Well, that's the Mid East peace process gone then...

[Aladdin]

So the Israelis and Palestinians form a truce (after the so-called "obstacle" to the peace process, Yasser Arafat, has been removed), and the Palestinians comply with a number of security demands made by the Israelis. So what's next then, after the all-important security issues have been addressed? It's time to start talking and resolving the real issues of this conflict- mainly the illegal occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, the illegal settlements and the return to 1967 borders. So what does Israel do?

Israel to build more than 6,000 illegal new homes in the West Bank (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4297097.stm)

Israel plans to build more than 6,000 new homes in settlements in the West Bank, an Israeli newspaper quoting the state land authority has reported.

Yediot Ahronot says the government will also legitimise 120 unauthorised settlement outposts.

What a bunch of so and so*


* Previous expletives removed in view that the story has changed and the Israeli government now denies the report is true...

[Kentish]

Any thoughts?
What the hell are we going to do about the Middle East?

[Aladdin]

Stop press.

I see that in hte last few moments the news piece has changed and now it reads "Israel denies homes plan report".

I hope this is true.

[ShyBoy]

Stop press.

I see that in hte last few moments the news piece has changed and now it reads "Israel denies homes plan report".

I hope this is true.

I noticed that. I think even Israel know at the moment that it's pushing it a bit far to build 6,000 new homes....

[Kermit]

They've denied it?

It's definitely true then.

[Man Of Kent]

Not our problem is it?

Just our fault. :(

[freethepeeps]

Breaking news - suicide bombing outside the Stage night club in Tel Aviv - several believed dead - reports of 30 injured

Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/545139.html)

[JsT]

BBC News - Bomb (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4299609.stm)

Rumour is suicide bomber again, several dead. Source: BBC News 10pm.

[BlackArab]

Clubbers again.

R.I.P & sympathy to all the young victims of 'adult' stupidity.

[freethepeeps]

Haaretz is reporting that Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility.

According to the Scotsman (http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4181258)

But militants in the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, a violent group with ties to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah movement, said the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah was involved in the attack.

whilst radio4 is saying there is no credible claim of responsibility.

Death toll now at 3 - injured at 38.

[Tommo100]

jesus christ, what value can you have for other peoples life when you dont even value your own.

What scum.

[The Matadore]

Looks like the Palestinian militants are once again responsible for destroying a chance for peace.

[freethepeeps]

Looks like the Palestinian militants are once again responsible for destroying a chance for peace.

Well thats what it looks like because Palestinian deaths haven't been receiving a lot of attention, whereas once again a suicide bombing gets top billing in the news.

But instead, the Israeli army has killed 70 Palestinian civilians since the Palestinian elections on January 9th. They have injured at least 102 Palestinians, according to the Red Crescent Society.

Source (http://www.imemc.org/opinion/2005/feb/The%2030-day%20Ceasefire.htm)

But hey don't let the real world get in the way of your prejudice....

[Madge Noon]

But hey don't let the real world get in the way of your prejudice....
I don't see how killing innocent civilians on either side is a step towards peace.

No-one forced the suicide bomber to murder clubbers.

One murdered civilian is one murdered civilian too many, Palestinian or Israeli.

I think its time arch-apologists faced up to the prejudices they hold, the double standards they apply to human life. Civilians in a nightclub queue, fair game for the so-called "resistance", civilians leading children to safety, heroic shahids, victims of oppression.

But you know who the bad guys are, who have only themselves to blame.

I don't think you have ever let the real world get in the way of your prejudice.

:wave:

[Man Of Kent]

Thought we'd discussed the use of that log-in, dipshit.

[Dear Wendy]

BBC News - Bomb (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4299609.stm)

Rumour is suicide bomber again, several dead. Source: BBC News 10pm.

And Aladdin was calling out for Israeli apologist in this thread. Unfortunately these actions speak way louder than anybodys words ever could.
Madge Noon has the right idea though. Welcome to the boards.

[freethepeeps]

And Aladdin was calling out for Israeli apologist in this thread. Unfortunately these actions speak way louder than anybodys words ever could.

70 deaths and 102 injuries vs 4 deaths and 50 injuries.

Am I missing something here, why is the latter figure so shocking, whilst the former figure appears to pass without comment?

Is it merely that the latter are prominently reported, whilst the former have been ignored ?

Is it really okay for Israelis to kill Palestinians, but when Palestinians kill Israelis after that, they are jeapordizing the peace process?

Anyone would think that the news was being stage managed........ especially with the Hezbollah connextion being brought into the picture within a very short while ....

Palestinian statements on the attack include:

Dr. Nafez Azzam, Islamic Jihad spokesperson and political head:

“The Islamic Jihad is not responsible about the explosion in Tel-Aviv. The Islamic Jihad is committed to calm in accordance with the understandings we have reached with President Mahmoud Abbas. The Islamic Jihad has no knowledge of the attack in Tel Aviv ”.

Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade spokesperson Abu Qussai:

“The Al-Aqssa Martyrs Brigades affirm its full commitment to the ceasefire agreement which came to light in accordance with the acceptance of all the Palestinian factions and the Palestinian Authority” He added “We have made the necessary contacts with the main Brigades leaders in all areas and they confirmed to us that their groups have no connection to the blast. The phone call that claimed responsibility in our name came from unknown person. We are aware that such attacks at this time harm the Palestinian national interests and put us in a difficult position”

Sami Abu Zohri, Hamas spokesperson:

“We have been observing the period of quiet as we told Mr. Abu Mazen at our last meeting in Gaza. The responsibility for this explosion lies with the Israelis because even as we observe the calm, the Israeli aggression and crimes continue"

Nabil Abu Rudeina - PA spokesperson:

“We are against all acts that harm civilians, Israelis or Palestinians. This is part of our agreement with Israel at Sharm El-Shaikh,"

Saeeb Erekat - Palestinian negotiator:

“We appeal to the international community to act immediately to ensure that Israel will not use the explosion in Tel-Aviv as an excuse to resume its military aggression against the Palestinian people"

The Minister of Palestinian civil affairs, Mohammed Dahlan suggested that an informal Palestinian group or even Israeli fanatics might stand behind the blast in Tel-Aviv.

So, the question is this - whose actions speak louder than words? Who is responsible? Hezbollah, Islamic Kihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, all have been blamed or said to claim responsibility - Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Brigade have denied. Is it the work of a renegade cell, a few pissed of individuals, is it black ops..... I have no idea.

And to make things even more confusing, the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1109301662726) tells us:

n Beirut, however, a Hizbullah spokesman denied involvement.

Abbas has vowed to hunt down those responsible, we shall see what happens.

[freethepeeps]

Madge Noon has the right idea though. Welcome to the boards.

I've just worked out that until recently you were Jacqueline the Ripper. I don't like "Madge Noon" following me around, with some dodgy agenda, I find it alarming and distressing. I believe that it amounts, in law, to harrassment, (http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-right-to-privacy/harassment,-unwanted-letters-and-telephone-calls/index.shtml) and that it is intended to do so.

But, maybe using a different handle would solve the problem.

So, perhaps you would be kind enough to let the mods know that you have no objection to me using the JtR handle that is closely associated with you.

You would of course still have two advantages over my current predicament - namely that

1) You would know who was using the handle closely linked to you
2) I wouldn't be following you about the boards.

After all, despite our political differences, I would defend you to the hilt if I believed that someone had followed you onto these boards with an agenda designed to cause you personal harrassment, alarm and distress.

Cheers.

[Disillusioned]

Just as we think things are getting better 4 innocent Israeli civilians are pointlessly murdered outside a club. Just normal people out having a good time killed because of a terrorist’s fanatical agenda. Sad. Abbas’s words are welcome, I hope he and the PA stick to their word but in the mean time Israel can’t just ignore this.

Oh and what are you on about now ftp? What's JtR supposed to have done?

[Kermit]

Madge Noon: fuck off, plskthnx.

[Kermit]

I shall obviously have to repeat ftp's point for those (disillusioned, jacq, matadore) who are slow of understanding.

Four deaths are disgusting, but 70 deaths don't matter.

Israel kills EIGHTEEN TIMES the number of people that one bomber does (origin unknown, the Palestinians have said they haven't done it, and they're not normally backward at admitting responsibility) and yet it's Palestine that is "de4stroying" the peace process.

I'm obviously missing something very important here. Maybe the Israeli apologists can explain to me why ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE palestinian lives don't count.

[lukesh]

Palestinians have shown yesterday they don't want to compromise with a peace process. therefore Israel has a right to defend its self.
Palestine uses suicide bombers to kill, therefore Israel should be allowed to sue what they want to defend them selves, simple as!

[freethepeeps]

in the mean time Israel can’t just ignore this

Do you expect Palestinian militants to ignore shootings of Palestinian civilians?

Do you think that it is time for Israel to strike back and bring the fragile truce to a close?

Are you happy for the (admittedly extremely slim) window of opportunity for peace to be closed?

It seems that all the main factions have denied involvement - and that no-one knows who bears responsibility. The PA have condemned it. and vowed to find those responsible.

According to recent reports the PA has sealed 12 tunnels in Rafah, so there is a case for suggesting that the PA might be more able to gather the intelligence needed to arrest those responsible.

It is time for ALL the killing to stop, and for a just settlement which restores human rights and dignity to the people of occupied Palestine.

Allowing extremists from either side (inc settlers threatening to attack the Al-Aqsa mosque) to destroy any hope of peace, justice and dignity for all in the forseeable future would be a travesty.

[lukesh]

If palestine was interested in peace don't you think they would of STOPPED these suicde bombings.... than Israel has no right to attack.

[freethepeeps]

Palestinians have shown yesterday they don't want to compromise with a peace process. therefore Israel has a right to defend its self.
Palestine uses suicide bombers to kill, therefore Israel should be allowed to sue what they want to defend them selves, simple as!

Sorry lukesh, I didn't realise that you knew who was responsible for the attack.

You also, erm, forget to mention it. Could you fill us in now please?

[lukesh]

Sorry lukesh, I didn't realise that you knew who was responsible for the attack.

You also, erm, forget to mention it. Could you fill us in now please?
Palestinian suicide bombers!

[freethepeeps]

Palestinian suicide bombers!

So, every single Palestinian is responsible for this action?

Is every single Israeli to be held responsible for the 70 Palestinian deaths too?

Are you personally responsible for the torture of Iraqis by British soldiers?

[Kermit]

Palestinian suicide bombers!
Lukesh is, in fact, a key member of MI6 it seems.

he certainly has access to information the rest of us don't.

Source, dipshit.

[lukesh]

So, every single Palestinian is responsible for this action?

Is every single Israeli to be held responsible for the 70 Palestinian deaths too?
Don't be stupid. However palestine hasn't be able to keep to the peace process.... the government should take drastic action, hunt down the terrorists and destroy them before they destroy peace for ever!

[freethepeeps]

Don't be stupid. However palestine hasn't be able to keep to the peace process.... the government should take drastic action, hunt down the terrorists and destroy them before they destroy peace for ever!

So you support bloodshed over peace.

Thankyou for your fascinating insights caller.

[Kermit]

If palestine was interested in peace don't you think they would of STOPPED these suicde bombings.... than Israel has no right to attack.
But Israel have attacked: one hundred and seventy three lives lost of destroyed since the elections.

If Israel had any design on peace then those one hundred and seventy three lives would still be in tact.

But I forget: Palestinian lives don't count, do they luke, do they jacq, do they dis? Four Israeli deaths are despicable, but eighteen times that number of Palestinian deaths doesn't matter.

[lukesh]

So you support bloodshed over peace.

Thankyou for your fascinating insights caller.
I support peace only, but terrorists need to be removed so that peace can be implemented. As with what happened yesterday shows, peace can't be achieved until terrorists are removed from the equation.

[Kermit]

I support peace only, but terrorists need to be removed so that peace can be implemented. As with what happened yesterday shows, peace can't be achieved until terrorists are removed from the equation.
So lets kill every Israeli then. After all, the IDF show that they're terrorists.

[lukesh]

But Israel have attacked: one hundred and seventy three lives lost of destroyed since the elections.

If Israel had any design on peace then those one hundred and seventy three lives would still be in tact.

But I forget: Palestinian lives don't count, do they luke, do they jacq, do they dis? Four Israeli deaths are despicable, but eighteen times that number of Palestinian deaths doesn't matter.
Israel is rooting down the terrorists, preventing any more attacks on their citizans. If the Palestinian government can't do it, if the UN just sist there, if the international community just sists there, I don't blame Israel rooting for them its self!

[lukesh]

So lets kill every Israeli then. After all, the IDF show that they're terrorists.
They are not terrorists, the Palestinians are not either, however there is a small minority that need to be rooted and put to justice or else peace will never happen!!

[freethepeeps]

I support peace only, but terrorists need to be removed so that peace can be implemented. As with what happened yesterday shows, peace can't be achieved until terrorists are removed from the equation.

I'm not surprised that you believe an occupied people can be broken by the use of brute force, terror and war crimes. Sharon believed that too, but if we are to believe that he is genuine in his statements at the Sharm-el-Sheikh conference, then it would appear he has conceded that it doesn't work.

The Israeli military intelligence bods involved in compiling a recent report for the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/542619.html) concluded that the adopting of the approach you suggest at the start of the second Intifada escalated the conflict and created more militants:

"The levers of pressure that were applied to the Palestinian population and to the security apparatus, most of whose members did not take part at the beginning of the conflict, gave rise to negative results. A sense of anger and vengeance led to the tightening of the cooperation among the terror groups and between them and elements of the Palestinian security services that joined the conflict as a result of the IDF's damages to them. As a result of this the phenomenon of suicide attacks swelled to unprecedented dimensions, spilling over into the nonreligious organizations."

And you thank its time to go there again.

I notice that you are studiously avoiding the deaths of Palestinians. Is it because you are a racist?

[lukesh]

Yeah I'm racist... don't you remember? :lol:

[freethepeeps]

Yeah I'm racist... don't you remember? :lol:

Well, at leat you admit it.

[lukesh]

Well, at leat you admit it.
If you say so.

[freethepeeps]

If you say so.

Do you have an opinion on the 70 deaths?

Are you going to share it with us?

Or should I conclude that I am wasting my time even bothering to discuss anything with an immature, intolerant, unthinking, bloodthirsty racist.

Cos thats exactly how its coming across.

[lukesh]

Do you have an opinion on the 70 deaths?

Are you going to share it with us?

Or should I conclude that I am wasting my time even bothering to discuss anything with an immature, intolerant, unthinking, bloodthirsty racist.

Cos thats exactly how its coming across.
Thats me yes. Why are you still talking to me? I'm racist remember, you don't accoicate with them.

[Toadborg]

Just our fault. :(

Depends how you think of 'our'.........

[Dear Wendy]

70 deaths and 102 injuries vs 4 deaths and 50 injuries.

Am I missing something here, why is the latter figure so shocking, whilst the former figure appears to pass without comment?

Is it merely that the latter are prominently reported, whilst the former have been ignored ?

Is it really okay for Israelis to kill Palestinians, but when Palestinians kill Israelis after that, they are jeapordizing the peace process?

Anyone would think that the news was being stage managed........ especially with the Hezbollah connextion being brought into the picture within a very short while ....

Palestinian statements on the attack include:

Dr. Nafez Azzam, Islamic Jihad spokesperson and political head:



Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade spokesperson Abu Qussai:



Sami Abu Zohri, Hamas spokesperson:



Nabil Abu Rudeina - PA spokesperson:



Saeeb Erekat - Palestinian negotiator:



The Minister of Palestinian civil affairs, Mohammed Dahlan suggested that an informal Palestinian group or even Israeli fanatics might stand behind the blast in Tel-Aviv.

So, the question is this - whose actions speak louder than words? Who is responsible? Hezbollah, Islamic Kihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, all have been blamed or said to claim responsibility - Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Brigade have denied. Is it the work of a renegade cell, a few pissed of individuals, is it black ops..... I have no idea.

And to make things even more confusing, the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1109301662726) tells us:



Abbas has vowed to hunt down those responsible, we shall see what happens.

In the end I referred to Madge Noon's post.

This one just naturally hits closer to home, being that
a - I had just got in from a night out, where the biggest worry was getting hold of a taxi and not falling in my new heels
b - I have a cousin who spends her weekends in Tel-Aviv

[Dear Wendy]

I've just worked out that until recently you were Jacqueline the Ripper. I don't like "Madge Noon" following me around, with some dodgy agenda, I find it alarming and distressing. I believe that it amounts, in law, to harrassment, (http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-right-to-privacy/harassment,-unwanted-letters-and-telephone-calls/index.shtml) and that it is intended to do so.

But, maybe using a different handle would solve the problem.

So, perhaps you would be kind enough to let the mods know that you have no objection to me using the JtR handle that is closely associated with you.

You would of course still have two advantages over my current predicament - namely that

1) You would know who was using the handle closely linked to you
2) I wouldn't be following you about the boards.

After all, despite our political differences, I would defend you to the hilt if I believed that someone had followed you onto these boards with an agenda designed to cause you personal harrassment, alarm and distress.

Cheers.

Believe it or not, me agreeing with Madge Nóon has nothing to do with our differences. I don't abide by my "enemies" enemy is my friend.
I just sincerely thought that her post was what everyone should remember.

Yes, I do understand where you are coming from, but so far I haven't seen her doing any of the above mentioned things, and you therefore can't presume I will boycott every new user you have a dislike towards just cause you say it. After all, I didn't offer her my lifelong friendship but merely welcomed her opinions to the board.

[freethepeeps]

Meanwhile, Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/545139.html) has updated the article:

Defense sources told Haaretz that the bomber, Abdullah Badran, a resident of the West Bank town of Deir al Ghusun, had connections to Fatah and Islamic Jihad agents in the Tul Karm region as well as with Hezbollah. Palestinian security officials issued a similar assessment.

The Palestinian Authority's interior minister, Nasser Yousef, told reporters that PA security services had arrested two Palestinians in connection with the attack. No further details were given.

[Dear Wendy]

Btw Kermit, I seriously don't appericiate your hostile tone in these discussions. You give me no reason to want to debate your points when you dish them out as you do.
The posters I disagree with the most, show me more respect than that.

[lukesh]

Btw Kermit, I seriously don't appericiate your hostile tone in these discussions. You give me no reason to want to debate your points when you dish them out as you do.
The posters I disagree with the most, show me more respect than that.
Yep... they want me to debate with them properly? I can't be bothered when they are full of abuse and so little respect for anyone.

[groovechampion]

The Minister of Palestinian civil affairs, Mohammed Dahlan suggested that an informal Palestinian group or even Israeli fanatics might stand behind the blast in Tel-Aviv.


Israeli fanatics? Yeah they are the obvious suspects. :rolleyes:


So, the question is this - whose actions speak louder than words? Who is responsible? Hezbollah, Islamic Kihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, all have been blamed or said to claim responsibility - Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Brigade have denied. Is it the work of a renegade cell, a few pissed of individuals, is it black ops..... I have no idea.





Does it really matter who did it? It was a palestinian terrorist, of one of the above groups.

[groovechampion]

I've just worked out that until recently you were Jacqueline the Ripper. I don't like "Madge Noon" following me around, with some dodgy agenda, I find it alarming and distressing. I believe that it amounts, in law, to harrassment, (http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-right-to-privacy/harassment,-unwanted-letters-and-telephone-calls/index.shtml) and that it is intended to do so.

But, maybe using a different handle would solve the problem.

So, perhaps you would be kind enough to let the mods know that you have no objection to me using the JtR handle that is closely associated with you.

You would of course still have two advantages over my current predicament - namely that

1) You would know who was using the handle closely linked to you
2) I wouldn't be following you about the boards.

After all, despite our political differences, I would defend you to the hilt if I believed that someone had followed you onto these boards with an agenda designed to cause you personal harrassment, alarm and distress.

Cheers.

Ah dont be such a big girl!

Its just the internet you big pansy. :D

[freethepeeps]

Ah dont be such a big girl!

Its just the internet you big pansy. :D

Top marks for sexism anyway.

[groovechampion]

Top marks for sexism anyway.

:thumb: ;)

[ShyBoy]

Israeli fanatics? Yeah they are the obvious suspects. :rolleyes:

Not the obvious suspects - analyze the Palestinians. There are desperate for peace, and this has happened and they don't know who did it. They're looking at every possibility - that includes that some Israeli who wants a full-blown conflict which results in Palestine being wiped off the map actually attacked his own people to do this.

[/quote]
Does it really matter who did it? It was a palestinian terrorist, of one of the above groups.[/QUOTE]

They've all denied it where they would not normally have. They want peace to - they are fighting a war with Israel they know they cannot win. If Israel chooses to they could easily occupy all of Palestine by tonight. These people are just desperate - they have had their families etc killed and have nothing left to live for except revenge. We should thank our blessings that the new Palestinian leadership is able, to an extent, to control them.

[Disillusioned]

I’d be very surprised if this latest attack was not the work of a Palestinian. The vast majority of these murderous attacks have been carried out by Palestinian terrorists. I don't see anything that makes this attack hugely different. And I don't think the word of Palestinian terrorist groups is particularly reliable. It's perfectly plausible that this was just the actions of an individual Palestinian and not connected to a group.

Oh and I think it's VERY unlikely that an Israeli did this TheShyBoyInTheCorner.

[freethepeeps]

. If Israel chooses to they could easily occupy all of Palestine by tonight.

Well, whilst its true that more forces could be put in, Israel has been occupying all of Palestine since 1967!!!

And, for the vast majority of Palestinians it is a desire for justice that keeps them going .... the militants have been pushed, by a widespread public desire for peace, to bring about a cessation of violence.

It appears that, for now, the Israeli military will restrain itself from committing a revenge attack, and that the PA have acted promptly to arrest responsible persons.

The question for many Palestinians now is whether they have a partner for peace - something that will be judged by what Israel does on the ground, both in Gaza and the West Bank.

I think Mustafa Barghouti (http://www.amin.org/eng/mustafa_barghouthi/2005/feb24.html) sums it up very eloquently:

Israel today faces no existential threat, and it has no easily-demonizable counterpart at the Muqata. Sharon’s government is out of excuses. It is now faced with the simple question of whether or not it is willing to be a good neighbor in the Middle East, of whether it prefers other people’s property over peace and security.

For the sake of both the Palestinian and Israeli peoples, it is imperative that the international community not allow this precious window of opportunity to go to waste. The best way to escape from the dead-end of another mendacious interim deal destined to lead to another devastating crisis is an international peace conference resulting in a resolution based on international law.

In considering this proposal, it is important to remember that the Palestinian people are not bargaining for concessions or spoils, but rather for the minimum of justice that has been denied to them during 57 cataclysmic years of war, dispossession and occupation. We are only asking to live in peace and freedom on 23% of historic Palestine.

At the end of the day, there must be security for everyone, Palestinian and Israeli - and hopefully there will be a push for that from the Palestinian people, the Israeli people and the rest of the world.

Allowing extremists to derail the peace process would be a vote against peace.

So would clinging onto the West Bank settlements.

[Madge Noon]

Your legal threats make me laugh. A non-offensive username harassment? Get real, my comments are there for all to see. It is clear the mods do not agree with you. Choose Jacqueline the Ripper if you want, I couldn't care less ftp. I want to move on from this subject. PM me if you want to continue this.

btw it is such an ultra-left poseur cliche to start smearing people as "racist" who don't agree with them. it is an extremely cynical attack, used to stifle debate. Just so people are clear I am not racist, even though I disagree with people.

Anyone would think that the news was being stage managed...Conspiracy theory innuendo? You might as well start repeating Mohammed Dahlans analysis that it might be Israeli fanatics... :rolleyes:

Just to reiterate, its not ok for anyone to kill civilians, be they Israeli or Palestinian. It is sickening though that it is a numbers game to some people. One civilian murdered is one civilian too many. Comparing casualty figures to apologise for terror is disgusting.

70 deaths and 102 injuries vs 4 deaths and 50 injuries.
My question would be to people who use this argument is this: Why the comparison of casualty figures?

You either think that murdering civilians is an unjustifiable crime, or you don't.

PS "sources" like IMEMC, any PNA website, ISM, zmag, counterpunch and any blog are NOT reputable or creditable sources. Using mainstream, reputable news organisations is surely not too much of a stretch.

[Man Of Kent]

Well, whilst its true that more forces could be put in, Israel has been occupying all of Palestine since 1967!!!

If we are being impartial here, how about you remind everyone what prompted that occupation in 1967? Given that much of the land was formally part of Jordan - and you don't seem to mind that they were occupying that land originally...

[groovechampion]

Your legal threats make me laugh. A non-offensive username harassment? Get real, my comments are there for all to see. It is clear the mods do not agree with you. Choose Jacqueline the Ripper if you want, I couldn't care less ftp. I want to move on from this subject. PM me if you want to continue this.

btw it is such an ultra-left poseur cliche to start smearing people as "racist" who don't agree with them. it is an extremely cynical attack, used to stifle debate. Just so people are clear I am not racist, even though I disagree with people.

Conspiracy theory innuendo? You might as well start repeating Mohammed Dahlans analysis that it might be Israeli fanatics... :rolleyes:

Just to reiterate, its not ok for anyone to kill civilians, be they Israeli or Palestinian. It is sickening though that it is a numbers game to some people. One civilian murdered is one civilian too many. Comparing casualty figures to apologise for terror is disgusting.

My question would be to people who use this argument is this: Why the comparison of casualty figures?

You either think that murdering civilians is an unjustifiable crime, or you don't..
Yeah! What he/she said! :thumb:


PS "sources" like IMEMC, any PNA website, ISM, zmag, counterpunch and any blog are NOT reputable or creditable sources. Using mainstream, reputable news organisations is surely not too much of a stretch.

Aaaah but you see they'll claim that mainstream media is under the thumb of the Jewish overlord making them terribly anti palestinian.

Anyone read that article about the anti-Israel bias at the BBC? Theyve commissioned something like 25 documentaries on the Middle East conflict in the past decade and something like 23 were presented as pro-palestinian.

Not that I care or think this is a bad thing, the BBC obviously have a point and there are injustices being committed. But it just goes to show that the media really aren't pro Israel in many cases.

[groovechampion]

If we are being impartial here, how about you remind everyone what prompted that occupation in 1967? Given that much of the land was formally part of Jordan - and you don't seem to mind that they were occupying that land originally...

Yes. What exactly happened to cause them to occupy the land? The Arab agressors attacked in order to try and wipe Israel from the map.

Doesn't make their occupation right, but it isn't as one sided as you say.

[freethepeeps]

If we are being impartial here, how about you remind everyone what prompted that occupation in 1967? Given that much of the land was formally part of Jordan - and you don't seem to mind that they were occupying that land originally...

Sorry, but where exactly have I ever said that I didn't mind that Jordan was occupying Palestine?

Cos I don't recall ever having thought about it.

Why don't you remind us what prompted it. Cos I'm pretty certain that you and I don't have the same ideas about that.


:)

[Man Of Kent]

Sorry, but where exactly have I ever said that I didn't mind that Jordan was occupying Palestine?

Sorry, as there had been no condemnation of the fact that there hasn't been a free-Palestine - ever - meant that I assumed something. Epescially as you only condemned Israel for their occupation and made no mention of the fact that this land didn't belong to a Palestine state in 1967 anyway...

Cos I don't recall ever having thought about it.

That figures. Easier just to abuse Israel, isn't it?

Why don't you remind us what prompted it. Cos I'm pretty certain that you and I don't have the same ideas about that.

Me neither ;)

What I see as an act of agression by a neighbouring Arab nation (or rather by more than one neighbour), you would probably see as defensive.

So, why don't you explain what happened, seeing as you are condemning Israel for their occupation...

[Man Of Kent]

PS "sources" like IMEMC, any PNA website, ISM, zmag, counterpunch and any blog are NOT reputable or creditable sources. Using mainstream, reputable news organisations is surely not too much of a stretch.

Because we all know how impartial they are :rolleyes:

[groovechampion]

Because we all know how impartial they are :rolleyes:

More impartial than crazy loons posting on the web though!

[Man Of Kent]

Clearly you have never seen CNN/NBC/Fox/Sky...

[groovechampion]

Point taken...

NBC/FOX are CRAP. But CNN and Sky aren't that bad. Not good, but not that bad either.

But there are other reliable sections of the mainstream media.

[Man Of Kent]

But CNN and Sky aren't that bad.

:lol:

Damn, I nearly fell off my chair.

But there are other reliable sections of the mainstream media.

Very few, and I include the BBC in that...

[freethepeeps]

Sorry, as there had been no condemnation of the fact that there hasn't been a free-Palestine - ever - meant that I assumed something. Epescially as you only condemned Israel for their occupation and made no mention of the fact that this land didn't belong to a Palestine state in 1967 anyway...



That figures. Easier just to abuse Israel, isn't it?



Me neither ;)

What I see as an act of agression by a neighbouring Arab nation (or rather by more than one neighbour), you would probably see as defensive.

So, why don't you explain what happened, seeing as you are condemning Israel for their occupation...

Oh my, is Jordan still occupying Palestine? No. 1967 was a whole 37 years ago - but if I do think about I would say they had no right to annexe Palestine, a view shared by most of the world at the time.

If you have any sources that show that the Jordanian occupation of Palestine took the same form, inward transfer of Jordanian civilians, control of the aquifers, dispossession and cantonisation I would be genuinely interested to see it. And, of course, we haven't even started looking at the Ottoman or British occupations, have we? Teel you what, I'll state categorically that I'm against all occupations. That should speed things up somewhat.

I am having a little difficulty in seeing where you're going with this one. Are we leading up to "Occupation is justified because Palestine has always been occupied"? ..... cos that view kinda died out with colonialism. Somewhere along the line, the right to self-determination became a guiding principle.

On then to the heavily disputed causes of the 1967 war:

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was 'no threat of destruction' but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could 'exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.'...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: 'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.' "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

Yes, yes, I know Chomsky's a lefty - but I've yet to see proof that he lied.

"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68source (http://www.cactus48.com/1967war.html)

One would think that Rabin, Begin and Weitzman knew what they were talking about. No?

[Madge Noon]

I don't know what your problem is. If you can't see a difference between propaganda/advocacy sites like IMEMC and reputable news sites like the BBC, then...

Talking about "impartial" or not is a classic strawman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman#Rhetorical_use) attack. I didn't mention the impartiality or otherwise of news sources.

[Man Of Kent]

Are we leading up to "Occupation is justified because Palestine has always been occupied"? ..... cos that view kinda died out with colonialism. Somewhere along the line, the right to self-determination became a guiding principle.

Actually that's not where I was going.

The point I was making is that you only ever condemn that actions of Israel, yet over look any reason why they may choose to act in that way.

I'm not defending them, and I won't defend the terrorists. You cannot say the same.

[Man Of Kent]

I don't know what your problem is. If you can't see a difference between propaganda/advocacy sites like IMEMC reputable news sites like the BBC, then...

Talking about "impartial" or not is a classic strawman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman#Rhetorical_use) attack. I didn't mention the impartiality or otherwise of news sources.

Hey, fuckwit. I can see the difference.

Doesn't mean that none of them have a bias...

BTW Why are you still using Madge Noon as your ID. Pathetic.

[freethepeeps]

Actually that's not where I was going.

The point I was making is that you only ever condemn that actions of Israel, yet over look any reason why they may choose to act in that way.

I'm not defending them, and I won't defend the terrorists. You cannot say the same.

I'll repeat the edit - I'm against all occupations. Hope that helps.

The majority of Palestinians have NEVER engaged in any acts of violence against any other party.

The use of the term "terrorists" is meant to blind people to reality, and it does it very succesfully on the whole. Where does it take us? How does it move us towards a peaceful resolution? Are you unaware that many colonised peoples have engaged in armed struggle to gain their "liberation"?

[Man Of Kent]

Erm, I didn't link the terrorists with Palestinians, for the record.

Personally I cannot see any proposal which will bring a solution. There are two completely diverse stances, each backed up with force, neither apparently wanting to back down...

[freethepeeps]

Erm, I didn't link the terrorists with Palestinians, for the record.

Personally I cannot see any proposal which will bring a solution. There are two completely diverse stances, each backed up with force, neither apparently wanting to back down...

What about Mustafa Barghouti's proposal above?

[Man Of Kent]

How does that address the terrorists call for the removal of Israel, or the call of ultra-right Israelis for the right to settle.

Those are the group who will maintain the cycle, not the ordinary Palestinians and Israelis... they are just the victims.

[Man Of Kent]

Jacq and her family/friends included.

[freethepeeps]

Sorry, where is this existential threat?

The PLO went for 2 states. The recent elections confirmed that the majority of Palestinians support that. Hamas looks set to move into electoral politics in the next election, and have a reasonable chance of beating the PA as things stand.

The extremists can be defeated by restoring dignity to the people of Palestine, by giving them a stake in their own society.

They can also be maintained by failing to do that.

As for the zionist extremists, well, Gaza shows us that settlements are not forever. Israel is apparently willing to press ahead with disengagement despite the threats of terror from them.....

[Madge Noon]

Doesn't mean that none of them have a bias...Of course it doesn't. I was just pointing out that your criticism of my statement about reputable news sources was a strawman argument. And you insist on building your strawman taller and taller...

A terrorist:

Any action intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians, non-combatants when the purpose of such act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.

Source (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/terrorism_definitions.html)

Attacking civilians on buses and in queues is terrorism, not a struggle for liberation, or 'resistance". Don't try and sugarcoat it.

[Disillusioned]

They've all denied it where they would not normally have. They want peace to

Well they've admitted it now. So much for the usual Palestinian terrorists not being responsible.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4301249.stm

They want peace?

Maybe when the Palestinian terrorists love their children more than they hate Jews peace will come, to paraphrase Golda Meir.

[marv]

But if Israel halts its part of the peace process then the terrorists win because in the end they are parts in these groups which don’t want peace and will carry on with these attacks.

From the article But Islamic Jihad leaders in Gaza still deny any involvement, suggesting a split between factions, says the BBC's Barbara Plett in Jerusalem.

This is like what happened in Ireland there is going to be factions and groups which are unwilling to compromise or reach agreement so these people will be trying to undermine the peace process.

Seven held over Tel Aviv bombing

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4299995.stm

From the report

Palestinian police separately arrested two people over the blast, which killed four people and injured about 30.

Also

The Palestinian Authority will not stand silent in the face of this act of sabotage," Mr. Abbes said in a statement after meeting security chiefs

The PLO is willing to deal and reach a compromise now and have helped in arresting suspects. Israel has to keep to its side of the bargain

[Yerascrote]

Maybe when the Palestinian terrorists love their children more than they hate Jews peace will come, to paraphrase Golda Meir.

even though you didn't say it but the fact that you take this statement seriously worries me, have you got any idea of what these people's motives are? they hate their children, is that it :confused: :rolleyes:

[Yerascrote]

They want peace?


i believe that the powers to be in the Palestinian world want peace, of course not everyone is going to change overnight, the RIRA murdered 29 people in omagh, does that mean sinn fein should autmoatically have got the blame? nope of course not, give them a chance will ya!

[lukesh]

even though you didn't say it but the fact that you take this statement seriously worries me, have you got any idea of what these people's motives are? they hate their children, is that it :confused: :rolleyes:
allowing them to blow their own children up is disgusting. why dont the the old farts do it them selves?

[Clandestine]

Gloda Meier, oh yeah a real champion of peace and conciliation to cite, Dis.

Lets look at some other reknown quotes of hers to see the true nature of the zionist ideologue...

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
-- Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.


I hope one day you are as dehumanised and brutalised as the Palestinians have been for more than a half century by this apartheid abomination of a state and we'll then see who you consider the true victims to be.

[freethepeeps]

Maybe when the Palestinian terrorists love their children more than they hate Jews peace will come, to paraphrase Golda Meir.

Of course, Palestinians aren't like other human beings are they? :rolleyes:

Strangely enough it was Golda Meir who denied that the Palestinians even existed. She seems to have been proven wrong on that one.

[Yerascrote]

allowing them to blow their own children up is disgusting. why dont the the old farts do it them selves?

:confused: i think you got the wrong end of the stick again

[freethepeeps]

I hope one day you are as dehumanised and brutalised as the Palestinians have been for more than a half century by this apartheid abomination of a state and we'll then see who you consider the true victims to be.

I don't wish that on anyone. Its time for the dehumanisation and hatred to end.

[Clandestine]

Perhaps FTP but it seems ideological zionists who fail to see the similitude of applied "principle" between the fascism under which European Jews suffered as well as that under which South Africa's blacks suffered and the longrunning perpetration of precisely the same degredation, brutality, disenfranchisement and dehumanisation perpetrated from the very commencement of Zionist migration into "Palestine" (already repeatedly demonstrated as an acknowledged reference pre 1947 even under British and Ottoman control) throughout the 1920's (see: Stern Gang, Hagganah, Irgun) deserve to learn by experience what its like to be on the receiving end.

The Zionist legacy of atrocities began well before the world was shocked into handing over legally owned Palestinian land to European zionists to assuage the collective sense of guilt over the holocaust. Until that legacy is acknowledged by the state of Israel itself and atoned for, all talk of peace initiatives (and ive watched enough repeated rounds of such "peace intiatives" over decades to see the same charade for what it is) will come to nought.

Peace only comes through acknowledgement of guilt by those who began the violence in the first place, there is no other legitimate or lasting route to atonement and conciliation.

[marv]

Israel blames Syria for bombing

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4301447.stm

[Clandestine]

LOL. of course it does marv. I expect the finger pointing headlines to run thick and fast and to villify all sort of outside targets of interest to the furtherance of Zionist greater Israel objectives. What you wont see, I would wager, are too many (if any) headlines reading

1. "Israel uncovers Mossad attempts to arouse citizens anger and paranoia to maintain Israeli dominant status quo and give outward cause for UNSC approvals for further military action against Syria (or the Palestinians, etc.)",

2. "Hardline Right-wing Settler group found to be behind Tel Aviv bombing".

Such headlines wouldnt advance what is transparently the ongoing re-design by both Israel and the US of the Middle East.

[freethepeeps]

Peace only comes through acknowledgement of guilt by those who began the violence in the first place, there is no other legitimate or lasting route to atonement and conciliation.

Not really the case in South Africa though, was it?

When a political system becomes financially unviable, then its adherents are capable of rapid transformation.

USAID has much to answer for in this scenario.

[Clandestine]

No FTP, you are right, it didnt transpire like that in South Africa since there never was any conciliation reached. Merely the inevitable overthrow of an oppressive regime by the majority it oppressed (helped of course by sanctions upheld by most countries even if my own was criminally complicit behind the scenes).

My point is that for Israel to continue as a viable, modern and truly democratic state entity (i.e. embracing true pluralism rather than clininging to notions of exclusivistic pre-eminence only for Jews) then it will have to first acknowledge its own ongoing terrorism of the once formerly peaceful inhabitants of that land prior to the land clearances, ethnocides and forced expulsions which killed and brutalised thousands and drove upwards of 800,000 from their homes and villages (which were summarily bulldozed and built over to create the myth of a "land without a people for a people without a land").

I have no wish to see Israel "driven into the sea", but understand that without the conciliation that comes from true atonement and contrition, this conflict will continue to perpetuate itself to further the power of an ideology that should have died out at the end of the 1800's.

[freethepeeps]

Clandestine

Judging by this thread, western opinion is a large part of the problem. At least people didn't (couldn't) bend over backwards to justify Apartheid, at the end. The disinformation, smear tactics and unbending belief in the right to perpertrate misery on a people beggars belief.

And the irony of the 2 key planks of defence - accusations of hatred and racism....

Still, the ideological underpinnings are coming apart - I believe it can't be sustained much longer.

And then you come along and depress me with your "I've seen it so many times before"

:impissed:

[Clandestine]

Sorry to depress you but this IS just another rotation of the same cycle that ive seen in the 70's, 80's and 90's (and I'm speaking of the totality of US/Israeli-led machinations once again being played out across the ME).

That so many prefer to think each rotation is somehow any different from its predecessor is simply demonstration of the PR-driven nature of mainstream decontextualised, sanitised spin which passes for accurate reporting.

[Disillusioned]

Originally Posted by Disillusioned
Maybe when the Palestinian terrorists love their children more than they hate Jews peace will come, to paraphrase Golda Meir.

even though you didn't say it but the fact that you take this statement seriously worries me, have you got any idea of what these people's motives are? they hate their children, is that it :confused: :rolleyes:

You've missed the point. No surprise there. :rolleyes:

I haven’t said that Palestinian terrorists and those that support Palestinian terrorism hate their children. My point is however that for somebody to support or carry out a terrorist attack against Israelis there must be a deep feeling of hatred. In many case a fanatical, obsessive hatred. The terrorist organisations, their supporters and those they recruit act on those feelings and carry out atrocities as they did last night.

Do their actions help the Palestinian cause? Do they make the region a better place for their children to grow up in? Do they make a better future for their children? The answer to all of these questions is no. And it’s as a result of the terrorism that Israel regrettably has to defend itself – and it’s a sad and unfortunate effect of Israel’s acts of self defence that innocent Palestinians suffer.

To paraphrase the late, great Golda Meir again:
"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." (to Anwar Saddat prior to the peace talks).

[Yerascrote]

You've missed the point. No surprise there. :rolleyes:

I haven’t said that Palestinian terrorists and those that support Palestinian terrorism hate their children. My point is however that for somebody to support or carry out a terrorist attack against Israelis there must be a deep feeling of hatred. In many case a fanatical, obsessive hatred. The terrorist organisations, their supporters and those they recruit act on those feelings and carry out atrocities as they did last night.

Do their actions help the Palestinian cause? Do they make the region a better place for their children to grow up in? Do they make a better future for their children? The answer to all of these questions is no. And it’s as a result of the terrorism that Israel regrettably has to defend itself – and it’s a sad and unfortunate effect of Israel’s acts of self defence that innocent Palestinians suffer.

To paraphrase the late, great Golda Meir again:
"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." (to Anwar Saddat prior to the peace talks).

Jesus Christ...so it's all the Palestinians fault, is it? you're the one missing the point, why does palestine have to change to suit israels needs, why can't a compromise be met, "making us kill yours" Holy Fuck i can't get over that, i od't have a clue who Golda Meir is but i'm sure he/she whatever it is is a fucking top class prick.

[freethepeeps]

You've missed the point. No surprise there. :rolleyes:

I haven’t said that Palestinian terrorists and those that support Palestinian terrorism hate their children. My point is however that for somebody to support or carry out a terrorist attack against Israelis there must be a deep feeling of hatred. In many case a fanatical, obsessive hatred. The terrorist organisations, their supporters and those they recruit act on those feelings and carry out atrocities as they did last night.

Do their actions help the Palestinian cause? Do they make the region a better place for their children to grow up in? Do they make a better future for their children? The answer to all of these questions is no. And it’s as a result of the terrorism that Israel regrettably has to defend itself – and it’s a sad and unfortunate effect of Israel’s acts of self defence that innocent Palestinians suffer.

To paraphrase the late, great Golda Meir again:
"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." (to Anwar Saddat prior to the peace talks).

Wasn't Sadat Egyptian? :confused:

I refer back to the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies article - where this point was made by Israeli intelligence bods about the handling of the start of the Intifada.:

"The levers of pressure that were applied to the Palestinian population and to the security apparatus, most of whose members did not take part at the beginning of the conflict, gave rise to negative results. A sense of anger and vengeance led to the tightening of the cooperation among the terror groups and between them and elements of the Palestinian security services that joined the conflict as a result of the IDF's damages to them. As a result of this the phenomenon of suicide attacks swelled to unprecedented dimensions, spilling over into the nonreligious organizations."

That flies in the face of the idea Israel being forced to kill civilians against its will. As does the fact that the army dropped automatic investigations of Palestinian civilian deaths.

[Dear Wendy]

even though you didn't say it but the fact that you take this statement seriously worries me, have you got any idea of what these people's motives are? they hate their children, is that it :confused: :rolleyes:

No one says they hate their children. Not at all.
But I find it worrying that some prominent Palestinian figures advocate using the children as weapons, as for example Arafat did when he refered to the Palestinian woman's womb as the greatest weapon against Israel. Or when the wife of a high-ranking Hamas or Hizbollah leader (can't remember) on a tv-show broadcasted all over the world mentions that she hasn't fulfilled all of her obligations as none of her sons are shahids.

[Dear Wendy]

I hope one day you are as dehumanised and brutalised as the Palestinians have been for more than a half century by this apartheid abomination of a state and we'll then see who you consider the true victims to be.

Why so personal and hateful?

[freethepeeps]

Why so personal and hateful?

As opposed to disillusioned's 'caring and sharing' sentiments you mean?

[Dear Wendy]

As opposed to disillusioned's 'caring and sharing' sentiments you mean?

Obviously Clandestine's remarks were harsh enough for you to respond like this I don't wish that on anyone. Its time for the dehumanisation and hatred to end.

[freethepeeps]

Obviously Clandestine's remarks were harsh enough for you to respond like this

Yes. And you made no response to disillusioneds disquieting diatribe.

Right?

Clandestines comments were a direct reaction....

[Dear Wendy]

Yes. And you made no response to disillusioneds disquieting diatribe.

Right?

Clandestines comments were a direct reaction....

That it his general opinion aimed at terrorist Palestinians, not personally at anyone on this board.

[freethepeeps]

That it his general opinion aimed at terrorist Palestinians, not personally at anyone on this board.

lol

[Kermit]

Of course it is hon.

But then again, what doe sone expect from a person who criticises someone's debating style when they ask a question that you don't want to answer.

70 deaths or four. Which is worse. It's a simple enough question.

[Dear Wendy]

I know I am demanding, but is there a possibility that you could also stop being so patronising? :)

[freethepeeps]

I know I am demanding, but is there a possibility that you could also stop being so patronising? :)

Erm, are you still avoiding the question?

[Dear Wendy]

Erm, are you still avoiding the question?

Yes, until I feel that I am not made to feel inferior.

[freethepeeps]

Yes, until I feel that I am not made to feel inferior.

Yes. The debate gets hard when you have to acknowledge the indignity and injustice of daily Palestinian existence ........

[Kermit]

Yes, until I feel that I am not made to feel inferior.
Aww, you poor dear.

Answer the question. At least have the decency to admit that you think four Israeli lives is "worse" than 70 Palestinian lives.

[Man Of Kent]

70 deaths or four. Which is worse. It's a simple enough question.

It's also the wrong one.

The reality is that it's 74 deaths, not 70 vs 4. You cannot separate the two, nor will you be able to separate the next death that occurs. They are forever interwoved and both sides are equally to blame for all 74 deaths.

Jesus people, you sound like the US in Vietnam giving body counts.

Do you really think that either side is looking at the body count saying "well you killed more of us than we did of you..."

[freethepeeps]

It's also the wrong one.

The reality is that it's 74 deaths, not 70 vs 4. You cannot separate the two, nor will you be able to separate the next death that occurs. They are forever interwoved and both sides are equally to blame for all 74 deaths.

Jesus people, you sound like the US in Vietnam giving body counts.

Do you really think that either side is looking at the body count saying "well you killed more of us than we did of you..."

Do you remember why the Palestinian deaths were brought into the discussion?

Looks like the Palestinian militants are once again responsible for destroying a chance for peace.

And Aladdin was calling out for Israeli apologist in this thread. Unfortunately these actions speak way louder than anybodys words ever could.

Just as we think things are getting better 4 innocent Israeli civilians are pointlessly murdered outside a club. Just normal people out having a good time killed because of a terrorist’s fanatical agenda. Sad. Abbas’s words are welcome, I hope he and the PA stick to their word but in the mean time Israel can’t just ignore this.

[Man Of Kent]

"They started it"[/paraphrase]

FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?

[freethepeeps]

FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?

I've got a few years on you.

Now that you've had your little ageist outburst would you like to grow up and deal with the issue at hand?

Which is that the point made a long time ago is that ALL the deaths matter, and that the ones who aren't prepared to acknowledge that are quoted above.

Thankyou.

[Man Of Kent]

Now that you've had your little ageist outburst would you like to grow up and deal with the issue at hand?

Ageist? Please explain how that comment was ageist...

Which is that the point made a long time ago is that ALL the deaths matter, and that the ones who aren't prepared to acknowledge that are quoted above.

I don't think that it was they who made the comparison... who asked which was worse...

[freethepeeps]

Ageist? Please explain how that comment was ageist...



I don't think that it was they who made the comparison... who asked which was worse...


When you can work out how "FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?" is ageist., get back to me.

I obviously gave you far more credit for intelligence than you deserve.

I see no reason to answer your questions in return for a load of abuse.

[Man Of Kent]

When you can work out how "FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?" is ageist., get back to me.

OMG I suggested that you were behaving like a toddler and toddlers also sometimes wet their pants. FFS What is ageist about that?

You made the accusation, now back it up or withdraw it.

[freethepeeps]

OMG I suggested that you were behaving like a toddler and toddlers also sometimes wet their pants. FFS What is ageist about that?

You made the accusation, now back it up or withdraw it.

Ageist (http://www.answers.com/ageist&r=67)Discrimination based on age, especially prejudice against the elderly.

Attempting to call posters children on a site which exists as part of a charity which serves young people.

If anyone is behaving badly here, it is yourself.

Now, anyway heres the clarification.

Firstly, kermit's original point:

I shall obviously have to repeat ftp's point for those (disillusioned, jacq, matadore) who are slow of understanding.

Four deaths are disgusting, but 70 deaths don't matter.

Israel kills EIGHTEEN TIMES the number of people that one bomber does (origin unknown, the Palestinians have said they haven't done it, and they're not normally backward at admitting responsibility) and yet it's Palestine that is "de4stroying" the peace process.

I'm obviously missing something very important here. Maybe the Israeli apologists can explain to me why ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE palestinian lives don't count.

And, it doesn't, btw take very much intelligence to work out that 70 bereaved families is worse than 4 - BUT kermit isn't actually saying that either!! Even 1 is too many.

The question was about exploring why there is such an emotional response to the 4 deaths, and yet a complete refusal even to DISCUSS the 70 deaths.

Now stop acting like our recently departed friend, it doesn't suit you.....

[Yerascrote]

And, it doesn't, btw take very much intelligence to work out that 70 bereaved families is worse than 4 - BUT kermit isn't actually saying that either!!

The question was about exploring why there is such an emotional response to the 4 deaths, and yet a complete refusal even to DISCUSS the 70 deaths.


i agree, it's all about who's percieved as good and who's percieved as evil, now Israel can easily kill 70 people because it's got ties with the US, therefore making it a democracy, therefore 70 deaths is acceptable as it's protecting democracy, but 4 deaths from a terrorist, the world is under siege and the Palestinians don't deserve a peace process :rolleyes: grow up jacq or wendy or whatever you are and you to dissillusioned.

[Kermit]

Thank you, ftp.

Any death is a bad death, especially in such a pointless and brutal manner, but my question was why the Israeli apologists on this board are wailing and gnashing teeth about four lives, but are strangely silent over the seventy deaths suffered by "the enemy".

All I'm pulling these people up for is their lack of consistency: Palestine are "evil" for murdering four people (assumg a Palestinian did it), but Israel are "good" for murdering seventy people and destroying over one hundred more lives. Why do Israeli lives matter when Palestinian lives so clearly do not.

Both sides are as bad as each other, I've been quite consistent in that comment. I am attacking the Israeli murderers' apologists for believing that one brutal murder of an innocent civilian is worse than another.

[Man Of Kent]

Ageist (http://www.answers.com/ageist&r=67)Discrimination based on age, especially prejudice against the elderly.

And where, precisely, did I discriminate against you?

Or is it wrong to suggest that toddlers are immature and wet themselves occasionally?

And, it doesn't, btw take very much intelligence to work out that 70 bereaved families is worse than 4

No shit sherlock, and if it was a competition that would be relevant.

The question was about exploring why there is such an emotional response to the 4 deaths

Indeed, suggesting that the posters didn't actually care about anyone else, when it was as much a case of bring about some balance here. If you read the start of this thread it was suggested that the peace process was being derailed because of Isreali actions. Poorly timed for two reasons, a) because the story has been denied b) because it was followed by a bomb.

The thread started without reference to the 70 people you now claim to be so concerned about.

had they really been so important, why didn't you mention them before.

Simple, because their deaths only became an issue for you to compare them with the number of Israeli deaths.

[Madge Noon]

And, it doesn't, btw take very much intelligence to work out that 70 bereaved families is worse than 4It's certainly more, although I don't see why its worse, if you respect all human life. Worse for who? The people who are now dead?

One civilian murdered is one too many.

70 deaths or four. Which is worse. It's a simple enough question.You are comparing casualty figures because you are an apologist for terror.

You don't care about civilians being murdered, you are unable to see that any individual murdered is a tragedy, irrespective of whether they were Israeli or Palestinian. Disgusting.

Israel kills EIGHTEEN TIMES the number of people that one bomber does70 divided by 4 is 17.5, not eighteen. Anyway, keep on apologising for terror.

Can we at least agree that murder is wrong, and should not be apologised for by looking at the other people, pointing and saying "look how bad they are! This guy only murdered 4 people!"?

If its numbers you care about, why not so much about 20,000 children killed in chechnya 1994-present day or 50,000-80,000 killed in darfur? By your sick logic, the 3000 palestinians and 1000 israelis killed during the אינתיפדת אל-אקצא نتفاضة فلسطين is small potatoes compared to these atrocities, they are "worse".

:confused:

[freethepeeps]

And where, precisely, did I discriminate against you?

Or is it wrong to suggest that toddlers are immature and wet themselves occasionally?



No shit sherlock, and if it was a competition that would be relevant.



Indeed, suggesting that the posters didn't actually care about anyone else, when it was as much a case of bring about some balance here. If you read the start of this thread it was suggested that the peace process was being derailed because of Isreali actions. Poorly timed for two reasons, a) because the story has been denied b) because it was followed by a bomb.

The thread started without reference to the 70 people you now claim to be so concerned about.

had they really been so important, why didn't you mention them before.

Simple, because their deaths only became an issue for you to compare them with the number of Israeli deaths.

I hope you get over whaever the hell has taken you over today, You're as unpleasant as can be.

In fact, I can't be arsed to have the discussion with you.

[Man Of Kent]

"That's it! I'm not going to play with you anymore"[/paraphrase]

What's the matter, not getting your way?

[Disillusioned]

:lol:

[freethepeeps]

What's the matter, not getting your way?

Sorry, whats my way?

What I'd like is a debate that doesn't pretend that black is white!!!

Your knee-jerk protection of Israel doesn't change the fact that there have been transgressions on BOTH sides.

[Clandestine]

Funny how the Zionist apologists conveniently ignore the true history of terrorism upon which the state itself was founded and how it indeed raised former terrorists like Begin, Shamir, and Sharon to premiership whilst always pointing the finger at Arafat as the "terrorist" in the equation.

Jacq and dis and their ilk have always come to these discussions with feigned concern for the plight of the Palestinians which drove them to violent resistant in the first place, all whilst compartmentalising only palestinian militants as "terrorists", never Israelis.

And one wonders why I hope these history revising liars come to expereince firsthand the sort of degradation, dehumanisation and oppression suffered by Palestinians since the Irgun, Stern Gang and Haganah first launched their murderous land clearances well in advance of the international legitimisation of THEIR terroristic acts which came with statehood.

Maybe when these apologists experience the suffering and desperation of being herded into bantustans and labelled "terrorist" for revisiting upon their oppressors a small taste of the pain they are handed daily (without knee jerk international media coverage) will they realise how deeply the militant, apartheid colonial era ideology of Zionism has betrayed all notions of social justice enshrined in Judaic teaching. It was, is and ever shall be an ideology steeped in a will to power and domination every bit as evil as any ideology which oppressed Jews in past generations.

Evil is evil, oppression is oppression and Israel has shown itself every bit as capable of perpatrating such evil against a weaker people from its very inception.

Until Israel repudiates the false history it has tried to pander to cover its atrocities and excuse itself as somehow justified and seeks conciliation and atonement no lasting peace will be found. Until then, I say once again, you can expect to grow old watching this conflict continue. Jacq however will never admit the truth, not to herself and even more so to anyone who dares expose the historic myths with which each successive generation in Israel (and those of its ardent external apologists) is indoctrinated.

[Man Of Kent]

Sorry, whats my way.

Smears don't work with me, do they?

You still haven't justified why you called me ageist, why you suggested I was disrciminating...

Whenever your smears are challenged, you turn tail.

What I'd like is a debate that doesn't pretend that black is white!!!

Your knee-jerk protection of Israel doesn't change the fact that there have been transgressions on BOTH sides.

Fucking hypocrite. This comes from someone who was defending a bombing on the basis that 70 other people had died.

Perhaps you need to read what I said, when I pointed out that it was a cycle, and that each contributed to the other.

[freethepeeps]

Smears don't work with me, do they?

You still haven't justified why you called me ageist, why you suggested I was disrciminating...

Whenever your smears are challenged, you turn tail.



Fucking hypocrite. This comes from someone who was defending a bombing on the basis that 70 other people had died.

Perhaps you need to read what I said, when I pointed out that it was a cycle, and that each contributed to the other.

Be so very kind as to quote the exact place where I defended the bombing would you?

[Man Of Kent]

No problem.

Just after you explain why I am ageist.

Quid pro quo.

[freethepeeps]

No problem.

Just after you explain why I am ageist.

Quid pro quo.

Because you belittle children on a site aimed at young people.

As I already explained,

I tell you what. I completely withdraw the allegation without reservation.

Over to you.

[Man Of Kent]

We could start with this one, I suppose...

Do you expect Palestinian militants to ignore shootings of Palestinian civilians?

Looks like Exhibit A for the defence.

"Honestly, you honour, the Palestinians had to act, when considering these shootings of civilians."

[freethepeeps]

We could start with this one, I suppose...



Looks like Exhibit A for the defence.

"Honestly, you honour, the Palestinians had to act, when considering these shootings of civilians."

And, how is that question a defence of bombing?

[Man Of Kent]

Because you belittle children on a site aimed at young people.

By suggesting that toddlers are immature and sometimes wet themselves? :lol:


I was right, you really do need to grow up.

[freethepeeps]

By suggesting that toddlers are immature and sometimes wet themselves? :lol:


I was right, you really do need to grow up.

No ..... by calling a poster a child.

Try sticking to the topic. How is that question a defence?

And, even more to the point, what is your answer to the question?

[Man Of Kent]

No ..... by calling a poster a child.

I think I actually asked you how old you were.

I then suggested that you were behaving like a toddler.

I didn't call you a child at all.

[freethepeeps]

I think I actually asked you how old you were.

I then suggested that you were behaving like a toddler.

I didn't call you a child at all.

Whatever.

I'm far more interested in your claim that I defended the bombing. and in your answer to the question.

[Man Of Kent]

Of course you are, not that you realise you are wrong.

Your comment about militants acting is an attempt at justification of the resulting action. Fuck, not only immature, but you're stupid as well.

[freethepeeps]

Of course you are, not that you realise you are wrong.

Your comment about militants acting is an attempt at justification of the resulting action. Fuck, not only immature, but you're stupid as well.

How is the question a justification?

And what is your answer to the question?

[Man Of Kent]

Fucking hell, why should I have to explain your own comment to you?

Is that how you always argue? Twist, turn, and contradict yourself... until the person in the discussion says "Fuck it, you're not worth it" whilst you claim some sort of weird victory?

[freethepeeps]

Fucking hell, why should I have to explain your own comment to you?

Is that how you always argue? Twist, turn, and contradict yourself... until the person in the discussion says "Fuck it, you're not worth it" whilst you claim some sort of weird victory?

No. You're the one twisting my words. And even in the absence of the context of the question, I fail to see how it serves as a justificatioin for bombing.

Heres the Jerusalem Institute of strategic studies finding again:

"The levers of pressure that were applied to the Palestinian population and to the security apparatus, most of whose members did not take part at the beginning of the conflict, gave rise to negative results. A sense of anger and vengeance led to the tightening of the cooperation among the terror groups and between them and elements of the Palestinian security services that joined the conflict as a result of the IDF's damages to them. As a result of this the phenomenon of suicide attacks swelled to unprecedented dimensions, spilling over into the nonreligious organizations."

and heres the statement that I was directly responding to:

Just as we think things are getting better 4 innocent Israeli civilians are pointlessly murdered outside a club. Just normal people out having a good time killed because of a terrorist’s fanatical agenda. Sad. Abbas’s words are welcome, I hope he and the PA stick to their word but in the mean time Israel can’t just ignore this.

So, what is your answer to the question?

[Man Of Kent]

Fuck it. You're not worth it.

Actually more that the subject's not worth it.

I just enjoy laughing at you. You're a bit like Luke you see...

[Disillusioned]

And one wonders why I hope these history revising liars come to expereince firsthand the sort of degradation, dehumanisation and oppression....

Let me get this straight.

You believe that those that support Israel deserve to be punished? Are you actually hoping that Israel’s supporters are oppressed, dehumanised and degraded? Aren’t a large section of Israel’s supporters Jewish? Hmm. :rolleyes:


It was, is and ever shall be an ideology steeped in a will to power and domination every bit as evil as any ideology which oppressed Jews in past generations. Evil is evil

You're starting to sound like Bush, isn't evil one of his favourite words? Anyway whatever, when you come out making blanket judgements like that and just start screaming evil this evil that you don't really help your case.

Until Israel repudiates the false history it has tried to pander

Riight okay. What false history is this? Oh sorry I haven’t been reading Clandestine’s favourite amateur home-made, conspiracy-theory websites where the author hides behind anonymity. :rolleyes:

Oh please enlighten us Clandestine...

[freethepeeps]

Fuck it. You're not worth it.

Actually more that the subject's not worth it.

I just enjoy laughing at you. You're a bit like Luke you see...

Actually, if anyone is behaving like lukesh it is yourself.

You call me wetthepants, then get huffy about being called ageist, then claim that I justified bombings, and then can't answer the simple question - "Do you expect Palestinian militants to ignore shootings of Palestinian civilians?".

I guess you think that the Israeli intelligence bods in the Jerusalem Institute of Strategic Studies are "justifying" suicide bombings as well when they conclude that as a result of of the brutal military response to the outbreak of the Intifada: "the phenomenon of suicide attacks swelled to unprecedented dimensions"


And in the same way that JtR and disillusioned don't want to discuss the deaths of Palestinians prior to the bombings, nor do you want to answer the question about whether you expect Palestinian militants to ignore those deaths.

Which shows an unwillingness to acknowledge what is really happening, and an overwillingness to smear in order to close down a line of debate.

Anyway, as you've deemed the subject not worth it, I guess thats the end of that. I will think twice before responding to you again though, because it ends up being a highly unsatisfactory exprience every time.

[Dear Wendy]

Aren’t a large section of Israel’s supporters Jewish? Hmm. :rolleyes:

While you're right about the above fact, I think it's dangerous to make that link J.

:)

[Disillusioned]

While you're right about the above fact, I think it's dangerous to make that link J.

:)

I probably am and it’s a clumsily made point…I don’t think anti-Zionism automatically equates to anti-Semitism but I think there’s a definite link. Now rabid anti-Zionism is acceptable there are a lot of anti-Semites hiding behind it...But you're right it's a dangerous link to make but sadly I think it applies to some people.

[Dear Wendy]

I probably am and it’s a clumsily made point…I don’t think anti-Zionism automatically equates to anti-Semitism but I think there’s a definite link. Now rabid anti-Zionism is acceptable there are a lot of anti-Semites hiding behind it...But you're right it's a dangerous link to make but sadly I think it applies to some people.

True.

[Yerascrote]

i'm not sure who's tongue is up who's arse but would jacq and dissillusioned please remove themselves and get a bit of sense, clandestine...i feel sorry for you...you're the only person on these whole boards who genuinely knows what they're talking about when it comes to the Middle East conflict, but jacq is so wound up in her nationalism or whatever that she won't listen...ah well better luck next time. :)

[Yerascrote]

I don’t think anti-Zionism automatically equates to anti-Semitism but I think there’s a definite link. Now rabid anti-Zionism is acceptable there are a lot of anti-Semites hiding behind it.

:banghead: by that definition you have reason to call me or anyone on these boards an anti-semite because of this "link" ok, so i can call you a racist because you are against arab terrorists...no? thought not.

[Dear Wendy]

i'm not sure who's tongue is up who's arse but would jacq and dissillusioned please remove themselves and get a bit of sense, clandestine...i feel sorry for you...you're the only person on these whole boards who genuinely knows what they're talking about when it comes to the Middle East conflict, but jacq is so wound up in her nationalism or whatever that she won't listen...ah well better luck next time. :)

Clandestine knows a whole lot of soundbytes.

[freethepeeps]

I probably am and it’s a clumsily made point…I don’t think anti-Zionism automatically equates to anti-Semitism but I think there’s a definite link. Now rabid anti-Zionism is acceptable there are a lot of anti-Semites hiding behind it...But you're right it's a dangerous link to make but sadly I think it applies to some people.

By anti-semitism, do you mean hatred or prejudice towards people just because they're jewish?

And, if so, are you against hatred or prejudice towards any people based on their ethnicity or race?

