the majority of people think it's a genocide, everyone except israelis and the US govt that is..
This is not true either. You left out the governments of Canada, the UK, France, Japan, the Czech Republic, Germany, etc. Plus, the US population overwhelmingly supports Israel.
The us population OVERWHELMINGLY supports Israel? Now this is just silly. It would be more believable if you just said that the US congress/senate OVERWHEMINGLY supports Israel.
And not only does the US population support Israel, "Support for U.S. military aid to Israel also remains fairly stable, with almost two-thirds of Americans saying that U.S. assistance to Israel should be increased or kept the same," Holland added."
I wouldn't call 57% over 34% OVERWHELMING, especially when the same article says 43% said Israel is using Right amount of force whereas 40% said Israel is using TO MUCH force. Also, poll was done by CNN, aren't they on the BDS list of company's supporting the siege on gaza?
But how about the debate be moved over to AMT and keep this one about peace and love? (the original topic)
Im finding that exact thing with pro-israelis..you cant even be 'please can we stop killing innocent children, stop waging war' without them going into a hysterical meltdown about it..it's feckin bizarre
Yeah, I've been thinking about how bizarre it is too. People are really losing their shit over this issue it seems. You can't say anything about anything without being accused of something, lol.
Unless you understand the history of the Middle East... and I am talking only back to the end of WWII history, then you cannot possibly understand why these conflicts continue to happen.
That is not very hard to know. How come people assume that anyone with an opinion they don't agree with is probably ignorant?
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
the majority of people think it's a genocide, everyone except israelis and the US govt that is..
This is not true either. You left out the governments of Canada, the UK, France, Japan, the Czech Republic, Germany, etc. Plus, the US population overwhelmingly supports Israel.
The us population OVERWHELMINGLY supports Israel? Now this is just silly. It would be more believable if you just said that the US congress/senate OVERWHEMINGLY supports Israel.
And not only does the US population support Israel, "Support for U.S. military aid to Israel also remains fairly stable, with almost two-thirds of Americans saying that U.S. assistance to Israel should be increased or kept the same," Holland added."
I wouldn't call 57% over 34% OVERWHELMING, especially when the same article says 43% said Israel is using Right amount of force whereas 40% said Israel is using TO MUCH force. Also, poll was done by CNN, aren't they on the BDS list of company's supporting the siege on gaza?
To say that I couldn't possibly care less about BDS' list of companies would be the understatement of the year. BDS is a bunch of people wasting time who don't know what they are talking about and who have had zero impact. If you actually followed a boycott of Israeli products you would no longer be able to post here since you wouldn't be able to use your cell phone, tablet or computer because every one of those items contains Israeli technology and/or parts.
It's nice to see that this thread supposedly about peace has been brought down to this debate. I guess...
Yes, exactly! And every effort to return the flow of this thread back to peace is outright ignored. Sad, very sad. If Ed were to read this thread I think that is precisely what he would say- "sad".
Brian,Im beginning to think you walk the earth barefoot in long flowing robes like a mix of Yoda and the Dali lama sprinkling flower pedals and chanting peace hymns.Am I close?lol
Hahaha rr! That would be a sight!
No, I like to think of myself in a way Jimi Hendrix once suggested: "Instead of walking the street with, you guns and weapons, why don't we walk down the streets with, ah, electric guitars!" ... and fire off riffs of peace and love I might add. ;-)
We are all Gazans, oppressed and hopeless, waiting for the next bomb to fall.
We are all Israelis, captive of the strength of own weapons which express our fears.
At this moment of peril, we are not called upon to take sides of either Gazans or Israelis, but of humanity itself and ask ourselves whether we shall at last put an end to war or shall war put an end to us? -- Dennis Kucinich
Eddie and the band have always been a major influence on my life, inspiring me to write my own songs and come clean and when at Milton Keynes with my brother he delivered a speech which touched everyone's hearts, it reinforced my belief that music can make a difference, my mum who recently passed would have been at the gig and would have brought tears to her eyes. She taught me love is the most important thing in life and whatever nationality we all have rights to speak the truth , thanks and peace. I believe...........
You can twist it any way you want, the fact is the UN Partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leaders and was wholly rejected by surrounding Arab leaders and governments. Israel was then formed and repeatedly Arab forces tried to destroy it.
As far as '67, I would suggest reading Michael Oren's Six Days of War, which is the authoritative book on the conflict. Oren got access to records that had never been seen before including in the Arab countries. He also spoke to almost all the major living players, Arab and Israeli. Operation Dawn, the Egyptian preemptive strike, was cancelled by Nassar because he was concerned it was compromised. But there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike. Israel seeing the danger acted.
I didn't twist anything. I simply provided some facts. Even Israeli historians admit that ethnic cleansing and land-theft took place before the Arab armies attacked. The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab. As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel. You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
That's a bunch of nonsense. For one thing, Israel does not control the land borders totally to Gaza. I don't hear you claiming that Egypt is committing genocide. Furthermore, the idea that Israel has intent to destroy the Palestinians is laughable. As one major example, Palestinians are treated in Israeli hopsitals every day. Hamas' own leader sent his granddaughter to an Israeli hospital when she needed medical attention (http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-pms-granddaughter-admitted-for-treatment-in-israel/). If Israel was intent on destroying the Palestinians, why would they ever allow even one Palestinian patient into Israel for world class treatment? That seems contrary to intending to destroy them, no?
Your reading comprehension skills aren't up to much are they?
'Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. (Article 2 CPPCG)'
"We don't have a solution, and you will continue living like dogs, and whoever wants will go, and will see how this procedure will work out. For now, it works out." - Moshe Dayan - Former Israeli Chief of Defense
"The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet but not to make them die of hunger."– Dov Weisglass, adviser to now-Prime-Minister Ehud Olmert, talking about Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip [February 2006]
You can twist it any way you want, the fact is the UN Partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leaders and was wholly rejected by surrounding Arab leaders and governments. Israel was then formed and repeatedly Arab forces tried to destroy it.
As far as '67, I would suggest reading Michael Oren's Six Days of War, which is the authoritative book on the conflict. Oren got access to records that had never been seen before including in the Arab countries. He also spoke to almost all the major living players, Arab and Israeli. Operation Dawn, the Egyptian preemptive strike, was cancelled by Nassar because he was concerned it was compromised. But there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike. Israel seeing the danger acted.
I didn't twist anything. I simply provided some facts. Even Israeli historians admit that ethnic cleansing and land-theft took place before the Arab armies attacked. The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab. As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel. You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
I can't wait till lucky has nothing to say and starts to call u dumb or ignorant or silly or misinformed or whatever. Remember byrnzie, he was in the idf. He's fought and protected Israel himself.
Edit-remember byrnzie, with lucky, facts don't count and mean shit. Just giving you a heads up.
Sorry, that's all good and well, but actions speak louder than words. And singing John Lennon's 'Imagine' in concert right now doesn't achieve anything either. It's a shame that Ed didn't stick to his guns instead of back-peddling into sentimentality.
You can talk about peace, love, flowers, and Jimi Hendrix 'till the cows come home, but people are being massacred in Gaza as we speak. If you want to do something constructive, then write a letter to your local government representative, or join a demonstration or a picket, e.t.c.
Imagine what eddies gonna feel if he looks in on this thread and sees this picture? He has 2 kids and I believe 1 is actually the same age. Anthony bourdain tweeted a pic of the incident at the beach and made a comment about he walked on that same beach and has a daughter the same age as those kids playing soccer. And you know what, he DIDNT even delete the tweet like those 2 cowards D Howard and Rihanna.
'I write as someone who served loyally in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s and who has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders. What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansionism. The aim was to establish Greater Israel through permanent political, economic and military control over the Palestinian territories. And the result has been one of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times.
...Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so.'
You were hoping for a bit of support were you? Feeling a bit lonely in the Gaza thread over on the AMT in your support for Israel's latest round of mass slaughter?
We will stop when we feel safe. As long as the area will keep threting us from many reasons, we keep fighting for our right to live here in peace. We are here to stay. Thats a fact. You want to eccept it? We find peace. You want to deny our rights we will keep fighting. More blood, more war, more death, more sorrow, more pain, more cry, more ani-war speaches..
And what 'rights' would they be? The 'right' to continue an illegal occupation and land-grab? The right to terrorize and murder Palestinians at will? The right to continue murdering on average one Palestinian child every three days for the past 13 years? Are those some of the 'rights' you wish to protect?
That's a bunch of nonsense. For one thing, Israel does not control the land borders totally to Gaza. I don't hear you claiming that Egypt is committing genocide. Furthermore, the idea that Israel has intent to destroy the Palestinians is laughable. As one major example, Palestinians are treated in Israeli hopsitals every day. Hamas' own leader sent his granddaughter to an Israeli hospital when she needed medical attention (http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-pms-granddaughter-admitted-for-treatment-in-israel/). If Israel was intent on destroying the Palestinians, why would they ever allow even one Palestinian patient into Israel for world class treatment? That seems contrary to intending to destroy them, no?
Your reading comprehension skills aren't up to much are they?
'Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. (Article 2 CPPCG)'
"We don't have a solution, and you will continue living like dogs, and whoever wants will go, and will see how this procedure will work out. For now, it works out." - Moshe Dayan - Former Israeli Chief of Defense
"The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet but not to make them die of hunger."– Dov Weisglass, adviser to now-Prime-Minister Ehud Olmert, talking about Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip [February 2006]
That's more crap. Neither of those quotes have anything to do with the words you've bolded, an intent to destroy or calculating to bring about its physical destruction. It has long been an accepted tactic in war/conflict to make the other side feel pain in order to bring about change without a military battle. Under your rationale there, the US has been committing genocide against Iran for a very long time because of the incredibly harsh sanctions in place.
And I ask again, in the history of genocides in the world, whether it was Rwanda, the Nazis or whoever, please show me a case where the side committing genocide actively treated people from the other side with medical care equal to their own people. What you are suggesting is moronic.
'I write as someone who served loyally in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s and who has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders. What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansionism. The aim was to establish Greater Israel through permanent political, economic and military control over the Palestinian territories. And the result has been one of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times.
...Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so.'
Actually, that quote proves the very opposite of the point you are trying to prove. In Israel, everyone has the right to state their opinion. It is an open and free society. Go to Gaza and openly state views contrary to Hamas and let's see how long you live.
You can twist it any way you want, the fact is the UN Partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leaders and was wholly rejected by surrounding Arab leaders and governments. Israel was then formed and repeatedly Arab forces tried to destroy it.
As far as '67, I would suggest reading Michael Oren's Six Days of War, which is the authoritative book on the conflict. Oren got access to records that had never been seen before including in the Arab countries. He also spoke to almost all the major living players, Arab and Israeli. Operation Dawn, the Egyptian preemptive strike, was cancelled by Nassar because he was concerned it was compromised. But there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike. Israel seeing the danger acted.
I didn't twist anything. I simply provided some facts. Even Israeli historians admit that ethnic cleansing and land-theft took place before the Arab armies attacked. The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab. As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel. You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
First of all, it is pretty funny you are using Finklestein again, a conspiracy nut who has been thoroughly discredited.
"Operation Dawn was an Egyptian military operation planned to strike the Israeli Air Force, in the prelude to what would become the Six-Day War. The Egyptian attack plan would involve strategic bombing of major ports, the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona, airfields and cities. Arab armies would then attack, effectively cutting Israel in half with an armoured thrust from northern Sinai via the Negev desert.[1]
Nasser had provoked Israel when he closed the Straits of Tiran. He was intent on getting revenge for previous military defeats. The army had been mobilized in the Sinai desert, and was poised to launch what he called "the operation that will surprise the world". The operation was set to take place on May 27th, 1967.Abdel Hakim Amer, an Egyptian general, planned the operation. [2]
Operation Dawn was called off after Nasser was informed by Russia that the US was aware of the plan."
Go to Gaza and openly state views contrary to Hamas and let's see how long you live.
Gideon levy openly stated views contrary to Israeli orthodoxy last week. He now requires round-the-clock protection with bodyguards. As for Hamas killing anybody with a differing viewpoint. Provide me with one example. You can't, because it never happened. And don't waste your time bringing up examples of Palestinians killed by Hamas during the U.S and Israeli sponsored coup attempt, because that's a separate issue.
That's more crap. Neither of those quotes have anything to do with the words you've bolded, an intent to destroy or calculating to bring about its physical destruction. It has long been an accepted tactic in war/conflict to make the other side feel pain in order to bring about change without a military battle. Under your rationale there, the US has been committing genocide against Iran for a very long time because of the incredibly harsh sanctions in place.
And I ask again, in the history of genocides in the world, whether it was Rwanda, the Nazis or whoever, please show me a case where the side committing genocide actively treated people from the other side with medical care equal to their own people. What you are suggesting is moronic.
Except it's not a war. It's an occupation. An illegal occupation and land-grab.
Here, I'll explain it for you: The Israeli's don't want a one-state solution because they insist on being the majority population. They also don't want a two-state solution that denies them full military control over a few disconnected Apartheid-style bantustans. This is why they want to maintain the status quo and have the Palestinians under their control living like dogs.
You can twist it any way you want, the fact is the UN Partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leaders and was wholly rejected by surrounding Arab leaders and governments. Israel was then formed and repeatedly Arab forces tried to destroy it.
As far as '67, I would suggest reading Michael Oren's Six Days of War, which is the authoritative book on the conflict. Oren got access to records that had never been seen before including in the Arab countries. He also spoke to almost all the major living players, Arab and Israeli. Operation Dawn, the Egyptian preemptive strike, was cancelled by Nassar because he was concerned it was compromised. But there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike. Israel seeing the danger acted.
I didn't twist anything. I simply provided some facts. Even Israeli historians admit that ethnic cleansing and land-theft took place before the Arab armies attacked. The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab. As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel. You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
I can't wait till lucky has nothing to say and starts to call u dumb or ignorant or silly or misinformed or whatever. Remember byrnzie, he was in the idf. He's fought and protected Israel himself.
Edit-remember byrnzie, with lucky, facts don't count and mean shit. Just giving you a heads up.
I am giving you the facts. You choose not to believe them because of your bias and hatred. And for the record, I have never stated here or anywhere I was in IDF. I'm guessing your are referring to Silvan. I did say that I have been involved for almost 25 years to making sure that Israel is properly supported with both funding and political support.
You can twist it any way you want, the fact is the UN Partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leaders and was wholly rejected by surrounding Arab leaders and governments. Israel was then formed and repeatedly Arab forces tried to destroy it.
As far as '67, I would suggest reading Michael Oren's Six Days of War, which is the authoritative book on the conflict. Oren got access to records that had never been seen before including in the Arab countries. He also spoke to almost all the major living players, Arab and Israeli. Operation Dawn, the Egyptian preemptive strike, was cancelled by Nassar because he was concerned it was compromised. But there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike. Israel seeing the danger acted.
I didn't twist anything. I simply provided some facts. Even Israeli historians admit that ethnic cleansing and land-theft took place before the Arab armies attacked. The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab. As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel. You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
I can't wait till lucky has nothing to say and starts to call u dumb or ignorant or silly or misinformed or whatever. Remember byrnzie, he was in the idf. He's fought and protected Israel himself.
Edit-remember byrnzie, with lucky, facts don't count and mean shit. Just giving you a heads up.
I am giving you the facts. You choose not to believe them because of your bias and hatred. And for the record, I have never stated here or anywhere I was in IDF. I'm guessing your are referring to Silvan. I did say that I have been involved for almost 25 years to making sure that Israel is properly supported with both funding and political support.
Man, stop already with your "facts." And my hatred and biases are against the government that's running that rogue nation you've supported for the past 25 years. Awesome, you support them and we'll continue to support the Palestinians. It's just to bad your lobbyists seem to play this game better then anyone else. Hopefully someday those fuckers will grow some balls and say enough. I know I know, I'm being silly again. Sorry, I apologize. I just can't help myself sometimes.
Go to Gaza and openly state views contrary to Hamas and let's see how long you live.
Gideon levy openly stated views contrary to Israeli orthodoxy last week. He now requires round-the-clock protection with bodyguards. As for Hamas killing anybody with a differing viewpoint. Provide me with one example. You can't, because it never happened. And don't waste your time bringing up examples of Palestinians killed by Hamas during the U.S and Israeli sponsored coup attempt, because that's a separate issue.
Right, Hamas they're great guys. Very understanding group of fellows, I tell you. Totally free society where you can speak your mind and act as you want.
Totally fine with homosexuals. Oh, wait...nope on that one too. "The official punishment for homosexuality in Gaza is severe; homosexuals can be given 10-year prison sentences. Hamas preachers aspire to take the punishment even further: homosexuals, they say, deserve the death penalty."
You'd think they'd be in favor of prayer but only under circumstances they like and certainly not anything that allows Fatah views to be expressed. "The Hamas on Tuesday banned public prayers in the Gaza Strip, moving to halt growing dissent by supporters of the rival Fatah movement."
Totally wonderful, open society. I can't understand why you don't move there.
As far as Levy, he has been stirring things up in Israel for a long time and is quite famous. I'm sure he has security, as many celebrities do, but as recently as last week, he felt safe enough to stand on a street corner in public and do an interview. There was an incident during the interview as Haaretz reported, here's what happened.
"You're a traitor!" the man yelled at Levy. "You're one to talk. You call our pilots murderers? Have you no shame? You should be the one to live with Hamas. We have the most ethical fighter pilots. You think children should spend the summer holiday in a bomb shelter? Shame on you!"
Those are really mean words that got shouted at him (by a civilian I might add and not a government entity). Clearly worse than killing homosexuals, denying freedom of the press, banning books, etc. I can see why you'd prefer Gaza, it sounds like a wonderful thing to live under Hamas.
Hamas supports the international consensus - blocked by the U.S - which calls for a peaceful settlement based on the 1967 borders - Israel's legal borders.
What do you support? Do you support Israel's illegal occupation and encroaching land-grab?
I have been involved for almost 25 years to making sure that Israel is properly supported with both funding and political support.
I think Americans should be fucking disgusted that $4 Billion of their fax dollars are being sent to Israel every year so that it can continue an illegal occupation and murder unarmed men, women, children and babies.
Comments
Not my enemy,.. no, not my enemy,..
Don't speak for me. No, not my enemy.
We are all Israelis, captive of the strength of own weapons which express our fears.
At this moment of peril, we are not called upon to take sides of either Gazans or Israelis, but of humanity itself and ask ourselves whether we shall at last put an end to war or shall war put an end to us? -- Dennis Kucinich
come together right now
The Palestinians had every right to resist the carve-up of their land which allocated 50% to the 20% Jewish population. just as they now every right to resist the post 1967 occupation and ongoing land-grab.
As for 1967, did you miss those quotes from Israeli leaders that I posted? What's the matter? You don't like it when reality stares you in the face? Two thirds of Egypt's army was on the border with Yemen at the time. They had no intention of attacking Israel.
You say that 'there is no doubt that Egypt and Arab forces intended to launch a surprise strike', yet your own Israeli political and military leadership think other wise. Also, the Americans at the time disagree with your 'opinion' too. Here's some more reality. Feel free to close your eyes and pretend it isn't there:
Norman Finkelstein - 'Knowing Too much - How The American Jewish Romance With Israel is Coming To An End'
P. 170: 'U.S appraisals of Nasser's Intentions on eve of 1967 war'
Major General Meir Amit, head of the Mossad, told senior American officials on 1st June that "there were no differences between the U.S and the Israeli's on the military intelligence picture or it's interpretation". "The Egyptian build-up in Sinai lacked a clear offensive plan," Israeli scholar Avraham Sela reports, "and Nasser's defensive instructions explicitly assumed an Israeli first-strike."
25th May - CIA Appraisal: 'In our view, UAR [Egyptian] military dispositions in Sinai are defensive in character...The steps taken thus far by [other] Arab armies do not prove that the Arabs intend an all-out attack on Israel....In sum, we believe these are merely gestures in the interests of the fiction of Arab unity, but have little military utility in a conflict with Israel.'
26th May - General Earle Wheeler, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff: 'The UAR's dispositions are defensive and do not look as if they are preparatory to an invasiob of Israel...'There was no indication that the Egyptians would attack. If the UAR moved, it would give up it's defensive positions in the Sinai for little advantage.'
26th May - CIA's Board of National Estimates: 'Clearly Nasser has won the first round. It is possible that [Nasser] may seek a military show-down with Israel, designed to settle the whole problem once and for all. This seems to us highly unlikely...The most likely course seems to be for Nasser to hold to his present winnings as long as he can, and in as full measure as he can.'
'Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. (Article 2 CPPCG)'
"We don't have a solution, and you will continue living like dogs, and whoever wants will go, and will see how this procedure will work out. For now, it works out." - Moshe Dayan - Former Israeli Chief of Defense
"The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet but not to make them die of hunger." – Dov Weisglass, adviser to now-Prime-Minister Ehud Olmert, talking about Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip [February 2006]
Edit-remember byrnzie, with lucky, facts don't count and mean shit. Just giving you a heads up.
It's a shame that Ed didn't stick to his guns instead of back-peddling into sentimentality.
You can talk about peace, love, flowers, and Jimi Hendrix 'till the cows come home, but people are being massacred in Gaza as we speak.
If you want to do something constructive, then write a letter to your local government representative, or join a demonstration or a picket, e.t.c.
'I write as someone who served loyally in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s and who has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders. What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansionism. The aim was to establish Greater Israel through permanent political, economic and military control over the Palestinian territories. And the result has been one of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times.
...Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so.'
Are those some of the 'rights' you wish to protect?
And I ask again, in the history of genocides in the world, whether it was Rwanda, the Nazis or whoever, please show me a case where the side committing genocide actively treated people from the other side with medical care equal to their own people. What you are suggesting is moronic.
"Operation Dawn was an Egyptian military operation planned to strike the Israeli Air Force, in the prelude to what would become the Six-Day War. The Egyptian attack plan would involve strategic bombing of major ports, the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona, airfields and cities. Arab armies would then attack, effectively cutting Israel in half with an armoured thrust from northern Sinai via the Negev desert.[1]
Nasser had provoked Israel when he closed the Straits of Tiran. He was intent on getting revenge for previous military defeats. The army had been mobilized in the Sinai desert, and was poised to launch what he called "the operation that will surprise the world". The operation was set to take place on May 27th, 1967.Abdel Hakim Amer, an Egyptian general, planned the operation. [2]
Operation Dawn was called off after Nasser was informed by Russia that the US was aware of the plan."
That is a summary of what Oren's research found.
As for Hamas killing anybody with a differing viewpoint. Provide me with one example. You can't, because it never happened. And don't waste your time bringing up examples of Palestinians killed by Hamas during the U.S and Israeli sponsored coup attempt, because that's a separate issue.
Here, I'll explain it for you: The Israeli's don't want a one-state solution because they insist on being the majority population. They also don't want a two-state solution that denies them full military control over a few disconnected Apartheid-style bantustans. This is why they want to maintain the status quo and have the Palestinians under their control living like dogs.
Do you support Israel's illegal occupation?
They don't do things like ban books or public discourse. Oh wait, they do. http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/03/07/gaza-lift-restrictions-books-newspapers
Freedom of the press. Oh, I don't think so. http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-arrests-Fatah-journalists-in-Gaza-Strip
Totally fine with homosexuals. Oh, wait...nope on that one too. "The official punishment for homosexuality in Gaza is severe; homosexuals can be given 10-year prison sentences. Hamas preachers aspire to take the punishment even further: homosexuals, they say, deserve the death penalty."
You'd think they'd be in favor of prayer but only under circumstances they like and certainly not anything that allows Fatah views to be expressed. "The Hamas on Tuesday banned public prayers in the Gaza Strip, moving to halt growing dissent by supporters of the rival Fatah movement."
And to top it off, there is a widespread problem of Honor killings in Gaza. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/03/upsurge-palestinian-honour-killings-gaza-201432372831899701.html
Totally wonderful, open society. I can't understand why you don't move there.
As far as Levy, he has been stirring things up in Israel for a long time and is quite famous. I'm sure he has security, as many celebrities do, but as recently as last week, he felt safe enough to stand on a street corner in public and do an interview. There was an incident during the interview as Haaretz reported, here's what happened.
"You're a traitor!" the man yelled at Levy. "You're one to talk. You call our pilots murderers? Have you no shame? You should be the one to live with Hamas. We have the most ethical fighter pilots. You think children should spend the summer holiday in a bomb shelter? Shame on you!"
Those are really mean words that got shouted at him (by a civilian I might add and not a government entity). Clearly worse than killing homosexuals, denying freedom of the press, banning books, etc. I can see why you'd prefer Gaza, it sounds like a wonderful thing to live under Hamas.
What do you support? Do you support Israel's illegal occupation and encroaching land-grab?