Quote:

---

Why is he the one that is being bonkers? Just a question here? From his standpoint he's the owner and from yours you are. Depending on point of view you are both right. So why is his view bonkers? Surely it can be no more bonkers than yours?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Quote:

---

Why is he the one that is being bonkers? Just a question here? From his standpoint he's the owner and from yours you are. Depending on point of view you are both right. So why is his view bonkers? Surely it can be no more bonkers than yours?

---

Was in reference to his refusal to negotiate, not his viewpoint.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kirkules:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Palistinians had their land took from them- in recent, living memory- and they deserve to get some back, period.
How peeps cannot see this is just lack of logic skills.
Or meanness.

---

Ehud Barack and Bill Clinton offered Arafat exactly what you say the Palestinians "deserve" and Arafat turned it down. The reason he turned it down is because it's not land they want, they want to kill all the Jews or remove them from the region.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Point acknowledged -

I am just of the opinion that anyone who prefers NOT to negotiate when negotiation is offered, knowing the outcome in that case is likely violence... isn't quite right in the head.

But that's just my opinion.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Jongstraw....

Just a quick question. Are you jewish? Is this why you insist on taking such a personal offense against anyone disagreeing with Israel?

It might help to have a better discourse with you if people understood your motivations....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
not a bad idea, although I'm not sure how he'd pull it off.

---

Quote:

---

1. They're ALL the Children of Ibrihim/Abraham, this makes them "brothers".

2. All THREE beliefs have some strong words about fratricide.

How they rationalize around that, just plain escapes me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn- the whole "They started it" belongs in kindergarten.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
What part of "England gave Palestinian land ... land that was not theirs to give... to the Zionists. And the Palestinians didn't roll over and accept it" do you fail to understand?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
"Democratically elected"...ha ha ha..just like Saddam used to get 99.9% of the vote? Very democratic I'm sure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Now that's what I like to see - rational and sane discussion of the issues.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But I suppose it’s easier for lazy people to buy into this moronic argument that Israel “stole” land, and when confronted, deny the “they started it” argument.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Yes, certainly the "Israel Creates Warsaw Ghetto" thread title was meant to stimulate "rational and sane discussions".

---

Quote:

---

3 Jan 2008: ‘Azzun ‘Atmah gate still closed at night, despite army’s promise: Two women forced to give birth in a car....

B'Tselem has twice contacted the military authorities and warned them of the danger inherent in closing the gate at night. The first warning came following the death of ‘Adel ‘Omer, a young man from the village who was seriously injured when a tractor overturned. Soldiers waited more than an hour and a half before opening the gate so he could be taken to hospital.

http://www.btselem.org:80/english/Separation_Barrier/20080103_Azzun_At
mah_Enclave.asp

---

Quote:

---

At around 2 A.M. this morning [5 December], I was woken by hard pounding on the door at the entrance to our building....The soldiers explained that they were looking for weapons. I told them we didn't have any weapons, and that they wouldn't find anything.... I saw them damaging the furniture as they searched. I protested, in Hebrew, and told one of the soldiers that they could search without destroying things. The soldier told me to shut up and said that if I didn't, he would cause more destruction,...We are a well-off family. We had quality furniture that we carefully chose piece by piece, which cost tens of thousands of shekels. Within an hour, the soldiers destroyed it. The soldiers also frightened the children a lot.
http://www.btselem.org/english/Testimonies/20071205_Destruction_of_Pro
perty_During_Search_in_Yata.asp

---

Quote:

---

According to B'Tselem, two themes clearly emerge from examination of the spectrum of human rights concerns in 2007. The first is the use of security justifications for virtually every Israeli action in the Occupied Territories . There is no doubt that Israel faces serious security threats, and is entitled and even obligated to do its utmost to protect its population. However, far too often, Israel fails to appropriately balance its security needs with equally important values, including protecting the rights of Palestinians under its control. In addition, Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests, such as perpetuating settlements and effectively annexing them to Israel .

The second theme arising from the report is the lack of accountability of Israeli security forces, in all matters relating to human rights. This can be seen clearly in the reluctance of the state to thoroughly investigate violations and to prosecute those responsible for them. The lack of accountability can also be seen in the denial of most Palestinians' right to compensation when they are injured through no fault of their own by Israeli forces.

In 2007 (up to 29 December), Israeli security forces killed 373 Palestinians (290 in Gaza , 83 in the West Bank ), 53 among them minors. By comparison, in 2006, 657 Palestinians were killed, including 140 minors: 523 in Gaza , 134 in the West Bank . In 2007, about 35 percent of those killed were civilians who were not taking part in the hostilities when killed. This is a reduction in comparison with the number of casualties who did not participate in the hostilities in 2006, which was 54 percent, (348 persons).

Palestinians killed seven Israeli civilians (three in a suicide attack in Eilat, two in Sderot by Qassam attacks, and two by gunfire in the West Bank ). This is the lowest number of Israeli civilian casualties since the beginning of the Intifada. Palestinians also killed six Israeli security forces. In 2006, Palestinians killed 17 Israeli civilians.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Press_Releases/20071231.asp

---

Quote:

---

A survey conducted by the Israeli military and published by leading Israeli daily, Yedioth Ahronoth, found that a quarter of soldiers serving at checkpoints in the West Bank perpetrated or witnessed abuse of Palestinians. ...

According to B'Tselem, most soldiers who harm Palestinians are never held accountable. Law enforcement authorities place numerous obstacles on Palestinians who try to complain against security forces personnel and only a small minority of complaints result in charges against those responsible for abuse.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Press_Releases/20071216.asp

---

Quote:

---

If it looks like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and lays siege on people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and kills people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," then maybe calling it a "Warsaw Ghetto" will stimulate a rational discussion on whether or not it is in fact a "Warsaw Ghetto."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The British, in 1921, then created the first Palestinian nation of Jordan since Biblical times

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

If it looks like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and lays siege on people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," and kills people like a "Warsaw Ghetto," then maybe calling it a "Warsaw Ghetto" will stimulate a rational discussion on whether or not it is in fact a "Warsaw Ghetto."

---

WHY... YOU... YOU... JEW HATER!!!!

I'm sorry CTS, but your post is just too factual for Jongsstraw.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
WHY... YOU... YOU... JEW HATER

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
and Israel keeps sending "settlers" in and that's not taking land away from the Palistinians how...?
I just don't see something here...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Well first of all, why is it Palestinian land?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Well first of all, why is it Palestinian land?

---

It's just that there's this group of people, and they live where they do, and if other peeps draw lines on maps and tell them to move, they should have a place for them to move TO that's not prison-like, in my view.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But that’s not what’s going on. Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.

---

Quote:

---

Since 1967 Israel has imposed its control over the Palestinian territories in the manner of a colonizing power, under the guise of occupation. It has permanently seized the territories' most desirable parts — the holy sites in East Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem and the fertile agricultural lands along the western border and in the Jordan Valley — and settled its own Jewish "colonists" throughout the land.

Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories has many features of colonization. At the same time it has many of the worst characteristics of apartheid. The West Bank has been fragmented into three areas — north (Jenin and Nablus), center (Ramallah) and south (Hebron) — which increasingly resemble the Bantustans of South Africa.

Restrictions on freedom of movement imposed by a rigid permit system enforced by some 520 checkpoints and roadblocks resemble, but in severity go well beyond, apartheid's "pass system." And the security apparatus is reminiscent of that of apartheid, with more than 10,000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and frequent allegations of torture and cruel treatment.

Many aspects of Israel's occupation surpass those of the apartheid regime. Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But that’s not what’s going on. Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.

---

So would you say that this is a mischaracterization?:

---

Quote:

---

Yes. Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Yes. Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel

---

Wow, talk about splitting fucking hairs! Thanks Finn, you made my day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Neither the Israeli settlements, nor the wall, are apartheid. Apartheid is racial segregation - that’s not what’s going on in Israel.

---

Quote:

---

[Israel] has permanently seized the territories' most desirable parts — the holy sites in East Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem and the fertile agricultural lands along the western border and in the Jordan Valley — and settled its own Jewish "colonists" throughout the land.

Israel's large-scale destruction of Palestinian homes, leveling of agricultural lands, military incursions and targeted assassinations of Palestinians far exceed any similar practices in apartheid South Africa.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Let me re-phrase: Is this what has happened or is happening?:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And the violence instigated by Palestinian terrorists has taken a heavy toll on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And the violence instigated by Palestinian terrorists has taken a heavy toll on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

---

So the PLO, anti-faddahs (I must have spelled that wrongish), terrorism, stone-throwing and violence in general is all because the Israelis can afford bigger and better houses, and not because of oppression and/or mistreatment of Palestinians? Colours them a right petty bunch, by that reckoning....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s about Palestinian war lords living high on the hog, like mafia dons over their own little piece of “Sicily” and the longer they can keep the violence and hatred going the longer they can hold their power.

---

Quote:

---

The Israelis aren’t racists out to stick it to the Palestinians. They’re just like you and me -

---

Quote:

---

These just a huge difference between actions taken to further security or defense and actions taken on a basis of racism.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
But why would the average Palestinian go along with that? Unless they were REALLY poor, or oppressed or something...something about this still don't make sense to me. You don't get the support of a people who are basically content and fed to rise against an otherwise benign government... or do the warlords operate without support?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
That depends on the action, doesn't it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Wow, talk about splitting fucking hairs! Thanks Finn, you made my day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn:
So the West Bank is Israeli territory.

---

Quote:

---

Palestinians in Israel aren’t being made to leave so Israelis can build settlements.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.seruv.org/english/combatants_letter.asp

We, reserve combat officers and soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces, who were raised upon the principles of Zionism, self-sacrifice and giving to the people of Israel and to the State of Israel, who have always served in the front lines, and who were the first to carry out any mission in order to protect the State of Israel and strengthen it.

We, combat officers and soldiers who have served the State of Israel for long weeks every year, in spite of the dear cost to our personal lives, have been on reserve duty in the Occupied Territories, and were issued commands and directives that had nothing to do with the security of our country, and that had the sole purpose of perpetuating our control over the Palestinian people.

We, whose eyes have seen the bloody toll this Occupation exacts from both sides,

We, who sensed how the commands issued to us in the Occupied Territories destroy all the values that we were raised upon,

We, who understand now that the price of Occupation is the loss of IDF’s human character and the corruption of the entire Israeli society,

We, who know that the Territories are not a part of Israel, and that all settlements are bound to be evacuated,

We hereby declare that we shall not continue to fight this War of the Settlements.

We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.

We hereby declare that we shall continue serving the Israel Defense Force in any mission that serves Israel’s defense.

The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose – and we shall take no part in them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Funny, members of the Israeli Defense Forces call it the "Occupied Territories." (See quote below.) Here's some hair-splitting rationalization that even the Israeli's don't do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is disputed territories.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Just a little something to try help balance the anti-Israel links supplied thus far.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I sometimes wonder if the real problem in this whole affair is the degree of ignorance with which the world views it...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is disputed territories.

---

And who decides that is the correct term?

Cause you know, everybody else outside of the government of Israel (and its sympathizers) calls it "occupied territories." This includes, as I mentioned, members of the IDF who served in said territories.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
FINN_ The only naiton that is "disputing" the territories is... why, it's Israel! Huh. Who'da thunk?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Do you think Israeli human rights organizations and Israeli soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories day in and day out, ripping up IDs and shooting at people who cut lines, are ignorant too?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is “disputed.”

---

Quote:

---

The UN doesn’t refer to the West Bank as “occupied territories.”

---

Quote:

---

UN Resolution 446
1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/ba123cded3ea84a5852560e50077c2dc?Op
enDocument

UN Resolution 465
Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/db942872b9eae454852560f6005a76fb/5aa2
54a1c8f8b1cb852560e50075d7d5!OpenDocument

UN General Assembly Resolution 60/104
Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/271d2c2cbc1ffd9185257106006ae89d?O
penDocument

---

Quote:

---

A conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention concerning the application of international humanitarian law in the occupied Palestinian territories took place in Geneva on December 5, 2001.

The participating High Contracting Parties reaffirm the applicability of the Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and reiterate the need for full respect for the provisions of the said Convention in that Territory.
http://www.fmep.org/reports/vol12/no1/07-conference_of_high_contractin
g.html

---

Quote:

---

International Court of Justice
By fourteen votes to one,
The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law”;
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=71&p1=3&p2=1&case=131&p3=6&

---

Quote:

---

Applicability of the term "occupied"
The United Nations Security Council (in Resolution 446, Resolution 465 and Resolution 484, among others), the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention[6], and the International Committee of the Red Cross[7], have each resolved that the territories discussed in this article are occupied and that the Fourth Geneva Convention provisions regarding occupied territories apply. In its decision on the separation barrier, the International Court of Justice ruled that the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem are occupied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Just because you call yourself a Human Rights Organization or been in the IDF doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about or have an honest or fair assessment. In fact, some of these people become polarized because of the traumatic things they’ve seen or done, and it becomes more difficult for them to view the situation with a fair or impartial perspective.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The correct term is “disputed.”

---

Again, correct according to whom?

Quote:

---

The UN doesn’t refer to the West Bank as “occupied territories.”

---

Then how do you explain this? (And there's more where this came from.)

---