I have been hearing some elected lawmakers are making calls for President Carter's passport to be revoked due to his travels in the mid-east and meetings with those our government have labeled as terrorists.

I realize that we have made serious progress BACKWARDS under the Dubya & Dick reign, but since when are we going to be dictating to our former Presidents what they can and cannot do in terms of meeting with people and attempting to further a peace agenda? He has made no claims to be doing anything under the guise of a representative of the US government. He is taking the pulse of the region, meeting with ALL concerned parties, and stating quite clearly that no serious solutions to the problems of the region can be solved unless ALL concerned parties are allowed to have some say in the process.

President Carter may make mistakes in these meetings, and he may say things that will come back to haunt him, but that is his right as an American citizen, let alone a former leader of our country. All our "leadership" needs to do is to make it emphatically clear that President Carter does not represent the government of the U.S. Calling for actions akin to punishment for practicing those freedoms we are so intent on foisting onto other countries smacks of the worst form of hypocrisy.

I have been hearing some elected lawmakers are making calls for President Carter's passport to be revoked due to his travels in the mid-east and meetings with those our government have labeled as terrorists.

I realize that we have made serious progress BACKWARDS under the Dubya & Dick reign, but since when are we going to be dictating to our former Presidents what they can and cannot do in terms of meeting with people and attempting to further a peace agenda? He has made no claims to be doing anything under the guise of a representative of the US government. He is taking the pulse of the region, meeting with ALL concerned parties, and stating quite clearly that no serious solutions to the problems of the region can be solved unless ALL concerned parties are allowed to have some say in the process.

President Carter may make mistakes in these meetings, and he may say things that will come back to haunt him, but that is his right as an American citizen, let alone a former leader of our country. All our "leadership" needs to do is to make it emphatically clear that President Carter does not represent the government of the U.S. Calling for actions akin to punishment for practicing those freedoms we are so intent on foisting onto other countries smacks of the worst form of hypocrisy.

I agree... And anyone who dares call for a president of the United States, no matter how messed up to have their passport revoked, needs to jump off a cliff.

What job have those people done that was as important to the United States as the job of the President?

Does the Logan Act have any relevance here?

Does the Logan Act have any relevance here?

No, because Hamas is not recognized as the government of the Palestinian people by the United States, and Carter is not negotiating.

I didn't catch the whole story, and I can't find anything online yet - I'll post it when the stories come up - but the news on the drive home said the Arizona legislature is considering legislation which would ban any teaching in classrooms deemed undemocratic, and would prohibit anti-American groups on any state funded campus.

Goodbye free speech, if the news had it correct. The humor in the situation is that last year they passed legislation requiring us to post the Constitution and Bill of Rights in every classroom.

I didn't catch the whole story, and I can't find anything online yet - I'll post it when the stories come up - but the news on the drive home said the Arizona legislature is considering legislation which would ban any teaching in classrooms deemed undemocratic, and would prohibit anti-American groups on any state funded campus.

Goodbye free speech, if the news had it correct. The humor in the situation is that last year they passed legislation requiring us to post the Constitution and Bill of Rights in every classroom.

Canada is looking very good right now...

Don't worry guys, it happens.

At the end of the C18th and beginning of the C19th Britain was regarded as *the* liberal and democratic power in Europe. When the stress of the Napoleonic Wars kicked it, habaeus corpus was suspended, laws passed to restrict freedoms, protests and riots broken up by gun-fire (Gordon Riots, Peterloo, etc) and long-awaited democratic reforms suspended - not to mention ANYONE with slight pro-French feelings could easily be incarcerated without reason.

All sound familiar?

Sometimes the channels created for democracy can be used rather easily for other means if the circumstances present themselves.

Arizona legislature is considering legislation which would ban any teaching in classrooms deemed undemocratic, and would prohibit anti-American groups on any state funded campus.So just to be clear, you're in favor of your government funding propoganda, teachings, and training in its own downfall?

And Halo likening that to someone being arrested for speaking the wrong accent is a far stretch. Hey I'm all for someone getting together and making their own KKK, Communist China, or whatever get-together. Make all the banners and protest posters and get togethers you want.

Just don't think you're entitled to do it with my tax dollars.. and if I cry fowl, don't whine about your free speech rights being trampled.

And as for Jimmy...

http://www.house.gov/list/press/nc09_myrick/041608carterpassport.html

“Former President Carter has acted in contradiction of international agreements to isolate Hamas. He has acted in defiance of both United States policy and international policy. His actions reward terrorists, lend support, and provide legitimacy to their belief that violence will eventually get them what they want,” said Rep. Myrick.

After Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections the Quartet (US, UN, EU and Russia) called on Hamas to renounce terror, recognize Israel and recognize the previous agreements between the Palestinian Authority and Israel as they seek an agreement to make peace. Hamas has categorically rejected these three conditions for more than two years.

I think the Rep. has a valid concern. Maybe yes or no, but it's certainly something to argue about.

Freedom of speach is one thing. Being a public official, and yes Pres Carter still is as he receives govt protection etc etc, but to speak with an entity on our countries list of terrorrists is another.

He doesn't get to enjoy both, he did a lousy job as president and now he's mucking shit up 30 years later.

I'm sure you'd agree he was awful Jedd, he was the one the in charge when we really mucked up in Iran after all.

If he wants to do what he's doing as a private citizen he needs to revoke all his lil party favors he gets from his run as President (monies, secret service, etc etc etc).

I heard some discussion between Bill Bennet and gods couldn't remember his guest and yes there is recourse if we wanted to push it to put pressure on Carter. They won't pull the trigger of course, and Carter will continue to muddle in shit he doesn't have the right to. It's already jacked up enough over there without that Peanut head getting involved.

Kind of in the middle on this.

On one hand, he has the right to talk to these clowns until he's blue in the face. On the other he has no right to use public funds to protect himself when he does moronic things. As long as he is paying for ALL of the protection needed for the trip...go right ahead.

As far as the Arizona law, what scares me, especially with our current fascist regime, it how vague the law appears to be. I personally believe teachers should never "preach" or try to directly influence students political or religious beliefs, but it would be extremely difficult to discuss current events without a teacher's opinion coming out. It's a very difficult line to legislate.

So just to be clear, you're in favor of your government funding propoganda, teachings, and training in its own downfall?

And Halo likening that to someone being arrested for speaking the wrong accent is a far stretch. Hey I'm all for someone getting together and making their own KKK, Communist China, or whatever get-together. Make all the banners and protest posters and get togethers you want.

Just don't think you're entitled to do it with my tax dollars.. and if I cry fowl, don't whine about your free speech rights being trampled.

And as for Jimmy...

http://www.house.gov/list/press/nc09_myrick/041608carterpassport.html



I think the Rep. has a valid concern. Maybe yes or no, but it's certainly something to argue about.

The question is, what is determined to be undemocratic, and who decides it... Snowball effect anyone?

And regarding Jimmy Carter... Someone has to try something different, cause shit ain't working... And if the President is too stupid to see it, I am glad at least Jimmy is not.

So just to be clear, you're in favor of your government funding propoganda, teachings, and training in its own downfall?Just to be clear, you're putting words in my mouth. I'll spell it out for you. A blanket ban over something labeled "undemocratic speech" should raise serious red flags. Who defines that? If a legitimate lesson highlights mistakes made by the current administration, is that anti-American? If a school does a play deemed to have subversive political messages, is that anti-American? (Goodbye Shakespeare, Aristophanes, du Maurier, Thoreau...) That would, in my opinion, be a downfall for the government - unless we're just saying to hell with free speech? Supreme Court cases have ruled that free speech absolutely exists on a public school campus, with the only limitation being that it cannot interfere with classroom instruction. If a teacher speaks during classtime, it needs to be relevant to the curriculum.

Just because it's so fun to reference, look up Alien and Sedition laws on wiki.

It may be a mistake on the DJs part anyhow, I still can't find anything on it in the AZ rags. Arizona is something of a third world state when it comes to education.

A blanket ban over something labeled "undemocratic speech" should raise serious red flags. Who defines that? If a legitimate lesson highlights mistakes made by the current administration, is that anti-American? If the people say, 'hey, don't spend my money on those lessons .. go do it with your own money', that's not banning free speech.

And don't get all snippy with me :p you're the one without any background material. I was just trying to make sure I understood your concern, because at first (and 2nd) glance you're confusing two issues.

And again for Carter, he shouldn't be allowed to do anything that a regular citizen can't do. I certainly couldn't go to a terrorist group and be allowed to keep my day job.

If the people say, 'hey, don't spend my money on those lessons .. go do it with your own money', that's not banning free speech.

And don't get all snippy with me :p you're the one without any background material. I was just trying to make sure I understood your concern, because at first (and 2nd) glance you're confusing two issues.

And again for Carter, he shouldn't be allowed to do anything that a regular citizen can't do. I certainly couldn't go to a terrorist group and be allowed to keep my day job.

The day you serve as President of the USA, and broker peace between Israel and Egypt, then you can have the same rights as Mr. Carter :)

The day you serve as President of the USA, and broker peace between Israel and Egypt, then you can have the same rights as Mr. CarterAnd those are ... ? Where exactly is this new and higher class of citizen enumerated in our Constitution?

And those are ... ? Where exactly is this new and higher class of citizen enumerated in our Constitution?

I am not speaking of the inalienable rights of all man... I am speaking of the right to speak with whoever the hell he wants.

The fact is, he is an ex US president and deserves some respect for getting off his ass to try and do something. He could just as easily have stayed home,and watched "I love Lucy" all day.

If our officials can meet with foreign leaders in secret at meetings like Bilderberg, flagrantly in violation of the Logan Act; I don't see any reason why Carter can't do this.

I don't know how he'll accomplish anything, but we're in this mess mostly because we've done too little talking. Why not let the man try?

If our officials can meet with foreign leaders in secret at meetings like Bilderberg, flagrantly in violation of the Logan Act; I don't see any reason why Carter can't do this.

I don't know how he'll accomplish anything, but we're in this mess mostly because we've done too little talking. Why not let the man try?

Because he's a Democrat?

Here's a novel thought: Elect a president that will set as our nation's foreign policy to speak to foreign terrorist organizations and countries.

It's likely to happen in a few months.

Here's a novel thought: Elect a president that will set as our nation's foreign policy to speak to foreign terrorist organizations and countries.

It's likely to happen in a few months.

And oh what an improvement it will be... Imagine trying something that not only can't make a situation worse, but has the potential to make the situation better!!! /gasp!

That's great and all, but it still doesn't justify squelching an ex-President (or anyone) just because he disagrees with the current administration.

Who said anything about disagreement with the current administration? I'm sure Obama, Clinton, and McCain wouldn't appreciate this either. And I have a vague recollection that Bill had a disagreement over something like this during his administration with Jimmy.

It's debatable was all I meant earlier. And it's certainly not 'another example of this facist administration' bull shit.

Personally I don't think he should be over there talking to terrorist groups. And it's a mute point anyway... Bush isn't going to remove his passport privs. No way.

Imagine trying something that not only can't make a situation worse, but has the potential to make the situation better!!! /gasp!You and your other George Galloway groupies can't grasp why we don't generally negotiate with terrorist organizations. Nothing good comes of it.

Who said anything about disagreement with the current administration? I'm sure Obama, Clinton, and McCain wouldn't appreciate this either. And I have a vague recollection that Bill and Jimmy had a disagreement over something like this during his administration.

It's debatable was all I meant earlier. And it's certainly not 'another example of this facist administration' bull shit.

Personally I don't think he should be over there talking to terrorist groups. And it's a mute point anyway... Bush isn't going to remove his passport privs. No way.

You and your other George Galloway groupies can't grasp why we don't generally negotiate with terrorist organizations. Nothing good comes of it.

When a "Terrorist organization" is the elected government of a group of people, the "We don't negotiate with terrorists" BS needs to get put aside.

There is no problem in not speaking with Al Queda, but Hamas is a government, Kim Jong Il was the leader of a country, Ahmadenijad is the president of Iran. All of those people are not people you just ignore.

Until we realize how much power lies in words, we will be doomed to always send people to fight for something that could have been resolved in 2 meetings.

+

Last I checked, the reason we do not speak to terrorists is because we do not want people to believe that they can get what they want through violence.

Isn't that how our government, and every other government that has waged war gets what it wants?

There is no problem in not speaking with Al Queda, but Hamas is a government, Kim Jong Il was the leader of a country, Ahmadenijad is the president of Iran. All of those people are not people you just ignore.I'm sure if you set enough Al-queda down in their own little patch of land and allowed them to vote, we wouldn't much appreciate the result. And we wouldn't be expected to talk to them either.

Look at how wildly successful that sort of policy was for decades with Cuba.

Not negotiating with "terrorists" is one thing, but maintaining dialog with other governments is essential in today's flat world.

An aside: What's with the 'OMG you're a country! I must speak to you!!!!' ?

And I'm sorry Cuba chose to be a terrorist sponsoring nation. Edit: Perhaps if their beloved and lovable dictator didn't, their people would have been better off. "Essential" to diaglue? Not rreally, I haven't lost any sleep from it.

Isn't that how our government, and every other government that has waged war gets what it wants?No.

How cute Jedd is in his defense of Carter yet he's had a stick up his ass since he came back about the US's screwing around with Iran.

Carter was the President in charge during the late 70's. Think you better link another clipping from another website quick!!

Folks, he's not working with anyone and not going to help. As his words don't reflect any desire by Israel (who btw decry his actions) he's doing lil more than head bobbing for a group lobbing missiles daily into Israel.

If he wants to give up all rights and public monies fine, he can maturbate his ego all he wants. I give a damn, I was alive and socially concious while he was reigning and my gods double digit inflation was FUN.

That peanutjob is worthless, he does great works with spending money on building homes I'll give him that.

He's worthless other than that, hell his own party is afraid of what he'll fuck up.

And I'm sorry Cuba chose to be a terrorist sponsoring nation. Edit: Perhaps if their beloved and lovable dictator didn't, their people would have been better off. "Essential" to diaglue? Not rreally, I haven't lost any sleep from it.
Err, it was our treatment of Cuba that directly led to the Cuban Missile Crisis being a possibility. There were certainly a lot of people losing sleep over that.

You guys are wanting to be like China by the way. "Who cares what you've done or what you continue to do, I want... no I need to do business with you. I'll look the other way if you'll just come supper with me."

That seems like an amazingly ironic statement, given our turning a blind eye to China's mile-long list of human rights violations.

Yup! Want lead with that irony?

I said it before regarding Iran - but it'll apply broadly here to Palestine and Cuba and other little despots around the world: if they could contribute more than a pencil eraser 's worth of technology or innovation to the world's economy, the situation would quickly be different.

Funny thing about head choppers and mob stoning civilizations, they don't advance much... and their people suffer terribly for it... but of course it's always fun to blame the Great Satan for those shortcomings.

An aside: What's with the 'OMG you're a country! I must speak to you!!!!' ?

And I'm sorry Cuba chose to be a terrorist sponsoring nation. Edit: Perhaps if their beloved and lovable dictator didn't, their people would have been better off. "Essential" to diaglue? Not rreally, I haven't lost any sleep from it.


For the last time... The United States has, and does sponsor terrorism. There is mountains of information about what our government does, yet you use that as your only reason as to why Cuba should not have been spoken to?

By your own admission, the US should be ignored by every other country in the world.

How cute Jedd is in his defense of Carter yet he's had a stick up his ass since he came back about the US's screwing around with Iran.

Carter was the President in charge during the late 70's. Think you better link another clipping from another website quick!!That Carter was President during the hostage crisis really has nothing to do with our dethroning of Mossadegh in 1953 and emplacement of the Shah -- a pivotal event that understandably left the average Iranian citizen less that pleased with the US. One has to wonder if Iran might be the Middle East democracy we're now trying to staple together had we not supported the coup.
That seems like an amazingly ironic statement, given our turning a blind eye to China's mile-long list of human rights violations.Add in the Saudis, Pakistan, Egypt, etc., etc...

For the last time... Oh thank God. I thought this day would never come. :p

The United States has, and does sponsor terrorism. There is mountains of information about what our government doesThose are freedom fighters! Er something. Got some evidence? I'm sure there's a Senate committee would love to talk to you.

yet you use that as your only reason as to why Cuba should not have been spoken to?Not the only one, just an example. /yawn Why do I want to speak to Cuba again?

Anyway, we do have some principles. Add in the Saudis, Pakistan, Egypt, etc., etc...I suspect it's not economically beneficial for Saudi Arabia to invade Iraq or another neighbor. As long as they play nice in their borders, we're generally fine with them. No? Start building nukes while at the same time out right calling for or alluding to the destruction of a neighbor who is one of our allies gets you smacked on the wrist. Train terrorists and supply them with rockets to do the same? I'll start the think you're really not a nice person after all. Trade with you is more trouble than it's worth.

Those are freedom fighters! Er something. Got some evidence? I'm sure there's a Senate committee would love to talk to you.

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

The point is that not talking to an unfriendly government is a good way to always be enemies. A government that truly cares for the well being of its citizens and wishes for peace, would not shy from talking to an enemy.

Especially the USA.. How the hell does talking sacrifice anything. We are the most powerful country in the world, and yet we are afraid to talk to a small shitty government that is walled in like prisoners. I am sure the day we talk to them is the day the world ends.

Good job Jimmy... At least someone has the balls to lay their own life on the line for peace.

An aside: What's with the 'OMG you're a country! I must speak to you!!!!' ?

No.. but if you are a country whose actions are causing us problems...

Be it boatloads of refugees and fomenting revolution and instability in South America, or really really making an already difficult time in Iraq nearly unbearable, and fomenting religious revolution in the middle east...

Maybe a nice step before "ZOMG BOMBS" would be talking, who knows, maybe even some lives could be spared in the bargain.

No.. but if you are a country whose actions are causing us problems...

Be it boatloads of refugees and fomenting revolution and instability in South America, or really really making an already difficult time in Iraq nearly unbearable, and fomenting religious revolution in the middle east...

Maybe a nice step before "ZOMG BOMBS" would be talking, who knows, maybe even some lives could be spared in the bargain.

Reason is not allowed here Lleauric

Lives are insignificant as long as talking to someone we hate makes them feel special for getting our ear.

No wonder the Audacity of Hope president resonates with you so well. That's all you have.

Your panties are wet down around your ankles and just before you bend over, you ask if it's going to hurt. You can atleast hope they give you a reach around.

No wonder the Audacity of Hope president resonates with you so well. That's all you have.

Your panties are wet down around your ankles and just before you bend over, you ask if it's going to hurt. You can atleast hope they give you a reach around.

Funny enough it looks like you are doing exactly as you described, but Bush is the one standing behind you :)

Compared to your willful submision to a sadistic gang rape by machiavellian type murderers, I'd choose Bush any day.

Let me know how that works out for you.

Compared to your willful submision to a sadistic gang rape by machiavellian type murderers, I'd choose Bush any day.

Let me know how that works out for you.

Submission... You admit then... you believe talking is Submitting?

Forgive us pussies for wanting to find a way to stop someone without pulling the trigger first. How can we ever live up to your brave expectations?

Oh strong republican, shall we murder the enemy in their sleep before we discuss with them the issue that makes them our enemy? We must repent.... Repent and follow the strong ways of Akipt and the Republicans. Shoot first... NEVER ASK QUESTIONS! HOOAHH!

Your panties are wet down around your ankles and just before you bend over, you ask if it's going to hurt. You can atleast hope they give you a reach around.

...

Compared to your willful submision to a sadistic gang rape by machiavellian type murderers, I'd choose Bush any day.
WTF?

Just home from work, and have not had a chance to read through all the posts here yet, but right away I noticed the one Akipt had quoted in his post on page 1.

I know it is beating a dead horse, but why is it all of a sudden a big deal to act in contradiction of international opinion by talking to Hamas, when it was not a big deal for Cheney and Halliburton to do business with Iran with the same contradiction of international opinion (US and UN sanctions, remember)?

It seems to me to be more of a ploy to distract folks from other real important matters, like the economy and gas prices and the war having no end in sight, etc.

Submission... You admit then... you believe talking is Submitting?Yes
Forgive us pussies for wanting to find a way to stop someone...You think me a monster? I'm not arguing against your motivations. I want it to be all bunnies and roses as well, but that's not reality. In doing what you suggest, I (and a very large group of people in this world that know a hell of alot more about it than either of us) wholeheartedly believe it will only make matters worse.

...without pulling the trigger first.So by not talking, we're pulling the trigger first?

Oh strong republican, shall we murder the enemy in their sleep before we discuss with them the issue that makes them our enemy?You've now changed what 'talking' means in this discussion. Hamas, Iran, North Korea, Cuba etc all know exactly why they're on our shit list.

Shoot first... NEVER ASK QUESTIONS! HOOAHH!Yeah you've bumped your head again. Got some drool there on your shirt.

Yes
You think me a monster? I'm not arguing against your motivations. I want it to be all bunnies and roses as well, but that's not reality. In doing what you suggest, I (and a very large group of people in this world that know a hell of alot more about it than either of us) wholeheartedly believe it will only make matters worse.

So by not talking, we're pulling the trigger first?

You've now changed what 'talking' means in this discussion. Hamas, Iran, North Korea, Cuba etc all know exactly why they're on our shit list.

Yeah you've bumped your head again. Got some drool there on your shirt.

Your first answer made reading the rest irrelevant. Talking with your enemies is not submitting. Action can still be taken after you talk with your enemy, if the talking is going nowhere.

The fact that people such as yourself who are so opposed to simply opening dialog before taking action, are in the leadership positions of our country, is a clear indicator as to why we are in the shit we are in. Dialog doesn't work with everybody, but it works with some people. War is supposed to be a last resort, but for us, it seems to be War before speaking with our enemy.

Problem is Carter has no authority is these talks. He's doing lil more than jumping in where he's not only not wanted, but flat out could be making things worse.

Carter is and was a joke, those of you that think different are too young to recall the awful late 70's.

Or, wait...taught to here revisionist history of him. I have a friend who gradded from local WSU and he trys to convince me Carter was a great president /guffaw

I don't disagree about Carter, but where's the relevance? If efficacy were a prerequisite for being allowed to go outside and voice your opinion, most of our current leaders would be on permanent house arrest.

Carter wasn't a particularly fantastic president but if you except the re-breeder reactor stupidity he's still netted more positive effort to try and get people to stop killing each other in the last month alone than every member of the Bush administration combined in all their tenures in every position since the 1970s.

And he's in trouble for that? In the land of the free?

Aye, good lord for such intelligent folks you are willfully daft about this one important fact.

Due to his past position he is not a private citizen. He enjoys monies, protections and perks as such. When he travels and speaks he's known as President Carter, folks assume and believe he speaks with some authority.

He doesn't, he's not part of any plan to bring peace to the middle east. Israel has come right out and said he doesn't speak for them. Hamas lobs in pain daily to Israel even after they were given their last set of demands.

Do you not see this? All he's doing is stroking his own legacy, nothing else.

There is Freedom of speech....but there is also responsibility of speech and accepting the ramifications. It's like yelling fire in a crowded theater or I'm hijacking this plane. Sure you can be a triffling twat and do it and yell "but it's Freedom of Speech" , but it's going to cost you. That's lawful and completly legit (held up in court of law as well if I recall)

As it should cost Carter, just strip him of his Presidential benifits and let him do what he wants imho.

Well, having read all the posts since I went to work this morning, I am still not seeing much discussion of my main point, which was, when did we start telling people who they could talk to and associate with, and how does that fit with our "democratic freedoms"?

The one thing President Carter did demonstrate an affinity for while in the White House was TALKING to people, and working with others to find common grounds. I am not a big fan of him, other than appreciating his work with Israel/Egypt, and his home-building efforts. But, I see no real harm that can come from his going and talking to people, whether they are considered friend or foe, in an attempt to find that common ground again. What could happen, other than a possible (albeit minute) chance of embarassing Bush by actually getting a little bit of progress made toward peace?

But still, the very notion that someone would suggest punitive measures for his taking the initiative to go and talk to people is outrageous. It is what I would expect from Putin, or the Chinese.

Carter is and was a joke, those of you that think different are too young to recall the awful late 70's.

No but I'm alive to witness the awful last part of the first decade of the 2000s.

Due to his past position he is not a private citizen. He enjoys monies, protections and perks as such. When he travels and speaks he's known as President Carter, folks assume and believe he speaks with some authority.
In the same thread, you've argued that he's such a joke that no one respects him politically and his efforts are pointless, yet also that he's so powerfully influential that he must be controlled.

Which is it?

Should we start controlling what the Forbes Top 25 Richest People do and say? They are undeniably far more powerful and influential than Carter could ever be.

How far down that slippery slope are you willing to arbitrarily slide?

Sanchek beat me to the point. This seems to be a confused point of view.
When he travels and speaks he's known as President Carter, folks assume and believe he speaks with some authority. What folks? Who assumes that he has what authority? I doubt anyone Carter speaks with assumes any such thing. Do you honestly believe that people out there Carter is talking to thinks he pulls strings in the Bush administration?
Do you not see this? All he's doing is stroking his own legacy, nothing else.This is just mind-reading presumption. Carter could just as easily believe it's his moral duty to attempt to bring about peaceful resolutions. It'd be in line with his religious beliefs.

Wow

The very fact that Hamas wants to talk to him indicates they think he speaks with some authority.

Ahh and love hearing....but but but Bush from the same set of folks that said but but but Clinton was no excuse....

No, the fact that Hamas is willing to talk to him only indicates that they're willing to talk to a former head of state who is well known for globe-trotting, chit-chatting and house building. They may also see it as a method of gaining legitimacy on the world stage (though by the US' own measure of "democratizing the Middle East" they pass this test).

Truth is, though, that direct US-Hamas talks aren't of real consequence. We're not neighbors or trade partners. It only matters if Israel talks to Hamas, as their dispute is the source of all the confrontation in the first place. We can try to convince or dissuade Israel from talking to Hamas, but they'll do what they want anyway. As I understand, the two sides are talking, but only via back-channels while their respective leaderships toss bluster, and occasionally missiles.

Hardly occasional Thor...

Daily missiles fly into Israel, not very effective but happens none the less.

You are correct in one thing, none of it matters unless Israel and Hamas find a happy middle ground.

Errr what's the happy middle ground of wiping all of Israel from the map for Hamas?

Hardly occasional Thor...

Daily missiles fly into Israel, not very effective but happens none the less.

You are correct in one thing, none of it matters unless Israel and Hamas find a happy middle ground.

Errr what's the happy middle ground of wiping all of Israel from the map for Hamas?

and israel routinely slaughter palestinians, what is your point?

Okay Wiggo. Daily and since the inception of Israel (a mistake I agree pushed in large by a guiltridden Europe) they've been attacked again and again. You're right it's all their fault...

I hope you enjoy your own onslaught of Muslims and the problems the rest of Europe is suffering as they suffer the troubles your type of fatalistic idealism is bringing them.

because israel is full of pacifists, thoroughly confused why anyone would attack them, i mean, its not like theyve been stealing their land for 50 years.

because israel is full of pacifists, thoroughly confused why anyone would attack them, i mean, its not like theyve been stealing their land for 50 years.

The Palestine Mandate of I believe it was 1947 was a United Nations decision, so wouldn't the appropriate target of the hostilities be the United Nations, and those signatory countries? Seems there would be more prompt action toward a settlement if the rockets were being lobbed at the countries that awarded that piece of land to Israel; Israel is only defending what was granted them.

And, it does seem they must have presented a better case than the Palestinians, to have been granted the land in the first place.

Its not like they tried to come to some kind of agreement 50 years ago either...the UN creates this Israeli state, the Arabs reject it and its been heaven ever since. How long should Israel go on with out attacking back before elitists like Wiggo will say, ok Israel you may now protect yourself?

<haha Bylimet we typed this at the same time>

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png/327px-UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png/374px-Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png

can you spot the difference? this also does not include the increasingly numerous illegal settlements on palestinian land.

...snip...
can you spot the difference? this also does not include the increasingly numerous illegal settlements on palestinian land.
I see the difference... I also put it into context that Israel has been attacked numerous times since the establishment of the state of Israel by the Arab world, and has taken land every time in retaliation after they kick the Arab's ass.

This is the same sort of idea that has existed since the dawn of time - attack me, and if I beat you, I'm gonna take something of yours; if you're lucky enough that I dont obliterate you and just take everything. Israel has restrained themselves during these attacks and has only taken postage stamp sized pieces of land, of course largely due to international influence saying they need to stop (not that international influence did anything to hold up the arab attacks).

I dont know why different rules apply to Israel than to any other country on Earth. How many times in the past has America taken land as retribution for being attacked?

How about this question - if the Arabs had attacked Israel, and had somehow succeeded to a point that they had taken some of the land on the original UN map that belonged to Israel, would you be arguing that the Arab's should give it back to Israel? Somehow, I'm doubting so.

I'd like to hear the case of why Israel has even a minute claim to the land that they stole in violation of international law?

I don't feel bad for them at all. Their sense of 'self determination' has resulted in them becoming yet another one of America's play things. They can thumb their nose at their Arab neighbors all they want when they can run and cry behind us, or the ridiculous amount of military equipment (And nukes anyone?) that we supply them with.

Yes, they get attacked. They also attack - often completely disproportionately.

This isn't an 'elitist' thing. In fact, most people around the world are very critical of the Zionist plight. America stands quite alone in their uncompromising support of Israel, which I guess would make you the 'elitist' one.

I'd like to hear the case of why Israel has even a minute claim to the land that they stole in violation of international law?



I would like to see the case made of Israel stealing land in violation of international law. Specifically, what land was stolen, and what proof of prior ownership is there; and, what international laws were broken, and by whom, and that should also include the international laws broken by the Arab countries against Israel, for context purposes, please.

I would like to see the case made of Israel stealing land in violation of international law. Specifically, what land was stolen, and what proof of prior ownership is there; and, what international laws were broken, and by whom, and that should also include the international laws broken by the Arab countries against Israel, for context purposes, please.

Does it matter? All those resolutions were vetoed by the good ol USA!

Remove all the religious context, and the historical context of tribal and familial vendettas, and look at the scenario in terms of a country being formed to house a select group of people by the international community. Said country sits on a land mass less than 1/10 of the surrounding enemy population.

Now, when the enemy population decides to exert their opposition to the granting of the land, the country awarded said land by the international body responds thusly: "If you fuck with us, we will kill five for every one, and if that does not stop you from fucking with us, we will kill ten for every one; and, we will then also take the land those who attacked us were based upon, to prevent them from using the same lands to launch attacks in the future. But, if you are willing to live alongside us un peace, we will be happy to share the wealth of the land, and teach you our irrigation and farming methods."

Israel wanted to be a part of the neighborhood, and share in a community spirit. They were rebuked, and have lived under threat of constant attack.
They have done a phenomenal job of reclaiming desert land and making it once more productive.

If the religious context is removed, there would not be nearly as much noise being made.

Remove all the religious context, and the historical context of tribal and familial vendettas, and look at the scenario in terms of a country being formed to house a select group of people by the international community. Said country sits on a land mass less than 1/10 of the surrounding enemy population.

Now, when the enemy population decides to exert their opposition to the granting of the land, the country awarded said land by the international body responds thusly: "If you fuck with us, we will kill five for every one, and if that does not stop you from fucking with us, we will kill ten for every one; and, we will then also take the land those who attacked us were based upon, to prevent them from using the same lands to launch attacks in the future. But, if you are willing to live alongside us un peace, we will be happy to share the wealth of the land, and teach you our irrigation and farming methods."

Israel wanted to be a part of the neighborhood, and share in a community spirit. They were rebuked, and have lived under threat of constant attack.
They have done a phenomenal job of reclaiming desert land and making it once more productive.

If the religious context is removed, there would not be nearly as much noise being made.

The only problem with that is that Israel kills 2 militants and 8 Civilians for every 1 civilian, OR soldier killed.

Israel also was given land that other people were living on... They established their own government on that land, and their government is racist.

Unless you are a Jew, you CANNOT own land in Israel. That is not normal.

East Jerusalem by the declaration of the UN is supposed to be the Palestinians part of the city... Instead Israel took it over and controls ALL of Jerusalem.

Forget religion, you don't need it to be involved to see how ridiculous it is to think of Israel as the good guy... Both sides are Fucked up, the reason why Israel should get a lot of shit is because they collectively punish the Palestinians, and there is no reason why airstrikes are needed to assassinate 1 officer of Hamas in a residential area. Israel makes them live in tiny strips of land with walls to keep them in and others out.

There is 0 representation for the Palestinians in the international community... The only country actually standing for them is Iran, and they are being demonized for it. How can anyone know the truth about the palestinians plight when the only country that stands for them is treated the same way as Israel treats the Palestinians?

-Edit

Even American and international groups that go to Gaza, report that Israel is way out of line, and the Palestinians are suffering at the hands of Israel, yet not even their words are enough to break the stigma that has developed in the way people think of the conflict. What will it take? Will Israel have to snap and kill 1000 civilians in 1 day before people will realize they were wrong in supporting their actions? We are so quick to act pre emptively for our interests, but the Palestinians are not important enough for us to even allow the International community to act.

Let's face it. Most of our real goals involving the area amount to maintaining instability in the Middle East.

No one in the region supports Israel, because it's clearly insane. However, when we're safely ~6,000 miles away and their continual contribution to destabilization of the area helps us keep control of it, then it only makes sense for us to be allies.

Without Saudi Arabia and Israel as our permanent political beachhead in the area, we'd have a damn hard time strong-arming OPEC nations the way we do.

Unless you are a Jew, you CANNOT own land in Israel.Over 90% of the land in Israel is owned by the government. The rest is split evenly between Jews and Arabs.

Conversely, being an Arab who sells their land to a Jew? Could get you executed. Typical practice by Arafat anyway.

Oh interesting... Apparently the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled it's ok for the government to give highly favorably lease agreements to Arabs ($124,000 versus $150)

http://www.meforum.org/article/370

Yeah not normal.

Over 90% of the land in Israel is owned by the government. The rest is split evenly between Jews and Arabs.

Conversely, being an Arab who sells their land to a Jew? Could get you executed. Typical practice by Arafat anyway.

Oh interesting... Apparently the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled it's ok for the government to give highly favorably lease agreements to Arabs ($124,000 versus $150)

http://www.meforum.org/article/370

Yeah not normal.

Unless you are a Jew, you cannot own land inside of Israel... Unless you are in Gaza or the West bank... that is a fact

An Arab can be a Jew, in case you didn't know Akipt

-Edit

Alright, I researched this a bit more... An Arab cannot own land in Israel, but even Israeli Jews have a hard time getting land, due to how much of the land is owned by the Government. Arabs only real way of living in Israel is to lease.

Alright, I researched this a bit more... An Arab cannot own land in Israel, but even Israeli Jews have a hard time getting land, due to how much of the land is owned by the Government. Arabs only real way of living in Israel is to lease.Didn't I say that? Except it's the same (actually harder) for a Jew to lease in Israel.

How many Jews leasing/owning in Gaza or the West Bank?

Didn't I say that? Except it's the same (actually harder) for a Jew to lease in Israel.

How many Jews leasing/owning in Gaza or the West Bank?

Yes you did... I apologize, you were correct.

Yes you did... I apologize, you were correct.


/gasp

/gets out telescope and starts scanning skies for the comet on a collision course with Earth

/gasp

/gets out telescope and starts scanning skies for the comet on a collision course with Earth

If you had glasses, ya wouldn't have needed a telescope, Ive admitted to being wrong before :)

Sense of humor ftw!

I would like to see the case made of Israel stealing land in violation of international law. Specifically, what land was stolen, and what proof of prior ownership is there; and, what international laws were broken, and by whom, and that should also include the international laws broken by the Arab countries against Israel, for context purposes, please.

I have two exams today and have been swamped. I'll get right on this though.

Succinctly, though, this isn't a war over religion, but land. Most people incorrectly assume that the Arab-Israeli conflict has extended back forever over some dogmatic bs, but that is not true.

Simply put - the Palestinians lived there. Jews began to attempt to establish a de facto majority on the land, despite that other people were living there. The UN eventually drew them up borders, which despite being land freely given to them for absolutely no reason other than getting their ass systematically kicked all over Europe (How often does this happen over the course of history?)was not good enough, and they have repeatedly violated these boundaries until again, they have established their own 'de facto' geography.

Think if we gave Indian Americans 40% of the District of Columbia because we felt bad, but they decided that wasn't enough so they got China to assist them in flooding the area with Indians, eventually taking it over and thumbing their noses at all the surrounding areas.

As Sanchek said, our reasons for supporting them are not altruistic in the least bit.

That's a piss poor analogy, but nonetheless, it would be more accurate to say if the American Indians set up their little country in DC and then we illegally invaded them... nearly succeeding, but not. In repulsing our illegal invasion they took a land grab (say Quintico and Alexanderia, VA) to better protect themselves from any future attacks, they'd be entirely within their rights to do so I think.

So, would you support the Republic of Lakota then?

That's a piss poor analogy, but nonetheless, it would be more accurate to say if the American Indians set up their little country in DC and then we illegally invaded them... nearly succeeding, but not. In repulsing our illegal invasion they took a land grab (say Quintico and Alexanderia, VA) to better protect themselves from any future attacks, they'd be entirely within their rights to do so I think.

What if we never accepted them setting up their country? What if some outside body like the United Nations just gave it to them. Would you still support their rights?

What if we never accepted them setting up their country? What if some outside body like the United Nations just gave it to them. Would you still support their rights?What Akipt doesn't get is that they were taking other people's land to begin with.

It's fairly ironic given the OMG AMERICA WAR!!!11 mentality that him and his kind subscribe to. You can imagine what the response would be if someone tried this shit on American soil. This isn't ancient history either, we're talking 60 years ago.

To the winner goes the spoils... Unless you lose really, really bad. Then I guess you can have some free land (By free I mean land occupied by some people with funny colored skin).

That's a piss poor analogy, but nonetheless, it would be more accurate to say if the American Indians set up their little country in DC and then we illegally invaded them... nearly succeeding, but not. In repulsing our illegal invasion they took a land grab (say Quintico and Alexanderia, VA) to better protect themselves from any future attacks, they'd be entirely within their rights to do so I think.

This is just lol. You cannot honestly be saying that if some foreign country set up shop in the heart of the United States you would have no problem with it. I mean, I'm well aware you just tailor your arguments around whatever point you're trying to make, logic and consistency be damned. You of all people, however, cannot be saying that not only would you accept this foreign intrusion, but believe that they have a right to defend themselves against the people (AMERICA!!!) whose land they took over?

You'd be the first person in line waiting to 'hunt me some [insert whatever racial epithet here].

"for absolutely no reason other than getting their ass systematically kicked all over Europe"

That is one of the most heartless descriptions of the holocaust I think I have seen.

Its obvious from even a quick reading that he wasnt referring to one single event, the Holocaust, but the historical pattern of antisemitism that has pervaded Europe since before the Dark Ages.

Aye it is Furv, it borders on outright anti-semitism doesn't it?

"for absolutely no reason other than getting their ass systematically kicked all over Europe"

That is one of the most heartless descriptions of the holocaust I think I have seen.
This is one time I'm in complete agreement with Furtivus. That is one of the most delusional, backward, and bigoted descriptions I've ever read about the Holocaust. You'd think that Ainwein was neo-Nazi himself.

Israel had already become a nation about 1220 B.c.-nearly two thousand years before the first Arab invasion began.4 (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/fled.html#4) The Jews' persistent presence on the land survived periodic attempts to extinguish them throughout their history. Around the first century,


By the time of the Roman conquest of Judea the Jews were considered "turbulent and troublesome people to deal with," according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica,6 when they stubbornly refused to surrender their country to Roman rule.

http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/fled.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917



Seems the Jews were there a looongtime before the the arabs or even Islam.

So, would you support the Republic of Lakota then?I don't know if they're a republic, but they already have their own sovereign nation.

What if we never accepted them setting up their country? What if some outside body like the United Nations just gave it to them. Would you still support their rights?The Putinista said it best a year or so ago, Israel has earned the right to exist more than anyone else on that land now.

What Akipt doesn't get is that they were taking other people's land to begin with. Actually from what I started learning yesterday, the non-profit group that started in 1901 and worked into the 40's actually bought much of the land.

To the winner goes the spoils... Unless you lose really, really bad. Then I guess you can have some free land (By free I mean land occupied by some people with funny colored skin).Yes, especially when you're pluralistic society bending over backwards (again learned some of that yesterday) to make peace. If you're in the nation of Israel, you can be represented in the government. It's a shining light of freedom compared to international welfare cesspool that surrounds it.

The 'oh noz you took this other nation's land and gave it to this zionist regime!!!11111eleven' doesn't compute with me. Palestine wasn't much of a country if at all at the time either. The reason people are so up and arms over it is because it's those jooos that have it now. Oh allah, we can't have that in our neighborhood. /shrug Sorry, I don't give them much sympathy. They need to get over it and pull themselves up by the bootstraps and get off of the international welfare list and be something useful to the world.

You of all people, however, cannot be saying that not only would you accept this foreign intrusion, but believe that they have a right to defend themselves against the people (AMERICA!!!) whose land they took over?Ok, last time I tailor my argument around your piss poor analogy. I hate them anyway. But again, we've set up sovereign nations all over the place for native Americans. /shrug I'm not going to say it's the same since we have so much land to give away, but the concept is not totally unheard of.

Its obvious from even a quick reading that he wasnt referring to one single event, the Holocaust, but the historical pattern of antisemitism that has pervaded Europe since before the Dark Ages.

No, it wasn't. You are defending a position that's reprehensible in how he voiced it simply because you both tend to be on the same side of every argument (a side I am generally on too). The way he said it was completely reprehensible.

That doesn't mean his opinion on Israel's formation is or isn't valid. Reducing the holocaust (which is one of the worst human rights debacles ever) to that sentence is just asinine.

I agree with L2. "All over Europe" clearly doesn't reference Germany alone, but a pattern of history that extends geographically and chronologically across Europe (and beyond). The parenthetical "How often does this happen in the course of history?" makes this clear.

I agree with L2. "All over Europe" clearly doesn't reference Germany alone, but a pattern of history that extends geographically and chronologically across Europe (and beyond). The parenthetical "How often does this happen in the course of history?" makes this clear.

Except with you know, the fact that the Germans took the Jews from all over Europe to take them to the little Nazi camps.

We're talking politics. I don't feel the need to say HEY, THIS WAS REALLY BAD. I FEEL SORRY FOR THEM AND I REALLY, REALLY LIKE THEM.

The Jews have taken a beating over the years, as have many other groups of people that none of you would say shit about if I said they were getting their 'ass kicked'. OMG, the ARMENIANS!! HOW DARE YOU!! (Yeah, right.)

Would I write it in a paper? Obviously not. Do I care if it comes off as slightly insensitive over an internet forum? Not really.

Remember now, I'm the bleeding liberal. I care about all people, including those that are not from America, Israel, or unborn.

Akipt - for the last time. This is not the same as us setting up some fucking reservation for Indians. They moved in a majority de facto population of Jews to TAKE the land from people who WANTED it.

They need to get over it and pull themselves up by the bootstraps and get off of the international welfare list and be something useful to the world.

Oh Jesus, the irony.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png/327px-UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png/374px-Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png

can you spot the difference? this also does not include the increasingly numerous illegal settlements on palestinian land.


At the time of the 1948 war, Arabs in Israel were invited by their fellow Arabs -- invited to "leave" while the "invading" Arab armies would purge the land of Jews.1 (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/refugees2.html#1) The invading Arab governments were certain of a quick victory; leaders warned the Arabs in Israel to run for their lives.2 (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/refugees2.html#2)

After the Arabs' defeat in the 1948 war, their positions became confused: some Arab leaders demanded the "return" of the "expelled" refugees to their former homes despite the evidence that Arab leaders had called upon Arabs to flee.
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/refugees2.html

The Jews have taken a beating over the years, as have many other groups of people that none of you would say shit about if I said they were getting their 'ass kicked'. OMG, the ARMENIANS!! HOW DARE YOU!! (Yeah, right.)

Actually I do care about the plight of the Armenians from how Turkey treated them. It's probably because I'm a big fan of System of a Down, but no, I won't diminish a couple million Armenians being killed, and then not even recognized for the atrocities from the majority of Europe. I think the way that situation has been shoved under the rug for the last century is reprehensible too.

I'm really confused as to where this is going, but

Except with you know, the fact that the Germans took the Jews from all over Europe to take them to the little Nazi camps.

I've been told that Jews are the most historically oppressed people on this planet. I'm confused as to why this is not making sense?

Actually I do care about the plight of the Armenians from how Turkey treated them. It's probably because I'm a big fan of System of a Down, but no, I won't diminish a couple million Armenians being killed, and then not even recognized for the atrocities from the majority of Europe. I think the way that situation has been shoved under the rug for the last century is reprehensible too.

I also think that the Armenians have been screwed, and that Turkey among other states need to recognize what happened.

I guess I am just callous. =(

Then you aren't reading to what I was responding too. The holocaust has a lot more to do than just with the Jews from Germany. Never read the Diary of Anne Frank? Never read about the Jews from Poland that died in the camps? etc. etc.

You guys are reading into Ain's post way too harshly.

It is a fact that the Jews had been getting their asses kicked throughout Europe going even further back to Ancient times.

If Ainwein was running for President then I would expect that kind of response from you guys, but man... bashing him for getting straight to the point?

Guys, I'm fairly certain ainwein is a callous sob, but I don't see his comments as being anything other than what he said they were. I'm sure he hates me more than the jews anyway.

But I would like you to explain this:Oh Jesus, the irony.Do you think Israel is on the international welfare ? For the land grant opportunity or the continued military assets we sell them or ... ?

i think israel is suffocating the palestinians akipt, and no welfare in the world is going to help them since israel controls the flow of pretty much everything into the palestinian territories. if you have no idea what the fuck is going on, maybe you should keep your mouth shut.

I think that for exactly both of those reasons and some.

The fact of the matter is that Israel chose to settle someplace volatile, already inhabited by other people. Sure, maybe less volatile than the current climate in Europe, but still, they knew what they were getting into. Since then, the United States has singlehandedly secured and maintained their status as a power in the region, entirely for our own purposes.

The amount of power held by Israel is immensely disproportionate to the amount of work they had to do to get there.

I'm sorry - being slaughtered is horrible, but I do not think that it guarantees you the right to your own state, much less in the method that they went about it. This is not historically how the world has worked, and the raging conflict occurring in the area only serves to highlight the shortsightedness of it all.

A common misperception is that all the Jews were forced into the Diaspora (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Diaspora.html) by the Romans (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Romans.html) after the destruction of the Second Temple (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Temple.html) in Jerusalem (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/jerutoc.html) in the year 70 C.E. (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/gloss#CE) and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/palname.html) demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years.

The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/abraham.html).

Even after the destruction of the Second Temple (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Temple.html) in Jerusalem (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/jerutoc.html), and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in the Land of Israel continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/jerutoc.html) and Tiberias (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vie/Tiberias.html) by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/gazatoc.html), Ashkelon (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vie/Ashkelon.html), Jaffa (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/geo/tatoc.html) and Caesarea (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vie/Caesarea.html). The Crusaders (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Crusader.html) massacred many Jews during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Rabbis.html) established communities in Safed (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vie/Safed.html), Jerusalem (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/jerutoc.html) and elsewhere during the next 300 years.
By the early 19th century — years before the birth of the modern Zionist (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/zion.html) movement — more than 10,000 Jews lived throughout what is today Israel.1 (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths2/Israelsroots.html#_edn1) The 78 years of nation-building, beginning in 1870, culminated in the reestablishment (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/dectoc.html) of the Jewish State.

Israel’s international “birth certificate” was validated by the promise of the Bible (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/bibletoc.html); uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/joshua.html) onward; the Balfour Declaration (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/baltoc.html) of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/mandatetoc.html), which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/parttoc.html) of 1947; Israel’s admission to the UN (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unga273.html) in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel’s people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths2/Israelsroots.html

i think israel is suffocating the palestinians akipt, and no welfare in the world is going to help them since israel controls the flow of pretty much everything into the palestinian territories. if you have no idea what the fuck is going on, maybe you should keep your mouth shut.


I'm glad you are so much more enlightened being several thousand miles away from Israel yourself...

Maybe you should read the seven words of your post and take the advice for yourself.

taleren...if you seriously consider the palestinian welfare queens who are wasting their monies you have no comprehension whatsoever of anything, at all, ever, you have to understand this.

A product of Jimmy Carter?


Hamas offers truce in return for 1967 borders
No Israeli response, but U.S. rejects it as 'no change'

DAMASCUS, Syria - The leader of Hamas said Monday that his Palestinian militant group would offer Israel a 10-year "hudna," or truce, as implicit proof of recognition of Israel if it withdrew from all lands it seized in the 1967 Middle East War.

Khaled Mashaal told The Associated Press that he made the offer to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter in talks on Saturday. "We have offered a truce if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, a truce of 10 years as a proof of recognition," Mashaal said.


In his comments Monday, Mashaal used the Arabic word "hudna," meaning truce, which is more concrete than "tahdiya" — a period of calm — which Hamas often uses to describe a simple cease-fire.



"Hudna" implies a recognition of the other party's existence.


Mashaal said Hamas would accept a Palestinian state limited to the lands Israel seized in 1967 — that is, the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem. But he said the group would never outright formally recognize Israel.


Carter comments
Earlier, Carter said that Hamas is prepared to accept the right of Israel to “live as a neighbor next door in peace.”


Carter said the group promised it wouldn’t undermine Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ efforts to reach a peace deal with Israel, as long as the Palestinian people approved it in a referendum.


In the past, Hamas officials have said they would establish a “peace in stages” if Israel were to withdraw to the borders it held before 1967. But it has been evasive about how it sees the final borders of a Palestinian state and has not abandoned its official call for Israel’s destruction.
There was no immediate reaction from Israel to Hamas' truce offer.


Israel, which evacuated Gaza in 2005, has accepted the idea of a Palestinian state there and in much of the West Bank. But it has resisted Palestinian demands that it return to its 1967 frontiers.


In Washington, the State Department dismissed Carter’s assessment of his meetings, saying there was no indication Hamas wanted peace with Israel.
“What is clear to us is that there certainly is no change in Hamas’ position,” said deputy spokesman Tom Casey. “It does not recognize Israel’s right to exist, it has not eschewed or walked away from terrorism and violence, nor has it said it will honor any of the previous agreements that have been made with the Israeli government.”


Carter’s comments came after his much criticized meetings with the top Hamas leaders in Syria in last week.


Over the weekend, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he decided not to meet with Carter in Israel because he does not wish to be seen as participating in any negotiations with Hamas.


Carter also urged Israel to engage in direct negotiations with the Islamic militant group, saying it was a “problem” that Israel and the United States refuse to meet with Hamas. Both governments consider it a terrorist organization.


'Problem' with Israel, U.S., Carter says
“The problem is not that I met with Hamas in Syria,” he said. “The problem is that Israel and the United States refuse to meet with someone who must be involved.”


“There’s no doubt that both the Arab world and Hamas will accept Israel’s right to exist in peace within 1967 borders,” he said.
In his comments Monday, Carter said Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking has “regressed” since a U.S.-hosted Mideast conference in Annapolis, Md., in November.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24235665/

What Akipt doesn't get is that they were taking other people's land to begin with.







And again, I would like to see some proof that the land they occupy was not occupied by them prior to the Palestinians. People were fighting over that land before Jerusalem was even built, with tribes being pushed out and then returning to push out the other.

At what point in history was it decided that "From this day forward, all existing land boundaries are set in stone". And how many other groups were screwed by that, such as the Kurds for example.

And again, I would like to see some proof that the land they occupy was not occupied by them prior to the Palestinians. People were fighting over that land before Jerusalem was even built, with tribes being pushed out and then returning to push out the other.

At what point in history was it decided that "From this day forward, all existing land boundaries are set in stone". And how many other groups were screwed by that, such as the Kurds for example.

That land was being occupied by Jews and Arabs... The issue is not that the Jews were allowed to form their own country, the issue is that the Arabs were not given equal representation in said government.

With the Jews, it has always been about "A Jewish State" and Muslims do not fit into those plans.

Ethnic Makeup of Israel Ethnic group ↓ Population ↓ % of total ↓ As of 2006
Jewish 5,394,400 75.79%
Israeli Arab 1,413,300 19.86%
Unaffiliated 309,900 4.35%

As you can see, Nearly 20% of Israel is made up of Arabs, and this is after a worldwide campaign by Israel to have all the Jews in the world move to the Jewish State.

There is no way in hell Israel should give up the land. Last time they gave land back to the Palestinians it was prompty used as a closer range to fire more missiles into Israel.

There is no way in hell Israel should give up the land. Last time they gave land back to the Palestinians it was prompty used as a closer range to fire more missiles into Israel.

There is no way in hell Hamas should stop firing rockets... last time they agreed to a cease fire, Israel broke it and shelled the beach killing 2-3 Civilians.

Yeah, Jedd. Im sure Isreal used the cease fire to get closer and sneak up on and kill some palastinians Im sure they had a good chuckle about it afterwards as well.

Not that I could blame Isreal to fire upon Hamas whose founding documents is written upon the destcruction of Isreal. literally

It is a common practice for the Hamas to launch their rockets, aimed at Israeli cities, from within built-up areas, in order to make it difficult for Israel to take preventative action against Hamas rocket salvos, without endangering the Palestinian population. These photos and video clips give evidence of this practice.
When launching rockets against Israel, Hamas terrorists usually do not stay nearby, but rather use timers, radio frequency and other ways to remotely control the launchings. In order to protect the rockets from counter-attack until they are launched, they send children to play near the launchers, or place the launchers near playgrounds.
Clip 1 (http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Pages/MediaPlayer.aspx?MediaUrl=http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=1913331!!!!ak=null&LANGUAGE_NAME=En)
Clip 2 (http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Pages/MediaPlayer.aspx?MediaUrl=http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=58!!!!ar=TwoRocketsFromGaza!!!!ak=null&LANGUAGE_NAME=En)
In order to avoid civilian casualties, Israel sends warning messages before attacking terrorist targets advising civilians to leave. Israel prefers to attack empty buildings used to manufacture rockets, even taking into consideration that the terrorists too will be warned and their lives spared.
Hamas, on the other hand, calls on civilians to come and to protect with their bodies the precise locations they expect Israel to attack. Since they know that Israel will usually strike from the air, they send the children to the roofs to prevent the air force from targeting that building.
During the course of the Israeli operation against terrorists in the Gaza Strip (March 2008), Hamas repeatedly called upon Palestinian civilians to gather near buildings where they feared that the IDF was about to launch air-strikes against Hamas targets hidden within. The purpose of the civilian presence was to have them serve as human shields, exploiting the fact that the IDF avoids harming Palestinian civilians, even if it means aborting attacks on crucial terrorist infrastructure targets.
Clip 3 (http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Pages/MediaPlayer.aspx?MediaUrl=http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=1915991!!!!ak=null&LANGUAGE_NAME=En)
Clip 4 (http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Pages/MediaPlayer.aspx?MediaUrl=http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=1913349!!!!ak=null&LANGUAGE_NAME=En)


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/gazavideo0308.html

please stop trolling with pasted shit from jewishvirtuallibrary.org nekko.

Keep it up Nekko, push through the antisemitism!!!

Keep it up Nekko. Thanks for the posts and links.

Long live the Israeli!

It's shocking how much Wiggo wants to shut people up he doesn't agree with.

I'm not sure what Wiggo expects with this. While one has to assume that the videos are translated and interpreted accurately, I doubt we'll find this information at www.hamas'greatesthits.com.

yes, everyone not blindly cheering for israel is an antisemite. the level of ignorance is astounding.

Anti Semitism is the most misused term in the world... Most Arabs are Semites as well in case you did not know.

Carter continues to define Useful Idiot.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080422/FOREIGN/690439509/1001

JERUSALEM — Hamas said yesterday it was prepared to accept a Palestinian state within 1967 borders, but contradicted a statement by former President Jimmy Carter that it would accept Israel's right to exist if that was the will of the Palestinian people.
...

"We accept a state on the [1967] line with Jerusalem as capital, real sovereignty and full right of return for refugees, but without recognizing Israel," Al Jazeera quoted [Hamas' political leader, Khalid Mashaal] as saying.

Anti Semitism is the most misused term in the world... Most Arabs are Semites as well in case you did not know.

Which has nothing to do with my point.

'sides, Wiggo isn't Arab....he's Hungarian or some such!~

Which has nothing to do with my point.

'sides, Wiggo isn't Arab....he's Hungarian or some such!~


Aye, but if he sympathizes with the Arabs in this situation, he really can't be called an Anti-Semite can he?

Carter continues to define Useful Idiot.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080422/FOREIGN/690439509/1001

Everything I read said that he later called it a truce and would accept Israel, after these comments were made.

Our reign of terror, by the Israeli army

In shocking testimonies that reveal abductions, beatings and torture, Israeli soldiers confess the horror they have visited on Hebron

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
Saturday, 19 April 2008


The dark-haired 22-year-old in black T-shirt, blue jeans and red Crocs is understandably hesitant as he sits at a picnic table in the incongruous setting of a beauty spot somewhere in Israel. We know his name and if we used it he would face a criminal investigation and a probable prison sentence.

The birds are singing as he describes in detail some of what he did and saw others do as an enlisted soldier in Hebron. And they are certainly criminal: the incidents in which Palestinian vehicles are stopped for no good reason, the windows smashed and the occupants beaten up for talking back – for saying, for example, they are on the way to hospital; the theft of tobacco from a Palestinian shopkeeper who is then beaten "to a pulp" when he complains; the throwing of stun grenades through the windows of mosques as people prayed. And worse.

The young man left the army only at the end of last year, and his decision to speak is part of a concerted effort to expose the moral price paid by young Israeli conscripts in what is probably the most problematic posting there is in the occupied territories. Not least because Hebron is the only Palestinian city whose centre is directly controlled by the military, 24/7, to protect the notably hardline Jewish settlers there. He says firmly that he now regrets what repeatedly took place during his tour of duty.

But his frequent, if nervous, grins and giggles occasionally show just a hint of the bravado he might have displayed if boasting of his exploits to his mates in a bar. Repeatedly he turns to the older former soldier who has persuaded him to speak to us, and says as if seeking reassurance: "You know how it is in Hebron."

The older ex-soldier is Yehuda Shaul, who does indeed "know how it is in Hebron", having served in the city in a combat unit at the peak of the intifada, and is a founder of Shovrim Shtika, or Breaking the Silence, which will publish tomorrow the disturbing testimonies of 39 Israelis – including this young man – who served in the army in Hebron between 2005 and 2007. They cover a range of experiences, from anger and powerlessness in the face of often violent abuse of Arabs by hardline Jewish settlers, through petty harassment by soldiers, to soldiers beating up Palestinian residents without provocation, looting homes and shops, and opening fire on unarmed demonstrators.

The maltreatment of civilians under occupation is common to many armies in the world – including Britain's, from Northern Ireland to Iraq.

But, paradoxically, few if any countries apart from Israel have an NGO like Breaking the Silence, which seeks – through the experiences of the soldiers themselves – as its website puts it "to force Israeli society to address the reality which it created" in the occupied territories.

The Israeli public was given an unflattering glimpse of military life in Hebron this year when a young lieutenant in the Kfir Brigade called Yaakov Gigi was given a 15-month jail sentence for taking five soldiers with him to hijack a Palestinian taxi, conduct what the Israeli media called a "rampage" in which one of the soldiers shot and wounded a Palestinian civilian who just happened to be in the wrong place, and then tried to lie his way out of it.

In a confessional interview with the Israeli Channel Two investigative programme Uvda, Gigi, who had previously been in many ways a model soldier, talked of "losing the human condition" in Hebron. Asked what he meant, he replied: "To lose the human condition is to become an animal."

The Israeli military did not prosecute the soldier who had fired on the Palestinian, as opposed to Gigi. But the military insists "that the events that occurred within the Kfir Brigade are highly unusual".

But as the 22-year-old soldier, also in the Kfir Brigade, confirms in his testimony to Breaking the Silence, it seems that the event may not have been exceptional. Certainly, our interview tells us, he was "many times" in groups that commandeered taxis, seated the driver in the back, and told him to direct them to places "where they hate the Jews" in order to "make a balagan" – Hebrew for "big mess".

Then there is the inter- clan Palestinian fight: "We were told to go over there and find out what was happening. Our [platoon] commander was a bit screwed in the head. So anyway, we would locate houses, and he'd tell us: 'OK, anyone you see armed with stones or whatever, I don't care what – shoot.' Everyone would think it's the clan fight..." Did the company commander know? "No one knew. Platoon's private initiative, these actions."

Did you hit them? "Sure, not just them. Anyone who came close ... Particularly legs and arms. Some people also sustained abdominal hits ... I think at some point they realised it was soldiers, but they were not sure. Because they could not believe soldiers would do this, you know."

Or using a 10-year-old child to locate and punish a 15-year-old stone-thrower: "So we got hold of just some Palestinian kid nearby, we knew that he knew who it had been. Let's say we beat him a little, to put it mildly, until he told us. You know, the way it goes when your mind's already screwed up, and you have no more patience for Hebron and Arabs and Jews there.

"The kid was really scared, realising we were on to him. We had a commander with us who was a bit of a fanatic. We gave the boy over to this commander, and he really beat the **** out of him ... He showed him all kinds of holes in the ground along the way, asking him: 'Is it here you want to die? Or here?' The kid goes, 'No, no!'

"Anyway, the kid was stood up, and couldn't stay standing on his own two feet. He was already crying ... And the commander continues, 'Don't pretend' and kicks him some more. And then [name withheld], who always had a hard time with such things, went in, caught the squad commander and said, 'Don't touch him any more, that's it.' The commander goes, 'You've become a leftie, what?' And he answers, 'No, I just don't want to see such things.'

"We were right next to this, but did nothing. We were indifferent, you know. OK. Only after the fact you start thinking. Not right away. We were doing such things every day ... It had become a habit...

"And the parents saw it. The commander ordered [the mother], 'Don't get any closer.' He cocked his weapon, already had a bullet inside. She was frightened. He put his weapon literally inside the kid's mouth. 'Anyone gets close, I kill him. Don't bug me. I kill. I have no mercy.' So the father ... got hold of the mother and said, 'Calm down, let them be, so they'll leave him alone.'"

Not every soldier serving in Hebron becomes an "animal". Iftach Arbel, 23, from an upper-middle class, left-of-centre home in Herzylia, served in Hebron as a commander just before the withdrawal from Gaza, when he thinks the army wanted to show it could be tough with settlers, too. And many of the testimonies, including Mr Arbel's, describe how the settlers educate children as young as four to throw stones at Palestinians, attack their homes and even steal their possessions. To Mr Arbel, the Hebron settlers are "pure evil" and the only solution is "to remove the settlers".

He believes it would be possible even within these constraints to treat Palestinians better. He adds: "We did night activity. Choose a house at random, on the aerial photo, so as to practise combat routine and all, which is instructive for the soldiers, I mean, I'm all for it. But then at midnight you wake someone up and turn his whole house upside down with everyone sleeping on the mattresses and all."

But Mr Arbel says that most soldiers are some way between his own extreme and that of the most violent. From just two of his fellow testifiers, you can see what he means.

As one said: "We did all kinds of experiments to see who could do the best split in Abu Snena. We would put [Palestinians] against the wall, make like we were checking them, and ask them to spread their legs. Spread, spread, spread, it was a game to see who could do it best. Or we would check who can hold his breath for longest.

"Choke them. One guy would come, make like he was checking them, and suddenly start yelling like they said something and choke them ... Block their airways; you have to press the adams apple. It's not pleasant. Look at the watch as you're doing it, until he passes out. The one who takes longest to faint wins."

And theft as well as violence. "There's this car accessory shop there. Every time, soldiers would take a tape-disc player, other stuff. This guy, if you go ask him, will tell you plenty of things that soldiers did to him.

"A whole scroll-full ... They would raid his shop regularly. 'Listen, if you tell on us, we'll confiscate your whole store, we'll break everything.' You know, he was afraid to tell. He was already making deals, 'Listen guys, you're damaging me financially.' I personally never took a thing, but I'm telling you, people used to take speakers from him, whole sound systems.

"He'd go, 'Please, give me 500 shekels, I'm losing money here.' 'Listen, if you go on – we'll pick up your whole shop.' 'OK, OK, take it, but listen, don't take more than 10 systems a month.' Something like this.

"'I'm already going bankrupt.' He was so miserable. Guys in our unit used to sell these things back home, make deals with people. People are so stupid."

The military said that Israeli Defence Forces soldiers operate according to "a strict set of moral guidelines" and that their expected adherence to them only "increases wherever and whenever IDF soldiers come in contact with civilians". It added that "if evidence supporting the allegations is uncovered, steps are taken to hold those involved to the level of highest judicial severity". It also said: "The Military Advocate General has issued a number of indictments against soldiers due to allegations of criminal behaviour ... Soldiers found guilty were punished severely by the Military Court, in proportion to the committed offence." It had not by last night quantified such indictments.

In its introduction to the testimonies, Breaking the Silence says: "The soldiers' determination to fulfil their mission yields tragic results: the proper-normative becomes despicable, the inconceivable becomes routine ... [The] testimonies are to illustrate the manner in which they are swept into the brutal reality reigning on the ground, a reality whereby the lives of many thousands of Palestinian families are at the questionable mercy of youths. Hebron turns a focused, flagrant lens at the reality to which Israel's young representatives are constantly sent."

A force for justice

Breaking the Silence was formed four years ago by a group of ex-soldiers, most of whom had served in Israel Defence Forces combat units in Hebron. Many of the soldiers do reserve duty in the military each year. It has collected some 500 testimonies from former soldiers who served in the West Bank and Gaza. Its first public exposure was with an exhibition of photographs by soldiers serving in Hebron and the organisation also runs regular tours of Hebron for Israeli students and diplomats. It receives funding from groups as diverse as the Jewish philanthropic Moriah Fund, the New Israel Fund, the British embassy in Tel Aviv and the EU.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...my-811769.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/our-reign-of-terror-by-the-israeli-army-811769.html)

Everything I read said that he later called it a truce and would accept Israel, after these comments were made.
That article was from today, not yesterday. So he's basically telling one group one thing and then another group something else? Right.

Aye, but if he sympathizes with the Arabs in this situation, he really can't be called an Anti-Semite can he?


Would you prefer if he were called a Jew-hater instead? Antisemitism obviously has a known connotation in today's society, and you are just arguing semantics here.

Would you prefer if he were called a Jew-hater instead? Antisemitism obviously has a known connotation in today's society, and you are just arguing semantics here.

The problem I have with that is that anyone who disagrees or critizes Israel is labeled an Anti-Semite. It is used for any negative opinion of Israel, and it is stupid.

http://sabbah.biz/mt/wp-content/uploads/2007/jan/Misuse_of_anti_Semitism_by_Latuff2.jpg

http://sabbah.biz/mt/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/Misuse_of_anti_Semitism_3_by_Latuff2.jpg

http://img5.pictiger.com/66a/14979916.jpg?u=1208883144

The problem I have with that is that anyone who disagrees or critizes Israel is labeled an Anti-Semite. It is used for any negative opinion of Israel, and it is stupid.
Going to have to agree with Jedd here.

He may or may not be right. However, if it's taboo to have a rational, logical discussion about anything involving Jews or Israel, how will we ever know?

This anti-semite crap should be the first corollary to Godwin's Law.

It's not an opinion of Palestine deserving to have their own land that I have branded Wiggo as antisemitic. It's the continual one line insults levied at Israel instead of any form of thought out dialogue from him that leads me to label him as such.

There's a difference in debating the value/right of Palestine to have their own country and doing nothing but lobbing insults at Israel. All he does is the latter.

please, when did i insult israel? insulting dumb people who hold dumb opinions over israel is a completely different thing.

please, when did i insult israel? insulting dumb people who hold dumb opinions over israel is a completely different thing.

Here, have some creative one line insults brought to you by Wiggo.

because israel is full of pacifists, thoroughly confused why anyone would attack them, i mean, its not like theyve been stealing their land for 50 years.

So you feel this way, debate it. Discuss it. Elaborate it with more than one line of dialogue.

and israel routinely slaughter palestinians, what is your point?

This completely dismisses one other side of the whole debacle over there. Both sides kill each other. When people blame solely one side of the issue, there can never be any resolution.

Throwing out one line insults or linking a few maps here and there is not debating. It's trolling. I didn't bother linking where he did nothing but post a map, because well, one can't even quote that material. Looking through Wiggo's posting history, it's full of one line posts and insults when he doesn't agree with another poster. It's not debate, and it's not even a semi-intelligent discussion.

You think you have things to add to the discussion Wiggo? Dictate a thought out post of more than one sentence laden with insults, and I might take your opinion more seriously.

Exclusive: “Killing Field” was the name of Hamas assault which killed 3 Israeli soldiers, injured three Wednesday

April 18, 2008, 1:28 PM (GMT+02:00)
http://www.debka.com/photos/s_5196.jpg Israeli soldiers guard Gaza border

The fallen Israeli soldiers were Sgt. Mattan Ovdati, 19, from Moshav Patish, Sgt. Menhash Albaniyat, 20, from Kseife, both from the Negev region, and Sgt. David Papian, 21, from Tel Aviv. Hamas reported 5 dead.
A senior officer told DEBKAfile that Hamas used tactics first seen practiced by Hizballah in the 2006 Lebanon War battles of Bint Jbeil and Maroun al-Ras. Both terror groups receive advanced training in Syria and Iran.
Early Wednesday, April 17, eight Hamas operatives went into action after splitting into two teams – one crossed the Gaza border barrier into Israel, alerting the warning systems and sensors to attack, then pulled back 60 meters from the border to a hill inside Gaza and dug in. The second team had meanwhile taken up position at the top of the same hill 150 meters from the border.
The Israeli Givati Brigade unit, responding to the alert, advanced on the first Hamas line and opened fire, only to find it had run into an ambush. The first Hamas team had joined the second and, providing each other with covering fire, trapped the Givati unit between them. Two Israeli sergeants died in close-range fire on the spot, the third of his injuries. All eight Hamas operatives escaped unhurt. Heavy battles continued during the day - on both sides of the Gaza-Israeli border at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal sector and around Kibbutz Beeri - in which at least 4 Hamas terrorists were killed. The Palestinians aimed 23 Qassam missiles at Israeli targets. Later, Israeli air attacks accounted for an estimated 20 Palestinian dead in their central Gaza strongholds

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5196

because if i attempt to use logic to describe how israel is not completely innocent in this conflict, someone will either call the palestinians terrorist shitbags who deserve it all, or call me a jew hater, or ask the utterly retarded question "how would we feel if terrorists took over canada and just spammed us with missiles? HUH?!" so i refrain.

and nekko keeps on copy/pasting irrelevant shit, glorious.

Exclusive: “Killing Field” was the name of Hamas assault which killed 3 Israeli soldiers, injured three Wednesday

April 18, 2008, 1:28 PM (GMT+02:00)
http://www.debka.com/photos/s_5196.jpg Israeli soldiers guard Gaza border

The fallen Israeli soldiers were Sgt. Mattan Ovdati, 19, from Moshav Patish, Sgt. Menhash Albaniyat, 20, from Kseife, both from the Negev region, and Sgt. David Papian, 21, from Tel Aviv. Hamas reported 5 dead.
A senior officer told DEBKAfile that Hamas used tactics first seen practiced by Hizballah in the 2006 Lebanon War battles of Bint Jbeil and Maroun al-Ras. Both terror groups receive advanced training in Syria and Iran.
Early Wednesday, April 17, eight Hamas operatives went into action after splitting into two teams – one crossed the Gaza border barrier into Israel, alerting the warning systems and sensors to attack, then pulled back 60 meters from the border to a hill inside Gaza and dug in. The second team had meanwhile taken up position at the top of the same hill 150 meters from the border.
The Israeli Givati Brigade unit, responding to the alert, advanced on the first Hamas line and opened fire, only to find it had run into an ambush. The first Hamas team had joined the second and, providing each other with covering fire, trapped the Givati unit between them. Two Israeli sergeants died in close-range fire on the spot, the third of his injuries. All eight Hamas operatives escaped unhurt. Heavy battles continued during the day - on both sides of the Gaza-Israeli border at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal sector and around Kibbutz Beeri - in which at least 4 Hamas terrorists were killed. The Palestinians aimed 23 Qassam missiles at Israeli targets. Later, Israeli air attacks accounted for an estimated 20 Palestinian dead in their central Gaza strongholds

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5196

Soldiers are valid targets in war... no?

Its relevant to the situation and pro hamas supported links, You dont complain about those.

Niether side is completely innocent, we can point fingers at who did what when and who deserves to be nuked or annihilated all day but the fact remains many americans are going to take Isreals side.

SEN. OBAMA: Now, my belief is that they should also know that I will take no options off the table when it comes to preventing them from using nuclear weapons or obtaining nuclear weapons, and that would include any threats directed at Israel or any of our allies in the region.

SENATOR CLINTON Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=865078

Not to just emntion Americas side in this Ill be back with the UK and French German remarks about this of late as well they all echo the same sentiment.

Soldiers are valid targets in war... no?


" 23 Qassam missiles at Israeli targets "

I knew I should of bolded that part.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket

They are all free-flying artillery rockets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_rocket) lacking any guidance system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guidance_system).

" 23 Qassam missiles at Israeli targets "

I knew I should of bolded that part.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket

They are all free-flying artillery rockets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_rocket) lacking any guidance system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guidance_system).

Give them precision guided bombs, and f16's and the accuracy will double!

What a GREAT ALLY!

American charged with giving secrets to Israel

Justice Department: Engineer employed by U.S. Army spied from 1979-1985


BREAKING NEWS
MSNBC News Services
updated 2 hours, 3 minutes ago



NEW YORK - A former U.S. Army mechanical engineer was arrested Tuesday on charges he slipped classified documents about nuclear weapons to an employee of the Israeli Consulate who also received information from convicted Pentagon spy Jonathan Pollard, authorities announced.


Ben-ami Kadish faces four counts of conspiracy, including allegations that he conspired to disclose U.S. national defense documents to Israel and that he acted as an agent of the Israeli government, U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia and FBI officials said.


A criminal complaint said the activities occurred from 1979 through 1985 while Kadish worked at the Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center in Dover, N.J.

Kadish, a U.S. citizen, is accused of taking classified documents home several times and letting the Israeli government worker photograph them.
The documents included information about nuclear weapons, a modified version of an F-15 fighter jet, and the Patriot missile air defense system, the complaint said.


According to the complaint, the Israeli government worker on numerous occasions during 1979-1985 gave Kadish lists of U.S. national defense classified documents for Kadish to obtain.


The complaint said Kadish, born in Connecticut, was employed from October 1963 to January 1990 as a mechanical engineer at the Army’s Picatinny Arsenal in Dover, where the research center is based.


The complaint said the Israeli worker, whose name was not given, is an Israeli citizen. It said that in the late 1970s, he was employed at Israeli Aircraft Industries in Israel, a defense manufacturing contractor for the Israeli government.


From July 1980 through November 1985, he was the consul for science affairs at the Israeli Consulate General in Manhattan, the complaint said.
The complaint noted that Pollard was charged in November 1985 with espionage-related offense after he provided classified information to the same Israeli worker, among other people.


The Israeli worker left the United States in November 1985 and has not returned, the complaint said.


Pollard, a former civilian intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy, pleaded guilty while standing trial for transferring military secrets to Israel while working at the Pentagon. He is serving a life sentence.


There was no immediate comment from the Israeli government but a senior Israeli defense official told Reuters: "I find it hard to believe that, after the Pollard affair, we would recruit an American spy."


Kadish was scheduled to appear Tuesday afternoon at a federal court in New York.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24256527/

Give them precision guided bombs, and f16's and the accuracy will double!

Doubtful, both require more intelligence and a decided desire to live than you'll ever find on a fucknut with a bomb strapped to his kids back.....

Doubtful, both require more intelligence and a decided desire to live than you'll ever find on a fucknut with a bomb strapped to his kids back.....

So all Palestinians who fight for their freedom are fucknuts with bombs strapped to their kids backs, and lack intelligence and the desire to live?

No wonder nobody gives a damn about them... It is fair to generalize all Palestinian fighters by the actions of 1 or 2, but 1 US soldier is not a reflection of the US? I smell hypocrisy

You're generalizing far too much. The ones I'm damning to hell are the ones that use their kids or target other kids with suicide bombs.

But keep victimizing, it's how you keep your idealistic boat afloat isn't it?

How much more do you want from me, I already said it was a mistake for a guilt ridden UN to place Israel where it did.

However it's clear to all that those with an agenda to wipe Israel off the map that they want nothing more but to push them into the sea.

Fuck any sort of concessions, they don't want peace....they want blood so I support a return in kind. Push them into the sea...

So all Palestinians who fight for their freedom are fucknuts with bombs strapped to their kids backs, and lack intelligence and the desire to live?Yes, a majority in Gaza anyway.

You're generalizing far too much. The ones I'm damning to hell are the ones that use their kids or target other kids with suicide bombs.

But keep victimizing, it's how you keep your idealistic boat afloat isn't it?

How much more do you want from me, I already said it was a mistake for a guilt ridden UN to place Israel where it did.

However it's clear to all that those with an agenda to wipe Israel off the map that they want nothing more but to push them into the sea.

Fuck any sort of concessions, they don't want peace....they want blood so I support a return in kind. Push them into the sea...

You have every right to be pissed about those bastards that send kids to die to kill civilians, but you seem to be exhibiting the same mentality the Israeli's have. Since some of them are trying to kill us, lets drive them all into the sea.

By your own admission, We should be driven into the sea because of our treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, or the 14 year old girl was was raped by a soldier, after he murdered her whole family in front of her, then set her on fire when he was done with her...

There are many instances where soldiers or fighters have done horrible things, and I find the hypocrisy in wanting them all driven to the sea for their sins, yet praising our own soldiers, typical of a holier then thou attitude.

If you are going to apply the "what one does" to all of them, then you better be prepared to do it in all instances, or face the charge of being a Hypocrite.

Yes, a majority in Gaza anyway.

And you wonder why there are people that think, All Americans are the same and deserve punishment equally?

Here's a difference you don't understand ( or do and should therefore relinquish your place here)

American soldiers are are American and as much as I think the war was fought badly and with bad general tactics I still back America > all others.

You wont' break my opinion down to our least common denominator or thug in a uniform and find me agreeing with your thugs who by in large are doing it with a greater % of the populace behind them.

Here's a difference you don't understand ( or do and should therefore relinquish your place here)

American soldiers are are American and as much as I think the war was fought badly and with bad general tactics I still back America > all others.

You wont' break my opinion down to our least common denominator or thug in a uniform and find me agreeing with your thugs who by in large are doing it with a greater % of the populace behind them.

Ah then you admit your extreme bias clouds your judgment.

You can claim I have bias, but seeing as how I am an American, it won't stick.

It is however good to know that you give your support to whatever action those men and women wearing our uniform take part in, simply because they are like you, and not like those evil haji's!

You wont' break my opinion down to our least common denominator or thug in a uniform and find me agreeing with your thugs who by in large are doing it with a greater % of the populace behind them.
Considering Jedd is every bit as much an American as you or I, that seems like an extremely un-American argument for you to make.

Reread what I said you board trolls.

Let me make it simple for ya'll....

I will not judge the greater of America by a small thug in one of our Uniforms and compare the remainder vs the much larger % of the population he keeps defending. Sorry, it's not equal...

No, San, it's not Unamerican to tell him to get out. He bites at the tit of freedom he sucks on. He's an ungrateful lout and deserves to hear what he hears from me.

Reread what I said you board trolls.

Let me make it simple for ya'll....

I will not judge the greater of America by a small thug in one of our Uniforms and compare the remainder vs the much larger % of the population he keeps defending. Sorry, it's not equal...

No, San, it's not Unamerican to tell him to get out. He bites at the tit of freedom he sucks on. He's an ungrateful lout and deserves to hear what he hears from me.


"Anger and insults are the common replacement for those with no proof of what they desperately want to believe."-Freud

No, San, it's not Unamerican to tell him to get out. He bites at the tit of freedom he sucks on. He's an ungrateful lout and deserves to hear what he hears from me.
Honestly, it seems that your hate for Jedd is consuming your wisdom here. You need to step back and think about what you're saying, instead of posting knee-jerks based in emotion.

Every one of our military personnel takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution.

In that silly Constitution thing that has been so ignored lately, freedom of political speech is one of the most basic rights we are granted. Not only that, but freedom of political speech has always been the most carefully protected form of free speech. It is unquestionable central to what the founders intended that amendment to mean.

Whether you hate him or not, saying that he doesn't or shouldn't have the right to question our military is absolutely incorrect. By definition, they are fighting for his right to do so.

To argue that he should be selectively granted or denied his freedoms flies in the face of everything the founders hoped to establish here. It is patently un-American, no matter how you slice it.

And you wonder why there are people that think, All Americans are the same and deserve punishment equally?Elections matter. I didn't put Hamas in power by voting for them. A majority in Gaza did though.

Elections matter. I didn't put Hamas in power by voting for them. A majority in Gaza did though.

You did vote for Bush though.... right?

Don't even compare Bush to one of your favorite terrorist organizations.

Don't even compare Bush to one of your favorite terrorist organizations.

Will you be open minded enough to acknowledge that it is possible that Bush's actions lead people to hate America, just as much as Hamas' actions lead people to hate Palestinians?

Thank you for the jab, but I do not have a favorite terrorist organization, I only seek justice, and Justice does not discriminate.

Terrorists around the world thank you for apologizing for them.

It's not what Bush or Israel has done. It's not what Hamas has done.

Simply put in context of this thread that you so desperately want to derail, Hamas could have peace if they only recognized Israel's right to exist. The people of Gaza chose to put people in power who don't want that so I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone in the boundary of Gaza at this moment. They're the ones directly responsible for every single death each and every day. May they rot in hell for that.

Terrorists around the world thank you for apologizing for them.

It's not what Bush or Israel has done. Simply put in context of this thread that you so desperately want to derail, Hamas could have peace if they only recognized Israel's right to exist. The people of Gaza chose to put people in power who don't want that so I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone in the boundary of Gaza at this moment. They're the ones directly responsible for every single death each and every day. May they rot in hell for that.

So you will not open your mind enough to realize that the people in Gaza were suffering with no help from their leaders, and then came along Hamas who was fighting for them? So the next time they had a choice, they picked the ones that fought for them?

Doesn't matter what it is like from your Point of view, what matters is that they are suffering, and dieing, and they chose the one group they thought could fight to free them. The ONLY group that is fighting and dieing for them. You sit here in your nice house, a world away and pass judgment?

Newsflash Akipt...many countries do not recognize Israel's right to exist.

Morocco
Algeria
Mali
Niger
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Chad
Libya
Sudan
Somalia
Syria
Lebanon
Iraq
Kuwait
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
The UAE
Oman
Iran
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Bangladesh
Indonesia
Malaysia
North Korea
Cuba

None of those recognize Israel's right to exist as a country. Should we destroy all of them?

So?

So?

You sound like Dick Cheney :)

When you continue to change the subject for gotchas that are completely irrelevent to the topic at hand, I'm gland you noticed.

The other countries you listed really have no dog in the fight. I'm sure their continued welfare support for those poor Gazans you care about are appreciated.

The people of Gaza need to wake up and face reality. They're not going to remove Israel from the map no matter how much support they get from Iran and other terrorist supporting countries you listed. The sooner they understand that the sooner they can join the rest of the world in the 21st century.

Jedd, I don't see that you're *helping* your case with that list, as many of those countries (seriously, North Korea?) either don't have the most sterling reputations or are non-entities (Guinea-Bissau) as far as international significance goes. It's also not insignificant that *all* of that countries on that list (except North Korea) are majority-Muslim states (if not declared Islamic states), many of whom have made the declaration (non-recognition of Israel) because of solidarity with the Palestinians, not out of their own strong convictions, as it were.

Yes, there is unquestionably suffering in Gaza, and I hope that we will see a two-state solution before much longer (after which Palestine can stand or fall on its own, and learn to manage its own affairs) but Hamas and other extremist groups aren't helping their cause by continuing to fire unaimed rockets at civilians, continuing the inflammatory rhetoric, and otherwise act unproductively, because like it or not, Israel *isn't* going to get pushed into the sea and will continue to exist (and, I expect, prosper) no matter how much ends up being ceded in the eventual two state solution. To get back to the original topic, I have not read all the details of his visit (been on the road), but I'm personally glad that Carter went over there and talked to Hamas as further polarization of the situation does no-one, especially the Gazans, any good.

Regards,
Nydia

When you continue to change the subject for gotchas that are completely irrelevent to the topic at hand, I'm gland you noticed.

The other countries you listed really have no dog in the fight. I'm sure their continued welfare support for those poor Gazans you care about are appreciated.

The point of listing those countries was to show that simply not recognizing Israel's right to exist is not a reason to be unworthy of life or happiness. The people of Gaza feel they have been stolen from, and they voted in a government of fighters.

Did they choose wisely? No... but we cannot expect them to have the clairvoyance to pick the best option, when the options are action, or inaction.

The constant deflection from Israels actions to that of Hamas is now the norm... Any negative remark of Israel is met with accusations of Anti-Semitism, while negativity towards the actual suffering people of Gaza is met with acceptance, and rewarded instant status as truth.

/chuckle

All countries of lil or no import in the scheme of things. Hell most of them are cesspools that stone their women at the drop of a hat.

I have to agree with Akipt....

so?

I don't lose sleep worrying about what countries ( that would be better off left in the 14th century) think. I feel for their populace controlled by folks you continue to make excuses for and defend.

Btw San, slowly here, I'm not taking his citizenship away. I'd love for him to revoke it and go play in the sandbox he so loves. To live his so expressed love for his terrorist countries...that's all , live out his dream!!

Just trying to help him move along to said place. I'll thank you to leave your definition of what's American to yourself. I didn't serve so you could define what I meant...thanks ;)

Getting real tired of the so called American apologists who use the same worn out excuse that was called out when the crys of But but Bill attacking with but but Bush ...

lmao insane

/chuckle

All countries of lil or no import in the scheme of things. Hell most of them are cesspools that stone their women at the drop of a hat.

I have to agree with Akipt....

so?

I don't lose sleep worrying about what countries ( that would be better off left in the 14th century) think. I feel for their populace controlled by folks you continue to make excuses for and defend.

Btw San, slowly here, I'm not taking his citizenship away. I'd love for him to revoke it and go play in the sandbox he so loves. To live his so expressed love for his terrorist countries...that's all , live out his dream!!

Just trying to help him move along to said place. I'll thank you to leave your definition of what's American to yourself. I didn't serve so you could define what I meant...thanks ;)

Getting real tired of the so called American apologists who use the same worn out excuse that was called out when the crys of But but Bill attacking with but but Bush ...

lmao insane

the funny thing is this board is filled with israel apologists, condoning everything israel could possibly do.

Just trying to help him move along to said place. I'll thank you to leave your definition of what's American to yourself. I didn't serve so you could define what I meant...thanks ;)
You have the right to speak out about your belief that Israel is the lesser of two evils in this situation. How is that different than Jedd's right to speak out about his belief in Palestine's position?

Should you have to "move along to said place" too, in order to exercise your rights? I'm not sure you'd be very happy living in Israel!

You can thank me all you want, but I certainly won't be censoring my opinion just because it doesn't agree with yours. However, I will thank you for helping to defend my Constitutional right not to do so.

Back on topic:

That list of countries does include one of our most important allies, Saudi Arabia. That's hard to overlook.

If we really had such moral qualms about the situation, we wouldn't be overlooking the Saudi support of Palestine, for cheaper oil. Pointing out the debacle that is their state of human rights just magnifies this hypocrisy.

And Kuwait?

We came, massively, to their aid after they badgered Iraq by stealing oil across their borders, yet we just string Israel along with marginal aid.

If we really wanted to resolve the situation for once and all, we certainly could. We have shown our ability and willingness to do so in other situations.

The fact is simply that we benefit more from turmoil in that part of the region than we would from peace. There is nothing right or honorable about our involvement in the whole mess.

So you will not open your mind enough to realize that the people in Gaza were suffering with no help from their leaders, and then came along Hamas who was fighting for them? So the next time they had a choice, they picked the ones that fought for them?

Doesn't matter what it is like from your Point of view, what matters is that they are suffering, and dieing, and they chose the one group they thought could fight to free them. The ONLY group that is fighting and dieing for them. You sit here in your nice house, a world away and pass judgment?

Newsflash Akipt...many countries do not recognize Israel's right to exist.

Morocco
Algeria
Mali
Niger
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Chad
Libya
Sudan
Somalia
Syria
Lebanon
Iraq
Kuwait
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
The UAE
Oman
Iran
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Bangladesh
Indonesia
Malaysia
North Korea
Cuba

None of those recognize Israel's right to exist as a country. Should we destroy all of them?


Hmmm, other than rugs and cigars, I am trying to find what the continued existance of those countries would be good for.

Hmmm, other than rugs and cigars, I am trying to find what the continued existance of those countries would be good for.

For the lives and happiness of the people who live there?

Do they have to be worth something to us to be worth something?

Most of those countries rely on American $, be it Sally Struthers Or goverment backed aide.

If it wasnt for the US telling Isreal to back off this would be a moot point Since Isreal would of wiped them right of the country. Dont tell me all those countries on the list would come running and help. Ever hear of the 6 day war ?

Oh and non of those countries are helping Gaza, be it in food ect. They dont want them in there borders or towns its the dredges of society even by there standards. Egypt put that fence back up last month pretty fast.

Most of those countries rely on American $, be it Sally Struthers Or goverment backed aide.

If it wasnt for the US telling Isreal to back off this would be a moot point Since Isreal would of wiped them right of the country. Dont tell me all those countries on the list would come running and help. Ever hear of the 6 day war ?

Oh and non of those countries are helping Gaza, be it in food ect. They dont want them in there borders or towns its the dredges of society even by there standards. Egypt put that fence back up last month pretty fast.

The inaccuracy's in your post are amazing...

First of all, Iran is on that list and does give aid in the form of Food and money to the Gazan's... As well as arms to their resistance groups.

Egypt sealed the border quickly because Israel was going to give them the responsibility of everything having to do with the Gazans... Do you know what that would entail?

Israel is responsible for the Palestinians because they are the occupiers in the land and according to International law, the occupier must support the occupied.

Egypt would be mad to accept full responsibility for the Palestinians. That is over 2 Million people!!!

Second of all the 6 day war is a ridiculous comparison, as Iran was not a part of the 6 day war, and is one of the regional powers in the Middle East.

The sad thing is that you acknowledge that Israel would have wiped them all off the map, and say that the US is the only thing holding them back, and yet you give them your full support... WOW!

Do they have to be worth something to us to be worth something?Doesn't that sweet little jewish boy hugging the Palestinian have a right to exist?

First of all, Iran is on that list and does give aid in the form of Food and money to the Gazan's... As well as arms to their resistance groups.

So Iran is in violation of agreements glad you finally admiotted it tells where there WMD are now K thkx.

Egypt sealed the border quickly because Israel was going to give them the responsibility of everything having to do with the Gazans... Do you know what that would entail?

Taking care fo the mess they help create in 1949 on up ?

Israel is responsible for the Palestinians because they are the occupiers in the land and according to International law, the occupier must support the occupied.

Prisoners bitching that the prison guards dont read them bed time stories and give warm milk at nap time


Egypt would be mad to accept full responsibility for the Palestinians. That is over 2 Million people!!!

I thought all those countries on the list would rush to help support there fellow arab terrosits whats 2 million for the sake of peace love and nachos

Second of all the 6 day war is a ridiculous comparison, as Iran was not a part of the 6 day war, and is one of the regional powers in the Middle East.

Oh Iran didnt have nukes back then, and prolly were pretty terrified after Isreal took out the whole Egyptian Syrian iraqi airforces in a day half.
Not to mention 400k dead Egyptians. Opps


The sad thing is that you acknowledge that Israel would have wiped them all off the map, and say that the US is the only thing holding them back, and yet you give them your full support... WOW!

Sometimes the prisoner deserves to be executed.

wow just wow... Can I have the last 3 minutes of my life back?

So Iran is in violation of agreements glad you finally admiotted it tells where there WMD are now K thkx.

What are they in violation of? And what WMD? what are you talking about?


Prisoners bitching that the prison guards dont read them bed time stories and give warm milk at nap time

6 year old prisoners.... wow Israel is so strong!


I thought all those countries on the list would rush to help support there fellow arab terrosits whats 2 million for the sake of peace love and nachos

Who said they would? I simply said they have not recognized Israel.


Oh Iran didnt have nukes back then, and prolly were pretty terrified after Isreal took out the whole Egyptian Syrian iraqi airforces in a day half.
Not to mention 400k dead Egyptians. Opps

What are you talking about... Iran and Israel were allies! Iran was the first country to recognize Israel... Do you even know what you are talking about?

The Egyptians left the majority of their aircraft grounded on one Air Force base, and Israel took out over 150 Fighters in one attack... How is that representative of Iran vs Israel?


Sometimes the prisoner deserves to be executed.

Wish I didn't bother responding to all the other points... this one alone shows how UnAmerican and hateful you are. You keep executing prisoners bro, just don't bitch when we lose another 3 thousand people in a tower somewhere.

Doesn't that sweet little jewish boy hugging the Palestinian have a right to exist?

Of course he does... the countries that do not recognize Israel are questioning that little boy's country's right to exist.

You seem to know about all the things that Iran does or doesnt do. If they are supplying weapons and you Know about it Bush must be Right omg. SO therefore you know where Iran has there WMD.

Those countries dont recognise Isreal and want to wipe off the face of the world. But they dont want to help there brothers without causing more hate and suicide bombs.

I didnt mention Iran in the 6 day war.

Un American that I dont care for hate groups whose whole agenda is to wipe out a race be it jew american or anyone who doesnt believe in islam ? They can say all they want about hate hell its the american way, but when you start killing people and justifing it with she wasnt wearing a viel or they kicked my great great great cousin Jethro it doesnt hold water.

You seem to know about all the things that Iran does or doesnt do. If they are supplying weapons and you Know about it Bush must be Right omg. SO therefore you know where Iran has there WMD.

Of course they supply weapons, Bush is right... but it is in direct response to Israel's actions, as well as our own. That is the subject of another thread. They do not have Nuclear weapons, as the NIE showed. They of course have WMD but have never used them, and have only been on the receiving end of them.

Those countries dont recognise Isreal and want to wipe off the face of the world. But they dont want to help there brothers without causing more hate and suicide bombs.

And it seems you know everything there is to know about all those countries... Please tell me where they keep their WMD since you know so much... Sound familiar?

I didnt mention Iran in the 6 day war.

You mentioned all those on the list, and referred me to the 6 day war... I pointed out that a HUGE force on that list was not involved in the 6 day war, and if it was, may have tilted the battle.

Un American that I dont care for hate groups whose whole agenda is to wipe out a race be it jew american or anyone who doesnt believe in islam ? They can say all they want about hate hell its the american way, but when you start killing people and justifing it with she wasnt wearing a viel or they kicked my great great great cousin Jethro it doesnt hold water.

Hate groups? Israel is one of the biggest hate groups in the world... 7+ million Jews who think they are gods chosen race, who are not only racist, but treat Arabs like dogs, wall them off and keep them in a virtual prison on their own lands.

Hate groups? Mossad is likely possible for just as many car bombs as Hamas.

Who made you the police of the world Nekko... If you want to change something you don't do it through war and death. It wasn't long ago that we had African slaves in America, who were treated less then human, and could be killed like cattle... Time went by and we changed. We learned it was wrong and we change our ways. You wish to however interrupt that process in another country with war? By Killing prisoners? by murdering 6 year olds?

You are extremely ignorant to the Middle East, and the cultures and people of many of the countries in that area. I would wager that you also know almost nothing about Iran.

I suggest you read up a bit, try to be objective, and stop blindly supporting the people that Bush tells you to support.

" If you want to change something you don't do it through war and death"

Thats what Ive been saying all along.

Of course he does... the countries that do not recognize Israel are questioning that little boy's country's right to exist.I'm sure the Gazans living in abject poverty and worry from day to day appreciate that sentiment. Again, you can't change the past. Israel is there and it's not going away. the people of Gaza have spoken and if they can't even allow Israel the right to exist then there's nothing else to talk about.

I could have saved Carter the airfare.

Jedd wrote:Egypt would be mad to accept full responsibility for the Palestinians. That is over 2 Million people!!!Heh, seems like the further countries are from the Palestinians, the more they care. We should give Iran a border to Palestine so that they can provide more direct relief. Should clean up their sentiments quickly. ;)

Jedd wrote:Heh, seems like the further countries are from the Palestinians, the more they care. We should give Iran a border to Palestine so that they can provide more direct relief. Should clean up their sentiments quickly. ;)

Not really... Lebanon and Syria care very much, and border Israel... and I guarantee you that if Iran were in the place of Egypt, there would be no wall between Iran and Gaza

It seems safe to wager that the greater the hate for Israel the greater the "give a damn" for the folks of Gaza....

It seems safe to wager that the greater the hate for Israel the greater the "give a damn" for the folks of Gaza....

The problem is the "give a damn" for the folks of Gaza, is what lead to the hate for Israel.

By 'give a damn' I'm referring to those countries who's only interest in the Palestinians (after all they were ran out of other countries historically) is due to their location and easy access to Israel.

aka they're using the Gaza strip populace as cats paws...

By 'give a damn' I'm referring to those countries who's only interest in the Palestinians (after all they were ran out of other countries historically) is due to their location and easy access to Israel.

aka they're using the Gaza strip populace as cats paws...

Ah, I understand, My mistake.

Well, we can agree to disagree on that point. This may be true with some groups, but I do not believe that governments care about Palestinians only because they hate Israel. Without the Palestinian issue, there is not as much for them to hate in the first place.

So you contend that the only reason Israel is hated so vehemently is due to the conflict with the Palenstinians? Or that's the merely the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak.

So you contend that the only reason Israel is hated so vehemently is due to the conflict with the Palenstinians? Or that's the merely the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak.


I would have to say that it is the biggest issue... though different countries may have other qualms... such as Syria and the golan heights.

I honestly think the majority of arab countries, and Iran would be able to live with Israel, if a solution was found for the Palestinians that was not a humiliating defeat, but rather a respectful compromise.

Syria and lebanon have other issues however, and those could also be resolved pretty easily.

I think it should be one big country and make a melting pot out of all them. We could call it .......hmmmm Barbeque.

I think it should be one big country and make a melting pot out of all them. We could call it .......hmmmm Barbeque.

Great idea, and we can send you there as our ambassador to stay in our embassy :)

I tend to agree with Jedd on that point. There will always be lingering sentiment against Israel by persons and groups (and some politicians will no doubt try to inflame that sentiment to galvanize their careers), but I think a 2-state solution would result in greater regional peace and tolerance of Israel. At that point, the onus is on the Palestinian government and would be leaders to provide for the people, who will be much more concerned with domestic matters. If countries like Iran will send food and infrastructural aid instead of missiles, so much the better.

Great idea, and we can send you there as our ambassador to stay in our embassy :)


You know a hell of a lot more about that area than I do...however one sided it is :p

You know a hell of a lot more about that area than I do...however one sided it is :p

Ah, but Imagine what we could do TOGETHER! Muahahahahahaha

after that last comment, i find myself rocking back and forth in my chair...

find a happy place
find a happy place
find a happy place...

Wouldn't this be a GREAT step?

Israel 'ready to return Golan'


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44538000/jpg/_44538697_golanafp226b.jpg Returning the Golan Heights to Syria is not a popular concept in Israel


Turkey's prime minister has told Syrian President Bashar Assad that Israel would withdraw from the Golan Heights in return for peace, reports say.

The al-Watan newspaper quoted "informed sources" as saying Recep Tayyip Erdogan had telephoned Mr Assad on Tuesday morning to inform him of the offer.


The office of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has declined to comment.
Israel and Syria remain technically at war although both sides have recently spoken of their desire for peace.


The Syrian government has insisted that peace talks can be resumed only on the basis of Israel returning the Golan Heights, which it seized in 1967.
Israeli authorities, for their part, have demanded that Syria abandon its support for Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups before any agreement.
The last peace talks between the two countries broke down in 2000.


'Friendly parties'
In an article on its website on Wednesday, al-Watan said: "Mr Erdogan contacted President Bashar Assad yesterday morning to tell him that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is ready for full withdrawal from the occupied Syrian Golan in return for peace with Syria."



http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/43015000/gif/_43015367_israel_golan_map203.gif

A Syrian television station and the news agency Champress also carried similar reports about Mr Erdogan and the reported offer by Israel. The Syrian media is highly controlled and often reflects the official line.


Mr Erdogan is due to visit the Syrian capital, Damascus, this weekend to attend the opening of the first Syrian-Turkish economic forum.


Mr Olmert's office did not deny the Syrian reports, choosing only to state that they "refuse to comment on the matter".


In June 2007, Israel's deputy prime minister confirmed his government had sent secret messages to Syria about the possibility of resuming peace negotiations through third-parties, one of whom was widely believed to be Turkey.


The Syrian reports also came only days after the President Assad told the Central Committee of the Baath Party that "friendly parties were making efforts to organise contacts between Syria and Israel".


"Syria is in favour of a just and lasting peace. Syria rejects any secret negotiations or contacts with Israel. Any action taken by Syria in this area will be revealed to the public," he said on Sunday.


'Expectations'
On Thursday, Mr Olmert told Israel's Channel 10 television that he was interested in peace with Syria, and that both sides knew what the other wanted.


"Very clearly we want peace with the Syrians and we are taking all manner of actions to this end," he said. "President Bashar al-Assad knows precisely what our expectations are and we know his. I won't say more."



http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44593000/jpg/_44593747_erdoganafp226b.jpg Mr Erdogan is due to visit the Syrian capital, Damascus, this weekend


The former US President, Jimmy Carter, who held talks with the Syrian leader recently has said he believes "about 85%" of the differences between Israel and Syria have already been resolved, including borders, water rights, the establishment of a security zone and on the presence of international forces.


"[Mr Assad said] the only major difference in starting good-faith talks was that Israel insisted that there will be no public acknowledgment that the talks were going on when Syria insisted that the talks
would not be a secret," Mr Carter said earlier this week.


Mr Carter said it was now "just a matter of reconvening the talks and concluding an agreement" between the neighbouring countries.
The Syrian reports on Wednesday have sparked outrage in the Israeli parliament, however, where several MPs said they would seek to accelerate the passage of a bill requiring any withdrawal from the Golan to be dependent on a referendum.


"Olmert's readiness to withdraw from the Golan represents an unprecedented political and national abandon," Yuval Steinitz of Likud told the Haaretz newspaper.


Correspondents say returning the Golan to Syria is not a popular concept in Israel, and the details of a possible Israeli withdrawal have bedevilled past negotiations between the two countries.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7362937.stm

That would be great for the region.

So, what happens when rocket attacks start happening from the land given back, as has occured in the past? Isreal should give back more land? All the way to the sea?

So, what happens when rocket attacks start happening from the land given back, as has occured in the past? Isreal should give back more land? All the way to the sea?

With that mentality there will never EVER be peace.

With that Reality there will never EVER be peace.

Changed to suit the reality of the situation.

Changed to suit the reality of the situation.

A hypothetical cannot be reality unless it happens.

To think that making peaceful concessions will cause more deaths, is to think that peace is impossible... Then perhaps Hamas and Hezbollah should never stop attacking, as Israel will never make peace with them.

The reality is Jedd it's happened every time Israel has given land back. It's happening daily right now so unless they give up the rockets I don't see them getting jack. The blind rocket attacks will have to stop first before they can expect any futher talks.

The reality is Jedd it's happened every time Israel has given land back. It's happening daily right now so unless they give up the rockets I don't see them getting jack. The blind rocket attacks will have to stop first before they can expect any futher talks.

Israel has never given the Golan heights back... Syria would be done with Israel as far as war goes.

Give back the Sheba farmlands, and Lebanon/Hezbollah would be done with Israel as far as war goes. That is the closest to peace they will get without addressing the Palestinian issue.

So basically the folks that waged a very bad and losing war against Israel should be given a pass and allowed to reclaim land they used to launch an attack on Israel the first time?

How bout the countries agree to recognize Israel and sign a non aggression pact first before such happens?

So basically the folks that waged a very bad and losing war against Israel should be given a pass and allowed to reclaim land they used to launch an attack on Israel the first time?

How bout the countries agree to recognize Israel and sign a non aggression pact first before such happens?

I think Syria has always said they would be at peace with Israel if Israel gave back their land... Hezbollah has also always said that they will fight until the day Israel stops occupying Lebanon (sheba) and releases their prisoners.

Take away a persons reason to fight, and they will eventually stop fighting, and Those who fight out of pure hatred, will eventually run out of recruits.

I don't know about the sincerity behind such claims Jedd.

After all they had the land originally till they attacked Israel.

I don't know about the sincerity behind such claims Jedd.

After all they had the land originally till they attacked Israel.

Aye, but look when it was that they attacked Israel... Israel had recently been plopped on that land, in their eyes was an Intruder, and did not belong...

Many years have gone by, and Arabs it seems do not like humiliation. Golan Heights, and Sheba Farms, are humiliating to the Arabs. Give them back and that is 2 major obstacles that may be removed.

Shit, Israel is strong enough to take the land back if they back away from their deal right? They provide enough of a deterrence, and with such a sign of respect in diplomacy, will win over many.

Remember, this issue isn't so much Jew V Arab. It is about land, and governments.

The hard part is getting Israel to do this... They have expanded settlements so far into Palestinian territory already, and may be planning on expanding into those lands as well. Only time will tell.

With that mentality there will never EVER be peace.

Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, and expecting different results.

What makes you think that giving the land back THIS time will keep the attacks from happening?

I didn't know that Israel ever gave back the Golan Heights.

Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, and expecting different results.

What makes you think that giving the land back THIS time will keep the attacks from happening?

Israel never gave back the Golan heights...

Well, tactically speaking giving them back before it's agreed upon they won't be used as a launching pad for more attacks is a mistake.

Well, tactically speaking giving them back before it's agreed upon they won't be used as a launching pad for more attacks is a mistake.

Agreed... A deal needs to be made, signed and followed through.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. When Israel left Gaza, Hezbollah started launching rocket attacks from the formerly occupied area.

What is to keep that from happening if the give back the Golan Heights?

Words on a paper will have the strength to stop the "Jihad"?

Sorry, I should have been clearer. When Israel left Gaza, Hezbollah started launching rocket attacks from the formerly occupied area.

What is to keep that from happening if the give back the Golan Heights?

Words on a paper will have the strength to stop the "Jihad"?

There is no Jihad...

Syria wants their land back... Lebanon wants their land back... Hamas wants 1967 Borders back.

There is a huge difference between how Hamas reacts to getting a tiny bit of land back, and how Syria and Lebanon would react in getting the only land they are fighting for back.

Quite frankly I am getting tired of people grouping every muslim in one category in discussing how they will react.

There is a HUGE difference between Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Queda, and Iran. Each has their own goals and their own reasons for existing. It is sheer ignorance to believe that they will all react the same as the other.

There is a HUGE difference between Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Queda, and Iran. Each has their own goals and their own reasons for existing. It is sheer ignorance to believe that they will all react the same as the other.All act like spoiled two-year olds with guns to me.

All act like spoiled two-year olds with guns to me.

And all of them think we act like crazed 60 year olds with a shotgun :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by akipt All act like spoiled two-year olds with guns to me.
And all of them think we act like crazed 60 year olds with a shotgun

One of those rare times when everyone is right.