bud

you have very little focus and attention span. once again, you're trying to cloud the debate by introducing what is in your head, which is unfocused misinformation that you have decided to splatter on a message forum. israel plans to forcibly transfer a minority group, all because they are not jewish. you, myself and everyone else know that an action like that would never happen in today's canada. at least not in the western world where we have set standards in morality, ethics and of course, we have international law which sees ethnic cleansing to be a war crime. unfortunately, now you're wasting time by trying to compare today's treatment of the aboriginals in canada by the canadian government to israel's treatment of its non-jews. israel and the people who control it do not care about morals, ethics and international law, when it comes to their vision of jewish only, racist zionist vision of greater israel and you are here to support their shameless behaviour and regime.

of course aboriginals have a lot of problems and there needs to some changes in canada. but their treatment by our government cannot be compared to what israel is doing to the palestinians and bedouins. again, the transferring of 40,000 bedouins is not something canada of today would ever do. these racist and discriminatory actions by israel are something that perhaps a canada from over 100 years would be capable of doing, or a nazi regime would do in order to keep control and ethnically cleanse a population. shame on you for trying to excuse such an action.

a powerful column in haaretz in regards to perez and bibi's hypocrisy and their sad display of once again trying to score morality points, like anyone believes israel anymore, by mentioning mandela and what he stood for: Mandela's mission is not yet complete Shimon Peres and Benjamin Netanyahu have no right to eulogize Nelson Mandela. South African President Nelson Mandela, in his address for International Solidarity Day with the Palestinian People on December 4, 1997, said: “We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.” And Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said after Mandela’s death: “Nelson Mandela was among the greatest figures of our time … a man of vision and … a moral leader of the highest order.” The sharp-eyed surely noticed the picture in the background when Netanyahu delivered his statement: an Israeli flag and the walls of Jerusalem’s Old City. There he was, eulogizing the “moral leader” against the background of the occupied city, whose Palestinian residents are oppressed and dispossessed. It’s a city where a separation regime prevails – an example of Israeli apartheid, even if it’s not the worst example. The sharp-eared must have noticed how false his flowery words sounded. President Shimon Peres also offered high praise for the “leader of immense stature,” and his words were no less hypocritical. The man who was involved up to his neck in the disgraceful cooperation between Israel and apartheid South Africa, who hosted its prime ministers with pomp and circumstance while Mandela languished in prison, is suddenly admiring the man who symbolized the struggle with that regime. Neither Peres nor Netanyahu have any right to eulogize Mandela; both are responsible, more than any other statesmen in the free world, for undermining his legacy and establishing the (nonidentical) twin of the regime he battled. They’re eulogizing him? Mandela will turn in his grave and history will laugh bitterly. he goes on to ask two very simple but important questions: Why was Israel virtually the only country that collaborated with that evil regime? Why are so many good people convinced that Israel is an apartheid state? While it may not pay to dwell on past shame – even Mandela forgave Israel – questions about the present should disturb us greatly.

you still haven't been able to respond to the fact that what israel is doing to the bedouins today, would never be accepted by canada or canadians, today. when the history of the european colonizers in canada and their treatment of the aboriginals is talked about, it's agreed that it was a shameful period in canadian history. you want to justify israel's actions by saying that canada did the same thing to the aboriginals in the past. once again, just more typing and no substance by you. not to mention a reference to the holocaust. how is it that there are some jews who never really learned from the holocaust? how is it that some of them are now advocating the way israel is treating the palestinians, which includes, systematic ethnic cleansing. especially in east jerusalem. does the statement "never again" only refer to the jews only? the great people in the past century, especially the champions of human rights have condemned israel's treatment of palestinians. this includes gandhi and mandela. there is a reason for that: it's because israel's treatment of palestinians and other non-jews is wrong.

your comments are absurd. in this day and age, with our moral and ethical standards and with our human rights laws, canada would NEVER do to the natives of canada as israel is doing to the palestinians and to the bedouins. imagine if canada suddenly declared that they are transporting 40,000 aboriginals and declaring the land for non aboriginals only. you cannot compare israel to any western country in today's world. israel is in a class of its own when it comes to being racist and discriminatory.

you can wait all you want. it's no secret that i'm not going to share more than i want to. i do take some delight in seeing you admit that your way of thinking resembles the immoral, unethical colonialist behaviour of the early 'white man' and their treatment of aboriginals. here you are admitting to it. this is after i mentioned that in this day and age, canada would never engage in the behaviour that israel is engaging in now, as it doesn't match with the standards in morality and ethics that we have set for ourselves:

my strongest memory of mandela was during the 1998 general assembly opening at the UN. in the morning before the first addresses, he walked around in one of his signature shirts, chit-chatting with junior diplomats from all different countries. wherever he stood was the center of gravity of the room. even though other heads of state were in the hall as well, all eyes were on mandela. no one cared about the others there was this special quality to his smile that he greeted you with. there was a undefinable purity to it, perhaps a smile that only those that truly have defeated hatred with love can carry. however, later in the day, when mandela addressed the GA, i was stunned to see the israeli delegation stand up and walk out as mandela began to speak. this is the highest gesture of disapproval a country could show. disagreement between israel and mandela was no secret to anyone, but the apparent depth of it was still surprising to me. it was very odd, almost surreal. because to the rest of the world, mandela was essentially a semi-god. today, again, we are reminded of the tremendous love and respect mandela enjoyed. may he rest in peace.

i would say the biggest reason was timing since iran has been offering the same deal all along. even ahmadinejad's offered the same thing to obama and obama didn't - or couldn't - make a deal. Former Obama Advisor: Rouhani’s Nuclear Offer No Different Than Ahmadinejad’s i would agree with moonlight that trust was a factor as well. ahmadinejad was simply not a negotiator. that and the fact that his reputation was pounded by the zionist PR machine. for example, ahmadinejad has been labeled as the guy who wanted to exterminate the jews (even though he never did say that). there was no way obama could deal with a guy with such a label or reputation. rouhani on the other hand, is new, fresh, smiley, with a reformist title and an active twitter account! not to mention he brought in zarif as the new foreign minister.

i support their movement and i encourage any group that promotes human rights. has this been a secret, sherlock?

here is a piece from mainstream internet media source, salon, who has come out in support of boycotting israel for its human rights violations after a major academic group calls for it. Academics should boycott Israel: Growing movement takes next step A major scholarly group affirms a boycott over Palestine. They're right and ethical -- and widely misunderstood In recent years, we have seen greater recognition in the United States that religious acrimony and ancient blood feuds are not the source of the Israel-Palestine conflict, whose progenitor in fact is Jewish colonization. As this recognition grows, along with corresponding support for Palestinian human rights, unprecedented pressure bears on Israel’s defenders to maintain the once-dominant narratives of Israeli victimhood and Palestinian terror. These days, Israel is an extremely difficult state to defend. It should be so. Israel continues to make a mockery of the “peace process” by constructing new settlements and insulting American leaders. It tolerates politicians who routinely make racist statements. And it continues to be in violation of at least 77 United Nations Resolutions andnumerous provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. if the american politicians are powerless in persuading israel to do the right thing, this is what needs to be done. the resistance against south africa started with such boycotts and when it picked up momentum, the easily influenced politicians had no choice but to do the right thing, which was to condemn the human rights violators and stop supporting them. The latest challenge to these violations comes from the Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions movement, which has attracted the attention of pro-Israel advocacy groups and the Israeli government itself, thus validating the efficacy of the tactic. A specific element of BDS, academic boycott, was recently ratified by the Association of Asian American Studies and enjoys overwhelming support among the membership of the American Studies Association, whose National Council today voted to affirm a resolution honoring the Palestinian call to boycott Israeli universities. the article lists the reasons why israel is in violation and why its necessary to speak out against it Here are the facts: No evidence has ever been presented that the Israeli government is interested in a viable solution to the conflict. Instead, Israel has persistently built illegal settlements, intensified its Judaization programs, shot and arrested children, appropriated land, destroyed olive groves, flaunted international law, tolerated pogroms against black immigrants, and passedovertly racist legislation, all of it with indisputable, institutional participation from Israeli universities. More facts: The people of Palestine have been subject to a project of settler colonization for nearly 150 years, as long as the French occupied Algeria. Over a million Palestinians live in refugee camps throughout the Arab World, many in severe poverty. Palestinian citizens of Israel inhabit the lower level of a two-tiered legal system that limits their rights to employment, land ownership, education, mobility, free expression, political participation and public services. The Gaza Strip is destitute and overcrowded, victim of an Israeli campaign to strangulate its economy with the express purpose of making its residents starve and suffer. The West Bank is carved into hundreds of inaccessible geographies separated by segregated highways, settlements, checkpoints, military installations and concrete walls. link

as much as you want to make it sound like i'm so closely associated with cjpme, i'm not. but whatever, i don't care. you've tried to associate me with hamas and hezbollah before, so as you know, i'm a man with many many connections. that said, i do support cjpme's position on sanctioning any israeli company in the west bank or who works with the illegal jewish settlements. this is inline with what the EU guidelines which are scheduled to start in january. since these jewish settlements are illegal and are violating international law, i'd like to show support for international law.

the extremist are coming out. here is congressman low-IQ, calling to nuke iran. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHP1LXWOOoI i wonder what kind of campaign donation he receives from AIPAC.

we as in canadians. with the clear rules and laws we have when it comes to human rights and the moral standards we have set for ourselves in the west, canada would not accept what it did back then and it would never happen in this day and age. so you have proven my point by admitting that israel is engaging in immoral and illegal behaviour with the way it is treating the natives of the land.

no one but you has ridiculed you. someone's religious background is not at discussion here. blind patriotism, blind nationalism, excusing immoral and unethical behaviour is. zionism is a sick ideology, much like wahabism is.

while rue tries to explain and justify yet another racist act by these ugly zionists, we should consider how we, as canadians would feel if the canadian government suddenly decided to forcibly move a group of natives from where they have been living for centuries, into a small, closed off area. this, without even consulting with them and while tearing their homes, every time they put them up. come to think of it. this did happen over a century ago and we're still apologizing for the inhumane way we treated them. here is what one israeli civil rights organization says: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10_pcJ3u8oU

i think hudson answered you well. he had the patience to go through all of the misinformation you posted. i stopped after reading your first link, which did not mention anything about iranians using chemical weapons. it confirmed the opposite. you have to understand that when you post one fallacy and misinformation after another, it makes it difficult to gather the motivation to engage you. my background is not of importance. the comments i make are based on international law, human rights laws and what i understand morality and humanity is. i don't base my comments based on what my background is and my agenda is not based on allowing a tribe to win. you do. you need to better understand that your tribe doesn't have to dictate what your beliefs should be or to have this unconditional, blinded support you want to show. there are plenty of jews who are against zionism's racist and selfish ideology. i hope one day you are able to grow as a person.

lols. satire is not only funny but it really can highlight the ridiculousness of the ridiculous.

i am not in agreement, because all western intelligence agencies, who would love to catch iran trying to make nuclear weapons agree that iran has no nuclear weapons and has abandoned its nuclear weapons programs many years ago. you didn't answer: any idea why israel needs them? why over 40 other countries have them? any idea why israel needs over 200 nuclear weapons? any idea why they won't sign the NPT? any idea why israel needs chemical and biological weapons? any idea why they won't ratify the chemical weapons convention?

any idea why israel needs them? why over 40 other countries have them? any idea why israel needs over 200 nuclear weapons? any idea why they won't sign the NPT? any idea why israel needs chemical and biological weapons? any idea why they won't ratify the chemical weapons convention?

baby steps dop. we're talking about rue's spreading of misinformation and now you're changing the subject. regarding iran's nuclear weapons programs. no need to take my word for it, take the word of both the u.s. intelligence organizations and israeli intelligence organizations - but not bibi's personal intelligence agency that shows no proof and it contradicts the others - they all say, that iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. all of them. here is the national intelligence estimates for iran: nuclear intentions and capabilities if you have a problem how far their missiles can travel, go have a debate with the intelligence agencies in u.s. and israel.

i was pointing to the first link he posted. when everyone already knows that it was iraq who used CW against the iranians and kurdish civilians and the first link he posts actually counters whatever fantasy he's trying to create, why is there a need to take anything else he spews seriously? it would be a shame for you to ruin the moment of honesty and integrity by trying to apologize for rue.

i will disagree with misinformation and lies, regardless. yes. as you did. the article he posted says nothing about iran using chemical weapons. it talks about iraq using it. if we can't be honest and forward and agree on simple facts like this and instead engage in lying and misrepresentation, then what is the point of debating?

where in the report? what are you reading in rue's first link? because this is what i'm reading: In fact, until that point, no civilian in the world ever had. The mustard-gas bombs dropped on Sardasht on that afternoon were the first time a chemical weapon was used on a civilian town. In the following months, Saddam Hussein’s troops would drop these deadly bombs on several other villages in Iran as well as on Kurdish settlements in Iraq itself, including the infamous bombing of Halabja. As Saddam’s inhumane campaign progressed, the consequences of a chemical attack quickly became known. But on this June afternoon, the people of Sardasht were bewildered by what was happening.

read your own links, rue. the only controversy is in your head. your link talks about iraq using chemical weapons on iranians. i don't know if these displays by you are on purpose to spread misinformation or you are spreading misinformation because you have a terrible attention span and cannot tell the difference between iran and iraq. your display here is extremely pathetic.

rue. once again, you told a fib and failed to own up to it when confronted: either back up that the iranians used chemical weapons again kurds civilians in turkey or admit by not responding to this that you're a failure.