General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[Virus]

the idf has had no problem killing women and children.

Yes it does.

Hamas doesn't. They'll kill both the Israeli women and children as well as their own. They set up command centers in schools and hospitals. Launch rockets from people's front yards. Store weapons in mosques.

 

[Thunder]

Yes it does.

but they do it soooo well!!!

 

[Thunder]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...palestinian-land-to-go-by-year-s-end-1.347693

Israel to demolish all illegal outposts built on Palestinian private-property. I commend Israel for this wise decision, but its only the beginning. Close to 1/3rd of all Israeli settlements are built partially on confiscated Palestinian private property.

 

[Virus]

Marxists tend to hate colonialism and oppression.

Except when they're doing it.

 

[Virus]

Maybe you can tell us why socialists/Marxists hate Israel so much? That's something I've always been curious about. If I were a Marxist and wanted to push Marxist ideology, I wouldn't spend any time on the Israeli/Palestinian issue at all.

They love victims that they can "represent". Or something. Who knows? Commies are weirdos.

 

[Thunder]

Except when they're doing it.

..

 

[Thunder]

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=211188

Bill to criminalize boycotting the West Bank or East Jerusalem passes its first reading in the Knesset.

The bill initially met with stiff opposition from the Justice, Foreign Affairs and Industry, Trade and Labor ministries for being likely to harm Israeli interests abroad. But last week, the bill’s sponsors agreed to a revised version that defines boycott as “an intentional avoidance of economic, cultural or academic relations with a person or another agent, solely because of their ties to the State of Israel, its institutions or areas under its control.”



....so much for freedom of speech in Israel, the only western-style democracy in the Middle East.

 

[mortimer]

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=211188

Bill to criminalize boycotting the West Bank or East Jerusalem passes its first reading in the Knesset.

The bill initially met with stiff opposition from the Justice, Foreign Affairs and Industry, Trade and Labor ministries for being likely to harm Israeli interests abroad. But last week, the bill’s sponsors agreed to a revised version that defines boycott as “an intentional avoidance of economic, cultural or academic relations with a person or another agent, solely because of their ties to the State of Israel, its institutions or areas under its control.”


....so much for freedom of speech in Israel, the only western-style democracy in the Middle East.

How would this bill limit free speech?

Do you believe free speech does not involve facing the consequences of that speech?

 

[Thunder]

How would this bill limit free speech?

Do you believe free speech does not involve facing the consequences of that speech?

this bill would make it ILLEGAL for any Israeli citizen or organization, to refuse to purchase products from or do work with someone or an organization in East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, or the West Bank.

----that means that if I was an Israeli citizen, and I went to a supermarket and urged folks not to buy oranges grown by settlers in Ariel, I could go to jail.

I could be civil, polite, and courteous. but I would still go to jail....because of my speech.


----that means that if I own an Israeli company, and do not want to hire a contractor because he is based in Ma'ale Adumim, I could go to jail.

this is a clear violation of free speech and freedom of association.

If Israelis can build housing for Jews-only in East Jerusalem or Arabs-only in Jaffa, then Israelis can choose to NOT do business with Israeli companies, farms, and contractors based in the Occupied Territories.

 

[mortimer]

this bill would make it ILLEGAL for any Israeli citizen or organization, to refuse to purchase products from or do work with someone or an organization in East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, or the West Bank.

----that means that if I was an Israeli citizen, and I went to a supermarket and urged folks not to buy oranges grown by settlers in Ariel, I could go to jail.

I could be civil, polite, and courteous. but I would still go to jail....because of my speech.


----that means that if I own an Israeli company, and do not want to hire a contractor because he is based in Ma'ale Adumim, I could go to jail.

this is a clear violation of free speech and freedom of association.

If Israelis can build housing for Jews-only in East Jerusalem or Arabs-only in Jaffa, then Israelis can choose to NOT do business with Israeli companies, farms, and contractors based in the Occupied Territories.

Evidence? The link you posted said nothing even close to this.

After a lengthy debate on the House floor, the Knesset voted late Monday evening to advance a bill that would place heavy sanctions against bodies that advocate a boycott against Israel, or against specific areas of the country such as the West Bank.

So Israel would be able to place sanctions on those companies/organizations that boycott Israel. It says nothing about making *anything* illegal.

 

[Thunder]

Evidence? The link you posted said nothing even close to this.

So Israel would be able to place sanctions on those companies/organizations that boycott Israel. It says nothing about making *anything* illegal.

err...did you even READ my OP, let alone the news article I linked to?

place heavy sanctions against bodies that advocate a boycott against Israel, or against specific areas of the country such as the West Bank.

The bill initially met with stiff opposition from the Justice, Foreign Affairs and Industry, Trade and Labor ministries for being likely to harm Israeli interests abroad. But last week, the bill’s sponsors agreed to a revised version that defines boycott as “an intentional avoidance of economic, cultural or academic relations with a person or another agent, solely because of their ties to the State of Israel, its institutions or areas under its control.”

if they can enforce penalties against people, agencies, or companies that boycott West Bank companies, farms, or contractors, then boycotting such companies, farms, or contractors is illegal.

this isn't that hard to understand dude. a behavior that can bring forth penalties and/or sanctions, is an illegal behavior. or do you want to have a semantic debate?

....cause I don't & I won't.

 

[Cobalt]

This thread isn't going to be fun.

Understatement of the century.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...palestinian-land-to-go-by-year-s-end-1.347693

Israel to demolish all illegal outposts built on Palestinian private-property. I commend Israel for this wise decision, but its only the beginning. Close to 1/3rd of all Israeli settlements are built partially on confiscated Palestinian private property.

Here's the cute thing though. Israel could do exactly what you wanted if you listed it all out, then thirty minutes after, you'd claim they didn't "do enough."

"Compromise" with regards to Israel means Israel gives up everything and gains nothing, thus defecating loudly on the point of compromise.

 

[Thunder]

Here's the cute thing though. Israel could do exactly what you wanted if you listed it all out, then thirty minutes after, you'd claim they didn't "do enough."

"Compromise" with regards to Israel means Israel gives up everything and gains nothing, thus defecating loudly on the point of compromise.

one..gigantic...monsterous.....colossal STRAWMAN!!!!

 

[mortimer]

err...did you even READ my OP, let alone the news article I linked to?

place heavy sanctions against bodies that advocate a boycott against Israel, or against specific areas of the country such as the West Bank.

The bill initially met with stiff opposition from the Justice, Foreign Affairs and Industry, Trade and Labor ministries for being likely to harm Israeli interests abroad. But last week, the bill’s sponsors agreed to a revised version that defines boycott as “an intentional avoidance of economic, cultural or academic relations with a person or another agent, solely because of their ties to the State of Israel, its institutions or areas under its control.”

if they can enforce penalties against people, agencies, or companies that boycott West Bank companies, farms, or contractors, then boycotting such companies, farms, or contractors is illegal.

this isn't that hard to understand dude. a behavior that can bring forth penalties and/or sanctions, is an illegal behavior. or do you want to have a semantic debate?

....cause I don't & I won't.

So you think that "sanctions" == "illegal and could go to jail", and you call this a semantic argument?

 

[Thunder]

So you think that "sanctions" == "illegal and could go to jail", and you call this a semantic argument?

please list those behaviors that a country would place heavy sanctions on, that are NOT illegal.

sure...I'll wait till next year. take your time.

 

[mortimer]

please list those behaviors that a country would place heavy sanctions on, that are NOT illegal.

sure...I'll wait till next year. take your time.

Nice try to shift the burden of proof. Please prove that this bill would put a single person in danger of being arrested.

 

[Thunder]

Nice try to shift the burden of proof. Please prove that this bill would put a single person in danger of being arrested.

that was my assumption, and it cannot be proved.......for now.

but we can all assume that these severe sanctions will at least include heavy fines and/or suspension of licenses and permits.

...or do you think it will simply be a judge calling someone a "naughty...naughty boy"?




...and btw, LOOK who just shifted the goalposts:

Originally Posted by mortimer
So Israel would be able to place sanctions on those companies/organizations that boycott Israel. It says nothing about making *anything* illegal.

 

[Cobalt]

one..gigantic...monsterous.....colossal STRAWMAN!!!!

You keep using that word.

that was my assumption, and it cannot be proved.......for now.

And as such, you can't be wrong! How LOVELY for you!

but we can all assume that these severe sanctions will at least include heavy fines and/or suspension of licenses and permits.

You don't know that and have no way to know that. Nice try though.

...or do you think it will simply be a judge calling someone a "naughty...naughty boy"?

Sure, totally, whatever.

 

[Thunder]

You keep using that word.

unfortunately, its a very common logical fallacy used at JREF. I think many folks don't realize they are using it until they fully understand what it means. And once that happens, they usually stop. Unless they are just morons..and don't care about making logical fallacies.

And as such, you can't be wrong! How LOVELY for you!

err....no. I never said. And btw, this is another example of a strawman, for its a false statement that can easily and logically be torn down, like a straw man.

You don't know that and have no way to know that. Nice try though..

what do you think these heavy sanctions might include, if jail time is not possible?

community service? written apology? please......share your thoughts on what these possible heavy sanctions might include.

I want to know.

 

[Cobalt]

unfortunately, its a very common logical fallacy used at JREF. I think many folks don't realize they are using it until they fully understand what it means. And once that happens, they usually stop. Unless they are just morons..and don't care about making logical fallacies.

Soooo much irony.

err....no. I never said. And btw, this is another example of a strawman, for its a false statement that can easily and logically be torn down, like a straw man.

No, actually that's just me mocking you.

what do you think these heavy sanctions might include, if jail time is not possible?

community service? written apology? please......share your thoughts on what these possible heavy sanctions might include.

I want to know.

I don't know, and you don't either, which is more or less the point.