Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wingnut_0 on April 06, 2002, 09:41:54 AM
-
When they have the army throwing stun grenades, rubber bullets and at least on one occasion real bullets at the media?
-
..maybe it's stime to send geraldo in?
-
Well, since most eurpoean and arab media are incredibly biased against Israel, I suppose they are thinking something along the lines of: "Get the #$¤# outta here and take that ´&#¤ camera with you"
I dont know about the US media, but somehow I suspect that no US journalists are in danger.
-
Fine Hortlund.
But it sure seems strange to see long-time BBC journalists getting shot at by Israeli soldiers, when it's absolutely clear who they are and why they are there.
What's your answer to that?
-
Might wanna tell that to the NBC journalists in the clearly marked TV car that took 2 bullets in the window from a soldier.
-
There has been a DEFINITE change in how Israeli soldiers behave towards journalists. The only conclusion from this is that the Israeli forces have been given specific orders regarding this matter. Which suggests a desire for media black-out on the Israeli's part.
And while we are on the subject:
Israel given new pullout warning - Colin Powell (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1914000/1914096.stm)
-
I guess the Israelis just wants the media out. Personally I can understand it. If you are going to have your soldiers going from house to house rounding up suspects, you are bound to get some "kodak moments" with soldiers dragging palestinian fathers away from crying women and children etc. Not exactly a PR dream...
-
While shooting the media is always a bad idea for any nation with pretensions of democracy, I absolutely LOVE the coverage it gets. I mean, come on CNN (who had a journalist get shot at) was acting VERY wounded about it. I mean, they might as well have filmed a beatin puppy and ran the story. "The journalists were told to leave, but some of them didn't hear the order, and THEY WERE SHOT!!! (with rubber bullets) I mean really, they knew what they were doing. I don't think Israel should be shooting anything at journalists, but it's not as if the journalists were just standing around eating lunch or anything.
-Sikboy
-
Hortlund there was a video where Israel soldiers blow up a door to the apartment and thus also wounded a woman behind that door.
Well that's not all: They also did not let help to get there and wounded women bleeded dead.
-
Seems to me the Israeli's are at war against the terrorists from Palestine
This makes the occupied areas the Israeli's are hunting the terrorists, a war zone.
If the journalist do not want to get shot at, I'd suggest they stay out of the war zone.
How difficult is it to mistake a shoulder mounted camera as a weapon? I would not think very ....
The journalist are in there for their own ego. That one shot or story which sky rockets their career into Geraldo status. They ain't there on some humanitarian mission. Play close to the fire and you get burned, sometimes .....
-
I was stunned when I saw that video.I tought it was a very bad move by the israelis.
Than I saw a gentleman talking on CNN about it.
He said there were jurnalists and cameramen at the site where the palestinians linched some 4 palestinians for collaborating with the israelis.After it was over they went up to the cameramen and took their videotapes,stressing their point by gunpoint.
So We will never see that part of the story.
Stungranedes and rubberbullets sure suck,but not life treatning.
The arabs would have killed them for those tapes.
BTW some of the protesters who walked into Arafat`s HQ were israelis.They`ll never be linched by their own people,but the arabs go around killing their own for having a different idea about how things should go.
Go figure people.....I wonder how long it takes untill everyone reallizes what`s really going on there.
-
I disagree Eagler and suggest you read some of the auto-biographical stuff by decent warzone reporters - two British ones are Martin Bell and Max Hastings. I bet there are plenty of US contemporaries.
They truly believe they are doing us a service by opening our eyes to what goes on in the world. I value their efforts, work and occasionally, their sacrifice.
What's the alternative? Press reports from the PLO and interviews with Israeli Defence Force PR people?
No thanks.
As for mistaking a camera for a rifle. That's the most absurd thing I've heard all day. In the footage I've seen the journalist's vehicles were marked and the soldiers were only a few metres away atop an APC. They knew they were journalists.
They also knew their orders...
-
I saw video footage on BBC where was a guy struggling on the ground with israeli soldier and other guy next to him and was said he was italian reporter who was shot in the stomach by MG of a tank.
Soon after was also seen video footage of tank pointing cannon at the BBC's car - as you can guess, they reversed away in nice order.
There was also something of finnish journalist whos been shot at on 3 occasiosn by israelis, maybe for warning or maybe not..
Israelis doesn't seem to be making difference between palestinians with rocks and with western journalists with camera hanging from the neck.
-
Wonder where Eagler got his brain wash, they did a damn fine job with it.
Catching terrorists should not be something to hide. If the Israelis where convinced of their own story they should not have any problem letting people tell us about it first hand.
-
Any outrage that I might feel is completely overshadowed by pure jealousy
-
I`ve never been in combat,the closest thing is problably Ghost Recon or OFP I`ve experienced.And in the heat of a firefight I shot and been shot by my own many times.
I bet the last thing the israelis need is piles of dead reporters who were shot by accident in the battles in the West Bank.
No scuicide bomber in 5 days......WTFG Israel
-
shootin a non combatant when you know it is a non combatant is murder. any way you cut it.you guys who made fun of it are acting badly in my oppinion ( like you care )
seems like some of you are saying that because you dont like the u.s. liberal media its ok for israeli soldiers to murder civilian reporters from other countrys. ( hell all you hear now is how wonderfull the israelis are on the news in usa anyway) but shooting a reporter in the belly cause you dont like what they say about you is well, totaly diddlyed up.
-
and sorry hortland but what right do isreali soldiers have to give orders on palistininian land ? to forign civilian press ? in territory that they invaded and have no right to be on ? the isrealis are totaly shure we wont cut off their aid but the day is comming and they are so outnumbered and when we cut them off out gunned. hell even their own military is in rebellion ( or 300 troops ) have refused unlawful orders to invade teritory. who ever is in charge of them has lost it.
just my scared toejamless opinion i dont want to fight another war and definatly not for israel.
-
seems like some of you are saying that because you dont like the u.s. liberal media its ok for israeli soldiers to murder civilian reporters from other countrys. ( hell all you hear now is how wonderfull the israelis are on the news in usa anyway) but shooting a reporter in the belly cause you dont like what they say about you is well, totaly diddlyed up.
Stunn-grenades..rubber bullets....read man read
Accidents happen,there are countless cameramen,reporter..etc fell in countless wars before.They go into harm`s way and they get killed sometimes.They have a dangerous job to do,and I respect them a great deal.
The reason why those israelis shot at them with non-leathal weapons,to keep them out of areas where they would get killed allmost certainly.
-
Little Boots
"Stunn-grenades..rubber bullets....read man read"
i have used stun grenades( were called flash ) and seen the effects of rubber bullets that israelis use (really hard plastic just like a shotgun slug but lighter quite capable of penitrating the body cavity. both are easly fatal.
but that wasent what is was talking about.
fishu
"I saw video footage on BBC where was a guy struggling on the ground with israeli soldier and other guy next to him and was said he was italian reporter who was shot in the stomach by MG of a tank."
please show me a picture of this non lethal rubber tank heavy machinegun round, i cant wait. wait you can't ? cause there aint no such thing? please dont take this wrong but you are a man with a mission it seems.
-
Originally posted by ~Caligula~
The reason why those israelis shot at them with non-leathal weapons,to keep them out of areas where they would get killed allmost certainly.
LOL! Do you really believe in that?
-
I`ve never been in combat,the closest thing is problably Ghost Recon or OFP I`ve experienced.And in the heat of a firefight I shot and been shot by my own many times.
Good Lord!
-
During the rule of King Herod the Great Jesus of Nazareth, peace be upon him was born. And years after, he began his teaching mission. His attempts to call people back to the pure teachings of Abraham and Moses were judged subversive by the authorities. He was tried and sentenced to death; "yet they did not slay him but only a likeness that was shown to them."
I submit that the remainder of this site has nothing more than confused facts (as this entire quote is misinformation). Hell, everyone in the region is confused to the point of STUPIDITY. Apparently, just setting foot in the region brings on a massive attack of stupidity. There must be something in the air, or water.
Ah, it's the heat! Must be.
-
What are the Israeli leaders thinking?
They are thinking that Bush will have to contradict the Bush Doctrine if he wants to curtail their ethnic cleansing campaign. They know that public opinion in the US is rabidly anti-terrorist, and since a tiny percentage of the Palestinian population are undeniably terrorists, the Israelis see an opportunity to achieve their version of the Enloesung err final solution without interference from Uncle Sam.
-
All these opinions posted here are exactly that, opinions. None of you are there and none of you have seen what is really happening. Don't trash other people just because you think that your opinion is the correct one, it won't help the situation any if everyone just gets pissed off at each other.
I'm not there either, obvisously. It is a fact that no suicide bombings have happened for five days now. That may or may not be directly related to the Israeli's incursion into Palenstein territory. If Israel really is doing what it claims to be doing, rooting out terrorists and then leaving, and it works I am all for it.
-
I think trying to justify the actions of Israeli soldiers by using Ghost Recon analogies, is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard on this BBS!
Well apart from TheWobble's 'experiences' that is...
-
im still hangin on the one eagler said
how once the israelis really invaded palistine the suicide bombers were to afraid to attack. i fell out of my chair.
-
I think the suicide bombers stopped because they lost their boom-belt factory :D :D
-
What are the Israeli leaders thinking?
This is apparently the text of an interview Ariel Sharon gave in 1982, after the Shabra and Shatila massacres had forced him out of politics.
This comes by way of this thread
http://www.onwar.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000731.html
You can judge the accuracy yourself from comments later in the thread, but nobody seems to be denying it.
The following is a reprint of an interview with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon by Amos Oz as originally published in the Israeli daily Davar on 17 December 1982. The man referred to as C. is Sharon.
"You can call me anything you like. Call me a monster or a murderer. Just note that I don't hate Arabs. On the contrary. Personally, I am much more at ease with them, and especially with the Bedouin, than with Jews. Those Arabs we haven't yet spoilt are proud people, they are irrational, cruel and generous. It's the Yids that are all twisted. In order to straighten them out you have to first bend them sharply the other way. That, in brief, is my whole ideology.
"Call Israel by any name you like, call it a Judeo-Nazi state as does Leibowitz. Why not? Better a live Judeo-Nazi than a dead saint. I don't care whether I am like Ghadafi. I am not after the admiration of the gentiles. I don't need their love. I don't need to be loved by Jews like you either. I have to live, and I intend to ensure that my children will live as well. With or without the blessing of the Pope and the other religious leaders from the New York Times. I will destroy anyone who will raise a hand against my children, I will destroy him and his children, with or without our famous purity of arms. I don't care if he is Christian, Muslim, Jewish or pagan. History teaches us that he who won't kill will be killed by others. That is an iron law.
"Even if you'll prove to me by mathematical means that the present war in Lebanon is a dirty immoral war, I don't care. Moreover, even if you will prove to me that we have not achieved and will not achieve any of our aims in Lebanon, that we will neither create a friendly regime in Lebanon nor destroy the Syrians or even the PLO, even then I don't care. It was still worth it. Even if Galilee is shelled again by Katyushas in a year's time, I don't really care. We shall start another war, kill and destroy more and more, until they will have had enough. And do you know why it is all worth it? Because it seems that this war has made us more unpopular among the so-called civilised world.
