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   » Israel Ordered To Dismantle Wall

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Israel Ordered To Dismantle Wall
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 July 2004 12:27 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The United Nations International Court of Justice has ruled the barrier Israel has been building along the West Bank is illegal must be dismantled.

http://www.cfra.com/headlines/index.asp?cat=2&nid=16839


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2004 12:55 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The ruling itself from the ICJ.

quote:
In its Opinion, the Court finds unanimously that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly and decides by fourteen votes to one to comply with that request.

The Court responds to the question as follows:

“A. By fourteen votes to one,

The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law”;


Eat THAT, Sharon!


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 July 2004 01:15 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Israel's response:

quote:
The question asked to court was deemed unbalanced in the way it was phrased. For instance, the question put to the Court misleadingly refers to the fence as a “wall” when, in fact, 5% of the anti-terrorist barrier is concrete and more than 95% consists of a chain-link system.

2. As expected, and as a result of the one-sided question put before the court, the Advisory Opinion fails to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - Palestinian terror. If there were no terror, there would be no fence.


10 Facts in Answer to the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Security Fence - July 9, 2004

[ 10 July 2004: Message edited by: Macabee ]


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2004 01:30 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I could have predicted you'd blaze in here insisting that the ICJ's ruling was wrong.

Hello? Even the Israeli Supreme Court itself has ruled on redirecting the wall.

Does even that make you pause and ask if maybe the whole basis of the wall is more than a little bit bonkers?

PS. And it. is. a. WALL. Concrete! Pillars! Barbed wire! Checkpoints! You tried denying the concrete made up a majority of the wall, but I see you shut up about that since we started getting reports of mass bulldozing in preparation for pouring the foundations.

Fence, my ass.

[ 10 July 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 July 2004 01:34 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A fence? A wall? A crime against humanity.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 July 2004 01:35 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Firstly I didnt blaze I just posted.

Secondly the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the Fence was a necessity in light of the terrorism but stipulated that in the place petitioned by the Palestinian applicants it encroached on their lands. Therefore it had to be moved. I agree.

As for the fence let me reiterate what was in the last post.

quote:
...in fact, 5% of the anti-terrorist barrier is concrete and more than 95% consists of a chain-link system.
...

From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2004 01:46 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
Firstly I didnt blaze I just posted.

Your continuing obtuse literalism at work again, I see. Even I'm not that literal-minded.

quote:
Secondly the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the Fence was a necessity in light of the terrorism but stipulated that in the place petitioned by the Palestinian applicants it encroached on their lands. Therefore it had to be moved. I agree.

The whole bloody thing "encroaches on Palestinian lands".

And your "95%" thing is from a website that's just as partisan on the opposite side as Gush Shalom, so do you really expect me to take it at face value?

If it was just barb wire that ain't bupkiss against "terrorism", Macabee. Wire cutters and gloves. Snip, snip, boom. You're in.

No, it's concrete. How else would you keep "terrorists" out? Use your head.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 July 2004 01:57 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You shame yourself and your cause when you try to minimize this horrible crime Macabee.

quote:
The word “Fence” is equally misleading. The fact of the matter is that this fence is composed of many components spread over 100-300 feet. The fence is composed of several attached loops of barbed wire, a trench, a dirt path “kill zone,” a 9-foot high electric fence built on a 3-foot high concrete wall, several service roads, another set of barbed wire, and the fence itself, which is just shy of 20-feet tall with guard towers every 500 feet or so. What’s more is that the Israeli government has decided that instead of building this Segregation Wall on Israeli land, they will build it deep into Palestinian territory. How deep, you say? The agricultural land that has been stolen by the Israeli government in order to construct the wall comes to just under 9,000 acres with over 700,000 fruit trees taken as well.

So when you hear the word “Security Fence” on the television, keep in mind that they are referring to the Israeli Segregation Wall. Don’t take my word for it though, go do the research yourself. I am willing to bet that as the Segregation Wall nears completion, the eyes of the world will be on this newest monstrosity against humanity.


http://www.bupipedream.com/100303/opinion/o5.htm


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 July 2004 02:11 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The whole bloody thing "encroaches on Palestinian lands".


This is untrue.

quote:
And your "95%" thing is from a website that's just as partisan on the opposite side as Gush Shalom, so do you really expect me to take it at face value?


Yes I do unless you have any proof to the contrary. I have seen the fence (it is a fence ...I drove along almost all of it...remember, Israel from North to South is less than the distance between Ottawa and Windsor a drive I have made many times in under 9 hours. You can see it with your own eyes.

And yes there are areas where it has been constructed that it has encroached on Palestinian land and cases brought to the Israeli courts will rectify it. That is what happens in democracies when there are disagreements.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 10 July 2004 02:53 AM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hi,

Just I thing about the wall/fence (and I'm going to stop posting because this is a great way to procrastinate).

I've just read the entire court ruling, and it explains why the term "wall" is used. Because taht's how that was the term the GA used.

But, the court rightly noted that "fence" or "barrier" dont fully encompass the wall/fence/barrier. The actual concrete part is 8 km, out of 180 (something in that region). So its far less than 8%.

However, the rest ain't no fence. And certainly not a "chainlink" fence. Its basically a pretty tall wire fence with electronic sensors, guardtowers, a 4 metre trench on one side (the Palestinian side) and a trace sand road on the other side (actually, that's the Palestinian side too). The width of this entire "thing" goes upto a hundred metres, on average I would think fifty metres.

So you can actually see through it, if you stand foty to a hundred metres away. An even more transparent violation of palestinian rights, at any rate.


From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 10 July 2004 03:06 AM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Only a tiny percentage is constructed on the Green Line. Here is a map, it requires acrobat.



From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 10 July 2004 03:07 AM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
http://www.btselem.org/Images/Maps/Full_Map_2004_Eng.pdf
From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2004 03:36 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
-----
The whole bloody thing "encroaches on Palestinian lands".
-----

This is untrue.


Oh, piss off. If you know how to read a map then you know that the "Security Barrier" (yes, I like that. Barrier.) is not built along the Green Line.

In the most nigletizing, parsimonious sense you are correct that it does not encroach on
"Palestinian" land, as Israel has never formally handed over effective control to the Palestinian "Authority". You yourself even slip into the same reasoning as the Sharon-followers do, referring to the Occupied Territories as Israel proper.

(or do you deny saying this:

quote:
Yes I do unless you have any proof to the contrary. I have seen the fence (it is a fence ...I drove along almost all of it...remember, Israel from North to South is less than the distance between Ottawa and Windsor a drive I have made many times in under 9 hours. You can see it with your own eyes.

I didn't see you saying "driving in the Occupied Territories". I see you saying, "driving [Israel]")

However, the fact remains that since the territories were not originally part of Israel at the 1948 formal declaration of Israel's existence, then the land on which the Security Wall/Barrier is being built belongs, ultimately, to the people who were living there when Israel swiped the West Bank.

Thus, it "encroaches on Palestinian land". All of it.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 10 July 2004 04:05 AM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And one last (truly last) point.
Had an Israeli delegation showed up to submit testimony, they might have been laughed out of court.

Here is one of Israel's arguments against the hearings:

Paragraph 63 from the court's ruling:

"Israel has contended
that Palestine, given its responsibility for acts of violence against Israel and its population
which the wall is aimed at addressing, cannot seek from the Court a remedy for a situation
resulting from its own wrongdoing. In this context, Israel has invoked the maxim nullus
commodum capere potest de sua injuria propria, which it considers to be as relevant in
advisory proceedings as it is in contentious cases. Therefore, Israel concludes, good faith
and the principle of “clean hands” provide a compelling reason that should lead the Court to
refuse the General Assembly’s request.
64. The Court does not consider this argument to be pertinent. As was emphasized
earlier, it was the General Assembly which requested the advisory opinion, and the opinion
is to be given to the General Assembly, and not to a specific State or entity."

"maxim nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria" is a legal principle: "no one can take advantage of his wrong doing."

This is a very embarrasing argument for Israel to make before 14 well informed justices. Aside from the obvious, and to them pertinent point that dismisses the argument, it was not lost on any of the judges (well maybe the American judge who voted againts everything) that Israel is constructing a defence for illegal settlements in occupied territories.

Another glaring contradiction: Israel and its allies maintained that this is a "political", not a legal matter, therefore the court had no business looking into this. THe ruling dealt with these arguments in the opening sections. And then, Israel's rep at the UN says:

“As soon as the terror ends, the fence will no longer be necessary. The fence is not a
border and has no political significance. It does not change the legal status of the territory in
any way.” (cited in paragraph 116 of the ruling).


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

posted 10 July 2004 05:25 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The question asked to court was deemed unbalanced in the way it was phrased. For instance, the question put to the Court misleadingly refers to the fence as a “wall” when, in fact, 5% of the anti-terrorist barrier is concrete and more than 95% consists of a chain-link system.

