Who are Palestinians?

[+and-then]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/02/us-israel-flotilla-gaza-idUSTRE65133D20100602

As long as Hamas is acknowledge to be at war with Israel...the blockade is legal.

[MichaelW]

Your comment has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic and is a personal attack on two posters.

Hi Mr. Pot. I'm Mr. Kettle. We're both black aren't we?

Hey, you’re just like someone with no argument.

Says the man who can't stop repeating himself with silly questions. Seriously, you have an argument? Isn't that like saying the contents of a septic tank have value?

Q can't handle the jandle. So he takes it out on other people, trying to discredit their character and moral standings. Like another certain poster. I wonder who could that be?

[Black Red Devil]

What makes my point even better is that Turkey condemned the building of Israeli settlements in Palestine, yet continues to relocate Anatolian peasants into Northern Cyrpus, thus outnumbering those Greek Cypriots still left. That is fairly hypocritical on Turkey's part is it not?

Yep, a decision they've been paying dearly and the main reason they've been denied EU membership until now.

Edited January 21, 2012 by BlackRedLittleDevil

[Black Red Devil]

http://www.reuters.c...E65133D20100602

As long as Hamas is acknowledge to be at war with Israel...the blockade is legal.

Only naval, but Israel still has an obligation to continue in its efforts to ease its restrictions on movement of goods and persons to and from Gaza. I bet they've never made any effort whatsoever.

Edited January 21, 2012 by BlackRedLittleDevil

[Erikl]

The Palmer report's finding that the naval blockade is lawful should not be interpreted to

mean that the entire closure regime imposed on Gaza is legal. As the occupying power in Gaza,

Israel has an obligation to protect all those under its jurisdiction.

This is a complete word laundry. This is the second time you use this expression - "should not be interpreted". So do tell, please, how it should be interpreted? Both sources do not offer an explanation, they just question the legality based on what? their own opinion. It is known that these organizations, and even UNRWA itself, are highly biased in favour of the Palestinians be default. Until I see a decision from the UN stating "the land blockade is not legal", coupled with sound standards attached to it, it's just opinions. If anything, it just shows how bad the situation of Israel is on the world public opinion stage, and should cause any open minded liberal to take whatever he hears about Israel with more than a grain of salts. If anything, what is the difference between a land blockade and a naval blockade? that one is on soil, the other one is on water? You do not use logic - just rant about what is obvious for you.

Here's what wikipedia has to say about the sanctions on Gaza:

2006–2007 economic sanctions against the Palestinian National Authority

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 2006–2007 economic sanctions against the Palestinian National Authority were economic sanctions imposed by Israel and the Quartet on the Middle East against the Palestinian National Authority and the Palestinian territories following the January 2006 legislative elections that brought Hamas to power.[1]

The international sanctions were terminated in June 2007 following the Battle of Gaza, while at the same time a new and more severe blockade was initiated by Israel against Gaza.

Sanctions program

The sanctions consist of (1) withholding of tax revenues collected in the Palestinian territories by Israel[2], (2) cutoff of international aid to the Palestinian National Authority from the Quartet countries, (3) restrictions by Israel of movement within the Palestinian territories and of goods moving in and out, and (4) U.S. banking restrictions.

Israel and the Quartet said that sanctions would be lifted only when the Palestinian government has met the following demands:

• Renunciation of violence,
  
• Recognition of Israel by the Hamas government (as the PLO had done), and
  
• Acceptance of previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinian National Authority.
  

Easing of West Bank sanctions

Following the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip in June 2007, Israel and the Quartet countries eased some of the sanctions on the West Bank, in order to support the Fatah government, while at the same time tightening the blockade of the Gaza Strip, in order to put pressure on the Hamas administration.

Blockade of the Gaza Strip

On June 16, 2007, United States Consul-General Jacob Walles said that the U.S. was planning to lift the ban on direct aid to the emergency government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Similarly, the Quartet voiced support for Abbas and concern for the humanitarian situation in Gaza, though they did not announce any change in the ban on direct aid. Some Israeli officials said $300 to $400 million in Palestinian tax revenues may be returned to the Palestinian National Authority, short of the $700 million Abbas was seeking.[3] Indeed, on June 25, 2007, Israel agreed to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenues it had seized to the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas in order to support the Fatah government.[4]

Obviously, the manipulative choice of words by both you and amnesty completely ignores that the sanctions on Gaza are internationally approved and supported by the Quartet, and there are very simple demands which Hamas needs to hold for it to be lifted. So it's completely legal. Ofcourse, Amnesty, B'Tselem and the rest of the pro-Palestinian folk will never elaborate, just use words such as "illegal", thinking no one cares to check. And they are right - usually people do not check the facts, because "they said so on BBC/CNN/NY Times".

That's not the world's opinion.

So, do you admit it's your own opinion then?

And, Wikipedia = reliable source. You are aware that even someone from Hamas could post something on Wikipedia as long as they're registered?

Even so, it has been proven on several occasions to be very neutral. Obviously much more than "palestineremembered.com" or "amnesty.com", both websites which their agenda when it comes to Israel vs. Palestinians is very obvious.

All medieval forts and castles were built on their own property and walls were built around them (again on their own property) to protect from invaders.

Forts = military bases and outposts.

Medieval break walls = modern borders/fences.

You don't even get your own analogies right.

The point is - the fence was built to lower the amount of suicide bombers getting into Israeli cities. It succeeded. Since then, the construction has almost halted completely.

Edited January 21, 2012 by Erikl

[+and-then]

Only naval, but Israel still has an obligation to continue in its efforts to ease its restrictions on movement of goods and persons to and from Gaza. I bet they've never made any effort whatsoever.

No, actually they have made efforts, usually met with increased rocket fire. Usually but not always.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viva_Palestinays.

Roughly a ton of supplies per individual per year goes through the LEGAL passages. The tunnels provide everything from weapons to luxuries. When Israel left Gaza they could have immediately begun to build on those 20 miles of beautiful Mediterranean beaches. Placed hotels and resorts. Had cruise ships and fishing operations. The land could literally have exploded into prosperity. Does what they did instead seem rational to you? Do you think the "west bank" territories will be treated any different in an Israeli withdrawal?

These palestinian children I feel sorry for...it's like finding some feral child - knowing they could have a wonderful life if you could just communicate to them that you did not want to hurt but to help...but after they attempt to kill you a few times you stop caring and consign them to their fate. I'm sure the Israelis have a profound weariness with the constant struggle but most haven't given over to hatred yet. They still grasp for peace. If the "palestinians" made certain demands in negotiations then in good faith ceased ALL offensive activity for 6 months. The region might change. The pressure on Israel would certainly increase by a couple of orders of magnitude.

To your original point of land blockade. No "palestinians" are hungry and most look as though they could lose a few pounds. They have free health care and are extended welfare benefits from the world. They live under a siege because they have elected leaders SWORN to kill all Israelis (thats called war). The tension could be reversed in DAYS if there was a change of mind by the "palestinians"

[Erikl]

Anyhow, just something I wanted to say, being that it's quite obvious the anti-Israelis have no interest in real discussion when they're presented with facts that contradict their own agenda.

Israel's justified existence stems from it's existence, because stoping that existence will be an unprecendeted, unthinkable, crime against humanity. A group of people have the right to define itself which stems from the basic right of self-determination. Where did we ever hear of something like that, needing some sort of moral justification? Does anyone ever thought about questioning the right of the United States to exist based, for example, on that the catastrophe of the native americans was justified? what is this BS?

The international community acknowledges the rights of the Jewish people on the land that is the State of Israel, based on our presence here. However our haters and bashers, from within and without, shout on every hill that if it is proven that our history is not spotless, we will have to pack our luggages and go back to the Ukraine, Morocco, Iraq and Poland. And you know what? Our history is as ugly as anyone, no more, maybe less. Bad things have been done in the past, and maybe in the present. Was there an ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians? nope. Does that matter? nope. What does matter? that currently, millions of people around the middle east are held in camps, deprived from any civil right, for three generations, and are mentally prepaired for a judgement day that will never come - when they expect to return and to sack Jerusalem from the hands of the infidel Jews. And you know what? who ever believe this catastrophe, and this situation, annules our right to exist here, or that Israel is "cancelable", is more than welcome to pack his bags (if he's a self-hating far left Israeli, if not - he could put a sock in it) and swim to the Ukraine by himself. I do not live here because of some belief in old stories or the Bible, and I intend to stay here even if it will be proved that the forefathers of Zionism were vampires from another planet that came here to perform medical experiments on local Arab farmers .

So this is my opinion: the rights of human beings do not hang on the moral purity of the historical events that have brought them to where they are today. As for what happened back in 1948 - technically on the papers 500-900,000 Palestinians fled/forced to leave/combination of both (as historical accuracy is obviously not important neither does it actually interest anyone here) from the land, after a war they started, and it doesn't matter how or why. As simple as that. And of course I do not believe, nor does history prove, that there was some sort of dark conspiracy to cleanse the land from Arabs, obvious and backed by the Haifa letter I provided here, which is one example out of surely many, but no one cared to responde on that. But even so, it was a two way road - Zionist Jews have been kicked out of places occupied by Arabs (the West Bank and Gaza and Jerusalem). Almost a million Jews have also been kicked out of the entire middle east, where they lived for almost three millennia, even though they had nothing to do with the war, simply for being Jews (there goes the hypocrisy of saying "Oh I don't mean Jews, I mean Zionists ). So technically you had exchange of two hostile populations, like the Indian-Pakistan war, the Turkish-Greek war, etc.. Arabs that chose to stay/were not kicked out - live peacefully and are now Israelis with full rights. Jews that were expelled have also been given full rights as Israelis. What happened to the Arabs that arrived to Arab countries? they have been made into a human weapon, nurtured and prepared for a future holy war, tortured like a battle dog being ready to be ruthless. Even the UN takes part in that in form of the morally ill UNRWA.

What I believe should be done today?

I believe first and upmost, that the simple fact that Israel is here to stay and is not going anywhere, should be explained by the Western far-left to their Palestinian buddies. I also think that Israel should dismantle all the small settlements in the West Bank, and annex the large ones, which seat on only 5% of the West Bank. I think that the Old City of Jerusalem should be modeled after the Vatican, and that the Arab villages that are on the outskirts of Jerusalem can become the capital city of a Palestinian state. I do believe that the refugee camps should be dismantled, regardless of whether a Palestinian state exist or not, it's inhabitants should be given full civil rights, and when a Palestinian state will exist, they should return to it if they please. If not - they more than proved worthy of staying in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, as they reside there for more than 3 generations now. I believe the hope of Palestinians, fed and encouraged by their leaders, to go back not to Ramallah (a city in the disputed territories), but no Ramle (a city inside Israel), is counter-productive to a peaceful solution, and should be explained so not only by Israel and it's supporters but by anyone who wishes to see a Palestinian state that co-exist alongside Israel. And being that I prefer to live here at peace (though if not, we have no problem fighting until peace is achievable), and the existence of a Palestinian state can only come if Israel wants it, I and most Israelis should be convinced that such creation will end the conflict, that Palestinians gave up on demanding the entire state of Israel. This is the important issue here, eveything else is just rubbish.

Edited January 21, 2012 by Erikl

[Black Red Devil]

This is a complete word laundry. This is the second time you use this expression - "should not be interpreted". So do tell, please, how it should be interpreted? Both sources do not offer an explanation, they just question the legality based on what? their own opinion. It is known that these organizations, and even UNRWA itself, are highly biased in favour of the Palestinians be default. Until I see a decision from the UN stating "the land blockade is not legal", coupled with sound standards attached to it, it's just opinions. If anything, it just shows how bad the situation of Israel is on the world public opinion stage, and should cause any open minded liberal to take whatever he hears about Israel with more than a grain of salts. If anything, what is the difference between a land blockade and a naval blockade? that one is on soil, the other one is on water? You do not use logic - just rant about what is obvious for you.

Obviously, the manipulative choice of words by both you and amnesty completely ignores that the sanctions on Gaza are internationally approved and supported by the Quartet, and there are very simple demands which Hamas needs to hold for it to be lifted. So it's completely legal. Ofcourse, Amnesty, B'Tselem and the rest of the pro-Palestinian folk will never elaborate, just use words such as "illegal", thinking no one cares to check. And they are right - usually people do not check the facts, because "they said so on BBC/CNN/NY Times".

I'm starting to get the impression that you're either, chronically brainwashed and paranoid or simply a troll.

Since you like wikipedia here you go. These are International views on the blockade, not only Amnesty or the UNRWA:

United Nations

• On 24 January 2008, the United Nations Human Rights Council released a statement calling for Israel to lift its siege on the Gaza Strip, allow the continued supply of food, fuel, and medicine, and reopen border crossings.

• Prior to this, U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, John Holmes, described the blockade as "collective punishment", saying, "We all understand the security problems and the need to respond to that but collective punishment of the people of Gaza is not, we believe, the appropriate way to do that."

• On 15 December 2008, following a statement in which he described the embargo on Gaza a crime against humanity, United Nations Special Rapporteur Richard A. Falk was prevented from entering the Palestinian territories by Israeli authorities and expelled from the region.The Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Itzhak Levanon said that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur was "hopelessly unbalanced," "redundant at best and malicious at worst."

• In August 2009, U.N. human rights chief Navi Pillay criticised Israel for the blockade in a 34-page report, calling it a violation of the rules of war.

• In March 2010, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon stated that the blockade of Gaza is causing "unacceptable suffering" and that families were living in "unacceptable, unsustainable conditions".

• A UN Fact Finding mission in September 2009 led by South African Judge Richard Goldstone (the Goldstone report) concluded that the blockade was possibly a crime against humanity, and recommended that the matter be referred to the International Criminal Court if the situation has not improved in six months.

• In May 2010, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs stated that the formal economy in Gaza has collapsed since the imposition of the blockade.They also stated that the "restrictions imposed on the civilian population by the continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip amount to collective punishment, a violation of international humanitarian law."

• In June 2010, United Nations envoy to the Middle East and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair stated that "The policy of Gaza is counter-productive and what [israel] should be doing is allow material in to rebuild homes and sanitation and power and water systems and allow business to flourish. Nor do we in fact do damage to the position of Hamas by harming people in Gaza. People are harmed when the quality of service is poor and people cannot work." He also called for Hamas to stop the "terrorism coming out of Gaza" In the same month, Robert Serry, the UN special envoy for Middle East peace process, also said that "The flotilla crisis is the latest symptom of a failed policy. The situation in Gaza is unsustainable and the current policy is unacceptable and counter-productive, and requires a different, more positive strategy. The closure and blockade of the Gaza Strip needs to come to an end. There is now a welcome international consensus on Gaza."

• In the September 2011 Palmer Report, the UN investigative committee for the 2010 Flotilla to Gaza said that the Israel's naval blockade of Gaza is legal under international law, but that "the Panel cannot make definitive findings either of fact or law. But it can give its view."

European Union

• EU Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid Kristalina Georgieva, said that she believes that the "humanitarian crisis...was artificially created because of the [israeli] blockade," but added that the idea of a flotilla is not the correct action to take: "We are not in favor of attempts to help people in this way.

Countries

Turkey

• Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan made harsh comments against the blockade, especially following the Gaza flotilla raid. Erdoğan raised the possibility of trying to forcibly breach the blockade by sending the Turkish Navy to escort any future flotilla or by trying to visit Gaza himself. The Turkish government made it clear that it opposes the blockade and regards it as illegal, and before the flotilla raid, issued a demand for safe passage. However, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said that Turkey was willing to normalize relations with Israel if it lifted the blockade.Following Israel's easing of the blockade, the Turkish Foreign Ministry called it "a positive but insufficient step", and said that "Turkey considers that Israel's inhuman blockade of Gaza represents a threat to regional peace and stability and considers that the blockade must be entirely lifted.

Ireland

• After visiting Gaza in March 2010, Irish foreign minister Micheál Martin described the Israeli blockade of Palestinian-ruled Gaza as "inhumane and unacceptable" and called on the European Union and other countries to increase pressure on Israel to lift the blockade. Michael Martin was the first EU foreign minister to enter Gaza in over a year. He said that all that is being achieved through the blockade is to "enrich Hamas and marginalize even further the voices of moderation."

United Kingdom

• David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, during Prime Minister's Questions, stated that "Friends of Israel – and I count myself a friend of Israel – should be saying to the Israelis that the blockade actually strengthens Hamas's grip on the economy and on Gaza, and it's in their own interests to lift it and allow these vital supplies to get through. ... We should do everything we can through the UN, where resolution 1860 is absolutely clear about the need to end the blockade and to open up Gaza." In July 2010, Cameron called on Israel to relax the blockade. He said "Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp." In response, Ephraim Sneh, former Israeli minister, said: "Cameron is right – Gaza is a prison camp, but those who control the prison are Hamas. I'm totally against the double standards of a nation which fights the Taliban but is showing its solidarity with their brothers, Hamas.

• Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom speaking after the Gaza flotilla raid, criticized the blockade saying "So the events of the last 24/48 hours confirm in my mind, as they do if you hear what William Hague and David Cameron have done and everyone in Government, the view that the blockade on Gaza is neither sustainable nor tenable in its present form." He also commented that "If we needed any confirmation about the unjustified and untenable blockade of Gaza, we have been reminded overnight of the need to lift this blockade. What is going on in Gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe. While of course Israel has every right to defend itself and its citizens from attack, we must now move towards lifting the blockade from Gaza as soon as possible."

• William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said in a prepared speech to the House of Commons that the blockade of Gaza was "unacceptable and unsustainable", and that it was "the view of the British government, including the previous government, that restrictions on Gaza should be lifted – a view confirmed in United Nations security council resolution 1860 which called for sustained delivery of humanitarian aid and which called on states to alleviate the humanitarian and economic situation", and that "current Israeli restrictions are counterproductive for Israel's long term security".

• Acting Labour Leader Harriet Harman also stated that "This blockade must end."

United States

• Although the United States officially supports the blockade Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met Israeli Minister of Defence Ehud Barak in February 2010 and urged him to ease the blockade. The United States has long been pressing Israel to ease the restrictions on Gaza Speaking about the Gaza flotilla raid, which occurred on 31 May 2010, Clinton stated that "The situation in Gaza is unsustainable and unacceptable." In regards to the impending second Gaza flotilla, Clinton has stated that, "the Gaza flotilla is not necessary or useful."

Groups and individuals

• On 7 March 2008, several international aid groups, including Amnesty International, CARE International UK, and Oxfam, issued a report saying that the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip was more acute than at any time since the beginning of the Israeli occupation in 1967. While critical of Palestinian militants firing rockets from Gaza into Israel, and acknowledging that "Israel has the right and obligation to protect its citizens", they said that as the "occupying power in Gaza" it also has a legal duty to ensure Gaza civilians have access to food, clean water, electricity and medical care. They urged Israel to lift the blockade, characterizing it as collective punishment against the 1.5 million residents of the territory.

• According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, "The hardship faced by Gaza's 1.5 million people cannot be addressed by providing humanitarian aid. The only sustainable solution is to lift the closure." Describing the blockade itself, they referred to it as "a collective punishment imposed in clear violation of Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law".

The Land blockade

Land blockade

Israel has built a border fence on its border with the Gaza Strip, and the Israeli Army maintains a presence at all border crossings and regularly patrols along the fence. All humanitarian aid bound for Gaza is transferred through four border crossings: The Kerem Shalom, Karni, Erez, and Sufa crossings. All aid first undergoes security inspection before being transferred by truck into Gaza.

Egypt has built an underground barrier to block smuggling tunnels, and the Egyptian Border Police maintains a presence along the Egypt-Gaza border. The Rafah Border Crossing is the only lawful crossing point between Egypt and Gaza, and is manned by Palestinian Authority security forces and the European Union Border Assistance Mission Rafah.All humanitarian supplies are transferred through Israel or Egypt via the land crossings after security inspection.

Here are the "few" effects the LAND blockade is causing.

Effects of land blockade on Gaza There have been several reports and studies analysing the effect of the blockade on Gaza.

• In July, 2008, an UNRWA report on the situation in Gaza stated that "the number of households in Gaza below the consumption poverty line continued to grow, reaching 51.8 percent in 2007 (from 50.7 percent in 2006)". In the same year, a Palestinian Bureau of Statistics study concluded that 80% of families in Gaza were living below the poverty line. The CIA World Fact book places this figure at an estimated 70% for 2009.

• A World Health Organisation assessment conducted in 2009 claimed that the level of anemia in babies (9–12 months) was as high as 65%, while a Socio-economic and Food Security Survey Report stated that 61% of Gazans are food insecure and reliant on humanitarian aid. Of those that are food insecure, 65% are children under 18 years. Lastly, a European Network of Implementing Development Agencies (EUNIDA) report notes that, because of the security buffer zone imposed around Gaza as part of the blockade, as of June 2009, 46% of agricultural land was either inaccessible or out of production.

• On 14 June 2010, the International Committee of the Red Cross noted that the increasing scarcity of items has led to rises in cost of goods while quality has fallen. There is also "an acute electricity crisis", where electricity supplies are "interrupted for seven hours a day on average". As a consequence, they note that public services, particularly health services, have suffered, posing "a serious risk to the treatment of patients". In addition, medical equipment is difficult to repair, and medical staff cannot leave to gain more training. Lastly, the ICRC note that sanitation is suffering, because construction projects lack the equipment needed, or the equipment is of poor quality. Only 60% of the population is connected to a sewerage collection system, with the rest polluting the Gaza aquifer. As a result, water is largely "unfit for consumption".

• A 25 May 2010 United Nations Development Programme report stated that, as a result of the blockade, most of Gaza's manufacturing industry has closed, and unemployment stood at an estimated 40%, a decrease on previous years. The blockade has also prevented much needed construction, noting that almost "none of the 3,425 homes destroyed during Cast Lead have been reconstructed, displacing around 20,000 people". Less than 20% "of the value of the damages to educational facilities has been repaired", only "half of the damage to the power network has been repaired", "no repair has been made to the transport infrastructure", "a quarter of damaged farmland has been rehabilitated and only 40% of private businesses have been repaired

My link

So, you've just shown yourself to be deceitful and unreliable again and furthermore, with comments such as this, "Obviously, the manipulative choice of words by both you and amnesty completely ignores that the sanctions on Gaza are internationally approved" you've managed to tarnish your credibility to the level of no return.

Forts = military bases and outposts.

Medieval break walls = modern borders/fences.

You don't even get your own analogies right.

The point is - the fence was built to lower the amount of suicide bombers getting into Israeli cities. It succeeded. Since then, the construction has almost halted completely.

From your reliable source, Wikipedia:

Opponents of the barrier object that the route substantially deviates from the Green Line into the occupied territories captured by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967. They argue that the barrier is an illegal attempt to annex Palestinian land under the guise of security violates international law,has the effect of undermining negotiations (by establishing new borders), and severely restricts Palestinians who live nearby, particularly their ability to travel freely within the West Bank and to access work in Israel. In a 2004 advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice considered that "Israel cannot rely on a right of self-defence or on a state of necessity in order to preclude the wrongfulness of the construction of the wall". The Court found that "the construction of the wall, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law"

My link

Edited January 21, 2012 by BlackRedLittleDevil

[Black Red Devil]

If the "palestinians" made certain demands in negotiations then in good faith ceased ALL offensive activity for 6 months. The region might change. The pressure on Israel would certainly increase by a couple of orders of magnitude.

What demands? You still don't get it!! Israel is the one causing the breakdown in the peace process because they keep on allowing illegal settlements to be built. THIS ILLEGALITY HAS BEEN CONDEMNED BY THE WHOLE WORLD.

To your original point of land blockade. No "palestinians" are hungry and most look as though they could lose a few pounds. They have free health care and are extended welfare benefits from the world. They live under a siege because they have elected leaders SWORN to kill all Israelis (thats called war). The tension could be reversed in DAYS if there was a change of mind by the "palestinians"

You might want to check some of the effects the land blockade is causing in my previous post.

[Erikl]

I'm starting to get the impression that you're either, chronically brainwashed and paranoid or simply a troll.

Since you like wikipedia here you go. These are International views on the blockade, not only Amnesty or the UNRWA:

The Land blockade

Here are the "few" effects the LAND blockade is causing.

My link

So, you've just shown yourself to be deceitful and unreliable again and furthermore, with comments such as this, "Obviously, the manipulative choice of words by both you and amnesty completely ignores that the sanctions on Gaza are internationally approved" you've managed to tarnish your credibility to the level of no return.

From your reliable source, Wikipedia:

My link

You do realize, that all of these all also just that - opinions? Everything is coupled with "expressed opinion", "described it as", "considered" - nothing is substantial. If everything, you've just proved exactly the point here - that it is not paranoia, but factual that the campaign to slander and bash Israel is very much successful. As long as there is no court order that says otherwise, as long as there is no UN decision that is BINDING (and not the general assembly that is often quoted when it comes to Israel, as that body has automatic anti-Israeli majority with some 52 muslim-majority countries, most of them do not even recognize Israel's right to exist, that is quite obvious on who's side they are), then it stays just that - opinions. I'm sure really flattered to be on the same boat with so many important people. To tell you the truth, I, and many others around the world, have lost the faith of the UN when it comes to many things. For me, the fact that this body didn't dismantle UNRWA, or that Libya was until few years ago the head of the UN Human Rights Council, says everything regarding the moral grounds of that organization. When you get automatic majority to countries that have no respect to human rights, you get people who speak in favor of claiming the sky is pink.

I'm afraid it is you who simply seem to not be able to judge facts rationally - you storm a thread, bashing everyone here, claims you have no interest on the actual thing discussed in the thread, just slandering your way in, then claim people blame you of anti-Semitism which they didn't. I do not think you are anti-Semitic - I think you are lost in your own self-confidence that if someone says the world is flat, it must be so. I wonder, for the simple fact that I brought here extensive amount of information that completely contradicts your world view, how does that come across to you? is all of that simply brainwashing? Oh I forgot, you have no interest in an open debate - you are here to slander, and then just make sure that your own beliefs stay that way. It's ok, no one is here to change your mind - you can sleep tight. Israel is evil, Palestinians are being genocided, and the world is indeed flat

Edited January 21, 2012 by Erikl

[+and-then]

And I might add BRLD, Israel possesses the land. Against all odds and all spurious charges and all hatred...Israel possesses the land. When the entire globe is so filled with the hatred of Israel that they "think an evil thought" and come to destroy Israel then the whole world will burn for awhile. And when the fire goes out everyone will have suffered and Israel will STILL possess the land. I don't say this to goad or anger anyone. I just say it because it is my faith.

Best wishes to you on your search for truth.

[Erikl]

and then, although I'm not religious and I tend to distance myself from all sorts of apocalyptic speech, thanks for the support, as Israel can use any right now.

For me, a true liberal, it saddens me that a camp that needs to be as critical and as skeptic as it can - the liberal camp - when it comes to Israel, behaves like an indoctrinated herd.

BRLD will probably result in more insults, after he stormed into this thread ignoring everything that had been reviewed here, thinking he knows everything. There's a problem to many, when it comes to Israel - they think that a certain truth is so, and will never open up to anything else. I am waiting in anticipation for his latest lack of politeness and barbarism in the defence of his ideas and opinions.

[Black Red Devil]

You do realize, that all of these all also just that - opinions? Everything is coupled with "expressed opinion", "described it as", "considered" - nothing is substantial. If everything, you've just proved exactly the point here - that it is not paranoia, but factual that the campaign to slander and bash Israel is very much successful. As long as there is no court order that says otherwise, as long as there is no UN decision that is BINDING (and not the general assembly that is often quoted when it comes to Israel, as that body has automatic anti-Israeli majority with some 52 muslim-majority countries, most of them do not even recognize Israel's right to exist, that is quite obvious on who's side they are), then it stays just that - opinions. I'm sure really flattered to be on the same boat with so many important people. To tell you the truth, I, and many others around the world, have lost the faith of the UN when it comes to many things. For me, the fact that this body didn't dismantle UNRWA, or that Libya was until few years ago the head of the UN Human Rights Council, says everything regarding the moral grounds of that organization. When you get automatic majority to countries that have no respect to human rights, you get people who speak in favor of claiming the sky is pink.

When the entire globe is so filled with the hatred of Israel that they "think an evil thought" and come to destroy Israel then the whole world will burn for awhile.

I've only got two words for these comments, pathetic and delusional. Just to summarise, this is the type of ludicrous paranoia I've been hearing from Erikl and the likes since I started reading and posting on this thread (heard the same in other threads as well):

• The whole world is biased and hates Israel,,,,,the whole world (!!!).
• Jews are the victims in this farce, not the Palestinians.
  
• The whole world has an agenda and sees the discrimination and mistreatment of a population as an excuse to target Israel, because they're antisemitic and racists.
• The whole world has opinions against Israel because it's just a natural fact to hate and persecute Jews since it's been happening for thousands of years.
• Historically, the Jews seem to have been the only ones that have ever suffered at the hands of other human beings.
• They've managed to build a land of their own and become a military powerhouse in the region, surrounded by enemies who naturally despise of them because they're Jews, and they've managed it all on their own because they can't rely on anybody else in a world that hates them.
• All Human Rights Groups in the world are leftists and biased against Israel.
• The UNHRC is biased against Israel.
• The whole UN is a biased organisation, composed mainly of radical muslims who hate Israel (although in my previous post, under United Nations, there wasn't one from the Middle East or a Muslim who commented on the illegality of the blockade).
• All political leaders in the world that complain against the abuse and treatment of Palestinians at the hand of Israel are biased and hostile towards Jews.
• Anyone in this forum that questions the legitimacy of the treatment of Palestinians at the hands of Israel is a Liberal, Neo Con, and supports terrorism. Is also a racist, biased and antisemitic

So, now that we've eliminated all world opinion as being either racist, biased, antisemitic, hostile and supporting terrorism, lets understand why the world hasn't taken action by either sanctioning or punishing in some way Israel. The answer is composed of two letters...... US. So, theoretically. I suppose I'm wrong, the whole world isn't against Israel, only 99.999%.

Israel ignores and is allowed to disregard all levels of international law because the US supports them and vetoes everything that moves. On top of this the US have supplied enough military aid to Israel since the 1970's that has allowed them to build their military strength, which is far superior than anyone else in the region by a country mile. Above all, the US has supplied Israel with enough Economic aid during this same period that has boosted their progress into a reasonably modern society. Israel doesn't have many natural resources and have to rely on industrial sectors which they've developed in the last 40 years thanks to this aid. So, it's totally laughable and irritating at the same time to hear the likes of Erikl coming here sprouting his pompous superiority of civility towards the arabs. If they're in this privileged condition, he and his compatriots, should be kissing you know who's a..s for the fortune, rather than being contentious and showing a lack of humanity towards another population who aren't/weren't so lucky.

On the wall/barrier:

On October 2003, the United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution, which stated:

The construction by Israel, the occupying power, of a wall in the Occupied Territories departing from the armistice line of 1949 is illegal under relevant provisions of international law and must be ceased and reversed.

The United Kingdom, Germany, Bulgaria, and Cameroon abstained from the vote. The justification given by the U.S. for the veto was that the resolution did not condemn terrorist attacks made by Palestinian groups (see Negroponte doctrine). The United States, however, has been condemned by some countries for its support of the barrier.

One week later, on October 21, a similar (though non-binding) resolution (ES-10/13) was passed by the UN General Assembly 144-4 with 12 abstentions. The resolution said the barrier was "in contradiction to international law", and demanded that Israel "stop and reverse" its construction. Israel called the resolution a "farce".

In 2004, the United Nations passed a number of resolutions and the International Court of Justice issued a ruling where judges unanimously stated that the portions of the Israeli West Bank barrier that are located within occupied Palestinian territories are illegal under international law. Prior to the ruling, Israel had made the claim that the ICJ lacked standing to rule on the legality of the barrier, which the court unanimously rejected. On July 20, 2004, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution demanding that Israel obey the ICJ ruling. 150 nations voted in favor of the resolution, 7 voted against, and 10 abstained.

Process of the ICJ

In December 2003, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution requesting the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to make a non-binding advisory opinion on the "legal consequences arising" from the construction of the barrier.

The hearings began in February 2004. The Palestinian Authority is not a member of the court but was allowed to make a submission by virtue of being a UN observer and a co-sponsor of the General Assembly resolution. In January 2004, the court also authorized the League of Arab States and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to make submissions.

Israel initially announced that it would cooperate with the court, while noting that advisory rulings of the ICJ are not binding. Israel later made a written submission to the court rejecting the authority of the court to rule on the case, but announced (on February 12, 2004) that it would not appear at the court to make oral submissions.

On January 30, 2004, Israel announced officially it did not recognize ICJ authority to rule over the barrier issue. Israel also dispatched a 120 page document, elaborating on the security needs to build the "terror prevention fence" and purporting to demonstrate the atrocities committed by Palestinian terrorists. The document also included a judicial part with legal accounts supporting Israel's claim that the issue of the barrier is political and not in the ICJ authority. Critics of the Israeli government argued that Israel has a long history of insisting that international law does not apply to the Israeli government's decisions. The Israeli government on numerous occasions has rejected UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, international court decisions, the Geneva Conventions, the precedence set by the Nuremberg Trials (specifically regarding the crime of Aggression) and international consensus.

In its 2004 advisory opinion on the legality of the Israeli West Bank barrier, the International Court of Justice concluded that the lands captured by Israel in the 1967 war, including East Jerusalem, are occupied territory (not disputed like Israeli's like to call it).

My link

Despite all the evidence above and in my previous post (coming from neutral HR's Organisations, world leaders, allies, UN leaders), Erikl would like to make us all believe that Israel are the victims and the suffering of millions of normal people are self inflicted. He provides sources of biased information you read in sites such as the Jewish Library, who present the information always in a twisted manner such as, people in Gaza are suffering - it's because of Hamas not because of the illegal blockade, the lands are "disputed" territories - despite the rest of the world calling them "occupied", the wall/barrier is built on occupied territories and restricts about 150,000 palestinians and their farming - it's a strategic security measure (so why not build it in Israel?).

The deceit and lies he tries to present to anyone reading this thread is similar to the tactics he uses in all threads where Israel's methods are criticized and similar to the tactics used by the Israeli Govt. Debunk all objective facts and play the self victimisation card by bringing out past events where Jews truly did suffer but the whole route cause of this suffering has no connection with the people they're currently punishing.

The true reason Israeli's and in particular people such as Erikl are prepared to disregard the suffering of millions of people are emphasized in this statement he wrote in a previous post:

Our history is as ugly as anyone, no more, maybe less. Bad things have been done in the past, and maybe in the present. Was there an ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians? nope. Does that matter? nope. What does matter? that currently, millions of people around the middle east are held in camps, deprived from any civil right, for three generations, and are mentally prepaired for a judgement day that will never come - when they expect to return and to sack Jerusalem from the hands of the infidel Jews. And you know what? who ever believe this catastrophe, and this situation, annules our right to exist here, or that Israel is "cancelable", is more than welcome to pack his bags (if he's a self-hating far left Israeli, if not - he could put a sock in it) and swim to the Ukraine by himself. I do not live here because of some belief in old stories or the Bible, and I intend to stay here even if it will be proved that the forefathers of Zionism were vampires from another planet that came here to perform medical experiments on local Arab farmers .

A typically twisted point of view where he's basically pointing out that the world should be ONLY concerned with what's happening outside of Israel. An extreme and cynical point of view claiming that unless there is genocide involved no one should be concerned. On the one hand I can accept the xenophobic and paranoia to a certain extent but, for what it's worth, I don't accept that a whole population should be subject to mistreatment and discrimination to subsidise these feelings. I don't accept that a country should be above the law and be allowed to perpetrate their agenda at the expense of other people just because "the world needs to cut them some slack" for what happened 70 years ago. I don't accept that this unfairness is covered up by lies and deception by one country against the world opinion (vetoed resolutions by the US is a good example). I don't accept that in their privileged position they should be taking advantage of innocent people.

Israeli's have a pretty simple agenda that is no different from every other country in the world:

Safeguard their people and country from hostile enemies. Compared to many other countries in the world they're surrounded by hostility. You would think they would try to avoid antagonising hostility by discriminating against some of the locals. But that doesn't seem to worry Israel because they're protected on the legal front and supported by military aid so they just continue on their merry way without a worry in the world, obliviously.

Finally, there are peculiar similarity in the way Israel operates on the world scale and Erikl comments in these threads. Both debunk, attack the source/messenger and play the victim, instead of trying to mitigate the situation, think of a solution and fix the issue. The main difference is when Israel is caught out with their illegalities, nothing happens to them because the US comes to the rescue. When Erikl is caught out with his deceitful BS, he throws tantrums, goes on the defensive by accusing everyone of this and that, makes a fool of himself and looses total credibility.

Edited January 22, 2012 by BlackRedLittleDevil

[Erikl]

Ooooh a victory dance BlackRedLittleDevil!

Your summarize is as ludicrous as your claims. You come here with an already made up opinion not only about the subject, but about the people here. Then you go on inventing that people called you by names, and it took 3 posts - 3 posts to finally take you down from that tree. The members shall judge by themselves.

As for your claims - the whole world doesn't hate Israel. The UN and many of it's bodies, however, have automatic majority against Israel (in the form of 52 muslim majority countries and the non-aligned countries which are usually allied with those countries). The opinions you quoted, mostly from UN workers, kind of proves this point. Palestinian propaganda is very successful, not because it's right, but because Israel as a democracy, where many different voices are heard, is dealing with well orchestrated non-democratic organizations that are funded by some of the most resourceful countries in the world, to advance this agenda. The sole proof is by numbers, which prove it all - in the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict, no more than 15,000 people died (on both sides). With this number, probably 2,000-8,000 Palestinian civilians found themselves dead. That's hardly a genocide, or a massacre. Palestinian population has been on the rise since 1948. Palestinians that live inside Israel enjoy full human and civil rights - and they are now some 20% of the citizens of Israel. Israel constantly offer Palestinians advance medical services. The disputed territories have lower infant mortality than Lebanon and Syria. Palestinian literacy rate is comparable to that of the West, leaving behind Egypt - the center of modern Arab culture - far behind. Palestinian life expectancy is higher than some place in Scotland, and is 71-75 years, as opposed to the rest of the Arab world and ofcourse Africa. But the pro-Palestinians will not let numbers to confuse them. Nope. They claim Israel is a monster with a computer, highly modernize fascist state, yet all what it managed to accomplish in the past 63 years, with all it's American weaponry, killed only 2,000-8,000 Palestinian civilians - an afternoon work for a genocidal nation.

Nope. We lead to assume the worse.

BlackRedLittleDevil, also tries to make it as if I present Israel as a victim - any user is more than welcome to look on at least the last two pages, where obviously it's not the case. I am fully aware that Israel has done bad stuff in the bad, and probably is today too, but BLRD cannot see this. For him, it's all clear - he was programmed on how Israelis think, so he response according to what he already knows we're about to say - not according to what is actually written.

But don't let him be confused by what is actually written.

And then there is the usual racism of low expectations - I mean, you have nothing to expect from the Palestinians themselves - after all they are being genocided by evil Israel, no? Ladies and gentlemen, members of the board - BLRD solely put the fingers on Israel. Completely. For him, antisemitism preached by the Palestinian leadership is OK (Hamas has been toning down - his words not mine). For him, Palestinian obssesion on making Israel accepting 5 million Palestinians into Israel, rather than into future Palestine, is not an obstacle for peace. Nope. For him, it's ok to keep the Palestinians for three generations, as the only case in the world of hereditary refugees in countries with exactly the same language and religion (and ethnicity - Arab), stripped of every right (in some countries, like Lebanon, even work permits). Nope, that's not a source of radicalism and an obstacle for peace. That's not a sick example of apartheid (btw - Israel have never put any Palestinian in a refugee camp - they were all built by the Arabs).

It's quite obvious on how BLRD is about to answer to this as well - he's about to go on and rant some more, bringing more quotes that are opinions, probably will not tackle half of the things raised in this post - because he can't help it.

Expect some name calling as well - paranoid, childish, etc.. of course as we all know - insults are the weapon of the losing side.

[Wyvernkeeper]

Glad I didn't check this thread over the weekend until now, I don't mind nonsense, but when spouted with such arrogance it grates hard.

BRLD and Q24, again I will say you misunderstand where I am coming from... I am one of the 'Jews' that fights for the Palestinian cause, but reading such warped opinions such as yours really makes me disillusioned with the modern left and it's relationship with the anti-Israel (not pro-Palestinian) bandwagon. It is sickening that when I try to explain the imprint that the Holocaust had on the development of Israeli psychology and the discussion suddenly became the opening salvo of a Holocaust denial seminar. I imagine Q24 and BRLD won't see the problem in this jump of logic but hopefully other readers will see the implicit nature of their attitude. BR, all that list of stuff you posted two posts ago shows is your own emotional reaction to discussions whilst your automatic dismissal of the things you cite shows how you are unprepared to accept that their might be a bit of truth in some of those points.

Namely this one: ''The whole world has opinions against Israel because it's just a natural fact to hate and persecute Jews since it's been happening for thousands of years.'' Now I'm not saying this is entirely true, but when I was talking about Holocaust psychology this is exactly the kind of attitude that mass genocides serve to create, so not true but understandable, whilst seemingly an alien concept to non-Israelis.

All I was saying is that people on this thread need to listen - and not just shout their own opinions at each other without compromise.

I'm going away for a nice break somewhere near Gloucester for a few days... Enjoy screaming off the wall at each other everybody.

Erik, again, I admire your patience.

Edited January 22, 2012 by Wyvernkeeper

[Black Red Devil]

The deceptions, inaccuracies and lies from Erikl's post continue:

Then you go on inventing that people called you by names, and it took 3 posts - 3 posts to finally take you down from that tree. The members shall judge by themselves.

We're not in kindergarten. You don't have to call someone names, a clear accusation is just the same. Do you deny in the below comment suggesting that I support terrorism? Post 383.

Actually, the real reason why you object the wall (or Palestinians for that matter) is that it actually lowered vastly the ability of Palestinian terrorists to carry out attacks against Israeli cities.

As for your claims - the whole world doesn't hate Israel.

My claims? Are you getting confused? These are what your posts suggest.

The UN and many of it's bodies, however, have automatic majority against Israel (in the form of 52 muslim majority countries and the non-aligned countries which are usually allied with those countries).

And Israel has the US (only) that seems to save their bacon all the time.

The opinions you quoted, mostly from UN workers, kind of proves this point.

UN workers??!! Yeah, the Janitor, Chaffeur and the lady at the front desk, i.e. the UN Security General Ban Ki Moon, UN envoy to the Middle East Tony Blair, UK PM David Cameron, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, just to name a few.

The sole proof is by numbers, which prove it all - in the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict, no more than 15,000 people died (on both sides). With this number, probably 2,000-8,000 Palestinian civilians found themselves dead. That's hardly a genocide, or a massacre. Palestinian population has been on the rise since 1948. Palestinians that live inside Israel enjoy full human and civil rights - and they are now some 20% of the citizens of Israel. Israel constantly offer Palestinians advance medical services. The disputed territories have lower infant mortality than Lebanon and Syria. Palestinian literacy rate is comparable to that of the West, leaving behind Egypt - the center of modern Arab culture - far behind. Palestinian life expectancy is higher than some place in Scotland, and is 71-75 years, as opposed to the rest of the Arab world and ofcourse Africa. But the pro-Palestinians will not let numbers to confuse them. Nope. They claim Israel is a monster with a computer, highly modernize fascist state, yet all what it managed to accomplish in the past 63 years, with all it's American weaponry, killed only 2,000-8,000 Palestinian civilians - an afternoon work for a genocidal nation.

Did my previous posts go straight passed you into limbo or did it pass through your brain at the speed of light without connecting to your grey matter?

Re-read post 408 under "Here are the "few" effects the LAND blockade is causing". Plus, I've never suggested genocide!

BlackRedLittleDevil, also tries to make it as if I present Israel as a victim - any user is more than welcome to look on at least the last two pages, where obviously it's not the case. I am fully aware that Israel has done bad stuff in the bad, and probably is today too, but BLRD cannot see this. For him, it's all clear - he was programmed on how Israelis think, so he response according to what he already knows we're about to say - not according to what is actually written.

But don't let him be confused by what is actually written.

Wow!!! I say wow. Please Erikl, remind me of what Israel "has done bad" as you've suggested.

And then there is the usual racism of low expectations - I mean, you have nothing to expect from the Palestinians themselves - after all they are being genocided by evil Israel, no?

Here we go again with lies that I've suggested genocide. Amazingly false and deceitful response.

Ladies and gentlemen, members of the board

Hang on. Erikl's making an official announcement to all his followers. [anxious to listen what he has to reveal to us mortals]

- BLRD solely put the fingers on Israel. Completely. For him, antisemitism preached by the Palestinian leadership is OK (Hamas has been toning down - his words not mine). For him, Palestinian obssesion on making Israel accepting 5 million Palestinians into Israel, rather than into future Palestine, is not an obstacle for peace. Nope. For him, it's ok to keep the Palestinians for three generations, as the only case in the world of hereditary refugees in countries with exactly the same language and religion (and ethnicity - Arab), stripped of every right (in some countries, like Lebanon, even work permits). Nope, that's not a source of radicalism and an obstacle for peace. That's not a sick example of apartheid (btw - Israel have never put any Palestinian in a refugee camp - they were all built by the Arabs).

Is this it? Just the same monologue? BTW, you are correct, Israel has never put any Palestinian in an official refugee camp. They made an unofficial one out of Gaza.

It's quite obvious on how BLRD is about to answer to this as well - he's about to go on and rant some more, bringing more quotes that are opinions, probably will not tackle half of the things raised in this post - because he can't help it.

Expect some name calling as well - paranoid, childish, etc.. of course as we all know - insults are the weapon of the losing side.

Yeah, yeah, just the same old, same old. Anyhow, I'm getting a bit bored and too busy to keep on posting comments on this thread which are smack banging against a brick wall and rebounding back with useless, baseless and childish jargon. You seem to know all about the loosing side, so I'll make a tactical retreat, avoid any insults and leave you with it.

[Black Red Devil]

Glad I didn't check this thread over the weekend until now, I don't mind nonsense, but when spouted with such arrogance it grates hard.

BRLD and Q24, again I will say you misunderstand where I am coming from... I am one of the 'Jews' that fights for the Palestinian cause, but reading such warped opinions such as yours really makes me disillusioned with the modern left and it's relationship with the anti-Israel (not pro-Palestinian) bandwagon. It is sickening that when I try to explain the imprint that the Holocaust had on the development of Israeli psychology and the discussion suddenly became the opening salvo of a Holocaust denial seminar. I imagine Q24 and BRLD won't see the problem in this jump of logic but hopefully other readers will see the implicit nature of their attitude. BR, all that list of stuff you posted two posts ago shows is your own emotional reaction to discussions whilst your automatic dismissal of the things you cite shows how you are unprepared to accept that their might be a bit of truth in some of those points.

Namely this one: ''The whole world has opinions against Israel because it's just a natural fact to hate and persecute Jews since it's been happening for thousands of years.'' Now I'm not saying this is entirely true, but when I was talking about Holocaust psychology this is exactly the kind of attitude that mass genocides serve to create, so not true but understandable, whilst seemingly an alien concept to non-Israelis.

All I was saying is that people on this thread need to listen - and not just shout their own opinions at each other without compromise.

I'm going away for a nice break somewhere near Gloucester for a few days... Enjoy screaming off the wall at each other everybody.

Erik, again, I admire your patience.

Wyvernkeeper, I've got know idea what your talking about or alluding to in the bold part or what I'm supposed to be emotionally reacting to. You might want to be more precise with attachments and links to be more clear. Until then, sorry I can't help you.

Also, I don't know where, how or when, I got pulled into this Holocaust denial thing but hey, if this is your psychological evaluation which has turned you off left wingers, well, so be it. I'm not a left winger (or a right for that matter), so who cares

[MichaelW]

[*]All political leaders in the world that complain against the abuse and treatment of Palestinians at the hand of Israel are biased and hostile towards Jews.

Well, it does seem that way when everyone's voicing their views on Israel and try to put pressure on the Israeli government with it's treatment of Palestinians, yet does nothing to address the injustices against Palestinians committed by the Lebanese government. So, let me guess, discrimination of Palestinians is justified in Lebanon because it is Arab vs. Arab rather than Arab vs. Jew?

[*]Anyone in this forum that questions the legitimacy of the treatment of Palestinians at the hands of Israel is a Liberal, Neo Con, and supports terrorism.

Seriously? Have you seen the extremist views expressed by Ex and co? They try to justify terrorism against Israeli civilians and yet get all emotional when Israel kills Palestinian civilians. Now is it just me, or does this smack of hypocrisy and double standards by the very same people that accuse those who support Israel of committing?

Edited January 23, 2012 by MichaelW

[Yamato]

Well, it does seem that way when everyone's voicing their views on Israel and try to put pressure on the Israeli government with it's treatment of Palestinians, yet does nothing to address the injustices against Palestinians committed by the Lebanese government. So, let me guess, discrimination of Palestinians is justified in Lebanon because it is Arab vs. Arab rather than Arab vs. Jew?

Seriously? Have you seen the extremist views expressed by Ex and co? They try to justify terrorism against Israeli civilians and yet get all emotional when Israel kills Palestinian civilians. Now is it just me, or does this smack of hypocrisy and double standards by the very same people that accuse those who support Israel of committing?

So, let me guess, discrimination of Palestinians is justified in Lebanon because it is Arab vs. Arab rather than Arab vs. Jew?

No, but that's what you will definitely insist it's all about because you can't lose the groupthink and accept the answer once it's given. I've already answered this question and you're still guessing? AGAIN, what the focus has been about here at least as far as you're concerned with me is, what is happening on Palestinian land. If Lebanon was encroaching on Palestinian land, or Israeli land, getting away with the hideous terroristic BS that Israel is on a daily basis, I would have a huge problem with that. Obviously as a non-interventionist I don't believe in meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. That means Hamas, and Likud, and Hezbollah all three. But Palestinians having their civil liberties destroyed by land hungry Israeli thieves isn't an internal Israeli issue. You want to believe it is, and these Zionists from Israel parrot the discrimination like it is, but it's not. The common feature you people have together is a lack of respect for other peoples' property and so we hope when this is over you will learn some respect.

Seriously? Have you seen the extremist views expressed by Ex and co? They try to justify terrorism against Israeli civilians and yet get all emotional when Israel kills Palestinian civilians. Now is it just me, or does this smack of hypocrisy and double standards by the very same people that accuse those who support Israel of committing?

Why justify terrorism against anyone? The terrorism is happening to Palestinians on a perpetual daily basis. If you really want to come here and convince people that you're against terrorism you need to stop supporting that immediately. No longer supporting Israeli terror isn't synonymous with supporting non-Israeli terror. They're not mutually exclusive, and moreover must not be.

[Yamato]

The Holocaust didn't happen in the Middle East. The Holocaust didn't happen to only Jews. Hitler exterminated Gypsies, but my lack of support for a "Gypsy Homeland" doesn't mean that I'm "anti-Gypsy". Gypsies aren't stealing someone else's land and getting away with it, and lucky for them that they're not. They'd need a massive lobby and a gang full of paid off shills to pull that off.

Hitler exterminated homosexuals too. Now why isn't the Holocaust being invoked every time some liberal or conservative from the federal gubmint makes a speech about supporting "civil unions" because they can't handle giving gays equal rights with everyone else? The Zionist poison that has saturated a few posters here would have everyone believe that we hit six million first, and then we start to care. A big thumb off the end of the nose to that.

[Yamato]

What demands? You still don't get it!! Israel is the one causing the breakdown in the peace process because they keep on allowing illegal settlements to be built. THIS ILLEGALITY HAS BEEN CONDEMNED BY THE WHOLE WORLD.

You might want to check some of the effects the land blockade is causing in my previous post.

It's often said that "Israel is the greatest ally of the United States" but the correct statement reads "The United States is the greatest ally of Israel." Israel hasn't earned the friendship of much of anyone judging by the votes against it all these years, and the friendship from the United States is plastic and made out of money. Keeping the best interests of every Israeli in mind, I don't think this status quo does their security any favors in the long term.

Unfortunately, Israel has bought a repugnant double standard of rights from the United States that the world opposes no matter who's exercising them. Zionist Israel's game is blatantly obvious. They're making life as miserable as possible for Palestinians so the Palestinians throw in the towel and become assimilated to Israeli society and sovereignty. Sadly, I think this is a reasonable possibility, once the (perceived) gap between one choice and the other becomes so wide that it will be very difficult to refuse the sugary sweet offer when it comes. This likens to the Nazi's gas chambers, making their victims naked and submissive before they willingly marched them in single file lines to their deaths. The sticky sweaty victims thinking they're finally going to be given a soap and towel after weeks of living in their own stench. But alas, six million Palestinians haven't died yet, and being bodily absorbed into Israel beats a five minute shower.

I'm sure (based solely on posts written before you arrived) that the Israeli and Zionist you're conversing with here don't care at all what effects the blockade of Gaza or occupation of The West Bank is having. Those effects are merely "opinions". Instead, they must talk about "the Arabs", or some other country not being occupied, or the Holocaust, or a 3,000 year old superstition, or some other non-Israeli terrorist organization, every time the occupation of Palestinian land is broached. Unless they change the subject, there'd be nothing left for them to say. You've done a good job at fleshing out the issues facing Palestinians and I'm glad you found this thread and shared your input. Please consider your posts not to be a waste of time here because sharing and viewing posts like yours is what this thread is all about.

[Yamato]

Bye-bye then. We don't need your "logic" anymore.

Hey, you're just like Yamato in his blatant denial of forum behaviour.

Still talking about me huh? What denial of forum behavior?

Please stop speaking for other people including moderators vainly attempting to tell me what my rights aren't.

[Yamato]

Priceless thank you!

Exactly my point - I put here quotes and articles from wikipedia, while the pro-Palestinian side puts "palestineremember.com". Maybe I should start posting from "zionismisright.com" or something like that?

But everyone else is "biased" because you're the one with the Israeli flags and fighter jets on your profile.

[Yamato]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/02/us-israel-flotilla-gaza-idUSTRE65133D20100602

As long as Hamas is acknowledge to be at war with Israel...the blockade is legal.

If Charters are what you really care about, we're supposed to be at war with Israel right now, thus blockading Israel is also legal. It's difficult getting caught advocating things like this when you can't ponly blockade or occupy Palestinians, I know.

[Yamato]

[/b][/i]

Apparently so. Or possibly that cowardly. Either way, Israel will continue to possess the land. But for my part, if anything DOES flare up I hope your family is kept far from it.

I appreciate the kindness of this reply.

Though what would the Americans be called who support the Chinese forces who invade the United States under the auspices of security, or stability, or regime change, or our liberation to their form of government, or to secure our energy resources, or to protect their "national interests", or to colonize us with Chinese-only settlements, or what ever? We'd be called cowards and traitors. The Americans treasonous or cowardly enough to work with the Chinese would get shot in the head by other Americans. When it's Iraqis or Afghans working with their invaders, we're told they're the "moderates" as if it's extreme or terroristic to fight for your country when you're a Muslim who doesn't submit to US interests. This is just timeless rhetoric of the ages whenever a state imposes its will on another land. George Washington was a "terrorist". But he's a hero and could have been a martyr. And these shady bureaucrats that the US government is buying with US taxpayer money aren't worth our while.