Tel Aviv U VP: Sharon's Plans to turn Israel into the old South Africa

So... why is it bad that there is a powerful Jewish lobby in Washington?

I didn't know that jews dominated the American popular culture.. lol. Last time I checked, most people don't care about the situation. They just want people to stop killing people. Yes, its that simple. This is hilarious. And we dominate the media? C'mon now. I remember someone calling in to Fox News and saying the same thing. All the people on the show had a field day with him. You have bought into some serious propaganda my friend. Jews do not dominate pop culture(when was the last time yalmulchas were in style?) and the media.

as for your last comment lil.. CLICK HERE!

 

Did I or did I not say "BEFORE THE FINAL SOLUTION"

Talking to Palestinian refugees here in Houston, I was told of their lives and what they had to go through living in the "occupied territories". They had to carry their papers when they were allowed to roam around, when they weren't on a military curfew that let them leave their houses one day a week.
They said they would walk by Israeli soldiers, and would get beat and harassed for no reason. Anyone that opened their mouth publicly would dissappear at night and be taken away never to be heard from again. They are locked into their ghetto's with horrible sanitation and no ability to sustain a living. Disease was rampant. Women dared not walk alone in fear of being raped by Israeli troops. If they walked outside of their houses at night they would be shot at, no questions asked. Their houses would simply be bulldozed one day to make room for an additional settlement with no compensation aside from 10 minutes notice. The Israeli's didn't want traps in the homes to they would only give them time to take a few things out. How nice of them.

When groups of men would get together to talk about something we have: freedom. They would all vanish the next night, under the blanket term of "terrorists"

This is just a fraction of the pain that I have seen in the eyes of these people, that reminds me of when I helped Bosnian refugees in New York and Houston. Maybe that is why i'm so emotional in regards to my asessment of the situation.

To hear tales of men losing their wives, of children losing their fathers and the desperation in their eyes. These people weren't terrorists, just people like you and me that want freedom. They grew up and lived their entire lives in a Refugee camp for God's sake. And a fact is that the Israeli army has never fully pulled out of the occupied territories, that is utterly false. They have been building and are building to this day more settlements for new Israeli's from Russia, Eastern Europe and Amercia.

And please don't bring up other Arab governments in that area. The fact is that they are worse in many regards than Israel, but my tax dollars are not directly supporting their regime, so it is not of as much consequence, and the public knows of their ways unlike the aura of innocence that seems to permeate Israel.

So if you read and then re-read my statements, I never compared the Palestinian situations to Aushwitz, I compared it to early hardships placed on Jews in Nazi Germany, and the way they were thrown out of their homes and relocated to the Ghettos is very reminiscient to how the Palestinians are being treated today.

 

My generally moderate stance on this issue is safe, thank you.

I am trying to illimunate your bias. Others here may have a similarly strong bias as you, but you continue to raise the topic. Since you continue on with that bias without fail, I continue to harp on it. If that's a personal attack, so be it. I having a growing suspicion that you are incapable of gaining perspective on your view, which, ironically, is what you have claim many Jews have a problem with. Yet, any criticism of your bias you summarily dismiss as an over-reaction.

With the numerous threads critical of Israel that you have started, I do not recall you starting one that criticizes the Palestinians for supporting the bombing of civilians.

Interesting that you now try to find the issues that we differ on, like I'm attacking you because I don't like your beliefs.

We agree on many things about Israel: Sharon sucks, the pre-67 borders are good and the settlements should be removed. The only 'tough' questions for the parties should be Jerusalem and the right of return. I personally believe that Jerusalem should be a shared capitol (could you imagine 2 great religions being that gracious? ) . I don't how the refugee issue will be resolved, but it seems that the world can figure out something that works.

Do I agree with leaning on Israel? You bet. I think that they are certainly making mistakes that benefit no one, including the Israelis. But the solution is not simple, and I don't claim to have it. Do you? You make it sound so simple, but do you know a path to peace that will work for both peoples?

On the Palestinian side, suicide bombing civilians is inhuman. Packed with nails. It is pure hatred agains fellow humans. It is disgusting that so many Palestinians support it, I just hope that their humanity can prevail once they have their own nation.


Now, if you happen to agree with most all of that, would you now consider that something else may be what raises ire?

 

Why do you defend Sharon? Do you really think that he's good for Israel? Is he inncocent of slaughtering civilians? Does he have a vision for peace?

He's no Rabin.

 

Israeli troops are raping women?

 

Cohen:

It was exactly that concern that was expressed when groups of people declined to vote for JFK. That's right...many people expressed that a vote for JFK was a vote for the Vatican. It was such a large concern that JFK addressed it in the Presidential debates.

Glynch:

Maybe not helpful, but certainly accurate.

What? UN troops? I don't know if you've heard the news, but the Palestinians are an army you can't know by seeing them and they engage in suicide guerrilla warfare. Sounds a lot like the problems we had fighting the Viet Cong. I'd rather not have UN troops slaughtered by sending them into an untenable situation thank you.

So now anybody who disagrees with you needs "deprogramming?" Such arrogance.

F.D. Kahn:

OK...so by "before the final solution" you mean the treatment in Nazi Germany prior to the extermination. So are you meaning to say that the concentration camps were "the final solution???" WTF???!!!!

While I don't agree with MANY of the actions of the Israeli government as it pertains to the Palestinians, don't act as though the Israelis are just beating somebody up because they can. If the Palestinians would stop strapping C-4 to themselves and setting it off on a bus, then the Israelis wouldn't feel the need to do what they're doing. Both sides need reform.

Cohen:

My thoughts exactly. Glynch has the issues all sorted out in his mind. When somebody disagrees he dismisses it as over-reaction or a misunderstanding of the situation rather than address the substantive points. It seems as though glynch believes:
Israel = evil oppressor
Palestinians = misunderstood freedom fighters
He is consistently one-sided against the Israelis. I wonder why that is...

 

I've heard the same thing from JEWISH peace-workers in Palestine. They described the horrendous treatment of Palestinians and the horrible conditions forced upon them. The evil suicide bombings won't stop until Israel finds a more peaceful leader. I read a letter yesterday signed by Albert Einstein, a JEW, warning about Isreali leaders like Sharon. I'll try and post it later, but I don't have time right now.

 

Exactly. Jewish-Americans should be very disturbed by a comment like this from Sharon. He made a major slip and exposed his true sentiments for all to see.

 

glynch,

Even though I have previously admitted that I do have some bias, I HAVE started thread decrying Sharon's/Israel's actions. I also don't keep starting threads on the attrocities committed and supported by Palestinians, in fact, I cannot recall ANY that I have started that criticized the Palestinians.

I realize that there are 2 sides to this conflict. You have shown no propensity to admit that. Even when directly confronted with that argument, you avoid it. Why not answer the question? Have both sides committed wrongs or not? If you say no, you lose all credibility. If you say yes, can't you just admit your error? Instead, you have to try and make the claim that I'm biased also? You have to raise a pitifully inaccurate argument that I am as biased as you are?

Your argument hinged on the fact that I haven't started any threads critical of Israel's actions, which is blatantly false. Then proceeds to compare the 'blandness' of my statements. Is that it?
Regarding my 'bland' comments, I have repeatedly stated that I cannot believe that the Israelis elected Sharon. But, as wrong as it was to elect him, don't try to compare support of Sharon with support of suicide-bombing civilians. When Sharon starts intentionally dropping cluster bombs on the Palestinian population, then you can make that argument. And I'm not belittling apartheid acts, but how much is based on race and how much is due to defense? It's not so clear cut. Supporting suicide-bombers is very clear-cut.

 

Cohen:
I need to make myself clearer. What I'm saying is, it's hard to believe USA's foreign policy isn't slanted to Isreal when the majority of the government chief officials are Jews. Not to mention American Jews' powerful lobby and fund raising ability.So what Sharon said, that Israel controls America isn't entirely baseless although it's definitely an exaggeration. I wouldn't use the word "control", just "heavily influenced" to describe the USA's relationship with Israel.

I don't see why the USA places relationship with Isreal, which is a country with little economic and military importance, above the oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Where does America's national interest intersect with that of the Isreal's?

BTW, saying Isreal controlling USA is no way a racist comment, but some serious compliment to the Jews, no need to be over sensitive. I don't think Sharon is a racist to the Jews.

 

I'm sure everybody would like to chalk it up to all sorts of sinister "jews controling the government" or "jews controling the media" angles, but the real reason, as I understand it, is much less sinister.

After the creation of the Israeli state, the US had at least a greater degree of neutrality on the issue. The primary 'pro Israel' forces at this point were the British and the French.

The United States began taking sides almost by accident, in resposnse to the appearance of Soviet-made arms (like AK-47
s) being provided to Israel's enemies, such as Syria. In it's dychotomous cold-war thinking, the United States naturally took up the banner for Iraq. Because the Israeli's proved to be more or less stable in their public suport of friendship with the US, the relationship just sort of grew to solidity.

Contrast this with other ME states that have been alies, but have maintained a general public apathy, or even antagonism to the US, and the ties there don't seem quite as strong. Remember, all of the OPEC countries 'put the squeeze' on the US in the '70's, even our friends such as Saudi Arabia. There's a sence that the ties between even pro-American arab states and the US are more ties of convienence than anything based on any true comonality.

Finally, I find it intresting how 'fuzzy' the concept of Judiasim seems to be. People refer to racial, religious, and ethinic Judiasim as if being a member of one group instantly makes one a member of the others. I've known people who had a jewish last name/genetic heritige that had less knowlede of Hebrew and Jewish religious custom than I do. (Much in the same way that it's racist to assume every Arab is a radical Muslim.) I think it's important when one claims that Jews control the United States to differentiate which subset of "Jews" you are speaking of. It really muddles things up to not do so, and leads to arguements that are based on fuzzy logic.