quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Israel is a democratic theocracy (as ironic as that is). Las time I checked, wasnt it the JEWISH state?

It's a Jewish state, yes, but I think that's more of a cultural definition than a religious one. If you want to call Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Iran, etc. all Islamic theocracies then okay, as long as we're all playing with the same set of cards... but I still wouldn't call this a war of religions. Is that what you see it as, Kaveh?

quote:

HE could say the exact same thing as you? PEOPLE LIKE YOU enjoy defining terrorism to suit your own right-winged argumentative objectives.

Well explain to me what's wrong with my definition? Do you disagree that terrorism should be defined as something that inherently targets civilians, and is used as a means of coercion by fear?

quote:

That definition seems to apply to what ISrael is doing to the palestinians as well.

That's essentially the same definition I'm going by but I don't see the logic in your conclusion. Applying the definition to Israel would again, be requiring them to be using force as a means to coercion by fear, but only the stupidest government wouldn't have realized by now that it's not scaring or coercing anyone. There is no logic to their actions if interpreted as a means to fear. If they're targeting militants (in large part, at least), then it is easy to see what their real motivation is (to get rid of the militants!)

quote:

Many times palestinians have attacked checkpoints, and soldiers. You just like to think they dont for the sake of your argument.

What what what!? No, I think they DO attack checkpoints and soldiers!!! That's why they get fired on! This is where the numbers come from on Palestinian civilian deaths!

quote:

Although most of them arent specifically suicide bombing, it still shows they are trying to resist. http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Dai...2002022019.html http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Londo.../19/261966.html

Resist what though? And please don't say "the occupation."

quote:

But it has helped the palestinians bring about a two state ssolution to end the occuptation and this mess. If they didnt go to this extreme, maybe the pals would be forever occupied and treated like shit.

Actually, believe it or not, I agree with you. It probably WAS the existence of Hamas and the "intifada" that paved the way for a potential Palestinian state alongside Israel.

But aren't we ignoring the obvious here? The PA rejected a two-state solution, and even spoke of it as merely a part of a "phased plan" to eliminate Israel. They didn't even make a counter-offer. If they had accepted the two-state solution and stopped the terrorism, I might even be able to concede that it had been an effective (although highly immoral) plan.

After all, it's unfair to apply a double-standard here - Israel expelled the Palestinians in early days for the survival of their own state, so if Palestine had merely wanted a state without wanting to destroy Israel, it would have made sense in a kind of perverted way. If they were living peacefully side-by-side now, some of us might even look back and call them freedom fighters (well, I'm pushing the envelope here but anything's possible). But it is precisely their unwillingness to stop - their unwillingness to compromise - their incessant murder of civilians for no real goal except to push Israel into giving in to MORE demands so as to put Palestine in a strong enough position to get rid of them completely - it is that sick mentality that makes them terrorists and not freedom fighters at all.

quote:

Palestinians have MANY peaceful protests... its never mediated becuase its not newsworthy. If you have international satellite, you would see it with your own eyes how many of them they actually have.

Actually I've watched a few videos of Palestinian protests and they don't seem to be all that peaceful. While it's true that they aren't actually killing anyone, the protests seem to be filled with anger and hostility. A friend sent me this link:

http://brain-terminal.com/video/rut...0-11/index.html

Admittedly they didn't seriously injure anyone, and admittedly this didn't happen in Israel, but if this is characteristic of what you call "peaceful" protests, I'd hate to see their not-so-peaceful ones...

quote:

Its only the violent clashes that make the headlines.

Again this may be true, but it is also only the violent clashes that Israel responds to with violence. I have sincere doubts that soldiers have killed many Palestinians in peaceful protests.

quote:

The mere fact that you dont beleive that invading a nation, causing harm to a populace, killing thousands in a "war" is terror, only shows that your perception of the term is so specific that it hardly happens in your eyes.

Well again, I'm not going to keep arguing on the definition of terror because that's been done already. I would, however, like to hear your definition of "invading." History seems to record that the Jews weren't violent when they first entered the middle east; and our own country, Canada, has no trouble whatsoever letting in thousands of refugees. But Palestine - or what we now call Palestine, because it didn't exist when the Jews first entered - was largely hostile to the Jews, and that is precisely what forced the kind of violence that we're now calling an "invasion." If the Jews hadn't been attacked, they probably would have felt no need to occupy or "expand."

It's not that the Jews went in there with the intention of taking over the land. They only did so when they were faced with a genuine fear for their own survival. I'm not saying that it's "right" - but both groups of people were in the "wrong" and Israel did what was necessary for its survival. Again, self-preservation is the overriding factor here, and no good leader would ever willingly let his own people die in order to avoid the death of people from another nation. Yes it's harsh, yes it's brutal, yes it's not a very peace-loving attitude, but that is life, and that is reality. When you are faced with either the death of yourself (or your country) or the death of another, you choose the other.

quote:

You dont think that the treatment of the vietnamese caused terror??? Napalming villiages? Villiage rapes?

Caused terror, yes. Intended to cause terror? No, those things were more like war crimes, and war crime <> terrorism.

quote:

You only look at the what is "officially" declared by the government w accuse of terrorist acts, and turn a blind eye at the actual nature and result of these pre-emtive strike type wars.

I'm not looking at what is officially declared, I'm looking at what their motivation logically COULD be. For Palestine, terror is the only option because they don't have a strong enough military presence to fight an all-out war. For Israel, terror isn't a logical option at all, because (first of all) they have enough military to wipe Palestine out completely if they want, and secondly, what the Palestinians observe as "terror" does not scare them at all, it only encourages them to intensify the violence.

So if Israel is clearly not doing what is in the best interests of their state, then we have to ask, why? Why don't they just wipe out Palestine completely? Why these pitiful retaliations and bulldozings? Why don't they just nuke the place? Why indeed - because it goes against what they know to be "right", because they don't want to kill, they just want to be left alone. And if they just want to be left alone, it does not stand to reason that they would have any want or need to intentionally threaten or use force to intimidate Palestinians.

quote:

Ive already proved to you how deadly and HARMFUL rubber bullets are.

I don't recall specifically where you proved that, although to be honest I'm not disagreeing with you. But I wouldn't say that they're any more dangerous than heavy rocks or molotov cocktails, would you?

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Ive already proved to you how deadly and HARMFUL rubber bullets are.

Perhaps you'd prefer them to be shot with 5.56x45 or 7.62x51?

Consider what the purpose of the rubber bullets is. It's not giving them a sponge bath.

___________________
Latest mix: Yohan - Full Spectrum (Fall 14 promo)
Like my stuff? Join my FB group here!

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon not true. i say "ugh" but i am a tranny.

quote:

Originally posted by kotsy lol colour me retarded

quote:

quote: American peace activist Rachel Corrie, 23, of Olympia, Wash., who was crushed to death by a bulldozer — not a D-9 — on March 16 while trying to block a house demolition in the Gaza Strip. Ooooooh! Nasty American terrorist!

Isn't this the same chick who was photographed with burning a Yank flag?

Silly of her of trying to pull a Tianamen Square and get whacked instead.
Give her the Darwin award.

___________________
Latest mix: Yohan - Full Spectrum (Fall 14 promo)
Like my stuff? Join my FB group here!

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon not true. i say "ugh" but i am a tranny.

quote:

Originally posted by kotsy lol colour me retarded

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Is this man a terrorist? Ooooooh! Nasty American terrorist! Now that one is interesting. Does that mean that the demolition of houses has one of its aims to change the behaviour of civilians? What? By terrorising them? Damn! Yet more terrorists! Now I could go and find some really juicy sources but to be honest, I cant be arsed, and you know as well as I what they will say

The problem is, we have absolutely no information on who or what was inside these buildings when they were demolished. If there were terrorist activities afoot, how can you call it terrorism to demolish the working-places of the terrorists?

quote:

The only way this kind of action can not be defined as terrorism is if there was a sniper in the building at the time of demolition.

Your opinion, once again... *sigh* You need to stop speaking of it in absolute terms like this.

quote:

What exactly does demolishing the house of a suicide bomber achieve, unless the aim is to terrify other civilians not to take the same path?

Um, to get rid of the suicide bomber so he doesn't blow anything up, perhaps?

quote:

Its not like the suicide bomber still wants it! Whether or not suicide bombers used to live there, or in the past Israel has claimed snipers have used them, it does not excuse the fact that THEY ARE PEOPLE'S HOMES. The people who live in those houses are just ordinary people. By taking that action Israel is simply terrorising those ordinary people into submission (well thats the plan, if you ask me it breeds many times more suicide bombers...)

Wow you seem to be totally confused as to what's going on here. They aren't demolishing homes that were once occupied by suicide bombers. They are demolishing homes that are PRESENTLY being used as "bases" for suicide bombers, i.e. to make the bombs!

quote:

Any comments on the water link? Or was that one a little tougher to argue against than the stories from the American media?

Actually I believe that was commented on already. Pay attention much?

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

The problem is, we have absolutely no information on who or what was inside these buildings when they were demolished

quote:

According to testimonies collected and researched by B'tselem, an Israeli human rights group, on April 6, 2002, the huge bulldozers demolished houses in the Al Quarim neighbourhood. The A-Sha'abi family were trapped inside their house, whose exits were blocked by the debris remaining from the neighbouring houses demolished earlier. The Sha'abis shouted and signalled to the bulldozer driver, but to no avail. Nine members of the family died under the rubble. Their bodies were recovered six days later, when the army had left, together with the survivors, Abdallah A-Sha'abi and his wife, who gave the testimony Taken from "Israel/Palestine: How To End The War Of 1948" by Tanya Reinhart

Sad, isn't it? Makes you wonder why Palestinians do the things they do to the people who support this kind of action doesn't it? There are countless other examples of this kind of unacceptable behaviour.

quote:

Um, to get rid of the suicide bomber so he doesn't blow anything up, perhaps?

Er, isn't the suicide bomber already otherwise desposed of? Unless you are promoting the Orwellian concept of the 'thought police'?

quote:

They aren't demolishing homes that were once occupied by suicide bombers

Yes they are as the articles stated (from Israeli military sources presumabally which others here have also accepted)

quote:

Actually I believe that was commented on already. Pay attention much?

That was aimed at Yoepus, and since you have taken an interest, care to comment yourself? If you were a Palestinian, and saw illegal settlements with SWIMMING POOLS ( ) in their back yards, while you consumed a fraction of the amount of water that Israelis consume (considering most of their water comes from Palestinian territories), wouldn't you be just a little bit pissed off? Or do they deserve it?

quote:

It's not that the Jews went in there with the intention of taking over the land

This is brilliant! You ever heard of something called Zionism?

quote:

But Palestine - or what we now call Palestine, because it didn't exist when the Jews first entered - was largely hostile to the Jews, and that is precisely what forced the kind of violence that we're now calling an "invasion."

Not entirely true. For a start, there was no such thing as Israel as well as Palestine when independence was declared and before that time, Jewish and Arab terrorism was rife, both towrds the British and towards each other.

quote:

Caused terror, yes. Intended to cause terror? No

quote:

From the memoirs of Lieutenant William Calley (in command during the massacre of My Lai Our mission in My Lai wasn't perverted, though. It was simply 'Go and destroy it'. Remember the Bible: The Amalikites? God said to Saul, 'Now go...and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass'.

Please please tell me you have made a mistake, and do not actually believe that the intention here was not to terrorise. And if you do still stick to your guns, what the fuck was the intention then?!

quote:

war crime <> terrorism

I am sorry, but war crimes are most certainly acts of terrorism, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Sad, isn't it? Makes you wonder why Palestinians do the things they do to the people who support this kind of action doesn't it? There are countless other examples of this kind of unacceptable behaviour.

Heartbreaking. And where's your evidence that these people were innocent?

quote:

Er, isn't the suicide bomber already otherwise desposed of? Unless you are promoting the Orwellian concept of the 'thought police'?

Now where would you get that idea? Do you think Israel is incapable of collecting intelligence on where suicide bombers are gathering and creating their bombs? Oh, but I suppose it's wrong to put a pre-emptive stop to them before they actually blow anything up? I suppose you think it's only acceptable if they're caught in the act? Seriously though, this isn't "thought police", even in North America you can easily be arrested for conspiring to commit a crime if there is evidence for that.

quote:

Yes they are as the articles stated (from Israeli military sources presumabally which others here have also accepted)

The articles stated that they were demolishing homes of suicide bombers, but NOT, as you so quaintly put it, the homes of the innocent families of suicide bombers that have already committed their attrocious acts. Again, where's your proof? These places are analogous to military bases considering that Palestine has no army.

quote:

That was aimed at Yoepus, and since you have taken an interest, care to comment yourself? If you were a Palestinian, and saw illegal settlements with SWIMMING POOLS ( ) in their back yards, while you consumed a fraction of the amount of water that Israelis consume (considering most of their water comes from Palestinian territories), wouldn't you be just a little bit pissed off? Or do they deserve it?

Even the U.N. whom you love so much says that it's Israel's water to do what they please with. Yes I'd be pissed about the swimming pools - hell, I'd be pissed to see them living in any kind of luxury, period - but that doesn't give me the right to try to kill them.

quote:

This is brilliant! You ever heard of something called Zionism?

Again...

quote:

Not entirely true. For a start, there was no such thing as Israel as well as Palestine when independence was declared and before that time, Jewish and Arab terrorism was rife, both towrds the British and towards each other.

There never was any Jewish terrorism. Early settling Jews just tried to live their lives while the neighbouring Arabs tried to kill them, circa 1948. That's what set it all in motion.

quote:

Please please tell me you have made a mistake, and do not actually believe that the intention here was not to terrorise. And if you do still stick to your guns, what the fuck was the intention then?!

Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. In any event, the relevance to the current situation in the middle east is nil. What you posted is completely immaterial.

quote:

I am sorry, but war crimes are most certainly acts of terrorism, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise

No, they are not, you are still trying to impose YOUR definition of "terrorism" on us, but no matter how many times you try to do that, you're still wrong.

I thought you said you were giving up on this. One form of violence is not equal to another, you cannot simply write them all off as terrorism. All violence causes terror to an extent, that doesn't make it terrorism - it's a very specific term that people like you are trying to pervert in order to make a false analogy come true.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

Arafat, Al Aqsa, Hamas and Islamic Jihad all depend on a conflict for their existence.
Each has a vested interest in continuing the conflict. Meanwhile, back in the refugee camps, the vast majority of the Palestinian people are living in squalor because it is politically necessary that they do so. It would be difficult for any of the PLO groups to obtain the sympathy of the world, if the Palestinians were living in three-bedroom condos instead of poverty.

quote:

Heartbreaking. And where's your evidence that these people were innocent?

That is pathetic! Where's the proof they are guilty?! You assume that because they are Palestinian they must have done something to deserve to die?

quote:

Again...

You clamimed that the Jews did not move to that area of the world with the intentions of taking over the land. Not one person here will argue that that is true as Israel was created out of the Zionist ideology. (You know, for a Jewish homeland?)

quote:

There never was any Jewish terrorism

Well in that case I'd go get some history books out about the creation of Israel. You may also be surprised to find out that Jewish terrorism still exists.

quote:

Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. In any event, the relevance to the current situation in the middle east is nil. What you posted is completely immaterial.

Ah so now your back's to the wall my comments were irrelevent? My comments were part of the sub argument we are having about definitions of terrorism, which is blatently not irrelevent as you carry on the argument in your next paragraph by claiming war crimes can not be considered acts of terrorism, which is a complete joke.

quote:

Even the U.N. whom you love so much says that it's Israel's water to do what they please with. Yes I'd be pissed about the swimming pools - hell, I'd be pissed to see them living in any kind of luxury, period - but that doesn't give me the right to try to kill them.

Sod what anyone has decreed on the matter, do you think that it is fair that Israelis consume much per water per head than Palestinians (even tho most of the water comes from Palestine)?

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut 1. There never was any Jewish terrorism. 2. Early settling Jews just tried to live their lives while the neighbouring Arabs tried to kill them, circa 1948.

Well, well. Some would see it differently but for me Irgun and Stern were what I would "really" call freedom fighters. Their attacks, like the one against the King David Hotel, were indeed targeted at militaries (one part of the hotel being a military basis of the British) and solely motivated by the fight for independence and not the desire for mass killings (which is underlined by the fact that there have been THREE telephonic warnings before the explosion - to avoid casualties). A classic example for a different target-motivation from the current Palestinian one.

2. First anti-Jewish riots go back to the early 1920s when Arab nationalists and those who were incited by the Mufti of Jerusalem (btw.: a big friend of a certain Austrian A. H.) began the first riots and attacks against Jewish citizens in cafe's, markets, kibbutzin and cinemas.

___________________
"Those are my principles, if you don't like them... well, I have others.”

The Stern Gang also attacked Arabs tho, and I could quite esily argue that the Jews weren't exactly oppressed by the British until attacks against it took place...

oh my, what have i started
Even if Stern and others weren't totally "clean" the Zionist leadership actively fought them and ended their actions as opposed to today's PA which mourns about the death of a Terrorist mastermind.

___________________
"Those are my principles, if you don't like them... well, I have others.”

Funnily enough, Zionism was originally going to be a socialist experiment! No idea why I feel the need to tell you that but I did!