reply?
wpi97:
"By the way, call me when Poland and the Czech Republic allow the descendants of millions of Germans they expelled after WWII to return. Or when the Arab countries absorb or compensate the descendants of 900,000 Jews they expelled after 1948" - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"And the huge influx of jews effectively nullified the point of Palestine's reformation."
That doesn't make any sense on two levels:
1a) There has always been a Jewish presence in Israel
1b) Jews had been emigrating to Israel en masse since the beginning of Zionism (the religious ones had been going their to die forever)
2a)What would have been the Palestinian "reformation"?
2b) What would be the "point" of a Palestinian reformation?
"The majority was artificially created, returning the natural balance of the region is only natural. "
That may have been true a up until a few hours after dawn on May 15, 1948 - the date when the Arab nations surrounding Israel decided to take matters into their own hands.
Every country on this Earth is as legitimate as the last war it wins. Example? America.
If you believe that the very existence of Israel is immoral then I suggest you leave America which is essentially just as legitimate as Israel post-1948 War for Independence.
What's "natural" is a Jewish majority in Israel. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -4/+2"Did you even read wpi97's reply?"
Yes, to defend Israel's actions, in a conversation about Israel, he compared it's actions to the equally reprehensible actions of Poland and Arab countries. Which means he puts Israel in the same category.
That's admitting you do harm, then saying it doesn't matter because some other places do it too. And even if did excuse anything, comparing the polish german situation to that of Palestinians... Apples and brocoli.
Poland and the germans is a problem, arabs and palestinians is another one, Israeli-palestinian relations is another.
That's also a Red Herring:
# Topic A is under discussion.
# Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
# Topic A is abandoned.
This is wpi97's entire strategy. This argument was about both sides being to blame. The authority being the UN, and the UN agreeing with this position, you already lost. It's the governing authority on this matter and reached a verdict, 100+ times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nation ...
I just happen to like arguing and the things you say piss me off, so I keep getting sucked in.
"the date when the Arab nations surrounding Israel decided to take matters into their own hands."
As opposed to the date where the british decided to take somebody else's matter in their own hands?
1a) there's always been an arab presence in Israel
1b) Palestinians have been BORN in palestine, no immigration.
2a) get a state
2b) The respect of the human rights declaration and international law. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"That's admitting you do harm, then saying it doesn't matter because some other places do it too. And even if did excuse anything, comparing the polish german situation to that of Palestinians... Apples and brocoli."
NO! That is not what he's saying.
He's trying to get you to put the Arab-Israeli conflict in a HISTORICAL CONTEXT.
To just look at Israel without respect for the actions of other nations in similar situations is ignorant.
"1a) there's always been an arab presence in Israel
1b) Palestinians have been BORN in palestine, no immigration.
2a) get a state
2b) The respect of the human rights declaration and international law."
Do you understand that there is no such "people" as Palestinians. "Palestinian" is not an ethnic group just as "American" is not an ethnic group.
Why would the "Palestinians" need to "get a state"? - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -4/+2"To just look at Israel without respect for the actions of other nations in similar situations is ignorant."
And to pretend that the reprehensible actions of a state excuses the reprehensible actions of another state, or even worst, another state from a different era, is a fallacy.
"HISTORICAL CONTEXT"
And then what? I know very well why and how they hate each other. The point of this is admitting when you are wrong, for both sides. Plus historical context, yet again, doesn't excuse actions of today.
"Palestinian" is not an ethnic group just as "American" is not an ethnic group.
Why would the "Palestinians" need to "get a state"?"
What does ethnicity have to do with anything? So what? It's ok to put millions of people in ***** limbo and to treat them like rabbid dogs because they aren't so different from other arabs? WTF is that?
WTF is wrong with you? These people exist, humans that exist have rights, period. Racist *****. - wpi97, on 07/29/2008, -1/+4"He's trying to get you to put the Arab-Israeli conflict in a HISTORICAL CONTEXT."
You do realize that using big fancy words will just make him mad, right? He will never understand that the "international community" condemning Israel for defending itself is as hypocritical as a jury of 12 gangsters convicting a guy for killing in self-defense. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+4"WTF is wrong with you? These people exist, humans that exist have rights, period. Racist *****. "
When have I ever condoned denying these people their human rights?
It's not a "human right" to not have to stand in queue at a checkpoint if you're entering another country - especially if people coming from your country have exploded themselves within their border.
It's not a "human right" to not get bombed when someone fires a rocket from YOUR house.
It's not a "human right" to blow up civilians.
It's not a "human right" to kidnap soldiers and then kill them in custody.
When Palestinian culture shifts from teaching their children hate to teaching peace or even toleration that's when Palestinians wont be subjected to the checkpoints, the trade embargos, the boycotts, the "apartheid wall".
You think I'm racist? ***** you. I want peace for Israel as does ever single (non-crazy and by that I mean Haredi) Jew, Israeli Christian, and Israeli Arab in Israel. I don't like hearing about Israel bulldozing terrorists houses, I don't like hearing about children dying.
The fact remains that Palestinians and most of the Arab world DOES NOT WANT PEACE. They want to keep Palestinians in ***** so they can have a front and an excuse to terrorize and demonize the Jews. Have you ever wondered why Egypt and Jordan and EVERY other Arab country has not offered shelter for Palestinians? - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -3/+2"When have I ever condoned denying these people their human rights?"
Dude, you've been arguing against their right of self-determination for three days now. Are you high or something?
You're arguing for collective punishment. You're arguing that they don't deserve a state because they don't constitute a specific and different ethnicity. Don't even try to pretend you didn't argue against human rights of palestinians.
It's a human right to not be punished for somebody else's actions. It's a human right to be tried for your crimes by a fair and balanced judicial system.
It's a human right to protect your property.
"When Palestinian culture shifts"
Why the ***** would it shift? How? What exactly was done to make that change happen? The situation keeps getting worst and worst for them. What in the hell, in poverty, lack of ressources, destroyed homes, destroyed families, days spent walking from point a to point b, would make them suddenly appreciate their situation?
If I was standing by your door with a baseball bat, had killed your mother and sister, to beat the crap out of you every single day, would you tell yourself you should appreciate me more? OR would you get yourself a gun to kill me and end the ***** situation?
Have you never been pushed around a little?
Palestinians hate Israelis because Israelis give them plenty of reason to hate them and absolutely no reason to appreciate them.
And again, relativist fallacy: why can't Israel change it's attitudes and accomplish the same? Why does the responsibility always lie in the hands of the most oppressed of the two? Who has the power? Who controls everything? Who can actually change things?
"I don't like hearing about Israel bulldozing terrorists houses, I don't like hearing about children dying."
CIVILIANS houses. Entire neighborhoods. They even killed an american humanitarian to do this. Here's she is a day before being crushed to death:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBPf29ZOWkg
"The fact remains that Palestinians and most of the Arab world DOES NOT WANT PEACE."
The racists on the other side have every reason to believe the same about Israel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/opinion/11sinior ...
"Have you ever wondered why Egypt and Jordan and EVERY other Arab country has not offered shelter for Palestinians?"
WTF does that have to do with anything? Red Herring. They were born there, "god given" right to be there. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+4"Dude, you've been arguing against their right of self-determination for three days now. Are you high or something?"
I don't believe it's a "human right" to have a state.
"You're arguing for collective punishment."
This isn't a boarding-school with 400 kids.
It's inconceivable that Israel would be able to keep tabs on over 2 million people and determine exactly which ones are firing the rockets.
Israel has made it VERY clear that she will bulldoze/bomb/attack any area that has been pinpointed to have been firing rockets.
If Hamas actually cared about their people they wouldn't fire rockets from civilian areas.
It's as simple as that.
Have you ever stopped and questioned that tactic? It happens over and over and over and over again.
It's because those bastards KNOW that Israel is going to bomb or bulldoze that area and they WANT Palestinians to die so they can get it in the newspaper or on television - hence the video that this article links to.
"Why the ***** would it shift? How? What exactly was done to make that change happen? The situation keeps getting worst and worst for them. What in the hell, in poverty, lack of ressources, destroyed homes, destroyed families, days spent walking from point a to point b, would make them suddenly appreciate their situation?
If I was standing by your door with a baseball bat, had killed your mother and sister, to beat the crap out of you every single day, would you tell yourself you should appreciate me more? OR would you get yourself a gun to kill me and end the ***** situation?"
That is complete *****. Do you even know what's going on right now within Palestine? Fatah and Hamas are killing EACH OTHER for power. How is that Israel's fault? What does that tell you about the Palestinians?
They need to take some ***** responsibility for their own situation and at least ATTEMPT to rebuild their own nation.
"days spent walking from point a to point b"
Assuming that means that they have to wait in check points - that can be easily averted as soon as they stop trying to get into Israel with bombs to kill civilians. And you know it.
"CIVILIANS houses. Entire neighborhoods. They even killed an american humanitarian to do this. Here's she is a day before being crushed to death:"
That's disgusting that you believe that lie. Do you really think Israel would intentionally murder someone with a bulldozer?
It was an incredibly unfortunate accident. Similarly, its ignorant to not take it with a grain of salt seeing as Palestinians are known to manufacture truths to vilify Israel. Does Al-Durrah ring a bell?
"The racists on the other side have every reason to believe the same about Israel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/opinion/11sinior ..."
I can't really blame Israel's skepticism when Hamas says:
"That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis."[2]
And then three months later:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/06/23/vot ...
Again, recently Hamas and Israel reached a ceasefire. Guess who broke it?
"WTF does that have to do with anything? Red Herring. They were born there, "god given" right to be there. "
I'm trying to get you to understand that if Israel's neighbors really wanted peace between Israel and her neighbors, they would step in and help - providing aid and rebuilding Palestine.
They have not and still refuse to.
Why won't they help? Because they would lose their ability to demonize and vilify Israel. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -3/+2"I don't believe it's a "human right" to have a state."
Then you're against the creation of Israel. Relativism. They invented the argument of having a state being part of human rights. Wpi97 made the argument for two days in another thread.
"This isn't a boarding-school with 400 kids.
It's inconceivable that Israel would be able to keep tabs on over 2 million people and determine exactly which ones are firing the rockets."
And that excuses crimes against humanity how? There you go arguing against Palestinian human rights again.
And how does collective punishment help?
"Assuming that means that they have to wait in check points - that can be easily averted as soon as they stop trying to get into Israel with bombs to kill civilians. And you know it."
Nice selection of a small part of a sentence. You rebuttal has nothing to do with the argument.
"Again, recently Hamas and Israel reached a ceasefire. Guess who broke it?"
Individuals.
"Palestinians are known to manufacture truths to vilify Israel."
Prove it.
Remember the Lavon affair?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
Proved.
"It was an incredibly unfortunate accident."
There's no such thing as an unfortunate accident when you're destroying civilians homes. There were seven activists. She was directly infront of the bulldozer, YELLING WITH A MEGAPHONE.
Here's a set of pictures of her from that day, during the demolition:
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml
"There's no way he didn't see her, since she was practically looking into the cabin. At one stage, he turned around toward the building. The bulldozer kept moving, and she slipped and fell off the plow. But the bulldozer kept moving, the shovel above her. I guess it was about 10 or 15 meters that it dragged her and for some reason didn't stop. We shouted like crazy to the driver through loudspeakers that he should stop, but he just kept going and didn't lift the shovel. Then it stopped and backed up. We ran to Rachel. She was still breathing."
EYE WITNESS ACCOUNT, BITCH.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Corrie#ISM_eye ...
"I'm trying to get you to understand that if Israel's neighbors really wanted peace between Israel and her neighbors, they would step in and help - providing aid and rebuilding Palestine."
And then Israel would say, "they're ganging up" and nuke them. Remember who attacked these countries.
AND THAT STILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISRAEL-PALESTINE RELATIONS.
"I can't really blame Israel's skepticism when Hamas says:
"That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis."[2]"
OMG. They're threatening good neighborhood! FIRE BOMB THEM!
Nice of you to completely ignore the Arab Peace initative and repeat the same crap.
You going to repeat again? I'll wait. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -3/+2Oh and since I know you will:
" "The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in.
"The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened.
"The International Solidarity Movement, to which Corrie belonged, was directly responsible for illegal behavior and conduct in the area of Corrie's death and their actions directly led to this tragedy."[16] "
The only story that contradicts everything about the case, including pictures and three eye witnesses. It's the Israeli story. - DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+4"Then you're against the creation of Israel. Relativism. They invented the argument of having a state being part of human rights. Wpi97 made the argument for two days in another thread."
Legally, Israel was created as a result of 2000 years of pogroms and persecution finally culminating in the Holocaust. The UN decided that the Zionist movement had some merit.
"And that excuses crimes against humanity how? There you go arguing against Palestinian human rights again."
Your intentionally misinterpreting what I'm saying. Never once do I advocate throwing out human rights.
"And how does collective punishment help?"
Alright smart guy. What _should_ Israel do when rockets are fired at them?
Please answer that. ("Stop oppressing them" doesn't count because it doesn't answer what they should do at the time their being attacked)
"Individuals."
That may be true, but Hamas did not take action and arrest the group or even attempt to arrest the group. That means they condone it.
"
"Palestinians are known to manufacture truths to vilify Israel."
Prove it."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jenin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Durrah
"Remember the Lavon affair?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
Proved."
1)How is that related?
2)That was in 1954
"EYE WITNESS ACCOUNT, BITCH.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Corrie#ISM_eye ..."
I see you specifically neglected to read this...
"According to an ISM activist, Joseph Smith, Corrie fully expected the bulldozer to stop just in front of her. In June of 2003, a military investigation by the Israel Defense Forces Judge Advocate’s Office concluded that the woman’s death was accidental. “The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie,” an army source told the Jerusalem Post. “She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in.”
Smith recounted afterward, "We were horribly surprised. They had been careful not to hurt us. They'd always stopped before."[4] Corrie was transported to a Palestinian hospital. Accounts vary as to whether she died at the scene, in the ambulance on the way to the hospital, or at the hospital.[4]"
Eyewitness account... bitch?
"OMG. They're threatening good neighborhood! FIRE BOMB THEM!"
I think, again, you neglected to read this part:
"And then three months later:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/06/23/vot ...
Again, recently Hamas and Israel reached a ceasefire. Guess who broke it?"
"And then Israel would say, "they're ganging up" and nuke them. Remember who attacked these countries."
What the ***** are you talking about? Israel wouldn't nuke Syria or Egypt you dumb ass. You just hate Israel. Nothing I say is going to change your opinion.
And what the ***** does "Remember who attacked these countries" mean?
"AND THAT STILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISRAEL-PALESTINE RELATIONS."
Yes it does. It means that the Arab nations, historically, have retarded the peace process. That is not to say that all Arab nations are guilty. Recently Syria has started preliminary talks with Israel trying to restart peace talks between the two nations. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/29/2008, -3/+2Hahahaha, I like the lists of inacurracy flags on your articles.
"The UN decided that the Zionist movement had some merit."
Yup, because of the self-determination argument. Thank you for agreeing.
al-Durrah one talks about how some reporters believe Israel didn't do it and how subsequent investigations suggested that it was staged. I guess that's possible, but far from proven.
The other one is about the battle of Jenin?
"# Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since August 2007.
# Its factual accuracy is disputed. Tagged since August 2007.
# Its neutrality or factuality may be compromised by weasel words. Tagged since September 2007.
# It may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations which do not verify the text.Tagged since September 2007."
"1)How is that related?
2)That was in 1954"
It's a rebuttal to "Palestinians are known to manufacture truths to vilify Israel."
That means that Israel is known to manufacture truths to vilify arabs.
And then I proved it. It's just one, there's ample reason to believe others exist and haven't been uncovered.
"Never once do I advocate throwing out human rights."
"I don't believe it's a "human right" to have a state."
"there is no such "people" as Palestinians."
"that's when Palestinians wont be subjected to the checkpoints, the trade embargos, the boycotts, the "apartheid wall"."
And I love how you don't even in the tinyest bit admit that collective punishment infringes human rights right after saying you don't advocate throwing out human rights.
"What _should_ Israel do when rockets are fired at them?"
Kill people who fire rockets. Not destroying water supplies, infrastructure, civilian houses, farms, etc. Intentionally, as a measure of collective punishment.
"but Hamas did not take action and arrest the group or even attempt to arrest the group."
Did that group keep on existing forever? Were they all arrested by the IDF? How do you know they did nothing?
I agree that Hamas is probably the worst possible government the Palestinians could have. But it wasn't always Hamas. And Hamas exists because all the intellectuals left Palestine, all there is left are religious idiots. It's a result, it's what happens when you drive a society to insanity.
Joe Smith contradicts himself like turd. But he is consistent in saying the opposite of the Israeli story. Each one has a common element to the others. And that is: it wasn't really an accident.
They were destroying homes around civilians. You saw the pictures. Even if it wasn't intentional, it would fall under criminal negligence.
"Israel wouldn't nuke Syria or Egypt you dumb ass."
Probably not, but they already want to bomb Iran. I hyperboled to say the Israelis would see it as an offensive strategy. Plus it still has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine.
"It means that the Arab nations, historically, have retarded the peace process."
Yeah, whatever. What about the arab nations? Is Palestine part of an Arab nation? Why does Egypt involve palestine. Why does Syria involve Palestine? Because they're all Arabs? They all look alike to you don't they?
Palestine =/= Other Arab Nations
Other Arab Nations =/= Israel
And as always, Israel never does anything bad, because destroying homes everyday and shooting kids doesn't RETARD the peace process.
"I think, again, you neglected to read this part:
"And then three months later:"
What? The violence? The violence in Israel has something to do with the Arab Peace Initiative? How?
How does that make any progress on the initiative stop when the parties involved are not responsible for the violence?
You can't group a place like Palestine like you group an army. There a bunch of angry, disorganized, extremely religious ignorants. They used to make sense, but now they don't. Their society isn't going very well, you see. These people will do what they do until they have something better to believe in.
"And what the ***** does "Remember who attacked these countries" mean?"
Well since you haven't heard, turns out Israel bombed Syria and Lebanon. And it's now threatening Iran too. Must suck to learn that just now. - DrDreyfus, on 07/30/2008, -1/+4We can't continue unless you answer the question:
Do you beleive Israel is a legitimate state? - AchaIemoipas, on 07/30/2008, -3/+2ROFL!! We can't continue argument A until I answer question B?
There's nothing to continue, you were completely owned, point by point.
The legitimacy of Israel is an entirely different topic. It's also irrelevant.
Whether I think Israel was legtimately created or not doesn't change the fact that it exists.
And if legitimacy is regulated by international law, it's just as legitimate as a Palestinian state. - DrDreyfus, on 07/30/2008, -1/+4Your answer is important because it's indicative of the way you are framing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This point is what made me ask the question:
"Well since you haven't heard, turns out Israel bombed Syria and Lebanon. And it's now threatening Iran too. Must suck to learn that just now."
I'm pretty sure that you know that Syria was stockpiling nuclear weapons and I'm pretty sure you know that Hizb'Allah captured two Israeli soldiers, hid in Lebanon, and the Lebanese government did nothing.
I believe that In your eyes, it's always going to be Israel's fault because in your eyes, Israel doesn't have the right to defend herself. - AchaIemoipas, on 07/30/2008, -3/+2"Your answer is important because it's indicative of the way you are framing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Oh good! Then it's an attempted ad hominem tu quoque.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-homine ...
My position on argument A has no relevance on my position on argument B. You can keep thinking it does, but it's still a fallacy.
"I'm pretty sure that you know that Syria was stockpiling nuclear weapons"
Relativist fallacy, pre-emptive strike. Israel has tons of nuclear weapons. A pre-emptive strike is only allowed when a direct threat has been formulated.
"and I'm pretty sure you know that Hizb'Allah captured two Israeli soldiers"
They were in Lebanon, illegally. And Israel bombed civilian areas, and UNARMED UN peacekeepers!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XrZphvbbqg
http://electronicintifada.net/artman2/uploads/1/cl ...
http://www.imemc.org/article/50842
Crimes of war.
"I believe that In your eyes, it's always going to be Israel's fault because in your eyes, Israel doesn't have the right to defend herself."
Yes, because defending yourself involves destroying entire communities, their houses, their livinghood, their farms and all means of survival to punish them for being part of the same community as individual terrorists, who die during their attack for the most part.
Golf clap.
You know what I believe? I think you're an endoctrinated, misinformed jewish supremacist who can't even admit that Israel does bad things, can't even admit that Israel is even part of the problem and doesn't think that human rights should precede material possessions.
Nice Red Herring btw, this is about Israel also being to blame, remember?
Keep coming up with crap, I'm enjoying this. - DrDreyfus, on 07/30/2008, -3/+3We're done dude. You're just an *****.
The reason I ask you whether or not you believe Israel is legitimate is because it determines whether this dialog is necessary - if we don't acknowledge the same axioms argument if futile.
I'm pretty sure I know the answer though.
Have a nice day.
- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -6/+15Sure. But Israel made a lot of attempts at making peace, such as the 2000 camp david agreements, or the disconnection from Gaza.
- HumanCattle, on 07/28/2008, -13/+10Look, Israel doesn't ENJOY torture and humiliation and ethnic cleansing. Trust us, it's horrible, but we have no choice! The terrorists are forcing us to take these extreme measures!
- yellowcakewalk, on 07/28/2008, -14/+10"I can't forgive the Palestinians that they force us to kill their children".
Golda Mabovitz, born in Ukraine, raised in Milwaukee
a.k.a. Golda Meir- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -8/+12Interesting. Only your comments show up on google when I search for that quote. Must be some Zionist conspiracy.
- antoniamart, on 07/28/2008, -7/+4She should have stayed in Milwaukee.
Two wrongs don't make a right, Israel. You've become what you've fled.
- antoniamart, on 07/28/2008, -7/+4She should have stayed in Milwaukee.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -9/+11That's incredibly low yellowcakewalk.
Your quote is completely devoid of context.
You'll do anything to demonize Israel you ***** bastard.- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -4/+10No DrDreyfus. Worse. His quote is completely made up.
- wpi97, on 07/28/2008, -6/+7This is the _actual_ quote: "We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." Golda Meir said this to Anwar Sadat just before peace talks. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Golda_Meir
By the way, I was born in Ukraine, and raised in the US too. Do you have a problem with that?
- urik88, on 07/28/2008, -8/+12Interesting. Only your comments show up on google when I search for that quote. Must be some Zionist conspiracy.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -10/+15@yellowcakewalk
I don't think I've seen a more blatant distortion of the truth ever.
"When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons." (Golda Meir, Press conference after the Six-Day War, 1967) - das0408, on 07/28/2008, -12/+17buried as pro terrorist propaganda. when the palestinians want peace, believe me, they can have it. the fact is they don't. the fact is that the terrorists set up shop in villages and use innocent civilians as human shields. they are the inhumane bastards, not israel. does anyone here at all entertain the notion that israel somehow enjoys the fact that innocent women and children are killed in their wars? please, refer to the golda meir quote above. the pics that aren't completely FAKED in this video are a distortion of the truth. if i could bury something a thousand times, i would on this.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -7/+5It takes two to tango. There is NO "innocent" side there. The sooner the extremists on both sides see that, the sooner some progress gets made. Until that time, we will have those pro-Palestinian "terrorists" hitting Israel - and we will have pro-Israel "terrorists" hitting the Palestinians.
Both sides are wrong, and if you can not see that - you are fundamentally part of the problem.- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -8/+5Amazing when someone says that both sides are to be held accountable - that gets dugg down. I wonder why? Could it be that one side can't come to terms with their imperfections?
Sad. - DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -3/+10Both sides are accountable - I agree there is no question.
However, Israel, like we have all been saying, has made multiple attempts to come to an agreement and the Palestinian leaders have spat in their face.
I believe it's ignorant to propose that the majority of the blame should fall upon Israel.
A recent example would be the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel.
Guess who broke it?
(I know you'll cite some article claiming that Israel broke the truce but just so you know, Israel fired at terrorists that were trying to breach the wall and the other case was Israel shooting a Hamas leader when he didn't lower his weapon and attempted to fire.) - hadees, on 07/29/2008, -0/+6"Could it be that one side can't come to terms with their imperfections?"
Which side would that be?
You make a semi-rational statement about both sides being at fault then totally destroy it by letting your own bias spew forth. You have no idea why you are getting dugg down but you attribute it to one side.
I think most Israel supporters would agree that it has become a circle of violence and that it is pointless to try and blame any one side entirely for the current state of affairs. However on that same token Israel supporters continue to see Israel's good gestures unreciprocated. Gaza was given totally over to the Palestinians and should have been the model for the future Palestinian state but instead it turned into Hamasistan and a launching bed for rocket attacks on Israel. - wpi97, on 07/29/2008, -0/+5@waiting2awake
I have asked you on another thread to give examples of the Palestinians trying to resolve the conflict peacefully. I am still waiting for an answer.
Israel, on the other hand, has been taking very concrete steps toward a peaceful resolution since the day it was founded. If you wish, I can list them again. Throwing your hands in the air and saying that both sides are guilty is either incredibly naive or incredibly dishonest. - writie, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1Hadees: "Gaza was given totally over to the Palestinians and should have been the model for the future Palestinian state".
1) Gaza was never given totally to the Palestinians, as both the land borders, airport and sea access were and remain blocked.
2) The Palestinians are pushing for fixed borders with Israel, so removing the military from a tiny part of it while continuing to build in the West Bank without even consulting them is not exactly the way to foster a nascent state.
I was very curious to see what Sharon had in mind when he withdrew from Gaza, and was relieved to see someone take a major initiative. Alas, we will never now know what he was trying to do and I don't see many initiatives on either side these days. Shame.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -8/+5Amazing when someone says that both sides are to be held accountable - that gets dugg down. I wonder why? Could it be that one side can't come to terms with their imperfections?
- razorsharpwit, on 07/28/2008, -9/+3It seems that Israelis agree with Nazi methodology just not their ideology
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -1/+8It seems you've never opened a textbook or even attempted to substantiate your claims.
- das0408, on 07/28/2008, -0/+7Godwin's law anyone? razorsharpwit, you're anything but what your username suggests. you don't merit a real response, so i won't waste my time on one.
- writie, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1"when the palestinians want peace, believe me, they can have it."
OK, let's talk about the Arab League proposal for peace, which was dismissed out of hand - twice. Let's talk about the truces that Hamas has repeatedly offered Israel, and which were refused. There were pros and cons to both, needless to say. But at least they exist.
What we can't talk about is the major initiatives for peace that Israel has undertaken recently, as I can't think of any. On that front, I think Olmert's mind was distracted by other concerns.
The Palestinians are not easy people to deal with. But is that an excuse for not trying? Or worse, pretending to try while continuing construction in the West Bank?- das0408, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1"The Palestinians are not easy people to deal with. But is that an excuse for not trying?"
um, let's talk about the truce between israel and hamas a month or two ago which was broken about a week later. guess who broke it? to say that israel hasn't been trying is.... ignorant, to say the least. - writie, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1Das, If I pull out the articles showing that the IDF shot at people in Gaza and at fishermen the day after the ceasefire was called, it will be shot down (see Dreyfus' telling comment above).
Let's be generous with each other and say there were teething problems. The salient point is that a fragile ceasefire is holding as far as we can tell, despite the continued arrest of Hamas people in the WB and an assassination in Ramallah. Is that not the most relevant point? Is that not something that could be worked on? - das0408, on 08/07/2008, -0/+0I'm not exactly clear on how you define "fragile ceasefire," but if the definition include rockets continually being launched from the GS despite a resolution to cease and desist, I can't say I'm too impressed with your point. I also very much doubt that the continued arrest and assassinations of terrorists for the protection of a sovereign nation constitutes violations of a peace treaty. (BTW, the assassination you referred to was actually an attempted arrest, I believe.) The examples you bring about the ceasefire barely holding up seem to only hold Israel accountable for perfectly justified actions. Why do you believe that Hamas and the general Palestinian people are without blame?
- das0408, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1"The Palestinians are not easy people to deal with. But is that an excuse for not trying?"
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -7/+5It takes two to tango. There is NO "innocent" side there. The sooner the extremists on both sides see that, the sooner some progress gets made. Until that time, we will have those pro-Palestinian "terrorists" hitting Israel - and we will have pro-Israel "terrorists" hitting the Palestinians.
- BillE3, on 07/28/2008, -7/+9If I recall there was the Mickey Mouse look alike on childrens islamic television advocating killing jews. Now there is the bugs bunny look alike advocating the killing and eating of jews. Islamic childrens television teaching children to go out into the streets to hate and attack jews. Children learn to do as they are told, that is why islamic television and childrens books are filled with racist hate mongering.
- razorsharpwit, on 07/28/2008, -7/+7It seems that Israelis agree with Nazi methodology just not their ideology
- curtisag, on 07/28/2008, -6/+7The Israelis are just defending themselves from the constant threat of terrorism. It's not the Israelis that preach to 'push their enemy into the sea', it's the Arabs that preach this hate speech. They are the ones that want to ethnically cleanse like Hilter, but do not have the means.
Most of these children were not targeted directly, they were hit because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, Palestinian suicide bombers specifically target the defenseless and innocent, that's the difference, and that's why they are the true animals in this conflict. The Israelis try to kill only the enemy during raids, not civilians. But in war there is always innocent life lost. That is the nature of war. This video is propaganda.- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -5/+3 That is an incredibly one sided view of things. Maybe you need to have your family, friends and region annexed before you "get it"? Maybe, you can be smart enough to exhibit empathy, and see yourself in their shoes.
If you had lost everything to a force much stronger than you - what do you do? Like the Americans? Sitting watching whatever rights they have had being written away? Or do you fight back, with whatever you have to fight with? If I killed your child because the guy down the block did something to me - How do you feel about me? WTF do you expect Palestinians to react any different?
The reverse is true as well. To any Israel that has lost a friend, family, etc to Palestinian rockets...
BOTH sides are to be blamed. Not just one. Until we get to that point - all that is happening is monkeys slinging feces at each other. It is - as I said - Sad.- curtisag, on 07/28/2008, -2/+6Excuse me, but if someone invaded my country and occupied it, I would attack their soldiers but not their defenseless population like the Palestinians do with their barbaric suicide bombings. Palestinians are brainwashed to believe a Jew is sub-human and that is why there is no peace in this part of the world. The radical Palestinians won't allow peace to proceed. Have you seen the racist cartoons shown to Palestinian children that glorify killing Jews and yourself in the process? I have tried to put myself in their shoes, and the more I think about it the more I am repulsed by their actions. The Palestinians have themselves to blame for their poor state of affairs.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -4/+2Curtisag - Excuse you if you must, no need for my benefit. Who invade whose land again? Who was there for the last several decades is not who was there prior to Britain and the US deciding to place a nation there. Now that said - That is Israel, and it is not going anywhere. But Israel is there because "the West" decided it so. That tends to piss off people - If the west suddenly decided to move Isreal to New Mexico and send Mexicans to what is now Israel would you have a problem with that? Would you fight it? Of course you would - which is exactly what Palestinians are doing. See? People are people.
Yes I have seen those pictures - as well as pictures of little Israeli girls (Cute as a button) writing the same on bombs for Lebanon. Evil is Evil regardless on what side of an arbitrary line you are on.
Almost like: People are people. Are you willing to have Israel take 1/2 of the blame? If not, you are only out for "get evenism", not for justice. - curtisag, on 07/28/2008, -2/+7First of all, the UN decided that was to be the home of Israel. But take a look at the map, Israel is the smallest country in the middle east. They deserved a homeland. I understand the anger of the Palestinians, but perpetual war is no life worth living. I might have more sympathy for the Palestinians if they weren't so ignorant and barbaric. And there are millions of people being ethnically cleansed in Africa, and no one cares about that. But all we ever hear about is the superficial suffering of the Palestinians at the hands of the evil Israelis.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -3/+2Curtis - How can you state "I understand the anger of the Palestinians, but perpetual war is no life worth living.", which seems to be thoughtful and clear(Yet still no understanding that it isn't ONLY the Palestinians - Israel is equally to be blamed - or do you say that they don't do violence? That innocents haven't been killed by bombs)
and then follow it up with " I might have more sympathy for the Palestinians if they weren't so ignorant and barbaric." - Which, if it were said about Israelis you would claim it as "anti-semitic" -
Can you not see the double standards? Say it with me, show you understand. Say it - Both sides are to be blamed. That extremists on BOTH SIDES have corrupted and stoped any peace process. That the average Palestinian and the average Israeli are victims, but the leaders of both sides have to be held accountable to what they have done respectively.
Can you go that far? Is that worded in such a way you can agree with it? Or is it any blame on Israel is too much blame? I am really trying hard to understand this.
- curtisag, on 07/28/2008, -1/+8Furthermore, I'd like to add that if the Palestinians had the technology Israel has, they would have already killed every Jew in Israel. And Israel could easily wipe out the entire Palestinian population within a few days. They don't because they are a civilized democracy, unlike the Palestinians. Arab Israelis are allowed to vote and given much freedom in Israel, the same cannot be said for Arab countries. Given all they've been through, I'm surprised they haven't forced all the Arab Israelis to leave the country.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -6/+3You simply do not know that. That is pure fear mongering.
Not that I am surprised - btw, a merely cursory glance and Gaza and the UN resolutions show Israel is not nearly as "civilized" as they have been portrayed. Which also goes along with how certain news gets censored - clearly in todays media.
Once again - No one side is innocent. Not the Palestinians and not the Israeli's... Why is that so hard to admit to?
Nationalism by any chance? - curtisag, on 07/28/2008, -2/+8I find it amusing you imply I am a Jew. My family is German/British/French. The Palestinians had many chances for peace, but the radical elements of their country have rejected it every time. And the Arab countries have tried to destroy Israel before, so it's not a leap of logic to conclude they would again if they had the military strength. The only solution to this conflict is for Arabs to be separated from Jews. They will never live in peace side by side as long as the ignorance of religion dominates them.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -3/+3I don't see me implying that anywhere. Please show me, as I certainly didn't mean it. I only see you trying to justifiy the unjustifiable. Just as those that claim killing Jews is OK because they are just animals, or Christians because of some other crap.
There is no one side that is free from blame. Israel, has been asked, several times, to do what is right. They have failed. For various reasons.
I have sympathy for the Israelis - I honestly do. It isn't their fault any more than it is the average Palestinians fault. The problem is that one side has all the weapons, money, power and backing of the world power and a willing media to whitewash and turn a blind eye to some things. When the ones with the power, claims victimhood (Which has been the status quo for Israel since it's inception) there is every reason to be questioning it. When questioning it, gets labeled as "anti-semetic" people should know, it is merely to stop the questioning.... - DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -3/+6"I don't see me implying that anywhere."
Let me show you:
"Nationalism by any chance?" - DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -2/+5"When the ones with the power, claims victimhood "
Really? Did you watch the video that is linked to from here?
What emotion do you believe that is playing to? - Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -2/+3Dreyfus - You still around? Interesting.
Since when is saying "Nationalism" a German, Jew, American or Canadian....
Me thinks you just want to be angry, and as usual have nothing to hold on to. Nationalism is not unique to any one group.
But nice try. I'll await for any actual implication... - Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -2/+3Dreyfus - they are images. We bring to them what we have seen. Those of us that aren't used to violence and hatred the way Palestinians AND Israeli's live are appalled at both sides - and that is something that clearly bothers many - thinking that only the Israeli's should have sympathies.
As I have said, and will continue to say - it is sad.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/28/2008, -2/+3I agree that any people or individual citizen can be nationalistic - isn't that what caused WW1?
What else would you be implying by querying: "Nationalism by any chance?"
Why would he feel a sense of nationalism for Israel if he wasn't Jewish or an Israeli Arab/Christian?
"thinking that only the Israeli's should have sympathies. "
I suggest you navigate to any of the myriad of anti-Israel submissions here before you make the claim that only Israel has received sympathy.
I apologize if it feels as though I am attacking you - from your comments you seem to be free of bias and levelheaded. - writie, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1"They [Israelis] don't because they are a civilized democracy, unlike the Palestinians."
Palestine held a historic democratic election, whose results were immediately overturned by Israel and the Quartet. You can't blame them for not being a democracy when their results are not just ignored, but actively quashed (imprisonment for the winning party, Hamas).
Hamas are not my type of people, but they did win the election and have since offered a truce several times. It wouldn't take much to extend the current Hamas-Israel ceasefire to the West Bank and see if they can live up to their word. Call their bluff, if necessary.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -6/+3You simply do not know that. That is pure fear mongering.
- Waiting2awake, on 07/28/2008, -5/+3 That is an incredibly one sided view of things. Maybe you need to have your family, friends and region annexed before you "get it"? Maybe, you can be smart enough to exhibit empathy, and see yourself in their shoes.
- plimpton777, on 07/28/2008, -6/+2***** you. Two of my friends died watching FOX CNN CBS ABC NBC ETC.
- 10stackz, on 07/28/2008, -4/+1People need to quit taking up sides for the Palestinians and Israelis. This is a religious war, the Zionist are trying to remove the Palestinians from their land so the 12 tribes of Judah can be reunited. America is fighting a religious war for Israel and Most americans are blind to that fact.
Buried because this is nothing more than propaganda.- DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+3copy+paste sorry
___________________________
"Why don't you just come out and say it? "God said so". You know that's the real reason."
That is probably one of the biggest misconceptions about the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Jews' yearning and right to live in Israel.
I am an atheist. I am Jewish.
These two things are not at odds with one another.
Did "God say so"?
I don't know. I don't care.
What I do know is that my people has had a presence in Israel since the formation of Judaic culture. Similarly (I'll get to why), my people have been persecuted under the law of the reigning power.
The fact is that in this 2000 trial run of living without a physical nation Jews have been subject to pogroms not just organized by the people but sanctioned and endorsed by the government finally culminating in the unabated and uncontested slaughter of 6,000,000 of them.
It's an undeniable truth that Jews will never be safe unless they are the masters of their own domain.
Why Israel?
The answer isn't difficult - it's the justification that is.
There aren't many cultures that have survived for so long so I'll see if this modern allegory makes sense.
Would you put Spaniards in Africa?
Would you put Tribal Africans in Canada?
Would you put Australians of Aboriginal decent in Mexico?
When Jews were given the chance to reform their physical nation there's no other place that it could be.
The fact is that not much land was "stolen" from the Palestinians. Early Zionists had been buying up the land from Arab land owners since the early 1700's. (Hope Simpson Report)
Similarly, there would be zero Palestinian refugees had Israel's neighbors decided not to attack the first day of Israel's existence. Israel kicked the Palestinians (that stayed - many left) out because they didn't want a fifth column within their country. Similar to the internment camps proposed and executed in America during WW2.
Hope that cleared some things up.
- DrDreyfus, on 07/29/2008, -1/+3copy+paste sorry
- Hortnon, on 07/28/2008, -2/+8Of course, there's no context given for any of these pictures. I could sit here and make up 3 completely different back stories to every one of those pictures, all completely contradictary, and they'd be just as credible as what this video is trying to prove.
Buried as spam. With pleasure. - Lynx55, on 07/29/2008, -1/+2Propaganda. Non-neutral originating source.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is 
