is Israeli response to Palestinians disproportionate?

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live

is Israeli response to Palestinians disproportionate?

yes
87
70%
no
37
30%
 
Total votes: 124

knotkranky
Posts: 4336
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: la

Post by knotkranky » Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:44 am

Chang wrote:
knotkranky wrote:
Chang wrote:I have gone back and change some my posts out of respect for ableton and machinesworking. Was over the top.
Good man.

Concerning your post just before.

I must say it's a little too convenient for you to only point to radicalism as an argument.

I'm curious, what are your views on Tibet. I'm guessing you're from China.




I point to radical view because Hamas is in control of palestine by vote and if hamas is not radical than i dont know who is. After this mess and your're a dick, fuck you chang, asshole etc i am not going to begin to talk about Tibet no matter what my views are.



To Homebelly. I had to look up sockpuppet troll, and can tell you i have no other identity on this forum, I am not a secret other person from what I gather from the definition. And I'm have helped in mpc threads and other non political threads so i dont come on here just to start abrasive threads in the general section.
I don't think your a troll but ya got that by some nasty posts to some long timers here. It's a small town that's all. You're a little ott passionate for sure but this place is a great place to get your writing and debate skills together. No matter what, you've got to keep your cool to get serious consideration here. Props to MW for hangin like pro with you.

Back to the point. Lots of fine Palestinians are being slaughtered for no reason of their own and israel has had them by the neck for 60 years. Further radicalisation would be the expected outcome.

djsynchro
Posts: 7471
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:06 pm
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Post by djsynchro » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:03 am

Here's an interesting viewpoint.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/post ... _mean.html[/img]

friend_kami
Posts: 2255
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:10 pm

Post by friend_kami » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:13 am

Chang wrote:
Khazul wrote:
Chang wrote:And opposite, the absolute self admitted undeniable fact that Hamas entire ideology is based on the total destruction and death of every single Jew on earth even if it means committing suicide and using innocent Palestinians as human shields?
Actually thats bollox - hamas want the destruction of the Israeli state - israei state is not jews.
Watch until 4:52 and post back your thoughts. "Once we muslims rule the world, even the stones and trees will want the muslims to finish off every jew". Palestinian TV of course.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whU2qFd89fA
one video clip to judge a whole people?
you need a reality check man.

Machinesworking
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Post by Machinesworking » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:26 pm

friend_kami wrote:
Chang wrote:
Khazul wrote: Actually thats bollox - hamas want the destruction of the Israeli state - israei state is not jews.
Watch until 4:52 and post back your thoughts. "Once we muslims rule the world, even the stones and trees will want the muslims to finish off every jew". Palestinian TV of course.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whU2qFd89fA
one video clip to judge a whole people?
you need a reality check man.
That's what I was thinking. This cleric is not Hamas, and what he says gives no credence to any claims Chang has made that Hamas want to kill every jewish person.

Machinesworking
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Post by Machinesworking » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:36 pm

Chang wrote: #1st - I've already proven & stated that no arabs gave a flying fuck about current Israel land in the 1800's being "holy" so your point is stupid, uninformed and moot.
Wanted to get back to this. You really need to look into this stuff more before posting things like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Land

Read the part about the muslim religion, it states that muslims consider everything west of the Jordan River holy. Plus of course various sites.

Also, very specifically this site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_the_Rock

Curious as to how you try to deny this one. :?

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:53 pm

Here's an interesting perspective on the causes of the current conflict, the quote below mentions something I was completely unaware of, but it certainly appears to make sense:
Post-1999: Gaza as Locus of Resource Conflict

The question, of course, is why now? Pundits have pointed at the telling coincidence of imminent Israeli elections, requiring the Olmert cabinet to find new ways to regain some semblance of credibility after the disastrous Hizbullah defeat in southern Lebanon, not to mention the impact of domestic scandals. Yet even more significant is the role of imminent Palestinian elections. As of September 2008, Israeli political observes noted an erupting "constitutional crisis" in the Occupied Territories due to disagreement "between Hamas and Fatah over when the next Palestinian elections will be held." Hamas officials stated that they would "not acknowledge Abu Mazen's legitimacy as President of the Palestinian Authority (PA) after January 2009, when it believes his term in office is due to finish." According to Hamas, "new elections should be held in January 09′ since according to the PA's Basic Law (which also serves as its temporary constitution) Abu Mazen finishes his Presidential term after 4 years." In the event of failure to do so, the Presidency "temporarily passes to the Speaker of the Parliament, Abd al-‘Aziz Dweik." As he is currently imprisoned by Israeli authorities, Hamas would resort to appointing Dweik's deputy "who is also a Hamas member."

Given the growing weakness of Abbas and the increasing popularity of Hamas, it was far from likely that the PA would be able to forestall elections until January 2010, as it had wanted to, without severe recriminations and domestic opposition. Both presidential and parliamentary elections were therefore likely in 2009, and would have allowed Hamas to consolidate its power in the Occupied Territories.

Israeli military and policy planners clearly recognized that this would create significant difficulties for Israel's own plans for the Occupied Territories. A decade back, the British the oil firm BG International discovered a huge deposit of natural gas just off the Gaza coast, containing 1.2 trillion cubic feet of gas valued at over $4 billion. Controlling security over air and water around Gaza, Israel quickly moved to negotiate a deal with BG to access Gaza's natural gas at cheap rates.

The incentives for Israel are obvious - as the Telegraph reports: "Israel's indigenous gas fields - north of the Gaza Marine field - could run out within a few years and the only other long-term source will be a pipeline from neighbouring Egypt."

The British Foreign Office, described the reserves as "by far the most valuable Palestinian natural resource." Tel Aviv journalist Arthur Neslen cites an informed British source saying, "The UK and US, who are the major players in this deal, see it as a possible tool to improve relations between the PA and Israel. It is part of the bargaining baggage." The project could provide up to 10 per cent of the Israel's energy needs, at around half the price the same gas would cost from Egypt. The Gaza Strip would be effectively circumvented, as the gas would be piped directly onshore to Ashkelon in Israel. Neslen reports another informed source noting "an obvious linkage" between the BG-Israel deal and "attempts to bolster the Olmert-Abbas political process." Yet this process is designed precisely to marginalise the Palestinian people, as Neslen reports that "up to three-quarters of the $4bn of revenue raised might not even end up in Palestinian hands at all. While the PIF officially disputes the percentages, it will provide no others for fear of a public backlash." The "preferred option" of the US an UK is that the gas revenues would be held in "an international bank account over which Abbas would hold sway." No wonder then, that Ziad Thatha, the Hamas economic minister, had denounced the deal as "an act of theft" that "sells Palestinian gas to the Zionist occupation."

Things didn't go quite according to plan. In fact, before any deal could be finalised, Hamas won the 2006 elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, provoking a bitter power struggle between Hamas and the pro-west Fatah, fuelled by the input of US and Israeli arms to the latter. Ultimately, the Palestinian Authority split in 2007, with Hamas taking control of Gaza and Fatah taking control of West Bank. Having been excluded from the US-UK brokered gas deal between Israel and the PA, one of the first things that Hamas did after getting elected was to declare that the natural gas deal was void, and would have to be renegotiated.

With Hamas declaring the constitutional imperative to hold elections in 2009, as early as January if possible, Israeli military and policy planners recognized the probability of a Hamas win - with all its political implications. At one time even stating its willingness to recognise Israel's right to exist within its 1967 borders, a consolidated Hamas government in control of Gaza's natural resources would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region, granting Palestinians the prospects of sustained economic growth, foreign investment, unprecedented infrastructure development, and thereby the prospect of a far more equal relationship with Israel, who in coming years needs to increasingly diversify energy supplies. Meanwhile Israel's original Anglo-America sponsored plans for the Occupied Territories - a docile Fatah-controlled patchwork of underdeveloped cantonized Bantustans whose natural resources are controlled by Israel and profited by Anglo-American companies - would be thrown into the sea.

friend_kami
Posts: 2255
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:10 pm

Post by friend_kami » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:03 pm

diverdee wrote:Here's an interesting perspective on the causes of the current conflict, the quote below mentions something I was completely unaware of, but it certainly appears to make sense:
Post-1999: Gaza as Locus of Resource Conflict

The question, of course, is why now? Pundits have pointed at the telling coincidence of imminent Israeli elections, requiring the Olmert cabinet to find new ways to regain some semblance of credibility after the disastrous Hizbullah defeat in southern Lebanon, not to mention the impact of domestic scandals. Yet even more significant is the role of imminent Palestinian elections. As of September 2008, Israeli political observes noted an erupting "constitutional crisis" in the Occupied Territories due to disagreement "between Hamas and Fatah over when the next Palestinian elections will be held." Hamas officials stated that they would "not acknowledge Abu Mazen's legitimacy as President of the Palestinian Authority (PA) after January 2009, when it believes his term in office is due to finish." According to Hamas, "new elections should be held in January 09′ since according to the PA's Basic Law (which also serves as its temporary constitution) Abu Mazen finishes his Presidential term after 4 years." In the event of failure to do so, the Presidency "temporarily passes to the Speaker of the Parliament, Abd al-‘Aziz Dweik." As he is currently imprisoned by Israeli authorities, Hamas would resort to appointing Dweik's deputy "who is also a Hamas member."

Given the growing weakness of Abbas and the increasing popularity of Hamas, it was far from likely that the PA would be able to forestall elections until January 2010, as it had wanted to, without severe recriminations and domestic opposition. Both presidential and parliamentary elections were therefore likely in 2009, and would have allowed Hamas to consolidate its power in the Occupied Territories.

Israeli military and policy planners clearly recognized that this would create significant difficulties for Israel's own plans for the Occupied Territories. A decade back, the British the oil firm BG International discovered a huge deposit of natural gas just off the Gaza coast, containing 1.2 trillion cubic feet of gas valued at over $4 billion. Controlling security over air and water around Gaza, Israel quickly moved to negotiate a deal with BG to access Gaza's natural gas at cheap rates.

The incentives for Israel are obvious - as the Telegraph reports: "Israel's indigenous gas fields - north of the Gaza Marine field - could run out within a few years and the only other long-term source will be a pipeline from neighbouring Egypt."

The British Foreign Office, described the reserves as "by far the most valuable Palestinian natural resource." Tel Aviv journalist Arthur Neslen cites an informed British source saying, "The UK and US, who are the major players in this deal, see it as a possible tool to improve relations between the PA and Israel. It is part of the bargaining baggage." The project could provide up to 10 per cent of the Israel's energy needs, at around half the price the same gas would cost from Egypt. The Gaza Strip would be effectively circumvented, as the gas would be piped directly onshore to Ashkelon in Israel. Neslen reports another informed source noting "an obvious linkage" between the BG-Israel deal and "attempts to bolster the Olmert-Abbas political process." Yet this process is designed precisely to marginalise the Palestinian people, as Neslen reports that "up to three-quarters of the $4bn of revenue raised might not even end up in Palestinian hands at all. While the PIF officially disputes the percentages, it will provide no others for fear of a public backlash." The "preferred option" of the US an UK is that the gas revenues would be held in "an international bank account over which Abbas would hold sway." No wonder then, that Ziad Thatha, the Hamas economic minister, had denounced the deal as "an act of theft" that "sells Palestinian gas to the Zionist occupation."

Things didn't go quite according to plan. In fact, before any deal could be finalised, Hamas won the 2006 elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, provoking a bitter power struggle between Hamas and the pro-west Fatah, fuelled by the input of US and Israeli arms to the latter. Ultimately, the Palestinian Authority split in 2007, with Hamas taking control of Gaza and Fatah taking control of West Bank. Having been excluded from the US-UK brokered gas deal between Israel and the PA, one of the first things that Hamas did after getting elected was to declare that the natural gas deal was void, and would have to be renegotiated.

With Hamas declaring the constitutional imperative to hold elections in 2009, as early as January if possible, Israeli military and policy planners recognized the probability of a Hamas win - with all its political implications. At one time even stating its willingness to recognise Israel's right to exist within its 1967 borders, a consolidated Hamas government in control of Gaza's natural resources would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region, granting Palestinians the prospects of sustained economic growth, foreign investment, unprecedented infrastructure development, and thereby the prospect of a far more equal relationship with Israel, who in coming years needs to increasingly diversify energy supplies. Meanwhile Israel's original Anglo-America sponsored plans for the Occupied Territories - a docile Fatah-controlled patchwork of underdeveloped cantonized Bantustans whose natural resources are controlled by Israel and profited by Anglo-American companies - would be thrown into the sea.
i think that the fact that bush is about to step down from the white house and let obama take over might have rushed the israeli desicions aswell, since afaik obama probably wouldnt support, nor allow this kind of behaviour from israel. not sure how he stands on the question publicly, but i dont htink he would go out and say that doesnt support israel at all because he would loose alot of voters i guess, but i doubt that he would actively give them support in this situation anyways.

but hey, what do i know, im not american, i might be completely wrong here, but thats a theory anyways. not the only reason, but a part of it i think.

Chang
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:38 pm

Post by Chang » Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:47 pm

friend_kami wrote:
Chang wrote:
Khazul wrote: Actually thats bollox - hamas want the destruction of the Israeli state - israei state is not jews.
Watch until 4:52 and post back your thoughts. "Once we muslims rule the world, even the stones and trees will want the muslims to finish off every jew". Palestinian TV of course.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whU2qFd89fA
one video clip to judge a whole people?
you need a reality check man.





I'm going to take knotkrankys advice and not be to passionate about things.

I was responding to an exact specific statement yes with video. I said that part of hamas ideology was to kill all jews, you claimed that was bollox. So i then grab one out of literally thousands of videos with hamas leaders and palestinian clerics saying to kill every last Jew, push them into the sea with some of the videos having 10-20 thousand people in background chanting yes yes allah willing death to all Jews.

Now you might say to me, well can you blame them? Look at all israel war crime?

But my point was originally valid, and my counterpoint to your bollox answer was also with literally thousands of such videos out there and Hamas does not try to hide or deny this belief in the first place. Cleric after cleric after hamas leader can be seen saying the same thing over & over again on the net, cnn, bbc etc. Death to the Jews. I could probably find 1,000 links to such videos.

But why does that matter in the first place? If the clerics were saying we dont want to kill British people, we just want to see the destruction of Britain itself would it matter?

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:56 pm

the fact is Hamas was/is also willing to negotiate a permanent peace (they were still trying this right up until the current situation started) & was/is (the current situation may change this) starting to evolve & change their 'revolutionary' tactics.
The proposal was based on a return to the per 1967 borders though, which the Israeli administration was unwilling to accept.

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:23 pm

So the U.N. is pulling out it's aid workers now
The UN's relief agency Unwra said it was "with great regret" that it had been forced to make a difficult decision.

"We have suspended our operations in Gaza until the Israeli authorities can guarantee our safety and security," said Unwra spokesman Chris Gunness.

"Our installations have been hit, our workers have been killed in spite of the fact that the Israeli authorities have the co-ordinates of our facilities and that all our movements are co-ordinated with the Israeli army."

The UN said the movements of the truck hit at the Erez crossing had been co-ordinated with Israel.

The Israeli army has not commented on that claim but has said it is looking into the matter.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/frykberg.php?articleid=14013
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has already condemned an Israeli attack on two members of the Palestinian Red Crescent (PRC) last week. The ICRC said the medics were wearing fluorescent jackets, their ambulances were clearly marked, and their flashing lights were on.

Nihal al-Akras, chairman of the Palestinian Health Care Committees, asked the international community to pressure Israel to stop firing on medical facilities and workers in the Gaza Strip.

Akhras's comments followed Tuesday's bombing of the ad-Dura hospital in the Rimal neighborhood of Gaza city. Three mobile clinics provided by a Danish NGO, DanChurchAid, were also destroyed.

"We've been able to help the wounded and suffering so far because our vehicles have been present and ready inside Gaza. This possibility of emergency aid is now in ruins," said Henrik Stubkjær, secretary general of DanChurchAid.

"We are deeply shocked that the Israeli air strikes directly prevent the humanitarian aid effort," he added.

According to DanChurchAid the clinics were clearly marked with red crosses and were parked in the Union of Healthcare headquarters.

"One Palestinian doctor and three medics have been killed during Israel's bombing campaign which began on December 27," Sammy Hassan, spokesman for Gaza's Shifa Hospital told IPS.

While Israel has denied that it deliberately targets civilians, reading between the lines of reports in the Israeli media and admissions by military leaders would suggest that the lives of Palestinian civilians are secondary to saving Israeli soldiers.

Several senior Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) officers have admitted that the IDF strategy is to use tremendous firepower on the ground to protect Israeli soldiers during fighting in civilian areas, a senior officer explained to journalists on Tuesday.

"For us, being cautious means being aggressive," said one officer. "From the minute we entered, we've acted like we're at war. That creates enormous damage on the ground.

"When we suspect that a Palestinian fighter is hiding in a house, we shoot it with a missile and then with two tank shells, and then a bulldozer hits the wall. It causes damage but it prevents the loss of life among soldiers."

The IDF suffered significant military casualties during the 2006 Lebanon war, and the top brass realized that a repeat of this would erode public morale and the country's political will. The Israeli cabinet took all this into account prior to the ground operation into Gaza.
Regarding Human Shields:
Amnesty International has accused Israel and Hamas of endangering civilian lives in the conflict in Gaza, including the use of "human shields".

Israeli troops had forced Palestinian civilians to stay in their homes after taking them over as sniper positions or bases, it said quoting sources in Gaza.

"This increases risk to families and means they are effectively being used as human shields," the group said.

Hamas fighters also put civilians in danger by firing from homes, it added.

"The use of these tactics at a time when armed confrontations are taking place in streets in the middle of densely-populated residential areas underlines the failure of both sides to respect the protected status of civilians in armed conflict," said Amnesty's Malcolm Smart.

The use of human shields in conflict is prohibited under the Geneva Conventions.
Amnesty also criticised Israeli forces for bombing civilian homes after they had been used to launch militant attacks when the attackers had probably fled.

"The army is well aware gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians - not gunmen," said Mr Smart, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme.

He stressed that even if either side did carry out attacks from civilian buildings it did not make the buildings or inhabitants legitimate military targets.

"The use of these tactics at a time when armed confrontations are taking place in streets in the middle of densely-populated residential areas underlines the failure of both sides to respect the protected status of civilians in armed conflict," Mr Smart added.
Remember - Gaza is the most densely populated area on the face of the earth.

diverdee
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Bradford - The Armpit of Britain

Post by diverdee » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:43 pm

Interview with Christopher Gunness of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency
CHRISTOPHER GUNNESS: Well, at the Jabalya school, we have done an initial investigation into what took place. We are 99.9 percent certain there were no militants in the school or the compound. There was no militant activity in the school or in the school compound. If anybody, including the Israeli army, anybody, has any evidence that there were people abusing our premises, we want to know. We want to find out what went on. It's in our interest to make sure that militants do not abuse our facilities. But we're 99.9 percent certain that yesterday there were no militants and no militant activity. And there is some question for the Israeli army about was this activity in the vicinity of the compound or in the compound. And that's more clarification that we need, because if it was in the streets outside, that, of course, is different from if they were in the compound itself.

