babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » first Jewish settlement in Palestinian Jerusalem

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: first Jewish settlement in Palestinian Jerusalem
Mohamad Khan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1752

posted 07 April 2003 01:12 AM      Profile for Mohamad Khan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sharon tests Bush, Blair and the road map by letting families occupy contested district

quote:
Ariel Sharon has brushed aside an appeal by the White House to stop an unprecedented move by Jewish settlers into a Palestinian district of Jersualem which his critics say will further hinder a political settlement.

After more than two years of legal and political wrangling, Mr Sharon's office approved the plan last week and the first Jewish families have moved into new flats in the Ma'aleh Ha'zeitim settlement, beside the densely populated Arab district of Ras al-Amoud.

It is the first time a Jewish settlement has been built in a Palestinian area of Jerusalem since Israel seized control of the entire city in 1967.

The first settlers at the apartment complex, just a few hundred metres from the Wailing Wall, include a millionaire, Irving Moskowitz, and his son-in-law Ariel King, a far-right political activist.

More than 100 more families are expected to move in during the coming months.



From: "Glorified Harlem": Morningside Heights, NYC | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 08 April 2003 01:49 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Palestinian Jerusalem?

Last I heard, there's only one Jerusalem: the capital city of the sovereign state of Israel.

If anyone thinks that they can get Sharon, or any other Israeli prime minister to even think of dividing Jerusalem ... well, dream on.

(Note: I said, "Israeli prime minister" -- not wannabes.)


From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 08 April 2003 02:12 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Barak was willing to consider doing so. "Jerusalem" is fungible. It has expanded greatly since its inception. Therefore, Jerusalem can be divided in a way that assures that both sides may lay claim to that designation.

In any case, East Jerusalem is nearly totally Arab.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 08 April 2003 02:16 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good spin, josh.

On this side of the border, in multicultural Toronto, one can find districts which are "totally (name your choice of ethnics)."

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Period. (And that's the reality of today ... tomorrow ... and forever after.)


From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 08 April 2003 02:16 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Y'know, CN, it's interesting ...

On my daily five minutes on babble yesterday, I read an exchange in which Bubbles said:

quote:
I have not checked lately, but it seemed to me that there were lots of folks in the Jeruzalem Post , for example, denying that Palistinians even exist.

To which Mishei responded:


quote:
This is just utter BULLSHIT. Please provide ANY proof whatsoever for this stupid statement!!!

And the discussion went on from there (anyone can look), Mishei clearly implying that he also would be offended by a statement that Palestinians don't even exist, and further, that no such statement had ever been made on babble.

Now, I admit freely, CN, that your statement above DOES NOT EQUATE to denying the existence of Palestinians. It made me think, though.

Suddenly, I remembered. There WAS a babbler in the distant past who did regularly flatly claim that there were no such people as the Palestinians. He didn't just toy around the edges of such a thought: he stated it. And although his career was ended for statements more egregious, I'm quite sure he got away with such claims.

I'm trying to remember his handle now ... Waterlogged? Something about James Bond?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 08 April 2003 02:19 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As always, skdadl, you're full of it (poetics, that is). Dream on.
From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 08 April 2003 02:22 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey, brainiac, you said that no Israeli prime minister would ever consider dividing Jerusalem. I pointed to one who already did. You call that "spin." I think the only thing "spinning" is your head.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 08 April 2003 02:33 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
josh, I'm talking about today's reality. Enjoy your history.
From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 08 April 2003 02:38 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"no Israeli prime minister" = not one of more than one.

How many prime ministers can fit in a day?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 08 April 2003 02:51 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While I find Barak's vision more to my way of thinking, let me be clear that any part of Jerusalem should be open to any Israeli citizen to live in.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 08 April 2003 02:54 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The whole world should be open to us all.

That wonderful thought still does not address bitter realities, and the generously humane among us are always ready to take account of how long it must take the broken-hearted to find generosity again.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 08 April 2003 02:59 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And Mishei, every part of Jerusalem should be open to every Palestinian, right?
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 08 April 2003 03:05 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Once a peace is negotiated no problem. Till then Palestinians should have acess to Jerusalem after security clearances.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 08 April 2003 03:08 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is this legal considering that east Jerusalem is also occupied territory? Israel's annexation is not recognised internationally.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 08 April 2003 03:18 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why is it okay Mishei for an Israeli to live in East Jerusalem in advance of a peace agreement, but not okay for a Palestinian to live in other parts of Jerusalem in advance of such an agreement?
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 08 April 2003 03:22 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Mishei: Till then Palestinians should have acess to Jerusalem...
...to live in?

From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 08 April 2003 03:25 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Because Israel is of course Jewish land.

*dons flame-repellent suit*

This sort of business is why I reject the validity of religiously-motivated claims to land. It creates a sense of "manifest destiny" that precludes being able to conceptualize the notion of equal rights for all who live within a given area of land.

Having said that I need to add my obligatory disclaimer that I am not an anti-Semite, nor do I believe idiotic notions like the Protocols of the Elders of blah blah blah, or the blood libel, or whatever else that gets recycled on the fringe extreme right, and that I do not deny Israel's right to exist.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sisyphus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1425

posted 08 April 2003 03:29 PM      Profile for Sisyphus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Whoah, I'm glad you cleared that up DrC .
From: Never Never Land | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 08 April 2003 05:39 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why is it okay Mishei for an Israeli to live in East Jerusalem in advance of a peace agreement, but not okay for a Palestinian to live in other parts of Jerusalem in advance of such an agreement?

*rend garments, wail, gnash teeth, etc. etc.*

How dare you make such accusations? You have no right to demonize any babbler in this undemocratic manner. You are a liar and a holocaust denier...and utterly beyond the pale and...


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 08 April 2003 07:42 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
While I find Barak's vision more to my way of thinking, let me be clear that any part of Jerusalem should be open to any Israeli citizen to live in.

Why refer to Barak when you can refer to Sharon. Isn't part of the LIkud platform that Jews should be allowed to live whereever the choose. Nice enough in theory except when in practice it means that Arabs may not, and must move it Jews decide to live in their homes.

[ 08 April 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 09:58 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, must be pondering my question. Or avoiding it.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 10:54 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Josh, personally I dont know why Israelis would want to live in East Jerusalem. That said, I think it would behoove both Israelis and Palestininas not to take any precipitous actions (IE moving for the sake of provocation) until a peace deal is negotiated.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 10:57 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That doesn't REALLY answer his question, Mishei. You kind of evaded it.

The question isn't why they would WANT to live in East Jerusalem. You made the claim that Israelis should be able to live anywhere in Jerusalem that they want. Josh asked you why Israelis should be able to live anywhere they want in Jerusalem in advance of a peace agreement, but that Palestinians shouldn't be allowed to do so in advance of a peace agreement.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 12:17 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No I answered the question. In my heart I believe Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Israel and principally Jews should be permitted to live anywhere in Jerusalem.

Palestinians already live in East Jerusalem and no one has a right to change that.

As for the future I believe as I stated that it behooves everybody to maintain the staus quo until a peace is neghotiated.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 April 2003 12:20 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, to be clear, Palestinians can only live in East Jerusalem and only if they already live there. But Jews can live anywhere in Jerusalem even if they don't already live there? Is that it?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 12:21 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My posts were pretty clear.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 April 2003 12:23 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Then I have translated correctly? Jews who have never lived in Jerusalem can move into East Jerusalem, but Palestinians cannot ensuring theri population will be diluted and become a minority over time? Ethnic cleansing through attrition?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 12:28 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, it sounds like a blatant case of discrimination based on religion and ethnicity.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 12:35 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My my a surfeit of interpretation.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 12:41 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, there's only one interpretation.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 April 2003 01:24 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well correct me Mishei? Am I wrong?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 April 2003 01:28 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is being reported that the blast injuring 20 children at a school near Jenin was carried out by an extremist Jewsih organization. Apparently the same group has taken credit for several killing s of Palestininas. Can we now expect to see Jewsih homes bulldozed and towns occupied? Do Palestinians now have the right of self-defence to carry out attacks against Jewish targets?

Or is self-defence and collective punishment like Jerusalem? Only one ethnic group is entitled to all of it as they see fit?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 01:49 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If what you post is correct this would be viewed as a criminal act. I am sure police are investigating and hopefully will bring the perpetrators to justice.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 01:52 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
By bulldozing their families' homes?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 09 April 2003 01:58 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[Michelle, WingNut, before you get too excited ... The police are investigating. It appears that the student brought the exploding device to school, after finding it in his home. And there is no Jewish organization behind it.]
[I'll fill you in just as soon as there is a website to link to.]

From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 02:02 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, but Mishei said, "if this is correct", and I was basing my question on that hypothetical proposition.

If the story were correct, do you think the Israeli government would punish the perpetrators, if found guilty, by bulldozing their families' homes?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 02:30 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is as much chance of that as a Palestinian living in West Jerusalem. It's called discrimination.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 09 April 2003 03:38 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If what you post is correct this would be viewed as a criminal act. I am sure police are investigating and hopefully will bring the perpetrators to justice.

You could write scripts for this guy:

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 03:51 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I didn't realize he was a friend of yours
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 04:01 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cute, both of you.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 04:09 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, your brevity today betrays a reluctance to face the consequences of your position on Jerusalem.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 09 April 2003 04:15 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I rather enjoy the brevity.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 04:39 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have no reluctance on Jerusalem. If you can read I made myself clear as a bell. You may not agree with me but why would that make this day different from others?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 04:41 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So you endorse the discrimination inherent in such a policy?
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 05:02 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I just love the way you put words in my mouth. No regard for geo-political concerns. Jeeze with your way of thinking Jews should never be permitted to settle anywhere in the area. That too would be discrimination no?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 05:03 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Where did josh say that Jews should not be permitted to settle anywhere in the area? I think I missed that part.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 05:07 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Never said he said that. Hoever many here have claimed that Jews/Israelis should not be permitted to live/settle in any part of the PA. There are geo-political reasons for this. Gee Im sure that even you have demanded that all Jewish settlements in the PA be dismantled haven't you?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 April 2003 05:12 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What is the PA?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 05:12 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, the master of obfuscation. Refuses to recognize that allowing Jews to settle in occupied East Jerusalem, but preventing Palestinians from settling in West Jerusalem is not discrimination.

And if you favour an eventual settlement, what is the geopolitical benefit of settling East Jersusalem? That's the same argument King Ariel has used for years in settling the west bank, and look where that's got us.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 05:13 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You said "with your way of thinking" which implies that josh believes that Jews should not be able to settle anywhere in the area. Whereas I can't find a single post in this entire thread where he even implies that Jews should not be able to settle anywhere in the area.

What he was asking you is why it is that Jews should be allowed to settle anywhere in Jerusalem before a peace agreement, but Palestinians should not be allowed to settle anywhere except East Jerusalem, and only if they already lived there. Doesn't sound to me like he's saying that Jews shouldn't be allowed in the area. I wonder how you came up with the idea that to josh's "way of thinking" that he would believe that.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 05:18 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And for me the opposite needs answering; why is it justifiable to demand that Israelis/Jews dismantle settlements (which I agree with) in the PA (Skdadl, PA is the Palestinian Authority)and not settle there? Is that also not a form of discrimnation?

All that stated, my preferance is that the issue of where people can live and settle along with how this is to be accomplished be part of the overall negotiations involved in a peace treaty.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 05:24 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's not a form of discrimination. It is illegal under international law to settle an occupied area. By settling Arab East Jerusalem, all that is being done is perpetuating that illegality. The only "geopolitical reality" Sharon's crowd cares about is putting down settlements in order to make that much more difficult for the occupation to end.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 05:30 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So I assume that you've conceded my point then, right, since you're moving onto another question, Mishei?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 April 2003 05:32 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Forgive my ignorance if I'm fuzzy on the history here, but I thought that East Jerusalem was on the other (Jordanian/now Palestinian) side of the Green Line -- no?

I see very practical reasons for accepting that, for a generation or so, certain kinds of ethnic/religious discrimination are going to be defended politically in both states (I'm assuming two states here -- call me a cock-eyed optimist).

That is certainly the problem with allowing the Israelis to digest more and more of the OT, not to mention East Jerusalem, especially since all this is being done in defiance of international law.

You know, Mishei, I have spent too much of my life dealing with PR and marketing people to waste a tear on any of them ever for any reason. But I have to tell you: I read this thread, and for the first time since I met you, I really, really feel sorry for you. I see where you're stuck, and it is such a pity. My condolences.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 05:33 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle you know what they say about people who assume
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 April 2003 05:35 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, actually, what IS the PA?

Yes, I certainly do know, Mishei! In which case, if you haven't conceded my point then you have merely evaded it. Ah well, either way is still losing the debate.

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 09 April 2003 05:36 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You mean Skdadl, it's like trying to have a dialogue with Ari Fleischer?

One another thing, it really burns that people like that clown who lives in Florida, Irving Moskowitz, finances these settlements. Meanwhile, people who have actually been living in this area for generations are either forced out of made to feel as though they are second-class citizens.

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 05:48 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Skdadl, cry no tears for me. I am content and happy with my lot. I have good friends a loving partner great children and a philosophy of life that I can live with. While I appreciate your concern please do not worry your poor head over me.

And Michelle;

quote:
Ah well, either way is still losing the debate
If it makes you feel better to feel that way please go ahead.

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 09 April 2003 06:41 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's rather like talking to a mimeograph machine with 3 or 4 templates, yet the operator keeps on churing out the same pamphlets, again and again and again.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 09 April 2003 06:59 PM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Palestinians already live in East Jerusalem and no one has a right to change that.

I couldn't agree with you more, Mishei. So now, when are you going to recognize the right of return for those 750,000 Palestinians (and their millions of descdendents) who were weren't allowed back to their homes after 1948?

Because, um, Palestinians already lived in the area. And no one had the right to chnage that.

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: Maggot ]


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 09 April 2003 07:05 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's rather like talking to a mimeograph machine with 3 or 4 templates, yet the operator keeps on churing out the same pamphlets, again and again and again.

...although we must admit that Mishei quite effectively illustrates the lack of credibility in Zionist arguments for all to see...

[ 09 April 2003: Message edited by: al-Qa'bong ]


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 09 April 2003 09:42 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I couldn't agree with you more, Mishei. So now, when are you going to recognize the right of return for those 750,000 Palestinians (and their millions of descdendents) who were weren't allowed back to their homes after 1948?


That is a complete non-starter. We have been over this ground before. Once a Palestinian state is established there should be a "right of return" for all Palestinians to a Palestinian state not to Israel.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 10 April 2003 02:39 AM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
That is a complete non-starter. We have been over this ground before. Once a Palestinian state is established there should be a "right of return" for all Palestinians to a Palestinian state not to Israel.

Yeah, I know it's a non-starter, for Israel. But it's amazing, my friend: you're completely blind to your own hyprocrisy. Earlier, you stated that because Palis in E. Jerusalem were already there, "no one had the RIGHT" to displace them. I am merely pointing out that it is exactly this kind of displacement of indiginous Arabs that birthed the modern state of Israel.

So what is it? Did the Palestinians living in what would become Israel have a right to be there because they did, in fact, live there already? And if that's the case, then wouldn't it have been a violation of their rights to deny them access to their own homes, after the war?


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 10 April 2003 09:13 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
it is exactly this kind of displacement of indiginous Arabs that birthed the modern state of Israel.

Maggot the history of the displacement itself is fraught with difficulty. By your standards should Ottawans/Torontonians/Montrealers etc leave their homes today in order for the decendants of certain Aboriginal tribes displaced years ago return and take up their rightful place as well?

And what about the United States God knows how much of New York is actually Aboriginal land. No Maggot this discussion has raged here before and I believe you know the answer as well as any of us.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 April 2003 09:17 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Native people have the right to live in Toronto and New York City here in North America. They can retain their fully unique status as First Nations People while living in those cities.

Not only that, but there are even programs (and I agree that they're not even adequate yet) that help First Nations people in Canadian cities to settle in cheap, affordable housing within the city. (Whoops, when I say cheap and affordable, I'm not talking about slums, either - they buy houses in residential neighbourhoods and then give them to Native families for very low, subsidized rent.) For instance, in Kingston, we have Tipi Moza, which an Aboriginal member of my family has used, and it's a wonderful program.

[ 10 April 2003: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 10 April 2003 12:15 PM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
By your standards should Ottawans/Torontonians/Montrealers etc leave their homes today in order for the decendants of certain Aboriginal tribes displaced years ago return and take up their rightful place as well?

Interesting point, Mishei. Michelle has done a fine job of ripping it apart, but let me add one more spice to the soup.

The displacement of our inidignous peoples was an atrocity. And you are using that atrocity to justify the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population of Israel.

What was done to Native Canadians is a terrible thing, indeed. But we are trying to attempt redress through a myriad of land claims disputes, going on (to paraphrase Heddy Fry) "as we speak." And there are differences. The human rights discussion has progressed since the time of Cartier; back then, the concept of human rights was pretty much that -- a concept. But in the aftermath of the 1948 war, there were international laws in place guaranteeing that those who were displaced by war would, by law, have the right to return to their homes. The newly expanded state of Israel chose to ignore those laws. And appropriate the property of those who fled.

This cuts to the core of the Arab position. To insist that Arabs accept Israel's "right" to exist implies that they also accept that its creation was a moral one.

But by (a) absorbing twice as much land as was originally allotted her and (b) disallowing the Arab population the right to return to their own homes after the cessation of hostilities, the fledgling Jewish state committed a serious human rights violation, to say nothing of breeching international law.

Mishei, everyone knows that anything more than a very limited right of return is off the table. But millions of Arabs believe -- and not without jutification -- that it shouldn't be.

Keep well. Shalom.

[ 10 April 2003: Message edited by: Maggot ]


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 10 April 2003 12:37 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
That is a complete non-starter.

Translate: The templates for the mimeograph machine are getting old. After years of putting out the same message over and over and over again, they are now so worn that some parts have no readable print. The printer is afraid to add to the text or to modify it to meet new conditions, so he inserts the term 'non-starter' in the blank spots.

The pamphlets now read like Hari Krishna tracts where the converted, when reading them out loud, repeat the phrase 'non-starter' over and over like a mantra. "Non-starter. Non-starter. Non-starter. Non-starter." Their eyes glaze over and they fall into an unthinking trance.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 10 April 2003 01:12 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Holy Cow, Batman ... Moredreads has discovered the mimeograph! Calls for a toast: Here's to Fantasy & Futility! [Dream on.]
From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 10 April 2003 01:14 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Que?
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 April 2003 01:16 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah, CN weighs in again with a constructive comment.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 01:21 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Back in the days of Mrs Thatcher, I used to fantasize about writing a novel in which all non-aboriginal Canadians decided, being decent people, to return to their own ancestral lands.

One comic subplot, of course, concerned those many millions of us who aren't entirely sure which ancestral homeland was actually ours.

I felt the greatest satisfaction, though, at the thought of the millions born of the Celtic diaspora lining up at Heathrow and driving Mrs Thatcher out of her mind. (Mrs Thatcher really detested the Scots, probably even more than she hated the Irish, and that's going some.)

Younger writers: free idea. Have fun.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 10 April 2003 01:22 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, the Scots.

Heres to us, and them like us. Damn few, and their all dead.

PS: The Scots hate Maggie back.

[ 10 April 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 10 April 2003 01:24 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You won't turn back and make the writer pay you royalties, won't you? On SF newsgroups you're not supposed to post story ideas, generally, in order to protect the SF series (a dying breed) scriptwriter.
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 01:29 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mandos: Ideally, I would like to see the death of copyright. It was an eighteenth-century idea, necessary at the time; but I think we need to figure out a new way to pay creators.

Of course, for the time being, I don't expect creators to be martyrs, so I would defend their right to earn money the way we currently do from our work. But I think it's a bad way. Pay per unit of product or time: very bad. Not necessary. Other ways possible.

And as for moi: I'm free. My ideas are free. Feel free.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 01:33 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Now, Moredreads, you and I should have done that as responses:

You: Here's tae us!

Moi: Wha's like us?

You: Damn few!

Moi: And they're a' deid!

Sun's over the yardarm, Moredreads. Slainte var!


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 10 April 2003 01:35 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[drift]

skdadl:

You've put me in mind of the copyright notice at DailyKos

quote:
© 2002. Steal what you want.

[/drift]

Edited to close my drift tag. How compulsive have I become?

[ 10 April 2003: Message edited by: Slim ]


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 01:55 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

I mean, like, a gril's gotta be generous, eh, or what is socialism for? Eh?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 01:58 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
PS: And besides, I simply love the Internet. I totally adore the Internet. I am one of those elderly people who just barely grasps what she is doing on the Internet, but still I love love loooooove it.

This is liberty! I wish I could show it to my beloved Denis (Diderot). Och, but he would be in raptures!

We must do what he did: Turn. On. The. Lights!


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 10 April 2003 02:08 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Skdadl, will you please stop calling yourself "elderly", at least until you qualify for an Old Age Pension? If your posted age is accurate, you are what - 57 - 58? Still middle-aged by my reckoning.

I know that "elderly" used to mean "getting on in years", but now it has squarely become a euphemism for "old".


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 03:03 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dearest Pussycat: some of us live fast, y'know?

You should see me right now. Really, you should. After you had me fumigated, you'd have me committed. I'm not kidding, Pussycat ... although I'm getting a giggle out of the thought.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 April 2003 03:27 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That fumigated/committed combination could apply to many of us on any given day, skdadl. Why right now I'm feeling on the edge of madness given my Internet has been down all day and people have been asking every five minutes since 6:30 a.m., "do we have mail, yet?" Well, &*%$#!@@$&, now we do.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 April 2003 03:36 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut, my stars! Such language from such a nice young man!

Do you think this qualifies as thread drift, guys? Incurable thread drift? Thread drift powerful enough to disrupt the Gulf Stream and return northern Europe to eternal winter? Is this a CIA plot?

Tune in again tomorrow, same time, same thread, for the exciting conclusion to ...


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 10 April 2003 07:05 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Have you read "How late it was... how late" by James Kellman? Do it if you haven't. Its all in dailect.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca