What's the fucking deal with Palestinians?

Colorsblending9 wrote:

I cant stand all this anti-Israeli propaganda you guys are spreading around here.
It truly makes me sick to my stomach. Stop spewing out articles by anti-Israel authors and automatically assume it is fact.

Hello Lazymoon! You weren't away for long were you!

Right then, let me explain it for you: being against the unjust and illegal Zionist occupation doesn't make someone 'anti-Israel'. It's a shame that certain people need this pointed out to them.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Theres a difference between disagreeing with Israel's policies and actions, and actually comparing them to Nazis and South African Apartheid.

The situation in the occupied territories is exactly like that of the Apartheid bantustans in South Africa. Maybe you explain to me how it's any different?

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Israel isn't ethnically cleaning anyone, there is no genocide, there is no massmurder.

This comment is so absurd it doesn't deserve a response.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Clearly innocent lives on both sides have been killed, and this makes me sick. But you will NEVER see an Israeli strap a bomb onto his/her chest and blowup a civilian bus containing Palestinian people.

You don't need to strap a bomb to your chest when you have the second largest fleet of F16's in the world.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Yes, IDF attacks have gone wrong, but not only at the expense of innocent palestinian lives, but at the expense of some Israeli soldiers lives. Its never the intention of the IDF to go out and brutally murder a group of innocent people. They intend to kill Hamas militants.

You're wrong.

Israel accused of war crimes
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5276626.stm

Israel targets civilians and UN personnel with impunity
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/isra-d12.shtml

'I can't imagine anyone who considers himself a human being can do this'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jul/28/israel
'On Friday a four-year-old Palestinian boy was shot dead by a soldier - the most recent child victim of the Israeli army. Chris McGreal investigates a shocking series of deaths.'


http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/child_41304.html
'The Israeli occupation army and paramilitary Jewish settlers have killed 545 Palestinian children and minors since the outbreak of the al-Aqsa Intifada in September 2000.

Among these victims, 266 children were 14 or younger while the ages of the remaining 279 ranged from 15 to 18. Moreover, as many as 20,000 Palestinian children were injured, with nearly 1500 sustaining life-long disabilities.

The total number of Palestinians killed by Israel during the current Intifada is around 2700, the vast majority of them civilians.'

'Palestinian children pay price of Israel's Summer Rain offensive'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/07/israel
Rights group says 197 civilians have been killed in military operation, including 48 minors
The Guardian, Thursday September 7 2006

Lebanon:
UN officer reported Israeli war crimes before deadly bombing: widow
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2008/02/06/ot-von-kruedener-080206.html
'A United Nations military observer sent e-mails home to Canada reporting that Israel was bombing schools and waging "a campaign of terror against the Lebanese people" shortly before he was killed by an Israeli bomb in Lebanon, said his widow.'

Colorsblending9 wrote:

From a historical point of view, the area known as Palestine before Israel was controlled by numerous empires (look it up) with Britain controlling it last. NEVER was there a country called Palestine. Britain spit the area known as Palestine into 2 parts. The larger part known as TransJordan, which then became Jordan. In a sense, "Palestinian" people live in Jordan....

The above comment is a lie.

'It is often said that the Palestinians were not a people. The most notorious example of this vague ploy is a 1999 remark by the then Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir:

"It was not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist"

The need to debate Meir's contention is obviated by, among many other sources, the impressive work of Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S Migdsal, 'The Palestinian people: A History'. They provide authoritative and utterly convincing evidence that yes, there was indeed a Palestinian people. Even without opening the book, one might wonder how there could be a Palestine - the term appears throughout Zionist literature - without Palestinians, or what possessed the British to refer to "Representatives of the Palestinian people" in 1939. But the persistance of Meirs type of argument suggests that we should consider whether it is even worth debating these matters.
When it is siad that the Palestinians are not a people, or were not a people when the Zionists settled in Palestine, there are limits to how much words can wash away. This much seems beyond dispute: before the Zionists came, there was a bunch of people who lived in the area. Whether they were called Palestinians, whether the area was called Palestine, whether the people who lived in this area considered themselves a people, Palestinian or otherwise, are all questions without the slightest importance when assessing Zionism. There was no United States of America before the American revolution, so, of course, no one could consider himself an American in the sense of being a citizen of a place called the United States Of America. No one suggests that, for this reason, these revolutionaries somehow had less legitinacy for not being identifiable in this fashion. No one suggests they were any less entitle reject subjugation by the British. What people are called, whether there is a name for the area in which they make their home, whether they have some sort of national self-consciousness - none of this has any bearing on whether they must accept, not merely settlers in the general vicinity, not merely setlers who intend to become predominant in the region, but settlers who propose to install themselves as soveriegns over that area. And today the identity of Palestine or the Palestinians has absolutely no bearing on whether Israelis should control the territory they occupy or the people within it.'
Michael Neumann - The Case against Israel.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

As for the people who lived in the Israeli portion of the former British owned 'Palestine': many of them stayed, and that is why 20 percent of Israel is made up of Arab Israeli. Many were exiled, yet some left by choice.

Many were exiled? Yeah, approximately 900,000 were forcibly evicted from their homes by the Zionist's race war.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

As we all know, when Israel accepted the borders and the Arabs didn't, the surrounding Arab nations felt it was appropriate to attack Israel from all sides, but not to take in all of the Palestinian refugees!

If you think these refugees were mistreated by Israel, then surely you'd they were grossly mistreated by surrounding Arab nations.

There's a reason the borders were rejected, but you choose to ignore that.
Your second point simply makes no sense.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Peace was available after the signing of the Oslo Accords in the early 90s, but the Palestinian side was far from holding up their end of the bargain. Israel wasnt perfect either, but the Palestinian authority truly screwed up. Then the Intifada broke out, and suicide bombings happened in large numbers.

How about explaining exactly what was on offer during the Oslo accords? I provided a map on this thread a few days ago which detailed exactly what was on offer. I suggest you take a look at it and maybe you'll see why it was rejected.
Perhaps you can also explain just why the intifada broke out? Or is that something else you choose to gloss over?

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Even though radical Islam might take up a tiny percentage of the Palestinian people, it still makes a powerful effect on the entire situation. Yes, Hamas was recently elected, but their is no denying they are a terrorist organization that wishes to destroy Israel. How can you make peace with a group like that?

Simple. You withdraw from the occupied territories and begin abiding by international law and the will of the international community - excluding the U.S - for a two-state solution along the pre 1967 border.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Israel might be too aggressive, or flat out wrong in this whole conflict. However, their overall goal is certainly not to destroy another group of people.?

Yes it is. I suggest you look at the history of Zionism and it's intentions. Here's a few quotes:

"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and .to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No Zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."

In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Another difference I've noticed during this conflict is the reaction to killings and attacks. While this may be a tiny portion of the population, there were still ACTUAL PARADES in the streets of Gaza when the 8 Yeshiva students were killed in Israel recently by a Palestinian terrorist. When the IDF kills Palestinians, Israelis don't parade in the streets.

The media sure is a wonderful thing.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Now, I know a few of you are going to reply to this message by copying and pasting anti-Isaeli author's words about the situation. I'd really like you guys to respond in your words.

We've already been over this Lazymoon. You asked me before to desist from backing up what I say with evidence and source material. This would obviously suit your needs because then you could continue spouting these unsubstantiated statements, half truths and just outright lies and people would have no way of checking their accuracy or validity. So, I'll repeat what I told you before: No.

Colorsblending9 wrote:

Explain to me what Israel should have done in '48 and 67 and 73 besides defend itself.

It should have ceased settlement expansion and it should have prevented any further extension of the Zionists intended race war.

evenkat wrote:

Of course but there was no rational justification for the mistreatment of the European Jews that continued after WWII that forced them to flee to Palestine in the first place! Why don't you ask your own government why it continued the brutality and mistreatment of the Jews that created this problem? Why weren't the European Jews given a nice safe place to go to in Europe? Britain objected to the immigration of the European Jews to Palestine after WWII so why didn't they secure a safe place for them in Britain? Why because they were not welcome there, in Europe and then not in Palestine. See the Jews are victims and those victims created another victim the Palestinians.

As for my second paragraph that you said was irrelevant, actually it is relevant because the Palestinians have had to deal with many occupiers over the years, which adds to their plight of freedom.

You talk about Jews as if they're a homogenous entity. I think you're mistaking Jews for Zionists.