Printable View
1234, you are out of order really on this one.
Putty has said that most Israeli's and most Pallestinians are decent people.
Although condoning hunting terrorists, which we all do im sure; he has not condoned shooting children and old people.
He just does not believe its as prevalent as we do...this is not the same as supporting it.
Seriously, why bother? From the way he has lied and manipulated the info in this thread, this doesn't exactly surprise me.
this has gone waaaaaaaay off topic. wasn't the point of this thread originally that the guy was leading by example, paving the way for all of us to express our personal views about art by going to museums/galleries and... um... censoring it?
i'm gonna rent a bus for me and anyone else who wants to come along, to drive down to the local MOMA and personally take down everything we don't agree with. who's with me? :lol:
You must be brain dead! He's posted more links in every single post than you have in all your pathetic arguments. You've provided nothing but Israeli propaganda.Quote:
Originally posted by putty@9 February 2004 - 09:06
Seriously, why bother? From the way he has lied and manipulated the info in this thread, this doesn't exactly surprise me.
Get out of Palestine and take your settlers with you. Leave the Palestinians alone to get on with their lives. Palestinians and Israelis are equal, each entitled to their own. Leave theirs alone. Leave their land alone, and leave their water alone. Fuck off out!!
:(
Ratty, he has said numerous times he condones the bombing of civilian areas, and has tried to paint all of the 1000+ children killed as terrorists.
What happens when you bomb civilian areas? What happened two days ago - a 10 year old boy dies and not a single terrorist is hurt.
I acknowledged that he has stated Isreal is not always right, but if I criticised Nazi transport policy but said it's killings of civilians were ok would I be any less the fascist?
It would be nice to hear him condemn the bombing of civilians, he says the UK shouldn't have bombed Dublin yet is quite happy with his army bombing palestinian towns and cities. Until he does, he condones it.
But you are right, he won't be convinced by anything we say. Zealots never are. They are incapable of deviating from a preset position. Throw religion into the mix too and you have a recipe for disaster. I'll leave him to his lies and distortions and let you mods sleep a bit easier ;)
I'll just be brief with his last points.
I said the site not the page. Are you so stupid you do not understand the distinction? The source material is detailed on the page, and I didn't state what those sources were at all. I even gave you a clue to find it, but you've had no success so far. Think of it as a game. It amuses me at least.
Here is a link to the actual Btselem numbers.Quote:
Btselem numbers. Kindly find someone else to lie to.
It lists 35 for the last 3 months of 2000 alone. Stop the blatent lying, you just look like a fool.
He planned the PLO part of it like I said. Arafat has no control over Hamas and the rest. When Isreal refused to negiotiate, the palestinians went back to fighting for their freedom. A right preserved in international law.Quote:
His own communications minister admitted that Arafat planned the intifadah but if you say he didn't start it, ok. We believe you.
Isreal never withdrew from Area A completely. The very site and map you reference says that.Quote:
In case you don't know what Area A is, it's the area that Israel withdrew from completely as part part of Oslo. It's the area that the PA had full control over wrt social services, and security.
The map also shows exactly why it was an unacceptable deal to palestinians. It created the equivalent of the black South African ghetto "states" with no contiguous border, surrounded by Isreali land, and restricted access to water and other services.
As the map/site you quote says, Isreal never withdrew completely and has constantly invaded/violated PLO territory.Quote:
So from 1993, 80% of Palestinian population was in 100% control by the PA police.
From the site you provide -
The Oslo Accords represented a triumph for Israel’s long-standing strategy of taking as much Palestinian land as possible with as few Palestinians as possible. The Oslo Accords carved the Occupied West Bank into 3 areas, giving Palestinian full civil and security authority over “Area A”: 17.2% of the Occupied West Bank comprised of 13 non-contiguous reservations (Map: Israeli and Palestinian Security-Controlled Areas). However, Area A contained more than 80% of the Palestinian West Bank population (excluding East Jerusalem). The Oslo Accords therefore allowed Israel to carve away the vast majority of the Palestinian people onto reservations while maintaining effective control over 83% of Occupied West Bank territory. Israel never implemented the Oslo Accords’ obligation for further troop withdrawals.
For the reasons (repeated for the upteenth time) above. Isreal never withdrew and targetted PLO infrastructure.Quote:
Why were the suicide bombers not stopped? Why was Hamas not declared illegal? Why were they not arrested as required by Oslo? Israel did arrest and illegalize Kahane Chai.
No, I am calling Hamas and assiciated groups that kill civilians terrorists. I am sure many non Hamas members were killed too. I have repeatedly said I am no supporter of Jordan. I agree that it was an oppressive regime too. Does that excuse Isreali oppression? Why are you so desperate to prove others do evil in order to excuse your own evil acts? Most of the sane world knows there are extremists on all sides and that an eye for an eye leaves the world blind.Quote:
Are you sure that it was mostly terrorists that were massacred? Are you calling Palestinian civilians terrorists?
Never had a canton argument. You raised it and I have never even referred to you mentioning it. Stop lying. Again.Quote:
I wonder where your canton argument went...
The lies have all been yours. I posted quotes to prove your lies, and you just ignore them and continue doing it.Quote:
When you lie about what I say, you show everyone that your argument is going nowhere and are now resorting to the desperate
Sure is. Here is one quote to get us started -Quote:
I said this not once, but "on numerous occasions". Should be easy enough to show.
I only said that when YOUR civilians are bombarded, IN THE SOLE PURPOSE of stopping the killing in your side, no one can blame you if you bomb the other side
So you say no one can blame you for bombing palestinian civilians because a few terrorists might be near. Yet you say the UK shouldn't bomb Eire when IRA terrorists are there and launching attacks from Eire.
Why is that? Is it maybe because Eire is a mostly nice, white, non arab population? Your racism and hypocrisy is apparent.
Oh and your bombings don't stop anything, they just serve as a nice recruiting tool for Hamas and the rest while further weakening the PLO.
I guess this just about concludes our discussion.
Again, where did I say this. Show it to me and everyone else. Ratty doesn't believe you and neither does anyone else.Quote:
Ratty, he has said numerous times he condones the bombing of civilian areas
Why do you lie like this? Do you think it helps your cause?Quote:
What happened two days ago - a 10 year old boy dies and not a single terrorist is hurt.
Islamic Jihad militant, Palestinian child killed in Israeli missile strike
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...st_040207141525
For fuck's sake, WHERE GODDAMIT?????Quote:
he says the UK shouldn't have bombed Dublin
There are 2 times that mods have had to step in here in this thread:Quote:
I'll leave him to his lies and distortions and let you mods sleep a bit easier
1) Lefty trying to insult me by calling my mother a kosher crack whore
2) You lying about what I've said
Wake the fuck up, dude.
Oh why do I bother? This is truly a joke.Quote:
I said the site not the page. Are you so stupid you do not understand the distinction? The source material is detailed on the page, and I didn't state what those sources were at all.
So you contest the numbers I posted? I gave you the fucking link to them!Quote:
Unreal. :lol:
What PLO part vs. Hamas part? The PLO was in negotiations, not Hamas. Only they knew how the negotiations were going. Hamas wasn't planning an intifadah, it never stopped the first one.Quote:
He planned the PLO part of it like I said. Arafat has no control over Hamas and the rest.
Suicide bombings being a right preserved in international law. Oh this I'm gonna need a link to. I can't wait.Quote:
A right preserved in international law.
It's the PLO site itself. :DQuote:
Isreal never withdrew from Area A completely. The very site and map you reference says that.
I showed you numerous news sources that showed that Israel DID leave Area A
Wait, oh my god this is funny. You're lying even from your own quote here.
This is what it says:
It doesn't say that Israel never withdrew completely from Area A. Another lie.Quote:
Israel never implemented the Oslo Accords’ obligation for further troop withdrawals.
Un-freaking-real.
How? Show me! I showed you Btselem numbers that demonstrate that the IDF DID NOT target the PA. You think it's true because you say so?Quote:
For the reasons (repeated for the upteenth time) above. Isreal never withdrew and targetted PLO infrastructure.
And again, "Israel never withdrew". Uh huh. Too bad the PLO's own site doesn't back you up.
Your quote:Quote:
Never had a canton argument. You raised it and I have never even referred to you mentioning it. Stop lying. Again.
Excuse me but this is the canton argument.Quote:
It created the equivalent of the black South African ghetto "states" with no contiguous border, surrounded by Isreali land
First of all, minus 10 points for the (yet another) use of "South Africa". Ever hear of a straw man argument?
Now, show me where the ghettos are on that map? Show me how there's no contiguous border. Show me where it is surrounded by Israeli land.
SHOW ME ANYTHING!
Liar. Show me where I said this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Sure is. Here is one quote to get us started -
I only said that when YOUR civilians are bombarded, IN THE SOLE PURPOSE of stopping the killing in your side, no one can blame you if you bomb the other side
Post a fucking link. I dare you. Do something because you're looking very very bad.
No. You don't get off that easily. I want everyone here to see how much of a liar you are.Quote:
I guess this just about concludes our discussion.
I want the answers.
Putty, you should have checked the whole of that story...
1st.
It says the Israeli's have a policy of Assasination.........illegal under international law
2nd.
It says the wall is an obstruction to peace
3rd
It mentions the number of injured civilians, including 2 year olds...
4th
The Israeli Army Officer admits that the Militant they killed was only responsible for Military Deaths...not suicide bombers etc..
and a quote:
Quote:
Also on Saturday, nearly 3,000 protestors, including both Palestinians and Israelis, rallied in the West Bank town of Abu Dis against the Jewish state's controversial West Bank separation barrier.
"No to apartheid," "The wall creates a prison for Palestinians, a ghetto for Israel," the demonstrators chanted, many of them waving Palestinian flags.
I did check that whole story and it changes nothing, as you know.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@9 February 2004 - 22:13
]
1234 lies.
The rest of it is opinion and I have nothing against Israeli or Palestinians protesting the wall. In fact, I never said that I myself was in favour of it. I never even said that I was in favour of targetted killings.
But none of it changes the fact that this 1234 person lies and so is not someone to reason with.
Well, perhaps an impartial view could be helpful.
I've spent the last good part of an hour reviewing this thread and I firmly believe the discussion is about all the wrong things. It mostly revolves around whodunnit first, eye for an eye, which party provoked who, etc.
I'm convinced it's futile to try to (theoretically) solve it that way. Just like a complex chain function can't be solved by using the whole fuction from step 1.
One needs to look at the current situation and work from that.
So what's the situation?
One party observes his situation as so desperate, that people are willing to blow themselves up to fight out of this situation. No sane man/woman will blow him/herself and other people up under normal circumstances. So obviously some (a lot?) Palestines feel very much oppressed to reach this point.
The other party feels that it is it's birthright to be in Israel. So much so, that they fought a war to reclaim it. And use extreme measures to hold it. Also decisions sane men do not take lightly.
So here's the situation broken down and stripped of any religious, sentimental and economical arguments: It's a territorial dispute.
A dispute between the original occupant (The Palistinians and please don't come with religious arguments claiming otherwise) and the occupiers (the Jews).
Now how were these kinds of disputes solved in the past?
Simple, the strongest side gets the whole nine yards. This immediately explains some Palistinians' extreme reaction and suicide-bombing.
And why hasn't this been done so already?
Well, here's where the thesis gets muddy.
Obviously humanist factions within the Israeli Government coupled with the foreign nations' views (none more so than the US) forced a 'stand-off' in the situation.
Here's my view:
The Palestinians' reactions are basic. Primordial fear of oppression and the will to defend what percieve as their own land. These are rather hard reasons to 'battle'.
They are even described in international rights for people.
To 'battle' that, the Israeli government has created an 'eye for an eye' situation. Basically mimicing the Palestinians' 'being attacked and defend yourself' reaction.
This created time for them to develop housing and such and installing themselves on THEIR own land. See the pattern starting to shape?
Ok, so how to get out of this mess?
Well, as strange as it may sound, neither the Israeli Gov. nor the Palistians have anything to win with a compromise. The Israeli Gov. will be forced to concede more territory and the Palestinians will never get 'all their land back'.
So it's safe to assume (and indeed has been proven over the years) that neither will try to resolve the issue fully and indeed perhaps even try to escalate it.
So, sadly a resolution has to be forced
The most obvious candidate *again* to do this would be the US as they have the 3 billion funding as bargaining chip, which could be used either way.
And the (re)solution itself?
In my opinion the most ideal one would be to make Israel and Palestine 1 country with a government representing both Israelis and Palestinians.
The reason being that territorial disputes seem harder to solve/cost more lives than ethnic/religious disputes.
I know it's going to be a Phyrric victory, but one can but dream can he not...
p.s. If people stopped calling eachother liars maybe that would ease the 'discussion'. Or as a wise man once said:
"The Truth would remain the Truth if man would view it and not describe it, as any description, however complete, could never hold the whole Truth"
Well stated, NotoriousBIC. ;)
Ex malo bonum?
Perhaps-perhaps not.
We shall see, though probably not in this lifetime.