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

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Do some Israelis really think like this column?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Do some Israelis really think like this column?
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 25 March 2004 04:07 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I find this column very spooky.

quote:
Gaza is where the injured Samson took his revenge on the barbarians. Gaza was the Biblical military center of the Philistines, and Sharon is officially pledged to recreating a center for Philistine barbarism there.

quote:
It does not matter that Ariel Sharon showed cowardice in not also mowing down the Hamas "mourners" marching in the Bloody Sheikh's funeral procession.

From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 25 March 2004 04:22 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh Yes! Begin once recalled fonldy how Moshe Dyan spoke of "liberating Gaza" when his armies marched through the city in 1967.

You should show this to Justice the next time he complains about the implicit Palestinian 'hate message' against Israel that is fostered when Palestinians fail to put the green line in their text books.

[ 25 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 25 March 2004 04:30 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Very, very, very few think like this today sadly though there are some.

Anyway you are getting this from a radical right wing media source that was even band for quite a while in Israel. I should of has sunk their illegal radio station when I had them in my sites.

And although what cueball is saying maybe true. I'm sure Dyans intentions were not the same as this. And he definitely would not say that today.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 25 March 2004 04:35 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How does this compare to the implicit Palestinian 'hate message' against Israel that is fostered when Palestinians fail to put the green line in their text books?

And Begin did recall that. He said it in a public speach in 1982.

Why isn't this fellow in a psychiatric institute or locked up? Why does he have money to run a web site? Why is there a paper that makes enough money to publish his drivel?

And furthermore, given your constant complaint about the teaching of hate at Palestinian schools, why is this fellow allowed to teach at the University of Haifa?

[ 25 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 25 March 2004 05:03 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And furthermore, given your constant complaint about the teaching of hate at Palestinian schools, why is this fellow allowed to teach at the University of Haifa?

You know what I don't know I'll admit there is problems in israel as there are in many countries. Why is Mel Gibsons film allowed to be shown? On the other hand though the vast majority of israelis would disagree with him and this is university not elmentry school.

as far as the paper goes I agree with you but its one out of many israeli papers that don't use drivel like this unlike the palestinains papers which many do.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 25 March 2004 07:50 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
One could engage in endless debate about the ethics behind these attacks, but this would not change three facts:

1.The attacks are a reaction to the violent history involved in the birth and maintenance of the state of Israel. Tanks, attack helicopters, and F-16's have for a long time have been used to subdue a Palestinian society that objects to the loss of its rights and the brutality and humiliation of the Israeli occupation. Israel, armed and racist, believes it has right on its side, provided by God, and backed up by US power. It believes might makes right.

After fifty years of conflict with Israel, the Palestinians failed at all levels of appealing their cause before the International court of law, the United Nations, and the human rights community. Israel tightened the borders and attacked defenseless civilians with its full military capacity. All of the violence was absorbed by Palestinian society, which sought a way to express its outrage and act in self-defense against it.

2. The attacks bring a heavy cost to Israel's security -- its economic, military, and political foundations.

3. The attacks are based on ideology, politics, and honor -- which makes them hard to stop. So far all efforts by Israel to do so have failed. In fact, such efforts increase the attacks.


Amer Jubran, Axis of Logic


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 25 March 2004 09:12 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
How does this compare to the implicit Palestinian 'hate message' against Israel that is fostered when Palestinians fail to put the green line in their text books?

And furthermore, given your constant complaint about the teaching of hate at Palestinian schools, why is this fellow allowed to teach at the University of Haifa?

[ 25 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


There is a difference between some fairly isolated extreme remarks and official indoctrination in anisemitism/hate. Most palestinian factions call for the mass slaughter/displacement of Jews and the elimination of a Jewish state. Hamas certainly does. Terror against the Jews in what is now Israel and the territories goes back centuries. Only in the 20th century have the Jews been able to defend themselves. The world never seems to mind the helpless Jew. The proud Jew, on the other hand, able to stand for him/herself and exercise sovereignty has always offended some.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 25 March 2004 09:15 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What are Israel's official borders?
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 25 March 2004 10:10 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh. The proud Jew. I see. Is that like the proud aryan?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 26 March 2004 06:56 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You know what I don't know I'll admit there is problems in israel as there are in many countries. Why is Mel Gibsons film allowed to be shown? On the other hand though the vast majority of israelis would disagree with him and this is university not elmentry school.

Worse that it is a University. University is were they teach teachers what to teach.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 26 March 2004 07:48 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Worse that it is a University. University is were they teach teachers what to teach.

Well, if he's working for an Education program, then yes. But universities have a tradition of allowing its professors to take partisan and controversial positions on subjects publicly, unlike, say, high school or elementary school teachers. The idea being that universities teach adults who are supposed to be able to take various viewpoints and think critically about them and come to their own conclusions.

However, this guy sounds pretty obnoxious, and I doubt that he would last long spouting that kind of racist bullshit in a Canadian university. But I was just responding to the idea that there is somehow a higher standard of circumspection for professors than for teachers in elementary and secondary schools. There isn't, and it's the exact opposite.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 26 March 2004 07:50 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No because most teachers get their degrees in education attached to other studies they have taken. This guys courses could very well end up on the overall degree of any teacher.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 26 March 2004 07:52 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So? My argument still stands. When people go to university, they're supposed to be adults, and they're supposed to be able to think critically about what their professors tell them. They're no longer children who are supposed to be protected from "biased" viewpoints.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 26 March 2004 08:46 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And this university professor in question... he is an adult?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 26 March 2004 11:36 AM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've seen many professors through out the western world with radical ideologies from both the left and the right but I haven't seen many schools in western society that have teachers that indoctrinate their children with radical nationalistic or intolerable religious beliefs.
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 26 March 2004 06:44 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Then you have never been to school. All states do this.

Canada does this. They don't for instance use maps that have all of the traditional tribal areas marked on them. They don't talk about the theft of native land, as theft of native land, they talk about 'treaty agreements.'

The above, if we were to hold your standards would be evidence of racism against natives. In a sense it is but it is not abnormal.

In the US they don't talk about the Vietnam War, they talk about the Police Action in Vietnam. Indoctrination into a national ideal is one of the most important jobs of public shools.

Israel also does this, reffering to the 1967 border as the Green Line, implicitly making the division between Arab land and Israeli land fuzzy. This helps supports the racist program of settlement and its accompanying repression.

I read a study were an American sociologist was hired by NPR do determine if Palestinian textbooks were racist. He determined that they were not, and that the simply presented a view at odds with the Israeli view of history.

This guy above is another can of worms entirely. Surely their are his equal opposites among the Palestinians. To focus attention on the racism of Palestinian teachers and then excuse as abberant the views of Steven Plaut is to set two different standards, one for Palestinians and one for Israelis.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 12:38 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
Oh. The proud Jew. I see. Is that like the proud aryan?

Why oh why do opponents of Israel turn to Nazism for analogy?
I find it both extremely troubling and extremely revealing.

From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
R_Louis
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5304

posted 29 March 2004 12:44 PM      Profile for R_Louis        Edit/Delete Post
Yes, the linkage by WingNut is obvious. Whatever does he mean? Would he fly an Israeli flag with a swastika in the center?
Do let us know, WingNut.

From: On the Border | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 12:59 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Israel also does this, reffering to the 1967 border as the Green Line, implicitly making the division between Arab land and Israeli land fuzzy. This helps supports the racist program of settlement and its accompanying repression.

The Green Line is simply where the Haganah and the Arab armies stopped shooting at each other in 1948. They were never internationally accepted borders. The West Bank was occupied by Jordan and the Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt from 1948 to 1967. Funny, there was no talk about "occupation" back then. Only when Jews controlled the land, fif this notion arise.

Since Egypt and Jordan did not recognize those lines as borders and the UN did not recognize these lines as borders why should Israel?

That is also the reason why a return to the Green Line is not simply a return to established borders. Moreover 242 only requires the return of "territories" captured in the 1967 war. It specifically does not call for the return of "the territories" because the expectation is that a just solution included the retention of some of the territories captured in 1967. If you look at both the geography and the history, you immediately understand why the UN took this position in 242.

Once again, Arabs have rejected every attempt to partition the land (1937, 1948, 2001). Each time, they have preferred war to a state. That is the real history of the region.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 29 March 2004 01:00 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by talkin2u:

Only in the 20th century have the Jews been able to defend themselves. The world never seems to mind the helpless Jew. The proud Jew, on the other hand, able to stand for him/herself and exercise sovereignty has always offended some.


This passage deals in stereotypes and historical overgeneralizations that are going to be deeply offensive to many babblers. WingNut was clearly echoing it sarcastically, pointing out the hateful potential of such ethnic essentialism.

talkin'2yu and R_Louis seem to be on some sort of campaign this morning.


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

posted 29 March 2004 01:11 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The "helpless Jew" stereotype is an insult to the many Jews who have fought for their own rights and those of others, before the foundation of the State of Israel. Jews have played a huge role in movements for socialism and human rights, which should be a great source of pride, not only for Jews, but for all human beings.

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: lagatta ]


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 01:21 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The Green Line is simply where the Haganah and the Arab armies stopped shooting at each other in 1948. They were never internationally accepted borders.

Yes we know that Israel recognizes no boundararies.

quote:
The West Bank was occupied by Jordan and the Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt from 1948 to 1967. Funny, there was no talk about "occupation" back then. Only when Jews controlled the land, fif this notion arise.

Tacit admission that the occupation is illegal.

I suppose you were there, listening to the voices of the Palestinians in the streets talking about how they felt about their Hashemite rulers? One of the key things that made the PLO founding charter unique in the Arab world is that it called for a secular democracy in the Palestine mandate. The organization was founded in 1964, before, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

Therefore, it would seem that this document was also a challenge to the Hashemite kings, Faisal and Hussien. I know that your knowledge of Arab history is limited, and only geared to finding excuses for the actions of Israel (Johnny did it first so I can do it too. Na na na.) but perhaps you might at least recognize that there was a strong anti-Hashemite movement throughout, Palestine, Syria and Iraq.

Did they not war with Hussein in 1970?

This of course does not mean that they accepted partition, or the impostition of a Jewish state in their midst, but simplfying Arab thought along the one axis (that of an anti-Israel stand,) shows extreme ignorance. Some might even say that this uni-dimensional conception of Arab mentality is fundamentally racist, itself.

Not only was partition forced upon the Arabs by GB and the UN, but also the Hashemites in Jordan and Iraq, and of course the Saudi's in Saudi Arabia by GB.

Give me Justice, not these armchair Zionists, who at least has the guts to admit some of the failings of Zionist movement and its congress with the Arabs. He at least is attempting to understand and solve problems, not just spout text book knee jerk patriotism.

How tiresome that one can not even make a statement about public schooling and how it is used to form national identities, without you guys prosecuting your war against the mythical and sometimes real enemies of Israel.

quote:
Moreover 242 only requires the return of "territories" captured in the 1967 war.

Pure tendentious obfustication. Not even worth arguing. Utter pedantry. The kind of parsing of language that Judges and Lawyers chuckle about over martinis.

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
o
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4435

posted 29 March 2004 01:35 PM      Profile for o     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actualy, there is some truth to the notion that the world prefers helpless Jews..It wasn't until Israels awesome victory in 1967 that world opinion began to sway against it..That victory transformed Israel in the eyes of many from the weak socialist David to a powerful Goliath.

Now I know some will say..But that is when the occupation started! But where was the worlds outrage when Jordan occupied the west bank? when egypt occupied gaza? Where is the outrage now when Syria occupies Lebanon? It cannot be just about the dispouted territories.


From: toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 29 March 2004 01:42 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Actualy, there is some truth to the notion that the world prefers helpless Jews..It wasn't until Israels awesome victory in 1967 that world opinion began to sway against it..That victory transformed Israel in the eyes of many from the weak socialist David to a powerful Goliath.

That's some spin. Utter bullshit but clever in a very sad way.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 01:43 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow! More of it! Lose an arguement and retreat into the lair of undefined subtle accusations.

quote:
But where was the worlds outrage when Jordan occupied the west bank?

Again, the PLO founding charter was written in 1964 and called for a unified secular state within the bondaries of the former Palestine mandate, including the WB. That is a direct challenge to the Hashemite rule of the WB.

The truth is that the reason that there is so much discussion about the Israeli occupation, as opposed to discussion about the Syrain presence in Lebanon, is that rabid Syrian nationalist don't show up on this board day after day defending Syria's interference in the business of the Lebanese.

First, start the arguement and then accuse everyone of racism because the they choose to argue back is undue focus on Israel (and Jews, hint hint....)

For three weeks there was not one thread started on this topic. It was only until Sharon murdered Yassin that anyone even bothered to talk about Israel. Are you saying the Yassin assassination is not worthy of discussion?

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
o
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4435

posted 29 March 2004 01:52 PM      Profile for o     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball wrote "First, start the arguement and then accuse everyone of racism because the fact that they choose to argue back is undue focus on Israel (and Jews, hint hint....) "

No offense Cueball, but if you look at the posts, 5 are started by you personally...only one out of several could be said to be started by a pro-israel poster... I think YOU are the one obssesed with Israel, which is why people like me are here to fight the good fight and keep people like you in check


From: toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 01:56 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No offence taken, I know you have no defence other than the smear.

And most of the recent threads are about the Yassin assassination. Posting a chronolgy of events leading up to major political assassination is anti-Jewish? And wasn't it I who began the thread about the 16 year old suicide bomber?

I guess it never occured to you I might be Jewish, and so I might be interested?

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 29 March 2004 02:07 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
keep people like you in check

People like what? Your treading a fine line here with comments like this, it seems to expose something akin to bigotry, or at the very least condscending snearing and baiting.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 29 March 2004 02:09 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
which is why people like me are here to fight the good fight and keep people like you in check

That is useful.

By the way, o, this site is moderated. Most of us think that the moderators do an excellent job and are unlikely to need you policing the site from the outside.

Vigilantes are unlikely to meet with friendly welcomes.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 02:13 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

Agent is a sinister and elusive opponent who usually works in concert with other Agents. Agent generally uses standard combat techniques, but differs from other Warriors in that he is in the employ of some organization. The organization may be political, commercial, or even criminal, and it’s Agent’s job to post messages that advance his employer’s interests. For example, several Agents who have been hired to promote a new theater production will invade theater discussion forums, and while energetically plumping for their own production, they will pick fights, spread malicious gossip and post fraudulent reviews about competing productions. Some Agents are benign shills, while others are malicious crusaders. Agents typically use hit and run tactics to avoid detection, but sometimes they can be detected by alert forum members who have seen them in other forums, or they may arouse suspicion by the obsessive monotony of their postings.


From Here

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 29 March 2004 02:21 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, skdadl is rolling on floor, holding tummy.

There's this:

quote:
For example, several Agents who have been hired to promote a new theater production will invade theater discussion forums, and while energetically plumping for their own production, they will pick fights, spread malicious gossip and post fraudulent reviews about competing productions.

Whoever wrote that has been reading either one of our Dipper threads or has met PerformanceAnxiety. Yee hee hee, and Levaaaaaack!

And then there's this:

quote:
Some Agents are benign shills, while others are malicious crusaders. Agents typically use hit and run tactics to avoid detection, but sometimes they can be detected by alert forum members who have seen them in other forums, or they may arouse suspicion by the obsessive monotony of their postings.

Oh stop, stop, Cueball -- it hurts!


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 02:54 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Pure tendentious obfustication. Not even worth arguing. Utter pedantry. The kind of parsing of language that Judges and Lawyers chuckle about over martinis.

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


So, the actual wording of SC resolutions is "utter pedantry". I guess it is better just to rewrite them to suit your ends?

In fact, the definite article "the" was proposed and rejected because of what it meant. I know it is pendantry to look at the actual history and the actual wording of the resolution (sooooo tiring yawn); however, in this case it makes a large difference. It should (at least for those who give the UN some legitimacy) affect how people look at future boundaries and so on.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 02:56 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Agent is a sinister and elusive opponent who usually works in concert with other Agents. Agent generally uses standard combat techniques, but differs from other Warriors in that he is in the employ of some organization. The organization may be political, commercial, or even criminal, and it’s Agent’s job to post messages that advance his employer’s interests. For example, several Agents who have been hired to promote a new theater production will invade theater discussion forums, and while energetically plumping for their own production, they will pick fights, spread malicious gossip and post fraudulent reviews about competing productions. Some Agents are benign shills, while others are malicious crusaders. Agents typically use hit and run tactics to avoid detection, but sometimes they can be detected by alert forum members who have seen them in other forums, or they may arouse suspicion by the obsessive monotony of their postings.


From Here

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


Is the allegation that of a conspiracy. Oh say it ain't so!


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
o
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4435

posted 29 March 2004 02:57 PM      Profile for o     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think some people are a little too sensitive..when I say "people like you" I probably should have said "people with your opinion"... cause that is all I can comment on, not having met anyone here on person. I will try to be clearer in the future.

.And I never accused Cueball of being a racist...but if he is gonna keep saying that the Israel issue is being brought up here by the right , I will point put that the majority of posts are started by people who apear to lean left in their posts, with him taking the prize for starting the most .


From: toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 02:57 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In fact, the definite article "the" was proposed and rejected because of what it meant. I know it is pendantry to look at the actual history and the actual wording of the resolution (sooooo tiring yawn); however, in this case it makes a large difference. It should (at least for those who give the UN some legitimacy) affect how people look at future boundaries and so on.


Your interpretation would mean that Israel could take everything up to a 1 mile stretch along the border of Jordan and still comply with 242. lol. Try again slugger.


quote:
I will point put that the majority of posts are started by people who apear to lean left in their posts, with him taking the prize for starting the most .

Did you miss the sign on the way in: "Progressive Board Ahead, Abandon all Hope Ye Who Enter Here?" Obviously left wingers are going to do most of the posting on a left wing board.

I have a right to have my opinions discussed on the basis of what they are, not based on preconceptions, or in terms of what you think is bias. Bias is part of the nature of opinions.

The only thing you have demonstrated is an inability to argue your case or support it with evidence, by resorting to cheap character assassination.

[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 03:09 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Is the allegation that of a conspiracy. Oh say it ain't so!

To busy navigating multiple boards to cut and paste my post without redisplaying the graphic and wasting valuable server space?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 03:21 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Your interpretation would mean that Israel could take everything up to a 1 mile stretch along the border of Jordan and still comply with 242. lol. Try again slugger.
[ 29 March 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]

My interpretation is the legally correct one. What the Security Council had in mind was that there would be a negotiation around security and land.

There has to be a price paid for starting and losing wars. The Arabs started and lost the 1967 war. The Security Council realised that although Israel would have to withdraw from some of the land, other bits of the West Bank would likely be retained for security purposes. The depth of the withdrawal would reflect the depth of the peace. If a price is not paid for starting and losing wars there is no disincentive. The Sudeten Germans paid a heavy price for Hitler starting and losing WWII. I don't think it was inappropriate.
As we saw in the Sinai, Israel withdrew because the peace offered merited it (BTW, that withdrawal also meant that Israel lost control of the only oil resources it would ever have. But, it complied with 242 and withdrew). The territories are different from Sinai for many reasons; however, Israel will withdraw to the extent of the peace offered (if any).


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 03:22 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

To busy navigating multiple boards to cut and paste my post without redisplaying the graphic and wasting valuable server space?


Apolgies for goodness sake. If an mod wants to cut the graphic, please do so!


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 03:23 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ok when and where did the any Arabs army enter Israel in 1967?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 29 March 2004 03:38 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
To busy navigating multiple boards to cut and paste my post without redisplaying the graphic and wasting valuable server space?

FYI, that graphic is not stored on rabble's server. Not once, and not twice. The board simply links out to it. All storage and bandwidth costs are being borne by winternet.com

We have, however, just wasted 3 posts thanks to it: one wherein cueball chastizes talkin2u for resposting the graphic, one wherein talkin2u pretends to apologize, and this one, wherein I describe how the web works.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 29 March 2004 03:46 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well that is a good point, but we are still consuming download bandwidth, no?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
talkin2u
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5284

posted 29 March 2004 03:50 PM      Profile for talkin2u        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Ok when and where did the any Arabs army enter Israel in 1967?

Repeated shelling from the Golan, terrorist attacks across the Green Line, massing of Egyptian and Syrian troops on the borders with Israel. The expulsion of the UN observers on the Egyptian border. The act of war was the closing of the straights of Tiran. The closure of an international body of water is recognized as an act of war.

The Voice of Arabs, May 18, 1967: As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain any more to the UN about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence.

Syrian Defence MInister, May 20, 1967: Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united....I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation.

May 22, Egypt closes the straights, in effect declaring war.

Nasser, May 23: The Jews threaten to make war. I reply: Welcome! We are ready for war.

May 30, Jordan and Egypt sign a defence pact. Nasser declares: The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.

The President of Iraq, June 4, 1967: The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear -- to wipe Israel off the map

250,000 arab soldiers had mustered on the borders with Israel (over half in Sinai).

June 5, 1967, Israel attacks Egypt.

Israel offered Jordan non-aggression if Jordan stayed out of it. June 5, 1967, Jordan shelled West Jerusalem.

If this is not a defensive war, what is? If Israel had waited for an invasion, it would have likely been destroyed. The Eqyptian battle plans (in keeping with the rhetoric above) called for the massacre of the civilian population of Tel Aviv.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 29 March 2004 04:41 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Well that is a good point, but we are still consuming download bandwidth, no?

Strictly speaking, once your browser has downloaded it the first time it caches it, so it shouldn't need to download it a second time. In fact you could put 10 of them in a thread, and so long as they're the same image from the same server (be it rabble or any other) then it should be downloaded the first time, loaded from cache any other time, until it's either changed on the server or flushed from your cache.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 March 2004 04:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's another one that's so far off-topic that it probably won't get back on again.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

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

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca