DogOnPorch Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Lots of folks in need of a history class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 I bet the war will continue after that it will just make it easier for Israel to move onto land that isn't theirs drive the Palestinians our of their land. You mean all the land? Is that your policy? For Israel to leave the Middle East? That is certainly the policy of Hamas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 You dismiss, I confront. And I confront you on whether you think you think Hamas is a terrorist organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 And I confront you on whether you think you think Hamas is a terrorist organization. Some might call them gorilla fighters, does that term make you more comfortable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Dobbin, you surely understand plain English? You, yourself said that reduction of settlements is an important peace agenda. So why nothing has been done in real, practical terms, by you, and your allies in this ostensibly peace process, against ongoing expansion of settlements as you and they had no problem acting against militant attacks? In practical terms, the settlements ended in Gaza. What didn't end was the violent attacks from Gaza into Israel. Is it because you cannot control your act? Or because you don't actually mean what you're saying, i.e. all this peace terminology is just a guise to cover the actual goal - to prop and promote the friendy at all cost? Because remember, words will never explain fully and correctly what one really means, but the acts (and inactions) do. I have told you the facts are but you can't seem to control your response of all or nothing. That is not what the various groups involved agreed to. It was always step by step. Geographic area to geograhic area. Dobbin, I have no choince but to start ignoring these meaningless repetitions from now on, I stated my position very clearly many many times, in this very conversation, and if you couldn't read and understand what's written in plain English, or refrain from misrepresenting it, it's your own problem, just as your selective vision, and selective standards, and creative definitons of successes, and my job here is only to expose it to the maximum extent possible. You haven't. Your focus has been on settlements and you've indicated you think that saying Hamas is a terrorist organization is unfair. It is my contention that you believe that Hamas is not a terrorist organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 And I confront you on whether you think you think Hamas is a terrorist organization. "Terror is Virtue" (Robespierre) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Some might call them gorilla fighters, does that term make you more comfortable? So you don't believe they are a terrorist organization and it is your policy that we accept their ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 "Terror is Virtue" (Robespierre) Which you seem to support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) So you don't believe they are a terrorist organization and it is your policy that we accept their ways. Show me where I wrote any of those words. I can stick words in your mouth too. Soo you believe they are a terrorist organization and all the women and children who live in Hamas protected Gaza should be killed? Edited July 18, 2009 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Which you seem to support. Without the support of terror, human beings would be like any other animals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Without the support of terror, human beings would be like any other animals. Thanks for that. I'll pass your quote on to those who suffer at the hands of terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Show me where I wrote any of those words. Show me where you sai they were a terrorist organization. I can stick words in your mouth too. Soo you believe they are a terrorist organization and all the women and children who live in Hamas protected Gaza should be killed? I said clearly that Canada did not and does not support Hamas as long as they advocate the end of all any Israelis in the Middle East. What we have done is give $300 million in direct aid to the people of Palestine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Thanks for that. I'll pass your quote on to those who suffer at the hands of terrorists. The access you have makes of you an accomplice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Show me where you sai they were a terrorist organization. Show me where I said "it is your policy that we accept their ways." I said clearly that Canada did not and does not support Hamas as long as they advocate the end of all any Israelis in the Middle East.What we have done is give $300 million in direct aid to the people of Palestine. Yet we support Israel even though it is their policy is to settle until their is no longer Land for the Palestinians to live on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 What we have done is give $300 million in direct aid to the people of Palestine. Your "direct aid" is killing their self-respect! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Hamas protected Gaza Hahaha, nice one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Your "direct aid" is killing their self-respect! So you would not send anything, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Show me where I said"it is your policy that we accept their ways." It is inferred by the indication that you don't think they are terrorist organization. Yet we support Israel even though it is their policy is to settle until their is no longer Land for the Palestinians to live on? Canada doesn't support settlements on disputed lands. We do support that Israel has agreed to the process of reducing violence, two states and the settlements issue. Hamas does not. They want Israelis tossed from all of the Middle East. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) The access you have makes of you an accomplice. The accomplice you have makes you an access. Edited July 18, 2009 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 So you would not send anything, right? Dunno about him, but I certainly wouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Dunno about him, but I certainly wouldn't. The policy of Canada has been to aid those that are suffering. And they do seem to be sufferring from bad government in Gaza. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 I thought it might be handy to post exactly where this latest massive expansion of Israeli settlements is occuring. It's a kibbutz called Maskiyot in NE West Bank in the Israeli security zone facing Jordan. This zone was established as per their peace treaty. Remember, Jordan didn't drop its claim to the WB until 1988...many years after losing it during the 6 Day War (1967). It was part of Jordan before that...annexed during the '48 war. Here's Google Maps link to Maskiyot. It appears to be in the middle of nowhere. Here's a 2002 map of WB showing the Eastern Israeli Security Zone with Jordan + existing kibbutzes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 In practical terms, the settlements ended in Gaza.What didn't end was the violent attacks from Gaza into Israel. And the massive expansion of settlements everywhere else, and overall. You being so shy about it, I'll have to say it for you, no thanks needes. I have told you the facts are but you can't seem to control your response of all or nothing. That is not what the various groups involved agreed to. It was always step by step. Geographic area to geograhic area. Oh, I see your point. Area by area. So you're saying that attacks against Israel from anywhere outside Gaza should also be ignored in that creative approach? Please say clearly, yes or no. You haven't. Your focus has been on settlements and you've indicated you think that saying Hamas is a terrorist organization is unfair. You've got to share with us one day how do you divine that somebody "indicated that they think". But what is on record here, is the description of peace agendas, and one of them is reduction of hostilities, both military and militant. So my position is very clear, and has been that way since the first posts of this discussion. I'm sorry I have to repeat, that if you couldn't read, or understand clrearly the meaning of read, or hold it in your memory long enough, or hold yourself against deliberately misinterpreting what you read, it's your problem and it'll be made as clear as I can possibly make it in this discussion. It is my contention that you believe that Hamas is not a terrorist organization. Dobbin, you still haven't answered the question, why your acts against serious and massive violations of peace agendas, differ so drastically depending on which side have committed it. And now, with that recently found focus on "terrorism", I had a glimpse of something that may lead to a hypothesis, let me share it with you right now: the "terrorism" Dobbin, is a word that helps you to reconcile what psychologists would call a cognitive dissonance, in plain words, a gap between the reality and what you think it should be. You see, in reality both sides behave in a nasty manner to each other, and both sides violate peace agreements, each in their own, different way. But that is not the picture you have in your mind, correct? In your mind, you represent the side of eternal good that simply cannot be wrong. As so, are, by association with you, your various friends and associates. So something needs to be done to explain why acts otherwise wrong and inexcusable (by your own admission) should be ignored, excused, pardoned, understood, defended, and so on, in this particular case here and now. And then, one precious morning, you "succeed"! You come up with a word, apply it where it needs to be applied, and all paradoxes, gaps and dissonances are instantly healed. The principles, rules, justice, fairness, etc, yada, they simply would not apply because of the (word). Could that be a reasonably close summary of why you think that word is so important in this discussion? Because otherwise you'd have to deal with the fact that in your peace process, any meaningful practical act only extends to one side. And until you explain, at least to yourself, the nature of that puzzling visual and actual imbalance, I think your plan would continue to have very little to do with genuine peace mediation, no matter how many words you say to make it sound so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 The policy of Canada has been to aid those that are suffering. And they do seem to be sufferring from bad government in Gaza. A policy I disagree with. Our aid only prolongs suffering. By constantly being supplied with international aid, people don't bother to try to fend for themselves. They even lose the skills to do so, and the population balloons ever higher than what the local land and infrastructure can support. Just look at Africa, for how many decades have we been shipping ever-increasing aid over there, and yet the situation is not improving at all, while the population keeps growing and growing. People need to be able to support themselves. And surprisingly benny's one-liner is quite right in this case, those who live off the eternal charity of others rather than the products of their own labor do lose their self-respect. If we wanted to help the people of Gaza, the thing to do would be to topple the Hamas government and install one that is more concerned with improving the quality of life of its people than with perpetuating terrorism and victimhood. But Canadians don't want to help the people of Gaza - Canadians just wanted to throw money at them so we can feel good about ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) And the massive expansion of settlements everywhere else, and overall. Edited July 18, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.