[Zimphire]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/408359.html

Taking a couple days break (Will be out) but I wanted to plant this gem before I leave.

Equal moral ground indeed.



NOT.

I am sure I will be missed.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Taking a couple days break (Will be out)

YAAAAAAAAAAAAY!

[SubGeniux]

Hope you're ok. have fun.


Oh, in answer to you post, I don't think they're challenged in any way, except by the IDF

take care dude.

[eklipse]

Some sick ****ers on both sides of the security fence it would seem.

[Logic]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Some sick ****ers on both sides of the security fence it would seem.

Yup.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Some sick ****ers on both sides of the security fence it would seem.

Yup.

[vmarks]

About time we hear this admission that Palestinian radicals might actually employ brutal and disgusting means of throwing away the lives of the mentally challenged in their aim to eliminate Israel. Note that Tanzim is an organization that Arafat is head of.

It isn't flamebait, it's unfortunate, outrageous, and factual. The people behind this are the people holding the Palestinians back from obtaining peace.

From the article:

The boy, who was taken in for questioning, said that he received NIS 100 to carry out a suicide attack.

The IDF believes that the boy was meant to detonate the belt near the soldiers or close to the nearby army base.

A Tanzim cell from the Balata refugee camp in Nablus took responsibility for sending the boy.

Army Radio reported that the belt failed to detonate due to a technical flaw, but Channel 1 television later said that Israeli sappers had discovered no problem with the explosives and had speculated that the boy had merely lost his nerve.

The family of the boy, Hussam Abdu, said he was mentally slow. "He doesn't know anything," his brother, Hosni, said.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Some sick ****ers on both sides of the security fence it would seem.

No one on Israel's side is doing this. Not even close. Not the same. Nope nowhere nohow .

Apologists know there is no way they can paint these people as being morally superior without looking foolish.

So we get apologists trying to paint them as equal morally.

Not even close.

Another top that doesn't spin here.

This a disgusting act committed by COWARDS.

Paying a retard to blow himself up because they don't have the guts to do it themselves.

[Logic]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Apologists know there is no way they can paint these people as being morally superior without looking foolish.

No, of course Sharon just joined a group(Haganah) that joined a terrorist group(Lehi) to form the Stern Gang, that tried to work with the Nazis. The man who founded the Unit 101 who took care of retaliatory attacks against civilians. The man who planned attacks and carried them out where grenades where thrown into houses where people where asleep. A group that shot the people fleeing their houses down with machineguns. The man found indirectly guilty of being responsible for the massacres of Sabra and Shatilla. Of course the both aren't morally equivalent

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
No one on Israel's side is doing this. Not even close. Not the same. Nope nowhere nohow .

Apologists know there is no way they can paint these people as being morally superior without looking foolish.

So we get apologists trying to paint them as equal morally.

Not even close.

Another top that doesn't spin here.

This a disgusting act committed by COWARDS.

Paying a retard to blow himself up because they don't have the guts to do it themselves.

It's an extended consequence of an extended conflict - something that has gone on for faaaar to long.

And vmarks, what are you talking about 'it's about time we heard this admission'? myself, Logic and eklipse have consistently maintained that this sick sh1t is carried out by Palestinian resistance movements as well as Israeli gov. officials.

[SubGeniux]

Of course, the Israelis don't live in refugee camps, have virtually no rights, their lives every single is day is one of utter despair. No, the Isaelies don't have to struggle all the time, as a whole people, they don't have to live thikning that at any minute their homes could be raised to the ground, their whole town closed off, barricaded, kept like in animals in a barn.The list goes on, and on, and gets far worse once yu start to examine each and every sickening incident, day after day.

So yes, isn't it any wonder that we don't see Israeli children carrying bombs, or youths having to hurl stones at soldiers who are armed to the teeth. What a contrast.

[SubGeniux]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
It's an extended consequence of an extended conflict - something that has gone on for faaaar to long.

And vmarks, what are you talking about 'it's about time we heard this admission'? myself, Logic and eklipse have consistently maintained that this sick sh1t is carried out by Palestinian resistance movements as well as Israeli gov. officials.

Yes, but varmks will never say say that his government is equally culpable as the Palestinian bombers, will you varmks?

[vmarks]

Originally posted by SubGeniux:
Yes, but varmks will never say say that his government is equally culpable as the Palestinian bombers, will you varmks?

There is no equivalency. The Arab League used Palestinians as pawns, the surrounding Arab countries have continued keeping them in bad conditions even as refugees in Arab countries (Lebanon, Black September in Jordan), and the terrorists amongst them have kept conditions brutal for them as a whole. Even as Israel has increased the quality of life for Palestinians (and it has) their own corrupt leadership tells them that nothing will remove them from misery until there is no Israel.

You cannot lay blame at Israel, who has from the beginning offered absorbtion, when the Palestinians along with Arab League have offered only extermination.

Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence includes the following: “WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions." --- http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/His..._of_Indep.html

UN Resolution 194, which was acceptable to the Israelis, stated in point 11 that, “…refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property…” This resolution was *unanimously rejected* by the Arabs.

-- text of the resolution - http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/unga194.html


The Israeli government was not indifferent to the plight of the refugees; an ordinance was passed creating a Custodian of Abandoned Property "to prevent unlawful occupation of empty houses and business premises, to administer ownerless property, and also to secure tilling of deserted fields, and save the crops...."


The implied danger of repatriation did not prevent Israel from allowing some refugees to return and offering to take back a substantial number as a condition for signing a peace treaty. In 1949, Israel offered to allow families that had been separated during the war to return; agreed to release refugee accounts frozen in Israeli banks (eventually released in 1953); offered to pay compensation for abandoned lands and, finally, agreed to repatriate 100,000 refugees.


The Arabs rejected all the Israeli compromises. They were unwilling to take any action that might be construed as recognition of Israel. They made repatriation a precondition for negotiations, something Israel rejected. The result was the confinement of the refugees in camps.


Despite the position taken by the Arab states, Israel did release the Arab refugees' blocked bank accounts, which totaled more than $10 million. In addition, through 1975, the Israeli government paid to more than 11,000 claimants more than 23 million Israeli pounds in cash and granted more than 20,000 acres as alternative holdings. Payments were made by land value between 1948 and 1953, plus 6 percent for every year following the claim submission.

-- http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/refugees.html

I have said before, and will say again, the war has not been fought that has not had some bad acts in it. These are regrettable. Stop people like Yassin, like Arafat, like Rantisi, from launching these wars, stop giving credibility to people who wage elimination of Israel and all the people within it.

[Logic]

<rightwing pro-Israeli nut> That's a biased source if I ever seen one. I didn't like the tone of the article either</rightwing pro-Israeli nut>

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
There is no equivalency.

Heh. Typical.

[vmarks]

Too bad you won't read the post or the links. The history is accurate. The Palestinians and Arabs both thought they could win by not acknowleding the existence of Israel and continual attacks, or cessation long enough to regroup. It was their attitude then, and it was the attitude of Arafat at Oslo, and the attitude of Yassin and Rantisi, and goes on today.

It is these leaders oppressing the Palestinians by continuing to wage a war that intends to eliminate Israel. If ever they should choose to make peace instead of false promises, Israel will be there.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
Too bad you won't read the post or the links. The history is accurate. The Palestinians and Arabs both thought they could win by not acknowleding the existence of Israel and continual attacks, or cessation long enough to regroup. It was their attitude then, and it was the attitude of Arafat at Oslo, and the attitude of Yassin and Rantisi, and goes on today.

It is these leaders oppressing the Palestinians by continuing to wage a war that intends to eliminate Israel. If ever they should choose to make peace instead of false promises, Israel will be there.

Read it, it's the same old rubbish.

You like to project that Israel is the almighty peace maker, despite the fact that Israel is the aggressor here. Sharon doesn't want peace. Just read about *his* history. Israel never has and never will 'be there' for Palestine. It's only ever been there with guns and tanks.

It's a shame too that the Arab world won't 'be there' for the Palestinians either. They are isolated, hence the acts of desperation we still see today.

[Logic]

vmarks:


I would really like to ask you one thing. I'm wondering if you could perhaps list a couple of bad things you feel that 1) Sharon has done and 2) Israel has done.

[Zimphire]

So far I have yet to see either of you debunk what vmarks has posted.

Just mud-slinging.

vmarks at least makes a honest argument.

You attack him with silliness.

SHAME ON YOU GUYS.

Let me let you in on a secret. It doesn't make you look right.

I don't think anyone would say Israel has never done any bad at all.

But to say they are moral equivalents is deluding yourself.

Which is fine if you don't mind being self deluded. But don't expect anyone else to fall for it.

[Logic]

Originally posted by Zimph:
Taking a couple days break (Will be out) but I wanted to plant this gem before I leave.

Originally posted by Zimph:
...........noise...........

Take your break already!!!!

[SubGeniux]

Zimphire, it doesn't need debunking here, it has been done many, many times in the past, and will continue to be for a good while yet. If you surround yourself with skewed views, which only serve to reinforce alreasy strong biases, then what can be done? No amount of debunking, or tearing apart these articles will sway your mind, if it's not willing to be open to the possibility that you could be wrong.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by SubGeniux:
Zimphire, it doesn't need debunking here, it has been done many, many times in the past, and will continue to be for a good while yet.

Actually no, no it hasn't.

If you surround yourself with skewed views, which only serve to reinforce alreasy strong biases, then what can be done? No amount of debunking, or tearing apart these articles will sway your mind, if it's not willing to be open to the possibility that you could be wrong.

I am not the one with the skewed views. I am not the one that is saying bombing a terrorists and his friends is the moral equivalent of tricking a retard into blowing himself up because they are too chicken to do it themselves.

If their cause was so just, they would have no problem doing it themselves would they?

These are not acts of desperation that LBK like to say, these are acts of cowards.

These kids aren't blowing themselves up. These kids are being tricked into carrying bags for small amounts of money so they can be blown up by COWARDS.

[vmarks]

Sharon should never have denounced the Bush Administration.

"Do not try to appease the Arabs at our expense," Mr. Sharon blustered. "Do not repeat the dreadful mistakes of 1938, when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient solution. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia." Of course, no one was asking Israel to be Czechoslovakia. All anyone asked was that Israel try for once to behave like an ally with a common purpose and cooperate with the coalition of states the Bush administration was trying to construct. - Oct. 11, 2001

AND

I haven’t heard a single serious person with an argument against the fence as such. The non-Arab world understands well enough our need to defend ourselves against terrorist attacks. In general, people do not rule out the fence as one of the means of defense. There is broad consent to the notion that a sovereign country has the right to take defensive steps against repeated murderous attacks on its citizens.

The problem with the fence, then, is not the fence itself, but its route. The dispute over this began long before the International Court of Justice was asked to give its opinion. Here in Israel too there were plenty of people who argued that the proposed route was impossible, inhumane. Even from a security point of view, the route seems ill-considered in several sections. In short, many negative opinions were expressed about the route, by Israelis, by the Americans, and by the Europeans.

The prime minister had two choices. He could listen, or he could take the Israeli approach of ignoring these opinions. Ariel Sharon, as is his wont, chose the second course. No one would tell him how and where to build the fence. He knows the security requirements better than anyone. Sharon after all is not one to let an opportunity for a display of toughness go begging, and the fence seemed to him a golden opportunity that could not and should not be missed. Even within his government, there were ministers who came out against the fence route.

But Sharon does not know how to listen, until he is forced to. The Arabs went to the International Court of Justice, and suddenly it seemed serious. Sharon has now torn down parts of the fence that he was told in the first place were problematic. Had Sharon listened at the beginning, he would have gained twice over: there would have been no referral to the court in The Hague; and we would have saved tens of millions of shekels wasted on building the fence, demolishing it, and rebuilding it on another route. -- http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/glob...20&amp;fid=980

Where are your statements about what is wrong with Palestinians, and their leaders, and the surrounding Arab countries?

Those who only find fault with the Jewish people, the Jewish State and the actions of the Jewish sovereignty and never find anything that is positive are anti-Semites under the guise of anti-Zionism and anti-Israel. That's the role you've filled so far- let's change that and hear from you about where you disagree with the Palestinians, their leaders, their readical Muslims who distort Islam - let's hear it all. Tell us how you really feel. Likewise, tell us what you find about Israel and Sharon that is good.

[Logic]

Thanks

I'll do my part now as asked.

I think it is absolutely horrible and disgusting to attack civilians like the terrorist organizations do. I think that if they want to get my respect they need to start attacking Israeli military positions in the occupied areas. And only military positions without any civilian casualties. They here meaning the terrorists.

I think that the PA is corrupted and probably does more bad than good for the Palestinian people by inciting hate and anger every time they get the chance to.

I think the PA does not do enough to capture terrorists and it is no excuse that Israel has tried to assassinate terrorist who are in jail by shooting missiles at the jail. If that is a problem the PA should make sure no one knows where the terrorist is held except the Red Crescent.

I hate their way of speaking in one way to the west and one way to the Arab world.

I do not tolerate any requests for the elimination of the Israelis.

About Sharon and Israel.

I think Israel has done an OK job at keeping a kind of a democracy in that area despite all the troubles since it's foundation.

I think Israel has mostly done an OK job of respecting other cultures within it's borders.

But unfortunately there is not one good thing that I can think of Sharon. Not one.


There are many more things that I could mention about both sides but I will let this do for now. And I ask you vmarks to stop labeling me anti-semitic. I am not. I'm against the policies of Israel, that does not mean I hate jews. I was against how the nation of Israel was founded but that does not mean I don't think Jews should have the right to their own country. I am against it expansionist policy but that does not mean I think they don't have a right to exist.

Like I have said many times before, Israel will get my respect and my full support the moment they start to follow international laws, give back the land they have conquered, and accept the original separation plan. Until then, I cannot support them. Until then I will support the people who have lost their lives, homes, families and friends in needless wars between nations with egos to big to fit inside their own hearts.

But back to the topic of how Israel was founded and especially the completely unfair and illegal Balfour declaration.

This is what the UN has to say about it

The implications of the Declaration

Three features of the Balfour Declaration draw attention.

One is that evidently it was not in accordance with the spirit of the pledges of independence given to the Arabs both before and after it was issued. The second is that the disposition of Palestine was determined in close consultation with a political organization whose declared aim was to settle non-Palestinians in Palestine. Not only did this ignore the interests of the native Palestinians, but it was a deliberate violation of their rights (see sect. IV below). The third is that through the Declaration the British Government made commitments to the Zionist Organization regarding the land of the Palestinians at a moment when it was still formally part of the Ottoman Empire.

One authority writes:

"The most significant and incontrovertible fact is, however, that by itself the Declaration was legally impotent. For Great Britain had no sovereign rights over Palestine, it had no proprietary interest, it had no authority to dispose of the land. The Declaration was merely a statement of British intentions and no more". 38/

Other authorities in international law have also held the Declaration to be legally invalid 39/ but this was not an issue in 1917, when the Balfour Declaration became official British policy for the future of Palestine. The ambiguities and contradictions within the Declaration contributed heavily towards the conflict of goals and expectations that arose between the Palestinian Arabs and the non-Palestinian Jews. The Zionist Organization was to use the assurances for "a national home for the Jewish people" to press its plans for the colonization of Palestine on the basis of the Balfour Declaration and its implementation through the League of Nations Mandates System. The Palestinian people were to resist these efforts, since their fundamental political right to self-determination had been denied, and their land was to become the object of colonization from abroad during the period it was under a League of Nations Mandate.

ps. And you are correct about the fence. The fence itself isn't such a big of a deal to me. But the fact that it is built following a route that makes it a land-grab, and that it is built before any temporary borders are put down on the map. That is my problem with it. If it was built following the original separation plans borders I wouldn't care how high or big it is. But building it inside other peoples land is completely unjustified.

[gadster]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
No one on Israel's side is doing this. Not even close. Not the same. Nope nowhere nohow

Well I think Sharon is a bit, well, you know, well, let's say he seems to be - a bit 'special'?

[christ]

Originally posted by vmarks:
...There is broad consent to the notion that a sovereign country has the right to take defensive steps against repeated murderous attacks on its citizens....

Unless the 'sovereign country' is Iraq, and the 'murderous attacks on its citizens' are perpetrated by the invading US Army (and allies), in which case those that 'take defensive steps' are deemed to be terrorists.

Strange world that we live in.

[phoenixboy]

i find this absolutely terrible. these kind of people just suck! i guess there is no end to the level these terrorists can sink....

on a lighter note:

"israel uses mentally challenged to attack palestinian terrorists"