Does Size Matter? (Israeli Peace Efforts) [Archive]

webfusion

12th March 2008, 08:37 PM

The Fool

13th March 2008, 04:53 AM

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not over the size, but rather, is about the very existence of a Jewish Nation located in a region defined as an “Islamic estate” by the Arabs.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3471412,00.html
Yoram Ettinger evaluates the intent and the aim of the palestinians.

Mr Ettinger refers to the scholarly treatise of the late Professor Majid Khadduri, from Johns Hopkins University, in MD.
Khadduri’s book, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, clarifies the meaning of the amazing 1,400-year sequence – since the 7th century - of wars, terrorism, and the violent violation of agreements, alliances, and conventions between Arabs, between Muslims, and between Arabs and non-Arabs.

Here we are in 2008, and it sure seems that we're just witnessing more of the same.
you seem to get a little restless whenever peace talks are happening. Let me clarify this, you feel the attitude people who are attempting to negotiate terms should go in with is the basic underlying assumption that Muslims are dedicated warmongers who will inevitably stab you in the back if you ever make a treaty with them. Is that about it?

I notice it also beats the "israel could get wiped out" drum... Hmmm, if you have ten bucks to spare I'll give you 34672 to 1 against that happening.

webfusion

13th March 2008, 07:16 AM

T-F: You seem to get a little restless whenever peace talks are happening.

Peace talks are fine. Israel even continues talking while rockets are fired at our quiet communities. Israel continues talking while terrorist murderers enter our schools and commmit atrocities. Israel continues talking while rampant arms smuggling is ongoing into gaza.

Look, T-F, here's the bottom line:
We are not interested in the establishment of a new mini terror-State, and it sure as hell looks like that's exactly what's happening, so excuse us if we don't go along with it.

The underlying assumption is this --- Dismantle the terrorist infrastructure; call for an end to jihad against Israel; disavow the 1974 Phased Plan of the PNC; decide to accept that Jerusalem is not going to be re-divided along the 1949 Rhodes Lines; and say that "peace" doesn't just mean "tadiyeh" (temporary calm).

Start with those basic points, and we'll see how things progress.

The Fool

13th March 2008, 10:33 PM

T-F:

Peace talks are fine. Israel even continues talking while rockets are fired at our quiet communities. Israel continues talking while terrorist murderers enter our schools and commmit atrocities. Israel continues talking while rampant arms smuggling is ongoing into gaza.

Look, T-F, here's the bottom line:
We are not interested in the establishment of a new mini terror-State, and it sure as hell looks like that's exactly what's happening, so excuse us if we don't go along with it.

The underlying assumption is this --- Dismantle the terrorist infrastructure; call for an end to jihad against Israel; disavow the 1974 Phased Plan of the PNC; decide to accept that Jerusalem is not going to be re-divided along the 1949 Rhodes Lines; and say that "peace" doesn't just mean "tadiyeh" (temporary calm).

Start with those basic points, and we'll see how things progress.
start with those basic points and then what? You simply add more conditions? Remember web....you say no Palestinian state under any circumstances.

Alas I fear that what is required to establish a state for this mass of stateless people is outside intervention. Israel will probably have to be forced to accept it.

webfusion

14th March 2008, 05:46 PM

T-F declares:Israel will probably have to be forced to accept it (a Palestinian State).

Meh.
Certainly Australia isn't going to lift a finger.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=963545

Who's going to force it? Let's see you name names...

The Fool

14th March 2008, 10:49 PM

T-F declares:

Meh.
Certainly Australia isn't going to lift a finger.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=963545

Who's going to force it? Let's see you name names...

Did you miss this bit in the article you linked to?

"We firmly believe the establishment of an independent and economically viable Palestinian state must remain a key objective of the Israeli peace process,"

because someone congratulates you on an anaversary of your founding doesn't mean they agree with you on all issues...

As to who might force you to play the game in the end??

Starts with a U ends with an A. with an S in the middle. Lots of nations have said nobody tells them what to do....but in the end its the golden rule isn't it, the one with the gold makes the rules. But hey...there is always a chance that before it comes to this Palestinians will accept your offer of permanant vassalage living in semi autonomous enclaves. But I doubt it.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 05:33 AM

Australia: "We firmly believe the establishment of an independent and economically viable Palestinian state must remain a key objective of the Israeli peace process..."

Israel: The United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations — along with Israel and the Palestinian Authority — all officially support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
-- RAND Corporation Palestinian State Study Team. --
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG146-1/

Israel is right now, while you sleep and dream T-F, working to arrange various approaches for promoting the Palestinian State’s economic development, determining how to best arrange access to safe and adequate supplies of water, strengthing their health and health care system, and expanding educational institutions, as well as identifying ways that leverage Palestine’s many strengths and address the many challenges a new state will face.

To claim otherwise is B-S.

a_unique_person

15th March 2008, 06:24 AM

Australia:

Israel: --
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG146-1/

Israel is right now, while you sleep and dream T-F, working to arrange various approaches for promoting the Palestinian State’s economic development, determining how to best arrange access to safe and adequate supplies of water, strengthing their health and health care system, and expanding educational institutions, as well as identifying ways that leverage Palestine’s many strengths and address the many challenges a new state will face.

To claim otherwise is B-S.

Except when it's trashing new farms for people who want to develop their lives.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 07:46 AM

Except when it's trashing new farms for people who want to develop their lives.

a_u_p is referring to a case whereby some palestinians had a few dunams confiscated so that the construction of the IDF Security Barrier could proceed on the designated route.

The entire Security Barrier can be discussed in the bi-lateral negotiations between Israel and the palestinians, certainly, and maybe it will be even removed / dismantled at some point in the future. For now, it's serving a valid purpose, and protecting Israeli citizens from infiltration by jihadist maniacs.

If the palestinians want to "develop their lives" then they could start by rejecting the jihadist maniacs and not publicly celebrating and handing out candies and sweets when atrocities against jews are perpetrated (like the Yeshiva murders 10 days ago).

WildCat

15th March 2008, 08:23 AM

you seem to get a little restless whenever peace talks are happening. Let me clarify this, you feel the attitude people who are attempting to negotiate terms should go in with is the basic underlying assumption that Muslims are dedicated warmongers who will inevitably stab you in the back if you ever make a treaty with them. Is that about it?
If the Palestinians really want to prove they are negotiating in good faith a good first step would be to amend their charter (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/plocov.htm) to recognize Israel's right to exist, don't you think? They promised to in 1998, but have apparently forgotten to do that for some reason.

Until they do so, what reason is there to believe they're not dedicated warmongers who will stab you in the back if a treaty is made with them?

webfusion

15th March 2008, 08:55 AM

If the Palestinians really want to prove they are negotiating in good faith a good first step would be to amend their charter (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/plocov.htm) to recognize Israel's right to exist, don't you think? They promised to in 1998, but have apparently forgotten to do that for some reason.

Until they do so, what reason is there to believe they're not dedicated warmongers who will stab you in the back if a treaty is made with them?

Look, I do have a lot of serious qualms about the establishment of the New Palestine State. I'm not really against it, in principle, and I actually believe that a legitimate leader from the palestinians will emerge and begin the process of dedicating himself to rejecting and overwhelming the jihadists. Abbas is not that man.

I am not all that concerned about the PLO Covenant or the HAMAS Charter. In all honesty, I am not all that worried about the 1974 Phased Plan, either. In the long run, the palestinians will recognize their desire to "crush" the Zionists is a useless exercise in futility, and their own desires for "developing their lives" will surpass their hatred for the jews.

Let's be fair, WildCat. The hatred against jews is not limited to palestinian culture. And the hatred by arabs (in general) against jews was in-vogue long before 1967 as the "occupation" began. To place a time-line starting at June 1967 as a point that will wind the clock back and all will be fine with the arabs, is unrealistic and naive. The 1949 Rhodes Cease Fire Lines were not really very useful during the 1950's and they're absolutely not useful in 2008.

Let's not get bogged-down in that same routine of "Change the PLO Charter First" as a pre-requisite for anything. Been there, done that.

I would be satisifed with more basic steps:
Dismantle the terrorist infrastructure; call for an end to jihad against Israel; disavow the 1974 Phased Plan of the PNC; decide to accept that Jerusalem is not going to be re-divided along the 1949 Rhodes Lines; and say that "peace" doesn't just mean "tadiyeh" (temporary calm).

WildCat

15th March 2008, 09:04 AM

I would be satisifed with more basic steps:
I think changing the charter would be just as likely as those things happening. The Palestinians to date have shown nothing to indicate they want to live in peace with Israel. Maybe at some point in the future, but I doubt if I'll be alive to see it. I'm 41 btw.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 11:58 AM

WildCat:The Palestinians to date have shown nothing to indicate they want to live in peace with Israel.

"The" Palestinians certainly have indicated a willingness to arrange a peaceful deal.

The problem is -- many palestinian political leaders and palestinian militant jihadists and palestinian religious imams, in cooperation with their fellow arab jihadists across the MidEast, are not representing the average palestinians.

For example - - - does Fathi Hammad, a leading palestinian political figure, truly represent "THE" Palestinians? I shudder to think so.
http://europenews.dk/en/node/8471

As for the elemental steps I mentioned, it must be recalled that these points are simply required within the Performance-Based Roadmap process... it's nothing new.
http://www.un.org/media/main/roadmap122002.html

And since the Palestinian Authority is completely failing to implement their part of the bargain, Israel isn't really violating any 'agreements' by building a few hundred apartments in the suburbs of Jerusalem.

WildCat

15th March 2008, 01:34 PM

WildCat:

"The" Palestinians certainly have indicated a willingness to arrange a peaceful deal.

The problem is -- many palestinian political leaders and palestinian militant jihadists and palestinian religious imams, in cooperation with their fellow arab jihadists across the MidEast, are not representing the average palestinians.
I hope you're right, but they did elect these guys.

And since the Palestinian Authority is completely failing to implement their part of the bargain, Israel isn't really violating any 'agreements' by building a few hundred apartments in the suburbs of Jerusalem.
True that.

a_unique_person

15th March 2008, 02:42 PM

a_u_p is referring to a case whereby some palestinians had a few dunams confiscated so that the construction of the IDF Security Barrier could proceed on the designated route.

The entire Security Barrier can be discussed in the bi-lateral negotiations between Israel and the palestinians, certainly, and maybe it will be even removed / dismantled at some point in the future. For now, it's serving a valid purpose, and protecting Israeli citizens from infiltration by jihadist maniacs.

If the palestinians want to "develop their lives" then they could start by rejecting the jihadist maniacs and not publicly celebrating and handing out candies and sweets when atrocities against jews are perpetrated (like the Yeshiva murders 10 days ago).

You don't see the irony in those farms being destroyed? That farm was worth a lot more than just the livelihoods of those farmers.

The Fool

15th March 2008, 02:45 PM

webfusion

15th March 2008, 02:54 PM

You don't see the irony in those farms being destroyed? That farm was worth a lot more than just the livelihoods of those farmers.

Their farm wasn't destroyed -- these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction, and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed" and lo and behold, a_u_p, they succeeded, as you're here trying to show how their farm was destroyed, as if it somehow is a huge '****** deal.

ETA --
You don't see the irony in those farms being destroyed? That farm was worth a lot more than just the livelihoods of those farmers.

Their farm wasn't destroyed -- these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction, and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed" and lo and behold, a_u_p, they succeeded, as you're here trying to show how their farm was destroyed, as if it somehow is a huge '****** deal.

BTW, a_u_p is referencing the story reported in Ha'aretz by Gideon Levy Feb 14th, 2008.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/952257.html
Sami al-Adam of Beit Ula.
These people knew perfectly where the route of the Barrier was going -- they had been seeing it advance along for years, and knew the route would take it right through that area, so they built up their little "farm" in the hills.
Sami al-Adam acts like a total innocent, and Gideon Levy provides a skewed version of events.
That palestiniain village (Beit Ula) was under no illusions --- the Army had issued confiscation orders previously, and the palestinians knew exactly what was due to happen as the Barrier proceeded, far in advance.

The Fool

15th March 2008, 03:16 PM

Their farm wasn't destroyed -- these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction, and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed" and lo and behold, a_u_p, they succeeded, as you're here trying to show how their farm was destroyed, as if it somehow is a huge '****** deal.
sigh...so now you are claiming that the wall only goes through scrubland and any d was just stuff palestinians hurridly threw up in the walls path for propaganda purposes?

Do you want to review and "clarify" this claim now or wait until later because I have some free time and am planning to pull it to pieces piece by piece.

I am starting out by claiming that you simply made this up. According to this story

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/west-bank-farms-fall-to-israeli-bulldozers/2008/02/22/1203467386462.html

"THE farmers of Beit Ula spent two years preparing their new groves of fruit, nut and olive trees, clearing rocks, building stone terraces and digging deep cisterns to catch the scarce rain.

The Israeli army destroyed it all in less than a day."

are you claiming that these farmers recieved notification of the wall over two years ago and spent two years of thier lives building all this in order to obtain a propaganda oportunity. Is that about it?
can I ask you to provide any support you have for your story....secret (wink wink) contacts????

webfusion

15th March 2008, 03:31 PM

sigh...so now you are claiming that the wall only goes through scrubland and any d was just stuff palestinians hurridly threw up in the walls path for propaganda purposes?

Do you want to review and "clarify" this claim now or wait until later because I have some free time and am planning to pull it to pieces piece by piece.

I am starting out by claiming that you simply made this up. According to this story

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/west-bank-farms-fall-to-israeli-bulldozers/2008/02/22/1203467386462.html

"THE farmers of Beit Ula spent two years preparing their new groves of fruit, nut and olive trees, clearing rocks, building stone terraces and digging deep cisterns to catch the scarce rain.

The Israeli army destroyed it all in less than a day."

are you claiming that these farmers recieved notification of the wall over two years ago and spent two years of thier lives building all this in order to obtain a propaganda oportunity. Is that about it?
can I ask you to provide any support you have for your story....secret (wink wink) contacts????

The Age offered their version of the story written by Gideon Levy, of Ha'aretz.
I linked to his original story, just to clarify what we're discussing.

In the Age article itself:
The Civil Adminstration issued palestinians in and around Beit Ula confiscation notices back in 2006.
So, yes, I am claiming that the residents of Beit Ula knew years in advance that the IDF Security Barrier was going right through. It was no secret!

webfusion

15th March 2008, 03:50 PM

The Fool

15th March 2008, 03:52 PM

The Age offered their version of the story written by Gideon Levy, of Ha'aretz.
I linked to his original story, just to clarify what we're discussing.

In the Age article itself:
The Civil Adminstration notified them of the route of the Barrier back in 2006.
So, yes, I am claiming that the residents of Beit Ula knew years in advance that the IDF Security Barrier was going right through. It was no secret!
I am not denying that a route for the barrier was notified in 2006. What I am asking for is your evidence to support your claim that the recently bulldozed farms were on that route.

The EU funded the farms you recently bulldozed. According to the article you posted they cleared the work with Israel...

"The Europeans provided their aid via the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC). The donors contributed NIS 36,000 for each approximately 10-dunam (2.5-acre) plot. There were nine plots in all. Each farmer added a similar sum out of his own pocket: Sami added NIS 45,000, Mahmoud put in NIS 20,000 and Suleiman invested NIS 36,000. Each of them also included several of his siblings in the agricultural project.

Al-Adam: "We built terraces, dug wells, planted. Everything was fine. We didn't receive any warnings, apart from one farmer, but in the end everything worked out for him, too. The EU doesn't offer aid until it gets approval from the Israeli government stating that it's possible to work. As I understand it, they get a permit from the Civil Administration in Beit El, to make sure the land doesn't have a lien attached to it.

"We leveled the land, we built fences, we dug eight wells. Each collects about 80-100 cubic meters of water per year, depending on how much rainfall there is. And we had 3,400 olive, almond, peach, lemon, pomegranate, fig and almond trees. Everything was going great."

looks like its either you or the EU that is making stuff up?

So far the only evidence you provide contradicts clearly your claim that these farms were thrown up in front of a known route for the wall for propaganda purposes. What else do you have to support your story? Time for the secret sources yet?

Unless you are claiming that the EU is in on the propaganda conspiracy??

webfusion

15th March 2008, 04:03 PM

One more thing -- here is a photo showing some of the type of lands which the IDF Barrier passes through.

Scrub. Rocks. Dirt.

http://chau84.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/west_bank_fence_south_hebron.jpg

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:06 PM

Just so we understand perfectly:
http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/view.php?recordID=448

The areas in and around Beit Ula were known to be in the direct path of the Security Barrier that was being constructed in those sectors as far back as 2004. The extensive report linked above talks about IDF land-levelling operations all across the West Bank. Beit Ula is among the zones cited:
the Israeli military issued order number T/64/4 in July 2004, to confiscate not less than 500 dunums form the lands of Surif, Nuba and Beit Ula to make space for the Wall construction

T-F, you are welcome to provide whatever data you wish, to contrast against the evidence presented here showing without a doubt that the residents of Beit Ula were completely aware of the Barrier that was coming along right their way...

ok so far I have claimed you made your story up. I would like to add that you are being deliberately dishonest in your provision of evidence to support your made up claim.

you provided this statement in support of your claim..

the Israeli military issued order number T/64/4 in July 2004, to confiscate not less than 500 dunums form the lands of Surif, Nuba and Beit Ula to make space for the Wall construction

here is the actual passage from the site you linked to.

the Israeli military issued order number T/64/4 to confiscate not less than 500 dunums form the lands of Surif, Nuba and Beit Ula to make space for the Wall construction. In reality, the area of land targeted for confiscation or separation is much bigger than that mentioned in the foresaid order.

Any other reason to remove the end part of that statement other than for the purpose of deliberate misrepresentation?

WildCat

15th March 2008, 04:07 PM

I think this is approximately the 5th?? time you have been corrected on this, disappeared , then popped up to chant it again. The charter has been amended wildcat, everyone including your own government accepts this.
Really? Can you link to the amended charter? :rolleyes:

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:14 PM

webfusion

15th March 2008, 04:16 PM

T-F: The EU funded the farms you recently bulldozed. According to the article you posted they cleared the work with Israel...

I don't know if the E-U funded project managers did anything of the sort.

The article only quotes the injured party:
"As I understand it, they get a permit from the Civil Administration in Beit El, to make sure the land doesn't have a lien attached to it."

They may have, they may not have gone through any of that bureaucracy. All we really know is the IDF had legal demolition orders; they posted those orders on the land itself; and the orders were carried out.

As far as I know, the IDF Barrier is indeed going to be erected across that specific stretch of land. That's why the IDF spends millions of $$$ to send in construction equipment and military forces! They are there to make it happen.
If you are now asking me to provide detailed satellite-imaging maps showing that the Barrier is being constructed on that exact stretch of land of 100 dunams --- sorry, T-F, I'm not going to jump through hoops for your silly demands.

The barrier was headed into that sector and everyone from miles around knew it, as far back as 2004. Let's leave it at that.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 04:28 PM

More scrub-lands being levelled for the Security Barrier:
http://www.osa.ceu.hu/galeria/the_divide/cpt27files/12.jpg

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:30 PM

Really? Can you link to the amended charter? :rolleyes:
Lol...can you link to the amended US constitution? You know the one I'm talking about...the one you rubbed out and rewrote when it was ammended.

Learn about how these sort of documents work wildcat. But you have had this explained to you before. Memory issues?

The Israeli government accepted it, the US government accepted it.....some right wing Isrealis and thier cheersquad don't accept it because the words make such great chants in post after post afetr post. Yet they go so strangely silent at the mention of the likud charter...the likud what???

anyway, I'm not going over this a sixth time. I recommend you use the forum search feature on the words wildcat amended charter....it picks up all the other times you and othersn have tried the same chant.

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:31 PM

More scrub-lands being levelled for the Security Barrier:
http://www.osa.ceu.hu/galeria/the_divide/cpt27files/12.jpg

not going to address the issue any more?.....reduced to spamming the thread with pictures?

WildCat

15th March 2008, 04:32 PM

Lol...can you link to the amended US constitution? You know the one I'm talking about...the one you rubbed out and rewrote when it was ammended.
I sure can, every single amendment. For example, here's the 18th Amendment: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxviii.html

Which was repealed by this one, the 21st Amendment: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxi.html

Your turn! The amended Palestinian charter is...?

Learn about how these sort of documents work wildcat. But you have had this explained to you before. Memory issues?
I do know, apparently more than you. Here is the Palestinian Charter, in its entirety: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/plocov.htm

Where is Article 2 repealed?

Where are the amendments?

When did the National Congress of the PLO convene for a special session, and amend the Charter to recognize Israel, per Article 33 of the Charter?

Come on The Fool, you said it was amended so these questions should be easily answered, right?

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:37 PM

T-F:

Let's leave it at that.
well of course you want to leave it at that....and I am happy to leave it at that too. You can't support your claim with any evidence.

The Fool

15th March 2008, 04:40 PM

I sure can, every single amendment. For example, here's the 18th Amendment: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxviii.html

Which was repealed by this one, the 21st Amendment: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxi.html

Your turn! The amended Palestinian charter is...?

I do know, apparently more than you. Here is the Palestinian Charter, in its entirety: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/plocov.htm

Where is Article 2 repealed?

Where are the amendments?

When did the National Congress of the PLO convene for a special session, and amend the Charter to recognize Israel, per Article 33 of the Charter?

Come on The Fool, you said it was amended so these questions should be easily answered, right?

Dammit wildcat......I can still see and read the 18th ammendment.....it must never have been repealed. Get out the scissors and white out....quick!!!

and besides....you can probably let it drop as web doesn't need the diversion anymore he has given up.

WildCat

15th March 2008, 04:40 PM

You can't support your claim with any evidence.
:id:

WildCat

15th March 2008, 04:42 PM

Dammit wildcat......I can still see and read the 18th ammendment.....it must never have been repealed. Get out the scissors and white out....quick!!!
I could have sworn I linked to the 21st Amendment. :rolleyes:

Where is that amended PLO charter?

When was the special session held?

The Fool

15th March 2008, 05:03 PM

I could have sworn I linked to the 21st Amendment. :rolleyes:

no you linked to the 18th....then linked to the 21st which repealed it....but dammit wildcat I can still see the 18th in there!!! why has it not been removed, obviously it is still in force eh?

as I have said, learn how this sort of documentation is used and use the search facility to refresh your memory....no more on this diversion for today.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 05:20 PM

I'm not spamming the thread with photos.

I am proving that the IDF Security Barrier goes across scrub lands.
T-F specifically doubted that it does.
How about now? Do you still doubt it, The FOol?

Now this:
What I am asking for is your evidence to support your claim that the recently bulldozed farms were on that route.

You are really demanding of me to prove that the lands which were bulldozed around Beit Ula actually lie in the path of the IDF Security Barrier? OK, sparky, now you are really going into woo-woo-land.
The IDF has a job to accomplish. They are building a very complex and extensive project. They are confiscating lands to accomplish the task. Nobody doubts that this is what's happening! Yes, for sure the IDF Engineers are bulldozing right through lands surrounding Beit Ula, in order to build the Barrier. DUH!
Evidence abounds. It's no secret.
But you wanna see satellite imaging.

Check. Gotcha.

http://home.comcast.net/~advent99/wall01.jpg

The Fool

15th March 2008, 05:48 PM

I'm not spamming the thread with photos.

I am proving that the IDF Security Barrier goes across scrub lands.
T-F specifically doubted that it does.
How about now? Do you still doubt it, The FOol?

Never have doubted that it goes through scrubland. Don't care if it goes through disneyland..good luck with providing evidence to support that it goes through scrubland because thats not in question. What is in question is your claim that those particular palestinians knew the wall was coming through a particular piece of land and deliberately spent two years of thier lives building and planting there in order to get a propaganda article in a newspaoper when two years of thier work was bulldozed. A very specific claim....that you cannot support with any evidence.

You are really demanding of me to prove that the lands which were bulldozed around Beit Ula actually lie in the path of the IDF Security Barrier? OK, sparky, now you are really going into woo-woo-land.

no sparky...just asking for evidence to support your specific claim. As I said before....do you want to rewrite the claim yet? Its already starting to morph a bit..

so tantrums assde...still nothing to support your specific claim that these farmers deliberately built infrastructure on a known path of the wall for propaganda purposes....so far you have provided zip......what you have provided does not support your claim even after you have dishonestly edited it.

ETA: the simple way to avoid being asked for evidence is to differentiate between what you claim as unsupported opinion and what you claim as fact. no too much to ask imho

WildCat

15th March 2008, 06:44 PM

no you linked to the 18th....then linked to the 21st which repealed it....but dammit wildcat I can still see the 18th in there!!! why has it not been removed, obviously it is still in force eh?

as I have said, learn how this sort of documentation is used and use the search facility to refresh your memory....no more on this diversion for today.
My oh my, you've really entered the twilight zone now, haven't you?

Fact: The 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment. The 18th is no longer the law of the land.

Fact: Article 2 of the PLO charter was never repealed, never superceded. The special session required under Article 33 to amend the Charter was never convened, the vote never taken. Article 2 is still in full force among the PLO.

Why you continue to embarrass yourself on a public forum for all to see I have no idea.

The Fool

15th March 2008, 07:23 PM

My oh my, you've really entered the twilight zone now, haven't you?

Fact: The 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment. The 18th is no longer the law of the land.

Fact: Article 2 of the PLO charter was never repealed, never superceded. The special session required under Article 33 to amend the Charter was never convened, the vote never taken. Article 2 is still in full force among the PLO.

Why you continue to embarrass yourself on a public forum for all to see I have no idea.
sigh...ok, for the sixth? time..

article 33..

Article 33: This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose.

On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council, convening in Gaza, voted 504 to 54, with 14 abstentions

On December 14, 1998, the Palestinian National Council, in accordance with the Wye Memorandum, convened in Gaza in the presence of U.S. President Clinton and voted to reaffirm this decision.

Its amended wildcat....its amended, the Israelis accept it, the US government accepts it. The only ones who don't are those who love to chant the words that have been amended in threads bashing palestinians.

keep at it son, if you are to be a pest at least be a persistant one. If you think you have found a loophole then please tell the US government they don't know what they are talking about. Tell Albrecht she is not up to your standard in these matters...tell Rabin he got it wrong and you know better...

Anyway, as I said, enough of 6 times rehashed diversions, maybe you can help web find some evidence to support his theories that the Palestinians, in league with the EU, are throwing up farms in the path of the wall for propaganda purposes.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 08:15 PM

T-F,, post #18:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3529642&postcount=18
"sigh...so now you are claiming that the wall only goes through scrubland..."

I'm claiming that the Security Barrier is being constructed across difficult and hilly terrain, in the region of Beit Ula, (and in many other areas) which is essentially scrub-land. I never said ONLY through scrub lands --- you are the one who imposed that restriction.

And here's the rest of your sentence:
"and (this farm project) was just stuff palestinians hurridly threw up in the walls path for propaganda purposes?"

Hurridly? I never said that either --- what I said was the residents of this village had plenty of advance notice about the route of the IDF barrier. They had received confiscation orders years before. They knew perfectly well what was happening out in the hills surrounding their town. They knew exactly the planned route. What were their motives in developing lands they understood were to be bulldozed for the fence? I say they were seeking to show the world exactly what they did show. That IDF bulldozers are tearing up "their farms"

http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/wp-content/flag1.jpg

and

http://www.imemc.org/attachments/mar2007/um_salamunah.jpg
(PHOTO LINKS)

We do have evidence of all kinds of efforts being made to get the Barrier construction stopped --- palestinians are making headlines regarding the Barrier, in whatever ways they can.
http://www.ainfos.ca/05/oct/ainfos00267.html

The Fool

15th March 2008, 08:47 PM

Hurridly? I never said that either --- what I said was the residents of this village had plenty of advance notice about the route of the IDF barrier. They had received confiscation orders years before. They knew perfectly well what was happening out in the hills surrounding their town. They knew exactly the planned route. What were their motives in developing lands they understood were to be bulldozed for the fence?

This is what you are not able to establish. That these farms were on land that was subject to a long term notice. That they knew long in advance exactly the planned route. The evidence you posted yourself suggests otherwise. The EU funded these farms, are we to believe that they funded them knowing they were to be bulldozed? You have provided no evidence beyond the general fact that some land in this area was to be cleared for the wall.

I say they were seeking to show the world exactly what they did show. That IDF bulldozers are tearing up "their farms"

The history of this village seems to suggest they are just farmers trying to farm.. If they are some part of a political conspiracy that is for you to establish.

I guess you just can't figure out why doing this sort of stuff doesn't make you popular eh?

webfusion

15th March 2008, 08:53 PM

...Tell Albrecht she is not up to your standard in these matters...tell Rabin he got it wrong and you know better...

Rabin is dead.
Arafat is dead.

In January 1999, Faisal Hamdi Husseini, head of the legal committee (appointed by the PNC in their Dec 1998 Photo-Op Session) stated "There has been a decision to change the Covenant. The change has not yet been carried out."

That holds true to this very day.

(In Gaza, 504 hands were raised, affirming the text of a statement saying that a Letter which was exchanged between Arafat and Bill Clinton, would form the basis for some FUTURE revision. No actual Amendments were passed; nothing was legally changed regarding the PLO Covenant, and that infamous document, exactly as written, is still in full effect).

maybe you can help web find some evidence to support his theories that the Palestinians, in league with the EU, are throwing up farms in the path of the wall for propaganda purposes.

The EU has openly stated they oppose that Barrier. What is so hard about believing they would provide a few measly thousands of Euros to some poor palestinian farmers in order to create "farms" where none previously existed, directly in the path of the Barrier? Seems perfectly logical to me.

webfusion

15th March 2008, 09:22 PM

By the way, it might be useful to examine the activities of the aforementioned PARC --- and to make some sort of reference to the types of anti-Israel propoganda campaigns they support and what their agenda is.

http://ngo-monitor.org/article.php?id=139
PARC supports boycott and divestment campaigns - it was signatory for the AUT's academic boycott of Israeli universities and also endorsed the ECCP "Call for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel." PARC also engages in political lobbying activities which have included political appeals to European governments regarding the status of Jerusalem. PARC actively campaigns to demonize Israel.

The EU funded these farms, are we to believe that they funded them knowing they were to be bulldozed? You have provided no evidence beyond the general fact that some land in this area was to be cleared for the wall.

Again, T-F, these are the types of statements that make me scratch my head and wonder about you. What kind of evidence are you seeking here? A public STATEMENT by the spokesperson of the European Union that they transferred over to the PARC some funds just to be used exclusively for the creation of a small farm in the path of the IDF Barrier? Is that what you're seeking? Please, tell me that's not what you are trying to establish here!

ETA --- I want to thank T-F for asking me to investigate the Palestine Agricultural Relief Committee in greater detail. I had no idea how deep in the muck of Anti-Israel propoganda they actually are!
http://www.pengon.org/wall/fact.html
Not only are they pre-disposed to create a little media show (like the one referred-to in this thread, in the hills outside Beit Ula), but they have a widespread interest in much more diabolical programs which seek to embarrass and discredit Israel, on a grand scale across Europe.

Conspiracy? Not a secret one! It's right there in the open.

The Fool

16th March 2008, 03:44 AM

The EU has openly stated they oppose that Barrier. What is so hard about believing they would provide a few measly thousands of Euros to some poor palestinian farmers in order to create "farms" where none previously existed, directly in the path of the Barrier? Seems perfectly logical to me.
Now web, I have a confession to make. I don't participate in debate with conspiracy theories until the conspiracy theorist comes up with more evidence that the statement "Seems perfectly logical to me". Maybe you want to reconsider your conspuiracy theory or should we ask that this thread be moved to the section that deals with conspiracy theories?

What part of the EU decides that this is thier policy? I can't find it in any of thier published stuff, are you proposing they have some form of secret commitee that can decide these things? How are the directives sent to the field officers without being known about? If you can find me even one scrap of evidence that any of this has or is happening I'm happy to discuss it. Otherwise it goes in with all the other "seems logical to me" stuff.

Just about everyone is out to get you eh? UN, now the EU.... who is next? The boy scouts of America?

webfusion

16th March 2008, 05:13 AM

What part of the EU decides that this (opposition to the Israeli Security Barrier) is their policy?

Perhaps, the part that decided to cast votes against it in the United Nations?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3914529.stm

I am really not going to pursue this with you further, TF --- we can see what PARC openly represents, and we understand that they are active in generating all kinds of anti-Israel publicity and organizing anti-Israel programs. By virtue of their membership in PENGON, they extend this effort into many spheres, using that EU sponsorship as a cover.

PARC is a co-organizer of the "Apartheid Wall Campaign" and the PARC works together with the European Coordinating Committee on Palestine (ECCP) in working to obtain International sanctions against the Israeli "occupation". Furthermore, PARC is an instrumental member of PNGO, an umbrella body of highly politicized Palestinian NGOs, that was involved in producing many of the preparatory documents for the noriously anti-Israel inflammatory and one-sided Durban conferences. (http://www.un.org/WCAR/)

The Boy Scouts of America, AFAIK, does not participate in, nor organize, any anti-Israel campaigns.
Unless you know something we don't.

webfusion

16th March 2008, 05:19 AM

TF: Should we ask that this thread be moved to the section that deals with conspiracy theories?

You can do whatever you wish; the address for contacting the JREF moderators is:
http://forums.randi.org/sendmessage.php

webfusion

16th March 2008, 06:00 AM

My claim:
Their farm wasn't destroyed -- these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction, and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed" and lo and behold, a_u_p, they succeeded, as you're here trying to show how their farm was destroyed, as if it somehow is a huge '****** deal.

1. "Their" farm wasn't destroyed. (key word: "their")

True -- this was an otherwise vacant and undeveloped area of land. In contravention of the legal process, they just went out and created "their" farm. They had no permits, no authorization, and in fact:

In the case of Beit Ula, the Civil Administration says these farmers were officially informed that they were building illegally in 2006 and given the statutory 45 days to appeal before the demolition notice became final.

AND
2. these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction

Just so we are clear, and there is not any misunderstanding here:

All the residents of Beit Ula, including the al-Adam family, as far back as 2004, knew that the IDF Barrier was being erected, and that some of their lands were in its route.

International Solidarity Movement
PR release:

December 3, 2004
For two days, the Palestinian village Beit Ula [near Hebron, West Bank] held demonstrations against the construction of the Barrier that is taking much of their land. The annexation barrier (sic) being built by Israel in the West Bank threatens to annex 1000 dunums of Beit Ula. (http://www.ccmep.org/2004_articles/palestine/120304_nonviolent_demonstrations_at_bei.htm)

Some time after that point, the PARC stepped in, and funded the al-Adam family to go out to a barren, scrub-hill, and invest time, energy and material, knowing perfectly well that it lay in the direct path of the oncoming "annexation barrier" ------

LASTLY:
3. and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed"

Now, I cannot offer Palestinian documentation, and internal memoranda which "proves" that PARC convinced the al-Adam family and their neighbors to undertake this project at the outset just for propoganda purposes.

PARC, by its nature, would seem to be perfectly capable of doing exactly that, and worse.
I think the entire story of the PARC and how they manipulated the al-Adam family should be investigated and the results published.
They won't be investigated. Trust me.

If my lack of having access to this particular internal Palestinian Agriculture Relief Committee documentation negates my entire claim, then so be it.

WildCat

16th March 2008, 07:12 AM

sigh...ok, for the sixth? time..

article 33..

Article 33: This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose.

On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council, convening in Gaza, voted 504 to 54, with 14 abstentions

On December 14, 1998, the Palestinian National Council, in accordance with the Wye Memorandum, convened in Gaza in the presence of U.S. President Clinton and voted to reaffirm this decision.
Let's see the text (http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/22573.htm) of that:

On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council, convening in Gaza, voted 504 to 54, with 14 abstentions, as follows:

"The Palestinian National Charter is hereby amended by canceling the articles that are contrary to the letters exchanged between the P.L.O. and the Government of Israel 9-10 September 1993.
Assigns its legal committee with the task of redrafting the Palestinian National Charter in order to present it to the first session of the Palestinian central council." (24/04/96)

Which articles, exactly, were cancelled?

It's been nearly 12 years, when is that legal committee going to complete that task and present it to the Palestinian Central Council?

Fact is, they haven't done squat. All they did was promise to do something, and 12 years later they still haven't done so. There is no revised Charter, there is no clarification as to which articles will be cancelled. The original Charter remains intact. The whole damn thing was nothing but a con, and apparently you fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

The Fool

16th March 2008, 07:07 PM

Let's see the text (http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/22573.htm) of that:

Which articles, exactly, were cancelled?

It's been nearly 12 years, when is that legal committee going to complete that task and present it to the Palestinian Central Council?

Fact is, they haven't done squat. All they did was promise to do something, and 12 years later they still haven't done so. There is no revised Charter, there is no clarification as to which articles will be cancelled. The original Charter remains intact. The whole damn thing was nothing but a con, and apparently you fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
jeepers wildcat...this con also got Clinton and Albrecht and heaps of other people...well, maybe you should tell the US government they have been conned, I'm sure they will be glad to hear from you.

In the end dude I can't do anything about how sad you feel that the original document has not been redrafted and the amendments are floating around on other bits of paper....just like yours..... but I don't cry about it or try to tell you that you should redraft your constitution to include the ammendments to eliminate any disagreement on what parts of it mean...like the right to bear arms etc..... After all, you have had a lot longer than 12 years you lazy person....

The Fool

16th March 2008, 07:17 PM

The Boy Scouts of America, AFAIK, does not participate in, nor organize, any anti-Israel campaigns.
Unless you know something we don't.

How can you be really sure web

After all ...The boy scouts of America and the EU both have had the same amount of evidence presented in this thread tying them in to a conspiracy with Palestinian farmers...

seems logical to me.....

WildCat

16th March 2008, 07:24 PM

jeepers wildcat...this con also got Clinton and Albrecht and heaps of other people...well, maybe you should tell the US government they have been conned, I'm sure they will be glad to hear from you.
Cons work because they tell you what you want to hear. Clinton and Albright wanted badly to have as their legacy peace in the Middle East. Didn't quite happen.

In the end dude I can't do anything about how sad you feel that the original document has not been redrafted and the amendments are floating around on other bits of paper....just like yours..... but I don't cry about it or try to tell you that you should redraft your constitution to include the ammendments to eliminate any disagreement on what parts of it mean...like the right to bear arms etc..... After all, you have had a lot longer than 12 years you lazy person....
How strange!

Let me know when the Abbas et al finally get around to actually amending their Charter. I can't imagine why they haven't done so yet, unless they have since backed away from the agreement, of course... But hey, the late Yasser Arafat promised he would, and his word is good enough for you!

The Fool

16th March 2008, 07:51 PM

My claim:

1. "Their" farm wasn't destroyed. (key word: "their")

True -- this was an otherwise vacant and undeveloped area of land. In contravention of the legal process, they just went out and created "their" farm. They had no permits, no authorization, and in fact:

so the bulldozers demolished all the bits of "vacant"? the next bit.....about permits....you have simply restated this claim but still nothing to back it up. It is my understanding that the EU clears thier funding projects with the Israelis, this would tend to indicate that your restated claim is a load of wollop.

In the case of Beit Ula, the Civil Administration says these farmers were officially informed that they were building illegally in 2006 and given the statutory 45 days to appeal before the demolition notice became final.

can you tell me where you get this from? I don't doubt it may be true as the "civil administration" seems to say this about everything that disappears under a bulldozer.

AND
2. these palestinians saw the Security Barrier was being built, they decided to develop a few dunams of scrub lands that were right in the path of the construction

restated claim yet again....how did you determine this....mind reading? Maybe you could provide some evidence that only land in the direct path of the wall was bulldozed? The article tends to indicate otherwise.

Just so we are clear, and there is not any misunderstanding here:

All the residents of Beit Ula, including the al-Adam family, as far back as 2004, knew that the IDF Barrier was being erected, and that some of their lands were in its route.

don't doubt that...but its not the same as being notified that a specific piece of land you were improving as part of an EU finded program would be bulldozed in two years time...thats your claim, you need to pony up some evidence.

International Solidarity Movement
PR release:

December 3, 2004
For two days, the Palestinian village Beit Ula [near Hebron, West Bank] held demonstrations against the construction of the Barrier that is taking much of their land. The annexation barrier (sic) being built by Israel in the West Bank threatens to annex 1000 dunums of Beit Ula. (http://www.ccmep.org/2004_articles/palestine/120304_nonviolent_demonstrations_at_bei.htm)

umm, how did the ISM get in here? whats the relevance of this?

Some time after that point, the PARC stepped in, and funded the al-Adam family to go out to a barren, scrub-hill, and invest time, energy and material, knowing perfectly well that it lay in the direct path of the oncoming "annexation barrier" ------

claim restated yet again....still no evidence

LASTLY:
3. and figured they could make some media headlines about how their "farm was destroyed"

Now, I cannot offer Palestinian documentation, and internal memoranda which "proves" that PARC convinced the al-Adam family and their neighbors to undertake this project at the outset just for propoganda purposes.

PARC, by its nature, would seem to be perfectly capable of doing exactly that, and worse.
I think the entire story of the PARC and how they manipulated the al-Adam family should be investigated and the results published.
They won't be investigated. Trust me.

If my lack of having access to this particular internal Palestinian Agriculture Relief Committee documentation negates my entire claim, then so be it.
well certainly no evidence of conspiracy is not good for a conspiracy theory....

but thats not fair....it isn't zero evidence as its gone from consisting of your statement "seems logical to me" to now also including your statement "would seem to be perfectly capable of doing just that".....certainly damning evidence if ever I have seen it. I'd be happy to hang them on that...

a_unique_person

17th March 2008, 03:14 AM

webfusion

17th March 2008, 04:33 AM

Hmmmmmmm...

Maybe you could provide some evidence that only land in the direct path of the wall was bulldozed?

http://home.comcast.net/~advent99/wall01.jpg

Blue arrows -- IDF Security barrier (follows topography)
Red arrows -- Small palestinian farms: Not in path of wall, not bulldozed.

(NOTE: This is an actual satellite photo of the area near Beit Ula, near Hebron)

a_unique_person

17th March 2008, 04:36 AM

The Fool

17th March 2008, 07:04 PM

Hmmmmmmm...

http://home.comcast.net/~advent99/wall01.jpg

Blue arrows -- IDF Security barrier (follows topography)
Red arrows -- Small palestinian farms: Not in path of wall, not bulldozed.

(NOTE: This is an actual satellite photo of the area near Beit Ula, near Hebron)

Can you provide any evidence that this photo is what you claim it is? Are you saying that the farm we are descussing is now under the section of wall in that photograph? The link appears to be to a general picture archive, couldn't find a caption for the picture. I'm not sure how this adds anything to your claim except that it is a picture of a section of the wall... I already know what it looks like.

webfusion

17th March 2008, 07:30 PM

The Fool

17th March 2008, 10:47 PM

From the PARC website itself:

We should be alert not to separate between the developmental projects aiming at the alleviation of the affected population gatherings and the struggle to dismantle the wall. The domestic and external governmental and non-governmental institutions must connect closely the relief projects to the political action.

What that means, in simple English, is the PARC has decided to create developmental projects (farms) right in the path of the wall. That is their clearly-stated policy.

does "in simple english" mean "what I say it means"?

anyway....wtf has parc got to do with this discussion? If you are claiming that parc was behind this project then show us some evidence. The only mentions in the stuff posted so far talks of EU project funding....

still looking for something to back up your picture?

webfusion

18th March 2008, 06:18 AM

You are really, truly asking for evidence to prove that PARC has something to do with this?
You're kidding, right?

SEE: My Post # 17, (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3529569&postcount=17) where I link to the original article from Ha'aretz (byline Gideon Levy) and this information is provided:
The Europeans provided their aid via the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC).

and further along within the same article:
A large sign at the entrance to the lands says: "The European Union, The Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees Project 2005/106-391."

The Age, which you relied upon for your information, T-F, has an interesting sentence:
"A statement from the Civil Administration maintained, contrary to the EU's statement, that the Europeans had not funded the project."
(The IDF Civil Administration apparently considered that PARC was a local Palestinian-funded and staffed organization. If the IDF had done some checking, they would have realized that PARC is indeed EU-backed).

For the record.

I am saying this:

The PARC is behind the al-Adam fiasco.
The PARC declares openly that they are interested in "the struggle to dismantle the wall"
The PARC policy is to combine their development projects with this struggle.
The PARC intended to go out into the fields and do what they could to "connect closely the relief projects to the political action."

In 2005, PARC realized the opportunity existed in the outskirts of Beit Ula to embarrass the IDF. (Remember, the IDF had already notified everyone in Beit Ula of the oncoming Barrier) PARC paid for the villagers to go out and construct on lands that were known to be in the path of the IDF Barrier.

My photo shows that the IDF bulldozes specific lands in the direct path of the Barrier. Small plots of farmland that are off to the side, would naturally be left untouched. That's what my photo illustrates.

webfusion

18th March 2008, 06:27 AM

Let's quickly review:

T-F asks me:
are you claiming that these farmers recieved notification of the wall over two years ago and spent two years of thier lives building all this in order to obtain a propaganda oportunity. Is that about it?

Yep. That's it.

1. It has been proven by me, providing several sources (including the ISM) that the entire village of Beit Ula, every man, woman and child, was aware of the oncoming IDF barrier years ago, and the IDF had given written notices that the outlying lands of Beit Ula were going to be confiscated.

2. PARC says in their own website that they are "not (going) to separate between the developmental projects aiming at the alleviation of the affected population gatherings and the struggle to dismantle the wall." and they also state:
"(we) must connect closely the relief projects to the political action."

You call it a conspiracy, T-F.
I call it a disgrace that they convinced people to waste their time and energy, on a project that was destined to be bulldozed, all to obtain some "political action" points.

a_unique_person

18th March 2008, 09:56 PM

Meanwhile, more arab animals attack and kill innocent human beings.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/tibetan-rioters-killed-13-civilians/2008/03/17/1205602256074.html

Why don't they settle their problems peacefully, like civilised human beings?

Please stay on the topic of this thread. If you wish to start a thread about the Tibet riots, I will be glad to split this off for you.

My apologies. My point was that we have in Tibet:-

An occupation by colonists.
The occupied people attacking and killing civilian colonists.
Not an Arab or Muslim or Jew in sight.

The Fool

19th March 2008, 04:54 AM

You are really, truly asking for evidence to prove that PARC has something to do with this?
You're kidding, right?

No I'm not kidding. Option 1 PARC is organising the building of farms to feed palestinians. Option 2 PARC is engaged in a conspiracy with the EU to build farms in the path of the wall knowing it will be bulldozed before they start. The EU also is in on this or maybe they simply don't bother to read the notices you claim were issued.
I know which one sounds more plausable.....anyway, anything is possible but you have to support the claim. so far you are content to establish that parc helps builds farms (not contested) The EU fund some of them (not contested) The Israelis deny everything (not contested) Apparently you also believe the IDF was not aware that parc had eu finding (don't they have internet access?)

In 2005, PARC realized the opportunity existed in the outskirts of Beit Ula to embarrass the IDF. (Remember, the IDF had already notified everyone in Beit Ula of the oncoming Barrier) PARC paid for the villagers to go out and construct on lands that were known to be in the path of the IDF Barrier.

claim restated again...

My photo shows that the IDF bulldozes specific lands in the direct path of the Barrier. Small plots of farmland that are off to the side, would naturally be left untouched. That's what my photo illustrates.

yet you claimed it showed "This is an actual satellite photo of the area near Beit Ula, near Hebron" but thats not true is it web....you made that bit up. Why should I continue if you are creating your own evidence.

webfusion

19th March 2008, 06:02 AM

T-F:"This is an actual satellite photo of the area near Beit Ula, near Hebron"

It certainly is.
I know how to use Google Maps. I know where Beit Ula is located.

As for the claim --- You didn't even know PARC was involved and you wrote that silly "WTF" posting yesterday, but now, you're going ahead and saying, "OK, I see that PARC was involved" -- but you reject the idea that they are "connecting closely the relief projects to the political action" and "not separating between the developmental projects aiming at the alleviation of the affected population gatherings and the struggle to dismantle the wall."

The Fool, you can go ahead with whatever you want to believe.
I am presenting facts, and one of the facts is the PARC is trying to STOP THE CONSTRUCTION of the IDF Barrier, and they are themselves admitting to using their agricultural development projects in that context.

This is not brain surgery.

The Fool

19th March 2008, 06:46 AM

T-F:

It certainly is.
I know how to use Google Maps. I know where Beit Ula is located.

I accept that you know how to use google maps....so are you now claiming that you created that image and posted it to that image dump and linked it here? If thats the case, and you do know how to use google maps you can give is the link direct to that location on goggle maps.

As for the claim --- You didn't even know PARC was involved and you wrote that silly "WTF" posting yesterday, but now, you're going ahead and saying, "OK, I see that PARC was involved" --

I know PARC helps build agriculture infrastructure. Your claim is that they are involved in a conspiracy. What proportion of PARC project farms are bulldozed to make way for the wall?

but you reject the idea that they are "connecting closely the relief projects to the political action" and "not separating between the developmental projects aiming at the alleviation of the affected population gatherings and the struggle to dismantle the wall."

I don't reject anything...It is you that claim those words are evidence that they conspired with farmers and the eu in building this specific farm in full knowledge that it would be bulldozed. I'll accept it if you prove it, I'll consider it if you present evidence.

The Fool, you can go ahead with whatever you want to believe.
I am presenting facts, and one of the facts is the PARC is trying to STOP THE CONSTRUCTION of the IDF Barrier, and they are themselves admitting to using their agricultural development projects in that context.

This is not brain surgery.

And The IDF bulldozes farms....Thats a fact. But I don't present it as evidence that supports a claim that they needlessly bulldoze farms in order to demoralize the civilian population.
The IDF sets up checkpoints...thats a fact. But I don't try to present it as evidence that they set up needless checkpoints to strangle commerce in order to demoralize the civilian population.

so far you have presented opinion "backed up" by self evident and irrelevant facts.

webfusion

19th March 2008, 11:01 AM

Onwards:
I know PARC helps build agriculture infrastructure. Your claim is that they are involved in a conspiracy. What proportion of PARC project farms are bulldozed to make way for the wall?

That's a legitimate question. Let me see how much available information can be obtained in searching online. I doubt I'll be able to get much data. It's not usually easy to get palestinian NGO's to reveal the extent of their activities and "political action" which is designed to focus on their self-proclaimed "struggle against the annexation wall" --- but I'll certainly give it a shot. I'll get back to you.

If thats the case, and you do know how to use google maps you can give is the link direct to that location on google maps.

I have no idea how to directly link to a geographic area as viewed within the googlemap.
If you would describe how to do that, I can provide the URL. In the meantime, I got that image from a screen capture and posted it (with the arrows drawn in myself).
I'm not sure why you're pursuing this line of "evidence" since it is already abundantly clear that the IDF bulldozes land which lies directly in the path of the wall, and not land which is outside the construction zone. In any case, I am not claiming that this photo shows the EXACT plots of land referred-to within the article (the al-Adam 'farm' --- Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees Project 2005/106-391). I'm merely saying that this section of the wall is typical of the work done by the IDF, and it shows that the IDF leaves palestinian lands untouched if they aren't in the path of the Barrier/Fence.

so far you have presented opinion "backed up" by self evident and irrelevant facts.

So far, I have presented a fairly intriguing case, and even revealed to you various facts which you doubted were true (such as the involvement of PARC itself!).

Now, if you'll kindly relax, and wait a bit, perhaps I may be able to break into the PARC archives and obtain some documentation in order to show here on JREF the extent of their "political action" as they attempt to Stop the Barrier.

Thank you for your continued interest.

E.J.Armstrong

2nd April 2008, 07:31 AM

ok so far I have claimed you made your story up. I would like to add that you are being deliberately dishonest in your provision of evidence to support your made up claim.

you provided this statement in support of your claim..

the Israeli military issued order number T/64/4 in July 2004, to confiscate not less than 500 dunums form the lands of Surif, Nuba and Beit Ula to make space for the Wall construction

here is the actual passage from the site you linked to.

the Israeli military issued order number T/64/4 to confiscate not less than 500 dunums form the lands of Surif, Nuba and Beit Ula to make space for the Wall construction. In reality, the area of land targeted for confiscation or separation is much bigger than that mentioned in the foresaid order.

Any other reason to remove the end part of that statement other than for the purpose of deliberate misrepresentation?

Looks like deliberate misrepresentation to me. Same old, same old.

webfusion

6th April 2009, 07:57 PM

I was recently going over some old threads, at Darat's suggestion, and came across this one.

For some reason, the PARC (Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees) website is down.
http://www.parc.ps/first.html

Ironically, it says "Under Construction"
I found this humorous.

Tin Foil Timothy

6th April 2009, 11:35 PM

The Fool 1
Israel Atrocity/Apartheid/Persecution Deniers 0

Job done!

webfusion

7th April 2009, 05:30 AM

If setting up a security barrier is wrong, then we're wrong.

But the barrier stays up and does its job, so we're OK with that.

Better to be seen as wrong in the eyes of some, than to be seen as right and dead.

Thunder

7th April 2009, 05:48 AM

It is clear that the some Israelis and Neo-Zionists fear peace above anything else.

I think its due to centuries of Jewish persecution and fear. Some of us are so used to the idea of feeling persecuted that we only feel comfortable when we feel under threat. Being at peace is scarier then being at war.

webfusion

7th April 2009, 06:43 AM

It is clear that the some Israelis and Neo-Zionists fear peace above anything else.

Depends on what your definition of "peace" is --- Kumbayaa chants and namby-pamby "International Guarantees" aren't what the majority of Israelis have in mind.
Been there, done that. No thanks.

I think its due to centuries of Jewish persecution and fear.

Nope. You sure have that wrong.
It's the past years of rockets and suicide attacks and other Islamic terror all around that makes us nervous about establishing a base for al-Qaeda right on our doorstep.

This is the kind of thing that we want to avoid:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-05-voa11.cfm
There is no let up in militant violence in Pakistan, where a suicide bomber struck a Shiite Muslim mosque in a central town, killing at least 24 worshipers and wounding dozens others.

Some of us are so used to the idea of feeling persecuted that we only feel comfortable when we feel under threat.

It's not paranoia when there are actually people seeking to kill you.

Being at peace is scarier then being at war.

Have you ever been to war?
I have.
Let me tell you, I sure disagree with THAT statement, friend.

bigjelmapro

7th April 2009, 10:19 AM

The armchair warriors strike again.

Being at peace is scarier then being at war.

This is by far, the most ludicrous statement you've made thus far. You ever been in a war? Under fire? And no, relatives involved in a war doesn't quite cut it.

And the Fool:
Keyword:

the area of land targeted for confiscation or separation is much bigger
Does not imply implemented. Or do you have a rebuttal that states the actual implemented amount?

Do you have evidence that demolitions is for demoralizing the Palestinians? Or is this once again used for an emotive effect? I would go with the latter.

a_unique_person

7th April 2009, 03:17 PM

Mr Ettinger refers to the scholarly treatise of the late Professor Majid Khadduri, from Johns Hopkins University, in MD.
Khadduri’s book, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, clarifies the meaning of the amazing 1,400-year sequence – since the 7th century - of wars, terrorism, and the violent violation of agreements, alliances, and conventions between Arabs, between Muslims, and between Arabs and non-Arabs.

Here we are in 2008, and it sure seems that we're just witnessing more of the same.

Have you ever looked at the history of wars, terrorism and violent violation of agreements, alliances and conventions between Xians in Europe, and between Europeans and no Europeans?

The Fool

7th April 2009, 05:10 PM

Does not imply implemented. Or do you have a rebuttal that states the actual implemented amount?

jeebus....you are refering to a post in a thread that is over a year old...

Web.....is bumping old stale Israel threads part of the plan to reduce the number of Israel threads...?
good grief.....

webfusion

7th April 2009, 07:12 PM

Have you ever looked at the history of wars, terrorism and violent violation of agreements, alliances and conventions between Xians in Europe, and between Europeans and non-Europeans?

Earlier in this thread you were asked by the Moderators to refrain from derailing:
"Please stay on the topic of this thread. If you wish to start a thread about the Tibet riots, I will be glad to split this off for you."

The OP refers to the situation of Israel vis-a-vis the Arab world surrounding it.
Israel is not located in Europe.

By the way, this thread got bumped because I happened to be discussing with someone recently how the Palestinians are trying to use NGO's to futher their aims of propagandizing and obtaining support for boycotting Israel, and the PARC got mentioned in our conversation. So, I remembered this thread...
Then I looked and noticed their website was down.

Web.....is bumping old stale Israel threads part of the plan to reduce the number of Israel threads...?

They often cover the same material, so it could indeed be a pretty good plan, when you think about it.

Here is what DARAT offers to the members of JREF:
I am asking Members to stick to discussing the same issue in a currently active thread or threads and only start a new thread when there is something new or different or something of substance to discuss about the Israeli/Palestinian situation. And if you do decide there is something that warrants a new thread, please, please check that the topic of your new thread is not already the topic of another thread before you start your thread!

I used the Search function, as requested, and voila!
Are you complaining about my using that valid method?
On what grounds are you basing your complaint? That an older thread is not technically "active"? I suppose we could clarify with DARAT if bumping older threads is inappropriate when the material in the 'bump post' falls exactly into the thread topic as it already existed.

Thunder

7th April 2009, 07:21 PM

It's the past years of rockets and suicide attacks and other Islamic terror all around that makes us nervous about establishing a base for al-Qaeda right on our doorstep. .

Israel used to be at war with Egypt. Now there is peace. Israel used to be at war with Jordan. Now there is peace.

Unless you believe that the Palestinians are somehow genetically different then their Arab brethren, there is no reason to believe that a comprehensive peace deal with them would have results any different then with Jordan and Egypt.

Nice strawman about Al Qaeda by the way. Very clever.

Right-wing Israelis fear peace for two reasons:

#1. It would force them to give up most if not all of their precious "Greater Israel".

#2. It would force them to live in a world where they no longer have a perpetual existential threat. Some Jews actually prefer to live in a ghetto mentality then live in true freedom and peace. 2,000 years of persecution can do that to a people.

Its not our fault. But we must evolve or we are doomed.

Darth Rotor

7th April 2009, 08:27 PM

Israel used to be at war with Egypt. Now there is peace. Israel used to be at war with Jordan. Now there is peace.

Unless you believe that the Palestinians are somehow genetically different then their Arab brethren, .
Your straw man here has to do with genetic, rather than behavioral, as an assumption.

It's a tribal thing. You ought to understand.

DR

The Fool

7th April 2009, 09:28 PM

Earlier in this thread you were asked by the Moderators to refrain from derailing:
"Please stay on the topic of this thread. If you wish to start a thread about the Tibet riots, I will be glad to split this off for you."

The OP refers to the situation of Israel vis-a-vis the Arab world surrounding it.
Israel is not located in Europe.

By the way, this thread got bumped because I happened to be discussing with someone recently how the Palestinians are trying to use NGO's to futher their aims of propagandizing and obtaining support for boycotting Israel, and the PARC got mentioned in our conversation. So, I remembered this thread...
Then I looked and noticed their website was down.

They often cover the same material, so it could indeed be a pretty good plan, when you think about it.

Here is what DARAT offers to the members of JREF:
I am asking Members to stick to discussing the same issue in a currently active thread or threads and only start a new thread when there is something new or different or something of substance to discuss about the Israeli/Palestinian situation. And if you do decide there is something that warrants a new thread, please, please check that the topic of your new thread is not already the topic of another thread before you start your thread!

I used the Search function, as requested, and voila!
Are you complaining about my using that valid method?
On what grounds are you basing your complaint? That an older thread is not technically "active"? I suppose we could clarify with DARAT if bumping older threads is inappropriate when the material in the 'bump post' falls exactly into the thread topic as it already existed.
OK webb....but you bumped this thread because you found it humerous that a website was down?? Maybe you should have bumped a thread from the computer forum about websites being down and how some may find this funny....if you could find one.

a_unique_person

8th April 2009, 04:59 AM

webfusion

8th April 2009, 08:34 AM

No, TF, it wasn't because the PARC website was down that I found humorous, it was the message "Under Construction" that seemed ironic and got me to smile.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not over the size, but rather, is about the very existence of a Jewish Nation.

This is the root of the problem.
We have the Arab Peace Initiative being put forward as a terrific solution.
Is it?
Hardly.

The so-called API is a rehash of garbage that we've been fed for decades.
"Withdrawal to 1949 Lines"
"Allow 11-million Arab-Palestinians to return into Israel"
"Give up the Temple Mount"

That's the plan.

And truth be told, a major group of the Arab-Palestinians doesn't think this is enough.
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

And that brings us back to square one.

The Fool

8th April 2009, 04:35 PM

No, TF, it wasn't because the PARC website was down that I found humorous, it was the message "Under Construction" that seemed ironic and got me to smile.

This is the root of the problem.
We have the Arab Peace Initiative being put forward as a terrific solution.
Is it?
Hardly.

The so-called API is a rehash of garbage that we've been fed for decades.
"Withdrawal to 1949 Lines"
"Allow 11-million Arab-Palestinians to return into Israel"
"Give up the Temple Mount"

That's the plan.

And truth be told, a major group of the Arab-Palestinians doesn't think this is enough.
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

And that brings us back to square one.

Kids, eat your vegetables or Israel will be obliterated....

Tin Foil Timothy

8th April 2009, 10:44 PM

Does Size Matter? (Israeli Peace Efforts)

"Israeli Peace efforts" ???

Oxymoron nomination if ever I heard one.

:dl:

webfusion

9th April 2009, 06:22 AM

Does Size Matter? (Israeli Peace Efforts)
"Israeli Peace efforts" ??? Oxymoron nomination if ever I heard one.

I know that you may find this surprising, but the Israelis are actually quite far along with their negotiations in regards to completely ending the outstanding issues between them and the Palestinian Authority.

Of course, right now, until April 26th (http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/news/international/Palestinian_factions_suspend_talks_without_agreeme nt.html?siteSect=143&sid=10530977&cKey=1238691298000&ty=ti), the Israelis aren't going to lift a finger.

Meanwhile, many voices are making hay while the sun shines, expressing their support for all manner of pie-in-the-sky solutions, without addressing the core problems.
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1077438.html
"Jerusalem should be the capital of the Palestinians and Israel"

What-evah.

bigjelmapro

9th April 2009, 08:37 AM

Awww, Fatah and Hamas don't come to an agreement, what a surprise. All this boils down to is who gets what position, gets dominant control of the financial coffers of the PA, and access to the endless supply of of 'humanitarian aid' which conveniently gets diverted to Swiss bank accounts, summer homes in Spain and large SUVs. Classic.

Settle the Shalit and the overall prisoner exchange, and then we can all continue from there. Good first step.

a_unique_person

10th April 2009, 05:22 AM

Awww, Fatah and Hamas don't come to an agreement, what a surprise. All this boils down to is who gets what position, gets dominant control of the financial coffers of the PA, and access to the endless supply of of 'humanitarian aid' which conveniently gets diverted to Swiss bank accounts, summer homes in Spain and large SUVs. Classic.

If anyone had said that about Jews, there would have been uproar.

webfusion

10th April 2009, 08:01 AM

If anyone had said that about Jews, there would have been uproar.

If anyone had said it about Avigdor Leiberman, there would have been uproar.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3661708,00.html

bigjelmapro

10th April 2009, 08:13 AM

If anyone had said that about Jews, there would have been uproar.
And this makes it less true about Fatah/Hamas by the off chance that this would be alleged to Jews overall? Strange reasoning...

Marc39

15th May 2009, 06:02 AM

If anyone had said it about Avigdor Leiberman, there would have been uproar.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3661708,00.html

An uproar? Highly doubt it. Far worse things are said about Jews and Israel in the Middle East on a daily basis that don't even raise an eyebrow.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 06:08 AM

Meanwhile, many voices are making hay while the sun shines, expressing their support for all manner of pie-in-the-sky solutions, without addressing the core problems.
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1077438.html
"Jerusalem should be the capital of the Palestinians and Israel"

What-evah.

The core issue is Muslims and Arabs do not accept infidels and
non-believers---AKA Jews---living among them. Jerusalem is a red herring.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 06:14 AM

Let's see the text (http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/22573.htm) of that:

Which articles, exactly, were cancelled?

It's been nearly 12 years, when is that legal committee going to complete that task and present it to the Palestinian Central Council?

Fact is, they haven't done squat. All they did was promise to do something, and 12 years later they still haven't done so. There is no revised Charter, there is no clarification as to which articles will be cancelled. The original Charter remains intact. The whole damn thing was nothing but a con, and apparently you fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Only time those PLO bandits made any meaningful revisions to their charter was in taking the extraordinary step to alter it in 1968 to express a claim to all of Palestine. The original charter, published in '64, disavowed claims to the West Bank and Gaza. Darn Jews had to go and take control of the territories in the '67 war, forcing the Pals to have to change their charter.

Almo

15th May 2009, 11:55 AM

webfusion

15th May 2009, 11:59 AM

I just don't even know what to say. I'll bet even the US isn't building its security measures on Mexican land.

What map are you using?

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/atlas_mexico/war_with_texas_1835.jpg

a_unique_person

15th May 2009, 12:46 PM

What map are you using?

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/atlas_mexico/war_with_texas_1835.jpg

The days of doing that are supposed to be over.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 12:50 PM

a_u_p is referring to a case whereby some palestinians had a few dunams confiscated so that the construction of the IDF Security Barrier could proceed on the designated route.

I just don't even know what to say. I'll bet even the US isn't building its security measures on Mexican land.

What do you suppose the US military's response might be if Mexico started shiipping suicide bombers into California? Israel should have leveled Gaza, instead, they took the more passive approach of constructing a wall to keep out the savages, and the only thing that occurs to you is the wall might intrude on the terrorists' land? Boo hoo hoo.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by bigjelmapro
Awww, Fatah and Hamas don't come to an agreement, what a surprise. All this boils down to is who gets what position, gets dominant control of the financial coffers of the PA, and access to the endless supply of of 'humanitarian aid' which conveniently gets diverted to Swiss bank accounts, summer homes in Spain and large SUVs. Classic.

If anyone had said that about Jews, there would have been uproar.

Where was the uproar over Arafat and his gangsters ripping off billions in foreign aid? Have any Israeli governmental officials been found to have done so?

webfusion

15th May 2009, 04:01 PM

Where was the uproar over Arafat and his gangsters ripping off billions in foreign aid? Have any Israeli governmental officials been found to have done so?

Olmert recently resigned due to an investigation about some travel expenses that have been allegedly double-billed.

Yitzhak Rabin (of blessed memory) resigned from the Premiership when it was discovered that his wife maintained a small personal bank account in New York, which was a violation of Israeli laws at the time.

Thunder

15th May 2009, 04:07 PM

Olmert recently resigned due to an investigation about some travel expenses that have been allegedly double-billed.

Yitzhak Rabin (of blessed memory) resigned from the Premiership when it was discovered that his wife maintained a small personal bank account in New York, which was a violation of Israeli laws at the time.

Careful now. Accusing Israeli leaders of criminal behavior is anti-Semitic.

:p

Marc39

15th May 2009, 04:26 PM

Careful now. Accusing Israeli leaders of criminal behavior is anti-Semitic.

:p

Do you understand what constitutes criminal behavior? I seriously doubt it. I mean, it took months to figure out the definition of a war crime, by needing to cut and paste from an Internet source, and it still wasn't entirely right.

webfusion

15th May 2009, 04:32 PM

Careful now. Accusing Israeli leaders of criminal behavior is anti-Semitic.

And I might even get blamed for having an Anti_Israel Bias™

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4713753&postcount=215

Marc39

15th May 2009, 04:35 PM

And I might even get blamed of having an Anti_Israel Bias™

Timothy McVeigh was an American, even served in the army, so, being an Israeli doesn't make you immune from being anti-Israel.

webfusion

15th May 2009, 04:53 PM

Timothy McVeigh was an American, even served in the army, so, being an Israeli doesn't make you immune from being anti-Israel.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever of me having an Anti_Israel Bias™ in over 6000 posts that I have recorded here as a member of the James Randi Educational Foundation forums?

Tell you what, you write to BPSCG, or the moderator LibraryLady, and ask them if they would entertain the very idea that I have shown even a HINT of Anti_Israel Bias™ in all the years thay have know me personally.

Timothy McVeigh --- pfffffft.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 05:03 PM

Do you have any evidence whatsoever of me having an Anti_Israel Bias™ in over 6000 posts that I have recorded here as a member of the James Randi Educational Foundation forums?

Tell you what, you write to BPSCG, or the moderator LibraryLady, and ask them if they would entertain the very idea that I have shown even a HINT of Anti_Israel Bias™ in all the years thay have know me personally.

Timothy McVeigh --- pfffffft.

Bashing Israel over the settlements is a red flag. Just sayin'

a_unique_person

15th May 2009, 05:25 PM

Do you have any evidence whatsoever of me having an Anti_Israel Bias™ in over 6000 posts that I have recorded here as a member of the James Randi Educational Foundation forums?

Tell you what, you write to BPSCG, or the moderator LibraryLady, and ask them if they would entertain the very idea that I have shown even a HINT of Anti_Israel Bias™ in all the years thay have know me personally.

Timothy McVeigh --- pfffffft.

You can ask me if you want. No anti-Israeli Bias from Webfusion. He just calls it as he sees it, though. I think he's wrong a lot of the time, but I think he has principles, and follows them.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 07:33 PM

You can ask me if you want. No anti-Israeli Bias from Webfusion. He just calls it as he sees it, though. I think he's wrong a lot of the time, but I think he has principles, and follows them.

And, expressing opposition to Jewish settlements while saying nothing of the Arab settlemens follows what principles, again?

a_unique_person

15th May 2009, 07:42 PM

And, expressing opposition to Jewish settlements while saying nothing of the Arab settlemens follows what principles, again?

They are Webs principals, so you would have to ask him, but he seems to believe in the rule of law as it works in Israel. The Israeli courts do decide from time to time that some settlements are illegal.

As for the Arabs and their settlements, IIRC, it can be impossible for an Arab to get a building permit, where it's possible for a Jew to get one, and Arab homes that have been there for half a century can be suddenly found to be illegal.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 08:06 PM

They are Webs principals, so you would have to ask him, but he seems to believe in the rule of law as it works in Israel. The Israeli courts do decide from time to time that some settlements are illegal.

Wonder when we can expect the PLO Supreme Court to close down illegal Palestinian settlements. Prolly shouldn't hold my breath on that.

As for the Arabs and their settlements, IIRC, it can be impossible for an Arab to get a building permit, where it's possible for a Jew to get one, and Arab homes that have been there for half a century can be suddenly found to be illegal.

What about Pals building illegally on Christian-owned land and chasing them out? Have you weighed in on this, yet, or, only on the Jews?

Thunder

15th May 2009, 08:18 PM

Do you have any evidence whatsoever of me having an Anti_Israel Bias™ in over 6000 posts that I have recorded here as a member of the James Randi Educational Foundation forums?

Tell you what, you write to BPSCG, or the moderator LibraryLady, and ask them if they would entertain the very idea that I have shown even a HINT of Anti_Israel Bias™ in all the years thay have know me personally.

Timothy McVeigh --- pfffffft.

Web, I think most of here know that you are pro-Israel.

Thunder

15th May 2009, 08:21 PM

As for the Arabs and their settlements, IIRC, it can be impossible for an Arab to get a building permit, where it's possible for a Jew to get one, and Arab homes that have been there for half a century can be suddenly found to be illegal.

It is often impossible for Palestinians to get legal building permits for East Jerusalem or the West Bank. Meanwhile, the Israeli govt. actually assists Jews build illegal trailer parks in the WB, by surveying and confiscating land, and by not enacting existing demolition or evacuation orders.

As far as Israeli law is concerned..there is one law for Jews..and another for Arabs. This has been known for quite some time now.

Where does most of this info come from? From Israeli newspapers like Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 08:41 PM

It is often impossible for Palestinians to get legal building permits for East Jerusalem or the West Bank.

And, you heard about this falsehood on what website?

Meanwhile, the Israeli govt. actually assists Jews build illegal trailer parks in the WB, by surveying and confiscating land, and by not enacting existing demolition or evacuation orders.

What about Palestinians confiscating Christian-owned land? Haven't gotten around to reading any websites on this topic?

As far as Israeli law is concerned..there is one law for Jews..and another for Arabs. This has been known for quite some time now.

I wasn't aware the Palestine Mandate, ratified by the 51 members of the League of Nations, was "Israeli law"

Where does most of this info come from? From Israeli newspapers like Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post.

They're much better when not read upside down.

a_unique_person

15th May 2009, 09:22 PM

And, you heard about this falsehood on what website?

What about Palestinians confiscating Christian-owned land? Haven't gotten around to reading any websites on this topic?

I wasn't aware the Palestine Mandate, ratified by the 51 members of the League of Nations, was "Israeli law"

The legal entity that was the League of nations also handed over Vietnam to the French, quite legally, India to England, etc. The League of Nations was effectively a means of handing out colonial power around the world in an orderly fashion so that there wouldn't be another WW.

Thunder

15th May 2009, 09:27 PM

The legal entity that was the League of nations also handed over Vietnam to the French, quite legally, India to England, etc. The League of Nations was effectively a means of handing out colonial power around the world in an orderly fashion so that there wouldn't be another WW.

The League of Nations gave independence to the peoples of Central Europe. But why not the Middle East? If they were worth one ounce of poop they would have turned the Middle East into one giant democratic republic...and not divided it amoung monarchs and sheiks.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 09:28 PM

webfusion

15th May 2009, 09:28 PM

Bashing Israel over the settlements is a red flag. Just sayin'

Bashing? Don't make me laugh.

The way it actually happened is right there for everyone to read themselves ----

On Feb 4, 2009, a thread was left to wither, having accumulated nearly 200 replies.
On May 14, some months later, marc39 picked up on one item by TheFool (which, truth be told, he had taken the trouble that day to delve into several threads and bumped with specific replies to TheFool, challenging him).

Now, I know that there aren't many here who would say that I'm a champion for TheFool, but that specific marc39 posting just stood out as being so easily debunked, and I figured that I might as well point out the ease to which it can be debunked, and saveTheFool a few keystrokes.

The challenge, to wit, was: "But, the settlements are not illegal, unless you can provide legal proof they are..."

And voila -- illegal outposts outposts Givat Assaf, Ma'aleh Rehavam, Givat Haroeh, Mitzpeh Yitzhar and Mitzpeh Lachish hove into the view of the forum, with the legal weight of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel offering some decent proof that illegal settlements exist. Not all, but some.
Fact.

Now, all things being equal, we then were treated to a journey out into the realm of "What about Palestinians confiscating Christian-owned land?" as the subject of the original challenge is lost and left behind, and marc39 lurches beyond to explore other dimensions.

Thank you and good night.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 09:35 PM

Bashing? Don't make me laugh.

The way it actually happened is right there for everyone to read themselves ----

On Feb 4, 2009, a thread was left to wither, having accumulated nearly 200 replies.
On May 14, some months later, marc39 picked up on one item by TheFool (which, truth be told, he had taken the trouble that day to delve into several threads and bumped with specific replies to TheFool, challenging him).

Now, I know that there aren't many here who would say that I'm a champion for TheFool, but that specific marc39 posting just stood out as being so easily debunked, and I figured that I might as well point out the ease to which it can be debunked, and saveTheFool a few keystrokes.

The challenge, to wit, was: "But, the settlements are not illegal, unless you can provide legal proof they are..."

And voila -- illegal outposts outposts Givat Assaf, Ma'aleh Rehavam, Givat Haroeh, Mitzpeh Yitzhar and Mitzpeh Lachish hove into the view of the forum, with the legal weight of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel offering some decent proof that illegal settlements exist. Not all, but some.
Fact.

Now, all things being equal, we then were treated to a journey out into the realm of "What about Palestinians confiscating Christian-owned land?" as the subject of the original challenge is lost and left behind, and marc39 lurches beyond to explore other dimensions.

Thank you and good night.

Israeli settlements, in general, are legal, while, certain individual ones might not be. I enjoy demolishing The Fool's posts. It's one of my simple pleasures.

webfusion

15th May 2009, 09:51 PM

Israeli settlements, in general, are legal, while, certain individual ones might not be.

Correct.
That is exactly what I proved in the other thread.
However, it is not what you originally said. (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4713070&postcount=197)

Word of friendly advice -- do not let the moderators catch you admitting that you're here to 'demolish' another poster. Attack the argument, and don't personalize things.
You are treading a fine line with several of your remarks, including the one comparing me to Timothy McVeigh. Don't go down that slippery slope, marc, if you intend to continue here as an active participant. Just sayin'

Marc39

15th May 2009, 09:59 PM

Correct.
That is exactly what I proved in the other thread.
However, it is not what you originally said. (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4713070&postcount=197)

I said, or meant to say, at least, that individual settlements are legal unless ruled otherwise. There's no controversy.

Word of friendly advice -- do not let the moderators catch you admitting that you're here to 'demolish' another poster.

But, I did not say that. You just made that up. Go back and read what I wrote. Maybe you should go to sleep, after all.

Attack the argument, and don't personalize things.
You are treading a fine line with several of your remarks, including the one comparing me to Timothy McVeigh. Don't go down that slippery slope, marc, if you intend to continue here as an active participant. Just sayin'

Get some much-needed rest.

webfusion

15th May 2009, 10:01 PM

I'm not a mind reader, and cannot know what you meant to say.
Stop being insulting, and you'll be fine here.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 10:03 PM

I'm not a mind reader, and cannot know what you meant to say.
Stop being insulting, and you'll be fine here.

It wasn't even a question of what I meant to say, so, mental telepathy is not needed. I said settlements are legal unless proven otherwise. I think that's pretty reasonable on my part.

a_unique_person

15th May 2009, 10:12 PM

It wasn't even a question of what I meant to say, so, mental telepathy is not needed. I said settlements are legal unless proven otherwise. I think that's pretty reasonable on my part.

Not for the Palestinians. A settlement can go up on Palestinian owned land. They then have to prove it is illegal. I would have thought the onus was on the settlers to clear up the legalities before building.

Marc39

15th May 2009, 10:23 PM

Not for the Palestinians. A settlement can go up on Palestinian owned land. They then have to prove it is illegal. I would have thought the onus was on the settlers to clear up the legalities before building.

Numerous illegal Pals settlements have been constructed. They don't, however, receive any attention because everone just wants to hassle the Israelis. Just as there were plenty of illegal Arab immigrants to Palestine during the Mandate years. Pals are not all angels, you know. Or, doesn't Allah have angels?

Marc39

15th May 2009, 10:30 PM

Not for the Palestinians. A settlement can go up on Palestinian owned land. They then have to prove it is illegal. I would have thought the onus was on the settlers to clear up the legalities before building.

Here, if you ever become simply exasperated obsessing on the Israelis, or, just need a little diversion, perhaps you can learn about the persecution of Christians by Palestinian Muslims, who burned this village down...

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0905/pipes2005_09_13.php3

webfusion

15th May 2009, 10:50 PM

I said settlements are legal unless proven otherwise. I think that's pretty reasonable on my part.

I proved otherwise, saving TheFool the trouble of responding to this little challenge:
"But, the settlements are not illegal, unless you can provide legal proof they are. Or, is this yet another baseless charge?"

You are both welcome.

(webfusion was) expressing opposition to Jewish settlements ...

Where did I do that? Got a link to the post?

Oh, before I shut it down for the night, I noticed this gem:
Pals are not all angels, you know.

And... your point is?

Can you prove the existence of any angels, by the way?
A million bucks awaits you.

Marc39

16th May 2009, 04:37 AM

I proved otherwise, saving TheFool the trouble of responding to this little challenge:

He's still stumped by my question about whether the Pals have ever been offered statehood.

"But, the settlements are not illegal, unless you can provide legal proof they are. Or, is this yet another baseless charge?"

Individual settlements might be illegal, however, Israel's settlement policy, overall, is not.

Can you prove the existence of any angels, by the way?
A million bucks awaits you.

No, I'll give you two million bucks if you can find me 72 virgins in heaven.

webfusion

26th May 2009, 09:17 AM

This popped up on my radar screen today:

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088343.html
A number of lawmakers from the ruling Likud party on Tuesday proposed that Israel annex parts of the West Bank, while turning over Palestinian population centers to Jordanian jurisdiction.

This is a counter-proposal to stop a NewPalestine State from forming.
"Israel should stop looking for an immediate solution to the conflict with the Palestinians," said Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon.
"We have to disavow the commonly held perception that we should find an imminent solution," he added.
"Hamas' violent takeover of Gaza and the ongoing missile fire at Israel proves that the problem was not the occupation. For them, the entire land, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, is occupied."

Marc39

26th May 2009, 09:27 AM