Israel - Palestine Conflict. **Mod note in OP - updated 1st August**

Tuisceanch

Claims which have been reported in the Israeli press of anti-Semitic comments by Palestine solidarity protesters in Manchester have been shown to be false by a new video that presents a more complete picture.


http://tinyurl.com/noquosf

In this film, the so-called protester denies having anything to do with the demonstration against Kedem, and indeed acts quite aggressively towards one of the protest organizers while being led away by police. The organizer clearly states that “this guy is not part of our demonstration.”
The man who made the original comments is then heard to say, “I’m not part of their demonstration” and “there’s no need to be sorry [to the police], I’m not part of you. I’m part of myself. I don’t need to be part of you.”


The attempt to slur Palestine protesters has included Manchester’s main newspaper, the Manchester Evening News, which has given unquestioning support for attempts to maintain business as usual in the city, suggesting that protesters outside Kedem should be removed.
But independent local media have presented more diverse views. One, Manchester Matters, noted that other people involved in the Boycott Kedem demonstration insisted that: “We warned others to look out for [the passer-by] because we don’t want people to use our protests as a platform for those kind of views … Our protest is about the Israeli government, it’s not about race or religion.”

Ignorant etc.

NotASheeple wrote: »

Looks like someone touched a nerve...



If anti-Zionism is racism then count me in please.

But really, even the thickest of thicks would have been so enlightened by this thread at this stage. That they would now clearly understand what Zionism and its disgusting evils stand for.

But like many Zionist zealots before you, you are desperately, desperately trying to blur the lines. But it ain't working buddy. Anyone that defends the actions of the Israeli state, hasn't a moral leg to stand on.



It's deplorable to fire rockets, especially if civilians are harmed. Which thankfully not many Israelis have been. But you haven't much to say about the 2100 Palestinians killed and the 9000 + wounded have ya. Like most Zionist apologists you might offer some token words, but they're always coated with a justification for the actions of Zionist murderers.




No, unlike the IDF, thankfully I haven't seen any industrial scale killing of Israeli civilians by Hamas. Personally, I say the Hamas military wing would become an irrelevance once the Palestinians are giving their Homeland. But since Zionism created Hamas, they hate to lose them, I mean how else could they justify murdering Palestinians.



Glad you can make fun of the unfolding human tragedy in Gaza. Would you like to sit back with those fellow Zionists lovers outside Gaza, sit on a hill with a beer and laugh at the murder of Palestinians in Gaza?

Sorry, but I'm not letting that go. Not all Jews are Zionists, not all Israelis are Zionists, not all pro-Israelis are Zionists. I am most certainly not a Zionist. I have categorically stated, more than once, that I wish Israel and Fatah would sit down and talk, that I wish Israel would make significant concessions to Fatah and I listed examples, it would also, of course, require Fatah to make concessions to Israel.

However, you go to great extremes to attack Zionists but make no attempt to attack extreme Islam. Sorry, but I don't see Zionists clattering planes into buildings in New York, I don't see Zionists blowing up tube trains in Madrid and London. No, I'm pretty sure that wasn't the Zionists.

Extreme Islam hates every single one of us. It hates Ireland and what it stands for, it hates my own country, the UK, and what we stand for. And would welcome the chance to destroy us. Please note, I said EXTREME ISLAM, not Islam. Hamas forms part of extreme Islam and subsequently is part of a network which hates everything we stand for. Maybe Hamas, at present, doesn't have an anti-western agenda, but don't rule out the idea that it may do one day. Other extreme Islamic groups have widened their horizons once they got a sniff of power. And even though I deplore their goals, and have said as much by criticising Yesha, I would take my chances with a Zionist over a Muslim Extremist any day of the week. Note again, EXTREME MUSLIM, not Muslim.

A Dub in Glasgo

^^^^

Have the Israelis just bombed another group of children?

Ignorant etc.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

^^^^

Have the Israelis just bombed another group of children?

Are you willing to discuss a topic without resorting to taunts and insults?

A Dub in Glasgo? Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

A Dub in Glasgo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

taunts and insults

Those words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean :pac:

Ignorant etc.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Those words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean :pac:

As I said, a Dub in Glasgo? Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

A Dub in Glasgo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

You are right, it does explain an awful lot

Tuisceanch

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

As I said, a Dub in Glasgo? Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You are right, it does explain an awful lot

Yes I'm afraid i suspected that too.

bumper234

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Are you willing to discuss a topic without resorting to taunts and insults?

A Dub in Glasgo? Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

:rolleyes:

Another fail

For someone who was leaving the thread you're sure posting an awful lot.

Ignorant etc.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You are right, it does explain an awful lot

Ahahahahaha... A Sellik fan... I literally cannot take a thing you say seriously now... ahahahaha... and before you accuse me of it, no I don't take things Rangers fans say seriously and I have absolutely zero interest in Scottish football because its pap and you'd have to seriously wonder about anybody who would watch it out of choice lol, as I said, it explains a great deal.

Fiolina

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Are you willing to discuss a topic without resorting to taunts and insults?

A Dub in Glasgo? Hardly a Glesga Sellik fan are you? Would explain an awful lot.

Talking out of your kippah at this stage

NotASheeple

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm not letting that go

this is interesting....

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Not all Jews are Zionists, not all Israelis are Zionists, not all pro-Israelis are Zionists.

ROFL. Lord above, Isn't that what half the thread has been explaining to pro-zionists like yourself, since the thread started. You don't have to be a Jewish to be a Zionist, you don't have to be German to be a Nazi. Zionism has nothing to do with religion ffs. Now will you go and read the thread and help yourself. Because you wouldn't embarrassing yourself if you did.

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

I am most certainly not a Zionist. I have categorically stated, more than once, that I wish Israel and Fatah would sit down and talk, that I wish Israel would make significant concessions to Fatah and I listed examples

Sounds like Netanyahu double speak, you like him, will have to eventually acknowledge that business can't be done without Hamas involvement. Did you miss the Unity Government part?

So I'm not convinced of your claims. Anyone that posts Up The IDF on several occasions, has to be a pro-zionist in my books. In fact, you can't but be a Zionist if you support that shower of brutes and their murdering of innocent civilians

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

it would also, of course, require Fatah to make concessions to Israel.

Maybe offer up the lives of more Mothers and Babies?
Maybe give back more of their land to the colonists?

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

However, you go to great extremes to attack Zionists but make no attempt to attack extreme Islam.

Possible because this thread is called The Israel - Palestine Conflict thread and extreme Islam has no relevance here. But work away if you want and amuse us.

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Sorry, but I don't see Zionists clattering planes into buildings in New York, I don't see Zionists blowing up tube trains in Madrid and London. No, I'm pretty sure that wasn't the Zionists

Why don't you start a 9/11 thread? Or an Al Qaeda thread? Of course your blind ignorance, probably thinks Palestinians are supporters of extreme Islam. Which they're not, hey some are even Chrsitian. Wait for this nugget, even Hamas killed Al Qaeda members and drove out their affiliates that tried to set up in the Gaza strip. But again, if you bothered your hole to read through the thread, you would have learned that.

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

xtreme Islam hates every single one of us. It hates Ireland and what it stands for, it hates my own country, the UK, and what we stand for. And would welcome the chance to destroy us. Please note, I said EXTREME ISLAM, not Islam.

Yes, that derailing tactic has been seen in here several times before. Please note: there is a relevant thread here for scum like ISIS...http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91643949&postcount=1

...__...

bumper234 wrote: »

Have you ever seen a Palestinian rocket? They are no more than glorified fireworks and if one landed on your road tomorrow you would think to yourself "Oh look another pothole". You really should look up and research things before posting embarrassing stuff like that.

what a really stupid comment these "fireworks" carry 20 kg of explosive if one was to slam into your house you wouldnt be calling the gaurds saying kids are letting off fireworks

Ignorant etc.

Oh I give up. That's the best yet. Zionism has nothing to do with religion. Nah, course it don't, neither does the Vatican lol. Oh this gets better.

NotASheeple

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Are you willing to discuss a topic without resorting to taunts and insults?

Wait for it......

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Up the IDF!

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--





Oh the irony.

eeepaulo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

that I wish Israel and Fatah would sit down and talk, that I wish Israel would make significant concessions to Fatah and I listed examples, it would also, of course, require Fatah to make concessions to Israel.

This is from the video posted yesterday, very interesting, the discussion between Finkelstein and Ben-ami, what concessions are israel offering this time?

This might not be the same link as posted yesterday but it is the same video
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/2/14/fmr_israeli_foreign_minister_if_i

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: My concern is let’s look at the diplomatic record, the factual record. What were the offers being made on each side of the Camp David and in the Taba talks? And the standard interpretation, which comes — which is — you can call it the Dennis Ross interpretation, which, I think, unfortunately Dr. Ben-Ami echoes, is that Israel made huge concessions at Camp David and Taba; Palestinians refused to make any concessions, because of what Dr. Ben-Ami repeatedly calls Arafat’s unyielding positions; and that Arafat missed a huge opportunity. Now, it is correct to say that if you frame everything in terms of what Israel wanted, it made huge concessions. However, if you frame things in terms of what Israel was legally entitled to under international law, then Israel made precisely and exactly zero concessions. All the concessions were made by the Palestinians.

Briefly, because we don’t have time, there were four key issues at Camp David and at Taba. Number one, settlements. Number two, borders. Number three, Jerusalem. Number four, refugees. Let’s start with settlements. Under international law, there is no dispute, no controversy. Under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, it’s illegal for any occupying country to transfer its population to Occupied Territories. All of the settlements, all of the settlements are illegal under international law. No dispute. The World Court in July 2004 ruled that all the settlements are illegal. The Palestinians were willing to concede 50% — 50% of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank. That was a monumental concession, going well beyond anything that was demanded of them under international law.



Borders. The principle is clear. I don’t want to get into it now, because I was very glad to see that Dr. Ben-Ami quoted it three times in his book. It is inadmissible to acquire territory by war. Under international law, Israel had to withdraw from all of the West Bank and all of Gaza. As the World Court put it in July 2004, those are, quote, "occupied Palestinian territories." Now, however you want to argue over percentages, there is no question, and I know Dr. Ben-Ami won’t dispute it, the Palestinians were willing to make concessions on the borders. What percentage? There’s differences. But there is no question they were willing to make concessions.

Jerusalem. Jerusalem is an interesting case, because if you read Dr. Ben-Ami or the standard mainstream accounts in the United States, everyone talks about the huge concessions that Barak was willing to make on Jerusalem. But under international law Israel has not one atom of sovereignty over any of Jerusalem. Read the World Court decision. The World Court decision said Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. Now, the Palestinians were willing, the exact lines I’m not going to get into now — they are complicated, but I’m sure Dr. Ben-Ami will not dispute they were willing to divide Jerusalem roughly in half, the Jewish side to Israel, the Arab side to the Palestinians.

And number four, refugees. On the question of refugees, it’s not a dispute under international law. Remarkably, even fairly conservative human rights organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, in 2000, during the Camp David talks, they issued statements on the question of the right of return. And they stated categorically, under international law every Palestinian, roughly five to six million, has the right to return, not to some little parcels, 1% of Israel, which Israel is about — which Israel would swap, return to their homes or the environs of their homes in Israel. That’s the law. Now, Dr. Ben-Ami will surely agree that the Palestinians were not demanding and never demanded the full return of six million refugees. He gives a figure of 4-800,000. In fact — I’m not going to get into the numbers, because it’s very hard to pin it down — other authors have given figures of the tens of thousands to 200,000 refugees returning. That’s well short of six million.

On every single issue, all the concessions came from the Palestinians. The problem is, everyone, including Dr. Ben-Ami in his book — he begins with what Israel wants and how much of its wants it’s willing to give up. But that’s not the relevant framework. The only relevant framework is under international law what you are entitled to, and when you use that framework it’s a very, very different picture.

Ignorant etc.

Oh bumper oh bumper oh bumper... Hamas rockets are like fireworks... You're running away with yourself now... Is that why my local Asda ran out before 5th November last year? Hamas bought them all... the ****ers.

...__...

Capt'n Midnight

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

To be honest, this thread adds about as much hope for peace in the Middle East as Ian Paisley did in Ireland. Its populated by extremist anti-semite types who prattle on about Palestine's right to self-determination yet have absolutely no regard for Israel's right to exist.

I will finish with this newsflash though. Hamas wants a Jewish genocide, its charter says so. You can paint it how you like but Hamas is the only organisation in this conflict that wants genocide of any form. Those who claim Israel is carrying out genocide in Palestine are silly and pathetic. After all, the population of Palestine keeps going up year on year, so if Israel has any intention on genocide it must be pretty sh1t at it.

Sometimes I think you are reading a different thread because the most generous thing I could say other wise is that my opinion is that you are being economical with the truth.

Does Israel have a right to exist within the 1947 boarders is one most people would probably agree to. Does Israel have a right to exist on Palestinian land that is being ethnically cleansed is a very different question. As I've pointed out before Palestinians have been evicted from 44% of Gaza.


Also as I've pointed out before a charter is just words and can be changed anytime, unlike say Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution which denied Norn Iron a right to exist which could not be changed by a political party or a government or the supreme court or the EU but only by a public referendum.

Hamas are so genocidal that their demands are outrageous, I'll let you tell us how unreasonable the demands they were negotiating for are.

Also if you attach such importance to that charter you will also have to attach the same importance to all the genocidal talk from Israeli politicians which doesn't put them in a good light. The difference is that Israel is slaughtering thousands. And actions speak louder than words.

How many people do think are in the Hamas organisation ?
Based on that how many innocent people do you think there are in Gaza ?

Ignorant etc.

Thanks for the heads up about Hamas only using fireworks lads... I'll make sure I get mine from my local Asda before the end of October before those Hamas ****ers have bought them all so my kid won't be disappointed.

WinnyThePoo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Thanks for the heads up about Hamas only using fireworks lads... I'll make sure I get mine from my local Asda before the end of October before those Hamas ****ers have bought them all so my kid won't be disappointed.

Why Asda why not Morrisons?

Awkward Badger

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Why Asda why not Morrisons?

Something sinister about this...

Ignorant etc.

Morrisons one only have 19kg of explosive in them.

Sorry, I stopped taking this thread seriously a long time ago and the comments that Zionism has nothing to do with religion and that Hamas were firing fireworks nailed the coffin. Oh and the Glesga Sellik fan, I used that as the mallet to knock the nails in.

...__...

Israel are a terrorist state
Well as some say one mans terrorist etc....

Tuisceanch

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Morrisons one only have 19kg of explosive in them.

Sorry, I stopped taking this thread seriously a long time ago and the comments that Zionism has nothing to do with religion and that Hamas were firing fireworks nailed the coffin. Oh and the Glesga Sellik fan, I used that as the mallet to knock the nails in.

Ah get away outta that. Sure you'll stick around longer I'm sure. Sure we haven't seen the like of you for many a donkey's year and sure aren't you great craic.

Irish Praetorian

eeepaulo wrote: »

This is from the video posted yesterday, very interesting, the discussion between Finkelstein and Ben-ami, what concessions are israel offering this time?

This might not be the same link as posted yesterday but it is the same video

Text

I would query how much of a concession it can be said the Palestinians were willing to offer on the issues of Jerusalem and Refugees. For one thing, any discussion of Jerusalem today must take account of the fact that East Jerusalem (not including the part within 1967 borders Israel) is half Jewish. So any proposal of returning East Jerusalem to a future Palestinian state faces the prospect of being depopulated by half - I would suggest the logical alternative is to keep the entirety of Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty as a united city, not a new Cold War Berlin.

On the issue of refugees, again it strikes me as rather unusual that we are predicating discussions of peace upon the requirement that Israel admit as citizens not just those exiled in 1948, but all their descendants as well. On a purely practical level, admitting the full 5-6 million would do no more than create a new 1990s Bosnia situation and rubbish any notion of peace. However even smaller numbers of refugees, although more practicable, begs a question - what about Jewish refugees? Those Arab state refusing to integrating Palestinian refugees in their midst are the same states that expelled about one million Jews from across the Middle East in 1948. In my view the most effective policy would be to have those states engaging in expulsions accept Palestinian refugees at a corresponding rate.

The other points of borders and settlements I wouldn't take as much issue with, quite frankly I think they treat the issue of settlements too leniently - a few along the 67 lines to tidy up the border sure, but half of all seems like an absurdly high number.

Nodin

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

[/INDENT]I would query how much of a concession it can be said the Palestinians were willing to offer on the issues of Jerusalem and Refugees. For one thing, any discussion of Jerusalem today must take account of the fact that East Jerusalem (not including the part within 1967 borders Israel) is half Jewish. So any proposal of returning East Jerusalem to a future Palestinian state faces the prospect of being depopulated by half - I would suggest the logical alternative is to keep the entirety of Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty as a united city, not a new Cold War Berlin.

On the issue of refugees, again it strikes me as rather unusual that we are predicating discussions of peace upon the requirement that Israel admit as citizens not just those exiled in 1948, but all their descendants as well. On a purely practical level, admitting the full 5-6 million would do no more than create a new 1990s Bosnia situation and rubbish any notion of peace. However even smaller numbers of refugees, although more practicable, begs a question - what about Jewish refugees? Those Arab state refusing to integrating Palestinian refugees in their midst are the same states that expelled about one million Jews from across the Middle East in 1948. In my view the most effective policy would be to have those states engaging in expulsions accept Palestinian refugees at a corresponding rate.

.

The right of return has been dropped, as I mentioned earlier.

Irish Praetorian

Nodin wrote: »

The right of return has been dropped, as I mentioned earlier.

Yes I think Abbas should be commended for making that move, even though it got him quite a lot of flak back home, its an embarrassment that Israel hasn't been biting his damn hand off for a treaty.

Nodin

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Yes I think Abbas should be commended for making that move, even though it got him quite a lot of flak back home, its an embarrassment that Israel hasn't been biting his damn hand off for a treaty.

Why should they? They get to expand at minimal cost in Israeli lives, almost entirely sanction free. There's no downside in the current setup, and evidently the prospect of centuries of bitterness to come bothers them not a whit.

eeepaulo

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

[/INDENT]I would query how much of a concession it can be said the Palestinians were willing to offer on the issues of Jerusalem and Refugees. For one thing, any discussion of Jerusalem today must take account of the fact that East Jerusalem (not including the part within 1967 borders Israel) is half Jewish. So any proposal of returning East Jerusalem to a future Palestinian state faces the prospect of being depopulated by half - I would suggest the logical alternative is to keep the entirety of Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty as a united city, not a new Cold War Berlin.

What you are suggesting is a concession if the palestinians choose to do it. Israel withdrawing is not, that is what the palestinians are entitled to under international law. the international court of justice recognise east jerusalem as occupied palestine.

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

[/INDENT]
On the issue of refugees, again it strikes me as rather unusual that we are predicating discussions of peace upon the requirement that Israel admit as citizens not just those exiled in 1948, but all their descendants as well. On a purely practical level, admitting the full 5-6 million would do no more than create a new 1990s Bosnia situation and rubbish any notion of peace. However even smaller numbers of refugees, although more practicable, begs a question - what about Jewish refugees? Those Arab state refusing to integrating Palestinian refugees in their midst are the same states that expelled about one million Jews from across the Middle East in 1948. In my view the most effective policy would be to have those states engaging in expulsions accept Palestinian refugees at a corresponding rate.

The other points of borders and settlements I wouldn't take as much issue with, quite frankly I think they treat the issue of settlements too leniently - a few along the 67 lines to tidy up the border sure, but half of all seems like an absurdly high number.

As was said above, they have given up the right, (sorry, i wasnt clear the interview was from 2006)

Ignorant etc.

eeepaulo wrote: »

What you are suggesting is a concession if the palestinians choose to do it. Israel withdrawing is not, that is what the palestinians are entitled to under international law. the international court of justice recognise east jerusalem as occupied palestine.

Yes, and international determination of what belongs to whom is always foolproof. Hells teeth, the Munich Agreement gave Nazi Germany the Sudetenland.

eeepaulo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Yes, and international determination of what belongs to whom is always foolproof. Hells teeth, the Munich Agreement gave Nazi Germany the Sudetenland.

Of course it isnt foolproof, but the idea that israel are making concessions by returning what was taken by force is simple nonsense.

Every argument you construct seems to involve the fact that worse things have happened therefore........

Ignorant etc.

eeepaulo wrote: »

Of course it isnt foolproof, but the idea that israel are making concessions by returning what was taken by force is simple nonsense.

Every argument you construct seems to involve the fact that worse things have happened therefore........

Not really, but I do subscribe to the view that Israel is surrounded by, or in the vicinity of, countries that would seek to destroy it. Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iran, you can't tell me any of those are happy that Israel exists. And to protect yourself in such a situation, a certain expansion from your own territories is necessary. That's not Zionism, its pragmatism. I could equally level at you that your argument seems to be completely based around the idea that the state of Israel should be obliterated.

Irish Praetorian

Nodin wrote: »

Why should they? They get to expand at minimal cost in Israeli lives, almost entirely sanction free. There's no downside in the current setup, and evidently the prospect of centuries of bitterness to come bothers them not a whit.

Well I'm not sure centuries of bitterness would result, I mean when you look at it, we manage to 'get over' these acts of outrage pretty quickly, look at Cyprus for example, heck most people would have a hard time mustering up a decent big of hatred for Russia despite it's recent actions. This is saying nothing about China, our primary source for so many manufactured items.

eeepaulo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Not really, but I do subscribe to the view that Israel is surrounded by, or in the vicinity of, countries that would seek to destroy it. Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iran, you can't tell me any of those are happy that Israel exists. And to protect yourself in such a situation, a certain expansion from your own territories is necessary. That's not Zionism, its pragmatism.

Surrounded by mortal enemies? Not very happy countries? What you need to do right is expand, thats just practical in all situations.

I feel like im entertaining a two year old

Tuisceanch

Words from the wise


‘We are reaching out to you because we want to re-examine what it means to be pro-Israel or pro-Palestine,’ says a public letter published by Israelis for a Sustainable Future. ‘We argue that these terms might be one and the same.’

http://972mag.com/israelis-in-the-u-s-urge-the-jewish-community-to-take-a-closer-look-at-gaza/95791/

We are a group of Israelis currently living in the U.S. We are reaching out to you because we oppose the actions of the Israeli government in operation ‘Protective Edge.’
This does not mean we don’t recognize the threat presented by Hamas to the Israeli people. We oppose firing of weapons into civilian population and the sacrifice of civilians by the regimes of both Hamas and the Israeli government. Calling to stop the bombing of Gaza does not mean we don’t realize the impossible conditions imposed on the residents of southern Israel. Nor does it mean we don’t demand security for them. But we also recognize that their plight is consistently ignored by the Israeli government until it becomes convenient for exploitation. We have seen three major military operations in less than six years. They repeat themselves because they don’t work. Yes, Hamas reserves are temporary depleted and the group is temporarily hindered. But this is not a moral price worth paying. Even if it were, killing thousands of civilians and displacing of hundreds of thousands doesn’t weaken Hamas in the long run. This bloodshed only feeds the one resource it can’t go without: hate. Only meaningful peace talks and an end to the ongoing occupation in the West Bank and in Gaza (a blockade is still occupation) will prevent both the next round of rockets into Israel and the next round of indiscriminate killings in Gaza.
We are reaching out to you because we want to re-examine what it means to be pro-Israel or pro-Palestine. We argue that these terms might be one and the same. We believe that supporting equal rights for both peoples is the only way to build a better Israel and a better Palestine and we want the American Jewish community to stand behind that message.
The belief that being ‘pro-Israel’ means uncritically supporting the actions of the Israeli government and military does not help the Israeli people. The Israeli people do not benefit from being oppressors. Israeli society does not benefit from ruling over 4 million Palestinians. The Israeli soldier does not benefit from risking his or her life in wars that could have been avoided.
The Israeli people gain nothing from perpetuating the occupation. Israeli children learn nothing from being taught everybody wants to kill them. And the Israeli population does not grow stronger from rising aggression within it, from a loss of tolerance and from a surge of violent racism against the Palestinian citizens of Israel.
But maintaining the occupation is what this war is all about. Unfortunately, the regimes in Israel are becoming increasingly cynical, willing to sacrifice as many people as necessary to maintain their position of power and their control over the Palestinian people.
We believe this war could have been avoided. We don’t believe all Palestinians want to kill us. And we are happy to explain where we are coming from.
We believe that a biased media attempts to draw symmetry that does not exist. Just look at the numbers. Look at the pictures. Throwing blame at international criticism isn’t making Israel look any better. Taking action to stop human rights violation would. We obviously do not condone any form of anti-Semitism in this discourse, but we also feel that dismissing the entire discourse as anti-Semitism is not helpful to anyone.
Most of all, we believe that blood is blood, all equal and all worth the same. And we are well aware of what happens when the lives of one people are deemed to be worth less than those of others.
Israel needs your support to break out of the cycle of violence:
We encourage you to tell your community leaders to critically examine the Israeli government policies they rally behind. We urge you to support the moderate voices in Israel, forces that find themselves increasingly under attack by their own government and the Israeli media, and even physically assaulted by right winged vigilantes. We ask you to write to your congressional representatives to share your conviction that Israel can only be safe and prosperous if it stops the killing of civilians, ends the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank and guarantees freedom and equality to all of its citizens. We invite you to start a fruitful dialogue with us.

Ignorant etc.

Traitors. Every country has them.

Also, we have no proof whatsoever that this wasn't written by Hamas militants posing as Israelis. Once a liar, always a liar.

Ignorant etc.

Mudar Zahran, a Palestinian-Jordanian with political asylum in the UK on how Hamas is terrorising the Palestinian people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1qpaWTu0eU

Incidentally, he agrees with my argument that Hamas is just another ISIS, an Al Qaeda, a Boko Haram...

Interesting that he says the Jordanians oppress Palestinians... though we hear no protest against Jordan.

Ignorant etc.

This is magic... what happens when morons seek to cause provocation in a Jewish area of New York!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkZdVeb9iSY

Ha-mas ter-ror-ists!!!

WinnyThePoo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Traitors. Every country has them.

Also, we have no proof whatsoever that this wasn't written by Hamas militants posing as Israelis. Once a liar, always a liar.

Can you explain to me why they are traitors?

Ignorant etc.

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Can you explain to me why they are traitors?

Putting up claptrap like that, calling into question every single thing Israel does. They should support their country in its hour of need, not run it down.

WinnyThePoo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Putting up claptrap like that, calling into question every single thing Israel does. They should support their country in its hour of need, not run it down.

No matter if their country acts immoral?

and by their country I mean their Leaders and Army.

Ignorant etc.

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

No matter if their country acts immoral?

and by their country I mean their Leaders and Army.

Who says that Israel is acting immorally? A group of latchycos that support terror?

WinnyThePoo

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Who says that Israel is acting immorally? A group of latchycos that support terror?

Why is the word terror used for Hamas

and not used for the IDF?

Nodin

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Well I'm not sure centuries of bitterness would result, I mean when you look at it, we manage to 'get over' these acts of outrage pretty quickly, look at Cyprus for example, heck most people would have a hard time mustering up a decent big of hatred for Russia .

...you ever talk to people from Greece about Turkey, or Poland and the Baltic states about Russia? Ever see what the 12th Of July looks like up north?

dav3

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Traitors.

As someone who is a british citizen and claims to have no connection to isreal, you're certainly getting quite worked up over this.

Although I'm not sure I'm talking to the same person that was posting on here this afternoon and announced that they we're leaving 5 hours ago.

What is your opinion on http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/

Are they traitors to your country israel too? Exposing the war crimes committed by the degenerates of the IDF.

Tuisceanch

Edinburgh City Council to fly Palestinian flag

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-city-council-to-fly-palestinian-flag-1-3517101


Glasgow Israeli flag councillor David Meikle urged to resign

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28742270

No deal with professor fired for Israel views is on Univ. of Illinois trustees’ table

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/no-deal-professor-fired-israel-views-univ-illinois-trustees-table

Ignorant etc.

Yes, because you can't support Israel if you're not from there. This discussion gets better by the minute.

What do you suppose happens if Israel is obliterated, as Hamas wants? That everyone can get back to their normal lives and peace will reign? When we're dealing with extreme Islam? Before you all go apopleptic, I said extreme Islam, not Islam. Extreme Islam has already made its intentions towards the west quite clear. I make no apologies for supporting Israel and the IDF. Personally, should Israel fall, I do wonder which country will be next on the agenda, according to extreme Islamists like Hamas, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda and ISIS, as a "terror state that robbed Islamic land".

Funny how you all give such credence to Jews who speak out against Israel and quote them endlessly, but when I put up a video of a Muslim criticising Hamas you chose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with you're grand plan for the world.

Tuisceanch

American Jews Speaking Out Against Assault On Gaza




https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/blog/growing-movement-of-american-jews-speaking-out-against-assault-on-gaza

“Every time Israel engages in high-profile repression of civilians, we get inundated. But we have never seen anything like this. Our mailing list grew by 50,000 in 3 weeks and we can’t keep up with the demand for new chapters. This is the final straw for many Jews, who have decided that their silence implies consent,” Said Rabbi Alissa Wise, JVP Co-Director of Organizing and Chair of the JVP Rabbinical Council.:)

Ignorant etc.

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Edinburgh City Council to fly Palestinian flag

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-city-council-to-fly-palestinian-flag-1-3517101


Glasgow Israeli flag councillor David Meikle urged to resign

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28742270

No deal with professor fired for Israel views is on Univ. of Illinois trustees’ table

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/no-deal-professor-fired-israel-views-univ-illinois-trustees-table

Ah so its OK to fly the Palestinian flag from Edinburgh City Hall, but a Glasgow Councillor who flies the Israeli flag should be sacked? Yep, that's the apopleptic argument you come to expect from pro-Palestinians.

Interestingly, Israeli tolerates criticism from within its own ranks... ironically, at least for your argument, Hamas executes anyone who opposes its policy... its executed at least thirty so far.