"We'll hear no more of that nonsense about the unique Jewish morality, the moral lessons of the holocaust or about the Jews who were supposed to have emerged from the gas chambers pure and virtuous. No more of that. The destruction of Eyn Hilwe (and it's a pity we did not wipe out that hornet's nest completely!), the healthy bombardment of Beirut and that tiny massacre (can you call 500 Arabs a massacre?) in their camps which we should have committed with our own delicate hands rather than let the Phalangists do it, all these good deeds finally killed the roadkill talk about a unique people and of being a light upon the nations. No more uniqueness and no more sweetness and light. Good riddance."
"I personally don't want to be any better than Khomeini or Brezhnev or Ghadafi or Assad or Mrs. Thatcher, or even Harry Truman who killed half a million Japanese with two fine bombs. I only want to be smarter than they are, quicker and more efficient, not better or more beautiful than they are. Tell me, do the baddies of this world have a bad time? If anyone tries to touch them, the evil men cut his hands and legs off. They hunt and catch whatever they feel like eating. They don't suffer from indigestion and are not punished by Heaven. I want Israel to join that club. Maybe the world will then at last begin to fear me instead of feeling sorry for me. Maybe they will start to tremble, to fear my madness instead of admiring my nobility. Thank god for that. Let them tremble, let them call us a mad state. Let them understand that we are a wild country, dangerous to our surroundings, not normal, that we might go crazy if one of our children is murdered - just one! That we might go wild and burn all the oil fields in the Middle East! If anything would happen to your child, god forbid, you would talk like I do. Let them be aware in Washington, Moscow, Damascus and China that if one of our ambassadors is shot, or even a consul or the most junior embassy official, we might start World War Three just like that !"
......We are talking while sitting on the balcony of the pretty country house belonging to C. which is situated in a prosperous Moshav. To the west we see a burning sunset and there is a scent of fruit trees in the air. We are being served iced coffee in tall glasses. C. is about fifty years old. He is a man well known for his (military) actions. He is a strong, heavy figure wearing shorts but no shirt. His body is tanned a metallic bronze shade, the colour of a blond man living in the sun. He puts his hairy legs on the table and his hands on the chair. There is a scar on his neck. His eyes wander over his plantations. He spells out his ideology in a voice made hoarse by too much smoking:
"Let me tell me [sic] what is the most important thing, the sweetest fruit of the war in Lebanon: It is that now they don't just hate Israel. Thanks to us, they now also hate all those Feinschmecker Jews in Paris, London, New York, Frankfurt and Montreal, in all their holes. At last they hate all these nice Yids, who say they are different from us, that they are not Israeli thugs, that they are different Jews, clean and decent. Just like the assimilated Jew in Vienna and Berlin begged the anti-Semite not to confuse him with the screaming, stinking Ostjude, who had smuggled himself into that cultural environment out of the dirty ghettos of Ukraine and Poland. It won't help them, those clean Yids, just as it did not help them in Vienna and Berlin. Let them shout that they condemn Israel, that they are all right, that they did not want and don't want to hurt a fly, that they always prefer being slaughtered to fighting, that they have taken it upon themselves to teach the gentiles how to be good Christians by always turning the other cheek. It won't do them any good. Now they are getting it there because of us, and I am telling you, it is a pleasure to watch.
-
Split in to two parts because it was too long for the board:
"They are the same Yids who persuaded the gentiles to capitulate to the bastards in Vietnam, to give it in to Khomeini, to Brezhnev, to feel sorry for Sheikh Yamani because of his tough childhood, to make love not war. Or rather, to do neither, and instead write a thesis on love and war. We are through with all that. The Yid has been rejected, not only did he crucify Jesus, but he also crucified Arafat in Sabra and Shatila. They are being identified with us and that's a good thing! Their cemeteries are being desecrated, their synagogues are set on fire, all their old nicknames are being revived, they are being expelled from the best clubs, people shoot into their ethnic restaurants murdering small children, forcing them to remove any sign showing them to be Jews, forcing them to move and change their profession.
"Soon their palaces will be smeared with the slogan: Yids, go to Palestine! And you know what? They will go to Palestine because they will have no other choice! All this is a bonus we received from the Lebanese war. Tell me, wasn't it worth it? "Soon we will hit on good times. The Jews will start arriving, the Israelis will stop emigrating and those who already emigrated will return. Those who had chosen assimilation will finally understand that it won't help them to try and be the conscience of the world. The 'conscience of the world' will have to understand through its arse what it could not get into its head. The gentiles have always felt sick of the Yids and their conscience, and now the Yids will have only one option: to come home, all of them, fast, to install thick steel doors, to build a strong fence, to have submachine guns positioned at every corner of their fence here and to fight like devils against anyone who dares to make a sound in this region. And if anyone even raises his hand against us we'll take away half his land and burn the other half, including the oil. We might use nuclear arms. We'll go on until he no longer feels like it...
"...You probably want to know whether I am not afraid of the masses of Yids coming here to escape anti-semitism smearing us with their olive oil until we go all soft like them. Listen, history is funny in that way, there is a dialectic here, irony. Who was it who expanded the state of Israel almost up the boundaries of the kingdom of King David? Who expanded the state until it covered the area from Mount Hermon to Raz Muhammad? Levi Eshkol. Of all people, it was that follower of Gordon, that softie, that old woman. Who, on the other hand, is about to push us back into the walls of the ghetto? Who gave up all of Sinai in order to retain a civilised image? Beitar's governor in Poland, that proud man Menahem Begin. So you can never tell. I only know one thing for sure: as long as you are fighting for your life all is permitted, even to drive out all the Arabs from the West Bank, everything.
"Leibowitz is right, we are Judeo-Nazis, and why not? Listen, a people that gave itself up to be slaughtered, a people that let soap to be made of its children and lamp shades from the skin of its women is a worse criminal than its murderers. Worse than the Nazis...If your nice civilised parents had come here in time instead of writing books about the love for humanity and singing Hear O Israel on the way to the gas chambers, now don't be shocked, if they instead had killed six million Arabs here or even one million, what would have happened? Sure, two or three nasty pages would have been written in the history books, we would have been called all sorts of names, but we could be here today as a people of 25 million!
"Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to have everyone hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it means blowing up one or two synagogues here and there, I don't care. And I don't mind if after the job is done you put me in front of a Nuremberg Trial and then jail me for life. Hang me if you want, as a war criminal. Then you can spruce up your Jewish conscience and enter the respectable club of civilised nations, nations that are large and healthy. What you lot don't understand is that the dirty work of Zionism is not finished yet, far from it. True, it could have been finished in 1948, but you interfered, you stopped it. And all this because of the Jewishness in your souls, because of your Diaspora mentality. For the Jews don't grasp things quickly. If you open your eyes and look around the world you will see that darkness is falling again. And we know what happens to a Jew who stays out in the dark. So I am glad that this small war in Lebanon frightened the Yids. Let them be afraid, let them suffer. They should hurry home before it gets really dark. So I am an anti-Semite ? Fine. So don't quote me, quote Lilienblum instead [an early Russian Zionist - ed.]. There is no need to quote an anti-Semite. Quote Lilienblum, and he is definitely not an anti-Semite, there is even a street in Tel Aviv named after him. (C. quotes from a small notebook that was lying on his table when I arrived)
'Is all that is happening not a clear sign that our forefathers and ourselves...wanted and still want to be disgraced? That we enjoy living like gypsies.' That's Lilienblum. Not me. Believe me. I went through the Zionist literature, I can prove what I say.
"And you can write that I am disgrace to humanity, I don't mind, on the contrary. Let's make a deal: I will do all I can to expel the Arabs from here, I will do all I can to increase anti-semitism, and you will write poems and essays about the misery of the Arabs and be prepared to absorb the Yids I will force to flee to this country and teach them to be a light unto the gentiles. How about it ?"
It was there that I stopped C.'s monologue for a moment and expressed the thought passing through my mind, perhaps more for myself than for my host. Was it possible that Hitler had not only hurt the Jews but also poisoned their minds? Had that poison sunk in and was still active? But not even that idea could cause C. to protest or raise his voice. After all, he said to have never shouted under stress, even during the famous operations his name is associated with.
-
Good reading....he`s a true maniac,but that`s something everyone knows.Most of all the people who voted for him.
I guess Israel needed a maniac to deal with the maniacs.
-
a maniac is a maniac freind to none threat to all.
-
I think Patton was the same caliber guy.Did he do good for the allies in your oppinion?
-
WOW
I like Sharon now! I like!
-
Patton was a soldier responsible to his superiors in a coherant system, excentric yea but advocating the killing of inocents and his own people i think not. you insult and defame his name using it in that comparison.
he was publicly made to appologise and then relieved of his command for insulting a enlisted man . your dude is massacreing civilions and wants to use nukes to prove a point (did i mention the genocide thing?)and got elected head of a government BIG difference
i respectfully pull out of this dissagreement my opinion is now set and yours is also. such is life. i really resent the patton comparison tho.
-
Oh well.
I used to be a total leftist.Now I`m all out rightwing.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
At least the guy is honest,no need to wonder about what might be in he`s mind.
Arafat on the other hand a damn liar,and I can`t understand how can anyone with their right mind can belive a word that dipshit says.
-
Thought you might feel an empathy with Sharon, Grunherz.
He'd fit in just fine, down in the Balkans.
-
Five Israelis hurt in Ghajar
Five Israeli Arabs were injured Saturday evening when Hezbollah gunmen opened fire at an IDF post in the Arab village of Ghajar. Hezbollah militants also fired on two other posts along Israel's northern border, one in the Western Galillee area, and one in the mount Hermon area. IDF troops returned fire.
An eyewitness in the Arab village of Ghajar said two or three shells were launched at the village. One of the shells hit a house and injured three people. The three injured people are all members of one family, including an three-year-old boy who was seriously injured and taken by helicopter to the Rambam hospital in Haifa.
What will You say when the IDF goes and hunts down these amazinhunks?Another evil move of the Nazi israeli regime?
They don`t even care about their own people.
-
LOL
I don't want him there, but hell if he's causing a ruckus and a war someware away from where I am thats all fine by me. Far away wars are always good for morale and unity and should be encouraged. I can't wait till later this year when we hopefully attack Iraq! What a blast that will be! :)
But I guess the peaceful Brits of today don't quite get that now? How bout you go colonise some African nation again. I always thought Rhodesia had a better ring to it than Zimbabwe, I mean what knid of a name is Zimbabwe for a country...... :rolleyes:
-
I'm sure invading Iraq will be a laugh. Especially for you, my friend, sat thousands of miles away in a comfortable chair with CNN on the TV. I'm sure there'll be plenty for you to enjoy.
Now let's see. Colonisation of Africa began several centuries ago, whereas your brethren were slaughtering each other by the thousand only 7 years ago. At least the British could claim to have developed and grown from Imperial/territorialistic policy.
In the aftermath of Warlord rule in the balkans, can your compatriots claim the same?
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
and sorry hortland but what right do isreali soldiers have to give orders on palistininian land ? to forign civilian press ? in territory that they invaded and have no right to be on ? the isrealis are totaly shure we wont cut off their aid but the day is comming and they are so outnumbered and when we cut them off out gunned. hell even their own military is in rebellion ( or 300 troops ) have refused unlawful orders to invade teritory. who ever is in charge of them has lost it.
just my scared toejamless opinion i dont want to fight another war and definatly not for israel.
They have every right lord dolf. I posted this in another thread, it pretty much sums up the "who owns what" question when it comes to Israel and the palestinians.
Oh..and regarding your "Im scared and dont want to fight a war for Israel" there is a quote that I think is very fitting to the situation after 9-11. "Young man, you may not be interested in war, but I assure you war is interested in you." While you ponder those wise words I leave you with the legal aspects of Israel and her "occupied" territories.
Enjoy...
You have to decide what country owns what territory before you can make bold statements regarding any occupation or "theft".
Before we even start, are you basing that statement on the 1975 Helsinki final act of the Conference of Security and Co-operation? Because if you dont, I want you to tell me who decides what country owns what territory. And if you base your statement on the Helsinki final act, where does that leave the Palestinians in their demand for a country of their own?
After you have made up your mind on what territory is occupied/stolen, and from whom? You can go on to the question which law is governing the alleged occupied territory, and if the answer to that question is the occupant, then what conclusions can be drawn from that?
IF you say that the territory is occupied or stolen by Israel, you MUST answer the question "who owned it before it was occupied". Now, lets suppose you answer that question with "Palestine". (Im gonna be real nice here, so instead of diving in on you after you answer that, Im gonna tell you what the problem is). Problem is that there never was an independent country named Palestine. You had a British protectorate, which was divided into two parts "Israel" and "Palestine". The part called "Palestine" was immediately conquered by Egypt and Jordan. The part called "Israel" survived. Everyone basically agrees that the "state" of Palestine never existed, Egypt and Jordan absorbed its territory. In another war 20 yrs later Israel conquered the territory from the new owners. Now I ask you, the West Bank and the Gaza strip... who owned it before Israel conquered it? Jordan, Egypt or "Palestine"?
If you claim that Israel occupies Palestinian territory, then you have effectively created a vaccum, because Palestine does not exist, and it has indeed never existed. That would mean that Israel "occupies" land that doesn't belong to anyone. And in such a case, the territory occupied is considered a part of the occupying country. Clearly you would not want that, so you must find some other way. How about Jordan then? After the 48-war, Jordan occupied the west bank and claimed ownership over the territory. Problem with that line of argument is that nowadays states never recognize aggressive warfare as a legal way to increase your country's territory. And besides, Jordan has stated that the river Jordan is her western border. That would mean that the west bank is abandoned territory, and thus it belongs to the country claiming it by occupation. And again, Israel owns the west bank.
Leaving all that legal complexity aside (its complicated huh…and no fun either), it should be pretty obvious that Israel currently "owns" the west bank. Israeli law is applicable on the territory, it is defended by Israeli armed forces, and no other country claims any legal rights to that territory.
You cant steal something that has no owner. Tough huh?
-
Hortlund, good quote there. Who wrote it?
[snippet] <<>>
Exactly. And the Turks owned the region before the British got hold of it, I believe. Syria took some of that land too, not just Jodan. So it seems the neighbors never really recognized "Palestinian" lands either. And it's becoming apparent to me that people don't realize there were already Jews in the area. The UN didn't just push "Palestinians" out and bus in a bunch of Jews. Yeah, there was a great influx after WW2, but there were already Jews there in an area not really owned by indigenous peoples. But as the British were leaving, the Jewish people in the region beat the Palestinians to the punch in getting their own country recognized. The day after that, Arab neighbors stole the "Palestinian" lands (partition.)
Wake up. This isn't about land. It's a religious hatred and quest for extermination of Jewish peoples.
-
"Especially for you, my friend, sat thousands of miles away in a comfortable chair with CNN on the TV. I'm sure there'll be plenty for you to enjoy."
EXACTLY! :)
I sure hope they do another highway to Basra and get it all on tape this time so I can see it well and have good ole time!
-
Uhhhm.....
Steven are you saying there were no arabs in that part of the middle east, that it was mostly just indigenous jews?
Do you have any idea how many zionist nazi jew terrorists invaded that area from just early this past century, not to mention the torrent after WW2.
-
Grun,
No and No.
-
http://www.palestinehistory.com/time1900.htm
there are about 5.2 million jews in isreal last census not including arab citizens .
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
there are about 5.2 million jews in isreal last census not including arab citizens .
fascinating...
(is there a point to that somewhere that went right over my head?)
-
well, how many Jews are there counting the Arabs???
-
..and how many americans counting jews and arabs?
sorry.
couldn't resist. ;)
-
I'm not sure if I started this counting of peoples or not. My original point was more along the lines that there were already Jews in the region going a long ways back (and yes, as well as Arabs) in an area which really was not an autonomous state and never really a "Palestine" state. Not ruled by its indigenous peoples, the area was controled by Turkey and later the British. But as the British were packing to leave, the Jews were able to usurp the Arabs (I guess) and get their own land. Why I said this, and my whole point, is because sometimes it sounds to me as though some people believe there was not a single Jew in the region and the UN or whoever made all the Arabs pack up and move and then shipped in Jews from Europe. How can you steal something if you are already living there and for many, many generations prior to WW2? As for stealing, talk with the Jordanians and Egyptians.
I guess I have to work on my communicative skills.
-
sorry hang that figgure is hard to find . but from memory i the last figure i heard whas about 30% of the jews in isreal are from america. this was about 10 years ago . and i guess 6 or 7 arab americans also . why any aray arab would want to move from america to palistine/israel is beyond me . unless they are goin to help fight sherons final solution . ok that is a nazi word but he is a self described jewdao nazi. (i still get a chill every time i write "jewdao nazi" just such a screwed up term )
-
Ok Fellas, here's something to think about.
I don't have a closed mind, and I will consider reasonable responses. Try to batten down the patriot hatches for a bit and respond as a citizen of the human race.
1. Why is it OK to persecute, kill, torture, maim, penalise, tax, "ghetto-ise", hunt, sterilise, and generally behave badly toward Jews?
2. Why is it OK for the US to bomb and invade (albeit temporarily, though the temporary part is still in question) Afghanistan on the basis of stamping out "Terrorism?
3. What nation would allow it's citizens to be killed by terrorist action without reaction?
4. How come no one seems to understand that the Israelis were displaced from Israel over a 400 year period beginning about the time of Christ's death and therefore did nothing more than the "Palestians" are doing now in attempting to reclaim "their" "homeland" when they retook Israel in '47/'48?
5. What moral imperative do the European States (inc the UK), US, and the Commonwealth countries believe they have to judge the Israeli response to perceived terrorist acts against their people, when those very Nations ignored the Holocaust until the evidence was presented to them at the end of WWII?
Please keep the insensate screaming, and frothing at the mouth to a dull roar, and a small tributary flood, respectively.
Regards
palef
-
1:) It isn't.
2:) Afghanistan harbored terrorists engaging in International Terrorism. There's a slight difference than terrorism in land disputes. One is an outright invasion of foreign soil and the other a landlord/tenant debacle, and really Palestine does not have an argument about reclaiming land in that they are disputing land that was never claimed to be theirs AS AN EXCUSE TO KILL JEWS.
3:) Hmm, I saw a trek episode once that,...
4:) It goes back further than 400 years. Israel has not been able to mount a viable force since way back (think within three generations of King David), until 1948 that is.
5:) It's not a moral imperative on the part of the U.S. (which you will see as time progresses). Rather, I believe Bush is trying to calm things down so we can flush out ALL terrorist leaders in the region. EVERY Arab nation that I can think of is a dictatorship. They stick together pretty good, and there's a lot of money down there (albeit spread thin). Rather, then make a bad situation worse, we need to segment this snake one portion at a time, before they mount a united front against us. We can fight them all at once, or use diplomacy to find the culprits and surgically remove them. Israel action is the proper one for them, but it almost seems Sharon is helping the enemy by unifiying their conviction against the U.S. (which they see as being the real director of Israel's policy anyway).
This WAR against terrorism is going to be long, hard-fought, and expensive. Jumping in and hacking away at the brush only gets things stirred up and confused. We have to hold to our convictions and NEVER forget what happened on 9/11. The U.S. is far too easily led astray by our liberals, free-thinkers, and protestors. We can't let an upcoming mood sway our conviction. We have decided upon a path of anti-terrorism, and we cannot afford to let our guard down for one minute, or we will pay the price.
Arafat IS a terrorist, but he is small fry compared to the real leaders of terrorism. Our Justice Department will root out those responsible, and our Justice has the longest reach of all.
Can you not see the danger?
-
Thanks Voss.
Thanks for thinking carefully before replying.
By 400 years I meant the period of time that the Romans basically denuded the area of the Jewish population.
Regards
palef
-
1.
The palestine can ask the same:
Why is it OK that the palestines are persecuted, killed, tortured, maimed, penalised, ghetto-ised and hunted by Israel ?
3. What nation would allow it's citizens to be killed by terrorist action without reaction?
Again the palestines could ask this question to the Israelis. When the Israeli military rages in thepalestine territory like Nazi hordes - destroying houses and butchering civilians - they could be defined as terrorists.
4. The territory was stolen in an illegitime act from the palestines and given to some foreigners who built up an apartheid regime during the last decades. Now the israeli apartheid regime, which was abusing the palestine as cheap workers has changed to a Nazi-like regime.
How could anyone have sympathy to such a terroristic regime ?
5. What moral imperative do the European States (inc the UK), US, and the Commonwealth countries believe they have to judge the Israeli response to perceived terrorist acts against their people, when those very Nations ignored the Holocaust until the evidence was presented to them at the end of WWII?
Because the european countries have failed in the past to protect people against Nazi-terrorism it is their duty to intervene when history repeats.
And it is a fact that the actual Israeli regime under Sharon is acting with massive terroristic actions against the palestines.
And it is not only Europe which demands that Israel stops its terroristic policy against the palestines.
Also Russia, China and the USA have demanded that the military hordes have to leave the palestine territory and stop their senseless killings.
The only good thing is, that Sharon with his fascistoid policy had ironicly helped the palestines to get their independant country earlier.
Now just wait until the people in the civilized world see the destructions in the palestine cities after Sharons mob left and the press could get in to document the israeli terrorism.
Then the false legend of the nice israelis and the need to help them against the bad arabs will fade away - like it is doing here day by day.
-
Babek..I have sat quietly and read your mindless ramblings for a couple of days now, wondering whether to respond or not. Somehow I get the sinking feeling that it would be easier arguing with a wall, than with you. But here goes. You certainly seem to have passion for this issue..although you seem to be lacking heavily in knowledge.
Originally posted by babek-
1.
The palestine can ask the same:
Why is it OK that the palestines are persecuted, killed, tortured, maimed, penalised, ghetto-ised and hunted by Israel ?
[/b]
Lots of reasons. There is no ghettoization going on in Israel though. That one is plain wrong.
Torture: Under certain conditions torture is permitted by Israeli law. Generally it is forbidden, but there is a "ticking bomb"-paragraph, meaning roughly, that if there is a "ticking bomb" hidden somwhere, and someone knows where that bomb is hidden, it is allowed for the police or military to use "physical persuation" to force him to reveal the location of the bomb.
Killed, maimed: Here you have to realize why some palestinians are being killed or maimed. How many Pals were being killed or maimed by the IDF before the Pals declared a "new" Intifada? What are the circumstances around each death/maiming? Is the victim a civilian caught in a crossfire, is the "victim" a stone thrower or a guman. etc etc. You have to realize that the IDF dont just take to the streets looking for palestinian civilians to shoot.
Penalised, hunted: Dunno what you mean here...please explain.
3. What nation would allow it's citizens to be killed by terrorist action without reaction?
Again the palestines could ask this question to the Israelis. When the Israeli military rages in thepalestine territory like Nazi hordes - destroying houses and butchering civilians - they could be defined as terrorists.
[/b]
Well, first you must realize that there is no Palestinian nation. Second, the private houses the Israelis destroy are the homes of suicide bombers or known terrorists. Id say that is pretty lenient considering the circumstances. Had a suicide bomber blown up some Swedish women and children, and his family was celebrating, I dont think I would settle for rubbling their house actually.
Butchering civlians? What exactly is your definition of civilian? And how do you define "butcher"?
4. The territory was stolen in an illegitime act from the palestines and given to some foreigners who built up an apartheid regime during the last decades. Now the israeli apartheid regime, which was abusing the palestine as cheap workers has changed to a Nazi-like regime.
How could anyone have sympathy to such a terroristic regime ?
[/b]
Apparently you dont know too much about international law. The territory was not stolen (at least not by Israel). Israel is a democracy, without any apartheid elements. Problem for most palestinians are that they are not Israeli citizens, and thus dont have the same rights and obligations as normal Israelis. But there is nothing strange with that...it is the same in every European or American country.
And it is a fact that the actual Israeli regime under Sharon is acting with massive terroristic actions against the palestines.
[SNIP some ramblings]
The only good thing is, that Sharon with his fascistoid policy had ironicly helped the palestines to get their independant country earlier.
Now just wait until the people in the civilized world see the destructions in the palestine cities after Sharons mob left and the press could get in to document the israeli terrorism.
Then the false legend of the nice israelis and the need to help them against the bad arabs will fade away - like it is doing here day by day.
It is hardly a "fact" that Israel is using terrorist actions against the palestines. That is just your twisted opinion of things. An opinion that is based on a number of wrongful assumptions.
The pals will not have a country in a long time yet. In fact, I dont think they ever will. Which is fine...during the time the palestinians had some limited "self government" they behaved roughly on par wiht Iraq when it comes to respect for human rights, support for terrorists and corruption. Draw your own conclusions from that.
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Somehow I get the sinking feeling that it would be easier arguing with a wall, than with you. But here goes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not known to change my opinion every day - so maybe it resembles speaking against a wall.
Maybe the anger according of the daily reports and all this senseless terrorusm had let me to use a "harder way" of argumentation, but even you will agree that the other side in this discussion is also using a hard style of argumentation.
Nevertheless - I enjoy this, while I sit at the internet-computer of the station and taking part in the discussion.
So- Lets go and discuss some of your argumentations...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Lots of reasons. There is no ghettoization going on in Israel though. That one is plain wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it ?
We have a country called Israel and inside of this country non-independant territories, where the palestines (have to) live.
Officially these territories are not part of Israel but this territory is not independent or autonomeous, but occupied by Israel.
From these territories Israel gets cheap labor crafts for their own industry.
The same concept was used by Apartheid-South Africa with the non-independent homelands.
The workers have to leave israel after their work and to go back in their - what i call - ghettos.
So - What else than a ghetto are the palestine territories ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Torture: Under certain conditions torture is permitted by Israeli law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not interested if barbaric torture is allowed or not. I just constated (and you obviously agreed with me in this point) that the palestines are tortured by the Israelis.
Btw - torture is also per definitionem a subpart of terrorism.
Whoever uses torture against someone, is also terrorising his victim and so becomes a terrorist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Penalised, hunted: Dunno what you mean here...please explain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I give one simple example - maybe it becomes more understandable, what I mean.
Some years ago, one of my collegues, a relative young MD, was in Israel.
The man is from Algeria - so he spoke in Arab to his wife. That was enough for the israeli people around him to define him as a palestinian and to attack him. When he came back to Germany he said that he now knows how the palestines must feel.
Its a fact that there are regions in Israel - like touristic-beaches - which are prohibited for palestinians.
We had similiar things in history - like the "For whites only"-things in South Africa or the "Jews prohibited"-things during Nazi-Germany time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Well, first you must realize that there is no Palestinian nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is. They have an own president, an own flag and thanks Sharon in the next time their own territory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Second, the private houses the Israelis destroy are the homes of suicide bombers or known terrorists. Id say that is pretty lenient considering the circumstances. Had a suicide bomber blown up some Swedish women and children, and his family was celebrating, I dont think I would settle for rubbling their house actually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nice emotional statement, but only distracting.
What sense has a rhetorical question like "Wouldnt you blow up the house of the man who had raped and killed your whole family?"
Its a fact that the Israelis blow up civilian houses. They say that the terrorists lived in these buildings. But according to the systematicly destructions they inflict to the infrastructure of the palestines I highly doubt that this is the true reason.
I doubt that this is a legitime terrorfighting and call the extreme destruction of civilian infrastructure terrorism (just check the definition of this word).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
Butchering civlians? What exactly is your definition of civilian? And how do you define "butcher"?
There are many reports about the war-crimes of the Israeli military.
Some weeks ago german TV reported that israeli troops entered a palestinian town, drove highhanded male civilians and shot them.
I call this butchering civilians.
BBC reported in Internet how israeli soldiers have beaten a civilian before they simly shot him in his neck (a favorite method of the nazis to execute their victims).
There were even pictures of this event, which showed this crime.
I call this butchering and terrorism against civilians.
But maybe - according to your definition - these were all terrorists and they have been sentenced to death and executed in a legitime act.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hortlund
The pals will not have a country in a long time yet. In fact, I dont think they ever will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just wait and see.
It seems unrealistic - but decades ago it also seemed unrealistic to believe that the Apartheid-regime in South Africa would change and the so called terrorist Neldon Mandela became their president.
It also seemed unrealistic that Germany became reunited and could heal many of the wounds of WW2 - but this also happened.
History has the nice side-effect to suprise us - and we are indeed living in interesting times.
:D :D
-
Originally posted by babek-
Is it ?
We have a country called Israel and inside of this country non-independant territories, where the palestines (have to) live.
Officially these territories are not part of Israel but this territory is not independent or autonomeous, but occupied by Israel.
From these territories Israel gets cheap labor crafts for their own industry.
The same concept was used by Apartheid-South Africa with the non-independent homelands.
The workers have to leave israel after their work and to go back in their - what i call - ghettos.
So - What else than a ghetto are the palestine territories ?
[/b]
First, you might want to check out the definition of "ghetto".
Second, correct me if I'm wrong here, but I dont actually think that the Palestinians are forced to live in the "non-independent territories" as you choose to call them.
Third, I dont think they are forced to work in Israel either.
Fourth, I also note that you have not yet replied to my legal "analysis" of the "occupied" territories I presented in some thread I cant remember right now. There might or might not be areas under palestinian limited self-rule, but there are no palestinian territories.
I am not interested if barbaric torture is allowed or not. I just constated (and you obviously agreed with me in this point) that the palestines are tortured by the Israelis.
Btw - torture is also per definitionem a subpart of terrorism.
Whoever uses torture against someone, is also terrorising his victim and so becomes a terrorist.
[/b]
No, I never said that "the palestinians are tortured by the Israelis" that statement is to general, and it gives a faulty impression. All I said was that there are situations under Israeli law where torture is accepted. Personally I think that is a good law. Let me ask you this question: Suppose a terrorist has hidded a nuke in London. He is caught, but he refuses to tell anyone where he hid the nuke. It will detonate in 2 hours. Which, in your opinion is better, to torture the terrorist, or to have a nuke detonated in London?
Also, your definition of terrorist is flawed.
Some years ago, one of my collegues, a relative young MD, was in Israel.
The man is from Algeria - so he spoke in Arab to his wife. That was enough for the israeli people around him to define him as a palestinian and to attack him. When he came back to Germany he said that he now knows how the palestines must feel.
Its a fact that there are regions in Israel - like touristic-beaches - which are prohibited for palestinians. We had similiar things in history - like the "For whites only"-things in South Africa or the "Jews prohibited"-things during Nazi-Germany time.
[/b]
I hardly think that anecdotal "evidence" from one of your friends can be taken as proof, or even indication that Israel is "penalizing and hunting" the Palestinians. I got curious thoug…when you say "attack him" what do you mean? Did they beat him up, or did the verbally attack him?
Well, first you must realize that there is no Palestinian nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is. They have an own president, an own flag and thanks Sharon in the next time their own territory.
[/b]
I'm really sorry Babek, "having an own flag" and "an own president" is not enough to have a nation. There are lots of criteria that has to be met before that can happen. If you want I can go into detail here, and give you the exact definition as to what constitutes a nation. Let me know if you want that.
Nice emotional statement, but only distracting.
What sense has a rhetorical question like "Wouldnt you blow up the house of the man who had raped and killed your whole family?"
Its a fact that the Israelis blow up civilian houses. They say that the terrorists lived in these buildings. But according to the systematicly destructions they inflict to the infrastructure of the palestines I highly doubt that this is the true reason.
I doubt that this is a legitime terrorfighting and call the extreme destruction of civilian infrastructure terrorism (just check the definition of this word).
[/b]
I find it pretty irrelevant what you choose to call terrorism. Allow me to point out this simple fact: If it is ok according to national or international law...then it is not terrorism. Lots of actions could be described as terrorist, but they are not, because there are more to the situation than what first might meet the eye. Let me give one example: If a paramilitary group decides to blow up an airfield in their or another country, that could be described as an act of terrorism. If the US sends in some Rangers to blow up a bridge in another country, that would NOT be an act of terrorism. Accept this and move on.
As for the Israeli destruction of Palestinian infrastructure, to me that is no different than the US destruction of Serbian or Afghan infrastructure. As for the Israeli destruction of private property, as I said to my knowledge, that has only happened as retaliation to suicide bombers…and if that is true, then it only serves them right.
There are many reports about the war-crimes of the Israeli military.
Some weeks ago german TV reported that israeli troops entered a palestinian town, drove highhanded male civilians and shot them.
I call this butchering civilians.
[/b]
Yes..hmm.."many reports". How many proved cases?
I find your second sentence puzzling, please try to explain again what happened to whom. "highhanded male civilians" what is that?
BBC reported in Internet how israeli soldiers have beaten a civilian before they simly shot him in his neck (a favorite method of the nazis to execute their victims).
There were even pictures of this event, which showed this crime.
I call this butchering and terrorism against civilians.
[/b]
I saw those pictures too. Problem is that there are more to that story than you might want to think. Consider the following:
First, what about this quote from the article " Salah - who was on a bombing mission for the militant al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade - is brought to the ground by a police".
Second, notice that there seems to be a significant jump in time between photos 3 and 4. What happened in that timespan? Any thoughs or comments?
I suppose the arab version of events would be somewhere along the lines of:
He (the suicide bomber) was subdued, then he was undressed, then he was shot in the middle of a crowded street, then (for some obscure reason) the Israelis sent in a bomb disposal robot?
It doesnt make sense. If you know the guy is a suicide bomber, you dont walk up to him.
My guess is that he was stopped for a routine check, (first 3 pictures), then he either tries to detonate his bomb, or the Israelis spots the bomb, either way, they shoot him dead (I suspect he is dead on pic 4). They then move in the robot to clear the bomb.
Put yourself in the Israeli soldiers position. You stop someone for a routine check, suddenly your backup spots a bomb strapped to him, or you see him reach for a detonator. All things considered, I'm not surprised they gunned him down. (and as I said, I dont think they knew he was carrying a bomb when they stopped him. Would make no sence at all to get up close to him in that case).
My conclusion
1) No evidence of an execution from those pictures
2) No sympathy for suicide bombers
-
What's funny is that the Palestinians have even less rights in [some] neighboring Arab countries which support their "independence" than they have in Israel.
It's not about land.
edited: added [some]