I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north -- an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal, and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures.posted by joe lisboa at 12:23 PM on June 11, 2010 [24 favorites]
the Palestinians spent years targeting and killing Israeli civilians with rockets, mortars and suicide bombs prior to the current, disproportionate Israeli oppression in Gaza... at least have the honesty and the balls to point out that there really is a lengthy history which led to the Israelis adopting these tactics. Hamas, Fatah and the PLO sure as hell aren't an innocents. They bear a partial responsibility for their people's current situation that must be acknowledged.And to adapt your own language, the "targeting and killing Israeli civilians with rockets, mortars and suicide bombs" was likewise a "disproportionate" reponse to the "lengthy history" of racist and illegal military occupation stretching back decades, and that one "should have the honesty and the balls to point out that there really is a lengthy history which led to [Hamas/Fatah/ the PLO] adopting these tactics".
The blockade and various military attacks by Israel have nearly always been direct responses to Palestinian Authority-sanctioned attacks, whether they have been claimed by the PLO, Hamas or Fatah.The blockade and various military attacks by Israel are the latest chapter in a history of racist occupation and attacks that go back to 1967 (if not 1949 - that's an argument for another day though). You're doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing in ignoring history. The attacks by the PLO, Hamas or Fatah are/were a reaction to a foreign military occupation. The first suicide bombings didn't happen for more than twenty years after the West Bank and Gaza had been invaded. There's a long chain of cause and consequence but it ultimately comes back to a violent, racist and illegal land-grab. You are condemning others for failing to point out that Israel's atrocities didn't occur in a vacuum. At the same time you are arguing as if Palestinian terrorism did occur in a vacuum. It didn't.
If Canada had done the same to the US for decades, and had been repeatedly asked to stop through diplomacy, yet the attacks continued, what do you think the US response would be?The analogy must include the fact that Canada has been under illegal US military occupation for forty-odd years, with Canadian land confiscated for the construction of US settlements and its people expelled to live in refugee camps for generations - all of which the US had been repeatedly asked to stop through diplomacy.
The PLO was formed in 1964, before Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan.which is why I included the bit in parentheses at the end of that quoted sentence
My understanding is that withdrawal and acceptance of a Palestinian state is the policy of the major parties, and Israel actually has pulled out of Gaza and demolished settlements in the West Bank. That should be evidence that Israel "really wants" to do it.What Israel wants to do is to create several non-contiguous Gaza-style bantustans (open-air prisons) in the West Bank, which will be surrounded by territory and "security fences" controlled by Israeli forces and reserved for Jewish settlements connected by Jewish-only roads, which will have all points of entry, airspace and water supplies controlled by the IDF, no self-defense forces of their own, but which will be called a "state" (which is what South Africa called its own bantustans), and governed by native police (as were South Africa's bantustans). The reason for creating this type of Palestinian "state" (or, at least, holding out the promise of it while pushing it further and further into the indefinite future) is purely to relieve Israel of having to grant the Palestinians equal rights as they would be forced to do if the entire territories were annexed.
To take it as a general comment about Israelis or Jews is an absurd interpretation.As if he doesn't know that.
It's using a classic antisemitic trope, perhaps the classic trope. Saying that "some" Jews think that they have the right to steal is no better than saying that "some" Jews drink the blood of babies. And in fact there is a steady stream of propaganda that makes both of those claims, believe it or not.Flagged Joe, and I'm not going to dignify that pathetic garbage with a response.
But I don't think it makes sense to read it down to those particular Jews. How would Moorooka explain this belief among settlers? Surely he wouldn't say that it's just a random happenstance, like a group of a dozen or so left-handed people who just happen to be in the same spot. He really must believe that it is typically Jewish (although perhaps not common to all Jews) to "think that their race gives them the right to naked theft."
Most Arab states do not recognise Israel's sovereignty over any territory.That's because their recognition is conditional on Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders.
The Arab League members unanimously endorsed the peace initiative on March 27.[11] It consists of a comprehensive proposal to end the entire Arab-Israeli conflict.[2] It provides in a relevant part:posted by moorooka at 4:51 AM on June 13, 2010
“ (a) Complete withdrawal from the occupied Arab territories, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the 4 June 1967 line and the territories still occupied in southern Lebanon; (b) Attain a just solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees to be agreed upon in accordance with the UN General Assembly Resolution No 194. (c) Accept the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since 4 June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital. In return the Arab states will do the following: (a) Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict over, sign a peace agreement with Israel, and achieve peace for all states in the region; (b) Establish normal relations with Israel within the framework of this comprehensive peace.[2]
Voice A: “They get held hostage or they get chucked off”posted by Joe in Australia at 5:12 AM on June 14, 2010
Voice B: “Chucked off?”
Voice A: “They get chucked off – they get thrown off.”
A few minutes later, Voice A explains things further for Voice B:
Voice A: “These guys … these Turks … they’re not like us … [we] come from an easy life … [they are not] just on a boat to Gaza…they’re always ready for these things.”
After a pause, Voice B expresses his concern, which is dismissed by Voice A:
Voice B: “So they’re ready to fight?”
Voice A: “Whatever happens.”
« Older "I went and saw Iron Man 2 today, pretty good... | Last week, a photo of Keanu Re... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by kuatto at 11:50 AM on June 11, 2010