ft.niagara Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 look at these crazy people who only want destruction. it's odd seeing jews acting like nazis did: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=FABqq_jjRRo Your utube video shows a NYC rally in support of Israel. Hardly people acting like nazis. What really upsetting is Islams intolerance and violence against other religions, and against women. Now that is really barbaric. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGaXxtvf2bM...feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rgSH0h45Eo...feature=related Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 You have a sick twisted mind to come up with this babble. It is testament that anyone can spindoctor anything.More comic relief than anything. His/her/its views are all over the place and clearly it's parody or sarcasm rather than serious posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyStone Posted January 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Rush Limbaugh would call you a "seminar" poster. You are obviously with an agenda: ANTI JEWISH. You start the thread and keep the 'poo-flinging' thing going. Your real name most likely begins with Abdul or Sheikh. KeyStone is a clever handle. It sounds almost western. Well, Rush Limbaugh might very well describe me as anti-Jewish, but that is because Rush Limbaugh uses gross generalizations, misinterpretations, outright lies, and a very loud voice, as tactics in his debating style. An informed poster might recognize that my posts have been critical of Israel's foreign policy, particularly towards Palestinians, as well as those posters who defend some of Israel's more egregious crimes. Crying anti-semitism or anti-Jewish every time someone criticizes Israel is getting a bit tired. Please consult with the CJC for updated tactics. I don't presume that everyone who defends Israel is Jewish. It's a bit silly for you to presume that everyone opposed to Israel's actions is Arab or Persian. But it's not as if you would be the only bigot here. You are in good company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) Your utube video shows a NYC rally in support of Israel. Hardly people acting like nazis.What really upsetting is Islams intolerance and violence against other religions, and against women. Now that is really barbaric. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGaXxtvf2bM...feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rgSH0h45Eo...feature=related you're changing the subject so that you don't have to deal with zionists' views of the israeli/palestinian situation. you try to change the topic by giving us links to stoning deaths? how does that even make sense? i don't think anyone here accepts or supports stoning so why even bother? are you saying because there have been a few cases of death by stoning, then it's okay for people to dance on the streets of NY and call for the killing of palestinians? the israeli supporters in NYC were calling for israel to wipe the palestinians out. they were okay with the children dying. are you one of those people niagara? Edited January 27, 2009 by dub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 are you saying because there have been a few cases of death by stoning, then it's okay for people to dance on the streets of NY and call for the killing of palestinians? No...you're saying that. ----------------------- You say 'yes'...I say 'no'. You say 'stop'... And I say 'go-go-go'... ---The Beatles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Then he was probably fibbing. Israel uses its own small arms. Uzi...Grail...Negrev, etc. Made in Israel. --------------------------------------------- The trouble with movies as a business is that it's an art, and the trouble with movies as art is that it's a business. ---Charlton Heston i don't know where you get your information, but a lot of weapons are bought by israel from the U.S. by money given to them by U.S. from the Jerusalem Post and CNN and Raw Story: Just last September, Congress approved a $77 million dollar deal to sell a thousand Boeing GBU-39 bunker-buster "smart bombs" to Israel. The Jerusalem Post reported on Monday that these small, GPS-guided missiles have now been used on underground tunnels and launchers in Gaza. "Precision guided bombs are only precision in that they hit the target they are aimed at," Starr explained. "We're getting these civilian casualties. These weapons are supposed to be used for a country's self-defense. Israel, obviously, believes this is its self-defense against Hamas, but you see these civilian casualties. That's not why the US sells weapons abroad -- for the killing of innocent civilians." "The world community only is going to stand for this for so long," continued Starr. "It's this reason that you're seeing people look for a political settlement." She added that Israel now intends to launch a ground campaign in Gaza to "get rid of Hamas once and for all," but -- as the US has learned in Iraq and Afghanistan -- it is impossible to wipe out an insurgency by military force along without first getting the civilian population on your side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 No...you're saying that. ----------------------- You say 'yes'...I say 'no'. You say 'stop'... And I say 'go-go-go'... ---The Beatles let him speak for himself. because in response to israeli jews dancing on the streets and calling for wiping out palestinians, he gave links to death by stoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 let him speak for himself.because in response to israeli jews dancing on the streets and calling for wiping out palestinians, he gave links to death by stoning. I'll post when and where I want unless Greg or Charles say otherwise. Your link shows people dancing in the street for some reason or another apparently in support of Israel. One or two others near the end seem to really dislike Hamas and perhaps all Palestinians...they aren't that clear...or smart by the looks. Ever see that Borat clip where he gets the bar to sing 'Throw the Jews Down the Well'? You might want to review it... i don't know where you get your information, but a lot of weapons are bought by israel from the U.S. by money given to them by U.S. Unlike many Arab nations, Israel isn't a welfare case. The so-called aid isn't without its strings and is often in the form of loan guarantees and such rather than a cheque in the mailbox like the Arabs are used to. Not having market economies...can you blame them for not figuring this out? Did you know that AK-47s come from the magical AK-47 tree? I didn't. But, they apparently do in this day and age. ------------------------------------ A Chuck U. Farley Production Presents: "Buggery On The High Seas". ---Cheech y Chong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) I'll post when and where I want unless Greg or Charles say otherwise. oh sorry. i didn't know it's okay for you to speak for Greg and Charles. then carry on. Your link shows people dancing in the street for some reason or another apparently in support of Israel. One or two others near the end seem to really dislike Hamas and perhaps all Palestinians...they aren't that clear...or smart by the looks. Ever see that Borat clip where he gets the bar to sing 'Throw the Jews Down the Well'? You might want to review it... the question that the interviewer, who is jewish, asked several times was that how long should israel continue its assault? should they continue to kill people? most of the people were for wiping the palestinians. some even spelled it out. it's kind of like the bush_cheney guy who posts in here who called the latest conflict a "happy ending" even after i asked him if he thinks the 400+ palestinian children killed was a happy ending. do you think it's okay for people to yell for the wiping out of another people? how low can these people sink? Unlike many Arab nations, Israel isn't a welfare case. The so-called aid isn't without its strings and is often in the form of loan guarantees and such rather than a cheque in the mailbox like the Arabs are used to. Not having market economies...can you blame them for not figuring this out?Did you know that AK-47s come from the magical AK-47 tree? I didn't. But, they apparently do in this day and age. ------------------------------------ A Chuck U. Farley Production Presents: "Buggery On The High Seas". ---Cheech y Chong israel receives $3billion (plus other incentives) a year from the U.S. government. most of that goes towards buying weapons back from the U.S. are you trying to dispute this too? israel receives more money from the U.S. than any other country in the world.... so i'm not sure why you're calling the arab states welfare countries when israel receive more money than other country. money that they never pay back. Edited January 27, 2009 by dub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 israel receives more money from the U.S. than any other country in the world.... so i'm not sure why you're calling the arab states welfare countries when israel receive more money than other country. money that they never pay back. Yeah...it's a big suitcase full of cash. Any citation re: what Israel uses the suitcase full of cash for? Or that it never gets paid back? Funny n' all....right? ----------------------------- I'm Brian and so's my wife. ---Monty Python's Life of Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 the question that the interviewer, who is jewish, asked several times was that how long should israel continue its assault? should they continue to kill people? most of the people were for wiping the palestinians. some even spelled it out. How did you determin he was Jewish, again? ------------------------ Ecce Homo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) (double) Edited January 27, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Yeah...it's a big suitcase full of cash.Any citation re: what Israel uses the suitcase full of cash for? Or that it never gets paid back? Funny n' all....right? ----------------------------- I'm Brian and so's my wife. ---Monty Python's Life of Brian sure. i will give you citations. since you like wikipedia so much, here is some information: Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid.[17] While it is mostly military aid, in the past a portion was dedicated to economic assistance. In 2004, the second-largest recipient of economic foreign aid from the United States was Israel, second to Iraq.In 2007, the United States increased its military aid to Israel by over 25% to an average of $3 billion per year for the following ten year period, while ending economic aid.In 1998, Israeli, congressional, and Administration officials agreed to reduce U.S. $1.2 billion in Economic Support Funds (ESF) to zero over ten years, while increasing Foreign Military Financing (FMF) from $1.8 billion to $2.4 billion. Separate from the scheduled cuts, there was an extra $200 million in anti-terror assistance, $1.2 billion to implement the Wye agreement, and the supplemental appropriations bill assisted for another $1 billion in FMF for the 2003 fiscal year. For the 2005 fiscal year, Israel received $2.202 billion in FMF, $357 million in ESF, and migration settlement assistance of $50 million. For 2006, the Administration has requested $240 million in ESF and $2.28 billion in FMF. H.R. 3057, passed in the House on June 28, 2005, and in the Senate on July 20, approves these amounts. is that good enough for you or do you want more? now you show me that U.S. is not giving over $3billion a year to israel each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 How did you determin he was Jewish, again?------------------------ Ecce Homo i usually try to read, watch and listen carefully to the information provided and i also like to look into the background and the sources; not only does he mention that he is jewish but you can also read his article on the topic: http://www.alternet.org/story/119372 Pro-Israel Rally Attended by Big-Time NY Dems Descends into Calls for 'Wiping Out' Palestinians By Max Blumenthal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 now you show me that U.S. is not giving over $3billion a year to israel each year. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...d_to_Israel.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...d_to_Israel.gif what are you showing me M.Dancer? what kind of a response is that? i don't get how that counters my argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 what are you showing me M.Dancer? what kind of a response is that? i don't get how that counters my argument. For the last 4 years the total has been less than 3 B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 For the last 4 years the total has been less than 3 B i'm not going to go through the other assistance they receive that is not on that graph. it still does not change the fact that israel receives more aid than any other country (iraq not included) for decades. i'm still a little baffled by the earlier comment in regards to arab states being welfare states when israel has received more assistance from the U.S. than all of them combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 sure. i will give you citations.since you like wikipedia so much, here is some information: Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid.[17] While it is mostly military aid, in the past a portion was dedicated to economic assistance. In 2004, the second-largest recipient of economic foreign aid from the United States was Israel, second to Iraq.In 2007, the United States increased its military aid to Israel by over 25% to an average of $3 billion per year for the following ten year period, while ending economic aid.In 1998, Israeli, congressional, and Administration officials agreed to reduce U.S. $1.2 billion in Economic Support Funds (ESF) to zero over ten years, while increasing Foreign Military Financing (FMF) from $1.8 billion to $2.4 billion. Separate from the scheduled cuts, there was an extra $200 million in anti-terror assistance, $1.2 billion to implement the Wye agreement, and the supplemental appropriations bill assisted for another $1 billion in FMF for the 2003 fiscal year. For the 2005 fiscal year, Israel received $2.202 billion in FMF, $357 million in ESF, and migration settlement assistance of $50 million. For 2006, the Administration has requested $240 million in ESF and $2.28 billion in FMF. H.R. 3057, passed in the House on June 28, 2005, and in the Senate on July 20, approves these amounts. is that good enough for you or do you want more? now you show me that U.S. is not giving over $3billion a year to israel each year. I never said Israel doesn't get aid from America. My point is the perception of that aid. When the Palestinian Arabs get aid...it's like a welfare cheque. When Israel gets aid, it's not a suitcase full of cash. It could be a simple as agreeing to sell F-16s at a reduced rate to Israel (which they did)...the resulting difference being 'aid'. My wife calls it a sale. My other point is also simple. For all the 'massive' amounts of US military aid being sent to Israel, what I see mostly on the battlefield is Israeli equipment and vast amounts of captured Arab equipment (ex-Soviet). Israeli soldiers have their own small arms and tanks for the most part...though I've seen quite a few old M-113s which are American Viet-Nam era APCs. Where this military aid apparently shows up is in the air where we see F-16s and F-15s...Apaches...Drones...Patriot missiles and what-not. The high tech stuff that costs A LOT per unit. Eats up yer '3 billion' pretty fast if we view it as a suitcase full of $$$. But either way...so what? Israel has been a pretty darn good chum over the years to America and vica versa. They can give aid or not as they please. Or is this all part of that 'fairness' thing some folks insist upon? Like, since Israel gets '3 billion', Hamas should get '3 billion'... Interesting concept...but that's not how zee vvorld verks. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Kyle: Is anyone else having problems concentrating on this? I just can't seem to concentrate. Cartman: Maybe we should send you to a concentration camp. ---South Park Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 i'm still a little baffled by the earlier comment in regards to arab states being welfare states when israel has received more assistance from the U.S. than all of them combined. Israel is a democratic market economy while Arab states tend to be either theocracies or dictatorships. Aid to these Arab states is to make ends meet...either in terms of the military or the economy. So-called aid to Israel is a business deal...money is to be made on both sides. ----------------------------------- Nothing except a battle lost can be half as melancholy as a battle won. ---Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
segnosaur Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Of course I said its not enough. Because while rocket attacks may have decreased they were still not eliminated. Ah I see, so after years of occupation, and thousands of dead Palestinians, Israel feels that a single rocket is enough to abandon the peace process, and trample the rights of the Palestinians. Ahem.... a "single rocket"? In the months that there was supposedly a 'truce', there were over 3 dozen rocket and mortar attacks. Not one. dozens. I'm particularly amazed at your willingness to dismissed dozens of attempts to kill Israeli citizens (not soldiers, but citizens... women, children, the elderly, etc.) is dismissed as just a 'single rocket', something that should be tolerated. You see, there will never be a time when no rockets are fired at Israel Well, lets see... If you actually want me to believe that the Palestinians are not the aggressors here, and that Israel should be willing to accept 'a few' rocket attacks, then perhaps the Palestinians should: - Not have an organization in power with the stated goal of the destruction of Israel - Should actually be shown to be making an attempt to stop the rocket attacks and other activities such as digging tunnels and kidnapping soldiers by, you know, actually arresting those involved - Not be showing TV shows like "Tomorrow's Pioneers". Yes, perfection may be a difficult goal to achieve, but your willingness to dismiss Palestinian culpability is rather distasteful. By the way, while you're trying to suggest that Israel should just accept constant bombardment, I want you to think of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel used to be subject to attacks from the north, until they actually invaded in 2006. The result? The attacks pretty much stopped. In fact, when there was a recent attack from Lebanon during the recent fighting, Hezbollah actually condemed the attackes and acted against those responsible. Hezbollah learned... why not Hamas? "The perfect is the enemy of the good". If Israel gives no recognition to progress, and only cares about perfection - they they are not looking for peace - they are looking for justifications to ignore the peace process. You're assuming that there actually IS progress. The fact that Hamas (you know, the people elected to run Gaza) has as its goal the total destruction of Israel suggests that perhaps there is not as much progress as you might think. You know, I keep asking this question, but for some reason people like you seem to avoid answering it... I did answer it. You just ignored my answer. No, you haven't answered it. All you've done is tried to justify the actions of groups like Hamas. So, once again... Given the fact that UN resolution 242 requires all states to end beligerance, when has Israel ever had a period of more than a couple of years when it has not been subject to terrorist attacks and/or external military threats. So, still waiting for your answer. It's a situation of give and take. Which comes first? Again, not all Palestinians can be controlled. Progress needs to be recognized. So, the leadership going from Fatah (a group that at least was willing to recognize Israel's right to exist) to Hamas (a group that has as its charter the goal of destroying Israel) is considered a sign of progress? Yes, Israel has always been subject to threats, but when Palestine is able to reduce rocket fire by 98%, and Israel responds by killing 6 Hamas leaders during a ceasefire, that's not really rewarding their progress or efforts. Yeah, how dare those dirty Israelis make any attempts to stop the kidnapping of Israelis. If the Canadian terrorists were hiding within the general population, and the Canadian government did not stop the attacks either due to malevolence or incompetence, the U.S. would still have the right to defend itself, and any civilian deaths should be placed squarely on the terrorists who were using the general population as unwitting human shields. Yes, that's right. Because we all know the only way to fight fair is to wear uniforms and stand in a field where no civilians are so that Israel can bomb the shit out of them with their billion dollar warplanes. You know, what you've done here is given a fall dichotomy. Believe it or not, there are alternatives that Hamas could engage in besides hiding behind baby carriages while they shoot at Israelis. Militarily they could restrict their attacks to actual military targets. They could restrict their movements to unpopulated areas (not "standing in a field"... believe it or not, the gaza strip consists of hundreds of square kilometers. If this really were some sort of legitimate military force, they would make use of some of that land. Even if it were necessary to operate within civilian areas, Hamas has far exceeded what would be acceptable, including: - Using a hospital for its operations (even having its people impersonate doctors).... http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/episodes...-hospital/4086/ (oh, and by the way, that source doesn't come from the IDF) - Firing from areas around schools and hospitals ... http://www.newsweek.com/id/180691/page/2 (And by the way, many of the sources quoted in that article are not from the IDF) - Hijacking ambulances ... http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/hamas-tri...2818246374.html - Firing rockets from an area used by journalists ... http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/...,603508,00.html By the way, I'd suggest you pay close attention to the article on hijacking ambulances. It has a section that describes how the Israelis were taking special percautions in order to allow the Palestinians to treat their wounded, and Hamas was willing to risk that in its operations. First of all, the article comes from Human Rights Watch, a group that certainly cannot be criticized as being 'pro-Israeli'. If they seem to think that the case was worth mentioning, they must have thought there was enough proof. I never disputed the source, so I don't see why you think that is something wrong with my argument. Read what I wrote again. I never claimed you were disputing the source. But OK, lets say proof was lacking... keep in mind that Hamas is an organization that regularly arrests and detains palistinians themselves and holds them (often without trial... see: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=23565). So given the willingness of Hamas to arrest or even kill people that it thinks harm its cause, then why would these members of the Aqsa Martyrs' brigade not be treated with the same consideration that they treat other prisoners? It is certainly disconcerting, but again I don't know all the issue. YOu know, I rather suspect that even if you did know the issue, and Hamas actually was willing to let these other groups operate, you would find a way to excuse their actions. Perhaps those they detained were relatives of the police. Perhaps they managed to convince the launchers not to do it again. Oh, that is wonderful. Wonder if your average criminal could try that here. "You just robbed a bank, but if you agree not to do it again we won't arrest you". Perhaps the men had their children killed by the IDF, and Hamas was sympathetic. That makes absolutely no sense... You crow about Hamas feeling committed enough to peace to allow only dozens of rocket attacks, then you're saying that Hamas is justified in allowing others to continue attacks. By the way, your description of Shalit as an 'IDF terrorist' demonstrates your ignorance of the word (and even the whole concept) of 'terrorist'. Oh, that's right, IDF aren't terrorists because they wear uniforms, and they don't TRY to kill civilians. I realize that you were trying to be sarcastic here... but believe it or not, your description is accurate. Of course, since they actually kill 8 times more civilians than Palestine kills Jews, they must be pretty f*king inept. Believe it or not, there is no law that specifies that the number of casualites on both sides must be equal. Frankly, Hamas could just say that they are launching rockets trying to kill IDF. Except that would be an extremely idiotic claim to make, given the fact that the rockets used are wildly inaccurate. Oh, guess they missed and killed civilians. That's ok, because they were trying to kill IDF so that makes it totally legit. That seems to be Israel's practice. Well, given the fact that hundreds of Hamas fighters were killed in the fighting (despite Hamas' willingness to use human sheilds) is a pretty good indication that that is the case. By the way, if you read the following article, it gives a description of the guidelines the Israelis use in deciding whether to attack a target... http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/...,603508,00.html On the other hand, the Hamas charter indicates that Israel must be wiped off the map. Why exactly would someone want to believe in the reports of underground tunnels? Lets see:- Shalit was kidnapped after Hamas used underground tunnels to launch an attack. So, why is it so far fetched to believe that Hamas may have wanted to use the same tactics? http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/06/25/hamas-soldier.html - The fact that Israel had uncovered the tunnels in 2008 was widely reported in western media. To assume that there was 'no proof' is to assume some giant conspiricy theory in action. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle5089940.ece So, let me see if I understand your logic. 1) Hamas did it before, so it is reasonable to assume they are doing it again, even though there is a ceasefire on. Well, you yourself were willing to justify the Palestinians holding Israelis hostage even through a 'ceasefire'... why wouldn't Hamas feel the same way? 2) Israel claimed they found the tunnels, and since the Times printed what Israel told them, you view that as a valid source. While I don't trust the IDF 100%, they have shown themselves to be more trustworthy than other sources. (Hello... Jenine? Or how about your wildly inaccurate Rachael Corrie claims?) 3) Israel knew exactly that the tunnel was being built for kidnapping purposes and not for smuggling of basic supplies. The tunnel went into Israel. Not exactly a location where they'd find a lot of sympathetic people willing to supply them. 4) There was no way to remove the tunnel or engage in diplomatic relations. Killing Hamas leaders was the only way. Hmmmm... Hamas takes agressive action, Israel takes steps to stop them.... and Israel is the bad guy... As for there being 'no other way to deal with it', what do you expect them to do? Send flowers to the tunnel diggers? Invite them over for beer Hmm, gosh - that's a tough one. They could: 1) Tell Hamas to shut down the tunnel or else Israel will be forced to bomb it. First of all, even if Hamas shut down the one tunnel, there may have been others. Why should Israel trust Hamas to shut down all tunnels when they were constructing this one tunnel in secret? Secondly... you suggested Israel should 'bomb it'... wouldn't that run the risk of killing Hamas fighters (the thing that you're incorrectly blaming Israel for earlier?) 2) Involve the international community so that international forces go in and investigate. Yeah... that makes sense... given the fact that much of the international community is anti-Israeli, and there is no ready military force to go in and investigate. (Not to mention the fact that I doubt ANY military is going to be willing to risk their soldiers in a potentially hostile situation) What colour is the sky in your world? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) I never said Israel doesn't get aid from America. My point is the perception of that aid. When the Palestinian Arabs get aid...it's like a welfare cheque. When Israel gets aid, it's not a suitcase full of cash. It could be a simple as agreeing to sell F-16s at a reduced rate to Israel (which they did)...the resulting difference being 'aid'. My wife calls it a sale. are you talking about the $50 million total US gave to the palestinians in 2007? the US gave israel $120 million as an economic grants in 2007. at the same time, US gave israel $40 million just for "migration and refugee assistance". instead of wasting your own time and others' time, read the following links in regards to US aid to both israel and to the palestinians. you might learn a few things: http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33222_20080102.pdf http://italy.usembassy.gov/pdf/other/RS22370.pdf Edited January 28, 2009 by dub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka mycroft Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) Letter to the National Post Re: Front-page editorial cartoon by Gary Clement, Feb. 24.It is beyond the pale for the National Post to equate Sid Ryan's stance on Israel with support for the Holocaust. Your vilification of Mr. Ryan is premised on the false proposition that Israel is being singled out and being treated differently because it describes itself as a "Jewish state." The fact is that the union movement has called for sanctions in the past against countries or states that violate human rights. The union movement boycotted Chile for its human rights abuses. Does this make it anti-Hispanic? Furthermore, it is normal for sanctions to be imposed on countries that violate UN resolutions. Israel is violating a number of resolutions regarding both the occupation of the West Bank and the continued construction of settlements. If the National Post is serious in wanting Israel to be treated like every other nation, you should be applauding Sid Ryan, not calling him names. Another letter Unfortunately, it's become more common for pro-Israel polemicists like letter-writer William Nicholls to deliberately conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism in an attempt to delegitimize criticism of Israel and defame that state's critics. By overextending the concept of anti-Semitism, these polemicists are effectively making the concept of anti-Semitism meaningless, and making it easier for actual bigots and racists to practise their craft.As British philosopher Brian Klug wrote in his seminal essay, The Myth of the New Anti-Semitism, "when anti-Semitism is everywhere, it is nowhere. And when every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite, we no longer know how to recognize the real thing-- the concept of anti-Semitism loses its significance." Moreover, only the most toxic of ultra-nationalists would contend that a state is the same as its people, and that criticizing one is the same as criticizing the other. Yet this is exactly what Prof. Nicholls must have us believe if he is seriously arguing that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are the same thing. Edited March 20, 2009 by aka mycroft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Listening to a Jewish spokesman speak on the radio the other day I was taken back when he was describing Palistine-- He said to para phrase.." The people in Palistine...I mean the terrorists" He instantly de-humanized the humans into things - This old guy was an old school racist - and what I did notice after listening to this Jewish programing is that almost all of the speakers were a bit on the stupid side - slightly dull - Hate to sound nasty - but maybe the forced and tradional inter-breeding that the Jews have done has left them genetically stupified...just plain dumb - this must explain their in ability to make friends - stupidity and racism are a bad mix - If Israel were below the American bible belt - WE WOULD CALL THEM RED NECKS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/35911.shtmlQUOTE Re: Front-page editorial cartoon by Gary Clement, Feb. 24. It is beyond the pale for the National Post to equate Sid Ryan's stance on Israel with support for the Holocaust. Your vilification of Mr. Ryan is premised on the false proposition that Israel is being singled out and being treated differently because it describes itself as a "Jewish state." The fact is that the union movement has called for sanctions in the past against countries or states that violate human rights. The union movement boycotted Chile for its human rights abuses. Does this make it anti-Hispanic? Furthermore, it is normal for sanctions to be imposed on countries that violate UN resolutions. Israel is violating a number of resolutions regarding both the occupation of the West Bank and the continued construction of settlements. If the National Post is serious in wanting Israel to be treated like every other nation, you should be applauding Sid Ryan, not calling him names. Israel is a country about the size of Prince Edward Island. Its human rights record is not perfect but neither is Canada's. It certainly isn't on the appalling scale of nations such as Sudan. In spite of the fact that Israel is but a flyspeck on a map, it is a magnet for overheated and selective criticism, as well as one-sided UN resolutions.There can be little doubt that much of the criticism of Israel is based on its identity as a "Jewish" state, by people and countries who have no moral standards whatsoever. http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/36921.shtmlUnfortunately, it's become more common for pro-Israel polemicists like letter-writer William Nicholls to deliberately conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism in an attempt to delegitimize criticism of Israel and defame that state's critics. By overextending the concept of anti-Semitism, these polemicists are effectively making the concept of anti-Semitism meaningless, and making it easier for actual bigots and racists to practise their craft. http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/36921.shtml In reality there is little difference. The mythical group of "anti-Zionists but not anti-Semites" had their chance for the millenium before 1945, and blew it. Outside of "New World" countries such as the U.S., Canada and Australia life for Jews was rife with persecutions, riots sanctioned by police, and often out and out murder. The horse is already out of the barn on the ability for Jews to exist without a Jewish state. Edited March 18, 2009 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.