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


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Sabra and Shatila Calls for Justice Endure

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Sabra and Shatila Calls for Justice Endure
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 17 September 2004 04:04 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From Al-Awda California
16 September 2004

quote:
Twenty-two years later, Sabra and Shatila Calls for Justice Endure

September 16, 2004 marks the 22nd anniversary of the killing of thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese residents of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut Lebanon. Al-Awda, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition joins Palestinians everywhere as we commemorate one of the bloodiest massacres in recent history.

On 6 June 1982, the Israeli army invaded Lebanon with the full backing and support of the United States of America. A few days later, the invading army besieged West Beirut for two-months before the US, France and Italy intervened with a plan to evacuate Palestinian resistance fighters from Lebanon. This occurred under the auspices of a multinational force on August 21 which was sent to oversee the departure, and to protect Palestinian refugees. However, in a sudden and inexplicable move, the multinational force withdrew by early September claiming its mission was accomplished.

On September 15, Israeli forces invaded West Beirut in a clear violation of the evacuation agreement agreed upon by the Palestinian resistance and the US. A day later, Ariel Sharon allowed entry of the Lebanese Forces (a right-wing, Phalangist militia with a long history of close relations with Israeli governments) and the South Lebanon Army (Israel's proxy militia in Southern Lebanon) into the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, which were completely sealed off by Israeli tanks. When the militiamen entered on the evening of September 16, the only resistance they were faced with was from lightly-armed young boys, the Ashbaal (lion cubs).

For the next 38 hours, aided by material support from Israel's army, including flares at night, Israel's proxy militiamen raped, tortured, mutilated and killed, in cold-blood, thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese residents of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Already on September 17, a day into the massacre, eye-witness reports of the killings were circulating.

Yet, the Israeli military allowed even more Phalange militiamen into the camp, an provided them with bulldozers to plough and bury the corpses.

Israeli commanders, including General Amos Yaron, the Israeli commander in Beirut, were stationed on the rooftop of a seven-story building 200 meters from Shatila, with a clear view of the camps below. The Phalangist intelligence also had radio communication with militiamen on the ground. By the morning of September 17, evidence that a massacre was taking place was communicated to Israeli Chief of Staff, Raphael Eitan, who then approved a request that the Phalangists remain in the camps until 5:00 am Saturday.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, more than 2,750 Palestinian men, women and children were massacred in the Sabra and Shatila camps in Beirut while the city was occupied by the Israeli army. The main war criminal bearing legal responsibility for the massacre is then Israeli Minister of Defense, General Ariel Sharon. Israel's official Kahane Commission concluded that Ariel Sharon was "personally responsible" for the Sabra and Shatila massacre.

Although the massacre was classified by the United Nations as a war crime, Ariel Sharon has not yet been brought to trial for his horrific war crimes against the Palestinian and Lebanese people.

Sabra and Shatila will continue to haunt Palestinians and the international community alike until the perpetrators of the massacres are brought to justice, until the forced and continuing exile of millions of Palestinians is ended, and until Palestinian refugees achieve their right to return to their homes and lands of origin in Palestine and from which they were expelled.



Sorry no link.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 04:41 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Obviously no one in Lebanon really cares that much about Sabra and Shatilla since as soon as the supposedly pro-Palestinian Syrians colonized Lebanon, they appointed the Falangist leader who led the massacre to a senior cabinet position.

No one seemed to care.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 September 2004 04:50 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And how about you, Stockholm?

I don't think that Cueball was expecting his post to be read first of all by the Lebanese -- although all Lebanese readers would be welcome, I'm sure.


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

posted 17 September 2004 05:06 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Perhaps, in the face of Stockholm's dismissive "no one seemed to care," we could turn this thread into defiant evidence of caring, memory, and a commitment to testify for as long as justice remains undone.

In the spirit of our several silent threads, we could each just continue to copy and paste these two paragraphs from Cueball's original source:

quote:
Although the massacre was classified by the United Nations as a war crime, Ariel Sharon has not yet been brought to trial for his horrific war crimes against the Palestinian and Lebanese people.

Sabra and Shatila will continue to haunt Palestinians and the international community alike until the perpetrators of the massacres are brought to justice, until the forced and continuing exile of millions of Palestinians is ended, and until Palestinian refugees achieve their right to return to their homes and lands of origin in Palestine and from which they were expelled.



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

posted 17 September 2004 05:20 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Obviously no one in Lebanon really cares that much about Sabra and Shatilla since as soon as the supposedly pro-Palestinian Syrians colonized Lebanon, they appointed the Falangist leader who led the massacre to a senior cabinet position.

Its called finding a partner for peace. Its called compromise. It is also a recognition of the large Christian community that exists in Lebanon. It is also recognition that not all of the Falange are cut from the same cloth.

These are principals that the Likud seems immune too, in its relations to Palestinians.

It should also be noted that there is a difference between colonization and military occupation. Syria, is not immigrating large numbers of Syrians to Lebanon, nor do the question the prinicpal of Lebanese sovereignty, nor do they dispute its borders. There is no movement in Syrian government circles toward annexing parts of Lebanon.

Israel is guilty on all these counts in regard to the West Bank and Gaza strip.

Stockholm, your inability to apply the very diverse vocabulary of the English language to express nuance is exceptional.

[ 17 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 05:36 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I guess what I am puzzled over is how first you post a long article calling for "justice" for the perpetrators of the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, but then when it is pointed out that perhaps justice should be meted out to the people who actually did the killing (ie: the Christian Arabs who did 100% of the killing), you contort your self like a pretzel to find a way to make sure that no one blames them. We are only allowed to blame Israel. If we dare to say that the Lebanese Christians who did the killing ought to face justice we are being politically incorrect.

I think people should pay the consequences of any massacre they are responsible for. But the apparent lack of any desire of punish the Christian Arab murderers makes me think that very few people actually care about the people who died at Sabra and Shatilla. They just like the fact that the massacre can be used as a propaganda tool against Israel.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 17 September 2004 05:45 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is no question that Sharon had some responsibility in this massacre. The Israeli courts agreed as well. But even the sentence you quote Skdadl indicates that the massacre was a war crime.

As Stockholm poignantly demonstrates the perpetartors of this tragedy have NEVER been brought to justice. Those that did the slashing, shooting and murder remain free. Have never been touched.

Perhaps it is time for you Cueball and others to make this your cause. Perhaps its time to briing those who actually carried out the killings to justice.
Continual focus on Sharon and Israel allows the real murderers to remain untouched.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 17 September 2004 07:07 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So the obvious solution is to put everyone responsible-the militiamen, the Israeli commanders and Sharon himself-on trial.

And, hopefully, in prison or the ground.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 17 September 2004 07:16 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by black_dog:
So the obvious solution is to put everyone responsible-the militiamen, the Israeli commanders and Sharon himself-on trial.

And, hopefully, in prison or the ground.



It seems to me that Sharon is always the only one focused on here. Let's try something different. Let's focus on the ones that ACTUALLY committed the murders. Oh by the way do we have the names of the Phalange leadership who were directly, not indirectly, but directly involved?

Yes Sharon could have done much to stop this tragedy from happening and for that he has been held accountable. However none of the murderers have ever been held accountable. And what were their namess again? Funny how their names, the ones with blood on their hands, seem to have slipped our minds but Sharon everyone remembers. Funny that.


From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 07:26 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I seem to recall at the time of the massacre someone or other making the rather prescient comment:

"A bunch of Christians massacred a bunch of Muslims and somehow they still find a way to blame the Jews"

Maybe Israel also bears some responsibility for the massacre of the Tutsis in Rwanda!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 07:28 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Its called finding a partner for peace. Its called compromise. It is also a recognition of the large Christian community that exists in Lebanon. It is also recognition that not all of the Falange are cut from the same cloth.


I guess that means that we were very wrong to prosecute concentration camp guards after WW2. Wouldn't it have been better in the interest of reconciliation to let all those sadistic SS officers live in peace in Germany and maybe appoint some of them to the German cabinet?


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

posted 17 September 2004 07:36 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
I seem to recall at the time of the massacre someone or other making the rather prescient comment:

"A bunch of Christians massacred a bunch of Muslims and somehow they still find a way to blame the Jews"

Maybe Israel also bears some responsibility for the massacre of the Tutsis in Rwanda!


This is even more irrelevant than your usual contributions to these types of threads. Yes, play the anti-Semitism card to avoid holding Israel responsible. And then throw in a non-sequitur to boot.


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

posted 17 September 2004 07:38 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:

It seems to me that Sharon is always the only one focused on here. Let's try something different. Let's focus on the ones that ACTUALLY committed the murders. Oh by the way do we have the names of the Phalange leadership who were directly, not indirectly, but directly involved?

Yes Sharon could have done much to stop this tragedy from happening and for that he has been held accountable. However none of the murderers have ever been held accountable. And what were their namess again? Funny how their names, the ones with blood on their hands, seem to have slipped our minds but Sharon everyone remembers. Funny that.


Yeah, it is kind of funny people remember that Sharon guy. Whatever happened to him? I'm sure after the disgrace of the Kahane Commission he was never heard from again.

[ 17 September 2004: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 09:08 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have always made it clear that I hate Sharon. I wish he could be thrown in a cell with Osama Bin Laden and both of them could be fed a steady diet of pork chops and forced to watch hard core gay pornography 24 hours a day!

But, if people really cared about the massacre at Sabra and Shatilla (as opposed to viewing as a convenient propaganda tool to use against Israel), then maybe just maybe there might be SOME calls for the actual murderes to be brouight to justice. But its just so inconvenient - the killers were other Arabs and calling for charges to be laid against Christian Arabs would get everyone "off message".


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Bacchus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4722

posted 17 September 2004 09:15 PM      Profile for Bacchus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I guess that means that we were very wrong to prosecute concentration camp guards after WW2. Wouldn't it have been better in the interest of reconciliation to let all those sadistic SS officers live in peace in Germany and maybe appoint some of them to the German cabinet?


Hello? we basically didnt. We prosecute a handful of guards from a few of the camps and basically ignored the rest. There were a estimated 40,000 guards at all the camps and some camps were never named, let alone had anyone prosecuted for them


From: n/a | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 09:51 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
and... we (at least those of us on the progressive left) tend to be outraged that any concentration camp guards got off scot-free.

I was responding to the post by Cueball that basically said that the mass murderers among the Christian Arab Falangists in Lebanon should not be brought to justice in the interest of creating "national unity and reconciliation in Lebanon".

I think that this is no different from saying that in the interest of national unity in Ukraine, we should welcome all Ukrainian concentration camp guards back to their homes with a bouquet of flowers and invite them to a village folk dance in the name of the national reconciliation of the Ukrainian people! And, if someone who was known as the Butcher of Auschwitz wants to run for Parliament and be made Minister of Housing - good for him!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 17 September 2004 10:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sure, but you would have us try some and not others, namely Sharon. I certainly would not challenge an attempt to try anyone involved, but the essential aspect of Sharon's ultimate responsibility lies in that the event occurred in a Israeli controlled zone, and also the fact that Israeli forces had absolutely no right to be in Lebanon in the first place. In other words Israel and its army are primarily responsible as they set the stage by invading Lebanon, and then supervised the killing fields.

It would be very politcally difficult for the Syrians or the Lebanese to try key Felangists unless there was a comprehesive trial, including all possible culprits. Trying only the Felangists, while Sharon gets to sip Martinis on his Cheba farms ranch, would be the same as absolving Sharon of guilt and laying the blame solely on the Felange. Accepting the Israeli line of scapegoating yet more "barabaric" Arabs, this time Christian ones.

The only possible politcal context where you could try the powerful Christian Felangists would be in a trial that also included Israeli perps. Any other course would likely reignite the civil war.

You'd know that if actually cared Stockholm, but you don't, except up to the extent where you can throw around pithy logic puzzles that puzzle no one but yourself.

Ultimately, Palestinians would be more than willing to forgive Sharon as part of a program of recociliation, based on addressing the base greviances of Palestinians, just as has been done in the case of the Felange.

From the text...

quote:
Sabra and Shatila will continue to haunt Palestinians and the international community alike until the perpetrators of the massacres are brought to justice, until the forced and continuing exile of millions of Palestinians is ended, and until Palestinian refugees achieve their right to return to their homes and lands of origin in Palestine and from which they were expelled.


Fact is none of these greviances have been properly addressed, as they were in the peace treaties in Lebanon, so why should the charge against Sharon be abandoned?

[ 17 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 11:21 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Most Lebanese will tell you that they never asked the Palestinians to occupy large chunks of southern Lebanon either and they had no right to be there. If both Israel and the Palestinians had respected Lebanese neutrality, the Lebanese civil war would never have happened.

I'd like to see Sharon tried for his role in Lebanon - as long as all the Phalangist leaders in Lebanon are tried as well and as long as Arafat and co. are also tried for ordering terrorist attacks. let's put everyone on trial!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 17 September 2004 11:28 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Those that did the slashing, shooting and murder remain free. Have never been touched.

Well, not everyone. Recall that one of the Phalangist leaders was blown up in his car before testifying at the Sharon hearing in Belgium.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 17 September 2004 11:37 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh yes, that little coincidental happenstance.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 September 2004 11:41 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I guess the Palestinians were doing a vigilante revenge action.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 17 September 2004 11:43 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Most Lebanese will tell you that they never asked the Palestinians to occupy large chunks of southern Lebanon either and they had no right to be there. If both Israel and the Palestinians had respected Lebanese neutrality, the Lebanese civil war would never have happened.

Absolutely bizarre. On one thread you argue that the Arabs should take better care of their own, (meaning the Palestinian refugees.) And then on the other you blame the Palestinians for using part fo Lebanon as refugee camps, as if they just wandered up there one sunny day, because they liked the weather.

Is it impossible for you to keep a single line of thought in your head for more than ten minutes?

Which one is it? The Labanese should be more accomodating or they are justified in rejecting Palestinian infringement on their territory?


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

posted 17 September 2004 11:46 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I guess the Palestinians were doing a vigilante revenge action.

Must be. It is obviously in their best interests to kill three key witnesses to the Sabra and Shatila massacre, in a period just before one of them Felange has agreed to testify against Sharon. Or perhaps they were all co-incidental.

[ 17 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 12:01 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Which one is it? The Labanese should be more accomodating or they are justified in rejecting Palestinian infringement on their territory?


Why do you think that the Lebanese Christians hated the Palestinians so much in the first place? because they tried to upset the delicate power balance in Lebanon where by all power was divided 50/50 between Muslims and Christians. They allied themsleves with Muslim fanatics who wanted to impose an Islamic theorcracy on Lebanon and strip the Christians of any right to practice their religion. On top of that, without asking permission from anyone, they used Lebanon as a base to lob shells into Israel - thereby making Lebanon a target for Israeli retaliation. If Lebanon had had a stronger army in the early 70s, they would have said to Arafat and co. you can stay here if you want but you must live by our rules and if you try to use our country as a base for terrorist attacks on Israel that will cause retaliation - you are out of here.

I think that countries like Jordan or Lebanon or Syria etc... should do one of two things - either not allow any Palestinans in at all and let them be Israel's problem, OR let them in, offer them full citizenship and help them to integrate as equal citizens. What good does it do to keep them penned up in prison like camps for no other reason than to be used as propaganda tools.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 01:22 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know, I know, anytime a Plalestinian is killed it is the Palestinians fault.

I love the way you are so blithe about mass murder.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 18 September 2004 01:55 AM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You realize this will halt all discussion in the thread. Yes?
From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 18 September 2004 02:16 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why do you think that the Lebanese Christians hated the Palestinians so much in the first place? because they tried to upset the delicate power balance in Lebanon where by all power was divided 50/50 between Muslims and Christians. They allied themsleves with Muslim fanatics who wanted to impose an Islamic theorcracy on Lebanon and strip the Christians of any right to practice their religion. On top of that, without asking permission from anyone, they used Lebanon as a base to lob shells into Israel - thereby making Lebanon a target for Israeli retaliation.

Since there hadn't been an attack on Israel from Lebanon for a year before Sharon invaded, the latter part of your claim is nonsense. As for the previous bit, the only response it warrants is:



From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Frac Tal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6796

posted 18 September 2004 03:05 AM      Profile for Frac Tal        Edit/Delete Post
You sure do know how to spread it around Al.
And the jewish blood, what? Got a snappy come back?

Edited to add: More pictures of shit?

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: Frac Tal ]


From: I'll never sign it. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 18 September 2004 03:09 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And the jewish blood, what?

You'll have to elaborate. I don't get it. Were any Jews killed at Sabra and Shatila?


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 03:16 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Since there hadn't been an attack on Israel from Lebanon for a year before Sharon invaded, the latter part of your claim is nonsense. As for the previous bit, the only response it warrants is:

No doubt nonesense, but I was completely uaware that there had been no attacks against Israel from Lebanon for the year prior to the invasion. Since you seem to be interested in a serious discussion based on actual events (as opposed to random pithy jawing) perhaps you could source that claim.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 18 September 2004 04:27 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Read Israeli writer, Jacobo Timermann's book about the invasion of Lebanon.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 05:05 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 18 September 2004 05:30 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
During that same time period, however, Israeli attacks against Lebanon continued apace, air raids and such, with many innocent civilian deaths, oops, sorry, how silly of me, collateral damage. The intent was to provoke a PLO attack against northern Israel in order to justify the long-planned invasion.

When the PLO annoyingly failed to respond with any such attacks, Israel fell back on a more creative excuse: they blamed the PLO for an assassination attempt on an Israeli diplomat somewhere in Europe (London, I think), when in fact it was Abu Nidal who was responsible. Whatever. Any excuse would do.

All that's from memory, so I don't have a link. Google away if you like.


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

posted 18 September 2004 11:44 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
There is no question that Sharon had some responsibility in this massacre. The Israeli courts agreed as well. But even the sentence you quote Skdadl indicates that the massacre was a war crime.

As a rule, war criminals are not slapped on the wrist and then allowed to achieve high office in important government positions.

However, I suppose Kurt Waldheim paved the way for Sharon to do the same thing.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 12:55 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
When the PLO annoyingly failed to respond with any such attacks, Israel fell back on a more creative excuse: they blamed the PLO for an assassination attempt on an Israeli diplomat somewhere in Europe (London, I think), when in fact it was Abu Nidal who was responsible. Whatever. Any excuse would do.


Isn't it also true that in 1982, Menachem Begin, expressed that both the 1967 war and the Invasion of Lebanon that Israel chose. I seeem to remember a speech made at the National War College. Or something like that. He proudly spoke of the way Moishe Dayan described the ocupation of Gaza as the "liberation" of Gaza, for Israel, in 1967.

Some analysts believe that Begin made the speech comparing the invasion of Lebanon as like that of the 1967 war, in order to reinforce flagging support within the military for an agression against its northern neighbour. Hidden within that comparison is fact that Israel chose to war with the Arabs in 1967, and not the other way around as is popularly believed.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 01:12 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As a rule, war criminals are not slapped on the wrist and then allowed to achieve high office in important government positions.


Well then why is a murderer like Arafat allowed to be head of the Palestinian Authorioty?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 01:18 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Which specific crime is Arafat being charged with?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 18 September 2004 01:18 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As spake by Stockholm:
Well then why is a murderer like Arafat allowed to be head of the Palestinian Authorioty?

