Double Standards

[chinook_apache]

current conflict in the middle east between Palestinians and jews is i think down to how america treat israel, an illegal zionist state. we have american weaponary responsible for little palestinian girls and boys death. basically american policy makers are all zionist jews these include richard pearle(pentagon advisor for foreign policy) paul wolfwitz(deputy secatary of defence) and dick cheny well the most notorious christian right wing man in Washington. you see they apply double standards towards israel. when israel attacked syria about 2 weeks ago. no western leader condemened that illegal aggression. america gives israel in "loan" 6 billion US dollars a year and for what....? what do the palestinians get? that 6 billion is like 2 thousand dollars to each israeli citizen.


reply your thoughts!

[J'Pol]

So Dick Cheny is a Zionist Jew and the most notorious Christian right wing man in Washington.

Is that possible.

[bigboab]

It might depend on the cut of your jib JP. ;)

Edit His jib. :lol:

[chinook_apache]

no ill make it clear for you jp. he is a right wing neo-conservative think tank, the most hawkish memebr in the Administration! yes and he is christian

[J'Pol]

He is a think-tank. Wow, plurality that has certainly cleared thing up for me.

Presumably you have some problem with the US giving money to it's friends and allies.

[chinook_apache]

lol..no problem to me im not american firstly and my tax money does not go towards terroism against a robbed palestinian state. i put loan in inverted comments because israel has never paid this loan back since it started to recieve after the first intifada.

[J'Pol]

The suicide bomber who kill women and children indiscriminately, are they also terrorists.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@18 October 2003 - 21:25
lol..no problem to me im not american firstly and my tax money does not go towards terroism against a robbed palestinian state. i put loan in inverted comments because israel has never paid this loan back since it started to recieve after the first intifada.
You sound like Fox News, always using "terror" or "terrorism"

[hobbes]

Originally posted by JPaul@18 October 2003 - 21:28
The suicide bomber who kill women and children indiscriminately, are they also terrorists.
No they are not. Haven't you been paying attention to EBP? Israel has all culpability in this conflict. Palestinians are innocent victims of a one-sided terroristic attack. Israeli soldiers laugh when killing children and they use Nazi-like tactics, how ironic, he pointed out.

[chinook_apache]

well i have only used about...once! so there! the suicide bombers well ok call them terrorists. they kill themselves and other cause the jews wont budge off the Palestinian land. simple as that they feel trapped by constant curfews and destruction of their homes and murder of their familes cause of the israeli soldiers

[J'Pol]

So the Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists. I'm glad you agree.

In that case the US is providing assistance to it's friend, the State of Israel, to deal with a terrorist problem.

Seems fair enough to me.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@18 October 2003 - 21:34
well i have only used about...once! so there! the suicide bombers well ok call them terrorists. they kill themselves and other cause the jews wont budge off the Palestinian land. simple as that they feel trapped by constant curfews and destruction of their homes and murder of their familes cause of the israeli soldiers
Has that helped in any way? Seems it just makes the problem more intractable.

[chinook_apache]

no jp i said call them terroists which means you can cause i wont. i find israel the terroists, headed under a war criminal who is responsible of 3000 muslims death in beriut in early 80's. sharon likud party is full of right wing extremist anyway even the media mention his administartion have some members who have extreme view against arafat and Palestine! so go on call them terroists..these days any one who is opressed and fights back is known as a terroist! funny how the word terroist wasnt used much before 9-11

[Rat Faced]

Both sides are "terrorists", however i agree that the State of Israel is the larger.

They are responsible for 10x the deaths the Palestinians cause, easily..


Notice: I said "State of Israel", not Israeli's in general

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@18 October 2003 - 21:44
no jp i said call them terroists which means you can cause i wont. i find israel the terroists, headed under a war criminal who is responsible of 3000 muslims death in beriut in early 80's. sharon likud party is full of right wing extremist anyway even the media mention his administartion have some members who have extreme view against arafat and Palestine! so go on call them terroists..these days any one who is opressed and fights back is known as a terroist! funny how the word terroist wasnt used much before 9-11
That is just stupid.

"The word terrorist was not used much before 9-11". Are you mental or something. The word terrorist has been used for decades. Trust me, anyone from the UK and in particular the North of Ireland is all too familiar with it.

As for suicide bombers not being terrorists, that is just an untenable position to take. They kill indiscriminately, they kill without warning, they kill to bring terror to the community they hate.

They are terrorists, whether you chose to accept it or not.

The fact that the IRA could justify their actions (at least to themselves) when they were having their bombing campaigns in the North and in England did not stop them being terrorists.

Why am I even talking to someone who takes this stance.

[clocker]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@18 October 2003 - 13:44
no jp i said call them terroists which means you can cause i wont. i find israel the terroists, headed under a war criminal who is responsible of 3000 muslims death in beriut in early 80's. sharon likud party is full of right wing extremist anyway even the media mention his administartion have some members who have extreme view against arafat and Palestine! so go on call them terroists..these days any one who is opressed and fights back is known as a terroist! funny how the word terroist wasnt used much before 9-11
Chinook,

How are you doing?
You've made your views about the Israeli state and it's leaders clear, so tell me...what do you think of Arafat?

[Rat Faced]

Is it possible that Arafat doesnt trust Sharron bacause the last time he did, in Lebanon, early 80's....he left 1000's of Palestinian women and children in his tender care, at the insistance of the USA, while he removed all the Palestinian fighters.

He did this....10,000 Palestinian fighters left Lebanon, leaving their wives and children behind under Israeli "Protection"...


The Israelis then invited the Christian and Muslim "Militia" there into the refugee camps and watched them massacre them....... 3000+, before the population of Israel found out what was happening and forced their government to stop it.

The Americans didnt even say they were bad boys.....


Clocker,

If it had been you.....would you trust the man again?

[hobbes]

Maybe we could have a thread dedicated to the Israel/Palestine issue?

[Rat Faced]

Another one?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I think there are a few already, however if you have found a new part of the problem that we havent discussed yet.....or wish to start a new one without previous posts distorting stuff, then please feel free.


Maybe you can find a new spin on it that would find a consesus view ;)

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@19 October 2003 - 03:14
Another one?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I think there are a few already, however if you have found a new part of the problem that we havent discussed yet.....or wish to start a new one without previous posts distorting stuff, then please feel free.


Maybe you can find a new spin on it that would find a consesus view ;)
I was joking you puppy covered pouter! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[noname12]

Why not make a "Israel An Palestine, Long Live Peace" thread where every one makes solutions for peace, muslims of k-lite world break bread with jews of k-lite world, then after 2 days a Jew will claim one of the threads as his rightful land, then a suicide spammer will hit his thread then a flame war will break out which will engulf us all. In the end the UM (United Moderaters) will have to make a new resolution and a Post map to peace.

[nikita69]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@19 October 2003 - 06:40
Is it possible that Arafat doesnt trust Sharron bacause the last time he did, in Lebanon, early 80's....he left 1000's of Palestinian women and children in his tender care, at the insistance of the USA, while he removed all the Palestinian fighters.

He did this....10,000 Palestinian fighters left Lebanon, leaving their wives and children behind under Israeli "Protection"...


The Israelis then invited the Christian and Muslim "Militia" there into the refugee camps and watched them massacre them....... 3000+, before the population of Israel found out what was happening and forced their government to stop it.

The Americans didnt even say they were bad boys.....


Clocker,

If it had been you.....would you trust the man again?
Very imporart and historical time frame. I was working for a relief agency then and stationed there at that time.

When Araft and his army left Beirut in summer of 1983, he went to Tripoli, Lebanon. Then Syria's army came in surrounded Tripoli to capture Arafat, dead or alive. 2 weeks of massive fighting between the PLO and the Syrian Army, hundreds of civillians died and thousands were injured.

Phillip Habib was sent back and struck a deal with Syria to allow a safe passage for Arafat and his followers thru their land to Jordan. Syria agreed to it. Neither the US, Israelis, nor Arafat trusted Hafez Al-Assad that Arafat will pass thru Syria without killing or capturing him first. So Habib struck another deal to have the PLO forces leave thru Syria and Arafat to go to Morroco via the Israeli Navy (were he stayed there several years before going back to Palistine.

And that's exactly what happened. Our agency was responsible for the assistance of supplying medical & food products to the PLO.

As for the Sabra & Shatila, the Palestinian camps in East Beirut, was setup by Sharon & the "Kata'ab" led by Eli Hobaika & Samir Jaajaa who are "christian" maronite and "muslim" factions didn't take any part of those massacres.

[Billy_Dean]

I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?


:)

[chinook_apache]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 07:18
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?


:)
hmm good question

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 08:18
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?


:)
PIRA, UDA et al were terrorists, no matter what happens in the future they were terrorists. Whether they "win" or not. Though in these situations it is a practical impossibility for anyone to "win".

When they stop carrying out terrorist acts and are accepted into the normal mainstream politic, they are no longer terrorists. If there is a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate who wish to be represented by them.

That does not mean that the acts which were committed are, in retrospect, no longer considered to have been terrorist. They always will be.

Unless all parties can accept this, then it is impossible to find a solution.

Compromise is also necessary - In the Irish situation, the Government of the South also removed it's constitutional claim on the North (as I understand it). This was part of the compromise to the "Loyalists" in the North. On the other hand the RUC was disbanded and replaced by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (not sure on name but that's not really important). This was something which the "Nationalists" wanted.

The solution must be acceptable to all sides and they must be willing to give and take. If any one is so entrenched that they will not budge, then there can be no solution.

[chinook_apache]

yes good answer jp. can i ask why you blending in the northern ireland situation? it is good however to give other examples. B)

[Billy_Dean]

Bearing what you say in mind, and in light of the fact that Israel was born out of terrorism, and "won", is it not also fair that Palestinians use the same tactics that robbed them of their country, to help them regain it? And what if they also "win", would that make the fight worthy?


:)

[chinook_apache]

lol i dont rekon they will win unless the bush administrations foreign policy is changed

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 11:40
Bearing what you say in mind, and in light of the fact that Israel was born out of terrorism, and "won", is it not also fair that Palestinians use the same tactics that robbed them of their country, to help them regain it?  And what if they also "win", would that make the fight worthy?


:)


To answer your point, neither side will "win". Unless and until that sort of attitude is put to one side.

Chinook,

This is why I use the Irish example. For all of my life I thought that the problem was beyond solution. It was a succession of bombings, shootings, assassinations, whatever. We certainly called it terrorism well before 9-11, so I don't know where you got that from.

We are now in the position of a cease-fire which has lasted for a long time. Tensions rise and fall, granted and the situation is far from resolved. However people are not being murdered in the name of freedom and equality.

As long as people keep talking and compromising there is every prospect of a peaceful solution being reached. I also think that ever day we get further away from the violence makes it less likely to return

[chinook_apache]

ok...well since the world domination of bush and his cronies namley blair i think terroism and insecurity has risen. you now have the US stuck in iraq. what happened to shock and awe?? we have like 1 US soldier dead everyday and remind me what they went to war on? have they found what they went for?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@19 October 2003 - 12:13
ok...well since the world domination of bush and his cronies namley blair i think terroism and insecurity has risen. you now have the US stuck in iraq. what happened to shock and awe?? we have like 1 US soldier dead everyday and remind me what they went to war on? have they found what they went for?
Sorry, aimless wandering is of no interest to me today.

If this is just another USA/UK bashing why don't you just say that.

[chinook_apache]

im british my self so i would not bash the uk mybe the us tho...

[Yogi]

I miss something here....

The word FreedomFighters.

People fighting for a cause call themselfes freedomfighters.

Country's or institutions with opposite inerests call them terrorists.

Israel is fighting the palestines with the most advanced weapons, subsidised by a.o. the us.

The palestines are fighting with small recources, formerly rewarded by Saddam Hoessein.(think it was 23000 dollar for the family of a deceased bomber....)

Personally i think both parties in the conflict use terror, i.e. are Terrorists.

I'm not in favour of either parties, though in general i tend to choose the underdog,
in this case imho obviously the palestines.(i know; there's no good argument there.....)

Just my penny's worth.

:huh: Yogi

[echidna]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 17:18
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?


:)
what? like nelson mandela?
once a terrorist now a nobel peace prize winner [like sharon]

labels like freedom fighter & terrorist get changed as suits the political landscape, terrorism is particularly popular at the moment.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by chinook_apache@19 October 2003 - 13:43
im british my self so i would not bash the uk mybe the us tho...
Having read your posts, in particular the first in this topic, I had taken English to be a second language. As such I did not think of you as British.

However that makes no difference. British people are capable of bashing their own country when they think it appropriate. RF does it on a regular basis, when he believes the British Government are in the wrong. I myself will happily do the same, again if I think it appropriate.

[chinook_apache]

hmmm jpaul. wel this discussion is really heating up!

[Busyman]

Originally posted by JPaul+19 October 2003 - 13:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JPaul &#064; 19 October 2003 - 13:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-chinook_apache@19 October 2003 - 13:43
im british my self so i would not bash the uk mybe the us tho...
Having read your posts, in particular the first in this topic, I had taken English to be a second language. As such I did not think of you as British.

However that makes no difference. British people are capable of bashing their own country when they think it appropriate. RF does it on a regular basis, when he believes the British Government are in the wrong. I myself will happily do the same, again if I think it appropriate. [/b][/quote]
hmm JPaul....you like to bash others syntax. You did the same to me in another post. Don&#39;t be an ass.
Anyway(s)... :lol:

@echnida Did Mandela go and kill white people indiscriminately. I don&#39;t think so.
Palestinians target any Israeli though.

[J'Pol]

I never mentioned her syntax, there were more basic problems than sentence construction.

I congratulate you for attempting to be coherent. You didn&#39;t manage, but at least you tried.

Top Effort.

Small point though. Belonging to other would be other&#39;s.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by nikita69+19 October 2003 - 06:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (nikita69 &#064; 19 October 2003 - 06:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@19 October 2003 - 06:40
Is it possible that Arafat doesnt trust Sharon bacause the last time he did, in Lebanon, early 80&#39;s....he left 1000&#39;s of Palestinian women and children in his tender care, at the insistance of the USA, while he removed all the Palestinian fighters.

He did this....10,000 Palestinian fighters left Lebanon, leaving their wives and children behind under Israeli "Protection"...


The Israelis then invited the Christian and Muslim "Militia" there into the refugee camps and watched them massacre them....... 3000+, before the population of Israel found out what was happening and forced their government to stop it.

The Americans didnt even say they were bad boys.....


Clocker,

If it had been you.....would you trust the man again?
Very imporart and historical time frame. I was working for a relief agency then and stationed there at that time.

When Araft and his army left Beirut in summer of 1983, he went to Tripoli, Lebanon. Then Syria&#39;s army came in surrounded Tripoli to capture Arafat, dead or alive. 2 weeks of massive fighting between the PLO and the Syrian Army, hundreds of civillians died and thousands were injured.

Phillip Habib was sent back and struck a deal with Syria to allow a safe passage for Arafat and his followers thru their land to Jordan. Syria agreed to it. Neither the US, Israelis, nor Arafat trusted Hafez Al-Assad that Arafat will pass thru Syria without killing or capturing him first. So Habib struck another deal to have the PLO forces leave thru Syria and Arafat to go to Morroco via the Israeli Navy (were he stayed there several years before going back to Palistine.

And that&#39;s exactly what happened. Our agency was responsible for the assistance of supplying medical & food products to the PLO.

As for the Sabra & Shatila, the Palestinian camps in East Beirut, was setup by Sharon & the "Kata&#39;ab" led by Eli Hobaika & Samir Jaajaa who are "christian" maronite and "muslim" factions didn&#39;t take any part of those massacres. [/b][/quote]
Considering that the whole invasion of Lebanon was based on "retaliation" for terrorist attacks that are now universally recognised as not having actually happened (while he was nominally in charge of IDF and Mossad)

How can we believe anything Sharon actually says?

Since he 1st came to public office and prior, he has spoken of "Greater Israel" and he moves towards this, his life long goal. The fact that this means annexing all territory occupied by the Pallestinians, leads me to doubt greatly any "Road Map to Peace" that involves him. After all, he doesnt recognise the Palestinian "Right to Exist". It must have been a terrible blow to him personally when they recognised Israels "Right to Exist" 13 years ago.


As to his attack on Syria, we just have to look again at his "Greater Israel". Jordan and Lebanon are no threat to him at all; Syria is. His "Greater Israel" depends upon Syria not getting involved in any Islamic "Guerrilla" warfare...not only of Pallestinians, but of "fighters" from Lebanon and Southern Jordon. In his own vision, both these areas will become "Protectorates" of Israel, prior to outright annexation.

This may not happen this year or next year....but if Sharon and his cronies are not removed, it will happen.

Of course, when people are stupid enough to do this (http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/publish/article_1877.shtml), in the current climate, its not surprising that Israel is more aggresive in its stance.

It was after all, a similar innocent event that gave Saddam Hussain the impression that it was OK to invade Kuwaite, when the Americans (his biggest allies at that time) told him they were not interested in "a purely Arabian War"....

The Syrians have attempted many times to pass information regarding terrorists to the CIA over the last 20 years, and even contacted the FBI when the CIA refused to take them up on the offers...all to no avail. The USA therefore have no right to accuse Syria, any more than they can accuse themselves, of supporting terrorism........the fact is, both countries do, and both countries will betray the same at the drop of a hat.

This isnt criticism (well it is), every country does.....any government active in world affairs, lies if it denies this fact.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by JPaul@20 October 2003 - 00:51
I never mentioned her syntax, there were more basic problems than sentence construction.

I congratulate you for attempting to be coherent. You didn&#39;t manage, but at least you tried.

Top Effort.

Small point though. Belonging to other would be other&#39;s.
Gee thanks but seriously...

Why, if you do know what a person is saying,
do you have to be an ass though?

I do congratulate you for your attempt at being one. You managed well.

Top Effort.

[cpt_azad]

Originally posted by JPaul@18 October 2003 - 12:40
So the Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists. I&#39;m glad you agree.

In that case the US is providing assistance to it&#39;s friend, the State of Israel, to deal with a terrorist problem.

Seems fair enough to me.
JP ur an idiot, i swear 2 god man&#33; u&#39;ve got 2 be permafried or something man 2 say that. of course they&#39;re TERRORISTS&#33;&#33; stupid kid. who&#39;s side r u gonna take? imagine, a man that lost his family, his house tore down, nothing to lose. would u want revenge? or would be an idiot like u r and just say "oh, they&#39;re doing the right thing, illegally occupying my land, tearing down houses, and shooting inncent ppl". it that&#39;s a terrorist, then don&#39;t even try to explain what an israeli bastard soldier is, i think u&#39;ll just run out of vocabulary and start takin a shit or somethin. dam man, think b4 u speak. one more thing... r u a zionist jp? just curious.
israeli troops don&#39;t give a shit, their pm is a terrorist (he blew up those houses in 1967 and killed like 40 innocent ppl, wait, massacred).

EDIT: SO 2 ALL&#33;&#33;&#33; SPREAD THE WORD&#33;&#33;&#33; JP IS AN IDIOT, BRAVO&#33;&#33;&#33;

[Billy_Dean]

EDIT: SO 2 ALL&#33;&#33;&#33; SPREAD THE WORD&#33;&#33;&#33; JP IS AN IDIOT, BRAVO&#33;&#33;&#33;

A t-shirt, maybe??


:)

[cpt_azad]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@26 October 2003 - 00:53

EDIT: SO 2 ALL&#33;&#33;&#33; SPREAD THE WORD&#33;&#33;&#33; JP IS AN IDIOT, BRAVO&#33;&#33;&#33;

A t-shirt, maybe??


:)
lol, ya that&#39;d be a good marketing promotion :lol: , aw man, jp&#39;s so invulnerable(did i spell that rite, probably didn&#39;t, but atleast i&#39;m not as stupid as him :lol: )

[echidna]

Originally posted by Busyman+20 October 2003 - 10:18--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman &#064; 20 October 2003 - 10:18)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>@echnida Did Mandela go and kill white people indiscriminately. I don&#39;t think so.
Palestinians target any Israeli though.[/b]
Yes Busyman. you may have been too busy to realise that the ANC used terror methods like car bombs in public spaces. The same ANC which is the organisation through-which mandela gained political power.
But you see mandela is a terrorist who is on OUR side now so he&#39;s OK. israelis and palestinians both use terror tactics, it just isn&#39;t acceptable in the corperate media for the israeli tactics to be discussed for what they actually are.

here my point is again;


Originally posted by http://www.despardes.com/Opinion/europe&#045;not&#045;marching&#045;to&#045;us&#045;drum&#045;090102.html@
South Africa in the &#39;80s, Nelson Mandela&#39;s ANC bombed restaurants and buses packed with civilians. South Africa branded the ANC a "terrorist organization." Yet abroad, Mandela and his ANC were hailed as "freedom fighters." Former Afghan "freedom fighters," like Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, are today scourged as "terrorists."

In Europe, during the &#39;70s and &#39;80s, Palestinian groups staged high-profile attacks to gain international attention for their then little-known cause.

The Irish Republican Army, largely financed by Americans, waged a bloody campaign to unite Belfast with Ireland. In 1993, the IRA detonated a huge truck bomb in London, causing nearly &#036;1 billion US in damage, the most costly terror attack until the 2001 World Trade Center outrage.


here is some american over-reaction [this article is mostly criticle of mandela because nelson has pointed out what a dim-wit GW is];

<!--QuoteBegin-http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune&#045;review/opinion/datelinedc/s_146312.html
Mandela was convicted of terrorism in 1963 and freely admitted at his trial, "I do not deny that I planned sabotage. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation."

As economic sanctions, and especially an oil embargo brought about the end of the white regime in South Africa, Mandela was released and became the ANC leader. The ANC&#39;s terrorist arm, which Mandela headed in 1963 -- called Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) or Spear of the Nation -- continued waging terrorist attacks with arson, political murder and robberies.

It was at this time that the recently freed Mandela told cadres from a Umkhonto meeting in Venda, "It was always my view that the armed liberation struggle is based on and grows out of mass political struggle fought by the oppressed." He called for the total defeat of "the white minority."
[/quote]

and for a really harsh view of nelsons gang read this (http://www.rebellie.org/Boeremoord/ANC%20terrorism.htm)