Peace Plan - "Accept it or face more violence."

thinkingaboutit said:
The Tyre story was not a fabrication although an internet blog claimed it was. How about sourcing that for us.

I notice you've ignored about 15 of my questions. Catch up and maybe I'll answer yours.

edit: on the Tyre 'hoax'

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/qana1206/4.htm
Click to expand...


You are not following the thread, apparently.

Lets' roll the videotape:
Have you asked even one question of me that I've not answered?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2518655&postcount=139
Going back, to post # 139, where you proposed that five years ago, when the IDF was employing bombs that dispersed darts, this was "punitive" and you decided that it might be useful for us "to imagine wondering if you might die every time you go out on the street." ---- and I certainly answered that.

After I patiently pointed out to you the problem with your argument, you asked:
"Hey webfusion could maybe both people be living in fear because both sides are doing things that get innocent people killed? Am I twisting things again?"

Which I answered -- "Yes" Here, thinkingaboutit, I'll be so kind as to link to the exact forum entry where I answered you:
POST # 158

(Bonus answer -- post # 157 --- my reply to your posting of the HRW report, which you have done already twice in this thread. Hmmmmmm, my memory fails me, but there was another poster who used to do that, and re-post it each time he felt crticism of Israel was required, which was often. Mycroft, help me out here, who was that guy?)

Going along, there are no further questions directed to me, as we skip past the horrendous ethics and morals of Israelis (who are "terrorists", I think you phrased it), and slide into the "ambulance blood libel"...

OK, now there's a specific question for me, in Post #177
"I guess I prove your claim too because I'm Jewish and I also speak out against the unethical things Israel has been doing?"


That question WAS ignored, because it's a non-sequitur. Your being jewish has nothing to do with my statement that Israel is an ethical nation, and acts, in the main, ethically, legally, morally. (and when ethics are violated, there are methods, there are ways, there are protests, to correct and voice displeasure with the way things are done. SEE: WINOGRAD. SEE: Israel Supreme Courts SEE: IDF soldier punished for Human Shield incident) ------ but I digress.

Which brings us back to this:
You keep talking about "two sides" or "either side" --- Yet, there are many sides, all aligned against Israel. Can you name the "other side"? Can you point to where this other side is, on a map?

||||||||||||||||||||||

The Tyre ambulance story you brought into this thread was absolutely a hoax, and to keep insisting that the IDF shot a missile through the roof of it makes you look exceedingly un-skeptical.

Just sayin'
 
webfusion said:
(Bonus answer -- post # 157 --- my reply to your posting of the HRW report, which you have done already twice in this thread. Hmmmmmm, my memory fails me, but there was another poster who used to do that, and re-post it each time he felt crticism of Israel was required, which was often. Mycroft, help me out here, who was that guy?)
Click to expand...

I think you probably mean Orwell, who was formerly known as Ex Lion Tamer. The one who eventually earned himself a long suspension and opted to not come back.

Though honestly that description likely fits more than one person. It seems as though many who are anti-Israel continue to cling to “evidence” long after it has been refuted.

webfusion said:
The Tyre ambulance story you brought into this thread was absolutely a hoax, and to keep insisting that the IDF shot a missile through the roof of it makes you look exceedingly un-skeptical.
Click to expand...

It may be helpful to remember where these discussions were held before:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1878157#post1878157

http://72.32.2.238/forumlive/showthread.php?p=1891802#post1891802

http://72.32.2.238/forumlive/showthread.php?p=1822458#post1822458
 
Yes, Orwell. He spammed the heck out of the discussions with HRW, and Zenith-Nadir went over them point-by-point, time and again, only to find that the words of explanation were going in one ear and out the other of Orwell.

I even recall making one detailed rebuttal myself, about an incident where the IDF was blamed in the death of a palestinian in the doorway of his home. The killing actually seemed to be caused, reading the descriptions and testimony of eyewitnesses (including the man's family), from incoming sniper fire down from the surrounding rooftops, at the IDF patrol. As they entered the home, the guy was in the door, and got shot. The IDF was blamed for it, but the way it went down, I got the impression that palestinian gunmen were shooting and their rounds were responsible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Oh, just to keep on-track to the OP, it was just announced that Israel is going to work to help the Arabs to form a committee that will explore further the Saudi Proposals.
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni will meet Sunday evening on the Jordanian side of the Dead Sea with her Jordanian counterpart, Abdelelah Al-Khatib. The two will discuss the appointment of the committee, which will include Jordan and Palestinians who maintain relations with Israel. Also, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will meet Sunday at his residence in Jerusalem with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. They will discuss for the first time "an outline of a diplomatic horizon" that Israel will propose to the Palestinians.
 
webfusion said:
Yes, Orwell. He spammed the heck out of the discussions with HRW, and Zenith-Nadir went over them point-by-point, time and again, only to find that the words of explanation were going in one ear and out the other of Orwell.
Click to expand...

Providing sources for your claims is not spamming, IIRC. HRW is a reasonably credible organisation.

I even recall making one detailed rebuttal myself, about an incident where the IDF was blamed in the death of a palestinian in the doorway of his home. The killing actually seemed to be caused, reading the descriptions and testimony of eyewitnesses (including the man's family), from incoming sniper fire down from the surrounding rooftops, at the IDF patrol. As they entered the home, the guy was in the door, and got shot. The IDF was blamed for it, but the way it went down, I got the impression that palestinian gunmen were shooting and their rounds were responsible.
Click to expand...

I would not be surprised if HRW got some things wrong, but I would be surprised if they were wrong on everything and the IDF or Mossad was innocent of everything.

That does not count as a rebuttal, to me it counts as an 'impression', something that may be plausible.
 
A story from Haaretz. (Haaretz link no longer works, this is the same story, however)

http://www.aad-online.org/2005///English/8-August/13-18/15-8/2.htm

Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz yesterday approved the promotion of a senior officer who was reprimanded recently for his role in an incident in which a Palestinian teenager was killed near the town of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip some two years ago.
Lieutenant Colonel Adam Zussman, who is currently serving as a battalion commander, will be appointed as a brigade commander in the Southern Command and has been promoted to the rank of colonel. Two years ago, Lieutenant Colonel Zussman authorized a company that had just ended its basic training to hold a “battalion welcome march” in the southern Gaza Strip area.
During their march, the troops passed by an IDF outpost in the settlement of Morag, bordering with the Palestinian towns of Rafah and Khan Yunis, from where fire exchanges were common between the sides.
Zussman allowed the troops to open “deterring fire” in the direction of nearby Palestinian homes. Palestinians later reported that a 15-year-old boy was killed in the area. Military Police failed to link the company's fire to the death of the Palestinian youth because, among other reasons, the Palestinians gave conflicting, and probably erroneous, reports on the time of his death. The incident nevertheless raised sharp criticism in the IDF because the “deterring fire” consisted of hundreds of rounds and because the march exposed the troops to unnecessary danger.
Click to expand...
 
Break on Through to the Other Side (Jim Morrison)

a_u_p,, I specifically recall that Orwell would post the same HRW report, over and over again, time and time again, like a parrot, in the threads. It reminded me of what was done here, by thinkingaboutit, who could have linked to his original post, or linked to the report, instead of reprinting the whole thing, word-for-word, like some sort of mantra.

And what, for the love of Ed, does this old story about Dan Halutz have to do with the Saudi Peace Plan or the Palestinians insisting that it "must be accepted in full, or Israel will face more violence" ??

A rebuttal is a reply statement, refuting the original claim. Sometimes it is supported with evidence, while other times it is merely "To deny the accuracy or truth of" and that may include presenting a credible alternative. I am very good at doing so.

In any event, thinkingaboutit says that I have "ignored about 15 of my questions" and I have shown that is not the case. He keeps talking about "both sides" have to work towards peace, and I am just trying to find out, who is the "other side"? Maybe you can help here, and define what components the "other side" consists of? Maybe draw the "other side" on a map for us? You're photoshop-savvy, right? So, can you graphically illustrate where this "other side" is on a map?
 
:boggled: Webfusion why don't you make your point instead of trying to draw me into some sort of rhetorical trap. You don't know who the other side is? Why does this not surprise me?

Why don't you come out and say what you are getting at?

p.s. i notice you missed the hard questions, shall i ask them again?

p.p.s. I reposted a small exerpt of a previous post because it was clearly not read by the likes of you and mycroft. It just doesn't seem to register.
 
Tailgater said:
After you posted this, it seems Webfusions' opinion of your view as bias seems reasonable. Not that I agree with either of you 100%.
Click to expand...
With respect you did not quote any of his opinions in relation to the act of terror. You simply quoted a fact of his, namely that Israel carries out acts of collective punishment on an entire group of people.
 
Mycroft said:
... It seems as though many who are anti-Israel continue to cling to “evidence” long after it has been refuted...
Click to expand...
Is there any chance whatsoever of you actually providing any evidence whatsoever for this claim for a change? Perhaps you will make us wait yet another year to do so. Perhaps like Sylvia you simply never will. Ho hum.
 
Webfusion,
Is there any chance you could supply us all with a definitive map of Israel's boundaries as agreed under international law?
 
Yes, Thinkingaboutit, ask them again, since I reviewed the thread back to post #139 and saw no hard questions --- link to the postings you now feel represent "about 15 questions" you want us to think about.

Why don't you come out and say what you are getting at?
Click to expand...

I'm not getting at anything --- we know that Israel is one side. Who do you feel is on the "other side" ? Is Israel only having to deal now with one other party to completely resolve the overall Israel-Arab conflict that has been raging for over 120 years, in your opinion? You say "Both Sides" need to work towards peace, and I want to know who are the representatives of the "Other Side" you mean to indicate. It's not rhetorical --- I want to know specifically who you see as the "Two Sides"

Look at my reply in Post 164 --- I said that there are many sides to this ongoing conflict, not just two, and if you want to claim there are just two, then please name them so at least we can have a point of reference to deal with when discussing your unique concepts.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2520267&postcount=164


p.p.s. I reposted a small exerpt of a previous post because it was clearly not read by the likes of you and mycroft.
Click to expand...

How so? We both replied about it. Look at the thread, sir, and stop being insulting.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2499512&postcount=113 (webfusion's )

and

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2499512&postcount=113 (mycroft's)
 
Last edited:
The other side is the Palestinians and those people who recognize that the Palestinians have a standing in this conflict. Neither side is monolithic.

So what is your point? I'm sure you want to contend that Israel has no partner to negotiate with yes? Because Hamas will never accept the existence of Israel? Is that it? I would humbly point to a couple of things to read in reply... (as well as make the point that Hamas hardly represents the will of the Palestinian people on this issue)

please click these links...

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0531-23.htm (Hamas makes overtures of peace)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0202/p09s02-coop.html (a Palestinian perspective for consideration)

webfusion, here's the one question I really wanted answered...

Hey webfusion could maybe both people (Israelis and Palestinians) be living in fear because both sides are doing things that get innocent people killed?
Click to expand...
 
For the record, the Saudi Plan, in practice, will be asking for Israel to return to the following "International Borders" --- per UN Resolution 181.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm

3742460e7ecc7da23.jpg


Why? Because there are no other resolutions which address the boundaries of the Jewish State (of Israel). This is what the Arabs want Israel to appear like when they say "accept our plan or face more violence", c'mon, be honest.
(Beersheba is purposely excluded from this blue map, because it was undeveloped inhospitable barren desert, with Bedouins camping out at random, and Beersheba itself was just watering hole.)
 
thinkingaboutit, the question you refer to now, as the "only question you want answered" (OK, you've gone from about 15 all the way down to 1, so I'll deal with it).
Here is the question ---
"Hey webfusion could maybe both people be living in fear because both sides are doing things that get innocent people killed? Am I twisting things again?"
Click to expand...
That is how you phrased the question, verbatim.

Which I answered -- "Yes" (you ARE twisting things)
Here, thinkingaboutit, I'll be so kind again as to link to the exact forum entry where I answered you:
POST # 158

Just because you don't like my answer is not the same as my not answering.
 
webfusion said:
thinkingaboutit, the question you refer to now, as the "only question you want answered" (OK, you've gone from about 15 all the way down to 1, so I'll deal with it).
Click to expand...
In fairness I shouldn't have done that to you. There was really about 5 or so questions I felt had been ignored in this thread and upon review, a couple of them were to posters other than yourself. Sorry about that. :(
 
5 pages and you guys can’t agree on anything. All of you are the perfect example of why it won’t work. So what makes you think the Israelis and the Palestinians will agree. They have a lot more at stake than just winning an argument on a message board.
 
thinkingaboutit said:
The other side is the Palestinians and those people who recognize that the Palestinians have a standing in this conflict. Neither side is monolithic.

So what is your point? I'm sure you want to contend that Israel has no partner to negotiate with yes? Because Hamas will never accept the existence of Israel? Is that it? I would humbly point to a couple of things to read in reply... (as well as make the point that Hamas hardly represents the will of the Palestinian people on this issue)
Click to expand...


You don't know what I want to contend, so please don't play 'psychic' here --- the Million Dollar Challenge stands if you really want to try.


Why is Syria not part of your equation?
Why is Iran not part?
Why is Lebanon not part?
Why is Saudi Arabia not part?


Here is the problem you are having (and parky76, too) ------

Israel is not going to resolve the entire conflict that has raged for over 120 years by negotiating with the palestinians exclusively.
There are too many outstanding issues that have nothing to do with the palestinians. In my view, the palestinian part is relatively simple to solve. They can have their peaceful little dual-zone Palestinian Principality-State tomorrow, for all I care. The palestinians can go about their routine business, and if they like HAMAS in charge, well, that is their own issue.

What about Lebanon (and by extension, Iranian proxies the Hezbollah)? What about Syria? Will Saudi Arabia get cozy with Israel and open an embassy there? How come you are leaving all of these other players out of your neat game plan?

That was my point, actually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom