PM Harper Shows Canadian Loyalty to Israel

[bud]

One hundred years is too much but forty-seven years is OK. There must be a line in there somewhere. It can't be sixty-eight years so it must be somewhat beyond that but after the year 1914...or whatever year your ancestors arrived and 'stole' land.

the major settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem started in the 90's. these settlements are deemed illegal under international law and canadian law. something our dear leader, harper, forgets to acknowledge and admit, even though he claims to be clear about what canada stands for.

no one gives a shit about israel, within its legal borders. this is now about the illegal settlements and the land that israel has annexed from the palestinians.

Ah right, the old how far back into history do we project our present politics.

It's funny how people who tell natives it's high time they get over the loss of their land a few hundred years ago expect the world to do back-flips to accommodate the 3 - 4 thousand year old land claim of the Zionists.

every declaration and comparison that is made by these fascist zionists is ironic.

[sharkman]

do you support torture of children by the israelis?

Do you support blind bigotry based on percentage of Jewishness?

[bush_cheney2004]

no one gives a shit about israel, within its legal borders. this is now about the illegal settlements and the land that israel has annexed from the palestinians.

Patently false, as many people "give a shit" about Israel within its "legal borders". The U.S. has backed up its "give a shit" factor with many billions of dollars in economic and military foreign aid, plus loan guarantees. The land belongs to Israel until somebody has the balls to take it away.

[DogOnPorch]

the major settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem started in the 90's. these settlements are deemed illegal under international law and canadian law. something our dear leader, harper, forgets to acknowledge and admit, even though he claims to be clear about what canada stands for.

no one gives a shit about israel, within its legal borders. this is now about the illegal settlements and the land that israel has annexed from the palestinians.

One day you'll have to admit to yourself that the Arabs got themselves into this mess by trusting a Nazi and declaring war on Israel rather than enjoying life post WW2.

Edited January 24, 2014 by DogOnPorch

[Rue]

No one said Harper "supports" child torture. What I said was that Harper has failed to condemn Israel time and time again for violating international law. One of those being, child torture.

Yes you did. Here are your words:

"This is an inconvenient truth that torturing of children is an Israeli policy that Harper, as the Canadian leader, has failed to condemn. Harper has failed as the leader of Canada to speak out against numerous reports showing the torture of children by Israel."

The above I would argue necessarily infers Harper supports Israel in torturing children.

I also believe the decision to use this thread as a pretext to call Israelis, Harper and anyone who supports Israel as complicit in child torturer speaks for itself as does the other name calling.

These allegations are necessarily inflammatory and demonize anyone supporting Israel as being involved directly or indirectly with child torture,

The attempt to derail the discussion to demonize Israel, Harper and supporters of Israel as child torturers speaks for itself and the words don't disappear because you now deny them.

They are in my opinion irresponsible and I agree with the other posters who have condemned them.

The repeated use of this forum and threads supposedly on the Middle East to engage in Israel bashing speaks for itself.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Rue

[bud]

Patently false, as many people "give a shit" about Israel within its "legal borders". The U.S. has backed up its "give a shit" factor with many billions of dollars in economic and military foreign aid, plus loan guarantees. The land belongs to Israel until somebody has the balls to take it away.

you didn't get the meaning of what i said. what i meant was that except for a few, countries accept israel and are not looking for its destruction. when there is any talk about israel's illegal settlements and expansion (which the world, including u.s. and canada agree that it's illegal), then the zionist apologists, scream like chicken little that people want to "deligitimize israel" and want to "push israel into the sea" and want to "wipe israel off the map". the usual sensational bs, to stop criticism of israel.

when in reality, this is not about israel, within its legal borders, but about the expanding illegal settlements.

Edited January 25, 2014 by bud

[bush_cheney2004]

...you didn't get the meaning of what i said. what i meant was that except for a few, countries accept israel and are not looking for its destruction.

And you didn't get the meaning of what I said....Israel includes all recognized borders and any occupied territory it controls until somebody and a bigger bad ass army and air force says otherwise. Next time win the war(s).

[bud]

And you didn't get the meaning of what I said....Israel includes all recognized borders and any occupied territory it controls until somebody and a bigger bad ass army and air force says otherwise. Next time win the war(s).

ah. no it doesn't.

the settlements and their expansion are illegal. arrogance and colonialism doesn't and shouldn't trump international law and human rights.

[ReeferMadness]

Governor Sarah Palin has some positive strokes for her good neighbours:

Former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is heaping praise on Prime Minister Stephen Harper for his "exemplary" support of Israel and scolding the media for not paying more attention.

Palin, whose public comments on various issues often attract attention, wrote a message on her Facebook page that linked to an article on the website of Breaking Christian News about Harper's visit to Israel and his support for the country since he became prime minister in 2006.

"Thank you to our good neighbours led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper for their exemplary support of our friend Israel," she wrote. "As significant and dangerous progress is made by Iran no doubt wanting nukes, and with the continued threats against Israel by radicals in the region, Canada's steadfastness is praiseworthy."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sarah-palin-is-a-fan-of-stephen-harper-s-israel-support-1.2506301

Well, she can see Russia from her front porch so I guess Harper can be considered her neighbor.

[bush_cheney2004]

ah. no it doesn't.

the settlements and their expansion are illegal. arrogance and colonialism doesn't and shouldn't trump international law and human rights.

But it does...and has done so for generations in Canada and the USA. Israel laughs at your curious righteousness from land taken from "PalestIndians".

[DogOnPorch]

ah. no it doesn't.

the settlements and their expansion are illegal. arrogance and colonialism doesn't and shouldn't trump international law and human rights.

If the settlements are illegal under 'international law', why was North Viet-Nam rubber-stamped by the same UN ten years after UN 242 with UN 413? This rewarded North Viet-Nam for invading another country and ethnically cleansing the population by giving it a full seat at the UN and not a word re: Boat People, mass murder and reeducation camps. More Boat People died as shark bait than all the civilian and military casualties in all the Arab-Israeli Wars...on BOTH sides.

Before you come up with a pat answer...

a] Viet-Nam was never a single country. That is...Viet-Nam was not a civil war.

b] Millions upon millions had zero interest in being Communist. Both in 1954 and 1975.

c] Poland was GIVEN Prussian and Pomerania. Germans uprooted from their homes...Poles moved in.

My conclusion: one rule for Israel...another rule for all others.

Edited January 25, 2014 by DogOnPorch

[bush_cheney2004]

.....My conclusion: one rule for Israel...another rule for all others.

Which is exactly what PM Harper publicly stated. Good thing Israel has one rule for itself....engage and destroy existential threats to Israel's existence.

[DogOnPorch]

Which is exactly what PM Harper publicly stated. Good thing Israel has one rule for itself....engage and destroy existential threats to Israel's existence.

After UN 413, they certainly had moral ground to do so. Had UN 242 been applied to ALL wars...well...bud might have a case.

[bud]

Israel laughs at your curious righteousness from land taken from "PalestIndians".

arrogant criminals usually do. criminals also usually fall from the top with their disregard for the law and the rights of others.

[DogOnPorch]

Incapable of spinning international law to explain what North Viet-Nam got away with? Didn't think you could.

[Hudson Jones]

Really, Rue? I mean, seriously?

There must be some kind of a problem in your brain that prevents you from understanding what you are reading:

I said:

No one said Harper "supports" child torture. What I said was that Harper has failed to condemn Israel time and time again for violating international law. One of those being, child torture.

You responded with:

Yes you did. Here are your words:

"This is an inconvenient truth that torturing of children is an Israeli policy that Harper, as the Canadian leader, has failed to condemn. Harper has failed as the leader of Canada to speak out against numerous reports showing the torture of children by Israel."

Just in case you missed what you quoted from me, here it is:

that Harper, as the Canadian leader, has failed to condemn.

The underlining and bold is to illustrate how you are out to lunch, again.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Hudson Jones

[On Guard for Thee]

And you didn't get the meaning of what I said....Israel includes all recognized borders and any occupied territory it controls until somebody and a bigger bad ass army and air force says otherwise. Next time win the war(s).

Recognized by whom?

[DogOnPorch]

Recognized by whom?

Where are Poland's 'traditional' borders?

Edited January 29, 2014 by DogOnPorch

[On Guard for Thee]

Recognized by whom?

so you are suggesting we keep the bloodshed going between Israel and the Palestinians?

[Bonam]

so you are suggesting we keep the bloodshed going between Israel and the Palestinians?

"We"? Why is it "our" role to do anything? Why does the world get so riled up about a few rockets launched or a few people killed by airstrikes in that part of the world, while largely ignoring thousands or even millions of deaths in other parts of the world? The conflict in the disputed territories is like any other of the hundreds of long-standing territorial conflicts in the world, different only in that the casualties (on both sides) are remarkably low, and that the media attention is remarkably high. For example, the entire history of the Arab-Israeli conflict from 1945 to the present day has had less casualties than the recent internal conflict in Syria, and yet the Arab-Israeli conflict has received thousands of man-years of media coverage, been the subject of hundreds of times more UN discussions and resolutions, has been the subject matter of political campaigns, boycotts, discussions, etc, all around the world, etc etc etc.

The world's laser-like focus on Israel and the Palestinians is hard to understand in any light other than some overpowering drive to single out Israelis and/or Jews.

Best thing "we" can do is to be consistent in how we interact with other nations, how we approach nations or peoples that have territorial disputes, and what criteria we use for intervention or lack thereof (whether diplomatic, economic, or military). If we did follow some consistent set of principles/criteria in this regard, the Arab-Israeli conflict would be about 500 places down the list of conflicts we should be paying attention to or intervening in.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Bonam

[Hudson Jones]

"We"? Why is it "our" role to do anything? Why does the world get so riled up about a few rockets launched or a few people killed by airstrikes in that part of the world, while largely ignoring thousands or even millions of deaths in other parts of the world? The conflict in the disputed territories is like any other of the hundreds of long-standing territorial conflicts in the world, different only in that the casualties (on both sides) are remarkably low, and that the media attention is remarkably high. For example, the entire history of the Arab-Israeli conflict from 1945 to the present day has had less casualties than the recent internal conflict in Syria, and yet the Arab-Israeli conflict has received thousands of man-years of media coverage, been the subject of hundreds of times more UN discussions and resolutions, has been the subject matter of political campaigns, boycotts, discussions, etc, all around the world, etc etc etc.

The world's laser-like focus on Israel and the Palestinians is hard to understand in any light other than some overpowering drive to single out Israelis and/or Jews.

Best thing "we" can do is to be consistent in how we interact with other nations, how we approach nations or peoples that have territorial disputes, and what criteria we use for intervention or lack thereof (whether diplomatic, economic, or military). If we did follow some consistent set of principles/criteria in this regard, the Arab-Israeli conflict would be about 500 places down the list of conflicts we should be paying attention to or intervening in.

In other words, "look the other way."

Let me know when Canadian government has shown the same affection for a country that has been accused of committing war crimes by numerous reports and investigations by respected organizations (like the red cross) and headed by respected individuals (like Judge Goldstone) and a country that has time and time again, violated international law and human rights for so long.

I love how one of the most recent Zionist apologists attempts at stopping criticism of the Zionist atrocities against the Palestinians is to bring up the worst things in the world and say: "hey now. it's not so bad compared to those!" - like our governments support those who are committing the atrocities, such as in the Congo or Syria.

[jacee]

Yes you did. Here are your words:

"This is an inconvenient truth that torturing of children is an Israeli policy that Harper, as the Canadian leader, has failed to condemn. Harper has failed as the leader of Canada to speak out against numerous reports showing the torture of children by Israel."

The above I would argue necessarily infers Harper supports Israel in torturing children.

Argue all you want rue, but that's not what was said.

For a self described "moderate", you do create more conflict than necessary with such tactics.

[jbg]

Incapable of spinning international law to explain what North Viet-Nam got away with? Didn't think you could.

You just don't get it. International law does not apply to progressive regimes such as North Viet Nam, North Korea, Democratic Kampuchea, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas or Democratic Republic of the Congo,

[jbg]

Where are Poland's 'traditional' borders?

Some would use Poland's 1900 borders. Similar to those that would use Israel's 1944 borders or the physical placement of Jews in 1944 as a benchmark.

Edited January 29, 2014 by jbg

[GostHacked]

The world's laser-like focus on Israel and the Palestinians is hard to understand in any light other than some overpowering drive to single out Israelis and/or Jews.

The media is complicit in this. Very low reports on Syria now, even though it is still horrific and we still have the bigger nations proxy fighting within Syria. The one reason we are not getting the reports is that it would eventually expose the US and Saudi Arabia specifically. The suspected gun running from Libya to Syria. Want to know why Stevens died? And the Benghazi thing is being swept under the rug because of it.

Best thing "we" can do is to be consistent in how we interact with other nations, how we approach nations or peoples that have territorial disputes, and what criteria we use for intervention or lack thereof (whether diplomatic, economic, or military). If we did follow some consistent set of principles/criteria in this regard, the Arab-Israeli conflict would be about 500 places down the list of conflicts we should be paying attention to or intervening in.

But we are not consistent, which is causing issues and conflicts within our own countries.