Because, to be frank, the only person who has even come close to expressing hatred or prejudice towards a people because of their ethnicity or race on this thread is your very own self.

They want peace?

Maybe when the Palestinian terrorists love their children more than they hate Jews peace will come, to paraphrase Golda Meir.

Because those responsible for the suicide bombing clearly weren't doing what they did for peace. In fact, the bomber said in his video he was doing it to undermine the PA .

But somehow, your statement can easily be, and was read as:

1) all the Palestinians don't want peace
2) Palestinians don't love their children,
3) all the Palestinians are terrorists.

For someone so mindful of the evils of hatred and prejudice based on ethnicity, one would imagine that you would be careful not to allow anything you said to be misconstrued so easily.

Clandestine certainly made it clear who he was refering to:

"Zionist apologists"
"the militant, apartheid colonial era ideology of Zionism has betrayed all notions of social justice enshrined in Judaic teaching"
"every bit as evil as any ideology which oppressed Jews in past generations."

and, your sensitivity meant you had to resort to this:

"Aren’t a large section of Israel’s supporters Jewish? Hmm. "
"I don’t think anti-Zionism automatically equates to anti-Semitism but I think there’s a definite link."

and this

"Now rabid anti-Zionism is acceptable there are a lot of anti-Semites hiding behind it."

in order to manufacture an accusation against him.

Imagine how easy it would have been to point that finger if he had said:

They want peace?

Maybe when the jewish terrorists love their children more than they hate Palestinians peace will come

Either you are against hatred and prejudice towards all members of a group, or you are not.

If you are, then you need to be more careful about expressing yourself.

[Yerascrote]

Clandestine knows a whole lot of soundbytes.

speaks the truth though...i know these days both sides are as bad as each other but if you look at the fundamentals of the issue you can't blame the Palestinian cause not one bit and you know that aswell.

[freethepeeps]

speaks the truth though...i know these days both sides are as bad as each other.

What do you mine by "both sides"?

[Yerascrote]

What do you mine by "both sides"?

Israeli's who kill innocent Palestinians and Palestinians who kill innocent Israeli's, i think if the Palestinians want to have a war...they should target the Israeli army only or government buildings...people who deserve to be attacked (awaits flaming)

ETA: when i say these days i mean the general situation over the past few years...not since the new peace process where the Palestinians can only be applauded for.

[freethepeeps]

Israeli's who kill innocent Palestinians and Palestinians who kill innocent Israeli's, i think if the Palestinians want to have a war...they should target the Israeli army only or government buildings...people who deserve to be attacked (awaits flaming)

ETA: when i say these days i mean the general situation over the past few years...not since the new peace process where the Palestinians can only be applauded for.

Is one "side" a well funded army -

And the other "side" is what exactly?

[Yerascrote]

Is one "side" a well funded army -

And the other "side" is what exactly?

i'm not on about causes/ability/firearms/numbers/finances or nothing i'm talking about them both killing innocents...thats it!

[freethepeeps]

i'm not on about causes/ability/firearms/numbers/finances or nothing i'm talking about them both killing innocents...thats it!

Talking about who?

Armies/militias/individuals?

What is a "side"?

[Yerascrote]

Talking about who?

Armies/militias/individuals?

What is a "side"?

IDF and Freedom Fighters usually...i don't mean they're as bad as each other in terms of killing.. the IDF has killed far far more i just mean in terms of their methodology and the brutality of each killing innocents...but on a tangent i suppose the IDF are worse because they also force people out of their homes and build big illegal walls aswell.

[freethepeeps]

IDF and Freedom Fighters usually...i don't mean they're as bad as each other in terms of killing.. the IDF has killed far far more i just mean in terms of their methodology and the brutality of each killing innocents...but on a tangent i suppose the IDF are worse because they also force people out of their homes and build big illegal walls aswell.

The IDF is the army of the Israeli state, which is elected by the people of Israel - it is under the direct control of the state, and is subject to International law. Inside of the Occupied Territories it is an occupying power. So we have a state that has taken control of someone elses land, and who controls that land through brute strength.

The militants are not under of the control of the Palestinian state, because, the Palestinian state does not exist. They are individuals who have joined militant groups to resist the occupation of their land. They cannot be said to represent the Palestinian people, because they have not been voted for by the Palestinian people. The PA has been voted for, but does not have direct control of the militant groups, who tend to be secretive about what they do, because by joining a group they are at immediate risk of being killed. There are various groups with differing aims and objectives. Because of the severe restrictions, often the groups are not even able to have effective communication between different cells, each of which might act autonomously, and without warning.

That is what makes the statement "both sides are as bad as each other" seem very strange.

It does suggest that there are 2 similar bodies engaged in a mutual war - whereas there is an occupying state and an occupied people.

[Yerascrote]

That is what makes the statement "both sides are as bad as each other" seem very strange.


oh yes i see your point now...no i wasn't reffering to the Palestinian state as a whole...just any individual who'd be evil enough to kill an innocent individual.

[freethepeeps]

oh yes i see your point now...no i wasn't reffering to the Palestinian state as a whole...just any individual who'd be evil enough to kill an innocent individual.

Okay - Its best to be clear with terminology, no?

[Yerascrote]

Okay - Its best to be clear with terminology, no?

it is but when you're just typing away without a care in the world and you understand what you're typing, you don't really take these things into consideraiton and yes it can get quite messy and confusing but point taken

[Disillusioned]

By anti-semitism, do you mean hatred or prejudice towards people just because they're jewish?

Yes. What else would I mean?

And, if so, are you against hatred or prejudice towards any people based on their ethnicity or race?

I am against hatred or prejudice towards people based on their ethnicity or race. Stupid question. :rolleyes:


Because, to be frank, the only person who has even come close to expressing hatred or prejudice towards a people because of their ethnicity or race on this thread is your very own self.

Bollocks. Care to find a quote to back your lies up?

Because those responsible for the suicide bombing clearly weren't doing what they did for peace. In fact, the bomber said in his video he was doing it to undermine the PA .

But somehow, your statement can easily be, and was read as:

1) all the Palestinians don't want peace
2) Palestinians don't love their children
3) all the Palestinians are terrorists.

I'm getting bored now. Where did I say that all Palestinians are terrorists who don't love their children and don't want peace? :rolleyes: You're either not reading my posts properly or just totally missing the point.

I don't know why I bother trying to discuss this with you.

[ShyBoy]

I'm getting bored now. Where did I say that all Palestinians are terrorists who don't love their children and don't want peace? :rolleyes: You're either not reading my posts properly or just totally missing the point.

You did say that when the palestinians love their children more than they hate israelis then there could be peace - but this is worthless until Israel stops being such a bully, for want of a better word.

[Dear Wendy]

You did say that when the palestinians love their children more than they hate israelis then there could be peace - but this is worthless until Israel stops being such a bully, for want of a better word.

He said palestinian terrorists :)

[ShyBoy]

He said palestinian terrorists :)

Oh right, oversight on my part. But if it was construed as a generalised term for palestinians... But anyway, even if every single terrorist stopped bombing Israel forever it would still take further concessions on both sides to bring about a solution.

eta: why do the terrorists have to be palestinians? There are loads (as I'm sure you're aware) from all over the middle east who dislike Israel, and there's always the possibility that die-hard Israelis zionists could be trying to stir up trouble - although im just saying its a possibility because im fully aware of the backlash i could get on this boards if i seriously suggested it.

[freethepeeps]

You did say that when the palestinians love their children more than they hate israelis then there could be peace - but this is worthless until Israel stops being such a bully, for want of a better word.

He says he didn't, and he may well not have meant to.

It did read that way though.Which isn't surprising because he specifically said that he was paraphrasing Golda Meir - and she was completely unambiguous in what she said:

Peace will come only when Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews.

as quoted by Linda Chavez (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/chavez070102.asp) of the Jewish World review,

Somehow, he seems surprised that someone could possibly imagine that he meant something racist by paraphrasing a racist statement.

:eek2:

I may have it wrong. Maybe I have misunderstood what Golda Meir said. If that is the case, I'd like to be shown how.

[Dear Wendy]

Oh right, oversight on my part. But if it was construed as a generalised term for palestinians... But anyway, even if every single terrorist stopped bombing Israel forever it would still take further concessions on both sides to bring about a solution.

Don't drag it further than what he wrote. He wrote palestinian terrorists, and therefore refered to palestinian terrorists.
Or are you going to twist it into meaning palestinians, hedghogs and caterpillars now, with your logic and distortions?

[ShyBoy]

Don't drag it further than what he wrote. He wrote palestinian terrorists, and therefore refered to palestinian terrorists.
Or are you going to twist it into meaning palestinians, hedghogs and caterpillars now, with your logic and distortions?

Dont get so offended, I was merely toying with the idea. It was the fact mainly that it's how it read to me, and apparently to ftp. Maybe a better use of language would be:

"When all the terrorists on both sides, whether from palestine or muslim countries or whether die-hard zionists from Israel or other places who dont see the Palestinians as worthy of their own people, when they both love their children more than they hate the other / pursue whatever objective, then there is a chance of peace."

It would be like me saying when the Israeli warmongers give up then there can be peace - but obviously you can see that it is not just those Israeli warmongers or otherwise.

[freethepeeps]

Don't drag it further than what he wrote. He wrote palestinian terrorists, and therefore refered to palestinian terrorists.
Or are you going to twist it into meaning palestinians, hedghogs and caterpillars now, with your logic and distortions?

Kinda like disillusioned attempted to do with Clandestine's post (erm "soundbytes") ?


:confused: