How fucked - Egypt, The U.S. and Gaza

[Dean]

"The Egyptian government has been heavily criticed by Western powers for alllowing the border to remain open.

The US congress has suspended $100 million of aid to Egypt due to the border breach."

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ABC697EB-004A-4552-B2F2-BD1A41D876A9.htm

For anyone who talks about "Arabs being just as bad to Palestinians." Well, here the source is again the western world.

The western world is a disease.

[KC]

For anyone who talks about "Arabs being just as bad to Palestinians." Well, here the source is again the western world.The Egyption bourgeoisie is in collusion with US imperialism; how's that just the United States' fault (much less the entire western world)?

[Dean]

The Egyption bourgeoisie is in collusion with US imperialism; how's that just the United States' fault
It's not, obviously.


(much less the entire western world)?
The foreign policy of the U.S. and it's allies are deeply intertwined. It doesn't make this specific event the fault of all involved, but it is part of a much larger trend.

[Phalanx]

The western world is a disease.


You ever read Guns, Germs and Steel? Give any society that kind of power and they would be just as merciless. That's human nature, you can't blame any group for being worse than the other.

[Faux Real]

It's not, obviously.
Mubarak has always caved in to Zionism. If he wasn't he would have had the wall torn down ages ago. He's allowed as many Palestinians to cross lately to preserve some sense of popularity/credibility with the Egyptian people and Arab world, which has been on a constant decline.

[Holden Caulfield]

it really raised my spirits and boosted my faith in the power of opressed and the poorest peoples to see waves of people pulling the walls down and en masse sending a message that there is only so much that people can take,

without Americas support Israel would have collapsed long ago,

[graffic]

without Americas support Israel would have collapsed long ago,

Without Arab aggression Israel would not need military support, Israel would not need any military - If you know anything about Israel and the Jewish state its goals and visions are the opposite of what it is now.

US imperialism and Arab elitest reactionary bigots have got us in this mess. The Jewish people and the Palestinian people want to live in peace, and I was happy to see the Palestinians breaking through the wall because the majority of those breaking down the wall were innocent and have no reason to be oppressed. But at the same time you have to remember the walls are up for a reason - a minority of Palestinians use land agreements as rocket launching pads.

[Holden Caulfield]

[quote=graffic;1061515] the majority of those breaking down the wall were innocent and have no reason to be oppressed. quote]

because people chose to be? because innocent people aren't,
Dont talk about the Israeli states goals because there shouldn't be a Israeli state, by all mean they can live their but why destroy Palestine,

it wasnt the Arab elitists that created Israel as a way of winning votes, rascists created Israel, and rascists live there now,

the Arabs are likely to be pissed off and fire rockets: if somebody invaded your country and smashed your home would you not fight?

[graffic]

Why destroy Palestine? "Palestine" was not a country and it was not destroyed. "The Arabs", "are likely to be pissed off" oh dear....

[Dr Mindbender]

Why destroy Palestine? "Palestine" was not a country and it was not destroyed. "The Arabs", "are likely to be pissed off" oh dear....
if it wasnt a country, what the fuck was it between 600 AD and 1946?

A diesel locomotive?

[Jimmie Higgins]

it wasnt the Arab elitists that created Israel as a way of winning votes, rascists created Israel, and rascists live there now,

Literally, created by anti-Semites too. When the idea of building Israel was backed by UK imperialism rather than post-war US imperialism, anti-Semites like Winston Churchill were big boosters.

Many of the problems going on right now originate from when US, UK, and USSR imperialisms redrew the world maps to suit their interests after WWII. The US and UK created Israel. The UK pushed for the patrician of India and created Pakistan and Afghanistan, divided people by religion, and created the possibility of nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

[Dean]

Without Arab aggression Israel would not need military support, Israel would not need any military - If you know anything about Israel and the Jewish state its goals and visions are the opposite of what it is now.
There should be no Jewish State. I don't care if there is an Israel or a Palestine, but the idea of creating a theocratic regime or a regime centered around a specific religious or ethnic group, particularly in an area dominated by people of different religion or ethnicity, is disgusting and reeks of the worst kind of imperialism - racist occupation.

Israel needs a military, and a large one, because it has consistantly taken land, divided Jews and Arabs, and occupied other people's homes. Israel's entire existance is based on theft and occupation, even where it could be based on peaceful coexistance and still fulfill it's religious basis. The concept of Arab aggression as being some kind of catalyst for violence in Palestine is the most disgusting kind of revisionism and ignorace of the facts. If someone invaded my homeland and I fought back, then invaded the small amount of land I had left, I wouldn't expect to be blamed when I fought back. But that's exactly what you're doing to the Palestinians.



US imperialism and Arab elitest reactionary bigots have got us in this mess.
It's racist to defend one's homeland, then? The Israeli government is not to blame? There are "Arab bigots" but no "Jewish bigots"? Tell me why you have to distinguish in such ways. Are Israeli nationalists incapable of racism or bigotry?


The Jewish people and the Palestinian people want to live in peace, and I was happy to see the Palestinians breaking through the wall because the majority of those breaking down the wall were innocent and have no reason to be oppressed.
And some people have reason to be oppressed? Why isn't it the Palestinian and Israeli people? Why "Jewish people"? Does Israeli = Jewish to you? You might be surprised to know that there are non-Jewish Israeli citizens, roughly 20% if I remember correctly.


But at the same time you have to remember the walls are up for a reason - a minority of Palestinians use land agreements as rocket launching pads.
And there is a reason for that violence. When 2000 people have been killed in Palestine over the past 2 years whereas ~50 Israelis have died, it becomes pretty clear who the primary agressors are. If your neighbor was constantly building fences in your land and annexing it, cutting off your water supply, making your septic system overflow so you had to wade in feces and urine, I don't think you'd be blaming yourself.

[graffic]

There should be no Jewish State. I don't care if there is an Israel or a Palestine, but the idea of creating a theocratic regime or a regime centered around a specific religious or ethnic group, particularly in an area dominated by people of different religion or ethnicity, is disgusting and reeks of the worst kind of imperialism - racist occupation.

Do you wear goggles that distort reality and show you the exact opposite? Since when has Israel been a "theocratic state" a "regime"? Israel is a Liberal Democracy. (http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=317)

Israel is the most progressive state in the Middle East in terms of:

Freedom of the Press (http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20764)
Economic Competition (http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Global_Competitiveness_Reports/Reports/gcr_2007/gcr2007_rankings.pdf)
Human Development (http://hdrstats.undp.org/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_ISR.html)

Yes this is not that important within the larger picture, but you have to acknowledge that Israel is a liberal Democracy and throwing around lies the whole time highlights the lack of confidence you have in your argument. Unlike its Arab neighbours, Israel, from the very start has shown it does not wish to be a theocratic state with its politics dominated by religion. The Jewish state was founded on freedom:

Martin Buberto Mahatma Gandhi in 1939:

“Our settlers do not come here as do the colonists from the Occident to have natives do their work for them; they themselves set their shoulders to the plow and they spend their strength and their blood to make the land fruitful. But it is not only for ourselves that we desire its fertility. The Jewish farmers have begun to teach their brothers, the Arab farmers, to cultivate the land more intensively; we desire to teach them further: together with them we want to cultivate the land -- to 'serve' it, as the Hebrew has it. The more fertile this soil becomes, the more space there will be for us and for them. We have no desire to dispossess them: we want to live with them. We do not want to dominate them: we want to serve with them.....”

William Safire:
“...For the first time in history, thousands of black people are being brought to a country not in chains but in dignity, not as slaves but as citizens.”

In 2002, the Israeli Supreme Court also ruled that the government cannot allocate land based on religion or ethnicity, and may not prevent Arab citizens from living wherever they choose.

Its not surprising Dean that most of your arguments are flase strawmen based on propaganda lies when you quote from "Al Jazeera". I will reply to your other points when I have more time

[graffic]

Israel needs a military, and a large one, because it has consistantly taken land, divided Jews and Arabs, and occupied other people's homes..... The concept of Arab aggression as being some kind of catalyst for violence in Palestine is the most disgusting kind of revisionism and ignorace of the facts.

Israel needs a Military because the very moment the word "Jewish" was put infront of the word "state" a proportion of the Arab world were up in arms. Not because of "Invading" or "taking ones land", the Palestinian leadership who collaborated with Hitler declared it would not let a "Jewish" state the size of a "postage stamp" on any part of "Islamic Holy Land".

This was the grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was recognized as the official leader of the Palestinians during this period. A virulent anti-Semite whose hatred of Jews was both religious and racial. He became a close ally and adviser to Adolf Hitler, and an active supporter of the "final solution," the mass murder of European Jewry.

The first ever outbreak of violence between modern Zionists and Arabs was triggered by a mass random killing of innocent Jewish civilians by a Palestinian terroist before Israel had even established itself as a state.


Israel's entire existance is based on theft and occupation, even where it could be based on peaceful coexistance and still fulfill it's religious basis.... If someone invaded my homeland and I fought back, then invaded the small amount of land I had left, I wouldn't expect to be blamed when I fought back. But that's exactly what you're doing to the Palestinians.

The US's existance is based on theft and occupation, the UK's existance is based on theft and occupation, even Japans existance is based on theft. By your logic we should give the Palestinians statehood, destroy the newly formed Palestinian state and give it to the byzantine Greeks - then we should destroy that state and give it to the Roman Italians.

The majority of Palestinians are not at fault, they are victims. Its the corrupt Palestinian leadership who have betrayed the Palestinian people, the Palestinians have been offered numerous agreements with the backing of the International community. All of which have been turned down because Israel would continue to exist.

1937: Palestinians turned down a large state offered by the Peel Commision
1947: Palestinians turned down a large contiguous state
1967: Palestinians said no to UN Resolution 242
2000-2001: Palestinians turned down a state which would have had $4.1 billion for its infrastructure.Israel is not to blame for the decisions made by the Palestinian leadership. Arafats prime victims have been the Palestinian people.

Your thinking is backwards, to reach a positive solution we have to look forwards, the two - state solution is the only solution for anybody in the real world.



And there is a reason for that violence. When 2000 people have been killed in Palestine over the past 2 years whereas ~50 Israelis have died, it becomes pretty clear who the primary agressors are. If your neighbor was constantly building fences in your land and annexing it, cutting off your water supply, making your septic system overflow so you had to wade in feces and urine, I don't think you'd be blaming yourself.

Palestinian deaths are far greater yes. The war tactics of the Palestinian terroists are desiged specifically to win International support and put Israel in a bad light. The terroists hide behind their own civilians, The radicals issue a challenge to democracies: Either violate their own morality by going after terroists and inevitably killing some innocent civilians, or maintain morality and leave terroists with a free hand to target the democracies innocent civilians. This challenge presents democracies such as Israel with a lose-lose option and terrorists with a win-win option.

Hezbollah and Hamas want the Israeli military to kill as many Lebanese and Palestinian civilians as possible, That is why they store their rockets underneath civilian beds. That is why they launch their missiles from crowded civilian neighborhoods and hide among civilians. They seek to induce Israel to defend its civilians by going after them among their civilian "shields." They know that every civilian they induce Israel to kill hurts Israel in the media and the international and human rights communities.

Israel has every self-interest in minimizing civilian casualties, whereas the terrorists have every self-interest in maximizing them -- on both sides. The rockets used are designed specifically to maximize deaths. And yuor accusations of Israeli racism are ignorant and hypocritical to say the least, Hezbollah and Hamas rockets are aimed at Jews, when an Israeli-Arab is killed by a rocket the victim is called a matyr, this is Anti-semitism plain and simple. Consider the recent apology made by Hassan Nasrallah, He called them shahids, martyrs, even though they did not choose to die at the hands of Hizbullah terrorists.

The apology was issued not because they were innocent bystanders, but because they were Israeli Arabs and not Jews. Hizbullah's rockets are aimed at Jews, and earn cheers whenever they kill a Jewish baby or grandmother. No apologies there. Link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/20/nasrallah.interview/index.html)

[Dean]

Israel needs a Military because the very moment the word "Jewish" was put infront of the word "state" a proportion of the Arab world were up in arms. Not because of "Invading" or "taking ones land", the Palestinian leadership who collaborated with Hitler declared it would not let a "Jewish" state the size of a "postage stamp" on any part of "Islamic Holy Land".

This was the grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was recognized as the official leader of the Palestinians during this period. A virulent anti-Semite whose hatred of Jews was both religious and racial. He became a close ally and adviser to Adolf Hitler, and an active supporter of the "final solution," the mass murder of European Jewry.

Guilt by association with a land who had an antisemitic leader? Israel needed a military for one simple reason: they pushed out the inhabitants of Palestine to form a Jewish-only state. If that isn't racist, then I don't understand the term. NEWSFLASH: in conflicts where race is a prerogative for an imperialist aggressor, racism often occurs on both sides.


The first ever outbreak of violence between modern Zionists and Arabs was triggered by a mass random killing of innocent Jewish civilians by a Palestinian terroist before Israel had even established itself as a state.
I guess your definition of "modern" includes the 1940s, but doesn't include earlier versions of Zionism? That's really logical. The current conflict can of course be summed up by looking at only portions of history. Thats how revisionism starts.




The US's existance is based on theft and occupation, the UK's existance is based on theft and occupation, even Japans existance is based on theft. By your logic we should give the Palestinians statehood, destroy the newly formed Palestinian state and give it to the byzantine Greeks - then we should destroy that state and give it to the Roman Italians.
You're an idiot. I never claimed that any given group had a right to control the area of Palestine, but the Palestinians themselves, which includes all the Jews who live there.


The majority of Palestinians are not at fault, they are victims. Its the corrupt Palestinian leadership who have betrayed the Palestinian people, the Palestinians have been offered numerous agreements with the backing of the International community. All of which have been turned down because Israel would continue to exist.
Actually the primary concern is the right of return. But Israel should not exist without declaring its borders - that leaves it open to future expansion into Palestinian land.


Israel is not to blame for the decisions made by the Palestinian leadership. Arafats prime victims have been the Palestinian people.
OK. So if Israel cuts off electricity that the Palestinians own, leading to conditions where young children have to wade in shit to leave theri houses, we are going to look at Arafat and other leaders' past actions as justification. By that token, one would find the bombing of Israeli women and children justified, too. I'm glad I don't think that way.


Your thinking is backwards, to reach a positive solution we have to look forwards, the two - state solution is the only solution for anybody in the real world.
I never said anything for or agaisnt a two-state solution. I actually think that, for the time being, it would be more appropriate. You clearly know nothing of my views.



Palestinian deaths are far greater yes. The war tactics of the Palestinian terroists are desiged specifically to win International support and put Israel in a bad light. The terroists hide behind their own civilians, The radicals issue a challenge to democracies: Either violate their own morality by going after terroists and inevitably killing some innocent civilians, or maintain morality and leave terroists with a free hand to target the democracies innocent civilians. This challenge presents democracies such as Israel with a lose-lose option and terrorists with a win-win option.
Really? Why, then, has AI confirmed that the imposition of military bases in the heavily Arab north Israel, by the Israeli military, was meant to use them as human shields? Why HAve there been numerous cases of Israel actively taking Arab citizens as hostages to use them as human shields in unfriendly areas?


Hezbollah and Hamas want the Israeli military to kill as many Lebanese and Palestinian civilians as possible, That is why they store their rockets underneath civilian beds. That is why they launch their missiles from crowded civilian neighborhoods and hide among civilians. They seek to induce Israel to defend its civilians by going after them among their civilian "shields." They know that every civilian they induce Israel to kill hurts Israel in the media and the international and human rights communities.
No, they do these things because they need cover, not amongst civilians, but amongst buildings etc.. In fact, Hizb Allah is known for it's rigorous attempts at evacuating civilian populations, but they are still reckless.


Israel has every self-interest in minimizing civilian casualties, whereas the terrorists have every self-interest in maximizing them -- on both sides. The rockets used are designed specifically to maximize deaths. And yuor accusations of Israeli racism are ignorant and hypocritical to say the least, Hezbollah and Hamas rockets are aimed at Jews, when an Israeli-Arab is killed by a rocket the victim is called a matyr, this is Anti-semitism plain and simple. Consider the recent apology made by Hassan Nasrallah, He called them shahids, martyrs, even though they did not choose to die at the hands of Hizbullah terrorists.
I'd like to know why, when both sides errantly kill civilians, and Israeli politicians directly say that the palestinian population should suffer for the acts of Hamas, you only call the Palestinians terrorists.


The apology was issued not because they were innocent bystanders, but because they were Israeli Arabs and not Jews. Hizbullah's rockets are aimed at Jews, and earn cheers whenever they kill a Jewish baby or grandmother. No apologies there. Link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/20/nasrallah.interview/index.html)

-CNN is a right-wing rag, and should not be trusted in general. On the middle east especially, you should look at http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/55ABE840-AC30-41D2-BDC9-06BBE2A36665.htm or, if you don't trust them due to their Arab name, check out http://haaretz.com/. If you weren't so ignorant and closed-minded, you might realize that the voices of Israelis are some of the best sources of information for understanding the conflict.

-Hizb Allah made such statements because Israeli Arabs are usually viewed as victims of the state as well. There is truth to this, but you're right that it's racist. However, again, one person's racism doesn't make someone else's actions non-racist or or otherwise justified.

Seriously, the concept that rockets - which are hardly that dangerous - justify the suffocation of an entire population is one of the most disgusting mindsets you can have. Fuckheads like you support the violence of the Israeli state much more than Israeli citizens do, and it is your mentality that prolongs and inflames the current conflict.

[graffic]

Guilt by association with a land who had an antisemitic leader? Israel needed a military for one simple reason: they pushed out the inhabitants of Palestine to form a Jewish-only state. If that isn't racist, then I don't understand the term. NEWSFLASH: in conflicts where race is a prerogative for an imperialist aggressor, racism often occurs on both sides.

A Jewish only state? Are you wearing those goggles again Dean or just quoting from reactionary right wing Islamic sources?

Its ironic that you call Israel a "racist" state, a "Jewish only state" when Arab residents have better rights in Israel than any Jew does living in any Arab country. Arab residents have equal rights to Jews in Israel, Israel is the only country where Arab Women may vote.

Arabs currently hold 8 seats in the 120-seat Knesset
Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior, the first Arab citizen to become chief executive of a key government ministry.
Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language in Israel.
More than 300,000 Arab children attend Israeli schools.Source (http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader)

Israel, the "Jewish only state".. ha. Next time you make a shit claim Dean, in fact next time you make any claim Dean use a link to a reliable source. Reliable being anyone other than yourself, which is where most of yor "facts" seem to be coming from.

It is pure bigotry to criticise Israel for its "Jewish character" (which is as far as it goes) when all faiths enjoy freedom of worship in Israel. This is compared to 21 Arab states with Islam as an official state religon, what makes you think the 22nd Arab state replacing Israel will be a "Democratic, secular Palestinian state"?, the only place you hear that slogan is in the West, where it is used to generate sympathy.

Its ironic that your two main points against the state of Israel, which both turned out to be completely false, could alot more realistically be applied to the future Palestinian state. "Israel is a theocratic state", "Israel is a Jewish only state", speculation is pointless however calculation with evidence is not. If the stated goals of the Palestinian cause are carried out by the most likely figures, your false lies about Israel will be implemented by the people you supposedly "support".


I guess your definition of "modern" includes the 1940s, but doesn't include earlier versions of Zionism? That's really logical. The current conflict can of course be summed up by looking at only portions of history. Thats how revisionism starts.

I'm not summing anything up, the current conflict is extremely complex and there are wrongs on both sides. Aggression against Zionism militarised Israel, that was the point.



I never said anything for or agaisnt a two-state solution. I actually think that, for the time being, it would be more appropriate. You clearly know nothing of my views.

I don't know anything about your personal views, I'm just replying to what you write in the thread:


There should be no Jewish State

I will respond to your other points later when I have more time

[Anarchist Freedom]

well egypt is dumb for supporting hamas which is a known terrorist organization. If any of you realized you would have known the entire arab league told hamas to piss off when they asked to control their border. Egypt didnt think about that so now its hurting them.

[Dean]

A Jewish only state? Are you wearing those goggles again Dean or just quoting from reactionary right wing Islamic sources?

Its ironic that you call Israel a "racist" state, a "Jewish only state" when Arab residents have better rights in Israel than any Jew does living in any Arab country. Arab residents have equal rights to Jews in Israel, Israel is the only country where Arab Women may vote.

Arabs currently hold 8 seats in the 120-seat Knesset
Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior, the first Arab citizen to become chief executive of a key government ministry.
Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language in Israel.
More than 300,000 Arab children attend Israeli schools.Source (http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader)

Israel, the "Jewish only state".. ha. Next time you make a shit claim Dean, in fact next time you make any claim Dean use a link to a reliable source. Reliable being anyone other than yourself, which is where most of yor "facts" seem to be coming from.

It is pure bigotry to criticise Israel for its "Jewish character" (which is as far as it goes) when all faiths enjoy freedom of worship in Israel. This is compared to 21 Arab states with Islam as an official state religon, what makes you think the 22nd Arab state replacing Israel will be a "Democratic, secular Palestinian state"?, the only place you hear that slogan is in the West, where it is used to generate sympathy.

Its ironic that your two main points against the state of Israel, which both turned out to be completely false, could alot more realistically be applied to the future Palestinian state. "Israel is a theocratic state", "Israel is a Jewish only state", speculation is pointless however calculation with evidence is not. If the stated goals of the Palestinian cause are carried out by the most likely figures, your false lies about Israel will be implemented by the people you supposedly "support".

So wrongs on the part of completely foreign bodies - Arab states - justify the wrongs of Israel? "I oppose Israel's theocratic nature, therefore if you can prove that an Arab state is theocratic I will be proven a hypocrite." Huh? The original post was primarily aimed at showing how Egypt, a terribly theocratic state, was fuckign the Palestinians over. Your response, unsurprisingly, was to defend anything that the U.S. imperial interests were for in the region.

To say that Israel is a Jewish only state is false. But it IS a state only for Jews. This is clear. The entire reason why the whole of Palestine has not been annexed is because the Arab Muslims are too prolific to maintain a Jewish majority in the region. This is a known fact; during the Oslo accords, Israeli leaders pointed out that if there was to be a secular, single state in Israel / Palestine, it would cease to exist. The entire point of Israel's existance and diplomatic relations hinges on its attempt to maintain a Jewish identity. They can give Arabs whatever rights they want in Israel proper, but denying the rights of foreigners in their backyard doesn't take on a softer appearance, except for sick assholes like you.




I'm not summing anything up, the current conflict is extremely complex and there are wrongs on both sides. Aggression against Zionism militarised Israel, that was the point.
Zionism became militarized during its attempts to take the land of others - as early as the 1910s, when Erich Fromm left the Zionist league in Germany calling them "worse than the swastika - bearers" due to their disregard for the local population of Palestine. I certainyl think it is glossign over history to ignore the fact aht Israel was created on populous land, and many local inhabitants were pushed out. It's worth noting that many of the early Zionists were against this violence, and some even opposed joinging the Israeli state in 1948 becasue of this. Zionism is a Jewish-nationalist movement, and as soon as a nationalist movement gets the major power in a region, in nearly all cases it becomes oppressive.





I don't know anything about your personal views, I'm just replying to what you write in the thread:
How does that deny a two-state solution? It opposes Jewish nationalism. I oppose nationalism as a rule. I don't believe in racial, ethnic or religious identity being mixed with national poicy. If you support a Jewish state you have no choice but to say that you do support state's rights being drawn along religious or ethnic borders, which to me is one of the sickest views you can have.




I will respond to your other points later when I have more time
I am sure that your racist mentality takes a lot out of you.

[Dean]

well egypt is dumb for supporting hamas which is a known terrorist organization. If any of you realized you would have known the entire arab league told hamas to piss off when they asked to control their border. Egypt didnt think about that so now its hurting them.

90% of Hamas' work is community based. I don't see them doing anythign wrong by blowing up a wall that imprisoned the Palestinian people with
-No electricity
-Failing life support
-Dwindling food supplies
-Relief organizations with canned food denied access to Palestine
-Various sanctions
-No power to sewage pumping facilities, which means that feces and urine flooded the streets and homes of the Palestinian people, which will soon lead to rises in disease.

Anyone who would sit back and say "well we're not allowed to cross the wall" is a fool.

[Dean]

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/11698E07-9AED-4E08-898B-F24CD0FC100D.htm

Looks like the Israeli Arabs hate the state, too. And what's this? Why are they carrying Palestinian flags? Probably because they, too, are under occupation.

[Dean]

Israeli respect for the Palestinians:



Since you seem to think your little links will prove something. Well, if someone stole my land to make a Jewish - only "neighborhood" (and that's not racist?) I would certainyl support militant actions. Probably including those targetting those who knowingly take up and live on land that my house used to be on.

[Dean]

Israeli respect for the Palestinians:
Since you seem to think your little links will prove something. Well, if someone stole my land to make a Jewish - only "neighborhood" (and that's not racist?) I would certainyl support militant actions. Probably including those targetting those who knowingly take up and live on land that my house used to be on.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=949976&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1

(forgot to link, and the edit function doesn't sem to work)

[graffic]

So wrongs on the part of completely foreign bodies - Arab states - justify the wrongs of Israel? "I oppose Israel's theocratic nature, therefore if you can prove that an Arab state is theocratic I will be proven a hypocrite."

Not a hypocrite a bigot. How can you oppose Israels "Theocratic nature" when there is no Theocratic nature, its a fact ive provided with evidence, which if your going to ignore, debating with you is pretty much a waste of time.


To say that Israel is a Jewish only state is false. But it IS a state only for Jews. This is clear.

It is a "state for Jews" in the same way that America is a state for "Americans" and the UK is a state for "British people". Both examples like Israel are multi-cultural countries . Good luck with that argument ;).

This is a classic example of bigotry that borders on anti-semitism, an anti-semite like Hitler or Stalin will take a human trait which is widespread and blame only the Jews for it. Like when anti-semites say "the jews lie", "the Jews cheat" when the reality is that all races of people have people that cheat and lie. When anti-semites are confronted with this answer, they say "thats not the point, were talking about the Jews" "Were not talking about anyone else, stop changing the subject". This is, in a sense what your doing with Israel, by condemning the state for acts which are not unique in the International community, and are automatically bankcrupt as an argument.


The entire reason why the whole of Palestine has not been annexed is because the Arab Muslims are too prolific to maintain a Jewish majority in the region. This is a known fact; during the Oslo accords, Israeli leaders pointed out that if there was to be a secular, single state in Israel / Palestine, it would cease to exist. The entire point of Israel's existance and diplomatic relations hinges on its attempt to maintain a Jewish identity. They can give Arabs whatever rights they want in Israel proper, but denying the rights of foreigners in their backyard doesn't take on a softer appearance, except for sick assholes like you.

The Arab Muslims are too proflic in that certain region because of the Arab political agenda. Not all Arab states have this political agenda, the few states which are not classed as "rejectionist states" i.e Jordan and Egypt recognise Israel and are on the way too peace with International backing. The reactionary states in the region such as Iran, Saudi Arabia have pursued a policy of refusing citizenship to Palestinians and kept them in squalid refugee camps to use as a political weapon against Israel. The Palestinians are the only refugee group in world history that have not been absorbed into their own lands. Ive posted it before, a UN resolution put forward the solution to the refugee problem. Israel and the Arab states (because both are responsible for the problem) would take in the refugees, Israel accepted the proposal and the Arabs rejected it. Olmert has said that Israel would be willing to accept significant numbers of Palestinians if Arab states had not pursued a policy of genocide against the Jewish state.

[Dean]

Not a hypocrite a bigot. How can you oppose Israels "Theocratic nature" when there is no Theocratic nature, its a fact ive provided with evidence, which if your going to ignore, debating with you is pretty much a waste of time.
It is theocratic because policy decisions are based on religious distinction. If you ignore the creation of Jewish-only settlements then it's just as hard to debate with you.





It is a "state for Jews" in the same way that America is a state for "Americans" and the UK is a state for "British people". Both examples like Israel are multi-cultural countries . Good luck with that argument ;).
It's a state for Jews liek the U.S. is a state for Europeans. Israel, as I've pointed out and provide an article and various examples for, is interested in a Zionist agenda. Zionism means Jewish nationalism. This is a simple fucking fact, and it is not a state for Jews like other states are for their citizens. Jews are not the only citizens of Israel, but zionist Jews who join the military are the only Jews that the state cares for.


This is a classic example of bigotry that borders on anti-semitism, an anti-semite like Hitler or Stalin will take a human trait which is widespread and blame only the Jews for it. Like when anti-semites say "the jews lie", "the Jews cheat" when the reality is that all races of people have people that cheat and lie. When anti-semites are confronted with this answer, they say "thats not the point, were talking about the Jews" "Were not talking about anyone else, stop changing the subject". This is, in a sense what your doing with Israel, by condemning the state for acts which are not unique in the International community, and are automatically bankcrupt as an argument.
Anti-semitism, the classic argument against anti-occupation. Interestingly, most people I've met who oppose the occupation are Jewish. I guess they hate themselves.

And what, condemning Israel and focusing on the issue of Apartheid makes me "anti-semitic" because I single out an imperialist power in the world to speak against? That statemetn is so full of holes, I literally don't now where to begin. I should statrt ignoring the crims of states which have ethnic or religious identities for fear of being labelled a racist, I guess?


The Arab Muslims are too proflic in that certain region because of the Arab political agenda.
And I sound like Hitler?!


Not all Arab states have this political agenda, the few states which are not classed as "rejectionist states" i.e Jordan and Egypt recognise Israel and are on the way too peace with International backing. The reactionary states in the region such as Iran, Saudi Arabia have pursued a policy of refusing citizenship to Palestinians and kept them in squalid refugee camps to use as a political weapon against Israel. The Palestinians are the only refugee group in world history that have not been absorbed into their own lands.
Yes, an Arab problem. Let's make all these distinctions by race. Well I'm no longer blaming the capitalist system for my poverty; I'm blaming my Swedish ancestors for not coming and saving me. Again, I sound like Hitler? Since when is it not racist to make distinctions of "who should solve a problem" on the platform that "races must stick together"?! That's clasic Nazi mentality.


Ive posted it before, a UN resolution put forward the solution to the refugee problem. Israel and the Arab states (because both are responsible for the problem)
As I point out in the first goddamn post of this thread.


would take in the refugees, Israel accepted the proposal and the Arabs rejected it. Olmert has said that Israel would be willing to accept significant numbers of Palestinians if Arab states had not pursued a policy of genocide against the Jewish state.
For various reasons. One, it doesn't grant the right of return. Israel is still closed off, in other words, to it's past inhabitants. Secondly, peopel ahve to leave theri current homes. Israel has never accepted or promoted a settlement that would allow for a sizeable Arab citizenship, because thye actively try to keep the Jewish population high. This is why Jews from all around the world have the right of return under Israeli law, but Palestinians do not. How can you say Israel is not racist when it makes this distinction?


It's really no surprise what your argument has boiled down to: a feeble, and colorfully racist attempt at crying "anti-semitism." Yawn.

[Dean]

It's a state for Jews liek the U.S. is a state for Europeans. Israel, as I've pointed out and provide an article and various examples for, is interested in a Zionist agenda. Zionism means Jewish nationalism. This is a simple fucking fact, and it is not a state for Jews like other states are for their citizens. Jews are not the only citizens of Israel, but zionist Jews who join the military are the only Jews that the state cares for.

I want to clarify that I am talking about militant zionists here. Jews who believe in living in the Holy Land due to a zionist ideology are not bad at all; it is only those who think that they have a right to take the lands and rights of others that are in the wrong. Zionism, in its Israeli-backed incarnation and as described by the lion's share of its followers, is a nationalist ideology, but the the ideology is not nationalist by definition.

[graffic]

It is theocratic because policy decisions are based on religious distinction. If you ignore the creation of Jewish-only settlements then it's just as hard to debate with you.

Its policys are not based on religous distinction, its policys are based on the survival of Israel. And just about every International organisation recognises Israel as a Liberal Democracy, not a theocratic state so I suggest you shut the fuck up.

"Jewish Only settlements", :laugh::laugh:. They are Israeli settlements not for Jews only, the Jewish state does not take part in "religous distinction". The most popular party in the Palestinian cause, Hamas, advocates religious distinction to the extreme. The Hamas charter states that Jews should be barred altogether from citizenship in the new Palestinian state. Just about every International organisation recognises this apart from you, yourself, presumably an armchair activist with no connection to the conflict, which is evidenced by your arguments which always place theory above reality.


It's a state for Jews liek the U.S. is a state for Europeans. Israel, as I've pointed out and provide an article and various examples for, is interested in a Zionist agenda. Zionism means Jewish nationalism. This is a simple fucking fact, and it is not a state for Jews like other states are for their citizens. Jews are not the only citizens of Israel, but zionist Jews who join the military are the only Jews that the state cares for.

Every single state in the area, including the Palestinian authority has Islam as an officially established religon and disrciminates both in law and in fact against non-Muslims, especially Jews. And you condemn only Israel for its law of return, whose law grew out of a history of Jews being slaughtered becuase no other state, or Palestine under British mandate would accept Jewish refugees.



Anti-semitism, the classic argument against anti-occupation. Interestingly, most people I've met who oppose the occupation are Jewish. I guess they hate themselves.

I guess you don't understand plain English. I am anti-occupation, most Jews are against occupation, you however attacked only the Israeli government for specific goverment policys which are common in hundreds more governments across the globe. Most governments even worse than Israel, in particular the government which you support the aims of (Palestine), its an invalid and hypocritical arguement and it borders on ignorant anti-semitism. Stop changing the subject.



Yes, an Arab problem. Let's make all these distinctions by race. Well I'm no longer blaming the capitalist system for my poverty; I'm blaming my Swedish ancestors for not coming and saving me. Again, I sound like Hitler? Since when is it not racist to make distinctions of "who should solve a problem" on the platform that "races must stick together"?! That's clasic Nazi mentality.

The Arab governments had a political agenda against the state of Israel. Classic Nazi mentality there ;). you accuse me of having a "Nazi mentality" for blaming the "Arab governments", for stating a historical fact. When the Arab governments of the time fucking collaborated with Hitler. Should we just ignore Historical fact in fear of being "racist"?

[Dean]

Its policys are not based on religous distinction, its policys are based on the survival of Israel. And just about every International organisation recognises Israel as a Liberal Democracy, not a theocratic state so I suggest you shut the fuck up.

"Jewish Only settlements", :laugh::laugh:. They are Israeli settlements not for Jews only, the Jewish state does not take part in "religous distinction". The most popular party in the Palestinian cause, Hamas, advocates religious distinction to the extreme. The Hamas charter states that Jews should be barred altogether from citizenship in the new Palestinian state. Just about every International organisation recognises this apart from you, yourself, presumably an armchair activist with no connection to the conflict, which is evidenced by your arguments which always place theory above reality.
So, some of Hamas is racist. I agree. You're too ignorant to realize that these organizations are not monoliths, so I won't argue the obvious point that Hamas' rhetoric doesn't add up to this conclusion, nor does its treatment of its militancy. Moving on, search "jewish only settlements" at google. Better yet, look at Wikipedia's entry:

"The Israeli governments have implemented a consistent and systematic policy intended to encourage Jewish citizens to migrate to the West Bank. One of the tools used to this end is to grant financial benefits and incentives to citizens."

Of course that can't be racist, your beloved Israel is responsible for it.

"According to B'Tselem, more than fifty percent of the land of the West Bank has been expropriated from Palestinian owners "mainly to establish settlements and create reserves of land for the future expansion of the settlements". While the seized lands mainly benefit the settlements, the Palestinian public is prohibited from using them in any way."

"A violent settler protest at the Palestinian village of Funduk in November 2007, in which hundreds of settlers converged at the entrance of the village and rampaged. The protest occurred five days after a settler was killed in response to settlers' illegal seizure of Palestinian land without Israeli government response to Palestinian complaints of the land seizure. The settlers smashed the windows of houses and cars. According to Funduk villagers, Israeli soldiers and police accompanied the protesters but mostly stood aside while the settlers rampaged."

Read the rest of the article yoursel,f maybe you'll learn a smidgen of fact about the occupation.



Every single state in the area, including the Palestinian authority has Islam as an officially established religon and disrciminates both in law and in fact against non-Muslims, especially Jews. And you condemn only Israel for its law of return, whose law grew out of a history of Jews being slaughtered becuase no other state, or Palestine under British mandate would accept Jewish refugees.
I have no problem with them accepting oppressed Jews into their state. it is admirable. Unfortunately, that's not what I was arguing. I argued that the disparity between the treatment of Jews versus Arab Palestinians (and Jewish Palestinians who don't have Israeli citizenship) is wrong. I say fuck the racist laws of all these states. Not surprisingly, I don't think they justify further racist policies by Israel.





I guess you don't understand plain English. I am anti-occupation, most Jews are against occupation, you however attacked only the Israeli government for specific goverment policys which are common in hundreds more governments across the globe. Most governments even worse than Israel, in particular the government which you support the aims of (Palestine), its an invalid and hypocritical arguement and it borders on ignorant anti-semitism. Stop changing the subject.
No, you dumb fuck. I attacked Egypt and the U.S. primarily. Israel's violent acts were something YOU brought up. I was simply saying how disgusting it was that the U.S. felt an entire population needed to be punished so bad that it would suspend 100M of aid to Egypt if they weren't.


The Arab governments had a political agenda against the state of Israel. Classic Nazi mentality there ;). you accuse me of having a "Nazi mentality" for blaming the "Arab governments", for stating a historical fact. When the Arab governments of the time fucking collaborated with Hitler. Should we just ignore Historical fact in fear of being "racist"?
No, I accuse you of having a nazi mentality for towing this line: "races should stick together." Why should other Arab nations "take in" the Palestinians? Why shouldn't Israel have the responsibility, since they are the major power in Israel and Palestine?

The Arab nations have less responsibility to stop the atrocities commited against the Palestinian people because they have not been the catalyst for their dilemma. But some nations have taken major roles in suporting Israeli subjugation of the Palestinians, particularly Egypt, and they therefore have a compelling responsibility to help them. In this same vein, The Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade should be targetted for the attacks agaisnt Israel (Hamas' rocket attacks are more a form of psychological warfare, since the rockets almost never cause any real damage, particularly in reference to deaths). Guess who Al-Aqsa is aligned with. I'll give you a hint: it's not Hamas and nearly all of their militants come from the West Bank.

It's interesting to me how completely ignorant you are of the conflict, and yet how ardently you defend racial discrimination. You're a real gem.