Listen to Ariel Sharon , Mr.Unique...

[Cleopatra]

I have bad news for you Mr.Unique.

PM Ariel Sharon indicated that it's time for Israel to start dismantling some of the settlements...

What a tragedy for people like you Mr.Unique...What will you blame Israel for afterwards...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2943941.stm

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has indicated he is willing to remove some Jewish settlements in the West Bank for peace with the Palestinians

[aerocontrols]

Mr Erekat added: "He speaks vaguely in English about painful concessions for peace while giving orders in Hebrew to intensify settlement activities."

That's pretty rich, coming from the Palestinians. :D

I thought the war in Iraq was going to be used as cover to intensify the settlement process and the persecution of the Palestinians?

I better go read some Robert Fisk. He'll tell me what the secret plan actually is.

MattJ

[tamiO]

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has indicated he is willing to remove some Jewish settlements in the West Bank for peace with the Palestinians

It's about time ! I just wish it were more than "some" of them.

[Clancie]

When it comes to Sharon, talk is cheap. He's offered 'concessions' in the past that fell far short of what was needed--so far short, in fact, that it seems likely his "concessions" fall into the "PR" category, not sincere efforts at negotiations.

Ultimately, Sharon's actions consistently seem bent on the destruction of the Palestinians, period. A few little "feints" and other tactics along the road to that goal are to be expected from any good general who feels he's going to decisively win an ongoing war.

Realistic peace proposals from Sharon? I'll believe it when I see it.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Clancy
When it comes to Sharon, talk is cheap. He's offered 'concessions' in the past that fell far short of what was needed--so far short, in fact, that it seems likely his "concessions" fall into the "PR" category, not sincere efforts at negotiations.

Ultimately, Sharon's actions consistently seem bent on the destruction of the Palestinians, period. A few little "feints" and other tactics along the road to that goal are to be expected from any good general who feels he's going to decisively win an ongoing war.

Realistic peace proposals from Sharon? I'll believe it when I see it.

Many people don't like Sharon. But in this interview he spoke as an elected Prime Minister of a State.
I feel the need to remind you that he is the only ELECTED Prime Minister in the area...

[Gem]

Israel will hand over some Jewish settlements for peace, but the Palestinians must give up their demand that refugees be allowed to return to their former homes in Israel, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) said in an interview published Sunday.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=535&ncid=535&e=7&u=/ap/20030413/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_8 (http://)

*bows respectfully to Cleopatra and courtisies*

I don't know if his moves are "PR" or not. Frankly the whole situation is not clearly black and white. It looks like both sides are going to have to make painful compromises to live in peace.

Gem

*bows to Cleopatra and leaves*

[Baker]

If you look at the history this land for peace has never worked when is everyone going to realize that the Palestinians simply want to destroy Israel.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Gem

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=535&ncid=535&e=7&u=/ap/20030413/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_8 (http://)

*bows respectfully to Cleopatra and courtisies*

I don't know if his moves are "PR" or not. Frankly the whole situation is not clearly black and white. It looks like both sides are going to have to make painful compromises to live in peace.

Gem

*bows to Cleopatra and leaves*

Stop him!!! Stop him!!!! I wanna talk to him!!! :)

Gem you are right. But regarding this : "but the Palestinians must give up their demand that refugees be allowed to return to their former homes in Israel, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) said in an interview published Sunday. "

Palestinians who are interested in solving the problem agree with Ariel Sharon on that.

The refugees and Jerusalem are out of question, especially the former...

[Gem]

Ask the 1948 Palestenian refugees why. Or the one living in poverty because they can't get work in Isreal or anywhere.

Not all of them wants to destroy Isreal. The new palestinian "PM" is called a Moderate by some Isrealis, so it could mean that peace could settle soon. There will always be a bunch of powerful individuals that wants Isreal out of the picture, but that doesn't mean it's the majority of Palestenians.

After both sides commits questionable acts to each other, peace negotiations are a bit hard.

Like I said before, both sides are going to have to do painful concessions.

Gem

[Gem]

*bows*

Quote from the Queen of Queens:
The refugees and Jerusalem are out of question, especially the former...

Since the refugees from 1948 are getting old, sooner or later it will no longer be a problem. It sad to think they might never see their original homes again, but we have to plow foward.

As for Jerusalem, I for one would never approve this historical city to be divided. Never. International city sounds like a very nice thing, but I don't know what an "International city" is. Perhaps Her majesty could enlighten me?:confused:

Gem

[Cleopatra]

I agree with the above but I am not so optimistic.

Like I said before, both sides are going to have to do painful concessions.

I think that they are not ready yet and USA doesn't help at all... not to mention the incapability of the Europeans...

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Gem
*bows*

Quote from the Queen of Queens:


Since the refugees from 1948 are getting old, sooner or later it will no longer be a problem. It sad to think they might never see their original homes again, but we have to plow foward.

As for Jerusalem, I for one would never approve this historical city to be divided. Never. International city sounds like a very nice thing, but I don't know what an "International city" is. Perhaps Her majesty could enlighten me?:confused:

Gem

The Queen of the Kings ( a title attribute to Her by Antonius himself) smiles...

Do you know the rates of births among Arabs? :)

I don't know myself what "International" city means.The same way I don't understand what sugar-free pastries are...To me the word International, suggests lack of determination to solve the problem.

My house is situated in Jerusalem, I'd rather give it to my Palestinian neighbour than see the flag of UN above the Walls of Jerusalem...

[Clancie]

Looking at a map of where Palestinians live, the little carved out enclaves scattered like reservations, makes it pretty obvious who's out to destroy whom (with the military backing and financial support of the U.S. Didn't we just pledge 2 Billion more dollars to Israel a week ago? No wonder Palestinians see Sharon's policies as an extension of U.S. policy toward them.)

Let's not forget that Israel was artificially carved out of Palestinian land after World War II by foreign powers.

But don't get me wrong. Boundaries have been artificially created before, and "to the victor goes the spoils" is a time-honored principle, whether just or not. I support the existence of Israel. Just not Israeli policies toward the Palestinians.

After all, history has shown over and over that ruthless suppression of a people never leads to peaceful coexistence with that people. (And Israelis should certainly know that better than anyone).

[Skeptic]

That's pretty rich, (accusing Sharon of speaking about peace in English and for war in hebrew-S.) coming from the Palestinians. :D

Yup. For example, the trasnaltor of the Palestinian charter from 1964 (long before "the occupation", of course) into English "forgot" to translate the section about "removing" all the jews who weren't in the place before 1917. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

Of course, it might be that the real palestinian anger here is about Sharon infringing on their patented "talk peace in English and war in Arabic" system. Sharon should really pay Arafat damages for stealing his idea.

By the way, it just occured to me: the interview with Sharon when he said these things WAS, of course, in hebrew--to the main hebrew-language israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz. His statements on making concessions is the headline on all the hebrew-language newspapers' web sites, at least when I last checked an hour ago. So much for "speaking of peace to the Americans in English and telling his people something different in hebrew" accusation.

Why on earth would the Palestinian spokesman blatantly lie about something so easily checked? Just keeping in practice, I guess.

[Skeptic]

I support the existence of Israel.

So you support the existence of what--according to your view--is an artificial, agressive, occupying power on stolen land? Hardly a consistent position, is it? It's a bit like saying: "I support women's right to equality, I just think it's time we realized they are inferior, hysterical little creatures who don't really deserve the rights us men do."

Frankly, I'm sick of the "I support israel's right to exist, I just think it would be wonderful if it disappeared and the poor palestinians could be liberated from its nefarious clutches" so-called "liberal" position. At least the arabs who repeat the "artificial evil colonialist occupying power" mantra against israel are honest enough to admit it logically follows that they wish its destruction. They don't employ the hypocritical "of course I support Israel's right to exist, BUT..." fig leaf, to make their desire for israel's demise appear "respectable".

P.S.

You will be glad to know that I decided, after long deliberation, that you DO have the right to exist. Now all you have to do is give me half your home in return.

Whaddaya mean, you won't do it? Don't you realize what an ENORMOUS CONCESSION this is for me, to try and attempt to believe you DON'T deserve to be butchered, and even consider the possibility that you HAVE the right to live? Disgusting, how you are stopping the advancement of the peace process between us both with your hardline positions! I'll tell the UN, and they'll pass a resolution comdemning your actions! So THERE!

[Skeptic]

After all, history has shown over and over that ruthless suppression of a people never leads to peaceful coexistence with that people.

Let's just ask the American Indians, or the Christians in the Arab world, about THAT one.

[Clancie]

So you support the existence of what--according to your view--is an artificial, agressive(sic), occupying power on stolen land?

Yes.

Hardly a consistent position, is it?

Quite consistent, actually. It's a reality of the world, not only there in the Middle East, but everywhere. Boundaries are changed by force and, to some extent, "to the victor go the spoils" always.

It's a bit like saying: "I support women's right to equality, I just think it's time we realized they are inferior, hysterical little creatures who don't really deserve the rights us men do."

Your analogy doesn't fit. Sorry. From your point of view, its more like arguing that I said, "Women are kept as second class citizens and that's okay just because its the way it is, even though I personally believe they are equals." However, that's not my meaning either.

Frankly, I'm sick of the "I support israel's right to exist, I just think it would be wonderful if it disappeared and the poor palestinians could be liberated from its nefarious clutches"

Strawman. I didn't say anything like that. Israel should exist (they've got it; they keep it), but the Palestinians deserve to have a homeland, too. In fact, this has been agreed to already, in principle, by Israel as well as the U.S. (see U.N. resolution).

At least the arabs who repeat the "artificial evil colonialist occupying power" mantra against israel are honest enough to admit it logically follows that they wish its destruction.

That hasn't been the official Palestinian position for years. They do not call for the destruction of Israel (nor is that what the Intifada is about--its about ending the Israeli occupation).

Have you ever looked at a map to see where the Palestinians live vis-a-vis Israel? You might be surprised.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


That's pretty rich, coming from the Palestinians. :D

I thought the war in Iraq was going to be used as cover to intensify the settlement process and the persecution of the Palestinians?

I better go read some Robert Fisk. He'll tell me what the secret plan actually is.

MattJ

I would say both sides have been doing the same. Just because the Palestinians have been doing one thing while saying another, does not justify the Israelis doing the same. It is also a matter of debate as to how many Palestinians do support the suicide bombings.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
I have bad news for you Mr.Unique.

PM Ariel Sharon indicated that it's time for Israel to start dismantling some of the settlements...

What a tragedy for people like you Mr.Unique...What will you blame Israel for afterwards...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2943941.stm

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has indicated he is willing to remove some Jewish settlements in the West Bank for peace with the Palestinians

This is hardly anything new. Every peace deal has seen offers of the removal of some settlements. Some have even been removed, to great fanfare. For everyone removed, two replace them. And I can tell you right now, the settlements in Hebron won't be on the list of those going.

As for this being a tragedy for me, why? It is of no great matter to me personally if there are settlements there or not. Your implication is that I revel in the war and killing. Playing word games may be your style, but all it does is cloud debate and logic. If you want to play word games, there are many sites that cater to such pasttimes.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Many people don't like Sharon. But in this interview he spoke as an elected Prime Minister of a State.
I feel the need to remind you that he is the only ELECTED Prime Minister in the area...

The Australian Prime Minister is our ELECTED leader, and I think he is a small, sniveling, cowardly, morally bankrupt, lying, scheming, insecure, self important, mean minded, ignorant, narrow, grovelling cur.

As Winston Churchill said, "it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others ".

A democracy may be a better form of government than others, but being a democracy does not then mean that, miraculously, all your policy is perfect and moral. Democracies that assert themselves to be morally superior just because they are a democracy are making a huge mistake.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


The Queen of the Kings ( a title attribute to Her by Antonius himself) smiles...

Do you know the rates of births among Arabs? :)

I don't know myself what "International" city means.The same way I don't understand what sugar-free pastries are...To me the word International, suggests lack of determination to solve the problem.

My house is situated in Jerusalem, I'd rather give it to my Palestinian neighbour than see the flag of UN above the Walls of Jerusalem...

A city that would exist as a city/state, not rules by any country. It is the only feasible solution. Three religions all have claims on the city as being holy. To have one country 'own' it is only setting the place up for future conflict. If all religions can come to an agreement to make it an international city, then no one has to claim ownership.

[Cleopatra]

By Mr. Unique

It is of no great matter to me personally if there are settlements there or not.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you want to play word games, there are many sites that cater to such pasttimes.

Are you showing me the exit, cheri?

The Australian Prime Minister is our ELECTED leader, and I think he is a small, sniveling, cowardly, morally bankrupt, lying, scheming, insecure, self important, mean minded, ignorant, narrow, grovelling cur.

I am very sad to hear this, but what you, an Australian and me, an Israeli citizen have in common, is that in the next elections, we can get rid of our "horrible" PMs if we wish.

Poor Palestianians that don't like General/President Arafat, can't talk to you right now for they are dead after being tortured and of course the rest of them can't participate in any elections. Even Saddam organized a parody of elections once...


A city that would exist as a city/state, not rules by any country. It is the only feasible solution. Three religions all have claims on the city as being holy. To have one country 'own' it is only setting the place up for future conflict. If all religions can come to an agreement to make it an international city, then no one has to claim ownership.

Nope. I won't answer this. The same way you are indifferent to the existence of settlements, be indifferent to the status of Jerusalem, unless, you are a very religious person...

[Cleopatra]

Tsk tsk tsk...

Some things, never change...

"Arafat 'opposes new cabinet'


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2945235.stm

[Skeptic]

At least the arabs who repeat the "artificial evil colonialist occupying power" mantra against israel are honest enough to admit it logically follows that they wish its destruction.

That hasn't been the official Palestinian position for years.

Yes it is.

Just look at palestinian schoolbooks, the speeches of the leaders (to their own people, not the bulls--t talk about "peace" to the west), the works of its intellectuals, and the opinions of the man in the street: "ending the occupation" is merely one of the stages in the "stage plan" for israel's destruction. They only talked of "peace" as long as israel was giving them land for empty promises and worthless declarations of friendship.

The war against the jews is NOT the means for the end of a palestinian state. It's the other way around: a palestinian state is the means to continue the war against the jews from an improved position, and--to use a lovely arab expression--to "throw the jews into the sea".

If you want quotes proving this, quite a few exist. Besides, you don't need quotes--the palestinians starting a new war in Sept. 2000 after being offered a state showed very clearly what they consider more important, ending the occupation or killing jews.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
By Mr. Unique



!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



I live on the other side of the world. It does not materially affect me which way the issue goes over there. All I can do is read the information which is available and come to my own conclusions. What I think about the issue does not affect in any way what the outcome to this whole tragedy will be.





Are you showing me the exit, cheri?



No, it is just that you seem to rely on obfuscation to cover ad hominem.



I am very sad to hear this, but what you, an Australian and me, an Israeli citizen have in common, is that in the next elections, we can get rid of our "horrible" PMs if we wish.



Both PMs are currently using the same means of getting elected. Find someone to hate and unify the country behind them using this ploy.



Poor Palestianians that don't like General/President Arafat, can't talk to you right now for they are dead after being tortured and of course the rest of them can't participate in any elections. Even Saddam organized a parody of elections once...



As I have already pointed out, being a democracy is better than not being a democracy. However, being a democracy does not mean that you are now capable of making the correct political choices. Democracies are still more than capable of making errors.



Nope. I won't answer this. The same way you are indifferent to the existence of settlements, be indifferent to the status of Jerusalem, unless, you are a very religious person...

I am not indifferent to settlements, you just accuse me, repeatedly, of being on some crusade to change the world. I am just trying to point out to you that I am not going to change the world, I am just stating what I believe to be so, based on the evidence I have seen.

As we have already seen in the Balkans, which is also a meeting of religions, special measures are needed to prevent disaster. Why not an international city, owned by no country?

[Clancie]

A Unique Person: Why not an international city, owned by no country?

For one reason: because Israel will never, never, never, never, never, ever agree to it.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I live on the other side of the world. It does not materially affect me which way the issue goes over there. All I can do is read the information which is available and come to my own conclusions. What I think about the issue does not affect in any way what the outcome to this whole tragedy will be.

I was surprised Unique, because sometimes you speak with such a passionate way , as if it's a matter of life and Death for you. Now you say that it's not that important to you...

At the beginning I thought that you were trying to inform people on the Palestinian side, in a forum that everybody supported Israelis.

Now I realize that you want to double Mr. Jedi Knight, Mr. Baker and the rest.

Anyway. The matter of settlements is essential to the issue.


As I have already pointed out, being a democracy is better than not being a democracy.

We were talking about the lack of Democracy in Palestine and about the fact that Sharon is the only elected leader in the area...please, don't lecture an Israeli on the benefits of Democracy...

I am not indifferent to settlements, you just accuse me, repeatedly, of being on some crusade to change the world. I am just trying to point out to you that I am not going to change the world, I am just stating what I believe to be so, based on the evidence I have seen.

To me, people who want to change the World are heroes. I respect them tremendously. I wish you were a crusador to change some mentalities and prejudices regarding this issue.Palestinians need that because most of them don't go to school and they don't have a voice outside Palestine.

As we have already seen in the Balkans, which is also a meeting of religions, special measures are needed to prevent disaster. Why not an international city, owned by no country?

Because Jerusalem is the spiritual centre of Judaism. Arabs have Mecca. Ortodox Christians have Instabul and Bethleem, Catholics have Bethleem and Vatican...

And last but not least.

No, it is just that you seem to rely on obfuscation to cover ad hominem.

If I ever decide to attack you, I won't need a cover. I have a Mediterranean temper, I am up-front. If I ever use ad-hominem attacks ( it might happen) I will apologize, don't worry.

Never forget what the famous rhetor Gorgias has said about debating.

" Debating is like love-making. You must have respect for your partner but not so much of respect as to forget why you have laid to bed with him; to @#$% the hell out of him..."

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I would say both sides have been doing the same. Just because the Palestinians have been doing one thing while saying another, does not justify the Israelis doing the same.

Are you suggesting that I offered up a justification?

Originally posted by a_unique_person It is also a matter of debate as to how many Palestinians do support the suicide bombings.

Was this sentence meant to be related in some way to my post?

MattJ