shaul mofaz slams netanyahu's iran saber rattling

[bud]

strong words from the opposition leader, former chief of IDF and former defense minister:

"You are headed for a rash confrontation at an unnecessary cost while abandoning the home front," opposition leader Kadima chairman Shaul Mofaz said at the Knesset dais, in response to remarks by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and talk about an attack on Iran. "Over the past few months, Israel has waged an extensive and relentless PR campaign with the sole objective of preparing the ground for a premature military adventure."

he also talks about the u.s. elections:

"This PR campaign has deeply penetrated the 'zone of immunity' of our national security, threatens to weaken our deterrence, and our relations with our best friends. Mr. prime minister, you want a crude, rude, unprecedented, reckless, and risky intervention in the US elections. Tell us who you serve and for what? Why are you putting your hand deep into the ballot boxes of the American electorate?

a reference to billionaire israeli american and a self-proclaimed zionist, sheldon adelson who has no qualms about his support for the illegal jewish settlements and a war on iran. adelson has been bank rolling netanyahu's political campaigns since the 90's and he plans to donate millions to the u.s. elections in order to push his agenda.

mofaz' passionate comments go even deeper:

"It isn't the defense chiefs who are covering their asses for the next investigative commission. You, Mr. prime minister and the decision-maker are covering the backside of the Israeli public. Ass-coverers and wipers. Making threats and sowing the seeds of fear and terror. Mr. prime minister, you are playing a dangerous and irresponsible game with the future of an entire nation.

"The piano player from the 35th floor is playing and you are dancing to his martial march. Please explain to us, Mr. prime minister, who is the real decision-maker? Will the next minister in your government also dance to the chords of this music?,"

link

Edited August 16, 2012 by bud

[jbg]

a reference to billionaire israeli american and a self-proclaimed zionist, sheldon adelson who has no qualms about his support for the illegal jewish settlements and a war on iran. adelson has been bank rolling netanyahu's political campaigns since the 90's and he plans to donate millions to the u.s. elections in order to push his agenda.

As for "illegal jewish settlements (sic)" What about Poland's illegal settlements in area formerly German territory? Danzig? The Kurile Islands? At least you're intellectually honest enough to use the word "Jewish". That shows your real problem.

As far as the war on Iran I guess you're against nukes when they make your power but for them when in the hands of a bunch of clerical, 10th Century madmen?

[bud]

As for "illegal jewish settlements (sic)"

why would you (sic) that like they're not deemed illegal internationally? it's not just the rest of the world, including canada that sees them as being illegal, even the international court of justice has deemed them illegal.

canada's stance:

Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967 (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip). The Fourth Geneva Convention applies in the occupied territories and establishes Israel's obligations as an occupying power, in particular with respect to the humane treatment of the inhabitants of the occupied territories. As referred to in UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The settlements also constitute a serious obstacle to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace.

What about Poland's illegal settlements in area formerly German territory? Danzig? The Kurile Islands? At least you're intellectually honest enough to use the word "Jewish". That shows your real problem.

your attempts at deflecting and trying to change the course of conversation is expected.

As far as the war on Iran I guess you're against nukes when they make your power but for them when in the hands of a bunch of clerical, 10th Century madmen?

even officials in the u.s. government and israel call iran rational.

listen jbg, read below so i don't have to repeat it - i hate repeating myself to you because you keep repeating misinformation:

JERUSALEM — The Israeli military chief described the Iranian government as “rational” in interviews published Wednesday and said he did not believe it would build a nuclear bomb, appearing to put some distance between himself and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

link

experts both in israel and in the u.s. are against a war with iran. why does it sound like you're supporting netanyahu's zionist bankroller? why are you warmongering like the idiots, netanyahu and barak?

Edited August 17, 2012 by bud

[Argus]

As for "illegal jewish settlements (sic)" What about Poland's illegal settlements in area formerly German territory? Danzig? The Kurile Islands? At least you're intellectually honest enough to use the word "Jewish". That shows your real problem.

Hey, I've supported Israel on numerous occasions, but calling the settlements illegal is pure and simple fact.

[wyly]

experts both in israel and in the u.s. are against a war with iran. why does it sound like you're supporting netanyahu's zionist bankroller? why are you warmongering like the idiots, netanyahu and barak?

it's israel's game plan, deflect, deflect,deflect...keep tensions high and constantly deflect attention elsewhere to avoid making progress with palestinians in order to continue with apartheid and complete illegal annexation of the west bank...the israeli zionist mindset is as foul as any found in 20th century fascist europe or today's fundamental islamic states...israel's claim to be just peace loving western democracy is a pathetic charade for the media...

[Canuckistani]

As for "illegal jewish settlements (sic)" What about Poland's illegal settlements in area formerly German territory? Danzig? The Kurile Islands? At least you're intellectually honest enough to use the word "Jewish". That shows your real problem.

As far as the war on Iran I guess you're against nukes when they make your power but for them when in the hands of a bunch of clerical, 10th Century madmen?

Jesus Christ. Are those settlements anything but Jewish? Not this bullshit again - everybody calls them Jewish settlements. They're based on the idea that God gave this land to the Jewish people.

So it's Israeli policy to take land because they won the war? Was there a truce signed with each side agreeing to the settlement, as in WWII? If things turn against Israel, and they start losing land, will they just shut up and take it?

Each side in the conflict has helped to create this mess. Israel can do no wrong is just as idiotic as Palestine can do no wrong. If Israel is sincere about wanting peace, they need to control their Jewish settlers instead of using them to push for more and more Lebensraum.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Canuckistani

[bleeding heart]

Jesus Christ. Are those settlements anything but Jewish? Not this bullshit again - everybody calls them Jewish settlements. They're based on the idea that God gave this land to the Jewish people.

So it's Israeli policy to take land because they won the war? Was there a truce signed with each side agreeing to the settlement, as in WWII? If things turn against Israel, and they start losing land, will they just shut up and take it?

Each side in the conflict has helped to create this mess. Israel can do no wrong is just as idiotic as Palestine can do no wrong. If Israel is sincere about wanting peace, they need to control their Jewish settlers instead of using them to push for more and more Lebensraum.

I believe people are trying to bait you, and using the very sensitive issue of anti-semitism seems like a good way to go about it.

For the record (as of course you know) there is not the faintest whiff of anti-semitism anywhere in anything you've written.

I do wonder sometimes, however (when I'm feeling a bit mischievous, granted) if those who are most promiscuous about their use of the politicized slur aren't themselves anti-semites, trying to make the self-proclaimed "Defenders of Israel" look bad.

If so, it's unlikely to work, thankfully.

[Canuckistani]

I believe people are trying to bait you, and using the very sensitive issue of anti-semitism seems like a good way to go about it.

For the record (as of course you know) there is not the faintest whiff of anti-semitism anywhere in anything you've written.

I do wonder sometimes, however (when I'm feeling a bit mischievous, granted) if those who are most promiscuous about their use of the politicized slur aren't themselves anti-semites, trying to make the self-proclaimed "Defenders of Israel" look bad.

If so, it's unlikely to work, thankfully.

Thanks for that bl. I'm still new here and learning what's what. I know enough to stay away from Bud's posts, usually, because to me he's way off in anti-Israel land to me. (Doesnt' mean he can't be right about a particular point.) The the anti-Bud people he attracts seem way off in Israel good, anybody says different is an anti-semite land. (Doesn't mean they can't be right about a particular point either) Then there's grand mufti guy, wow.

I think Isreal has the right to exist within the 67 borders. If they withdrew behind those borders and were attacked, I would support Canada coming to their aid. But you can't keep saying you're for peace, and keep taking the other guys' land while you're doing it.

BTW, my using the term Lebensraum is definitely seen as anti-semitic by some people. I'm aware of that. I think it's apt, including the mythical appeal as to why this Lebensraum is justified.

[bleeding heart]

Thanks for that bl. I'm still new here and learning what's what. I know enough to stay away from Bud's posts, usually, because to me he's way off in anti-Israel land to me. (Doesnt' mean he can't be right about a particular point.) The the anti-Bud people he attracts seem way off in Israel good, anybody says different is an anti-semite land. (Doesn't mean they can't be right about a particular point either)

Agreed.

For the record, while I don't agree with everything Bud says, the "we all know Bud hates Jews" theme seems to me extremely questionable, to put it lightly. I don't know any such thing.

Then there's grand mufti guy, wow.

Yeah, some people believe that a single topic is the debate-ender on every subject. It's a poor way to have a civil discussion.

I think Isreal has the right to exist within the 67 borders.

There's no question about it. Even for those who argue that the founding was itself illegitimate...how many countries can claim otherwise, using similar arguments? Canada? the United States?

We can't expect Canadians or Israelis to pack up and move away. That's patently absurd.

If they withdrew behind those borders and were attacked, I would support Canada coming to their aid. But you can't keep saying you're for peace, and keep taking the other guys' land while you're doing it.

No, you're right, Israel is waaaay out of line, and virtually everybody knows it. Even Canadian and US official policy is that they're behaving illegally. That it is never publically spoken in those terms doesn't change that.

A fringe minority remain unable to comprehend the plain facts....amd predictably make observations about the terrible behaviour of someone else....often Hamas.

And I agree with them about Hamas; but it doesn't alter the other facts at all.

[Canuckistani]

Agreed.

For the record, while I don't agree with everything Bud says, the "we all know Bud hates Jews" theme seems to me extremely questionable, to put it lightly. I don't know any such thing.

Yeah, some people believe that a single topic is the debate-ender on every subject. It's a poor way to have a civil discussion.

There's no question about it. Even for those who argue that the founding was itself illegitimate...how many countries can claim otherwise, using similar arguments? Canada? the United States?

We can't expect Canadians or Israelis to pack up and move away. That's patently absurd.

No, you're right, Israel is waaaay out of line, and virtually everybody knows it. Even Canadian and US official policy is that they're behaving illegally. That it is never publically spoken in those terms doesn't change that.

A fringe minority remain unable to comprehend the plain facts....amd predictably make observations about the terrible behaviour of someone else....often Hamas.

And I agree with them about Hamas; but it doesn't alter the other facts at all.

Read an interesting piece today where the leader of Hezbollah says they wouldn't exist today if Bush/Netanyahoo had accepted Iran's peace overtures at the time. In part, we create our enemies, or at least their continued existence.

[bleeding heart]

Read an interesting piece today where the leader of Hezbollah says they wouldn't exist today if Bush/Netanyahoo had accepted Iran's peace overtures at the time. In part, we create our enemies, or at least their continued existence.

Yes, no doubt. It's a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, maybe.

[bud]

Thanks for that bl. I'm still new here and learning what's what. I know enough to stay away from Bud's posts, usually, because to me he's way off in anti-Israel land to me.

then i invite you to point out how and where you think i'm way off in anti-israel land. i'm anti anything that violates the rights of individuals. of the many atrocities that are happening around the world, the reason why the israel/palestine conflict is the most important to me, is because our western governments support and even try to justify a government who has been violating the rights of a group of people for decades.

some try to flat out justify every israeli action. some try to come off as balanced by playing fence sitter and try to equate the atrocities on both sides, while i see israel being the main culprit in this ongoing issue. i see israel as having the ball in their court. i see them as being able to change the course by simply following international law.

again, i'm all for discussing any issue in an honest and respectful manner.

I think Isreal has the right to exist within the 67 borders.

i still think how israel came to be and how the europeans forced the jewish state in palestine is questionable, but we've reached a point of no return and we must deal with the hand that we have. so i also think israel has a right to exist within the 67 borders. i have repeated this many times, but it looks like the hasbara bots have been successful in drowning out my stance.

[Canuckistani]

then i invite you to point out how and where you think i'm way off in anti-israel land.

You seem fixated on Israel and what they do wrong, is my impression. I might even agree with you on some of what you post, but really I don't want to get involved because it seems too single minded. But I got drawn in by one of the Israel can do no wrong yahoos.

[bud]

You seem fixated on Israel and what they do wrong, is my impression. I might even agree with you on some of what you post, but really I don't want to get involved because it seems too single minded. But I got drawn in by one of the Israel can do no wrong yahoos.

i don't have enough time on here to respond to other issues in depth, so i stick with one of the topics that i find matters most to the stability of the world. it's also an issue that is heavily effected by a powerful PR campaign that allows it to go on. a PR campaign which must be exposed by speaking out.

[Canuckistani]

i don't have enough time on here to respond to other issues in depth, so i stick with one of the topics that i find matters most to the stability of the world. it's also an issue that is heavily effected by a powerful PR campaign that allows it to go on. a PR campaign which must be exposed by speaking out.

Well, do your thing. Seems to me you mostly attract the Israel ueber alles crowd in response. I'm going to try to stay out of it.

[jbg]

I think Isreal has the right to exist within the 67 borders. If they withdrew behind those borders and were attacked, I would support Canada coming to their aid. But you can't keep saying you're for peace, and keep taking the other guys' land while you're doing it.

There's a fundamental misunderstanding about the 1948-67 borders. That was an armistice line. They would have been borders had the Arabs deigned to recognize Israel. They made the decision to fight on. There are consequences to those decisions.

BTW, my using the term Lebensraum is definitely seen as anti-semitic by some people. I'm aware of that. I think it's apt, including the mythical appeal as to why this Lebensraum is justified.

It was a horrifying term to use. Germany, pre-1933, was an internationally recognized country with recognized borders. Poland, France and Belgium had all recognized the borders. Hitler decided on his own that he could not live with those borders. Israel would have accepted the 1948-67 borders in 1967. The Arabs attacked twice, in 1967 and 1973. What do the Arabs get, a do-over when they lose a war?

[Rue]

Well, do your thing. Seems to me you mostly attract the Israel ueber alles crowd in response. I'm going to try to stay out of it.

Good for you. And for the record I appreciate your contributions and not generalizing in your comments that all supporters of Israel who are Jewish think the same way. Bleeding Heart has his agenda and he knows very clearly if someone makes an accusation about anti-semitism it is not simply because someone said something that criticized Israeli foreign policy. In fact I challenge him to provide one comment where that was done on this forum.

I myself am sick and tired of comments intended to criticize Israeli foreign policy stated in a way that stereotypes all Israelis and/or all Jews. It is absolutely called for to call out anyone who makes negative generalizations about ALL Jews as an anti-semite. Using the pretext its part of a discussion about Israel does not legitimize it.

That said criticizing Israel foreign policy is not anti-semitic per se and Bleeding Heart is well aware of that and no one has suggested otherwise.

You have a problem Bleeding Heart you know where you and Wyly and Bud can find me and for that matter JBG. Peekaboo here I am.

That said as well if someone wants to stereotype all Israelis as having the same opinion its technically anti Israeli. It only becomes anti-semitic if it casts a negative stereotype on all Jews.

This Zionist Jew is against Biblical Zionism a minority sect of Zionism expressed by one third of the Jewish settlers on the West Bank. That kind of Biblical Zionism that uses the Old Testament to state historic right to all of the West Bank for me personally is antiquated and unrealistic. I reject it the same way I do Muslim fundamentalism or Christian fundamentalism.

That said, of the Jewish settlers on the West Bank, at least one third of them were economic migrants. They moved there because of job and tax incentives not religious ideology or anything else. They would gladly move if someone got them a job and moved them.

Another one third of them were ALWAYS there. They are ultra orthodox Jews who have always lived on the West Bank particularly near Hebron. Most of those ultra orthodox Jews do not recognize the state of Israel. They believe the Messiah must return before Israel can be created and so see Israel as an abomination. In the event of a Palestinian state creation on the West Bank they would have no intention of living in Israel.

So let's get it clear. The one third settlers who are often what is depicted as the only Zionists or majority Zionists are not mainstream Zionists-they are a minority and always were and will be. The majority of Israelis reject their violence and rhetoric. They do not speak for all Israelis only themselves. One of their followers assasinated Yitzhak Rabin and that is not something Israelis forget.

The IDF does not like having to protect them. They do not like having to be police and referees between them and Palestinians. The average Israeli is not religious-they are practical existentialists. Ask them to sit about and have a terrorist shoot a rocket up their ass they will not put up with it. That has to do with wanting to survive not religious ideology.

Now this b.s. that Israel is to blame for all the problems in the West Bank is typical and its as counter-productive as any stereotype that blames simply one side for problems.

Palestinians have failed to find moderate leaders to lead them. They have been unable to embrace non corupt democratic style representation which is of no surprise because it does not exist in the Middle East except in Israel and I would be of course the first to say while Israel is democratic it certainly has its own coruption problems and social division.

Israel has many divisions within its Jewish sects as the Muslim world does with its sects and therein lies the problem. Neither is a homogenetic people. They are in fact a collective of many peoples who share the same language or political history but not much else. There will always be a common existential collective of Jews as there are Muslims. In the case of Muslims its far more scattered as it can be expressed in many nations. Because Jews have been only able to achieve one nation and such a small one at that-our expression of collective existential identity has depended heavily on the Israeli state organ protecting our identity.

For those who say we can survive and live in "white" states they do not understand our history or what we have had to face in these so called "white" states.

If someone is going to use such an absurd concept as "white" states then they should get it clear-no one has ever considered Jews anything but "niggers".

The majority of Israelis would give up much of the West Bank for peace just don't expect them to negotiate with terrorist organizations who to this day want Israel wiped off the map or the current Palestinian leader who claims he will never recognize the right of Jews to have an Israeli state. It makes negotiations problematic. So does terrorism.

That said there are moderate Palestinians and Israelis and they will one day find themselves despite the terrorists and extremists on either side.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Rue

[dre]

There's a fundamental misunderstanding about the 1948-67 borders. That was an armistice line. They would have been borders had the Arabs deigned to recognize Israel. They made the decision to fight on. There are consequences to those decisions.

Both sides made the decision to fight on. Violence - post armistice - was predicated on a failure of both sides to agree on how to share the headwaters of the River Jordan. Isreals national water carrier reduced the flow of water to the Hashemites which they needed to drink and grow food. The Arabs responded with their own water diversion project, which Israel subsequently bombed.

To pretend that the reason for the following war was simply that Arabs who did not recognize Israel would not stop attacking it, is a gross distortion of history.

And this is why a two state solution will not emerge whether or not Palestinians and Jews start being nice to each other or not, or whether they recognize each others states or not. The reality is that the scarce resource they were fighting over in the first place is still scarce... and becoming increasing more scarce.

Contrary to popular beleif the military occupation of the west bank is NOT a security operation. They are there to plunder natural resources. A real security operation does not need a massive network of wells, pipelines, and pumping stations. The west bank is jam packed with critical Israeli infrastructure that is essential for Israel to provide food and drinking water for its people. OTherwise this would have been over a long time ago.

SO youre wrong. The armistice line would NOT still be the border, whether or not Israels arab neighbors has recognized it or not. Israel still would have built the NWC, and Syria and Lebanon still would have responded with the Headerwaters Diversion Plan. They STILL would have gone to war.

Edited August 22, 2012 by dre

[bleeding heart]

Bleeding Heart has his agenda

Really?

What is my agenda, Rue? Spell it out.

As you say, "I challenge" you to produce whatever "agenda" this might be...with due evidence, of course.

and he knows very clearly if someone makes an accusation about anti-semitism it is not simply because someone said something that criticized Israeli foreign policy. In fact I challenge him to provide one comment where that was done on this forum.

How about jbg's post #2 on this very thread--directed at the very poster with whom you're having this discussion?

How's that...for starters?

[Rue]

Really?

What is my agenda, Rue? Spell it out.

Lol. No problem. Drum roll and.....

"I believe people are trying to bait you, and using the very sensitive issue of anti-semitism seems like a good way to go about it.

For the record (as of course you know) there is not the faintest whiff of anti-semitism anywhere in anything you've written."

Here now read his posts and tell me how your smell missed this:

"It does. And as was shown by the example of Germany. the allies learned from WWI and did things differently after WWII. Maybe at some point Israel will do the same. "

"So Israel is following a policy of Danzigfication for the last 50 years?"

Oh gee comparing Israel to Nazis not a whiff of anti-semitism right Bleeding Heart?

Oh but wait Bleeding Heart what does this

mean?

"Do you think the Jews seriously want to negotiate with the Palestinians?"

This coming from Canuckistanti who then stated :

"This thread is about Israel."

You don't smell anything? Lol.

I do. I saw someone who interchanged references to all Jews when he wanted to criticize Israeli

foreign policy.

My agenda to the above was very precise Bleeding...

"What you (Cancuk) and Bud and that lovely Mullah have in common is you like to use the word jew and Israeli interchangeably typifying how people like you and Bud and this bearded genius use alleged debate about the existence of Israel to engage in disparaging comments about all Jews.

Are you capable of using the word Israeli or are you as bigoted and hateful as that Mullah. See unlike you he makes no pretense. His war is against JEWS. Who is your criticism directed against hmmm? Do you even know?

Jews? You want to refer to all Jews do you. Here I am. You want to ask me if I want to negotiate with Palestinians or are you speaking of Israelis? Hmmm? Does your brain fathom the difference? Can it?

Get it clear-I am not Israeli. I do not live in Israel. The fact I am a Jew does not mean you consult me about the future of Israelis. Speak to them. I doubt you even would know what a Jew is if one bit you.

Do me a favour, when you want to compare Israel to Nazi Germany be careful. The analogy has been done before and it might slip why you do that. Save the odious Jews are Nazis shtick for someone else."

"You use the word Jew interchangeably for supporter of Israel as if no other supporter of Israel exists. Do you refer to British people as Anglicans when you discuss their nationality? Do you refer to French as Catholics when you discuss their French nationality?

What is so PROBLEMATIC is that you clearly demonstrate you do not understand how many but not necessarily all Jewish people choose to define ourselves collectively and like Bud you spew ridiculously simplistic black and white stereotypes of all Jews because your brain can't fathom we have all kinds of opinions that can not be lumped in a "the Jews" category."

There I spelled it out.

By the way I did read this from you:

"But the US is certainly not run by an Israel lobby group, and so performing against its own (US's) interests. It's absurd to even think so, in my view."

So I know you know what I am talking about. You do not engage in the above exercise I criticized Canuckistani for and when he made his most recent comments I applauded him because he made an effort to do what I asked which I appreciated. I appreciated that. Now you want to write off what he said in the past go ahead. I can not.

In specific regards to what JBG said to him and vice versa, lol let us get this straight as well -you and I and Canuckistani are not very far off on the same points. Semantics might tie us up that is about it.

You know friggin well I have a huge substantive disagreement with JBG as everyone has read. I personally consider him the reverse mirror image of Bud. I have no time for either. You want me to spell that outÉ Sure. I think they both have agendas to incite anger and disagreement.

Now as for Canuckistani using the term Jewish settlers I did not challenge it because that is in fact how the settlers refer to themselves-the ones at least Canukistani is challenging so why would I. I also doubt he had any idea that they are only one third of the Jewish people living on the West Bank and there was another third of ultra orthodox Jews who live in a segregated world theer or that another one third of Jewish settlers are just shmucks who had no where else to go no different than Palestinians.

Here is the tragedy-let's spell it out-we can dwell on the past forever but it won't change anything it will only entrench hatred.

The only way to resolve this conflict is to talk about what can be, not what wasn't or has not worked. We need to focus on today and tomorrow and the fact that neither Israelis or Palestinians have any place to go.

We either deal with that physical reality or we engage in Bud name calling.

Buds of the world I have met. They come in all kinds of religions and colours. The one thing they have consistent is they can't hear because they are too busy lecturing. People who talk can not hear. The brain can not do both.

Bud is so busy presuming he can't see.

He is someone easily manipulated precisely because of his assumptions and presumptions.

He knows sweet phack all of the reality of the land we talk of.

As for JBG I have met many like him. They are all righteous until they hear a loud noise. Then they rush back to their homes in the suburbs and let the Israelis do their own fighting. Oh I get it. So do Israelis. They do not need arm chair pom pom girls. Make no mistake about that. Ask them. I have. I have heard exactly what they have said and that is-don`t presume you know how I live or what I feel. So I do not. I speak for myself not them or Palestinians and I make that clear each and every time. I do not live in the conditions they do.I will not presume to tell an Israeli what they have to do or a Palestinian for that matter. Any solution must come from these two peoples not you and I.

It is why I am blunt and have no time for the Buds of the world and their non stop trolling or the posts from JBG. I ridicule and reject them both equally.

My days of dimplomacy on this forum are long gone Bleeding. I lost my Hare Krishna smile along time ago.

Edited August 23, 2012 by Rue

[bleeding heart]

Oh look who is playing the victim.

I don't feel like a victim, so am not playing one. I asked only for clarification.

Here genius read his posts:

That doesn't spell out my "agenda." That spells out that I made an observation abotu another poster--an observation that you contend is not accurate.

The worst case scenario is thta I misread the poster...which hardly constitutes some "agenda," now, does it?

"Do you think the Jews seriously want to negotiate with the Palestinians?"

This coming from someone who then states:

"This thread is about Israel."

Youd on't see any whiff do you.

I do. I see someone who interchanges references to all Jews when he wanted to criticize Israeli

foreign policy. Pure and simple and to the point.

Yes, okay. I get it.

So don't play with me or what your agenda was.

Again: no agenda.

"What you abd Bud and that lovely Mullah have in common is you like to use the word jew and Israeli interchangeably typifying how people like you and Bud and this bearded genius use alleged debate about the existence of Israel to engage in disparaging comments about all Jews.

Uh, no, I don't. I never have. Do another search and see if you can find an instance.

I doubt you even would know what a Jew is if one bit you.

???

Do me a favour, when you want to compare Israel to Nazi Germany be careful.

So careful....that I have never do it?

Already done. I already never do it...so I"m already "careful."

You use the word Jew interchangeably for supporter of Israel

Yet again: wrong. Factually incorrect. Flatly untrue.

By the way I did read this from you:

"But the US is certainly not run by an Israel lobby group, and so performing against its own (US's) interests. It's absurd to even think so, in my view."

Yes, and that remains my view.

He was careful. I appreciated that. Now you want to write off what he said in the past go ahead.

OK, fair point.

In specific regards to what JBG said to him and vice versa, lol let us get this straight-you and I and Canuckistani are not very far off on the same points. Semantics might tie us up that is about it.

I suspect you're right.

The only way to resolve this conflict is to talk about what can be, not what wasn't or has not worked. We need to focus on today and tomorrow and the fact that neither Israelis or Palestinians have any place to go.

Just so; exactly right.

My days of dimplomacy on this forum are long gone Bleeding. Too much trolling for me to remain sweety pie.

Few of us are angels, so no worries!

Edited August 23, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Rue]

1-I don't feel like a victim, so am not playing one. I asked only for clarification.

2-Uh, no, I don't. I never have. Do another search and see if you can find an instance.

3-Already done. I already never do it...so I"m already "careful

4-Few of us are angels, so no worries!

In regards to 1-probably not but then I wanted to be in your face. Its the least I can do ont his forum.

In regards to 2, probably not. I don't remember. These were quotes from Bud. I was referring to him and his comments.

In regards to 3, I appreciate that as I do when Canuckistani stopped. Its appreciated. I appreciate people being

fair and not deliberately stereotyping. I have tried to practice what I preach as well in reverse and challenegd people stereotyping all Muslims too not because I am perfect but because I am trying to be fair. I am far from perfect. Everyone who has read my posts knows I can be very sarcastic and send myself up and others with inappropriate language. I need not admit I am a sphincter at times. Well aware of it. But I find Budworm a piece of lice and it does not surprise me he can not deal with American Woman and resorts to misogynist squeeling with her.

In regards to 4, I do not agree with some of your opinions but I am the first to concede you have never baited me or tried to be rude at any time in your debates other than to be as sarcastic as anyone else.

I on the other hand find what Budworm does on this forum to be deliberate Jew and Israel baiting. In my personal opinion his posts and threads lack any merit because they simply repeat the same Israel attacks over and over with no message other than to rid the Middle East of Israel and defend Hamas, Hezbollah and inter-Muslim civil wars and intolerance.

He is someone who has a narrow hateful agenda focused solely on disparaging Jews and Israel and to date he has never apologized for ridiculing holcoaust survivors in a previous post which is a testament to his anti-semitism and hatred and if he pulls the who me routine about what he said ask him. When I confronted him on it the coward did not respond. Its what he is all about on this forum.

He hides behind the forum anonimity to give him his courage.

American Woman shows a remarkable amount of restraint when dealing with his misogynist squeeling.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Rue

[bud]

In regards to 2, probably not. I don't remember. These were quotes from Bud. I was referring to him and his comments.

when israel throws out palestinians from their homes, confiscates their land and then allows only jews to live there, there is nothing i can do about it. they're jewish only settlements. facts don't care about your sensitivity towards someone using the words jew or jewish.