General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[WildCat]

There is plenty of people on both sides who do not want peace. Why give them the deciding vote?

There's far more on the Palestinian side, both in sheer numbers and in percentage of the population. The 2 sides are not even comparable in that regard.

In fact, Palestinian political parties who declare all of Israel to be occupied Palestinian territory and support terrorism received what, 95% of the vote? 98%?

But hey, it all evens out becaause 5% or so of Israelis want to establish Greater Israel, right?

 

[The Fool]

What are you driveling about? There's no such thing as a movement for an independent Aboriginal state.

You will get used to the argument. It pops up every couple of months

 

[WildCat]

Australian Aboriginals are Australian citizens. They also Have land rights entrenched in Law. Are you proposing that Israel adopt a similar policy of land rights for Palestinians?

Israeli Arabs don't have rights?

I guess this is where you whine and moan about Arabs who don't live in Israel and aren't Israeli citizens don't have the same rights as Israelis. And therefore Israel is an apartheid state, correct?

I say Australia is an apartheid state because citizens of Papua New Guinea can't vote in Australian elections or hold public office in Australia, just like blacks couldn't vote in South African elections or hold public office!

 

[boyntonstu]

Burning the Koran and the Goldstone Report

Jones had the right to burn a book called "Koran".

The reaction to his act was that 30 innocent people were murdered by an angry mob of insulted Muslims.

Goldstone wrote a report without hearing both sides.

Goldstone was irresponsible in writing his infamous report as was Jones irresponsible in burning the Koran.

Both had the legal right to do what they did.

Would a fair person write a book about a conflict if he heard only one side?

I wonder how many civilians were murdered as a direct response to the Goldstone Report?

I place Goldstone and Jones in the same category.

 

[The Fool]

There's far more on the Palestinian side, both in sheer numbers and in percentage of the population. The 2 sides are not even comparable in that regard.

In fact, Palestinian political parties who declare all of Israel to be occupied Palestinian territory and support terrorism received what, 95% of the vote? 98%?

But hey, it all evens out becaause 5% or so of Israelis want to establish Greater Israel, right?

I agree...there are a lot more on the palestinian side....so what?

what percentage of Israelis voted for Likud? Who's platform states simply and clearly no Palestinian state...under any circumstances....so what?

who did you vote for in the last US election Wildcat? Do you intend to support every one of their policies to the grave? After all....you voted for them so you and everyone else who voted for them must have Borg like solidarity on all their many policies.

 

[a_unique_person]

They loved the idea of an invasion. Which is why they repeatedly tried to invade Israel.

Evasion noted.

 

[Thunder]

I wonder how many civilians were murdered as a direct response to the Goldstone Report?

exactly zero.

 

[Thunder]

Withdrawal is a goal in itself. "It will bring Peace" is just the excuse.

the withdrawal from the Sinai brought peace.

 

[The Fool]

..

 

[The Fool]

Israeli Arabs don't have rights?

are you claiming this or suggesting someone else has?

I guess this is where you whine and moan about Arabs who don't live in Israel and aren't Israeli citizens don't have the same rights as Israelis. And therefore Israel is an apartheid state, correct?

No....I don't hold this opinion and never have. Good luck if you choose to back up this one with an example.....My next door neighbor is an Arab why should he Have the same rights as Israelis? Now if you are actually talking about Stateless Arabs that Israel chooses to continue to exercising control measures over as the occupying power thats a different issue. Do you want to add that to the opinion you want to attach to me? Even then...I don't hold that They should have the same rights as Israeli Citizens and have never proposed anything like that........Honestly, why do you need to keep making this stuff up? Oh hang on...of course....you are just "asking questions"

I say Australia is an apartheid state because citizens of Papua New Guinea can't vote in Australian elections or hold public office in Australia, just like blacks couldn't vote in South African elections or hold public office!

mate...buy a more recent world Map. PNG is a nation....so....they can't stand for election here and we can't stand for election there. I hope you are not spending too much money trying to get elected in Canada....its just not going to work.

 

[The Fool]

Goldstone wrote a report without hearing both sides.

you are absolutely correct. He should have heard both sides....why didn't he?

 

[IDB87]

The findings were that, on the basis of the evidence before him, Israel had a case to answer. Not that it was proven.

Proven or not, it did not stop him from suggesting that Cast Lead was Collective Punishment and that it was a deliberate attack on the infrastructure of Gaza. That is what I am taking issue with here.

Israel initially refused to co-operate and was not going to answer the case.

Why is this, TF? I know - do you?

Israel changed its mind. When Israel finally agreed to and conducted acceptable investigations it was found to have answered the case.

Is it not your mantra that state entities shouldn't be expected to honestly report incidents that would otherwise paint them in a bad light? Why are you fine with Israel apparently telling the truth this time?

Goldstone pointed out that if Israel had done this in the first place and not stonewalled

Why did they stonewall?

it was likely that he would not have concluded they had a case to answer....this now is being misrepresented as goldstone "retracting" his findings which is bollocks.

Please pay attention TF. The claim that he retracted in his editorial was that Israel deliberately targeted civilians and infrastructure as policy.

The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.

Goldstone determined, “where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other conclusion”, that civilians had been deliberately targeted as policy of the IDF. Individual soldiers had committed crimes, but that is not what Goldstone took issue with.

goldstone announced that if he had that info earlier he would probably have mad a different finding. Amazing isn't it.

Yes, one that wasn’t so biased. He had alleged that Israel purposefully targeted schools as a policy. That is the claim that was retracted.

why do you constantly refer to "baseless" claims. They were not baseless. They were based on all the information he had.....

The claim that Israel attacked civilians on purpose as part of policy were baseless – in that they had no substance to him other than his own bias.

when Israel eventually did "play ball" a better conclusion was possible. If they had "played ball" in the first place a better conclusion may have been reached in the first place. Is it Goldstones fault that Israel would not co-operate?

Why would Israel not want to co-operate? The fact IS out there, but I want YOU to look for it. Try google maybe.

My position has not fallen out from under me..

Yes it has. When you say “Goldstone retracted nothing” and I go on to point out that Goldstone retracted his most damning claim, what do you call that?

 

[Thunder]

Why is this, TF? I know - do you?

Why did they stonewall?

Why would Israel not want to co-operate? The fact IS out there, but I want YOU to look for it. Try google maybe.

because Israel believes it is above the law, and after the Holocaust, Gentiles have no business telling them how to defend themselves or investigating their methods of self-defense.

 

[Thunder]

http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...using-victimhood-with-foreign-policy-1.354141

Israel's belief that 'the world is against it' has in recent years turned into a real obsession, a sense that we are constantly under attack, a fear of delegitimization, an insanity of persecution.

 

[IDB87]

because Israel believes it is above the law, and after the Holocaust, Gentiles have no business telling them how to defend themselves or investigating their methods of self-defense.

Why don't we start with the Resolution that created the Fact Finding mission in Gaza

From the outset it established guilt with Israel and did not reflect on the actions of Hamas which contributed to the civilian deaths.

 

[Thunder]

Why don't we start with the Resolution that created the Fact Finding mission in Gaza

From the outset it established guilt with Israel and did not reflect on the actions of Hamas which contributed to the civilian deaths.

ah, so Israel had a grand opportunity to prove the UN wrong and make the UN have egg on its face.

and yet, they chose the path of MOST resistance instead.

 

[Skeptic]

If we can stop blaming Israel for a minute for lack of peace -- despite the fact that other side explicity calls for its destruction and for genocide -- in related news about Goldstone, Israel's minister of the Interior, Eli Yishai, invited Goldstone to visit Israel in the name of the Israeli government; Goldstone accepted.

Clearly, then, Goldstone himself doesn't consider the evil Israeli right-wing zionist government's antisemitic smear campaign against him, as some here described the criticism of his report, to have been serious enough to be requiring an apology from said evil right-wing zionists before coming to visit.

Not that this will stop the usual gang from, first, not apologizing for their use of the now-exploded report to viciously smear Israel, and, second, from demanding Israel apologize for attacking the report as biased anyway.

 

[The Fool]

Proven or not, it did not stop him from suggesting that Cast Lead was Collective Punishment and that it was a deliberate attack on the infrastructure of Gaza. That is what I am taking issue with here.

He did not do this.....you can't quote him saying this. He said what he said on the basis of the evidence before him which he laboriously explained. Why do you keep ignoring this. The man can only take into consideration evidence he has before him. He could have accepted the denials of Israel as truth.....is that what a competent Jurist should do?

Why is this, TF? I know - do you?

why can't you reveal your secret?

Is it not your mantra that state entities shouldn't be expected to honestly report incidents that would otherwise paint them in a bad light? Why are you fine with Israel apparently telling the truth this time?

sorry, I can't make any sense of this one...

Why did they stonewall?

Because they believed it was the best thing to do I suppose.

Please pay attention TF. The claim that he retracted in his editorial was that Israel deliberately targeted civilians and infrastructure as policy.

I'm the one not paying attention? I know this is probably pointless but can I ask if you know the difference between a finding of guilt and a finding that there is a case to answer....based on all available evidence?

Goldstone determined, “where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other conclusion”, that civilians had been deliberately targeted as policy of the IDF. Individual soldiers had committed crimes, but that is not what Goldstone took issue with.

see the bits above.....the bit that says "had no evidence" see....as a competent Jurist he can't consider evidence that is withheld from him.

Yes, one that wasn’t so biased. He had alleged that Israel purposefully targeted schools as a policy. That is the claim that was retracted.

see above for the same answer to the same repeated claim.

The claim that Israel attacked civilians on purpose as part of policy were baseless – in that they had no substance to him other than his own bias.

firstly, and for the last time. The finding was a case to answer...not guilt. They were based on the evidence he had at the time and were not "baseless" as you state. You can't make evidence you don't like disappear.

Why would Israel not want to co-operate? The fact IS out there, but I want YOU to look for it. Try google maybe.

do your own legwork. I'm not going to carry your misunderstandings to the finish line for you.

Yes it has. When you say “Goldstone retracted nothing” and I go on to point out that Goldstone retracted his most damning claim, what do you call that?

I call it asking for evidence.
you believe reclaiming he retracted something is evidence he retracted something? I'm sure you believe he retracted something....something you believe exists...

you are simply claiming over and over again that he has retracted a finding of guilt....which he had no authority to make and didn't make. I'm not going to explain "case to answer" again you are obviously shutting that out of your mind.

 

[IDB87]

ah, so Israel had a grand opportunity to prove the UN wrong and make the UN have egg on its face.

and yet, they chose the path of MOST resistance instead.

You find nothing wrong with deeming a state guilty before the investigation even begins?

 

[Thunder]

You find nothing wrong with deeming a state guilty before the investigation even begins?

guilty?

only a court of law can deem someone guilty.