I don't think cool chick should be banned. I think it's good to have all types of view points in this thread. Hell... the optomist in me wants to believe by having cool chick in here, by the end of the disscussion maybe both sides would understand a little bit of where the other side is coming from. It's a long shot but if our posts become a little more imormative with evidence to back up our opinions and then express the obviously deeply felt emotions connected with the events in that context it might help.
I cannot be certain what she intended by her 'killing babies' reference, so I let it alone. If she does advocate 'killing babies', I imagine that could rise to a bannable offense (but only the admins know, eh).
This is r****ded. Cool chicks comments can not possibly be interpreted as opinion - they are pure and simple hate...evil. Forget about the politics, etc. She (or he) is spouting discrimination, violence and hate. That shouldn't be accepted anywhere. I don't have to venture in these threads but I did - unfortunately -one would hope that people like cool chick don't actually exist - what she wrote in this thread literally boggles my mind - at the very least we can live without it.
we can also live without terrorists dropping bombs, armies killing young ones, and arnold as governor, but it happens and thers nothing we can do about it, esp going attacking some other country next to Palestine. dont you think that the israeli army killing pre teens isnt evil, and an upset arab raising her voice is considered hate. i have seen pictures of babies with holes in their bodies(kinda like in terminator 2) and that goes unsoken of and no one shuns israel for doing so. but when a pissed of father or mother goes back andtakes their anger out its terrorism. look im not saying its right, but every body thinks that they are doing it the right way. america used to think slavery was the right thing to do, and now we live as equals with our african american counterparts, so lets just pray and hope we can get along and just forget about what happened. (ofcourse better said than done) but thats my 2 cents
dude, you're either smoking crack or can't read. I don;t care what "side" she's on. She is spouting hate and violence. On this board, fortunately, their is something that can be done about it. She can be banned, and she should be. What does it have to do with Arab-Israeli...who cares, it is the crap that she's writing that's just appaling - almost in a brainwashed type of manner. As I've said before, it literally amazes me that people like her actually exist (really scares me too)
THERE WAS NO PROOOOF it was a terrorist camp, syria said it was NOT a terrorist camp. is that too hard to understand?
http://www.angelfire.com/ak3/akka/pal.html http://snapshots.palestinechronicle.com/snapshots.php?gid=38&page=&aid=603 go there
Excellent point, FranchiseBlade and one of the best posts in this thread. The extremists on both sides are keeping the killing going. Somehow, they both need to be stopped. Some effective leadership from this country could help a great deal. Say what you want about Carter, but the man made more progress in the Middle East towards peace than his successors... with help from two leaders with the courage to take a risk.
I don't think anyone can deny that Israel has killed innocents. That doesn't mean that killing more innocents by the Palestinians will make things better. The argument shouldn't even be reduced to who killed the first innocents. It should be stopped no matter which side did it. Like others I'm not exactly clear on which particular incidents cool is talking about, or if she is denying that Palestinians have killed innocent babies as well. Before wanting to ban her, I would like to see her points clarified.
hate to be a party-pooper to this lovefest, but... the claim that peaceful resistance promotes real action is simply absurd. i point to the Tibetan movement, the greatest living symbol of nonviolent resistance, which gets the dalai lama banned in several european countries and his country violated for an eternity. europe and the us has done NOTHING for tibet for the past 50 years, and never will. money talks, rights walk. power and self-interest will always dominate morality and sympathy in international relations. and nothing gives more power than the edge of a sword. pardon my cynicism.
i agree but no one says anything to stop the israelis anytime they do it, but anytime there is a suicide bombing in retaliation. ITS ON THE FRONT PAGE. how is this fair, do you not call this media abuse, or some sort of coverup. i agree both sides have to stop, but for the palestinians to stop the hamas, and Islamic Jihad, they have to be told atleast what their boundries in the country are.
I agree that Tibet has been trod upon with a great injustice done to the Dalai lama. I knew that he was exhiled from his homeland. I didn't know that he was banned from any European countries. I would also like to point out that media attention plays a large part in what happens. For whatever reason the Tibet situation receives little while the Middle East receives quite a bit. So whatever struggles do happen there will be in the spotlight. I also pointed out that the Palestinian cause receives a lot of favorable feeling in Europe already. But to say that peaceful protest gets nothing accomplished because of Tibet is not accurate. Look at South Africa and the ANC. They once used used violent resistence in an effort to obtain justice and get their rights. It didn't work, their leaders were killed and imprisoned... sometimes killed while in prison. It was only after they stopped those methods that attention started turning towards the problems there. Sanctions took hold, and luckily in the U.S. congress voted to override Reagan's veto of those sanctions, and with increased international pressure a change did take place in S. Africa. The oppressed were given more rights and a chance to take part in the government. We can also look and see what the alternative has achieved for the Palestinians. How many rights have they gotten through terrorism? How much of their land was returned to them? How many of the families are reunited because of the suicide bombers? How much easier is it for the Palestinians to find work, and travel to that work because of suicide bombings?
As far as saying the suicide bombings happen in retaliation, I don't think we should even argue about that. Both sides have claims that the other side started it and somehow each side was only retaliating. I'm not saying your wrong, or right, just that who started doesn't matter as much as how it's going to end. If we argue about who is retaliating and who started it, we will never move on the important issues of oppression, lack of justice, and death of innocents. I agree with you that, at least in the U.S., media coverage is slanted, and so is the pressure put on Israel when they do something atrocious vs. the pressure put on the Palestinian side. Someone else brought up Carter and his work in the Middle East. At that time we had someone who was genuinely interested in the idea, leaders on boths sides who saw that a fair peace agreement would be good for both their peoples, and they sought to work it out. For anything like that to happen now we would probably need different leadership in the U.S., Palestinian, and Israeli side.
its not just those three countries that this conflict is relying on. we have about 140 countries and why is US the only one with an opinion about who does what, i think there should be a vote in the UN, and then US should accept no matter what the outcome is to back it up, since they are "world powers". as long as US funds israel, palestine will think of them as "satan". so why would they agree to a road map from USA, they assume that they are getting jipped. let someone nuetrel like say switzerland put out a proposal, and then the UN votes on it and we the US back up the UN proposal. we cant disagree with the UN if we dont like whats on the board, we have to do whats better for the world as a whole. its kinda like LE$ charging the fans for conveniance, but the fans as a whole would be happier without the charges, whereas the rich people are the ones who support LE$, thats why in the end LE$ and the rich ones win. US and ISrael will win until the US accepts a back seat to the UN, and israel accepts what its given, and also palestine will have to accept what its given, because the middle east wont go against the UN. trust me.
I agree the UN should be involved. But as for brokering peace, someone powerful has to act as mediator, and perhaps bring in a plan. I do believe that the UN would be more likely to get involved if the Israelis had their excuse (defense from terrorism) taken away from them.
even if that excuse was taken away from them UN cant do anything till US takes a seat back, and lets not one but lets say a group of 10 countries decide, and ofcourse not all US's little Bizzatches, like say UK, but a more rounded out group.
'decide' what? edit: ok, just read your previous post. The UN cannot 'force' a settlement here. Entirely unrealistic.
And while the bombings continue, how much easier is it for Israel to continue building settlements, and also build a wall outside of the '67 lines? Peaceful resistance would actually be painful for the present Israeli leadership, and would most likely force that leadership out. The US would also be forced to exert more pressure on Israel to stop settlement construction, etc.