[MY COMMENT: Preverication as art.]

2. As expected, and as a result of the one-sided question put before the court, the Advisory Opinion fails to address the essence of the problem and the very reason for building the fence - Palestinian terror. If there were no terror, there would be no fence.

[Imagine the outrage: "Jewish Terror"]



From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 10 July 2004 07:18 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's a fence...and another fence...and a trench...and another trench...and a road...and barbedwirefloodlightscamerasbunkersobservationpostsmachinegunnests...

Hey, they're even developing remote-control machineguns so IDF soldiers can sit safely in bunkers and rock and roll on anyone they think is threatening the 'fence'.

There's your brave, heroic IDF right there: autogunners. Aliens? Robocop? Escape from New York?


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 10 July 2004 10:25 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You yourself even slip into the same reasoning as the Sharon-followers do, referring to the Occupied Territories as Israel proper.

(or do you deny saying this:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I do unless you have any proof to the contrary. I have seen the fence (it is a fence ...I drove along almost all of it...remember, Israel from North to South is less than the distance between Ottawa and Windsor a drive I have made many times in under 9 hours. You can see it with your own eyes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't see you saying "driving in the Occupied Territories". I see you saying, "driving [Israel]")


That's what I like about you Doc, you make comments about what you know NOTHING about. When was the last time you were in Israel and driven it's length.?

You can actually drive from Kiryat Shmonah in the North along the Lebanese border to Eilat in the south without driving into or through the occupied territories. I have done it many times.

And while I have driven along the fence, I do admit that some of it (between 5-8% even aa seems to accept that) may encroach on PA land (occupied territory) it does not mean I have deviated one bit from my oft stated position that Israel must leave Palestinian land. Once terror stops and the PA leadership returns to the negotiating table perhaps they can get back to real peace talks. Heck the world is still awaiting a response to the Israeli offer at Camp David which never came other than the intifada.

This is why so many people question your thesis on much of what you post. If you can get something THIS SIMPLE this WRONG.....


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 10 July 2004 12:00 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Once you understand why there wasn't a peace and why there will never be a peace then you can see why the fence was built.

Once Oslo failed it became clear that any kind of negotiate agreement was never going to happen.

The fence is the first step of many where Israel will back away from any connection to the Palestinians.

Whatever line you thought should be the border at the end of the day the fence will answer that question.

No longer will Israel need to negotiate with or "occupy" Palestinian land.

The endless circular violence will hopefully subside.

At some point the Israelies had to realize it was a zero sum game.

For the next 20 years the UN will issue dozens of comdenations of the fence and their will be endless BBC documentaries on how its all so unfair.


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 10 July 2004 12:09 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
A 10 feet-high wall was erected and anyone leaving the place was shot. No contact with the outside world was allowed, and food, clothes and medical supplies were restricted

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 10 July 2004 12:15 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
That's what I like about you Doc, you make comments about what you know NOTHING about. When was the last time you were in Israel and driven it's length.?

You can actually drive from Kiryat Shmonah in the North along the Lebanese border to Eilat in the south without driving into or through the occupied territories. I have done it many times.


Your previous post implied that you have seen every meter of the barrier currently built or under construction, thus further implying that on at least one occasion you drove into the Occupied Territories to do so.

Your comment that one can indeed drive Israel proper without touching the Occupied Territories is actually somewhat telling, since it makes me wonder if you've actually gone into the Occupied Territories all that much.

quote:
This is why so many people question your thesis on much of what you post. If you can get something THIS SIMPLE this WRONG.....

As Reagan once said, "There you go again!" Speaking for people other than yourself in order to falsely buttress your position when (a) they never gave their permission for you to be their spokesperson, and (b) you know darn well you're only talking about yourself when you say "many people".

But hey, don't let that stop your ego from expanding to unhealthy proportions by insisting on referring to yourself as the "royal we".

quote:
And while I have driven along the fence, I do admit that some of it (between 5-8% even aa seems to accept that) may encroach on PA land (occupied territory)

I'm not going to waste my time responding to the sheer ludicrousness of your attempt to minimize the land grab that the wall is all about.

[ 10 July 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 10 July 2004 01:59 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kudos to the Court for its decision, and for its clear statement regarding the illegal settlements, which Macabee and his ilk prefer not to discuss. The case has nothing to do with Israel's right to defend itself from terror and everything to do with using that excuse to grab Palestinian land in an effort to fortify its occupation and protect the illegal settlements.

Of course, no one should expect Israel to comply with the decision. It only complies with those international decisions to its liking, such as the partition which created the state. Since June 1967, its message to the international community has been "Drop Dead."


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 10 July 2004 11:21 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:

For the next 20 years the UN will issue dozens of comdenations of the fence and their will be endless BBC documentaries on how its all so unfair.

Jack,

I think you're mostly right. I think the route of the barrier is likely to become the new border. And I think a border is an excellent idea.

But I think Israel is foolish to have the barrier swing so far into the West Bank. This creates an unrealistic border which will be difficult to maintain.

I understand the route of the fence also puts many Palestinians on the Israeli side of the fence and their fields etc. on the Palestinian side. Again, this can do nothing but create a long-term grievance.

Of course, Israel will ignore the World Court. It's opinion after all is only advistory and it's advice is bad.

On the other hand, Israel will alter the route of the fence in line with the decision of it's own court. There's even a faint hope that in a national unity government of Likud and Labour (and Shinui, etc), the route of the fence will revert to something like the borders outlined by Barak.

But of course that's a faint hope.

There's an even fainter hope that Arafat will be sidelined, that the Palestinians will cease their terrorist war and peace negotiations will resume.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 10 July 2004 11:25 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
Well, I guess when we're looking for simplistic interpretations of things, we'll know where to turn. Jack and MyName, you're on call.
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 11 July 2004 04:12 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But I think Israel is foolish to have the barrier swing so far into the West Bank. This creates an unrealistic border which will be difficult to maintain.

Then there's the small matter of the devestation this "unrealistic border" will cause -- has already caused -- to hundreds of thousands of innocent Palestinians. But apparently for you that pales in comparison to the logistical difficulties Israel will have in maintaining the wall.

You're right, though -- the wall as built is far more difficult for Israel to maintain than if it had been built on the Green Line. Just the added length (all those carefully-placed crinkles and wiggles encompassing the desired settlements and aquifers) makes it into a logistical nightmare. Of course, the fact that Sharon went ahead and built it that way anyway might lead a reasonable person to conclude that "security" concerns were not foremost in his mind. But I guess that's expecting too much of you.

quote:
I understand the route of the fence also puts many Palestinians on the Israeli side of the fence and their fields etc. on the Palestinian side. Again, this can do nothing but create a long-term grievance.

Um, yeah. That's the idea. It's the siege tactic: create conditions so miserable that the unwanted population will eventually "cry uncle" and leave. It's even more obvious in the cases where entire Palestinian communities have been literally surrounded, turned into prison camps. Some Arabs will literally not be able to walk ten minutes from their homes in any direction without hitting the wall.

quote:
Of course, Israel will ignore the World Court. It's opinion after all is only advistory and it's advice is bad.

True, in a technical sense. Its advice is "bad" because it contradicts the dictates of the Rogue Hyperpower. Israel, as said hyperpower's fave client state, also enjoys, like its patron, the enviable right to tell international law to Fuck Right Off when and where it sees fit. And with the sugar daddies in Washington holding the veto sledgehammer, any UN resolution stemming from this decision will undoubtedly be squashed like a bug.

So yeah, Sharon probably will get away with giving the World Court the finger. The political damage to Israel's reputation is another matter entirely.

Oh and BTW: I've been asking this repeatedly for months, and have yet to get any answer from any of our resident Israeli-government-cheerleader types: what possible "security" explanation is there for the proposed second wall/barrier/whatever, the one on the east side, between the West Bank and Jordan? Hopefully that wall will never get off the ground now, given the unfavourable domestic and international conditions -- but I'm curious to see how anyone could defend it. I can't see any way to stretch the usual "Israel must defend itself against terrorists" excuse to cover that eastern wall. Any takers?


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 11 July 2004 10:43 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Because the terrorists will suicide bomb the sea of Galilee.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 11 July 2004 10:39 PM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
/Even aa seems to accept that/

I never wrote that I think that Israel is encroaching on 5 to 8% of the West Bank.

That was the percentage of the barrier that is made up of pure concrete. I dont see how my comment could be misinterpreted in that way.

As for encroahment, the court ruling cites a 16% figuire, from the dossier Koffi Annan provided it.

I think that if the barrier were to go as planned, with the third section that has been spoken about but is not included in most maps, the percantage of land may be in the are of 40%.


From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 11 July 2004 11:24 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
July 12 terrorist bombing in Tel Aviv

'Sami Mcarah, an Israeli-Arab resident of Yaffo and the head of a non-profit-organization which works towards coexistence between Israelis and the Palestinians, got off the bus just seconds before the bomb went off.

'The terrorist did not intend to just hurt Jews, but he went out to kill as many people as possible. The Palestinians are stupid for what they're doing, they're not achieving anything and in the end they will only turn us Israeli Arabs against them," said Mcarah, who also survived the 1995 number 5 bus bombing on Dizengoff Street in Tel Aviv.

'Wounded by shrapnel to his leg, Mcarah, rushed over to a woman he saw on the ground and tried to help her. He said he took her pulse but she was already dead. "The images in my head will never go away," he added.'


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Zahid Zaman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6459

posted 11 July 2004 11:39 PM      Profile for Zahid Zaman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Doesn't Israel understand that terrorism is actually increased by repression not decreased. How hard is it to really smuggle a person into a country. An artificial barrier will not actually stop the spat of bombings but actually increase it. We need peaceful solutions not escalations. The wall must come down and negotiations restarted.
From: Mississauga/Waterloo, ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 12:00 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
An artificial barrier will not actually stop the spat of bombings but actually increase it.

This is not correct. The barrier around Gaza reduced the suicide murders to almost zero, the newest part of the barrier has greatly reduced the killings as well. No barrier is 100% but Israelis have every right to defend themselves from terrorists.

Zahid Zaman, I agree, we do need peaceful soultions and when Israel has a peace partner that wants peace, peace will flower.

DrConway, have you ever actually seen the barrier? When was your last trip to Israel?


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Zahid Zaman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6459

posted 12 July 2004 12:19 AM      Profile for Zahid Zaman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:

when Israel has a peace partner that wants peace, peace will flower.


So are you telling me that Israel is not to be blame two cents when it comes to the violence in the Middle East?


From: Mississauga/Waterloo, ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 01:09 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
Israel has every right to protect its citizens from Palestinian terrorist attacks. Call it a fence, a wall, or a barrier, they have the right and duty to protect themselves. Judaism does not believe in turning the other cheek.

I laughed when I saw photos of the Chinese judge reading the judgement. China, the great protector of human rights? Sierra Leone? Gimme a break!


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Zahid Zaman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6459

posted 12 July 2004 01:13 AM      Profile for Zahid Zaman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm pretty sure you laugh in the same self conceited way when Palestinians get thrown out of their homes and their lands get confiscated for a WALL!!! Just because the judge is Chinese does NOT necessariloy equate to him representing China when stating the decision. Umm ... last tiem I checked he was giving the UN verdict. But I gues people like you find the UN a laughin matter as well.
From: Mississauga/Waterloo, ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 12 July 2004 02:21 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:
DrConway, have you ever actually seen the barrier? When was your last trip to Israel?

You're Macabeeifying, and as such I feel no need to waste my time actually answering you.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 03:11 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm pretty sure you laugh in the same self conceited way when Palestinians get thrown out of their homes and their lands get confiscated for a WALL!!!

Wrong, my heart goes out to those that suffer because of the conflict. On both sides. I wish the Palestinians had real leaders that would sit at a table and talk rather than send suicide bombers to murder people with suicide bombs. The added ballbearings and nails are meant to spread the murder over as large an area as possible.

quote:
But I gues people like you find the UN a laughin matter as well.

When the UN starts treating all nations the same I would have more respect for the institution. They are preoccupied with Israel and seem to forget other areas of conflict that require their attention.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 03:30 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe because if it weren't for the UN, there would be no Israel.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baldfresh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5864

posted 12 July 2004 03:39 AM      Profile for Baldfresh   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:
The added ballbearings and nails are meant to spread the murder over as large an area as possible.

Hey s'up always good to hear from you again.

Just so we're clear: if those nail bombs are horrific (and they most certainly are) then what does that make the flechette shells, shot from tanks, that have thousands of tiny steel darts in them that get sprayed in a "kill radius" of about 300 meters long and 90 meters wide? Used often in one of the most densely populated regions of the world, the Gaza Strip?

Horrific.

C'mon, you can say it: this policy that Israel has is horrific.

No?

Really. Anyway, I'm done again, I'll give ya a *plonk* in advance for whatever justification you try and come up with for this. I'm not going to actively engage you in any more threads, at least not for any length of time.

However, I will show up from time to time to lay down some indisputible facts as to the situation there, or to call bullshit on some things you say. Maybe arguing over grey area issues isn't the way to deal with neocons/trolls/whatever. Maybe sticking to a constant pattern of blatantly solid truth is a better strategy. Well, exceedingly blatant truth, as opposed to the normal kind we spend so much time trying to find the right words to express.

I know I couldn't stand by my ideals and beliefs if people were constantly and undeniably shooting them down. But I guess we'll have to see about you (and others like ya). Lord knows people can convince themselves of some amazing things.

Cheers.


From: to here knows when | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 04:05 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
However, I will show up from time to time to lay down some indisputible facts....

Don't worry baldfresh, I will continue to ignore your "indisputible facts".

Tell us more about the Zionist Entity and how they target innocent victims, I love hearing your stories.

PLONK


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 04:15 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Maybe because if it weren't for the UN, there would be no Israel.

Josh, do you think the amount of time the UN spends on condeming the Zionist Entity makes sense? There are so many conflicts in the world that are as serious or more than the one in Israel. Why did the Palestian cause get leapfrogged ahead of most of the others? TERROR! It works.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Baldfresh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5864

posted 12 July 2004 04:19 AM      Profile for Baldfresh   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:
Tell us more about the Zionist Entity and how they target innocent victims, I love hearing your stories.

Where did I say they target innocent victims? They most certainly target "terrorists". Its just that the means they do this with happens to kill innocent civilians along with it, and it seems sometimes some of them really could care less. The matter of if they use these shells or not isn't one for debate, its an internationally known issue. If you want to come on here and tell me that Palestinian suicide bombers use nails and whatnot to "maximize the killing" I'm going to tell you that weapons the Israels use to try and kill terrorists are just as powerful, and have just as widespread effects upon a densely populated area. In this case, more so.

Not something either of us can question, just a statement of fact. Thats all.


From: to here knows when | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 12 July 2004 05:08 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[sarcasm]Yeah, but Baldfresh, when Israeli soldiers drop flechettes on densely-populated refugee camps, they do it while thinking warm & fuzzy thoughts. Can't you see that that absolves them of responsibility for the consequences of their actions?[/sarcasm]

Now: Regarding the vile and spectacularly-ill-timed terrorist bus bombing MyName referred to above:

Sharon blames World Court for bomb

quote:
An angry Mr Sharon was quick to blame the International Court of Justice, which on Friday declared illegal the Israeli-built wall on Palestinian territory, for the first bomb attack in Israel in almost four months.

...

"The murderous act that was carried out this morning was the first to occur under the patronage of the world court."


I guess this means we'll be seeing a retaliatory Israeli missile strike on the Hague in the next couple days.

Followed by an expression of regret over the "collateral damage" caused to innocent Dutch folks.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 07:07 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:

Josh, do you think the amount of time the UN spends on condeming the Zionist Entity makes sense? There are so many conflicts in the world that are as serious or more than the one in Israel. Why did the Palestian cause get leapfrogged ahead of most of the others? TERROR! It works.


"Nothing to see here folks. Pay no attention. We know how to handle these Palestinians." This attitude reminds me somewhat of the southern politicians in the U.S. with respect to segregation when they would tell "outsiders" to butt out. Israel continues to occupy "diputed" land, settles the land in blatant violation of international law and has engaged in ethnic cleansing in pursuit of that settlement. These actions do not get enough of the international community's attention, terror or terror.

[ 12 July 2004: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 11:58 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
Josh,

You did not answer the question!

Put the IP conflict in perspective and explain how it is different from the MANY other conflicts that do not receive ANY attention from the UN?

You seem to carry a personal zeal in attacking Israel. Stop foaming at the mouth and start putting it in perspective.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 12:10 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Any "personal zeal" I have against Israel is because, as a Jew, I resent the external policies pursued by the state and, as a secularist, I reject the notion of a state based on religion.

The conflict deserves the attention it gets because (1) of the role the UN played in the creation of Israel in 1947; (2) the continued occupation and blatant violation of international law by a supposed "democratic state"; and (3) geopolitical reality.

[ 12 July 2004: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 12 July 2004 12:26 PM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, please.

If 'terror' was the reason why the Occupation gets so much press, why are the following barely registering:

Kashmir
Chechnya
Colombia
Congo/Uganda
Phillipines
Greece
Nigeria
Indonesia
Algeria
Egypt
Nepal
Basque region/ETA

et j'en passe. With files from the US State Department and other web pages.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 July 2004 12:29 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:
You seem to carry a personal zeal in attacking Israel.

So? And you seem to have a personal zeal in defending it. What's your point? As for your "foaming at the mouth" remark, how stupid. If you can't handle strong arguments, then you might want to check out the babble banter forum for a little while.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 12:37 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And you seem to have a personal zeal in defending it.

