I'm no supporter of Arafat, as far as he being a proven liar, Bush also holds the same claim as proven by the document that he claimed existed from the AIEA which said that IRaq was six months away from a nuke. It was only later discovered that such a document never existed. So I don't want to get into who can and can't be trusted. That may be how you see it, but it isn't based in reality. Sharon's own party did vote to NEVER recognize a Palestinian state. And Zionists who were there prior to 1948 had no intention of ever having a Palestinian state. So while some troops This is from the group, Jews for Justice. http://www.cactus48.com/mandate.html "The Zionists made no secret of their intentions, for as early as 1921, Dr. Eder, a member of the Zionist Commission, boldly told the Court of Inquiry, 'there can be only one National Home in Palestine, and that a Jewish one, and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs, but a Jewish preponderance as soon as the numbers of the race are sufficiently increased.' He then asked that only Jews should be allowed to bear arms." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest." "In 1936-9, the Palestinian Arabs attempted a nationalist revolt... David Ben-Gurion, eminently a realist, recognized its nature. In internal discussion, he noted that 'in our political argument abroad, we minimize Arab opposition to us,' but he urged, 'let us not ignore the truth among ourselves.' The truth was that 'politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country, while we are still outside'... The revolt was crushed by the British, with considerable brutality." Even David Ben-Gurion calls Israel the aggressor. So at best the desire not to recognize the other sides claim has gone both ways for some time. If you consider writing something anti-Israeli as being an enemy combatant then your sense of justice is severely lacking. As for America doing the same thing, I used to believe it was never possible, but since Ashcroft came into office you may be right.
Franchise Blade- You wrote-I'm no supporter of Arafat, as far as he being a proven liar, Bush also holds the same claim as proven by the document that he claimed existed from the AIEA which said that IRaq was six months away from a nuke. It was only later discovered that such a document never existed. So I don't want to get into who can and can't be trusted. Please provide a link. You are spinning badly here. Sharon's own party did vote to NEVER recognize a Palestinian state. And Zionists who were there prior to 1948 had no intention of ever having a Palestinian state. So while some troops The Likud Party doesn't want a Palestinian State because the Palestinians have been at war with Israel for their ENTIRE existance, but they don't represent majority opinion on this matter. Most Israelis want a Palestinian state, and Barak's offer of Peace during Clinton's last term proves this. The desire of Zionists before 1948 COULD NOT be more irrelevant to this discussion. _______________________________________________ Franchise Blade, I looked at the website that produced your quotes, and you are full of BS. The SUPPOSED author is a group called "Jews for Peace in the Middle East", but no names or information is posted. The website refers to the Massacre in Jenin, WHICH NEVER HAPPENED. You are posting crap from a Palestinian website that is another example of Arab lies, in my opinion. Please check your sources more clearly. If you consider writing something anti-Israeli as being an enemy combatant then your sense of justice is severely lacking. As for America doing the same thing, I used to believe it was never possible, but since Ashcroft came into office you may be right. What part don't you understand? The Palestinians ARE NOT Israeli citizens! They are foreigners in an occupied land who are threatening Israel. Do you think we would allow 16 year old Iraqis to threaten American soldiers, and not arrest them? WE WOULD DO THE SAME THING.
The group JEws for Peace are indeed Jewish people and not Palestinian. On the website each quote is followed by the source of the quote, and if you read my post you will see that they are included in it. I also said that if the minors committed a jailable offense then by all means they should be arrested. Violence against innocent civilians would definitely fall into that category. They shouldn't be arrested without trial, or charges being made against them which is happening. Writing something bad about an oppressive Israeli govt. shouldn't be considered jailable for any justice loving person, and when they are arrested ISrael should follow the UN agreement that they signed. Zionoism pre-1948 is relevant, because it shows that the aggression didn't just pop up from the Palestinians on the day Israel gained statehood. There is a history that goes beyond that, and Ben-Gurion himself is quoted as saying that at least politically the 'soon to be' Israelis were the agressors.
LOL, this is not a group! The website is registered to a man who lives in Southern California. When you click on the link to his poetry, a PLO flag (?) is flying proudly. Sorry, but this is war, and the United States is doing the exact same thing with the detainees in Cuba. Before 1948, 85% of what is considered Israel today was legally transferred to Jews either through legal land sales or transfers. You are a victim of Arab disinformation.
Right on the button john Here is a quote from the website about the history of the region. How long has Palestine been a specifically Arab country? "Palestine became a predominately Arab and Islamic country by the end of the seventh century. Almost immediately thereafter its boundaries and its characteristics - including its name in Arabic, Filastin - became known to the entire Islamic world, as much for its fertility and beauty as for its religious significance...In 1516, Palestine became a province of the Ottoman Empire, but this made it no less fertile, no less Arab or Islamic...Sixty percent of the population was in agriculture; the balance was divided between townspeople and a relatively small nomadic group. All these people believed themselves to belong in a land called Palestine, despite their feelings that they were also members of a large Arab nation...Despite the steady arrival in Palestine of Jewish colonists after 1882, it is important to realize that not until the few weeks immediately preceding the establishment of Israel in the spring of 1948 was there ever anything other than a huge Arab majority. For example, the Jewish population in 1931 was 174,606 against a total of 1,033,314." Edward Said, "The Question of Palestine." Edward Said is a PROVEN liar.. want links? here ya go http://www.freeman.org/m_online/sep99/camera.htm http://publishersweekly.reviewsnews.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA167288&publication=publishersweekly and this one comes from (hold your breath) a jewish website. Yes, Jews are reliable sources if you can pull your head out of your donkey. http://www.afsi.org/OUTPOST/99SEP/sep10.htm Lets see.. another post from this website. Public vs private pronouncements on this question. "In internal discussion in 1938 [David Ben-Gurion] stated that 'after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand into the whole of Palestine'...In 1948, Menachem Begin declared that: 'The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognized. The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) will be restored to the people of Israel, All of it. And forever." Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle." Chomsky is an engine for neo-nazi/anti-jewish propaganda. http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/cohn_on_chomsky_intro.html Being Jewish myself, I wouldn't even care if this website was from REAL jews. Most people think that if one website from jews says this then MANY jews think the same. This is pure crap. We know Israel is not 100% innocent. We know that the Palestinians are oppressed. But, who really oppresses them? As johnheath said "If Israel did not realize that the Palestinians would someday get the occupied lands back, then Israel would have annexed the land. Egypt and Jordan don't want the land back, so use you head and realize that Israel has always planned to trade land for peace. Peace is up to the Arabs, but they don't want peace. " I must reitterate that the west bank and jordan belonged to Egypt and Jordan, NOT Palestine. This land was taken in a defensive war. It is occupied by Israel and continues to be today because there is no real security and no trust between the Israeli's and Palestinians. As for holding minors imprisoned for nothing.. I disagree. But if it saves lives on BOTH sides. Palestinian side- less recruits for suicide attacks. Israeli side- less chance for suicide attacks. Is it really that bad. I think there has been a slowdown in attacks for a while and the settlements need to be demolished. The Palestinians need a homeland and these kids should be let out of jail. If the Palestinians continue to attack Israel after these steps have happened. Then the Israelis have every right to defend themselves to the extreme.
Chomsky is an engine for neo-nazi/anti-jewish propaganda. http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/cohn_on_chomsky_intro.html This is a joke. And a very fine example of how pseudo intellectual arguments can prove anything to anybody, given to the desire of the reader to have his/her prejudices validated.
As fat as Edward Said, and not really being from Palestine, here are some parts from the very link that you provided. But some facts are beyond dispute. Said was born to Palestinian parents in Jerusalem in 1935. In a blistering riposte published in London's al-Hayat and Cairo's al-Ahram Weekly, Said retorted, "It is part of the Palestinian fate always to be required to prove one's existence and history!" Had Weiner properly consulted Out of Place, Said wrote, he would have ascertained that the family divided its time between Jerusalem, Cairo and Lebanon in the years before 1948. In response to Weiner's accusations, Said affirmed that "the family house [in Jerusalem] was in fact a family house in the Arab sense, which meant that our families were one in ownership"; asserted that the records for St. George's school ended in 1946, a year before he enrolled; and, finally, accused Weiner of never bothering to contact him, and of threatening his relatives. "What he cannot understand," Said wrote, "is that I have been moved to defend the refugees' plight precisely because I did not suffer and therefore felt obligated to relieve the suffering of my people." Appartenly the one who's being dishonest is in question as to whether it's acutally Said, or the gentleman investigating him. To look at records of a school the year before Said went there and then to say that shows proof he never went there isn't really all that honest. And again as far as honesty goes, our own presidents administration is lacking on with their talk about IRaqs nuke program that turned to out to be based on non-existent documents, forged evidence, and a lie about the aluminum tubing. Because they weren't honest about those things, doesn't mean they aren't honest about other things. As far as the evidence in the website I linked lists quotes by Ben-Gurion, who it is that wrote about those quotes doesn't take away the fact that it was Ben-Gurion who originally worte them. Chomsky is in no way a tool of neo nazis, and that's either ignorance of what he really writes about, or blatent dishonesty to begin with. By the way, CHomsky is jewish. The website is indeed written by REAL jews, and I've seen memebers of the group on Donahue, back when he had a show. One of them had even lost his child to terrorist bombings. If that Israeli father doesn't count as a REAL jew to you, then that's fine, and what you consider a real or false jew isn't all that important.
I agree with this and feel it is fair. The question remains though that will Sharon ever agree to a state and budge on dismantling the settlments? Currently in Israel there are huge government subsidies to individuals to live out there and they continue building them today. I just don't see the Israeli government willing to give them up and tear them down, even for peace. There is no real pressure on Israel to do so. And as much as the Israeli's have every right to defend themselves to the extreme, as do the Palestinians. Terrorist acts are also common by extremist Jewish groups and actions by the IDF like sending a missle into the middle of a city and leveling a few buildings to 'attempt' to assasinate one individual is an despicable and terrorist like attack. After that attack would it have been reasonable for Palestinians to take over Tel Aviv the way Jenin was?? I think the violence is horrific on both sides and I hope that the leaders can look beyond their petty disdain for each other.
How is this a joke? It is a simple link with Chomsky and a group of holocaust deniers. As a jew, this makes me sick.
F.D. Khan.. sup bro I hope the settlements are removed and so do the majority of Israelis. I agree with you that the Palestinians have every right to defend themselves. However I think they are going about it all wrong. Unfortunately, Arafat has no real power anymore. He has stolen so much money from his own people that 1. they are poor as hell and 2. they can't afford a decent police force to arrest militants. I know that the Israelis have crippled the palestinian police, but they can still do better. The palestinian jail system is known for having a revolving door. I pray for the day that there is peace. Hamas and other groups that want Israelis in the seas need to go. The settlements need to go. Arafat needs to go. Sharon will most likely need to be replaced because he is a little too extreme for this type of agreement(Netanyahu is worse though). The 2 groups are going to have to come together on this one. When will it be?
How is it a crazy statement? Have you ever seen the move Blackhawk Down? Yes, kids do fight and they are extremely effective because soldiers do not expect them to fight. If a kid is pointing a gun right at you are you not going to react because he is just a little kid? Hell no, you are going to blow his freakin head off. He isnt a child, he is an enemy combatant and thats how he should be treated. In Jenin, soldiers followed a child into an alley where they were killed because he had a bomb strapped to him. They are also used to set up ambushes. Palestinian children are also given slingshots and throw rocks. Do you want to get hit in the head with a rock? A rock can kill you if it hits you with the right force in the right place. And if you are going to call a statement crazy, atleast say why you think so. I am going to respect your opinion.
My next encounter with Chomsky revolved around his writing an introduction to a book by an anti-Semite named Robert Faurisson who denied that the Holocaust took place, that Hitler’s gas chambers existed, that the diary of Anne Frank was authentic, and that there were death camps in Nazi occupied Europe. He claimed that the "massive lie" about genocide was a deliberate concoction initiated by "American Zionists" and that "the Jews" were responsible for World War II. Chomsky described these and other conclusions as "findings" and said that they were based on "extensive historical research." He also wrote that "I see no anti-Semitic implication in the denial of the existence in gas chambers or even in the denial of the Holocaust." He said he saw "no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson’s work," including his claim that "the Jews" were responsible for World War II. He wrote an introduction to one of Faurisson’s book which was used to market his anti-Semitic lies. In a subsequent debate at the Harvard Medical School, Chomsky initially denied having advocated a Lebanon-style binational state for Israel, only to have to back down upon being confronted with the evidence. He also tried to dispute the fact that he had authorized an essay he had written in defense of Robert Faurisson to be used as the forward to Faurisson’s book about Holocaust denial, but again had to back down. Chomsky took the position that he had no interest in "revisionist" literature before Faurisson had written the book. When confronted by Robert Nozick, a distinguished philosophy professor who recalled discussing revisionist literature with him well before the Faurisson book, Chomsky first berated Nozick for disclosing a private conversation and then he shoved him contemptuously in front of numerous witnesses. Source: Chomsky's Immoral Divestiture Petition, Alan Dershowitz, May 10, 2002.
Thx john, I had to get back to work. I would like to get everyone's opinion on children in a warzone because of the relevence to the thread. As I stated before, IMO a child with a weapon is no longer considered a child, but an enemy combatant. However, pgabriel says this opinion is crazy. My dad once told me about one of his friends who is a vietnam vet. He told him a story about a child who had a bomb strapped to him, and then shoved towards the soldiers by his own mother. He shot the child and watched the kid explode while he hit the ground. My dad's friend still suffers from PTSD today because of this. Lets just say you have two different groups of people in a warzone. First, you have your enemy. Second, you have your bystanders. Typically, your bystanders are elderly, women, and children. I believe by the rules of engagement, if a bystander pulls a weapon of any kind, then he/she is no longer a bystander. I would love to hear everyone's opinion on this.
Children with weapons should be treated like any enemy soldier. There is nothing difficult about your question. The difficult and horrible part is having to pull the trigger.
Damn I'm bored. I decided to do a little more research on Edward Said. Found some pretty interesting stuff. The huge anti-Israel propaganda machine is just incredible. Go to any google search, type Israel attrocities. You will find Jenin, Deir Yassin. All proven to be false. As for Edward Said: One "expert" NPR quoted was Dr. Edward Said, the Columbia University professor -- also Cairo raised -- who was recently photographed violently throwing stones across the Lebanese border at Israeli soldiers. Said's hatred of Israel is visceral. He was a member of the Palestinian National Council, after all. But he also hates Arafat. Curiously, he said the only accurate words about Arafat in the series. He said Arafat lacked courage, foresight and intelligence. http://www.the-idler.com/IDLER-02/11-5.html This page was written is response to an 7 segment NPR story on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The NPR link to the story is: http://www.npr.org/news/specials/mideast/history/index.html Pretty interesting stuff.
Funny thing about the Internet, one man's facts are another man's fiction. The Institute for Historical Review, or IHR, publishes many small pamphlets designed to misinform people about the Holocaust. One of the most-persistent has been a pamphlet called "66 Questions And Answers About the Holocaust," or simply "66 Q&A." This pamphlet neatly summarizes many of the most common arguments used by Holocaust-deniers. Refuting these 66 claims strikes directly at the core of Holocaust-denial. What follows is a point-by-point refutation of its half-truths and untruths. "Increasing numbers of Jewish scholars" who supposedly support Holocaust-denial is probably a reference to Professor Noam Chomsky of MIT. They tend to claim that Chomsky supports their absurd theories, but that is a lie. Chomsky has defended the right of the French "revisionist" Faurisson to free speech, but he completely rejects Holocaust revisionism itself. Here is what he wrote on the matter: My views are quite explicitly stated: the Holocaust was the most extreme atrocity in human history, and we lose our humanity if we are even willing to enter the arena of debate with those who seek to deny or underplay Nazi crimes. And when asked his opinion on the writings of Faurisson and other Holocaust "revisionists," he answered: I have seen no reason to doubt the conclusions of authentic Holocaust historians (Hilberg, Bauer, etc.) on the facts of the matter. Hilberg and Bauer are well-known Holocaust historians. Each has written numerous books and articles. Needless to say, neither of them doubts the murder of millions in gas chambers.
Thanks for posting that No Worries. My wife and I were talking about Chomsky at lunch today, and we both knew that Chomsky and the French book that tried to deny the Holocaust would be brought up. It was cool to see that when I got home and checked the website, my posting was already cleared up.
