TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Israel attacks Gaza City
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Who lived there before those 1000 years, never having consentually departed? [Moral]

and who lived there a 1000 years before? how about 2000 years? how about 4000 years or 6000 years!!! look at Kosovo and Serbia, Serbs were a majority 400 years ago, but now its not the case... when the Serbs started some shit about retakin ownership they got bombed. Talking about double standards.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Who legally owned that land as a colony prior to the existence of Israel? [Legal]

yep barely 4% of the land and owning a land doesn't mean you can declare independance... try doing that with the backyard lot you have, its yours all right!!

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Please argue it!

Well, for starters, there is this:

http://www.fair.org/activism/psyops-response.html

just found that on a quick search. I admit, it's not very conclusive proof that cnn is on the govt payroll, interestingly similar to how i don't think CNN's document is conclusive proof that arafat supports terrorism. most likely, both are true though, imo at least to some extent. i don't have time to search around more, but in general CNN has been known to provide a "pentagons eye view" of the world. apparently someone has started a website http://www.cnn-sucks.org attempting to compile such information.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus You seem to have a common preconcieved distrust.

sort of. i have what i like to call, optimistic trust. i trust everyone, until they give me a reason not to. in my opinion, the govts of canada, britain, australia etc have all let me down through some scandal or another. and the govt of america, the WORST and most damaging scandals to innocent people world wide. this is where my distrust comes from, it did not spring up out of nowhere.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus You refusing to visit IDF sites on the notion that you believe them to be "false and pure propoganda" (and I'm paraphrasing),

BADLY paraphrasing! i said propaganda, pure and simple, not FALSE and propaganda. in fact, that's a contradiction in terms, propaganda is by definition, not false ( The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause. ) i'm sure that the idf website has true information, i don't accuse them of being liars. however, i'd hardly call them the most impartial source of info on the situation in the middle east.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus will never help you achieve the truth of the situation. You must examine the links, review the content, use logic and rational, and then contend, is this true?

i have, I do, and i will continue to do so.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Just as I am sure that you believe whitehouse.gov, and cia.gov web posts are not inaccurate, as well as your Canadain ministries informational web sites, why then would you radically disbelieve anything Israeli ministries say when they submit such information?

well the double negative is confusing. not innacurate? so you are implying that i think that everything on government websites IS accurate then? no, i certainly don't. some is misleading, some is outright false, either through being outdated, incorrect, or incomplete. as well, important facts are often left out, to portray the image of the world the govt wants you to see.

do i blame them for this? no. i have an antiwar website, do i promote the pro war view for completeness sake? no of course not, i have a goal, i want to convince people to be antiwar, and i do the best i can. govt websites do their best to steer their people in a way they would like them to go, and i don't blame them for this either. however, when i want to find a comprehensive facts on something, i don't put much stock in addresses ending with .gov, or ESPECIALLY .mil

especially when the govt in question has manifest reason to make me want to believe one side of the story, as is the case in israels claims about arafat.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus I am still suprised, how often you submit links to uncredible sites on this forum you believe, such as independent media, with no incentive for credibility, and you disagree with information coming from the words of some government, which carries their honor, reputation, and respect to their people, and people across the world, with great incentive not to be caught lying, or fabricating truths. Its just simply hypocritical and irrational.

I would argue that indy media, or ANY media for that matter has just as much incentive to not be caught fabricating truths or lying.

on the subjeft of uncredible sites, i ask where do you get your information? what is credible these days? i get my info from a variety of sources, some of them proper journalism, some opinion, some statistical facts, some govt sites, and try to piece it all together. i find it's the best way.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter 2. They, as an ethnic group, have chosen a mechanism for obtaining redress of their concerns [that being, terrorism], which is so immoral as to require the denial of whatever requests they are making, regardless of the extent to which those requests are justifiable.

Here, I have to disagree:
1. You generalize. They as an *ethnic group* are surely NOT Terrorists. Even if there was a 95% support for terrorism among the Palestinian people your statement would be wrong.
(according to the latest polls its somewhere around 73%)
2. More importantly: To make peace, is by definition to FORGIVE. You make peace with enemies, not with friends. However, such acts only make sense provided that the oppostie side indeed intends to cease violence. So, if it was clear that the Arab side was to end all terrorist/brainwashing activities, in order to reach an agreement you would HAVE to forgive.
Currently, though, we're faaaaaaaaaaaaaar away from that point.

Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

to back John Smith up, I believe Rupert Murdoch owns Fox News? and a large number of Western television channels, newspapers etc..., and Rupert Murdoch was one of the biggest contributors to George W. Bush's campaign (yet again I must point out if Fox News hadn't have announced Bush's victory, he wouldn't be in power). The only news channel that has in any way trustworthy news is the BBC (ask Michael Moore )
anyway.....
Trancegiant, I hardly think I was being "so fucking stupid" as you so elegantly put it. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a distinct possibility Sharon will face charges for 2 War Crimes (Between June 4 and Aug. 31, 1982, the IDF, under Sharon's direction, being Minister of Defense at the time, killed a total of 19,025 Palestinians and wounded 30,032. And the horrific events of April 2002 in Jenin). There is also evidence that Sharon had connections with the man that assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, that military groups Sharon founded orchestrated "terrorist" attacks against the Jewish people to sway public opinion.
The thing that scares me most is that so many young Israeli's are so unbelievably right wing, and can support this monster, but this scares me more

quote:

Ariel Sharon Israeli Prime Minister Knesset, Tel Aviv, October 3, 2001 �Every time we do something you [Shimon Peres] tell me America will do this and will do that... I want to tell you something very clear: Don�t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.�

and Yoepus, don't call me fucking stupid, you seem to be preaching peace, but you've got a tank in your avatar? get a grip

Az you're simply hilarious!

edit: okay, i cant just leave it with that...
Let me add that all of your (evidently wrong) "arguments" sound very familiar to me, as some1 who has spent plenty of time investigating the the accusations of each party and their originis.

your "quote" is a faked propaganda "quote" by neonazis.
Here, my friend, is a nice website (special tip: Scroll down to those wonderful links!) with points that could have come out of your mouth
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/zionazis/ArielSharonTerrorist.html


You see, allegedly "left" peacemakers, especially in the israeli case, are mostly ugly antisemitic bastards.

edit�: OMG, your quote is right up there, at the top

Re: Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

quote:

Originally posted by Az and Yoepus, don't call me fucking stupid, you seem to be preaching peace, but you've got a tank in your avatar? get a grip

hahahahahah i always had that in mind...

quote:

Originally posted by TranceGiant You see, allegedly "left" peacemakers, especially in the israeli case, are mostly ugly antisemitic bastards.

how did I know someone would say that
get a fucking grip, accusing someone of being Anti-semitic because they strongly disagree with Israels current political situation is retarded, but unfortuneately seems to happen a lot, for whatever reason. The quote by Sharon speaking of America was sent to me by e-mail by my Israeli general studies teacher, as it was reported by the Daily Telegraph in the UK two days after it was said. But then again if thats wrong, so must be invasion of the lebonese refugee camps in 1982, or Jenin last year? oh wait.....
ffs

Re: Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

quote:

Originally posted by Az Yoepus, don't call me fucking stupid, you seem to be preaching peace, but you've got a tank in your avatar? get a grip

If I have a pantagram as my avatar I must be a follower of Satan.
If I have an animation of a cartoon blowing up in my sig I probably love it when men blow up ...



Why ofcourse!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

quote:

Originally posted by oDrori If I have a pantagram as my avatar I must be a follower of Satan. If I have an animation of a cartoon blowing up in my sig I probably love it when men blow up ... Why ofcourse!

oDrori sort it out, stop being so pedantic......
and by the way you've just got a red cross in your sig

Look by reading your posts I encounter such a great lack of historical knowledge, and such a stubborn attitude, that I highly doubt that any comment from my side will change a thing. Therefore I'll keep it short and to the point.


1. I accuse you of being paranoid, now that I see how you interpreted my post as an antisemitism accusation towards YOU. It was not my intention to do that. What i did point out, was that almost all of your arguments are brought up by extremists, be they left or right wing extremists (which eventually is the same). I'd suggest that you carefully consider what you say before you do so. Hitler-comparisons and generalizations demonstrate a biased,uninformed,hatred-filled attitude. If you think that your comparing Hitler with Sharon affects me in the sense of defending Israel's prime minister, you're wrong. Call himf fat pig, murderer, whatever (or just buy an Arab newspaper and scan it--same effect). BUT comparing ANYBODY with Hitler is a relativation of Hitler's crimes. Why, at all, comparing? And why particularly with Hitler? Do you and the rest who do so( I know, it's a "trend" also practiced in the America "criticism") find amusement in the irony of equalizing a Jew with Hitler (whose relation to Jewsshould be well known?). Do you think that comparing some1 with Hitler will make your arguments any stronger or more credible? Why not compare him with Stalin? Mussolini? Napoleon? Why picking the most evil mother****** in history and not others who'd better fit into such a comparison (dimensions wise).
I find that trend of comparing Hitler with Bush Sharon and whoever else annoys us nowadays extremely disturbing. It worries me cause one day it'll become exhausted and we'll compare little shoplifters with Hitler too, hm ? I read a pretty interesting article concerning this phenomenen, which stated that in a secular world we live in Devil-comparions don't impress anymore. So, Hitler, without thinking further and taking the horrible consequences and the moral dilemma into consideration, was soonly adapted as a "secular" more "recent" substitution.
for fuck's sake..that's irrelevant here actually. Hehe so back to the "topic"

Oh right, I could write much longer essays on the antisemitism - israel criticism problem..but..Ill make it some other time. Let's just say that many israel critiques use antisemitc stereotypes (the media included) without knowing, and also, that many indeed hide antisemitms behind the israel-criticism mask. And to confuse(or annoy) you totally I'll add that even anti-americanism has antisemitc origins. In fact I believe that what sexuality is to the human behavior (a huge determining subconscious aspect) antisemitsm is to the modern European's political perception.

2. As for the quote: The only time I've heared about it was through browsing neonazi-site like zundelsite.org and other extremist websites such as the one I linked too previously. I cannot believe that Sharon said EXACTELY what is quoted here, simply because there's no chance it wouldn't have caused huge protest or at least wide attention throughout the world. The media just waits for such statements ( i remember how german newspapers transformed Sharon's announcment of a "great offensive" into a "total war", thereby creating a analogy to the famous Nazi "total war"), so it's really hard to believe he said those words.

3. as for Sharon: He was the military leader of the 1982 war against the PLO in Beirut. A war like any other in the history of mankind and another example of the typical middle east mechanism of arab action and israeli reaction. The PLO under Araft's rule was back then situated in Lebanon's capital, Beirut. After getting their ass kicked by Jordan (where they just caused instability and trouble, having launched several attacks against israel) they were now attacking Northern Israel with Rockets launched in Lebanon (speaking of which, the European "left" movement had nothing better to do than being tourists in those famous Beirut camps, practicing with the Terrorists etc. etc.). Anyway, the Palestinians once again provoked Israel too much and a war was declared. I don't see any war crime in that. [Just think back to 1973 when the Arab nations suddenly decided it was once again time to wipe out Israel and invaded on Jom Kippur(a chirstmas like holidy for Jews, in terms of importance)].
So what YOU are alluding to is the old story of Sabra and Shatila. I'll make this one really short as I've said it dozens of times before: A Christians Lebanese milita killed Muslim Refugees. Sharon who controlled this area let them go in in order to kill Terrorists only. As we know, they killed them all. Now what you CAN accuse sharon of is lack of responsibility, or the fact that "he should've been more suspicious". Well, you won't believe it, but an Israeli commission said exactely that thing, kicking him out of the office. That's it, he Prime Minister now. No war crimes, no massacres, but surely a black mark on a already not so white shirt.
Nobody says Sharon's an angel, but neither was Rabin, neither was Peres (do you know that Peres, the so called dove of peace, was responsible of a massacre of more then 100 arabs in 1996?)neither was Begin. However they all changed, and even Sharon did. Arafat ,however, (a guy resposible of killings of Jews and Israelis from Buenos Airs through Rome to Tel Aviv) has not changed. Yet he's never critcized.

4. The Jenin Massacre is a myth. Even the Palestinians themselves have addimted to it. 23 Israeli soldiers were killed in Jenin, 5 Palestinian civilians, 20+ Palestinain gunmen. Nope, this is not what i'd classify as a Massacre.

seems the british public was misled about Jenin, there was a big fuss about the "massacre", not much fuss when it was revised down to 56...
as for Peres and Rabin I can't comment, but it seems as if Rabin was the only person that was getting the middle east on track, with amicable solutions......
as for the war crimes, I believe Slobodan Milosevic is being tried for similar atrocities on a larger scale, and I'm pretty sure that was during a war

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

<--- look, i am actually a little blue cartoon!

quote:

Originally posted by oDrori If I have a pantagram as my avatar I must be a follower of Satan. If I have an animation of a cartoon blowing up in my sig I probably love it when men blow up ... Why ofcourse!

trancegiant, that was one of the WORST posts i have ever read. please, take some time to cool off before you post, or at the very least, proofread to make sure it makes sense and is coherent.

i'm not saying i disagree with the content, just, it wasn't well phrased. i normally don't make a point of saying these things, but that one warranted at least a mention..

anyway, i am a leftist peace activist, and i HOPE that you are not trying to conclude that i would be anti-semitic.

Hm....
LOL
Maybe you're right. I just wrote down what I thought, but without tinking, if you know what I mean. It's just that I have so much to say, that I find it hard to really compress it. Also, don't forget English isn't my native Language

But if you have any questions referrinf to passages that came out too unclear, feel free to ask

quote:

Originally posted by TranceGiant Here, I have to disagree: 1. You generalize. They as an *ethnic group* are surely NOT Terrorists. Even if there was a 95% support for terrorism among the Palestinian people your statement would be wrong. (according to the latest polls its somewhere around 73%)

Perhaps my point was poorly phrased. I did not, of course, mean that all Palestinians are terrorists. However, one cannot help but think that negotiating seriously with the Palestinians while their citizens continue to commit acts of terrorism might legitimize terrorism as a mechanism for obtaining one's political goals.

quote:

2. More importantly: To make peace, is by definition to FORGIVE. You make peace with enemies, not with friends. However, such acts only make sense provided that the oppostie side indeed intends to cease violence. So, if it was clear that the Arab side was to end all terrorist/brainwashing activities, in order to reach an agreement you would HAVE to forgive. Currently, though, we're faaaaaaaaaaaaaar away from that point.

I agree, in most respects. However, I think there is a difference between forgiving someone and granting them sovereignty. If they cease terrorist activity, certainly I think an end to retaliatory violence would be warranted. But even greater change would have to occur in Palestinian society before they, as a people, would be ready for sovereignty.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Israel attacks Gaza City

quote:

Originally posted by Az and Yoepus, don't call me fucking stupid, you seem to be preaching peace, but you've got a tank in your avatar? get a grip

And you have an avatar of an angry guy spewing bullshit... oh wait , maybe you do have a point.

Now on that bright note, let me address the Critizing Israel is Anti-Semitism post, because it is, and I'll let Thomas Friedman make the point for me. He's a well respect 'moderate' journalist in regard to the middle east, he is listend to supposedly in every corner in the middle east, and the Saudi "peace plan" that was proposed to Israel, was done so via him. And so I hope you understand he does not write from biased, and he writes from a heart of peace as well. I read this last year, and dug it up for you guys from one of my academic sources. Here I saved you guys a $1.50 to buy it from the archives on NYTimes, so enjoy the read:

October 16, 2002, Wednesday, Late Edition - Final, Section A; Page 23; Column 5; Editorial Desk, 761 words, Campus Hypocrisy, By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

quote:

The Washington Post recently reported that students and faculty at a growing number of universities are pressuring their schools "into selling their holdings in companies that do business with Israel, prompting a counter-campaign among Jewish groups that consider the effort part of a creeping tide of anti-Semitism on campus." Here's what I would say to both sides on this issue: Memo to professors and students leading the divestiture campaign: Your campaign for divestiture from Israel is deeply dishonest and hypocritical, and any university that goes along with it does not deserve the title of institution of higher learning. You are dishonest because to single out Israel as the only party to blame for the current impasse is to perpetrate a lie. Historians can debate whether the Camp David and Clinton peace proposals for a Palestinian state were for 85, 90, or 97 percent of the West Bank and Gaza. But what is not debatable is what the proper Palestinian response should have been. It should have been to tell Israel and America that their peace proposals were the first fair offer they had ever put forth, and although they still fell short of what Palestinians feel is a just two-state solution, Palestinians were now prepared to work with Israel and America to achieve that end. The proper response was not a Palestinian intifada and 100 suicide bombers, which are what brought Ariel Sharon to power. It is shameful that at a time when some Palestinians are writing that they made a historic mistake in not nurturing the Clinton peace offer, pro-Palestinian professors and students in America and Europe pretend that the only reason the occupation persists is because of Israeli obstinacy. This approach will never gain the Palestinians a state, and those who dabble in it are simply prolonging Palestinian misery. You are also hypocrites. How is it that Egypt imprisons the leading democracy advocate in the Arab world, after a phony trial, and not a single student group in America calls for divestiture from Egypt? (I'm not calling for it, but the silence is telling.) How is it that Syria occupies Lebanon for 25 years, chokes the life out of its democracy, and not a single student group calls for divestiture from Syria? How is it that Saudi Arabia denies its women the most basic human rights, and bans any other religion from being practiced publicly on its soil, and not a single student group calls for divestiture from Saudi Arabia? Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is vile. But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction -- out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East -- is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is dishonest. Memo to Israel's supporters: Just because there are anti-Semites who blame Israel for everything that is wrong does not mean that whatever Israel does is right, or in its self-interest, or just. The settlement policy Israel has been pursuing is going to lead to the demise of the Jewish state. No, settlements are not the reason for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but to think they do not exacerbate it, and are not locking Israel into a permanent occupation, is also dishonest. If the settlers get their way, Israel will de facto or de jure annex the West Bank and Gaza. And if current Palestinian birth rates continue, by around the year 2010 there will be more Palestinians than Jews living in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza combined. When that happens, the demand of the college anti-Israel movements will change. They won't bother anymore with divestiture. They will simply demand: "One Man, One Vote. Since Israel has de facto annexed the territories, and there is now just one political entity between Jordan and the Mediterranean, we want majority rule." If you think it is hard to defend Israel on campus today, imagine doing it in 2010, when the colonial settlers have so locked Israel into the territories it can rule them only by apartheid-like policies. This is not a call for unilateral Israeli withdrawal. This is a call for everyone who wants Israel to remain a Jewish state -- and not become a binational state -- to urge President Bush to renew the U.S. push for a two-state solution. If you think the Bush team is doing Israel a favor with its diplomacy of benign neglect, if you think the only campaign Jews need to be involved in today is with hypocrites on U.S. college campuses -- and not with extremists in their own camp -- you too are telling yourselves a very big and dangerous lie. http://www.nytimes.com

quote:

Originally posted by guetag Damn you still can't notice who is the good and the bad in this conflict may be you are stupid

yes you, every post you've ever made has confirmed this, if you want to get involved and de validate everything every pro israeli has said on these boards, go ahead, I'm sure they won't mind
oh and your sigs too big

bleh, this world sucks, along with all the political leaders with it, and most of the ignorant wankers that support these political leaders. Also, comparing anybody to hitler (whether the moron is comparing bush or sharon) has to be the STUPIDEST shit i have heard all year.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.