Murderer kills 90 injures 200 more

[Signals.Cpl]

The settlements are stupid; most Israelis oppose them as well.

However, since you "defenders of Israel" care more about North American views of Israel than Israelis' views of Israel...the settlements are in opposition to official Canadian and American policy, also.

how would you handle the situation different? Clear the settlements and then let the Arabs back in to attack Israel? What is the solution, Israelis might be against that, but until someone has a better solution to the problem it becomes irrelevant. If Israel removed all settlements form the contested are what then? The Arabs trickle back in, set up rockets and attack again? If the Palestinians were able to police themselves and guarantee that they will not be launching attacks against Israel I don't see a reasonable excuse for the Israelis to refuse them use of the land.

[DogOnPorch]

I don't like the Nazis either.

But Hamas, Hezbollah, etc are fine.

However, in this bizarre black and white world of debates on Israel, anyone who disagrees with official Israeli policy (that there should be a viable Palestinians state) must be consorting with their enemies.

The irony of a movement started by a Jew baiter and former SS man, I guess. To have the same guy across from you in 1947 as was conducting Jewish pogroms during the war must have been incredible (with British support!). Unlike Himmler, the Mufti didn't vomit when he got to gas a load for himself.

(Though just to clarify, I don't actually think that's true.)

When someone says that Israel sometimes behaves badly, I don't know why you'd think they are supporters of Hamas, or what have you. I can't even imagine how you get there.

Odd that I dislike Hamas. Such nice fellows.

???

Are you saying that Israeli policy is that there shouldn't be a Palestinian state?

My policy is that there shouldn't be yet another Arab state with Nazi-like attitudes towards Jews. They have plenty of the Allied Mandates already paid for with Allied blood. They can't have Israel too and they can lose land like evey other group that fails at the invasion game. If that's not kosher to you, I expect you'll be at the bring back South Viet-Nam rally which is right after the bring back Prussia/Pomerania rally.

[Signals.Cpl]

It has been addressed tons of times.

Notably, the unelected and unrepresentative Nazi sympathizer was a long time ago, is not part of the Palestinian project for a state, is not relevant in any way.

Israel's official stance is that the Palestinians should have a state. You don't see them talking about the Mufti, and how peace negotiations amounts to collaboraiton with Nazis.

Like I said, the Israelis are more reasonable on the whole subject than their erstwhile "supporters" hereabouts are..

When Arabs accept Israelis right to live we an talk about how different they are from the Nazi's.

Like I said, the Israelis are more reasonable on the whole subject than their erstwhile "supporters" hereabouts are..

So the israelis are more reasonable on the subject? Which is the subject?

[bleeding heart]

Please inform me how I did this? I presented the other side,

????Where?

I just think that the Arabs are just as responsible for the whole mess as the jews if not more so. Saying one side is 100% right and the other is 100% wrong is stupid.

I couldn't agree more.

I never claimed the Israelis were innocent or right all the time, but he claims that the root of the problem is israel which is wrong.

I think bud is too one-sided, I agree.

But the only distinction I'm seeing between him and his online opponents are that they keep using the "anti-semite" card, and he isn't using the "racist against Arabs" card. So he's not quite as politically correct in his style of debate.

I don't follow.

Israelis seem to be more open to debating these matters...no doubt heatedly, but without the barrage of invective that they hear when they arrive in N America and say anything bad about their own country...after which they are "terrorist supporters" and "Self-hating Jews" and so on.

[bleeding heart]

how would you handle the situation different? Clear the settlements and then let the Arabs back in to attack Israel?

Do you think the only settlements are in areas once used to stage attacks?

Where did you hear this? Not from the Israelis, who make no such wild claims.

[bleeding heart]

But Hamas, Hezbollah, etc are fine.

????

On the contrary.

Again, I have no idea why you should believe this my stance. It's the opposite of my view.

The irony of a movement started by a Jew baiter and former SS man, I guess. To have the same guy across from you in 1947 as was conducting Jewish pogroms during the war must have been incredible (with British support!). Unlike Himmler, the Mufti didn't vomit when he got to gas a load for himself.

But the Palestinians' "movement," such as it is, is not related. It's not relevant.

Odd that I dislike Hamas. Such nice fellows.

And again...I don't see how criticism of the behaviour of a geopilitical entity, a nation-state, can reflexively be construed as support for Hamas. I still don't understand how you get from there to here.

My policy is that there shouldn't be yet another Arab state with Nazi-like attitudes towards Jews. They have plenty of the Allied Mandates already paid for with Allied blood. They can't have Israel too and they can lose land like evey other group that fails at the invasion game.

It has nothing to do with what I want: Israeli policy is that there should be a viable Palestinian state. You don't agree with the Israelis, which of course is your right.

Edited May 27, 2012 by bleeding heart

[DogOnPorch]

But the Palestinians' "movement," such as it is, is not related. It's not relevant.

The Mufti most certainly is part of the history of this conflict. He's JUST as relavent as the partition and the so-called pre-1967 lines and any other factor that is at play. His clan still has influence and Hamas and Hezbollah both mimic his actions and interests. I do understand how YOU'D like to not be associated with the Nazi Mufti while supporting the lie that is Palestine. T'is your nature. I mean, who WANTS to be seen supporting Nazis? Right?

And again...I don't see how criticism of the behaviour of a geopilitical entity, a nation-state, can reflexively be construed as support for Hamas. I still don't understand how you get from there to here.

Again, I do understand that you want to put these things in little isolated boxes. T'is your nature.

It has nothing to do with what I want: Israeli policy is that there should be a viable Palestinian state. You don't agree with the Israelis, which of course is your right.

There already is numerous Arab states that hate Jews. I admire that you want another, though.

Edited May 27, 2012 by DogOnPorch

[bleeding heart]

The Mufti most certainly is part of the history of this conflict. He's JUST as relavent as the partition and the so-called pre-1967 lines and any other factor that is at play. His clan still has influence and Hamas and Hezbollah both mimic his actions and interests. I do understand how YOU'D like to not be associated with the Nazi Mufti while supporting the lie that is Palestine. T'is your nature. I mean, who WANTS to be seen supporting Nazis? Right?

Well, I don't especially cherish the idea of being seen to support Nazis, that's true; but it's all pretty moot, since I don't support Nazis.

Again, I do understand that you want to put these things in little isolated boxes. T'is your nature.

My "nature" is pretty mainstream homo sapiens sapiens, focusing a little overmuch on food and sex even at my rapidly advancing age.

There already is numerous Arab states that hate Jews. I admire that you want another, though.

I don't wish for any state to hate Jews. I have noted that the need for a viable Palestinian state is official Israeli policy, however, and I don't believe that's a bad thing.

[bud]

What are you talking about?

The official Israeli stance is that the Palestinians should have a state...and that the settlements should end.

Your argument is with the Israelis.

first of all, kudos to you and your patient approach to responding to them, however, i don't think you will get anywhere with dogonporch. this is why he's been put on ignore. it's impossible to get into a discussion with someone who has a narrow view of the situation and who is not here to discuss issues, but is only here to drive home a narrative.

second, i wanted to share some information into the discussion:

at the moment, there are 3 official government parties involved in this:

likud's official platform, in regards to a palestinian state, as it stands right now is this:

Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

in words, bibi has said that he agrees with a 2 state solution, but officially, in action and on the ground, it's a totally different story. israeli government sponsored illegal jewish settlements on palestinian land in the west bank and in east jerusalem are growing at an extremely fast pace. bibi, more than his predecessors, has avoided taking any steps in the creation of a palestinian state. in fact, all of their moves so far has been the opposite. fact remains that israel has never officially and legally agreed to a palestinian state. for the past few decades, it's been more land grabs, more settlements, more dragging of their feet and it seems like they're always moving the line on the sand.

the only so-called progress we've seen from israel has been the removal of the 7000 gaza settlers, but, who were then moved to illegal west bank settlements. it has also been argued that barak, under immense pressure from clinton unofficially, offered arafat a plan where 90% of the land from 1967 green line would be given to the palestinians. however, what gets lost in the constant propaganda about the offer is that what was offered included jewish colonies with jewish only roads, splitting palestinian areas. there was also east jerusalem that barak wouldn't agree to give back. another big issue is the right of return of the palestinians or some kind of compensation for expelling them. this is a big issue. also, the use of water on the palestinian territory, which barak still wanted control over.

Fatah/PLO: officially recognized the state of israel in 1988. to reconfirm this, arafat sent a letter to rabin and the israelis, re-stating the palestinians' recognition of israel.

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

the acceptance of the state of israel had been announced to be the main reason for the lack of peace between the two states. however, despite this unpopular move by arafat, israel continued to drag its feet. the settlements and land theft continued to increase even during rabin's time in power and accelerated under the prime minister's who followed him.

hamas was formed in 1987 as a resistant movement because of people's discontent with any progress and the PLO's corruption. their charter officially states that they do not recognize the state of israel (basically the same view as likud in regards to a palestinian state). though, hamas' charter is more melodramatic and in some cases archaic. like this quotation from the hadith:

The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?

This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement.

that shit is not going to receive any acceptance or support from the west.

one huge problem with hamas, since it became an official part of the government, is that it hasn't changed its old charter. this has worked in favour of the zionist propaganda machine in trying to justify its own lack of progress in negotiations. however, it should be noted that hamas leaders have repeatedly announced the acceptance of the 1967 border and their willingness to do negotiations based on that.

Edited May 28, 2012 by bud

[DogOnPorch]

Yawn.

[bud]

how would you handle the situation different? Clear the settlements and then let the Arabs back in to attack Israel? What is the solution, Israelis might be against that, but until someone has a better solution to the problem it becomes irrelevant. If Israel removed all settlements form the contested are what then? The Arabs trickle back in, set up rockets and attack again?

how are the settlements preventing attacks? not sure how you see the settlements as security for israel.

here is the map of west bank with the jewish settlements in red. the settlements are scattered all over the place well inside the border. it's not like they're acting like buffers to attacks.

Edited May 28, 2012 by bud

[DogOnPorch]

how are the settlements preventing attacks? not sure how you see the settlements as security for israel.

here is the map of west bank with the jewish settlements in red. the settlements are scattered all over the place well inside the border. it's not like they're acting like buffers to attacks.

The Jordan River Valley is a natural barrier. Jordan attacked Israel in 1967 from the WB which was Jordan back then...not mythical Palestine.

[jbg]

Let's go back to the topic of the OP. Apparently when someone murders 90 people they've had a really good day.

[Signals.Cpl]

Let's go back to the topic of the OP. Apparently when someone murders 90 people they've had a really good day.

Not any more.

http://britishfreedom.org/suicide-bombers-to-go-on-strike/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744032/posts

[Guest Peeves]

Not any more.

http://britishfreedom.org/suicide-bombers-to-go-on-strike/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744032/posts

Now that diplomats are to be kicked out of a few countries maybe the UN will hire them?

BTW where are the international orgs, United church and unions asking to boycott Syrian goods or, arranging for flotillas to demonstrate against these killers of civilian Muslims?

Where is Bud when you need him?

[Guest Peeves]

I admit I laughed, but it is sad that a murderer of children can become a martyr.

[bud]

BTW where are the international orgs, United church and unions asking to boycott Syrian goods or, arranging for flotillas to demonstrate against these killers of civilian Muslims?

in case you missed it, syria is all over the news. in case you missed it, there are major sanctions on syria. there are also international condemnation (except for the few countries) of syria. human rights organizations, like amnesty and HRW have all reported extensively on syria.

[dre]

If the Palestinians keep using the land to attack Israel, Israel is well within their right to occupy that land to protect itself. And the Grand Mufti was brought up in every thread bud started yet never answered or directly addressed by anyone.

Thats not why Israel occupies the land though.

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/mideast/info/maps/israel-water-systems-map.html

The occupation is a resource extraction operation disguised as a security operation. Israel has built a massive network of wells, reservoirs, pumping stations, and pipelines, and jewish settlements in the west bank are built around this things to support them.

Israel gets almost 2/3rds of its water from the occupied territories and without that Israel would starve. Anyone that thinks Israel would abandon all that infrastructure, and all those resources and settlements is kidding themselves.

Would you spend billions of dollars building infrastructure in an occupied territory you didnt plan to keep?

If you want to know why Israel is there just think of which of these two objectives are more important: Defense against a dirt poor disorganized and impotent enemy that poses virtually no threat what-so-ever? Or: Access to a vital resources that your economy and existance depends on, in an area where that resources is getting more and more scarce.

This is what they have been fighting over post-armistice...

Israel has played this rather well. They have doubled in size, and secured access to vital strategic resources, and they have set up a strong future claim to that land by developing it and moving a shitload of settlers there. Its most likely a recipe for success. At the end of the day whatever happens over there will be whatever Israel wants to happen. They are in the drivers seat.

They dont plan on giving up the west bank, and its extremely unlikely they would give up the golan heights either. They plan to keep it - or at least every bit of it thats usefull to them. And they can do that if they want to! Nobody will stop them. The world will piss and moan like it already does but there wont be any "coalition of the willing" marching into Palestine to push Israelies back onto their side of the greenline.

[jbg]

in case you missed it, syria is all over the news. in case you missed it, there are major sanctions on syria. there are also international condemnation (except for the few countries) of syria. human rights organizations, like amnesty and HRW have all reported extensively on syria.

I have a question for you, bud. Will there be any investigation of this atrocity on the scale, even, of the Goldstone Commission with regard to Cast Lead (link)?

[DogOnPorch]

The usual dre nonsense. Like water motivated the Arab invasion of 1948.

[Guest Peeves]

The usual dre nonsense. Like water motivated the Arab invasion of 1948.

Or the thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians since.

For 1400 years and counting, Muslims have been killing each (sectarian) other and anyone else they consider pigs and monkeys.

now wait for "Yeh but Christians and Jews have too" moment.

[bud]

I have a question for you, bud. Will there be any investigation of this atrocity on the scale, even, of the Goldstone Commission with regard to Cast Lead (link)?

i'm sure there will be once they're able to enter and begin an investigation. kind of like how goldstone and his team entered gaza after the ceasefire.

i have a question for you, jbg. how come the western countries' governments, including canada and the u.s. did not react to the killing of civilians (over 1000) which included over 300 children, when israel attacked gaza? why weren't the israeli diplomats removed? why weren't there any sanctions against israel?

Edited May 30, 2012 by bud

[Guest Peeves]

i'm sure there will be once they're able to enter and begin an investigation. kind of like how goldstone and his team entered gaza after the ceasefire.

i have a question for you, jbg. how come the western countries' governments, including canada and the u.s. did not react to the killing of civilians (over 1000) which included over 300 children, when israel attacked gaza? why weren't the israeli diplomats removed? why weren't there any sanctions against israel?

I have an answer for you. When Arabs pull corpses together for a photo op from anywhere and everywhere creating a set-up for the media,why would anyone but a dyed in the wool Arab supporter use the agitprop as factual? Any claims of killings by Israelis are exaggerated,trumped up, falsified, arranged lies.

Most countries have cottoned on to the subterfuge by now and react in kind. There are those however that use any ploy at their disposal to vilify Israel. They learned the 'big lie' technique from Joseph Goebbels. Tell a big enough lie that may include a smidgen of truth out of context, and some fool will repeat it as fact.

Now I'm sure there were a few Arabs killed in Israel's response to attack(s) from Gaza, one would expect that.

IF a child or civilian innocent was killed, it would have been by error since Israel uses surgical strikes on combatants when ever possible.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Peeves