Michelle, I would hope you understand the diffference between attack and defense.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 July 2004 12:44 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sure, except that you're defending the indefensible.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 12 July 2004 12:49 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
MyName,

The mistake the Israelies make and seem willing to continue is engaging the Palestinians in a tit for tat escalation.

The Israelies need to disconnect with the Palestinians completely.

Close the border for good.

Leave "Palestine" to implode on its own on its side of the fence.

Take Israel out of the equation.

Get rid of the settlements and build the fence along whatever line the UN wants.

Let the UN get the job of dealing with the Palestinians.


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 12 July 2004 12:51 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Michelle, I would hope you understand the diffference between attack and defense.

Why? So she can explain it to you?


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 01:23 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Michelle assistant babbler posted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure, except that you're defending the indefensible.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great to see that Babble hires impartial moderators.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 01:26 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Scout posted 12 July 2004 12:51 PM                   
Why? So she can explain it to you?

Scout, after your moronic post on Jly 7 2004 2:40 pm I have one word for you:

*PLONK*


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

posted 12 July 2004 01:34 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, Starbuck: have you sent your fraternal greetings to Ian Paisley on the occasion of the Glorious Twelfth?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 01:41 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
aRoused,

When was the last time you heard about a Ugandan terrorist hijacking an Air France jet, flying it to another country, separating the Jewish hostages and murdering 75 year old Mrs. Dora Block as Palestinian terrorists did in 1976?

When have you heard about Nepalese terrorists taking hostages at the Olympics and slaughtering 11 members of the wrestling team as well as a German police officer as the Palestinians did in 1972?

When have you heard about Greek terrorists taking hostages in a school, killing 27, 21 of whom were children as the Palestinian terrorists did in Maalot in 1974.

When have you heard about Philippine terrorists opening fire in a passenger terminal, killing 26 as the Palestinian and Red Army terrorists did in Lod in 1972.

Is it possible the Nigerian terrorists hijacked 3 airliners, took them to Jordan and held 400 passengers hostage then traded them for Palestinian prisoners in German, Swiss and UK jails in 1970? No, it was Palestinian terrorists.

Was that a Colombian terrorist that hijacked that El Al jet and diverted it to Algiers and held 32 Jewish passengers hostage for 5 weeks? Wrong again, it was Palestinian hijackers.

And lest we forget the Indonesian terrorists that attacked the schoolbus in Avivim in 1970 that resulted in the killing of 12, 9 of whom were children. Ooops, that was Palestinian terrorists again

Well then how about the 1986 attack on the Neveh Shalom synagogue in Istanbul? After all, 22 dead Jews, could it have been terrorists from Kashmir, Chechnya or how about Algeria? Wrong again. Palestinian!

We all remember the images of Leon Klinghoffer, that disabled American Jew that was murdered in his wheelchair and pushed over the side of the Achille Lauro. Let's guess... Egyptian? No. Basque? Wrong again. If you guess Palestinian terrorists you get points.

Palestinian terrorists have brought terror to a TV screen near you even before the wall/fence/barrier was built, even before the growth of settlements. Others have also brought their cause to the world stage but the Palestinians have been very successful at getting the limelight as have Al Queda more recently.

There are many other factors that cause the UN to be so slanted against Israel. When the UN votes to put Libya on a human rights body we know there are problems.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 01:59 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"There's no need to pay any attention to me killing this guy here. Look at that guy over there, he's killing a half a dozen. And I'm doing so out of the purest of motives. He's just doing it for fun."
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 02:02 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
So, Starbuck: have you sent your fraternal greetings to Ian Paisley on the occasion of the Glorious Twelfth?

You know Skdadl, I used to go out with someone who, if she read your thread, would literally and figuratively turn green.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 02:06 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
I can just see all the Babblers running to Google to try and find instances of international terrorism that hit the front pages of the papers. Relax, yes, it exists.

I wonder when Babble will have a section for Congo and then another section for the rest of the world. What is it that gets guys like josh and aroused to spend so much time attacking Israel? Oh yes, it is because the Zionist Entity has trampled the rights of the poor Paelstinians and it is the most serious and pressing cause in the world.

Josh, does not even live in Israel. He lives somewhere in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" and sits at a desk and writes that as a Jew, he rejects the notion of a state based on religion.

Well woop-di-doo. Who cares.

Let me understand this. If you were not Jewish you would not have a problem with a "state based on religion" or because you are a Jew living in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" you believe you have more right to criticize Israel because you "reject the notion of a state based on religion". Are you one of those Jews that walk around embarrased by Israel?

Josh, I'm waiting for YOU to put it in perspective and tell me why the IP conflict receives a disproportianate amount of UN resolutions. Why Israel is isolated while Libya is elected to the UN Human Rights Commission? Why is it that a dispproportinate amount of journalists cover the intifadah compared with other lsimilar conflicts?

Don't tell me why the conflict deserves attention. Tell me why it deserves MORE attention than other conflicts.


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

posted 12 July 2004 02:08 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:

You know Skdadl, I used to go out with someone who, if she read your thread, would literally and figuratively turn green.


josh: *nervous laughter*

Ummmm ... could you give me a slightly stronger hint about sectarian affiliation there, josh?


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

posted 12 July 2004 02:10 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Starbuck, has it ever occurred to you that the rest of us DO NOT WANT TO DIE FOR ARIEL SHARON'S SAKE???
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 12 July 2004 02:10 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Scout, after your moronic post on Jly 7 2004 2:40 pm I have one word for you:
*PLONK*

You! Plonking! That’s rich.
quote:
Great to see that Babble hires impartial moderators.

You, dissing the moderators, that’s moronic.
You, posting in general, that’s moronic.
quote:
Why? So she can explain it to you?

This is me sinking your battle ship with a direct hit of great wit!
Anyway. That post your so rattled about was almost a week ago! It took you that long to read it did it! It’s so very special that you, are plonking me, due to my post to Mishabee regarding his ever present need to ruin yet another thread with his bullshit. Do go lick his boots elsewhere please this is a family site. I guess you aren’t a sock puppet after just a groupie.

I appreciate the plonk by the way, now I don't have to feel nauseated when you reply to me on Mishabee’s behalf. He really can speak for himself, he has several aliases with which to do so. I even remember the first handle he used like it was yesterday.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 02:15 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:

Josh, does not even live in Israel. He lives somewhere in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" and sits at a desk and writes that as a Jew, he rejects the notion of a state based on religion.

Well woop-di-doo. Who cares.

Let me understand this. If you were not Jewish you would not have a problem with a "state based on religion" or because you are a Jew living in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" you believe you have more right to criticize Israel because you "reject the notion of a state based on religion". Are you one of those Jews that walk around embarrased by Israel?

Josh, I'm waiting for YOU to put it in perspective and tell me why the IP conflict receives a disproportianate amount of UN resolutions. Why Israel is isolated while Libya is elected to the UN Human Rights Commission? Why is it that a dispproportinate amount of journalists cover the intifadah compared with other lsimilar conflicts?


If you don't care, why are you responding? And how do you know I'm sitting at a desk? I could be floating in the ocean while I'm writing this. I reject all states that are created for one specific religious group. And, yes, Israel's behaviour is often worthy of embarassment.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 02:16 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:

josh: *nervous laughter*

Ummmm ... could you give me a slightly stronger hint about sectarian affiliation there, josh?


Funny thing. She wasn't even Irish.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baldfresh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5864

posted 12 July 2004 02:17 PM      Profile for Baldfresh   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:
You! Plonking! That’s rich.

I'd like to apologize to Babble; I did this to him a couple of times yesterday and he seems to have picked right up on it. I'm not even sure he knows what it means . . .


From: to here knows when | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
beverly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5064

posted 12 July 2004 02:18 PM      Profile for beverly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I so very rarely wade into these discussion - well because they get so nasty, and I don't get all the egos and alter-egos at work.

But, the wall, barrier, fence, concrete barricade - whatever it is wrong. Now an international court has point blank told Israel so. So there is is.

I hope no one would ever argue the Berlin Wall was right, and I hope no one would argue Israel had any right to erect this obnixious structure.

People should be breaking down barriers.


From: In my Apartment!!!! | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 12 July 2004 02:20 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
josh, you are such a tease.

Sounds as though she was quite the tease too, though. So: dish.

Or was she just misled? Presbyterian? I can empathize ...


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 July 2004 02:23 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey, the Irish aren't the only Catholics around.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 02:24 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nothing like an Italian who's hot for the IRA.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 12 July 2004 02:33 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh! That bunch!
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 12 July 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This thread is reminding me so much of my friend's toddler, who just learned the power of the word "NO!", and insists on repeating it for hours at a time.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
SnowyPlover
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6431

posted 12 July 2004 04:43 PM      Profile for SnowyPlover     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sarcasmobri:
This thread is reminding me so much of my friend's toddler, who just learned the power of the word "NO!", and insists on repeating it for hours at a time.

From: Archipelago | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
SnowyPlover
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6431

posted 12 July 2004 05:18 PM      Profile for SnowyPlover     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
oops, my bad for the cut and paste. I'm just familiarizing myself.

In any case, I would like to rekindle the issue concerning the legality of the barrier. (and I'll use that word so as to avoid unnecesary provacation that leads nowhere) But this time lets redirect the discussion towards the Israeli High Court of Justice: The issue here is not the political impetus vs. legal standing of the barrier which aa noted above and which was evaluated at the Hague. The Israeli High Court of Justice--independent of any political motive--determined the legality of the fence with respect to the need for security and with respect to Palestinian residents.

The Court determined the governments right to build the barrier provided that it doesnt cause avoidable hardship to Palestinian residents. In addition, this hearing requires Israel to reroute 30 km of the barrier north of Jerusalem. Similar hearing in the past have halted construction and required rerouting near the Northern West Bank villages of Dir Balut and Rafat. The Court also ruled work suspended on those parts of the barrier where it received complaints and petitions from the villagers themselves. In addition, the Court ruled that "even a security fence must balance security considerations against the needs of local residents, and this proportionality must be maintained even if it means choosing a route that provides less security." Haaretz

There is no doubting the successful measures against drastic terrorist attacks that the security barrier provides. And lets not forget that Israel is perfectly capable of trying and hearing issues of legality and politics in its Supreme Court.


From: Archipelago | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 06:35 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

And lets not forget that Israel is perfectly capable of trying and hearing issues of legality and politics in its Supreme Court.

And what good does that do the Palestinians? Are they supposed to be at the mercy and good graces of a state that occupies and confiscates their land. In addition, a decision by the Israeli Supreme Court is all well and good, but the enforceability of its decisions depends on the extent to which the Israeli government is willing to abide and enforce them.

No, this is not an internal Israeli matter. Israel has thumbed its nose at the rest of the world long enough not to be trusted to act in the best interests of people it is occupying. And its lack of good faith has already been established by its determination to build the wall to cut into territory outside the green line to take in the illegal settlements. If it wanted to build a wall strictly for security, it could have simply built along the green line.

[ 12 July 2004: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 06:49 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Israel's behaviour is often worthy of embarassment.

You are obviously not going to change the Jewish Homeland but you don't have to stay Jewish. You could convert to another religion and avoid the embarassment.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 July 2004 06:57 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:

You are obviously not going to change the Jewish Homeland but you don't have to stay Jewish. You could convert to another religion and avoid the embarassment.


A very revealing statement, on a lot of levels. So Zionism has now turned into the Inquisition? With you as chief inquisitor no doubt. And thank you for enlightening me to the fact that Theodore Herzel discovered Judaism. What were all those supposed Jews practicing for the previous three millenia? But thank you for elucidating the dangers of a state based on religion. The state now determines the religion, and who is and who is not worthy of being a member. The Knesset is now the Holy See, with Ariel Sharon as Pontiff. But if he ever decides to step down, I'm sure you would love to take his place.


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

posted 12 July 2004 07:16 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Telling people they're not worthy of their religion has to be against babble policy. And yeah, I know you didn't say that specifically, but I think that was the implication.

Israel does not equal Judaism. You have no right to tell anyone they should leave their religion. That goes beyond the bounds of civilized debate.

[ 12 July 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 12 July 2004 07:48 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For your last two posts, josh, this is the best I can do. I wish I could do more.

Seriously, josh, I wish that. I come from a culture you would not have liked, although I suspect that you remember a lot of it.

Oh, shit, josh. What do we do?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 08:06 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And thank you for enlightening me to the fact that Theodore Herzel discovered Judaism.

Study your history, Herzl did not invent Zionism.


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

posted 12 July 2004 08:12 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A WHOOSH! A very WHOOSH!
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 July 2004 08:16 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
A WHOOSH! A very WHOOSH!

On a usenet group I read, they say "I have [or "He has..."] heard the whooshbird flying."


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zahid Zaman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6459

posted 12 July 2004 08:22 PM      Profile for Zahid Zaman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Starbuck:
Oh yes, it is because the Zionist Entity has trampled the rights of the poor Paelstinians and it is the most serious and pressing cause in the world.

Josh, does not even live in Israel. He lives somewhere in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" and sits at a desk and writes that as a Jew, he rejects the notion of a state based on religion.

Well woop-di-doo. Who cares.

Let me understand this. If you were not Jewish you would not have a problem with a "state based on religion" or because you are a Jew living in "the twighlight zone between the U.S. and Canada" you believe you have more right to criticize Israel because you "reject the notion of a state based on religion". Are you one of those Jews that walk around embarrased by Israel?


I'm suprised that you have so little info on your own country (assuming you are Israeli). People like Josh are the ones hwo came up with the idea of a peaceful Israel, and enclave for the Jews that could safeguard their rights. Their message was not based on religion but rather the political reality of the the Jewish nationhood in the throngs of Europe's growing Nazi sentiment. It is this zeal for peace that has been a element missing for post independence Israel that is much needed in an area which could very well lead into a third world war (nuclear weapons being a major reality in the region). So, I don't see any reason why Josh should be embarassed of the Israel he envisions or why he should be proud if an Israeli like you who thinks escalating violence is the only solution to the Mid East crisis.


From: Mississauga/Waterloo, ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 12 July 2004 08:26 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Oh, shit, josh. What do we do?

Forgive me, but what are you on about in relation to this thread? I wish to know; I sense many references are being made to which I am not familiar.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 12 July 2004 09:10 PM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So, I don't see any reason why Josh should be embarassed of the Israel he envisions...

His response to my question : " Are you one of those Jews that walk around embarassed by Israel?" was:

"Israel's behaviour is often worthy of embarassment."

He did not say he was embarassed by the Israel he "envisions".

Zahid, if the modern zionists were not basing zionism on religion why did they not just adopt the Uganda plan and live in Kenya or Grand Island?

I hate to burst your bubble but "people like Josh" are NOT "the ones hwo (sic) came up with the idea of a peaceful Israel, and (sic) enclave for the Jews that could safegaurd their rights."


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 13 July 2004 05:26 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So who did then?

(bated breath)


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 13 July 2004 12:53 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Zahid Zaman:
Doesn't Israel understand that terrorism is actually increased by repression not decreased?"

Well, of course Israel understands that. And so do the terrorists. It's the central theory of terrorism: murder as many innocent people as possible in order to provoke a repressive response. Then increase the terrorism in order to increase the repression.

But though they risk increasing support for the terrorists by doing so, states still have to defend themselves.

Israel's attempts to defend itself have become extremely effective. There have been many attempts, but Sunday’s terrorist attack on Arab and Jewish Israelis was the first successful attack inside the green line in 4 months.

The barrier between Israel and the West Bank will also prove effective. How do we know? Because the barrier between Israel and Gaza has been extremely effective.

That's what prompted Peace Now to begin campaigning for a barrier separating the West Bank from Israel. The Labor party took up the cause and began building the barrier and now, unfortunately, it's been left to Sharon to finish it.

But while Sharon may be inclined to ignore Palestinian hardships, Israel is a democracy, so his powers are limited. And the wall is being rerouted to make it much less intrusive. From the point of view of anyone interested in peace, that’s a good thing.

Besides preventing attacks from the West Bank, having a barrier will make disengagement possible. No more checkpoints. No more military raids. That’s the hope – though of course the reality is that the terrorists will continue to do their worst and, consequently, there will still be some targeted killings and raids and temporary reoccupations – but the general effect will be to scale back the level of violence.

Zahid writes: "We need peaceful solutions not escalations."

Absolutely, that's the whole point of a wall: de-escalation.

That's also why the terrorism must stop and Arafat must go. Israel is a democracy. If the terrorism stops, Israel will respond. If it continues, Israel will defend itself.

Zahid writes: "The wall must come down, and negotiations restarted."

I think we need some realism here. There won’t be serious negotiations while the terrorism continues and until there’s a partner on the Palestinian side who has both power and a commitment to creating a Jewish state and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace.

At the very least, a lull in the violence is needed. The wall is the best way of achieving that.

[ 13 July 2004: Message edited by: MyName ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 13 July 2004 01:04 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by beluga2:
Now: Regarding the vile and spectacularly-ill-timed terrorist bus bombing

Beluga, you should explain to these terrorist idiots that they're reminding people why Israel is building a wall.

[ 13 July 2004: Message edited by: MyName ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
SnowyPlover
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6431

posted 13 July 2004 01:58 PM      Profile for SnowyPlover     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Their message was not based on religion but rather the political reality of the the Jewish nationhood in the throngs of Europe's growing Nazi sentiment. It is this zeal for peace that has been a element missing for post independence Israel that is much needed in an area which could very

If you are speaking about Zionism Zahid, then you have miscalculated. Zionism has many facets. In fact, the first Zionism thinkers came from the mid-19th century. The vision was not framed around the danger of Nazi Germany. No, Zionism came way before that in response to the brutal conditions Jews lived in post-emancipation. (Thats AFTER they were freed) In addition, Zionism was not only a political movement to find a safe-haven for the Jewish people, it was also a religious movement, a cultural/ethnic movement, and in part...a secular socialist movement.

More importantly, declaring that Israel has lacked a zeal for peace is unmerited. Especially when considering the account of Israeli peace initiatives of 1977-78 with Egypt and Jordan, 1993-96 Oslo, 2000 Camp David and the Israeli favorable reception of UN peace proposals in 1937 and 1947 which proposed partition.

MyName is right. Lets be realistic, terror wont stop no matter what happens. There are militant Islamists who are determined to do away with Israel. Just look at theHamas Charter.


From: Archipelago | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 13 July 2004 10:50 PM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Beluga, you should explain to these terrorist idiots that they're reminding people why Israel is building a wall.

I'm sure they know that -- or, to be a bit more accurate, they know they're providing Israel with the perfect excuse to build a wall, which is actually based on entirely different grounds, namely land theft and ethnic cleansing. But the idiots who carry out these bombings have always been Sharon's de facto allies and vice versa, so there's nothing new here. Extremism begets extremism.

quote:
MyName is right. Lets be realistic, terror wont stop no matter what happens. There are militant Islamists who are determined to do away with Israel.

You're right, of course. Just as there are militant Jewish fundamentalists who are deteremined to "transfer" the Arab population of the West Bank (or "Judea & Samaria" as they call it). I recommend this recent New Yorker article if you haven't already read it. Violent fanaticism is by no means limited to one side of this conflict.

PS: I note my earlier question (back on July 11) regarding the justification for the proposed eastern wall, between the West Bank and Jordan, has once again fallen on deaf ears. Maybe one of these years I'll get an answer.

[ 13 July 2004: Message edited by: beluga2 ]


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 13 July 2004 11:15 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
Arafat knows why there was such an “ill-timed” terrorist attack in Tel Aviv on Sunday – the Israelis did it themselves!


From Al-Jazeera, July 11, 2004:

"We condemn this act as we always condemn these acts," Arafat said, before hinting that it could have been carried out by the Israelis.

"You know who is behind these acts," he told reporters on Sunday at his West Bank offices. "Europe knows it, the Americans know it, the Israelis know it."


From Al-Aquds Al-Arabi, July 12, 04:

Zakariya Al-Zbeide, West Bank commander of Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Brigades, said yesterday’s Tel Aviv operation was part of “the continuing battle against the occupation.” Regarding Arafat’s condemnation of the attack, Al-Zbeidi said, these are press announcements. “We know what Arafat wants.”


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 14 July 2004 06:17 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
"You know who is behind these acts," he told reporters on Sunday at his West Bank offices. "Europe knows it, the Americans know it, the Israelis know it."

That's not much of a hint. Um, lesseee... Oh, wait! It's the Rosicrucians, right? I'm both American by birth and European by naturalization, so it must be them, because I just know it!

Puh-leeze. If that's the best you or your reportage can do to suggest Arafat is blaming the Israelis for this bombing, you've got to try harder.

In Macabee terms: Where does Arafat specifically say it was the Israelis that did it? Nowhere? Then he was obviously not blaming them.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 July 2004 06:25 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But is Arafat looking inside himself?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 14 July 2004 07:59 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anyone who thinks the wall is an effective tool for deescalation is kidding themselves. It may make it more difficult to carry out suicide bombings, but stealing land the way they are with that wall does nothing but escalate tensions. The more land Israel steals, the more the Palestinians will hate them.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 14 July 2004 10:13 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
Michelle posted:
quote:
Anyone who thinks the wall is an effective tool for deescalation is kidding themselves. It may make it more difficult to carry out suicide bombings, but stealing land the way they are with that wall does nothing but escalate tensions.

Anyone who thinks the barrier was built as an effective tool for deescalation is kidding themselves. But it is good to finally see that those that are often critical of Israel believe that the barrier is doing what it was meant to do, make it more difficult to carry out suicide bombings.

quote:
The more land Israel steals, the more the Palestinians will hate them.

By this reasoning, if Israel wanted to be loved by the Palestinians they should leave "Palestine" completely. That would certainly be an effective "tool for deescalation". It is not a popularity contest that they are in. Attacks on Israelis started way before the barrier, long before the growth of post 1967 settlements, and yes, BEFORE the 1967 war itself.

If Israel returned to the 1967 borders they would still not win the Palestinian "popularity contest". Those lines were 1948 armistice lines, not final borders and the "West Bank" was part of Jordan then.

Michelle, do you really believe that if Israel went back to their 1948 armistice lines they would be seen as stealing just a little bit of Palestine and hated just a little bit by Palestinians and all of Israel's Arab neighbours would kiss and make up?


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 14 July 2004 10:29 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
By this reasoning, if Israel wanted to be loved by the Palestinians they should leave "Palestine" completely.

Worth a shot. Why does this rhetorical question get brought up by the apologist crowd every time, with the tacit implication of 'it'll never work'.

Buddy, it's never been ATTEMPTED, let alone TRIED. Didn't your mother tell you 'not to knock it until you tried it'?

Instead we get 'We've got to go forward, 'cause going back could never possibly, evereverever work. Sure, going forward has never worked before, but next time, or maybe the next, it'll work, and then you'll see!'

I'm still waiting. When can I see?


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Khadiija
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6142

posted 14 July 2004 11:42 AM      Profile for Khadiija   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm still waiting. When can I see?

aRoused, If Israel left Palestine completely there would be no Israel. A bit harsh, don't you think?


From: the twilight zone between Canada and the U.S. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 14 July 2004 11:52 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Aroused was talking about the occupation, so stash that strawman somewhere.

quote:
Modern government has historically aimed to administer and better the lives of its population. The philosopher Michel Foucault called this biopolitics, or the politics of life. The wall instead enforces a politics of death, or in the chilling term of South African political scientist Achille Mbembe, necropolitics.

The wall in Palestine is thus more than security, more than land grab, more than humiliation. It marks a momentous, and monstrous, social experiment that explores the very limits of how one group can make another disappear without actually killing them.


"You really should care; it could happen to you. "


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Khadiija
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6142

posted 14 July 2004 12:34 PM      Profile for Khadiija   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Aroused was talking about the occupation

What is the difference between the occupation of Palestine and the a smaller part of Palestine referred to as the West Bank?


From: the twilight zone between Canada and the U.S. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 14 July 2004 02:53 PM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Huh? There seems to be some terminological confusion here. There's 2 possible definitions of "Palestine":

1 - the former British Mandate, covering all lands between the Jordan River/Dead Sea and the Mediterranean

2 - the projected future state representing the Arab population of #1

Starbuck was using #1, aRoused was using #2. Clear?

BTW, polls have repeatedly shown that most Palestinians (not all of whom are Hamas members, believe it or not) would accept Israel if they'd just get the hell out of the OT. They might not "love" Israelis, and won't any time soon, but they would be willing to co-exist.

Unlike the likes of Starbuck, who have apparently already decided that peace is impossible, so why bother even trying?


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 14 July 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Anyone who thinks the wall is an effective tool for deescalation is kidding themselves. It may make it more difficult to carry out suicide bombings.

You're contradicting yourself here. Fewer bombings is a de-escalation of the violence. Just as more bombings would be an escalation.

The barrier is part of the strategy of disengagement, which ideally means an end to targeted killings, military raids, temporary reoccupations, checkpoints, etc.

In short, the barrier will save the lives of both Palestinians and Israelis.

Since the barrier won't be 100% effective against terrorists, its effect will be to de-escalate the violence, not stop it entirely.

Michelle, you seem to be confusing de-escalation with resolution. And your argument seems to be that construction of the barrier will further enrage the Palestinians, making the conflict more intractable...?

This point has some merit. I don't think the issue is simple.

I’d prefer – and have long advocated – a route for the barrier that could reasonably become an actual border, and so far, that’s not what's being built.

Furthermore, a barrier creating great hardship for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians might deepen or broaden Palestinian hostility and make the conflict more intractable.

However, the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled this can’t happen.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruling is going to result in more settlements being isolated on the Palestinian side of the fence – so who knows how good or bad the actual route will be.

Finally, the extent to which the barrier prevents terrorism is the extent to which we may hope that a political option might re-emerge and the conflict might actually be resolved.

In the meantime, if the Palestinians want to stop construction of the barrier, they might more profitably spend their time trying to stop the terrorism.

And the UN should do likewise.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 14 July 2004 03:35 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by beluga2:
polls have repeatedly shown that most Palestinians (not all of whom are Hamas members, believe it or not) would accept Israel if they'd just get the hell out of the OT. They might not "love" Israelis, and won't any time soon, but they would be willing to co-exist.

Polls have also shown that most Palestinians no longer support the senseless terrorist war against Israel. But the territories are in no sense democratic. The Palestinian leaderships represents themselves, not the wishes of most Palestinians.

And the current war against Israel was not a reaction to the occupation, but to the possibility of the occupation ending, through a peace treaty with Israel.


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

posted 14 July 2004 04:20 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What is the difference between the occupation of Palestine and the a smaller part of Palestine referred to as the West Bank?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I'll take a stab at it.

Your concern seems to be that if Israel ever takes its jackboot off the neck of the Palestinians, the latter may eventually become strong enough to take over all of Palestine.

Since Israel now controls all of Palestine, your fear appears to be that these future Palestinians will behave exactly as the Israelis have behaved.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 14 July 2004 06:55 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MyName:
And the current war against Israel was not a reaction to the occupation, but to the possibility of the occupation ending, through a peace treaty with Israel.

Surely it had nothing to do with successive governments of Netanyahu and Barak breaking Oslo provision after Oslo provision...

No, of course not - it's that those Palestinians just blindly want war. Nothing to do with bulldozers, and settlements, and bypass roads and the targetting of the PA infrastructure by the IDF...


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 15 July 2004 12:30 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Surely it had nothing to do with successive governments of Netanyahu and Barak breaking Oslo provision after Oslo provision...

Nor the fact that Oslo never offered anything like a viable Palestinian state in the first place, merely a gaggle of discontiguous bantustans which were to be administered by Arafat as a colonial governor for the Israelis. (So that the Israelis wouldn't have to do the dirty work of cracking Palestinian heads themselves.)

It's amazing how much self-delusion there is about these matters.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
MyName
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6174

posted 15 July 2004 12:39 PM      Profile for MyName        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aRoused:
Puh-leeze. If that's the best you or your reportage can do to suggest Arafat is blaming the Israelis for this bombing, you've got to try harder.

It was wasn’t me saying Arafat implied Israel was behind Sunday’s terrorist attack in Tel Aviv; it was Al-Jazeera and the Toronto Star and the New York Times and Albawaba.com….

As far as I can tell, every media outlet that reported Arafat’s claim understands that when Arafat says, We all know who really did this – he means Israel.

This isn’t the first time, he’s blamed Israel actually committed some Fatah atrocity, and Arafat isn’t the only one who uses the “You know who” formulation.

Speaking about an al-Qaeda terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Abdallah ibn Abd Al-'Aziz said,

“You all know who is behind it all. Zionism is behind it…. It is not 100%, but 95% certain that the Zionist hands are behind what happened. We are convinced that Zionism is behind everything.”

Who are these “Zionists”?

At a news conference at the Saudi embassy in Washington, Adel Al-Jubeir, foreign affairs adviser to the prince said the “Zionist elements” the prince was referring to, weren’t just Israelis, but also Americans.

Question: “Well, who are these elements in the United States? Who are you talking about?"

Al-Jubeir: "I think you know who I'm talking about. It's been reported in a number of magazines. The individuals have been on television, saying so. And they've written in American publications. And as a journalist and a good investigative journalist, I'm sure you can find them."

http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP72604

The “You know who” formulation didn’t originate with the Saudis or Arafat. It’s been part of the lexicon of Jew-hatred for a long time and is rooted in the myth of a Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world.

Fully parsed, the phrase means something like this: “We both know that the secret hand of the Jewish conspiracy is behind this, because you and I understand how the world really works – the Jews are behind everything.

The refusal to actually name the secret hand also has a long history, and it parses something like this: “We know the Jews are behind everything, but we play along with the media’s game of not knowing – but then we know who really controls the media, don’t we?”


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 17 July 2004 05:57 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Folks for the record, I am spending some time in Israel this summer. I have been here now for over a week and have seen much of the security barrier.

Let's cut the BS. Ive seen it. It is a fence; a barrier ...yes with barbed wire and security detection devices but it IS A FENCE.

A small portion is a wall where in the past Palestinian terrorists have shot at civilians and murdered them. So let's HAVE NO MORE TALK OF "WALLS|". Anyone claiming such either does not know and speaks out of ignorance or is simply lying.

All that said Isarel is teeming with tourists. It is great for the economy. I had an interesting chat today with an Israeli Arab shopkeeper who told me that most of his friends and family are overjoyed that the fence is up . He insists that the fence has stopped the terrorism and that has brought business back to Israel. BTW, he also told me he lost his nephew in a suicide bombing.

As we say in Hebrew L'hitraot. I will be back in a week or so and tell you more about my time here.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 17 July 2004 06:14 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey, Mac? Been there, seen it. Because the whole thing isn't concrete doesn't make it ethical, moral, or justified or not where it is.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 17 July 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So let's HAVE NO MORE TALK OF "WALLS|".

- Macabee

quote:
Semantics is my life.

- Sergeant Arthur Dietrich (Barney Miller)

[ 17 July 2004: Message edited by: Slim ]


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
t_link
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6427

posted 17 July 2004 11:00 PM      Profile for t_link     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Because the whole thing isn't concrete doesn't make it ethical, moral, or justified or not where it is.

So Israel should take down the wall, and than do what to stop suicide attacks?


From: That Place | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 18 July 2004 01:21 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, I'm sorry. Is Israel teaching everybody in the world that it's OK to sacrifice ethics for expediency?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 18 July 2004 10:51 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
Macabee posted 17 July 2004
quote:
Folks for the record, I am spending some time in Israel this summer. I have been here now for over a week and have seen much of the security barrier

quote:
Tuesday July 13, 2004 UN blasts Arafat, says Palestinian Authority near collapse

Macabee in Israel. He must be behind Arafat's downfall.


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

posted 18 July 2004 11:28 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, well then.

Happy happy sunshiny days, eh?

It isn't a wall after all! In Israel, there is shopping! And Macabee is having a good time!

So everything is copacetic, and we should all be happy! What were we all arguing about anyway?

Let's see some happy faces, people.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 18 July 2004 11:37 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
beluga2 posted 14 July 2004
quote:
   Unlike the likes of Starbuck, who have apparently already decided that peace is impossible, so why bother even trying?

Beluga, Please show me where I said peace is impossible. I did say "we do need peaceful solutions and when Israel has a peace partner that wants peace, peace will flower."

If you read into that sentence that peace is impossible it means that you believe Israel will not have a peace partner that wants peace. I disagree with your thinking. I believe that peace is possible and when the Palestinians reject their corrupt leaders they will be open to peaceful solutions. It looks like Arafat is under a lot of pressure to make changes. Who knows what the future holds. BTW, did you read that Palestinians have now set up "check points" to block UN staff from entering Rafah?


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 19 July 2004 01:09 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
Folks for the record, I am spending some time in Israel this summer. I have been here now for over a week and have seen much of the security barrier.

Let's cut the BS. Ive seen it. It is a fence; a barrier ...yes with barbed wire and security detection devices but it IS A FENCE.

A small portion is a wall where in the past Palestinian terrorists have shot at civilians and murdered them. So let's HAVE NO MORE TALK OF "WALLS|". Anyone claiming such either does not know and speaks out of ignorance or is simply lying.

All that said Isarel is teeming with tourists. It is great for the economy. I had an interesting chat today with an Israeli Arab shopkeeper who told me that most of his friends and family are overjoyed that the fence is up . He insists that the fence has stopped the terrorism and that has brought business back to Israel. BTW, he also told me he lost his nephew in a suicide bombing.

As we say in Hebrew L'hitraot. I will be back in a week or so and tell you more about my time here.


Are you being paid to write propaganda for the Sharon government while your there? Because it sure sounds like it.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Zahid Zaman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6459

posted 19 July 2004 01:12 AM      Profile for Zahid Zaman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:

Are you being paid to write propaganda for the Sharon government while your there? Because it sure sounds like it.


I was of the same opinion when I read the will be back in a week to feed you more one-sided BS statement.


From: Mississauga/Waterloo, ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 July 2004 08:23 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Zahid Zaman:
I was of the same opinion when I read the will be back in a week to feed you more one-sided BS statement.

To be fair, everyone on these threads write one-sided statements.

However, this is old news - he told us the same thing last year as Mishei when he visited Israel.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Starbuck
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5920

posted 19 July 2004 11:38 AM      Profile for Starbuck        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Michelle posted 19 July 2004               

To be fair, everyone on these threads write one-sided statements.

However, this is old news - he told us the same thing last year as Mishei when he visited Israel.


Yes, Michelle, even moderator/participants. This was the same thread where you persistently made the argument that the fence was not working. You failed to recognize that the unfinished fence is still permeable in places and it actually improves as more sections are built. You refer to it as a wall even though you know most of it is a fence.

quote:
Michelle posted 12 November 2003

As for saving lives - how many suicide attacks have there been since the wall has started being built? Wow, what a lifesaver it is, indeed!

Michelle posted 13 November 2003

And it's working oh so well!

Michelle posted 13 November 2003

Didn't stop this one - November 3rd

Didn't stop these guys - October 25th

Didn't stop this from happening - October 24th

Whoops, looks like the fence didn't stop this either - October 21st

Hmm, thought the fence was going to stop stuff like this. Guess not - October 21st

This report couldn't possibly be right - the fence would have stopped this! - October 10th

I'm sure the fence will make people like this feel much better, and encourage them to be peaceful in the face of Israeli atrocities.


The latest expert to add their voice to the chorus of voices saying the fence is working is Jane's. I was not able to get the original url but have quoted the article in the NP.

A report by Jane's, the prestigious international defence and security publication, has concluded Israel's controversial defence barrier has - so far - been a resounding success in stopping Palestinian suicide bombers from mounting attacks from the West Bank.

"It may not be fashionable to say so publicly," says the article, published online yesterday in Jane's Foreign Report. "But all the evidence at the moment suggests that the wall made a huge difference and that, at least for the moment, the Israelis have the upper hand."

The article says terrorist attacks inside Israel have dropped by more than 80% so far this year.

"Furthermore, the number of Israelis killed or maimed in these attacks was a tenth of the figure registered last year," Jane's writes.


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 19 July 2004 01:19 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
"It may not be fashionable to say so publicly," says the article, published online yesterday in Jane's Foreign Report. "But all the evidence at the moment suggests that the wall made a huge difference and that, at least for the moment, the Israelis have the upper hand."

The article says terrorist attacks inside Israel have dropped by more than 80% so far this year.


There is a cause-and-effect problem here. The wall around the West Bank is very much uncompleted (something like 30% of it is done now, obviously this number was lower in January). It is still very porous. How can the barrier possibly be cited as the reason for the drop in terror attacks? Perhaps there are other reasons?


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 20 July 2004 12:55 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Folks for the record, I am spending some time in Israel this summer. I have been here now for over a week and have seen much of the security barrier.

Let's cut the BS. Ive seen it. It is a fence; a barrier ...yes with barbed wire and security detection devices but it IS A FENCE.


While you're in the neighbourhood you should check out the Krak des Chevaliers to see the future of your fence.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Khadiija
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6142

posted 20 July 2004 10:10 AM      Profile for Khadiija   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
While you're in the neighbourhood you should check out the Krak des Chevaliers to see the future of your fence.

al-Qa'bong, Krak des Chevaliers is in Syria. Is Syria now allowing Jews to enter if they have an Israeli visa stamped in their passport?


From: the twilight zone between Canada and the U.S. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 20 July 2004 10:38 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The seperation fence is working!!! It is saving the lives of many many Israelis be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim or others. Skdadl you might think that the life of one Israeli Arab shopkeeper is unimportant but I guess when you have children to feed the "fence" becomes a saviour.

Oh how easy it is for those in Canada to sit back and tell Israelis that the fence should be taken down. And while the Israeli Supreme court has made a ruling pertaining to its path it has not ruled the fence illegal. And guess what? Israel has begun today to implement the decision of the Israeli Court.

So for me the lives of innocent Israelis remains more important than some of the safe armchair demands made by some here. Being in Israel, I for one applaud the incredible work done by Israel to protect all its citizens.

BTW, I was in the Arab market today. It is filled with tourists. The economy is bouncing back. Yes we tourists give our shekels to Israel and yes all the economy whether fueled by Jews or Arabs seem grateful for the "fence". So I invite each of you to come to Israel (yes Thomas I know you have been here ) but for those who haven't, before you venture to tell Israeli Jews and Arabs about how you feel they should handle their security, come to Israel and speak to the average Jew and Arab on the street. Ask them if they feel safer today or last year when there was no fence. Speaking from a high-horse is oh so easy.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 20 July 2004 10:45 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

To be fair, everyone on these threads write one-sided statements.

However, this is old news - he told us the same thing last year as Mishei when he visited Israel.


Is it the job of a moderator to suggest what identities other Babblers may have assumed in the past.

As I understand it, as a moderator you have information that would be considered confidential. This small breach suggesting that macabee is Mishei (and whether you are correct or not is unimportant) puts your job as moderator in question. What next identifying others here you know by their actual names? It is indeed a bit scary and might make many here question the trustworthyness of the moderator.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 20 July 2004 10:45 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is Macabee really Tom Friedman of the New York Times? Because reading his "reports" from Israel reminds of me of Friedman's supercilious pieces where he builds a whole column on what some "person in the street" tells him.

And to counter Macabee, please don't visit and give money to a state that is currently occupying and illegally settling land that does not belong to it, and is currently denying basic human rights to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

"I ain't gonna play Sun City."


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 20 July 2004 10:49 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:
Is Macabee really Tom Friedman of the New York Times? Because reading his "reports" from Israel reminds of me of Friedman's supercilious pieces where he builds a whole column on what some "person in the street" tells him.

And to counter Macabee, please don't visit and give money to a state that is currently occupying and illegally settling land that does not belong to it, and is currently denying basic human rights to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

"I ain't gonna play Sun City."


Hey Josh just to keep it bakanced lets create a whole list of countries that babblers should not go to...hmmm lets see... I will start:

China, USA, Sudan, Sierra Leone, India, anyone else want to join in?


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 July 2004 10:51 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nice try, Macabee. Audra has always exposed sock puppet accounts, no matter who they are.

As for exposing real names, Macabee, you have a lot of nerve suggesting that I would do that when I've gone out of my way to protect the real identity of certain babblers, and have been very quick to take action whenever an attempt has been made to "out" them. You might want to think about that.

[ 20 July 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 20 July 2004 10:54 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, Mac -- did you happen to catch Sharon's speech about the nasty French?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 20 July 2004 11:12 AM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Uh, I really don't think anyone has to have any super moderator powers to come to the conclusion that Macabee = Mishei. In fact, a quick glance at the two profiles doesn't give me any extra clues.


There is no babble policy against using your powers of perception. If people can tell you're Mishei, that can hardly be considered Michelle's fault.

[ 20 July 2004: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 20 July 2004 11:12 AM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:

Is it the job of a moderator to suggest what identities other Babblers may have assumed in the past.

As I understand it, as a moderator you have information that would be considered confidential. This small breach suggesting that macabee is Mishei (and whether you are correct or not is unimportant) puts your job as moderator in question. What next identifying others here you know by their actual names? It is indeed a bit scary and might make many here question the trustworthyness of the moderator.


What a complete crock of shit. I had you pegged as Mishei within two or three posts as, I'm sure, did many others. By the time Michelle referred to your previous handle it had become common knowledge. Now consider the irony of a sock puppet giving someone else a lecture on trustworthiness.


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 20 July 2004 11:14 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The seperation fence is working!!! It is saving the lives of many many Israelis be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim or others.

How many Palestinian lives has it saved?


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 July 2004 11:18 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"Separation fence". Aww, isn't that sweet. Why, that name almost gives me the warm fuzzies.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 20 July 2004 11:23 AM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
I heard someone on CBC Radio call it the "contoversial security barrier" several times yesterday.

I also remember a tour guide in East Berlin arguing fiercely that the Wall was not a "wall". Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 July 2004 11:38 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually, I think "controversial security barrier" is a good compromise.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 20 July 2004 11:42 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Logic is no barrier to 'facts', I see. Once again I ask how an incomplete wall can possibly be cited as the main driver in reduced attacks on Israelis. It makes no sense.

If the wall does so much to deter terrorism, why does the IDF commit so many resources to operations in Gaza? Gaza's already an open-air prison, is it not?


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 20 July 2004 12:43 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As I understand it, as a moderator you have information that would be considered confidential. This small breach suggesting that macabee is Mishei (and whether you are correct or not is unimportant) puts your job as moderator in question.

It's sad really, and quite telling, that some babblers would assume that there is a conspiracy to reveal certain babblers' former identities.

Mish, if Udo and Maccabe didn't write exactly the way you do, I doubt that any of us would have made the connection between you and your sock puppets. Michelle came along relatively late in calling you "Mishei", after many of us already had done so.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 20 July 2004 01:29 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
The seperation fence is working!!! It is saving the lives of many many Israelis be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim or others. Skdadl you might think that the life of one Israeli Arab shopkeeper is unimportant but I guess when you have children to feed the "fence" becomes a saviour.

I love how you haul this "Israeli Arab" shopkeeper out and talk about him as though he should be grateful that the Israeli government is using a big ol' barrier to snip off chunks of land inside the Green Line.

That reminds me of how South African whites expected their blacks, no matter how demeaned or humiliated, to stand there saying "yes, baas, all is good, baas." Why? Because the SA whites figured they knew what was best.

I don't expect you even realize that you are, in effect, forcing many Israeli Arabs into the position of bowing and scraping and saying the equivalent of "yes, baas", when they probably want to speak their minds.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 20 July 2004 01:31 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Too long.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 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