Corrie vs. Caterpillar -- Redux.

[webfusion]

You don't justify Israel's expansion outside its borders.

Not only is it justifiable, it is amazing that you can sit there and tell me definitively where Israel's "borders" were ----- There were no "borders" in May of 1967. There were only Armistice (cease-fire) Lines, which had been negotiated on the Isle of Rhodes in 1949, and those lines had been routinely violated by terrorists (fedayyin) to kill jews across the lines for years.

By June 5th, 1967, those arbitrary lines seemed to provide little in the way of security to Israel, as the combined Military Forces of the surrounding States went on the alert for attack. With a mere 9-miles at the "waist" (Netanya-to-Tulkarm), the Israelis were not interested in sitting behind those fragile demarcations of the Green Lines and waiting for the massive assault to commence.

So, the "expansion" outside the "borders" was
a) not a violation of borders
b) not illegal
c) justified by any standard of international morality


Are you one of those, Ion, who thinks that jews should not be allowed to live in certain areas? Are you one of those, Ion, who believes in the concept of "judenrein" ?

 

[Ion]

Not only is it justifiable, it is amazing that you can sit there and tell me definitively where Israel's "borders" were ----- There were no "borders" in May of 1967...

You stated this in another thread.

I took your word.

Then The San Diego Union Tribune of Saturday July 7 2007 stated that Israel is outside its borders.

State of Denial by Bob Woodward also states this and that settlements are being built outside of Israel's borders with money that U.S. sent Israel in aid.

So there are Israeli borders.

You don't say it.

But there are.

The Israeli settlers ouside Israel borders are terrorists.

Just like Israeli settlers settling anywhere in the world (in U.S. for example) and claiming that their settlements belong to the state of Israel.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Whew!

It seems that I can point out that Hitler killed himself, and that the forum rules do not prohibit me from saying so. This might, I suppose, grieve people who have their tongues stuck up the decaying, putrifying anus of the lunatic halfwit dictator, but it turns out that upsetting insane necrophiles is not against forum rules.

If only Hitler had a grave. We could dance on it.

 

[webfusion]

Sorry, Ion.
The term "boundary" is proper -- "border" is absolutely not correct, no matter who misuses the term.

Israelis have both legal and ethical grounds to live today across the Green Lines.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3020745,00.html


Also, your use of the term "terrorist" to describe jewish homesteaders is a bad parody of the accepted meaning of the word.


I cannot help you, if you want to go along believing that jews living peacefully in the hills of palestine are the 'terrorists' here.

 

[JJM 777]

Israelis have both legal and ethical grounds to live today across the Green Lines.

You wouldn't share those "legal and ethical grounds" with us?

Judging from the consequences, this said activity constantly (endlessly?) provokes terrorism and hatred from the Arab side.

 

[webfusion]

You wouldn't share those "legal and ethical grounds" with us?
Judging from the consequences, this said activity constantly (endlessly?) provokes terrorism and hatred from the Arab side.

"I cannot help you, if you want to go along believing that jews living peacefully in the hills of palestine are the 'terrorists' here."


Endlessly? Care to define what you mean by this? As you know full well, the killings of jews by fedayyin took place routinely long before the 'occupation' of 1967. So, if by "said activity" you refer to "illegal settlements on the "other side of the border" -- then you cannot substantiate why the terrorism was rampant prior to any crossing of the Rhodes Armistice Lines by Israel.

Legal & Ethical grounds aplenty. I dare you to locate a single published item anywhere that says the jews have no legal and ethical claims to palestine.

 

[webfusion]

For this reason I am glad webfusion is posting for the Israeli position.

Facing-off with IDF soldiers seems to be the preferred method with ISM. They want to challenge a mechanized war tractor, a huge beasty armored behemoth that is assigned to clearing a minefield, or digging for tunnels, or supporting an infantry assault with tanks?

Doing this doesn't qualify as being "innocent"

They want to run ships through strictly guarded shore waters of the State of Israel, past submarines and corvettes and pt boats?

Doing this doesn't qualify as being "innocent" either.


Some deaths are unavoidable, in war. Israel is better than most for keeping a lid on it.

How many other deaths by being run over by mechanized tracked vehicles have been recorded during this conflict? Any?

 

[webfusion]

and as if to prove a point ----

More Qassem rockets came raining down today into the sleepy village of Sderot, and Gaza terrorists have completely violated the boundary between Egypt and the Strip, using a network of tunnels beyond anything previously conceived, to smuggle in tons of weaponry, including Saggers.

The IDF is reporting that massive arming in the Gaza Strip will eventually lead to a situation like in Lebanon, a full-scale war, where entire infrastructures are demolished, and populations evacuated.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/884438.html

The Prime Minister of Israel indicates war a distinct possibility against HAMAS in Gaza, similar in scope to the Lebanon Incursions of last summer.

 

[Ion]

Let's see about this:

Sorry, Ion.
The term "boundary" is proper -- "border" is absolutely not correct, no matter who misuses the term.

Israelis have both legal and ethical grounds to live today across the Green Lines.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3020745,00.html


Also, your use of the term "terrorist" to describe jewish homesteaders is a bad parody of the accepted meaning of the word.


I cannot help you, if you want to go along believing that jews living peacefully in the hills of palestine are the 'terrorists' here.

The San Diego Union Tribune of Saturday July 7 2007 writes in page A12:

"JERUSALEM- Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank use only 12 percent of the land allocated to them, but one third of the territory they do use lies outside their official jurisdictions, according to a report released yesterday.
The report, based on official data released by the Israeli government following a court order, says 90 percent of the settlements sprawl beyond their official boundaries.

New York Times News Service"

So there are Israeli borders or boundaries like you like the name them -unlike what you repeatedly lied to me- and the Jews expanding Israeli rules beyond these boundaries into Palestine -or anywhere in the world, into U.S. for caricature's sake- are:

terrorists.

 

[JJM 777]

Legal & Ethical grounds aplenty.

I can imagine a few of these, such as "a trophy for the successful genocide on the indigenous Canaanite population of ancient Palestine".

 

[webfusion]

Let's see about this:

The San Diego Union Tribune of Saturday July 7 2007 writes in page A12:

"JERUSALEM- Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank use only 12 percent of the land allocated to them, but one third of the territory they do use lies outside their official jurisdictions, according to a report released yesterday.
The report, based on official data released by the Israeli government following a court order, says 90 percent of the settlements sprawl beyond their official boundaries.

New York Times News Service"

So there are Israeli borders or boundaries like you like the name them -unlike what you repeatedly lied to me- and the Jews expanding Israeli rules beyond these boundaries into Palestine -or anywhere in the world, into U.S. for caricature's sake- are:

terrorists.

You misread the story.

The report is referring to boundaries (not borders) of the individual communities themselves -- the zoned jurisdictional limits, if you will.

What the story says and your incorrect interpretation of it are two different things. I'm trying here, Ion, to give you some accurate points of information and I sure don't appreciate being called a liar for it, since you are the one failing to grasp the details.


You can take your definition of "terrorists" and shove it.

 

[webfusion]

JJM_777, I have to say, that you're really quite unable to see the forest for the trees.

 

[Ion]

You misread the story.

The report is referring to boundaries (not borders) of the individual communities themselves -- the zoned jurisdictional limits, if you will.

What the story says and your incorrect interpretation of it are two different things. I'm trying here, Ion, to give you some accurate points of information and I sure don't appreciate being called a liar for it, since you are the one failing to grasp the details.
...

You misred my post.

I edited it to boundaries before you replied.

You replied without reading my edit.

The point remains the same:

after all, it's when Jews are outside these boundaries that they are terrorists.

...
You can take your definition of "terrorists" and shove it.

That's how you are a terrorist murderer.

I remember you were in the Israeli army.

Unlike me, or Rachel Corrie.

 

[Bud Fox]

I remember you were in the Israeli army.

Unlike me, or Rachel Corrie.

People such as the character you play in this forum rarely have the courage to enlist in a force which acts to defend your freedoms.

Perhaps you would have been as naive as Rachel Corrie, to place herself in the middle of a conflict that she clearly did not comprehend in any meaningful way.

Service in the IDF makes one a terrorist murderer? Now there's a well thouhgt-out, non-rhetorical argument.

 

[Ion]

What a dumb post:

People such as the character you play in this forum rarely have the courage to enlist in a force which acts to defend your freedoms.
...

I was born in Communist Romania.

I didn't have the courage to defend my freedoms, says you.

That's imbecility.

 

[Mycroft]

I can imagine a few of these, such as "a trophy for the successful genocide on the indigenous Canaanite population of ancient Palestine".

Wow. This is shameful.

There isn't a square inch of habitable land anywhere on this Earth that wasn't fought over and taken from some other people at some point in history, yet you feel obliged to go so far back in time that the events in question are more likely to be mythological than not in order to smear Jews with the crime of genocide.

Shameful.

 

[JJM 777]

to smear Jews with the crime of genocide.

Shameful.

What we hear is a mantra that goes: "holocaust, holocaust, holocaust, holocaust, holocaust..." (Repeat this mantra 1000 times, then start again from the beginning.)

If dead people need to be mentioned (and they constantly are being mentioned, especially by Israeli Jews) it would be healthy and honest to mention also other dead people than Jewish ones.

 

[Loss Leader]

If dead people need to be mentioned (and they constantly are being mentioned, especially by Israeli Jews) it would be healthy and honest to mention also other dead people than Jewish ones.

Please state your evidence for your contention that Israeli Jews are somehow more apt than anyone else to mention the Holocaust.

Alternatively, since Israel probably has the highest population of Holocaust survivors (and descendents of survivors and victims) in the world, please state your evidence as to why people should not memorialize stuff that actually happened to them, their parents and grandparents.

Ah, never mind. You don't care. You just post the first thing that comes into your head that you think will get a reaction.

 

[gtc]

..."holocaust, holocaust, holocaust, holocaust, holocaust..."

People might be more willing to listen to your argument if you weren't a citizen of a country that was allied with Nazi Germany.

 

[Loss Leader]

People might be more willing to listen to your argument if you weren't a citizen of a country that was allied with Nazi Germany.

Come on, that's not fair. Finland allies itself with any nation that waives a gun in its general direction. Or threatens to do so. Or who they think someday might.