"All-Out War" - Israel to now crush Hamas completely by "whatever means necessary" [Archive]

DoctorDoom

06-13-2003, 07:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Again, Israel will fail and only spent more blood of children.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, yes, the favorite leftist buzzword:

<center>The CHILDREN!!!</center>

Would you like to know about children? Let me tell you about children.

[ QUOTE ]
June 1, 2001

21 people were killed and 120 were wounded when a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a disco near Tel Aviv's Dolphinarium along the seafront promenade just before midnight on Friday, June 1. The terrorist mingled with a large group of teenagers, who were standing in line to enter the disco. While still in line, he detonated the explosives strapped to his body. The explosive charge contained a large number of metal objects - including balls and screws - designed to increase the extent of injuries.

Most of those killed were youngsters from the former Soviet Union who had planned to attend a dance party at the Dolphin disco. Others who had been waiting in line to enter an adjacent nightclub known as the Pacha were also caught in the blast. The 'Palestinian Hizbullah' claimed responsibility for the attack.

[/ QUOTE ]
Tel-Aviv suicide bombing at the Dolphin disco (http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0k0g0)

Here are the victims. Look for the asterisks. Those are children.

Jan Bloom, 25, of Ramat Gan (d. June 3)
Marina Berkovizki, 17, of Tel Aviv *
Roman Dezanshvili, 21, of Bat Yam
Yevgenia Haya Dorfman, 15, of Bat Yam (d. June 19) *
Ilya Gutman, 19, of Bat Yam
Anya Kazachkov, 16, of Holon *
Katherine Kastaniyada-Talkir, 15, of Ramat Gan *
Aleksei Lupalu, 16, of the Ukraine *
Mariana Medvedenko, 16, of Tel Aviv *
Irena Nepomneschi, 16, of Bat Yam *
Yelena Nelimov, 18, of Tel Aviv *
Yulia Nelimov, 16, of Tel Aviv *
Raisa Nimrovsky, 15, of Netanya *
Pvt. Diez (Dani) Normanov, 21, of Tel Aviv
Sergei Pancheskov, 20, Ukraine (d. June 2)
Simona Rodin, 18, of Holon *
Ori Shahar, 32, of Ramat Gan
Liana Sakiyan, 16, of Tel Aviv *
Yael-Yulia Sklianik, 15, of Holon (d. June 2) *
Maria Tagilchev, 14, of Netanya *
Irena Usdachi, 18, of Holon *

[ QUOTE ]
August 09, 2001

A suicide bombing rocked a central Jerusalem pizza restaurant just moments ago, killing at least 18 people and wounding nearly 100. Six children are among the dead.

The explosion took place in the packed Sbarro pizza restaurant at the corner of King George and Jaffa Streets during the lunch hour.

The restaurant was completely demolished in the terror attack. Television broadcasts are showing dozens of wounded people in the streets outside the restaurant.

[/ QUOTE ]
Suicide bombing in central Jerusalem pizza parlor (http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2001/08/09/News/News.32248.html)

And in "Palestine"...

http://www.adl.org/israel/sbarro.jpg[ QUOTE ]
Palestinian students at al-Najah University in the city of Nablus marked the anniversary of the outbreak of Palestinian violence with an exhibition entitled "The Sbarro Cafe Exhibition," celebrating the August 9, 2001 suicide bombing of the Sbarro pizza restaurant in Jerusalem, which killed 15 people and wounded dozens more.

According to reports in the Israeli media and The Associated Press, the exhibition was comprised of a series of rooms. The Sbarro section of the exhibit was replete with body parts and pizza slices strewn across the room. The walls were painted red to represent spattered blood.

Another part of the exhibit glorified the "martyrs" who carry out suicide operations shown with a Koran and Kalishnikov in hand. A third section depicted a Palestinian behind a rock placed in front of a mannequin of an ultra-Orthodox Jew, with a taped recording broadcast on the loudspeakers saying "O believer, there is a Jewish man behind me. Come and kill him."

[/ QUOTE ] Palestinian Students Glorify Terrorism with Exhibit in Nablus (http://www.adl.org/israel/israel_sbarro.asp)

[ QUOTE ]
Two Palestinian terrorists disguised as Israeli soldiers infiltrated the settlement of Adora, near Hebron yesterday, and carried out a house-to-house killing spree. Four residents were killed, including a five year-old girl, who was shot in the head from close range as she slept in her parents bedrooms. Seven people were injured, two critically.

[snip]

Shefi ran from house to house, alerting residents that there were terrorists dressed as soldiers. At a neighbor's house he learned his daughter had been killed and his wife and two sons--aged two and four--wounded. "I saw my wife, Shiri, being carried out on a stretcher, and she called out 'they murdered our children,' " he said.

[/ QUOTE ]
Terrorists Murder Four in Israeli Settlement (http://www.ict.org.il/spotlight/det.cfm?id=771)

[ QUOTE ]
February 11, 2002

Obituaries honoring terrorists who murder innocent civilians regularly appear in Arafat's newspapers. The following death notice glorifying the perpetrator of an attack last week in which a mother, her 10-year-old disabled daughter, and a reserve soldier (a new immigrant from Ethiopia) were killed featured prominently yesterday, on the front page of a Palestinian daily.

The text reads:

"In the name of Allah the merciful and compassionate. With great pride and esteem, and with faith in the destiny determined by Allah, the Hamas movement Alkassam in the district of Jenin is happy to notify the Arab, Islamic nation and our jihad-fighting Palestinian people that the heroic Martyr from Alkassam, Muhammed Ziad Alkhalili, carried out the brazen suicide attack in Hamra in the [Jordan] Valley, to avenge the execution of the commanders of the Martyr brigade Az A-Din Alkassam by the occupation forces in Nablus. We pray that Allah will grant a haven for the heroic Martyr with His plentiful mercy, and will house him in His vast gardens together with the Martyrs, the prophets, and the true believers."

[Al Ayyam, February 10, 2002]

[/ QUOTE ]
Palestinians Glorify Murderer of 10-Year-Old Girl and Her Mother (http://www.pmw.org.il/bulletins-110202-2.html)

There's a lot more of this available. Now, since you lament the "children", perhaps you can provide equivalent reports on "Palestinian" children deliberately murdered by cowardly suicidal Israeli terrorists who blow themselves up for the specific purpose of killing civilians.

nosferatuscoffin

06-13-2003, 07:57 AM

To follow up on DD's post, people also need to realize that what the terrorists are doing is not just killing for a cause, or a new 'Palestine' blah blah blah. No, this is also a well thought way to achieve population control, or better said, population extermination.

You notice that they almost always target women, teenagers and children. They pay attention to birthrate stats just like anyone else does, and if you check those stats, you will see that the Palestinian birth rate has been skyrocketing for years, while the Israeli birthrate has been steady to declining.

If you cannot defeat your enemy militarily, stunting their ability to pro-create is the second best option. You ever wonder why you see 400 PLO teenagers hanging out on one street? It is not just because there is little of an economy in the conquered territories ('occupied territories' is a non-sequiter in this case), but it also points out the way these Arab women are pumping out kids like Teddy Kennedy ordering scotch-on-the-rocks at the local bar.

PeteS_in_CA

06-13-2003, 08:03 AM

Hamas's goal has always been to destroy Israel utterly, while using Arab civilians, "world opinion" (manipulated by media shills), and US/Euro diplomacy as a shield. It's about time Israel is finally defending themselves as a sovereign nation should, and Hamas needs to be just the start!

DoctorDoom

06-13-2003, 08:19 AM

Part one dealt with Israeli children. Let's look at what the "Palestinians" do with THEIR children.

<center>http://www.pmw.org.il/new/images/bulletins-071001.jpg</center>

[ QUOTE ]
The following ad appeared in the Palestinian Authority owned daily:

"Jihad Al Aksa Dia Fauzi Maala addresses Palestinian children in honor of his first birthday …[which] coincides with the first anniversary of the Intifada.

…The world and its leadership should hear my message and that is that we, the Palestinian children, are the timebombs around the neck of the occupation… I tell all of you Palestinian children and swear to you that the future belongs to you with the help of Allah; enjoy the god-given victory… [signed:] Your brother, Jihad Al Aksa Dia Fauzi Maala"

[Al Hayat Al Jadida, Oct. 6, 2001]
[Note that the baby's first name means 'the Holy War for the Al Aksa Mosque.']

[/ QUOTE ]
BABY JIHAD CELEBRATES HIS BIRTHDAY AND THE INTIFADA (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-071001.html)

[ QUOTE ]
Journalist Samir Shahin: "The children only wanted to leave [school] and throw stones at the Israeli soldier, and to reach Shahada [Death for Allah]. They aspired to Shahada as a first priority.

Moderator: Mrs. Firial, in your opinion, does the Palestinian child understand the concept of Shahada?

Firial Hillis, C.E.O. of the Palestinian "Children's Aid Association": "The concept of Shahada for him [the child] means belonging to the homeland, from a religious point of view. Sacrifice for his homeland. Achieving SHAHADA in order to reach Paradise and to meet his God. This is the best. We also teach our children to protect the homeland, belonging and to reach Shahada".

[PATV, May 4, 2003]

[/ QUOTE ]
"We teach our children to reach Shahada" (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-%20060503.htm)

[ QUOTE ]
PMW has documented in the past the Palestinian Authority's [PA's] tactic of encouraging children to seek heroic Shahada - death for Allah, and then using the numbers of dead children in their PR war against Israel.

A PMW bulletin last week noted the PA's recent attempts to brings crowds of violent demonstrators into the streets, in an attempt to change the image of the terrorist war to that of a popular uprising.

Now the PA has combined the two tactics, once again encouraging children to die as part of the "popular uprising", as they have renewed the broadcasting of one of the most odious PA video clips, the "Farewell letter" clip. In the clip a child writes a farewell letter to his parents, glorifying his desire to die, and then places himself in front of Israeli soldiers during a violent riot where he is shot and dies, achieving his goal. As he falls his words are sung: "How sweet is Shahada [death for Allah] when I embrace you my land."

[/ QUOTE ]
Palestinian Authority renews efforts to have Palestinian children die in confrontations (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-011002.html)

[ QUOTE ]
PMW has reported extensively on Palestinian education to hatred. One of the potent means used by the Palestinians to indoctrinate children to hate Israelis is the repeated broadcasting on Palestinian TV of Hate-filled Music Videos depicting Israelis as murderers, especially of children and the elderly.

One of the new Palestinian Music Videos which has been broadcast regularly since January 2003 includes the following scenes, acted out by Palestinian actors:

1. It opens with a laughing girl on a swing, which turns into a burning swing and burning child’s rocking horse. The implication is that Israelis attack children at play, leaving behind burning swings and burning rocking horses.

[/ QUOTE ]
Palestinian Hate-Filled Music Video #1 (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-%20200403.htm)

[ QUOTE ]
One of the most frequently shown Palestinian Music Videos, broadcast regularly for two years and frequently in recent days, teaches young children that throwing stones at Israelis is a way to defend their mother's honor.

In one scene young boys throw stones at a glass window with Jewish symbols: the word Israel in Hebrew, a star of David, an Israeli flag and an Israeli soldier. Immediately after the window and the Jewish symbols are smashed, all the flames on a Menorah [Jewish Traditional Candelabra] are extinguished.

The message to Palestinian children is clear: their stones have the power to destroy Jewish symbols and extinguish the flames of Jewish tradition.

[/ QUOTE ]
Teaching Palestinian children they can destroy Judaism (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-%20210403.htm)

<center>http://www.pmw.org.il/new/images/010902.jpg</center>

[ QUOTE ]
[Palestinian Authority TV, August 23, 2002]

The Palestinian Authority's [PA] sending different messages to the world and to their own people was seen again last week after the Palestinian journalists union “banned journalists from photographing Palestinian children carrying weapons ... saying that the pictures harm the Palestinian cause.” [AP The Jerusalem Post Aug. 26, 2002]

[/ QUOTE ]
PA: Give Kids Guns - Don't Show the Press (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/bulletins-010902.html)

This is a small portion of the many megabytes of data I've stored re the way "Palestinians" indoctrinate their children into hatred and violence. And then, when the kids act out what they've been carefully taught and are killed, the "Palestinians", their ass-kissing western media toadies and the looney leftists whine and wail and lament about "the children".

Quite bluntly, to the "Palestinians", dead children are propoganda tools, nothing more.

Rigfire

06-13-2003, 11:57 AM

It's time to solve the problem once and for all. From now on, ANYONE in the so-called Palestinian areas who owns or is seen holding a weapon of any sort should be shot or rocketed on the spot. Take advantage of the funerals, where Hamas in particular marches around with their weapons in the air. Kill 'em. Kill 'em ALL!! No mercy. And I don't give a fig about anyone who happens to be living or standing around them. Annihilate them!

nosferatuscoffin

06-13-2003, 12:05 PM

I pretty much agree with Rig here in that their's would be acceptable losses. After all, Israel has been putting up with more than their share of losses for decades now.

Venus

06-13-2003, 12:08 PM

The Israelis have the ability and the moxy to crush the "Palestinians" like bugs.

Make it so, and the sooner the better.

**DONOTDELETE**

06-13-2003, 12:09 PM

To continue or even escalate the hatred between the Arabs and the Jews is to guarantee that Isreal will one day be destroyed.

All it will take is for Isreal to lose a single war, and then it is all over.

Time is not on Isreal's side; they must develop a moderate faction within the Palestinian leadership, cultivate it, help it attain and maintain power, and then negotiate in good faith.

Or else Isreal will evntually be destroyed as certainly as she is surrounded by hundreds of millions of people who will hate her.

This current wave of Hamas led violence needs to be handled through the PLA as much as posible, but the people of Isreal need to be protected in the long view as well as in the immediate emergency.

Rigfire

06-13-2003, 12:23 PM

rglen, I disagree. All it takes is for the world to allow Israel to FINISH OFF the wars it regularly wins against the Arabs. THAT is the sole reason this problem has never been solved. The Arabs have always been able to rely on the world to save them from themselves. Bush just needs to give Israel the go-ahead. When the Arabs suffer the FULL CONSEQUENCES of their actions and are made to face the misery and devestation they deserve, then they'll shut up and beg for peace at any price.

Rink

06-13-2003, 12:47 PM

Hate to say it but there is no such thing as a 'moderate' Arab, thats something of a misnomer.

They have had over 50 years to make peace with these warmongering barbarians, and nothing has been achieved except death death and more deaths of israeli innocents.

You cannot make peace with a people hell bent on your complete and utter destruction, no matter what.

That 'Palestinians' HAD a homeland and that was Jordan, but when the British Mandate was being implemented Britain went to the Hashemite king and told them to 'change' the name from Palestine to Jordan, hence getting away from the quagmire and giving the jews a thorn in their side.

Boil it down and it goes like this, Israel is a stand alone nation, they cannot Afford to rely on ANYONE for their survival, the moment they do they will be annihilated.

The whole world stood by and watched as 6 million jews went up in flames in Europe, those hatreds are still there, in every country you go to Even Japan there is Anti-semitism against Jews.

Israel cannot afford to rely on America, or the Europeans or anyone but themselves and they MUST take decisive action now, as everytime they have gone to the table and agreed upon any peace accords suicide bombings erupt.

That Has to stop if any kind of peace is to be achieved and if that means eradicating Hamas and their toadies in the PLO then So be it!!

Kill them all off.
Spare no one or they will have nothing BUT troubles.

This is a Biblical world where the Israelis live in, not a modern fluffy democratically sweet world where people can talk through their differences, there IS no way you can discuss, debate, or talk peace with a people as rabid as these islamic nutcases, as they are not sane enough to even discuss sane issues with.

NO sane people would sacrifice their children on the altar of suicide for a such thing as hatred of another people, its Insane!

You cannot negotiate with insane people, you either lock them up or kill them. Period.

DesertFox

06-13-2003, 12:57 PM

Moderation works when other people are willing to moderate their passions.

When they aren't, moderation is a recipe for death. YOUR death.

Israel needs to show itself one notch meaner, one notch tougher, one notch less tolerant than the Islamic fanatics.

Venus

06-13-2003, 01:43 PM

I agree. If I was an Israeli, I'd be hammering Ariel to ratchet up the strikes against Hamas and Hezbollah - just take 'em out.

Rigfire

06-13-2003, 02:17 PM

Ever compare the aftermath of a suicide bombing in Israel to that of the removal of yet another Hamas motorist? Israelis grieve but they handle the situation with dignity, efficiency, and a strong sense of stoic resolve. The Pals, however, make a Chinese fire drill look like a boardroom meeting at IBM. I've seen feces tossing gorillas in a zoo behave with more dignity. And I've seen a chicken without its head bounce around the barnyard with a clearer sense of purpose.

Venus

06-13-2003, 02:21 PM

They do behave rather....um.... tacky, to say the least. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif A lot of symbolism and shouting, keep 'em stirred up, and so on. Well-orchestarted chaos, but still tacky.

Daskid

06-13-2003, 03:11 PM

It worked against Thuggee.

http://www.clipart.co.uk/clipart/dingbats2/small/green/smilies/12.gif

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 05:03 PM

If Israel wants to keep shooting rockets into intersections, we shouldn't support them. This is a war on terrorism, and we can't support terrorism.

nosferatuscoffin

06-13-2003, 05:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
If Israel wants to keep shooting rockets into intersections, we shouldn't support them. This is a war on terrorism, and we can't support terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is why we are not Dems.....we had that shit for 70 years......live in your shit idiot.

You'd Oprah Hitler.

Stop eating cookies.

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 05:31 PM

That is why we are not Dems.....we had that shit for 70 years......live in your shit idiot.

You'd Oprah Hitler.

Stop eating cookies.

Huh? What on earth on you trying to say?

DoctorDoom

06-13-2003, 05:33 PM

Perhaps Israel should send in bomb-wielding self-immolators to target "Palestinian" civilians in buses and restaurants and on street corners. Then no lefties could whine that it's "unfair".

Since when has the conduct of war been dictated by civilian losses or by which side has more casualties? Nobody snivelled about how many German and Japanese civilians died in WW2.

Wars are shortened by making the enemy either unwilling or unable to continue fighting. Period. And, despite the spin, Israel is at war with the "Palestinians".

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 05:50 PM

Wars are shortened by making the enemy either unwilling or unable to continue fighting. Period. And, despite the spin, Israel is at war with the "Palestinians".

Really? Then there is no such thing as terrorism. The Palestinians are completely legitimate in attacking restaurants and buses, since they are at war. In fact, that group of 20 or so Saudis and others were completely legitimate in attacking the WTC, because they figured they are at war with us. If we aren't attacking terrorists, who are we attacking? Muslims? Arabs? Random countries in the middle east?

DoctorDoom

06-13-2003, 05:55 PM

And how do you spin such a ridiculous conclusion out of what you quoted?

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 06:16 PM

And how do you spin such a ridiculous conclusion out of what you quoted?

Well, Palestine isn't a country, so obviously you believe there can be war between two groups of people. And if there is war between Palestinians and Israelis, then obviously Palestine is legitimate in all there acts of war, since we can't question war decisions based on how many civilians die. Furthermore, if Palestine and Israel are at war, why can't Al quaeda, or whomever, decide they are at war with the United States, and thus attack us, and be perfectly legitimate in doing so, since we can't question war by who the casualties are or how many there are.

Dash_Riprock

06-13-2003, 06:36 PM

The Palestinians are engaging in an intifada--a collective uprising. Their "soldiers" move freely among the general populace. They receive virtually unanimous public support--either directly through arms, training, funds, and safe-houses; or indirectly by those who know their identities and refuse to turn them in to the authorities. Their "funeral processions," comprised of masked, armed gunmen parading openly before thousands of cheering/screaming "civilians," makes it clear that it is a single entity the Israelis are combating. They recruit from the masses and don't hesitate to employ minors or women to carry out their attacks.

As such, they are waging war as a people. That makes cars carrying their leaders legitimate targets even when they are traveling through busy intersections. The Palestinians have no typical military infrastructure that would allow the Israelis to conduct conventional military assaults. Instead, the Palestinians hide their military assets inside "civilian" homes and factories, then complain when those targets are struck. Such deception has the same level of "honor" as putting a radar site on a school playground or an ammo dump next to a hospital. Their methods of attack and their use of civilian dress (even using the religious garb of their opponents) make it impossible for the Israelis to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. And considering the length of their training, it is very often the case that today's "civilian" is tomorrow's suicide bomber.

Their suicide bombings are acts of both weakness and cowardice. The Israelis may inadvertently inflict "civilian" casualties when targeting militant leaders, but they do not simply send up attack helicopters and start lobbing missiles into crowded intersections for no reason. The actions of the Israelis are being dictated by the strategy and tactics being employed by an adversary without honor. What kind of grown man hides behind women and children? What kind of "soldier" does that?

The Palestinian (and by Arabs, in general) redefining of words such as soldier, martyr, and hero to mean "anything goes," regardless of how indefensible and despicable the act, gives a clear indication as to the fairness and justice their culture would embody should it ever attain official recognition as a nation-state. Their unmitigated savagery in war leaves no doubt of the intolerant mindset their society would epitomize in peace. That's ironic when you consider that they are supposedly fighting a "war of liberation." True liberation embodies true freedom, not the effort to expel an alleged occupier for the purpose of creating a social/cultural structure that would be an anathema to the principles of a truly liberated society.

How many decades has it been since the Palestinians had a leader other than Arafat? Arafat can appoint all the prime ministers he wants because everyone knows that Arafat is the one really calling the shots--and he has killed many political opponents within the Palestinian people over the years for having the "audacity" of disagreeing with him or becoming a little too powerful. Besides, the repetitiveness of the violence, coupled with armed celebrations/demonstrations on the streets, clearly shows that the Palestinian leadership either cannot or will not stop the violence. Whether their impotence is by default or by design, the clarity of reality suggests that there is little point of negotiating with them.

Considering the political domination they willingly endure and support within their own community, just exactly what noble goal are the Palestinians fighting to achieve? Yet another Arab dictatorship? How is that liberation? How is that freedom? Palestinians who live in Arab nations are treated similarly (jailed and killed) to those who live on the Gaza Strip, but you don't see the Palestinians blowing themselves up inside Arab cafes and buses. I think everyone knows what would happen to them, collectively, if they tried that in an Arab country. Nor do Arabs, at large, care about the Palestinians beyond what they represent as a thorn in the side of Israel. For Arabs outside of Israel, their fervor on the matter hasn't anything to do with the establishment of "Palestine." But it does have everything to do with the establishment (and continuing existence) of a country called Israel--a country nearly all of them have stubbornly refused to make peace with despite most of the Arab nations never having suffered in any way at the hands of the Israelis.

The Palestinian quest for the official establishment and recognition of a homeland is sheer hypocrisy since their methods clearly demonstrate that they have NO appreciation for the concepts that a society requires to be regarded as civilized. You cannot openly celebrate (and advocate) a so-called soldier stepping on to a bus and blowing up a bunch of innocent men, women, and children--targets with absolutely no military value--then reasonably have the expectation of being able to convert oneself into a loving, honorable, and civilized spouse/parent/citizen simply because some independence status is formally established. There are some things about being a human being that you cannot simply turn on and off. You either are or you aren't.

Longhorn_Platinum

06-13-2003, 06:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
rglencheek said:
Time is not on Isreal's side;

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif No, but God is.

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/um.gif Oh, & Warlady, since you asked, it's "Al Aqsa".

Longhorn_Platinum

06-13-2003, 06:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
The Palestinians are completely legitimate in attacking restaurants and buses, since they are at war.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif More fodder for my sig line?

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 07:19 PM

More fodder for my sig line?

Instead of quoting me, why not quote Mahatma Gandhi?

[i]"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French...What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct...If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs... As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds."

CAinSanFrancisco

06-13-2003, 07:45 PM

That quote helps prove that Ghandi was only human and just as prone to poor judgement and prejudices as any man.

Longhorn_Platinum

06-13-2003, 09:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Instead of quoting me, why not quote Mahatma Gandhi?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/um.gif If you're implying that Gandhi's comments are just as asinine as yours, then you're right.

Chris

06-13-2003, 09:24 PM

Good post Dash. http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/appearingsoon/website/img23.gif

Maxi, Palestine belongs to the Palestinians alright, except that you and Ghandi seem to miss the part about the real Palestinians are the Jews.

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 09:37 PM

If you're implying that Gandhi's comments are just as asinine as yours, then you're right.

Hey, if you want to quote Gandhi and then call him asisnine, then knock yourself out.

Maxi, Palestine belongs to the Palestinians alright, except that you and Ghandi seem to miss the part about the real Palestinians are the Jews.

What does that mean? Why can't 'real palestinians' be palestinian? If the real palestinians are jewish, why is the name of their country Israel?

xagent

06-13-2003, 09:46 PM

Good. I've been saying it forever, this Roadmap For peace, is a roadmap to nowhere. You don't negotiate with terrorists!

I really want to know why a Palestine should exist. They are not a distinct race or ethnicity. They are Arab Muslims... no different than Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, and Egyptians

This Roadmap for peace is a joke. It will never work.

What is it going to take for the peaceniks to realize, that the Palestinians will never stop the violence? Does anyone really think all they want is the West Bank? There never was a Palestine, there is no such ethnic Palestinian group. They are Arabs who were banished from Jordan, desperate for their own land, and to rid the world of Jews.

It was the Ottoman Empire, then briefly controlled by Britain, then given to Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. At the time the "disputed" territories were not a part of Israel. The Muslims in Israel hated the Jews, and wanted to kill them and get rid of Israel. The neighboring Arab states hated having a Jewish neighbor. So they waged 3 preemptive wars against them. Israel gains some land - West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, etc.. and the Muslims in Israel and the ones living in the disputed territories see this as an opportunity to form their own country and as an excuse to get rid of Israel.

If anything, return the "disputed territories" back to their original countries - Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon.

No appeasement, no giving in to Arafat and the PLO. Live in peace with Jews, or get the **** out to live with your Arab brothers.

Just look at what happened with the Oslo Accords. Roadmap For Peace is a Roadmap for NoWhere.

And what is with this settlement issue? It's just land. Civilians are living there. If I go up to Canada, or down to Mexico and live there, I'm settling that land. How does it matter? I moved. Only difference is that the Canadians or Mexicans won't hate me so much, they won't kill me if I don't stop "occupying their land". Why should Palestinians in Israel be forced to move out? They are all welcome to live in peace.

This is a black and white issue. There's no moral relativism. Israel: good, modern, democratic, defending and retaliating against violence. Palestinians: bad, Islamofascist (do you really think their democracy will last long), violent. It's like rewarding a whiny trouble making child who's throwing a tantrum, just to shut him up.

If any group of people deserve their independence, it is Tibet... ruled by a murderous communist regime for so many years. Or at least the Kurds - a real distinct ethnic group and culture.

Chris

06-13-2003, 09:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
What does that mean? Why can't 'real palestinians' be palestinian?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the Arabs couldn't confused people like you if they were. The real Palestinians are the Jews Maxi.

[ QUOTE ]
If the real palestinians are jewish, why is the name of their country Israel?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was called Israel when the Romans started referring to them as Palestinians, as an insult.

DesertFox

06-13-2003, 09:55 PM

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon2.gif

wolfplus3

06-13-2003, 10:01 PM

Lord help me, I love CA's Kermit avatar!!!! (furiously wipes screen to clean nostril ejected coke off of it)

RIDE EM FROGGIE!!!! Yeeeeee Haaaa!!!! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rotflmbo.gif

Dania

06-13-2003, 10:08 PM

I think we all need to just CHILL OUT re: the Israel/Palestinian issue. Let's face it.....whatever happens will happen according to Biblical prophesy. I don't really think we have any choice in the matter.

Do you?

All we can do is pray for peace.

Lapcat

MaximumSam

06-13-2003, 10:15 PM

Because the Arabs couldn't confused people like you if they were. The real Palestinians are the Jews Maxi.

Why?

It was called Israel when the Romans started referring to them as Palestinians, as an insult.

And this has relevance to what? What about the hundreds of years where arabs lived in the region? They aren't palestinian because the Romans didn't call them palestinian?

Good. I've been saying it forever, this Roadmap For peace, is a roadmap to nowhere. You don't negotiate with terrorists!

Israel just bombed a street intersection. That's terrorism. Shouldn't we now stop all aid and negotiation with Israel?

I really want to know why a Palestine should exist. They are not a distinct race or ethnicity. They are Arab Muslims... no different than Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, and Egyptians

Huh? What does this have to do with anything? They deserve a country because they had a country and it was taken from them. Do Appalachina people deserve to have a partition from the U.S. because they are Appalachian? Your position makes no sense.

What is it going to take for the peaceniks to realize, that the Palestinians will never stop the violence? Does anyone really think all they want is the West Bank? There never was a Palestine, there is no such ethnic Palestinian group. They are Arabs who were banished from Jordan, desperate for their own land, and to rid the world of Jews.

I dunno. When will anyone realize that Israel doesn't want to end the violence, it wants to keep it so it can rake in plenty of money, and keep control of its people, and of the arabs in their land. When will people realize that Israel is no more legitimate than Palestine. When will people realize that Jewish people don't get to have control of a whole country because they are Jewish? Questions never cease.

It was the Ottoman Empire, then briefly controlled by Britain, then given to Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt.

Well, that ignores 8 centuries of arab control (and of course the land itself has traditionally been mostly arab. Again, I don't see what your argument is.

The Muslims in Israel hated the Jews, and wanted to kill them and get rid of Israel. The neighboring Arab states hated having a Jewish neighbor. So they waged 3 preemptive wars against them. Israel gains some land - West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, etc.. and the Muslims in Israel and the ones living in the disputed territories see this as an opportunity to form their own country and as an excuse to get rid of Israel.

Of course, you could believe Chompsky and Rabin and say that Israel actually struck first in 1967 - and expanded their territory. Israel 'needed' some extra land, and that decision had great impact on where we are today. It is simply wrong to say that Israel is right and everyone else is wrong.

wolfplus3

06-13-2003, 10:18 PM

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/libsoffmeds.gif.gif

DesertFox

06-13-2003, 10:25 PM

Sam, you sayin' Israel is wrong and "everyone else" is right?

Chris

06-13-2003, 10:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Because the Arabs couldn't confused people like you if they were. The real Palestinians are the Jews Maxi.

Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

The answer was in my next statement Maxi.

[ QUOTE ]
It was called Israel when the Romans started referring to them as Palestinians, as an insult.

And this has relevance to what? What about the hundreds of years where arabs lived in the region?

[/ QUOTE ]

They lived there with Jews Maxi. People from other countries have lived here for hundreds of years, does that automatically make the US their country?

[ QUOTE ]
They aren't palestinian because the Romans didn't call them palestinian?

[/ QUOTE ]

Arabs are Arabs, Egyptians are Egyptians, etc., just like Americans are Americans, no matter where they live. The point is that when Israel was conquered by the Romans, the Romans called the Israelis Palestinians. No Arabs were called that, nor called themselves that until after Israel became a nation in 1948.

MaximumSam

06-14-2003, 07:49 AM

Sam, you sayin' Israel is wrong and "everyone else" is right?

Not at all. But Israel is hardly the innocent victim that many here try to portray them as.

They lived there with Jews Maxi. People from other countries have lived here for hundreds of years, does that automatically make the US their country?

Uh, yeah. Don't you consider the U.S. your country?

Arabs are Arabs, Egyptians are Egyptians, etc., just like Americans are Americans, no matter where they live. The point is that when Israel was conquered by the Romans, the Romans called the Israelis Palestinians. No Arabs were called that, nor called themselves that until after Israel became a nation in 1948.

Well, what were arabs called who lived in Palestine for the hundreds of years before 1948? I don't really understand your statements - Jews were called Palestines once, so no arabs can ever be Palestinian?

Chris

06-14-2003, 08:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
They lived there with Jews Maxi. People from other countries have lived here for hundreds of years, does that automatically make the US their country?

Uh, yeah. Don't you consider the U.S. your country?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's my country, but it's not Ireland, it's still America.

[ QUOTE ]
Arabs are Arabs, Egyptians are Egyptians, etc., just like Americans are Americans, no matter where they live. The point is that when Israel was conquered by the Romans, the Romans called the Israelis Palestinians. No Arabs were called that, nor called themselves that until after Israel became a nation in 1948.

Well, what were arabs called who lived in Palestine for the hundreds of years before 1948? I don't really understand your statements - Jews were called Palestines once, so no arabs can ever be Palestinian?

[/ QUOTE ]

It didn't say they could never be called that. I'm saying that it doesn't give them claim to the land because they decided to call themselves that all of a sudden. In 1948, Arabs only actually owned 3% of that land.

Wyatt_Junker

06-14-2003, 09:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Hey, if you want to quote Gandhi and then call him asisnine, then knock yourself out.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, you quoted the toga wearing, bespectacled, bald man. Other people called him a naive twit. Your arrogant presumption that he was anything other is what is asinine, thinking you could just toss his name out into the void - the Ghandi bomb- and that that in itself would prove a damn thing.

Ghandi was a pacifist: Meaning he sucked pacifiers, like this one... http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon51.gif

To not engage in violence when one is being beaten is one's perogative. But to speak for another on the matter is insulting and dehumanizing.

People used Ghandi as their personal vicarious hippie saint- and he prolly got off on being crowned Mister Humility- a Pet Rock, an icon, like Brittany Spears without the soft porn profile. The only reason Ghandi got so far in the propaganda game is because he wasn't caught diddling himself. Catch him on a bad day, he's flinging boogers off a bridge like everyone else. The man had a good PR machine.

As to his affiliation, siding with the Arabs, most paci-FISTS side with violence in a subconscious, passive aggressive urge unknown even to them. Its because, deep down, they recognize who the instigator is and they don't want to get their ass beat. An example would be the current crop of anti-war protestors. Funny how they don't protest Kim Jong ill. Funny how they don't protest China. Funny how they don't protest Russian intolerance or lack of moderation in Chechnya. Funny how its only America, since they know we won't hurt them. They have the luxury of appearing brave when really its just a lame excuse to build up credits on their resume.

That being said, the pacifists say nothing about the last infant-fad-duh. The Fad of Infants. Infant-FAW-DOUGH. In-TEE-fat-dor. Intifadas are cries of spoiled jackasses who like to slip-n-slide through the bloody guts of innocents. The fad of infants who in turn use infants as cheap shills for their pawn game of spilt red blood cells. (Cue 1950's TV voice), "Hey boys and girls, did you hear about the latest fad? No, its not a Slinky. No, its not Silly Putty. Its TNT. Play with it. Wear it. Love it. Go down to your local hardware store's toy section and buy some today. Then strap it on. You're a human weapon of fun and endless entertainment!"

Inter-fear-duh. Intuhh-fur-dough. Infant fads always used to mean bell bottoms or Pokemon. Now its all about turning Bar Mitzvahs into bloodbaths. Arab culture. Gotta love it. Funny how the North Koreans(whose fate is far worse than a Palestinian's worse nightmare) wouldn't even think of an intifada. Funny that. Maybe its cause they know they'd get forced to drink Draino in town sqaure. It actually speaks well of Israel's unusual and near holy restraint that a mob would think they COULD gutter-snipe on her citizens without getting carpet bombed.

MaximumSam

06-14-2003, 09:25 AM

Yes, it's my country, but it's not Ireland, it's still America.

Well can't you be both Irish and American? If someone tried to take over Ireland, or America, wouldn't you be offended by both.

It didn't say they could never be called that. I'm saying that it doesn't give them claim to the land because they decided to call themselves that all of a sudden. In 1948, Arabs only actually owned 3% of that land.

Yes, but that is part of their claim - Arabs used to own all the land, and they had dispossesed by Jews who wanted to establish their own Jewish country at the expense of the Arabs.

Wyatt_Junker

06-14-2003, 09:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but that is part of their claim - Arabs used to own all the land, and they had dispossesed by Jews who wanted to establish their own Jewish country at the expense of the Arabs

[/ QUOTE ]

How about some links to those Arab land deeds then?

There's got to be some?

Or did they just squat like the Thuderbird-swillin' hobos they were, Will Work For Chick Peas?

MaximumSam

06-14-2003, 09:32 AM

How about some links to those Arab land deeds then?

Palestine has been a dominantly Arab region since what, the 7th century. I think they have some adverse possession.

Wyatt_Junker

06-14-2003, 09:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
How about some links to those Arab land deeds then?

Palestine has been a dominantly Arab region since what, the 7th century. I think they have some adverse possession.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they are adverse and possessed.

Chris

06-14-2003, 10:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Well can't you be both Irish and American? If someone tried to take over Ireland, or America, wouldn't you be offended by both.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is, I have no claim to establish an independent Irish Republic here, just because I live here.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but that is part of their claim - Arabs used to own all the land,

[/ QUOTE ]

No they didn't. Arabs and Jews have lived there for centuries. That claim is bogus, and continually repeating it doesn't make it any more true, but those that want to rid the world of Israel will do whatever revisions of history they need to in an attempt to appear justified.

[ QUOTE ]
...and they had dispossesed by Jews who wanted to establish their own Jewish country at the expense of the Arabs.

[/ QUOTE ]

They weren't dispossessed by anyone but they original countries Maxi. Most of the Arabs that lived there were chased out of there original homelands.

The land wasn't absent of Jews until 1948 Maxi. They just didn't come along and take over. They were there all along. They just weren't a nation at that time.

MaximumSam

06-14-2003, 10:53 AM

The point is, I have no claim to establish an independent Irish Republic here, just because I live here.

No, but you would have a claim if other people tried to take over the country.

No they didn't. Arabs and Jews have lived there for centuries. That claim is bogus, and continually repeating it doesn't make it any more true, but those that want to rid the world of Israel will do whatever revisions of history they need to in an attempt to appear justified.

Arabs have been the dominant group in the region since the seventh century. The owned most of the land and they were most of the population. Of course, that changed over time, and Jews did start buying up land, but that doesn't change the fact that arabs dominated the population and land ownership for a very long time.

The land wasn't absent of Jews until 1948 Maxi. They just didn't come along and take over. They were there all along. They just weren't a nation at that time.

It wasn't absent of Jews at all. But until 1948 there was the population was dominantly arab.

Venus

06-14-2003, 04:43 PM

Marximum Osammie, doesn't your spin ever become embarrassing to you?

SabbahV2

06-14-2003, 05:36 PM

Couple of points.

I wont get into emotive tales of death and destruction as it seems unconstructive but will note a couple of trends. The vast majority of deaths are civilians. There is no pattern of attack/retaliation on either side. The pattern for Palistinians is generally a steady level of deaths consistent with a people living under a fairly brutal occupation. The pattern for Israelis is sporadic low levels of deaths among settlers and soldiers interspersed with large scale terrorist acts aimed at civilians.

In common usage the term 'Palistinian' does not mean Jewish. It may started that way two millenia past...no longer. The land has been refered to as Palistine for these two millenia and all of its inhabitants have been refered to as Palistinians for most of this time.

Both Israel and Palistine were formed by the mandate. If Palistine does not exist then neither does Israel. This split went against the wishes of the majority of the population. Every Arab State voted against the partition.

The jewish population in the area was tiny up untill the mid 1800's. British diplomatic screw ups led to confusion and tensions between the Jewish immigrants and the existing population. Acts of terror occured on both sides.

What has been happening in the occupied territories is a text book case of ethnic cleansing. An increase in violence by the IDF is simply an exceleration of this policy.

Longhorn_Platinum

06-14-2003, 05:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Hey, if you want to quote Gandhi and then call him asisnine, then knock yourself out.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif I didn't quote Gandhi, you did, & I don't feel the need to venerate him the way you liberals do.

DesertFox

06-14-2003, 07:16 PM

He's another media fraud, a dude whose 15 minutes of fame extended waaaaay beyond his achievements. He was a fad that caught on, a fez among stetsons, a moccasin among saddle oxfords, a bowline among square knots, a kayak among canoes, a ready-made among roll-yer-owns, an adobe brick among the kiln-fired, a derringer among 6-shooters, cursive among block letters, a fad, a FAD -- and like most fads, more smoke than fire.

MaximumSam

06-14-2003, 11:08 PM

nosferatuscoffin

06-14-2003, 11:41 PM

You sir, are an ass.

Consdiering your hero's..Clinton, remember less than Pres. Reagan, I consider you a true dorkhead.

Personally, you should be banned, not Rglen.

Dash_Riprock

06-15-2003, 06:18 AM

Why should he be banned?

MaximumSam

06-15-2003, 09:21 AM

Edited by Administration. Watch it, Sam.

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon129.gif

MaximumSam

06-15-2003, 09:22 AM

Why was rglencheek banned?

DoctorDoom

06-15-2003, 09:42 AM

Check the Members forum.

SabbahV2

06-15-2003, 05:24 PM

I knew you would get in trouble for that Sam. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

SabbahV2

06-15-2003, 08:01 PM

Tanya Rienhart (Israeli academic) quoting Ha'aretz (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=3763)

"Hamas leaders openly declared their willingness this weekend to enter a temporary cease-fire (hudna) with Israel, for the first time since the establishment of the movement in 1987. If such a cease-fire is attained, it would mean a cessation of terror attacks against civilians in Israel. A senior Hamas spokesman in Gaza, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, who usually represents movement hardliners, said on Friday: 'The Hamas movement is prepared to stop terror against Israeli civilians if Israel stops killing Palestinian civilians ... We have told (Palestinian Authority Prime Minister) Abu Mazen in our meetings that there is an opportunity to stop targeting Israeli civilians if the Israelis stop assassinations and raids and stop brutalizing Palestinian civlilians" (Ha'aretz, Arnon Regular, May 25, 2003).

What could be more suitable for a new peace initiative then starting with a period of some calm - quiet for the Israelis without terror, quiet for the Palestinians without the constant presence of the IDF in their midst? Not in Sharon's view, who repeatedly rejected this proposal. On the eve of the Aqaba summit, the headline in Ha’aretz declared: “The prime minister: A Palestinian ceasefire is not enough”; and the text continued to explain that

"in his meeting with U.S. president George Bush at the Aqaba summit, prime-minister Ariel Sharon will seek the U.S. backing of his demand that the Palestinian authority will use forceful [military] means against the terror organizations and their infrastructure in the territories, as a precondition for any diplomatic advance. Sharon will tell Bush that it is not acceptable to settle just for agreements between the Palestinian organizations to a cease fire (Hudna)… In return Sharon will promise Bush that Israel will evacuate illegal outposts in the West bank ” (Ha’aretz Hebrew edition, Aluf Ben, June 2, 2003).

(1) In other words, until the Palestinian organizations willingly begin to kill one another, the IDF will continue to do this job for them.

Chris

06-15-2003, 10:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
SabbahV2 said:
(1) In other words, until the Palestinian organizations willingly begin to kill one another, the IDF will continue to do this job for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. IOW, until Mazen gets a handle on these groups (which will obviously have to be done by forceful means or it won't happen), there can't be any agreements because they have shown to be useless.

nosferatuscoffin

06-16-2003, 02:29 AM

Foot In Mouth Disease on my part. Well, it is hardly the first time. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smack.gif

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 05:56 PM

No. IOW, until Mazen gets a handle on these groups (which will obviously have to be done by forceful means or it won't happen), there can't be any agreements because they have shown to be useless.

Prior to the uprising the PA was doing a pretty good job of reigning in the militants (Better than the IDF) but with over 80% of their police infrastructure destroyed Im not sure how this is a realistic option. If Israel makes this a precondition then they are just setting up the Palistinians to fail...Not that the roadmap was going to lead anywhere anyway.

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon109.gif

DoctorDoom

06-16-2003, 06:16 PM

"Roadmap" is just another catchphrase/buzzword that looks good in the media, but that doesn't mean squat.

[ QUOTE ]
"Hamas leaders openly declared their willingness this weekend to enter a temporary cease-fire (hudna) with Israel, for the first time since the establishment of the movement in 1987. If such a cease-fire is attained, it would mean a cessation of terror attacks against civilians in Israel.

[/ QUOTE ]
Anyone who believes this should contact me about my shares in United Rhodesian Tapioca Mines, Ltd.

The issue is, how much does Israel have to compromise to satisfy the demands of the fabricated "Palestinians" this time? The answer, based on events and Arab statements since May 5, 1948, is as follows: Israel cannot do anything that will be enough.

The Arabs will be satisfied only when Israel ceases to exist as a nation, and all the Jews there are dead. Since that isn't going to happen without a bloodbath of fearsome proportions, there will never be peace between Israel and the Arabs.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 06:31 PM

The Arabs will be satisfied only when Israel ceases to exist as a nation, and all the Jews there are dead. Since that isn't going to happen without a bloodbath of fearsome proportions, there will never be peace between Israel and the Arabs.

for Israel's sake, I hope you are wrong

I personally have hope, although it is dwindling. All Israel needs to do is go back to its 67 borders (This is also the veiw of my best friend who was untill recently the head of the local zionist org). I dont see this as a politically viable option for Sharon at the moment.

Longhorn_Platinum

06-16-2003, 06:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
SabbahV2 said:
All Israel needs to do is go back to its 67 borders.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif Why should they? The Arabs shouldn't have attacked them, in the first place. Israël shouldn't sacrifice not one square millimeter of their territory.

Dash_Riprock

06-16-2003, 06:59 PM

It would appear the roadmap to peace will be paved with blood.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 07:06 PM

The Arabs didnt attack them. There was Arab posturing which Israel used to as an excuss to launch a 'defensive' war. In addition the war was agianst Arabs nations, not the Palistinians, but it was Palistinian territory that was taken (for the most part).

In any case war is no longer a legitimate way of gaining territory. If it was Saddam would still be in Kuwait.

Note....Im not saying the Arabs did not share responsibility for 67, just that they did not attck Israel and that the situation was not as clear cut as an Israeli 'war of defence'

Chris

06-16-2003, 07:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
SabbahV2 said:
All Israel needs to do is go back to its 67 borders...

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's all it would really take, then none of this would be happening, because they were offer a deal along those lines during the Clinton administration I believe, and Arafat refused it.

DesertFox

06-16-2003, 07:21 PM

Then it sure had me fooled, Sabbah. Ever look at a map of Israel? The whole damn country's not 50 miles wide at its widest point. Our Army traveled further in a day in Iraq than two Israels.

Point is, Israel can't afford to wait'n'see. She has no ground to give. She has to take action quickly to prevent being overrun.

Dash_Riprock

06-16-2003, 07:33 PM

I think the Arabs would prefer them to go back to their '47 borders, not their '67 borders.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 07:33 PM

'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was
really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him." Menahem Begin

"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967.

I agree that Israels position is tenuous. They need peace.

Chris: The Camp David negotiations were a sham.

First up. Nothing was written down...There was no formal offer from Barak.

Camp David was called the 10-40-50 deal in the Israeli press. It breaks down like this.

Territory:

10% to be annexed to Israel.
40% To be under negotiation, but 80% of settlements would remain including access roads. In any case, while this teritory would be nominally Palistinian it would be occupied by the IDF
50% Would be the declared Palistinian state...maybe...This 50% would be a series of Islands divided but the settlements (It should be noted that the term 'settlement' includes large tracts of surrounding land) and access roads and would have no external borders.

"it is hard to imagine the Palestinians accepting such a state. Certainly no other nation in the world has such curtailed sovereignty."John Mearsheimer, professor in the department of political science at the University of Chicago

Jerusalem:

The Palistinians position was that they should get back east Jerusalem (As per UN 242) but were willing to allow Irael to annex Jewish subberbs in this area.)

The Israeli position was that Jerusalem borders should be defined as Greater Jerusalem. A very large area cutting a long way into the west bank. In addition the Palistinians Jerusalem would consist of two villages - Al Quds and one other -outside of east Jerusalems borders. Basically a couple of suburbs. Al Quds means Jerusalem, which may be why confusion over this Q exists.

Other:

Water access would be guaranteed to Israel. Cuurently Palistinians are not allowed to drill deep for water in their own territories, this is a right reserved for settlers.

The four million Palistinian refugees would not be allowed to return but would be compensated buy the international comunity. The Palistinian position on this was quite pragmatic. They would take in most of the refugees but Israel had to acknowledge the part it played in causing this refugee problem. Israel would not do this.

IDF forces would have the right to enter the Palistinian state with no notice.

An end of conflict would be declared by the Palistinians. This meant that Israel would no longer have any legal obligation to observe UN242 (or indeed any UN resolution prior to the negotiations) and that the negotians on refugees and the 40% of the land remaining in Israels hands would be on Israel's terms...THIS WAS A MAJOR STUMBLING BLOCK.

Who broke off the negotiations:

Barak missed a meeting in Jan 2001. Saron won the election. Game over.

A Palistinian rejection?:

Clinton had agreed at camp david that no-one would be blamed for the negotions failing. A couple of weeks after this he stated that Arafat had once again 'missed an historic oppurtunity for peace' The Palistinians have largely remained silent on the matter because the dont want to let on to the Palistinian people how little was gained from 7 years of negotiations and what they were willing to give up.

"Many have come to believe that the Palestinians' rejection of the camp david ideas exposed an underlying rejection of Israel's right to exist. But consider the facts: The Palestinians were arguing for the creation of a Palestinian state based on the June 4, 1967, borders, living alongside Israel. They accepted the notion of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs. They accepted the principle of Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem -- neighborhoods that were not part of Israel before the Six Day War in 1967. And, while they insisted on recognition of the refugees' right of return, they agreed that it should be implemented in a manner that protected Israel's demographic and security interests by limiting the number of returnees. No other Arab party that has negotiated with Israel -- not Anwar el-Sadat's Egypt, not King Hussein's Jordan, let alone Hafez al-Assad's Syria -- ever came close to even considering such compromises." [i]Robert Malley who was Clinton's special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs, participated in the camp david negotiations.

The effects of this endless negotiation was an increasing frustration amongst the Palistinian people. This tinder-box exploded when Sharon visited the Mount.

DoctorDoom

06-16-2003, 08:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
for Israel's sake, I hope you are wrong

[/ QUOTE ]
Not for Israel's sake. For the Arabs' sake. Israel is a nuclear power, and if faced with its own destruction, it's inevitable that many millions of Arabs will die in cities reduced to radioactive rubble.

[ QUOTE ]
All Israel needs to do is go back to its 67 borders.

[/ QUOTE ]
From whom did Israel obtain its territories in the Six-Day War (which was initiated by the towel-heads)? From the "Palestinians"?

[ QUOTE ]
Tension began developing between Israel and Arab countries in the 1960s. Israel began to implement its National Water Carrier plan, which pumps water from the Sea of Galilee to irrigate south and central Israel. The project was in accordance with a plan proposed by US envoy Eric Johnston in 1955, and agreed to by Arab engineers. Arab governments refused to participate however. In several summit conferences beginning in 1964, Arab leaders decided on establishment of the PLO, declared their resolve to destroy Israel, and decided to divert the sources of the Jordan river that feed the Sea of Galilee, to prevent Israel from implementing the water carrier plan. The Syrians and Lebanese began to implement the diversions. Israel responded by firing on the tractors and equipment doing the work in Syria. This was followed by Israeli attempts to cultivate the demilitarized zones (DMZ) as provided in the armistice agreements. Israel was within its rights according to the armistice agreements, but Moshe Dayan claimed many years later that 80% of the incidents were deliberately provoked. The Syrians responded by firing in the DMZs (Click here for a map of the demilitarized zones). When Israelis responded in force, Syria began shelling Israeli towns in the north, and the conflict escalated into air strikes. The USSR was intent on protecting the new Ba'athist pro-Soviet government of Syria, and represented to the Syrians and Egyptians that Israel was preparing to attack Syria. As tension rose, Syria appealed to Egypt, believing the claim of the USSR that Israel was massing troops on the Syrian border. The claim was false and was denied by the UN.

Against this background, in Mid-May, 1967, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser again closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping and dismissed the UN peace force from the Sinai Peninsula. The United States failed to live up to its guarantees of freedom of the waterways to Israel. A torrent of bellicose rhetoric issued from Arab capitals and in the UN. At the UN, PLO Chairman Ahmed Shukhairy announced that "if it will be our privilege to strike the first blow" the PLO would expel from Palestine all Zionists who had arrived after 1917 and eliminate the state of Israel. Nasser said on May 27, "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight." On May 28, he added: "We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948."

[/ QUOTE ]
Israel - Territory Occupied in the 6-Day War (http://www.mideastweb.org/israelafter1967.htm)

From that page:

http://www.mideastweb.org/6daywar.jpg

The green areas were occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War. Sinai and the Gaza Strip were taken from Egypt. The West Bank was wrested from Jordan. The Golan Heights was won from Syria. Israel later returned Sinai to Egypt in a peace agreement (no doubt in a foolish hope that their intractable enemies would abide by pacts).

So, do you seriously believe that Israel unconditionally surrendering land that it won in war would bring peace? Do you seriously believe that the creation of an autonomous "Palestinian" state from Gaza and the West Bank would bring peace? The hell it would. The West Bank would provide a staging ground for Arab forces to amass for the final destruction of Israel, and would offer a much longer border with Israel, which would be concomitantly much harder to defend.

Note the pinch point above Tel Aviv. That's about ten miles wide, and military forces there could effectively cut Israel in half.

Also note that Jerusalem is in a cul-de-sac, and it would take little effort for the Arabs to sever it completely from Israel. This they would do in a heartbeat, inasmuch as they have repeatedly stated that Jerusalem is a Muslim city to which Jews have no claim.

The map from the official PA website, reproduced below, shows the ultimate goal of the "Palestinians" and the Arabs, and they will not rest until it becomes reality. Anyone who thinks that Israel would allow this to happen without inflicting massive casualties to its enemies is living in LaLaLand.

http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_a/ipc_a-1/a_map/pal-e.jpg

Chris

06-16-2003, 08:09 PM

It wasn't quite as innocent on Egypt's part as you make out.

"The Six-Day War (1967) (http://www.khouse.org/articles/currentevents/20020601-416.html)

The events surrounding the 1967 Arab-Israeli Six-Day War is perhaps the biggest bone of contention regarding today's conflict: borders and who started the fight. Frequently, demands are heard about UN Resolution 242, which requires Israel to keep to its pre-1967 borders with its Arab neighbors, but no one can agree exactly what that will mean. At the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, no peace treaty was signed; a cease-fire armistice was the only thing defining borders and the terms of peace. A peace treaty was to be hammered out later, something which the Arab countries subsequently refused to do, since they still intended to retake the territory of Israel when the occasion presented itself.

A Bellicose Chronology

On May 15, 1967, Israeli intelligence discovered that Egypt was concentrating large-scale forces in the Sinai peninsula - remember this is before the days of satellite intelligence. On May 19, the United Nations Emergency Force stationed on the border between Egypt and Israel was evacuated at the demand of Egypt's president, Gamal Abdel-Nasser. During the night of May 22-23, Egypt's navy blockaded the Straits of Tiran opening into the Indian Ocean, prohibiting passage to Israeli ships. On May 30, Jordan joined the Egyptian-Syrian alliance of 1966 and placed its armies under Egyptian command. Iraq followed suit shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, military detachments from other Arab countries began arriving. By the end of May, Israel confronted a Muslim force of 465,000 troops, 2,880 tanks and 810 fighter aircraft along the entire length of her borders with Arab countries, which had not been there less than a month earlier.

As Arab radio crackled with "drive-them-into-the-sea" rhetoric, the situation became very tense. Technically, the Egyptian blockade of the Straits of Tiran could probably be considered the first bellicose act of war, but there had been no violence or lives lost. Despite a huge Egyptian army threatening its southern border, Israel tried to diplomatically defuse the crisis by approaching Britain and France, who had guaranteed freedom of Israeli navigation. Those counties reneged on their promise. U.S. President Johnson proposed breaking the blockade with an international armada. In a May 28 broadcast, Israel's Prime Minister Levi Eshkol agreed to wait and see.

By June 4 it became clear that diplomatic channels had failed. Faced with imminent danger, Israel launched a preemptive air strike to shatter Arab air forces while their aircraft were still on the ground, a move which succeeded. During the six days of the war, in fierce fighting Israel took the Golan Heights from Syria, the Sinai Desert from Egypt, and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Jordan - all of the territories that have been on the table for negotiation during the Oslo Peace Process. Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt during the historic Camp David agreement under President Jimmy Carter, negotiated between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Sadat would later pay for this with his life as the result of an assassination. The remaining territories are still held by Israel. The Palestinians view these lands as having been seized and occupied by Israeli aggression, while Israelis view them as spoils of a war they didn't start or want. "

MaximumSam

06-16-2003, 08:20 PM

Israel needs the atrocities to continue as an excuse to keep that land and keep Palestine from becoming a viable nation. Seriously, what kind of sham is an offer to form a nation of Palestine, when Israel would still basically control all intrastate transport. Israel is bombing street corners to keep this war alive.

DesertFox

06-16-2003, 08:39 PM

Israel is bombing street corners because that's where the terrorists are hanging out.

Chris

06-16-2003, 08:46 PM

You're ruining his schtick DF. How's he supposed to play dumb if you keep bring up the facts? http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon129.gif

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 08:48 PM

DrD: Point taken about the territories taken...I was thinking of post Saddat. Im pretty sure the second map you show isnt from the official PA web site. The PA have recognised Israels right to existence and removed anything in their charter which conficts with 242. This makes the PA, Eygypt and Jordan the only countries in compliance with 242.

Chris:

It wasn't quite as innocent on Egypt's part as you make out.

[ QUOTE ]
Note....Im not saying the Arabs did not share responsibility for 67, just that they did not attck Israel and that the situation was not as clear cut as an Israeli 'war of defence'

[/ QUOTE ]

I was definitely not trying to make out the Arabs were blameless. The rhetoric coming out of the Arab countries was jingoistic in the extreme. The 'drive them into the sea' comment is almost mild. My point was that the situation was a great deal more complex than 'The Arabs attacked Israel' and that Israel used the situation to its advantage.

I do believe a return to the pre 67 borders will bring peace and security for Israel. It obviously will not be immediate. Its current position is in my opinion unsustainable and a few extra miles of territory wont change that.

DesertFox

06-16-2003, 08:56 PM

The issue is trust. It would be irresponsible on the part of any Israeli Prime Minister to take an Arab "trust me" at face value.

MaximumSam

06-16-2003, 09:03 PM

Israel is bombing street corners because that's where the terrorists are hanging out.

Oh yeah, I forgot, this was a 'military strike.' You have to kill on a budget to be considered a terrorist.

Chris

06-16-2003, 09:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
SabbahV2 said:
My point was that the situation was a great deal more complex than 'The Arabs attacked Israel' and that Israel used the situation to its advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is that there wouldn't have been any situation to take advantage of or anything else if it wasn't for this -

"On May 15, 1967, Israeli intelligence discovered that Egypt was concentrating large-scale forces in the Sinai peninsula - remember this is before the days of satellite intelligence. On May 19, the United Nations Emergency Force stationed on the border between Egypt and Israel was evacuated at the demand of Egypt's president, Gamal Abdel-Nasser. During the night of May 22-23, Egypt's navy blockaded the Straits of Tiran opening into the Indian Ocean, prohibiting passage to Israeli ships. On May 30, Jordan joined the Egyptian-Syrian alliance of 1966 and placed its armies under Egyptian command. Iraq followed suit shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, military detachments from other Arab countries began arriving. By the end of May, Israel confronted a Muslim force of 465,000 troops, 2,880 tanks and 810 fighter aircraft along the entire length of her borders with Arab countries, which had not been there less than a month earlier."

None of that was Israel's doing. I'd like to see what NZ would do if they were totally surrounded by troops screaming to push them into the sea, and their ports were blockaded and no one would come help them.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 09:19 PM

"(That) is the uniqueness and the beauty of the world of the pilot. You sit up above, quietly, with your wide space. There are no noises, no booms, no shouts of people. You are totally focused on the target, you don’t have the dirt and the horror of the battlefield. You do your thing and head home." Vered Levy-Barzilai.

"If you really want to know what I feel when I release a bomb, I will tell you: I feel a slight bump to the plane as a result of the bomb’s release. A second later it’s gone, and that’s all. That’s what I feel." Dan Halutz.

I am speaking of assassination in the main street by missiles fired from a helicopter, when three bystanders are killed. This cannot be described as "collateral damage"; it cannot be claimed that there was no intention to harm civilians. When a plane bombs a populated city, civilian casualties must be taken into account. Even when the bombs are supposed to be precisely targeted. Therefore, this is a premeditated killing of civilians. A war crime. Dr. Yigal Shohat, Colonel (ret.), Israeli Air Force

gush-shalom.org (http://www.gush-shalom.org/archives/forum_eng.html)

DF: Trust is a two way street.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 09:27 PM

Chris: "[there was] no threat of destruction" but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could "exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies." Former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer.

See also the quotes I posted above.

The war of 67 was probably inevitable considering the animosity between the Israelis and the Arabs but to call it a 'war of defence' is stetching things.

DoctorDoom

06-16-2003, 09:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The effects of this endless negotiation was an increasing frustration amongst the Palistinian people. This tinder-box exploded when Sharon visited the Mount.

[/ QUOTE ]
That was a lame-assed excuse. The Mount was the site of the two Jewish temples (Solomon's and Herod's) for many centuries years before the pedophile Mohammed invented Islam. And, Islam has no claim whatsoever to the Mount other than a cryptic reference to Mohammed's going to "the furthest mosque", and acsending to heaven from the Mount. Honest Islamic scholars state that this did NOT refer to Jerusalem or the Mount, neither of which are mentioned even once in the Koran.

[ QUOTE ]
The Moslem "claim" to Jerusalem is based on what is written in the Koran, which although Jerusalem is not mentioned even once, nevertheless talks (in Sura 17:1) of the "Furthest Mosque": "Glory be unto Allah who did take his servant for a journey at night from the Sacred Mosque to the Furthest Mosque." But is there any foundation to the Moslem argument that this "Furthest Mosque" (Al-Masujidi al-Aqtza) refers to what is today called the Aksa Mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, none whatsoever.

In the days of Mohammed, who died in 632 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was a Christian city within the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem was captured by Khalif Omar only in 638, six years after Mohammed's death. Throughout all this time there were only churches in Jerusalem, and a church stood on the Temple Mount, called the Church of Saint Mary of Justinian, built in the Byzantine architectural style.

The Aksa Mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by Khalif Abd El Malik. The name "Omar Mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, or about 80 years after Mohammed died, Malik's son, Abd El-Wahd - who ruled from 705-715 - reconstructed the Christian- Byzantine Church of St. Mary and converted it into a mosque. He left the structure as it was, a typical Byzantine "basilica" structure with a row of pillars on either side of the rectangular "ship" in the center. All he added was an onion-like dome on top of the building to make it look like a mosque. He then named it El-Aksa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the Koran.

Therefore it is crystal clear that Mohammed could never have had this mosque in mind when he compiled the Koran, since it did not exist for another three generations after his death. Rather, as many scholars long ago established, it is logical that Mohammed intended the mosque in Mecca as the "Sacred Mosque," and the mosque in Medina as the "Furthest Mosque." So much for the Moslem claim based on the Aksa Mosque.

With this understood, it is no wonder that Mohammed issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Mohammed put an abrupt stop to it on February 12, 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the Moslems themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain.

[DR. MANFRED R. LEHMANN is a writer for the Algemeiner Journal. Originally published in the Algemeiner Journal, August 19, 1994.]

[/ QUOTE ]
The Islamic Claim to Temple Mount (http://www.cmep.com/temple2.htm)

For a perspective on Islam's concern for its alleged "third holiest site", look over these photos from the late-1800s, found on that web page.

<center>http://www.cmep.com/images/dome3.gif

http://www.cmep.com/images/dome.gif

http://www.cmep.com/images/cupolas.gif</center>

The disrepair and evidence of lack of use are irrefutable. The Muslims didn't care in the slightest for it... until the Jews came back. Then, it suddenly became holy again. So, tell us how Sharon going to the Mount justified the savagery visited against Israel.

The "Palestinians" are and always shall be thugs. They are useful tools for Arab nations that lust for the destruction of Israel and the deaths of all Jews in the mideast without directly soiling their hands with Jewish blood.

<hr>
<center>http://www.levitt.com/slideshow/s01p05.jpg</center>

[ QUOTE ]
The Western Wall (Wailing Wall)

This is the holiest shrine of the Jewish world. The Western Wall is part of the retaining wall supporting the temple mount built by Herod in 20 B.C. After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D., Jews were not allowed to come to Jerusalem until the Byzantine period, when they could visit once a year on the anniversary of the destruction of the Temple and weep over the ruins of the Holy Temple. Because of this, the wall became known as the "Wailing Wall."

Jews were again not allowed to visit the wall from 1948-1967 when it was in the Jordanian section of the city. After the Six Day War, the Western Wall became a place for national rejoicing and prayer, as the last accessible relic of the last Temple.

[/ QUOTE ]
The Western Wall (Wailing Wall) (http://www.levitt.com/slideshow/s01p05.html)

The "Palestinians" now claim that this wall is NOT in any way related to Jewish history, and that it is Islamic. The ongoing excavation that is gutting the interior of the mount is destroying thousands of years of Jewish heritage and artifacts, and the camel-humpers sneer in defiance as they continue to rape Israel's history.

[ QUOTE ]
Israeli scholars are warning of a travesty at the holiest site in Judaism. They say Palestinian Muslims are bulldozing tons of stone containing priceless historical treasures at the famed Temple Mount, and the government of Israel has done nothing to stop it.

In a CBN News exclusive, last week in Jerusalem Pat Robertson talked with Dr. Eilat Mazer, an archaeologist at Hebrew University, who provided photographic evidence of the destruction.

Pat Robertson: I'm showing pictures here that show stones from the Temple from ancient days, then I see a stone cutter and little clean blocks where these ancient stones from the Temple Mount have been cut up by Palestinians. Dr. Mazer, would you tell us about it?

Dr. Mazer: Well, it's quite a long time that the Islamic authorities are destroying the ancient antiquities of the Temple Mount. And we are speaking about the area which contains the remains since the first Temple period, the Biblical period, and then the New Testament period at the second Temple period, the time of Jesus at the Temple Mount, and then later periods, Byzantine period, the Crusades period. And they destroy it all. They have one goal, which is very certain and we have very solid evidence about it: to build the whole area as a mosque and they couldn't care less what they do.

[/ QUOTE ]
Desecration Uncovered in Muslim Excavation of Temple Mount (http://www.har-habayt.org/cbn11-07-01.html)

http://www.har-habayt.org/marble1.jpg[ QUOTE ]
In 1967, Jerusalem once again became a united city under Israel's sovereignty. The Old City section fell under Israeli administration. Since then, every Israeli President and Prime Minister has proclaimed the ever-lasting devotion of the Israeli people and government to the holiest place, revered by Jews, Christians and Moslems.

For over 30 years Israel has in fact delegated almost all authority over the Temple Mount to the Islamic Clerics. By doing this, Israel showed her commitment to respect the rights of the Muslims.

Now, as incredible as it seems, the Islamic Clerics deny any non-Moslem connection to the site. The Moslems also prevent archaeologists from investigating the site, one of the world’s most prominent ancient treasures.

Israel has accepted its present inability to actively explore the Temple Mount. However, It is one thing to prevent exploration, and quite another to bulldoze through ancient structures without any archeological supervision.

In 1996 the Islamic Clerics changed the accepted status quo that was kept for generations and converted two ancient underground Second Temple Period structures into a new large mosque. Both structures, known as Solomon’s stables and the Eastern Hulda Gate passageway, were never mosques before. The new mosque extends over an area of 1.5 acres, thus being the largest mosque in Israel, able to accommodate 10,000 people.

In November 1999, the Islamic Clerics opened what they called an “emergency exit” to the new mosque. Over 3 days and nights the exit has expanded into a gapping hole, 18,000 square feet in size, and up to 36 feet deep. Thousands of tons of the ancient fills from the site, subsequently found by Israeli archeologists to contain artifacts dating as early as the First Temple Period, were dumped into the Kidron Valley.

Since the creation of the gaping hole and up until now, without any archaeological supervision, thousands of square-meters of the ancient surface level of the Temple Mount are dug up by tractors, paved and announced as open mosques.

[/ QUOTE ]
The destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities (http://www.har-habayt.org/destruct.html)

The shameless provocation of the Jews by the Arab pawns of hell will not forever be tolerated.

Note: edited so as not to offend liberals and leftists.

SabbahV2

06-16-2003, 09:59 PM

Ill get to your points in an hour or so DrD. Just one comment.

I gather you don't think very highly of the Jews. But it's not surprising. Loathing of Israel and Jews is S.O.P. amongst Arab-championing leftists

Like I said above my best friend is Jewish and a zionist. I 'loath' neither the Jewish people nor Israel, although I am critical of Israels policies in the occupied territories. This critisism in no ways validates Afafat, Arab dictatorships or any anti-semitic stand. This sort of slanderous anti-semitic accusation really pisses me off and in my opinion it detracts from what was otherwise a great post. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon122.gif

Be back later...gotta cool down and have some coffee...http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon109.gif

DoctorDoom

06-16-2003, 10:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure the second map you show isnt from the official PA web site.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, sonny, I'm absolutely sure it IS! Here's the web-page. Click the logo to go there.

<center>http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/img1/ipc-e1.gifhttp://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/img1/ipc-e2.gifhttp://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/img1/ipc-e3.gif (http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_a/ipc_a-1/a_map/pal-e.html)</center>

The logo is half-size, and the text is hard to read. Here's the left end of it full-sized.

http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/img1/ipc-e1.gifhttp://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/img1/ipc-e2.gif

Here's the caption under the map.

[ QUOTE ]
Historical Map of Palestine

Long and narrow in shape, Palestine is about 290 miles (470 km.) in length and 85 miles (135 km.) in width at its widest point.

Although small in size, Palestine encompasses the varied topographical features of an entire continent, ranging from forested highlands and fertile green valleys to mountainous deserts and from the coastal plain to the semitropical Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea, the lowest point on earth.

[/ QUOTE ]
This "Palestine" does not exist, and the claim that it is a "historical" map is, to be very kind, suspect. It shows the intended future, not the past.

DesertFox

06-16-2003, 10:10 PM

Trust is a two way street.

Uh, Sab, there isn't quite the same level of vulnerability involved by the two sides. Arabs in that region number -- what, 50 million? and Jews five million? And Arabs control, what, a couple million square miles of territory to the Israelis' 500 or so?

I'm guessing at these numbers but am confident they reflect the reality that not-many-Jews are squeezed into not-much-area by many-times-more Arabs on very-much-more land. Arabs lost the 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973 wars and are still around in their millions. The Jews have never sworn to annihilate them and haven't tried to do so. The Jews can't lose even one or it's all over for them; the Arabs have repeatedly promised/threatened as much.

Yeah, trust is a two-way street, but the dramatically different levels of vulnerability MUST be properly respected.

DoctorDoom

06-16-2003, 10:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This sort of slanderous anti-semitic accusation really pisses me off and in my opinion it detracts from what was otherwise a great post.

[/ QUOTE ]
I call 'em the way I see 'em. But, it has been edited.

The truth of the now-deleted comment is demonstrable from past performances of leftists here at FC, from pro-"Palestinian" protests and demonstrations by leftists and students at leftist colleges, etcetera. The supporters of the "Palestinians", and those who evoke moral equivalency to minimize or eliminate the fundamental differences between Israel and the burnoosed barbarians, are almost exclusively leftist and almost without exception anti-Semitic.

On the one side is a nation that has been fighting for its right to exist since May 5, 1948. On the other side is a murderous band of terrorists that have been deliberately targeting and murdering Israeli civilians, and who are doing the Arabs' dirty work to exterminate Israel. Whenever I see posts that include such phrases as "but Israel...", I fully expect another leftist apology for those who would destroy that little nation. I am rarely wrong.

<hr>
Here's a little history on what the Arabs think of Israel's right to exist, from the camel-jockeys' own mouths.

"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."
--Arab League Secretary General Azzam Pasha, May 15, 1948, the day five Arab armies invaded the new state of Israel, one day after the nation declared its independence

"The Arab nations should sacrifice up to 10 million of their 50 million people, if necessary, to wipe out Israel ... Israel to the Arab world is like a cancer to the human body, and the only way of remedy is to uproot it, just like a cancer."
--Saud ibn Abdul Aziz, King of Saudi Arabia, Associated Press, Jan. 9, 1954

"I announce from here, on behalf of the United Arab Republic people, that this time we will exterminate Israel."
--President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, speech in Alexandria, July 26, 1959

"We shall never call for nor accept peace. We shall only accept war. We have resolved to drench this land with your (Israel's) blood, to oust you as aggressor, to throw you into the sea."
--Hafez Assad, then-Syrian Defense Minister, May 24, 1966, who later became Syria's president.

"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel."
--President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, May 27, 1967, nine days before the start of the Six-Day War.

"The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear -- to wipe Israel off the map."
--President Abdel Rahman Aref of Iraq, May 31, 1967

"All countries should wage war against the Zionists, who are there to destroy all human organizations and to destroy civilization and the work which good people are trying to do."
--King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, in a speech in Uganda, Beirut Daily Star, Nov. 17, 1972

"The battle with Israel must be such that, after it, Israel will cease to exist."
--Libyan President Mohammar Qadaffi, al-Usbu al-Arrabi (Beirut) quoted by Algiers Radio, Nov. 12, 1973

"After we perform our duty in liberating the West Bank and Jerusalem, our national duty is to liberate all the Arab-occupied territories."
--Jordan's King Hussein, Radio Amman, Dec. 1, 1973

"Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity."
--Zoheir Muhsin, head of the PLO Military Operations Department and member of the PLO Executive Council, 1977

"I have never met an Arab leader that in private professed a desire for an independent Palestinian state. Publicly, they all espouse an independent Palestinian state -- almost all of them -- because that is what they committed themselves to do at Rabat (the 1974 Arab League summit conference)."
--President Jimmy Carter, at a 1979 press conference

"There has been no change whatsoever in the fundamental strategy of the PLO, which is based on the total liberation of Palestine and the destruction of the occupying country. ... On no accounts will the Palestinians accept part of Palestine and call it the Palestinian state, while forfeiting the remaining areas which are called the State of Israel."
--Rafiq Najshah, PLO representative in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabian News Agency, June 9, 1980

"The struggle with the Zionist enemy is not a struggle about Israel's borders, but about Israel's existence. We will never agree to anything less than the return of all our land and the establishment of the independent state."
--Bassam Abu Sharif, a top Arafat aide and PLO spokesman, quoted by the Kuwait News Agency, May 31, 1986

"There are two different approaches in the Arab world: that Israel can be overwhelmed militarily, or that a military victory is impossible. The power struggle between Israel and the Arabs is a long-term historical trial. Victory or defeat are for us questions of existence or annihilation, the outcome of an irreconcilable hatred."
--Al-Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, July 11, 1986

"The establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip does not contradict our ultimate strategic aim, which is the establishment of a democratic state in the entire territory of Palestine, but rather is a step in that direction."
--Salah Khalaf (Abu Iyad) interview with Al-Safir, Lebanon, Jan. 25, 1988

"This is the ideology of the PLO and of Yasser Arafat: To destroy the state of Israel and to establish a Palestinian state instead. They will accept the territories -- but only as a beginning, as a base for further attacks to conquer all of Israel. Why give them this opportunity to strengthen their efforts to attack us?"
--Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, U.S. News & World Report, March 21, 1988

"The armed struggle must continue, everywhere, against the Zionist enemy and his allies. ... We have no alternative but to carry out armed activity in order to vanquish the enemy and establish our state."
--Salim Zaanoun, Deputy PNC speaker and member of the Fatah Central Committee, in Al-Anba, Kuwait, Dec. 23, 1988

"The PLO will not stop the armed struggle."
--Yasser Arafat, June 6, 1989 at a press conference in Kuwait, Associated Press.

"The Middle East peace efforts have reached a stalemate. ... The PLO now has no alternative but to escalate armed struggle outside the occupied territories in support of the uprising."
--Arafat's number two man, Salah Khalaf, Jan. 22, 1990, Associated Press

"We will enter Jerusalem victoriously and raise our flag on its walls. ... We will fight you (the Israelis) with stones, rifles, and 'El- Abed' (the Iraqi missile)..."
--Yasser Arafat, reported by the Associated Press, March 29, 1990, at the start of the Gulf War

"In the name of Allah, we shall cause fire to devour half of Israel. ..."
--Iraqi News Agency, April 2, 1990

"We say to the brother and leader Saddam Hussein -- go forward with God's blessing."
--Yasser Arafat, the next day, Iraqi News Agency, April 3, 1990

'An irreconcilable hatred' (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=18764)

One hopes that Israelis can be excused for not trusting the hellish bastards as far as they could throw the Sphinx.

There is no rational way to make comparisons between Israel's ongoing quest for self-preservation and that sort of obsessive, intractable hatred. It is literally a matter of survival vs annihilation.

SabbahV2

06-17-2003, 12:32 AM

DF: Agreed. Israel cannot take chances. This is why in my opinion a peaceful resolution to the conflict is imperitive.

Your comparison of power also works the other way...Israel vs Palistinian. A British security expert (kosovo..cant remember his name) did a study of the conflict and came to the conclusion that Israel could handle it without resorting to anything more than M16`s.

DrD, thanks for deleting that. Much appreciated. Im not sure of the behaviour of other lefties has been here but most of the ones I know are (rightly) extremely critical of the various Arab regimes and the PA.

Critisism of Israel = anti-semitism is one of the things that does piss me off. In my opinion it distracts from the dangerous rise of real anti-semitism occuring in many places in the world....now you know how to wind me up. Dont abuse you new found power http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

k...cool like Fonzie. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

I wont get into a quoting war with you (although I kinda started it), both sides seem to be filled to the brim with hatred as any quick google search will show...although for the most part it seems to be the leaders and the extremists. Its about time both sides started listen to their respective peoples.

RE The mount. Haram al Sharif is where Mohammed asended to heaven. sine about the 8th century its been a centre of Muslim religious practice. The wailing wall and the Temple mount are very different things. The wailing (western) wall has long been the centre of Jewish religious practice and is not part of the Temple compound. The importance of the temple was restricted to an extreme fringe in Israeli religious society untill Barak declared it of sacred importance during the Camp David negotiations.

This was largely symbolic as under a return to the 67 borders Israel would keep this area and Palistinians would only have a ceremonial control of the temple compound.

In sept 2000 tensions were running high. Sharon announced his intensions to visit the Mount against the warnings of both the PA and members of the Israeli Parliment. Barak gave him permission and IDF protection. The 200 or so Palistinians who peacfully blocked his entrance were dispirsed with tear gas and rubber bullets.

The next day when the Mosques emptied the IDF was waiting...Like I said, a tinderbox.

Chris

06-17-2003, 06:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The war of 67 was probably inevitable considering the animosity between the Israelis and the Arabs but to call it a 'war of defence' is stetching things.

[/ QUOTE ]

The stretch is you acting like it wasn't justified. Like I said, I’m sure if all that was happening to NZ that they would view it all as provocative and a threat to their security. You label it whatever you want, but I’m sure your country would think it was defensive move under those circumstances too.

It’s the same pattern the Arabs always use. Saddam did the same thing. The Palestinians keep doing it. They constantly provoke and when people strike back, they whine about. They are like little kids that deliberately annoy and throw tantrums to get their own way. The grownups are simply say NO!

[ QUOTE ]
RE The mount. Haram al Sharif is where Mohammed asended to heaven. sine about the 8th century its been a centre of Muslim religious practice.

[/ QUOTE ]

The temple mount, a 35 arce area, was the site of Abraham's alter. 900 years later (3000 years ago) it was purchased by King David to built an alter to God. It was there that Solomon built the first temple.

You would understand better if you checked out the true history, rather than rely on a website with an agenda.

Longhorn_Platinum

06-17-2003, 07:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
SabbahV2 said:
In any case war is no longer a legitimate way of gaining territory. If it was Saddam would still be in Kuwait.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/um.gif I thought SoDamn Insane lost that war.

DoctorDoom

06-17-2003, 08:41 AM

[ QUOTE ]
RE The mount. Haram al Sharif is where Mohammed asended to heaven. sine about the 8th century its been a centre of Muslim religious practice. The wailing wall and the Temple mount are very different things. The wailing (western) wall has long been the centre of Jewish religious practice and is not part of the Temple compound. The importance of the temple was restricted to an extreme fringe in Israeli religious society untill Barak declared it of sacred importance during the Camp David negotiations.

[/ QUOTE ]
Inasmuch as you've evidently ignored the documention provided in an earlier post, allow me to repeat this fact: Mohammed never went near Jerusalem. The notion that he did comes from an unsupportable interpretation of Sura 17:1, shown in four translations.

Sura 17: The Children of Israel (Bani Israel)
Number of verses in sura: 111
Order of revelation: 50

[17:1] Most glorified is the One who summoned His servant (Muhammad) during the night, from the Sacred Masjid (of Mecca) to the farthest place of prostration,* whose surroundings we have blessed, in order to show him some of our signs. He is the Hearer, the Seer.

Note by translator: *17:1 ``The Aqsa Masjid'' means ``the farthest place where there is prostration,'' many billions of Light Years away. This verse informs us that Muhammad, the soul, was taken to the highest Heaven to be given the Quran (2:185, 44:3, 53:1-18, & 97: 1).

017.001
YUSUFALI: Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things).

PICKTHAL: Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far distant place of worship the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed, that We might show him of Our tokens! Lo! He, only He, is the Hearer, the Seer.

SHAKIR: Glory be to Him Who made His servant to go on a night from the Sacred Mosque to the remote mosque of which We have blessed the precincts, so that We may show to him some of Our signs; surely He is the Hearing, the Seeing.

The "farthest mosque" aka "Far distant place of worship" aka "remote mosque" is interpreted to be the Al Aqsa mosque, which didn't exist until decades after Mohammed died. And, his wives said that he made his "journey" in a dream, and never went anywhere physically. Objective Muslim scholars will verify it.

Jerusalem is mentioned by name 667 times in the Old Testament and zero times in the Koran and Hadith. The Muslims have no basis whatsoever for their claim re the Temple Mount. Like everything else they say, it is a brazen lie for political gain.

<hr>
Next, re the alleged Sharon provocation:

[ QUOTE ]
The latest round of violence in Israel erupted when Likud Party leader Ariel Sharon tried to visit the Temple Mount, the foundation of the Temple built by Solomon.* It is the holiest site for Jews. Sharon and his entourage were met with stones and threats. I know what it's like. I've been there. Can you imagine what it is like for Jews to be threatened, stoned and physically kept out of the holiest site in Judaism?

[snip]

*Note: We beg to differ with Joseph Farah on this one po