Everyone needs to watch this video

soulsinging

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

hamas just gives the Israelis a scapegoat for its brutal military reactions and border blockade in Gaza. the Palestinian Authority can easily replace Hamas

The Palestinian authority is a fucking joke. The following articles sheds some truth on the matter:

http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/c ... story.html

'...Israel has never liked Palestinian moderates, for the simple reason that concessions might have to be made to them. To avoid being drawn into negotiations, it has always preferred Palestinian radicals - and when they were not there it has done everything it could to create them.
'How can you negotiate with someone who wants to kill you?' is a familiar Israeli refrain.
The war on Gaza has confirmed Israel's visceral rejection of any expression of Palestinian nationalism. It will kill to prevent it, as sixty years of wars, assassinations and massacres testify. Consciously or not, Israeli leaders seem to fear that any recognition of Palestinian aspirations undermines the legitimacy of their own national enterprise.
It may be that the war was launched precisely because Hamas has recently shown signs of moderation. Its key spokesmen - including Khaled Mish'al, head of its political bureau - have expressed their readiness to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. To Israel's dismay, they have begun to distance themselves from the movement's 1987 charter, which calls for Israel's destruction.
The Qassam rockets were a great embarrassment to the Israeli government. It was unable to stop them except by agreeing a truce. The rockets angered an Israeli population notoriously blind to any suffering but its own. But, in truth, the rockets were no more than highly irritating pin-pricks. The figures speak for themselves. Fewer than 20 Israelis have been killed by Qassam rockets since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. In the same period Israel, displaying its usual astonishing indifference to Arab life, has killed some 2,000 Palestinians. Israeli state terror has been incomparably more lethal than anything Hamas could manage. The death toll continues to mount.
Israel never liked the truce with Hamas and chose not to respect its terms. Instead of easing the blockade on Gaza -- as it was meant to do -- it tightened it, reducing the crowded, suffering Strip to abject misery. And it unilaterally broke the truce by an armed incursion on 4 November, which killed several Hamas men. In retrospect, this action must be seen as a deliberate attempt to provoke Hamas into a violent response, and thus provide Israel with a casus belli.
Stopping the rockets fired by Hamas into the Negev was indeed only one of several reasons Israel went to war, and by no means the most important one. If anything, the rockets have provided Israel with a pretext for launching a war with far wider aims.
The principal aim of Israel's 'all-out war' on Hamas is to reaffirm the military supremacy over all its neighbours which the Jewish state has enjoyed since its creation in 1948. The war is therefore meant as a warning to Hizballah in Lebanon, as well as to Syria and Iran -- and indeed to anyone who might dare challenge Israel's predominance -- that they, too, could face the sort of devastating punishment Gaza is now enduring.
Deterrence - one-sided, Israel-only deterrence - lies at the heart of Israel's security doctrine. It wants total freedom to hit, and never to be hit back. It relies on brute force to protect itself, and rejects any form of mutual deterrence. It is totally opposed to a regional balance of power which might force it to moderate its actions...'

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8449
Hamas, Son of Israel - The Israelis birthed and nurtured their Islamist nemesis

"Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years. Israel 'aided Hamas directly – the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization),' said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic [and International] Studies. Israel's support for Hamas 'was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative,' said a former senior CIA official."

Middle East analyst Ray Hanania concurs:

"In addition to hoping to turn the Palestinian masses away from Arafat and the PLO, the Likud leadership believed they could achieve a workable alliance with Islamic, anti-Arafat forces that would also extend Israel's control over the occupied territories."

Huh? That article doesn't even mention the Palestinian authority, just says that Israel likes Hamas because it justifies its violence, which is exactly the point that jlew made?

polaris_x

jlew24asu wrote:

hamas just gives the Israelis a scapegoat for its brutal military reactions and border blockade in Gaza. the Palestinian Authority can easily replace Hamas

i agree with you for the most part in that they are a convenient excuse however back to my previous post - the opinions have been changing ... remember the PLO used to be what hamas was ... now they are considered the moderate voice? ... times and opinions change

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

On a more positive note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

It's suddenly very quiet in here...

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

jlew24asu wrote:

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

According to the definition of war crime, probably. Although the rockets largely fell in and around the area of Sderot. Sderot is occupied Palestinian land and legally belongs to the Palestinians. The Israeli's have no right to be there. If the rocket attacks make life there uncomfortable for them then they can simply fuck off back to America or Israel.

Although only 3 Israeli civilians were killed by Hamas' rockets, compared with an estimated 900 Palestinian civilians.

Byrnzie

soulsinging wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

hamas just gives the Israelis a scapegoat for its brutal military reactions and border blockade in Gaza. the Palestinian Authority can easily replace Hamas

The Palestinian authority is a fucking joke. The following articles sheds some truth on the matter:

http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/c ... story.html

'...Israel has never liked Palestinian moderates, for the simple reason that concessions might have to be made to them. To avoid being drawn into negotiations, it has always preferred Palestinian radicals - and when they were not there it has done everything it could to create them.
'How can you negotiate with someone who wants to kill you?' is a familiar Israeli refrain.
The war on Gaza has confirmed Israel's visceral rejection of any expression of Palestinian nationalism. It will kill to prevent it, as sixty years of wars, assassinations and massacres testify. Consciously or not, Israeli leaders seem to fear that any recognition of Palestinian aspirations undermines the legitimacy of their own national enterprise.
It may be that the war was launched precisely because Hamas has recently shown signs of moderation. Its key spokesmen - including Khaled Mish'al, head of its political bureau - have expressed their readiness to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. To Israel's dismay, they have begun to distance themselves from the movement's 1987 charter, which calls for Israel's destruction.
The Qassam rockets were a great embarrassment to the Israeli government. It was unable to stop them except by agreeing a truce. The rockets angered an Israeli population notoriously blind to any suffering but its own. But, in truth, the rockets were no more than highly irritating pin-pricks. The figures speak for themselves. Fewer than 20 Israelis have been killed by Qassam rockets since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. In the same period Israel, displaying its usual astonishing indifference to Arab life, has killed some 2,000 Palestinians. Israeli state terror has been incomparably more lethal than anything Hamas could manage. The death toll continues to mount.
Israel never liked the truce with Hamas and chose not to respect its terms. Instead of easing the blockade on Gaza -- as it was meant to do -- it tightened it, reducing the crowded, suffering Strip to abject misery. And it unilaterally broke the truce by an armed incursion on 4 November, which killed several Hamas men. In retrospect, this action must be seen as a deliberate attempt to provoke Hamas into a violent response, and thus provide Israel with a casus belli.
Stopping the rockets fired by Hamas into the Negev was indeed only one of several reasons Israel went to war, and by no means the most important one. If anything, the rockets have provided Israel with a pretext for launching a war with far wider aims.
The principal aim of Israel's 'all-out war' on Hamas is to reaffirm the military supremacy over all its neighbours which the Jewish state has enjoyed since its creation in 1948. The war is therefore meant as a warning to Hizballah in Lebanon, as well as to Syria and Iran -- and indeed to anyone who might dare challenge Israel's predominance -- that they, too, could face the sort of devastating punishment Gaza is now enduring.
Deterrence - one-sided, Israel-only deterrence - lies at the heart of Israel's security doctrine. It wants total freedom to hit, and never to be hit back. It relies on brute force to protect itself, and rejects any form of mutual deterrence. It is totally opposed to a regional balance of power which might force it to moderate its actions...'

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8449
Hamas, Son of Israel - The Israelis birthed and nurtured their Islamist nemesis

"Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years. Israel 'aided Hamas directly – the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization),' said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic [and International] Studies. Israel's support for Hamas 'was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative,' said a former senior CIA official."

Middle East analyst Ray Hanania concurs:

"In addition to hoping to turn the Palestinian masses away from Arafat and the PLO, the Likud leadership believed they could achieve a workable alliance with Islamic, anti-Arafat forces that would also extend Israel's control over the occupied territories."

Huh? That article doesn't even mention the Palestinian authority, just says that Israel likes Hamas because it justifies its violence, which is exactly the point that jlew made?

'Palestinian moderates' = Palestinian Authority? Get it?

And Jlew has never made the point that Israel likes Hamas. Once again you resort to putting words in other peoples mouths that weren't there to begin with, because you have no argument.

Byrnzie

soulsinging wrote:

Since you love talking about what's justified, here's a simple yes or no question for you:

Is it ok for Hamas to target civilians?

Let me get this right...Israel recently massacred over 900 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and you're asking me if I think it's o.k for Palestinians to attack Israeli civilians?


I'll go with Gandhi on this one. I'll say that the Palestinians have every right to hit back in retaliation.

Byrnzie

soulsinging wrote:

Since you love talking about what's justified, here's a simple yes or no question for you:

Is it ok for Hamas to target civilians?

Do you consider Illegal Jewish settlers to be innocent civilians?
These are the civilians that you love so much:

Attack by American-Israeli Settlers May 13th 2006
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5358600137

'Jewish settler attack' on film - Thursday, 12 June 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7451691.stm

'...Over the brow of the hill walk four masked men holding baseball bats. To the right of the screen, in the foreground, stands a 58-year-old Palestinian woman.

Thamam al-Nawaja has been herding her goats close to the Jewish settlement of Susia, near Hebron in the southern West Bank.

Within a few seconds, she, along with her 70-year-old husband and one of her nephews, will be beaten up.

As the first blows land, the woman filming - the daughter-in-law of the elderly couple - drops the camera and runs for help.

Mrs Nawaja spent three days in hospital after the attack...'


http://www.cpt.org/cptnet/2008/11/17/tu ... internatio
17 November 2008
Israeli settlers attack Palestinian shepherds, kill donkey, injure internationals.

'On 15 November 2008, around 9:00 a.m., approximately fifteen masked Israeli settlers from the illegal outpost of Havat Ma'on attacked three Palestinian shepherds who were grazing their flocks in a valley south of the outpost. The settlers came running down from a ridge above the shepherds, hurling rocks. The shepherds were able to get their flocks away before the rocks injured them.

During the incident, the settlers were able to steal two of the shepherds' donkeys. The settlers killed one donkey with a knife wound in the chest area. They slashed another across the throat, but the donkey survived.

Settlers also hit two internationals from Christian Peacemaker Teams—who were accompanying the shepherds—with large rocks. One CPTer sustained minor injuries...'


Photo Essay - Israeli Settlers attack Palestinian School Girls in Hebron
http://www.eappi.org/en/photos-videos/p ... ebron.html


Israeli settlers attack farmers near Qalqiliya
http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?op ... s&ID=37921
19 / 05 / 2009
'Israeli settlers set fire to farmland and assaulted Palestinian farmers and an Israeli activist in two villages east of the West Bank city of Qalqiliya on Tuesday.

Ma’an’s correspondent reports that large areas of wheat fields and olive groves went up in flames in the villages of Jit and Far’ata before firefighters arrived and extinguished the blaze.

Local residents said Israeli soldiers also attacked farmers, leaving many of them bruised among them Hani Arman, Othman As-Sadda, Ahmad Arman, Zakariyya As-Sadda, and an Israeli activist with the organization Rabbis for Human rights.

Soldiers also seized 15-year-old Murad Yamin.

According to farmers, fights erupted after settlers from the Gilad outpost attacked a rally in the area protesting previous settler attacks and Israeli Civil Administration’s claims that farmers do not own their land in spite of documents proving ownership.'


http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=93 ... =351020202
Israeli settlers attack Palestinian villagers
Fri, 01 May 2009

'Human right groups have voiced concern about the growing number of Israeli settlers attack on Palestinians.
Armed Israeli settlers have attacked a village in the southern West Bank, inflicting considerable damage on Palestinian residential and agricultural property.

Palestinian sources say a group of twenty Israeli settlers from Beit Ein attacked Beit Safa, a nearby Palestinian village, late Thursday and opened fire on Palestinian homes.

The attackers also set ablaze land under cultivation in the region.

Moments later Israeli soldiers rushed into the area to disperse the crowd and stop the violence, but there were no reports of arrests.

Israeli settlers, who are considered illegal under international law, frequently attack Palestinians in the West Bank.

Beit Ein -- with nearly 1,000 residents -- is known as one of the most radical settlements in the occupied West Bank.'

http://www.imemc.org/article/60403
Israeli settlers attack Palestinian homes near Hebron
Thursday May 14, 2009

A group of Israeli settlers attacked on Thursday Palestinian homes located at the village of Khirbit Um-alkher near the southern West Bank city of Hebron.

'The villagers said that the settlers came from the nearby Karmel Settlement. They added that at least 15 armed settlers ransacked and damaged three homes and killed two sheep dogs.

The villagers rushed to stop the settlers; the Israeli military and police arrived and escorted the settlers out of the village.

The village is the home of 170 farmers, the setters attack them frequently in an attempt to force them out of their homes and land to expand the settlement, the villagers told media.'

http://imeu.net/news/article0016205.shtml
Israeli settlers attack Palestinian Red Crescent ambulance in Hebron's Old City
Ma'an News, Apr 12, 2009

'A group of Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian Red Crescent ambulance in the old city of Hebron Saturday afternoon, causing damage to the vehicle.

According to Abed Al-Haleem Al-Ja'afra, the Head of Ambulance and Emergency Services for the Red Crescent, the ambulance was moving a patient from the Hebron governmental hospital to her home on Ash-Shuhada Street when the attack occurred. The Israeli army had given permission for the ambulance to drive on Ash-Shuhada Street, which is normally closed to all Palestinian cars and traffic.

As the ambulance arrived to the Al- Qarantina area, the soldiers opened the checkpoint, allowing the vehicle into the area where it was then attacked by settlers who threw stones at the vehicle.

"The vehicle was ambushed, and the soldiers turned a blind eye to the incident, making no move to stop the settlers from throwing stones," Al-Ja'afra said.

Being unable to move forward and take the patient safely to her home, the ambulance tried to back out of the street, but soldiers would not open the checkpoint for several minutes.

The patient was eventually returned to the emergency ward at Hebron governmental hospital, and awaits approval from Israeli authorities as to when she will safely be able to return home.'

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

On a more positive note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

Amazing that out of the whole article, which discusses Israel's massacre of 1,300 Palestinians you choose to focus your attention on the fact the 3 Israeli's were killed. I think this speaks volumes about you.

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

'Palestinian moderates' = Palestinian Authority? Get it?

And Jlew has never made the point that Israel likes Hamas. Once again you resort to putting words in other peoples mouths that weren't there to begin with, because you have no argument.

thats actually the EXACT point I was making here..

jlew24asu wrote:

hamas just gives the Israelis a scapegoat for its brutal military reactions and border blockade in Gaza. the Palestinian Authority can easily replace Hamas

and yet again you are accusing others of putting words in peoples mouth? this is getting beyond absurd. thats pretty much the only thing you have been doing.

did you google hypocrisy like I told you to?

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

On a more positive note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

Amazing that out of the whole article, which discusses Israel's massacre of 1,300 Palestinians you choose to focus your attention on the fact the 3 Israeli's were killed. I think this speaks volumes about you.

it does? ok let me try again. the massarce of 1300 Palastinians is a disgusting and horrible act. I sincerely hope there are generals or leaders in charge who get put in jail for war crimes for such acts.

ok ready....

Byrnzie wrote:

On a more positive note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

jlew24asu wrote:

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

nevermind, you already answered... you feel Israeli civilians are valid targets and should be killed


now THAT speaks volumes about you.

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

Since you love talking about what's justified, here's a simple yes or no question for you:

Is it ok for Hamas to target civilians?

Let me get this right...Israel recently massacred over 900 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and you're asking me if I think it's o.k for Palestinians to attack Israeli civilians?


I'll go with Gandhi on this one. I'll say that the Palestinians have every right to hit back in retaliation.

and here we have the ROOT of the problem in the middle east. thanks for publicly admitting you feel Israeli civilians should be killed.

un fucking real

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

Since you love talking about what's justified, here's a simple yes or no question for you:

Is it ok for Hamas to target civilians?

Let me get this right...Israel recently massacred over 900 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and you're asking me if I think it's o.k for Palestinians to attack Israeli civilians?


I'll go with Gandhi on this one. I'll say that the Palestinians have every right to hit back in retaliation.

and here we have the ROOT of the problem in the middle east. thanks for publicly admitting you feel Israeli civilians should be killed.

un fucking real

In my opinion these American-Israeli illegal settlers are scum. Are they legitimate targets? Yes.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5358600137

The Palestinians have a right to retaliate. A moral right and a legal right. The Illegal Israeli settlers have just one right of self-defence, and that is to get out. Period.

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

and here we have the ROOT of the problem in the middle east.

Now explain to me why you think that Palestinian attacks on Israeli's is the ROOT of the problem in the Middle East.

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

and yet again you are accusing others of putting words in peoples mouth? this is getting beyond absurd. thats pretty much the only thing you have been doing.

Fine. Provide just one example.

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Amazing that out of the whole article, which discusses Israel's massacre of 1,300 Palestinians you choose to focus your attention on the fact the 3 Israeli's were killed. I think this speaks volumes about you.

it does? ok let me try again. the massarce of 1300 Palastinians is a disgusting and horrible act. I sincerely hope there are generals or leaders in charge who get put in jail for war crimes for such acts.

ok ready....

Byrnzie wrote:

On a more positive note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8059021.stm

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

jlew24asu wrote:

do you consider this a war crime? a simple yes or no will suffice.

nevermind, you already answered... you feel Israeli civilians are valid targets and should be killed

now THAT speaks volumes about you.

The definition of hypocrisy, and a disgusting one at that. It is ok for Palestinians to kill Israeli citizens. It is not ok for Israelis to kill Palestinian citizens. Thinking like that is why this situation will never progress... it plays right into Israel's hands and helps them immeasurably.

Me? Targeting non-combatants is wrong. Period. Doesn't matter who does it, or what their reasons are. It's wrong. Israel is wrong. Hamas is wrong. We're wrong for backing Israel always without question. Not a single reasonable voice in this whole fucking mess over there.

soulsinging

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

and here we have the ROOT of the problem in the middle east.

Now explain to me why you think that Palestinian attacks on Israeli's is the ROOT of the problem in the Middle East.

The ROOT of the problem is not Palestine's attacks on Israel. It is the fact that BOTH sides consider all their violence and disgusting practices to be ok due to what they claim the other side is doing. If it's wrong for Israel to do it, it's wrong for Hamas to do it too. You can't say your side is allowed to target civilians and the other side isn't. You lose all legitimacy. Israel says Hamas is a terrorist group and so it's ok for them to kill anyone that blinks down there. That's wrong and it's despicable. Hamas says Israel is on their property and thus it's ok for them to target civilians and murder them. That's wrong and despicable too. Neither side can act like savages and then try to claim it's ok because the other side started it. It won't get anyone anywhere.

Commy

soulsinging wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

and here we have the ROOT of the problem in the middle east.

Now explain to me why you think that Palestinian attacks on Israeli's is the ROOT of the problem in the Middle East.

The ROOT of the problem is not Palestine's attacks on Israel. It is the fact that BOTH sides consider all their violence and disgusting practices to be ok due to what they claim the other side is doing. If it's wrong for Israel to do it, it's wrong for Hamas to do it too. You can't say your side is allowed to target civilians and the other side isn't. You lose all legitimacy. Israel says Hamas is a terrorist group and so it's ok for them to kill anyone that blinks down there. That's wrong and it's despicable. Hamas says Israel is on their property and thus it's ok for them to target civilians and murder them. That's wrong and despicable too. Neither side can act like savages and then try to claim it's ok because the other side started it. It won't get anyone anywhere.

Israel does not have the right to use force in occupied territories. Gazans do.


that's not a biased opinion, that's using logic. If your land is being taken with force by outside invaders, you have a right to defend yourself with force.

Israel, being in occupied territories, has a right to defend themselves as well,only not with violence. They can defend themselves by leaving occupied territories.

Byrnzie

soulsinging wrote:

The definition of hypocrisy, and a disgusting one at that. It is ok for Palestinians to kill Israeli citizens. It is not ok for Israelis to kill Palestinian citizens. Thinking like that is why this situation will never progress... it plays right into Israel's hands and helps them immeasurably.

Me? Targeting non-combatants is wrong. Period. Doesn't matter who does it, or what their reasons are. It's wrong. Israel is wrong. Hamas is wrong. We're wrong for backing Israel always without question. Not a single reasonable voice in this whole fucking mess over there.

I think that illegal Israeli settlers who verbally abuse, spit at, beat, and murder Palestinians in the Occupied territories are legitimate targets. Don't pretend to be so shocked.

Byrnzie

soulsinging wrote:

The ROOT of the problem is not Palestine's attacks on Israel. It is the fact that BOTH sides consider all their violence and disgusting practices to be ok due to what they claim the other side is doing. If it's wrong for Israel to do it, it's wrong for Hamas to do it too. You can't say your side is allowed to target civilians and the other side isn't. You lose all legitimacy. Israel says Hamas is a terrorist group and so it's ok for them to kill anyone that blinks down there. That's wrong and it's despicable. Hamas says Israel is on their property and thus it's ok for them to target civilians and murder them. That's wrong and despicable too. Neither side can act like savages and then try to claim it's ok because the other side started it. It won't get anyone anywhere.

Try and get your lawyers mindset around this:

One man is crushing another mans neck with his boot. The man on the ground tries desperately to fight back. He occasionally manages to bite the toe of the attacker who is squeezing the life out of him. This doesn't make it an equal contest. There is no level playing field here. The root of the problem is not the sporadic violence from either side. The root of the problem is the occupation.

The Israeli settlers are not innocent civilians. If someone broke into your home and began abusing, and beating members of your family you would use violence against them.

The Palestinians have every right to use violence against the Zionist occupation. This is a perfectly logical, reasonable, and moral response in the face of the threat which they face.

You and Jlew keep talking about the word hypocrite. You both keep trying to justify and excuse Israel's crimes, and yet you pretend to be shocked when anyone says the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves. That is Hypocrisy.

Byrnzie

I just read your post Commy. Looks like you said it first. Respect.