• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a deal with the Pope and Obama.

I do not believe you have ever met the Pope or the President.

If you insist upon creating a strawman about me and then attacking your own creation

"All kikes are lampshades" was your creation, sir.

And it's a spectacular indicator of your prejudices and biases and why you believe the way you do.

BTW: If the WORLD Zionist Organization is not a global, aka world, conspiracy what does constitute a conspiracy in your reality?

There is nothing in the dictionary definition which say a conspiracy must be secret. Criminal Zionism has always operated in the open.

Irrelevant.

The issue is that you believe that virutally every last jew is guilty to some degree.

Guess you better just round them all up and gas the whole bloody lot, huh Matt?

BTW2: PLEASE try to come up with a better whine than conspiracy and lampshade. Those exact same words have been posted to me at least a hundred times.

They're among the most mind-bogglingly hateful words I have ever read. They're like a sucking chest wound upon the psyche. You shouldn't be surprised that they keep cpoming back to haunt you.

Edited by LashL: 
Removed quote of moderated content.

Yes, keep using that word. It tells people more than you know.

The lampshade thing is one of the few hoaxes that even Shoah experts agree is a hoax.

The mass production of such artifacts is unlikely at best. However at least one lampshade was discovered in 2006 and was shown through laboratory tests to be of human origin and to have come from Europe some time in the early to mid 20th century.

Given what we know of the activities of persons like Josef Mengele, the manufacture of human skin lampshades is entirely plausible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not believe you have ever met the Pope or the President.

You haven't noticed either of them speaking for me have you?

"All kikes are lampshades" was your creation, sir.

And it's a spectacular indicator of your prejudices and biases and why you believe the way you do.

Not mine. I never said it.

Irrelevant.

The issue is that you believe that virutally every last jew is guilty to some degree.

Guess you better just round them all up and gas the whole bloody lot, huh Matt?

That is what we call a straw man. You invent out of your fervid brain something to attribute to me and then attack me for you what you invented.

I have never said such a thing and you know it as well as you know I never said the lampshade thing. Yet you appear to think you are clever by attributing that to me.

I have said plenty of things about Zionists and Israelis. I only refer to Jews in that context when it refers to Israeli government actions. The Israeli government claims it does in fact represent all the Jews of the world. It also claim that a group, the "jewish people", which has no political or legal existence "owns" Judea and Samaria. This in the face of their claim of the Galilee and much more and the fact as Schlomo Sand demonstrated, jewish people is zionist invention from the late 19th c. Sort of about the same time Jews invented the Bar Miztvah because of the tale of Jesus in the temple in the gospels.

They're among the most mind-bogglingly hateful words I have ever read. They're like a sucking chest wound upon the psyche. You shouldn't be surprised that they keep cpoming back to haunt you.

As everyone should know the entire "jewish lampshade" things was a fanciful invention, an urban legend along with the jewish soap. Kike was a reference to superstitious and illiterate as some jewish immigrants refused to make their mark, their X, because it looked like a cross, so they made a Kikle, a circle. Thus kike. Anyone dumb enough to believe in either jewish lampshades or jewish soap does in fact satisfy the meaning of Kike, superstitious and illiterate.

THAT is approximately what I did say. And that is true. I have had people "prove" there were lampshades by posting pictures of everything but a lampshade. Never a picture of a lampshade which would have to be accompanied by a forensic determination that it was human skin and then something that would indicate jewish.

Yes, keep using that word. It tells people more than you know.

Tell me what it tells you. It is nothing more than a propaganda trump card for Zionists these days. Lucky for Americans the Indians have not mastered the same public relations skills for their "holocaust."

The mass production of such artifacts is unlikely at best. However at least one lampshade was discovered in 2006 and was shown through laboratory tests to be of human origin and to have come from Europe some time in the early to mid 20th century.

And from that thing you sort of remember reading some place which does not in any way come close to making your case for your belief in jewish lampshades even if you remember it correctly, what is it supposed to mean what to a rational person?

Given what we know of the activities of persons like Josef Mengele, the manufacture of human skin lampshades is entirely plausible.

As I have never met anyone who knew anything substantive about Mengele whereas I have read most everything available I am certain you know next to nothing about Mengele. I do know he has been accused of curing leukemia and changing eye color and inventing impervious sutures. Any of those would be worth creating a Nobel prize in medicine just for him. That is what one learns from reading the complete stories about him rather than just the modern abbreviated versions which leave out his impossible successes. The stories become incredible and the people who told them liars. And wilful liars because no one can witness the impossible therefore recounting the impossible is a wilful lie.
 
Last edited:
The blockade is not in conformation with international law embodied in the Hague convention on Naval warfare. So stopping the ships for any reason was unlawful. All deaths consequent to an unlawful act are murders.

The attack began in international waters. It was not in Israeli waters. It is unclear what piracy is called when it is done by a government. Even if the blockade were lawful the attack was conducted where it was not lawful to attack. Again, the deaths were murders.

Obviously actions taken outside of Israeli territorial waters cannot be construed as actions to preserve sovereignty.

What was on the ships was unimportant, what matters was the activists stated intentions to run a military blockade which, according to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea, is a legal blockade. Everybody knows this, I know this, you know this and the ICC knows this.

I've got to hand it to the activists though, they really know how to stage a media circus.

Now that Egypt has had it's revolution, and flung open the gates of Gaza, the activists now have a "friendly" country to dock their ships at making this year's Freedom Flotilla even more retarded than last year's. Hey! Gaza is already free, the revolutionary Egyptian brothers and sisters have seen to it. :)

Is there anything else? or are you just hung up on the word machine
gun? In this case that would refer to any weapon capable of full auto fire which includes the standard issue IDF M-16 rifle. So few people know proper gun terminology that is a meaningless error.

I'm not hung up on the word machine gun, what I am hung up on is the painting of an inaccurate picture of the boarding. The way the opening paragraph is written it leads the reader to think the IDF approached the ships, guns ablazing, , bent on murder and mayhem without even giving the activists a chance to "negotiate".

This isn't true, we all know this as well. Paintball guns become machine guns, and what's next ? Let's keep going shall we ? Firing machine guns from the air, that's an AIRSTRIKE, and what's a bullet but a small missile ? See where this type of false reporting and dishonesty goes ?

So anything yet on the veracity of the posted video or do we really have a Hamas official on TV saying that the two state solution isn't possible ?
 
Now that Egypt has had it's revolution, and flung open the gates of Gaza, the activists now have a "friendly" country to dock their ships at making this year's Freedom Flotilla even more retarded than last year's. Hey! Gaza is already free, the revolutionary Egyptian brothers and sisters have seen to it. :)
Bit of a correction here. The Egyptians opened the Rafah crossing for a few days and now the total human traffic, beyond the token humanitarian supplies crossing into Gaza, is back to the 300-350 range people per day, with the same restrictions as before. Common practice: Announce a supposed breakthrough in their efforts in alleviating the plight of Gazans, do it for a few days, media attention tapers off, and back to the same routine. Its the same sad song as before thanks to the Egyptians in their decades long efforts in creating Gaza as a terror base against Israel.

Maybe things will change for the better in the near future, but yet again, not holding my breath.
 
Last edited:
every settler house built in the West Bank brings the one-state solution closer to reality.

maybe this is what Israel truly wants.

I mean honestly, does Israel really expect to bring back 100,000 or more settlers?

..please. These people are going to either learn to live together or die seperately.
 
Last edited:
These people are going to either learn to live together or die seperately.

Israel allows muslims and arabs full rights of citizenship including voting, serving in the military and the Israeli parliament.

Hamas and Fatahs charters both have clauses calling for Israels annihilation.

The Israelis have already learned and actively applied these lessons, it's the other side that is taking its sweet time growing up.
 
Israel allows muslims and arabs full rights of citizenship including voting, serving in the military and the Israeli parliament.

and also allows discrimination against Muslims & Arabs in housing, employment, education, etc etc.

anyway...my statement stands: every new settler moved into the West Bank and every new settler house built in the West Bank, brings the one-state solution ever closer. I mean seriously, Israel isn't going to force 100,000 or more settlers to move back to Israel. Its simply not going to happen. That means either these settlers will live in Palestine..or there will be NO Palestine.

what shall we call this new state? New Canaan?
 
Last edited:
Not really. There havn't been any new settlements built since the early nineties. The conflict is not about settlements anyway. It's about the existence of a Jewish state and keeping a low-intensity conflict bubbling over so the PA gets aid money to steal.
 
and also allows discrimination against Muslims & Arabs in housing, employment, education, etc etc.

anyway...my statement stands: every new settler moved into the West Bank and every new settler house built in the West Bank, brings the one-state solution ever closer. I mean seriously, Israel isn't going to force 100,000 or more settlers to move back to Israel. Its simply not going to happen. That means either these settlers will live in Palestine..or there will be NO Palestine.

what shall we call this new state? New Canaan?

There will be no Palestine. It is the only possible outcome of the current course. There will be one state, but with a significant amount of the population partitioned off into a token state with no real rights.
 
As long as the occupation continues, as Israel lacks either a constitution or clear borders, as there is discrimination against the Palestinian minority and an attempt to Judaize the space, and the state defines itself as "Jewish," it cannot be called a full democracy.

There are many examples of violations of Arab rights, starting with house demolitions and the non-recognition of the Arab-Bedouin villages in the Negev, through the exclusion of Arab Knesset members and their parties from the possibility of becoming members of the government, to the stringent security inspections to which Arab citizens are subjected, without distinction, at the airports and border crossings.

The fourth "equality index" published about two months ago by Sikkuy: The Association for the Advancement of Civic Equality in Israel, based on reliable data from the Central Bureau of Statistics, showed an increase over the past few years in the gaps between Jews and Arabs in the areas of employment, welfare, housing and health. It also found that public education in the Arab community lags far behind that in the Jewish sector - and all this as a result of systematic and consistent discrimination by all the governments of Israel.
 
Matt, you seem to have forgotten to tell me the name of the Author of the book you reviewed.
 
More fiction on top of the usual fear-mongering by Parky. And where is this one-state solution drivel coming from again?

East Jerusalem has between 200,000-210,000 Israeli Jews living there, the brunt of which will stay with some adjustments to the northern portion of the current Jerusalem district that would eventually be part of a contiguous Palestinian state in any future agreements. Include the settlement blocs of Ariel, Ma'ale Adumim, Beitar Illit, Givat Zeev, and the group of Gush Etzion, and this would cover 300,000 of the around 350,000 Jewish residents/settlers in both the WB/E. J'lem area. These settlements reside close to, many adjacent to, Israel and the 1949 armistice line.

Include the fact that the brunt of these supposed settlements don't reside of Palestinian owned land (of which even B'tselem had to admit with respect to Ma'ale Adumim and others), but Jewish agency bought land decades prior to the declaration of Israel's independence but evicted by Arab league and Jordanian forces. This is where the blanket statement as to the legality of Jews settling in the WB/Judea/Samaria/E. J'lem doesn't apply on top of the legal documents allowing Jewish settlement in the areas in question.

The argument here becomes one of displacing Jewish residents for the sake of peace in a two-state solution with the Palestinians which does include a number of settlements and outposts that need to be withdrawn from, of which there has been more actions by the IDF in recent weeks. The peace initiatives have shown time and time again that Israel is serious about making a wide-range of concessions for this two-state solution to take place.

As with Israel's unilateral withdraw from Gaza, which included almost 8,000 residents and around 2,000 supporters, in a number of days, I think a phased withdraw from those settlements that will not become part of Israel (discussed in the 'Palestine papers') is very possible with the land swaps so often discussed.

This, of course, has been mentioned repeatedly and consistently by those on this forum, but I have yet to see any serious response to these matters beyond the one to two-liner rhetoric from the likes of AUP, Parky, Bikerdruid, etc.

Is this the quality of discussion to look forward to? Is there going to be a point where those in question will sit down and make a serious attempt to replying, in detail, to the matters at hand?
 
Okay, WTF?

In the wake of Obama's speech on the Middle East, the AP reports the following:


Note especially the last sentence, which flat-out states Obama dramatically changed US policy towards Israel's border.

They reiterate that here:


Except that's not what Obama said in his speech. What he said, in fact, was exactly what the AP said was the previous, long-standing US policy:


Obama's words, in fact (in addition to being pretty much a word-for-word repeat of what the AP said was US policy before today's speech), are pretty much a verbatim reiteration of what Hillary Clinton said in 2009:


So where's this "Obama changes US policy towards Israel, says they must return to pre-1967 borders!" crap coming from?

Now, take a gander at this article from this past January, published in The Telegraph:


In other words, before Obama's speech, he had angered the Palestinians because he was apparently backtracking (due to supposed "Israeli pressure") on a promise made by Bush Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice in 2007. A promise that the proposed Palestinian/Israeli border would be the 1967 border, with agreed-upon swaps of territory! The same thing Clinton repeated in 2009, and that Obama stated in his speech today!

Why was a statement made by Rice under Bush apparently perfectly okay and a valuable part of Bush's attempts to secure peace in Israel, but when the exact same statement is made by Obama, it's a stunning declaration that he seeks nothing less than the destruction of Israel itself?

EDIT: And it can't just be the public statement regarding the 1967 borders that Rice apparently refused to make, because Clinton's public statement about exactly that three years ago passed with nary a peep. So what gives?

The responses to Obama's speech was all politics, and has nothing to do with actually finding a solution.

The right in the US has never been known for being very honest or "fair and balanced."
 
For the most part Obama stated the same basic concepts behind the peace initiatives in the past. He was simply re-iterating, except with a hint of putting the cart before the horse wrt to border demarcations as a negotiations starter.

Anything else you're going to respond to HoverBoarder or you going to fall into the same trap as a number of other posters by ignoring other people and sticking to lazy rhetoric?
 
If the only just & fair solution is a Palestinian state in more than 90% of the WB, and the Arab sections of East Jerusalem...which the Israelis REFUSE to give up...what will Israel look like in say 10...20 years?

Can the status quo go on forever? Eventually the Palestinians will either get their own state..or they will disband the Palestine Authority and demand Israeli annexation of the West Bank and Israeli citizenship.
 
If the only just & fair solution is a Palestinian state in more than 90% of the WB, and the Arab sections of East Jerusalem...which the Israelis REFUSE to give up...what will Israel look like in say 10...20 years?

Can the status quo go on forever? Eventually the Palestinians will either get their own state..or they will disband the Palestine Authority and demand Israeli annexation of the West Bank and Israeli citizenship.
The Palestinians are in no position to demand ANYTHING. Think Israel will just cave and annex all of the WB just because the Palestinians demand it? Think anyone has the ability to force Israel to do anything they don't want to do?

However, at some point Israel is going to have to figure out a way to get their Arab neighbors to get along with them. They've probably got a couple or three decades to figure out how to do that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom