#190178 Efraim Fri Nov 16th 07:50:15 2007
No matter how much I read about the treatment of women in Arab and Islamist society, I am still sometimes shocked by some of the things that happen. The following is another example of how Saudi Arabia with all of its oil wealth is gallantly galloping forward into the 16th century when it comes to the treatment of women in its society.
Efraim
#190179 Will It won't fit in the coffin, you know. Fri Nov 16th 12:11:28 2007
Dont be silly Jaron, of course I can see that there are millions of Jewish landowners all over the world. Whilst I'm sure some of those people's estates were gotten in nefarious ways , such as poisoning the Granny or humping the brother's wife, I'm sure 99% of it is legitimately acquired and owned.
As much as a mere mortal can 'own' something that predates and probably post date him or her by a few billion years , that is.
#190180 maría etc. Fri Nov 16th 15:17:45 2007
Efraim
The following is another example of how Saudi Arabia with all of its oil wealth is gallantly galloping forward into the 16th century when it comes to the treatment of women in its society.
I doubt that you could find similar examples in the 16th century. Saudi Arabia is worse.
maría
#190181 Eskimosik eskimosik-82@mail.ru Fri Nov 16th 16:16:12 2007
Hi all!
What do you think about this? When it happens?
#190182 maría etc. Fri Nov 16th 16:35:23 2007
Democracy stuff
Russia denies visas to international electoral observers.
FYI.
#190183 Will Ehhh... Fri Nov 16th 18:15:58 2007
I cant figure out for myself which is worse.
To let the election monitors in and let them witness a free and fair election. Let them see the people turn out unintimated and overwhelmingly vote for a certain party. Then see the people starved and besieged for excercising democracy and the elected parliament broken up. Then Half of the ministers locked up and a puppet regime installed, all under the watchful gaze of the self-righteous asses that demanded fair and monitored elections in the first place.
Or just not to let them in at all as it gives the people a false sense of hope whilst giving the meddling westerners a veneer of respectability.
Anybody out there know anything about election monitoring and associated propaganda ? like!
#190184 Lvinseges llmedc56g@mail.ru Fri Nov 16th 18:32:51 2007
#190185 Jaron Saudi Arabia Fri Nov 16th 20:13:39 2007
Efraim, Maria,
Stop distracting us with tales of oppressed Saudi women. Focus on the real evils of Zionism instead.
#190186 Ioram Shahar ioram_sh@yahoo.com Fri Nov 16th 20:16:19 2007
Efraim, María habibti
Yes, Saudi is surely galloping though I'm not certain it's in the forward direction. They punish the victim of the crime while condemning the criminals to short prison time. In the same matter I heard some bad things about Pakistan as well.
#190187 Ioram Shahar Fri Nov 16th 20:18:15 2007
Jaron
Re: evils of zionism
That's my dept. but I'm on strike, my evil is worth more money dammit.
#190188 Kir aaron@yahoo.com Sat Nov 17th 13:54:32 2007
#190189 Efraim Money, money, money... Sat Nov 17th 18:36:29 2007
Hi Ioram,
Was your reference to the strike connected in any way with the current school strike? I'm hoping that the teachers get a whopping pay raise but it won't effect me.
Efraim
#190190 maría etc. Sat Nov 17th 20:05:49 2007
Ioram habibi
Good to read you again and to reconnect with the family in general.
Saudi is surely galloping though I'm not certain it's in the forward direction. They punish the victim of the crime while condemning the criminals to short prison time.
Saudia is going nowhere that I can see. Back at the end of 2004, when they had the first municipal elections, warts and all, it seemed like they were at the begining of a start of a hint into the right direction. Now, I don't know.
In the same matter I heard some bad things about Pakistan as well.
Since I've known that my next destination (if at all) will be Pakistan, I have been reading non stop about the country... and it looks even worse than it sounds. To all the general retardedness existing in the Indian subcontinent, add the retardedness introduced by what they call sharia' (another name for exacerbated macho stuff), one has to add the horror of the Pashtun hyper-mega-super-retardedness, which, no need to remind you, produced as ça-va-de-soi consequence, the taliban. Quite a horror.
maría
#190191 maría etc. Sat Nov 17th 20:24:53 2007
Jaron
Stop distracting us with tales of oppressed Saudi women. Focus on the real evils of Zionism instead.
Is that still in fashion? I haven't heard about "the-evils-of-Zionism" for a while from the usual sources; they remain pretty quiet about it. There is a recent "re-discovery" of the Pali camp and the new thoughts are getting organised to interact with the previous ones, which don't work any longer. Time of transition right now.
maría
#190192 Epitsmism wemneersslort@mail.ru Sat Nov 17th 20:36:24 2007
#190193 Will Sat Nov 17th 23:47:42 2007
Time of transition right now.
Maria,
Do tell please, transition to what ?
#190194 Ioram Shahar Sun Nov 18th 00:22:58 2007
María habibti
I was glad to read you as well, I hope you feel fine.
As for Pakistan it not only has been going toward clerical state since Zia Ul-Haq's rule, it has also been turning very unstable, what with the army's debacle in Waziristan (part of FATA: Fedeally administrated Tribal Agencies, ya3ni with tribal self-rule), and the general unrest; quite scary thinking of their nuclear weapon, state of emergency, etc. Contrary to many westerners, I have no inclination toward Benazir Bhutto, it was under her rule that Pakistan started backing the Taliban.
Efraim
Yes, it was a reference to the current school strike. Too bad you won't get a pay raise. I hope you are well, and I hope to read more of you now that the forum is clean.
#190195 ben Sun Nov 18th 08:22:37 2007
Contrary to many westerners, I have no inclination toward Benazir Bhutto,
BB has one good thing going for her - she speaks harvard english. i don't know about europeans but americans love anyone who can speak english. it always struck me as funny how american jews loved bibi, moshe arens and abba eban and thought that they were all great leaders, totally ignoring their massive differences. what do they have in common? their tongues know how to enunciate the "th" sound.
#190196 maría etc. Sun Nov 18th 11:56:40 2007
Ioram habibi
cc Ben
As for Pakistan it not only has been going toward clerical state since Zia Ul-Haq's rule, it has also been turning very unstable, what with the army's debacle in Waziristan (part of FATA: Fedeally administrated Tribal Agencies, ya3ni with tribal self-rule),
I am surprised that they are surprised about their debacle. Pakistan has, at best, had only nominal power and influence in the FATA, since independence. At the same time, people in the FATA were legally deprived of the other rights (in whatever degree of implementation) that the other Pakistanis enjoyed... and all of that to please the tribal leaders, who are not pleased anyway. Adult franchise was only introduced for the elections of 1997. Supreme court and high courts have no jurisdiction in FATA, political parties and civil society orgs were never allowed to enter and work in the FATA. The law of the tribal areas is still the Frontier Crimes Regulations, imposed by the British at the beginning of the 20th century. There is no banking system in the FATA, literacy is around 17% as compared to 44% in Pakistan as a whole. People in the FATA have been left for 60 years under the jurisdiction of the tribal leaders, without enjoying the some advantages of the rest of Pakistanos... who is surprised that they are pashtunbised/talibanised? (rhetoric question)
maría
#190197 ben Sun Nov 18th 12:28:32 2007
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/925041.html
if anyone wants to read about how even the smallest, most insignificant events in israel somehow mushroom into Armageddon like proportions - read this article. granted i wasn't in england or russia last week so i have no idea if the entire article is nothing but nonsense.
#190198 Jacob Sun Nov 18th 18:14:18 2007
American Jews also love Natan Sharansky, and he can't pronounce half of the English sounds.
#190199 Jacob Sun Nov 18th 18:20:40 2007
To add to this, it is true that in the US an Israeli leader gains a lot (for Israel's cause) when he is able to communicate with the American people in fluent vernacular English. Believe me, Peres does not come across as such a chochem when he speaks English. I am not sure anyway what is the language in which he sounds like the second reincarnation of Trotsky, only a modern version of one.
#190200 Jacob Sun Nov 18th 20:27:13 2007
Russia denies visas to international electoral observers.
This is a positive thing. This way, the international electoral observers will not be providing cover for yet another Russian electoral farce and their "managed democracy".
#190201 george Sun Nov 18th 21:49:45 2007
How do they learn these sneaky tactics? And are they that stupid to display themselves so openly ("throw hundreds of firecrackers during the game")? When they have so much other crimes to hide ("cocaine and hashish, as well as stolen phones, DVD players, and Sony Playstations") shuoldn't they want to be "low profile"?
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127532852&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
Now this I have never heard before "boys who (along with female virgins) are available to the Muslim martyr in heaven" Where is this tradition recorded?
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127535188&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
We have to come up with a better name. "Westophobia" is just not catchy.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127535188&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
#190202 Will Ya mean loike David Beckham loike? Sun Nov 18th 23:09:50 2007
Jacob,
I think that if an Israeli leader came and spoke in "vernacular English" to America, nobody would have a clue what the hell was going on.
I think you mean "Barney and Friends English".
Also, you could have done with election monitors in your own poorly managed democracy the last couple of times out. The rest of the world mightn't be feeling the fallout of America's electoral fraud if you'd been a lttle more careful.
One thing is for sure, that mean minded Clinton wench won't let the Bush whackers pull another electoral stunt. If she wins she'll make sure nobody thieves her throne away from her. Even if Barney and Co. are too busy eatin up on good ole fried Chicken to give a good God dam.
#190203 TadjMahalli mail@luckyvid.we.bs Mon Nov 19th 00:58:33 2007
#190204 Jacob Mon Nov 19th 03:41:19 2007
Will,
If I get your complaint correctly, you are bewailing our low educational standards. This is all true, unfortunately. But who is to blame for such a sad situation? The answer may surprise you, but it is a fact. Officially not admitted due to the misguided notions of political correctness, but true nonetheless. The problem is you see is that the poor country of hours has had to cope with a massive influx of Irish immigrants. That has resulted not only in a catastrophic drop of the educational level of the American people, but also in the significant and lamentable lowering of the average IQ among the US population.
Alas, in spite of all the attempts of the US government to educate the masses of Irish immigrants, the only result was to turn them into jaw-breaking cops or womanizing and always drunken politicians. So what do you want? Of course our country can’t compete with overachievers like your very own land.
Now, regarding managed democracy. I admit the many crimes and faults, and injustices this evil country has committed against progressive and highly moral and pure people everywhere on the planet. But what can we do? We don’t have great leaders any more and never had them anyway. We don’t have any worthwhile democratic traditions or political parties to speak of. So I know many of the Americans have begun to contemplate inviting some illustrious democrats from the Old World. In particular we are looking at the Irish Republican Army and her great leader Gerry Adams as our beacon of democracy. Would they agree to manage our feeble democracy? But if not, then maybe the progressive people of Europe would find someone else to take over this task?
#190206 george Mon Nov 19th 15:25:57 2007
This makes it sound like the organization behind these posters is actually doing so not only publicly, but seriously, openly and officially. It would be incitement if it wasn't so loooooonie: stop Lieberman - he is responsible for Iran going nuclear!
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127538866&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
But going to serious matters - who really is responsible for allowing these things to get this far (and as an aside, these type of things, more than anything else, is responsible for the failure of "Annapolis"):
www.debka.com/headline_print.php?hid=4784
#190207 Will Mon Nov 19th 20:39:43 2007
Dont be getting excited with all the irrelevant nonsense surrounding Annapolis, George.
The fact is that the alleged purpose of Annapolis was scuppered from day one with the refusal to invite the Palestinians to negotiate their own position. You cant have a negotiating process with the two sides of the table representing ISrael's interests.
Annapolis is a smoke screen, a political sideshow, a pantomime of clowns. It's all these thing s and more, but a peace conference , it is not.
#190208 Will What a rant. Mon Nov 19th 22:38:31 2007
Heck no, Jacob , ye got me all wrong,
When you said Israeli leaders were speaking to Americans in Vernacular English I had the image of Bibi addressing the Good ole boys in the White house wiv a bloomin big cockney twang aw samfink, ye na?. English being the Vernacular language to England and spoken in the vernacular, it would be unintelligible, they would need to be wearing translating headphones.
But you know, I really was entrigued by your xenophobic anti-Irish rant anyway, it took me back a hundred years. I didnt think that mindset prevailed in many areas of the developed world anymore.
I also just wanted to point out that I just think it funny to hear Americans patronise people about election standards when they cant safeguard the integrity of their own elections. I also think it's quite ridiculous to hear people rabbit on about election monitoring and democracy on a so called Israeli - Palestinian forum when we know what the free world does to Palestinians who vote in elections.
Americans, in general, dont seem to be able to grasp the importance of these points before they go around the world shooting people they dont agree with. And, when their soldiers get killed they seem to get upset less about the violence and more because of the lack of gratitude on behalf of the undemocratic dumbasses they are killing for world peace and harmony.
I wouldn't have said this was due to poor educational standards caused by a load of thick micks stealin allz yallz resources, but more a general lack of awarenes which is nurtured by your stitched-up media and possibly exacerbated by eating too much southern fried chicken.
cool off you too
cool off
#190212 Will Better to Fade away. Tue Nov 20th 03:14:54 2007
Oops Jacob,
Forgot to mention, that thing about your country being "strong"
I'd file that with the dodgy media and the southern fried chicken , if I were you.
#190213 Mark Tue Nov 20th 03:59:59 2007
"Why, then, the unflagging optimism? 'First of all, I'm an optimist by birth,' Avnery said as we sat down in his living room. 'I'm a genetic optimist--my father was an optimist, my grandfather was an optimist.' Avnery added that age might lend him a sense of perspective others lack. 'Look, when I and a small group of people put forward the idea of a two-state solution immediately after the war of 1948, it would have been a wild exaggeration to say there were 100 people who advocated this. Today, it is the worldwide consensus'. "
www.thenation.com/doc/20071203/press
#190214 Efraim Oh Really? Tue Nov 20th 05:39:58 2007
"Today, it is the worldwide consensus"
Except with the Hamas, the PLO rejectionists, Al Qaidah, a large number of European and American leftists such as Noam Chomsky, the Israeli extreme right and Will.
Mark, are you in favor of the two-state solution?
Efraim
#190217 ben Tue Nov 20th 08:18:18 2007
Annapolis is a smoke screen, a political sideshow, a pantomime of clowns. It's all these thing s and more, but a peace conference , it is not.
so you and olmert agree on something will. there you have it.
Discuss Harry Potter somewhere else
#190219 Will Tue Nov 20th 11:58:45 2007
The two state solution is the only show in town, Efraim. Almost all the people you claim to be opposed to it in your post above, are not opposed to it (me included , for all the difference that will make).
Chomsky says it's not ideal but it would suffice.
Even Lieberman wants a bit of waste ground somwhere to dump Palestinians out of Israel onto. Hamas accepts it but acknowledges that Israel doesn't, so is prepared to try for mutually assured destruction.
The biggest impediment is Israel, your average rank and file Joe Shmoe. You, Efraim.
Lets be honest, Ben, Efraim, would you accept a two state solution that saw Israel withdraw to the 1967 Borders? An answer that saw Hamas accepted as the legitimate government of the Palestinians?
Honestly, Chaps?
#190220 ben Tue Nov 20th 13:18:23 2007
will
enough with the propaganda, or rather, lies. hamas has said that it will agree to a long term cease fire based on an israeli withdrawal to the 67 borders, freeing of all prisoners, and a full right of return.
hamas has stated time and time again that it will not sign a peace treaty with israel and that its goal is the eradication of the israeli state.
#190221 Mark Tue Nov 20th 13:31:04 2007
Efraim - I think the TSS is impossible to achieve. I don't think Israel will ever end its occupation of the WB. However, please go ahead and prove me wrong I would be overjoyed with a TSS if it were to really happen - but it wont.
Besides creating a "2nd state", Israel needs to "dezionize", demcoratize itself and become a state of all its citizens. I fully agree with Azmi Bishara and Avrum Berg, etc. on this point
BTW, the article I quoted from was about what Uri Avnery thinks, not about what I think.
#190222 george Tue Nov 20th 16:35:15 2007
So many lawsuits - so little time
Lawsuit for "comments" which "were disappointing"
www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=925839
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127546264&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
Public/media outrage (justified or not is not the topic here) forces her to resign for the good of the school (she was not "fired") - so she sues the ministry that did not fire her? And this lawsuit now advances the prestige of the school how?
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127547471&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
To change topic. Looks like Olmert's list is getting longer
www.israelnationalnews.com/SendMail.aspx?print=print&type=0.1&item=136752
And just what makes this "news" at all is way beyond me. Here in Canada (and the US) all sorts or monsters are funded without a peep or care ....
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195127545061&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
#190223 ben Tue Nov 20th 17:14:07 2007
george
the first sentence in the story about the principal is that she was pressured to resign by officials. so yes, she is suing. i am not a lawyer but resigning under duress is not resigning out of free will.
the funding the amir campaign was news because many news people have admitted that they fell for the trap, and that story (the campaign, the video) became the news for several weeks.
#190224 Will Chaps. Tue Nov 20th 20:09:00 2007
hamas has said that it will agree to a long term cease fire based on an israeli withdrawal to the 67 borders, freeing of all prisoners, and a full right of return.
Hmm. I see what you mean there Ben, those sons of bi.....Hold on just a minute there.... that IS the two state solution.
I was right !
Now that we have that sorted, would you or Efraim accept a withdrawal to the 67 borders and full independence for the Palestinians with a government of their own choice. i.e democracy?
#190226 Jacob Wed Nov 21st 02:25:45 2007
Brother, can you paradigm?
#190227 Moe Wed Nov 21st 04:47:02 2007
Mark,
I don't think Israel will ever end its occupation of the WB
Israel will never end its occupation of the Golan Heights either. However, the next episode of the Israeli-American PR summit series might "mention" the word "Golan" in its opening OR its concluding [bla bla bla] statement.
Syria has stated that it will not attend the summit unless an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights is put on the agenda. It is still not clear how the issue will be dealt with at the summit. One proposal is to mention it in either the summit's opening declaration or its concluding statement.
//haaretz.com/hasen/spages/926307.html
take care
#190228 Jaron Wed Nov 21st 05:26:45 2007
Will,
What the Palestinians call right of return (i.e. unlimited immigration of Palestinians born abroad to move, not only to the state of Palestine, but rather to Israel) is NOT a two state solution. It is a ONE state solution when Israel when gets voted out of existance in the next election after millions of Palestinian trained from birth to hate Jews vote to make it so. Or turn it into Bosnia in the interim. Judging by the vast Jewish population of Gaza and the WB in Palestinian controlled areas (around none) I don't have much faith in how Jews would fare under Palestinian rule. A return that is limited to within the borders of the state of Palestine is a true 2 state solution that leaves both states viable. Last I heard, the Palestinians weren't overly interested (a very few exceptions aside) in that option, unless I am misinformed. I certainly don't see Palestine voluntarily accepting Jewish immigrants and see no reason why Israel should have to commit suicide for the sake of what Palestinian nationalism calls "justice".
#190229 eugene Wed Nov 21st 06:33:49 2007
jaron, i don't know what a peace agreement, if there's ever going to be one, is going to be like except for this: there will be no "right of return" in it.
#190230 ben Wed Nov 21st 07:59:55 2007
moe
your cutting and pasting left out a bit. i said that hamas has stated, off the record never officially, that they would accept a cease fire under those terms. they are not willing to sign a peace treaty recognizing the state of israel (forget recognizing the jewish state).
their goal, in the past and now, is to rid the world of the zionist nunsance.
#190231 ben Wed Nov 21st 08:00:43 2007
sorry the last was to will
#190232 ben Wed Nov 21st 08:08:41 2007
efraim/will
while hamas and eurolefties (of a certain mind set) certainly don't accept the two state solution, the good doc chomsky does, sort of.
more importantly he does recognize that the fate of the jews, democracy, human rights in a single state would not be that good.
It is understood that this would soon become a Palestinian state with a Jewish minority, and with no guarantee for either democracy or secularism (even if the minority status would be accepted, which it would not).
www.chomsky.info/interviews/20040330.htm
regarding your question: if a two state solution will bring peace to israel and free it of the burden of 3 million or whatever palestinians then so be it.
#190233 ben Wed Nov 21st 08:56:14 2007
Israel will never end its occupation of the Golan Heights either.
i hope not. i still have a dream of buying a home there.
#190234 maría etc. Wed Nov 21st 09:03:48 2007
Ben, re our conversation about Annapolis expectations
Only now the Spanish media are mentioning Annapolis, without much of a background for it.
maría
#190235 ben Wed Nov 21st 09:59:58 2007
maria
is spain going to be there? will the spanish FM being supplying the churros?
#190236 ben Wed Nov 21st 10:47:20 2007
yossi beilin is autistic, so states shulamit aloni.
#190237 maría etc. Wed Nov 21st 11:32:18 2007
Ben
is spain going to be there?
No, Spanish PM is in bad / non-existing relations with the Bush administration. He concentrates his foreign activities into Evo Morales (Bolivia) and Venezuelan Chávez... although with the last one relations are bad, since a few days ago the Spanish king told Chávez to shut up, in public, in the middle of a hispano-american joint thing.
will the spanish FM being supplying the churros?
Not this time Bush doesn't want any of the two around
maría
#190238 ben Wed Nov 21st 11:45:09 2007
well if not churros then maybe crab cakes. that should go down well. (for non-cheasepeake bay people, crabs are one of the local delicacies).
#190239 Will Defining the modern goals of Zionism Wed Nov 21st 11:52:59 2007
Zionism, was a political movement to establish a Jewish homeland which according to my history books attained it's goal in 1948. There are a lot of people drifting around the place today calling themselves Zionists. When asked , what the goals of their new Zionism is they usually come up with some answer that they think is funny. It usually isn't funny, but it seems to entail unflailing support for the policies of the state of Israel in relation to it's obligations to the Indigenous Palestinian people who were disinherited of their own nationalistic legacy when Zionism achieved its goals. These policies are more than a niusance, they are a complete impediment to a resolution to the Palestinian issue.
These policies facilitate numerous recorded and ongoing Human rights abuses and violations of international Law and Human rights Conventions. If Zionism, as it is touted by the demagogs of the post-Zionist era is an unerring commitment to see the Palestinian lands celansed of its Arabs peoples to make way for a greater Israel, then it should be opposed by all good people who support the Human rights Laws that were written in the blood of the oppressed. Hamas, and all others would be right to fight against it.
However, if Zionism does not equate to the blind and unquestioning ethics of adhereing to the actions of Israel against the Palestinians, then I wish somebody would clarify that, because Zionism in this form will be the unravelling of post world war Human Rights advances.
It undoubtedly will also be the unravelling of Israel, sooner or later.
#190240 Will Wed Nov 21st 15:05:18 2007
regarding your question: if a two state solution will bring peace to israel and free it of the burden of 3 million or whatever palestinians then so be it
Not sure who you are talking to here Ben, is this supposed to be an answer to my question : would you or Efraim accept a withdrawal to the 67 borders and full independence for the Palestinians with a government of their own choice. i.e democracy?
If it is, then it isn't. I'd like a proper answer and also a clarification as to who are the three million Palestinians to be freed from your burden?
#190241 ben Wed Nov 21st 15:21:27 2007
Ben, is this supposed to be an answer to my question :
yes
If it is, then it isn't.
yes it is. it expresses my opinion about a two state solution.
#190242 Will Ben Wed Nov 21st 15:47:19 2007
I didnt ask you for your opinion re a two state solution. I asked you would you accept your government making a complete withdrawal of all its control to behind the 67 borders and putting no obstacles in the way of complete Palestinian sovereignty on every square inch of that land remaining between the 67 line and Jordan?
#190243 Ioram Shahar Wed Nov 21st 16:09:00 2007
María habibti
«a few days ago the Spanish king told Chávez to shut up, in public, in the middle of a hispano-american joint thing.»
Yes, I watched it on TV, the now famous “porqué no te callas” has even become a ringtone for mobile phones. It made the Iberoamerican summit nearly as funny as the Arab League's.
#190244 Will The Fog. Wed Nov 21st 16:44:38 2007
A return that is limited to within the borders of the state of Palestine is a true 2 state solution that leaves both states viable.
Jaron,
While Ben's figuring out how to not answer my straight forward question to him for the third time, perhaps you would like to try to not answer the same question as honestly as you feel you can?
#190245 ben Wed Nov 21st 16:45:19 2007
will
I asked you would you accept your government . . .
what is the alternative to accepting the government decree? are you asking me if i would man the barricades?
#190246 Will Make that the fourth time, jaron. Wed Nov 21st 16:54:54 2007
If you like Ben,
man the barricades, or
vote against them in a plebicite on the issue, or
tell your mates over a few glasses of whiskey that you do not support the government's decision to make a complete withdrawal of all its control to behind the 67 borders and putting no obstacles in the way of complete Palestinian sovereignty on every square inch of that land remaining between the 67 line and Jordan?
Or would you in fact support them in that decision and all that it entails ?
I think its clear what I am asking you.
#190247 ben Wed Nov 21st 17:05:36 2007
vote against them in a plebicite on the issue
there is going to be a vote? news to me.
tell your mates over a few glasses of whiskey . .
and if speak to my friends, what? will that change anything?
will i told you, if giving the palis a state will help the zionist state, fine. if the goverment makes a decision which i consider to be suicide for the zionist state, then not fine. what would i do with my "not fine", i'll tell you when i figure that out. lots of people didn't (and don't) accept the withdrawal from gaza and that didn't mean a hill of beans.
are you asking me if i believe if the palis have a right to a state? no, i don't believe that they have a right. but if that will solve some problems, then giv 'em the state. i'll have a good old time watching them run the place into the ground.
#190248 Will Wed Nov 21st 17:34:22 2007
Amazing , missed again.
I presume by the "Zionist State" you mean Israel. As I dont know what a Zionist is in your opinion i dont really know what you mean by zionist state, so I'll stick to calling it Israel, but if you mean New York just let me know.
Would you consider your government making a complete withdrawal of all its control to behind the 67 borders and putting no obstacles in the way of complete Palestinian sovereignty on every square inch of that land remaining between the 67 line and Jordan, to be suicide for Israel? And if yes why ? And if you're feeling chatty could you tell me why it is your humble opinion that the Palestinians dont have a right to a state.
#190249 ben Wed Nov 21st 18:21:33 2007
Amazing , missed again.
nope, i said the answer, again. you on the other hand keep changing the question.
when this mystical treaty regarding the mystical palestinan state comes up for the mystical vote i'll look at it and decide if it good or bad for the zionist state. what is so hard to understand?
and i couldn't care less if the palis have a democracy.
#190250 Will Same question once again. Wed Nov 21st 18:27:32 2007
Would you consider your government making a complete withdrawal of all its control to behind the 67 borders and putting no obstacles in the way of complete Palestinian sovereignty on every square inch of that land remaining between the 67 line and Jordan, to be suicide for Israel?
#190252 Will William's Shakesperean soliloquy. Wed Nov 21st 18:50:46 2007
Prithee, I said and maintain that getting the people of Israel to accept the reality of the Two State solution is the biggest obstacle to the Two state solution. Israeli society is only conditioned to presume that it's pointless to even consider the realtiy of it but never to actually consider it.
Hence, I conclude this current exchange is proof of what I said at the outset; that the biggest impediment is Israel, your average rank and file Joe Shmoe.
In this case, Ben Shmoe, cannot even consider the question, never mind considering an answer. But in the end I think we will find that the answer will eventually be "no".
Let us see, shall we...
#190253 ben Wed Nov 21st 19:48:45 2007
But in the end I think we will find that the answer will eventually be "no".
well i can't argue with that.
#190254 Will Wed Nov 21st 20:21:03 2007
So can you confirm to us then please Ben,
Contrary to your initially stated position, that you support the two state solution, you now clarify that you dont support the two state solution, on the basis that the Palestinians have no right to a state and to withdraw from the territory east of the 67 lines in order to provide one , would be suicide for Israel.
Is this your actual position?
Also, who are the three million Palestinians you referred to earlier?
#190255 JORDAN mewasas@gmail.com Wed Nov 21st 21:14:43 2007
Mother country
#190256 ben Wed Nov 21st 22:01:37 2007
Contrary to your initially stated position, that you support the two state solution, you now clarify that you dont support the two state solution, on the basis that the Palestinians have no right to a state and to withdraw from the territory east of the 67 lines in order to provide one , would be suicide for Israel.
the dude abides.
#190257 ben Wed Nov 21st 22:06:38 2007
or to put it another way - you are a doing a damn good job or arguing with yourself. no reason for me to get involved. you want to say what is my position for me, go right ahead. it is all nonsense what you wrote, but don't let stop you.
the dude abides.
#190258 BANDIT gxkasas@gmail.com Wed Nov 21st 23:51:44 2007
Flat out
#190259 Will There you have it., Thu Nov 22nd 02:14:32 2007
That sure aint how the record looks, dude.
I think my point is pretty clear now, thanks.
Abide.
#190260 Jacob Thu Nov 22nd 02:42:45 2007
Will
Just relax. I am quite sure that for your sake the Israelis will do everything you insist on. Take it easy.
#190261 Will Jacob Thu Nov 22nd 02:57:30 2007
Isnt it fascinating, the lack of input from you and your friends ? What do you think it means?
#190262 eugene Thu Nov 22nd 03:29:57 2007
Isnt it fascinating, the lack of input from you and your friends ? What do you think it means?
it means they finally got smart and remembered the old irish adage "chaval al hazman"
#190263 Efraim Borders? Thu Nov 22nd 06:54:01 2007
#190266 Efraim Woops Thu Nov 22nd 07:14:20 2007
Hit the wrong button again.
Will,
Israel cannot return to the 1967 borders because there were no 1967 borders. The term "1967 borders" is simply more post-1967 Arab propaganda that you have swallowed hook, line and sinker.
Israel has accepted UNSC242 and UNSC338 as the basis for a peace treaty with the Palestinians just as those two resolutions were recognized as the basis for the negotiated peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. Your continued repetition of the mantra "return to the 1967 lines" indicates that you are not willing to see the Palestinians engage the Israelis in negotiating a secure and recognized border as called for in those two UNSC resolutions. I am quite willing to see Israel withdraw from the West Bank to borders that are negotiated between the Israeli government and the Palestinian government. Twice Israel has withdrawn to borders without such negotiations and in both instances the Arabs have responded with a continuation of the war and with violent attacks against Israel. So we won't be playing that game again.
Will, as far as Israel is concerned the Palestinians can choose to have a democratic government, a theocracy, a dictatorship, a thugocracy, monarchy or whatever they come up with. The only concern of Israel is that the Palestinians are willing to live at peace with the Jewish State of Israel. And the fact that Hamas is unwilling to do so and permits, sponsors and organizes violent attacks against Israel is why the Hamas government that was chosen by the Palestinian people is unacceptable to Israel, Europe and the USA. It is not a question of how the government was chosen but the policies that the Hamas government implements.
By the way Will, the only one around here who doesn't accept the Hamas regime qua regime on this forum seems to be you. I assert this because you are the only one here, IMHO, who ignores just about everything they claim to be and insist that they are something else and that their policies are different from what the Hamas say they are to their own electorate.
Efraim
#190267 eugene hell's kitchen Thu Nov 22nd 07:21:36 2007
look who's been hanging out with chavez:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=925839
#190268 ben Thu Nov 22nd 07:37:01 2007
will
just so that you can sleep soundly at night and not be tossing and turning about what ben will do when olmert announces that israel will be turning over the west bank to the palestinians - i may grumble over my whiskey but i won't be the one to take olmert down.
#190269 Efraim the take on Syria by an Irish guy Thu Nov 22nd 08:56:36 2007
Will,
I came across this nine part series by an Irish Protetant who went to Syria to learn Arabic. After 14 months in the place he changed his original attitude about the Middle East and the Arab-Jewish conflict. The article is arranged in reverse order from the 9th part to the first. The article can be found at:
http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/cat_syrian_journal.html
#190270 ben Thu Nov 22nd 09:29:19 2007
Pakistan court dismisses last challenge to President Pervez Musharraf's re-election, the Associated Press reports.
#190272 ben Thu Nov 22nd 09:33:53 2007
maria
apparently your FM is a busy boy in lebanon, trying to help the lebaneese figure out who should be their next president, which apparently they have to do chik chak or things will start to break down.
#190273 Will My Thanksgiving Prayer. Thu Nov 22nd 12:15:28 2007
It's That time again when the good people of the American continent reflect upon the gifts that God has given them.
The Stealth Bombers , the aircraft carriers, the Nuclear warheads. The smoking oilfields of Iraq. The primitive wilderness of Taliban owned Afghanistan. All given to Gods people over the years for there adherence to his Holy Word as remembered by George Bush after prayer time each night.
From the thousands of burger joints to the crack houses of LA, the African brother turns to his red-skinned Indian fellow to give thanks that they dont have to walk around with their black and red asses hanging out anymore.
They Give thanks for the returned the White Native Asses who came back in their ships to the shores they had left a couple of years previous as .....spaniards or something.The returning Americans took a land without smallpox for a people without a clue and made it blossom with slums , parking lots and K-marts.
Give praise for the turkeys that used to roam a wilderness and now come on sticks in the shape of sausages. For the plains where a hundred million buffallo once roamed and gave nothing to the land save piles of dung and now 300 million people roam but give to the whole world a new type of dung.
Good Dung, Democratic Dung, American Dung.
George Bless You All.
#190274 george Thu Nov 22nd 14:00:07 2007
190223 ben
I suppose I am too brief. Just for the fun of it (not that I find this all that important) here goes.
The article makes an assertion ("pressure" by her superiors) and then fails to back it up with anything of the kind when discussing the actual lawsuit that was filed. In any case, "pressure" could mean anything, like "do something or else leave". Now other sources give different versions.
This one www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=almontaser11.21.07.htm states explicitly "unlawfully fired by the New York Department of Education", which could mean "constructive dismissal" rather than out-right "you're fired", but again that is not clear.
This one gives a conspiracy "to deny her the opportunity to regain her position as principal" at the institution she founded, Brooklyn's embattled madrassah, the Khalil Gibran International Academy [KGIA]. That is at least a direct qoute from the lawsuit (so it seems) rather than the questionable paraphrasing going around.
There is www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c36_a1116/News/New_York.html " Deputy Mayor for Education Dennis Walcott "made clear that the mayor wanted her resignation". So now it seems she had no contact with the mayor - it was the "deputy". Even a "civil rights" attorney points out: That is complicated by the fact that she officially resigned ... If she felt a lot of pressure on her because of the press, and she elected to [resign], she will have a tough road to show she was basically ordered to do it.
And my view is this. Part of the job of a principal is public relations for the school. Seeing as she obviously can't handle it (whether it is her fault or not is not the question) she cannot be considered suitable.
#190275 george Thu Nov 22nd 14:07:56 2007
Here it goes again (hardly the first time and hardly the only city). To this day I cannot fathom the point of these people. Here the Israeli had left Israel. She is no longer there. What is gained by threatening her if she does not "go home"? Whatever way that phrase may have been meant by the speaker, it clearly takes on the meaning of going home to Israel (as obviously staying around Canada is too dangerous). So basically this pushes the person back to Israel where presumably the speaker does not want her to be.
www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13551&Itemid=86
#190276 ben Thu Nov 22nd 14:39:32 2007
george
everything you wrote in 274 would make it seem that a lawsuit is in order.
#190277 george Thu Nov 22nd 15:38:52 2007
190276 ben
I suppose that depends on whether there is such a thing as a "First Amendment" right (and if there is, what it means). That is the basis of her lawsuit. There is no such a "First Amendment" right anywhere else in the world.
#190278 Will No Thanksgiving in Israel Thu Nov 22nd 15:52:00 2007
Efraim,Ben,
For all your flapping about Arabs and attacks and negotiated peace settlements both you and Ben have really only done one thing with clarity and that is to confirm my original point which is that the biggest impediment to implementation of a peace deal with the Palestninian is the mindset of the ordinary Israeli Joe.
Israelis are completely incapable of seriously considering their responsibilities to the Palestinians under UN 242, to withdraw from the territory siezed in the 1967 war. Not a glimmer of the reality of Palestinian Arabs having agreed to accept the state of Israel on 78% of their original Homeland 2 decades ago exists within the Israeli psyche. Israel just takes for granted that whatever land Palestinians would form a state on would somehow be gifted to them by a benevolent and peaceloving Israel making scarafices to attain elusive peace."Thanks for your land"? You must be joking, Israelis like Ben actually think the Palestinians have no right to a state.
The United States which led the Palestinians to believe that they would have a state on the lands occupied after 67 abandoned completely their side of the agreement once the Palestinians had proclaimed their commitment to accept the state of Israel. A complete betrayal of negotiations and the spirit of UN 242 is what is at the heart of Israels current presence in the Occupied territories.America was supposed to have pressured Israel to accept it's obligation but never did. Thats why Palestinians have no State.As the years went on and Israel continued to illegally tranfer it's poulation onto the occupied lands of the future Palestinian State, Israel has blotted out from existence their short history as a nation on the land granted to them in 1988 by the original Arab population. The fact that there is nothing left but a few prison camps surrounded by barriers and military zones upon which the Palestinians can try to form a state goes completely ignored or in some more zealous Israeli minds lauded as justice for the ungrateful Arabs who did not accept the mythological generous offer.
IMHO Hamas is absolutely right to reject previous deals as it was only the Palestinians who ever went any distance to accepting them in the first place. America rejected it's commitment , Israel has completely forgotten that there was ever supposed to be a deal, only the Palestinians are expected to accept what nobody else will. Hamas is absolutely right to reject what noone else will accept.
When Israelis realise why they are where they are then they will start to realise what they must agree to in order to finally clinch the deal that put them where they are.
Your Borders , lines, negotiations story is a simple story of treachery, chutzpah and willfull ignorance.
#190279 ben Thu Nov 22nd 16:07:09 2007
As the years went on and Israel continued to illegally tranfer it's poulation onto the occupied lands of the future Palestinian State, Israel has blotted out from existence their short history as a nation on the land granted to them in 1988 by the original Arab population
land was granted to israel by the original population in 1988? that's funny.
and i accept their right to a state just like some pali accepts my right.
#190280 Will Doctor Bob. Thu Nov 22nd 16:37:03 2007
Ben one day says,
are you asking me if i believe if the palis have a right to a state? no, i don't believe that they have a right
Ben the next day says,
i accept their right to a state just like some pali accepts my right.
Now Ben, I know you didnt have a change of heart overnight so i can only presume that you are equating your begrudging - let them have the scraps - attitude to Palestinian Statehood, with your personal supposition that the Palestinians would feel the same way about you were the roles reversed.
Its possible you are absolutely correct in your supposition but again it reinforces my point that Israelis mindset is incapable of reconciling the Palestinian plight with any need for ethical or nationalistic compromise required on their own behalf. In your case you will project your own disdain for compromise into the mind of every Palestinian in order to not even face up to having to analyse your own disdain.
Fascinating stuff!
#190281 ben Thu Nov 22nd 16:43:06 2007
will
you really believe that palis think that jews have a right to a state, here in the former land of canaan?
that's even funnier your belief that palis granted us land in 1988.
#190282 Will Ben Thu Nov 22nd 17:12:38 2007
Do I really believe that "palis think that jews have a right to a state, here in the former land of canaan ?" No not really, I'd bet a majority of them dont. And I'd also bet that that will continue on forever or until the authority of that State makes reparation to them for their terrible losses.
Do I believe you are using that situation to rationalise your way out of even considering accepting Israel's historical responsibilities to enable a viable Palestinian state to come into existence ?
Abso Lootly, Ben.
#190283 george Thu Nov 22nd 17:14:06 2007
Well written article, but it still falls into the trap (like so many others) of wording this comment so poorly:
"No state could long tolerate a ... minority whose first loyalty lies elsewhere."
Nonsense. Who cares where first loyalty lies? The proper wording is more like "No state could long tolerate a ... minority whose first loyalty lies contrary to the principles of the state."
#190284 george Thu Nov 22nd 17:29:55 2007
To continue with the "freedom of speech" issue, this showed up conveniently
www.israelnationalnews.com/SendMail.aspx?print=print&type=0.1&item=136886
So, where is this lecturer's freedom of speech to verbally assault the student? Well, for one thing this is not the United States and there is no First Amendment. But more relevant, I think, is that the teacher has a job to do, which is to teach, and if he does not do so then he has "constructively quit" his job.
#190285 Jacob Thu Nov 22nd 17:59:33 2007
Your Borders , lines, negotiations story is a simple story of treachery, chutzpah and willfull ignorance
Will
Want a few strong Russian words to enrich your anti-Zionist vocabulary?
#190286 Jacob Thu Nov 22nd 18:02:23 2007
(IsraelNN.com) Sapir College has suspended a lecturer accused of verbally assaulting a student who attended class in his IDF uniform. According to initial investigations, the lecturer, Nizar Hassan, told a reservist, “Nobody comes into my class in a uniform, or with a gun.
So why do Jews their own country for this kind of things? Why would Russia, for example, any worse?
#190287 Efraim Mindset? Whose mindset? Thu Nov 22nd 18:03:25 2007
Will, you wrote:
"... both you and Ben have really only done one thing with clarity and that is to confirm my original point which is that the biggest impediment to implementation of a peace deal with the Palestninian is the mindset of the ordinary Israeli Joe."
Will,
Far be it from me to try to change you views about the Arab-Israeli conflict. No facts, logic or testimony has ever caused you to do anything other than remain confirmed in your own opinion that Israel is totally and 100 percent at fault, unless something can be pinned on the Americans, and that the Palestinians are totally passive innocent bystanders to everything that has happened here in the last 130 years.
"Israelis are completely incapable of seriously considering their responsibilities to the Palestinians under UN 242, to withdraw from the territory siezed in the 1967 war."
That's funny, according to the author of UN242, the Palestinians are not even mentioned. He suggested that another UNSC resolution was needed to deal with the Palestinians. But what the heck, he doesn't know what's in 242 better than Will. After all he only wrote the thing.
"Not a glimmer of the reality of Palestinian Arabs having agreed to accept the state of Israel on 78% of their original Homeland 2 decades ago exists within the Israeli psyche."
Which Palestinian Arabs did that; the representative ones who are not invited to Annapolis or the non-representative ones who are?
"You must be joking, Israelis like Ben actually think the Palestinians have no right to a state."
Will, the Palestinians have no right to a state. Neither do the Jews, the Irish, the French, the Germans, the Poles, the Slovaks, the Biafrans, the Kuwaitis, the Iraqis, the Kurds or any other self-defined group. The Palestinian Arabs once again, as in 1948, have the opportunity to create a state. If they, once again, squander the opportunity in the vain effort to prevent the Jews from having a state, then they will fail this time too. And it may be their very last chance.
"A complete betrayal of negotiations and the spirit of UN 242..." when someone begins to talk about the spirit of 242 that usually means, forget what is actually written in the decision or that the speaker has imbibed a little too much spirits himself.
"Thats why Palestinians have no State."
Without even reading what went before this statement we know that it was some form of Israel-and-America-are-at-fault. The fact that Arafat, like his predecessor Haj Amin did nothing to build the civil structures of a state nor take any actions to better the economic conditions of the Palestinians under his control, but spent years salting away whatever aid and tax money he could lay his hands on in his overseas bank accounts; that had absolutely nothing to do with the Palestinians current situation.
"IMHO Hamas is absolutely right to reject previous deals ..."
Will, it's statements like that that cause me to thank my lucky stars that the Arabs have friends like you, willing to fight to the last Palestinian in the cause of "justice".
"Hamas is absolutely right to reject what noone else will accept."
I love it. This is just great. Tell me Will, with all of this rejectionism on the part of Hamas, are you still sure that it is the mindset of the average Israeli that is the problem here?
"When Israelis realise why they are where they are then they will start to realise what they must agree to in order to finally clinch the deal that put them where they are."
Will, could you please translate that one into simple English. I must be a little slow this evening.
Efraim
#190288 ben Thu Nov 22nd 18:15:39 2007
Do I believe you are using that situation to rationalise your way out of even considering accepting Israel's historical responsibilities to enable a viable Palestinian state to come into existence ?
this is where you get it wrong. do i believe that the palis have the right to a state? no. would i accept they're having a state? sure.
as far as historical responsibilities go: i always like to keep in mind that had the 6 day war never happened, we would not be having this talk. and you wouldn't be having this talk with some jordanian either.
btw you are in the wrong profession, whatever your profession is. you should be in the field of telling people what they think. you do that alot.
#190289 Will Not Lost in Translation Thu Nov 22nd 18:28:01 2007
Lets start with the translation.
Israelis think that God gave them the land that Israel is formed on. That, or some bloke who said something to that effect. Or waybe it was the Brits, or maybe it was the UN. Or was it Ben Gurion, or was it that army guy speaking the funny language at immigration control. Oh ... anything, other than to accept how they really came to be there : which is by result of an act of mass colonisaiton of a relatively small tract of land that was formerly inhabited by local Paeltinian Arabs mainly. A colonial act initially enabled by an occupying empire then continually facilitated by sympathetic military sponsors.
Once Israelis have accepted this, its only a short step to realising that in order for them to inherit the land others had to be disinherited. Then, with some simple humanity, another short step to rectify to some extent the deficit between those who now have and those who now have not. UN 242 was the essence of this contract between the conquering colonials and the defeated indigenous refugees. The Palestinian refugees accepting the formation of Israel on three quarters of their lands in return for independence on their own smaller state. land for peace, in essence. The fact that UN 242 doesn't specifically name the refugees as Palstinians does not absolve Israelis of the responsibility to acknowledge who they are. The fact that subsequent attempts to actually identify those refugees in writing were wrecked by Israel and its military sponsor the US is indicative of the depth of treachery to which the disinherited continue to be exposed to.
#190290 ben Thu Nov 22nd 18:38:14 2007
The fact that Arafat, like his predecessor Haj Amin did nothing to build the civil structures of a state
actuall he did everything he could to ruin whatever structures there were.
#190291 Will Thu Nov 22nd 18:43:02 2007
Oh Ben,
I didnt tell you what you think, I told you what I believe you think. And had Israel not happened to Invade and occupy the West bank in the 6 day war then I dont know what I would be doing now, neither do you, unless of course you have a functioning crystal ball in which case you most certainly are in the wrong profession.
#190292 ben Thu Nov 22nd 19:02:38 2007
like i said you got it wrong and like eugene said chaval al hazman.
#190293 Will Dont be getting wound up. Thu Nov 22nd 19:09:38 2007
Like I said, you rationalise away the Palestinians state by saying "sure I would let them have a state" but not on the land where its supposed to be because it would be murder to Israel and that's all they want because they dont accept my rights and so I can say "sure I would let them have a state" because they'll never get a state cos all they want is to...... and round and round you go like a self winding toy.
Contrary to arch philosopher Eugene, I believe I got it right.
#190294 Wael Thu Nov 22nd 19:31:04 2007
Ben,
re your "dream" of buying a home in the Golan, I remember you once quickly jumped to correct me when I called you a settler.... a settler wanabe maybe ?
#190295 Will Efraim Thu Nov 22nd 19:57:34 2007
I love it. Me too.
Tell me Will, with all of this rejectionism on the part of Hamas, are you still sure that it is the mindset of the average Israeli that is the problem here?
Yeh pretty sure, because your government wont change its attitude until it senses the people want it.
BTW it's not rejectionism to refuse to be bound to something somebody else agreed to 20 years ago. It is rejectionism to reject your end of a two way bargain. i.e land for peace.
Arafat offered the peace and gave recognition by accepting UN 242, where is the land?
No land -( no state , no state) - no peace.
#190296 george Thu Nov 22nd 20:45:46 2007
This being marginally related to the freedom of speech topic. I was just doing a quick read of jpost which carries Pipe
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195546692398&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
and was curious what wikipedia had to say if Oswald really was a "communist"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
and in the article it notes how such a "liberal" (one assumes a defender of free speech) like Kennedy treated someone when he did not like the message
General Edwin Walker was an outspoken anti-communist, segregationist and member of the John Birch Society who had been commanding officer of the Army's 24th Infantry Division based in West Germany under NATO supreme command until he was relieved of his command in 1961 by JFK for distributing right-wing literature to his troops.
#190297 Efraim Whose land? Thu Nov 22nd 22:11:01 2007
#190298 Efraim Whose land? Thu Nov 22nd 22:13:14 2007
Let's see. God said that the land belongs to the Jews. Will said that the land belongs to the Arabs.
Sorry Will, I think that the Jews have a stronger claim.
Efraim
#190299 george Thu Nov 22nd 22:38:28 2007
Seems that the court-order to release the unedited al-Dura tape may have been violated - they claim that 9 minutes are still missing
www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13589&Itemid=86
And it seems the father of al-Dura was recently detained by Hamas (presumably because he is a Ftah supporter, but maybe because he is asking embarassing questions):
www.theaugeanstables.com
Scroll down further in that same link and see the desription of the courtroom events. I like this one:
Enderlin denies that anyone ever said there were 27 minutes… and then says there was some irrelevant material that he chopped off the day after the incident.
So which is it - there never was 27 minutes or heedited out some "irrelevant" material?
#190300 ben Thu Nov 22nd 22:49:04 2007
but not on the land where its supposed to be because it would be murder to Israel
nope, i didn't say that either. i said that when the mystical vote for the mystical treaty about the mystical pali state (in what ever border you want) comes up i'll let you know.
and i happen to believe that two people or nations can come to an agreement, all the while hating each others guts and wishing that the other would disappear.
#190301 Will Thu Nov 22nd 23:30:59 2007
Hateful agreements ? I firmly believe that too, Ben. It supposed to be happeing in the north of this little Isle right now.
The land that is to be made available to the Palestinians for their state is not a mystery, its not in any border I want either. Its the territories conquered in 67 with minor and mutual transfers. Minor meaning, very little of. Then full independence and freedom on that land. Is this murder for Israel,IYO.
#190302 Will Meanwhile, back in the real world Thu Nov 22nd 23:37:14 2007
Let's see. God said that the land belongs to the Jews. Will said that the land belongs to the Arabs.
Lets see. Will goes to court and says to judge that Ahmed Salaam owns this plot by virtue of the fact that his family has owned it for twelve hundred years and tenders supporting documentation.
Ibn Tzion approaches bench and says Avi Shalom owns this by virtue of Gods decree and offers relevant Torah Chapters.
Will has tea and scones in Ahmed's house shortly after.
Ibn Tzion, is invited for Torah reading.
#190303 Mark Thu Nov 22nd 23:40:45 2007
Good luck reversing the 40-year occupation and removing settlements/settlers. 300,000 people! The WB is not Gaza - the TSS is dead.
So then what?
#190304 Will Fri Nov 23rd 00:36:25 2007
Mark,
It's the Israelis who say that the two state solution is the only show in town
I believe the figure is closer to 500,000 people and removing them is Israel's problem.
#190305 Mark Fri Nov 23rd 00:56:25 2007
It's those nasty Palestinians and their naive euro-lefty and islamofacscist (sic) lackies that oppose a TSS, Will, doncha-know?
Israelis of course overwhelmingly support a TSS - the 500,000 settlers and their infrastructure are just "temporary" ambassadors of Good Will.
#190306 Jacob For TTS solution Fri Nov 23rd 03:38:16 2007
I personally support an even better option: a TTS solution (22 Arab states and 1 (one) tiny Jewish state. Appreciate how much it's better for the Arab people than your sorry TSS.
#190307 Wael Fri Nov 23rd 05:45:11 2007
Who in his right mind would believe that Israel would move half a million people and trillions of infrastructure out of the West Bank. Only an idiot would even contemplate such a possibility.
The question is , a Mark said, then what ?
#190308 Wael Fri Nov 23rd 05:59:37 2007
Jacob believes that a state where 50% of its de-facto subjects are Arabs is in fact "Jewish" because 1-its tiny and 2- its surrounded by 21 Arab states
#190309 Efraim Will's words of wisdom Fri Nov 23rd 07:50:15 2007
Will,
There are times when I think that you don't read what you write. Here are two example:
"190219 Will Tue Nov 20th 11:58:45 2007
The two state solution is the only show in town, Efraim. Almost all the people you claim to be opposed to it in your post above, are not opposed to it (me included , for all the difference that will make)."
"190304 Will Fri Nov 23rd 00:36:25 2007
Mark,
It's the Israelis who say that the two state solution is the only show in town"
Which, leads one to conclude that you, Will, must be an Israeli.
On another note, Will, you have often said that the Hamas have offered Israel a peace treaty. Here is your statement describing the Hamas offer:
"190224 Will Chaps. Tue Nov 20th 20:09:00 2007
hamas has said that it will agree to a long term cease fire based on an israeli withdrawal to the 67 borders, freeing of all prisoners, and a full right of return.
Hmm. I see what you mean there Ben, those sons of bi.....Hold on just a minute there.... that IS the two state solution."
What the Hamas has also said is that they will not sign a peace treaty with Israel nor recognize the Israeli state. Somehow that seems to be neither a two state solution nor a peace agreement. It is just more of Will's seeing what he wants to see when it is not there.
Will, one point, and these is my words not yours. Israel is not going to repeat the mistakes of the past. We have had succesfull Israeli withdrawals in the framework of fulfilling the terms of peace agreements. The three territorial withdrawals that we carried out not in the framework of a peace agreement led to more armed conflict. The lesson has been learned. We also lived for almost two decades under a long term cease fire agreement with no recognition, no negotiations. It was definitely neither a peace agreement nor a two state solution.
Will, perhaps your inferior level of knowledge about the Arab Israeli conflict precludes you from realizing when you sound like you are trying to sell the Israelis the Brooklyn bridge. Just for your information, you are fooling no one. After being a teacher for many years none of my students could come up with any new excuses for not doing their homework. It always amused me how the students often thought that they were coming up with something new and original when in fact I had heard the same nonsense a dozen times before. Will, do you really think that this Hamas propaganda has not been heard many times before in these parts. You must be the only one still taken in by it.
Efraim
#190310 Efraim Evidence Fri Nov 23rd 07:59:08 2007
Will, you wrote:
"Lets see. Will goes to court and says to judge that Ahmed Salaam owns this plot by virtue of the fact that his family has owned it for twelve hundred years and tenders supporting documentation."
Will, what happens when it is discovered that Ahmed Salaam immigrated to the Palestine mandate from Syria two years before the 1948 war, rented a room and went to work in a Jewish owned factory so that he could earn enough to bring over the rest of his family like all of his neighbors did. Oh, and the 12 hundred year old documents were forgeries provided by a kind reporter from France-2 who wanted to do a story sympathetic to the "plight of the Palestinians".
Efraim
#190311 Will Fri Nov 23rd 11:44:31 2007
Efraim,
I think Our friend Ahmed would still have more claim to it in a court of law than the poor lad arriving in from Poland with the Holy Book as his only paperwork.
#190312 Will Careful with that axe Efraim. Fri Nov 23rd 12:17:05 2007
After being a teacher for many years none of my students could come up with any new excuses for not doing their homework
And this Efraim, is where you finally prove, emphatically, what I have been saying about the psychology of your average Israeli being incompatible with reality.
Like all teachers I have met you come to your class completely assured of your infallability, to impart to the hungry little minds your burden of enlightenment : "And that is how the state of Israel came to be how it is today, Amen" And all the little minds go off to do their homeowrk within the framework of your induced state of awareness. Utterly convinced that the herd mentality of mutual indoctrination is in fact learned agreement. Never noticing the tiny details that might present even the faintest schism in their comfortable mantra.
Here is you homework, Efraim.
All those quotes of mine you posted above, read them again and ask yourself, Is there any thing in any of those quotes that contradicts my assertion that it is the Israelis who have made the Two State Solution the only show in town. ?
Trying very hard all the while to grasp the notion that everybody else is prepared to accept the Two State Solution as the best solution in light of the fact that the indoctrinated Xenophobia of Israeli society is anathema to the preferred and logical One State Solution.
The fact that you cant see this glaring simplicity through your pre-constructed psychosis should be proof enough, even for an infallable teacher type, to concede:
Lord, I cannot see a single tree for this thick dark forest.
#190313 ben Fri Nov 23rd 12:25:34 2007
will
given that you haven't spoken, i mean actually spoken, to an israeli in your life (well maybe if you met one in the street in belfast or dublin or wherever) your assertions about what israelis want ring a bit hollow.
#190314 Will Fri Nov 23rd 12:44:00 2007
Who in his right mind would believe that Israel would move half a million people and trillions of infrastructure out of the West Bank. Only an idiot would even contemplate such a possibility.
Are you calling me an Idiot, Wael?