Way to misinterpret!

Not all murderers are war criminals while by definition all war criminals are murderers.

Please to be learning Venn Diagrams and simple logic, Stockholm!

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 01:19 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Take it away Doc...
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 01:52 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Which specific crime is Arafat being charged with?

I dont know...hmmm let's see perhaps we can start with the planning of the murder of 8 olympic atheletes in Munich in 1972. Then we can list a number of hijackings beginning in the late 60s...wait there's more...lets start a list...

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

posted 18 September 2004 02:01 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some evidence, for that, hmmm. What specifically is the evidence.... or are you going to give us something like... it is well known that...

And besides Israel was more than happy to agree to the US plan to allow Arafat back into the West Bank so that he could run their occupation for them through the PA.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 02:09 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I see, so now Arafat is a double agent for the Israelis.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frac Tal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6796

posted 18 September 2004 03:04 PM      Profile for Frac Tal        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And besides Israel was more than happy to agree to the US plan to allow Arafat back into the West Bank so that he could run their occupation for them through the PA.

That is a truly amazing claim, cue ball.

Are the suicide bus bombings then merely a smokescreen, to mask his complicity in Israeli war crimes?


From: I'll never sign it. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 September 2004 03:11 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So this isn't going to be a commemorative thread after all, is it.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 September 2004 03:19 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by josh:
Yeah, it is kind of funny people remember that Sharon guy. Whatever happened to him? I'm sure after the disgrace of the Kahane Commission he was never heard from again.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 03:41 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Some evidence, for that, hmmm. What specifically is the evidence.... or are you going to give us something like... it is well known that...

And besides Israel was more than happy to agree to the US plan to allow Arafat back into the West Bank so that he could run their occupation for them through the PA.


Frankly Im not surprised to see Cueball as an apologist for the crimes committed by Arafat. Instead of me posting all the links just Google Arafat and Munich 1972 there are dozens of stories and articles about Arafat's link to Munich, his planning of the trasgedy along with the Achille Lauro and many more.

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

posted 18 September 2004 03:45 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:


While Im glad some people find humour in tragedy I for one will focus on the real murderers.

Perhaps before you scoff at the Kahane Commission you should read it first.

Kahane Inquiry


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

posted 18 September 2004 03:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, I was grinning at human tragedy, Macabee. Yippee, dead people, yahoo!

Or...maybe I was laughing at the sarcasm in josh's post! No...that would be too obvious, that couldn't be it.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 03:56 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The sarcasm itself on such human tragedy is unseemly and that is what I am referring to.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 September 2004 04:01 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Give it a rest. He was being sarcastic about your deflecting claims that Sharon is being unfairly focused upon with regards to the massacre, and your assertion that he has been "held accountable".

The reason the others aren't being as focused upon as Sharon is because he hasn't really been "held accountable" if it's possible for him to be PM of Israel, which puts him in a position of power over Palestinians.

If you think that josh was joking about a tragedy rather than drawing attention to the fact that the reason Sharon is being focused on more than the others is because he's the one right now who is currently in a position to do the most harm to Palestinians, then there's not much I can do except encourage you to develop better reading skills.


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

posted 18 September 2004 04:23 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The confusion here is partially my fault. When I said the "disgrace of the Kahane Commission," I was not referring to the Commission's report, but the disgrace supposedly visited on Sharon as a result of the report. That the disgraced defense minister went on to be elected prime minister should give anyone pause.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 September 2004 04:25 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I understood that perfectly when I read it. I don't see how it could have been taken any other way.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 05:28 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Give it a rest. He was being sarcastic about your deflecting claims that Sharon is being unfairly focused upon with regards to the massacre, and your assertion that he has been "held accountable".

The reason the others aren't being as focused upon as Sharon is because he hasn't really been "held accountable" if it's possible for him to be PM of Israel, which puts him in a position of power over Palestinians.

If you think that josh was joking about a tragedy rather than drawing attention to the fact that the reason Sharon is being focused on more than the others is because he's the one right now who is currently in a position to do the most harm to Palestinians, then there's not much I can do except encourage you to develop better reading skills.


Thanks for the encouragement. However I would respectfully suggest that it is not I who is either deflecting or blinded by reality.

Read the Kahane report. No one suggests that Sharon is guiltless far from it. We are suggesting however that as in all crimes there are different levels of guilt. While Sharon's crime was indirect the others who actually did the murdering remain unaccountable to either authorities or public disdain and morality. Perhaps you should read more about the law and ultimate responsibility prior to encouraging my education.


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

posted 18 September 2004 06:26 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, lets see, Abu Daud claims that Abu Mazen and Arafat funded the Munich attack, and also that they knew of the general details, in his Memoirs of a Terrorist. Of course selective reading of the memoirs is necessary when constructing the propganda myth that you are trying to portray Macabee. This is because in the very same text Daud claims that they never intended to kill the Athletes, which he faults on the action of German police.

So, our best source establishes, yes that Arafat and Mazen knew that a hostage taking was being planned, yet the same source also claims that they did not intend to kill the hostages. Therefore, if we accept Daud's narrative, then neither Arafat or Mazen expected the athletes to be killed.

How do you want it? Daud is an untrustworthy source, or he is reliable?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 06:37 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So you agree that Arafat was "aware" and I suppose being the leader of Fatah was more than "aware" but involved in its planning.

And even if you take that giant leap and accept that he didnt want any "harm" to come to the Israeli atheletes (which frankly defies rational thought)he is still quite guilty at least according to most legal precepts.

Oh and one more thing, weren't the hostages shot at point blank range by the Terrorists? Yes its possible that the German police botched the job. Is that reason then to murder the hostages in cold blood?

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: Macabee ]


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

posted 18 September 2004 06:58 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That puts Arafat in the position of Menachem Begin, not Areil Sharon. Begin might be accused of having overall command repsonsibility for Sabra and Shatila as Prime Minister, (authorizing the use of force in Labanon, signing the budget and other executive rolls,)but Sharon had specific command repsonibility for Sabra and Shatila, as Daud does at Munich.

Again, you either accept that Daud is reliable, or not. If you accept Daud's statement that Arafat knew about the operation, then you also have to accept his contention that they did not intend to kill the hostages.

Yes, legally I agree that Arafat shares repsonsibility, on the level of Begin, accessory to Manslaughter say, not murder, as there is no evidence that either intended unwarranted killing, and that both overall supervision of illegal operations. Begin authorized war (the highest crime, as estabished at Nuremberg) and Arafat kidnapping and unlawful confinement.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 08:28 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Arafat founded Al-Fatah from scratch in the 60s, does anyone doubt that at least in the early years he was personally involved in terrorist actions> He probably murdered people personally.

I guess Arafat is seen as a such a paragon of virtue that some people cannot bear to see him described as a criminal. Oh poor, poor Yassir, he's such a nice boy, all he needs is to get rid of that unsightly five o'clock shadow and he would be so sweet.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 18 September 2004 08:32 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm, I slapped you because you couldn't seem to make the distinction between someone who is a murderer yet not a war criminal versus someone who is a war criminal and, thus, a murderer.

Try not to wave that tar brush in my direction, since I don't need my roof redone.

As for Kurt Waldheim, it is instructive to note that he tried to disclaim responsibility by saying the SS gave him a desk job, or some balderdash thereof. This flimsy excuse was brushed aside and Waldheim was justly pilloried as someone who knew he did not have to join the SS but chose to do so anyway.

Yet similar flimsy excuses are readily harvested like so much fodder which grows after a laying of fertile horse manure, when it comes to dear old Arik Sharon.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 08:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Arafat founded Al-Fatah from scratch in the 60s, does anyone doubt that at least in the early years he was personally involved in terrorist actions> He probably murdered people personally.
I guess Arafat is seen as a such a paragon of virtue that some people cannot bear to see him described as a criminal. Oh poor, poor Yassir, he's such a nice boy, all he needs is to get rid of that unsightly five o'clock shadow and he would be so sweet.

Do you actually source anything ever? Do you actually discuss directly the issues at hand? Do you actually ever stay on topic? Do actually do anything other than argue vague points hypothetically based on your vague impressions?

People are suggesting that Yasser Arafat is a murderer, personally and otherwise, I would like to see some evidence. Your argument Stockholm could easily be made about 4/5ths of the Israeli high command whom grew up in the period 1930-1950. There is no point to that.

What is being disucssed here is the 8 people that Macabee is claiming Arafat is repsonible for the deaths of and the minimum 750 that were killed at Sabra and Shatila, that Sharon clearly has repsonibility for.

There is a difference between someone who may have had some political ememies eliminated and someone who operates an extermination camp.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 08:59 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

What is being disucssed here is the 8 people that Macabee is claiming Arafat is repsonible for the deaths of and the minimum 750 that were killed at Sabra and Shatila, that Sharon clearly has repsonibility for.


Difference here is that Sharon was held accountable by his government. Arafat was never brought to justice for any of his terrorist activities including the ones he is responsible for today.

Unlike Begin he never became a statesman. He has just remained a terrorist.


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

posted 18 September 2004 09:08 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh? How much jail time did Sharon get?

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 18 September 2004 09:27 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
Difference here is that Sharon was held accountable by his government.


Macabee is absolutely right. In Israel, the Prime Minister is held in considerable disrepute. Though a curiousity to outsiders, in Israeli political culture positions of great political importance are handed out as pennance for past crimes! In fact, if you've committed great crimes, and shown a committment to carrying out more, it is not uncommon to be awarded the country's highest office!


quote:
Arafat was never brought to justice for any of his terrorist activities including the ones he is responsible for today...Unlike Begin he never became a statesman. He has just remained a terrorist.

Macabee is, as usual, quite correct. You see, following the aforementioned age-old tradition, Begin was officially absolved of his "terrorism" by submitting to be placed in official positions of ever-increasing authority. The pinnacle of his rehabilitation from "terrorist" to "statesman" was his election to the Prime Minister's office. He provides a prime example of the great successes of Israel's "rehabilitation system".

Arafat has obviously not been through this special Israeli rehabilitation process. This may be because there is no Palestinian state to carry out this delicate procedure. The sincere hope of many - sometimes called "The Peace Process" - is that a viable Palestinian state might emerge that could properly rehabilitate Arafat as well. Only time will tell if old Yassir will be able to undergo a miraculous metamorphosis as wondrous as that of Sharon and Begin.

NOTE: "viable" in this context refers to a Palestinian state which will essentially be under the control and care of Israel, who will inturn ensure that the "Israeli Method" is properly carried out on Arafat or upon whomever might become the chief reformed killer of the new semi-sovereign state of Palestine.

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 18 September 2004 09:34 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 18 September 2004 09:40 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Oh? How much jail time did Sharon get?

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


Better yet how much justice did Aarafat have to endure. Any inquiries or commissions? Your need to focus on Sharon to the extent you do pretty much tells the story. As responsible as Sharon was indirectly for this tragedy, Arafat is a cold-blooded killer who continues, by the good graces of people such as yourself, to carry on in his terrorist ways. Why? because his criminal history is either deflected, forgotten or praised.

From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 18 September 2004 09:43 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well then, we see that Arafat is, in fact, getting the Royal Treatment. A little more work and perhaps he could sit at the table with the fully reformed killer, Sharon. Or, if luck be with him and his rehabilitators, he might be buried as a hero on the Mount of Olives, just like Menachem Begin!

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 10:05 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Do we consider Nelson Mandela a terrorist too?

Do we consider every single person who has played any role in government in a country that was at war and in which people died to be war criminal?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 10:19 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So far just a bunch of mud slinging. No evidence. Boring.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 10:21 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree. It is boring to dredge up this unfortunate massacre 20 years after the fact. The same year, Assad of Syria killed 20,000 people in Hama, too bad he couldn't get charged as a war criminal before he died.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 18 September 2004 10:41 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, so why did you bother to post? Just to prove that you are a pigheaded insensitive asshole? Do you crash funerals to tell the mom's and dad's that "what is past is past," also?

How about this: Why dredge up the holocaust, that was all a long time ago? And besides what absout Pol Pot?


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

posted 18 September 2004 10:49 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can we not call other babblers pigheaded insensitive assholes? Thanks.

(Although, come to think of it, I'm not sure why I'm defending someone who thinks that certain Jews and Muslims he doesn't like should be forced to eat pork every day for the rest of their lives...)

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 11:25 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Pork is such a delicious meat. i always tell people who are primitive and retrograde enough to be kosher or halal that they just don't know what they are missing!
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 18 September 2004 11:28 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Know what Stockholm? Go fuck yourself.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 September 2004 11:28 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Are you TRYING to get kicked off babble, or what? Calling people "primative" or "retrograde" for following benign religious observances is out of bounds, and you should know that, Stockholm.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 September 2004 11:43 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
OK, I take back the primitive and retrograde comment.

But, I will NEVER for the life of me understand the link between religion and diet. Maybe someday the Unitarians will oblige all their members to live on the South Beach Diet for a lifetime.

Someone PLEASE explain, what does belief in your God have to do with whether you can or can't eat lobster???


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 18 September 2004 11:43 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe he has a Clever Plan(tm) to bring about peace between Jews and Muslims by making them declare war on him, or something
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 18 September 2004 11:46 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's it. He's really a uniter, not a divider.
From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 18 September 2004 11:47 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Someone PLEASE explain, what does belief in your God have to do with whether you can or can't eat lobster???



She might be allergic to lobster.

From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 18 September 2004 11:58 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by clersal:

She might be allergic to lobster.

If she's there, I think she's far more allergic to Stockholm.

So no one eat him.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 19 September 2004 01:51 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No prob. His posts leave a bad enough taste in my mouth.
From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 19 September 2004 08:15 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd explain it to you, Stockholm, as it's a perfectly straightforward anthropological concept, but what would be the point?
From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 September 2004 08:56 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So I guess this isn't going to be a commemorative thread after all.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 September 2004 09:20 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, no. Not likely. It's in the Middle East forum. And there was nothing in the thread title or the piece that suggested that this was supposed to be a commemorative thread...
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 19 September 2004 09:31 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by B.L. Zeebub LLD:
Well then, we see that Arafat is, in fact, getting the Royal Treatment. A little more work and perhaps he could sit at the table with the fully reformed killer, Sharon. Or, if luck be with him and his rehabilitators, he might be buried as a hero on the Mount of Olives, just like Menachem Begin!

[ 18 September 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


Nice try at deflecting.

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

posted 19 September 2004 01:01 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And so the pot spake to the kettle, "you're black!"
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 19 September 2004 01:16 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Nice try at deflecting.

A compliment from the master. B.L. Zeebub LLD, you should be proud.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 19 September 2004 01:37 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Begin, Shamir, Rabin and Sharon.

Terrorists, bonebreakers, murderers all; yet they later became "Statesmen."

I suppose Arafat won't be raised to the position of "Statesman" because he's been rather inneffectual throughout his career. He has done some delegating, if the Munich accusations are true, but has he really taken a situation in his own hand and acted upon it himself?

Ariel Sharon, conversely, was the founder and commander of his very own death squad, way back in 1953. His hands have been soaking in Arab blood for decades.

Who else in his state has such high qualifications?

[ 19 September 2004: Message edited by: al-Qa'bong ]


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 19 September 2004 01:44 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The present president of Bosnia said (paraphrased) : "Killing one person is to be charged with murder, to kill ten is to be charged with mass murder and to kill one thousand is to be invited to a peace conference."

Notice that Sharon still won't invite Arafat to a peace conference? Perhaps, Arafat just hasn't crossed the threshold to true statemanship, like Sharon?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 19 September 2004 01:49 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Notice that Sharon still won't invite Arafat to a peace conference? Perhaps, Arafat just hasn't crossed the threshold to true statemanship, like Sharon?


Neither will many others have anything to do with him it seems.

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

posted 19 September 2004 01:57 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So you agree that Sharon's chief qualification for statemanship is the fact that it can be proven that he has murdered enough people, to meet Izetbegovic's defintion? I'm glad we agree on some things.

Arafat, as Al Q points out just isn't efficient enough to get in the Sharon statesman class.

Hey, given that no one has presented a shred of evidence to support the thesis that Arafat has killed anyone at all, perhaps we can't say that he is a murderer at all?

Truthfully, Macabee, the idea that Arafat has never ordered an unlawful killing had never occurred to me until this thread. The sparse nature of the evidence is really telling. I had always just assumed that there was some basis to the charge, but now....

What say you to that?

[ 19 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 19 September 2004 10:08 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How silly of me...Of course Arafat is a hero of his people. He never planned terrorist attacks that was just Israeli propaganda. He was never part of the Fatah killing machine more israeli nonsense.

Arafat the hero. Now I see the light. All that stuff..just made up to make him look bad...lies lies and more lies...


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

posted 19 September 2004 10:38 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Right exactly its all lies. So back it up? otherwise its just libel. simple.

Geeze, you seem to speak from a position of knowledge, the when someone asks for some background information you get all sarcastic. Its not ok to ask for you to source your allegations?

U just want me to accept whatever you say on faith?

[ 19 September 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 19 September 2004 11:54 PM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No but Arafat is well documented. Its called research. But as Ive told my students in the past, do your own research.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 September 2004 11:56 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've always heard that it's up to the person who makes the claim to back it up. That'd kind of be like me telling a professor, "Here's my essay where I argue such and such without sources - you can look it up yourself."
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 20 September 2004 12:02 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ok OK here is Alan Dershowitz's case against Arafat. Yes I know you hate Dershowitz but he is an eminent criminal attorney with more experince than you or I would ever have put together when it comes to criminal law.

Dershowitz on Arafat


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

posted 20 September 2004 12:07 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You think I hate Dershowitz? What an assumption! I read two of his fiction court thrillers and loved them.

P.S. BUT HE WAS NEVER CHARGED! Still no charges!

[ 20 September 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227

posted 20 September 2004 12:16 AM      Profile for Macabee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wasnt referring to you Michelle. And yes still no charges.
From: Vaughan | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 20 September 2004 12:24 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is odd. Why don't the Israelis charge Arafat? It isn't as if they don't have him under house arrest already, so apprehending him would be no problem.

They managed to charge Marwan Barghouti with multiple counts of murder, even though Barghouti said he wants a political, peaceful solution to the Palestinian/Israeli disputes.

If Arafat is the bloodthirsty murderer he's being portrayed as here, he should be tried.

Why isn't he?


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 September 2004 12:27 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Macabee:
I wasnt referring to you Michelle. And yes still no charges.

Well, so if there are no charges against him then how can we say anything about him? Isn't that what you were arguing about that situation with the alleged Israeli spy in the Pentagon, that we shouldn't be jumping to conclusions when no charges have been laid?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 20 September 2004 12:38 AM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A little googling will quckly show that this whole story comes straight from the (deluded) minds of the Worldnetdaily crew . . . oh and the fool Dershowitz lost all credibility when he started promoting torture as a legitimate tool in intelligence gathering.
From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 20 September 2004 03:22 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Ok OK here is Alan Dershowitz's case against Arafat. Yes I know you hate Dershowitz but he is an eminent criminal attorney with more experince than you or I would ever have put together when it comes to criminal law.

Thank you for sourcing your allegation.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

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

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca