Who is that Freund motherfecker?
Arseholes like him on either side are why peace never goes any where.
Arseholes like him on either side are why peace never goes any where.Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
But it has you, and I've realized, it's about the quality of your friends, not the quantity.
Shalom.
That is partly true. In reality neither side is innoccent. Both sides have the type of leaders who don't really want peace. Determined to turn peace talks into peace jokes.
Sacrificing the lives and future's of many of their citizens as a result.
The peace talks from the Israeli publics perception have become a joke, a side show, like a crappy burger bar that nobody buys from. They are so last year.
The public no longer care at all. They don't trust their own leaders, let alone there enemies and certainly have been burned to often to trust anything ever.
More trouble looms in the garden of Eden:
Israel proposes Jewish state loyalty oath for new citizens | World news | The Guardian
Israel proposes Jewish state loyalty oath for new citizens | World news | The Guardian
not sure what has changed? Israel is a zionist entity, it is all about being Jewish, and a homeland for Jews...
This is probably what Bibi has to promise for another round of temporary freeze on new settlements or something similar.
This is probably what Bibi has to promise for another round of temporary freeze on new settlements or something similar.
You're right about the Jewish nature of Israel, but this law discriminates against non-Jews unnecessarily and therefore needs to be modified. Jews and non-Jews alike should take the same oath when granted citizenship.
anyway, I can't see how this is aimed at Israeli Arabs as they are already Israeli citizens.
You're absolutely right. This is a political spin on Bibi's behalf with little significance. Little chance for this new "law" to pass the supreme court hurdle without necessary alterations, so even though I understand the Guardian's impatience with the running the story I think they could just as well allocate a few inches to human rights abuse elsewhere.
Didn't bother reading the whole Guardian story, but could not avoid Gideon Levy's comment at the end. The loon has been saying this about Israel for ages now which doesn't mix with the dramatic "Remember this day" he begins with.
I dont doubt that at all, as they always say...take each sides story and the truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle.
When you have leaders that dont want peace and will take any reason for further bloodshed you will never get anywhere except into a deeper hole than where you were at the beginning.
The thing that just surprised me was how slanted the media coverage had been on the side of Israel, like someone said, its like they were a shining light and it was something I hadnt really even questioned until now due to the information I guess I had been fed. It seems many of the atrocities Israel had committed just disappeared from history whereas any Palestinian uprising or attack is major news.
Hmm, noted.
I mean I am not trying to put any one view across as the right one because I dont know that there even is one but it is interesting to think about how things are given a certain political spin.
Care to elaborate? I doubt many of the "atrocities" escaped the media or the attention of CE enthusiasts. FFS, some events even make a comeback several years after originally being discussed for a second round of condemnations.
I don't mean that quite as it sounded. Indeed your right, very little would escape the media these days. My point is more that the perspective that we see in Australia and possibly the Western world is that Israel is above reproach and only acts to defend itself when this is possibly not the case. I honestly didn't intend this as a critiscism of anyones foreign policy or anything like that.
I mean the atrocities I speak of are not covered up but they are not common knowledge either. I know all about "Israel defending itself" and Palestine "breeding terrorists" through education and media but things like the 1948 massacres, Sabra and Shantila in the 80s was it? Even 2002 in Jenin. To me they all seem like important things in the background of the story that I knew nothing of until I did some extra reading.
1948 atrocities are indeed not common knowledge, and the war which started as a civil war was indeed horrible. However, you can't expect Western media to break news about 1940's massacres.
Sabra and Shatila was a massacre that got shedload of media attention, and depite that I'd bet a bollock that many don't know that it was carried out by Christian Lebanese against Muslim Palestinians. An Israeli investigation committee found the then Israeli Minister of Defense guilty of neglegence, which led to his ousting. I bet this is a quite unprecedented response by a country "beyond reproach".
Funny you mention the Jenin massacre. I share your concern because it never happened. It was an exercise in using lies and world media for the Palestinian cause. Just like the Muhammad al-Dura story. Paliwood.
I think everbody knows this, and the fact that the Israelis had and massive hand in it.
The Israeli Forces occupied the capital city of Lebanon, Beirut and dominated militarily the refugee camps of Palestinians and controlled the entrance to the city. Immediately after the event of assassination of Bachir Gemayel, the leader and president-elect of the Lebanese Phalangist, a Maronite group, also called Lebanese Forces militia group, the Israeli forces enabled the entrance of the angry Kataeb Party group to the refugee camps, by providing them transportation from outside Beirut with Israeli military Helicopters (pick up and drop into the camps) and firing illuminating flares over the camps to enable the killing to continue during the night. The exact number killed by the Kataeb Party militia is disputed, with estimations running from 700-800 to 3,500 according to different source
Israel and the Christians Lebanese had a common enemy in the PLO whose fighters took refuge in the camps. Israeli officials made poor judgement in allowing the Phalangists to enter the camps and take on the allegedly hiding PLO fighters. Despite the clear instructions not to target civilians the Israeli officials should have known better based on past history of massacres between Lebanese Christians and Palestinians.
Horrible as things turned out to be, and Israel as an occupying force should have some (even if indirect) responsibility, it's clear that Israel had nothing to gain from the massacre of Palestinian civilians.
Horrible as things turned out to be, and Israel as an occupying force should have some (even if indirect) responsibility, it's clear that Israel had nothing to gain from the massacre of Palestinian civilians.
Yo, Holyland, where you at brother? Just a quick question in relation to the bit in bold, the rest you can ignore, it's just the standard fare, nothing new...
I think it makes sense that a company would want to hire someone who will point out the positives rather than someone who says "see that rubble, it used to be my ancestral home..etc etc..."
But an actual legislation? Is that necessary? Will it pass? Is there something the author missed?
Its passing wouldn't surprise me one bit. As long as Israel remains a constitutionally racist state, this sort of thing will happen without most of the Jewish citizens being able to see anything wrong with it.
Israel won't be allowed to get away with it for much longer. The US might not change its stance, but a time will come when Europe is no longer willing to put up with it, just like how opposition to the apartheid regime of South Africa grew to a point where it became politically impossible to do anything other than oppose it. It's quite shocking that in 2010 we have yet to reach that stage, actually.
Israel won't be allowed to get away with it for much longer. The US might not change its stance, but a time will come when Europe is no longer willing to put up with it, just like how opposition to the apartheid regime of South Africa grew to a point where it became politically impossible to do anything other than oppose it. It's quite shocking that in 2010 we have yet to reach that stage, actually.
That is a disgrace, yes I can understand individual companies only wanting positives pointed out but if its institutionalised then that is just unacceptable. How can a country just pretend that a section of its population just doesnt exist? How can anyone else just stand by and let them?
Unbelievable!
Unbelievable!
You know what Jews are like. Racist, the lot of them.
These are interesting actions for a nation that's supposedly in 'peace talks' with the Palestinians. Just the other day they also began work on 700 more illegal settlements on the West Bank the second that restriction ceased. It makes you wonder, do they actually desire peace with the Palestinians? Or maybe it's a warning to the them: sign the peace process, submit to our demands and shut it.
Bah this whole things a mess, frustrating more so since you've got active state apartheid here that's being given the green light by the rest of the world. I don't really blame the Israelis - if you're not getting burnt by playing with fire then why stop?
Bah this whole things a mess, frustrating more so since you've got active state apartheid here that's being given the green light by the rest of the world. I don't really blame the Israelis - if you're not getting burnt by playing with fire then why stop?
Yeah, because that's exactly what I said.
Yes. It is.
The peace talks are posturing bollox. Everybody knows it and all parties are actually very happy with it that way.
Why can't you / don't you want to understand this?
So what's the solution then Cuntastine? Keep eating away at Palestinian land and individual rights until they've had enough and all bugger off?
Never heard about it. Sounds absolutely mad and not much different than having only journalists who are only licensed if they hold the same personal agenda as Mr. Ezra.
Did they? Who are "they"? Do you have any sort of evidence to support this claim?
Do you? I mean, do you support a two-state solution? If one of those state is a Jewish state does that mean that it's an apartheid state that is constitutionally racist?
Can we simply push all of these people onto a spaceship and shoot them off to a random planet?
Least we'd have somewhere to put the polar bears and tigers then
Least we'd have somewhere to put the polar bears and tigers then
Land swap INCLUDING Jordanian territory.
After all, this is actually Jordan's mess far far more than Israel's.
Would this 'land swap' you propose include a return to pre-1967 borders with the Golaan heights and Sheeba farms returned to Syria and Lebanon respectively, and would you then accept that Israel would finally have to declare its borders?
Least we'd have somewhere to put the polar bears and tigers then
Polar bears in a hot and humid region like the middle east? I take it science wasn't your forte?
The Jews are just pissed at the realization they never really were the “chosen ones”. Let’s face it if a God truly did exist and had his favorites surely he is smart enough to place the oil underneath their land.
Polar bears in a hot and humid region like the middle east? I take it science wasn't your forte?
You haven't watched much lost eh?
Shut up goyim...you are mere donkeys, to be tolerated till you are no longer of use.
^not my words.
Being the almighty that he is, and knowing the plan Arabs has for his "chosen ones", god planted enough of his energy reserves deep under the Mediterranean water.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/world/middleeast/21israel.html
No, it isn't.
I said that most of the Jewish citizens of Israel are unable to see anything wrong with Israel's racist policies. Not all Jews in Israel, and certainly not 'all Jews' per se. The fact that Israel is able to carry its racist policies is evidence of it. When you grow up in a society in which you are told from an early age that the country you are living in is the land of your own race above all others (often from a religious point of view, informing you that you are God's chosen racial group), then the result is what we're seeing. Racism.
Explain to me the difference between what is happening in Israel and the hypothetical situation of the BNP (or any other racist party) coming into power in the UK and declaring it a white country where ethnically British people have primary rights on things such as land, and where non-ethnic-Britons are subject to various restrictions.
Lets get this straight: the 'pre-1967 borders' are armistice lines - not borders.
They are the result of Arab aggression - not Israeli colonial adventures as so many on this thread want to believe.
As far as Syria goes, the Golan Heights are a strategic advantage to either, as proven by Syria's 1973 invasion...and nobody in their right mind trusts the Syrians right now (other Arab states especially).
Furthermore, any peace deal should include compensation for 800,00 refugee'd Jews as well as Palestinians.
Very disingenuous. I know of no law in Israel that distinguishes on race, bar the law of return (though I do understand that - like any other country - racism does indeed sadly play out in the public domain).
If you are in fact talking about the palestinians then remember that they are not citizens (ie Israeli Arabs) and therefore - like any other country - not subject to the benefits of state.
US vetoes UN condemnation of Israeli settlements | Ed Pilkington | World news | The Guardian
And you wonder why the peace talks get nowhere
So much for Obama being a breath of fresh air, we're just seeing a Bush MKII who also refuses to catch up with the rest of the world.
And you wonder why the peace talks get nowhere
So much for Obama being a breath of fresh air, we're just seeing a Bush MKII who also refuses to catch up with the rest of the world.
US vetoes UN condemnation of Israeli settlements | Ed Pilkington | World news | The Guardian
And you wonder why the peace talks get nowhere
So much for Obama being a breath of fresh air, we're just seeing a Bush MKII who also refuses to catch up with the rest of the world.
Of course, reading the story may help:
Not exactly Bush Mark II, even if you disagree with the veto decision.
So let me get this straight: the US opposes the settlement activity and thats why they vetoed a UNSC resolution thats condemned the very same thing they supposedely disapprove of? Furthermore, Susan Rice's justification is that Israelis will build LESS settlements if the the US vetoed this condemnation?
I give up, I honestly do...worlds gone mad.