Israel continues to spit in the face of international law

[jbg]

They continue to spit in the face of U.S., the international community and in the face of peace. However, this time they've chosen to make it as blatant as possible.

Yes, a PEI size country surviving in the face of teeming hordes filling an area bigger than the remainder of Canada and thriving is spitting in the face of the interntional community. And the Jews' survival, as 0.02% of the world population, with lots of positive accomplishments is spitting in a lot of faces as well.

The obama administration has no choice but to try to save face now. We'll see how powerful the Israeli lobby is in shutting up the U.S. administration's rare vocal opposition on Israel's actions. I find Bibi's actions quite arrogant. He's either stupid or he has faith in the power of the Israeli lobby. We have reached an interesting collision course.

The U.S.'s choice is to support its allies and not those that would wish it death.

And Naomi, urgent message here (link).

[Rue]

I'm surprised that Israel gave permission for the Canadian government to 'regret' their actions.

I find it hysterical that Harper encourages both sides to get back to the negotiating table, as if we now have any credibility with the Palestinian side whatsoever.

Lol, well I find describing disagreements as to political positions "spitting" hysterical.

I also would ask you to point out where Mr. Harper ( and I am no conservative ) or more accurately put, the current Canadian government ever said anything that supports either side over land title issues in Jerusalem.

Please point out the policy and/or statements, because they do NOT exist and never have.

The assumption that Canada must be anti-Palestinian because it has spoken out against terrorism or said Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism is just that an assumption and its an assumption made I would contend by lazy minds.

With due respect this trendy leftist assumption that demands we all consider anyone who is against terrorism or supports the right of Israel to exist must be anti Palestinian is a fallacy. It is a negative stereotype that says anyone who is against terrorism or supports Israel can't possibly believe Palestinians should also have a right to a state and live free of terrorism as well.

Numerous Canadians including myself may be against terrorism and believe Israel has a right to exist, but it doesn't necessarily mean we are anti-Palestinian.

More to the point I find it an absolute rock for people to make sweeping statements that says Harper or for that matter any politician or citizen panders to "Jews" because they support Israel's right to exist.

That is pure unmitigated anti-semitism. It uses the pretext of Israeli policy to drag in all Jewish Canadians and label us as part of some cloned conspiracy to hate Palestinians simply because we believe in a Jewish state and that if you want our vote you must hate Palestinians. What an odious, belittling, patronizing smeer.

What next? Did Harper pander to Haiti votes because he sent support to Haiti?

Enough with this passive bigotry. I can not stand snively, indirect couched bigotry.

Let's get it straight. Jew or non Jew, if a Canadian believes Israeli has a right to exist and defend itself against terrorism, it does not make them anti Palestinian or a panderer to Jews.

This is the assumption bigots make and in the reference to Jews its based on the stereotype that a Jew by supporting Israel hates others. Take that stereotype and shove it where it doesn't shine, I say.

More to the point policy Harper enunciates was in fact started by Paul Martin, not him and it came in response to elements in the Liberal party openly engaging in open anti-semitic comments using the pretext of criticizing Israeli policies to try rationalize those comments. Martin became so disgusted he openly stated what I am now stating-the fact that a Canadian politician defends Israel's right to exist or its right to defend itself against terrorism does not mean Canada is anti-Palestinian.

This is the same whisper bigotry we saw circulate across the Liberal party convention floor telling voters not to elect Bob Rae because his wife was a Jew and he would support Israel.

I am a Liberal and I would not have voted for Bob Rae because I consider him an NDP putz who dag nab near destroyed Ontario but to smeer him as many Liberal party members did with the same assumption being used against Harper is an anti-semitic crock.

You tell me why does it seem that the sameperson who says it is possible to criticize Israel without being anti-semitic is the same one to claim if you support Israel you pander to Jews? You tell me because it is the same trendy leftists that engage in both references.

This snide suggestion that anyone who supports Israel's right to exist hates Palestinians is the kind of simplistic black and white all or nothing you are either for or against mentality that intellectually lazy people engage in and I challenge or as Naomi says, spit at.

In the real world, those of us with credibility when we look at two parties to a conflict do not see things as black v. white.

You want to set Harper up for simplistic name calling do it without exploiting the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

I support any Canadian politician who supports the right of Israel to exist and is against terrorism and if that same politician criticizes Israel for other policies such as its current position on settlements in Jerusalem, no simply because I am a Jew does not mean I won't vote for them or automatically reject their criticism, thank you very much.

Edited March 29, 2010 by Rue

[Jerry J. Fortin]

There is no such thing as international law outside of "Maritime Law", and that applies on not one square inch of land.

[jbg]

There is no such thing as international law outside of "Maritime Law", and that applies on not one square inch of land.

It applies to the beaches of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

[GostHacked]

I did not want to start another Israel=bad thread... so I will throw this here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8614908.stm

Let there be no doubt that this is an occupation.

Israel has imposed a military order which rights groups say could see tens of thousands of Palestinians deported from the occupied West Bank.

The order, which came into force on Tuesday morning, could have "severe ramifications" for people in the West Bank, human rights groups say.

[Bonam]

I did not want to start another Israel=bad thread... so I will throw this here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8614908.stm

Let there be no doubt that this is an occupation.

Your interpretation is just silly. The order simply states that people that are in the area illegally can be removed. Palestinians that have been living there are considered to have a permit. Almost any nation in the world has laws under which it can deport people who are present unlawfully. Illegal immigrants in Canada, in the US, etc, can all be deported. The purpose of the law is for Israel to be able to remove individuals who unlawfully come into the West Bank from other nations (Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc). The only thing that is happening is a minor modification in wording from the prior existing law.

[GostHacked]

Your interpretation is just silly. The order simply states that people that are in the area illegally can be removed. Palestinians that have been living there are considered to have a permit. Almost any nation in the world has laws under which it can deport people who are present unlawfully. Illegal immigrants in Canada, in the US, etc, can all be deported. The purpose of the law is for Israel to be able to remove individuals who unlawfully come into the West Bank from other nations (Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc). The only thing that is happening is a minor modification in wording from the prior existing law.

But this is Gaza/West Bank. If Israel has this kind of self imposed authority over another region (aka not Israel proper.. I dare you to actually define Israel Proper) like the West Bank and Gaza, then my point stands that it is an occupation.

[myata]

I'm quite astonished at how easily Israel's government can talk "peace" and perpetuate these open acts of provocation, hostility and aggression all at the same time. Next time there's a flare of violence in the region, as it almost inevitably happens (hope I'll be wrong this time around), there shouldn't be any doubts as to which side has contributed so much to it (as well as the real worth of "poor victim of the hostile environment" fairy tale).

The sooner we stop playing into this hypocrisy, and no, not verbally, words don't count for much here, the sooner the real movement toward peace will happen. At some point down this road of hypocrisy and double talk our inaction will begin looking nothing less than appeasement (and maybe even sponsoring, through diverse "aid" packages) of aggression.

[jbg]

I'm quite astonished at how easily Israel's government can talk "peace" and perpetuate these open acts of provocation, hostility and aggression all at the same time.

Wanting peace does not mean wanting the peace of the grave.

[myata]

I know that that adage can justify pretty much everything. The question is, how long we need to hear it, or pretend to believe until opening our eyes to what's actually going on in reality.

[naomiglover]

Wanting peace does not mean wanting the peace of the grave.

Because expanding the illegal settlements and not following international law is about security?

You don't make sense.

[BCMan]

Since when does Westbank belong to Israel? Please Enlighten Us.

Your interpretation is just silly. The order simply states that people that are in the area illegally can be removed. Palestinians that have been living there are considered to have a permit. Almost any nation in the world has laws under which it can deport people who are present unlawfully. Illegal immigrants in Canada, in the US, etc, can all be deported. The purpose of the law is for Israel to be able to remove individuals who unlawfully come into the West Bank from other nations (Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc). The only thing that is happening is a minor modification in wording from the prior existing law.

Edited April 28, 2010 by BCMan

[DogOnPorch]

Since when does Westbank belong to Israel? Please Enlighten Us.

Since 1967 after the Arabs failed to defeat Israel in the 6 Day War. Jordan had annexed the place in 1949 only giving-up claim in 1988. By default, Israel was left holding the bag.

[bloodyminded]

Since 1967 after the Arabs failed to defeat Israel in the 6 Day War. Jordan had annexed the place in 1949 only giving-up claim in 1988. By default, Israel was left holding the bag.

So...you're making the claim that Israel "owns" the West Bank.

Even Israel doesn't make this claim. You're the only one...well, you and the Christian Zionist radicals, perhaps.

[DogOnPorch]

So...you're making the claim that Israel "owns" the West Bank.

Even Israel doesn't make this claim. You're the only one...well, you and the Christian Zionist radicals, perhaps.

Far from me to make a 'claim'...that's just the way the dice hit the felt in the history books. BTW...many are aware of what happened in 1967...so I doubt I'm the 'only one' who is going say Israel was left 'holding the bag'. You can play pretend re: mythical Arab Palestinian states in the 1960s all you wish. In June 1967, no such thing existed...nor had it ever. And lo...still doesn't exist.

[bloodyminded]

Far from me to make a 'claim'...that's just the way the dice hit the felt in the history books. BTW...many are aware of what happened in 1967...so I doubt I'm the 'only one' who is going say Israel was left 'holding the bag'. You can play pretend re: mythical Arab Palestinian states in the 1960s all you wish. In June 1967, no such thing existed...nor had it ever. And lo...still doesn't exist.

Again: Israel does not claim to own the West Bank. Only you claim they do.

[DogOnPorch]

Again: Israel does not claim to own the West Bank. Only you claim they do.

Feel free to point out where I claim such a thing. What a scum-bag you are. A divorce lawyer by chance?

[bloodyminded]

Feel free to point out where I claim such a thing. What a scum-bag you are. A divorce lawyer by chance?

And yet, here you are exposed, by your own words, as a pantywaisted little liar:

Since when does Westbank belong to Israel? Please Enlighten Us.

Since 1967 after the Arabs failed to defeat Israel in the 6 Day War. Jordan had annexed the place in 1949 only giving-up claim in 1988. By default, Israel was left holding the bag.

It's funny when you do the work for me.

Edited April 29, 2010 by bloodyminded

[DogOnPorch]

History is history, dirt-bag.

[bloodyminded]

History is history, dirt-bag.

You asked me to point out where you made your claim...implying it was a lie.

So I pointed it out.

I wouldn't have felt compelled to do so, were you not such a liar that you have begun to believe your own nonsense. You might have scrolled up the thread a few inches to discover I was right.

No wonder you're pissed. Being exposed in this way can't be too much fun.

Edited April 29, 2010 by bloodyminded

[DogOnPorch]

I just like calling you what you are. You're just a typical revisionist who likes to put words in people's mouths. History is clear as to what happened in 1967. I was alive to see it. Were you? Don't think so.

[bloodyminded]

I just like calling you what you are. You're just a typical revisionist who likes to put words in people's mouths. History is clear as to what happened in 1967. I was alive to see it. Were you? Don't think so.

I didn't put words in your mouth. They were your words. Don't blame me for your own deceptions.

[Oleg Bach]

HAS not one notice that the Israels have this old and antiquated religous idea that racism is just fine as long as it is there race in dominance?

[DogOnPorch]

I didn't put words in your mouth. They were your words. Don't blame me for your own deceptions.

Does the slime ever stop dripping from you?

Here you go...learn what happened.

http://www.sixdaywar.org/

[bloodyminded]

Does the slime ever stop dripping from you?

Here you go...learn what happened.

http://www.sixdaywar.org/

You're trying to distract from the very argument that you began.

First, you were asked "since when does the West Bank belong to Israel?"

Then, you answered: "since" the 1967 war...meaning, by your formula, that the West Bank does belong to Israel. That is the explicit meaning of your response.

Then, I pointed out that the West Bank does not "belong" to Israel...and that Israel itself does not claim that it does.

Then, you got huffy, asserted you'd never made the claim.

So i pointed out, using your own posts, that you did.

Now you're back onto history (ignoring the historical truth that Israel does not claim to own the West Bank, which contradicts your historical revisionism)...presumably RE-asserting the claim that Israel owns the West Bank.

So, you deny saying it (even though you did); and now you're...what? Saying it again?

You're just blowing smoke because you've been exposed as either a liar, or a very confused person.

Edited April 30, 2010 by bloodyminded