Israel, Secret Weapons, Venunu, Suicide Bombers

[a_unique_person]

The ABC in Australia, the Public TV station, is running a story on secret gases and weapons used against Palestinians.

So where is the roadmap.

Israel is telling lies about it's fight against the Palestinians. The use of secret weapons, methods, aims and outcomes is undeniable.

Palestinians, for all their brutality, are fighting in the open. They are killing, using their own, against the Israelis.

Questions against Israel are off limits. Questions will not be answered about Israel.

Both Israel and Palestine are committed to a war to the death.

The tragedy, is that the majority of Israeli's and Palestinians are people who want nothing more than you or I, a peaceful life, in which they can watch their children grow.

Why does the madness of the quest for the West Bank continue?

Israel will not commit to the International regulations against WMD. It secretly researches and builds biological weapons, nuclear weapons and chemical weapons. Anyone who speaks out, such as Mordachi Venunu, is silenced, by whatever means it takes.

These weapons, according to this story, are being used today against the Palestinians.



00.33.56 Dr MOHAMMED SALAMA, Director, Palestinian Health Ministry: We asked, what kind of gas? But nobody verified for us the type of gas to give the antidote at that moment. Also we don't know how to check, how to examine, how to send this. We are in occupied area. We are surrounded. It is impossible to send these samples to international lab to test.

00.34.27 Olenka Frenkiel: Israel is outside chemical and biological weapons treaties and still refuses to say what the new gas was.

00.34.44 Olenka Frenkiel: The Eoloffs have still not heard from the prison. Their flight home is tomorrow night and they worry they may have to leave without seeing their adopted son.

00.34.56 Olenka Frenkiel: Today they are having lunch with a small group of activists who for sixteen years have fought in vain for Vanunu's release.

00.35.03 First Israeli activist: They pressurise Iraq about nuclear weapons. What about Israel and nuclear weapons?

00.35.07 Second Israeli activist: Imagine for one moment that Mordechai Vanunu was not an Israeli, that the whole story had happened with a Korean or an Iranian or a Pakistani technician, he would have had the Nobel Peace Prize. He would have been the second Sakharov.

00.35.23 Second Israeli activist: Instead he is a non-person in the West. This tells you what we are dealing with. We're dealing with the number one privileged state on earth.

00.35.34 Third Israeli activist: Counter to the Israeli argument that the whole world is against us, it is the exact opposite. We started the nuclear race in the Middle East. There is no doubt about it.



Israel did start the Middle East Middle East arms race.

It appears it is now using weapons that are classifed as WMD. There has just been another suicide bombing, that has killed many, and injured many.

Will there ever be a point that is reached, in which each side says, enough?

Israel will give up the West Bank, as Ben-Gurion himself advised many years ago, and Palestinians will agree that Israel is here to stay.

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2003/08/52602.php

[Shinytop]

Ya, right. Any other fairy tales?

I am not an international scholar but I can tell the difference between sides by who they target. Busloads of shoppers, children, and infants are not legitimate targets. When the Palestinian side starts fighting military to military I will consider the value of each side's arguements. But when weddings and shopping malls are their favorite targets I consider them nothing but craven cowards.

[Sundog]

At one time I felt the Palestinians were the underdogs and Israel was using uncalled-for force with them. I no longer have any sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians. Israel can shove them all into the sea for all I care.

Shinytop, welcome to the forum, my reasons are the same as yours.

[peptoabysmal]

Every so often the Palestinians claim that the Israelis are using poison gas on them. So far, every time, the claim has been proven false.

What makes you think that the Palestinians will be happy with the West Bank when so many official Palestinian maps still look like Israel?

I know, I know, Iraq never had any WMD, but those rotten Israelis are using them daily.

[Skeptic]

(Shrug)

The Palestinians claim a lot of "awful things" israel is supposed to have done. Using "poison gas" is one of their favorites. Other include the claims that israel is using "radioactive weapons"(?), that it developed a special virus that kills only palestians (but not, mysteriously, other Arabs or levant jews), that israeli doctors "inject Palestinian children with the AIDS virus", that israeli agents created chewing gum that makes women sexually aroused in order to "destroy the morals of Arab society", and that the mossad put crocodile eggs in the Nile in order that the hatching crocodiles will eat Arab swimmers.

To give a few other examples, a couple of years back, they claimed that a palestinian whose face was burned when he died in a car crash that happened outside a jewish village, was "really" tortured by the jews having "put hot irons" on his face--the fact that they haven't even KNOWN of the accident until the driver was long dead notwithstanding. Recently, a palestinian "documentary" claims, israeli tanks "destroyed the northen wing" of an hospital in Jenin... the slight problem with the story being that the hospital in question NEVER HAD a "northern wing", destroyed or not. This was, by the way, at the same (after the pitched battle in Jenin) the palestinians brought to Jenin bodies from mourges all over the palestinian territories, in order to claim there was a "massacre".

Without exception, EVERY SINGLE TIME that the rumors of "israeli atrocities" were investigated, they were proven to be a propaganda fabrication. But since you WANT to believe israel is evil, you'd buy anything that says so, no matter how silly the rumor or how suspect the source.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Sundog
At one time I felt the Palestinians were the underdogs and Israel was using uncalled-for force with them. I no longer have any sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians. Israel can shove them all into the sea for all I care.

Shinytop, welcome to the forum, my reasons are the same as yours.

Blowing up a bus load of civilians during the "road map" cease fire was a new low for Hamas. Hopefully now the PA itself will go after Hamas...that is if they're serious about peace. :confused:

-z

Watch it Sundog....this is the 4th time in 2 days we've been in agreement. You'll be wearing a neo-con label before long! :D ;)

[Sundog]

Originally posted by rikzilla



Watch it Sundog....this is the 4th time in 2 days we've been in agreement. You'll be wearing a neo-con label before long! :D ;)

My views aren't monolithic. I'm conservative on some things, liberal on others. I don't understand the mental processes of people who have one solution to everything.

[Skeptic]

So where is the roadmap.

Blown up by a sucidie bomber who killed 20 israeli women and children and injured over 100.

Israel is telling lies about it's fight against the Palestinians. The use of secret weapons, methods, aims and outcomes is undeniable.

Actually, it is. Arab propaganda LOVES to claim how israel is using "evil secret methods" to fight, but so far, EVERY TIME this was investigated by non-palestinians sources, it turned out to be a propaganda lie. See my above post for a few of these claims.

As for the reilability of the "palestinian health ministry" in particular, on which you rely for this "evidence", you should know that--inter alia--it was the body that claimed that israel desyoyed the "northern wing" of a palestinian hospital which NEVER HAD a "northern wing", and that it has "evidence" that israeli doctors "inject palestinians children with the AIDS virus".

But noooooooooooooo, they wouldn't LIE, now would they???

Simply put, you cannot believe a word they say about israel. Although, of course, you WOULD, being an antisemite who is quite happy to accept as gospel truth ANY claim about israeli "evil methods", no matter how absurd or how uncredible the source.

Palestinians, for all their brutality, are fighting in the open.

So were the Nazis: both are quite open about their goal of killing all the jews.

How considerate of them, eh? Perhaps Hitler, like Arafat, should be awarded a Nobel Peace prize, for his honestly and openess about his goals for such a long time, starting in 1919 and ending in his last will and testament of 1945.

Questions against Israel are off limits. Questions will not be answered about Israel.

Bulls--t. Questions about israel are answered all the time. It's just that it's hardly israel's responsibilty to refute every kooky conspiracy about it by notorious liars, like the officials of the "palestinian health ministry".

Both Israel and Palestine are committed to a war to the death.

Nonsense. Israel has always agreed to negotiate with the palestinians on the basis of giving them a state for peace, and, in fact, offered them JUST THAT in 2000. The palestinian war of annihilation against them was the reply.

Those who are committed to killing all the jews are the palestinians, but not vice versa. Israel is only "committed to a war to the death" in the same sense that a man engaged in a life-and-death struggle against a murderer who attacked him on the street and is trying to kill him is.

The tragedy, is that the majority of Israeli's and Palestinians are people who want nothing more than you or I, a peaceful life, in which they can watch their children grow.

Not true. Ever watched the palestinian version of "sesame street"? It featured a five-year-old explaining to his classmates how his goal in life is to be a shahid (suicide bomber). Ever saw a palestinian summer camp? They are all named after suicide bombers. Remember the film released by the Hamas of the mother of a suicide bomber blessing him on his way and asking him to kill many jews on his mission?

The israelies want their children to grow up. The palestinians want their children to suicide while killing jews. That's the problem in a nutshell, really: civilization against savagery.

Why does the madness of the quest for the West Bank continue?

Because the palestinians declared a war of annihilation against the jews, and the jews are too soft-hearted to treat them like any other nation would have done to such an enemy long ago.

How long, do you suppose, California would have remained on the map if it had declared war against the rest of the US and sent an unending string of suicide bombers to blow up targets from Seattle to Washington? How many Aboriginies would have remained in Australia if they decided to start a war of terror against the european "occupation"?

Israel will not commit to the International regulations against WMD.

Boo ****in' hoo.

It secretly researches and builds biological weapons, nuclear weapons and chemical weapons. Anyone who speaks out, such as Mordachi Venunu, is silenced, by whatever means it takes.

Indeed so. Shockingly enough, israel has some military secrets (a necessity considering the fact that it is facing the constant threat of genoicde by its Arab neighbors, of course), so if someone tried to disclosed them they are tried for treason. This is acting EXACTLY the same way any nation does. The US and Australia, for example, also have military secrets, and put in jail those who illegally advertise those secrets. What's your problem?

Oh wait, I know what your problem is. israel, by daring to have some things as military secrets, is NOT "fighting completely in the open"! Ohmigod!!! How awful! I keep forgetting, of course, that every nation on earth has the right to have military secrets and protect them by punishing those who disclose them... EXCEPT for the jewish state.

It, alone, must fight against a genocidal, savage enemy "completely in the open", or else accept that its fate, for having "illegal" military secrets, is to be constantly denounced all the antisemitic hypocrites in the world--the same people whose own governments, of course, have just as many military secrets, and treat traitors just as severly, as israel does.

You know something? That's not a hard choice. Somehow, I prefer israel to have those secrets even if the likes of you express "shock" and "moral outrage".

These weapons, according to this story, are being used today against the Palestinians.

Of course, according to the Palestinians, it is also true that the jews are the spawn of Satan (literally), that the "Protocols of the Elders of zion" are history, and 9/11 was a conspiracy the mossad.

More particularly, this story is by the same storyteller (the Palestinian Health ministry) who claimed the israelies "destroyed the northern wing" of a hospital who never had one, among many, many other lies.

Hey, what's not to believe?

Israel did start the Middle East Middle East arms race.

That might have something to do with being 600,000 among 150,000,000 bloodthirsty Arabs who want you dead. If you don't start an arm race under these conditions, you don't live long.

It appears it is now using weapons that are classifed as WMD.

According to same sources who also think that "it appears" that jews use Muslim blood in passover matzos.

There has just been another suicide bombing, that has killed many, and injured many.

That's OK, they're only jews. Doesn't count.

[Skeptic]

Hopefully now the PA itself will go after Hamas...

Jeez, why don't you hope for something more realistic--I dunno, instant immortality for everybody, or perhaps that the sky, starting tomorrow, will be purple, instead of that ol' boring blue? Wishing for an extra moon, just for beauty's sake, would be nice, too.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Hopefully now the PA itself will go after Hamas...

Jeez, why don't you hope for something more realistic--I dunno, instant immortality for everybody, or perhaps that the sky, starting tomorrow, will be purple, instead of that ol' boring blue? Wishing for an extra moon, just for beauty's sake, would be nice, too.

I was trying to strike a hopeful note. I'm certainly not holding my breath!

I wonder why Hamas broke the cease fire that they themselves helped negotiate?? Here's a possible tidbit I found:
The very concept of a hudna, an Islamic term that often is translated into English as ``cease-fire," has connotations of a temporary lull while the conditions of battle favor the opponent. Once conditions change to your favor, the hudna is broken and attacks begin again.

...I guess they think the balance has shifted?? :confused: Lesson learned: ...never trust an Arab bearing a "hudna". What good is such a maleable agreement in the first place?

-z

PS: Jeez, getting blasted for being a Polyanna is alot less satisfying, and more embarrasing than being vilified as a heartless neo-con! :o

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Sundog


My views aren't monolithic. I'm conservative on some things, liberal on others. I don't understand the mental processes of people who have one solution to everything.

Okay,...make that the 5th time in 2 days!!

....don't say I didn't warn you. :hit:

Your reasonableness has been noted by the virulent lefties...I hear them whispering and pointing at you from the corners of the forum!!

-z

:D :D :D

[Skeptic]

By the way, I've just heard: israel officially cut all ties with the BBC for its broadcasting of this so-called "documentary". It must have been even worse than AUP describes it.

No doubt AUP was ecstatic as he was watching: "see? SEE?!! I TOLD you the dirty jew--- er, kike--- er, *cough*, *cough*, zionists are evil!!!"

[JamesM]

Originally posted by rikzilla

I wonder why Hamas broke the cease fire that they themselves helped negotiate??
The suicide bomb was jointly claimed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The latter had been vowing revenge for the death of one of their leaders in the West Bank last week. That's one possible explanation.

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Skeptic
No doubt AUP was ecstatic as he was watching: "see? SEE?!! I TOLD you the dirty jew--- er, kike--- er, *cough*, *cough*, zionists are evil!!!"
You can, of course, point to a post where AUP has referred to Jews as 'kikes'.

[Skeptic]

You can, of course, point to a post where AUP has referred to Jews as 'kikes'.

No, but I can point to quite a few where AUP excuses and justified the genocide of jews--for example, his "considered opinion" is that the Arabs were quite correct to start their war of annihilation against israel in 1948, but that this "isn't antisemitism" because it was limited to a "specific geographical area".

I can also point to quite a few posts where AUP accepts at face value just about ANY claim for "evil israeli crimes", no matter what the source or the circumstances--for example, the post which started this thread, where AUP (like the BBC) bought hook, line, and sinker the claims by notorious liars about "secret israeli crimes".

He doesn't use the word "kike"--it's just that he thinks it's quite justified for the jews to be mutchered "in a limited geographical area" for the imaginary "secret crimes" they are accused of. Which is like not using the word "ni**er", but instead considering it quite reasonable to demand all "african-americans" be re-enslaved.

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Skeptic
No
In that case, while I realise this is an emotive subject for you, I would urge you not to falsely attribute anti-semitic hate-speech to other posters.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
Ya, right. Any other fairy tales?

I am not an international scholar but I can tell the difference between sides by who they target. Busloads of shoppers, children, and infants are not legitimate targets. When the Palestinian side starts fighting military to military I will consider the value of each side's arguements. But when weddings and shopping malls are their favorite targets I consider them nothing but craven cowards.

Given that Israel has billions of dollars worth of modern arms, from nukes to tanks and jets and gunboats and helicopters, while Palestinians have guns and HE, to expect a traditional military face off on the field of battle is pretty naive.

I don't recall a wedding being a target, are you sure you are not confusing that with the Jewish wedding disaster that happened when a floor collapsed due to shoddy workmanship.

Those bombed yesterday were the extremists who are actively involved in depriving the Palestinians of their homes, from an area of Jerusalem that has been taking homes directly from Palestinians.

I was not raising this topic in response to these issues however, but in response to the show on TV last night detailing how Israel is an active user and owner of WMD, while being a party to no international treaties on their control.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla


Blowing up a bus load of civilians during the "road map" cease fire was a new low for Hamas. Hopefully now the PA itself will go after Hamas...that is if they're serious about peace. :confused:

-z

Watch it Sundog....this is the 4th time in 2 days we've been in agreement. You'll be wearing a neo-con label before long! :D ;)

You will find that Palestinians leaders have condemmed the bombing. Also note that, even after the start of the road map, Israel was still killing the leaders of Hamas and Al Aqsa, and still expanding settlements.

The roadmap is still very much a concept, not a reality.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
(Shrug)

The Palestinians claim a lot of "awful things" israel is supposed to have done. Using "poison gas" is one of their favorites. Other include the claims that israel is using "radioactive weapons"(?), that it developed a special virus that kills only palestians (but not, mysteriously, other Arabs or levant jews), that israeli doctors "inject Palestinian children with the AIDS virus", that israeli agents created chewing gum that makes women sexually aroused in order to "destroy the morals of Arab society", and that the mossad put crocodile eggs in the Nile in order that the hatching crocodiles will eat Arab swimmers.

To give a few other examples, a couple of years back, they claimed that a palestinian whose face was burned when he died in a car crash that happened outside a jewish village, was "really" tortured by the jews having "put hot irons" on his face--the fact that they haven't even KNOWN of the accident until the driver was long dead notwithstanding. Recently, a palestinian "documentary" claims, israeli tanks "destroyed the northen wing" of an hospital in Jenin... the slight problem with the story being that the hospital in question NEVER HAD a "northern wing", destroyed or not. This was, by the way, at the same (after the pitched battle in Jenin) the palestinians brought to Jenin bodies from mourges all over the palestinian territories, in order to claim there was a "massacre".

Without exception, EVERY SINGLE TIME that the rumors of "israeli atrocities" were investigated, they were proven to be a propaganda fabrication. But since you WANT to believe israel is evil, you'd buy anything that says so, no matter how silly the rumor or how suspect the source.

Lets not get derailed with side issues, as you always like to do. The specific claims of this show are the issue.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla


I was trying to strike a hopeful note. I'm certainly not holding my breath!

I wonder why Hamas broke the cease fire that they themselves helped negotiate?? Here's a possible tidbit I found:


...I guess they think the balance has shifted?? :confused: Lesson learned: ...never trust an Arab bearing a "hudna". What good is such a maleable agreement in the first place?

-z

PS: Jeez, getting blasted for being a Polyanna is alot less satisfying, and more embarrasing than being vilified as a heartless neo-con! :o

If you read their justification, it was because of Israeli attacks on Hamas leaders. I am not saying that this was a reprisal that was warranted, but each side is just playing the old game of kill tag.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by JamesM

The suicide bomb was jointly claimed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The latter had been vowing revenge for the death of one of their leaders in the West Bank last week. That's one possible explanation.

Thank you James. I must admit I was bit fired up last night, we had been celebrating our wedding anniversary with a little bubbly. It tends to make me a bit 'shrill', as jj has pointed out to me.

However, as you have pointed out and I have responded already, there is a logic to the madness. It is the Jewish people such as you and Cleopatra, who can at least stand back and try to see why, not just what, that hold the hope for some peace in the long run, along with like minded Palestinians.

As I have pointed out already, the majority of Israelis do not want the West Bank, the people who do want it were those targetted last night, the fundamentalists, who are a very small minority.

[Shinytop]

Those bombed yesterday were the extremists who are actively involved in depriving the Palestinians of their homes, from an area of Jerusalem that has been taking homes directly from Palestinians.


Which specific home was the 11 month old baby taking from Palestinians? Were the school children extremists? Do you actually read what you post?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic

You can, of course, point to a post where AUP has referred to Jews as 'kikes'.

No, but I can point to quite a few where AUP excuses and justified the genocide of jews--for example, his "considered opinion" is that the Arabs were quite correct to start their war of annihilation against israel in 1948, but that this "isn't antisemitism" because it was limited to a "specific geographical area".

I can also point to quite a few posts where AUP accepts at face value just about ANY claim for "evil israeli crimes", no matter what the source or the circumstances--for example, the post which started this thread, where AUP (like the BBC) bought hook, line, and sinker the claims by notorious liars about "secret israeli crimes".

He doesn't use the word "kike"--it's just that he thinks it's quite justified for the jews to be mutchered "in a limited geographical area" for the imaginary "secret crimes" they are accused of. Which is like not using the word "ni**er", but instead considering it quite reasonable to demand all "african-americans" be re-enslaved.

You have accused me of being obsessed with the issue of hating Jews. In fact, I have gone very quiet on the issue lately, having made most of the points I feel are worth making. This documentary last night, however, has raised new issues that I feel are worth raising.

If you read other posts on this board, I think you will find I have a lot of respect for Cleopatra, for instance. She is very intelligent and open minded.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop


Which specific home was the 11 month old baby taking from Palestinians? Were the school children extremists? Do you actually read what you post?

If you want, I can find you pictures of dead Palestinian babies too. The Palestinian leaders have condemmed the bombing for the waste of life it was, but don't think that only Jews are suffering in this conflict. The hard heartedness that is quite apparent has been building for many years on both sides.

For example, ask Skeptic about his time driving bulldozers in the IDF. I believe he has many interesting tales to tell.

[ssibal]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


If you want, I can find you pictures of dead Palestinian babies too.

The issue is not with dead children or babies per se, it is with the deliberate targeting of children and babies by Palestinian terrorists.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Shinytop


Which specific home was the 11 month old baby taking from Palestinians? Were the school children extremists? Do you actually read what you post?

Haven't you heard? Civilian casualities are inevitable in any conflict.

Make no mistake, both sides have blood on their hands. But many times, the Israeli government could have done more to avoid this from happening if they at least allowed a few UN resolutions to pass instead of calling on the US to veto them. The Palestinians are becoming more frustrated, and more desperate. Extreme factions are killing children and civilians. But guess what? It's no more than what the Israeli government are doing.

[crackmonkey]

Equating civilian casualties of IDF action to those of Palestinian terrorists is absurd... Palestinians target civilians, that's the point of terror.
Israel has tried to negotiate with the Palestinian factions, and has offered much. Hamas and kin have offered to wipe Israel off the map in return.

[Skeptic]

Which specific home was the 11 month old baby taking from Palestinians? Were the school children extremists?

Of course. They were jews, weren't they?

You see, AUP claims not to be an antisemite, but he obviously is--routinely excusing and celebrating the death of jews, spreading odd conspiracy theories and other lies about the "awful crimes" of the jews (or, as euphemistically called, "zionists"), denying the jews (and ONLY the jews) have any right to a country or to self-defense, and so on.

To excuse this obvious contradiction, he has to do two things.

First, he defines "not being an antisemite", very oddly, as not hating and killing jews "just because they are jews". Of course, by this definition, Hitler wasn't an antisemite, either--it just so happens that the jews were genetically inferior and had to exterminated; it wasn't "just because they were jews", you see.

Then, when he wants to cheer or excuse the death of jews, he adds insult to injury. Being a hypoctrite, he cannot admit his hate and just say "it's good that jews are killed" (that's being "antisemitic", you see). So, he has to find something--ANYTHING--the dead jews did wrong. That, naturally, becomes the "real reason" the jew was murdered, and therefore it is justified, since it wasn't "just because they were jews".

Of course, since what the details of what the dead jew supposedly did "wrong" is totally immaterial--it only serves as a rhetorical device--the excuse doesn't really matter. It doesn't have to be true, or make the least bit of sense. Also, there is also no need to explain why, even IF the jew in question was "guilty", does this make his murder acceptable.

The excuse is simply plucked out of thin air, and tacked on to the "guilty" jew with a grunt of of satifaction, as in this case: God forbid, it is not that the murder of an 11-month old baby was "just because" the baby was jewish; it's just that the "real reason" he was killed was that he was an "extremist" who was "taking homes away from the Palestinians". Obvious, isn't it?

Finally, AUP's rather "loose" matter of blaming jews for their own death not only (he thinks) saves him from charges of antisemitism, but also has the side benefit of glorifying the terrorists. Since AUP "knows" instantly what the "real reason" for any attack on jews is, and that "real reason" is always the jew's fault, it just so happens, by SHEER COINCIDENCE, it that ALL the jews who were were guilty of SOMETHING.

It's amazing, ins't it, how humane and accurate the Palestinian terrorist attacks are: dozens of suicide bombings, hundreds of jewish dead, but--thank God--not one INNOCENT jew was killed. We wouldn't want to think the Palestinians are acting in an antisemitic way, would we? Surely that's just jewish propaganda against their noble enemy.

[Shinytop]

I am new here, but I think I can already read AUP. His posts will be easy to ignore from now on. Or if I feel like an easy target I will ask him a question to bring out his insane answers.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
I am new here, but I think I can already read AUP. His posts will be easy to ignore from now on. Or if I feel like an easy target I will ask him a question to bring out his insane answers.

Think what you like, but Skeptic is long on wind and short on reason.

[Cain]

I love seeing the usual blowhards spout their classic apologia for Israel's undeniable atrocities on this board. It's an instructive reflection of the non-stop propaganda that plagues US news on the middle-east (or foreign policy in general).

Any where else you go in the entire world you'll find news and opinions quickly condemned as "anti-Semitic" here. You'll find more balanced coverage in Israel.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cain
I love seeing the usual blowhards spout their classic apologia for Israel's undeniable atrocities on this board. It's an instructive reflection of the non-stop propaganda that plagues US news on the middle-east (or foreign policy in general).

Any where else you go in the entire world you'll find news and opinions quickly condemned as "anti-Semitic" here. You'll find more balanced coverage in Israel.

Wouldn't surprise me at all.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Skeptic
(Shrug)

Without exception, EVERY SINGLE TIME that the rumors of "israeli atrocities" were investigated, they were proven to be a propaganda fabrication.

you are most definitely part of the problem, you will never be part of any solution. If you cannot see that firing rockets into civilian streets, blowing women and children to pieces because you were aiming at a car containing a legitimate target is not an atrocity then what the F*ck IS an atrocity in your opinion???????

As long as people can hang onto this stupid simplistic "baddies and goodies" version of this ongoing middle east debacle I fear there is little hope.

My Late uncle was peppered by shrapnel from a terrorist bomb in Palestine while serving with the British army. Little bits kept errupting from his skin for decades afterwards. He did not imagine this bomb. In those days, before they got Jets and Tanks, Terrorist bombings were an Israeli tactic, along with murdering British soldiers. Palestinians were into the same tactics too, they still are....they don't have the Jets and tanks.

Now it is time for you to start calling me an anti-semite. After all, I have now commited the crime of pointing out that neither side in this farce holds the moral high ground. War criminals, terrorists and murderers exist on both sides. Learn to deal with it and open both eyes......

There are a number of posters who regularly post on this topic who seem to believe that one side in a conflict like this can be totally blameless......what a joke.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
Equating civilian casualties of IDF action to those of Palestinian terrorists is absurd... Palestinians target civilians, that's the point of terror.
Israel has tried to negotiate with the Palestinian factions, and has offered much. Hamas and kin have offered to wipe Israel off the map in return.

I might just point out that I've said that both the Palestinian and the Isreali governments have blood on their hands.

Palestine, too, has tried to negotiate with Israel in the past, and has been slapped in the face for her troubles. Both the Palestinian and the Isreali governments have blood on their hands (sorry to repeat myself, but I get the feeling some are missing the point I'm trying to make).

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Which specific home was the 11 month old baby taking from Palestinians? Were the school children extremists?

Of course. They were jews, weren't they?

You see, AUP claims not to be an antisemite, but he obviously is--routinely excusing and celebrating the death of jews, spreading odd conspiracy theories and other lies about the "awful crimes" of the jews (or, as euphemistically called, "zionists"), denying the jews (and ONLY the jews) have any right to a country or to self-defense, and so on.



OK, where did I celebrate (your words) the death of Jews. You may be justified in saying I am not as hurt by the deaths of Jews as you are, but I find, after reading about the deaths of so many around the world for so many years, that I am suffering death fatigue. But that is true for all deaths.

As I have already pointed out to you, there was the famous example of Israelis filming the WTC on fire and acting in an excited manner. Are you going to condemm these guys for not breaking out in tears?



To excuse this obvious contradiction, he has to do two things.



Not quite, first of all you have to show that I celebrate the deaths of Jews. The only evidence you have shown so far is your assertion.



First, he defines "not being an antisemite", very oddly, as not hating and killing jews "just because they are jews". Of course, by this definition, Hitler wasn't an antisemite, either--it just so happens that the jews were genetically inferior and had to exterminated; it wasn't "just because they were jews", you see.



If you look up the dictionary definition.

discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion

If I was anti-semitic, I would be so on the basis that Jews are a race or religion I don't like. That is, I would dislike them purely because of what they are, not who they are. I have met plenty of Jews, and I can't see that, as a whole, they are any different to any other race or religion. You do get the kooks, and the extremists, and these I don't like. I also don't like the really annoying xian preacher that hangs around the streets of Melbourne, moaning away in his 'holy' voice. The women in the hajib you see around sometimes are also a little disconcerting. Head scarves a pretty innocuous, but only seeing some eyes gleaming out is very strange.



Then, when he wants to cheer or excuse the death of jews, he adds insult to injury. Being a hypoctrite, he cannot admit his hate and just say "it's good that jews are killed" (that's being "antisemitic", you see). So, he has to find something--ANYTHING--the dead jews did wrong. That, naturally, becomes the "real reason" the jew was murdered, and therefore it is justified, since it wasn't "just because they were jews".



Still shopping at Al's Strawmen I see.



Of course, since what the details of what the dead jew supposedly did "wrong" is totally immaterial--it only serves as a rhetorical device--the excuse doesn't really matter. It doesn't have to be true, or make the least bit of sense. Also, there is also no need to explain why, even IF the jew in question was "guilty", does this make his murder acceptable.

The excuse is simply plucked out of thin air, and tacked on to the "guilty" jew with a grunt of of satifaction, as in this case: God forbid, it is not that the murder of an 11-month old baby was "just because" the baby was jewish; it's just that the "real reason" he was killed was that he was an "extremist" who was "taking homes away from the Palestinians". Obvious, isn't it?



You are the one concentrating on the death of the baby. I would think it is just as unfortunate a death as the Palestinian baby I referred to in an earlier thread.



Finally, AUP's rather "loose" matter of blaming jews for their own death not only (he thinks) saves him from charges of antisemitism, but also has the side benefit of glorifying the terrorists. Since AUP "knows" instantly what the "real reason" for any attack on jews is, and that "real reason" is always the jew's fault, it just so happens, by SHEER COINCIDENCE, it that ALL the jews who were were guilty of SOMETHING.



Some of the bombings were against people who weren't even Jewish, just people who happened to be working Israel. That doesn't alter the reason for the bombings, which is to terrorise the population.



It's amazing, ins't it, how humane and accurate the Palestinian terrorist attacks are: dozens of suicide bombings, hundreds of jewish dead, but--thank God--not one INNOCENT jew was killed. We wouldn't want to think the Palestinians are acting in an antisemitic way, would we? Surely that's just jewish propaganda against their noble enemy.

I don't think I have tried to pick and choose between the innocent and the guilty, just pointing out the reason for ways. If we want to go into this aspect of things, start a topic.

As Fool has pointed out, innocents are killed in the targetted attacks on the numerous leaders of Hamas too. However, I have not raised this as an issue.

Now if you want to get into the guilt game, maybe you can tell us what you did in the IDF when you were driving bulldozers.

[Mr Manifesto]

Anyway, what do you call it when you burn down a suicide bomber's house, punishing his (or in one case, her) family for what the bomber did? Isn't this terrorism?

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Shinytop
I am new here, but I think I can already read AUP. His posts will be easy to ignore from now on. Or if I feel like an easy target I will ask him a question to bring out his insane answers.

That's not hard. In this thread, AUP called the assassination of an 11-month old jewish baby on a bus "fighting in the open against extemists". On the other hand, in other threads, he declared that israel's killing of Hamas leaders is "illegal assassination".

That's it in a nutshell, really; for AUP, the illegal assassination of jewish babies is "fighting in the open against extremists", while the open fight against the extremists who head terrorist organizations is "illegal assassination".

Why? It's only dead jews in one case, so it MUST be justified, while it's--heaven forbid!--dead Palestinians in the other, so it MUST be evil.

[Skeptic]

you are most definitely part of the problem, you will never be part of any solution. If you cannot see that firing rockets into civilian streets, blowing women and children to pieces because you were aiming at a car containing a legitimate target is not an atrocity

It isn't. It's the equivalent of trying to assassinate Hitler or Stalin, say, and the bomb killing some by standers. Would that be an "Atrocity"? No. Or, to give another example (although not with the same moral force, of course), suppose the Palestinians tried to assasinate sharon, or the army chief of staff, and killed bystanders as well. Would THAT be an "atrocity"? No!

In fact, when they DID do that--when they killed Rehav'am Ze'evi, an israeli right-wing politicians, or when two Hamas men were captured in a plot to down Ariel Sharon's helicopter--ALL the israeli papers called these plots an "assassination" or an "attempted assassination". Nobody called it a terrorist attack (or an attempted one)--despite the fact that, for example, blowing up sharon's helicopter would definitely kill innocents.

If only that was the case generally. If only the Hamas' method was to commit EXACTLY the same "atrocities" you accuse israel of committing, targeting israeli leaders and sometimes missing them. I would be dancing in the street if that was the case--because that would mean the Hamas has at least some pragmatism (using its resources to kill higher-ups) and some basic decency (trying to get those it considers responsible for bad things). Alas, this is not the case. Hamas, unlike israel, indiscriminately kills any jew they can get their hands on.

israel's method of targeting the heads of the terorrist organizations is clearly the method that SAVES the most innocent lives, not the method to commit atrocities. To claim this is even remotely like the Palestinian method of targeting babies in an attempt to DESTROY as many innocent lives as possible, is morally repugent.

[Cleopatra]

Such threads put me in despair...

This is not a video game, real people get killed with no reason, if the international community doesn't do something to help people of both sides really soon, I do not know what will happen of them....

There is no justification for what is going on in Middle East right now.

We know what Arabs have been doing, we know how the Arab world takes advantage of The Palestinian issue, we know how dangerous is to have an old lunatic man like Sharon, armed with nuclear weapons, we know the atrocities of the Israeli occupation, we know everything.

Now, what? What is next? How the international community is willing to help? By getting divided into two camps that fight each other in order to promote their own political agendas?

[Correa Neto]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Such threads put me in despair...

This is not a video game, real people get killed with no reason, if the international community doesn't do something to help people of both sides really soon, I do not know what will happen of them....

There is no justification for what is going on in Middle East right now.

We know what Arabs have been doing, we know how the Arab world takes advantage of The Palestinian issue, we know how dangerous is to have an old lunatic man like Sharon, armed with nuclear weapons, we know the atrocities of the Israeli occupation, we know everything.

Now, what? What is next? How the international community is willing to help? By getting divided into two camps that fight each other in order to promote their own political agendas?

Wise words. Should follow the quotes regarding both sides having blood in their hands and that there are no good guys or good side in this issue.

Both sides commited atrocities. One has much more money then the other, what should naturally bring more simpathy to it. But then it starts to blast buses filled with children...

And all of this is being done in the name of God, the Promissed Land, Allah, work on saturdays, and both religions speak about peace love and etc. on their sacred books.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic


That's not hard. In this thread, AUP called the assassination of an 11-month old jewish baby on a bus "fighting in the open against extemists". On the other hand, in other threads, he declared that israel's killing of Hamas leaders is "illegal assassination".

That's it in a nutshell, really; for AUP, the illegal assassination of jewish babies is "fighting in the open against extremists", while the open fight against the extremists who head terrorist organizations is "illegal assassination".

Why? It's only dead jews in one case, so it MUST be justified, while it's--heaven forbid!--dead Palestinians in the other, so it MUST be evil.

What are you trying to achieve here, Skeptic, by making up blatant lies about me? You are making up quotes now. All you are doing is ridiculing your own cause by stooping to the methods of Jedi Knight.

I'll tell you what, I'll give you a chance to tell the truth now. What did you do in the IDF when you drove the bulldozers?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Such threads put me in despair...

This is not a video game, real people get killed with no reason, if the international community doesn't do something to help people of both sides really soon, I do not know what will happen of them....

There is no justification for what is going on in Middle East right now.

We know what Arabs have been doing, we know how the Arab world takes advantage of The Palestinian issue, we know how dangerous is to have an old lunatic man like Sharon, armed with nuclear weapons, we know the atrocities of the Israeli occupation, we know everything.

Now, what? What is next? How the international community is willing to help? By getting divided into two camps that fight each other in order to promote their own political agendas?

Sorry Cleopatra, the documentary by the BBC got me fired up. I can still remember when Venunu was captured and wondering what was going on. At the time, I was still a supporter of Israel. It just brings back to me the feeling of betrayal when I found out that Israel is not the beacon of virtue in the middle east it portrays itself as, but another player in a very grubby and very deadly game of machismo and pig headedness.

So, what do we achieve here by having a bun fight over this issue when we should be urging the two sides to negotiate a real peace and spare their children the suffering and death that no child should have to endure?

I think I just don't like the attitude of the right on this board. For them, Palestinians are just wrong. I recall, I think it was Davefoc, or Dancing David, asking if someone from each side could say something nice about the other side. I didn't responde, because I have already said such things about Israel, such as the fact that the majority do not want to keep the West Bank, even Ben Gurion did not want it, Jews I meet locally do not act in the extremist ways that the settlers do in the occupied territories.

I have been prepared to concede that Arafat has been a failure as a leader. That the extremists do not achieve anything except a dangerous raising of the stakes with their suicide bombing.

At the same, what do we get from the right? Nothing more than the same old cliche's lifted directly from the right wing press. No compromise, no attempt to see the other point of view, no interest in seeing the human and historical dimension of the Palestinian point of view. Skeptic is the worst, stating blatant lies about me, attributing statements and motivations to me that I have never held.

So I guess that is why I get fired up. Because I try to see a point of compromise, while others refuse to even try. I do not hold any illusions that the sides will kiss and make up and everyone will be happy ever after. There is only a long, slow path of pain ahead, even in the most optimistic scenario. People will continue to die and suffer on both sides. That you can guarantee.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by The Fool


you are most definitely part of the problem, you will never be part of any solution. If you cannot see that firing rockets into civilian streets, blowing women and children to pieces because you were aiming at a car containing a legitimate target is not an atrocity then what the F*ck IS an atrocity in your opinion???????

So the IDF should allow terrorist leaders to operate with impunity? No. Just because cowards who command brainwashed weaklings to blow themselves up among shoppers and tourists hide behind the skirts of their women is no reason to allow them to operate freely. The attrocity here lies between the ears of the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

As long as people can hang onto this stupid simplistic "baddies and goodies" version of this ongoing middle east debacle I fear there is little hope.

There is a choice here to be made. That's what war is really, a choice. There are two sides. As long as people hang on to their stupid misconcieved and confused moral relativism this war will never end. Killing innocent civilians is wrong no matter if Israel or Palestine is doing it. Right now however, Israel has shown a real desire and effort to target only terrorist operatives and leaders. Sometimes they kill civilians, and that is regretable...but they do not SEEK to kill civilians. Therein lies the true difference.

My Late uncle was peppered by shrapnel from a terrorist bomb in Palestine while serving with the British army. Little bits kept errupting from his skin for decades afterwards. He did not imagine this bomb. In those days, before they got Jets and Tanks, Terrorist bombings were an Israeli tactic, along with murdering British soldiers. Palestinians were into the same tactics too, they still are....they don't have the Jets and tanks.

That is sad, and I'm sorry your Uncle had to suffer that bomb. There are others like him though, now serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They too will bear scars. Now, to your other point. Israel indeed has tanks and jets. They could (if they truly desired) sweep Israel clean of Arabs. They possess that power and have demonstrated it by defeating the combined Arab armies in the past. But have they used it to ethnically clense Palestine? No. Of course the Palestinians do not have tanks and jets, but do you really think that if they possessed the military power of Israel they would wait even one brief moment before killing every Jew? Let us thank God/Allah/Whomever, that Hamas, et al do not have tanks and jets!

Now it is time for you to start calling me an anti-semite. After all, I have now commited the crime of pointing out that neither side in this farce holds the moral high ground. War criminals, terrorists and murderers exist on both sides. Learn to deal with it and open both eyes......

You have pointed out the obvious. You are waving about a strawman, and hoping someone will turn it magically real for you. Your argument does not make you an anti-semite. It merely makes you look foolish.

There are a number of posters who regularly post on this topic who seem to believe that one side in a conflict like this can be totally blameless......what a joke.

Please show us which poster has claimed this so that we may all join you in ridiculing him/her.

-z

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


What are you trying to achieve here, Skeptic, by making up blatant lies about me? You are making up quotes now. All you are doing is ridiculing your own cause by stooping to the methods of Jedi Knight.

I'll tell you what, I'll give you a chance to tell the truth now. What did you do in the IDF when you drove the bulldozers?

JK's gone AUP. Try addressing the issue that Skeptic brings up instead of trotting out JK. I have alot of experience with your past posts, and Skeptic has not lied about you yet.

So, if you want to be seen as an honest debater :rolleyes: try speaking to the issue. Tell us all how targeting schoolchildren, tourists, shoppers, and poor car-less schmucks on their way to minimum wage jobs is more honorable than accidentally killing bystanders while targeting real, bloodthirsty terrorists who are attempting to hide behind the skirts of their women.

Try speaking to that....leave JK out of it.

-z

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla


JK's gone AUP. Try addressing the issue that Skeptic brings up instead of trotting out JK. I have alot of experience with your past posts, and Skeptic has not lied about you yet.

So, if you want to be seen as an honest debater :rolleyes: try speaking to the issue. Tell us all how targeting schoolchildren, tourists, shoppers, and poor car-less schmucks on their way to minimum wage jobs is more honorable than accidentally killing bystanders while targeting real, bloodthirsty terrorists who are attempting to hide behind the skirts of their women.

Try speaking to that....leave JK out of it.

-z

How can I speak to blatant lies?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


How can I speak to blatant lies?

The issue that I brought up and asked you to speak to is a blatant lie? What part of:

Tell us all how targeting schoolchildren, tourists, shoppers, and poor car-less schmucks on their way to minimum wage jobs is more honorable than accidentally killing bystanders while targeting real, bloodthirsty terrorists who are attempting to hide behind the skirts of their women.

...is a blatant lie? :confused: A little hyperbole perhaps, but blatant lie, no.

Try again. Answer the question without bringing up JK, Skeptic, or even me.

-z

[The Fool]

Originally posted by rikzilla


So the IDF should allow terrorist leaders to operate with impunity?

Are you suggesting this is my position? If the NYPD decided it was going to combat criminals in the streets of NY by launching rockets down Broadway from Helo gunships would you be saying it was ok because they were not "SEEKING" to kill innocent bystanders? I hope you liked that little straw man argument bause it rivals your own. No rick, the fool does not expect the IDF to allow terrorist leaders to operate with impunity....But missiles down mainstreet? wtf?????


No. Just because cowards who command brainwashed weaklings to blow themselves up among shoppers and tourists hide behind the skirts of their women is no reason to allow them to operate freely. The attrocity here lies between the ears of the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

How about a coward who commands a brainwashed gunship pilot to release munitions down civilian streets in some sort of wierd mafia "hit" on a car full of terrorists.......cool idea? what if it was your street? still a cool idea?

There is a choice here to be made. That's what war is really, a choice. There are two sides. As long as people hang on to their stupid misconcieved and confused moral relativism this war will never end. Killing innocent civilians is wrong no matter if Israel or Palestine is doing it.

you have just demonstrated by this statement why you are not one of the posters that cause me to tear my hear out.... Killing civilians is an atrocity...the clowns on this board who simply ignore one sides contribution to the innocent kill count are the ones that I simply fail to comprehend.

Right now however, Israel has shown a real desire and effort to target only terrorist operatives and leaders. Sometimes they kill civilians, and that is regretable...but they do not SEEK to kill civilians. Therein lies the true difference.

I fired it down the main street in the middle of the day sir...I never intended to hit innocent bystanders.... What is the difference between intending to do something and simply not caring if you do something......semantics, thats all it is.

That is sad, and I'm sorry your Uncle had to suffer that bomb. There are others like him though, now serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They too will bear scars. Now, to your other point. Israel indeed has tanks and jets. They could (if they truly desired) sweep Israel clean of Arabs.

I seriously doubt they could, I seriously doubt that any Israeli government would survive the outrage of the majority of rational Israelis. I am absolutely confident that the vast majority of Israelis, like the vast majority of Palestinians, just want all this crap to end and peace to have a chance. Unfortunately, while ever the current pack of idiots controls the Palestinian terrorists and the current pack of Idiots controls the IDF then I can't see much changing...... Oh yea, don't forget the current pack of idiots that post here that think one side or the other wears the white hats.


It merely makes you look foolish.

Its what I'm good at.... ;)


Please show us which poster has claimed this so that we may all join you in ridiculing him/her.


"Without exception, EVERY SINGLE TIME that the rumors of "israeli atrocities" were investigated, they were proven to be a propaganda fabrication."

Think this is a reasonable statement Rik? Think this sort of ignorance is part of the solution or part of the problem?
Israel......179 at-bats 179 hits. Israel has, and always will bat 1000 in skeptics posts....

How about it Skeptic???? has Israel EVER done anything wrong? ever?? you use the name "skeptic"..... time to start living up to it. Its time to tell ALL the clowns involved in this middle east circus that the rest of the world has had enough....

My simplistic solution?? I freely admit I don't have one. My simplistic opinion of who is at fault? I don't have one of those either..... Maybe I can borrow one off a "white hat, black hat" poster.


[/B]

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Skeptic
By the way, I've just heard: israel officially cut all ties with the BBC for its broadcasting of this so-called "documentary". It must have been even worse than AUP describes it.

No doubt AUP was ecstatic as he was watching: "see? SEE?!! I TOLD you the dirty jew--- er, kike--- er, *cough*, *cough*, zionists are evil!!!"

BTW- what do you think to these anti-Semites?

http://www.inminds.co.uk/rabbi-burns-zionist-flag.jpg

[rikzilla]

Well Fool,

The NYPD enforces law and keeps the peace in NYC. NYC for all it's faults, is not Gaza. You cannot keep the peace, unless the peace exists in the first place. When NYC became what Israel is; a war zone; on 9/11 the NYPD/Port Authority/FDNY/EMS suffered the loss of over 400 people. Civil authorities are not designed to fight wars.

Now, are you seriously saying that a couple of black and white units could safely cruise the Gaza Strip or West Bank, and just arrest these baddies? Because that is just simply nonsense.

How about Hamas keeping it's word and not blowing up people who can't afford a car or taxi? That would be a great way to keep missiles from arcing down their "Main Street", wouldn't it?

After all, that's the issue du jour isn't it? There was a cease fire. Hamas violated it. That's about as black and white as it gets in the good old Middle East.

-z

[crackmonkey]

I certainly don't agree with some of Israel's methods of targeted killings - firing missiles from helicopters at cars always kills and wounds innocent bystanders. This is negligent, and basically the same as manslaughter. This still is a far cry from seeking out concentrated groups of civilians to attack so the death toll would be as great as possible, as the Palestinians do. The IDF is too unconcerned about civilians casualties; the Palestinians are driven by the thought of civilian casualties. The IDF approach is too indifferent to suffering, while the Palestinian one is a bloodthirsty quest for it.

[Mr Manifesto]

No, rik, Fool's basic argument is that Israel is not merely punishing the guilty. Part of the reason that terrorism gets so much support from the Palestinians is that the Israeli government seems to be callous in its treatment of Palestinian civilians. For example, the Israeli government's practice of punishing and burning down the homes of families of suicide bombers. Why punish them?

Similarly, why let loose with gunships and rockets, knowing you will kill civilians, when there is another way? Don't forget Northern Ireland got pretty hostile too, not much different from the Gaza strip, but you didn't see the Brits firing missiles into civilian streets. Erm, I think.

[Cleopatra]

You know Unique this is exactly the point.

People that belong either to the left or to the right are fighting about the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to kill each other.What both sides have in common is that they live miles away from the conflict.

Of course, I understand that if people that live in the area are not interested in finding a way to live together in peace, foreigners are entitled to amuse themselves with the matter as long as they wish.

.

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Originally posted by rikzilla



I wonder why Hamas broke the cease fire that they themselves helped negotiate?? Here's a possible tidbit I found:

The very concept of a hudna, an Islamic term that often is translated into English as ``cease-fire," has connotations of a temporary lull while the conditions of battle favor the opponent. Once conditions change to your favor, the hudna is broken and attacks begin again.

...I guess they think the balance has shifted?? :confused: Lesson learned: ...never trust an Arab bearing a "hudna". What good is such a maleable agreement in the first place?

-z


Are there any Arab speaking people that can confirm this? If this even remotely rings with truth and has cultural and historical precedence the is worrisome. Are there other Arab words for "cease-fire" that can be used to replace "hudna"?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe


...I guess they think the balance has shifted?? :confused: Lesson learned: ...never trust an Arab bearing a "hudna". What good is such a maleable agreement in the first place?

-z


Are there any Arab speaking people that can confirm this? If this even remotely rings with truth and has cultural and historical precedence the is worrisome. Are there other Arab words for "cease-fire" that can be used to replace "hudna"?

[/B][/QUOTE]

Well, I don't know the word "hudna" any better than you, it came up in an article I was reading about the Hamas leader who was killed. But I found this from an Israeli source:
June 29, 2003
The Hudna Treaty
Note from Aaron: The truce being debated by the Palestinians is one they openly call a "Hudna" treaty, a reference to an agreement entered into by Mohammed with his enemies, the Quraishites.

At the core of this agreement were the following terms:

1. The Muslims shall return this time and come back next year, but they shall not stay in Makkah for more than three days.

2. They shall not come back armed but can bring with them swords only sheathed in scabbards and these shall be kept in bags.

3. War activities shall be suspended for ten years, during which both parties will live in full security and neither will raise sword against the other.

4. If anyone from Quraish goes over to Muhammad without his guardian’s permission, he should be sent back to Quraish, but should any of Muhammad’s followers return to Quraish, he shall not be sent back.

5. Whosoever wishes to join Muhammad , or enter into treaty with him, should have the liberty to do so; and likewise whosoever wishes to join Quraish, or enter into treaty with them, should be allowed to do so.

The result of this treaty is that the hand of the Quraishites were tied, they were not allowed to fight the Muslims.

The Muslims, on the other hand, had the opportunity to spread Islam over areas not then explored. When there was armistice, war was abolished, and men met and consulted together, none talked about Islam intelligently without entering it; within the two years following the conclusion of the treaty double as many entered Islam as ever before. This is supported by the fact that the Prophet went out to Al-Hudaibiyah with only 1,400 men, but when he set out to liberate Makkah, two years later, he had 10,000 men with him. The article of the treaty pertaining to cessation of hostilities for ten years points directly to the utter failure of political haughtiness exercised by Quraish and its allies, and functions as evidence of the collapse and impotence of the war instigator.

Hudna in a nutshell: agree to anything, to buy time to build up your forces and then resume the war on your terms and at a time of your choosing.

I'll see if I can find more, hopefully from an Arab source.

-z

[Ziggurat]

Hey everyone, I think the thread is getting off track. The point of the thread should be that AUP posted absurd conspiracy theories of alleged Isreali attrocities with no supporting evidence. He should be ashamed of his claims. The muddy politics of the conflict should not obscure that fact.

Flame away.:j2:

[Cleopatra]

I am sorry but I'd better not characterize these things.

Hudna means cease-fire indeed but what a cease-fire means in English and in every language?

Doesn't it mean the same thing? In a cease-fire both sides stop shootings.

Does a cease-fire mean that the implicated sides stop the preparations? Of course not!

[rikzilla]

It's a tiny bit of a hijack...but while looking for info on "Hudna" via Arab sources I found this hilarious tidbit on Al-Jazeera:
This time, even the Israeli assassination attempt of Hamas leader Rantisi failed to do the trick: the Hudna is a fact, and, given the masses on the streets, a paper signed between the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and Islamic Jihad seems to give Israelis much more security than one of the strongest armies on earth has been able to. Following years in which Israel did its best to pulverize the Palestinians physically, politically and institutionally, one is astonished by the almost absolute obedience to the Hudna on the Palestinian side.

...opps! :id: ...I'll need another one of those!

-z

[Mike B.]

If Skeptic was an Israeli, and therefore in the IDF, why should he have to apologize?

Doesn't everyone in Isreal have to serve in the IDF?

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Those bombed yesterday were the extremists who are actively involved in depriving the Palestinians of their homes, from an area of Jerusalem that has been taking homes directly from Palestinians.



You are claiming people are lying about you.
The above is what you said. In that at least one of the victims was a child under 1, would you at the very least have the decency enough to admit maybe you used a poor choice of words?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mike B.
If Skeptic was an Israeli, and therefore in the IDF, why should he have to apologize?

Doesn't everyone in Isreal have to serve in the IDF?

Cleopatra, who is quite clearly a peacenik, was also in the IDF I think. I do not hold this against her. There are many Israeli conscientious objectors who refuse active duty in the IDF, and for this they are severly punished.

No, the reason I ask Skeptic is that he has said he was a bulldozer driver, and bulldozers for the IDF are a very active WMD and tool for stealing land.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mike B.


You are claiming people are lying about you.
The above is what you said. In that at least one of the victims was a child under 1, would you at the very least have the decency enough to admit maybe you used a poor choice of words?

I was pointing out an obvious link to the reason for the bombing. There were disingenuous claims, by Israelis interviewed about the bombing, that it was all to do with attacking children. It was clearly more than that.

Nowhere, however, did I celebrate the attack, or take joy from the death of a child.

As I have said before, my job in computers involves a lot of problem solving. No problem ever gets solved till you look at the cold, bare facts and look for the reason for a system failure. You also never take the users statements at face value. They misinterpret, make assumptions, hide complicity and miss vital information.

I am simply trying to take the same approach to this problem. It may appear to be cold hearted and ruthless, but I think it is more a sign of a genuine attempt to get to the root of the problem.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I was pointing out an obvious link to the reason for the bombing. There were disingenuous claims, by Israelis interviewed about the bombing, that it was all to do with attacking children. It was clearly more than that.

I am simply trying to take the same approach to this problem. It may appear to be cold hearted and ruthless, but I think it is more a sign of a genuine attempt to get to the root of the problem.

Don’t you mean an evidence-less attempt to get to the root of the problem?
Can you ever come up with real facts and evidence instead of emotional plea’s to support killing of woman and children.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
You know Unique this is exactly the point.

People that belong either to the left or to the right are fighting about the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to kill each other.What both sides have in common is that they live miles away from the conflict.

Of course, I understand that if people that live in the area are not interested in finding a way to live together in peace, foreigners are entitled to amuse themselves with the matter as long as they wish.

.

I don't know that I am arguing for the right of the Palestinians to kill Israelis. I think I am just saying that that is what is going to happen in these circumstances.

Eg, Skeptic saying that of course Israel needs all it's weapons, it has had to fight wars against millions of Arabs who want to wipe it out. Well, if you put yourself into a hot kitchen, don't complain about the heat. No one made the Zionists found modern Israel, it was all their own work.

The BBC documentary was also about more than just Israel fighting Palestinians. It was about international law and order. Saddam was invaded for his WMD that were outside the control of international law. Israel has also WMD, also Israel is a signatory to no international treaties to monitor and limit them. Israel is no longer just a threat to Palestinians, it is a threat to others. Israel, for example, sells numerous weapons to fuel wars in other countries.

So I am no longer just debating a regional conflict, but one that has repurcussions for other countries and myself too.

However, I do take your point about debates such as occur on this board, where it is more a game of chess and bravado than a matter of human suffering. I hope you do not despair too much, as at least the problem has visibility to the world. As has been shown in numerous other conflicts, the fact that people are watching does temper the actions of the extremists.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I don't know that I am arguing for the right of the Palestinians to kill Israelis. I think I am just saying that that is what is going to happen in these circumstances.

Eg, Skeptic saying that of course Israel needs all it's weapons, it has had to fight wars against millions of Arabs who want to wipe it out. Well, if you put yourself into a hot kitchen, don't complain about the heat. No one made the Zionists found modern Israel, it was all their own work.



This is always the foundation of all your arguments that its those evil Zionists that founded modern Israel, it was all their own work they asked for all of this.

[Shinytop]

Wow, that's a new argument for me. Next time my wife accuses me of not having any romance I will just tell her it is because I work with computers and liars all day so I do not have any emotion.

Easy to account for saying Palestinians are only choosing good 11 month old targets. Go Hamas. Maybe they can pick a good nursery school next.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Ziggurat
Hey everyone, I think the thread is getting off track. The point of the thread should be that AUP posted absurd conspiracy theories of alleged Isreali attrocities with no supporting evidence. He should be ashamed of his claims. The muddy politics of the conflict should not obscure that fact.

Flame away.:j2:

One important point, overlooked in all the flaming, was Israel's secret nuclear weapons program. We know the Israeli government want to keep that a secret, because they've locked up a whistleblower for 18 years.

From FAS (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/):

There followed two decades in which the United States, through a combination of benign neglect, erroneous analysis, and successful Israeli deception, failed to discern first the details of Israel's nuclear program. As early as 8 December 1960, the CIA issued a report outlining Dimona's implications for nuclear proliferation, and the CIA station in Tel Aviv had determined by the mid-1960s that the Israeli nuclear weapons program was an established and irreversible fact.

United States inspectors visited Dimona seven times during the 1960s, but they were unable to obtain an accurate picture of the activities carried out there, largely due to tight Israeli control over the timing and agenda of the visits. The Israelis went so far as to install false control room panels and to brick over elevators and hallways that accessed certain areas of the facility.Look, Ma! A Middle-East country is hiding WMD's! Let's liberate 'em! The inspectors were able to report that there was no clear scientific research or civilian nuclear power program justifying such a large reactor - circumstantial evidence of the Israeli bomb program - but found no evidence of "weapons related activities" such as the existence of a plutonium reprocessing plant.

Although the United States government did not encourage or approve of the Israeli nuclear program, it also did nothing to stop it. Walworth Barbour, US ambassador to Israel from 1961-73, the bomb program's crucial years, primarily saw his job as being to insulate the President from facts which might compel him to act on the nuclear issue, alledgedly saying at one point that "The President did not send me there to give him problems. He does not want to be told any bad news." After the 1967 war, Barbour even put a stop to military attachés' intelligence collection efforts around Dimona. Even when Barbour did authorize forwarding information, as he did in 1966 when embassy staff learned that Israel was beginning to put nuclear warheads in missiles, the message seemed to disappear into the bureaucracy and was never acted upon.

In early 1968, the CIA issued a report concluding that Israel had successfully started production of uclear weapons. This estimate, however, was based on an informal conversation between Carl Duckett, head of the CIA's Office of Science and Technology, and Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb. Teller said that, based on conversations with friends in the Israeli scientific and defense establishment, he had concluded that Israel was capable of building the bomb, and that the CIA should not wait for an Israeli test to make a final assessment because that test would never be carried out.


As for other so-called 'unsubstantiated allegations' made by A_U_P, he left out this bit from his link:

00.32.34 Olenka Frenkiel: But even in Israel some do. The current Prime Minister Ariel Sharon directed the invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed.

00.32.49 Olenka Frenkiel: The worst excesses were in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, for which an Israeli enquiry held Sharon personally responsible. In Belgium there are plans to prosecute him for alleged war crimes.

00.33.09 Olenka Frenkiel: While Sharon has been Prime Minister seven hundred Israelis have been killed. But more than two thousand Palestinians have died in attacks by Israeli soldiers.

00.33.21 Olenka Frenkiel: The Israeli army has used new unidentified weapons. In February 2001, a new gas was used in Gaza. A hundred and eighty patients were admitted to hospitals with severe convulsions.

00.33.41 Voiceover: The Israelis say this is tear gas. But this is not tear gas. We have never seen this gas before. We need some medicine for treatment. But it must be the right medicine.

00.33.56 Dr MOHAMMED SALAMA, Director, Palestinian Health Ministry: We asked, what kind of gas? But nobody verified for us the type of gas to give the antidote at that moment. Also we don't know how to check, how to examine, how to send this. We are in occupied area. We are surrounded. It is impossible to send these samples to international lab to test.


My link here (http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1667.shtml).

As to Israel blackballing the BBC- what's the reason for that? What country denies access to information about its weapons program that is on the up-and-up? Read my sig line for a clue.

So, as Ziggurat implies, we can leave off discuss the topic that A_U_P brought up by flaming him down. But that isn't going to make the issues go away.

Link to site which discusses another film on 2001 gas attack (http://www.yaleherald.com/article.php?Article=1056).

With regard to the Khan Yunis gas attack of 2001, it was indeed reported by the BBC, UPI, Agence France Press, Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Ha'aretz, French National Radio, and Free Speech Radio News, and the Palestinian accounts were corroborated by Doctors Without Borders. Kirchick's supposedly damning claim that the attack was not written about in The New York Times and the Washington Post is, however, completely accurate. The New York Times's silence on this issue extends even to its review of my film. I arrived in Khan Yunis while fighting was still going on and patients were still being admitted to the hospitals with symptoms, such as severe recurrent convulsions, which I document in my film. Also included in my film are interviews with the gas patients, their families, doctors, and others, the full transcripts of which are available on my website. Viewers of my documentary may choose to believe or disbelieve the testimony of the Palestinians interviewed. I believe that my film is an accurate presentation of the reality I found in the Gaza Strip.

[crackmonkey]

TO quote AUP - 'bulldozers for the IDF are a very active WMD'.

What an interesting perspective... wrongheaded and bizarrely in a homorous kind of way, but interesting nonetheless. Please continue - it makes me smile.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker



This is always the foundation of all your arguments that its those evil Zionists that founded modern Israel, it was all their own work they asked for all of this.

You have been taking lessons from Skeptic for too long. Where did I use the word 'evil', for instance.

As I asked in another thread, what reaction to the founding of modern Israel did they expect from the Arabs? I can just imagine the reaction to the Chinese deciding to start a new country in California.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


Don’t you mean an evidence-less attempt to get to the root of the problem?
Can you ever come up with real facts and evidence instead of emotional plea’s to support killing of woman and children.

I have no idea what you are on about here.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
TO quote AUP - 'bulldozers for the IDF are a very active WMD'.

What an interesting perspective... wrongheaded and bizarrely in a homorous kind of way, but interesting nonetheless. Please continue - it makes me smile.

You're very good at picking up on the weak parts of A_U_P's arguments, but unfortunately picking the odd flaw doesn't invalidate an argument. Do you have anything to say about Israel's use of WMD's in February 2001?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


You're very good at picking up on the weak parts of A_U_P's arguments, but unfortunately picking the odd flaw doesn't invalidate an argument. Do you have anything to say about Israel's use of WMD's in February 2001?

I stand by my remark, the amount of land and housing owned by Palestinians that has been cleared and stolen from them with bulldozers is huge, the wall that is being built right now is taking away many acres of farm land. They might not be doing it rapidly, but they are most definitely a weapon of mass destruction of the Palestinian country.

[crackmonkey]

Priceless. I love this guy.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
Priceless. I love this guy.

A part of the whole Israeli strategy, they certainly know how to work the press better than Hammas. Keep it low key, not too many bodies, and you can get away with anything you want.

[JAR]

What I think to be strange is that Christians and Jews consider suicide bombing to be an evil method for killing people, yet, they have great reverence for a Bible character called Samson who used suicide to kill large amounts of his enemies.

Perhaps they aren't bothered by the suicide bombings but rather by the reason that the suicide bombings are done for.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto

So, as Ziggurat implies, we can leave off discuss the topic that A_U_P brought up by flaming him down. But that isn't going to make the issues go away.


UAP's post was shameful. It repeats lies and slander, and all you can do to defend it is try to bring up other criticism of Israel. That's not good enough. Legitimate criticism of Israel can stand on its own (and there is plenty to criticise), but propaganda of the sort UAP spouted cannot be tolerated. It harkens back to things like the fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which was used to justify persecution of jews. And it continues today, with fabricated tales of attrocities that never occured, absurd conspiracy theories, and urban legends that claim jews perform human sacrifice on muslims. Israel has killed innocent civilians, but that cannot justify the patern of lying about the extent of their crimes that so many of their critics engage in regularly. We have a duty to the truth, and UAP violated that principle. His post was shameful.

Want to know just how wacked the arab world is in its propaganda about Israel? Take a stroll through the archives at http://www.memri.org and see for yourself..

[Mr Manifesto]

So, Zig, are you saying that the BBC, and other news agencies I listed all made up the Feb 2001 gas attack? A conspiracy among news agencies just for the sake of discrediting the Israeli government?

As to your link, I could just as easily find someone posing as an intellectual institute with rabid anti-Arab spoutings. How would that promote my argument? Just the same way your link does.

[Skeptic]

TO quote AUP - 'bulldozers for the IDF are a very active WMD'.

What did you expect from AUP? After all, for him, 11-month old jew is an "extremist", and killing the heads of terrorist organizations are "illegal assassinations". Besides, he has to support the Arab propaganda claim that israel is "secretly using WMD" against the Palestinians SOMEHOW, doesn't he? After all, they couldn't POSSIBLY just be lying....

By the way, I've heard that the US found a secret stash of Iraqi bulldozers lately... does this mean the missing Iraqi WMD were found? Oh, wait, I forget: bulldozers mysteriously become WMD ONLY when jews use them. How silly of me.

Oh, and P.S.: guess what book does AUP recommend as the "best book about WWII"? That's right, Hitler's War (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25452) by David Irving, the antisemitic, neo-nazi holocaust denier. What a SHOCKING surpirse... as they say, birds of feather flock together.

[Mr Manifesto]

As I said to crackmonkey, Skeptic, kudos for finding the weak part of the argument and attacking that. What about Israel's secret nuclear weapons program, and the government's efforts to keep knowledge of nuclear weapons from inspectors? What about the Feb 2001 gas attack? Any comments on those?

[crackmonkey]

The Venunu situation was shameful. Is there any objective evidence that there was any secret nerve gas attack against the Palestinians? I mean, other than that of some exceedingly biased sources? I remain quite skeptical about the whole episode. Using nreve gas doesn't really make much sense for the IDF - if evidence leaked out, the entire word would turn on Israel - including the US. There is no benefit to the Israelis by using any kind of gas, other then using tear gas to disperse stone-throwing mobs. Any troops using nerve gas would have to be swathed head-to-foot in WMD suits or else be affected by the very gas they're attempting to use. The odds of this kind of thing being true is extremely unlikely at best.
Add to that the fact that the Palestinian propaganda machine isn't very sophisticated, and will use the wildest and most easily disproven claims to further its agenda.
Nope. Occam's razor leaves this tissue of lies on the cutting room floor.

[Mr Manifesto]

Have a look at the sources cited in this (http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/kosher_weapons.shtml) link.

And your scenario involving troops being swathed head to toe in protective gear is ridiculous. To start with, they could use a gas weapon that only injures or kills by inhaling: in that situation only gas masks would be needed. To second with, who said the troops need to be on top of the target to deploy the weapon? Why not fire it via mortar or helicopter?

And finally, Occam's razor is more useful in deductive arguments than arguments concerning politics and human interaction. You can't simplify the Middle East conflict.

[crackmonkey]

After reading the article, it is clear that the 'victims' of this mystery gas got better. According to the article, 'MANY' of the victims required hospitalization... and presumably, some didn't. After 6 weeks, a doctor still had 10 victims he wanted to send abroad for treatment.
Not much of a WMD, is it? No reported fatalities, even though apparently victims stood by and inhaled for some time - one victim said she liked the smell and admired the rainbow-like hues of the smoke plumes emanating from the canister.
The article mentions a mountain of open-source publications on the mystery gas, but the footnotes refer to numerous works by a very few individuals.
Is there any objective medical data? Any kind of evidence? Any nerve agent that would fit this description? What was the supposed means of launching this gas? Many questions and precious few answers.
My guess is that the IDF used CS gas, or a similar agent which caused some Palestinians to choke and wheeze (which could also cause some flailing about). The use of tear gas wasn't suitably inflammatory for propaganda purposes, so CS was promoted to the big leagues and became WMD.
It walks like a duck, talks like a duck... it's a damned duck.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
So, Zig, are you saying that the BBC, and other news agencies I listed all made up the Feb 2001 gas attack? A conspiracy among news agencies just for the sake of discrediting the Israeli government?


I'm saying that there's absolutely no evidence that anything other than teargas was used.


As to your link, I could just as easily find someone posing as an intellectual institute with rabid anti-Arab spoutings. How would that promote my argument? Just the same way your link does.


memri.org provides translations and sources for major middle eastern press. Cry all you want about it being selective, but the arab press is in deep denial about the reality of their situation, and the examples it gives provide an insight into their deeply disfunctional mindset. They supported Saddam despite his decades of harsh repression of his own people and hostility towards his neighbors. They focus on the Palestinian conflict as their number one issue when many orders of magnitude more arabs were killed by Saddam than by Israel. They harp on Israel's violations of Palestinian rights, while ignoring the repression of their own peoples by every arab government in the region. They cannot pull their heads out of their backsides and see that they need to put reforms of their own countries first, because the path they have traveled on for the last half century has lead only to cultural and economic stagnation in the region. The point isn't that this press coverage is rabidly anti-Israeli, the point it that this is mainstream arab press being rabidly and hypocritically anti-Israeli. If you can find equivalent anti-arab sentiment among mainstream US press, that would be significant, and would also be something to worry about.

Posts like AUP's original serve absolutely no purpose - they do not help the Palestinian cause, they do not increase understanding or awareness of the truth, they merely serve as cover to continue on the current path of self-destruction for the region.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


No one made the Zionists found modern Israel, it was all their own work.


I won't get tired to repeat that this is not true. Zionists' will alone wouldn't be enough reason for the state to be founded. Europe didn't want the Jews, that's why it favored the establishment of modern Israel.

As for the nuclear weapons I have already posted my opinion in the Vanunu thread. Israel must comply with the International rules.Period.

One more thing. The joke with the bulldozer is rather old, find something else to insult Skeptic.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
TO quote AUP - 'bulldozers for the IDF are a very active WMD'.

What did you expect from AUP? After all, for him, 11-month old jew is an "extremist", and killing the heads of terrorist organizations are "illegal assassinations". Besides, he has to support the Arab propaganda claim that israel is "secretly using WMD" against the Palestinians SOMEHOW, doesn't he? After all, they couldn't POSSIBLY just be lying....

By the way, I've heard that the US found a secret stash of Iraqi bulldozers lately... does this mean the missing Iraqi WMD were found? Oh, wait, I forget: bulldozers mysteriously become WMD ONLY when jews use them. How silly of me.

Oh, and P.S.: guess what book does AUP recommend as the "best book about WWII"? That's right, Hitler's War (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25452) by David Irving, the antisemitic, neo-nazi holocaust denier. What a SHOCKING surpirse... as they say, birds of feather flock together.

One of these days, Skeptic, you will actually try to get one fact right.

"Hitler's War" was written by Heinz Magenheimer, not David Irving. You are confusing this book with the one written by David Irving, "Hitler's War and the War Path".

I also acknowledged that even this book appears to have been written by someone who appears to be sympathetic to Hitler, and contrasted it with another book, How Germany could have won the war, which points out how Hitler screwed up big time. They are interesting books if you want to see how the war was prosecuted, what Hitler's motivations were and what his failings were.

But I am used to you telling lies about me and not even checking basic facts or even reading my posts. The classic would have to be about my saying that Sharon should be brought to heel, and you then ranted on about my saying that Israel should be brought to heel and how this made me anti-semitic.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


I won't get tired to repeat that this is not true. Zionists' will alone wouldn't be enough reason for the state to be founded. Europe didn't want the Jews, that's why it favored the establishment of modern Israel.

As for the nuclear weapons I have already posted my opinion in the Vanunu thread. Israel must comply with the International rules.Period.

One more thing. The joke with the bulldozer is rather old, find something else to insult Skeptic.

I will keep taunting him about the bulldozer as long as he tells blatant lies about me. However, this is the truth. He said he has driven the bulldozers. Reminds me of the political line which goes, When he stops telling lies about me, I will stop telling the truth about him.

You are right about the Europe being part of the reason for the founding of Israel, however, I do think you underestimate the genuine attempts at atonement behind this act. The West in general was genuinley schocked at what had happened to the Jewish people, and it's complicity in that act. In an act of ongoing racism, they then decided that since they had behaved so badly towards the Jews, they would remedy the situation by behaving badly towards the Arabs.

[Skeptic]

So, Zig, are you saying that the BBC, and other news agencies I listed all made up the Feb 2001 gas attack?

Nope. The PALESTINIANS made up the gas attack, like they make up tons of other horror stories about the jews, and the news agencies lap it up, since nothing is a bigger crowd pleaser than such horror stories.

There is no need for conspiracy; the news agencies also lapped up the Palestinian claims of a "massacre" in Jenin (there wasn't), of the destruction of the "left wing" of a hospital there (that never had a left wing), of israeli tanks "running over" a Palestinian baby (which never existed), etc., etc., etc. These--and many others--were reported in the news media as "facts", too.

To give another example, remember Muhahad al-Dura, the 12-year-old "viciously killed" by heartless israeli soldiers for no reason? The fact, of course, is that he and his father were caught in a crossfire between israelies and palestinians, not targered by the israelies; and later analysis showed the bullet that killed him probably was fired from the Palestinian side at any rate.

While I do believe that the world media is, as a rule, biased against israel, the more general reason for reporting such nonsense is simply the "will to believe": not so much the will to believe in such "atrocities" per se, but more the journalist's refusal to recognize the embarrasing truth, namely, that their "trusted insider sources" in the PA are shameless, vicious liars who would say absolutely ANYTHING about the jews.

For the record, anybody who really knows anything about nerve gas works will laugh at these stories. Nerve gas has no odor, taste, and causes no irritation, unlike the "nerve gas" described here by witnesses; nerve gas does not "sicken" people--it kills them within minutes; it does not effect a few people around it, but whole areas (remember the pictures of the Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein?); you do not "recover" from a nerve gas attack by lying in a hospital for a while--you must have extensive, immediate treatment for any chance of survival; and it cannot be used "secretly", due to its wide-range destructive effect, any more than an atom bomb can be used "secretly". It just makes no sense--if this was really "nerve gas", all these witnesses, and many more people besides, would have been dead.

The symptons descibed are FAR more likely to be those of exposure, or overexposure, to tear gas or something similar to it. Note that I am not saying that the witnesses are lying in what they saw or felt. Nor am I saying that they invented any in bad faith--it is quite reasonable that someone exposed to an unknown chemical who later feels sick, and knows nothing about nerve gas, will panic and think "Oh my God--nerve gas!" (in the same way that any vague abdominal pain gets some people to think "Oh my God--I've got cancer!".)

But the so-called "Palestinian health ministry" (actually, the arm that spreads medical propaganda about israel) knows better. They know that not only those effected might think it was nerve gas--but that most people in the world, who know nothing about it, will believe them! And they cannot pass up such a golden opportnity to invent slander about israel.

Simply put, "Mr. Manifesto", you are utterly naive about the Palestinian sources reliability, and an utter ignoramous about nerve gas--so it comes as no suprise that you fell for the same nonsense the BBC fell for.

[Skeptic]

No one made the Zionists found modern Israel, it was all their own work.

You are quite right. If the jews hadn't founded modern israel, you would not be hating the jews for the NEW reason of zionism, because it wouldn't exist. Instead, you and your ilk would be hating the jews for all the OLD reasons they were hated for before zionism--you know, being "Christ killers", or "leaders of the evil bolsheviks", or "plutocrats who rob the workers", or "atheists", or "users of gentile blood for matzos", or "poisoning the wells", or one of a dozen other "real reasons" for hating them.

Hey, it's all THEIR fault; no one made the jews kill Christ and create Bolshevism; it was all their own work! If jews didn't want to be hated, they should of thought of that before the crucifixion or the Russian revolution...

For antisemites such as yourself, "zionism" was manna from heaven, wasn't it? Just as the old reasons for hating the jews ("Christ killers! Greedy, dirty people! Bolshevicks!") were becoming rather socially embarrasing, along came this NEW, still socially acceptable, "real reason" for hating them--zionism. "I am not an antisemite, just an anti-zionist" sounds SO much better in mixed company than "I am not an antisemite, I am just against jews poisoning the wells", doesn't it?

[rikzilla]

[misc rambling mode]
"Ah believe that the Jews, and them Ay-rabs, should get together and solve their differences in a Christian manner!" --The "Governor" (from "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas")
:D :D :D

"Why can't we all just get along?" --Rodney King


Well we do try don't we?? The "road map"...the resulting "Hudna" (AKA cease-fire until we're ready to fire again)... and then the "hudna" was broken by a Hamas bomber on a bus filled with women, kids, tourists, poor schmucks that are too poor to take a cab, or own a car. One victim is 11 months old.

....and the great humanitarian AUP says:
Originally posted by A_Unique_Person:
"Those bombed yesterday were the extremists who are actively involved in depriving the Palestinians of their homes, from an area of Jerusalem that has been taking homes directly from Palestinians."

Hmmm.... :bs: doesn't sound likely AUP, that the Israeli government's evil elite are cruising town with the great unwashed on the 3pm bus. Does it? Or perhaps in your world 11 month old babies are running the show? BTW how is the weather there in Bizarro land?

When the 3,000+ Americans were murdered on 9/11 AUP was among those who said we had it coming because of our foreign policies. Yet now our policies are far more intrusive into the Muslim world. We've invaded and occupied two of their countries, from where we can threaten Iran/Pakistan/Syria. I wonder why there have been no more terrorist bombings in the US? Perhaps they like us now?? Perhaps, like Rodney King suggested they just want to get along??

It couldn't be possible that the evil WOT is working...or could it?? Could it be that GWB is (*choke*) RIGHT?? No, that guy is EVIL!


[/misc rambling mode]

[demon]

"Well we do try don't we?? The "road map"...the resulting "Hudna" (AKA cease-fire until we're ready to fire again)... and then the "hudna" was broken by a Hamas bomber..."

Not quite accurate Rik.

There never was a ceasefire. Home demolitions, shootings etc were still going on, they just don't merit media attention. 'Ceasefire' is just the word used by the media to mean 'no Palestinian violence'.
One can't speak of a meaningful ceasefire when an occupying force is still brutally oppressing, daily, a subject population.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by demon
"Well we do try don't we?? The "road map"...the resulting "Hudna" (AKA cease-fire until we're ready to fire again)... and then the "hudna" was broken by a Hamas bomber..."

Not quite accurate Rik.

There never was a ceasefire. Home demolitions, shootings etc were still going on, they just don't merit media attention. 'Ceasefire' is just the word used by the media to mean 'no Palestinian violence'.
One can't speak of a meaningful ceasefire when an occupying force is still brutally oppressing, daily, a subject population.

:bs: ....thank the dieties Randi gave us a good strong meter!

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
He said he has driven the bulldozers.

So what? Once you join the Army you have to follow orders.

You are right about the Europe being part of the reason for the founding of Israel, however, I do think you underestimate the genuine attempts at atonement behind this act. The West in general was genuinley schocked at what had happened to the Jewish people, and it's complicity in that act. In an act of ongoing racism, they then decided that since they had behaved so badly towards the Jews, they would remedy the situation by behaving badly towards the Arabs.

As far as I know Jews didn't have any unsolved issues with the Arabs before the establishment of Israel... if Europeans were feeling guilty for the Holocaust, they should have given Jews the State of Vatican to establish their country ;)

No, they didn't want Jews so they sent them to ME to play the cops of the angloamericans in the area. I am mostly sad that the Zionists accepted that role for the Jewish Diaspora but on the other hand they had no option, they were deadly scarred.

Skeptic has a point. If Israel wasn't established and Jews were living in Europe, they would have to face again racism, at least according to the statistics, I mean if you go back in History you will see that pogroms against Jews coincide with periods of economic depression.

There is a big moral issue though. I expected from people who have suffered the extreme version of barbarism to be more sensitive towards other people but you have to admit AUP that most of the people that complain about Israel they do not do it out of love for the Arabs but out of hatred for Israel and Israelis.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


So what? Once you join the Army you have to follow orders.



I have already related the story of these friends of my family who were firm believers of the fight against communism in Vietnam. Their oldest son went off to fight and was ordered to run over a hut containing women and children with the armoured vehicle he was driving.

He came back, from Vietnam, a heroin user, picked up his things, said goodbye, and they never saw him again.

He was only obeying orders, but at least he had the sense to recognise what he did was wrong. I would not have wanted him to become a drug addict, and to have more of a capacity to forgive himself for what he did do.

Skeptic, however, is just full on no regrets. If he showed just one inkling of understanding for the other side, and stopped attributing motivations to myself that I do not hold, I would not give him such a hard time.

I have never given you a hard time because you served in the IDF. Your overall attitude clearly conveys that, even if you have been caught up in things that are bigger than the individual, you have not abandoned you capacity for self awareness and criticism.



As far as I know Jews didn't have any unsolved issues with the Arabs before the establishment of Israel... if Europeans were feeling guilty for the Holocaust, they should have given Jews the State of Vatican to establish their country ;)



Now, I have never actually come up with what would have been a good solution for the situation the Jews found themselves in. My own belief, given the history in the West since WWII, is that much of the anti-semitism was gone. It will never be gone entirely, but then, I think you will find the die hard anti semites don't like any other racial groups either, so it is not just something that Jews experience.

But you are right, the Arabs and Jews, prior to Zionism, do not appear to have had any ongoing issues that involved mass murder and mayhem.



No, they didn't want Jews so they sent them to ME to play the cops of the angloamericans in the area. I am mostly sad that the Zionists accepted that role for the Jewish Diaspora but on the other hand they had no option, they were deadly scarred.



In that much derided book, "The Holocaust Industry", Finklestein makes the point that the US and Britain were actually quite ambivalent about Israel for many years, as they did not believe it had much hope of surviving a protracted war with the Arabs. That is, the gesture of creating Israel as a solution for the Jews for their problems was really only a token gesture, one that would end in bloodshed and misery.

It was only after the six day war that the US thought that Israel was actually a viable state worth supporting, and started increasing it's arms and monetary support.



Skeptic has a point. If Israel wasn't established and Jews were living in Europe, they would have to face again racism, at least according to the statistics, I mean if you go back in History you will see that pogroms against Jews coincide with periods of economic depression.



True, and slowy but surely, over time, we do get more civilised, despite the best efforts of those who wish us all to behave like cavemen with nuclear bombs.

I was taught by a lecturer at Uni who was married to a German. She was conscious of the massive guilt in Germany over the treatment of Jews. The anti-semitism in the US was also markedly changed, along with the anti-Irish racism.



There is a big moral issue though. I expected from people who have suffered the extreme version of barbarism to be more sensitive towards other people but you have to admit AUP that most of the people that complain about Israel they do not do it out of love for the Arabs but out of hatred for Israel and Israelis.

True too, but I think you will also find they hate the Arabs as much as the Jews, and any other racial group that is not white, pure and full of hate.

Also don't forget, as Renata has found out, that many of the so called friends of Israel are just religious extremists who want the State of Israel to be restored to Biblical boundaries so the world will end.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla
[misc rambling mode]

:D :D :D




Well we do try don't we?? The "road map"...the resulting "Hudna" (AKA cease-fire until we're ready to fire again)... and then the "hudna" was broken by a Hamas bomber on a bus filled with women, kids, tourists, poor schmucks that are too poor to take a cab, or own a car. One victim is 11 months old.

....and the great humanitarian AUP says:


Hmmm.... :bs: doesn't sound likely AUP, that the Israeli government's evil elite are cruising town with the great unwashed on the 3pm bus. Does it? Or perhaps in your world 11 month old babies are running the show? BTW how is the weather there in Bizarro land?

When the 3,000+ Americans were murdered on 9/11 AUP was among those who said we had it coming because of our foreign policies. Yet now our policies are far more intrusive into the Muslim world. We've invaded and occupied two of their countries, from where we can threaten Iran/Pakistan/Syria. I wonder why there have been no more terrorist bombings in the US? Perhaps they like us now?? Perhaps, like Rodney King suggested they just want to get along??

It couldn't be possible that the evil WOT is working...or could it?? Could it be that GWB is (*choke*) RIGHT?? No, that guy is EVIL!


[/misc rambling mode]

I have pointed out before that the majority of Israeli's, who are not religious nutters like these guys, would trade the West Bank for peace. The nutters have no concept of what would make sense, but daily set up 'outposts' and settlements in the West Bank. The particular part of Jerusalem being 'settled' now is an interesting case in point. The Jewish and Arab quarters were in close proximity, and there was violence and bloodshed, especially since 'settlements' were being set up in flats and houses. To stop the violence, a 'buffer zone' was create that involved using bulldozers to clear Arab housing. Lo and behold, 'settlements' sprouted on that cleared land. If you were an Arab, you might see the process in chain and it's logical, long term conclusion.

A political part was formed in the last election for people such as you, Rick. It consists of conservative Israelis who want no part of the nutters.

The people who actually settle in the West Bank appear to me to be

a) Nutters
b) Poor people offered very cheap housing deals to make up the numbers
c) Ethiopians granted honorary Jewish status to make up the numbers.
d) Troops who have to guard all these people.

Make no mistake, the settlement process grinds on relentlessly.

As for 9/11. You must be pretty thick. All I said was, don't be surprised if the US is attacked. It is called 'blowback'. Do you have any concern for the many people tortured and killed under the care of the Shah, who was sponsored by the US and CIA?

[Shinytop]

AUP, I will not deign to answer a question about who I care about from somebody who believes an 11 month old infant is plotting to steal a Palestinian's house.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
AUP, I will not deign to answer a question about who I care about from somebody who believes an 11 month old infant is plotting to steal a Palestinian's house.

I don't recall waiting for an answer from you.

I will point out, however, that 11 month old infants are being killed on both sides.

[Shinytop]

But only the Palestinians try to kill them, but you already know that.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
But only the Palestinians try to kill them, but you already know that.

But I am already getting a good idea how naive you are.

[Shinytop]

Naive, am I? A good label to justify your spewing of hatred and lies. Funny how you can judge me without knowing anything about me. But then, thst fits in with the judgement passed and carried out by brave Palestinian bombers.

[a_unique_person]

here, I'll up your 11 month old with a four month old and call you.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/05/08/mideast.killings/

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
Naive, am I? A good label to justify your spewing of hatred and lies. Funny how you can judge me without knowing anything about me. But then, thst fits in with the judgement passed and carried out by brave Palestinian bombers.

Name one lie?

[Shinytop]

How about Isreli use of nerve gas?

How about children on a bus being extremists?

How about calling a bulldozer a WMD?

Play with youself AUP, I am going to look for a serious person.

[Skeptic]

Name one lie?

That bulldozers are "weapons of mass destruction"; that israel uses nerve gas; that the attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate; that the 11-month old baby who died in the attack recently was "taking homes from Palestinians"; that a journalist killed by a stray bullet during a firefight is the case of "israel targeting journalists"; that Hamas "targets extremists"; that a woman accidentally killed when a bulldozer demolished a house was "murdered"; that israel has no right to exist; that Vanunu is some sort of saint, instead of a spy; that the IDF is guilty of "routinely commiting war crimes"; that Arafat wantes peace; that it isn't antisemitism to want the jews dead "only in a limited geographical area"; that antisemitism means "hating jews just because they are jews"; and, above all...

...that you are "not an antisemite, just an anti-zionist".

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Shinytop
How about Isreli use of nerve gas?

How about children on a bus being extremists?

How about calling a bulldozer a WMD?

Play with youself AUP, I am going to look for a serious person.

It was from a reputable new organisation, the BBC. It was not my lie. If you have evidence to rebut this story, please provide it.

I did not call the children extremists. I was putting forward a reason for the bomber choosing these people to bomb. Other targets have been, for example, a quiet area of Israel where Jews and Arabs lived together in peace. Anathema to an extemists, so a bomb was set off there to break down the community. Also areas where guest workers tend to congregate. This may have just been a soft target, or an attempt to undermine the guest workers that Israel relies on for cheap labour.

Bulldozer as a WMD. WMD is a pretty loose term. Destruction of what? If we are talking about houses and farms what people need to live, we are talking about a lot of destruction.



WMD — ANY WEAPON THAT KILLS A LOT OF PEOPLE

IF YOU ARE GOING TO INCLUDE CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS IN THE DEFINITION OF WMD, YOU SHOULD INCLUDE EVERYTHING THAT KILLS LOTS OF PEOPLE — LIKE LANDMINES

Gert G. Harigel, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2000, Chemical and Biological Weapons: Use in Warfare, Impact on Society and Environment http://www.ceip.org/files/Publications/Harigelreport.asp //VT2002acsln

However, if one wants to maintain the term "Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)", it is a defendable view to exclude chemical and biological weapons, but put together with nuclear weapons all those that actually has killed millions of people in civil wars since World War II. These are mainly assault rifles, like AK47s, handguns, and land mines, to a lesser extent mortars, fragmentation bombs, and hand grenades.

WMD DEFINITION IS CONSTRUCTED BASED ON "SUPERIORITY" OF ONE SET OF WEAPONS TO ANOTHER

World Internet News Distribution Service, 3/19/98, NATIVE AMERICANS & WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, http://thewinds.arcsnet.net/arc_features/newworld/weapons_of_destruction1.html //VT2002acsln

Another way of seeing weapons of mass destruction correctly would come from comparing one nation's technology with another. When one nation has only a cavalry on horses and another has tanks, those with the tanks would possess the weapons of mass destruction in comparison, even though they may exist contemporaneously. The tribe with bows and arrows faces a weapon of mass destruction when their rival has a Hotchkiss gun or a howitzer. The massive destruction may not come from a single application weapon, but, if the end result is a mass killing, could not the application apply? With CBW, a single weapon such as anthrax is, in reality, many thousands of germs disseminated over a large area.



http://debate.uvm.edu/wmd2002/020a.htm

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Name one lie?

That bulldozers are "weapons of mass destruction";



refer above



that israel uses nerve gas;



ditto.



that the attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate;



That was highly debateable, and an event that will never be clearly decided to the satisfaction of either side. To call it a lie, however, is over the top



that the 11-month old baby who died in the attack recently was "taking homes from Palestinians";



I was referring to the group as a whole. However, that is what you are debating as part of the 'hate' aspect, I was asking for lies.



that a journalist killed by a stray bullet during a firefight is the case of "israel targeting journalists"



Another contentious incident. Not a lie on my part in any way. You are disagreeing with an opinion that can be defended.



; that Hamas "targets extremists";



See above. Hamas also has other targets, amongst them people living in peace.



that a woman accidentally killed when a bulldozer demolished a house was "murdered";



No who's telling porky pies



that israel has no right to exist;



More pork pies



that Vanunu is some sort of saint, instead of a spy;



lie



that the IDF is guilty of "routinely commiting war crimes";



it certainly appears that way. Once again, a contentious point.



that Arafat wantes peace;



Lie. I don't quite know if even arafat knows what he wants.




that it isn't antisemitism to want the jews dead "only in a limited geographical area"



Lie. When did I say I want jews dead in any area?



; that antisemitism means "hating jews just because they are jews"; and, above all...



That is what I believe to be true. Racism is basically disliking someone, not because you know anything about them as an individual, but pre-judging them to be 'bad' because of their race.



...that you are "not an antisemite, just an anti-zionist".

I am less of a racist than you are.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Have a look at the sources cited in this (http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/kosher_weapons.shtml) link.

And your scenario involving troops being swathed head to toe in protective gear is ridiculous. To start with, they could use a gas weapon that only injures or kills by inhaling: in that situation only gas masks would be needed. To second with, who said the troops need to be on top of the target to deploy the weapon? Why not fire it via mortar or helicopter?

And finally, Occam's razor is more useful in deductive arguments than arguments concerning politics and human interaction. You can't simplify the Middle East conflict.

What do you find so difficult about the conflict Israel has their women and children blown to bits and then when they retaliate you claim its aggression.

All of the terrorists have admitted they will not stop short of Israel’s destruction.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

It was from a reputable new organisation, the BBC. It was not my lie.


Oh, well that makes it all OK. But how come you didn't retract it? Why didn't you admit early that you were wrong, that the claim was baseless? Why did you let the accusation stand? If you post it, you still need to take responsibility for it, even if it comes from a "reputable" source.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Ziggurat


Oh, well that makes it all OK. But how come you didn't retract it? Why didn't you admit early that you were wrong, that the claim was baseless? Why did you let the accusation stand? If you post it, you still need to take responsibility for it, even if it comes from a "reputable" source.

Because I still don't believe it is a lie.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Because I still don't believe it is a lie.

You are despicable. I call you out for posting lies, you try to excuse yourself by saying that it wasn't YOUR lie but someone else's, then you admit you still believe the lie. Let me clue you in (again): IT'S A LIE! There is absolutely NO evidence that the gas in question was anything other than tear gas. And I'm calling you a liar because you were told this, did not care to investigate yourself, and did not retract the claim. You're a liar. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

For those curious, here's some first-hand reporting from Doctors Without Borders, which is rather sympathetic to the plight of palestinian civilians:

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/publications/reports/2001/palestine_01-2001.shtml

It's rather critical of Isreali actions, but it's quite clear from the report that this was just tear gas.

[Skeptic]

Oh, well that makes it all OK. But how come you didn't retract it? Why didn't you admit early that you were wrong, that the claim was baseless? Why did you let the accusation stand?

Ever seen a memeber of Scientology, or the Moonies, or some other cult, lie through their teeth to a non-member they hope to convert?

They do it because, for cult members, there is a "lower truth" and a "higher truth". For them, it is acceptable to fudge the "lower truth" (how much money they give to the cult, what their guru's biography is, etc. ) as long as the lies they tell get people closer to the "higher truth" (help convert new people to the cult's metaphysical beliefs. )

AUP is acting the same way. For him, it is perfectly acceptable to bend the "lower truth" (e.g., simply invent, or pass along without thinking, any and every silly blood libel the Palestinians make about the jews), as long as that serves to convert the reader to the "higher truth" (that the jews are evil). There is nothing wrong, as far as AUP is concerned, in inventing or spreading lies about such AWFUL and DESPICABLE people as the jews.

AUP "knows" in his bones the jews are evil, and feels it is his moral duty to expose this "fact". If the "controlled media" refuses to expose it (using the weak excuse that the alleged israeli "war crimes" are fabrications), what's the harm in helping out by repeating a blood libel or two yourself? It's all for a good cause, after all--if AUP convinces ONE person that the jews are awful people, all his lying was worth it.

AUP is a cultist; it just so happens that his cult is not Scientology or Trancendental Meditation, but pathological hatered of jews.

[Skeptic]

I call you out for posting lies, you try to excuse yourself by saying that it wasn't YOUR lie but someone else's,

...which, of course, means that AUP KNOWS it's a lie. When you say that some claim is "someone else's lie", you admit that it IS a lie, you are just claiming it was said by someone else.

then you admit you still believe the lie.

Actually, no; he already admitted that it's a lie. You cannot admit something is a lie and still believe it. When AUP says now that "he doesn't believe it's a lie", he's lying.

So why does he continue to post stuff he knows is a lie? See my above post.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
I call you out for posting lies, you try to excuse yourself by saying that it wasn't YOUR lie but someone else's,

...which, of course, means that AUP KNOWS it's a lie. When you say that some claim is "someone else's lie", you admit that it IS a lie, you are just claiming it was said by someone else.

then you admit you still believe the lie.

Actually, no; he already admitted that it's a lie. You cannot admit something is a lie and still believe it. When AUP says now that "he doesn't believe it's a lie", he's lying.

So why does he continue to post stuff he knows is a lie? See my above post.

Ziggurats previous post was the first one that offered any sort of actual refutation to the original source I used. It makes very interesting reading in general, (care to comment on any of what the doctors say about the plight of Palestinians, people?), but what it does appear to say is that this is a new form of tear gas, one that is much more potent than the old types. Given the doctors complaints that in their situation, they cannot follow normal medical practice and get proper scientific analysis for the victims they are treating, I can understand the confusion.

This is the first actual piece of evidence presented. You don't expect me to be swayed by arguments such as Skeptic's that in every single case where an Israeli has been accused of an atrocity, it has been found to be false. The reference to the doctors make it clear that an untenable way of life is the lot of most Palestinians, as do many other sources, some of which I have provided links to before.

[Ziggurat]

I'm glad to see you've backed off from your original claim, AUP, but I'm disapointed I even had to dig that source up for you. The claim that Israelis were using some kind of nerve gas is an extremely serious charge, and one many people on this board would find highly unlikely. You were negligent in posting that information without checking into it, and not even digging deeper after you started getting flack. It took me something like two minutes to track down the link I posted. Following one of the links that Manifesto posted in support of this nerve gas idea, I read the article author claiming that Doctors Without Borders supported Palestinian claims of a gas attack at Khan Yunis. Since that's a well-respected organization, I decided to check out what they actually said about the incident. It didn't take much effort at all, but it was effort that you should have spent before posting something so inflammatory.

As for the contents of the firsthand report of Palestinian hardship, I'll put it on record again that I think Israel has plenty to be critical about, but I have no intention of wading into a debate about which side is worse. But criticism of Israel (and the Palestinians) still has to be based on facts, not rumors or lies. Your original post was not, and the kind of disinformation it contains doesn't help anybody's cause except those who would escalate the violence.

[a_unique_person]

That is one claim, but the others have not been addressed. Such as Israel not being a party to international treaties to regulate the spread of such weapons, which opens it up to such charges in the first place.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Ziggurats previous post was the first one that offered any sort of actual refutation to the original source I used. It makes very interesting reading in general, (care to comment on any of what the doctors say about the plight of Palestinians, people?), but what it does appear to say is that this is a new form of tear gas, one that is much more potent than the old types. Given the doctors complaints that in their situation, they cannot follow normal medical practice and get proper scientific analysis for the victims they are treating, I can understand the confusion.

This is the first actual piece of evidence presented. You don't expect me to be swayed by arguments such as Skeptic's that in every single case where an Israeli has been accused of an atrocity, it has been found to be false. The reference to the doctors make it clear that an untenable way of life is the lot of most Palestinians, as do many other sources, some of which I have provided links to before.

Seems to me there are at least two sure-fire ways for the poor Palestinian people to get themselves a tenable life.

Way #1: Bomb the crap out of every Jew in Israel until they succeed in sweeping them into the sea.

Way #2: Stop bombing the crap out of Israeli civilians, and start pursuing a compromise that will be the foundation for a Palestinian state. Start teaching their children tolerance, so that terrorist tactics stop with this latest generation. Start using non-violent protest to right wrongs, instead of murder.

Sadly, the Palestinians continue to indoctrinate their children into becoming smart-bombs for the jihad. The Palestinian people are far more responsible for their own suffering than Israel is.
-z

[demon]

quote:
'Dispersing Demonstrations -- Or Chemical Warfare?'
"When will professional investigators begin to retrieve and test the gas canisters? Why has no one but James Longley bothered to document interviews with victims, doctors, and other eyewitnesses? In a world in which one country’s mere possession of chemical weapons can be an excuse for international retribution, how another country’s use of chemical weapons against civilians be dismissed as a "regrettably excessive" tactic of crowd control?"
by: James Brooks on: 8th Jul, 04


"On June 10th, 2004, the two clinics in Al-Zawiya treated 130 patients for gas inhalation. The patients were children, women, old people and young men. Dr. Abu Madi related that there was a high number of cases of [tetany], spasm in legs and hands, connected to the nervous system. Pupils were dilated...Other symptoms included shock, semi-consciousness, hyperventilation, irritation and sweating."

Thus reads a report by medical units serving the West Bank village of Al-Zawiya, where nonviolent resistance to Israel’s impending wall has been extraordinarily resolute. According to the medical report (procured by the International Middle East Media Center - IMEMC), "the gas used against the protestors is not tear gas but possibly a nerve gas."

The following day, Israel’s ‘Peace Bloc’, Gush Shalom, began a press release with the following quote from Al-Zawiya: "What the army used here yesterday was not tear gas. We know what tear gas is, what it feels like. That was something totally different…. When we were still a long way off from where the bulldozers were working, they started shooting things like this one (holding up a dark green metal tube with the inscription "Hand and rifle grenade no.400" - in English). Black smoke came out. Anyone who breathed it lost consciousness immediately, more than a hundred people. They remained unconscious for nearly 24 hours. One is still unconscious, at Rapidiya Hospital in Nablus. They had high fever and their muscles became rigid. Some needed urgent blood transfusion. Now, is this a way of dispersing a demonstration, or is it chemical warfare?"

The incident in Al-Zawiya appears to be the tenth attack by Israeli soldiers using an "unknown gas" against Palestinian civilians since early 2001. We have photographs of the canisters. We have film of victims suffering in the hospital. We have interviews with Palestinian and European doctors who have treated the victims. And we presumably have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of survivors. But we know nothing of their fate. Despite the evidence, we have not inquired.

Though it is a state secret, Israel’s development of chemical and biological weapons has been known and analyzed for decades. From the typhoid poisoning of Palestinian wells and water supplies in 1948 to the conversion of F-16s into nerve gas ‘crop dusters’ in 1998, Israel has always demonstrated a strong interest in developing CBW agents and methods for their dispersal.

In 1992 an El Al 747 flying nerve gas ingredients from the US to Israel crashed into an Amsterdam apartment building. According to Salman Abu-Sitta, president of the Palestine Land Society, the respected Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad followed up the crash with an in-depth investigation of the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR), Israel’s CBW complex in Nes Ziona. The paper reportedly found "strong links" with several US CBW and medical research centers, "close cooperation between IIBR and the British-American biological warfare programme", and "extensive collaboration on BW research with Germany and Holland."

At IIBR, doctors publish world-class research in acetylcholine, the mother lode of nerve gas design. The Nes Ziona complex is reputed to have invented an "undetectable" poison-needle gun for "clean" assassinations. In September 1997, two days after Jordan’s King Hussein told Israeli PM Netanyahu that Hamas was seeking negotiations, Mossad agents in Jordan attempted to kill Hamas leader Khaled Misha’al with a lethal dose of fentanyl.

For years, rumors persisted that Israel was using or testing unknown chemical agents on Palestinian civilians. The rumors began to reveal their substance February 12, 2001, when Israel began a six-week campaign of "novel gas" attacks in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. By chance, American filmmaker James Longley arrived in Khan Younis, Gaza in the middle of the first attack. That afternoon he began filming the victims. His award-winning film, Gaza Strip, documents the naked reality of Israel’s chemical weaponry—the canisters, the doctors, the eyewitnesses, and the hideous suffering of the victims, many of whom remained hospitalized for days or weeks.

The February 12 gassing of neighborhoods in Khan Younis presaged the attacks that followed. When the gas canisters landed, they began to billow clouds of either white or black, sooty smoke. The gas was non-irritating and initially odorless, changing to a sweet, minty fragrance after a few minutes. One victim recalled, "the smell was good. You want to breathe more. You feel good when you inhale it." The smoke often shifted to a "rainbow" of changing colors.

From five to thirty minutes after breathing the gas, victims began to feel sick and have difficulty breathing. A searing pain began to wrench their gut, followed by vomiting, sometimes of blood, then complete hysteria and extremely violent convulsions. Many victims suffered a relentless syndrome for days or weeks afterward, alternating between convulsions and periods of conscious, twitching, vomiting agony. Palestinians agreed: "This is like nothing we've ever seen before."

Forty people were admitted to Al-Nasser Hospital "in an odd state of hysteria and nervous breakdown", suffering from "fainting and spasms." Sixteen gas patients had to be transferred to the intensive care unit. Doctors "reported the Israeli use of gas that appeared to cause convulsions."

At the Gharbi refugee camp, thirty-two people "were treated for serious injuries" following exposure to the gas. Dr. Salakh Shami at Al-Amal Hospital reported the hospital receiving "about 130 patients suffering from gas inhalation from February 12."

Bewildered medical personnel had "never seen anything..like the gas at Tufa." Victims were "jumping up and down, left and right..thrashing limbs around", suffering "convulsions..a kind of hysteria. They were all shaking." Others were already unconscious. An hour or two later, they would come to. And the convulsions and the vomiting and disorientation and pain would return.

The following day, February 13, Israeli forces again deployed the strange new gas canisters in Khan Younis. Over forty new gas victims, "including a number of children..from 1 to 5 years-old", arrived at Al-Nasser Hospital and the hospital of the Palestinian Red Crescent Society.

The news began to trickle out. "Palestinian security services have accused the Israeli army of using nerve gas during a gunbattle yesterday", reported AFX News Limited, noting "the army has strongly denied the charges." The Voice of Palestine reported that "specialists believe that this is an internationally banned nerve gas." Those who inhaled the gas "suffered a nervous breakdown and vomited blood."

The next day, Deutsche Presse-Agentur quoted Dr. Yasser Sheikh Ali from Al-Nasser Hospital: "Israel has been using a powerful type of tear gas against the Palestinians that causes convulsions and spasms." According to DPA, more than 80 Palestinians…reported that Israeli soldiers had used the white smoky gas, but Israel denied doing so."

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) reported that on February 15 three more canisters of the poison gas were fired at houses in the Khan Younis camp, and "another 11 Palestinian civilians, mostly children, suffered from suffocation and spasms due to gas inhalation." British journalist Graham Usher wrote that Khan Younis civilians were "incapacitated" by "a ‘new’ form of toxic gas."

PA President Yasser Arafat publicly "accused Israel of using poison gas." The IDF issued a second denial. Israeli Communications Minister Ben-Eliezer called reports of gas casualties in Khan Younis "incorrect and false." Senior PA minister Nabil Shaath said that a sample of the gas would be sent to "an international center for analysis." The results, if any, were never divulged.

On February 18, Israeli soldiers near the Neve Dekalim settlement reportedly fired four poison gas canisters at Palestinian houses in Khan Younis. Later that afternoon, more canisters were fired, forcing Palestinians to flee their homes. PCHR reported that "41 Palestinian civilians, mostly children and women, suffered from suffocation and spasms." By PCHR’s count, 238 Palestinians were affected by poison gas attacks between February 12 and February 20. Twenty-seven of the victims were still hospitalized on the 22nd.

On March 2, an unknown gas was used against civilians in the West Bank town of Al-Bireh. Israeli soldiers reportedly fired "canisters of a highly effective black gas similar to the one used in Khan Yunis three weeks ago."

Twenty-four days later, Israeli forces east of Gaza City used a gas that "left symptoms different from those of the..gas used first.. in Khan Yunis starting from February 12..", although several similarities also appeared. In this attack the onset of abdominal pain seemed to be delayed.

On March 30, medical professionals in Nablus reported Israeli soldiers using the new poison gas against Palestinian demonstrators.

British journalist Jonathan Cook reported a March gas attack on the schoolyard of Al-Khader village, near Bethlehem. Thirteen year-old Sliman Salah was playing when a gas canister landed next to him, "enveloping him in a cloud of gas described by witnesses as an unfamiliar, yellow colour." Large doses of anti-convulsants were required to control the boy’s seizures and maintain consciousness. His symptoms "were finally brought under control five days after his exposure to the gas. But Salah’s father says the boy is still suffering from stomach pains, vomiting, dizziness and breathing problems."

In its March, 2003 special report, Israel's Secret Weapon, BBC Television reviewed this series of gas attacks, noting, "The Israeli army has used new unidentified weapons. In February 2001 a new gas was used in Gaza. A hundred and eighty patients were admitted to hospitals with severe convulsions….Israel is outside chemical and biological weapons treaties and still refuses to say what the new gas was."

In my amateur analysis of the reported comments of victims, eyewitnesses and medical professionals regarding this series of attacks, I identified thirty-three distinct symptoms attributed to the unidentified gas. All but three of these symptoms appear to be typical of nerve gas poisoning. Tareg Bey, a chemical warfare expert at the University of California-Irvine, told the Chicago Reader that the symptoms described to him "all fit really well to nerve gas", though he was puzzled by the reported fragrance and skin rashes.

In an October 9, 2003 article, Jennifer Loewenstein and Angela Gaff asked, "What gas is Israel using?" They reported the story of Mukhles Burgal, a Palestinian prisoner caught in a brutal attack inside Israel’s Ashkelon prison. The "guards forced their way into the crowded cell, spraying two canisters of some type of gas. Some of the 14 prisoners passed out…The effects of the gas were severe muscle spasms and an overwhelming sensation of not being able to breathe."

Two days later, Palestine Monitor reported that Israeli forces in Rafah were allegedly "firing gas grenades containing a black gas believed to be adamatite [adamsite?]– the use of which is forbidden according to international law. Medical authorities urged people to avoid the gas at all costs, as it not only causes difficulty in breathing but seriously affects the nervous system." For some reason, PCHR’s press release from the same day, an apparent source of these reports, is no longer available. On the 14th, eyewitness Laura Gordon wrote, "The army used some kind of nerve gas for the first time in Rafah, leaving people in convulsions for days."

Following the recent gas attack in Al-Zawiya, town officials reportedly told Al Ayyam newspaper, "the Israeli occupation troops were using an illegal substance that caused nerve spasms and that several cases had been transferred to Nablus hospitals."

The PA’s International Press Center reported that "official and public sources in..Al-Zawya..asserted that those who have inhaled the tear gas IOF troops fired at them four days ago are still suffering from the effects of the gas…a number of those citizens have already had amnesias or partial memory loss, in addition to cramps…in addition to strange cramps every three hours… those who inhaled the gas are still suffering severe pains in the joints and nausea for four days now. Eyewitnesses recalled that the Israeli soldiers were keen on picking the empty tear gas canisters.." Journalists told IPC "that the gas was in different colors they have never seen coming out of a tear gas canister before, and that some gases had an unrecalled smell."

According to IMEMC, "..tens of demonstrators who inhaled this gas had partial memory loss. Dr. Bassam Abu Madi told IMEMC that the some of those who inhaled the gas had severe choking and some contraction in their feet and arm muscles. Eyewitnesses said the gas has a strange smell and a reddish-brownish color." [corrected copy] In a follow up story, IMEMC concluded that "protesters were attacked with gas that is not like the tear gas. Those who inhaled the gas suffered some memory loss while others had other symptoms of a nerve gas. Yet this was not medically confirmed for lack of laboratories to inspect the gas canisters collected from the scene."

Al Jazeera reported the opinion of Awni Khatib, a professor of chemistry at Hebron University; "the new symptoms–particularly the violent convulsions experienced by some Palestinian protesters outside the village of Sawiya [Zawiya], southwest of Nablus–suggest..that the Israeli army may be using a new class of chemicals that lie somewhere between normal tear gas and chemical weapons."

Israel’s repeated use of highly toxic unknown chemicals against Palestinian civilians is now an open secret. We can expect these attacks to continue until a concerted effort is made to determine the facts and hold Israel accountable. So far, the international human rights community has steadfastly ignored the mounting evidence.

When will professional investigators begin to retrieve and test the gas canisters? Why has no one but James Longley bothered to document interviews with victims, doctors, and other eyewitnesses? In a world in which one country’s mere possession of chemical weapons can be an excuse for international retribution, how another country’s use of chemical weapons against civilians be dismissed as a "regrettably excessive" tactic of crowd control?

Our silence is poisoning Palestine

http://globalecho.org/view_article.php?aid=940

[Giz]

Originally posted by The Fool


you are most definitely part of the problem, you will never be part of any solution. If you cannot see that firing rockets into civilian streets, blowing women and children to pieces because you were aiming at a car containing a legitimate target is not an atrocity then what the F*ck IS an atrocity in your opinion???????



So how are terrorist leaders to be stopped? The PA has shown a distinct unwillingness/impotence to take action against them. If a ground force was sent in - by Israel! - to seize them it would probably turn into a running battle (and the leaders would have fled before they turned up) (and civilian casualties would likely be huge). Or they can take them out with a rocket and try to minimise civilian casualties. (This may count as the lesser evil).

If you were promoted from Major Fool to General Fool in charge of the IDF how would you go about hindering the ability of the terrorist factions to hit civilian targets? If you wont hit the leaders, you dont like the fence, perhaps the 11 month old's can take it the chin?

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by demon
quote:
'Dispersing Demonstrations -- Or Chemical Warfare?'
http://globalecho.org/view_article.php?aid=940

You can't post entire articles.

Oh and I call BS, why? Because there is a history of these types of claims and none have yet proven to be true so why should this one be any different?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Grammatron
You can't post entire articles. Oh and I call BS, why? Because there is a history of these types of claims and none have yet proven to be true so why should this one be any different? Well I went to Demon's GlobalEcho website to read the story for myself, because as we all know Israelis use nerve gas on palestinians and jews use teen's blood in pastries...anyhow... I came across this story in the Middle eastern section with Demon's quoted article;

The Israelis just had to get in on the fun. But then the stories of torture – of hooded, humiliated inmates at Abu Ghraib and other facilities – did have a familiar air, as if the Israelis were tutoring their American sock-puppets in the finer points of squeezing those ragheads until they squealed. Torture – of the "mild" variety – has the official imprimatur of Israel's high court (http://globalecho.org/view_article.php?aid=905)

Now that sounds like an "alternative media" source you can trust! ;)

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Giz


So how are terrorist leaders to be stopped? The PA has shown a distinct unwillingness/impotence to take action against them. If a ground force was sent in - by Israel! - to seize them it would probably turn into a running battle (and the leaders would have fled before they turned up) (and civilian casualties would likely be huge). Or they can take them out with a rocket and try to minimise civilian casualties. (This may count as the lesser evil).

If you were promoted from Major Fool to General Fool in charge of the IDF how would you go about hindering the ability of the terrorist factions to hit civilian targets? If you wont hit the leaders, you dont like the fence, perhaps the 11 month old's can take it the chin?
If you think that launching missiles down heavily populated civilian streets is an acceptable way to eliminate criminals I'm glad you do not run a police department.
Maybe you would have a different opinion if the fugitives lived in your community eh? If the British army Identified a terrorst cell in London would you see the value in a quick airstrike? It would probably kill very few bystanders...well worth it in the long run. After all, if the Army went in there would be a gunbattle that would kill far more people...Well, its settled, airstrikes on London is by far the most sensible approach...next problem?.

[Giz]

Originally posted by The Fool

If you think that launching missiles down heavily populated civilian streets is an acceptable way to eliminate criminals I'm glad you do not run a police department.
Maybe you would have a different opinion if the fugitives lived in your community eh? If the British army Identified a terrorst cell in London would you see the value in a quick airstrike? It would probably kill very few bystanders...well worth it in the long run. After all, if the Army went in there would be a gunbattle that would kill far more people...Well, its settled, airstrikes on London is by far the most sensible approach...next problem?.

I asked what would YOU do? The crux of the problem (yes, I agree that there is a problem) is that these guys aren't being apprehended in the "usual" way (whether because the PA don't want to, or Israel cant send in guys without a massive urban battle erupting). If you discount those options then what are you left with? Leave them alone, leading to more civilian deaths (that in our hypothetical YOU are supposed to be preventing) or try and hit them with precision strikes? Are there other options? If so, please share... what is your "lesser evil" option?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Giz


I asked what would YOU do? The crux of the problem (yes, I agree that there is a problem) is that these guys aren't being apprehended in the "usual" way (whether because the PA don't want to, or Israel cant send in guys without a massive urban battle erupting). If you discount those options then what are you left with? Leave them alone, leading to more civilian deaths (that in our hypothetical YOU are supposed to be preventing) or try and hit them with precision strikes? Are there other options? If so, please share... what is your "lesser evil" option?

There is a low level war going on. More Palestinains are dying than Israeli's. Let's not forget the children, more Palestinian children are dying than Isreali children. One day, both sides may want to achieve a real peace. Until then, people on both sides will keep dying and suffering.

[Skeptic]

There is a low level war going on. More Palestinains are dying than Israeli's. Let's not forget the children, more Palestinian children are dying than Isreali children.

So the side who has more casualties is in the right and has justice on their side? On this view, Germany and Japan were significanly more right and just than the USA in WWII.

In reality, the Palestinians might have has slightly less casualties if they had accepted a state in 9/00, instead of starting a terror war for israel's annihilation.

One day, both sides may want to achieve a real peace.

But you keep portratying israel COLONIALIST RACIST NATION that has NO RIGHT TO EXIST and whose VERY EXISTENCE is the cause of all their suffering, and justify all attacks on it as brave resistance.

So now you want "both sides" to want to achieve peace? Does this mean you changed your mind and accepted israel has a right to exist?

Oh wait, I forget: it is only when israel fights back that you are suddenly concerned about "peace". As long as it is Palestinian attacks, you don't care.

What you really call "peace" is "israel surrendering".

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
There is a low level war going on. More Palestinains are dying than Israeli's. Let's not forget the children, more Palestinian children are dying than Isreali children.

So the side who has more casualties is in the right and has justice on their side? On this view, Germany and Japan were significanly more right and just than the USA in WWII.

In reality, the Palestinians might have has slightly less casualties if they had accepted a state in 9/00, instead of starting a terror war for israel's annihilation.

One day, both sides may want to achieve a real peace.

But you keep portratying israel COLONIALIST RACIST NATION that has NO RIGHT TO EXIST and whose VERY EXISTENCE is the cause of all their suffering, and justify all attacks on it as brave resistance.

So now you want "both sides" to want to achieve peace? Does this mean you changed your mind and accepted israel has a right to exist?

Oh wait, I forget: it is only when israel fights back that you are suddenly concerned about "peace". As long as it is Palestinian attacks, you don't care.

What you really call "peace" is "israel surrendering".

That is your opinion, I don't agree with it.

Let me ask you, how should the people who lived in that area have responded to the notion that a new country is being created, that they live in, that states that it is being created for a racial group that they don't belong to?

I have already said that Zionism was a logical result of anti-semitism, and particularly the Holocaust. I don't see why it had to be at the expense of the people who lived in the area that was chosen to create a Jewish state. They were not the perpetrators of the Holocaust. Yet they still see extremists, with a lot of power, saying that nothing less than a return to 'biblical' borders is acceptable. Children are growing up knowing only a life in which hostile tanks and helicopter gunships roam the streets at will.

[Giz]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


There is a low level war going on. More Palestinains are dying than Israeli's. Let's not forget the children, more Palestinian children are dying than Isreali children. One day, both sides may want to achieve a real peace. Until then, people on both sides will keep dying and suffering.

So what would YOU do? I see criticisms of Israeli actions from you and The Fool but nothing in the way of alternatives... unless you consider treating terrorist leaders as sacrosanct as an alternative. Viable course of action please...

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Giz


So what would YOU do? I see criticisms of Israeli actions from you and The Fool but nothing in the way of alternatives... unless you consider treating terrorist leaders as sacrosanct as an alternative. Viable course of action please...

Who said I had an alternative? The best political minds in the world have been nutting this one out for 50 years now, and are no closer to a solution than they were at the start.

Call me when both sides really want peace. Just don't blame it all on the Palestinians.

[Giz]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Who said I had an alternative? The best political minds in the world have been nutting this one out for 50 years now, and are no closer to a solution than they were at the start.

Call me when both sides really want peace. Just don't blame it all on the Palestinians.

I wasn't really asking for a solution on the strategic/political level. I had been asking for a practical course of action the IDF could use to constrain terrorist leaders (rockets being abhored - and I can see why, I just cant see any other way).

If you did have a solution to the "big" problem there'd be a million dollars headed your way.

And, most importantly, this forum would probably whither and die. (So if you do, keep it to yourself, eh?)

[demon]

ZN:
"Now that sounds like an "alternative media" source you can trust! ;)"


Ok, I`ll see if I can dig something up from The Old Testament next time, maybe a quote from King David or Solomon.
Howz that for you?