With a cease-fire like this, who needs war?

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

You missed this bit

I didn't miss it.

When you talk about a democracy and ascribe to it a single goal and single motivation that spans more than a 100 years, you're implying that the goal is shared by all of them. There can be no other explanation. Sure, when pressed you will talk about the "good Israelis" but somehow you never bring yourself to believe they had any influence ever in the past, even when they were in charge, or ever will have any influence anytime in the future, because you know this is all headed towards genocide.

If you really saw Israelis as being a diverse people just like Australians, you'd be able to look at history and see how the different administrations acted differently and how the different factions tried to accomplish different goals in different ways, but you don't do that. Instead for their entire history you describe them as one homogenous lump who's only goal is to screw the Arabs at any cost.

In short, I don't believe you when you claim not to be smearing all Israelis or all Jews. If that were really true, your outlook would be very different.

Edited by Darat: 

As per my announcement I am indicating that the paragraph above is borderline as it is attempting to personalise the issue.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

As for 'Over the top', what happened in Tasmania to the aboriginals there was an act of genocide, that removed all full blood aboriginals living there from the face of the earth. According to conservatives here, that is the "Black Armband" view of history, and to be derided at all costs, as 'too over the top'.

That's why I call your rhetoric over the top. We're talking about Australia, about a near genocide, and you say, "That's what's being done to the Palestinians" when clearly it's not. Proportionately, Israel would have to kill some four million people to be comparable. That's absurd.

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
"Are Being" is debateable, according to the article I linked to earlier, a few checkpoints gone, then the process stopped.

You're so eager to excuse lack of progress from the Palestinian-Arab side, why the double standard?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
That is all I claimed, I did not say none, the claim was a few, and then none. It apparent expectation of the Palestinians, and a reasonable one in my opinion, the reasonable response to the initial observance of the ceasefire would have been all internal checkpoints closed, with only the checkpoints to Israel itself still being manned, which would have been entirely reasonable.

Ceasfire <=> cease internal checkpoints.

This is amazing. Palestinians-Arabs don't cease firing, and you object when I call that not a cease fire, but the Isrealis not only have to cease firing, but they have to do all these other things too.

Why the double standards? Cease fire just meanst they cease firing. Anything else, from both sides, is worked out after.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

I didn't miss it.

When you talk about a democracy and ascribe to it a single goal and single motivation that spans more than a 100 years, you're implying that the goal is shared by all of them. There can be no other explanation. Sure, when pressed you will talk about the "good Israelis" but somehow you never bring yourself to believe they had any influence ever in the past, even when they were in charge, or ever will have any influence anytime in the future, because you know this is all headed towards genocide.

If you really saw Israelis as being a diverse people just like Australians, you'd be able to look at history and see how the different administrations acted differently and how the different factions tried to accomplish different goals in different ways, but you don't do that. Instead for their entire history you describe them as one homogenous lump who's only goal is to screw the Arabs at any cost.

In short, I don't believe you when you claim not to be smearing all Israelis or all Jews. If that were really true, your outlook would be very different.

The goal of Zionism was not to screw the Arabs at any cost, the side effect of Zionism is that the Arabs who live on 'zion' get screwed. If some are actively screwing the Arabs, which is documented, that is their responsibility.

Different administrations have acted differently, but the settlers have been funded by a surprisingly diverse rage of parties. Racist attitudes towards the Arabs have been documented from long ago. The natural response to doing the dirty on someone is to blame them for it. Your own quote of 'backwards sh**hole' typifies that. They didn't deserve the land, they were dying of malaria, etc, etc.

When Rabin had a change of heart, and appeared committed to a negotiated withdrawal, he was assasinated. To many Israelis, the man is a hero.

Israel itself appears to be changing, just as Palestine is. Just as the religous domination, as has been well documented by yourself and others, is making the Palestinian response more extreme, the same is happening in Israel.

Cleopatra once started a thread on the withdrawal from Gaza, and my first response was, how did she know it was going to happen. Gush Emunim is organising some pretty concerted resistence to the whole concept, and it is being portrayed as a betrayal of Jews by other Jews. That kind of appeal is hard to resist. The initial popular acceptance of the plan now appears to be falling. Sharon is making sure his body guards are covering his back everywhere he goes.

The longer this trend to extremism on both sides goes on, the less likely peace will ever be.

Sharon and Likud seem to believe that if they can build a big enough wall, they can pretend the Palestinians don't exist. Time will tell.

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

"Are Being" is debateable, according to the article I linked to earlier, a few checkpoints gone, then the process stopped. That is all I claimed, I did not say none, the claim was a few, and then none. It apparent expectation of the Palestinians, and a reasonable one in my opinion, the reasonable response to the initial observance of the ceasefire would have been all internal checkpoints closed, with only the checkpoints to Israel itself still being manned, which would have been entirely reasonable.

Ceasfire <=> cease internal checkpoints.

What YOU consider reasonable is not what was agreed with the supposed Palestinian leadership (unless you happen to assign that to Hamas and friends?).

Who are you to redefine an agreed ceasefire when it is obvious that you just look for excuses when you read that it is not being observed by your favorites?

Edited by Darat: 

As per my announcement I am indicating that the last paragraph above is borderline as it is attempting to personalise the issue.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

Different administrations have acted differently, but the settlers have been funded by a surprisingly diverse rage of parties.

Nice try, only you're not talking just about the settler movement. You're the same way about every moment from when the first immigrant came from Russia back in 1881 to your projection of genocide on parr with the Australians slaughter if it indigenous population in the last century. It doesn't matter what happens, what the context, you can only interpret it as Jews doing whatever they can to screw Arabs. Without ever once acknowleging and Arab contribution to the violence, or an Arab contribution to the misery of other Arabs.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

Nice try, only you're not talking just about the settler movement. You're the same way about every moment from when the first immigrant came from Russia back in 1881 to your projection of genocide on parr with the Australians slaughter if it indigenous population in the last century. It doesn't matter what happens, what the context, you can only interpret it as Jews doing whatever they can to screw Arabs. Without ever once acknowleging and Arab contribution to the violence, or an Arab contribution to the misery of other Arabs.

Do you think it is maybe time to take this to the moderation forum, as we are descending into bickering again about my 'anti-semitism'. Your statements I know are false, and all this typing will be down the gurgler.

As I have previous stated if you believe any Member is breaching their Membership Agreement use the "Report" feature or send a PM to the Moderating Team.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[zenith-nadir]

Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

You seem to think that I don't care about Israeli deaths, but, as I have stated many times, I would never be happier than to see this whole, terrible process end. No Israeli deaths, no Palestinian deaths.

Tell these guys...

 

[Mycroft]

Do you think it is maybe time to take this to the moderation forum, as we are descending into bickering again about my 'anti-semitism'. Your statements I know are false, and all this typing will be down the gurgler.

Nope. It won't bother me if it's censored. At this point the audience is pretty small anyway.

I do want to know; in your own mind, how do you justify it? All the mental gymnastics you have to go through to blame everything on Israel?

You have been warned that continuing to discuss your issue with another Member in this section of the forum could result in further action. Since the warning has been ignored and despite much discussion about this issue I conclude that you do not intend to cease making posts which are contra to what is acceptable and appropriate for this section of the forum. Therefore I am suspending you for three days.

Please note the notice above is wrong. I relied on assumption rather then checking the facts, Mycroft could not have ignored my original warning at this point in the thread. I should have carefully checked the time stamps on the posts. Mycroft has of course been reinstated and I offer my apologies to Mycroft.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[webfusion]

this just in...

Israel suggests that there be a rail link built between Gaza and the West Bank, running across Israeli lands, to facilitate the movement of people and goods between the two disparate areas, in order to allow these two 'New Palestine' populations to have a close connection.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/591246.html

Israel suggests that the Gaza International Airport be re-opened and flights be resumed.

Israel suggests that a deep-water Gaza seaport be built.

Israel suggests that Egyptian Border Police be given the Philadelphi route at Rafah, and the Palestinians be allowed to cross without Israeli controls.

Israel suggests the Palestinian Parliament building in Abu Dis be finished in order to form the basis for the 'New Palestine' capital in Al_quds.

Israel suggests that the OASIS casino operate again (the beautiful multi-million-dollar venture was a huge success in Jericho after it opened).

Israel suggests these and many other things, to improve the lives of their neighbors.

Yet, when push comes to shove, the Palestinians still are unable to move in that direction, held back by their Jihadists and home-grown Al-Quaida mentality.

That is the pity. The Arabs can't get past their hatred of Israel, and accept that having Jews as good neighbors is a positive thing. Jews_as_neighbors. This is an ABOMINATION that sticks in their throats, as it does anywhere in the entire MidEast ---- from Iran, to Saudi Arabia, to Syria, to Libya, to Sudan, to Egypt, to Jordan.
Judenrein. That's the mentality.
And yet, the Israelis are asked to compromise, to withdraw, to stop building housing, to DESTROY HOUSING, merely because it is Jewish.

The whole concept makes me sick.

I support the IDF resuming their work, unhindered by any false claims that there is a cease-fire of any type or shape.
I support the IDF decimating the Palestinian terror organizations so dramatically and then expelling the few remnants to the four corners of the world, so that they will never be able to regain their abilities to do harm to Israelis/Jews. That outcome would suit me just fine, and I have no doubt the Palestinians will be better off for it as well.

 

[a_unique_person]

Nope. It won't bother me if it's censored. At this point the audience is pretty small anyway.

I do want to know; in your own mind, how do you justify it? All the mental gymnastics you have to go through to blame everything on Israel?

The reason you can't understand it is because that is not what I do.

 

[The Fool]

Re: this just in...

And yet, the Israelis are asked to compromise, to withdraw, to stop building housing, to DESTROY HOUSING, merely because it is Jewish.

The whole concept makes me sick.

Buildings do not have religions. The problem is, as you know, the fact that these structures and the land they stand on are de facto annexations. Annexations that are ongoing with no end in sight.

Unfortunately, I really see no real prospect of Israel voluntarily allowing a Palestinian state. I really hope I'm wrong but, in the end, outside intervention and/or sanctions may be required. I don't think the US is going to allow Israel to keep these people under military rule forever and will eventually have to pull the financial rug from under Likud and force them to withdraw the IDF within thier own borders...wherever those borders may be???? Thats probably another thing that will need to be imposed on Israel..the end of elastic borders.

 

[Mycroft]

The reason you can't understand it is because that is not what I do.

Oh, c'mon! You're the guy who once described 600 years of Ottoman rule as "occupation" just to delegitimize early Zionist negotiations with them. You're the guy who looks at a photograph of trees on a hill and sees it as evidence of hilltop aquifers for Zionists to steal. You're the guy who can look at a chart that clearly shows an increase in terrorism for three years after the signing at Oslo and see it as proof that Arafat "tried his best" to make Oslo work. In short, your very good at pulling facts out of thin air, substituting conjecture for evidence if it supports your world view, and outright denial of evidence that doesn't.

That's gotta take some work. Why? It's not compassion for the Palestinian-Arabs, they're not helped by your denial and revisionism.

Webfusion just gave a half-dozen ways in which Israel is trying to promote peace. Can you name even one way Abbas is? The truth is very clear here, one side is making an effort, the other is not. Yet you turn that on it's head just to promote your crusade.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: this just in...

Buildings do not have religions. The problem is, as you know, the fact that these structures and the land they stand on are de facto annexations. Annexations that are ongoing with no end in sight.

There could have been an end back in 2000.

If the Oslo plan had been followed, it could have ended back in 1998.

The truth here is the Palestinian-Arabs also have an obligation to make peace and create a state. So far they have done nothing to accomplish that.

 

[webfusion]

"no jews allowed --- death to the jews"

Buildings do not have religions.

Sure they do. This one does.

IIRC, that used to be a Jewish site. Not any longer.
It has been declared to be an exclusively MOSLEM religious domain. (see: WAQF)

If the Palestinians have their way, this site of the Jewish Patriarchs in Hebron will be an exclusively MOSLEM site, as well. Yep, Hebron is an Arab city, from Time Immemorial, as we all know.
No Jews Should Be Allowed.

Oh yeah, how about this building, that has "no religion" ?
(((( Site of Joseph's Tomb ))))

It was a sanctified gravesite of the Jewish biblical patriarch Joseph, and was brutally overrun by the Palestinians and ransacked and turned into a MOSQUE.

And so it goes...

 

[Darat]

No. Because the charter of Hamas and Islamic Jihad calls for the total destruction of Israel. They are not the Aboriginies of Australia, they are terror groups. Nor are they interested in the slightest in any of the principles of "mabo".

But since they are terror groups they won't then listen to anyone will they?

I have the view that until the recognised leaders and government of a state (in this case the PA) no longer offer any kind of support (clandestine or open) to terror organisations committed to the destruction of the other country negotiated agreements aren't going to work.

However once the legitimate (and I'm using the word legitimate in a very lose way, for instance I don’t believe that Arafat was a legitimate representative of "his" people) representatives of a "people" and their leaders no longer support terrorist organisations then I do believe that it is wrong to impose conditions on them based on what the disowned terrorist groups do and it is wrong then to hold them responsible for whatever atrocities the terror groups commit.

At that point negotiations can take place in good faith and then it is necessary to look for examples of how other people in similar situations as the Israelis and Palestinians have managed to come to a negotiated agreement.

That is why the Palestinian Authority has the obligation to dismantle these groups as they operate in violation of international law and the Palestinian Authority's wishes.

[edited to add]

This is where we differ as I don't believe the PA has the ability to dismantle these groups. What I think they have the ability to do is to totally, utterly and sincerely disown them, to make it clear that the terror groups do not represent legitimate Palestinian objectives and so on. Of course I do think they can use their own internal police etc. to hunt down the terror groups, but that is very different then being able to just “dismantle” the groups.

Sadly whilst the new leadership appears to consist of fundamentally better people then Arafat we haven't (as far as I am aware) seen indications that they will sincerely totally disown the various terrorist groups in the near future.

 

[Darat]

I think we should always be looking for a less bloodthirsty route to a lasting peace, but I wonder if you might be looking at the principles of mabo with some false impressions.

My understanding of the Mabo ruling of 1992 is that it recognized land rights for aborigionals who could claim "title" to land even when they didn't have written title to the land based on previous historic useage.

The problem is this is not at all comparable to the situation in Israel, where the Holy Land had been ruled by the Ottoman Empire for some 600 years, and the locals had very similar concepts of land ownership as did the Jewish immigrants comming from Europe. The immigrants didn't colonize the land as did the first whites who went to Australia, they purchased the land they put their farms and towns on.

Essentially colonization is Europeans going to places like America, Australia or Africa and imposing European customs of land ownership on land inhabited by primitive cultures. That wasn't the case in the Holy Land, where they already had similar customs of land ownership, and the natives already had all the same aspects of civilization the immigrants did.

Fair points and I wasn't trying to say that there is a one to one correspondence between the situations. However hopefully at some time in the not so distant future some of this will come down to the point of there being two people saying "this is mine" and that's when we need to look at different approaches that have had some success in the past.

 

[zenith-nadir]

But since they are terror groups they won't then listen to anyone will they?

Nope they only listen to clerics and mullahs.....additionally they are jihadists, the worst kind of terror groups.

I have the view that until the recognised leaders and government of a state (in this case the PA) no longer offer any kind of support (clandestine or open) to terror organisations committed to the destruction of the other country negotiated agreements aren't going to work.

That is why ten treaties between the Israeli and Palestinians have failed. Because the PA is a former terror organization who supports, incites, arms and finances these other terror organizations.

However once the legitimate (and I'm using the word legitimate in a very lose way, for instance I don’t believe that Arafat was a legitimate representative of "his" people) representatives of a "people" and their leaders no longer support terrorist organisations then I do believe that it is wrong to impose conditions on them based on what the disowned terrorist groups do and it is wrong then to hold them responsible for whatever atrocities the terror groups commit.

The problem Israel faces Darat is that the PA can say anything it wants to but the reality is there is popular support amongst the Palestinian population for these terror groups.

This is where we differ as I don't believe the PA has the ability to dismantle these groups. What I think they have the ability to do is to totally, utterly and sincerely disown them, to make it clear that the terror groups do not represent legitimate Palestinian objectives and so on. Of course I do think they can use their own internal police etc. to hunt down the terror groups, but that is very different then being able to just “dismantle” the groups.

The PA built, armed, sponsored and harbored these terror groups over the course of decades. The PA itself is a former terror group. I am sick and tired of people ABSOLVING the PA from it's responsibility of dismantling these groups it supported for decades. There is no "get out of jail free" card in this respect for me. Not only is it the PA's responsibility to dismantle these groups it is OBLIGATED to.

Sadly whilst the new leadership appears to consist of fundamentally better people then Arafat we haven't (as far as I am aware) seen indications that they will sincerely totally disown the various terrorist groups in the near future.

That is because the PA is a former terror group. It's security forces are made up of terrorists from Hamas, Al Aqsa and Islamic Jihad. They are all one in the same.

Anyone old enough at JREF to remember the PLO? Abbas was the money man for all those international terror attacks by the PLO in the 60s, 70s and 80s...and that is why the middle east is such a mess, because the world legitimized the Al Queda of the 60s, 70s and 80s and renamed it the Palestinian Authority...

 

[Darat]

Nope they only listen to clerics and mullahs.....additionally they are jihadists, the worst kind of terror groups.

A lot of the time I believe they wrap themselves in the colours of their religion to gain more popular support, a bit like the IRA cloaked themselves in the colours of “patriotism”. However like the IRA that is just a veneer to cover what they are, brutal, sadistic killers. Not to say there aren’t idealist and yes the ones they persuade to become martyrs believe in the religious rubbish however the leaders – I doubt it.

That is why ten treaties between the Israeli and Palestinians have failed. Because the PA is a former terror organization who supports, incites, arms and finances these other terror organizations.

But that can change, for instance the ANC was a terror organisation (no matter whether what they were fighting for justified their actions or not), it made the transition to a true political party albeit with some issues along the way. The same can be partly said for the emergence of the political wing of the IRA, Sinn Fein. It is very difficult and it will have atrocious failures as it reforms but reform is not impossible.

The problem Israel faces Darat is that the PA can say anything it wants to but the reality is there is popular support amongst the Palestinian population for these terror groups.

That is the crucial point that has to be tackled and constantly addressed by both sides, the talks with each sides leaders are good and should continue but if there is significant support for the terror from the population (of either side) then it will continue. However history teaches us that there is no “military” solution to these problems (apart from attempts at genocide) so ways have to be found. I had so much hoped when Arafat died we would have seen so much more change.

The PA built, armed, sponsored and harbored these terror groups over the course of decades. The PA itself is a former terror group. I am sick and tired of people ABSOLVING the PA from it's responsibility of dismantling these groups it supported for decades. There is no "get out of jail free" card in this respect for me. Not only is it the PA's responsibility to dismantle these groups it is OBLIGATED to.

Perhaps we use the word “dismantle” in a different way? What I thought you meant was that the PA could just say “stop”. If by dismantling you mean ensuring no official funds are ever channelled to them, that the PA actively uses the resources it does have to track down the murderers and the leaders organising the groups, then ensures that they are treated as criminals under what ever is the appropriate legal system then I am in agreement that they have an obligation to do that. However that has to be seen as an ongoing process and I think it is totally unreasonable to have as prerequisite for progress on other fronts that no further atrocity is committed by any Palestinian group. Even in a police state terror groups can operate. What is important is that there are no ties between the PA and any terror organisation, that there is a totally denouncement of violence against anyone, not just Israel. (I suspect that like other terror organisations they use violence against their “own people” to keep the communities that harbour them under control.)

That is because the PA is a former terror group. It's security forces are made up of terrorists from Hamas, Al Aqsa and Islamic Jihad. They are all one in the same.

I do not know enough to agree or disagree with your statement in detail. My view is that there are many ties between at least areas of the PA and some of the groups, however I did not think that they truly were one and the same.

Anyone old enough at JREF to remember the PLO? Abbas was the money man for all those international terror attacks by the PLO in the 60s, 70s and 80s...and that is why the middle east is such a mess, because the world legitimized the Al Queda of the 60s, 70s and 80s and renamed it the Palestinian Authority...

Historically many political parties and organisations have been terrorist groups and then evolved into legitimate political parties and even governments.

 

[a_unique_person]

Oh, c'mon! You're the guy who once described 600 years of Ottoman rule as "occupation" just to delegitimize early Zionist negotiations with them.

It was a colonialist empire, like many, the inhabitants were glad to see the last of it, and gave it a good boot up the khyber on the way out.

You're the guy who looks at a photograph of trees on a hill and sees it as evidence of hilltop aquifers for Zionists to steal.

A forest in that area was notable for it's rarity. A spring or something must have been there. The settlement was one more that was illegally built.

You're the guy who can look at a chart that clearly shows an increase in terrorism for three years after the signing at Oslo and see it as proof that Arafat "tried his best" to make Oslo work.

I am the guy who looked at year four, as well. We have been over this numerous times. I'm not saying it was good it took three years, I am saying that at least after three years, there was a real reduction.

In short, your very good at pulling facts out of thin air, substituting conjecture for evidence if it supports your world view, and outright denial of evidence that doesn't.

I have provided evidence for these claims, and others that I noted as 'documented' a few posts back that you have ignored.

That's gotta take some work. Why? It's not compassion for the Palestinian-Arabs, they're not helped by your denial and revisionism.

I'm hardly under the delusion I am 'helping' anyone here. This is a debate on the issue. Just as I am not 'helping' the Palestinians, I don't believe I am 'harming' the Israelis.

If you could demonstrate to me that my debating here was causing people to die or suffer, I would reconsider participating in the debates.

Webfusion just gave a half-dozen ways in which Israel is trying to promote peace. Can you name even one way Abbas is? The truth is very clear here, one side is making an effort, the other is not. Yet you turn that on it's head just to promote your crusade.

I was going to ask him, where he got that list from. I read about the airport, and was encouraged that maybe some real conecssions were going to be made. I also recall, however, that apparent 'concessions' in the past have not turned out to be what they first looked to be, or have failed to materialise, or the exact opposite happened.

If both sides don't trust each other, it hardly suprises me.

The truth is hardly 'clear'. If it was, this shambles would have been resolved long ago.

My 'crusade' is nothing more than I have already characterised it. It's not as if anyone else other than a few mad bastards like us even perseveres in these threads. Most people seem far too sensible. If you want to see a 'crusade' in action, try LGF.