Palestinian kindergarten graduation ceremony
Comments
-
jlew24asu wrote:just because you are weak doesn't automatically make you the victim.
I'll let this picture answer that comment...
http://arab.sa.utoronto.ca/map99.PAL.land-loss.jpg0 -
Byrnzie wrote:
i wonder if you will get a reply? maybe he'll just claim it's a single child/incident like before?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way0 -
I already told you. I support Israel going back to the 1967 borders. or some sort of compromise with Israel giving up land back to the palastinians. I will never support a people who encourage, teach, condone, killing of innocent people.Byrnzie wrote:0 -
jlew24asu wrote:I already told you. I support Israel going back to the 1967 borders. or some sort of compromise with Israel giving up land back to the palastinians. I will never support a people who encourage, teach, condone, killing of innocent people.
So we are in agreement then.0 -
not so fastByrnzie wrote:So we are in agreement then.
I support Israel going back to the borders, but doesnt mean I think they should. I believe they have to defend themselves from hamas who states that they want Israel destroyed. and several of its neighbors who have no problem attacking them. 0 -
jlew24asu wrote:not so fast
I support Israel going back to the borders, but doesnt mean I think they should. I believe they have to defend themselves from hamas who states that they want Israel destroyed. and several of its neighbors who have no problem attacking them.
What does their right to defend themselves have to do with them moving or not moving back to the 1967 borders? They will have more legitimacy in defending themselves within the internationally recognized borders pre 1967. An occupying army has no rights to anything.0 -
a war was fought. borders changed. in order for peace, compromises with have to come from both sides. I think abbas was the only chance at peace in the near future. and as of today, he is gone.Byrnzie wrote:What does their right to defend themselves have to do with them moving or not moving back to the 1967 borders? They will have more legitimacy in defending themselves within the internationally recognized borders pre 1967. An occupying army has no rights to anything.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:a war was fought. borders changed. in order for peace, compromises with have to come from both sides. I think abbas was the only chance at peace in the near future. and as of today, he is gone.
Borders didn't change though. Just as France's borders didn't change after Germany's defeat. The only countries who think the borders changed are Israel and the U.S.0 -
......
Whoops! I made a mistake. Silly me.
0 -
jlew24asu wrote:well according to the little map you posted, they changed.
That map was drawn up by Israel after years of illegal settlement expansion.
*Time out*
P.s. I was just looking at your photo's of Chicago again. They really are pretty awesome. I will definitely have to pay it a visit.
O.k, back to debating.....0 -
so would you like america to go back to the 1745 borders and give all the land back to indians?Byrnzie wrote:That map was drawn up by Israel after years of illegal settlement expansion.
like I said, a war was fought, borders changed. both sides will have to compromise, most of which will be Israel returning land to palastine.
peace isnt going to happen with your cut and dry approach of.."return to 1967 borders or terrorists attacks are justified"0 -
thanks man. if and when you do, make it summertime. its fucking great. I just finished upping some more photos tonight. I am going to make a summer 2007 folder on myspace to keep em organized and freshByrnzie wrote:
*Time out*
P.s. I was just looking at your photo's of Chicago again. They really are pretty awesome. I will definitely have to pay it a visit.
time in0 -
jlew24asu wrote:so would you like america to go back to the 1745 borders and give all the land back to indians?
There are no "Indians".
But, the answer is "yes".
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:thanks man. if and when you do, make it summertime. its fucking great. I just finished upping some more photos tonight. I am going to make a summer 2007 folder on myspace to keep em organized and fresh
time in
O.k. And when we meet for a few beers I have just one rule: No politics!
0 -
jlew24asu wrote:so would you like america to go back to the 1745 borders and give all the land back to indians?
Well, that would certainly be more interesting than daytime t.v. Although, like the situation with the native Americans, I believe that compromises should be made. In the case of Israel, the only compromise that appears feasible and workable is for them to abide by the will of the international consensus - excerpting the U.S - which calls for an end to the occupation and a return to the 1967 borders. This seems to be the only viable option.
The American Indians are not a generic unified country, but a collection of different tribes with claims to different areas of land in America. Fir instance, the Lakota would probably be satisfied simply with being given a large part of South Dakota back to them, including the black hills, while the Apache and Hopi would have claim to parts of Arizona and New Mexico.0 -
well lets both agree that we do not want innocent people dying on either side. I would love peace throughout the middle east. I would love to visit the region. its where civilization started. its gotta be good.Byrnzie wrote:Well, that would certainly be more interesting than daytime t.v. Although, like the situation with the native Americans, I believe that compromises should be made. In the case of Israel, the only compromise that appears feasible and workable is for them to abide by the will of the international consensus - excerpting the U.S - which calls for an end to the occupation and a return to the 1067 borders. This seems to be the only viable option.
The American Indians are not a generic unified country, but a collection of different tribes with claims to different areas of land in America. Fir instance, the Lakota would probably be satisfied simply with being given a large part of South Dakota back to them, including the black hills, while the Apache and Hopi would have claim to parts of Arizona and New Mexico.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 279 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help