RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 5:47:51 AM)

Your point is at best a technical defence. As far as i am aware no Palestinian leader has been convicted of contravening the Geneva Convention by any neutral court so the basis of your technical defence is at best contestable and most likely without any merit. It seems to me that your claim has any merit, then a single unsubstantiated allegation of contravention of the Convention by the other side releases a State from its obligations under the Convention. This would reduce the Conventions to the level of farce.

However I'd be happy to leave it to International Law Courts to determine whether this technical defence has any merit, which I gravely doubt. Israel, to judge by its repeated refusals to recognise or abide by International Court decisions, doesn't have any such confidence.

More importantly, there is an implicit admission of the broad thrust of my points. Your defence is not that my charges of Israeli war crimes are invalid in fact, just whether there is legal application. Put simply you don't deny that Israel has committed war crimes. You just contest the extent of their legal culpability, because of the alleged actions of the other side.

Of course, if Israel lets the 'terrorists' determine it's standards of behaviour, Israel is no better than the 'terrorists' it professes to despise. The nicest thing i can say about that is that it is pure undiluted hypocrisy.

What a clear indication of the abject moral culpability of Israeli policy when the only thing separating it from war crimes convictions is a dubious legal technicality? Such a shame that a State that embodied such noble ideals upon its foundation has sunk so low.




Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 9:37:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20

As for your continuous statements of Israel being a rogue nation, the largest violations it has committed that are true are breaking U.N. resolutions specific to Israel. I contend that Israel has not violated the Geneva convention and has not violated maritime law.



Israeli colonies in the West Bank (sometimes misleadingly called 'settlements') and the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem both, in my view constitute war crimes. Both contravene Art 47 of the Geneva War Crimes Conventions, which explicitly forbids the colonisation of land acquired by force.

Thus the mere existence of the colonies (aka settlements) is a war crime. The annexation of East Jerusalem constitutes a war crime. Israel will be committing war crimes until it returns the colonies to their lawful owners, and withdraws from East Jerusalem.

These is not the only war crimes that Israel has committed - it would take several volumes to list all those in detail - nor is Israel the only party in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict guilty of war crimes. Israel is responsible, both legally and morally, for its own actions. Israeli politicians and leaders, who have instigated, promoted and maintained these criminal policies must be held to account for their criminal behaviour.

As long as the status quo continues, Israel will remain in contravention of the Geneva Conventions ie it will be committing war crimes.


Article 49 was designed to stop the Nazi government's mass transfer of populations to and from Poland and other states. The Settlements, for that is what they actually are, were entirely voluntary and some were against the wishes of the Israeli authorities. The Settlements were not developed by the Israeli state but Israel has a legal and moral responsibility to protect its citizens wherever they happen to be located in the state or the contested territories even though it is deeply wasteful to their resources to protect 500 settlers surrounded by thousands of Palestinians as in flash points like Hebron. Under the mandate Jews have a legal right to settle anywhere in the mandated territory including Jordan.

Hebron is probably the most contested settlement in the contested territories. Hebron was resettled by Jews due to its religious importance in the 1700’s. These people were repeatedly killed or expelled by the Palestinian population over the centuries. Even after the Hebron Massacre of 1929, Jewish families returned but the British made them leave in 1936 after there was a national Palestinian revolt. After Israel took the territory from Egypt which had also “occupied” it, there was no intention to resettle it by the state itself. A number of Jews resettled in 1968 by refusing to leave a hotel in Hebron. After a lot of political turmoil in Israel over the issue because there were a number of violent attacks on these people and due to the history of massacre in the area, Israel relented and gave them a patch of land (an old military base) outside the town in 1970. The settlers have tried sometimes successfully to expand by buying land. They number some 500 today after over 40 years compared to 170,000 Palestinians - that hardly represents a state colonisation policy lol. The Jewish presence was actually bigger in 1929.

It should be noted that pro-Palestinians and the media have remarkably limited view of history when it comes to the issue of Jerusalem and settlements. Jerusalem was inhabited by Jews since the 1600's. Jerusalem was a relatively unimportant city in the region at the time with a small population and the Jewish population became predominant by the 1800's. Ramallah was actually the administrative capital under the Ottoman Empire. Jordan illegally took the territory in 1948 and expelled the Jewish populace by force from the Eastern part. In contravention with international law the Jordanians distributed Jewish owned land to Palestinians, banned Jews from access to that part of the city or any other part of their territory, and demolished over 50 synagogues. Have the Israeli’s simply forced Palestinians off the land they were illegally given? Well no they haven’t. Israel recognised the true ownership of this land and the Palestinian occupants were charged with paying a small rent - principally ground rent. They refused to do so after decades of legal fighting some have or are being taken off land. What awful war criminals the Israeli’s are by enforcing basic laws of ownership, recognised throughout the world.



hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 1:34:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
...What awful war criminals the Israeli’s are...


I think the apostrophe here may be unnecessary.



MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 1:38:59 PM)

No, this defense is simply to put into perspective that the enemy of the state of Israel is brutal and underhanded, and therefore the need for harsh, hardline tactics which may be inappropriate against an honorable enemy should be noted. Israel tribunals its soldiers who abuse civilians, use human shields, etc. Israel constantly has its civilians attacked and murdered every time they remove a road block or give back a parcel of land.

As Anaxagoras state, the people of Hebron have been massacred by the Palestinians, and this is before those people were settlers, but rather the indigenous people.

If you want another arguing as to why the settlements are perfectly fine think about this? Who owned the West Bank and Gaza before Israel's occupation? If you said Palestine, you are wrong. Jordan and Egypt owned those parcels of land. Israel took the land and offered it back in return for peace. The owning parties refused the land back. This would make it impossible for the return of land and hence Israel actually has the right to annex and take total ownership of those lands because the owners refused them back.

And I agree that there are countless other accusations against Israel, many based on false facts or the fact Israel has to make a call of "do we kill Palestinians or let Israelis die?" and at the end of the day they need to favor self preservation like any other nation would. Its a sad fact the enemies of the state of Israel love propaganda against Israel so much as to sacrifice the comfort and safety of people by using ambulances to get bombs into Israel and firing rockets from schools, thus forcing those things to become targets of search and possible attack.



hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 1:42:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20

No, this defense is simply to put into perspective that the enemy of the state of Israel is brutal and underhanded, and therefore the need for harsh, hardline tactics which may be inappropriate against an honorable enemy should be noted. Israel tribunals its soldiers who abuse civilians, use human shields, etc. Israel constantly has its civilians attacked and murdered every time they remove a road block or give back a parcel of land.

As Anaxagoras state, the people of Hebron have been massacred by the Palestinians, and this is before those people were settlers, but rather the indigenous people.

If you want another arguing as to why the settlements are perfectly fine think about this? Who owned the West Bank and Gaza before Israel's occupation? If you said Palestine, you are wrong. Jordan and Egypt owned those parcels of land. Israel took the land and offered it back in return for peace. The owning parties refused the land back. This would make it impossible for the return of land and hence Israel actually has the right to annex and take total ownership of those lands because the owners refused them back.

And I agree that there are countless other accusations against Israel, many based on false facts or the fact Israel has to make a call of "do we kill Palestinians or let Israelis die?" and at the end of the day they need to favor self preservation like any other nation would. Its a sad fact the enemies of the state of Israel love propaganda against Israel so much as to sacrifice the comfort and safety of people by using ambulances to get bombs into Israel and firing rockets from schools, thus forcing those things to become targets of search and possible attack.



Luckily, there is a considerable groundswell of public opinion which does not accept this sanitised version of things.



MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/8/2010 3:14:04 PM)

Your right I forgot about the middle-eastern refugees who were forced from their homes, or in some cases had to escape from their homes on threat of mutilation and death. The refugees who were forced onto a small, sliver of land and had all their money and possessions of value stripped from them. All titles property taken. Were then banned from return based on their religion and not because they fought against the state and can not even legally purchase land in their homelands.

Luckily Israel settled these Jewish refugees inside of Israel.

There are also those who left their homes on the request of foreign officials and aided in in acts of war against the other members of their communities and expected to be allowed to return to those very communities.

Luckily Israel has not let these Palestinians back into those communities because they are enemies of the state.


Unfortunately propaganda has buried the facts and would like people to see only the Palestinian refugees and not understand who was the aggressor initially and who else cannot return home.

I know Israel has erred many times, and I feel if both sides could accept that this war is deadly to their people there could be peace. However at the end of the day I also feel the Palestinian leaders would rather see their people die than live in a country next to the Jews. I feel compromise is needed on both sides and the Palestinians cannot see that being on the losing side does not mean they compromised.



tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 3:09:10 AM)


" The Settlements, for that is what they actually are, were entirely voluntary and some were against the wishes of the Israeli authorities. "
Anaxagoras Post #85

So sorry but the claim that the Occupied Territories (West Bank) colonies (aka 'settlements') are "entirely voluntary" and not official Israeli policy is simply NOT true. But please don't take my word for it - here's what Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had to say on the matter on 25th January this year:

"Our message is clear: We are planting here, we will stay here, we will build here. This place will be an inseparable part of Israel for eternity", the prime minister [Netanyahu] said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8478022.stm

I do hope we can agree the the Israeli Prime Minister speaks about Israeli policy with more authority than either of us. In fact, it's difficult to think of a more authoritative voice on the issue.

Netanyahu lays out the goal of Israeli policy in stark unmistakeable uncompromising terms - "This place will be an inseparable part of Israel for eternity". So there you have it - straight from the horse's mouth, as it were - Israel's long term goal is the colonisation of the Occupied Territories (West Bank).

As colonisation of land acquired by force is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, it naturally follows that it is official Israeli policy to commit war crimes. As simply, as clearly and as indisputably as 1 + 1 = 2.

If that wasn't bad enough, Israel also encourages its citizens to join in the commission of war crimes. Israeli citizens are offered cheaper housing, tax incentives and other subsidies to colonise ('settle') the Occupied Territories (West Bank). Colonists (aka 'settlers') are protected in the commission of their war crimes by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF).

Further, the IDF ruthlessly suppresses any local opposition to this colonisation process. Thousands of Palestinians have been murdered by the IDF since the Occupation began in 1967. As these killings occur in defence of an illegal occupation, they too are arguably war crimes. Resistance by the local indigenous population to the occupation and theft of its land is met with accusations of 'terrorism' and dealt with through almost daily killings of Palestinians by the IDF and collective punishments (yet another war crime)

The Israeli State supports the colonists by building infrastructure such as roads to integrate the colonies into Israel proper ie Israel's internationally recognised (pre-1967) borders. Much of this infrastructure (eg the roads) are for use of Israeli citizens only. The indigenous Palestinian population is prohibited from using these facilities. This naked racism is part of the basis of the apartheid charge often levelled at Israel.

But wait ... there's worse. Last month, faced with the choice of freezing the expansion of the colonies or continuing peace talks with the Palestinian Authority, Israel chose to expand its colonies. It chose this in flagrant disregard of the advice of the rest of world. Every nation that offered a view urged the Israelis to freeze construction in the colonies. Even the USA, Israel's only ally, urged and tried to bribe Israel to stop building the colonies and keep talking to the Palestinians. Not a single country in the entire world supported the path that Israel chose.

Please think about that for a minute - faced with a choice of continuing to commit war crimes OR talking peace with the Palestinians, Israel CHOSE war crimes. Staggering isn't it? It's impossible to avoid concluding that Israel wants the West Bank more than peace, that Israel prefers committing war crimes to talking peace.

Is it any wonder that virtually the entire world (bar the USA Australia and one or two others) regards Israel as a rogue terrorist State?



tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 5:11:54 AM)

quote:

I know Israel has erred many times, and I feel if both sides could accept that this war is deadly to their people there could be peace. However at the end of the day I also feel the Palestinian leaders would rather see their people die than live in a country next to the Jews. I feel compromise is needed on both sides and the Palestinians cannot see that being on the losing side does not mean they compromised.


I am glad we can agree that neither side has clean hands, and that compromise is the only route to peace.

Perhaps the most poignant tragedy is the most of the world knows the broad outline of the compromise that must eventually occur, neither of the protagonists seems able to see it. This compromise is outlined in UN Resolution 242, which broadly speaking proposes recognition and security for Israel in exchange for its withdrawal to the internationally recognised pre-1967 borders.

Both sides will have their extremists who prefer war to peace. Israel will face enormous upheaval in dismantling its colonies and resettling the 300, 000 intractable settlers/colonists inside Israel's 1967 borders. The Palestinians will have to deal with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, neither or whom seem disposed to compromise.

The situations in Ulster (Northern Ireland) and South Africa seemed as intractable and the prospects for peace seemed so bleak, but both peoples have made enormous progress along the path to peace and resolution. So I feel we can be optimistic that reconciliation can be achieved.

The first step must be a freeze in the colonies/settlements. How can anyone be expected to talk peace while the other side is busy committing war crimes against it as they negotiate?

There is currently a proposal from the Arab League (initiated by the Saudis) that offers Israel a negotiated deal with all the members of the Arab League, along the lines of UN Resolution 242. This seems to me to be one potential starting point for a peace process ...... what do you think?



Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 8:12:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

" The Settlements, for that is what they actually are, were entirely voluntary and some were against the wishes of the Israeli authorities. "
Anaxagoras Post #85

So sorry but the claim that the Occupied Territories (West Bank) colonies (aka 'settlements') are "entirely voluntary" and not official Israeli policy is simply NOT true. But please don't take my word for it - here's what Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had to say on the matter on 25th January this year:

"Our message is clear: We are planting here, we will stay here, we will build here. This place will be an inseparable part of Israel for eternity", the prime minister [Netanyahu] said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8478022.stm



Netanyahu was speaking in a certain context where he has to appeal to the more right-wing pro-Settler sides of his relatively fragile coalition. This was at a time when Obama was criticising Israel on a frequent basis for even allowing natural growth of settlements (including in Jerusalem) which would include conventional extensions on buildings. Thus there was a lot of anger about it in his coalition.

quote:


I do hope we can agree the the Israeli Prime Minister speaks about Israeli policy with more authority than either of us. In fact, it's difficult to think of a more authoritative voice on the issue.

Netanyahu lays out the goal of Israeli policy in stark unmistakeable uncompromising terms - "This place will be an inseparable part of Israel for eternity". So there you have it - straight from the horse's mouth, as it were - Israel's long term goal is the colonisation of the Occupied Territories (West Bank).



Ordinarily I would say “yes” but firstly I would like to remind you that Israel is a democracy where politicians have different takes on what they wish to see occur in Israel. Netanyahu is a relatively right-wing politician. Some have gone as far as to call him a “hawk” which is a bit unfair but nonetheless he is only one of many Israeli prime ministers. Pro-Peace leftists like Olmert, who offered Abbas virtually all the territory he had demanded in 2008 without any negotiations, would have a very different take on the settlements so what Netanyahu said should not be conflated with the policies of the Israeli state itself. Secondly Netanyahu was speaking in a highly fraught political context as I explained above with great external pressure from Obama but also a lot of pressure from his right-wing coalition partners. He was far more conciliatory toward Palestinians in other speeches so it need not be an indicator of policy.

quote:



As colonisation of land acquired by force is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, it naturally follows that it is official Israeli policy to commit war crimes. As simply, as clearly and as indisputably as 1 + 1 = 2.



Unlike Nazi Germany which gave rise to Article 49, Israel has never transferred the native populations out of those contested regions or transferred populations into them. Quite the opposite where it forcibly removed settlements out of Gaza and the Sinai at a political cost to its leaders and at a lot of financial expense as well. I understand it was policy at different times during the various administrations in Israel to use the settlements as part of their defensive strategy so they offered incentives such as tax breaks and cheaper housing but that is not akin to the mass transfer of populations which Article 49 refers to. All settlement acts were still entirely voluntary and many people in Israel also dislike them. Pro-Palestinians use this argument but a basic familiarity with the facts shows it is completely invalid.

quote:



But wait ... there's worse. Last month, faced with the choice of freezing the expansion of the colonies or continuing peace talks with the Palestinian Authority, Israel chose to expand its colonies. It chose this in flagrant disregard of the advice of the rest of world. Every nation that offered a view urged the Israelis to freeze construction in the colonies. Even the USA, Israel's only ally, urged and tried to bribe Israel to stop building the colonies and keep talking to the Palestinians. Not a single country in the entire world supported the path that Israel chose.



With regard to the expansion of “settlements”, I would make the same point. Netanyahu is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Faced with the probable collapse of his government he refused to freeze construction. He did freeze it for along time though and your peace loving Palestinians still refused to come to the table until it was almost too late. Furthermore he had asked the Palestinians not to come to the peace table with pre-conditions for there were no preconditions on the Israeli side. They refused and then Israel placed a pre-condition that if they agreed to the Palestinian demand to freeze settlement building, would they in turn recognise Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. They said no.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 8:35:13 AM)

I’m afraid you are lapsing into traditional extremist pro-Palestinian diatribes at this point which display a real bias even though you acknowledge neither side has clean hands in the following post. Personally I want to see peace where there is a real two-state solution but all but moderate pro-Palestinians have no capacity to see Israel’s perspective and simply push propaganda which I think is deeply damaging.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

If that wasn't bad enough, Israel also encourages its citizens to join in the commission of war crimes. Israeli citizens are offered cheaper housing, tax incentives and other subsidies to colonise ('settle') the Occupied Territories (West Bank). Colonists (aka 'settlers') are protected in the commission of their war crimes by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF).

Further, the IDF ruthlessly suppresses any local opposition to this colonisation process. Thousands of Palestinians have been murdered by the IDF since the Occupation began in 1967. As these killings occur in defence of an illegal occupation, they too are arguably war crimes. Resistance by the local indigenous population to the occupation and theft of its land is met with accusations of 'terrorism' and dealt with through almost daily killings of Palestinians by the IDF and collective punishments (yet another war crime)

The Israeli State supports the colonists by building infrastructure such as roads to integrate the colonies into Israel proper ie Israel's internationally recognised (pre-1967) borders. Much of this infrastructure (eg the roads) are for use of Israeli citizens only. The indigenous Palestinian population is prohibited from using these facilities. This naked racism is part of the basis of the apartheid charge often levelled at Israel.

... Please think about that for a minute - faced with a choice of continuing to commit war crimes OR talking peace with the Palestinians, Israel CHOSE war crimes. Staggering isn't it? It's impossible to avoid concluding that Israel wants the West Bank more than peace, that Israel prefers committing war crimes to talking peace.

Is it any wonder that virtually the entire world (bar the USA Australia and one or two others) regards Israel as a rogue terrorist State?



How did the so-called “occupation” take place? The Six Day War started after Egypt ordered UNIFIL’s peace keeping buffer troops out of the Sinai (they acquiesced) and mobilised its own troops in a strategy of invasion. Thus the “occupation” only occurred after an act of aggression. What you call the “occupation” could have been ended within months when Israel offered a solution to return all the territory with the exception of Jerusalem. It was rejected by the Arab powers that be out of hand and they invaded and nearly destroyed Israel in 1973. Since that time there has only been a modest clime-down in terms of hostility and with Islamicisation rising greatly in these countries war will occur again.

I suppose by what you call “thousands of Palestinians” “resistance" to the “occupation” of land that was previously in a state of “occupation” before would be Hamas, Hizbullah and the PLO. Israel like all other sovereign states has a legal and moral right to self-defence. It also has a legal right to make war against armed groups. As I said Israel’s presence is not a war crime – it ended in that position due to its defeat of enemies making war. It has a moral right to occupy a piece of land as a buffer zone in a defensive strategy until its neighbours recognise its right to exist in a meaningful fashion. You accuse Israel of stealing land and of killing Palestinians on a daily basis. Both points are completely untrue. Whenever there is a killing it is reported internationally due to the immense interest in this conflict. It isn’t all that common outside of the context of war. In order to prove the land theft theory Pro-Palestinians commonly use misleading maps where they ascribe massive tracts of publicly owned land to the Palestinians pre-Israel, and then after the creation of Israel to Jewish occupation. In truth the land supposedly occupied by Jewish settlers amounts to 4% of the contested territories. I thought the whole propaganda thing about West Bank roads "for Jews only" on which Arabs are forbidden to travel had been explained. The reality is that certain West Bank bypass roads are sometimes closed to non-Israeli Palestinians and has been twisted into an accusation of apartheid. In truth when such roads are closed they are open to all Israeli citizens, regardless of whether they are Jewish, Arab, Christian or Muslim.

quote:


The situations in Ulster (Northern Ireland) and South Africa seemed as intractable and the prospects for peace seemed so bleak, but both peoples have made enormous progress along the path to peace and resolution. So I feel we can be optimistic that reconciliation can be achieved.

The first step must be a freeze in the colonies/settlements. How can anyone be expected to talk peace while the other side is busy committing war crimes against it as they negotiate?


To say that these organisations Hamas, Hizbullah, PLO and now Al Qaeda in Gaza) are not “terrorist” even if their violence can be morally legitimised shows a distinct bias. You mentioned peace in Ulster but need to look more deeply at why peace was achieved there. With regard to that issue I would say that I as an Irishman could see there was some moral legitimacy in IRA’s use of violence when protesting Catholic civilians were being shot on the streets of Northern Ireland, being treated as third class citizens in a state of severe fiscal deprivation, and denied any effective vote by gerrymandering. However, I recognised that the IRA still qualified as “terrorists” and did not agree with their approach because I felt the result was worse than the cause. Peace only came to the North when there was a meaningful recognition of the fears on both sides and real acceptance for their occasionally conflicting needs. By contrast the Palestinians and surrounding Arab states do not recognise the right of Israel to exist as a non-Islamic state in Dar al-Islam. Your stance is a complete legitimisation of Palestinian terror, and do bear in mind the IRA did not remotely compare with the likes of Hamas and Hizbullah in terms of their terrorist activities. We see the complete legitimisation of all Palestinian actions no matter how barbaric, whilst simultaneously condemning Israel no matter how reasonable and necessary the act in order to protect their citizens. It’s the very opposite to what is necessary to promote peace. That is why I believe most Palestinian supporters demonise Israel with the ultimate objective of destroying it. This is the reason I object strongly to people like Hertz. Since the pro-Palestinian movement is a world-wide phenomenon with no effective pro-Israel response, it is a real impediment to any chance of peace.



tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 12:16:37 PM)

" ........so what Netanyahu said should not be conflated with the policies of the Israeli state itself. "

Anaxagoras post # 92


Sorry Anaxagoras, your claim that you are a higher authority on Israeli policy than the Israeli Prime Minister is simply too stupid for words. To describe it as infantile would be to over state its intellectual content.
I do not propose to waste any more of my time dealing with your gibberish.
Enjoy your life.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 12:43:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

" ........so what Netanyahu said should not be conflated with the policies of the Israeli state itself. "

Anaxagoras post # 92

Sorry Anaxagoras, your claim that you are a higher authority on Israeli policy than the Israeli Prime Minister is simply too stupid for words. To describe it as infantile would be to over state its intellectual content.
I do not propose to waste any more of my time dealing with your gibberish.
Enjoy your life.



Ah Tweakabelle you are resorting to insults. I never said I was a higher authority than Netanyahu so please don't pretend that I did. You quoted a strong speech he gave which is fair enough but I tried to explain that he said different things to different people which is fairly typical behaviour by a politician. He says different things to different people to keep them happy and on his side. Thus it stands to reason he would tell pro-settler coalition parties what they want to hear regardless of whether he believes it or not. As a result I asserted one speech is not really sufficient to assert this is the policy of the state.

I gave a contrast with Olmert who was willing to give the Palestinians everything they demanded territorial wise. This included East Jerusalem and all the settlements. Was he following state policy at the time or is there a continuous Israeli State occupation principle as you are trying to assert? Well the former is difficult to assert while it seems clear the latter does not exist or he wouldn't offer up all that territory so easily before there was any dialogue with Abbas. Barak was also willing to give up the settlements in 2000. Netanyahu’s policy might be different or he might have seen the need to give them up too. That’s why I referred to Israel being a democracy where the approaches to peace, settlements etc. change with governance. BTW I won't talk down to you by wishing you an enjoyable life.



hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 1:11:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

Since the pro-Palestinian movement is a world-wide phenomenon with no effective pro-Israel response, it is a real impediment to any chance of peace.


Wrong on two counts.

The reason the Israeli response to the pro-Palestine movement is ineffective is because generally, killing the people who protest one's actions doesn't win the argument.

The Settlements and the unending slaughter of Palestinian civilians by Israel are the biggest impediments to peace.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 1:23:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

Since the pro-Palestinian movement is a world-wide phenomenon with no effective pro-Israel response, it is a real impediment to any chance of peace.


Wrong on two counts.

The reason the Israeli response to the pro-Palestine movement is ineffective is because generally, killing the people who protest one's actions doesn't win the argument.

The Settlements and the unending slaughter of Palestinian civilians by Israel are the biggest impediments to peace.



Aside from Rachel Corrie, Israel is not responsible for killing any pro-Palestinians. The killing of Corrie appears to have been an accident not least because killing a girl in her 20's would be a huge own-goal although I am sure pro-Palestinians like yourself would disageree. Funny how Israel repeatedly offered to remove settlements and withdraw in return for demands to ensure security but there still isn't peace. With the er... "unending slaughter of Palestinian civilians" its peculiar how the Palestinian population of the "Occupied Territories" has risen from one million to around four million whilst other indicators like child mortality have also improved. If Israel is a genocidal regime it must be as competent as Dad's Army.



hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 1:38:36 PM)

Again you are wrong.

Pro-Palestinians quite obviously contain Palestinians living in Palestine amongst their number, and Israel has killed thousands of them, some of them for really mundane things like harvesting olives on their own land and so on. Obviously, these were all accidents or terrorists -  we can just take your reply as read.

quote:

Funny how Israel repeatedly offered to remove settlements and withdraw in return for demands to ensure security but there still isn't peace.


Yeah, about that - offering isn't really going to do it. It actually needs to be followed up with action. And 'withdrawal'? Well, let's just say that the Israeli definition of withdrawal is everyone else's definition of 'continue the occupation'.

Your touching tale of population growth in Palestine doesn't really answer the point that Israel has killed thousands of Palestinians simply for living on their own land.



Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 2:01:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

Again you are wrong.

Pro-Palestinians quite obviously contain Palestinians living in Palestine amongst their number, and Israel has killed thousands of them, some of them for really mundane things like harvesting olives on their own land and so on. Obviously, these were all accidents or terrorists - we can just take your reply as read.



Again you are trying to misconstrue the context. I was referring to the international pro-Palestinian movement external to the Palestinians themselves in Post 90 which you responded to. Obviously it wouldn't be expected that the Palestinians themselves support anything other than themselves. I said this movement was an impediment to peace because it demonises one side whilst proping up the other side morally.

quote:


quote:

Funny how Israel repeatedly offered to remove settlements and withdraw in return for demands to ensure security but there still isn't peace.


Yeah, about that - offering isn't really going to do it. It actually needs to be followed up with action. And 'withdrawal'? Well, let's just say that the Israeli definition of withdrawal is everyone else's definition of 'continue the occupation'.


This is getting absurd. I said they offered in return for some security expectations - not an unreasonable demand. No agreement was forthcoming with regard to the latter so Israel did not withdraw. They did withdraw from Gaza but once Hamas got in they publicly vowed to continue aggression against Israel. Israel placed an embargo on the area to limit the exportation of weapons. It was tough on the population but first and foremost Israel has to protect its own populace.

quote:


Your touching tale of population growth in Palestine doesn't really answer the point that Israel has killed thousands of Palestinians simply for living on their own land.



I'm afraid it isn't a touching tale - it is a cold hard fact. All too often the pro-Palestinian movement tries to trump facts with sheer propaganda. If Israel had a genocidal motive toward the Palestinians since they took the region we call the "OPT" in 1967 the population would not have quadrupled. In 40 years the percentage of population growth actually increased AFAIK.



MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 2:05:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

Yeah, about that - offering isn't really going to do it. It actually needs to be followed up with action. And 'withdrawal'? Well, let's just say that the Israeli definition of withdrawal is everyone else's definition of 'continue the occupation'.



Every time a Palestinian leader agrees to something along the lines of peace for withdrawal (which is rare) they immediately attack. Israel recently offered to continue the settlement freeze in return for recognition as a Jewish state so that peace talks could continue. However Israel is the one being condemned as the party with preconditions and hard-lining.



hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 2:11:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20

Israel is the one being condemned as the party with preconditions and hard-lining.



Well, with all those anti-Semites demonising them, what do you expect?

There are many possible reasons for people seeing Israel in a less than favourable light. One possibility is that the racist state of Israel has been rumbled.



MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 2:44:40 PM)

Racist meaning, of course, being the only middle eastern state which allows both Jews and Arabs to be citizens and the only middle eastern state that allows both Jews and Arabs to purchase land?

Israel offered peace to Jordan and Egypt in return for land and when the treaties were signed at the end of the 6-day war Israel held its promises to those two states. Can you name one case where the Palestinian leaders and militants have stopped shooting rockets, stopped sending suicide bombers, stopped calling for the death of Israel under an agreement for peace.....and then Israel attacks or is violent afterward?



Politesub53 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 4:08:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20

Racist meaning, of course, being the only middle eastern state which allows both Jews and Arabs to be citizens and the only middle eastern state that allows both Jews and Arabs to purchase land?



How many more times do I have to state this is utter nonsense. Do some research and stop spouting rubbish. If you need a hint, which it seems you do, start with Iran.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.736328E-02