A picture says so much !

gandalf

azezil

indeed it does, seen another good one a couple of weeks back on the Independent (I think?) picture of 'Uncle Sam' startled pointing at a small mouse hole with "antrax" over the door, and behind him was a thug croc etc. with stuff writen on them like, "social problems", "murder", "crime" that sort of thing, thought it quite excellent!

Gargoyle

What the picture says is the way muslim arabs feel about Sharon, which we already knew.

Loomer

Originally posted by Gargoyle
What the picture says is the way muslim arabs feel about Sharon, which we already knew.

Incisive as usual, Gargoyle.
I think its pretty pointed, I mean how ridiculous is it that the mass media night after friggin night waxes triumphiantly of the stupid coup the west supported then lost control of in afladenstan while this fascist in Israel decides that the militant rule his state has enjoyed for 40 years over the previous inhabitants isn't enough, while the rest of the world sleeps.

Typedef

http://members.tripod.co.uk/mekanoid/newspeak.jpg

Hobbes

I prefer this one.

http://www.salon.com/comics/boll/2001/12/20/boll/story.gif

Typedef

http://www.attrition.org/gallery/politics/bush_pope.jpg
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/politics/bush_nostradamus.jpg

JustHalf

Mind telling me what that says?

I mean, it's just "humourous" political "observation", with the laughable suggestion that the "state" of Palestine is some defenseless and innocent maiden.

Typedef

Yes you're right it's all the fascists in the media poisoning our minds with clap trap like stone throwing Palestinian youth is not a match for a nuclear power, when clearly the guy throwing the stones is alot more dangerous, it's a fascist plot, thanks for pointing that out.

JustHalf

Right Typedef, show me how Palestine is a defenseless maiden that has done no wrong -- for that is what the picture is portraying Palestine as.

Typedef

Without getting into a metaphysical argument about the underlying motif's and allegories in said Sharon caricature, show me where the cartoon professes Palestine is defenceless?

Thorbar

Hmmm a sleeping little girl doesn't strike you as defenceless?

Typedef

Yes you're right, maybe we should tell all those stone-throwing Palestinian "terrorists" to "duck and cover" and then go back to dismanteling the Jewish state with their ballistic missiles huh?

Boston

Originally posted by JustHalf
Right Typedef, show me how Palestine is a defenseless maiden that has done no wrong -- for that is what the picture is portraying Palestine as.

you dont have to be pure to be deserve human rights.
we piss ourselfs in this country if murders and scum bags arent treated well in prison, but dont give to ****s once its not us doing the mistreatment, something aint right with that logic

Hobbes

Originally posted by Thorbar
Hmmm a sleeping little girl doesn't strike you as defenceless?

Sharon died of blood poisoning caused by the sleeping girl not getting proper food and drink. So palistine isn't that defenseless!!

Sand

You dont have to be pure to be given human rights, but if you try to portray yourself as a defenceless maiden when that portrayal is laughable....well, no-one is going to take it seriously, unless theyre members of the Judean Peoples Front of course.

As for getting upset over prisnors rights- You might get upset over it but I certainly dont.

Boston

you see you dont get upset about people getting upset over people in prison.
and yes they are relatively helpless, they cant stop isreal from doing anything against them in any way

Zaphod Beeblebrox

Wait a minute. Take a look at the news.
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli ground assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli helicopter assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli missile assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!

Seeing a pattern here? Obviously there are Palestinian murderers and terrorists but that doesn't change the fact that Palestinians are blowing themselves to pieces to take out Israelis for political and/or religious reasons which is something the Israelis don't seem to do too often - they just bring out the big guns. To suggest that Palestine has any kind of military equality with Israel is a joke, albeit not a very funny one. We are expected to believe that Palestine is oppressing the Israelis. Now that's funny.
When was the last time Arafat gave Sharon ultimatums while knowing Sharon could never comply with them, or send helicopters to fire missiles near Sharon's house? Now switch the names around in that sentence and the answer is: all the time. Sharon knows only too well that Arafat can't control suicide bombers. He knows Arafat can't start mass arrests of Palestinian terrorists. The USA knows it too.

Now this isn't the best comparison but bear with me on this. Imagine this scenario. A car drives into London and explodes killing 20 people. The 'Real IRA' claim responsibility. Tony Blair gives Sinn Fein an ultimatum to arrest or kill every single man that fits his definition of a republican terrorist. Sinn Fein points out that it's impossible. They don't control every political activist or terrorist. They don't know who or where they all are. If they tried to arrest them they would be killed and/or lose power. Tony Blair gives the order. Helicopters and tanks move in and start blowing up Sinn Fein members' houses. Almost every human rights group on the planet tries to intervene. Guess what happens next? George Bush appears on TV to congratulate his good friend Mr Blair and says it's about time. Get the idea?

Sand

you see you dont get upset about people getting upset over people in prison.

No what I said was

You might get upset over it but I certainly dont.

To suggest that Palestine has any kind of military equality with Israel is a joke,

No what I said was

but if you try to portray yourself as a defenceless maiden when that portrayal is laughable....well, no-one is going to take it seriously, unless theyre members of the Judean Peoples Front of course.

Sharon knows only too well that Arafat can't control suicide bombers. He knows Arafat can't start mass arrests of Palestinian terrorists.

Which is probably why Israel considers Arafat to be irrelevant. Just dont illuminate Typedef on this matter. You cant argue with logic like that.

Now this isn't the best comparison

Youre right, It isnt.

Zaphod Beeblebrox

Originally posted by Sand


Youre right, It isnt.

Hmm now wait a sec. A blatant abuse of human rights not only ignored but actively encouraged by the world's greatest superpower. A situation so unbelievable that when I recreate the situation closer to home, then you see the stupidity in it and refuse to accept it. So I'd say it was a pretty damn good comparison. O but wait, they're only arabs right? Not normal people like you and me. So its ok if it happens over there...

Originally posted by Sand


Which is probably why Israel considers Arafat to be irrelevant.

ROFL. Israel considers Arafat to be irrelevant... that hardly puts them in the clear now does it? Since they are giving HIM ultimatums and restricting HIS movements while realising he's irrelevant. ARAFAT is told to arrest terrorists. Which he can't do. So that pretty much proves my point that they know he can't comply with their threats, allowing them to follow through on those threats.

It's true the Palestinians are not entirely defenceless. They have guns. But the Israelis have bigger guns. How many tanks do the Palestinians have compared to the Israelis? How many attack helicopters? How many weapons of mass destruction?
Wait, I forgot... the suicide bombers! Now wait a second. Does anyone see a flaw in this? You see a suicide bomber by definition commits suicide in the act of killing. You don't do that if you have better ways of doing it.

Ah I see. I don't like what the Israelis are doing, hence obviously I'm a member of the Judean Peoples' Front or the Peoples' Front of Judea or the Peoples' Popular Front of Judea etc... sure. It's the same mentality adopted by rednecks who stick a big label reading "COMMIE" on anyone who doesn't agree with their views, as the US government is now doing to support their legislation, with "COMMIE" replaced by "TERRORIST SYMPATHISER". Feel free to air your views, just let other people air theirs too without this ridiculous branding.

Sand

A situation so unbelievable that when I recreate the situation closer to home

You didnt recreate it. You went into complete fancy. I just didnt bother going into detail- but to give you a hint, for starter Arafat is the head of the administration in the Palestinian areas, nominally the law and order- Adams isnt in NI, Trimble is. An intelligent chap shouldnt have too much trouble recognising what your example is in that light.

Please stop making remarks about arabs being "only arabs"- Its a pathetic attempt to "racialise" the issue.

ARAFAT is told to arrest terrorists. Which he can't do.

And hence he is irrelevant. You negotiate ceasefires with the commanders, not with the privates.

Wait, I forgot... the suicide bombers! Now wait a second. Does anyone see a flaw in this? You see a suicide bomber by definition commits suicide in the act of killing. You don't do that if you have better ways of doing it.

*Some* might call that asymmetric warfare, indeed Id call it that- If they targeted milatary targets- but they target pizza parlours and pubs so theyre no better than the IRA- i.e terrorists.
BTW given the japanese used kamikazie pilots when they did not have the conventional means to defeat US air and naval power (much as the palestinians can not match the Israelis conventionally), was the US infringing on their human rights? Was the US being unfair?

Ah I see. I don't like what the Israelis are doing, hence obviously I'm a member of the Judean Peoples' Front or the Peoples' Front of Judea or the Peoples' Popular Front of Judea etc... sure.

I didnt say you were in the JPF did I? If you take offence from my use of that term (which is a joke revolving around the nature of certain individuals "struggle against reality" and their preference for emotive rhetoric rather than realism) then please accept my apologies.

As for not liking what the Israelis are doing- Your perfectly entitled not to- Im not their cheerleader by any stretch of the imagination- but to blame them (and the US, which can only view the whole thing as a headache-How can they have such a hard on for Oil producers yet at the same time enjoy pissing off the Arabs who produce most of the oil?) for everything whilst exscusing and convieniently ignoring the atrocities carried out by the palestinians is a bit---unsound. Thats my grounding for believing that the portrayal of Palestine as a defencless maiden is laughable. In that sorry conflict theres more than enough bloodshed to go around.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Sand
As for not liking what the Israelis are doing- Your perfectly entitled not to- Im not their cheerleader by any stretch of the imagination- but to blame them (and the US, which can only view the whole thing as a headache-How can they have such a hard on for Oil producers yet at the same time enjoy pissing off the Arabs who produce most of the oil?)

I have only this question. Your American Sand? Prehaps you can answer it for me.

How can the US justify giving a military budget to Israel and also veto the UN when they plan to put in independant observers into Palistine to watch for senseless killing and then claim they are on the side of peace?

You have a country supplying guns to one side of the conflict while hampering observers to see if the human rights violations are happening and then we are supposed to believe that they are on the side of peace?

Hobbes

Originally posted by Zaphod Beeblebrox
Wait a minute. Take a look at the news.
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli ground assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli helicopter assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!
Israeli missile assault!
Palestinian suicide bomb!

Actually it's not like that at all. After looking up on another story (Fox news censoring a story that claims Israel knew something about 9/11) I came across IsraelInsider news site. Pretty Pro-Israel news site (but reading proproganda is Ok as long as you know it's proproganda).

One of their pages had a score board system of attacks. Before christmas it went something like this...

Israeli hurt by stone throwers
Palestinian killed after being run over by tank.
Israeli injured in shoot out.
Palestinian killed in shoot out.

and so on. It's gotten a bit more active since Dec 25th, but prior to that it was more along the lines of 2-3 palistinians killed for every 1-2 israelis hurt. (I'm sure some will think this is a good thing).

One thing that got me is the sheer lack of World press on settler actions. For example while everyone was getting excited about Afarfat having to walk to church, no one noticed (outside of Israel) about a settler running down and killing a number of Palistinians. Or prehaps more recently the settlers blockading a highway and shooting taxi drivers from palistine?

Sand

Your American Sand?

No.

How can the US justify giving a military budget to Israel and also veto the UN when they plan to put in independant observers into Palistine to watch for senseless killing and then claim they are on the side of peace?

One, because I imagine its a political "requirement" to protect Israel, or at least be seen to do so if you want to get elected.

Two, because if the US had not supported the Israelis theyd have been driven into the sea by their peaceloving arab neighbours.
Given that neither side can win given the USs support of Israel, the obvious option would be serious negotiation- However the palestinians believe blowing up Israeli women and children will be more productive in the long run.

Of course one has to ask what the US *gains* from supporting Israel if not a peaceful outcome to the conflict. It is a major source of friction with the arab, oil producing world- what does the US gain from promoting the conflict? And before you say arms sales or something remeber that oil underpins the *entire* economy, and arms sales dont.

Why they would prevent UN observers going in? Well Id imagine because the Israelis dont want them there, if they did come back with a report along the lines of Israel being a "cruel and demonic power" what would happen then that Israel wouldnt simply ignore?

but prior to that it was more along the lines of 2-3 palistinians killed for every 1-2 israelis hurt. (I'm sure some will think this is a good thing).

The conflict isnt a scoreboard- Its not fair or unfair based on how evenly distributed the casualties are.

Boston

Originally posted by Sand

Two, because if the US had not supported the Israelis theyd have been driven into the sea by their peaceloving arab neighbours.
Given that neither side can win given the USs support of Israel, the obvious option would be serious negotiation- However the palestinians believe blowing up Israeli women and children will be more productive in the long run.

you know, you really pissed me off with this comment, you seem to ignor anything that doesnt support your tunnel view of the world.

you seem to think palestinians, are the one group like the borg or something, that take collective actions.

but this comment

However the palestinians believe blowing up Israeli women and children will be more productive in the long run.

i didnt realize you spook for the palestinians people, i was un aware you had an indept knowleadge of the palestinians firedoms fighters phyci.
im begining to think you havent a clue what your talking about.
you comment on peace talks, you branded the ENTIRE palestinian people as rather wanting to bomb isrealis, ever ask why, o yea, they are evil stantic ****s, i allmost forgot that. get real!

back to peace takes, how many times to you think sharon and arafat have meet to talk peace, answer never, the palestinian leader is fogged off contantly will a low ranging goverement offical with zero power to negosiate peace agreements. but o no you ignor this fact completely, because that might mean the palestinians ain't the blood crazed murdering scum you make them out to be.

The isreali leader(sharon) has said he will not speak, talk, reconize as being alife, the only palestinian man in the world that can make peace on the palestinian side. does that sound like the actions of a man that craves peace. grow up

Btw, you dont like my reply, read the rules, dont make sweping statements, someone might trip you up.
i await you inevitable back tracking and counter alligations

Boston

i was going to post this else were, but its relatent here as well

Sand

you know, you really pissed me off with this comment, you seem to ignor anything that doesnt support your tunnel view of the world.

Please dont let emotions overwhelm logic. However the tunnel vision statement is ironic:)

i didnt realize you spook for the palestinians people, i was un aware you had an indept knowleadge of the palestinians firedoms fighters phyci.

I dont, but Im sure your right- They dont believe bombing civillians is productive, they just do it for kicks.

you comment on peace talks, you branded the ENTIRE palestinian people as rather wanting to bomb isrealis, ever ask why, o yea, they are evil stantic ****s, i allmost forgot that. get real!

Yeah I cant get over the amount of Palestinians marching in the streets every day demanding the suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks stop. The fact is the terrorists have a lot of support from the people- Otherwise where would they hide, arm and train? The palestinian police efforts to stop them are feeble at best.

And i never said the palestinians were evil satanic whatevers (it was edited sorry) - so please stop lying- Weve already had this discussion about you lying about what i said. And coming from someone who described Israel as a "Cruel and demonic power"- well lets just say youve not got a leg to stand on:)

back to peace takes, how many times to you think sharon and arafat have meet to talk peace, answer never, the palestinian leader is fogged off contantly will a low ranging goverement offical with zero power to negosiate peace agreements.

As many in the JPF have already stated poor ol Arafat cant stop the terrorists. So any agreement signed with him is worthless, if he cant uphold his side of it. And its the terrorists who are the blood crazed murdering scum, the ordinary palestinian is just into supporting them.

the only palestinian man in the world that can make peace on the palestinian side.

For all the control Arafat has evidenced over the terrorists Sharon might as well sign a peace deal with me.

Btw, you dont like my reply, read the rules, dont make sweping statements, someone might trip you up. i await you inevitable back tracking and counter alligations

Your reply is pretty predictable to be honest. Lie about what I said, rant on about Arafat and the evil Israelis and slap yourself on the back when your done.

CiaranC

Id like to hear your ideas for a resolution to the confict in Israel/Palestine Sand, given that you say there is no viable leadership among the Palestinian people.

On a more Off-Topic note, is there anything about the status quo in todays world that you dont support and endorse? Reading through the posts on this board, I see you basically support every aspect of the economic and political systems which Washington has in place. In the case of the middle east, I have yet to see you concede that Israel might have even the smallest amount of responsibilty for the dreadful things that have happened (and continue to happen daily) there. How do you explain this?

Typedef

One, because I imagine its a political "requirement" to protect Israel, or at least be seen to do so if you want to get elected.

Political requirement, therefore, the threat is not real, but preceived yes? So if the threat to Israel does not exist or is more a matter of being "seen" to be helping Israel, why must the USA support the occupation, annexation and colonizing of Palestinian land at the expence of the Palestinian people and contrary to inumerate UN resolutions regarding the enitre conflict? Better not answer that, in the same way the US seems to think that people hate the US because of the Big Mac, I imagine that support of such a wholistically indefensable stance as support of Israeli imperialism, would entail "fuzzy logic" or better yet an entire contrived obliviousness to the issues presented, so why bother tackeling the issue?

Two, because if the US had not supported the Israelis theyd have been driven into the sea by their peaceloving arab neighbours.

Are you trying to sound like a biggot here or is it accidental? Jews and Arabs alike are humans, "they" are people just like us, "if you prick us do we not bleed" and so on. Bottom line Israel is a nuclear power, it does not need the US to act as big brother. Also US support of Israeli human rights abuses, Jewish religious elitism and repression on the grounds that "Israel would not exist otherwise" is a mockery of the intellect and the supposed precis of civilisation. There is no tabernacle of illucidation and moral fortitude vis-a-vis colonialism, Colonialism is simply wrong, colonialism is an affront to sentient thought, to support Colonialism at the expence of the colonised a person must delibrately set aside notions of humanity and declassify one section of humanity as sub-human, as you Sand seem to be suggesting, that the Arabs are not in fact interested in peace, that the Palestinians are intrinsically war like and therefore may be treated as non-human savages, who can not self-vet but must be vetted by an external power, the "White man's burdon". Ironically this is exactly the kind of "logic" that the Nazi used to vindicate the holocaust, and is the same logic that the Israelis use to qualify the Israeli occupation,annexation and colonization of Palestine,. Again the motif of the "White man's burdon", a rationalisation and permutation of colonial thought throughout the ages, Arabs are warlike so Israel is justified in transgressing the line of acceptable action.

Given that neither side can win given the USs support of Israel, the obvious option would be serious negotiation- However the palestinians believe blowing up Israeli women and children will be more productive in the long run.

Again this is truly wrong, Palestinians are people who are driven to desperate acts and it is fecicous in the extreme to ascribe such abasement of thought to Palestinians as a group, it is racist and repugnant and an affront. You have no evidence of the statement you make, you simply ascribe action, intent and impetus on the grounds of race and religious disposition and that is racism. You are so wrong it is unbelieveable, you might as well say that "If you are born black you can't govern yourselves, no, only white people can do that", it's the same thing, racial segretation and arbitrary ascription of thought and ability based on race. I refuse to call you a racist Sand, but I must say this kind of two-tier thought does seem to suggest it, why must you make such an abasement of people based on race? It just seems so wrong.

Of course one has to ask what the US *gains* from supporting Israel if not a peaceful outcome to the conflict. It is a major source of friction with the arab, oil producing world- what does the US gain from promoting the conflict? And before you say arms sales or something remeber that oil underpins the *entire* economy, and arms sales dont.

Presumably this particular foreign policy is in place because of the desire of some Religous groups in the US to see a Jewish state come to fruition. Aside from the Jewish interest groups, many Christian groups would also find relgious vindication in America's espousal of a Jewish homeland. What I am trying to say is that it is not simply a matter of American Zionist interest group's money versus Arab oil magnate interest group's money, the policy is also intrinsically one of religion.

Why they would prevent UN observers going in? Well Id imagine because the Israelis dont want them there

Hey pal, the Palestinians don't want Israel occupying their territory and pushing them off of Palestinian land and treating Palestinians with contempt and disrespect. Palestinians don't want to be made refugees from their homes by a power supported by the supposed supreme exponent of democracy.

, if they did come back with a report along the lines of Israel being a "cruel and demonic power" what would happen then that Israel wouldnt simply ignore?

If the US did not filibuster the process of the UN in this regard and allowed the UN to arbitrate and impose sanctions if necessary then prehaps the UN could require Israel with threat of sanctions to comply with the 1948 UN resolution for Israel to provide a land for peace deal with the Palestinians. Notice how UN sanctions are not the same as protecting Israel from the "Demonic Arabs". UN sanctions would not destroy Israel so why must the US filibuster the UN to such an extent? This obstruction must end and the UN must be allowed to place observers into the Middle East conflict so that the world may hold Israel to account. If the Israelis are in such a position of correctness then there is nothing to hide is there, so why go to such lengths to hide away from international scrutiny if the actions of Israel are so justafied and vindicated?

Boston

were have i lied, were have i said you said anything you did.

i said this is what you make them out to be, as in the impression or image you build of palestinians on the board.
comments like this

Two, because if the US had not supported the Israelis theyd have been driven into the sea by their peaceloving arab neighbours.

You cant makes comments like that, and then when someones says you accused them of being "blood crazed murders" you cant called them a lier because thats basically what your saying

but why did i expect more, when you cant argue a point you call a person a lier.

Why wouldnt eh palestinians be calling for the bombing of isreal, are you say that because of that they them selfs deserve to be bombed? in that case they are plenty of isreali weman and children callign for attacks on palestinians do they deserve to die to?

As for arafat, he is not a puppet leader, he can cal la stop to the bombing, if he can show its in his peoples best interest, and that theres hope it will lead to and end to the isreali assults, but as proven time and time again, these cease fires wont stop isreali attacks, he has called 5, yes 5 cease fires in the last afaik 2 years. were there had been none(or very few) before. each time isreal messed them up, because sharon doesnt want peace,
all this means he will need allot to work with from the isrealis before he can may a solid cease fire, you people keep expecting him to do it with noting. hell the isreali wont even talk about a cease fire untill one has all ready happened, and held for 7 days.

if that went on in the north, the war would still be going on, and just as intensely as it was in the 70s.

Buts what the point in talking to you, you still wont waver your opinion one bite, not even if isreali tanks were driving over unarmed palestinians... o hold on that have, they are, and they will again.

Sand

CiranC:

Negotiation. That cannot occur until both sides want it. Sadly at this time the palestinians are bombing women and children and the Israelis simply do not trust the palestinians even slightly. Its a sad state of affairs.

About the status quo- hmm thats a pretty broad question- I might ask you is there anything you dont have a problem with in the current status quo? Lets just say any problem I might have with aspects of the status quo are not going to be solved by me strapping some exsplosives to my chest and murdering civillians. Id hope youd agree there- thats my whole point in this, I dont support terrorism regardless of the exscuses. *Others* have murkier view on it.

Typedef:

the threat is not real, but preceived yes?

1948
1956
1967
1973
1982

Thats counting actual wars with states- not the ongoing guerilla conflicts and terrorism. So its pretty accurate to say one can perceive a threat.

Are you trying to sound like a biggot here or is it accidental?

No its you trying to misinterpret my words- and I havent called them "muslim mud people"- have I?

that the Palestinians are intrinsically war like and therefore may be treated as non-human savages

Another Typedefesque interpretation- As long as the palestinians continue to bomb civillians they are acting in a terrorist manner. Israel is entitled to defend itself.

you might as well say that "If you are born black you can't govern yourselves, no, only white people can do that",

More classic Typedef lunacy.

I refuse to call you a racist Sand

Cos youd only look even more stupid- mind you its the classic Judean Peoples Front debating tactic so knock yourself out.

why must you make such an abasement of people based on race? It just seems so wrong.

Alas poor Typedef you simply cannot read. If i condemn the supporters of Republican terrorists in the North am i being a bigot too? Ironically though you exscuse the actions of Palestinian terrorists on the basis that "Palestinians are people who are driven to desperate acts"- So you exscuse terrorism on the basis of race-Very close to racism there Type:)

the policy is also intrinsically one of religion.

Ohhh-kay. And the religious right wing is such a dominant force in the US they cant even dictate domestic policy (abortion) let alone foreign. Ohhh-kay.

About the sanctions Type- Israel doesnt give a fiddlers about the UN. It only cares about its security. So sanctions arent going to bother them.


Boston: Do I have to remind you about you saying I called you an IRA member and your refusal to recognise you were wrong or apologise?

And I did not call them "blood crazed" anything - so stop lying. The reference to the peaceloving arabs was sarcastic, making fun of people who like to make exscuses for the arabs and find it convienient to blame the Israelis/US for everything. Wonder why you and Type got so hot under the collar about it?:)

they are plenty of isreali weman and children callign for attacks on palestinians

Calling for attacks on Palestinian women and children or palestinian terrorists? Ands theres a bit of a difference.

he can cal la stop to the bombing, if he can show its in his peoples best interest,

He should then shouldnt he?- Its not in their best interests to blow themselves up and put themslves at risk of Israeli retaliation. Unless of course he cant.

hell the isreali wont even talk about a cease fire untill one has all ready happened, and held for 7 days.

That seems pretty fair- given the 5 failed ceasefires you mentioned before? If they cant hold a ceasefire for 7 days then how can they hold one for years to come once an agreement is signed?

Buts what the point in talking to you, you still wont waver your opinion one bite

Im open minded- but it takes a better argument than ranting and raving to convince me that youre correct and that Im wrong to oppose palestinian terrorism.

Boston

i dont know, on whioch one of us is more opjective id have to say its me, i know palestinians arnt staints, there not in that line of business. but i dont pretend blindly to denie everything.

yes they murder and kill " weman and children" but that is the way of the world. you corner and animal, and mistreat it, you deserve to be bite.

That seems pretty fair- given the 5 failed ceasefires you mentioned before? If they cant hold a ceasefire for 7 days then how can they hold one for years to come once an agreement is signed?

preconditions to peace, are never a good idea. we learnt that after ww1

Typedef

Negotiation. That cannot occur until both sides want it. Sadly at this time the palestinians are bombing women and children and the Israelis simply do not trust the palestinians even slightly. Its a sad state of affairs.

Sand try to be a little more objective here will you, realise that both sides are human beings not demons and that both should be given equal esteem ok? Seriously how can your skewed view of the world allow for any kind of vindication of colonization? You say "Palestinians bomb women and children", Israel a state that is flouting the entire UN bar the USA asassinates arbitrarily someone it labels "terrorist", no trial, summary execution. Do you happen to remember when this happened here ? Tell me, given the ambugity of wether or not the innocent people killed by Israel are by design or accident, where do you get off accusing the Palestinians of being the only side, to do wrong? How is it Israeli aggression is so excusable, Israeli murder of innocent life so easily explained, but watch your ass if you are a Palestinian? Two-tiered logic and racism perhaps?

About the status quo- hmm thats a pretty broad question- I might ask you is there anything you dont have a problem with in the current status quo? Lets just say any problem I might have with aspects of the status quo are not going to be solved by me strapping some exsplosives to my chest and murdering civillians.

Illogical, Israel asassinates people it "suspects" of terrorism, no actual proof just suspicion, ergo, those people have been convicted of no crime but were executed on suspicion. The horrible thing is that, it is the Israeli army who executes these people, whilst at least the Palestinian authority may claim that it is militants within Palestine that are acting without the vindication of the "state".

Hey I noticed you didn't rebuff my point on UN observers being present in the Middle East if Israel has nothing to hide, if as you say all the aggression is on the Palestinian side, then the UN would bear witness to this so why does Israel hide behind the USA? Presumably if Israel is being wronged so much it would welcome some international support, which would be forthcoming if as you seem to think the Palestinians originate all the violence.

No its you trying to misinterpret my words- and I havent called them "muslim mud people"- have I?

It's not the phrase but the attitude and lack of objectivity that seems to endemnify the mindset, know what I'm saying?

Cos youd only look even more stupid- mind you its the classic Judean Peoples Front debating tactic so knock yourself out.

hmm I feel kind of sorry for you Sand, either you can't rebuff my arguments or you're trolling (if you trolling, then there are I dunno limits as to what is kool to troll about know what I'm saying) either way you whinge and moan and call me stupid etc,etc..... yawn, but hey if it makes you feel better. YOU ARE A RACIST.

Kindly stop insinuating I'm mad, stop insinuating I can't read (I went to DCU and studied psychology when I was 14 ok?) and grow up a little bit when you are responding to a post. If your position is so untenable that you must attack me and not my issues (much like Sharon labeling Arafat 'irrelevant' and a 'terrorist') then maybe you should examine the basis of that position. Just an opinion.

JustHalf

Originally posted by Typedef
Political requirement, therefore, the threat is not real, but preceived yes? So if the threat to Israel does not exist or is more a matter of being "seen" to be helping Israel, why must the USA support the occupation, annexation and colonizing of Palestinian land at the expence of the Palestinian people and contrary to inumerate UN resolutions regarding the enitre conflict?

Typedef, I am constantly amazed by your "logic". It is as if you begin reciting the alphabet with A, then proceed directly to the last letter, 9.

JustHalf

Congratulations Typedef. You went to CTYI (as did I, for Computer Applications). It doesn't change the fact that you don't seem to be replying to the post at hand.

By the way, it is a sign of intellectual weakness to call someone a racist for saying that the Palestinians support the bombings, while at the same time making similar comments about Israelis.

Also, just because you are a nuclear power does not mean you are going to use them (in fact, you probably won't use them), so it is irrelevant to the argument.

And with tell me, Typedef, how many times has Israel been invaded since it's founding 53 years ago?

Boston, you need preconditions to peace. The other option is an unconditional surrender.

Sand

Typefef

I give both sides equal esteem Type. I dont even mention colonialism. The palestinians terrorists are bombing women and children. Israel is targeting terrorists. As for the issue of Israel of being the only side to do wrong I dont know whether to laugh or cry- We seem to be nearer on this issue than you care to admit- My view is that both sides are equally to blame for the violence - The Israelis mightnt be right in extending settlements (in fact its stupid but how and ever) but that does not give the palestinians the right to murder women and children .

I might even side with the palestinians as you obviously do but my complete and total opposition to terrorism prevents that. Nobody deserves terrorism and terrorism is not exscusable. If the IRA are wrong (and they are) then Hamas and the equivalent are wrong (and they are). Why do I belive the Israelis might "get off"? They do not deliberately go out to kill women and children- there is no gain in that for them. There is none for the palestinians either (it actually alienates support that they may gain from those who oppose terrorism like myself) but they still bomb resteraunts and shops. There is no racism in my stance much as you would love to think there is. I do not support terrorism full stop, regardless of race , colour or creed. Please understand that. Demonstrate your ability to read here.

The UN is unrealistic- How can anyone take seriously an organisation that claims to uphold human rights but at the same time just stood aside whilst the deathsquads came for the people of Srebinica (Something I find sickening- wonder how that figures into your delusion that i have something against Muslims.) How then can it be taken seriously to judge whose right or wrong in the middle east when it was guilty of one of the most sickening acts of hypocrisy and cowardice in modern history?

Im just going to ignore your next paragraph because its pure drivel.

Kindly stop insinuating I'm mad, stop insinuating I can't read (I went to DCU and studied psychology when I was 14 ok?) and grow up a little bit when you are responding to a post. If your position is so untenable that you must attack me and not my issues (much like Sharon labeling Arafat 'irrelevant' and a 'terrorist') then maybe you should examine the basis of that position. Just an opinion.

Im not insinuatiing youre mad, your views often appear to be however- thats my opinion, disregard it at your leisure. Prove you can by not making up stuff I didnt say and repeating stuff Ive already countered. My opinion of DCU is lowered. My opinon of Psychology students is unchanged. Actually scratch that thing about proving that you can read, you obviously cant cos Ive already said why the Israelis view Arafat as irrelevant. Ill value your opinion on that as much as I value your opinion on most subjects:)

Okay this thread has gone off topic again- perhaps not so much given it was about a cartoon that laughably portrayed Palestine as a sleeping maiden. How and ever Typedef/Boston if you wish to discuss the middle east and how to solve it in 10 easy steps then open a new thread and argue it to your hearts content-Im sure youll find a lot in common. Remember however that much of that ground has been gone over in the Israel vs Palestine thread and a lot of it in this thread. I do get tired of repeating myself- dont you?

Typedef

Originally posted by JustHalf
Typedef, I am constantly amazed by your "logic". It is as if you begin reciting the alphabet with A, then proceed directly to the last letter, 9.

JustHalf, it gladdens me inumerately that you are entertained, um but, last time I checked 9 was not the last letter of the alphabet, therefore the USA should stop it's prosaic blank cheque policy towards support of Israel and both Israel and the United States should comply with the very basics of UN requirements vis-a-vis a Land for Peace deal with the Palestinians.

By the way, it is a sign of intellectual weakness to call someone a racist for saying that the Palestinians support the bombings, while at the same time making similar comments about Israelis.

Umm either I am misreading this scentence or you have missed my point. I say that because of the lack of international observers(at least) that the Israeli imposition of occupation and the "supposed" "casaulties of war" as a result of that occupation are questionably accidental and therefore may well be delibrate. No doubt in some cases the Israeli caused "casaulties of war" are delibrately killed(assuming Israelis follow the same pattern as most other humans throughout recorded history), and therefore no one side is so righteous in it's campaign against the other to be able say, "Palestinians bomb women and children, Israelis do not".

Clearly human rights abuses are commited by both sides and if one examines the facts further it "should" become evident that the only side with upwards of 66 UN resolutions calling for a monumental sift in said side's way of conducting itself is the Israeli side.

Also just half the number of times Israel has been invaded is irrelevant to the issue of Israeli occupation and settlement of the West Bank and Jerusalem. The UN has set out quite clearly that Jersualem should be a city that does not belong to Jew or Muslim, Semite or Arab, the UN also requires Israel to give back the West Bank and the establishment of a Palestinian state, the UN also requires the end of settlement of all terrortories Israel occupied by force.

Most of this is a matter of fact, it is the interpretation that people seem to be fighting and killing over.

http://www.likud.nl/extr60.html
In fact over fourty countries within the UN make just these kind of requirements of Israel, but more importantly the other fourty countries do not require the Palestinians to jump through hoops in order to reach a negotiating table, but somehow Israel has managed to filibuster compliance with international requisites for fifty years. I said somehow when I meant to say "with American support".

While the world's attention was diverted last week to the Balkans, the Palestinians presented their demand - and were backed by more than 40 countries - at a session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva. Only Israel and the United States said no.

The call is for reaffirming General Assembly Resolution 181, dated November 29, 1947, which divided the land west of the Jordan into two states - one Jewish, one Arab - to replace the British mandate.
Since it was adopted, a lot of blood has been spilled, beginning when the Arabs rejected the partition and went to war with Israel in 1948 - and lost.

After that, Israel regarded Resolution 181 as dead. As David Ben-Gurion, founder of the Jewish state, said:
"They started the war and they will pay for it."

So for Israel, this terrible suppression of the Palestinians is about revenge and petty self interest, revanche,revanche,revanche.

Typedef

Okay this thread has gone off topic again- perhaps not so much given it was about a cartoon that laughably portrayed Palestine as a sleeping maiden.

Good point
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/950000/images/_952600_ramiap300.jpg

Sand

Ive seen it. Have you seen this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1320000/1320589.stm

Hobbes

Makes a mention at the end that the Israelis are on stolen land. What's your point?

Fails to mention about the crimes caused by settlers on the palistines.

Here's a few for you.

http://my3.myonehost.com/News/2001/12/2001120611.php3

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/010201/0101015.html

Sand

http://my3.myonehost.com/News/2001/12/2001120611.php3

The malaysian PM says the Israelis are terrorists- Well Id guess hed know given hes got his own terrorist groups to deal with. Other than that, whats your point?

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/010201/0101015.html

The US gives aid to Israel. And? BTW you do realise that while the figures are most likely accurate, though they do use some assumptions, the actual bias of the writer and most likely the editor, and thus the publication is decidely anti Israel.

Now to prove Ive got a search engine too and can use it to search for articles containing the words "Israel", "Terrorist" and "Children" too

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/terrorism.html

Not important for the actual opinion of the author- which is pro-Israeli, I quote it for the picture of the Israeli child on April 4th.

http://info.jpost.com/C001/Supplements/Intifada/

Thats a link from the above site- Worth a look too.

http://www.yashanet.com/news/suicide.htm

And theres another.

Only took me a minute to find a nice long list of sites, I just took those as a sample- and thats using only one search engine. So by all means go ahead and quote some more links to "prove" the Israelis are the side doing all the wrong in this. All it will prove is that youve got a search engine. Newsflash- So do I.

The original purpose of this thread was a discussion over whether the cartoon that portrayed Palestine as a defenceless maiden was accurate. It is clear it is not.

Boston

5 straight questions sand's, yes or no answer, no BS and ill answer five of yours in the same fashion

1) Do you feel the palestinians have a case to heard for there own sovern state, one which isreal will repeat the borders off, and goveremnt off.

2)Do you think, that the palestinians could achieve this aim, without killing innocent "weman and children"

3)Do you think that isrealis courant tactics with relation to palestin will result in peace.

4)Do you believe that there will only be peace when both sides are safe with in their own borders and confident in their security.

5)Do you believe the isrealis have the right to assinate arafat

Sand

1) Do you feel the palestinians have a case to heard for there own sovern state, one which isreal will repeat (respect?) the borders off, and goveremnt off

Yes.

2)Do you think, that the palestinians could achieve this aim, without killing innocent "weman and children"

Yes.

3)Do you think that isrealis courant tactics with relation to palestin (Palestinian terrorists?) will result in peace.

Yes.

4)Do you believe that there will only be peace when both sides are safe with in their own borders and confident in their security.

Yes.

5)Do you believe the isrealis have the right to assinate arafat.

No.

1)Do you believe that terrorism is justifiable?

2)Do you believe that there can be any exscuse for it?

3)Do you recognise a difference between milatary action (which by nature involves targets of milatary value) and terrorism (which by nature involves targets chosen to cause the greatest terror)

4)Do you believe the ills of the Arab world, including the palestinians, are best solved by US and the West in general taking terrorists demands as a guideline for their policies in the middle east?

5)Assuming the Palestinian terrorists ceased their attacks on Israeli civillians, do you believe Israel would cease their targeting of terrorists in Palestine and engage in negotiation?

Boston

1) depends, Terrorism, as an act soly to and purely to terrorise people, then no i dont believe in it

2)several, in the right situation allmost anyone could be a terrorist

3)i Judge things by results, so no, i dont see a difference

4)questions to abiguious, and cant be answered yes or no

5)Engage, but do what is nessecary for peace, no.

Id apreciate you use terms never time that are alittle less argumentative, i kept in nice and simple for you, if your going to talk about terrorism, name groups, if your going to talk about arabs, name which ones.

Sand

Hmm your first three answers confirm what I assumed your views on terrorism were. Theres probably not much point in us discussing the morals of terrorism any further.

Question 4 is pretty clear to me- either you think Bin Laden and his ilk have demands that can form the guidelines for the wests policies with regard to the middle east- how simple does it have to be?

Question 5 Israel has shown it can negotiate agreements with enemies who are prepared to uphold them- Such as its agreements with Egypt (which got Sadat killed shortly afterwards) and Jordan.

BTW you couldnt keep to Yes or no answers- Even with you demanding I do so, which I did - (despite the ambiguity contained in your question 3 and 5)- and you claiming you would you still insisted on qualifying your answers, unwilling to get off the fence unless you had to.

if your going to talk about terrorism, name groups, if your going to talk about arabs, name which ones.

Why does it make a difference if a woman coming home from work is targeted by an IRA sniper or a ETA one? By a Hammas Sniper or Islamic Jihad one? Which one tells a sad story and which one doesnt? Which one has more stories to tell about injustices that happened in the past, but are continued on to justify the murder of this woman and you and other apologists for terrorism lap it up so you can believe their heroes or something?

I thought you said you judged by the results- So who cares which particular terrorist group did it- theyre all terrorists and the woman is just as dead. Perhaps the only difference is this- The JPF are NIMBYs- If it happens in Belfast its evil, but if it happens in Tel Aviv then its okay, its exscusable and justifiable. They exscuse the terrorism, because of the misery- ignoring the fact that terrorism only cause MORE misery, both to the victims and to the terrorists when the victims retaliate. They completely disregard the fact that negotiation is the only win-win solution.

It strikes me that you dont have a priniciple underlying your views- Youve seen plenty of pictures like the one posted at the start of this thread and youve bought into the Palestinian propaganda (and thats what it is) that theyre the wronged ones, the ones to whom this evil is being down by a "cruel and demonic power" whilst theyre fighting the brave fight with sticks and stones- shades of Star Wars eh? You consider the "defenceless maiden" picture to be fairly accurate? Its not. Its just more palestinian propaganda, and nauseatingly poor propaganda at that.

Ah whats the point- You believe the palestinians are justified to get a sovereign state, so do I. You believe their tactics of terrorism are justifiable and exscusable- I dont. I for one wont be saying terrorism is okay and this debate has got a bit too- stalled- for any meeting of the minds. I think you accept the portrayal of palestine in that picture is a bit rich- even if you wont admit it, so lets just drop it

Typedef

Originally posted by Sand
[B
Ah whats the point- You believe the palestinians are justified to get a sovereign state, so do I. You believe their tactics of terrorism are justifiable and exscusable- I dont. [/B]

Sand, who exactly gave the Israelis the sceptre of illucidation and moral fortitude which allows Israel to arbitrarily decide who it may and may not asassinate? What is the difference between Israel asassinating a person it "suspects" of terrorism or even bombing the "suspected" HQ of some "terrorist" and killing people in the process it "allegedly" was not targetting, and a member of a paramilitary Palestinian group killing some innocent people with a bomb being targeted at the Israeli army of occupation in Palestine? Answer nothing.

What is the difference between when Israel targets Palestinian civilians (as it is pretty clear Israel has done so in the past) and when a member of a paramilitary Palestinian group does the same? Answer, when Israel does it the USA seems to miss it, the media in the west misses too it would seem and when Palestinians do it the USA recalls envoys and gives Israel billions of dollars to "defend itself from Islamic(Islam means peace) terrorists" and the media is filled full of the evils of Palestinian "terrorism". This is just a form of geo-political religious supremecy, except it is being espoused by "the world's only superpower", the same superpower that brought the world the KKK, Confederatism and the same power that has protected Israel from over 66 United Nations resolutions stretching back over fifty years.

You may cast aspersions on the United Nations Sand, but it is the only mechanism of it's kind of scope in place and it is preferable to the Dictatorial style that Washington the home of "freedom" seems prone to in it's foreign policy pontifications.

Sand

and a member of a paramilitary Palestinian group killing some innocent people with a bomb being targeted at the Israeli army of occupation in Palestine?

Lets see if me and my search engine can whistle up some typical Palestinian milatary objectives (discounting accidents of course- you know the ones where they blow themselves up by accident without being in a bus or a resteraunt filled with people)


http://www.ou.org/news/yaelhyd.htm

Yeah I guess the Palestinians missed the IDF forces there.

http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2001/07/17/LatestNews/LatestNews.30609.html

A bus stop eh? Hmm taking that out (and the peopole queing for it) will really cripple the IDF.

http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2001/02/23/News/News.21922.html

I guess those lads just couldnt find an IDF guy, never there when you need them eh?

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/arabterrordeath.html

They probably mistook it for a troop carrier. Its an easy mistake.

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/jerattack11.4.html

Hmm , funny how they didnt learn from the first time they tried it?


BTW im getting bored of being sarcastic now. Is my point made or do you continue to spout rubbish such as the Palestininians acting like any milatary force in targeting objectives of milatary value? Maybe you can enlighten me to the milatary value of the above targets. They werent accidents were they? All of them?

If they werent accidents then maybe you can justify it for me - Palestinians live in refugee camps, sounds like a good reason to me to blow yourself up on a bus full of people. Or the US supports Israel, theres another good reason. Thats why those people were targeted then? Perhaps a child prodigy can see something I cant.

Cos Im sure your right- Palestine is a defenceless maiden, those people werent killed by Palestinian "freedom fighters"- They were killed by the Israeli-US oppression of the Palestinian people- Thats what it comes down to, to admit anything else would be to admit that the Palestinians are terrorists, not "terrorists" and far from defenceless.

tools

Originally posted by Sand
If it happens in Belfast its evil, but if it happens in Tel Aviv then its okay, its exscusable and justifiable. They exscuse the terrorism, because of the misery- ignoring the fact that terrorism only cause MORE misery, both to the victims and to the terrorists when the victims retaliate. They completely disregard the fact that negotiation is the only win-win solution.

Except in places like afghanistan where it's ok to bomb first and talk later.

If you want to talk about terrorism in ireland, look up your school history book and see how this state was actually formed. Then look up Northern Ireland's history since the 1960's and explain to us how catholics were to achieve basic civil rights when every attempt at peaceful negotiation was ignored or criminalised. Under circumstances like those, it was inevitable that certain people thought the only means left available was an armed one. "Terrorism" did work in northern ireland. For far too long, the institutionalized state terrorism worked for the bigoted loyalist elite who controlled the place and had the forces of "law and order" at their disposal, and it worked for Sinn Fein/IRA who are now in government with all their prisoners out of jail. Watchtowers are coming down and troop levels are nothing like the 20,000 they were at the height of the conflict. They may not have achieved their primary objective - a united ireland - but they've got far more than they had 10 years ago, (nothing more than civil equality) and they know a united ireland will happen within the next 15 years anyway.

Ah whats the point- You believe the palestinians are justified to get a sovereign state, so do I.

A state that doesn't even have control of its own water supply ain't much of a state.

You believe their tactics of terrorism are justifiable and exscusable- I dont.

What happened to the end justifying the means as you pointed out in another thread?

Let's follow the "end justifies the means" logic and ask that since loyalist groups are still killing catholics at random and sometimes protestants "by mistake", would it be wise to send bulldozers and helicopter gunships into east belfast to "smoke 'em out" and "bring 'em to justice" as Emperor Dubya put it?

This is the thing with right wingers, they tend to contradict virtually everything they say. So in the end, words are meaningless and reason becomes futile.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Sand
So by all means go ahead and quote some more links to "prove" the Israelis are the side doing all the wrong in this. All it will prove is that youve got a search engine. Newsflash- So do I.

Well prehaps I should clear something up. I know both sides are at fault. What's annoying is people seeming to think the Israelis are the innocent parties in all this.

Boston

Question 4 is pretty clear to me- either you think Bin Laden and his ilk have demands that can form the guidelines for the wests policies with regard to the middle east- how simple does it have to be?

4)Do you believe the ills of the Arab world, including the palestinians, are best solved by US and the West in general taking terrorists demands as a guideline for their policies in the middle east?

You didnt mention bin laden in any shape, way or form in that question, that why i could not have answered it, i say yes, then bang you accuse we of supporting sept11, your no very fair when you try to trick people into a cornor.

Why does it make a difference if a woman coming home from work is targeted by an IRA sniper or a ETA one? By a Hammas Sniper or Islamic Jihad one? Which one tells a sad story and which one doesnt? Which one has more stories to tell about injustices that happened in the past, but are continued on to justify the murder of this woman and you and other apologists for terrorism lap it up so you can believe their heroes or something?

groups do make a differece, i see huge differences between the old IRB, the todays IRA, The Real IRA, and then the groups such as the NLA, To me, if the group have the majority support of the people they are fighting for then they cant be terrorist, this is why bin laden is one and why groups like hamas (imho) arn't

BTW i havent been brain washed by media, i know perfectly well the history of this conflict, and the sides. If what im reading cant be propaganda maybe thats how you can support isreal, by being its all bull****.

BTW those agreements with other countries dont mean a damn, they have never up held up with the palestinians

Biffa Bacon

Then look up Northern Ireland's history since the 1960's and explain to us how catholics were to achieve basic civil rights when every attempt at peaceful negotiation was ignored or criminalised.

Catholics did have basic civil rights. The civil rights movement was concerned with ending discrimination in certain areas. The IRA's campaign had nothing to do with this.

Under circumstances like those, it was inevitable that certain people thought the only means left available was an armed one.

That doesn't make it morally justifiable.

"Terrorism" did work in northern ireland.

No it didn't.

it worked for Sinn Fein/IRA who are now in government with all their prisoners out of jail...Watchtowers are coming down and troop levels are nothing like the 20,000 they were at the height of the conflict.

No, that was achieved by ending terrorism. The IRA achieved absolutely nothing. Zilch.