With a cease-fire like this, who needs war?

[Mycroft]

Gaza lull shaky as Palestinians fire rocket at settlers' school bus

Palestinians on Friday morning fired an anti-tank rocket on Friday morning at school bus carrying children outside the southern Gaza Strip settlement of Kfar Darom, shaking the fragile lull in violence. The rocket failed to hit the bus.

A mortar shell also hit a Gush Katif settlement. No damage or casualties were reported in either case.

Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip fired four Qassam rockets at the southern Israeli town of Sderot predawn Friday. The Magen David Adom ambulance service said that several people had been treated for shock.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/573010.html

I keep reading stories like this comming from Israel. Attacks, attempted attacks, people caught smuggling weapons for an attack...at what point do you decide that a "cease-fire" where one side hasn't ceased firing isn't a cease-fire?

[epepke]

At least they have bad aim.

[Skeptic]

Oh, hush. Firing anti-tank rockets at schoolchildren is merely, um, an expression of the legitimate rights of the opressed Palestinian people (blah blah).

In particular it's the expression of their right to "resist occupation" and for a "free homeland"--that is, to butcher the jews and destroy israel.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Mycroft
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/573010.html

I keep reading stories like this comming from Israel. Attacks, attempted attacks, people caught smuggling weapons for an attack...at what point do you decide that a "cease-fire" where one side hasn't ceased firing isn't a cease-fire?

This is exactly my point in the "Capturing the #3 Al Qaeda" string.

Certainly the Israelis are justified in killing more Palestinians now, but Israel has been fighting terrorism a lot longer than the U.S. and there is apparently no shortage of terrorist or "suiciders" coming out of Palestine.

It would be so much easier to believe that after killing a certain amount of them, we'd never have to worry about them again, but births, political ideology, religion, boredom and tradition all combine to ensure there is always someone willing to step up.

When will mankind eventually realize that "they kill us, we kill them, they kill more of us, we kill more of them" doesn't work? Will we ever bother to look for another solution, or is it just more gratifying to wrap ourselves in a flag, bless the artillery and do it for God & country?

Mephisto

[Beanbag]

I've reached the conclusion that the majority of the human race is simply a waste of skin.

The only good news is that the decent ones seem to congregate around this forum. Thanks for letting me hang with you all.

Beanbag

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Mephisto
When will mankind eventually realize that "they kill us, we kill them, they kill more of us, we kill more of them" doesn't work? As opposed to "they kill us, we ignore them and hope they go away"?

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Beanbag
I've reached the conclusion that the majority of the human race is simply a waste of skin.

The only good news is that the decent ones seem to congregate around this forum. Thanks for letting me hang with you all.

Beanbag

Don't be so quick to call me decent, Beanbag. You'll find that I build straw men, support ridiculous opinions and conflict constantly with those whose logic is flawless. Just ask them.

If you don't mind the company, I'll be the Pedro to your Napolean.;)

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
When will mankind eventually realize that "they kill us, we kill them, they kill more of us, we kill more of them" doesn't work? Will we ever bother to look for another solution, or is it just more gratifying to wrap ourselves in a flag, bless the artillery and do it for God & country?


Mephisto, I partly agree with you.

The difference is where you see "they kill us, we kill them, they kill more of us, we kill more of them" I see "Palestinian-Arabs kill Israelis, Israelis pretend it isn't happening so the 'peace process' can go on."

When a specific approach isn't working, it's time to try something else.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Mephisto, I partly agree with you.

When a specific approach isn't working, it's time to try something else.

I'm glad we agree, at least on this point.

Maybe our point of contention lies in the specific approach? Not meaning to think in terms of black and white, but to me the opposite of cease fire is . . . . .

I'm more concerned that innocents will suffer for the actions of idiots. I'd be willing to bet that good many Palestinians DON'T support the actions of their "freedom fighters." I'd also be willing to bet that many Israelis also don't support the bulldozing of Palestinan homes and the displacement of families every time such an act occurs.

There are casualties on both sides of any military action. The first among those casualties include innocence, compassion, empathy and level-headed thinking. A passionate reponse doesn't necessarily mean revenge.

Mephisto

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
As opposed to "they kill us, we ignore them and hope they go away"?

As opposed to "let's not give them so many excuses to hate us."

You know, like invading their countries on trumped-up charges, killing 100,000 of their people and telling them we've liberated them . . .

Mephisto

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by Mephisto
You know, like invading their countries on trumped-up charges, killing 100,000 of their people and telling them we've liberated them . . .

Which 100,000 specifically?

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Rob Lister
Which 100,000 specifically?

Specifically, this 100,000

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-08.htm

http://www.jhsph.edu/PublicHealthNews/Press_Releases/PR_2004/Burnham_Iraq.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7967-2004Oct28?language=printer

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
I'm glad we agree, at least on this point.

Maybe our point of contention lies in the specific approach? Not meaning to think in terms of black and white, but to me the opposite of cease fire is . . . . .

I think everyone agrees that peace is desirable, with the disagreement being the specific approach. Some seem to believe that peace will magically happen if only the Israelis do enough to pacify the Palestinian-Arabs. My personal belief is that the Palestinian-Arabs need to be brought into an active role in creating the peace, and held accountable for specific failings just as the Israelis are.

In this specific case where there are clearly factions that are not honoring the cease-fire, I would stop trying to move other aspects of the process forward until it’s dealt with. If Abbas needed help maintaining control, I’d see that he gets it. Then, and only then, would I move forward.

Originally posted by Mephisto
I'm more concerned that innocents will suffer for the actions of idiots. I'd be willing to bet that good many Palestinians DON'T support the actions of their "freedom fighters." I'd also be willing to bet that many Israelis also don't support the bulldozing of Palestinan homes and the displacement of families every time such an act occurs.

I agree, but it’s so much easier for dissenting Israelis to express themselves than it is for dissenting Palestinian-Arabs. There are some that follow Sharansky’s view that increased freedoms for the Palestinian-Arabs is essential in creating a society that can exist in peace with the Israelis.

Originally posted by Mephisto
There are casualties on both sides of any military action. The first among those casualties include innocence, compassion, empathy and level-headed thinking. A passionate reponse doesn't necessarily mean revenge.


I think this is a little simplistic. The revenge aspect of this conflict is played up and does an injustice to both sides.

[epepke]

Originally posted by Mycroft
I think everyone agrees that peace is desirable, with the disagreement being the specific approach.

I disagree with this, not limited to this particular conflict but extended to all of human history and some of our nearer primate relatives as well.

I think people like being pissed off. I think they like holding grudges. I think they find violence exciting and romantic to such an extent that it overrides their own fear of death.

I think that we could do more to promote peace in the Middle East by sending over a bunch of PlayStation 2s with a CD of Intifada: The Sequel than by all other means put together.

[clarsct]

Originally posted by epepke
I disagree with this, not limited to this particular conflict but extended to all of human history and some of our nearer primate relatives as well.

I think people like being pissed off. I think they like holding grudges. I think they find violence exciting and romantic to such an extent that it overrides their own fear of death.

I think that we could do more to promote peace in the Middle East by sending over a bunch of PlayStation 2s with a CD of Intifada: The Sequel than by all other means put together.

Hmmm. I think people like problems. War is merely an obvious and easy way to create them. When you find a man with no problems to solve, you've found a bored stiff human being ready to die. This is WHY we like games. They are artifical problems provided to us. This is why people work. Some would work even if they didn't need money. Why? To keep them occupied with a constant set of problems.

As for the OP, If you want those two to agree, then support Egypt in invasion plans. Give them a common enemy and you may be surprised at just how quickly they can find solutions to their problems. I realize this is short term, and would foster yet more war in the region, but I have difficulty imagining another way it could happen. Alien invasions from space? I dunno.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Mephisto
As opposed to "let's not give them so many excuses to hate us."So we should reward people for killing us?

You know, like invading their countries
"Their" countries? Have we invaded Saudi Arabia recently? Or do you subscribe the idea that Iraq was behind 9/11 (and that it did as retaliation... for the invasion that happened afterwards)?

on trumped-up charges,
They weren't "trumped" up.

killing 100,000 of their people and telling them we've liberated them . . .
According to your own link, the "100,00" figure does not refer to the number killed by US forces, and it is much larger than accepted figures. So how about not including your own trumped up charges?

[webfusion]

beanbag says:The only good news is that the decent (humans) seem to congregate around this forum. Thanks for letting me hang with you all.

I share this sentiment, beaneroo,

Regarding the OP, it should be recalled that "cease fire" is the ongoing situation that exists between Israel and most of its neighbors (with the exception of Egypt and Jordan). The entire 'West Bank' itself came about as a result of the 1949 Rhodes Armistice Agreements. Israel decided to act against repeated violations of that document, (including cross-border incursions, mortar and artillery fire, and other miscellaneous terror) culminating in the 6-Day War (1967).

The Syrians are currently honoring the DOF in the Golan (1973). How many people even know that the USA maintains troops there as part of the UN Disengagement Of Forces (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/undof/)?

Lebanon has no formal arrangements with Israel. The entire Northern Border is just a pencil line drawn on the map by the French cartographers Sykes & Picot (back in the early part of the last Century).

The Palestinians never signed a "Cease Fire" (Armistice) of any kind. What is being called a temporary lull or calm, is the result of "understandings" between Abbas and Sharon, mainly in the sphere of halting targeted assassinations by Israel of Islamic terrorists.

The fatal shooting by Israeli troops of two Palestinian teenagers on Wednesday (while they were violently protesting the bulldozing of lands by the IDF for the security fence) may have prompted the recent
round of tit-for-tat. At least, that is the operative rationale.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/572451.html

"Palestinian security officials promised to investigate (the incidents of rocket firing)."

[demon]

The wingnut fundie "Settlers" put their own children in harm`s way. Most must surely know that they are invaders and even if they don`t, they must be aware that they are moving to one of the most dangerous areas of the world -straight into the maw of a hostile native population, from whom even the permanent IDF detachments cannot protect them fully. Why don`t Israeli parents keep their children from harm`s way and withdraw from the Occupied Territories -protecting their own children directly, and increasing the safety of all those kids behind the Green Line who suffer for the "settlers" crimes?
Israeli children are placed in harm`s way through the conscious actions of their Government -who see "settlers" and "settlements" as strategic pieces in a colonialist project- and the complicity of parents who place religious dogma over the interests of their kids. So let`s spare a thought for all the kids who are placed in harm`s way by the Israeli Government, who care little for the safety of Israeli children and even less for Palestinian ones.
As I said before, maybe standards of behaviour tend to get a little rough when an entire population is forced to subsist in a communal open grave.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mycroft
I keep reading stories like this comming from Israel. Attacks, attempted attacks, people caught smuggling weapons for an attack...at what point do you decide that a "cease-fire" where one side hasn't ceased firing isn't a cease-fire?

From Sept. 29, 2000 to May 2, 2005: Israeli Dead: 964
Palestinian Dead: 3612

from http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/resources/mrates.asp

Surely both sides have to stop murdering to have a proper ceasefire?

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
So we should reward people for killing us?

No, you're absolutely right, we should go in and kill AT LEAST twice as many as they've killed, that'll teach them, huh? Boy, I'll bet no one has ever thought of THAT before!


Originally posted by Art Vandelay
"Their" countries? Have we invaded Saudi Arabia recently? Or do you subscribe the idea that Iraq was behind 9/11 (and that it did as retaliation... for the invasion that happened

They weren't "trumped" up.afterwards)?

By their countries, I was specifically referring to Iraq (yes, I know it's only ONE country, but I'm also certain that Muslims all over the middle-east feel threatened by our actions in that ONE country). For the record, I know for a fact that Iraq was NOT behind 9/11, and have constantly questioned our invasion of Iraq as a useful step in our "war on terrorism." This to me is like FDR invading Uruguay in retaliation for Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.


Originally posted by Art Vandelay
According to your own link, the "100,00" figure does not refer to the number killed by US forces, and it is much larger than accepted figures. So how about not including your own trumped up charges?

So, you're saying that we're not technically responsible for a good number of those deaths? If we bomb a city, and the inhabitants return later to rummage through what's left of their belongings, and a wall crumbles killing several people, then we technically didn't kill them, right? If a stray bullet takes the life of an Iraqi child a half a mile away from a fray between soldiers and insurgents, that's not our responsibility right? After all, that bullet could have been fired by anyone.

As for the 100,000 figure, where does one go to obtain the "accepted figures" you talk about? BTW, these are NOT my own trumped up charges, I was merely pointing the way to other sources that seem to agree on a figure closer to the 100,000 mark than some care to admit.

I think you probably advocate more killing until the terrorists learn a lesson, right? Too bad the lesson won't be lost on the sons, daughters, wives, parents, cousins and friends of those we kill.

Mephisto

P.S. I rather liked the idea of giving potential terrorists Playstations, X-Boxes and assorted war games. They could glorify war from the comfort of their own couch.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
From Sept. 29, 2000 to May 2, 2005: Israeli Dead: 964
Palestinian Dead: 3612

from http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/resources/mrates.asp

Surely both sides have to stop murdering to have a proper ceasefire?

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I've often held the unpopular assertion that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. These numbers will no doubt be questioned by those who don't stop to think that:

A. most Palestinians are dirt poor

B. Palestine DOES NOT have an organized military

C. Palestine DOES NOT have Aircraft or Tanks

D. Israel bulldozes Palestinian homes after any terrorists action

Tensions run high on both side of this scenario, and rightfully so. What amazes me is that; in spite of all the death and destruction perpetuated by either side, no one stops to consider another solution. So, it's business as usual; they kill, we kill, they kill more, we kill more to teach them shouldn't shouldn't kill more, they get angry . . . where does it stop?

Mephisto

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by demon
The wingnut fundie "Settlers" put their own children in harm`s way. Most must surely know that they are invaders and even if they don`t, they must be aware that they are moving to one of the most dangerous areas of the world -straight into the maw of a hostile native population, from whom even the permanent IDF detachments cannot protect them fully. Why don`t Israeli parents keep their children from harm`s way and withdraw from the Occupied Territories -protecting their own children directly, and increasing the safety of all those kids behind the Green Line who suffer for the "settlers" crimes?
Israeli children are placed in harm`s way through the conscious actions of their Government -who see "settlers" and "settlements" as strategic pieces in a colonialist project- and the complicity of parents who place religious dogma over the interests of their kids. So let`s spare a thought for all the kids who are placed in harm`s way by the Israeli Government, who care little for the safety of Israeli children and even less for Palestinian ones.
As I said before, maybe standards of behaviour tend to get a little rough when an entire population is forced to subsist in a communal open grave.

Your post struck me as particularly observant. I've always questioned the intelligence of people (many of them parents) who would move into such a place. It seems to me similar to an American truckdriver (you know, one of those guys with the dotted line around his neck) moving his whole family to Tikrit to be closer to his job - then blaming "terrorists" for making conditions unsafe for his family.

This irresponsible behavior is, to me, EXACTLY like dancing with snakes under the assumption that God will protect you. Unfortunately, innocents on BOTH sides of the fight die because adults around them respond in the most conventional (and predictable) way.

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

And let's not forget it's not just Israelis who are being targeted in this cease-fire that isn't.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1115434039847

Islamic Jihad kill 'collaborator' teen

Islamic Jihad members on Saturday killed a Palestinian youth suspected of collaborating with Israeli intelligence, the group said.

The body of the 18-year-old youth, identified as Rami al-Malakh, was found outside his village near the West Bank town of Tulkarm.

Residents said al-Makh had disappeared last night. He was shot to death.

In Tulkarm, the Islamic Jihad issued a leaflet claiming responsibility for the killing, saying they would release a video of the youth confessing to giving Israeli security forces information on the location of Islamic Jihad fugitives.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Palestinians on Friday morning fired an anti-tank rocket at a school bus carrying children outside the southern Gaza Strip settlement of Kfar Darom Originally posted by demon
The wingnut fundie "Settlers" put their own children in harm`s way.

:dl:

Originally posted by Mycroft
I keep reading stories like this comming from Israel. Attacks, attempted attacks, people caught smuggling weapons for an attack...at what point do you decide that a "cease-fire" where one side hasn't ceased firing isn't a cease-fire? In my opinion it's really sad that the people trying to ruin everything are willing to do so against the wishes of the elected representatives of the Palestinians. For decades Arafat let them use Palestinian civilians for cover and concealment. Now if Abbas really and truely stops Hamas, Hizbollah, Al Aqsa or Islamic Jihad from dictating - in essence - Palestinian foreign policy, then he is a "tool of the zionists" or a "puppet of the American zionist lobby".

And therein lies the rub. All the settlers are leaving Gaza, the jihadists should be celebrating, but they are nuts, so their answer is firing anti-tank rockets at school buses carrying children.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
I've often held the unpopular assertion that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.

Originally posted by Mephisto
These numbers will no doubt be questioned by those who don't stop to think that:

A. most Palestinians are dirt poor

Due to the Intifada. Before the Intifada the per-capita income of Palestinian-Arabs was higher than average for Arab nations

Originally posted by Mephisto
B. Palestine DOES NOT have an organized military

Their militants are very well organized.

Originally posted by Mephisto
C. Palestine DOES NOT have Aircraft or Tanks

Nor do they want them.

Originally posted by Mephisto
D. Israel bulldozes Palestinian homes after any terrorists action

In fact, they don’t. That policy was ended months ago. When it was policy, they bulldozed homes of terrorists who’s families would get a $25,000 reward (paid for by the previous government of Iraq) and a pension from the Palestinian-Authority.

Originally posted by Mephisto
Tensions run high on both side of this scenario, and rightfully so. What amazes me is that; in spite of all the death and destruction perpetuated by either side, no one stops to consider another solution. So, it's business as usual; they kill, we kill, they kill more, we kill more to teach them shouldn't shouldn't kill more, they get angry . . . where does it stop?

We agree other solutions need to be considered. I believe it won’t stop until there is honest consideration of the Palestinian-Arabs, which in part means not equating terrorism with "freedom fighting."

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.

No, that's not another way of saying that! Those are YOUR words. All I meant is that each side believes that it is doing the right thing. Palestinian terrorists are "bravely" fighting the Israeli threat to their land and the Israeli military is "bravely" carving their oasis of peace amidst hostile elements. Isn't it clear to you yet that I abhor all the killing, violence and useless waste of lives?



Originally posted by Mycroft
Due to the Intifada. Before the Intifada the per-capita income of Palestinian-Arabs was higher than average for Arab nations

When I make a claim like that, I'm always asked for proof. Otherwise I rob them of the chance to scoff at my evidence. Where's yours?



Originally posted by Mycroft
Their militants are very well organized.

So what? White Supremicists in the American south are very well organized, that doesn't qualify them as an army.



Originally posted by Mycroft
. . . they bulldozed homes of terrorists who’s families would get a $25,000 reward (paid for by the previous government of Iraq) and a pension from the Palestinian-Authority.

Well, what's their big complaint then? Sounds to me like it's very profitable to lose the land that generations of your family have lived on. They're probably all old houses anyway, and who wouldn't want a chance to have the home where you raised all your children razed if you get a pension plan? Those stupid Palestinians, they don't know a good thing when it crumbles at their feet!



Originally posted by Mycroft
We agree other solutions need to be considered. I believe it won’t stop until there is honest consideration of the Palestinian-Arabs, which in part means not equating terrorism with "freedom fighting."

At least we agree, again, at the point when it makes the most difference, at the end. I support your assertions that terrorism should never be seen as "freedom fighting," but you'll have to remember that isn't my view of it. You'll also have to agree that we need to quit seeing the Israelis as brave frontiersmen carving their country from the grips of indigenous savages.

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
No, that's not another way of saying that! Those are YOUR words. All I meant is that each side believes that it is doing the right thing. Palestinian terrorists are "bravely" fighting the Israeli threat to their land and the Israeli military is "bravely" carving their oasis of peace amidst hostile elements. Isn't it clear to you yet that I abhor all the killing, violence and useless waste of lives?

It’s not at all clear that you abhor killing and violence when you equate terrorists to freedom fighters. Yes, we can agree that everyone thinks they’re doing the "right thing", but that can be said about everyone everywhere. Firing rockets at school busses full of children is a war crime by anyone’s standard, and is not the act of a "freedom fighter."

Originally posted by Mephisto
When I make a claim like that, I'm always asked for proof. Otherwise I rob them of the chance to scoff at my evidence. Where's yours?

Maybe. If you get tired of waiting for me you can start by checking the websites maintained by Saudi Arabia, they keep statistics on Arabic peoples everywhere. Keep in mind I’ve been over all this before with Demon, AUP, the Fool, E.J.Armstrong and others long ago, so my enthusiasm for spending a couple hours tracking down trivia for your benefit is low. I have a family.

Originally posted by Mephisto
So what? White Supremicists in the American south are very well organized, that doesn't qualify them as an army.

So what does it mean that they don’t have an army? The violence from the Palestinian-Arabs is very well funded and organized. Saying "They don’t have an army" is sort of like excusing the violence of Al Capone by saying, "He doesn’t have a police force."

Originally posted by Mephisto
Well, what's their big complaint then? Sounds to me like it's very profitable to lose the land that generations of your family have lived on. They're probably all old houses anyway, and who wouldn't want a chance to have the home where you raised all your children razed if you get a pension plan? Those stupid Palestinians, they don't know a good thing when it crumbles at their feet!

Is this sort of sarcasm helpful? Knowing the Palestinian-Arabs martyrs families used to get cash rewards and pensions is important context in which to understand some ways the conflict has been perpetuated and to help understand the Israeli policy of demolition. That’s not the same as saying the Israeli policy was good or effective.

Originally posted by Mephisto
You'll also have to agree that we need to quit seeing the Israelis as brave frontiersmen carving their country from the grips of indigenous savages.

Where did you get this? I’ve never said anything like this nor have I seen anyone else say it. This is not the way to reach understanding on such a complex issue.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mephisto
Israel bulldozes Palestinian homes after any terrorists action
I have always wondered how resorting to terrorism is meant to stop terrorism.

By the way, you will find that people like Mycroft will try to demonise you by interpreting your own words in ways that you do not mean.

I notice that he is already engaging in this, one of his regular attempts to demonise those who disagree with hime when he makes the claim about your words that 'Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.' He seems unable to construct a rational argument without resorting to this type of abuse.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mycroft
Keep in mind I’ve been over all this before with Demon, AUP, the Fool, E.J.Armstrong and others long ago, so my enthusiasm for spending a couple hours tracking down trivia for your benefit is low. I have a family.
A key thing to remember about Mycroft is that he is the Sylvia Browne of this forum. You can start the clock ticking because he will carry on running away from his own claims. This seems to a characteristic of those who espouse his views such as Elind, Sceptic, zenith-nadir the antisceptics on this site and those who appear to support their seedy tactics such as Randfan.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by zenith-nadir
...so their answer is firing anti-tank rockets at school buses carrying children.

So their answer is murdering schoolchildren.

Ghadir Mokheimer was hit in the chest when troops opened fire towards the school. The Israelis said they returned fire after coming under mortar attack.

A schoolgirl from the same refugee camp in Khan Younis died last month after being shot in the head at her desk.

Israel has been hit by controversy over the death of another Palestinian girl shot by troops in Rafah last week. from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3737218.stm

[Mephisto]

A. I abhor killing and violence for anything other than self-defense against an IMMEDIATE threat to your life.

B. I don't believe that terrorists are freedom fighters - only that some people see them that way.

C. I don't think "conventional means" (i.e. blowing the **** out of each other) is solving anything, nor has it solved anything in the past 100 years.

D. I don't believe we have a right to force our form of government on anyone.

and last,

E. I don't believe that anyone other than whomever suggested giving Playstations to the Palestinians AND the Israelis has much to suggest in the way of original thought.

Mephisto

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong

By the way, you will find that people like Mycroft will try to demonise you by interpreting your own words in ways that you do not mean.

I notice that he is already engaging in this, one of his regular attempts to demonise those who disagree with hime when he makes the claim about your words that 'Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.' He seems unable to construct a rational argument without resorting to this type of abuse.

I've already noticed that tendency (when in fact, it doesn't take much to demonize someone named Mephisto).

I just wonder if you are sympathetic to my posts, or if you're just not willing to apply standards of behavior to liberals when they question assertions that a cease-fire should end. ;)

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
I just wonder if you are sympathetic to my posts, or if you're just not willing to apply standards of behavior to liberals when they question assertions that a cease-fire should end.

Whoa, I hope you’re not claiming I said a cease fire should end.

Closer to my opinion would be to recognize the "cease fire" that exists now needs work, and that more should be done to make it a reality before advancing the process in other ways. I want there to be a cease fire, I want it to be a real one. I just think pretending it’s not being broken when it is is counter-productive.

BTW, E.J.Armstrong is on ignore by many for trollish behavior. He’s sympathetic to your posts because he wants to bait someone into a long and pointless exchange with him.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
BTW, E.J.Armstrong is on ignore by many for trollish behavior. He’s sympathetic to your posts because he wants to bait someone into a long and pointless exchange with him. I think he wants to point out that Palestinian children die because of the occupation. Which is true. It shouldn't happen but it is true.

Where EJ fails to make the intellectual leap is that a year later his 'freedom fighters' are not avenging the death of Ghadir Mokheimer by specifically targeting jewish schoolbuses with a anti-tank rockets.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
I think he wants to point out that Palestinian children die because of the occupation. Which is true. It shouldn't happen but it is true.

Where EJ fails to make the intellectual leap is that a year later his 'freedom fighters' are not avenging the death of Ghadir Mokheimer by specifically targeting jewish schoolbuses with a anti-tank rockets. Maybe they're avenging the deaths of Palestinian children.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Whoa, I hope you’re not claiming I said a cease fire should end.

Closer to my opinion would be to recognize the "cease fire" that exists now needs work, and that more should be done to make it a reality before advancing the process in other ways. I want there to be a cease fire, I want it to be a real one. I just think pretending it’s not being broken when it is is counter-productive.

BTW, E.J.Armstrong is on ignore by many for trollish behavior. He’s sympathetic to your posts because he wants to bait someone into a long and pointless exchange with him.

Mycroft.

How should the cease fire be "worked on"? Much of this violence seems (to me) to be simple lawlessness. I hear you saying often that it has to be a "real one" before the process is allowed to advance is this like to saying that crime should stop in New York before something is allowed to happen? I think it will be decades before random acts of lawlessness and violence by uncooperative factions finally completely stops. Your formula is simply going to entrench the occupation.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by The Fool
Mycroft.

How should the cease fire be "worked on"? Much of this violence seems (to me) to be simple lawlessness. I hear you saying often that it has to be a "real one" before the process is allowed to advance is this like to saying that crime should stop in New York before something is allowed to happen? I think it will be decades before random acts of lawlessness and violence by uncooperative factions finally completely stops. Your formula is simply going to entrench the occupation.

As usual, I agree heartily with the fool (there are many in my life).

I don't think that innocent Palestinians should pay for lawless actions by militant Palestinians, and I don't think that Israeli children should pay for the justification of violence for violence by the Israeli government.

The entire area (laughingly called "The HOLY Land") is at the mercy of whomever chooses to cause death and destruction at any given moment.

If had to do something about "fixing" the problem, I would immediately mix the children of both Palestinians and Israelis in a common school. I heard this was done once in Northern Ireland as an experiment that ended well. It would break the cycle of thought that is perpetuated by adults and allow the next generation to see the other side as simply children caught in the same trap. They might even become . . . God forbid, friends!

Mephisto

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Mephisto
I'm more concerned that innocents will suffer for the actions of idiots. I'd be willing to bet that good many Palestinians DON'T support the actions of their "freedom fighters." I'd also be willing to bet that many Israelis also don't support the bulldozing of Palestinan homes and the displacement of families every time such an act occurs. Let's see: when Israelis kill Palestinians, Palestinians hold protests. When Israelis bulldoze homes, other Israelis hold protests. Now, how many times have you heard about Palestinians protesting a terrorist attack? There is a worldwide movement by Jews in opposition to Israeli policy. Where is the Muslim opposition to terrorism? I really don't see much evidence that a significant portion of Muslims are actively opposing terrorism.

What amazes me is that; in spite of all the death and destruction perpetuated by either side, no one stops to consider another solution.It seems to me that one side is quite willing to consider other solutions, but the other is not.

This to me is like FDR invading Uruguay in retaliation for Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.It seems to me more like invading France in response to Japan's attack. And the invasion of Iraq was not merely "retaliation" for 9/11, it was due to a recognition that the status quo was not viable, and the US would soon have to choose between ending the cease fire agreement on Saddam's terms, or on their own.

So, you're saying that we're not technically responsible for a good number of those deaths?Yes, the US is not in fact responsible for every single death that occurs in Iraq.

As for the 100,000 figure, where does one go to obtain the "accepted figures" you talk about?Your link cites them; ask them.

BTW, these are NOT my own trumped up charges, I was merely pointing the way to other sources that seem to agree on a figure closer to the 100,000 mark than some care to admit. Oh, you're just repeating someone else's charges. Funny how you don't accept that as a defense for Bush. Anyone with a web server can put up a website claiming that the US has killed 100,000 Iraqis. Doesn't make it convincing, though.

A. I abhor killing and violence for anything other than self-defense against an IMMEDIATE threat to your life.So say there's an army marching towards your city. You could set up an ambush before the army reaches your city, and have a good chance of winning. Or you could adopt a completely defensive posture and wait for them to reach your city, but there is only a small chance of winning that way. You would say that the first choice is immoral because the threat is not "immediate" enough?

C. I don't think "conventional means" (i.e. blowing the **** out of each other) is solving anything, nor has it solved anything in the past 100 years.How can you possibly say that? Have you never heard of World War II?

D. I don't believe we have a right to force our form of government on anyone.It's not an issue of forcing them to have our form of government, it's a matter of forcing them to not force their form of government on others. We havea right to stop oppression.

E.J. Armstrong
By the way, you will find that people like Mycroft will try to demonise you by interpreting your own words in ways that you do not mean.

So their answer is murdering schoolchildren.
What a hypocrite you are.
You complain about Mycroft misrepresnting others' positions, then you do it yourself. Killing schoolchildren is not their "answer", it's an unavoidable consequence of the Palestinian decision to use them as cover. And in addition, you seem to be using "Palestinian dead" as a synonym for "killed by Israelis".

kimikoMaybe they're avenging the deaths of Palestinian children.By making sure that even more will die?

The Fool I hear you saying often that it has to be a "real one" before the process is allowed to advance is this like to saying that crime should stop in New York before something is allowed to happen?No, because there isn't widespread support for criminals among New Yorkers.

[webfusion]

Despite some lapses, the cease-fire is being observed in the main. The Israelis are demanding more accountability and action by Abbas, while Abbas is requesting a face-to-face meeting immediately.

Next week, Sharon's senior advisor Dov Weisglass is due to meet with PA chief negotiator Saeb Erekat to discuss the implementation of February's Sharm summit decisions.

Interior Minister Ophir Pines-Paz called on Sharon to meet with Abbas ahead of that in order to prevent the ceasefire from collapsing, Israel Radio reported on Saturday.

Pines-Paz also called for an immediate meeting between the joint Israel-PA security committees in order to restore the level of cooperation between the two sides, according to Israel Radio.

FYI, here is the report from the West Bank regarding the tragic shooting incident on Wednesday:

IDF suspends officer after Palestinian boys killed
By Arnon Regular- Haaretz Correspondent

Israel Defense Forces GOC Central Command Yair Naveh yesterday suspended a senior Combat Engineering Corps officer who commanded a force that shot dead two Palestinian teenagers in the West Bank on Wednesday. Naveh said the conduct of the deputy company commander was defined as "unreasonable."

Oudai A'asi, 14, and his 15-year-old cousin Kamal A'asi, both from the West Bank village of Beit Lakia, were shot dead while throwing stones along with hundreds of other protesters at a separation fence work site next to a village north of Highway 443.

Around 6 P.M., some 200 youths arrived on the scene and began throwing rocks at bulldozers and at the five soldiers who arrived on the scene in a jeep.

It was this specific action which may have prompted the militants in Gaza to fire the Qassems and perpetrate the attack on the bus, as retaliation for the death of those teenagers. In this one instance, kimiko appears to be correct.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
Mycroft.

How should the cease fire be "worked on"?

Previously we talked about the revolving door justice system for the Palestinian-Arabs. I would work on the cease fire by seeing to it that the Palestinian Authorities made real efforts to bring to justice those who broke the cease fire.

If they didn’t have the capacity to do it, I would get them aid. If they didn’t have the political clout to do it, I would wait until they did. In any case, I would work on solving this problem before moving on. You can’t make it go away by pretending it isn’t really happening.

Originally posted by The Fool
Much of this violence seems (to me) to be simple lawlessness.

Firing a rocket isn’t simple lawlessness and even if it were, it still needs to be dealt with. So long as these actions get a nod and a wink or (at worst) a slap on the wrist from the Abbas government, a cease fire can’t be taken seriously.

Originally posted by The Fool
I hear you saying often that it has to be a "real one" before the process is allowed to advance is this like to saying that crime should stop in New York before something is allowed to happen?

If the Palestinian Authority put the same effort into arresting these criminals as the NYPD puts into curbing crime, I’d be more than satisfies. The problem is the PA encourages it, they don’t curb it.

Originally posted by The Fool
I think it will be decades before random acts of lawlessness and violence by uncooperative factions finally completely stops. Your formula is simply going to entrench the occupation.

I don’t expect perfection but it’s not unreasonable to expect real efforts. Arresting, charging and convicting militants who break the cease-fire is a reasonable expectation as is ending enticement to violence. We are not faced with a black/white choice of allow everything or demand perfect compliance. There is reasonable ground in between, only you refuse to look at it.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Previously we talked about the revolving door justice system for the Palestinian-Arabs. I would work on the cease fire by seeing to it that the Palestinian Authorities made real efforts to bring to justice those who broke the cease fire.

If the Palestinian Authorities are not making "real efforts" how come there is the existing cease fire? You see Isolated breaches and lampoon the cease fire.



If they didn’t have the capacity to do it, I would get them aid. If they didn’t have the political clout to do it, I would wait until they did. In any case, I would work on solving this problem before moving on. You can’t make it go away by pretending it isn’t really happening.

what sort of Aid would you give tghe PA? How about the absence of an occupying Army...now that would certainly help them keep the population calm.


Firing a rocket isn’t simple lawlessness and even if it were, it still needs to be dealt with. So long as these actions get a nod and a wink or (at worst) a slap on the wrist from the Abbas government, a cease fire can’t be taken seriously.

yes it is...it is simply people taking justice into thier own hands in the form of revenge taking....It will continue to happen at a low level when people are occupied and you will continue to use it as an excuse to champion israels ongoing occupation.



If the Palestinian Authority put the same effort into arresting these criminals as the NYPD puts into curbing crime, I’d be more than satisfies. The problem is the PA encourages it, they don’t curb it.

And the NYPD cannot eliminate crimes against Authority in NY and niether will the PA be able to eliminate crimes against Israelis in the occupied land... Get used to it and stop using it as an excuse to undermine the peace process.



I don’t expect perfection but it’s not unreasonable to expect real efforts. Arresting, charging and convicting militants who break the cease-fire is a reasonable expectation as is ending enticement to violence. We are not faced with a black/white choice of allow everything or demand perfect compliance. There is reasonable ground in between, only you refuse to look at it.
If you don't expect perfection tell us all what level of violence would be acceptable and still allow the efforts towards peacefull agreement to continue? Or will the sarcastic belittlement of this cease fire be your reaction to any violence? What about Israeli shootings will you critisize them too? Will you claim Likud has not interest in controlling it?

[webfusion]

Some perspective:

"It (violence by the Palestinians) will continue to happen at a low level when people are occupied and you will continue to use it as an excuse to champion israels ongoing occupation."

I don't know what will or will not happen when Israel ultimately withdraws, and the New Palestine State is formed.

However, if I look at the following list of atrocities perpetrated by Palestinians during the period when they were not under occupation, for sure I have some serious doubts about Israel just sending the IDF to barracks then and doing nothing.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/terrisrael-1.html
11 Jun 1953 2 killed in Kfar Hess, shot by terrorists invading a home
17 Mar 1954 11 killed, others injured in ambush of bus between Eilat and Tel Aviv
2 Jan 1955 2 killed hiking in the Judean Desert
24 Mar 1955 1 killed, 18 injured in grenade and shooting attack on wedding in Patish
7 Apr 1956 1 killed in grenade attack on home in Ashkelon
7 Apr 1956 2 killed in ambush of car between Plugot Junction and Mishmar Hanegev
7 Apr 1956 1 killed, 3 injured in several grenade and shooting attacks in Nitzanim and Ketziot
11 Apr 1956 4 killed (including 3 children) and 5 injured in shooting attack on synagogue in Shafrir
29 Apr 1956 1 killed
(just a jew, killed, no circumstances given)
23 Sep 1956 4 killed, 16 injured in shooting attack on archaelogoists near Kibbutz Ramat Rachel; shooters fired from Jordan
24 Sep 1956 1 killed on farms in Aminadav
4 Oct 1956 5 killed in Sdom
9 Oct 1956 2 killed in orchard in Neve Hadassah
8 Nov 1956 6 injured in attacks on a train, cars, and at water wells in various locations across Israel.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
If the Palestinian Authorities are not making "real efforts" how come there is the existing cease fire? You see Isolated breaches and lampoon the cease fire.


Isolated breeches that just happen to be about the same frequency as before the cease-fire.

Originally posted by The Fool
what sort of Aid would you give tghe PA? How about the absence of an occupying Army...now that would certainly help them keep the population calm.


Your pointless and empty sarcasm aside, I think the exact nature of the aid could be subject for discussion and negotiation. This could be a good area for the UN or another neutral party to help.

Originally posted by The Fool
yes it is...it is simply people taking justice into thier own hands in the form of revenge taking....It will continue to happen at a low level when people are occupied and you will continue to use it as an excuse to champion israels ongoing occupation.


Not everybody can make or get a rocket. The person that can has connections. These events will continue to happen as long as nobody is serious about trying to stop them, and as long as those like you insist on pretending it doesn’t mean anything.

Originally posted by The Fool
And the NYPD cannot eliminate crimes against Authority in NY and niether will the PA be able to eliminate crimes against Israelis in the occupied land... Get used to it and stop using it as an excuse to undermine the peace process.


If a person commits a crime in New York they stand a good chance of being prosecuted and punished. If the same standard were to apply in the Gaza Strip, I’d be happy.

Originally posted by The Fool
If you don't expect perfection tell us all what level of violence would be acceptable and still allow the efforts towards peacefull agreement to continue?

The situation as it is right now is that absolutely no effort will be made even to find out who fired the rockets.

If international pressure were applied, what would happen is they would be arrested and placed in prison without charge. Later either be released, or would "escape" in a "spontaneous anti-Israel demonstration" that resulted in a "prison break."

In the case of extreme international pressure, like when the US envoy looking for Palestinian-Arab recipients of US scholarships was ambushed and bombed, "suspects" would be rounded up then rushed to trial before US aided prosecutors could build a case, then they would be found not guilty due to lack of evidence.

The point is any effort at all would be better than none, which is what we have now.

Originally posted by The Fool
Or will the sarcastic belittlement of this cease fire be your reaction to any violence? What about Israeli shootings will you critisize them too? Will you claim Likud has not interest in controlling it?


If the Palestinian-Arab gunmen faced the same sort of investigation and discipline as an Israeli soldier would, that would be something too.


Let me ask you, if you were in charge of the Palestinian-Arabs, what would you do about an underling who violated a cease-fire?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by webfusion
It was this specific action which may have prompted the militants in Gaza to fire the Qassems and perpetrate the attack on the bus, as retaliation for the death of those teenagers. In this one instance, kimiko appears to be correct. See, here's the real cycle. Mephisto et al. would have us believe that this is some sort of eye for eye situation in which the Palestinians kill people, then Israelis kill people in retaliation, then Palestinians kill more people. What's really going on is that that Palestinians kill a bunch of people, public opinion starts to turn around on them, so militants intentionally get themselves killed (or other Palestinians killed), then Palestinians whine about how "bloodthirsty" the Israelis are, and use it as "justification" to kill more people. If Israeli soldiers went around throwing rocks at Palestinian children, Palestinians wouldn't think twice about shooting the Israelis. Yet for some reason it's perfectly okay for Palestinians to throw rocks at Israelis.

There is simply no way the two are comparable. Palestinians intentionally target innocents. Israelis kill militatnts and/or by accident. Israelis are not "perpetuating a cycle of violence" or "killing in retaliation" or "murdering schoolchildren". They are acting in self defense, and it is disgusting that people would engage in such libel.

[webfusion]

My posting about the Palestinian teenagers was not an effort to JUSTIFY the shooting of an anti-tank weapon at a Jewish schoolbus. Any more than I would justify the launching of SCUD missiles at Tel Aviv by Saddam Hussein in 1991 for the reason he claimed:

"Raining fire on the Jews to liberate Palestine"

The people behind launching rockets, shooting at cars and busses, sending suicide bombers into the cities, and encouraging their children to throw barrages of stones at armed troops, are they doing it because of the "occupation" or in "retailiation" for a particular incident or other?

I don't think so. Looking at a list of terror attacks from 1956 proves this. The brutality was perpetrated against Jews merely because they were Jews.

Israel is now in the annual period of Holocaust Remembrance, leading to the celebration of their Independence. It is all interconnected.

The Palestinians are at a crossroads.
They cannot pursue their goal of the destruction of Israel any longer in this generation. It is a dream they may hold onto for future generations, that I cannot predict.
But for now, they have to trust Israel and the USA (and the EU and Russia too) to do the right thing on their behalf, and if they miss this opportunity, miss this outstretched hands of Israel, Egypt and Jordan to help them form a proper non-terrorist-dominated society, then what is left?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
Israelis are not "perpetuating a cycle of violence" or "killing in retaliation" or "murdering schoolchildren". They are acting in self defense, and it is disgusting that people would engage in such libel.
shooting stone throwing children in self defence?....here we go again with the Art Vandelay method of discouraging stone throwing.

Art...it appears even the Israeli Authorities have not attempted to label the shooting "self defence".

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Isolated breeches that just happen to be about the same frequency as before the cease-fire.

Are you suggesting that since the cease fire there has been no dramatic drop off in violence contrary to all visible evidence? Are you doing that mycroft?....everyone seems to have no problem seeing the obvious. Is there any limit to the efforts you will go to to avoid any chance of peace breaking out?



Your pointless and empty sarcasm aside, I think the exact nature of the aid could be subject for discussion and negotiation. This could be a good area for the UN or another neutral party to help.

As I suspected, you have no Idea...you just want to be able to use the platitudes without any actual substance behind them.


Not everybody can make or get a rocket. The person that can has connections. These events will continue to happen as long as nobody is serious about trying to stop them, and as long as those like you insist on pretending it doesn’t mean anything.

As you said, the NYPD is serious about stopping crime in NY... but they can't. You want the PA to perform miracles before you will take any steps towards peace.


If a person commits a crime in New York they stand a good chance of being prosecuted and punished. If the same standard were to apply in the Gaza Strip, I’d be happy.

what is the clearing rate of violent crime in NY? Tell you what, I.ve just had a great Idea....lets make the palestinians a nation then we can hold them accountable through international laws that apply to nations.....but wait, that would mean you would have to give up calling the place they live "Israeli land"..



The situation as it is right now is that absolutely no effort will be made even to find out who fired the rockets.

I suspect that the PA may feel that ordinary palestinians don't want to see people they regard as fighting thier oppressors from being prosecuted for taking revenge for the killing of Palestinian children....Do you want to bulldoze a couple of houses to continue the cycle of revenge....you seem to want to throw the ceasfire in the toilet any chance you get....

If international pressure were applied, what would happen is they would be arrested and placed in prison without charge. Later either be released, or would "escape" in a "spontaneous anti-Israel demonstration" that resulted in a "prison break."

what sort of international pressure? Threatening them with not forcing the Israelis to pull out by wieght of public opinion?


In the case of extreme international pressure, like when the US envoy looking for Palestinian-Arab recipients of US scholarships was ambushed and bombed, "suspects" would be rounded up then rushed to trial before US aided prosecutors could build a case, then they would be found not guilty due to lack of evidence.

Not un uncommon process in the area....Hey I've got an Idea....no, hang on...you've already heard about allowing them to be a nation so they could be held accountable...that catch about the land.


The point is any effort at all would be better than none, which is what we have now.

If the Palestinian-Arab gunmen faced the same sort of investigation and discipline as an Israeli soldier would, that would be something too.
Let me ask you, if you were in charge of the Palestinian-Arabs, what would you do about an underling who violated a cease-fire?
I would take whatever action I could depending on what real world access or control I had over the person...You probably think all palestinians are controlled by Abbas. If I was like you I would just call it all too hard, toss the ceasefire in the toilet and call for a return to intifada.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
shooting stone throwing children in self defence?....here we go again with the Art Vandelay method of discouraging stone throwing.

It seems every time an Israeli tank stands idly by doing nothing a photographer can find a Palestinian-Arab urchin willing to pose with his armed poised as if about to throw a pebble, creating a poignant image symbolizing the disparity of power and the plucky courage of these noble souls who resist occupation and oppression.

The reality is somewhat different. If instead of babies with pebbles you imagine packs of teenagers each throwing multiple rocks bigger than your fist creating a deadly hail that slams down on or around you with skull-crushing force sometimes from multiple directions.

As a rule, they don’t get shot. But if they were, you couldn’t exactly say they were not wielding deadly force.

[demon]

Art Vanderlay:
"Anyone with a web server can put up a website claiming that the US has killed 100,000 Iraqis. Doesn't make it convincing, though."

I might be wrong but I think Mephisto is referring to The Lancet Report here.
A peer reviewed and thoroughly scrutinized Lancet Study is a little more than someone putting up a website and making a claim. I suggest you read it and then I look forward to you debunking it for us.

[demon]

The Fool:
"shooting stone throwing children in self defence?....here we go again with the Art Vandelay method of discouraging stone throwing."

Yes, that was amusing the first time around. I hope the sequel is just as good...I`ll get my popcorn ;)

[demon]

Mycroft:
"The reality is somewhat different. If instead of babies with pebbles you imagine packs of teenagers each throwing multiple rocks bigger than your fist creating a deadly hail that slams down on or around you with skull-crushing force sometimes from multiple directions."

"multiple rocks", "deadly hail", "skull crushing force", "multiple directions"...you are wasted here Mycroft, you should be writing for Marvel Comics.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
It seems every time an Israeli tank stands idly by doing nothing a photographer can find a Palestinian-Arab urchin willing to pose with his armed poised as if about to throw a pebble, creating a poignant image symbolizing the disparity of power and the plucky courage of these noble souls who resist occupation and oppression.

The reality is somewhat different. If instead of babies with pebbles you imagine packs of teenagers each throwing multiple rocks bigger than your fist creating a deadly hail that slams down on or around you with skull-crushing force sometimes from multiple directions.

As a rule, they don’t get shot. But if they were, you couldn’t exactly say they were not wielding deadly force. I know......you want to shoot them too. Maybe you should lobby to have this plan enacted in the USA next time there are rock throwing riots. How do you think the American public would react to americans being shot for rock throwing?

[Art Vandelay]

webfusion:
No, I wasn't including you in "et al".

The Foolshooting stone throwing children in self defence?....here we go again with the Art Vandelay method of discouraging stone throwing.Here we go again with The Fool's lying. I did not present any "method of discouraging stone throwing", merely pointed out that comparing the shooting of stone throwers to firing rockets at school buses is absolutely ridiculous. We have already had this discussion, your position was shown to have no merit, yet you insist on twisting my statements into a universal endorsement of killing stone throwers even though I have previously made it clear that that is not my position. The excuse of ignorance not being available to you after I spend several pages trying to get this through your thick skull, I can only conclude that you are simply a liar who will use any trick he thinks will discredit his opposition.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
I know......you want to shoot them too.

You're trying to be king of the straw-man, arn't you? Is there anything else you would like to attribute to me?

No, I don't think they should be shot, but neither do I think we should pretend it's nothing either.

Originally posted by The Fool
Maybe you should lobby to have this plan enacted in the USA next time there are rock throwing riots. How do you think the American public would react to americans being shot for rock throwing?

When americans throw rocks at cars and people they get arrested and put in jail. Maybe you should come over here and try it.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
webfusion:
No, I wasn't including you in "et al".

The FoolHere we go again with The Fool's lying. I did not present any "method of discouraging stone throwing", merely pointed out that comparing the shooting of stone throwers to firing rockets at school buses is absolutely ridiculous. We have already had this discussion, your position was shown to have no merit, yet you insist on twisting my statements into a universal endorsement of killing stone throwers even though I have previously made it clear that that is not my position. The excuse of ignorance not being available to you after I spend several pages trying to get this through your thick skull, I can only conclude that you are simply a liar who will use any trick he thinks will discredit his opposition.
art.
1. you have previously stated the view that the throwing of rocks makes someone a combatant conducting an attack with a weapon. Do you deny this?
2. You have previosly stated that you are happy with troops shooting combatants conducting an attack...Do you deny this?

Now blow me down if I don't put those two together.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft

No, I don't think they should be shot, but neither do I think we should pretend it's nothing either.

so will we be expecting your critisizm of the IDF for shooting them?



When americans throw rocks at cars and people they get arrested and put in jail. Maybe you should come over here and try it.
exactly my point....what if they were shot? How about if they were shot by an army of occupation?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by The Fool
1. you have previously stated the view that the throwing of rocks makes someone a combatant conducting an attack with a weapon. Do you deny this?I said that rock throwers can be considered combatants; I do not recall saying that all rock throwers are combatants.

2. You have previosly stated that you are happy with troops shooting combatants conducting an attack...Do you deny this.I never said that I am universally happy with shooting combatants conducting an attack. In fact, I was quite adament that there are conditions in which killing combatants might not be advisable. Do you deny that I said that? I recall that we had a prolonged discussion on this very point, with you ridiculing my postion. And now you are pretending that I never said it? The claim that the proper response an attack is ALWAYS to kill combatants is a claim that you made, and which you are now trying to attribute to me. This is the very sort of disingenuous tactic that was so rampant in that other thread.

I suspect that the PA may feel that ordinary palestinians don't want to see people they regard as fighting thier oppressors from being prosecuted for taking revenge for the killing of Palestinian childrenIs there a coherent thought somewhere in there?

demonA peer reviewed and thoroughly scrutinized Lancet Study is a little more than someone putting up a website and making a claim. I suggest you read it and then I look forward to you debunking it for us.If he wishes to cite the Lancet Study, he should cite the Lancet Study, not cite a page which in turn cites the Lancet Study.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
Are you suggesting that since the cease fire there has been no dramatic drop off in violence contrary to all visible evidence? Are you doing that mycroft?....everyone seems to have no problem seeing the obvious. Is there any limit to the efforts you will go to to avoid any chance of peace breaking out?


Where is your evidence that violence has dropped?

Originally posted by The Fool
As I suspected, you have no Idea...you just want to be able to use the platitudes without any actual substance behind them.


I don’t need to know exactly what help they need to say that if they can’t stop the violence on their own they should get help.

Originally posted by The Fool
As you said, the NYPD is serious about stopping crime in NY... but they can't. You want the PA to perform miracles before you will take any steps towards peace.


You’re lying. Time and time again I tell you I don’t expect perfection, just reasonable effort. Why do you keep going back to this all or nothing lie?

Originally posted by The Fool
I suspect that the PA may feel that ordinary palestinians don't want to see people they regard as fighting thier oppressors from being prosecuted for taking revenge for the killing of Palestinian children....Do you want to bulldoze a couple of houses to continue the cycle of revenge....you seem to want to throw the ceasfire in the toilet any chance you get....


Do you realize not one single terrorist has been charged by the PA since its creation 12 years ago? Do you realize the PA was created on its promise to crack down on terrorism? The hypocrisy is staggering.

If there is ever going to be peace then rule of law must take precedence over revenge. It’s that simple.

Originally posted by The Fool
I would take whatever action I could depending on what real world access or control I had over the person...You probably think all palestinians are controlled by Abbas. If I was like you I would just call it all too hard, toss the ceasefire in the toilet and call for a return to intifada.


How is calling for a real cease-fire where people actually cease firing the same as tossing a cease-fire in the toilet?

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
By making sure that even more will die? Would Palestinian children stop dying if they didn't blow up a bus of Jewish children? They have no reason to think so, so blaming possible future deaths of Palestinian kids on retaliation for their retaliation is probably not something they would even consider. If Palestinian children have died, and will probably continue to do so, then they would never blame the cause of their deaths on themselves, but on the IDF or whoever in particular is directly responsible. Revenge isn't necessarily a well thought out tactic.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
merely pointed out that comparing the shooting of stone throwers to firing rockets at school buses is absolutely ridiculous. I'm not so sure that was the specific reason for the bus attack. More Palestinian children have died than Jewish children; that alone might be enough for them to target children in an attempt to even the score. Not all young Palestinians who die are teenagers or have been throwing stones.

Originally posted by webfusion
...are they doing it because of the "occupation" or in "retailiation" for a particular incident or other?

I don't think so. Looking at a list of terror attacks from 1956 proves this. The brutality was perpetrated against Jews merely because they were Jews. It doesn't seem like they separate the presence of Jews from the presence of a non-Arab state. If Israel was some other state, perhaps Christian-based, I think they would have attacked with the same frequency and would hold the same grievances.

[Mycroft]

It seems someone else would also like to see more done to crack down on militants:

Israel rejects prisoner release demand

Israel has halted the release of Palestinian prisoners, demanding that the Palestinian Authority crack down on militants before anyone else is freed.

The decision followed a declaration last week that Israel would not hand over three more West Bank towns to Palestinian control for a similar reason - a claim that Palestinians have not moved against militants in the two towns they took over patrolling since the February 8 truce.


http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Israel-rejects-prisoner-release-demand/2005/05/09/1115584883396.html

Palestinians have not moved against militants in the two towns they took over patrolling...what a shock!

[Skeptic]

When the Palestinians do something "mild"--like killing israeli soldiers--then "The Fool" explains to everybody how this is really justified resistance.

When they do something horrific--like firing anti-tank weapons at a schoolbus--"The Fool" switches gears and explains to everybody how this report is merely zionist propaganda.

This is the exact same "reasoning" used in the 30s and 40s: when reports about Nazi persecution of jews began in the 30s, people like "The Fool" explained how this is justified resistance by the Germans to disgusting jewish beahvior.

Once reports of gas chambers and mass shootings started surfacing later on, the same people explained that it's just war propaganda spread by dishonest jews.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Skeptic
When they do something horrific--like firing anti-tank weapons at a schoolbus--"The Fool" switches gears and explains to everybody how this report is merely zionist propaganda.


Or worse, just too unimportant to worry about.

Originally posted by The Fool:
Much of this violence seems (to me) to be simple lawlessness.

Fire a rocket at a bus full of children? Hey, Arabs will be Arabs, after all. What do you expect? Not civilized behavior. Besides, they wouldn’t hurt anyone except Jews.

Originally posted by The Fool
I suspect that the PA may feel that ordinary palestinians don't want to see people they regard as fighting thier oppressors from being prosecuted for taking revenge for the killing of Palestinian children...

It would be unreasonable to expect the Palestinian-Arabs to prosecute their Jew-killing heroes. We can’t expect those Arab barbarians to forgo their lust for revenge; it’s in their blood, you know. Besides, they wouldn’t hurt anyone except Jews.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by kimiko
Would Palestinian children stop dying if they didn't blow up a bus of Jewish children?Well, I guess literally speaking, it wouldn't make Palestinians immortal. They would still die from diseases, etc. But in the context of this thread, yes, absolutely. If Palestinian terrorism were to stop, the IDF would stop killing children.

They have no reason to think so,
Are you serious?!? What, the IDF kills for fun? What possible reason would they have for killing kids if they were not in mortal danger?

so blaming possible future deaths of Palestinian kids on retaliation for their retaliation is probably not something they would even consider. The IDF does NOT kill children in "retaliation", they kill people in self defense, and sometimes children get in the way.

If Palestinian children have died, and will probably continue to do so, then they would never blame the cause of their deaths on themselves, but on the IDF or whoever in particular is directly responsible. Well, if someone throws rocks at someone with a gun, and gets killed, I'd say that the rock thrower is directly responsible for his own death.

I'm not so sure that was the specific reason for the bus attack. More Palestinian children have died than Jewish children; that alone might be enough for them to target children in an attempt to even the score. There's a massive fallacy in thinking that merely because more Palestinians have died, that means the score isn't "even". Since when do people have the right to demand that the exact same number of people die on both sides? Would a German be justified in killing a bunch of Americans because more Germans died in WWII? Is this going to be part of the final peace negotiations? "Let's see, we've had X more people die, therefore, as part of the peace settlement, you must agree to allow us to kill X Israelis"?

Not all young Palestinians who die are teenagers or have been throwing stones. And yet a disproportinate number of them are, as well as being male. Why is that? Are the Israelis going out of their way to target male teenagers? Or are male teenagers going out of their way to put themselves in situations where they will become "martyrs"?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mephisto
I just wonder if you are sympathetic to my posts, or if you're just not willing to apply standards of behavior to liberals when they question assertions that a cease-fire should end. Not clear who you are referring to as liberal or what standards of behaviour you are suggesting I'm not willing to apply. I believe that every form of terrorism is wrong whether applied by sub-national or national bodies.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mycroft
BTW, E.J.Armstrong is on ignore by many for trollish behavior. He’s sympathetic to your posts because he wants to bait someone into a long and pointless exchange with him. A long long time agon, in a glaxay far far away Mycroft invented a claim. Many many eons have passed since simply asking him to define his terms. Notice how he makes another claim yet declines to support it with evidence. Plus ca change.

Yeah verily by their non-skeptic behaviour shall ye know them.

Does rewriting others words into what they didn't say count as trollish behaviour? Hmmmn.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
What a hypocrite you are.
You complain about Mycroft misrepresnting others' positions, then you do it yourself. Killing schoolchildren is not their "answer", it's an unavoidable consequence of the Palestinian decision to use them as cover. And in addition, you seem to be using "Palestinian dead" as a synonym for "killed by Israelis".
.
The difference is that I posted what the IDF actually did. What Mycroft did was to invent something the other person did not say.

Presumably you will now produce evidence that there actually was any fire from 'Palestinians' and that they were using the schoolchildren for cover rather than the IDF having contempt for the lives of innocent children as demonstrated when Sharon orders the assassination of untried people in circumstances that guarantee the deaths of innocent children.

You seem to be using 'Palestinian' as a synonym for 'terrorist'.

Who bulldozes the homes of innocent Palestinians?

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
Well, I guess literally speaking, it wouldn't make Palestinians immortal. They would still die from diseases, etc. But in the context of this thread, yes, absolutely. If Palestinian terrorism were to stop, the IDF would stop killing children. I wasn't talking about Palestinian terrorism in general, but the bus attack in particular. Anyone can see attacking a schoolbus is particularly vicious, so what sets the motivation for that tactic apart from the typical suicide bombings, etc? I think it is the difference in death tolls between the children of the two groups.

Are you serious?!? What, the IDF kills for fun? What possible reason would they have for killing kids if they were not in mortal danger? I have no doubt that many Palestinians believe the IDF kills their children on purpose. Besides, even if they accepted that they were accidents, accidents, by their very nature, won't stop.

Well, if someone throws rocks at someone with a gun, and gets killed, I'd say that the rock thrower is directly responsible for his own death. No, the rock thrower may have instigated the response, but he didn't kill himself.

There's a massive fallacy in thinking that merely because more Palestinians have died, that means the score isn't "even". Fallacy? The numbers aren't even. They see that their children die in the struggle in greater numbers than Israeli children. I'm not asserting some kind of right that people can demand equal deaths, I'm just saying people will see inequality in the death rates and think it unfair. That may be the motivation for their targeting of a schoolbus.

And yet a disproportinate number of them are, as well as being male. Why is that? Are the Israelis going out of their way to target male teenagers? Or are male teenagers going out of their way to put themselves in situations where they will become "martyrs"? A sex difference suggests the male teenagers are going into dangerous situations and the females are not. But why are the situations dangerous? Depending on who showed up on the scene first, that will affect how the responsibility for any deaths is apportioned.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Or worse, just too unimportant to worry about.

Originally posted by The Fool:
Much of this violence seems (to me) to be simple lawlessness.

Fire a rocket at a bus full of children? Hey, Arabs will be Arabs, after all. What do you expect? Not civilized behavior. Besides, they wouldn’t hurt anyone except Jews.








Originally posted by The Fool
I suspect that the PA may feel that ordinary palestinians don't want to see people they regard as fighting thier oppressors from being prosecuted for taking revenge for the killing of Palestinian children...

It would be unreasonable to expect the Palestinian-Arabs to prosecute their Jew-killing heroes. We can’t expect those Arab barbarians to forgo their lust for revenge; it’s in their blood, you know. Besides, they wouldn’t hurt anyone except Jews. [/B]
sometimes I think that you are not a wierdo like skeptic...sometimes I realise I'm wrong. Pardon me if I don't just take a short break from your wierd little rants.

[zenith-nadir]

Dear The Fool, kimiko, demon, E.J.Armstrong and Mephisto,

Please allow me to lay some foundation. Attacks by islamist paramilitary groups predate the "occupation". I would hazard to say that so many attacks have come from Gaza and the West Bank since 1948 - by so many groups - I think it would be impossible to catalogue them all. You will at the very least grant me that.

Many of those old attackers are now cronies in the Palestinian Authority. The PLO morphed into the Palestinian Authority but it didn't evolve. It has allowed islamist paramilitary groups - and their cells - to operate freely in Gaza and the West Bank. Their bases of operation are hidden amongst the Palestinian civilian population, there are no army bases. They dress like civilians on purpose, they do not wear recognized uniforms. They conceal bomb vests and other weapons in disguises, they do not carry arms openly. Sometimes they even operate out of official Palestinian Authority buildings and police stations. It is so well documented and well-known that I need not 'prove' it to you, you may google it at will.

At this point in history Israel has had to literally build a barrier to keep out terrorists, man hundreds of checkpoints to weed out combatants from civilians, block off farm lands and put down barbed wire to stop mortar and rocket launching. The islamist paramilitary groups are so defeated they are reduced to shooting it out with the IDF on Palestinian streets and launching anti-tank rockets at buses full of kids.

This isn't a new phenomenon, for decades islamist paramilitary groups have continued to launch terror attacks at Israel from Gaza and the West Bank.

I sometimes marvel at characterizations of the occupation, as it was earlier in this thread by Mephisto, as;"justification of violence for violence by the Israeli government".I wonder if Mephisto remembers Black September or the Munich Massacre or the Maalot Massacre or the Rome airport Massacre and why he thinks Israel want's any of this nonsense. The justification for the occupation is to protect Israeli civilians from islamist paramilitary groups from operating freely in Gaza and the West Bank.

The result is hell on earth for the non-combatant Palestinian civilians. Of course it is unjust and terrible. The same crap happened to them in Jordan - see: Black September - and in Lebanon, see: the civil war. Palestinian civilians have been caught in the crossfire between the PLO and the Jordanian army, the PLO and the Lebanese army and now the IDF and Hamas, Hizbollah, Al Aqsa and Islamic Jihad.

For over a decade Arafat promised to stop islamist paramilitary groups from operating freely in Gaza and the West Bank. He utterly failed to do so. Now Abbas promises to stop islamist paramilitary groups from operating freely in Gaza and the West Bank. Yet the islamist paramilitary groups still continue to operate.

It is because they continue to hide amongst the civilian population is the reason more Palestinians die than Israelis kimiko. It should be the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority to A) seperate the combatants from hiding behind civilians and B) stop combatants from dictating Palestinian military policy in regards to Israel. But after a decade they have yet to do either.

[Skeptic]

What I see in all these replies is that the poor, opressed Palestinians who fired the anti-tank rocket at the schoolbus are automatons. They acted out of "irrational revenge", or to avenge the "death of Palestinian children", or whatever--it is simply beyound their moral and intellectual capacity to not take revenge by killing schoolchildren, or to note that however they might want revenge for something, this does not make blowing up schoolbuses acceptable.

Far from showing the "real reason" for terrorisms, however, all these excuses--if they were true, that is--would mean only one thing: Palestinians are simply dangerous animals without any ability to act nonviolently, and their natural prey is, of course, jewish children. It's not that they CHOSE to act this way, mind you--it's just the "irrational" actions of "rage" or the inevitable sad result of their "opression", etc., etc., etc. They could do no other; they are Palestinians, after all--what would you expected them to do EXCEPT kill jews? The natural conclusion is that Palestinians should be fought in the same way germs or man-eating lions are: to be contained at destroyed on sight, since they are inherently dangerous creatures.

The Palestinians are treated by these "caring" and "considerate" people the same way the poor or the blacks are treated by the same people: if a poor or a black person commits a crime, is not THEM that really robbed the store or stole the car; it's really an uncontrollable reaction to "racism", "economic inequality", and so on and so forth. Well, in that case, shouldn't we lock up all poor or blacks in preventive detention, for the protection of the community, until they prove that they are not one of those infected with the uncontrollable desire to crime? The mere fact that this unctonrollable desire is due to "racism" or "capitalism", and thus not their fault, is besides the point; after all, we quarantine both mentally and physically ill people who are a danger to the public until they can be shown to no longer be such a danger, and nobody thinks this is because they are to blame for their SARS germ or schisophrenia.

But this of course is totally unacceptable. The Palestinians should be free of moral blame because they cannot do otherwise to kill jews... AND they should not be quarantined or destroyed to prevent them from killing jews--just like criminals are not to blame because it's all "the system"'s fault... but at the same time they must not be put in detention because they have rights for free trial, habeas corpus, etc.

Why is this? Well, because the "concern" for the Palestinians--like the "concern" for criminals--by these "humane" and "understanding" people is merely a show. The "it's not the terrorist's fault and you are not allowed to do anything to him anyway" view is simply a fashion statement, like wearing certain clothes brands or driving certain cars, showing that you are "understanding" and "liberal". It's a matching pair, like a Gucci bag that comes with a set of gloves (or whatever): you must believe BOTH that the group in question is essentially violent inhuman automatons AND that nothing should be done about it by the intended victims in order not to violate their "human rights".

That this dehumanizes the perpetrator and abandons the victims to their fate is besides the point--after all, it's only Palestinians that are being dehumanized as automatons, and they're only killing jews, so what's the big deal? It's only blacks or poor that are portrayed as essentially dangerous monsters, and they only tend to kill other poor people, so who cares? Isn't me looking caring and humane and "with it" more important?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
The difference is that I posted what the IDF actually did. What Mycroft did was to invent something the other person did not say.
1. You did not post what the IDF actually did, you posted an alleged position of the IDF. Whether the IDF murders children and whether the IDF considers murdering children to be the "answer" are two different issues.
2. Mycroft did not "invent something the other person did not say", he posted his opinion of what Mephisto's position is, just as you posted your opinion of what the IDF's position is.
3. You say that the two are different because your statement is based on actuality, yet you have not proven that Mycroft was wrong.
4. Your "evidence" is ridiculous. You simply presented examples of people who had been killed, without any evidence that the IDF killed them, or that they had been murdered.

Presumably you will now produce evidence that there actually was any fire from 'Palestinians' and that they were using the schoolchildren for cover ...
What?!? YOU'RE the one making the claim, YOU'RE the one with the burden of proof. What evidence do you have that there wasn't any fire from Palestinians?

rather than the IDF having contempt for the lives of innocent children as demonstrated when Sharon orders the assassination of untried people in circumstances that guarantee the deaths of innocent children. See, here's the thing. In order for you to say that the IDF has "contempt" for the lives of innocent children, you must, at the very least, show that there is a clear alternative. I started a thread (http://randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52319) to see what people alternatives people think there are, and I don't remember anyone presenting any. In fact, I'm pretty sure that you didn't post at all. Seeing as how no other methods of defending themselves have been presented, it seems to me like you really have a problem with Israel defending itself in general, and your alleged concern of "innocent children" is just an excuse.

You seem to be using 'Palestinian' as a synonym for 'terrorist'. You seem to be "inventing something the other person did not say".

[epepke]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Please allow me to lay some foundation. Attacks by islamist paramilitary groups predate the "occupation".

We've been through all this before. You'll just be told that "in retrospect, they had the right idea" or something like that.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by kimiko
I wasn't talking about Palestinian terrorism in general, but the bus attack in particular. Anyone can see attacking a schoolbus is particularly vicious, so what sets the motivation for that tactic apart from the typical suicide bombings, etc? I think it is the difference in death tolls between the children of the two groups.Or perhaps it's due to practical considerations, such as lack of people willing to blow themselves up, or greater security measures.
As for how this addresses my point, I'm not clear. Are you saying that the thinking is that as long as there are suicide bombings, Palestinian children will be killed, so they might as well launch rocket attacks as well?

I have no doubt that many Palestinians believe the IDF kills their children on purpose. Besides, even if they accepted that they were accidents, accidents, by their very nature, won't stop.Huh? Are you saying that accidents are by definition unpreventable? Accidents happen because the conditions for the accident exist. Remove the conditions, and the accidents go away. If no one drove cars, we wouldn't have car accidents. If the IDF were not in Palestine, people in Palestine wouldn't be killed by the IDF.

No, the rock thrower may have instigated the response, but he didn't kill himself. I didn't say that he killed himself, I said that he is responsible for his death. He didn't literally kill himself, but that's a bit like saying that someone who jumped off a building didn't kill himself; it was the ground that killed him. There's something called "suicide by cop" in which someone goes up to a cop and starts shooting at him, knowing that he'll be shot. This seems like a milder version to me.

Fallacy? The numbers aren't even.The numbers aren't even, that doesn't mean the "score" isn't.

Depending on who showed up on the scene first, that will affect how the responsibility for any deaths is apportioned. How is Palestinians showing up first compatible with the facts? You're still left the question of what causes the disparity: females must be somewhere, why is the IDF showing up where males showed up rather than where females showed up? And even if the IDF shows up last, doesn't that present the possibility that males are showing up where they know the IDF will be later?

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
Or perhaps it's due to practical considerations, such as lack of people willing to blow themselves up, or greater security measures.
As for how this addresses my point, I'm not clear. Are you saying that the thinking is that as long as there are suicide bombings, Palestinian children will be killed, so they might as well launch rocket attacks as well? I've been quite clear that I think the rocket attack on the bus was chosen because of disparities in children's deaths. Pure revenge targetting the same age they think are murdered with impunity by the IDF.

Huh? Are you saying that accidents are by definition unpreventable? Accidents happen because the conditions for the accident exist. Remove the conditions, and the accidents go away. If no one drove cars, we wouldn't have car accidents. If the IDF were not in Palestine, people in Palestine wouldn't be killed by the IDF. The responsibility for the occupation rests with both parties.

I didn't say that he killed himself, I said that he is responsible for his death. He didn't literally kill himself, but that's a bit like saying that someone who jumped off a building didn't kill himself; it was the ground that killed him. There's something called "suicide by cop" in which someone goes up to a cop and starts shooting at him, knowing that he'll be shot. This seems like a milder version to me. He is responsible for his death, and so is the shooter.

The numbers aren't even, that doesn't mean the "score" isn't. What is a score then? I've already stated that I believe many Palestinians find the inequality in death rates unfair. To them, the score IS the numbers, among other things.

How is Palestinians showing up first compatible with the facts? You're still left the question of what causes the disparity: females must be somewhere, why is the IDF showing up where males showed up rather than where females showed up? And even if the IDF shows up last, doesn't that present the possibility that males are showing up where they know the IDF will be later? It sounds like you think you have the answer for why males are killed more often, so why bother asking me? The last young females I heard of dying were a girl shot sitting in her desk, a girl shot while standing in her kitchen, and a girl shot while walking to school. If you're interested in the disparity, look up the circumstances of female vs. male deaths yourself for an answer. If you're trying to make a point that young male Palestinians go looking for death, you might be right, but you'd have to consider that Israel has a military, where young people interested in defending their people will be expected to go. Palestinians don't have that, so what ways can they defend their group? It seems throwing rocks and terror attacks are the ways they think they defend themselves. Therefore, they have no reason to wait to enter the military, but would take matters into their own hands at a younger age. If Israel didn't have a military, we'd probably see young Jewish boys out fighting too.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Skeptic
What I see in all these replies This garbage about automatons and germs and animals is all yours; there isn't a single post in this thread you could have taken those characterizations from. No one has argued Palestinian terrorists aren't responsible for their actions. Motivations don't excuse behavior, and all behavior must have motivation. But your imaginative descriptions would only apply if they didn't have motivations. The most important words in your post were "What I see". Claiming you saw it in other people's posts is just an excuse to say the nastiest things you want while blaming it on other people.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by kimiko
...I'm just saying people will see inequality in the death rates and think it unfair. That may be the motivation for their targeting of a schoolbus.


You do know that speculation is not evidence? Just because you can imagine yourself thinking this in their place does not mean this is what they are thinking.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
sometimes I think that you are not a wierdo like skeptic...sometimes I realise I'm wrong. Pardon me if I don't just take a short break from your wierd little rants.

I'm honored to be compared to Skeptic. He's very intelligent and well reasoned. That he’s earned the disdain of the likes of you is, in my humble opinion, a plus. Further, I believe many of the things you say about him apply to you, only you can’t see it.

Feel free to take a break. I encourage you to make it a long one.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Mycroft
You do know that speculation is not evidence? Just because you can imagine yourself thinking this in their place does not mean this is what they are thinking. Of course I know speculation isn't evidence. I'm making a rational argument, not a proof. That is the only sensical reason I can think of for targetting schoolchildren. If someone else can think of a more plausible one, I'd revise my view.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by kimiko
I've been quite clear that I think the rocket attack on the bus was chosen because of disparities in children's deaths. Pure revenge targetting the same age they think are murdered with impunity by the IDF. The issue wasn't why they were doing this, the issue was whether they recognize that it will lead to more Palestinian children being killed.

The responsibility for the occupation rests with both parties. But it is equal? It seems to me that the Palestinians have it within their power to end the occupation, while Israel does not. You seem to be dodging the issue: were terrorist attacks to cease, would the IDF kill children anyway, on a level comparable to the current one?

He is responsible for his death, and so is the shooter.Even if the shooter believed the thrower to constitute a clear and present danger? If the shooter mistook the rock for a grenade, is he still responsible?

What is a score then? I've already stated that I believe many Palestinians find the inequality in death rates unfair. To them, the score IS the numbers, among other things.I can't think of any simple way of explaining what I consider "score" to mean. The closest I can think of is "moral high ground". Does the moral high ground automatically go to whatever side has the highest body count? The score isn't just the raw numbers; it's also about how justified the killings were. And of course, Palestinians are going to think of the score differently from Israelis.

It sounds like you think you have the answer for why males are killed more often, so why bother asking me? I admit I am biased, but I am open to other explanations. For instance, perhaps women in that culture are less likely to be in public, and most of the shootings happen in public, so men are disproportionately killed. If you can find evidence for that, that would be an argument to advance.

Therefore, they have no reason to wait to enter the military, but would take matters into their own hands at a younger age. If Israel didn't have a military, we'd probably see young Jewish boys out fighting too. I don't understand what you're saying here. Doesn't this support the idea that Palestinians are responsible for their own deaths, and aren't really "noncombatants".

This garbage about automatons and germs and animals is all yours; there isn't a single post in this thread you could have taken those characterizations from. Why should he be restricted to this thread? Isn't it valid to say that a post in this thread can be interpreted in a certain way, and to make use of one's general life experiences to evaluate how accurate that interpretation is? Someone in another thread kept going on about how terrorism was "inevitable" and it is the existence of Israel rather than terrorists that are to blame for it. Isn't that rather similar to what Skeptic is saying?

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
The issue wasn't why they were doing this, the issue was whether they recognize that it will lead to more Palestinian children being killed. My original post was on the issue of why they were doing this. As to the other part, if they really had a long term view of the situation they wouldn't be conducting terror attacks, so probably not. But it is equal? It seems to me that the Palestinians have it within their power to end the occupation, while Israel does not. You seem to be dodging the issue: were terrorist attacks to cease, would the IDF kill children anyway, on a level comparable to the current one? I'm not dodging the issue; you seem to want me to agree that the deaths of Palestinian children is entirely the fault of Palestinian terrorists. Unless Palestinians shoot the kids, then the IDF is still responsible for reacting when they know civilians will die. It's a trade-off they are willing to make. Even if the shooter believed the thrower to constitute a clear and present danger? If the shooter mistook the rock for a grenade, is he still responsible? Of course. Whoever shot the other person is always partly responsible, because they took action. Even if you kill in self-defense, you are responsible for pulling the trigger. I'm not talking about moral responsibility; that will vary by circumstance. I can't think of any simple way of explaining what I consider "score" to mean. The closest I can think of is "moral high ground". Does the moral high ground automatically go to whatever side has the highest body count? The score isn't just the raw numbers; it's also about how justified the killings were. And of course, Palestinians are going to think of the score differently from Israelis. I was using the term score in a strict numerical sense. I'm not in a position to make judgements about moral high ground without specifics on different . I admit I am biased, but I am open to other explanations. For instance, perhaps women in that culture are less likely to be in public, and most of the shootings happen in public, so men are disproportionately killed. If you can find evidence for that, that would be an argument to advance. I would lean towards males having to prove their masculinity in physical confrontation. It's an interesting topic either way. I don't understand what you're saying here. Doesn't this support the idea that Palestinians are responsible for their own deaths, and aren't really "noncombatants". Only if boys with rocks can be considered akin to an armed military. I think "combatants" would probably be better reserved to organized violent groups, and only applied to young people when they take on armed activities like shootings and bombings. That could indicate why many teenaged Palestinians die whenever statistics don't differentiate between combatants and civilians. Why should he be restricted to this thread? Isn't it valid to say that a post in this thread can be interpreted in a certain way, and to make use of one's general life experiences to evaluate how accurate that interpretation is? Someone in another thread kept going on about how terrorism was "inevitable" and it is the existence of Israel rather than terrorists that are to blame for it. Isn't that rather similar to what Skeptic is saying? He opened his post referencing phrases used specifically in this thread and drawing his conclusions from those, so yes, he is restricted to this thread. The conclusion in the first paragraph doesn't follow from the premises. He ascribes motivations for people's arguments instead of addressing the arguments themselves. He is generous with the ad homs, and other fallacies like false analogy, emotive language, etc. And since his post is negative in characterization, the effect is like a push-poll. Statements and questions made make no attempt to arrive at valid conclusions, and convey a bias to the readers. It isnt equivalent to the other poster you mention becuase that argument pertains to the subject of the thread, not fellow posters.

And because I know someone will drag this out, please think on this before engaging in character assasination.
It is important to point out that empathy does not necessarily imply sympathy. To empathize is "to understand and to share the feelings of another," without necessarily having feelings of pity or sorrow for their misfortunes, agreeing with their sentiment or opinions, or having a favorable attitude toward them- the feelings that define sympathy. It is a kind of vicarious introspection. Although empathizing with a religious-extremist killer is difficult, I discover that it can be learned. It is possible to understand and vicariously share the feelings that give rise to terrorism-if only briefly- and still maintain that the terrorist's actions are immoral, or even evil. Jessica Stern-Terror in the Name of God; Why Religious Militants Kill

Skeptics shouldn't have to make a disclaimer to avoid being negatively characterized on the basis of an argument, because we all know what ad homs are and should be avoiding them. For that, there's Flame War.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
It seems to me that the Palestinians have it within their power to end the occupation, while Israel does not. The Palestinians have had several opportunities since September 1993 to end the occupation. They are in order; Oslo 1, The agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area, The agreement on the Preparatory Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities, The Interim Agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, The Wye River Plantation Agreement, The Sharm el Sheikh Agreement, The Palestinian-Israeli Security Implementation Work Plan (Tenet Plan) and The Performance-Based Road Map to a Permanent Two-State Solution.

Every single one of these treaties have a common theme. Stop the islamist paramilitary groups who operate in the West Bank and Gaza from attacking Israel. It has been over ten years of endless promises by Arafat - and now Abbas - that the islamist paramilitary groups will stop operating in the West Bank and Gaza.

After ten years of promises we now know beyond a reasonable doubt that the Palestinain Authority will not stop the islamist paramilitary groups operating in the West Bank and Gaza. Therefore Israel has the obligation to protect it's citizens from the islamist paramilitary groups operating in the West Bank and Gaza.

Originally posted by kimiko
Of course I know speculation isn't evidence. I'm making a rational argument, not a proof. That is the only sensical reason I can think of for targetting schoolchildren. If someone else can think of a more plausible one, I'd revise my view.How about the real one kimiko? That the ideology of these islamist paramilitary groups involves the extermination of Israel and all jews in "Palestine". You can easy visit the website of Hamas, they tell you themselves. Hell, they've said it publicly a hundred times.

You cannot impose your rationale onto these jihadists and then extrapolate why you think they might be shooting anti-tank rockets at buses full of settler schoolkids. These people shoot at buses full of kids or blow up Israeli buses, restaurants, malls, discos, pool halls, holiday resorts, markets, bus stops, seders, pizzarias, hotels, stores because they are ideological nut cases, some of whom are bent on martyrdom. And if the Palestinian Authority will not stop these islamist paramilitary groups then unfortunately that obligation falls squarely into the lap of the victims...the Israelis.


Originally posted by kimiko
I'm not dodging the issue; you seem to want me to agree that the deaths of Palestinian children is entirely the fault of Palestinian terrorists. Unless Palestinians shoot the kids, then the IDF is still responsible for reacting when they know civilians will die. It's a trade-off they are willing to make.Civilians die because the Palestinian Authority allows islamist paramilitary groups to use Palestinian civilians for cover and concealment. Said another way, Palestinian civilians are used as shields by these islamist paramilitary groups. These islamist paramilitary groups hide amongst Palestinian civilians and dress like Palestinian civilians, ergo Palestinian civilians die in clashes between islamist paramilitary groups and the IDF. Since the Palestinian Authority has yet to stop any islamist paramilitary group since 1993, many Palestinian civilians have died as a result.

[zenith-nadir]

Case in point:

Palestinian Gunmen Join Police Force - Associated Press - 10/May/05 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050510/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_militant_cops/nc:736) TULKAREM, West Bank - Hosni Abu Ghreib figures he has a good deal. After four years on the run from Israeli forces, the militant has traded his mask for a Palestinian police uniform and a steady paycheck. To top it off, he still has a gun.

His transformation was made possible by the jobs-for-fugitives program, the Palestinian response to Israeli and U.S. charges that Palestinians have failed to crack down on militants. Palestinians say they are getting militants off the streets without confrontations. Ya.. by making them Palestinian policemen. But there is more...The militants want "to give politics a chance," he said, warning they could still return to violence. "Those who say the uprising is over are wrong. We are in a cease-fire, but if the Palestinians don't get their demands, there will be more uprisings," he said.(emphasis mine) Now is that a Palestinian policeman talking or is that a combatant from an islamist paramilitary group?...I dunno cuz he's dressed like a policeman...Meanwhile in the same article; In Jenin, a militant stronghold, dozens of Palestinian gunmen and police exchanged fire for a second day Monday after a local militant leader said police shot him in the leg without provocation. Are those Palestinian policeman firing at Palestinian gunmen in Jenin or are those former islamist paramilitary members - now dressed like policemen - firing at Palestinian gunmen in Jenin? How do we know? Who can we trust?

[Cleon]

zenith-nadir, much as I appreciate your ability to gleam articles from the Net and spin them as you see fit, would you please at least read them before sampling bits and pieces?

You write:




The militants want "to give politics a chance," he said, warning they could still return to violence. "Those who say the uprising is over are wrong. We are in a cease-fire, but if the Palestinians don't get their demands, there will be more uprisings," he said.(emphasis mine)


Now is that a Palestinian policeman talking or is that a combatant from an islamist paramilitary group?...I dunno cuz he's dressed like a policeman...


Here's the entire section, without your comments:


The militants are supposed to turn over their weapons when they start their new job, but some admit they don't. An Islamic Jihad gunman who is in talks with the
Palestinian Authority to receive a government job, said he and nine other militants for the group still have their weapons.

"We have put them away somewhere safe," said the gunman, who identified himself only as Abu Ahmed, fearing the Israelis could still track him down.

The militants want "to give politics a chance," he said, warning they could still return to violence. "Those who say the uprising is over are wrong. We are in a cease-fire, but if the Palestinians don't get their demands, there will be more uprisings," he said.


He's not a policeman, he's a different guy altogether "in talks" to get a government job. For all you know, he might wind up as a garbage collector.

So either you didn't bother reading it before spewing the propaganda, or you're deliberately misrepresenting it.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Cleon
So either you didn't bother reading it before spewing the propaganda, or you're deliberately misrepresenting it. The ironic part about your entry into this thread Cleon is that you object to me not quoting the proper islamist militant to your satisfaction...rather than the fact that islamist militants - who still have their weapons - are being given jobs as p-o-l-i-c-e-m-e-n and government officials.

Priceless....:D

[Cleon]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
The ironic part about your entry into this thread Cleon is that you object to me not quoting the proper islamist militant to your satisfaction...rather than the fact that islamist militants - who still have their weapons - are being given jobs as p-o-l-i-c-e-m-e-n and government officials.

Priceless....:D

Spin, spin, spin....Must be your only talent.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Cleon
Spin, spin, spin....Must be your only talent. The only spin happening here is the one you are perpetuating. That being, lambasting me for not quoting islamist militants to your satisfaction rather than talking about islamist militants being given police and government positions.
:D:id:

[Cleon]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
The only spin happening here is the one you are perpetuating. That being, lambasting me for not quoting islamist militants to your satisfaction rather than talking about islamist militants being given police and government positions.

Repeating the spin doesn't distract from the fact that you didn't bother reading the article, yet felt free to "sell" the parts you found important.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
These people shoot at buses full of kids or blow up Israeli buses, restaurants, malls, discos, pool halls, holiday resorts, markets, bus stops, seders, pizzarias, hotels, stores because they are ideological nut cases, some of whom are bent on martyrdom. Calling them nut cases isn't helpful, and even suggests they aren't totally responsible for their actions due to mental illness. It's better to remember that they're mostly regular people, who deliberately choose to join terror organizations. This is a group phenomenon. Once inside an organization whose goals include killing, ordinary people can commit seemingly demonic acts. According to psychiatrist Robert J. Lifton, who has studied Nazis and other violent, fanatical groups, cult members become two people: the self they were, and the new, morally disengaged killer self. Some people are more susceptible to such doubling than others, often in response to trauma. Jessica Stern- Terror in the Name of God Civilians die because the Palestinian Authority allows islamist paramilitary groups to use Palestinian civilians for cover and concealment. And because the people who have set policy in Israel have decided that civilian casualties are acceptable in attacking terrorist leaders, even knowing they are providing the stimulus that people prone to the moral doubling described above will use to justify new attacks. Civilian deaths are in no one's interests.

I'm not convinced the PA has the power to get all of these people. They're obviously extremely violent, and seem to operate with impunity because of that violence. Have the Israelis tried enticing people with large bounties for getting important terror leaders?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Cleon
Repeating the spin doesn't distract from the fact that you didn't bother reading the article, yet felt free to "sell" the parts you found important. :slp:

Originally posted by kimiko
Calling them nut cases isn't helpful, and even suggests they aren't totally responsible for their actions due to mental illness. It's better to remember that they're mostly regular people, who deliberately choose to join terror organizations."Regular" people do not join terror organizations. ;)

Originally posted by kimiko
And because the people who have set policy in Israel have decided that civilian casualties are acceptable in attacking terrorist leaders, even knowing they are providing the stimulus that people prone to the moral doubling described above will use to justify new attacks. Civilian deaths are in no one's interests.For decades Palestinian Islamist groups have been killing Israeli civilians, even prior to 1967. Anyhow... these so-called "leaders" know that the Palestinian Authority shall never arrest them. They also know that if they hide amongst Palestinian civilians when the Israelis come to get them it is great P.R. if Palestinian civilians die. Quite the dilemma for Israel. So either, A) Israel waits for the moon to turn blue and the Palestinian Authority finally arrests a single Islamist leader or B) Israel arrests and kills Islamist leaders who are sending people to kill Israelis. Originally posted by kimiko
Have the Israelis tried enticing people with large bounties for getting important terror leaders?"Collaborators" - as they are called - are murdered on the spot. Their killers are never arrested.
Palestinians execute woman 'collaborator' - 25 August, 2002 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2215320.stm)
The body of a Palestinian woman accused of collaborating with Israeli forces has been found in the West Bank town of Tulkarm. A member of the militant group, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, said it had seized her from her house and videotaped a confession before shooting her as a warning to others.Gunmen kill suspected collaborators in Gaza hospital - August 3, 2004 (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/02/1091432117642.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true)

A Gaza jail guard hurled grenades at prisoners accused of collaborating with Israel and militants later killed two of the wounded men in their hospital beds.

Four armed Palestinians went into the hospital's intensive care unit and shot Hamdiya three times in the head and chest, killing him instantly.There are literally hundreds of these incidents Kimiko. We are talking about some really really bad people here. More ironic is that the Palestinian Authority doesn't even attempt to arrest these people for murdering Palestinians without trial. That is the environment Israel and Palestinian civilians have to live with... terrorists killing Israelis while they hide amongst Palestinian civilians, murderous terrorist gangs executing Palestinians without trial in the streets, and an "Authority" who refuses to stop any of it. Some here blame the "settlements" for it all, I chose to see the forest rather than the trees.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
:slp:


Well, as long as you're honest about your lack of interest in accuracy or facts.


"Regular" people do not join terror organizations. ;)


And where, then, do terrorists come from? Planet Zeebo?


For decades Palestinian Islamist groups have been killing Israeli civilians, even prior to 1967. Anyhow... these so-called "leaders" know that the Palestinian Authority shall never arrest them.


Nope, the PA shall never arrest them. (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/2/26/80820.shtml)



"Collaborators" - as they are called - are murdered on the spot. Their killers are never arrested.


All of them are murdered "on the spot?" Always? Everyone who ever helped the Israelis in any way? What spot, exactly? Are you sure their killers are never arrested?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by kimiko
I'm not dodging the issue; you seem to want me to agree that the deaths of Palestinian children is entirely the fault of Palestinian terrorists. No, I just want to clarify whether you think that the death of children is a result of the violent situation, or whether you think the IDF would kill children no matter what. Let's put aside the issue of "fault" for the moment. Is it within the power of the Palestinians to prevent the death of their children?

Unless Palestinians shoot the kids, then the IDF is still responsible for reacting when they know civilians will die. Are you using "responsible" to mean the same thing as "at fault"?

Only if boys with rocks can be considered akin to an armed military. I think "combatants" would probably be better reserved to organized violent groups, and only applied to young people when they take on armed activities like shootings and bombings.
I don't see why we need to have only one type of combatants, and everyone who isn't fullblown paramilitary is "noncombatants". Calling these people "noncombatants" gives the impression that they have no responsibility for their deaths.

[webfusion]

Cleon, what are you trying to prove?

You know perfectly well that the essence of the information presented here is largely correct. You seem to take special pride in ignoring the main realities and getting your kicks by going off on some bizarro nit-picking fest.

The article you quoted about the PA "arresting" some people who were thought to be behind the STAGE nightclub bombing (a report from February) has had some updates since then. Are you aware of new details in this ongoing story, or are you satisfied with the old Feb. 26th version? I am astonished that you are participating in this discussion without bothering to place the truth before the readers of this forum, Cleon.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/571284.html
An Israel Defense Forces soldier was killed and another lightly wounded in a gun battle with wanted Palestinians near the West Bank city of Tul Karm before dawn Monday May 2, 2005. The IDF fatality was identified as Staff Sergeant Dan Talasnikov, 21, from Nir Galim. He was laid to rest Monday in the Nir Galim cemetery.
An Islamic Jihad leader suspected of involvement in a February suicide bombing in Tel Aviv was also killed in the clashes. Palestinian sources identified the Jihad militant killed in the ensuing clashes as Shafiq Abdul Rani, 37, one of the leaders of the group's military wing in the Tul Karm area, Israel Radio reported. He had been arrested for his alleged involvement in the Tel Aviv bombing, but escaped from a Palestinian prison about two weeks ago, according to the report.

He 'escaped' which is a euphemism for "he was let go"
and then IDF forces decided to take care of the job themselves, at considerable risk to the troops involved (as evidenced by the result of Sgt Talisnikov dying).

When you post into a forum to call someone else "lacking interest in accuracy or facts" then it would behoove you to try and offer some insights of your own that meet the minimum standards of repudiation.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=palestinians+arrest&itemNo=573366

So far what I have seen is laser beams and dazzle but no substance from you, Cleon.

[demon]

webfusion:
"He 'escaped' which is a euphemism for "he was let go""

Says who? You?
I can think of a few euphemisms for that kind of BS.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by webfusion
Cleon, what are you trying to prove?

Mainly, that zenith-nadir cares less about facts and accuracy than about backing up his point of view. Actually, I need to prove very little; he proves it pretty well on his own.


You know perfectly well that the essence of the information presented here is largely correct. You seem to take special pride in ignoring the main realities and getting your kicks by going off on some bizarro nit-picking fest.


Asking for evidence of his claims and pointing out his errors is a "bizarro nit-picking fest?" Funny, I could've sworn this was a skeptics' board. My bad.


The article you quoted about the PA "arresting" some people who were thought to be behind the STAGE nightclub bombing (a report from February) has had some updates since then. Are you aware of new details in this ongoing story, or are you satisfied with the old Feb. 26th version? I am astonished that you are participating in this discussion without bothering to place the truth before the readers of this forum, Cleon.


Considering that zenith-nadir has already established himself as not giving a whit about the truth, your astonishment means very little to me.


He 'escaped' which is a euphemism for "he was let go"
and then IDF forces decided to take care of the job themselves, at considerable risk to the troops involved (as evidenced by the result of Sgt Talisnikov dying).


Wow. I assume, of course, that the moment I ask for evidence of this claim--mainly that he was let go, and that "escape" is a euphemism for this--I will once again "astonish" you by not "bothering to place the truth in front of the readers of this forum."

Funny how that works.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by webfusion
Cleon, what are you trying to prove? That he is a troll. He entered this thread to attack me, period. He has nothing to offer, no insight, no new ideas... hell, he has yet to address the topic of the thread. All he has done is dropped his usual libelous turd into the conversation under the guise of his self-imposed superiority complex.

Well as you can see by his post regarding the "arrested" militants he failed to produce the actual facts... that they were let go days later to kill again. Now dropping into threads to attack posters and misrepresenting facts is frankly trolling of the first order.:D

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Cleon
Wow. I assume, of course, that the moment I ask for evidence of this claim--mainly that he was let go, and that "escape" is a euphemism for this--I will once again "astonish" you by not "bothering to place the truth in front of the readers of this forum."

Funny how that works.

Cleon,

Can you provide one example of where the Palestinian-Authority ever arrested, charged, and convicted a man for terrorism?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Cleon, Can you provide one example of where the Palestinian-Authority ever arrested, charged, and convicted a man for terrorism? How about an easier one. No jews involved. Can he provide one example of where the Palestinian-Authority ever arrested, charged, and convicted a person for murdering another Palestinian without trial? See: collaborators. ;)

[Cleon]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
That he is a troll. He entered this thread to attack me, period.

Quite an ego you have, there.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Cleon
Quite an ego you have, there.

That's just a warm-up, right? You're about to answer our questions?

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Mycroft
That's just a warm-up, right? You're about to answer our questions?

Hang on...ZN provides inaccurate information, webfusion provides an extremely questionable claim, and I have to answer your questions?

Yeah...

[webfusion]

Abdul Rani escaped from detention easily, and the Palestinians claimed that
PA security will probe "incidents which allowed the escape to happen.".
http://imemc2.thinkhost.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10576&Itemid=1

His guards probably forgot to lock the doors to his cell overnight! Whoops!

I don't need to provide evidence of the circumstances of the escape! It is a common thing, happens all the time; wanted Palestinians are detained one day, the press is duly notified, and as soon as the media is busy looking the other way, these guys are out on furlough ('escaped', 'released', 'paroled', 'village arrest', whatever...)
http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/nfo/article.cfm?id=3525


There are probably some official records of PA Detention Centers for 2004/5, but I can't locate any currently--- How about you, Cleon? Where are your facts and figures?
http://www.piccr.org/newsletter/nov03-eng.pdf

You have the floor...

[The Fool]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
How about an easier one. No jews involved. Can he provide one example of where the Palestinian-Authority ever arrested, charged, and convicted a person for murdering another Palestinian without trial? See: collaborators. ;)
ets get this clear ZN. you want palestinians to auto repress? Basically its your idea that they should catch and imprison for Israel anyone who kills thier occupiers? Handy if you can arrange it....Can you imagine the American founding fathers rounding up and prosecuting people for murdering British? How about Native americans or australian aboriginals punishing those that killed the clonial invaders?

Thats the trouble here ZN, just as you see the Palestinians as the face of the same old opressors that have murdered jews for being jews for centuries...Palestinians see Israelis as the face of the same old opressors who have blown in from europe to control and humiliate them.

Niether the Jews nor the palestinians are going anywhere..Israel is not going to establish a greater israel with thier acceptable 20% or less non Jewish population without massive ethnic cleansing. The Palestinians are not going to have the power to eliminate the Israeli government and restore the jewish presence in palestine to a nice quiet minority by massive ethnic cleansing either.

The first step in any chance for peace has got to be the establishment of a viable Palestinian nation. The longer this occuation continues the worse the prospects are for all the people of palestine.

ZN, you are going to have to get used to the idea that the history of Israelis and palestinians will forever be intertwined....The future has got to start now...not with whining about the natives resisting too much but with the realisation that you need to get your foot off thier throats and allow them to get up off the floor and sit at the negotiation table as an emergent nation...not as "the arab problem".

[RandFan]

Originally posted by The Fool
ets get this clear ZN. you want palestinians to auto repress? Basically its your idea that they should catch and imprison for Israel anyone who kills thier occupiers? Handy if you can arrange it....Can you imagine the American founding fathers rounding up and prosecuting people for murdering British? How about Native americans or australian aboriginals punishing those that killed the clonial invaders?

Thats the trouble here ZN, just as you see the Palestinians as the face of the same old opressors that have murdered jews for being jews for centuries...Palestinians see Israelis as the face of the same old opressors who have blown in from europe to control and humiliate them.

Niether the Jews nor the palestinians are going anywhere..Israel is not going to establish a greater israel with thier acceptable 20% or less non Jewish population without massive ethnic cleansing. The Palestinians are not going to have the power to eliminate the Israeli government and restore the jewish presence in palestine to a nice quiet minority by massive ethnic cleansing either.

The first step in any chance for peace has got to be the establishment of a viable Palestinian nation. The longer this occuation continues the worse the prospects are for all the people of palestine.

ZN, you are going to have to get used to the idea that the history of Israelis and palestinians will forever be intertwined....The future has got to start now...not with whining about the natives resisting too much but with the realisation that you need to get your foot off thier throats and allow them to get up off the floor and sit at the negotiation table as an emergent nation...not as "the arab problem". The Palestinians are not interested in their own State. They simply want Israel gone. Their rhetoric has always called for the destruction of Israel. Israel isn't going anywhere either. Let's stop pretending that Palestinians are simply interested in autonomy when all of their Rhetoric and actions demonstrate otherwise.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by RandFan
The Palestinians are not interested in their own State. They simply want Israel gone. Their rhetoric has always called for the destruction of Israel. Israel isn't going anywhere either. Let's stop pretending that Palestinians are simply interested in autonomy when all of their Rhetoric and actions demonstrate otherwise.
Yes, that is a commonly held opinion. Another opinion commonly held is that Israel is not interested in peace and will continue to
expand and make life hell for Palestinians until it has driven them out of the entire land that god promised them. I believe there are plenty of people on both sides, and on this forum, that subscribe to these views...I think they are part of the problem and certainly not part of any potential solution.

I can only see two options...a one state aparthied solution with a permanent underclass or a two state solution. Can you think of any other alternative?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by The Fool
ets get this clear ZN. you want palestinians to auto repress? Ok. Lemme see if I have this. The islamist paramilitary groups represent all Palestinians... ergo if the Palestinian Authority arrests any of them for attacking Israel that would be... er...ah..."oppression"? Interesting.:D

Originally posted by The Fool
Yes, that is a commonly held opinion. Another opinion commonly held is that Israel is not interested in peace and will continue to expand.... Yes.. look at all that Israeli expansion...;)

http://www.gva.be/dossiers/-i/israel/img/palgeb.gif

[The Fool]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Ok. Lemme see if I have this.
No you haven't....but thats normal.

you are part of the problem in the middle east ZN....Hopefully peace will win over your efforts.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
Not clear who you are referring to as liberal or what standards of behaviour you are suggesting I'm not willing to apply. I believe that every form of terrorism is wrong whether applied by sub-national or national bodies.

I'm a self-confessed liberal and the standards of behavior I was suggesting you weren't willing to apply are whatever standards of behavior Mycroft accuses us both of not applying. I also believe every form of terrorism is wrong. In the case of the Unholy Land, both sides are guilty.

It seems to me that one side in this argument seems to resort to the same basic assertions that "something" (and no doubt, something drastic) be done about the cease-fire so the cease-fire can continue.

The only thing they can apparently espouse is more killing (doing "something" to "help" the Palestinians about their "terrorist" problem. Great! I think that's an original thought. While we're at it, the Palestinians and the U.N. could monitor military actions taken by Israel in respose to retaliations from all the "help."

As I said before, we just need to kill more of them so they'll realize they shouldn't kill more of us! If we could just get the idea across to their stupid children, brothers, parents, wives, uncles, grandparents and friends, that the IDF is their friend. They should come around, forgive us for killing their loved one, then the peace process can truly go forward.

Watching an argument with no movement towards a PEACEFUL end is like watching you guys argue about whether we support the People's Front of Judea, or the Judean People's Front.

Mephisto

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
ets get this clear ZN. you want palestinians to auto repress? Basically its your idea that they should catch and imprison for Israel anyone who kills thier occupiers?

If it's what they agreed to under a peace agreement, yes.

What's the alternative? Either they can be trusted to live up to their agreements, or they can't. Either they're capable of living in peace with the Israelis, or they're not.

Originally posted by The Fool
Handy if you can arrange it....Can you imagine the American founding fathers rounding up and prosecuting people for murdering British? How about Native americans or australian aboriginals punishing those that killed the clonial invaders?


Yes in all cases.

If the American founding fathers had made a peace agreement with England where they agreed to cease hostilities and prosecute individuals or groups that continued waging war, then yes, I would expect the new American government to round up the lawbreakers and prosecute them.

Tell me, if an Australian aboriginal killed a non-aboriginal "colonial invader" today, wouldn't he be prosecuted? I know a native American would.

Originally posted by The Fool
Thats the trouble here ZN, just as you see the Palestinians as the face of the same old opressors that have murdered jews for being jews for centuries...Palestinians see Israelis as the face of the same old opressors who have blown in from europe to control and humiliate them.

Oh, this is brilliant. :rolleyes: You want to distinguish Palestinian-Arabs from the "same old opressors"(sic) who murdered Jews for centuries...by giving them Carte Blanche to kill more Jews?! By never expecting them to stop killing Jews? By never expecting them to live up to any agreement?

Originally posted by The Fool
Niether the Jews nor the palestinians are going anywhere..Israel is not going to establish a greater israel with thier acceptable 20% or less non Jewish population without massive ethnic cleansing. The Palestinians are not going to have the power to eliminate the Israeli government and restore the jewish presence in palestine to a nice quiet minority by massive ethnic cleansing either.

So they had better learn to get along! And fundamental to getting along is building trust by living up to agreements made.

You claim to want peace, but then you literally excuse Palestinian-Arab terrorism. The path to peace isn’t making excuses for terror, like you are, but in putting an end to violence. You certainly don’t put an end to violence by shooting rockets busses of children.

Originally posted by The Fool
The first step in any chance for peace has got to be the establishment of a viable Palestinian nation. The longer this occuation continues the worse the prospects are for all the people of palestine.

The first step is building trust. No agreement means anything without that.

Originally posted by The Fool
ZN, you are going to have to get used to the idea that the history of Israelis and palestinians will forever be intertwined....The future has got to start now...not with whining about the natives resisting too much but with the realisation that you need to get your foot off thier throats and allow them to get up off the floor and sit at the negotiation table as an emergent nation...not as "the arab problem".

By excusing terror, you’re the one encouraging them to be "the Arab problem."

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mephisto
It seems to me that one side in this argument seems to resort to the same basic assertions that "something" (and no doubt, something drastic) be done about the cease-fire so the cease-fire can continue.


By some standards acknowledging that a cease-fire is broken when someone no longer ceases to fire (i.e., just recognizing truth when you see it) is considered "drastic."

Closer to my opinion would be recognizing there is a problem now and dealing with it now might prevent something drastic from happening later. I think this is a problem that can be solved at the negotiating table if we don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by The Fool
And the NYPD cannot eliminate crimes against Authority in NY and niether will the PA be able to eliminate crimes against Israelis in the occupied land... Get used to it and stop using it as an excuse to undermine the peace process.

[L]ets get this clear ZN. you want palestinians to auto repress? Basically its your idea that they should catch and imprison for Israel anyone who kills thier occupiers? Handy if you can arrange it....Can you imagine the American founding fathers rounding up and prosecuting people for murdering British? How about Native americans or australian aboriginals punishing those that killed the clonial invaders?

And here we see The Fool's mind at work. Or rather, what passes for a mind at what passes for work.

The PA is like the NYPD. Just like New Yorkers are generally lawabiding folk, but there are few people who break the law, and that will never change, there will always be Palestinians who kill Israelis, no matter how hard the PA tries to stop it.

On the other hand, the PA is like the "founding fathers", a group that was in open warfare.

The Fool asks "what level of violence would be acceptable and still allow the efforts towards peacefull agreement to continue?" There's a simple answer to that: we need a Palestinian population that isn't comparable to the founding fathers.

Either the PA is at war with Israel, or it's not. The Fool wants to have it both ways: when people complain about terrorist attacks, well, the PA isn't at war Israel, so it's not their fault. When people say that PA should do something, suddenly they are at war, and therefore can not be expected to help their enemy.

The first step in any chance for peace has got to be the establishment of a viable Palestinian nation. No, the first step will have to be the security of Israel. Israelis will never countenance the creation of a state dedicated to its destruction. Terrorism predates the beginning of the occupation, and if the end of terrorism does not predate the end of the occupation, there is not reason to think terrorism won't continue after the occupation. Can you imagine the Germans demanding that all Allied forces leave Germany before signing a peace treaty?

not with whining about the natives resisting too much but with [whining about the Zionists being disrespectful towards the people that are trying to kill them]

the realisation that you need to get your foot off thier throats and allow them to get up off the floor and sit at the negotiation table as an emergent nation...not as "the arab problem". The foot on the throat will be removed when the knife in the hand disappears. Palestinians will be treated as an emergent nation when they start acting like one.

Originally posted by The Fool
Yes, that is a commonly held opinion. Another opinion commonly held is that Israel is not interested in peace and will continue to
expand and make life hell for Palestinians until it has driven them out of the entire land that god promised them.And one of these views is based on actual events, and the other on prejudice.

I can only see two options...a one state aparthied solution with a permanent underclass or a two state solution. Can you think of any other alternative? What about a one state solution in which Arabs are on par with Jews? Seems about as likely as a two state solution. If the Palestinians get their own state, what do you think Israel will do when that state attacks them? They'll just invade and occupy, and we'll just be right back where we started. Unless they're a major shift in Palestinian attitudes, I don't see any viable situation other than the status quo.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
What about a one state solution in which Arabs are on par with Jews? Seems about as likely as a two state solution. If the Palestinians get their own state, what do you think Israel will do when that state attacks them? They'll just invade and occupy, and we'll just be right back where we started. Unless they're a major shift in Palestinian attitudes, I don't see any viable situation other than the status quo.

Well as a one state solution with Arabs on par with jews is not possible and you dismiss a two state solution what is your final solution? What does your "status quo" look like? Does it look like a Jewish minority controlling a non Jewish Majority? Will you still be claiming it is democracy?

Do you imagine Israelis want to be the Palestinians permanent masters? The last place to try that ended up under sanctions from the free world. Is that the future you want for Israel? A racist rogue state?

[Skeptic]

Do you imagine Israelis want to be the Palestinians permanent masters? The last place to try that ended up under sanctions from the free world. Is that the future you want for Israel? A racist rogue state?

I don't see why not. After all, you see absolutely nothing wrong with a racist rogue Palestinian state, which must be judenrein and can engage in blowing up jewish schoolchildren in buses without this counting against it--it doesn't even "really" count as breaking a cease-fire as long as they missed.

Clearly it's not engaging in racism, or rthnic cleaning, or genocide, or terror, or rogueishness that bothers you. All those are perfectly legitimate cases of "resistance" and protection of occupied land" (there is only Palestinian land, no jewish land, of course)--as long, of course, as they are used against jews.

But you are not an antisemite.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Skeptic


I don't see why not.

The Idea appeals to you?


After all, you see absolutely nothing wrong with a racist rogue Palestinian state, which must be judenrein and can engage in blowing up jewish schoolchildren in buses without this counting against it--it doesn't even "really" count as breaking a cease-fire as long as they missed.

I don't count these crimes as the "breaking of a ceasefire" I doubt if you would classify the ongoing shootings by the IDF as breaking the cease fire would you? You dearly want to see this cease fire fail because a permanent state of war is required for your plan for the palestinian people.

Clearly it's not engaging in racism

yes it is....


, or rthnic cleaning, or genocide,

I agree with you there, the palestinians do not have the capacity to ethnically cleans such a large military power as Israel.


or terror, or rogueishness that bothers you.

Terrorist attacks most definitely "bother me" but you will continue to state otherwise because thats what you do.

All those are perfectly legitimate cases of "resistance" and protection of occupied land"

Have I said that?...bet you a donut you can't find it.




(there is only Palestinian land, no jewish land, of course)--as long, of course, as they are used against jews.

Mycroft has moved on from describing the west bank as "disputed" land and now calls it Israeli land...bit of a mask slip but nobody is perfect...what say you? Is the west bank "Israeli land" or "palestinian land" or "disputed land"? You speak of "Jewish land" what about the Israelis that are not Jewish...is it thier land too? You know the ones I'm talking about...the "arab problem"

But you are not an antisemite.
you are correct....but what do you care, its something fun to call anyone who does not march to Sharons drum eh?

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
I agree with you there, the palestinians do not have the capacity to ethnically cleans such a large military power as Israel.


They may not have the military strength to do it directly, but they’re about to achieve exactly that in the Gaza Strip.

Originally posted by The Fool
Terrorist attacks most definitely "bother me" but you will continue to state otherwise because thats what you do.


I guess you just don’t define it as terrorism when it’s done by Palestinian-Arabs. You dismiss the idea that the Abbas government should do anything about it by saying it would be "auto repression" if they were to catch and imprison anyone who "kills their occupiers."

Originally posted by The Fool
But you are not an antisemite.
you are correct....but what do you care, its something fun to call anyone who does not march to Sharons drum eh?

That's what I call people who excuse the deliberate targeting of children. Lot's of people are against Israeli policies, you go way above and beyond that.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by The Fool
you are part of the problem in the middle east ZN....Hopefully peace will win over your efforts. Ya...er...ahhhh...ok Einstein.

The Palestinian Authority agreed to stop the islamist paramilitary groups when they signed on the dotted line during Oslo 1, The agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area, The agreement on the Preparatory Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities, The Interim Agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, The Wye River Plantation Agreement, The Sharm el Sheikh Agreement, The Palestinian-Israeli Security Implementation Work Plan (Tenet Plan) and The Performance-Based Road Map to a Permanent Two-State Solution.

So either the islamist paramilitary groups represent Palestinian foreign policy or they do not the Fool. It is that simple. Either their actions are an act of war on behalf of the Palestinian people or they are acting against the wishes of the Palestinian people. Even I can understand that one.

Therefore, if the islamist paramilitary groups are acting on behalf of the Palestinian people then Israel has the obligation to defend itself against acts of war like suicide bombing and shooting anti-tank rockets at schoolbuses. If the islamist paramilitary groups are not acting on behalf of the Palestinian people then the Palestinian Authority has the obligation to stop them under international law and several signed peace treaties with Israel. Period, end of sentence.


PA to sound siren on 'Nakba Day' - May. 11, 2005 (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1115705340547)

The Palestinians are planning to mark Israel's Independence Day by sounding a siren as an expression of mourning.

Leaders of various factions in the West Bank issued a statement on Tuesday in which they said that there would be no peace with Israel unless all the refugees are allowed to return to the original homes. The statement came at the end of an emergency meeting in Ramallah of representatives of Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as Syrian-backed groups like the Popular Front and the Democratic Front. As you can see the Fool the islamist paramilitary groups are dictating Palestinian foreign policy. They say there will be no peace until their demands are met. In essence they are extorting Israel using terrorism if their demands are not met. I thought the elected Palestinian Authority spoke for the Palestinian people not the islamist paramilitary groups. And that is why they must be stopped and removed.Jordanian convicted of Israel attack plan - May 11, 2005 (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/05110002aaa05384.upi&Sys=rmmiller&Fid=WORLDNEW&Type=News&Filter=World%20News)

AMMAN, Jordan, May 11 (UPI) -- Jordan's state security court Wednesday sentenced a Jordanian to four years in prison for planning an attack against Israel.

The indictment said Amro received military training from a commander in the outlawed Jaysh Mohammed, Mohammed's army, and purchased arms in 2000 to carry out an operation against Israel through the border with Jordan. As you can see the Fool Jordan is not oppressing Jordanians by stopping Jordanian Islamist paramilitary members. Jordan's government is arresting them for breaking the law and attempted terrorism. It's not a bizarre phenomenon or something unheard of...nor is it unreasonable to require the same behaviour from the Palestinian Authority.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Cleon
Hang on...ZN provides inaccurate information, webfusion provides an extremely questionable claim, and I have to answer your questions?

Yeah...

It would be a fast and easy way for you to win this argument. Why wouldn't you do that?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
1. You did not post what the IDF actually did, you posted an alleged position of the IDF. Whether the IDF murders children and whether the IDF considers murdering children to be the "answer" are two different issues. Au contraire. 'The Israelis said they returned fire after coming under mortar attack.' I contend that showing such a regular disregard for the lives of innocent children constitutes a clear position. If they do not want to do it why do it? Did a 'Palestinian' or apparently in your lexicon a 'terrorist' come up and force them to fire towards the school or are their weapons skills so poor that they cannot hit what they aim at?2. Mycroft did not "invent something the other person did not say", he posted his opinion of what Mephisto's position is, just as you posted your opinion of what the IDF's position is. What Mycroft actually claimed was 'Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.' In other words he invented something the other person did not state. Interestingly the other person stated 'No, that's not another way of saying that! Those are YOUR words.' I posted exactly what the IDF did, chose to do, and admitted to doing, unless God almighty is now pulling their triggers for them. 3. You say that the two are different because your statement is based on actuality, yet you have not proven that Mycroft was wrong. The person about whom Mycroft invented a statement stated that Mycroft was wrong. QED.4. Your "evidence" is ridiculous. You simply presented examples of people who had been killed, without any evidence that the IDF killed them, or that they had been murdered. My 'evidence' caomes from one of the most reputable sources of world news, namely the BBC and from Israel sources themselves. If you had read the link you would have noticed that either the commander of a unit or the men are lying when 'The soldiers complained that after the first shots were fired at the girl, the company commander approached her motionless body, fired two shots to her head, and then sprayed her with automatic fire. The commander denies some of the accusations, Haaretz reports. ' I know it is ridiculous to posting the words of IDF soldiers as claimed by IDF soldiers and as reported by the BBC.

Who is lying here the IDF or the IDF?
What?!? YOU'RE the one making the claim, YOU'RE the one with the burden of proof. What evidence do you have that there wasn't any fire from Palestinians? I have presented the evidence of the Israeli's own words, as reported by the BBC. You appear to be calling Israeli's liars. If you are now trying to claim that the Palestinians shot their own children in these specific cases please provide evidence supporting your allegation. See, here's the thing. In order for you to say that the IDF has "contempt" for the lives of innocent children, you must, at the very least, show that there is a clear alternative. The alternative is very clear. Don't assassinate untried people in circumstances that ensure innocent children will be killed. Don't shoot at children in school.I started a thread to see what people alternatives people think there are, and I don't remember anyone presenting any. In fact, I'm pretty sure that you didn't post at all. So should I follow every thread you start? I really don't think so. I have just given you an alternative. It wasn't very difficult to arrive at as it is an alternative the decent democracy I live in uses. I commend it to Sharon if he really wants peace. Seeing as how no other methods of defending themselves have been presented, it seems to me like you really have a problem with Israel defending itself in general, and your alleged concern of "innocent children" is just an excuse. At least one other alternative has now been presented to you so you can no longer make that silly claim. The principle is to behave like other decent democratic states.

My concern for innocent children is exactly that, a concern for innocent children. You choose to disparage decent sentiments. That is your problem, not mine as it demonstrates a lack of humanity in my opinion.

I have absolutely no problem with Israel defending itself. I come from a terrorised land and know how decent democratic states behave and they do not collectively punish entire groups of people through the appalling crime of bulldozing the homes of innocent children, amongst other things.

I do have a problem with Sharon's terrorist collective punishments of innocent people. That you see fit to put the words, innocent children, into quotes suggest that you have a real problem with believing there are any and that is not the attitude of a decent democrat in my opinion.You seem to be "inventing something the other person did not say". No. Just trying to accurately reflect your views. I notice you didn't deny it so I will take it that it was accurate.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
"Regular" people do not join terror organizations. Unfortunately, like the Nazis, they are and were ordinary people. Quite the dilemma for Israel. Quite the dilemma for everyone. Terrorists have to be stopped, whether they are terrorizing Israelis or operating as vigilantes among Palestinians.

[demon]

Speaking of children...

quote:
Study Reveals TV News Vastly Underreports Palestinian Children's Deaths
On Capitol Hill yesterday, a two-year study of network news coverage of Israel/Palestine revealed extensive underreporting of Palestinian deaths, particularly of children's deaths.
by: If Americans Knew on: 11th May, 05
The study (http://www.ifamericansknew.org/download/networks.pdf)
conducted by media watchdog organization If Americans Knew, shows that in 2004 eight Israeli children and 179 Palestinian children were killed.

In reporting on this situation, the organization found that the networks reported on Israeli children's deaths at rates up to 13 times greater than Palestinian children's deaths. In reality, 22 times more Palestinian children were being killed than Israeli children.

"Since American taxpayers give Israel over $10 million per day, it is essential that we be accurately informed on this issue," says executive director Alison Weir, who discussed the study in a briefing in the Rayburn House Office Building yesterday "Unfortunately, our study shows that in many cases we're being misinformed, rather than informed."

The study, which examined ABC, CBS, and NBC news coverage of the first year of the current Palestinian uprising and of 2004, found "pervasive patterns of distortion" in which Israeli deaths were emphasized and Palestinian deaths largely unreported......

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050510134409990014&cid=1291

[kimiko]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
No, I just want to clarify whether you think that the death of children is a result of the violent situation, or whether you think the IDF would kill children no matter what. Let's put aside the issue of "fault" for the moment. Is it within the power of the Palestinians to prevent the death of their children? Of course it is the situation. The Palestinians alone cannot prevent the death of their children. Are you using "responsible" to mean the same thing as "at fault"? No. I don't see why we need to have only one type of combatants, and everyone who isn't fullblown paramilitary is "noncombatants". Calling these people "noncombatants" gives the impression that they have no responsibility for their deaths. Calling them noncombatants is unrelated to their responsibility in their own deaths. Rock throwing is not equivalent to military and para-military force; it is more like civil unrest during protests when they turn dangerous- throwing objects, overturning cars, smashing windows, etc. Those kinds of behaviors don't warrant a military response, they warrant a police response, with officials trained in police action, riot gear, rubber bullets, etc. Kids throwing rocks should get a rubber bullet at most.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
Au contraire. 'The Israelis said they returned fire after coming under mortar attack.' I contend that showing such a regular disregard for the lives of innocent children constitutes a clear position. If they do not want to do it why do it? Did a 'Palestinian' or apparently in your lexicon a 'terrorist' come up and force them to fire towards the school or are their weapons skills so poor that they cannot hit what they aim at?
You are simply begging the question of whether they show disregard to Palestinian lives, giving no evidence for that allegation. Even IF they show such disregard, you are STILL making assumptions. You can run around in circles all you claiming that those assumptions are based on evidence, but that doesn't change the fact that you are making assumptions. Earlier, you said that "So their answer is murdering schoolchildren." Unless you can produce an official policy declaration to that effect, all you have is the allegation that they murder schoolchildren, WHICH IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE IDEA THAT THIS IS THEIR "ANSWER". In claiming that this is their "answer", you are saying that they do INTENTIONALLY. Incidents in which they do it accidently, even if due to gross negligence, do nothing to support your position. If you are allowed to make deductions as to their intentions based on their actions, it is hypocritical for you to deny the same right to Mycroft. Finally, the fact that you ridicule the idea that they might actually hit schoolchildren by accident shows that you either know absolutely nothing about warfare, or you are being deliberately disingenuous.

What Mycroft actually claimed was 'Which is another way of saying you will apply no standards of behavior to the Palestinian-Arabs and will not object when they target children.' In other words he invented something the other person did not state. [emphasis mine] When applied to Mycroft, the standard is whether they "stated" it. When applied to you, it is whether it is supported by the evidence. You have two different standards, ergo you are a hypocrite.

I posted exactly what the IDF did, chose to do, and admitted to doing, unless God almighty is now pulling their triggers for them. You posted no evidence that the IDF did it, let alone that they CHOSE to do it.

he person about whom Mycroft invented a statement stated that Mycroft was wrong. QED.So if someone denies something, they can't possibly be guilty?!?

My 'evidence' caomes from one of the most reputable sources of world news, namely the BBC and from Israel sources themselves.You didn't HAVE any evidence! If you think that there's something on another website that supports your position, quote it! Don't post a link and expect me to hunt through the website trying to figure out what you think is "evidence".

I know it is ridiculous to posting the words of IDF soldiers as claimed by IDF soldiers and as reported by the BBC. So... someone in the IDF must be lying, therefore killing Palestinian children must be an official policy of the IDF? Why is someone being investigated for killing a Palestinian child if that is the official policy of the IDF?

I have presented the evidence of the Israeli's own words, as reported by the BBC. You appear to be calling Israeli's liars.Give me a quote from an Israeli that shows that killing children is an official goal of the IDF.

If you are now trying to claim that the Palestinians shot their own children in these specific cases please provide evidence supporting your allegation. What part of "You're making the claim, you have the burden of proof" do you not understand?

The alternative is very clear. Don't assassinate untried people in circumstances that ensure innocent children will be killed.I said "Seeing as how no other methods of defending themselves have been presented, [emphasis added]". I didn't ask for any old alternative, I asked for an alternative method of defending themselves.

Don't shoot at children in school. They are not shooting at children at school! That is an outright lie, and if you had any scruples at all you would ashamed of such a disgusting allegation.

So should I follow every thread you start?This from someone who feels free to continue lying about me because I didn't officially deny the lie. My point is that I hear over and over again that they shouldn't do this, but I can't get anyone to tell me what an alternative is.

It wasn't very difficult to arrive at as it is an alternative the decent democracy I live in uses.
Most incredibly idiotic ideas are easy to arrive at. For instance, what's an alternative to high pollution cars? Don't use any cars at all! How can we stop the high rates of death due to medical errors? Outlaw hospitals! See how easy it is to come up with a solution when one completely ignores the premises of the question?

My concern for innocent children is exactly that, a concern for innocent children. You choose to disparage decent sentiments. "Decent sentiments"? You call accusing the Israelis of being murderers "decent sentiments"? Your statements have been very short on concern for the children, and long on the hate mongering against the Israelis.

I have absolutely no problem with Israel defending itself. So why is it that when I specifically ask for an alternative that defends Israel, you give one that includes no such provision?

I come from a terrorised land and know how decent democratic states behave and they do not collectively punish entire groups of people It is impossible to engage in warfare without collective punishment.

through the appalling crime of bulldozing the homes of innocent children, amongst other things.
Are there a lot of Palestinian children who own their own homes?

I do have a problem with Sharon's terrorist collective punishments of innocent people. Even though your accusations of terrorism are based on lies?

That you see fit to put the words, innocent children, into quotes suggest that you have a real problem with believing there are any and that is not the attitude of a decent democrat in my opinion.No, it suggests that I think there are some children who are not innocent. That you continue to engage in ridiculous interpretations of my statements, while criticizing Mycroft's "inventing" words shows just how dishonest you are.

No. Just trying to accurately reflect your views. When have I ever said that "Palestinian" is a synonym for "terrorist"?

I notice you didn't deny it so I will take it that it was accurate. I specifically said that it was something that I did not say. "You didn't deny it strenuously enough" has got to be one of the lamest excuses I have ever seen.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by kimiko
Of course it is the situation. The Palestinians alone cannot prevent the death of their children. With all due respect Kimiko that is a load of crap. Doesn't your government prevent the death of children by not allowing islamist paramilitary groups to attack neighboring countries while they hide amongst your civilians? Doesn't your government prevent the death of children by preventing warfare in your streets? Doesn't your government prevent the death of children by not allowing them to be groomed as child soldiers? So why can't the Palestinians do the same? Are they incapable of even those basic responsibilities? The responsibility for the welfare of Palestinian children lays squarely at the feet of the Palestinian Authority. Period.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/images/palestinian_girl_explosives.jpg
http://www.jafi.org.il/agenda/9-1c.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Pictures/pal-child-abuse-15.jpg

(Images courtesy of jafi.org.il, palestinefacts.org, homepage.mac.com)


Originally posted by kimiko
Rock throwing is not equivalent to military and para-military force; it is more like civil unrest during protests when they turn dangerous- throwing objects, overturning cars, smashing windows, etc. If you attack a policeman, tank or a soldier with rocks - or anything else for that matter - you have left the realm of noncombatant into the realm of combatant. Sorry that is how it goes. The answer is not to riot against tanks and soldiers, the answer is not to nit pick what is an acceptable level of rioting.

Originally posted by kimiko
Those kinds of behaviors don't warrant a military response, they warrant a police response, with officials trained in police action, riot gear, rubber bullets, etc. Kids throwing rocks should get a rubber bullet at most. Well since the Palestinian Authority does nothing to stop kids rioting and does nothing to stop islamist paramilitary groups launching raids into Israel it is up to Israel to deal with it. You may not agree with it but someone has to stop this type of behaviour.

Originally posted by kimiko
Unfortunately, like the Nazis, they are and were ordinary people.I don't know any 'regular' people who are members of islamist terror organizations Kimiko. Do you know any regular people who are members of islamist terror organizations? How many regular people do you know who yearn to blow up a restaurant or bus? You Nazi reference is null and void in this instance unless you agree that the islamist terror organizations are at war with Israel on behalf of the Palestinian people.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
You are simply begging the question of whether they show disregard to Palestinian lives, giving no evidence for that allegation. Shooting at schools is an affront to decency and shows a disregard for the lives of children.Even IF they show such disregard, you are STILL making assumptions. No. I reported the words of the Israeli soldiers as reported by the BBC. Shooting at children in schools is crime against humanity - whoever does it.You can run around in circles all you claiming that those assumptions are based on evidence, but that doesn't change the fact that you are making assumptions. No. My posts are based on evidence from one of the most reputable news companies in the world and the words of the Israeli soldiers themselves. Are you claiming that the soldiers are lying and that the Palestiniabns shot the children or some other group shot them. If so, please provide evidence.Earlier, you said that "So their answer is murdering schoolchildren." Unless you can produce an official policy declaration to that effect, all you have is the allegation that they murder schoolchildren, Where did I say it was an official policy? You can torch your own straw men as much as you like but you are just debating your own claim. I believe my post accurately represents the choice made by specific Israeli soldiers to shoot at schools. In doing so they chose to do so in a way that showed no concern for the children therein and as such any deaths that result can be described as murder. Who forced them to pull their triggers and fire into schools? WHICH IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE IDEA THAT THIS IS THEIR "ANSWER". No it isn't. It is the chosen answer of those soldiers. Unless you are now suggesting someone forced each one of them to pull their triggers.In claiming that this is their "answer", you are saying that they do INTENTIONALLY. Yes I am. Who else forced them to pull their triggers?Incidents in which they do it accidently, even if due to gross negligence, do nothing to support your position. Then please supply your claim that these cases happened accidently. If you are allowed to make deductions as to their intentions based on their actions, it is hypocritical for you to deny the same right to Mycroft. I have made no deductions. The soldiers admitted to shooting into the school. Mycroft invented something about what the other poster said.Finally, the fact that you ridicule the idea that they might actually hit schoolchildren by accident shows that you either know absolutely nothing about warfare, or you are being deliberately disingenuous. Please present your evidence that they all did so by accident. Is every incident of Palestinian children being killed by Israeli an accident in your opinion? If not, how many have not been accidental.When applied to Mycroft, the standard is whether they "stated" it. When applied to you, it is whether it is supported by the evidence. You have two different standards, ergo you are a hypocrite. Mycroft made up something about another posters intentions. I accurately reported that the IDF have killed children in schools with a disregard to human life. That amounts to murder. You posted no evidence that the IDF did it, let alone that they CHOSE to do it. Once agin you seem to have failed to actually read the links I quoted when the IDF stated 'The Israelis said they returned fire after coming under mortar attack.' in relation to the child being shot. Are you now trying to claim that any one else shot the child? If so, please present your evidence. I also presented these statements by the IDF
'The soldiers complained that after the first shots were fired at the girl, the company commander approached her motionless body, fired two shots to her head, and then sprayed her with automatic fire. The commander denies some of the accusations, Haaretz reports. ' I have adasked you before and I ask you again. Who is lying here? The IDF or the IDF? Do you have an answer this time or are you going to ignore the evidence of the IDF's own words yet again?So if someone denies something, they can't possibly be guilty?!? Who denies what exactly?You didn't HAVE any evidence! If you think that there's something on another website that supports your position, quote it! Don't post a link and expect me to hunt through the website trying to figure out what you think is "evidence". My evidence was posted for you. The soldiers admitted firing. I have posted it again on this site. I have also posted where the IDF must be lying about the murder of a girl. Let me post it again for you as you appear to have a problem with finding words on this thread.
Which part of the IDF is lying here?
'The soldiers complained that after the first shots were fired at the girl, the company commander approached her motionless body, fired two shots to her head, and then sprayed her with automatic fire. The commander denies some of the accusations, Haaretz reports. ' So... someone in the IDF must be lying, therefore killing Palestinian children must be an official policy of the IDF? Why is someone being investigated for killing a Palestinian child if that is the official policy of the IDF? Where did I state that killing Palestinian children is an official policy of the IDF? That is something you made up. Debate your own straw men if you like. Your inventions, like Mycrofts are nothing to do with me.Give me a quote from an Israeli that shows that killing children is an official goal of the IDF. As you made the claim you will have to supply your own evidence.What part of "You're making the claim, you have the burden of proof" do you not understand? Either you will support your own claims or you don't? It is up to you.I said "Seeing as how no other methods of defending themselves have been presented, [emphasis added]". I didn't ask for any old alternative, I asked for an alternative method of defending themselves. Defending themselves against what exactly - maurading houses, ten year old girls in school uniform carrying school books, olive trees, pregnant women in labour? Everyone, including Sharon should stop terrorising people - full stop. That is the alternative. Are you suggesting that collectively punishing entire group of innocent peopel is a defense against something. If so, why can't everyone indulge in that practice?They are not shooting at children at school! That is an outright lie, and if you had any scruples at all you would ashamed of such a disgusting allegation. It is not a lie it is a statement of fact. The contempt the IDF has for the lives of innocent children is also shown in this following harrowing extract from http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16886-2004Nov27?language=printer
'"It's a little girl," a soldier watching from a nearby Israeli observation post cautioned over the military radio. "She's running defensively eastward. . . . A girl of about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death."

Four minutes later, Israeli troops opened fire on the girl with machine guns and rifles, the radio transmissions indicated. The captain walked to the spot where the girl "was lying down" and fired two bullets from his M-16 assault rifle into her head, according to an indictment against the officer. He started to walk away, but pivoted, set his rifle on automatic and emptied his magazine into the girl's prone body, the indictment alleged.

"This is Commander," the captain said into the radio when he was finished. "Whoever dares to move in the area, even if it's a 3-year-old -- you have to kill him. Over."
The BBC also reports that

'The United Nations runs this school. Its investigators believe that Raghda was hit by a bullet fired by Israeli soldiers.

The shooting began when Palestinian militants who oppose the Israeli occupation of Gaza launched a series of missiles at a nearby Jewish settlement.


In the Israeli town of Sderot, the threat is from crude Hamas rockets
The UN says that the soldiers shot indiscriminately into the crowded refugee camp for more than half an hour.'

The Washington Post in the above link also states that

The shooting of the schoolgirl added to a growing number of incidents that have spurred Israeli soldiers to speak out about abuses of Palestinians, despite pressure from superiors in the field and statements by senior military officials playing down such cases. Last week, after troops provided photographic evidence to an Israeli newspaper, the military opened an investigation into allegations that soldiers desecrated the bodies of Palestinians killed during army operations.

I urge every IDF member to support the truth and speak about what they have witnessed accurately and completely.This from someone who feels free to continue lying about me because I didn't officially deny the lie. My point is that I hear over and over again that they shouldn't do this, but I can't get anyone to tell me what an alternative is. What lie exactly are you talking about? At least support your own claims this time. You can no longer say that you have not been provided with an alternative. I have given you a number of alternatives. Stop terrorising innocent children for one. Stop shooting at schools. Stop shooting schoolchildren. Stop bulldozing the homes of innocent children. Stop building apartheid walls. Stop stealing land. Start treating the Palestinians like Isrealis i.e. like human beings.
Most incredibly idiotic ideas are easy to arrive at. Then provide at least some evidence why you infer my ideas are idiotic. Is Sharon stopping his terrorism of innocent Palestinians idiotic in your eyes. Is stopping shooting into schools idiotic in your eyes? For instance, what's an alternative to high pollution cars? Don't use any cars at all! If you want to hurl abuse at your own ideas feel free.How can we stop the high rates of death due to medical errors? Outlaw hospitals! See how easy it is to come up with a solution when one completely ignores the premises of the question? What this demonstrates is your inability to accurately reflect my views. Why not suggest that if Sharon really wants to stop terrorism he might start with his own terrorism? How difficult is that idea?"Decent sentiments"? You call accusing the Israelis of being murderers "decent sentiments"? Your statements have been very short on concern for the children, and long on the hate mongering against the Israelis. Once agin you disparage decent sentiments. Your attempt to demonise me by falsely climing I hate Israelis. Please quote a single phrase of mine where I state that I hate Israelis. Just one would do. You can't. Once again as you have demonstrated so often in this thread, like Mycroft you have made something up. You can carry on torching your own straw men but they remain your own straw men, not mine.

Is your case and Mycroft's really so weak that you have to make things up to support it? I do believe that if you choose to murder someone you are a murderer, wherever you come from. So why is it that when I specifically ask for an alternative that defends Israel, you give one that includes no such provision? An alternative to what, terrorism as a method of defending yourself? The answer is very simple. Stop terrorising. My answer to what you do is obey the law. How difficult is that? Ask Sharon to stop assassinating untried people in circumstances that ensure innocent children are murdered. Treat the Palestinians like Israelis.It is impossible to engage in warfare without collective punishment. Despicable. When did Israel declare war against innocent Palestinians? Even in warfare you have to behave like human beings. Sharon does not have to bulldoze the homes of innocent people. I believe that is a crime against humanity.
Are there a lot of Palestinian children who own their own homes? Since when did you have to own a building for it to be your home. This demonstrates an chillingly inhuman attitude towards innocent Palestinian children.Even though your accusations of terrorism are based on lies? What lies? At least try to support your claim. Are you saying that Sharon does not collectively punish an entire group by bulldozing the homes of innocent children? That is an act of terror. No, it suggests that I think there are some children who are not innocent. That you continue to engage in ridiculous interpretations of my statements, while criticizing Mycroft's "inventing" words shows just how dishonest you are. Mycroft invented something the other person did not say. You chose to put the words - innocent children - into quotes. That was your choice. You have also chosen to ask 'Are there a lot of Palestinian children who own their own homes?' I submit this demonstartes extemely clearly your despicable attitude to innocent Palestinian children. When have I ever said that "Palestinian" is a synonym for "terrorist"? You still haven't denied it so presumably you feel it was an accurate reflection of your own tactic. Here is a sample of your own posts.
'What's really going on is that that Palestinians kill a bunch of people, public opinion starts to turn around on them, so militants intentionally get themselves killed (or other Palestinians killed), then Palestinians whine about how "bloodthirsty" the Israelis are, and use it as "justification" to kill more people.' I specifically said that it was something that I did not say. "You didn't deny it strenuously enough" has got to be one of the lamest excuses I have ever seen. When you put things in quotes and attrubute them to me please quote them accurately and don't lie. After all, the words are there on the thread for anyone to see how you chose to misrepresent me. Let me ask you a simple question. Are all Palestinians terrorists? Yes or no?

[Mycroft]

Art,

The cool think about reading troll-posts like this is you know it took him a couple hours to write it, but you can skim over it in just a few seconds. Then with some bland response like, "You have not provided evidence for your case, you've only restated what you've said before" you may be able to get him to spend another couple hours making another one.

That is, if you insist on responding at all.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Mycroft
The cool think about reading troll-posts like this is you know it took him a couple hours to write it, but you can skim over it in just a few seconds. I'm not so sure. Take a look at the quote below. It's composed entirely of rearranged portions of his last post, and nearly all of it is stuff he's said in previous posts. Note how he repeats the same idea over and over again. Debating EJA is like listening to some bizarre parody of "A Partridge in a Pear Tree".

First post:
Israelis are terrorists

Second post:
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis are terrorists

Third post:
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis murder school schildren
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis are terrorists

Fourth Post:
Israelis murder school schildren
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis murder school schildren
Are you going to support any of your claims?
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis are terrorists

Using this tactic, he can very easily turn a few vacuous thoughts into several dozen pages.

Shooting at schools is an affront to decency and shows a disregard for the lives of children.
Shooting at children in schools is crime against humanity - whoever does it.
I believe my post accurately represents the choice made by specific Israeli soldiers to shoot at schools. In doing so they chose to do so in a way that showed no concern for the children therein and as such any deaths that result can be described as murder.
The soldiers admitted to shooting into the school.
I accurately reported that the IDF have killed children in schools with a disregard to human life. That amounts to murder.
'The United Nations runs this school. Its investigators believe that Raghda was hit by a bullet fired by Israeli soldiers.
I do believe that if you choose to murder someone you are a murderer, wherever you come from.

As you made the claim you will have to supply your own evidence. Either you will support your own claims or you don't? It is up to you.
At least support your own claims this time.

I reported the words of the Israeli soldiers as reported by the BBC.
My posts are based on evidence from one of the most reputable news companies in the world and the words of the Israeli soldiers themselves.
My evidence was posted for you. The soldiers admitted firing.

Everyone, including Sharon should stop terrorising people - full stop.
Stop terrorising innocent children for one. Stop shooting at schools. Stop shooting schoolchildren. Stop bulldozing the homes of innocent children. Stop building apartheid walls. Stop stealing land. Start treating the Palestinians like Isrealis i.e. like human beings.
Is Sharon stopping his terrorism of innocent Palestinians idiotic in your eyes. Is stopping shooting into schools idiotic in your eyes?
Why not suggest that if Sharon really wants to stop terrorism he might start with his own terrorism? How difficult is that idea?
An alternative to what, terrorism as a method of defending yourself? The answer is very simple. Stop terrorising. My answer to what you do is obey the law. How difficult is that? Ask Sharon to stop assassinating untried people in circumstances that ensure innocent children are murdered. Treat the Palestinians like Israelis.
Sharon does not have to bulldoze the homes of innocent people. I believe that is a crime against humanity.
Are you saying that Sharon does not collectively punish an entire group by bulldozing the homes of innocent children? That is an act of terror.

Are you claiming that the soldiers are lying and that the Palestiniabns shot the children or some other group shot them. If so, please provide evidence.
Are you now trying to claim that any one else shot the child? If so, please present your evidence.

Where did I say it was an official policy? You can torch your own straw men as much as you like but you are just debating your own claim.
Where did I state that killing Palestinian children is an official policy of the IDF? That is something you made up. Debate your own straw men if you like. Your inventions, like Mycrofts are nothing to do with me.
What this demonstrates is your inability to accurately reflect my views.
Once again as you have demonstrated so often in this thread, like Mycroft you have made something up. You can carry on torching your own straw men but they remain your own straw men, not mine.
Is your case and Mycroft's really so weak that you have to make things up to support it?
Mycroft invented something the other person did not say.
When you put things in quotes and attrubute them to me please quote them accurately and don't lie.
Mycroft made up something about another posters intentions.
Mycroft invented something about what the other poster said.

Who forced them to pull their triggers and fire into schools?
Unless you are now suggesting someone forced each one of them to pull their triggers
Who else forced them to pull their triggers?

It is the chosen answer of those soldiers.

Then please supply your claim that these cases happened accidently.
Please present your evidence that they all did so by accident.


I also presented these statements by the IDF
'The soldiers complained that after the first shots were fired at the girl, the company commander approached her motionless body, fired two shots to her head, and then sprayed her with automatic fire. The commander denies some of the accusations, Haaretz reports. '
I have also posted where the IDF must be lying about the murder of a girl.
Which part of the IDF is lying here?
'The soldiers complained that after the first shots were fired at the girl, the company commander approached her motionless body, fired two shots to her head, and then sprayed her with automatic fire. The commander denies some of the accusations, Haaretz reports. '
'"It's a little girl," a soldier watching from a nearby Israeli observation post cautioned over the military radio. "She's running defensively eastward. . . . A girl of about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death."
Four minutes later, Israeli troops opened fire on the girl with machine guns and rifles, the radio transmissions indicated. The captain walked to the spot where the girl "was lying down" and fired two bullets from his M-16 assault rifle into her head, according to an indictment against the officer. He started to walk away, but pivoted, set his rifle on automatic and emptied his magazine into the girl's prone body, the indictment alleged.
"This is Commander," the captain said into the radio when he was finished. "Whoever dares to move in the area, even if it's a 3-year-old -- you have to kill him. Over."
The BBC also reports that

I have adasked you before and I ask you again. Who is lying here? The IDF or the IDF? Do you have an answer this time or are you going to ignore the evidence of the IDF's own words yet again?

[zenith-nadir]

Meanwhile in Israel;

Violence flares in south Lebanon (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/05130000aaa00cfe.upi&Sys=rmmiller&Fid=WORLDNEW&Type=News&Filter=World%20News)

BEIRUT, Lebanon, May 13, 2005 (UPI) -- Israeli warplanes raided a Hezbollah position in south Lebanon Friday shortly after the militant Shiite group bombarded a disputed border area.

The raid was in retaliation for Hezbollah's bombardment of an Israeli outpost in the disputed Shabaa Farms area on the foothills of Mount Hermon. Hamas threatens to kidnap Israeli soldiers (http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/05130000aaa01b52.upi&Sys=rmmiller&Fid=WORLDNEW&Type=News&Filter=World%20News)

GAZA, May 13, 2005 (UPI) -- Members of the Palestinian militant group Hamas threatened Friday to kidnap Israeli soldiers and swap them for Palestinian prisoners in Israel.

Nizar Rayyan, a commander of the Hamas military wing, al-Qassam Brigades, told demonstrators in the Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza kidnapping Israeli soldiers is a valid tactic.

Meanwhile in other parts of the world;New German Holocaust Memorial Vandalized (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050513/ap_on_re_eu/germany_holocaust_memorial/nc:732)

BERLIN May 13, 2005 (AP)- Within hours of the opening of Germany's national Holocaust memorial to the public, a vandal scratched a swastika into one of the 2,711 gray slabs, a spokesman for the memorial said Friday.Embassy attacker wore fake bomb belt (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1115950742669)

TASHKENT May. 13, 2005 (AP) - Police shot and killed a suicide bomber outside the Israeli Embassy in the Uzbek capital on Friday, the US Embassy in Tashkent said.Damn those settlers! ;)

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
I'm not so sure. Take a look at the quote below. It's composed entirely of rearranged portions of his last post, and nearly all of it is stuff he's said in previous posts. Note how he repeats the same idea over and over again. Debating EJA is like listening to some bizarre parody of "A Partridge in a Pear Tree".

First post:
Israelis are terrorists

Second post:
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis are terrorists

Third post:
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis murder school schildren
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis are terrorists

Fourth Post:
Israelis murder school schildren
Israelis are terrorists
You are a liar
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis murder school schildren
Are you going to support any of your claims?
Israelis are terrorists
You are liar
Israelis are terrorists

Using this tactic, he can very easily turn a few vacuous thoughts into several dozen pages.

Good lord, you're right, and I haven't laughed so hard in months! The Twelve Days of Christmas is a perfect analogy.

Once I carried on this debate with him for three months before I gave up. When I saw how often he repeated himself, I started cutting and pasting my own responses from previous posts in the same thread. It saved a lot of time for me, but he never noticed. He really could be a bot.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Good lord, you're right, and I haven't laughed so hard in months! The Twelve Days of Christmas is a perfect analogy.

Once I carried on this debate with him for three months before I gave up. When I saw how often he repeated himself, I started cutting and pasting my own responses from previous posts in the same thread. It saved a lot of time for me, but he never noticed. He really could be a bot. E.J. suffers from selective reality. When Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinians were bombing the crap out of Israel from 48 to 67 he sees the result - the six day war - as Israeli colonialism. When the Palestinian islamist paramilitary groups bomb the crap of Israelis or murder them from Munich to Rome to Tel Aviv he sees the result - IDF retaliation - as Israeli terrorism. Such is E.J's world view.

Perhaps one day he will have an epiphany and finally the horse will actually pull the cart instead of the opposite.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
E.J. suffers from selective reality. When Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinians were bombing the crap out of Israel from 48 to 67 he sees the result - the six day war - as Israeli colonialism. When the Palestinian islamist paramilitary groups bomb the crap of Israelis or murder them from Munich to Rome to Tel Aviv he sees the result - IDF retaliation - as Israeli terrorism. Such is E.J's world view.

Perhaps one day he will have an epiphany and finally the horse will actually pull the cart instead of the opposite.

Either that or he just gets a kick out of baiting people. Have you noticed he doesn't try to change anyone's mind? All he really does is try to keep it going for as long as possible until hew gets the last word.

[E.J.Armstrong]

Art,

The cool think about reading troll-posts like this is you know it took him a couple hours to write it, but you can skim over it in just a few seconds. Then with some bland response like, "You have not provided evidence for your case, you've only restated what you've said before" you may be able to get him to spend another couple hours making another one.

That is, if you insist on responding at all.


Here is Mycroft the arch anti-sceptic at work. As well as refusing to support his own claims it seems that he can't bear others do so. Plus ca change?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
I'm not so sure.

And your response to my points is....?

Abuse.

Is your argument so bereft of its own merits that it needs to be supported by abuse.

Sadly it does seem so.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by zenith-nadir
E.J. suffers from selective reality. When Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinians were bombing the crap out of Israel from 48 to 67 he sees the result - the six day war - as Israeli colonialism.
I have just a simple question for you. The sort you often run away from. Just one place would do.

When the Palestinian islamist paramilitary groups bomb the crap of Israelis or murder them from Munich to Rome to Tel Aviv he sees the result - IDF retaliation - as Israeli terrorism. Such is E.J's world view. Terrorism is terrorism where ever it comes from. Is that concept too difficult for you?

How do you defeat terrorism by terrorisng innocent people. Bulldozing the homes of innocent people is collective punishment and equivalent to terrorism in my book.Perhaps one day he will have an epiphany and finally the horse will actually pull the cart instead of the opposite. I come from a terrorised land. I know terrorism when I see it - wherever it comes from. You seem to want to only see the terrorism you want to see and ignore the rest. Who knows, perhaps one day you will be able to see that all terrorism is bad, whereever it comes from?

[zenith-nadir]

E.J.

In a paragraph or two - I have a short attention span because I grew up near powerlines - what is your answer to solve this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
E.J.

In a paragraph or two - I have a short attention span because I grew up near powerlines - what is your answer to solve this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians.

Oh, don't do that! Nothing productive will come from it!

[Mephisto]

One of my favorite philosophers is Eric Hoffer, and I believe that he would have quite a bit to say about the length of this string.

It's the difference between men of intellect and men of action. Unfortunately, the men of intellect are just as stuck in their conventions (and their blame) as the men of action are stuck in their bloody retributions.

It's obvious that many here involved in this discussion are apparently incapable of looking beyond their own justifications. I suggested (in all seriousness) that perhaps the Palestinians would be better off running casinos and draining the Israelis financially rather than militarily, but everyone thought I was joking.

It worked for the Native Americans to the point that now many American states are considering banning the casinos (for religious reasons). We can't have the people we've fought so hard to conquer coming back to take our hard earned (and badly invested) money, can we?

I've had my say. You can all go back to moot arguments and to deciding whether to call yourselves the Judean People's Front, the People's Front of Judea or the Popular People's Front of Judea. Men of action shouldn't be hindered.

Mephisto

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Mephisto
One of my favorite philosophers is Eric Hoffer, and I believe that he would have quite a bit to say about the length of this string.

It's the difference between men of intellect and men of action. Unfortunately, the men of intellect are just as stuck in their conventions (and their blame) as the men of action are stuck in their bloody retributions.

It's obvious that many here involved in this discussion are apparently incapable of looking beyond their own justifications. I suggested (in all seriousness) that perhaps the Palestinians would be better off running casinos and draining the Israelis financially rather than militarily, but everyone thought I was joking.

It worked for the Native Americans to the point that now many American states are considering banning the casinos (for religious reasons). We can't have the people we've fought so hard to conquer coming back to take our hard earned (and badly invested) money, can we?

I've had my say. You can all go back to moot arguments and to deciding whether to call yourselves the Judean People's Front, the People's Front of Judea or the Popular People's Front of Judea. Men of action shouldn't be hindered.

Mephisto I just love arrogance and pomposity. Perhaps that is why I engage in it from time to time. From one (at times) arrogant b@sterd to another --good form.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by zenith-nadir
E.J.

In a paragraph or two - I have a short attention span because I grew up near powerlines - what is your answer to solve this conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians.

ZN
In all seriousness for once, can I ask if you have any intention of supporting your allegations about other posters and ask in all seriousness why you seem unable to post without abusing those who respond to your posts?

I replied to your last post and asked you to demonstrate where I posted what you alleged about me. You have declined to do so. Why is that?

I notice that once again Mycroft intervenes to try to stop discussion but that seems to be his method of operating at present.

In the light of your question and in the hope of a reasoned reply I will summarise the position that I have posted on more than one occasion previously and which I hold sincerely.

You have to treat everyone equally under the law, both domestic and international where applicable. I submit that is not happening in Israel and Arab countries at present.

If that policy is fairly and consistently carried out, support for extremists on both sides will shrink and decent people on both sides will feel reassured that the government will support them and they will not need resort to extremists.

This however is not an overnight process and it will be attacked by men of ill will from every side including those for whom peace is anathema. Administrations have to be strong in standing up to men of ill will and reasonable people have to be prepared to name the men of ill will fearlessly and openly.

I have given this opinion seriously and with good intent based on my own experiences in growing up in a terrorised land. If you choose not to accept it so be it. It does not and never will mean that I support terrorism wherever it occurs, whether from an arab individual, group or country or a christian individual, group or country or a jewish individual, group or country etc.

I abhor all terrorism. This includes individual, group and state terrorism.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by RandFan
I just love arrogance and pomposity. Perhaps that is why I engage in it from time to time. From one (at times) arrogant b@sterd to another --good form.

Call me arrogant and call me pompous, but BOTH sides of this argument can't come to an agreement (because they're all still pointing fingers). We're just discussing this in a philosophy forum, how would our views differ if we actually had to LIVE in Israel or Palestine? How more vehement would our views be if our sister, mother or wife was killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber? How much more angry would we be if our sister's or mother's house had been bulldozed by the Israeli government in retaliation for a terrorist action she wasn't responsible for?

Is it pompous to see that a grotesque stalemate has been drawn? Is is arrogant to suggest that, no matter how well a point is made, it is a moot point unless we A. learn a lesson from it, and B. it benefits everyone involved?

Call me arrogant, and call me pompous, but I know for a fact you can't stir the $hit without getting some on you!

Mephisto

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Mephisto
Call me arrogant and call me pompous, but BOTH sides of this argument can't come to an agreement (because they're all still pointing fingers). We're just discussing this in a philosophy forum, how would our views differ if we actually had to LIVE in Israel or Palestine? How more vehement would our views be if our sister, mother or wife was killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber? How much more angry would we be if our sister's or mother's house had been bulldozed by the Israeli government in retaliation for a terrorist action she wasn't responsible for?

Is it pompous to see that a grotesque stalemate has been drawn? Is is arrogant to suggest that, no matter how well a point is made, it is a moot point unless we A. learn a lesson from it, and B. it benefits everyone involved?

Call me arrogant, and call me pompous, but I know for a fact you can't stir the $hit without getting some on you!

Mephisto This isn't a think tank and our purpose here isn't to solve problems. There is a purpose to the first amendment and it isn't about practical problem solving. Any speech anywhere for any reason is of value. Full Stop. Period. End of story. Should the people here stop pointing fingers and be productive? Hey, count me in. I no longer take part of such discussions the way I used to. I have come to the conclusion that there is little to be gained.

I've had my say. You can all go back to moot arguments and to deciding whether to call yourselves the Judean People's Front, the People's Front of Judea or the Popular People's Front of Judea. Men of action shouldn't be hindered. Taking your ball and leaving and accusing others of wasting their time IS both pompous and arrogant. Now, we could debate that but then what would be the point? I concede that I have often done the same as you are now.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by RandFan
This isn't a think tank and our purpose here isn't to solve problems. There is a purpose to the first amendment and it isn't about practical problem solving. Any speech anywhere for any reason is of value. Full Stop. Period. End of story. Should the people here stop pointing fingers and be productive? Hey, count me in. I no longer take part of such discussions the way I used to. I have come to the conclusion that there is little to be gained.

Taking your ball and leaving and accusing others of wasting their time IS both pompous and arrogant. Now, we could debate that but then what would be the point? I concede that I have often done the same as you are now.

You're absolutely right, and thank you for acknowledging that you've also done it. I guess the frustrations of hearing an argument without end bothered me. And you're also right about the "think tank." Most of us are amateur philosophers and I sometimes forget that this forum is, at most, a forum of mental entertainment/exercise.

I'm still learning.

Mephisto

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Mephisto
You're absolutely right, and thank you for acknowledging that you've also done it. I guess the frustrations of hearing an argument without end bothered me. And you're also right about the "think tank." Most of us are amateur philosophers and I sometimes forget that this forum is, at most, a forum of mental entertainment/exercise.

I'm still learning.

Mephisto Cool and BTW, I welcome any future notice of my next flight of superior fancy in advance. And I can assure you that it will come, soon. No matter how I try I can't seem to help myself. :( :)

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
You have to treat everyone equally under the law, both domestic and international where applicable. I submit that is not happening in Israel and Arab countries at present. Sounds great. One problem, Israel is home to the three "great" religions. While I am not religious, billions of people are, and the ultra religious public - jews, muslims and christians in Israel - feel the court has no right to rule in matters they feel are questions of religious law. Due to Israel's democratic nature with a jewish majority it has been unable to come up with a legislated consensus on a constitution whereby everyone in Israel is equal under the law.

As to why Arabs of a different caste are not equal in muslim countries and discriminated against I am unable to reason. It makes no sense.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
If that policy is fairly and consistently carried out, support for extremists on both sides will shrink and decent people on both sides will feel reassured that the government will support them and they will not need resort to extremistsOne thing about radicals such as Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Hamas even Al Queda...they don't want to compromise. You either accept their "way-of-life" or you are the enemy. Look at Iraq E. J. you think all those suicide bombers give a rats ass about their fellow muslims they are blowing up? Nope, they want to impose their will onto them, just like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa want to impose their will on Israelis.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
This however is not an overnight process and it will be attacked by men of ill will from every side including those for whom peace is anathema. Administrations have to be strong in standing up to men of ill will and reasonable people have to be prepared to name the men of ill will fearlessly and openly. The part about the middle east conflict that really saddens me the most is that I know the Palestinians have better and brighter to offer. For thirty years several different Israeli Prime Ministers and several world leaders tried to reason with Arafat and his henchmen. They all failed to force him to stop the "extremists" because he sold out the Palestinians for greed and power.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
I have given this opinion seriously and with good intent based on my own experiences in growing up in a terrorised land. If you choose not to accept it so be it. It does not and never will mean that I support terrorism wherever it occurs, whether from an arab individual, group or country or a christian individual, group or country or a jewish individual, group or country etc.

I abhor all terrorism. This includes individual, group and state terrorism. The way to stop - if I may borrow your colloquialism - "Israeli" state terror (sic) is for the jihadist paramilitary groups stop chanting "A million martyrs to Jerusalem" and blowing themselves up on buses and in restaurants in Israel. It's the key to stopping the IDF.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
And your response to my points is....?

Abuse.

Is your argument so bereft of its own merits that it needs to be supported by abuse.

Sadly it does seem so. Is your argument so bereft of merit that you must whine about "abuse" when someone points out your use of repitition in place of substantive debate? Do you dispute that you do, in fact, repeat the same thing over and over again? YOU are the one being abusive. You are abusing my patience, by expecting me to respond to points that I have already answered. By lying about my position, then posting stupid excuses like "well, you haven't denied it". By calling me a liar when I criticize your position. By badgering me with nonsense question like "Who is lying- IDF or IDF?" By posting three different instances of Israeli "terrorism", and posting "evidence" for them, but not saying what that evidence is, which of the three accusations it supports, or how it does so.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Due to Israel's democratic nature with a jewish majority it has been unable to come up with a legislated consensus on a constitution whereby everyone in Israel is equal under the law.



Throughout history Jewish people have insisted on equality under the law. They have fought and died for this principle and justifiable expressed outrage when it is denied. Except in Israel, Zionists have enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism in israel. Just as numerous other Middle east regimes have set up cosy arrangements for the benefits of thier particulat sect.

Can you not see the double standard? This discrimination is plain simple racism and you condemn it wherever it occurs in the middle east with one exception.

[Art Vandelay]

I don't know why, but I'm going to try once again to get you to listen to me.

Shooting at schools is an affront to decency and shows a disregard for the lives of children.You either need to post proof that the IDF does this, or apologize for spreading antisemitic propaganda. Posting lies about Israelis is absolutely unacceptable, and shows that you have no concern for the truth.

reported the words of the Israeli soldiers as reported by the BBC. Did the Isreali soldiers say that their answer to terrorism is to murder Palestinian children? YES OR NO?

My posts are based on evidence from one of the most reputable news companies in the world And once against you completely missed the point of my statement. THE FACT THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE BASED ON EVIDENCE DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ASSUMPTIONS. There is a difference between that which you ACTUALLY WITNESSED, and that which YOU DEDUCE. Posting a bunch of "evidence" does nothing to move this from the latter to the former.

Where did I say it was an official policy? You said that it is their "answer". That means that it is their official policy. If the IDF merely has a tendecy to murder people, rather than an official policy, then that means that it is not an "answer".

I believe my post accurately represents the choice made by specific Israeli soldiers to shoot at schools. You did not say that it was the answer of "specific Israeli soldiers" to murder children. You said that it was the answer of ISRAEL AS A WHOLE. Stop trying to weasel out of your claims.

It is the chosen answer of those soldiers.Saying that someone does something and saying that it is their "answer" are two completely different statements.

Who else forced them to pull their triggers?Whether they fired their weapons accidently, and whether they hit children accidently are completely different issues, and it is a tribute to your incredible dishonesty that you would try to obfuscate this disctinction.

Then please supply [evidence for?] your claim that these cases happened accidently. I have already pointed out that as the person who is making the claim, you are the one with the burden of proof. Your asking me to repeat myself shows a large degree of disrespect to me. How am I supposed to prove a negative?

The soldiers admitted to shooting into the school.First of all, I have seen no such quote. Second, YOU DID NOT CLAIM THAT THE SHOT "INTO" THE SCHOOL. YOU SAID THAT THEY MURDERED CHILDREN. This is a pathetic attempt to confuse me into forgetting what your actual claim was.

I accurately reported that the IDF have killed children in schools with a disregard to human life. That amounts to murder. Not only have you NOT provided any evidence that this is so, it does NOT amount to murder, it amounts to manslaughter. Yet another example of you trying to twist language to suit you. If you wished to advance the claim that they "kill with disregard for life", you should have said so from the beginning, rather than using the word "murder", then weaselling out later.

Once agin you seem to have failed to actually read the links I quoted when the IDF stated 'The Israelis said they returned fire after coming under mortar attack.' in relation to the child being shot.THAT'S your evidence?!? Remember, your claim was they murdered a child at a school. That quote says absolutely nothing about a child, a school, or murder. If there was more to this that actually established that they shot towards a school and hit a child, you should have included it.
Furthermore, it completely demolishes your claim. If they were under fire, then it was self defense, which shows that it is not murder. The fact that you would have the IDF sit around and get killed just to avoid the possibility of hitting a child shows just how little you care about Jewish lives, and the fact that you blame the IDF, rather the Palestinians who instigated the incident, shows just how warped your sense of morality is. And finally, to say that someone fired "at" a school means that the school is the intended target. But your quote shows that the militants, not the school, were the intended targets.

Who denies what exactly?You're too lazy to follow the thread, so you want me to do your work for you?

I have also posted where the IDF must be lying about the murder of a girl. Inconsistencies are not the same as lies, and individual IDF members lying is not the same as the IDF as a whole lying. And finally, so what? The original claim was that Israel's answer to terrorism is murder, not that the IDF lies.

Defending themselves against what exactly - maurading houses, ten year old girls in school uniform carrying school books, olive trees, pregnant women in labour?You seriously don't know what Israeli needs to defend themselves against? You seriously have not heard about Israelis being murdered by Palestinians? Or are just being intentionally obtuse?

Are you suggesting that collectively punishing entire group of innocent peopel is a defense against something.There is a difference between collective punishment as a goal, and collective punishment as an unavoidable side effect of another goal, but considering your behavior in this thread, you will probably not being able to grasp the distinction.

It is not a lie it is a statement of fact.Then support it. Show me one example in which the IDF intentionally shot a child at a school. Not where they had "disregard", but where they intentionally shot.

What lie exactly are you talking about?That I consider Palestinans and terrorists to be synomynous.

You can no longer say that you have not been provided with an alternative. I most certainly can, and YOU can no longer honestly claim that it is an alternative, because I have already told you why it does not qualify.

Then provide at least some evidence why you infer my ideas are idiotic.If you cannot figure out for yourself why the idea that terrorism can be stopped by simply leaving Palestinians alone is idiotic, then I don't think I can help you.

What this demonstrates is your inability to accurately reflect my views. No, it quite clearly echoes your views. Instead of presenting an alternative plan to stop terrorism, you simply suggest that they stop fighting terrorism. The analogy of stopping medical errors by closing hospitals is quite apt.

Your attempt to demonise me by falsely climing I hate Israelis... Once again as you have demonstrated so often in this thread, like Mycroft you have made something up.What a hypocrite you are. I am not the one making something up, YOU are. I never said that you hate Israelis, I said that you are a HATEMONGERER. Not all hatemongerers actually hate, just as not all fishmongerers actually fish.

This demonstrates an chillingly inhuman attitude towards innocent Palestinian children.Is it "chillingly inhuman" to recognize that it is an inescapable fact of life that children will suffer for the choices of their parents? Should we not shoot militants, because that would leave innocent children orphaned? Would you consider those children to be "punished" by the IDF?

Are you saying that Sharon does not collectively punish an entire group by bulldozing the homes of innocent children?My understanding is that as far as the present tense is concerned, Israel does not engage in collective punishment by bulldozing houses. Do you have conflicting information?

You chose to put the words - innocent children - into quotes. That was your choice. So if I choose to post something, that gives you the right to make ridiculous misinterpretations? You chose to say that Sharon is a terrorist. I guess I have the right to say that you think Israel was behind 9/11.

I submit this demonstartes extemely clearly your despicable attitude to innocent Palestinian children. Yet another example of your hypocrisy. You, in complete disrespect for my time, post the same thing over and over again. When I point this out, you scream "abuse!" Yet you have no problem calling my attitide "despicable". I guess abuse is only a problem when it's directed towards you.

When you put things in quotes and attrubute them to me please quote them accurately and don't lie. I didn't attribute them to you. I said that it was a lame excuse, I did not say that they were your exact words. As you say, the words are there for everyone to see. Anyone who wanted your actual words can read them; what I put in quotes was what I believe your actual position is. I have made it quite clear to anyone with any sense at all what my position is, so the idea that I have not denied it is ridiculous. My characterization of your position is based on the facts, rather than what you claim your position is.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by The Fool
Can you not see the double standard? This discrimination is plain simple racism and you condemn it wherever it occurs in the middle east with one exception.
Yes, when people treat other people differently because of their race, I consider that to be racism. But when they treat them differently because they're trying to kill them, I consider that to be common sense. What a double standard that is.
:rolleyes:

Oh, and are you ever going to respond to my post regarding the killing combatants issue?

[webfusion]

Zionists have enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism in israel.

Enshrined?
It's not enshirined in the Parliament.
Nor in the Courts.
Also, there are no such enshrined principles in the health care realm, in the motor vehicle realm, in educational institutions.
In housing and real estate, the law prohibits such discrimination (unlike Jordan, where selling a property to a Jew is punishable by death).

Israel may tend to tilt in favor of Jewish inhabitants because it is ostensibly a Jewish State, but there is nothing 'enshrined' about the treatment of the minorities, be they Moslems, Christians, Ba'Hai, Druse, Bedouin, Circassians, Armenians, Samaritans or whomever. Minorities should have it so good elsewhere!

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
Yes, when people treat other people differently because of their race, I consider that to be racism. But when they treat them differently because they're trying to kill them, I consider that to be common sense. What a double standard that is.
:rolleyes:

All non Jews are treated differently, are you suggesting that all non jews are treated differently because they are trying to kill people?


Oh, and are you ever going to respond to my post regarding the killing combatants issue?

Not sure which post you are talking about...Have you been talking about shooting rock throwers again?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by webfusion
Enshrined?
It's not enshirined in the Parliament.
Nor in the Courts.
Also, there are no such enshrined principles in the health care realm, in the motor vehicle realm, in educational institutions.
In housing and real estate, the law prohibits such discrimination (unlike Jordan, where selling a property to a Jew is punishable by death).

Israel may tend to tilt in favor of Jewish inhabitants because it is ostensibly a Jewish State, but there is nothing 'enshrined' about the treatment of the minorities, be they Moslems, Christians, Ba'Hai, Druse, Bedouin, Circassians, Armenians, Samaritans or whomever. Minorities should have it so good elsewhere!
I'm sure you feel your second class citizens are treated better than anyone elses second class citizens but thats not really the point is it...Discrimination on the basis of religion is the foundation of Israel. In my Country the government has no idea what religion you are and doesn't need to know or want to know...I tend to lump governments that do care what religion you are into the creepy category.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
I don't know why, but I'm going to try once again to get you to listen to me.


I betcha a dollar it doesn't work.

Now repeat after me:

"We admit we are powerless over trolls - that our on-line lives have become unmanageable."

You have my sympathies.

You get sucked into thinking if you just point out where he's wrong, how he's twisting logic, and how he's being hypocritical in simple enough terms that he’ll have to acknowledge and deal with it and become a rational person.

But that assumes his goal in the conversation is to exchange ideas. It’s not. His goal is only to abuse you and keep it going as long as possible. You have to understand when he’s reading your words he’s not thinking, "What does Art mean by this? What in my behavior made Art say this?" No, he’s thinking, "How can I turn this to more abuse on Art or Israelis?"

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by The Fool
All non Jews are treated differently, are you suggesting that all non jews are treated differently because they are trying to kill people? You don't seem to be able to make up your mind whether you're talking about racism or religious discrimination.

Not sure which post you are talking about...Have you been talking about shooting rock throwers again?

I was referring to this exchange:

You:
You have previosly stated that you are happy with troops shooting combatants conducting an attack...Do you deny this.

Me:
I never said that I am universally happy with shooting combatants conducting an attack. In fact, I was quite adament that there are conditions in which killing combatants might not be advisable. Do you deny that I said that? I recall that we had a prolonged discussion on this very point, with you ridiculing my postion. And now you are pretending that I never said it? The claim that the proper response an attack is ALWAYS to kill combatants is a claim that you made, and which you are now trying to attribute to me. This is the very sort of disingenuous tactic that was so rampant in that other thread.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by The Fool
Except in Israel, Zionists have enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism in israel. The only discrimination "enshrined" is the preference for religion, Orthodox Judaism in particular, over secularism in immigration and personal status law. There is institutional discrimination by the government, but it isn't explicit policy that I can see. For example, Arabs receive harsher sentences on average in the courts, like blacks and Hispanics do in the US, but that isn't because there are requirements that they be punished more. I posted some links in the Jewish state/Muslim world thread if you want to see what the US State Dept has on record about human/religious rights in Israel and the occupied territories.
Originally posted by webfusion
(unlike Jordan, where selling a property to a Jew is punishable by death).I'd like to see something to support that. My uncle's sister married a Jewish guy from Jordan, and they recently bought property there.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by The Fool
Throughout history Jewish people have insisted on equality under the law. They have fought and died for this principle and justifiable expressed outrage when it is denied. Except in Israel, Zionists have enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism in israel. Just as numerous other Middle east regimes have set up cosy arrangements for the benefits of thier particulat sect.

Can you not see the double standard? This discrimination is plain simple racism and you condemn it wherever it occurs in the middle east with one exception. If Israel was a dictatorship I could buy your "enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism". But since I have been there and because it is a democracy I cannot accept that accusation. Arabs own businesses beside jewish businesses beside christian businesses. Nobody has to sit "at the back of the bus" or use "arab-only" toilets.

Sure there are some Israelis who are discriminatory against arabs, why? Because Arabs have been trying to kill Israelis since the turn of the century. Thousands of them have been trying to destroy Israel since the 50's. The arab nations ran all the jews out on a rail with just the clothes on their backs in the 40's and 50's. Hundreds of Arabs have blown up Israeli businesses/buses/restaurants. So there is some genuine hard feelings there the fool. Once you actually accept that all that aggression has had a detrimental effect on how Arabs are viewed by Israelis then we shall have made some progress here today. It's kinda like how Islam is viewed because of AL Queda's actions around the world, well take that current world-view of Islam and times it by FIFTY YEARS.

Sure there is inequality in Israel the fool, there is inequality in every democratic country. Israel's special problem is that it is a democracy who's government has a jewish majority. The majority and minority cannot agree on a constitution whereby everyone is equal under the law. It's a simple as that. Hell even in the USA there is inequality, do you really think OJ would have walked if he was just a garbage man?

Sure there is racism in Israel. There is racism in Britain, France, America, Australia, Canada... racism is not specific to Israel.

You, like many, hold Israel up to a different set of standards the fool. Arab aggresssion has had a toll. The toll is the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank - the result of a war - and mistrust between Arabs and Jews - the result of 50 years of combat. This manifests itself as the inequality, discrimination and racism you are talking about. But there is not a global Israeli policy to be racist, discriminatory or make people unequal. That is just a great sound bite commonly used to put Israel up to a different set of standards as you commonly do.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by zenith-nadir
Sounds great. One problem, Israel is home to the three "great" religions. While I am not religious, billions of people are, and the ultra religious public - jews, muslims and christians in Israel - feel the court has no right to rule in matters they feel are questions of religious law. Due to Israel's democratic nature with a jewish majority it has been unable to come up with a legislated consensus on a constitution whereby everyone in Israel is equal under the law. What matters are christians and muslims claiing that the state should not rule on. I fail to see why this should be so. If so, that is surely a failure of the legislators who are elected by the electorate. Surely a key principle of modern democracies is to treat everyone equally under the law in all the importanat areas of human rights.As to why Arabs of a different caste are not equal in muslim countries and discriminated against I am unable to reason. It makes no sense. If that is so then it is unreasonable. Palestinains are vebeibng discriminated against in Israel. That also makes no sense.One thing about radicals such as Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Hamas even Al Queda...they don't want to compromise. You either accept their "way-of-life" or you are the enemy. Look at Iraq E. J. you think all those suicide bombers give a rats ass about their fellow muslims they are blowing up? Nope, they want to impose their will onto them, just like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa want to impose their will on Israelis. Yes there are extremists on every side. My point is that governments that want to be seen as decent democraices have to practise what they preach and treat everyone equally. When that is done the support for extremists will tend to decline but the government has to want peace.The part about the middle east conflict that really saddens me the most is that I know the Palestinians have better and brighter to offer. For thirty years several different Israeli Prime Ministers and several world leaders tried to reason with Arafat and his henchmen. They all failed to force him to stop the "extremists" because he sold out the Palestinians for greed and power. One could also argue that debate failed to get the givernmenets to stop their illegal activities in expanding onto land they occupy illegally. It is also a shame that Palestinians have not been treated equally. That in my opinion is a major factor in driving people to extremes and that has to change in order to move towards peace.The way to stop - if I may borrow your colloquialism - "Israeli" state terror (sic) is for the jihadist paramilitary groups stop chanting "A million martyrs to Jerusalem" and blowing themselves up on buses and in restaurants in Israel. It's the key to stopping the IDF. You seem to fail to see the point. If a government believes in fariness and equality and in stopping terrorism then surely it has to act fairly and treat all people equally and stop terrorising. That is if it truly wants peace.

By the way I have asked you to justify your claims about me. You have failed to do so. I am seriously concerned to know how you believe this helps your argument?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
Is your argument so bereft of merit that you must whine about "abuse" when someone points out your use of repitition in place of substantive debate? Do you dispute that you do, in fact, repeat the same thing over and over again? YOU are the one being abusive. You are abusing my patience, by expecting me to respond to points that I have already answered. By lying about my position, then posting stupid excuses like "well, you haven't denied it". By calling me a liar when I criticize your position. By badgering me with nonsense question like "Who is lying- IDF or IDF?" By posting three different instances of Israeli "terrorism", and posting "evidence" for them, but not saying what that evidence is, which of the three accusations it supports, or how it does so.
No. When I use the word abuse I mean abuse. You claimed I lied about you but have failed to support your claim with something difficult like a fact.

I do not call people liars when they criticise my position. I call people liars when they lie. You put these words in quotes with the obvious intent to suggest they they are words of mine "You didn't deny it strenuously enough" I did not use those words as you quoted them.

I have asked you a simple question about the IDF a number of times. What do you do? Do you answer it? No. You call a simple question nonsense. Can I ask what you are doing on a sceptics board? Your response to simple questions is the mark of you as a man.

I have quoted the source of my quotes. I have shown you where to obtain the quotes.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
What matters are christians and muslims claiing that the state should not rule on. I fail to see why this should be so. If so, that is surely a failure of the legislators who are elected by the electorate. Surely a key principle of modern democracies is to treat everyone equally under the law in all the importanat areas of human rights. Israel operates under eleven basic laws (http://www.knesset.gov.il/description/eng/eng_mimshal_yesod1.htm) they make up proposed general rulings for the yet-to-be-written constitution of the State of Israel. The big problem involves religion, and we know how goofy people get over religion, anyhow... it has proven impossible so far to get the legislators - elected by the electorate - from 14 different parties to all agree on the same words for Jewish, Muslim, Druze, Catholic, and Christian Israelis. We're talking about the cradle of the three great religions here, these guys play hardball.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
My point is that governments that want to be seen as decent democraices have to practise what they preach and treat everyone equally.Show me one government on earth that treats everyone equally, it may say it does but the reality is often much different. Otherwise there would be no reason for human rights organizations or human rights lawers. Israel has been technically at war for over 50 years I'm surprised it treats people as well as it does considering.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
When that is done the support for extremists will tend to decline but the government has to want peace.In some cases that may work. In the case with jihadists - Hamas, Al Aqsa, Islamic Jihad, etc - the support for the extremists is because they want to replace Israel not to replace human rights legislation in Israel.

Originally posted by E.J.Armstrong
One could also argue that debate failed to get the givernmenets to stop their illegal activities in expanding onto land they occupy illegally. It is also a shame that Palestinians have not been treated equally. That in my opinion is a major factor in driving people to extremes and that has to change in order to move towards peace. You seem to fail to see the point. If a government believes in fariness and equality and in stopping terrorism then surely it has to act fairly and treat all people equally and stop terrorising. That is if it truly wants peace. The "terror" predates Israel EJ, see: the "Grand Mufti of Jerusalem" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini). The "terror" predates the occupation, see:"Founded in 1964 the PLO"... (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/plo.htm) There were no settlements in Gaza or the West Bank during those 60 years. Israel does not have the power to make a final and lasting peace. Only the Arabs/Palestinians have the power to make that final and lasting peace.

[webfusion]

TF, the Israelis do employ a National ID Card which clearly spells out "religious affiliation" (horrors!)

There has been some effort in their courts to overturn the requirement, to no avail (however, it has more to do with the orthodox-Jewish definition of "who is a Jew" rather than any attempt to discriminate against Moslems or other non-Jews).

Discrimination is inherent in every society on Earth.
I would say, in complete agreement with ZN, that Israel's minorities do pretty darn well, under the circumstances!

Since 1997, plans have been floated to implement a new, magnetic\RFID card, but so far, that is bogged-down in the details and nothing had been done.
http://www.badil.org/Publications/Article74/1998/25i.htm

Creepy? Yeah. Welcome to Israel. Lots of creepy stuff.
Not a place you would like to live, I'm sure.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Art Vandelay
I don't know why, but I'm going to try once again to get you to listen to me.
I don't know why but I am going to try once again to get you listen to me oh and answer a couple of simple questions.You either need to post proof that the IDF does this, or apologize for spreading antisemitic propaganda. Posting lies about Israelis is absolutely unacceptable, and shows that you have no concern for the truth.
Ah, the truth comes out at last.

I put it to you squarely and clearly that you are unable to accept any criticism of the IDF without equating it to anti-semitism, even when it is supported by one of the most respected news organisations in the world and by members of the IDF itself.

Your modus operandum is out in the open now. I will not now and never will be demonised by the likes of you or stopped from quoting the IDF itself by using lies to call me an anti-semite. I am calling you directly and publicly a liar. Please quote one word of mine where I have disparaged the Jewish religion in any shape or form. I notice that you have not had the guts to stand by your own claims and show where I am anti the jewish religion. You rargument appears so bereft of support that you have to resort to a monstrous lie to justify them.

Can I just remind you that Israeli is not equal to Jew. There are approximately 19% non-jewish people in Israel. Your attempts to link the cliams of the IDF itself to antisemitism is laughable.

Did the Isreali soldiers say that their answer to terrorism is to murder Palestinian children? YES OR NO? If you want to make something up then you reply to it yourself. I have pointed out that the IDF soldiers stated that a schoolgirl was shot in the head as she lay on the ground by their commander. The BBC has reported on Palestinian schoolchildren being shot while they sat at school by Israeli soldiers.And once against you completely missed the point of my statement. THE FACT THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE BASED ON EVIDENCE DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ASSUMPTIONS. There is a difference between that which you ACTUALLY WITNESSED, and that which YOU DEDUCE. Posting a bunch of "evidence" does nothing to move this from the latter to the former. I have posted the words of IDF soldiers. Are you saying they are liars? You said that it is their "answer". That means that it is their official policy. If the IDF merely has a tendecy to murder people, rather than an official policy, then that means that it is not an "answer". No. You made it up. If you want to take issue with your own words feel free but they remains your words not mine. You did not say that it was the answer of "specific Israeli soldiers" to murder children. You said that it was the answer of ISRAEL AS A WHOLE. Stop trying to weasel out of your claims. Once again you have made something up. I never stated it related to your invented words. If you say it was my claim at least have the honesty and guts to post where I stated exactly what you claimed. Just once would do. At least support your claims with a fact for once.Saying that someone does something and saying that it is their "answer" are two completely different statements Are they in control of what they do or not? Whether they fired their weapons accidently, and whether they hit children accidently are completely different issues, and it is a tribute to your incredible dishonesty that you would try to obfuscate this disctinction. You have yet to produce one single piece of evidence to support your inference that all these killing were accidental. Let me take the words of the IDF soldiers who claimed their commander fired at a palestinian schoolchild on the ground. Were they liars?

Firing into a school is a monstrous act, whoever does it.I have already pointed out that as the person who is making the claim, you are the one with the burden of proof. Your asking me to repeat myself shows a large degree of disrespect to me. How am I supposed to prove a negative? Au contraire. You are the one claiming it was accidental. I have supported my post with the words of the IDF soldiers thenselves on the web pages of one of the most reputable news organisations in the world. If you want to claim that every single incident was an accident and that the commander of the IDF accidently shot the girl while she lay defenceless on the ground then please support your own claim.First of all, I have seen no such quote. Second, YOU DID NOT CLAIM THAT THE SHOT "INTO" THE SCHOOL. YOU SAID THAT THEY MURDERED CHILDREN. This is a pathetic attempt to confuse me into forgetting what your actual claim was. Yes shooting into a school with schoolchildren sitting at their desks shows such a disregard for the human life of children that it is tantamount to murder in my eyes. If you are so confused that you forget what you are debating about can I suggest there is nothing I can do to help you.Not only have you NOT provided any evidence that this is so, it does NOT amount to murder, it amounts to manslaughter. Yet another example of you trying to twist language to suit you. If you wished to advance the claim that they "kill with disregard for life", you should have said so from the beginning, rather than using the word "murder", then weaselling out later. I do not twist language. I have provided you with the evidence of the soldiers own words. Who shot the small schoolgirl going to school? Who sprayed her with bullets while she lay defenceless on the ground? Do you believe members' of the IDF own words or not? Shooting into schools shows a complete disregard for the lives of children. I have not weaselled out of calling it murder. Far from it. In my eyes shooting into schools, whoever does it, shows such a disregard for the lives of innocent schoolchildren that it is tantamount to muder in my eyes.THAT'S your evidence?!? Remember, your claim was they murdered a child at a school. That quote says absolutely nothing about a child, a school, or murder. If there was more to this that actually established that they shot towards a school and hit a child, you should have included it. If you disagree with the BBC or the IDF please provide your evidence. Furthermore, it completely demolishes your claim. If they were under fire, then it was self defense, which shows that it is not murder. The fact that you would have the IDF sit around and get killed just to avoid the possibility of hitting a child shows just how little you care about Jewish lives, and the fact that you blame the IDF, rather the Palestinians who instigated the incident, shows just how warped your sense of morality is. And finally, to say that someone fired "at" a school means that the school is the intended target. But your quote shows that the militants, not the school, were the intended targets. Er no it doesn't. Have you ever held a rifle? The peron who holds the rifle has the choice where to fire it. It doesn't fire by itself. It needs to be pounted and the trigger pressed. Once again you equate Israeli with Jew and try to demonise me by claiming there is a religious element to my observations. As you appear not to have read what I have stated let me remind you that I have stated before. I stated that 'Shooting at children in schools is crime against humanity - whoever does it.' Whoever is exactly what I mean, whoever. I don't rule out anybody therefore your fantasy that I am making a claim against one religion is shown to be a total nonsense. I really don't know how to make it more plain for you because all you seem to want to do is to take out a completely false religious message. You made up the religious message. You should be ashamed of your self but that now seems to be one of your more despicable modus operandi. You're too lazy to follow the thread, so you want me to do your work for you? If you don't want to answer simple questions don't.Inconsistencies are not the same as lies, and individual IDF members lying is not the same as the IDF as a whole lying. And finally, so what? The original claim was that Israel's answer to terrorism is murder, not that the IDF lies. THat is your claim not mine. You really do seem to be unable to accurately quote anything I say don't you a la Mycroft. I actually stated ' So their answer is murdering schoolchildren.' You can make up as much as you like about that statement but I will always show when you are making it up. Where does it mention Israel's or Israel's official policy or Jews. At least try to be intellectually honest. I have posted a number of instances where innocent children have been killed by IDF soldiers in circumstances that I consider to be murder. Please support your own claims with facts for once instead of inventions of your own a la Mycroft.You seriously don't know what Israeli needs to defend themselves against? You seriously have not heard about Israelis being murdered by Palestinians? Or are just being intentionally obtuse? I have heard about Palestinians and Israelis being murdered. Since when did defending against that nrequire bulldozing of the homes of innocent children or forcing pregnant women to lose their babies at checkpoints. It doesn't,.Those are monstrous acts against humanity. But then you haven't answered me as to whether you believe there are any innocent Palestinian children.There is a difference between collective punishment as a goal, and collective punishment as an unavoidable side effect of another goal, but considering your behavior in this thread, you will probably not being able to grasp the distinction. Are you now suggesting that the bulldozing of the homes of innocent children is unavoidable? Can I suugest that you don't steer bulldozers into their homes. It really is that simple. Your behaviour on thes thread has consisted of making up things about what I stated, inaccurately representing what I did say and avoiding answering simple questions.
Let me try to ask you a simple question in the hope of an answer this time.
Has the IDF ever done anything wrong? Ever? If so what was it?Then support it. Show me one example in which the IDF intentionally shot a child at a school. Not where they had "disregard", but where they intentionally shot. Once again you misquote my claim. My claim is that IDF soldiers shot at children at school. From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3693860.stm 'Nine-year-old Raghda al-Assar died last week after being hit by Israeli fire while sitting at her school desk in the Gaza Strip - the fourth child hit in similar circumstances in 18 months.' I say that anyone shooting at a school is committing a crime against humanityThat I consider Palestinans and terrorists to be synomynous. After you claimed 'Killing schoolchildren is not their "answer", it's an unavoidable consequence of the Palestinian decision to use them as cover.' I stated 'You seem to be using 'Palestinian' as a synonym for 'terrorist'. ' You did not say that surmise was wrong. You then lied by misquoting what I had said so I asked you the question outright 'Let me ask you a simple question. Are all Palestinians terrorists? Yes or no?' As far as I can see you have avoided that simple question, like so may others.I most certainly can, and YOU can no longer honestly claim that it is an alternative, because I have already told you why it does not qualify. No you cannot and it merely demonstrates your utter dishonesty to make such a claim. Stop terrorisng innocent children, stop stealing land, stop assassinating suspects in circumstances where innocent children are guaranteed to be killed. Stop shooting at schools.If you cannot figure out for yourself why the idea that terrorism can be stopped by simply leaving Palestinians alone is idiotic, then I don't think I can help you. Once again you have chosen to deliberately misrepresent my views. I have never asked that Palestinians be left alone. That is simply an outright lie. Once again you torch your own claims not mine.
I have requested that Palestinians be treated like Israelis. If an Israeli commits a terrorist act he should be tried under the law. Where have I stated that should not happen to a Palestinian. If an Israeli is seen with a weapon trying to shoot an innocent child then he can be shot in self defence. Where have I ever stated that cannot be applied to a Palestinian? You have been given alternatives so you can no longer claim that you have not. Start treating Palestinians likle Isrealis fairly under the law. How difficult is that? Stop committing crimes against humanity by bulldozing the homes of innocent Palestinians.No, it quite clearly echoes your views. Instead of presenting an alternative plan to stop terrorism, you simply suggest that they stop fighting terrorism. The analogy of stopping medical errors by closing hospitals is quite apt. No it is a farce. Where have I ever claimed that Palestinians should not be treated like Israelis under the law. See above section for true analogies and stop making things up. You have been given solutions. What a hypocrite you are. I am not the one making something up, YOU are. I never said that you hate Israelis, I said that you are a HATEMONGERER. Not all hatemongerers actually hate, just as not all fishmongerers actually fish. I have demonstrated many occasions where you have made things up. What a liar you are you. You actually claimed 'Your statements have been very short on concern for the children, and long on the hate mongering against the Israelis.' Quite clearly you cannot stand up uplike a man for your own claims. I do not hate Israelis. I hate some of the policies of Sharon. It seems that you are unable to differentiate between the two.Is it "chillingly inhuman" to recognize that it is an inescapable fact of life that children will suffer for the choices of their parents? Should we not shoot militants, because that would leave innocent children orphaned? Would you consider those children to be "punished" by the IDF? Your apparent disregard for the lives of innocent children is chillingly inhuman. Are you now cliaming that all the parents of all the murdered children have been guilty of something? If so at least be man enough to provide evidence for your claim for once. I consider your position inhuman.
If anyone shoots children with a disregard for their safety then they are guilty of murder in my eyes.My understanding is that as far as the present tense is concerned, Israel does not engage in collective punishment by bulldozing houses. Do you have conflicting information? Conflicting to what exactly as you have provided no evidence for your claim.So if I choose to post something, that gives you the right to make ridiculous misinterpretations? You chose to say that Sharon is a terrorist. I guess I have the right to say that you think Israel was behind 9/11. I accurately quoted what you did with the words innocent children. why do you seem to believe that when accurately describe what you did you have the right to lie about me? Is that the true mark of your arguments?Yet another example of your hypocrisy. You, in complete disrespect for my time, post the same thing over and over again. When I point this out, you scream "abuse!" Yet you have no problem calling my attitide "despicable". I guess abuse is only a problem when it's directed towards you. Please provide one example where I have done so as you have failed once again to support your claim and given your record of misrepresenting what I have said, I believe I am entitled to ask for evidence.I didn't attribute them to you. I said that it was a lame excuse, I did not say that they were your exact words. As you say, the words are there for everyone to see. Anyone who wanted your actual words can read them; what I put in quotes was what I believe your actual position is. I have made it quite clear to anyone with any sense at all what my position is, so the idea that I have not denied it is ridiculous. My characterization of your position is based on the facts, rather than what you claim your position is. So why put them in quotes? It is not normal practice to put in quotes words that you invented and imply they come from another poster. That is mendacious behavior of the sort you seem to delight in.

[E.J.Armstrong]

Ioriginally posted by zenith-nadir
Israel operates under eleven basic laws they make up proposed general rulings for the yet-to-be-written constitution of the State of Israel. The big problem involves religion, and we know how goofy people get over religion, anyhow... it has proven impossible so far to get the legislators - elected by the electorate - from 14 different parties to all agree on the same words for Jewish, Muslim, Druze, Catholic, and Christian Israelis. We're talking about the cradle of the three great religions here, these guys play hardball. Let me ask you again What matters are Christians and Muslims claimimg the state should not rule on?Show me one government on earth that treats everyone equally, it may say it does but the reality is often much different. Otherwise there would be no reason for human rights organizations or human rights lawers. Israel has been technically at war for over 50 years I'm surprised it treats people as well as it does considering. THen this is where we differ. I have told you a number of times now that I come from a terrorised land. I know what it is to have a member of my wider family blown apart and to go to school through bombs. I do not wish the family of the terrorist who blew my uncle up to have their house torn down by bulldozers. That terrorist activity is completely abhorrent to me. I submit that the UK is close to treating everyone equally especially in Northern Ireland where I believe that starting to treat people equally was a cornerstone of the current albeit faulty peace process.

In some cases that may work. In the case with jihadists - Hamas, Al Aqsa, Islamic Jihad, etc - the support for the extremists is because they want to replace Israel not to replace human rights legislation in Israel. The IRA were marginalised by starting to treat everyone equally that is why they sued for peace afterall the years they spent in prsion.The "terror" predates Israel EJ, see: the "Grand Mufti of Jerusalem". The "terror" predates the occupation, see:"Founded in 1964 the PLO"... There were no settlements in Gaza or the West Bank during those 60 years. Israel does not have the power to make a final and lasting peace. Only the Arabs/Palestinians have the power to make that final and lasting peace. I am not sure what your links prove. Israel was founded partly on the activities of terror gangs such as the Stern gang. See 'The combined Jewish resistance movement organized illegal immigration and kidnapping of British officials in Palestine and sabotaged the British infrastructure in Palestine. In response Bevin ordered a crackdown on the Haganah and arrested many of its leaders. While the British concentrated their efforts on the Haganah, the Irgun and Lehi carried out terrorist attacks against British forces, the most spectacular of which was the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in July 1946. The latter event led Ben-Gurion to sever his relationship with the Irgun and Lehi.' from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/israel-inde.htm.

Both parties have the power to make peace. Isn't it time to treat everyone equally, stop bulldozing the homes of innocent children and start the process rolling?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mycroft
You get sucked into thinking if you just point out where he's wrong, how he's twisting logic, and how he's being hypocritical in simple enough terms that he’ll have to acknowledge and deal with it and become a rational person.

But that assumes his goal in the conversation is to exchange ideas. It’s not. His goal is only to abuse you and keep it going as long as possible. You have to understand when he’s reading your words he’s not thinking, "What does Art mean by this? What in my behavior made Art say this?" No, he’s thinking, "How can I turn this to more abuse on Art or Israelis?"
Same old same old. Claims without support. Sylvia strikes again. never mind we're here for you.

[webfusion]

My uncle's sister married a Jewish guy from Jordan

A Jewish guy from Jordan?

No Jews lived in Transjordan in 1946 (when it became an independent state), as a result of Winston Churchill's 1921 decision in favor of "preserving [the] Arab character" of Transjordan and the resulting British policy forbidding Jews from settling there.
This policy was ratified — after the emirate became a kingdom — by Jordan's law no. 6, sect. 3, on April 3, 1954, and reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963. It states that any person may become a citizen of Jordan unless he is a Jew. So, this story of yours about a Jewish guy from Jordan is quite unusual.


Regarding my statement, I must admit that the Law in Jordan currently does not indicate the death penalty as punishment for sales of land to Jews, but de facto, land is not sold to Jews, and I know of no Jewish communites in Jordan at this time. You're welcome to show us anything that even tangenitally offers proof of what you are claiming about a relative marrying a Jordanian Jew, Kimiko.

(BTW, by definition, the "uncle's sister" would be either your mother or your aunt).


In 1973, Jordan made land sales to Israelis a crime punishable by death and from 1973-97 about 170 people were sentenced by Jordanian courts to death in absentia.

In 1973, under the direct instructions of King Hussein, the government of Jordan passed the "Law for Preventing the Sale of Immoveable Property to the Enemy" with the "enemy" defined in Article 2 as:

... any man or judicial body [corporation] of Israeli citizenship living in Israel or acting on its behalf.

Under Article 4 of this law any Jordanian citizen who sold land in Jordan or the West Bank to the "enemy" faced the death penalty and forfeiture of all his property (moveable and immoveable) to the state:

(A) The sale of immoveable property against the provisions of this law constitutes a crime against state security and well being, punishable by death, and the confiscation of all the culprit's immoveable and moveable possessions.
(B) If the crime is committed by a judicial body the punishment will be exacted from the persons who committed the crimes on behalf of this judicial body, and the judicial body will have its registration cancelled.

In addition, under Article 3 the sale of land to any alien (ie., someone who is either non- Jordanian or non-Arab) without permission from the Council of Ministers became a security offense, again punishable by death.

According to PA Attorney General Khaled Al-Qidreh, 172 people had been sentenced to death under this law (Palestine Report, 6 June 1997). Amnesty International reported that as of 1988 many of the convictions were in absentia and there had been no executions (Jordan: Human Rights Protections After the State of Emergency, Amnesty International, 1990).

In 1995, following the peace treaty between Israel and Jordan, the Jordanian Parliament repealed the 1973 law which threatened those selling land to Jews with death. In its place milder statutes were adopted that still effectively bar Israelis/Jews from purchasing or leasing land in Jordan.

[kimiko]

Originally posted by webfusion
You're welcome to show us anything that even tangenitally offers proof of what you are claiming about a relative marrying a Jordanian Jew, Kimiko.

(BTW, by definition, the "uncle's sister" would be either your mother or your aunt). BTW, my uncle married my aunt, my mom's younger sister, so no, his sister is neither my aunt nor my mother. I'm not sure what I could post that would be appropriate considering it isn't my personal information that I'd be spreading to the world. I don't even have physical proof he's either Jewish or from Jordan, but considering the information was from family, I have no reason to doubt it. I may ask for clarification for my own personal reasons now though. You don't have to believe it since it is anecdotal.

edited to add: Ok, so his parents were Americans, but he was born in Jordan and grew up there. I guess that would explain how he's Jewish if there are no Jewish communities.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
If Israel was a dictatorship I could buy your "enshrined the principle of inequality, discrimination and racism". But since I have been there and because it is a democracy I cannot accept that accusation. Arabs own businesses beside jewish businesses beside christian businesses. Nobody has to sit "at the back of the bus" or use "arab-only" toilets.

Arabs are second class citizens due to the founding principles of the state of Israel.


Sure there are some Israelis who are discriminatory against arabs, why? Because Arabs have been trying to kill Israelis since the turn of the century. Thousands of them have been trying to destroy Israel since the 50's. The arab nations ran all the jews out on a rail with just the clothes on their backs in the 40's and 50's. Hundreds of Arabs have blown up Israeli businesses/buses/restaurants. So there is some genuine hard feelings there the fool. Once you actually accept that all that aggression has had a detrimental effect on how Arabs are viewed by Israelis then we shall have made some progress here today. It's kinda like how Islam is viewed because of AL Queda's actions around the world, well take that current world-view of Islam and times it by FIFTY YEARS.

Sure there is inequality in Israel the fool, there is inequality in every democratic country. Israel's special problem is that it is a democracy who's government has a jewish majority. The majority and minority cannot agree on a constitution whereby everyone is equal under the law. It's a simple as that. Hell even in the USA there is inequality, do you really think OJ would have walked if he was just a garbage man?

Sure there is racism in Israel. There is racism in Britain, France, America, Australia, Canada... racism is not specific to Israel.

You, like many, hold Israel up to a different set of standards the fool. Arab aggresssion has had a toll. The toll is the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank - the result of a war - and mistrust between Arabs and Jews - the result of 50 years of combat. This manifests itself as the inequality, discrimination and racism you are talking about. But there is not a global Israeli policy to be racist, discriminatory or make people unequal. That is just a great sound bite commonly used to put Israel up to a different set of standards as you commonly do.

Yes I hold Israel to a different set of standards because Israel sets itself different levels of citizenship based on your religion. Can you tell me of other countries that do this? I hold them to this standard too...It is despicable. There is racism in every country in the world but one thing the second class citizens of America (for example) have is the ability to have racist laws struck down due to constitutional protections. Australia's second class citizens are also protected by our sytems. The systems are in place to provide equality to all, not to ensure inequality.. Israel will never have constitutional protection of Arabs because Israel does not want them protected. Israel needs a free hand to enact whatever measures are required to supresss the non jewish populations of the future to keep them below the level where they can become a politically influential force.


Your claim that the only reason there is inequality in Israel is due to understandable hatred from jewish individuals is very interesting.....Have you forgotten why israel was founded? The special position of Jews and the inferior position of Non Jews is the whole point.....As I have heard many times...what is the point of Israel if Jews are not in charge? Sounds to me to be pretty much the same as whats the point of South Africa if whites are not in charge.

[webfusion]

"I have posted the words of IDF soldiers. Are you saying they are liars?"

First, according to testimony in open court, yes, they are indeed liars. The trial of the IDF officer is a matter of public record. The soldiers lied and that has been brought forward in the defense of the officer.



Secondly, the death of Nine-year-old (or 10-year-old, depending on the report) Raghda al-Assar while she was sitting at her school desk, September 23, 2004, is almost certainly a fabrication of the events. The IDF was not aiming at her school, and was just involved in a serious firefight with armed combatants in the proximity.
Some stray bullets penetrated the school, and they might have been Palestinian bullets, for all the evidence.

Another classic case, a few months later, was that of
Nuran Dib Jan. 31, 2005. All the media reported that IDF shot her. But despite the lie, what really happened?
It has been investigated in detail and the resulting findings showed that a bullet came straight down out of the sky, after being fired in the air by Palestinians who had shot their Kalishnikovs wildly nearby in celebration of the Haj.

In fact, the Palestinians subsequently arrested the man responsible:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1107228084937


However, google the incidents, and in general, the stories are circulated of cold-blooded murders of schoolkids by Israeli snipers! Over and over it is repeated, until the lie becomes truth.

How about another story of IDF shooting some schoolkids in cold blood:
http://judicial-inc.biz/School_shooting.htm

E.J. -- Do you believe this story?

You are a sucker.

[webfusion]

OK, now I understand the relationship of your uncle's sister, and our seeing the whole Jordanian Jew evidence is not really that critical to our discussion. I can assure you, as an American Jew, if he declares that status when he comes to take possession of his property, he'll run into some issues with that land in Jordan, same as if he tried to buy land openly as a Jew in Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, etc.

It just ain't allowed, kimiko.
He is "hiding" behind his American passport, while his name is not obviously a Jewish one. Is that a valid scenario, based on what you know?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by webfusion
Secondly, the death of Nine-year-old (or 10-year-old, depending on the report) Raghda al-Assar while she was sitting at her school desk, September 23, 2004, is almost certainly a fabrication of the events. The IDF was not aiming at her school, and was just involved in a serious firefight with armed combatants in the proximity.Yes, but any time the IDF finds themselves in the middle of a firefight near a school, they're supposed to just lay down their weapons and allow themselves to be killed. To do otherwise would be "disregard" for human life. One Palestinian child's life is worth hundreds of Israeli soldiers.
:rolleyes:

[kimiko]

Originally posted by webfusion
He is "hiding" behind his American passport, while his name is not obviously a Jewish one. Is that a valid scenario, based on what you know? I don't think this should be pursued as a tangent; if you'd like to explore the meanings of identity being "hidden" versus being "advertised" then it should go in a new thread.

[zenith-nadir]

Well the "ceasefire" just got a wee bit more complicated for Abbas;

Who's the Palestinian president? - May. 15, 2005 (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1116123542901) RAMALLAH - Jerusalem Post - The PLO executive committee's recent decision to declare Mahmoud Abbas as President of the State of Palestine has enraged veteran PLO leader Farouk Kaddoumi, who has dismissed the move as illegal and unacceptable.

Kaddoumi, who is based in Tunis, said in a message he sent to many PLO and Fatah leaders in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that the executive committee did not have the authority to relay the powers of the president to Abbas after the death of Yasser Arafat. He said that only the Palestine National Council (the PLO's parliament-in-exile) was entitled to make such a decision.

The Palestine National Council, which met in Algiers in 1988, elected Arafat as President of the State of Palestine and Kaddoumi, who serves as head of the PLO's political department, as foreign minister.

Kaddoumi noted that the Algiers conference had also announced the establishment of a Palestinian state in exile. "How can a state exist in exile while its president is located inside the occupied territories?" he asked. "This is in violation of our internal regulations."

A senior aid to Abbas told The Jerusalem Post that Kaddoumi was trying to discredit Abbas by inciting against him. He claimed that Kadoumi was apparently receiving funds from Iran and some Arab countries.

"I've been the foreign minister of Palestine for 30 years. He, (Abbas), was appointed without my knowledge," he complained.

(emphasis mine)Ouch, my head hurts....now PLO representatives in exile are claiming to be the Palestinian President and foreign minister. Poor Abbas, he inherited a nightmare from Ara-fraud...;)

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Webfusion
"I have posted the words of IDF soldiers. Are you saying they are liars?"

First, according to testimony in open court, yes, they are indeed liars. The trial of the IDF officer is a matter of public record. The soldiers lied and that has been brought forward in the defense of the officer.

Can you provide a link to the court procedings? Did they admit they lied or was that an assertion of the defence? It appears therefore that is we take your claim as true then the words of at least some IDF soldiers appears to be suspect. Was any reason given for why they lied?The IDF was not aiming at her school, and was just involved in a serious firefight with armed combatants in the proximity. If the IDF were not aiming at the school how did their bullet get into the classroom and is the BBC wrong in their claim? If so how do you know?

In fact, the Palestinians subsequently arrested the man responsible: I don't believe I have ever quoted that case. In contrast to your claim the link states that a suspect was being questioned. In my country you are innocent until proven guilty. What happened to him? In my country you are innocent until proven guilty. As I have stated already I believe that anyone who fires into a school commits a crime against humanity, wherever they come from.How about another story of IDF shooting some schoolkids in cold blood:
http://judicial-inc.biz/School_shooting.htm

E.J. -- Do you believe this story?

You are a sucker:I have never heard or quoted that story and as with one you brought up above you have jumped to conclusions before I have even considered it. I have never used the St Louis Post Gazette as a source for any factual information and given that the report seems remarkably long on claims but remarkably light on facts I see no reason to do so at any time in the future. What is the truth in this case?

[webfusion]

EJ --- I would have thought you could google the public record of the trial of Captain "R" in a few seconds, less time than it took you to ask me for further links and details. Sometimes all this 'you claimed, so you need to show the proof' stuff is just too lame. What ever happened to people using their own brains and checking things for themselves?


"Was any reason given for why they lied?"
(about the circumstances surrounding the shooting death of 13-year-old Iman al-Hams)

Yes, according to the legal representative of the accused:

Capt. R's lawyer, Yoav Manni, claimed that the two witnesses had sought to mount a 'vendetta' against his client (a Druze).

A military judge ordered the release from detention of the officer after two witnesses at his military trial revealed that they have deliberately lied in their first testimony.
Aljazeera
February 7, 2005

[Mycroft]

Troops Kill Palestinian After Attack

JERUSALEM - Israeli troops killed a Palestinian Friday after militants fired missiles at a Jewish settlement in the
Gaza Strip in the third consecutive day of violence hampering efforts to salvage a shaky truce.

The army said three militants fired missiles, mortars and assault rifles from an abandoned building near the Gaza settlement of Kfar Darom. One of the militants was killed in an ensuing gunbattle with troops while two others escaped.

Israel threatened harsh retaliation for the latest attacks and warned a cease-fire reached in February at the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheik was in danger of collapse.

The Islamic group Hamas said it carried out the attack jointly with the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades — a militant group linked to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' ruling
Fatah party — and the Gaza-based Popular Resistance Committees. Hamas said the attack was in retaliation for Israeli strikes.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050520/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians

So it's not just lone gunmen breaking the truce, this is coordinated between competing factions.

So this is what a Palestinian cease-fire looks like?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
So it's not just lone gunmen breaking the truce, this is coordinated between competing factions.The ultimate irony of the "ceasefire" lie is Fateh is the ruling party of the Palestinian Authority. It's leader is none other than President Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen.

IMAGE HERE (http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050520/capt.xem10305201820.mideast_israel_palestinians_xe m103.jpg?x=380&y=261&sig=Nx3OyOfhdqQJAMZ72lkFdQ--)
Masked Palestinian militants of the Popular Resistance Committees, a militia linked to the Fatah movement, perform a military exercise in the streets during a rally in Gaza City, Friday May 20, 2005. (courtesy of AP)

IMAGE HERE (http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050520/capt.xem10205201818.mideast_israel_palestinians_xe m102.jpg?x=380&y=263&sig=avIwb0bk9UhMmJMcMB0V4w--)
A boy holds a machinegun as masked Palestinian militants of the Popular Resistance Committees, a militia linked to the Fatah movement, march in the streets during a rally in Gaza City, Friday May 20, 2005. (courtesy of AP)

IMAGE HERE (http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050520/capt.xem10405201818.mideast_israel_palestinians_xe m104.jpg?x=380&y=258&sig=ns3JZjuGGcvSKlvl242TbA--)
Palestinian children watch as masked militants of the Popular Resistance Committees, a militia linked to the Fatah movement, march in the streets during a rally in Gaza City, Friday May 20, 2005. (courtesy of AP)

(emphasis all mine)

Ceasefire? With ceasefires like this the Palestinians don't really need wars...;)

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by webfusion
EJ --- I would have thought you could google the public record of the trial of Captain "R" in a few seconds, less time than it took you to ask me for further links and details. Sometimes all this 'you claimed, so you need to show the proof' stuff is just too lame. What ever happened to people using their own brains and checking things for themselves?
Whatever happened to people supporting their own claims? It is your claim, not mine after all. Why refuse to supply a simple link if it is so easy? Yes, according to the legal representative of the accused:

Capt. R's lawyer, Yoav Manni, claimed that the two witnesses had sought to mount a 'vendetta' against his client (a Druze).

A military judge ordered the release from detention of the officer after two witnesses at his military trial revealed that they have deliberately lied in their first testimony.
Aljazeera
February 7, 2005

Taking this at face value it confirms that at least some IDF soldiers have deliberately lied about the deaths of Palestinian children.

I understand that the captain stated
'On the tape, the company commander then “clarifies� why he killed Iman: “This is commander. Anything that’s mobile, that moves in the zone, even if it’s a three-year-old, needs to be killed. Over.�'

Can this truly monstrous statement be true?

[webfusion]

EJ, when I feel that a supporting link is necessary or vital to the discussion, I provide one. In the meantime, all I see you doing is complaining and sniping in the forums about people here failing to back up their "claims", despite the evidence and clear references to well-known realities. You seem to have a serious issue with people making statements of facts that are essentially not in dispute to begin with.

"The moon is 238857 miles away"

E.J. Armstrong:
"WHAT? Can you provide a link to prove that claim?"

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/103984main_moon1.gif

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by webfusion
EJ, when I feel that a supporting link is necessary or vital to the discussion, I provide one. In the meantime, all I see you doing is complaining and sniping in the forums about people here failing to back up their "claims", despite the evidence and clear references to well-known realities. You seem to have a serious issue with people making statements of facts that are essentially not in dispute to begin with.

"The moon is 238857 miles away"

E.J. Armstrong:
"WHAT? Can you provide a link to prove that claim?"

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/103984main_moon1.gif

Some of us ignore E.J. for that sort of behavior. Actually, most of us ignore him for that sort of behavior.

I don't want to tell you what to do or anything, I'm just saying ignoring him works pretty well.

Just in case you want to try something different on that front.

[Mycroft]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050522/ts_nm/mideast_bomber_dc


Israelis arrest teenage suicide bomber: army

NABLUS, West Bank (Reuters) - Israeli soldiers arrested a Palestinian teenager with a bomb belt tied around his waist at a checkpoint near the West Bank city of Nablus on Sunday, the army said.

Troops manning the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus became suspicious of a Palestinian teenager passing through on Sunday evening, an army spokeswoman said.

"The teenager was asked to lift up his shirt and it revealed a bomb belt containing two pipe bombs tied around his waist," she said.

...

The army spokeswoman said it was the 14th time in the past two months that a Palestinian teenager had attempted to detonate a bomb or smuggle arms and explosives through a military checkpoint despite a de facto truce declared in February.

Wow, the 14th time in the last two months. This during a cease fire?

It wasn't very long ago that a child suicide-bomber was something new and shocking. I guess now that the line has been crossed, it's old stuff, hardly worth a headline anymore.

Still, you would think that there being so many of them during a cease fire would get a little more attention.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Some of us ignore E.J. for that sort of behavior. Actually, most of us ignore him for that sort of behavior.

I don't want to tell you what to do or anything, I'm just saying ignoring him works pretty well.

Just in case you want to try something different on that front. Good advice. Trust me on this one. Trust Mycroft. Sometimes you just have to ask "what's the point?"

[The Fool]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Ceasefire? With ceasefires like this the Palestinians don't really need wars...;)

funny thing is the people actually there seem to think its holding fairly well...There has been some aggression on both sides, each blaming the other for starting it....I'm not sure what you see as your role in all this with all your efforts to talk the ceasefire down. Do you want to see an end to the cease fire and just get on with the fighting again...is that it ZN?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050522/ts_nm/mideast_bomber_dc




Wow, the 14th time in the last two months. This during a cease fire?

It wasn't very long ago that a child suicide-bomber was something new and shocking. I guess now that the line has been crossed, it's old stuff, hardly worth a headline anymore.

Still, you would think that there being so many of them during a cease fire would get a little more attention.

You don't wonder why so many teenagers are volunteering? Why does a teenager want to end his life. My tip is it's got nothing to do with virgins.

[webfusion]

funny thing is the people actually there seem to think its holding fairly well...There has been some aggression on both sides, each blaming the other for starting it....I'm not sure what you see as your role in all this with all your efforts to talk the ceasefire down. Do you want to see an end to the cease fire and just get on with the fighting again...is that it ZN?

First of all, ZN is not directly engaged in any of the fighting.

I have been. For almost two decades.
My son will be, too. Of that, I have no false illusions.

When you talk of "some aggression" on both sides, this lends the impression to the casual reader that Israel's armed forces are making a concerted and organized effort to break the cease fire.

Which they are not.

IDF has been under fire from mortars, bombings, ballistic missiles, automatic weapons fire, and according to reports (as offered here in the forum), several suicide attacks have been attempted.

After several days of violence - in which Palestinian militants fired dozens of mortars at settlements and Israel resumed using missile strikes against militants - a tentative calm returned to the Gaza Strip two days ago.

Hamas stated that the cease fire "does not mean giving up the right to self-defense in the face of Israeli aggression."

Firing mortars at civilian settlements is "self-defense" ????? HAMAS are a bunch of cowards who prefer not to face the IDF in battle, because they know the outcome wouldn't be in doubt.

As with every other 'cease fire' that Israel has ever known, it is mainly honored in the breach. Only when things get totally out of hand does the IDF respond.

In any case, this is not a cease fire at the level of the 1949 Rhodes Armistice, whose ongoing and consistent violation by the Arabs resulted in the 6-Day-War.

This current cease-fire is more like a lull before the coming storm. The dark clouds are there for all to see.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You don't wonder why so many teenagers are volunteering? Why does a teenager want to end his life. Most do not volunteer a_u_p. Most undergo a process of indoctrination by Palestinian islamist groups. The Palestinian islamist groups make the bombs, they plan the attacks and they often transport the suicide bombers to their targets. The Palestinian islamist groups also make a confession video of the bomber for PR purposes and take a photograph that will be reproduced and displayed through the West Bank and Gaza to honor the bomber. The Palestinian Islamists splash suicide bombers posters all over Gaza and the West Bank like we splash posters of celebrities and sports stars a_u_p.

Bombers are made to commit suicide a_u_p, they are not born to commit suicide.

Originally posted by
The Fool
Do you want to see an end to the cease fire and just get on with the fighting again...is that it ZN?A ceasefire means just that... CEASEFIRE. Palestinians lobbing motars and rockets at civilians in soon-to-be-ethnically-cleansed...sorry,.. "evacuated" housing developments is not a ceasefire. Islamists militants - linked to the Palestinian Authority - marching in downtown Gaza with their weapons is not really folowing the terms of the ceasefire either the fool. Just an F.Y.I. :D

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You don't wonder why so many teenagers are volunteering? Why does a teenager want to end his life. My tip is it's got nothing to do with virgins.

All the various forms of indoctrination and social conditioning the Palestinian Authority uses to create more militants and martyrs has been well documented and discussed in these forums. I see no reason to beat a dead horse.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
funny thing is the people actually there seem to think its holding fairly well...

Part of my purpose in starting this thread is to point out the weird double standards applied to this conflict. Yes, many people actually seem to think the cease-fire is holding pretty well, which is an excellent indication of how warped perceptions are when applied to this conflict.


Originally posted by The Fool
Do you want to see an end to the cease fire and just get on with the fighting again...is that it ZN?

I think maybe Abbas needs more time to get his people behind his cease-fire. I think it's clear more work needs to be done on this phase of the peace process before moving on.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by webfusion
This current cease-fire is more like a lull before the coming storm. The dark clouds are there for all to see.
so you do notice it is a "lull" The warmongers on this board that hate the cease fire like to avoid noticing the cease fire.

Web, I'm sure you are correct that the IDF has no secret plans to sabotage the ceasefire but people still get shot. People still retaliate and people still retaliate for the retaliations. I have also been shot at during a "cease fire" that, unfortunately, is one of lifes rich realities.


The shakespearean tragedy that I see is the absolute rabid attachment that the extremists on the Israeli side have to the occupation of the palestinians when this is the first thing that has to end if anything is to improve. Murderers will always be able to rationalise thier actions when they are a member of a repressed occupied people....every time you knock one over another will take thier place.

It seems thier attitude to the Palestinians is that of the famous Navy saying.....the floggings will continue until morale improves.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
All the various forms of indoctrination and social conditioning the Palestinian Authority uses to create more militants and martyrs has been well documented and discussed in these forums. I see no reason to beat a dead horse.

And you know this as a fact?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by webfusion
First of all, ZN is not directly engaged in any of the fighting.

I have been. For almost two decades.
My son will be, too. Of that, I have no false illusions.

When you talk of "some aggression" on both sides, this lends the impression to the casual reader that Israel's armed forces are making a concerted and organized effort to break the cease fire.

Which they are not.

IDF has been under fire from mortars, bombings, ballistic missiles, automatic weapons fire, and according to reports (as offered here in the forum), several suicide attacks have been attempted.


Do you acknowledge that military occupation can be a violent act in itself. Asylum seekers in Australia are locked up in 'detention', which is basically a prison, while their claims are processed.

The psychological damage is apparently quite significant. The people are not shot, beaten (much), etc, but many are going nuts, and attempting suicide, families are beaking down etc.

From what I can tell of your involvement in the IDF, you are principled and would not commit crimes against the civilians, but, as Pirate Lad has found, not all troops share those princples. People can be humiliated, attacked, even shot and killed, for no valid reason. After 30 years of such treatment, the results are apparent, as far as I can tell. The people in the West Bank under Jordan's rule were not sending out suicide bombers against the Jordanese.

The pipe bomber referred to was just a teenager. It is easy to blame those who take advantage of a teenager, but you have to ask yourself too, why would a teenager offer his services to these people. That is what happens. They don't have to go around in press gangs, rounding up suicide bombers, these people will just walk in the front door offering to do the job.

One of the articles that I will always remember on this is this one.

http://www.bintjbeil.com/articles/en/011001_hedges.html



It was in Gaza, where I lived for weeks at a time during the seven years I spent in the Middle East, that I came to know the dark side of the Israeli Defense Force. During the first Palestinian uprising, begun in December 1987 and ended in 1993 with the Oslo peace accords, the army had little interest in crowd control. It fired live rounds at boys hurling rocks. And on a few occasions the Israeli soldiers, angered at the coverage, turned their weapons toward groups of photographers and cameramen. They shot rubber bullets into their legs—doing it with a self-congratulatory arrogance that came to define the occupation for me.

In Beit Agron I run into familiar Israeli press officials. They are efficient: our press cards are ready in minutes. They welcome me back. They ask about New York. They hand out cell-phone numbers and tell us to call if we need assistance. Joe and I get up to leave, but we are blocked at the door by a man in his early sixties wearing a gray leisure suit. His name is Yusuf Samir, and he is a reporter for the Israeli Arabic service. He tells us that he was kidnapped recently in the West Bank by Palestinian gunmen and held for several weeks.

"The Palestinians are animals," he says. "They are less than human. They are savage beasts. Israel is a land of love. People in Israel love one another. But the Palestinians do not love. They hate. They should be destroyed. We should put fire to them. We should take back Beit Jala, Bethlehem, take back all the land and get rid of them."

The Israeli press officers are beaming.

"He is a great man, a poet," one says as we leave. "He is a man of peace."

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by The Fool
The shakespearean tragedy that I see is the absolute rabid attachment that the extremists on the Israeli side have to the occupation of the palestinians when this is the first thing that has to end if anything is to improve. This said with a straight face as Palestinian militants continue to fire missiles at civilians.
:dl:

Originally posted by
a_unique_person
And you know this as a fact?Come on a_u_p, even you know Hamas-run schools and islamist clerics extole the rewards of martyrdom throughout Gaza and the West Bank. Even you know Palestinian teenagers do not know how to make bomb vests let alone mix up the explosives with ball bearings and bolts. Even you know suicide bombers don't plaster hero-worship posters of themselves across Gaza and the West Bank after they have exploded... for that would be impossible.

Mycroft is not on some wild tangent when he states " the various forms of indoctrination and social conditioning the Palestinian Authority uses to create more militants and martyrs has been well documented".

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
This said with a straight face as Palestinian militants continue to fire missiles at civilians.
:dl:

Come on a_u_p, even you know Hamas-run schools and islamist clerics extole the rewards of martyrdom throughout Gaza and the West Bank. Even you know Palestinian teenagers do not know how to make bomb vests let alone mix up the explosives with ball bearings and bolts. Even you know suicide bombers don't plaster hero-worship posters of themselves across Gaza and the West Bank after they have exploded... for that would be impossible.

Mycroft is not on some wild tangent when he states " the various forms of indoctrination and social conditioning the Palestinian Authority uses to create more militants and martyrs has been well documented".

Just blaming one side is futile and self defeating. Read the Gaza Diary. He is a reporter, he doesn't pull any punches when it comes to reporting the faults on both sides.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The people in the West Bank under Jordan's rule were not sending out suicide bombers against the Jordanese. The Palestinians paid Jordan back for their benevolence by causing a civil war there, (see:Black September)....they tried to overthrow the Jordanian government (http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/bravo/blacksept1970.htm), they assassinated the Jordanian Prime Minister in Cairo, they plotted to kidnap other Jordanian cabinet ministers and to hold them hostage, they caused great material destruction in Jordan. That is how the Palestinians under Arafat paid the Jordanians back for running the West Bank from 1948 to 1967. So your claim that "the people in the West Bank under Jordan's rule were not sending out suicide bombers against the Jordanese" is correct but completely devoid of the "Palestinians tried to take over Jordan, murdered thousands and caused a civil war there" part. Originally posted by a_unique_person
Just blaming one side is futile and self defeating. Read the Gaza Diary. He is a reporter, he doesn't pull any punches when it comes to reporting the faults on both sides. This is where you and I differ. I don't have to read what some visitor/reporter writes in his diary-for-sale. I have family in Israel, I've been there. I know life for Palestinians sucks.

You, like many others, start the clock in 1967 when the occupation began. You see Palestinian violence as resistance to the occupation.

I, on the other hand, start my clock when the P-a-l-e-s-t-i-n-i-a-n Mufti of Jerusalem and President of the Supreme Muslim Council Amin al-Husayni (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini) started anti-jewish riots in the 20's and conspired with Hitler to wipe out the jews in the 30's & 40's. My clock has numbers representing when Hafez Assad and Nasser tried to destroy Israel several times over. My clock has numbers representing when Arafat and the PLO murdered jews from the Olympics in Munich to the airport in Rome to cruise ships in the Med to schools in Maalot. My clock has numbers representing when Arafat caused civil wars in Jordan, Lebanon and a war with Israel from Gaza and the West Bank.

My clock has numbers representing things that your clock is missing a_u_p....and that is why we differ so completely on our views as to why life sucks for the Palestinians.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
The Palestinians paid Jordan back for their benevolence by causing a civil war there, (see:Black September)....they tried to overthrow the Jordanian government (http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/bravo/blacksept1970.htm), they assassinated the Jordanian Prime Minister in Cairo, they plotted to kidnap other Jordanian cabinet ministers and to hold them hostage, they caused great material destruction in Jordan. That is how the Palestinians under Arafat paid the Jordanians back for running the West Bank from 1948 to 1967. So your claim that "the people in the West Bank under Jordan's rule were not sending out suicide bombers against the Jordanese" is correct but completely devoid of the "Palestinians tried to take over Jordan, murdered thousands and caused a civil war there" part. This is where you and I differ. I don't have to read what some visitor/reporter writes in his diary-for-sale. I have family in Israel, I've been there. I know life for Palestinians sucks.



How did I know you were going to ignore the point. The acts however, seem at odds with the commonly made claim that the Palestinians have had no intent of creating their own state. They appear to not be blaming the Israelis for the lack of a State, but this is not mentioned either.

Life doesn't just 'suck'. Life is dehumanising and breaking down social structures, it appears to me. When this happens, and it has been observed many times before, the resulting behaviour is just blamed on the victime. For example, Australian aboriginials had just about the longest surviving society in history, till the white man turned up. Now they are in decay everywhere, and they are usually blamed for it. It seems absurd to me to say that a society that was functional for many hundreds, or in the case of
Australian Aboriginals, many thousands of years, is to blame for it's decay when it was not like that before.


You, like many others, start the clock in 1967 when the occupation began. You see Palestinian violence as resistance to the occupation.

I, on the other hand, start my clock when the P-a-l-e-s-t-i-n-i-a-n Mufti of Jerusalem and President of the Supreme Muslim Council Amin al-Husayni (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini) started anti-jewish riots in the 20's and conspired with Hitler to wipe out the jews in the 30's & 40's. My clock has numbers representing when Hafez Assad and Nasser tried to destroy Israel several times over. My clock has numbers representing when Arafat and the PLO murdered jews from the Olympics in Munich to the airport in Rome to cruise ships in the Med to schools in Maalot. My clock has numbers representing when Arafat caused civil wars in Jordan, Lebanon and a war with Israel from Gaza and the West Bank.



Well of course you do, because that suits you. You see only confirms your world view, and ignore the rest. You may correct me, but I don't know of any teenage suicide bombers before the occupation.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
How did I know you were going to ignore the point. Actually I didn't ignore it, I showed what the Jordanians got after they tried to help the Palestinians. They got a civil war courtesy of the PLO, thousands dead and an assasinated Prime Minister.Originally posted by a_unique_person
You may correct me, but I don't know of any teenage suicide bombers before the occupation.Suicide bombing was invented by Hizbollah when they sent a truck into the US Marine barracks in Lebanon. The islamists in Gaza and the West Bank evolved the idea by disguising men, women and children and sending them into soft civilian targets.Originally posted by a_unique_person
Life is dehumanising and breaking down social structures, it appears to me. When this happens, and it has been observed many times before, the resulting behaviour is just blamed on the victime.Life has broken down for the Palestinians because for nearly 100 years they've only had two leaders, the first one was a racist cleric who started anti-jewish riots and ended up conspiring with Hitler to kill the jews. The other Palestinian leader began a 40-year losing guerilla war with Israel, stole billions in aid while he started civil wars between Jordanians and Palestinians then Lebanese and Palestinians.

If one takes all those decades of war, corruption, dictatorship, theocracy, terrorism and mayhem somehow a jewish settlement is minor in the 10 reasons why Palestinian society has broken down. ;)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Actually I didn't ignore it, I showed what the Jordanians got after they tried to help the Palestinians. They got a civil war courtesy of the PLO, thousands dead and an assasinated Prime Minister.Suicide bombing was invented by Hizbollah when they sent a truck into the US Marine barracks in Lebanon. The islamists in Gaza and the West Bank evolved the idea by disguising men, women and children and sending them into soft civilian targets.Life has broken down for the Palestinians because for nearly 100 years they've only had two leaders, the first one was a racist cleric who started anti-jewish riots and ended up conspiring with Hitler to kill the jews. The other Palestinian leader began a 40-year losing guerilla war with Israel, stole billions in aid while he started civil wars between Jordanians and Palestinians then Lebanese and Palestinians.

If one takes all those decades of war, corruption, dictatorship, theocracy, terrorism and mayhem somehow a jewish settlement is minor in the 10 reasons why Palestinian society has broken down. ;)

"A Jewish Settlement"? Please.

[webfusion]

You may correct me, but I don't know of any teenage suicide bombers before the occupation.

The first teenage suicide bomber was in Afula during April 1994, killing 8 people.
That is over a quarter-century from the June 1967 events. How did the Palestinians manage to avoid suicide attacks during those 25 years and abruptly start with them?

What happened in 1994? Why did the Palestinians suddenly embark upon this new tactic? (and it must be remembered that regular random bombings against Israelis within their cities was a common method of Arab terrorists long before any "occupation" began)

What caused the suicide bombers to volunteer in that period of 1994? Was there a specific reason?
I am curious to know...

(It might be linked to the emerging Peace Treaty with Jordan which was eventually signed later that year, and the Palestinian rejectionists viewed the Israelis gaining political ground around the world)
http://www.caabu.org/press/documents/israel-jordan.html

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by webfusion
The first teenage suicide bomber was in Afula during April 1994, killing 8 people.
That is over a quarter-century from the June 1967 events. How did the Palestinians manage to avoid suicide attacks during those 25 years and abruptly start with them?

What happened in 1994? Why did the Palestinians suddenly embark upon this new tactic? (and it must be remembered that regular random bombings against Israelis within their cities was a common method of Arab terrorists long before any "occupation" began)

What caused the suicide bombers to volunteer in that period of 1994? Was there a specific reason?
I am curious to know...

(It might be linked to the emerging Peace Treaty with Jordan which was eventually signed later that year, and the Palestinian rejectionists viewed the Israelis gaining political ground around the world)
http://www.caabu.org/press/documents/israel-jordan.html

Is it anything to do with the period of time under occupation? That is, people who have grown up knowing nothing else but that.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Is it anything to do with the period of time under occupation? That is, people who have grown up knowing nothing else but that. If that was the case then explain why Aboriginies have never suicide bombed Australians.

Suicide bombers suicide bomb because charismatic leaders like the ex-Sheik Yassin play on their fears and hopes using religious fervor. He'd promise the bomber a place reserved in paradise where they can 'start a new life', he'd promise them that they would cast terror and fear into the hearts of the enemy, he'd promise them that what they are doing is righteous. On the other hand Saddam and the Palestinian Authority used to give the bomber financial compensation for their families, now Hizbollah does that. Strong support for suicide bombers amongst the Palestinian population teaches bombers that what they are doing is not really suicide, but a socially acceptable "heroic martyrdom operation".

If the islamists chose the right person for the job and the indoctrination is done well, eventually one will willingly fly passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon a_u_p. You aren't born a suicide bomber, you are indoctrinated (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/israel_and_the_palestinians/profiles/1249937.stm) into being a suicide bomber.
Syrian music star sings praise of suicide bombers - THE WASHINGTON TIMES (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040728-111758-3815r.htm)

Syrian music star sings praise of suicide bombers

Singer Nour Mehana's latest album includes the song "Um El Shaheed," or "Mother of a Martyr,"....Mr. Mehana, widely known as the Syrian Wayne Newton, sings to the mother that her son's goals are heroic and she should be happy he is dead.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
so you do notice it is a "lull" The warmongers on this board that hate the cease fire like to avoid noticing the cease fire.

Baiting ignored.

Originally posted by The Fool
Web, I'm sure you are correct that the IDF has no secret plans to sabotage the ceasefire but people still get shot. People still retaliate and people still retaliate for the retaliations. I have also been shot at during a "cease fire" that, unfortunately, is one of lifes rich realities.

The article I quoted said 15 teenage suicide-bombers or smugglers had been captured in the past two months. That suggests many more non-teenagers were also caught. When you add that to the constant shelling, the rocket attacks on the children...and it becomes obvious that one side doesn’t feel bound by this cease-fire.

I don’t want to trash the cease-fire as you claim I do (and dishonestly insist is what I want despite repeated statements otherwise) but I do want it solidified before moving on. If Abbas needs more time and resources to get the various factions and the population behind him, then he should have them. In the meantime, further withdrawals, concessions and talks can wait until this part of the process is accomplished.

Originally posted by The Fool
The shakespearean tragedy that I see is the absolute rabid attachment that the extremists on the Israeli side have to the occupation of the palestinians when this is the first thing that has to end if anything is to improve.

There was violence before Israel captured the territory, and violence from the Palestinian-Arabs increases whenever there is an agreement to turn over sovereignty to them. This evidence contradicts your assertion that the "occupation" must end for things to improve. You state your position on this often, but you never offer evidence to support it. Would you like to now?

Originally posted by The Fool
Murderers will always be able to rationalise thier actions when they are a member of a repressed occupied people....every time you knock one over another will take thier place.

Certainly, when so many social forces are at work creating new killers to replace the old. But so many of these social forces are artificial constructs created by Arafat and his cadre to keep the hate machine going. It can be dismantled, and should be.

Originally posted by The Fool
It seems thier attitude to the Palestinians is that of the famous Navy saying.....the floggings will continue until morale improves.

You’ve repeated this trite saying several times now, but morale isn’t improved by pretending there is no problem. Right now we have a problem in that many militants are not honoring the cease-fire, and that’s endangering the cease-fire. Further, the Palestinian-Authority has not taken decisive action against these militants, and has even resorted to the old Arafat trick of arresting some, only to allow them to "escape" later. This does not demonstrate good faith on their part, and progress cannot continue without it.

[webfusion]

Let's see some real research...

Is it anything to do with the period of time under occupation? That is, people who have grown up knowing nothing else but that.

What happened in 1994, specifically?
Why did the Palestinians decide to send people to die during that period, when they had not done so before (despite the occupation being in effect for over 25 years prior, and anti-Israel sentiment by the Arabs in Palestine being expressed with violence and killings of one sort or another for way long before that).

Was there a catalyst? ZN hints at some... I would like to see some evidence, if such exists. I'm sorry, I just don't have the opportunity this week to carry out the extensive websearches for the details, so I appeal to others to make this effort, if you're inclined. Thanks.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
If that was the case then explain why Aboriginies have never suicide bombed Australians.



The interesting thing is that suicide is a significant problem with aboriginals, as well as a high rate of self harm due to habits such as petrol sniffing.

The difference here, (that is, with the Palestinians), is that there appears to be a diversion such that if you're going to be suicidal, why not take someone with you while you are at it.

A person who places no value on their own life often ends up placing no value on anyone else's, either. If you want less Jews dying from suicide bombers, it is in Israel's interest to do their part in raising the self esteem of those under occupation. IMHO, ending the occupation would be a good start, YMMV.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by webfusion
Let's see some real research...

Is it anything to do with the period of time under occupation? That is, people who have grown up knowing nothing else but that.

What happened in 1994, specifically?
Why did the Palestinians decide to send people to die during that period, when they had not done so before (despite the occupation being in effect for over 25 years prior, and anti-Israel sentiment by the Arabs in Palestine being expressed with violence and killings of one sort or another for way long before that).


Once again, sent or volunteered. There is a significance.

[zenith-nadir]

If suicide bombing is the only answer to occupation and humiliation why is it a muslim phenomenon? Are there no other people on earth occupied or humiliated? And yes, I am singling out muslims because in the past 15 years 9.999 times out of ten suicide bombers around the world have been proven to be muslim.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
If suicide bombing is the only answer to occupation and humiliation why is it a muslim phenomenon? Are there no other people on earth occupied or humiliated? And yes, I am singling out muslims because in the past 15 years 9.999 times out of ten suicide bombers around the world have been proven to be muslim.

You see, there's your problem. You are so blinded by your narrow mindedness, you can't even get a simple claim like that correct. Maybe you should do some research on suicide attacks around the whole world, and see what comes up.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You see, there's your problem. You are so blinded by your narrow mindedness, you can't even get a simple claim like that correct. Maybe you should do some research on suicide attacks around the whole world, and see what comes up. Nice dodge a_u_p, but suicide bombing is a muslim phenomenon no matter how many times you say it is not. Unless you can prove statistically that over the past 15 years suicide bombing is not an muslim phenomenon then I maintain that it is. It is not a racist comment it is a fact. Feel free to prove me wrong.:D

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The interesting thing is that suicide is a significant problem with aboriginals, as well as a high rate of self harm due to habits such as petrol sniffing.

So if Aboriginal leaders started working to create a culture that encouraged suicide-terror towards non-Aboriginal Australians, you'd be okay with that?

Suppose they started interpreting their traditional religion in a way that promised eternal paradise for any Aboriginal Australian who died while killing non-Aboriginal Australians?

Suppose they ran television programs that demonized non-Aboriginal Australians, claiming you booby-trapped toys with explosives or stole Aboriginal organs for transplant?

Suppose Aboriginal leaders openly praised these suicide-bombers, and named streets, schools and hospitals for them?

Suppose they printed posters and trading cards like other nations do for musicians and sports stars? Suppose these martyrs were praised in schools by teachers, their pictures hung on the walls?

Suppose they paid cash awards and pensions to the families of suicide-bombers, to give teens and children in poor families could die believing they're taking care of their parents and siblings?

If all these things were done in Australia as they are in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, we would see suicide terrorism on your continent too. The question is, would you deliberately ignore all of these ways in which the behavior is engineered into the culture and dishonestly focus only on the "depression" felt by many Aboriginals?

All these things have been brought to your attention many times before, how come you keep ignoring them? At what point does having a different opinion cross the border into outright denial or historical revisionism? How can anyone possibly be so one sided on an issue as to dismiss over and over again all these examples of how suicide-terror is engineered into Palestinian-Arab culture, and maintain any pretense of non-bias?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
All these things have been brought to your attention many times before, how come you keep ignoring them? At what point does having a different opinion cross the border into outright denial or historical revisionism? How can anyone possibly be so one sided on an issue as to dismiss over and over again all these examples of how suicide-terror is engineered into Palestinian-Arab culture, and maintain any pretense of non-bias? I am the first to admit that Israel is a pretty screwed up place. Many times the Israeli government does things I do not agree with but they have been under fire for five decades so I am willing to cut them a little slack.

On the other hand I feel that if a_u_p admits that 40+ years of duplicity by Ara-fraud, 50+ years of rule by gun and 50+ years of allowing islamist militants dictate your foreign policy has had a worse effect on the Palestinians than Israel ever has then it kinda takes the wind out of his "occupation" sail.

Before AL Queda became enemy #1 there was only one other international terror group. It's heyday was in the 60s, 70s and 80s and it was called the PLO. It's track record is well documented. Legitimizing the PLO and changing it's acronym from the PLO to the PA was a huge injustice to the Palestinians, but alas, they didn't get the choice. The PLO never did have the mandate to speak for all Palestinians on earth, yet that point is moot now, the bell cannot be unrung.

Giving the PLO the West Bank and Gaza along with the fate of every Palestinian on earth was tantamount to giving Al Queda Afghanistan and wondering why "things just aren't working out". :D If one admits that the PLO used to be the world's Al Queda and it's leader ran the West Bank and Gaza into the ground, let islamist militants run wild and free while he stole billions in international aid then it is really hard to make Israel the bad guy in that context...that is why I feel some people just will not let go of the "occupation-is-the-cause-for-everything" excuse.

If Aboriginies started suicide bombing Australians from Aboriginal reserves you bet your butt there would be Australian police and military occupying those reserves in a heartbeat with checkpoints and everything else needed to protect Australian citizens. I bet a_u_p's tune would change pretty quickly if buses, shopping malls and restaurants were blowing up around him. ;)

[webfusion]

a_u_p, are you interested in seeing why 1994 was significant? A suicide bomber did not just wake up one fine day and think to himself "Wow, I have all this Semtex lying around the house, maybe it would be really cool to make an electronic detonator (using spare parts from a transistor radio) and then head over to Afula and see what havoc I can cause among the Jews by blowing myself to smithereens" ----
These people were chosen to be indoctrinated.
They were then sent.
What part of that process don't you understand?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Nice dodge a_u_p, but suicide bombing is a muslim phenomenon no matter how many times you say it is not. Unless you can prove statistically that over the past 15 years suicide bombing is not an muslim phenomenon then I maintain that it is. It is not a racist comment it is a fact. Feel free to prove me wrong.:D

You're the guy who cited figures, you prove them.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by webfusion
a_u_p, are you interested in seeing why 1994 was significant? A suicide bomber did not just wake up one fine day and think to himself "Wow, I have all this Semtex lying around the house, maybe it would be really cool to make an electronic detonator (using spare parts from a transistor radio) and then head over to Afula and see what havoc I can cause among the Jews by blowing myself to smithereens" ----
These people were chosen to be indoctrinated.
They were then sent.
What part of that process don't you understand?

I don't deny that, but to be indoctrinated you have to be susceptible.

[webfusion]

"You're the guy who cited figures, you prove them."

This remark by ZN about suicide bombing being a virtually exclusive "muslim phenomenon" may indeed be an obvious thing on its face, but I would also like to see if it holds up under scrutiny of the facts and figures. I tend to think it will, but let's see some details.
a_u_p, is it that difficult to find more detailed information about non-muslim suicide attacks? I googled and only came up with this:
http://www.johnjemerson.com/zizka.tamil.htm

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
...to be indoctrinated you have to be susceptible.

Again, I return to the original issue: What caused the Palestinians in 1994 to turn to that method, just out of the clear blue sky? Up until that point, there was terror indoctrination, there was certainly a tendency toward susceptibility of being convinced to perpetrate violent and bloody attacks, but up until that fateful April day in 1994 in Afula, no Palestinian had blown himself (or herself) up in such an act of wanton sacrifice.

I wish that I had a few minutes free in my hectic schedule this week to be able to just look around the 'net and find some information as to WHY.
Maybe after Memorial Day, if nobody else manages to post the answer...


edited to add image of a typical public rally of the Palestinians ---
http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D240505/130hamas.jpg

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I don't deny that, but to be indoctrinated you have to be susceptible.

Again, I have to ask; at what point does disagreement cross the line into denial or historical revisionism?

They're in a conflict. Nobody denies that. At the same time, there have been a lot of players dedicated to maintaining this conflict. The Arab League, Arafat, the various factions of Palestinian militancy...even if you place all the responsibility on "susceptibility" you still have acknowlege the Arabic role in creating that susceptibility.

This is why I think you're a bigot is your absolute refusal to see any fault in this conflict other than Israel.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Again, I have to ask; at what point does disagreement cross the line into denial or historical revisionism?

They're in a conflict. Nobody denies that. At the same time, there have been a lot of players dedicated to maintaining this conflict. The Arab League, Arafat, the various factions of Palestinian militancy...even if you place all the responsibility on "susceptibility" you still have acknowlege the Arabic role in creating that susceptibility.

This is why I think you're a bigot is your absolute refusal to see any fault in this conflict other than Israel.

It appears you cannot read, and I quote, "I don't deny that".

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It appears you cannot read, and I quote, "I don't deny that".

Then why persist in this anti-Israeli propaganda campaign of hate?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Then why persist in this anti-Israeli propaganda campaign of hate?

I was arguing a point with webfusion, go back a few posts and follow it.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I was arguing a point with webfusion, go back a few posts and follow it.

I'm following it. It appears you're in denial that the Palestinian-Arab leadership has been purposefully creating and maintaining a culture of hate for the past 12 years with the aim of keeping the rate of violence directed at Israelis high. You also seem to be in denial as to the role these actions have played in maintaining the climate where young people think that aspiring to be a suicide-bomber is a noble ambition, instead preferring to place all responsibility for this on Israel, despite evidence to the contrary. This has been your behavior for the past couple of years (maybe longer) and not just this exchange with Webfusion.

So let me ask you;

If you do understand the role the Palestinian-Arab leadership has played in working to create and maintain this climate where young men (and more recently, young women) feel their greatest ambition is to die as a martyr in killing Jews, why do you persist in downplaying this contribution to the violence and instead only credit factors that can be blamed on Israel?

Why do you persist (in a larger sense, not just this exchange) in waging this propaganda campaign of hate against Israel?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Why do you persist (in a larger sense, not just this exchange) in waging this propaganda campaign of hate against Israel? It's quite simple and ingenious.

#1) Deny that the Palestinian Authority used to be the Al Queda of the 60s, 70s and 80s or has any responsibility for the Palestinian islamist militants/suicide bombers - eventhough they finance some of these people - and the responsibility for the continued occupation, checkpoints and security barrier falls onto Israel.

#2) Admit that the PA used to be the Al Queda of the 60s, 70s and 80s and it finances and supports Palestinian islamist militants/suicide bombers - and it has been proven they do finance some of these people - and the responsibility for the continued occupation, checkpoints and security barriers falls onto the Palestinian Authority.

The game is to always go with scenerio #1 eventhough it is demonstratively possible to show that #1 is false and #2 is true. ;)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft

Why do you persist (in a larger sense, not just this exchange) in waging this propaganda campaign of hate against Israel?

Let me put it this way, **** off.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Let me put it this way, **** off.

It's an honest question.

We've been re-hashing the same issues for almost two years now, and you've been exposed to all the various ways the Palestinian-Authority encourages suicide terror over and over again, yet you still seem to be in denial. Why?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
It's an honest question.


It's a dishonest accusation.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It's a dishonest accusation.

How are you not in denial? You absolutely refuse to give any credence to any Arabic contributing factors to suicide-terror and instead lay it all on "depression" and "breakdown of society" while you refuse to even give any credence to Arabic contributions to that.

Why? When you're given evidence over and over again and you continue to dismiss it or pretend it doesn't exist, at some point you have to call it denial.

Seriously, I've met white supremacists less stubborn than you.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
How are you not in denial? You absolutely refuse to give any credence to any Arabic contributing factors to suicide-terror and instead lay it all on "depression" and "breakdown of society" while you refuse to even give any credence to Arabic contributions to that.

Why? When you're given evidence over and over again and you continue to dismiss it or pretend it doesn't exist, at some point you have to call it denial.

Seriously, I've met white supremacists less stubborn than you.

You haven't read what I said only a few posts before, or you have forgotten it already.

Perhaps my stubborness can be explained by my refusal to cop a dishonest accusation.

As Cleon said once, the Palestinians have got the short end of the stick. That's all I have claimed, from the start.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
As Cleon said once, the Palestinians have got the short end of the stick. That's all I have claimed, from the start. Top 4 reasons the Palestinians have the short end of the stick a_u_p;
The first real leader of the Palestinians, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, led anti-jewish riots in the 20s, 30s and conspired with Hitler to wipe out the jews in the 40s.
The Arab states - along with the Palestinians - tried to destroy Israel by wars in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973.
The PLO - the Palestinian nationalist umbrella organization - used fedayeen militia groups to terrorize and murder Israelis across the globe in the 60s, 70s and 80s.
The second real leader of the Palestinians - and leader of the PLO - Yasser Arafat, became the President of the Palestinian Authority and continued to support/harbor/finance fedayeen militia groups to terrorize and murder Israelis throughout the 90s into the 21st century.

The Palestinians have the short end of the stick because Haj Amin Al-Husseini, the Arab states, the PLO, Yasser Arafat and thousands upon thousands of Palestinians have spent the best part of a century killing jews and trying to destroy Israel.

How can I prove that?

The Palestinian violence predates the Haganah a_u_p... it predates the Irgun, it predates Israel, it predates the occupation, it predates the settlements, it predates Sharon, it predates the bulldozing, it predates the checkpoints, it predates the security wall....that is how I can prove that a settlement is not the reason for a Palestinian teenager to decide one day to strap on a bomb vest and blow up in an Israeli restaurant. He/she does it because it has been "the way" for nearly a century.

[webfusion]

http://www.theisraelproject.org/conference/

June 26-27 Washington DC

-------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile,
Lebanon's president says "war with Israel is legitimate" (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/579980.html)


And while the leader of Lebanon makes such bellicose statements, we have this gem from the Iranian/Syrian-backed terrorists who control Southern Lebanon ----
"Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah Wednesday acknowledged for first time that his Lebanese guerrilla group has more than 12,000 rockets and that all of northern Israel is within reach.

"All of the north of occupied Palestine, its settlements, airports, seaports, fields, factories and farms is under the feet and hands of the Islamic resistance," Nasrallah said.

This comes from the mouths of the leaders in a nation (Lebanon) that Israel does NOT occupy at all.
How can the Palestinians be expected to offer words less strident?!!!

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You haven't read what I said only a few posts before, or you have forgotten it already.

Read it. It appears you're in denial that the Palestinian-Arab leadership has been purposefully creating and maintaining a culture of hate for the past 12 years with the aim of keeping the rate of violence directed at Israelis high. You also seem to be in denial as to the role these actions have played in maintaining the climate where young people think that aspiring to be a suicide-bomber is a noble ambition, instead preferring to place all responsibility for this on Israel, despite evidence to the contrary.

Now if there is some other way I should iterpret your words, you're free to tell me what it is.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Perhaps my stubborness can be explained by my refusal to cop a dishonest accusation.

What dishonest accusation? Are you denying you've been running an anti-Israel propaganda campaign for the past several years?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
As Cleon said once, the Palestinians have got the short end of the stick. That's all I have claimed, from the start.

Nobody disagrees with that. The reason I call you a bigot is your continuing denial (historical revisionism) of any role the Palestinian-Arabs have played in creating and perpetuating the conflict where they keep comming out on the short end of the stick. I also think you're prejudiced because you (and the Fool) continue to deny the Palestinian-Arabs have any role and responsibilities to play in ending the conflict.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
If suicide bombing is the only answer to occupation and humiliation why is it a muslim phenomenon? Are there no other people on earth occupied or humiliated? And yes, I am singling out muslims because in the past 15 years 9.999 times out of ten suicide bombers around the world have been proven to be muslim.

Sri Lankan Tamils are Catholics, and have been quite succesful with their suicide bombing tactics.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
I also think you're prejudiced because you (and the Fool) continue to deny the Palestinian-Arabs have any role and responsibilities to play in ending the conflict.

Please show one example of me doing this, just one example will do. If I "continue" to do it as you claim then one example should take you ....ummmmmm.....2 minutes to find? 10 minutes? How about I give you a year? Want to know why you won't find it?Because its not there Mycroft.....not there. your lying is tedious.

ok, off you go...don't let fear of failure prevent you from having a good hard look.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
Please show one example of me doing this, just one example will do. If I "continue" to do it as you claim then one example should take you ....ummmmmm.....2 minutes to find? 10 minutes? How about I give you a year? Want to know why you won't find it?Because its not there Mycroft.....not there. your lying is tedious.

About a month ago I presented to you a list of nine things Palestinian-Arabs could do to promote peace including such basics as refraining from preaching hate and violence and you dismissed the entire list, taking the attitude that the Palestinian-Arabs shouldn't be expected to do anything at all, not even maintain a cease-fire.

Later, when Zenith-Nadir talked about the Palestinian-Authority arresting terrorists who break the cease-fire (as they agreed they would do by treaty, as they are required to do by the road-map) you ridiculed the idea, saying we expected the Palestinian-Arabs to "auto-repress" themselves.

That's what I can think of off the top of my head. No, I'm not going to hunt them down and provide links, but if you recall these conversations differently than I do you're more than welcome to.

Or...if you really want to prove me wrong, you could just make a list of things you think the Palestinian-Arabs should be doing to promote peace. My guess is that would be a very short list as you dismiss or ridicule anything anyone else comes up with.

Originally posted by The Fool
ok, off you go...don't let fear of failure prevent you from having a good hard look.

Baiting ignored.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft

That's what I can think of off the top of my head. No, I'm not going to hunt them down and provide links, but if you recall these conversations differently than I do you're more than welcome to.


Garbage...its your lie and you want me to look for it? I've told you Im not interested in your opinions of what my opinions are....I want you to find a single example of me denying that palestinian arabs have any role and responsibilities to play in ending the conflict.

You are a lying pest...either back up your claims with evidence or stop libeling me with this garbage.

You say I have denied it...that is a lie...put up or shut up and go away....I've lost my patience with you, but then again thats probably your aim.

Edited to add: I just went looked back a short ways and found a recent statement of mine on who is to "blame"...

"Every day more and more moderates are turned into extremists on both sides by the two great curses of the Arab Israeli conflict...Arab terrorism and Israeli occupation."

Is that statement consistant with your lie?

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
Garbage...its your lie and you want me to look for it? I've told you Im not interested in your opinions of what my opinions are....I want you to find a single example of me denying that palestinian arabs have any role and responsibilities to play in ending the conflict.


You grow tiresome. You asked for examples and I gave them to you. If you want to claim senility and pretend not to remember, too bad for you.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Read it. It appears you're in denial that the Palestinian-Arab leadership has been purposefully creating and maintaining a culture of hate for the past 12 years with the aim of keeping the rate of violence directed at Israelis high. You also seem to be in denial as to the role these actions have played in maintaining the climate where young people think that aspiring to be a suicide-bomber is a noble ambition, instead preferring to place all responsibility for this on Israel, despite evidence to the contrary.



I don't deny that there is hatred that is being encouraged, but there is also hatred at Israel for the occupation.



Now if there is some other way I should iterpret your words, you're free to tell me what it is.



What dishonest accusation? Are you denying you've been running an anti-Israel propaganda campaign for the past several years?



Absolutely.



Nobody disagrees with that. The reason I call you a bigot is your continuing denial (historical revisionism) of any role the Palestinian-Arabs have played in creating and perpetuating the conflict where they keep comming out on the short end of the stick. I also think you're prejudiced because you (and the Fool) continue to deny the Palestinian-Arabs have any role and responsibilities to play in ending the conflict.

Creating is one of the big sticking points of the whole issue. As has been repeatedly confirmed, officially and by extremists Jews, the whole point is to create a Jewish State, something that Arabs in the area have a big problem with. It is an intrinsically racist notion. Now, a racist reaction is blamed entirely on those subject to one.

South Africa has abandoned such a path, Australia was an unabashadly racist country till the 1960's. Israel has to abandon such a notion, IMHO. Take it or leave it.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I don't deny that there is hatred that is being encouraged, but there is also hatred at Israel for the occupation.This is what is so funny about you a_u_p. You can't lay the responsibility for nearly a century of incitement by Arab and Palestinian leaders without going "but" and adding at least one Israel reference. The hatered and incitement by Arab and Palestinian leaders began before the Haganah, before the Irgun, before Israel exsisted, before settlements, before the occupation, before Sharon, checkpoints, bulldozers, etc.

The Haganah was created because Arab and Palestinian leaders were attacking and killing jews in the 20's. The occupation happened because Syria, Jordan and Egypt were shelling Israel, kicking out UN peacekeepers, blockading Israeli shipping and massing their forces at Israel borders. The checkpoints and bulldozers and targetted killings happened because Arafat and the Palestinian Authority/PLO supported/harbored/financed fedayeen militia groups to terrorize and murder Israelis for nearly 40 years.

It's a function of "cause" and "effect". In your world - and the fools it seems - the "effect" is the reason for the "cause". It's truely baffling.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Creating is one of the big sticking points of the whole issue. As has been repeatedly confirmed, officially and by extremists Jews, the whole point is to create a Jewish State, something that Arabs in the area have a big problem with.Why? BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST AGAINST JEWS EINSTEIN! 220,000,000 Arabs in 22 Arab nations have a problem with 5.9 million jews living near them on 8000 sq miles of land. Hell, 98% of all jews were expelled from their homes in Arab countries in the 40s and 50s. This is an Arab problem, not an Israeli problem.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It is an intrinsically racist notion. Now, a racist reaction is blamed entirely on those subject to one. Israel doesn't control 220,000,000 Arabs. They are not "subject to Israeli racism". Quite the contrary, Israel is subject to Arab racism that is so easily documented I won't even bother.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
South Africa has abandoned such a path, Australia was an unabashadly racist country till the 1960's. Israel has to abandon such a notion, IMHO. Take it or leave it. So only if Israel abandons "racism" then all will be well in the Arab world....you slay me...:D

[a_unique_person]

Mr Smiley, you made a factual claim, 9.999 out of ten. Now justify it.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I don't deny that there is hatred that is being encouraged, but there is also hatred at Israel for the occupation.

The occupation is a result of the continuing conflict, so it’s somewhat dishonest to blame Israel for this hatred without also acknowledging the role the Arab nations have played in creating it. In truth, any conflict will create hate and anger on both sides, but it’s only when Arafat and other Palestinian-Arab leaders channel this anger into creating a cultural worship of martyrdom that the suicide-bomber is created. That this is done at precisely the same time that Arafat is publicly promising to end terror increases his culpability. That you minimize and deny this is why I think you’re a bigot.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Absolutely.


I’m not sure which is worse, that you might truly believe this or that you could lie so blatantly.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Creating is one of the big sticking points of the whole issue. As has been repeatedly confirmed, officially and by extremists Jews, the whole point is to create a Jewish State, something that Arabs in the area have a big problem with. It is an intrinsically racist notion. Now, a racist reaction is blamed entirely on those subject to one.

What an interesting change in topic. I charge you with denying the role the Palestinian-Arabs have played in creating the conflict and with denying that they have any responsibility in ending the conflict, and you just sort of side-step those charges and say something completely unrelated. This is typical of your argumentative style.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
South Africa has abandoned such a path, Australia was an unabashadly racist country till the 1960's. Israel has to abandon such a notion, IMHO. Take it or leave it.

More dishonesty. Israel does not struggle with the Palestinian-Arabs because they are racist but because the leadership of the Palestinian-Arabs keep provoking them into violence.

There are certainly aspects of racism in this conflict, but from the organized anti-Jewish riots of the 20’s, to the racial incitement on PA television in the 90’s to the very recent promotion of the Protocol’s of the Elders of Zion on the official PA website, it has been predominantly anti-Jewish racism.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
The occupation is a result of the continuing conflict,

You know perfectly well that is not the case. The occupation allowed the expansion of the settlements. Sharon now believes Israel has grabbed as much as it can, and is building the fence and pulling out of Gaza. That's what the occupation was about.



I’m not sure which is worse, that you might truly believe this or that you could lie so blatantly.



I can't help it if you are a delusional liar. Refer previous point.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
You know perfectly well that is not the case. The occupation allowed the expansion of the settlements. Sharon now believes Israel has grabbed as much as it can, and is building the fence and pulling out of Gaza. That's what the occupation was about.

Notice again the subtle shift in topic. You were blaming Israel for suicide bombings, now you're putting forth a woo-woo conspiracy theory. Read about the Six Day War here. (http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_sixday_backgd.php)

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I can't help it if you are a delusional liar. Refer previous point.

The funny part here is you're putting forth this woo-woo theory on the Six Day War, and now you're calling me a "delusional liar" for calling you an anti-Israel propagandist. Ironic, huh?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Notice again the subtle shift in topic. You were blaming Israel for suicide bombings, now you're putting forth a woo-woo conspiracy theory. Read about the Six Day War here. (http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_sixday_backgd.php)



The funny part here is you're putting forth this woo-woo theory on the Six Day War, and now you're calling me a "delusional liar" for calling you an anti-Israel propagandist. Ironic, huh?

Subtle shift in topic? Notice the subtle shift in topic. WTF? I try to state a fact about the occupation, and you are now accusing me of something I never mentioned. On that basis, I am a delusional liar. Because you have accused, tried, and and found me guilty of something I didn't do, and, once again, I have been very 'subtle' about it. Well **** you. That's where I draw the line, I have done so in the past, and I will do it every time in the future.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Subtle shift in topic? Notice the subtle shift in topic. WTF? I try to state a fact about the occupation, and you are now accusing me of something I never mentioned. On that basis, I am a delusional liar. Because you have accused, tried, and and found me guilty of something I didn't do, and, once again, I have been very 'subtle' about it. Well **** you. That's where I draw the line, I have done so in the past, and I will do it every time in the future.

I'm sorry you don't like the way you're perceived. Three guesses on how you can change it.

You can start by avoiding the woo-woo mind reading exercises, "Sharon now believes..." and the historical revisionism, and acknowledge that desperation causes people to sue for peace and get angry at their own leaders who torpedo the process, and artificially created aspiration through manipulation of the culture by the Palestinian-Authority is what channels anger into becoming suicide bombers.

[a_unique_person]

http://randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55860&highlight=sharon

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
http://randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55860&highlight=sharon

This doesn't support anything you're trying to say in this thread.

Still, that's typical AUP. Exhaust yourself on one topic, just change to another and hope nobody notices the shift.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
This doesn't support anything you're trying to say in this thread.

Still, that's typical AUP. Exhaust yourself on one topic, just change to another and hope nobody notices the shift.

It's exactly what I am basing my argument on, Sharon's own words. He has decided what the boundaries are, where the populations are to be divided, and is in the process of sealing it all off.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
It's exactly what I am basing my argument on, Sharon's own words. He has decided what the boundaries are, where the populations are to be divided, and is in the process of sealing it all off.

That's why I said it's a different topic. Your initial point was "I don't deny that there is hatred that is being encouraged, but there is also hatred at Israel for the occupation." in response to my saying you're in denial about the PA creating cultural support for suicide bombing.

If you want to argue this new topic, fine. You know I'll argue anything with you all day long. Just have the honesty to admit that your theories on Sharon's strategies are a different topic from how the Palestinian Authority promotes suicide-terror.

On this new topic I'll remind you it would be moot had Arafat followed the Oslo plan began back in 1993, that he would have had an independent Palestinian state in 1998, years before Sharon came to power. Instead, we had the first suicide-bombing back in 1994 (remember this factoid Webfuson brought up?) during the very period your revisionist history claims Arafat was "doing the best he could" to control terror.

Since Arafat didn’t follow the plan, since Palestinian compliance with every agreement since has been non-existent (the topic of this thread, nobody really expects them to cease-firing even when there is a cease-fire) I fail to see the problem with Sharon having a unilateral decision ready to implement just in case Abbas doesn’t live up to expectations. If it’s as you describe (meaning if your psyching powers prove real) it would end the occupation and create peace.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
I'm sorry you don't like the way you're perceived. Three guesses on how you can change it.

You can start by avoiding the woo-woo mind reading exercises, "Sharon now believes..." and the historical revisionism, and acknowledge that desperation causes people to sue for peace and get angry at their own leaders who torpedo the process, and artificially created aspiration through manipulation of the culture by the Palestinian-Authority is what channels anger into becoming suicide bombers.

I'll give you a tip to keep our exchanges more civil. Next time you think I am saying something, especially something 'subtle', that might not be too clear, just ask me first, and get my point clarified. That's what other people tend to do. Typically, they will ask "AUP, are you saying that....", or "AUP, I don't understand...". It may be a weakness in argument on my part, for which I will apoligise, for not making myself clear. But it will save a lot of acrimony, and lead to a more civil forum. If you are going to make what I believe are outrageous accusations, it would be best if you make sure of what I am claiming before you do so.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I'll give you a tip to keep our exchanges more civil. Next time you think I am saying something, especially something 'subtle', that might not be too clear, just ask me first, and get my point clarified. That's what other people tend to do. Typically, they will ask "AUP, are you saying that....", or "AUP, I don't understand...". It may be a weakness in argument on my part, for which I will apoligise, for not making myself clear. But it will save a lot of acrimony, and lead to a more civil forum. If you are going to make what I believe are outrageous accusations, it would be best if you make sure of what I am claiming before you do so.

So are you now conceding all points and just saving face by lecturing me on style?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft
So are you now conceding all points and just saving face by lecturing me on style?

I am conceding nothing, I am pointing out that abusive attacks by yourself can be avoided by just asking first, for example, if I am referring to "The Six Day War", or not. I wasn't, and I was not indulging in any 'subtle shifts'.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I am conceding nothing, I am pointing out that abusive attacks by yourself can be avoided by just asking first, for example, if I am referring to "The Six Day War", or not. I wasn't, and I was not indulging in any 'subtle shifts'.

How else could I interpret, "The occupation allowed the expansion of the settlements." when "the occupation" was the result of the Six Day war? And even that was a change in topic from your refusal to acknowledge any Arabic contributions to suicide terror.

Are you going to continue to minimize that?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Mycroft
So are you now conceding all points and just saving face by lecturing me on style?
grow up Mycroft, at least some people are still interested in trying to channel you towards productive discussion. Personally I have less patience.....

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by The Fool
grow up Mycroft, at least some people are still interested in trying to channel you towards productive discussion. Personally I have less patience.....

Baiting ignored.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Mycroft
Baiting ignored. :D A little sauce for the gander.

Mycroft, I have never noted anything but honest and serious debate from you. Hang in there.

[webfusion]

Meanwhile, my 'factoid' has remained ignored and my question still goes unanswered:

"What specifically happened in 1994 that prompted the suicide attacks to begin?"

===============================

There is a cease-fire right now. It is holding in the most fragile way. It is being honored in the breach by Israel. HAMAS and Islamic Jihad are trying to scuttle it, in various ways. Just look at the news.

Every Tuesday and Thursday something else threatens to collapse it totally. Mostly the breaking is on the part of the Islamic terrorists, as their suicide attackers are lined-up and ready to go.

===============================

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=577789&contrassID=2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Interesting article about South African Apartheid and the Israel - Palestinian/Arab conflict.

(A very lively reader's feedback discussion follows)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by webfusion
Meanwhile, my 'factoid' has remained ignored and my question still goes unanswered:

"What specifically happened in 1994 that prompted the suicide attacks to begin?"

===============================

There is a cease-fire right now. It is holding in the most fragile way. It is being honored in the breach by Israel. HAMAS and Islamic Jihad are trying to scuttle it, in various ways. Just look at the news.


I was waiting for you to provide it.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by RandFan
:D A little sauce for the gander.

Mycroft, I have never noted anything but honest and serious debate from you. Hang in there.

So how did I make 'subtle' insinuations about the six day war? I honeslty missed that part, but not the attack on me for being a woo for 'subtly' bringing it up.