Well, first of all, for the attack at Jabalya, we said yesterday thirty confirmed fatalities and fifty-five injured, including fifteen critically. Very sadly, overnight, ten people passed away. The fatality figure has now risen from thirty to forty. The people in the compound, over 1,300 people—by the way, some of those, many of them had been told by the Israeli army to leave their houses and move to a safe place. Of course, Gaza is unique in being a war with a fence around it. But they nonetheless came—frightened, terrified, vulnerable—to our center. They were coming to what they thought was a neutral United Nations shelter, and then the rest is history, forty people killed.

A school for young children. It's one of over twenty centers that we've set up as shelters. We had given the Israeli army the exact GPS coordinates of this building well before the conflict. We gave them the coordinates of all of our facilities in Gaza. The schools are clearly marked, like any school anywhere in the world. The famous blue UN colors. And, in addition, a third source of where the school was in being clearly marked and all that, one assumes that when an army is doing house-to-house fighting in an area like this, it's got more detailed maps than anybody about which building is what. So, you know, three sources—GPS coordinates, the fact that it was marked and, one assumes, very accurate IDF maps—to suggest that the IDF knew exactly what this building was.

jonny72
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:43 pm

Post by jonny72 » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:01 pm

Chang wrote:I was responding to an exact specific statement yes with video. I said that part of hamas ideology was to kill all jews, you claimed that was bollox. So i then grab one out of literally thousands of videos with hamas leaders and palestinian clerics saying to kill every last Jew, push them into the sea with some of the videos having 10-20 thousand people in background chanting yes yes allah willing death to all Jews.
The whole "death to all Jews" is just plain stupid. Sure some people from Hamas / Palestine might say it but to take that and state it is a fact and an actual and serious aim is ridiculous - its propaganda, nothing more. Israel and their supporters repeat it for propaganda as well whilst knowing the same as everyone else that it is not a real or credible policy.

Do you honestly believe the "death to all Jews" is a bigger issue than, for example, the UN withdrawing their aid workers from Gaza as Israel are attacking them and that they need a firm guarantee of their safety?

Machinesworking
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Post by Machinesworking » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:51 pm

Chang wrote:
friend_kami wrote:
Chang wrote: Watch until 4:52 and post back your thoughts. "Once we muslims rule the world, even the stones and trees will want the muslims to finish off every jew". Palestinian TV of course.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whU2qFd89fA
one video clip to judge a whole people?
you need a reality check man.





I'm going to take knotkrankys advice and not be to passionate about things.

I was responding to an exact specific statement yes with video. I said that part of hamas ideology was to kill all jews, you claimed that was bollox. So i then grab one out of literally thousands of videos with hamas leaders and palestinian clerics saying to kill every last Jew, push them into the sea with some of the videos having 10-20 thousand people in background chanting yes yes allah willing death to all Jews.

Now you might say to me, well can you blame them? Look at all israel war crime?

But my point was originally valid, and my counterpoint to your bollox answer was also with literally thousands of such videos out there and Hamas does not try to hide or deny this belief in the first place. Cleric after cleric after hamas leader can be seen saying the same thing over & over again on the net, cnn, bbc etc. Death to the Jews. I could probably find 1,000 links to such videos.
Post back with a Hamas political leader saying the same and I might believe it, but fundamentalist religious leaders always are more extreme than the politicians in a country. In the USA it's the same.
You said Hamas not some cleric or another, big difference.
But why does that matter in the first place? If the clerics were saying we dont want to kill British people, we just want to see the destruction of Britain itself would it matter?
Yes it does. Odd that you can't get this one? A country is an ideological state, a human being is a human being. They are separate things, no matter how people delude themselves on this.

Chang
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:38 pm

Post by Chang » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:54 pm

jonny72 wrote:
Chang wrote:I was responding to an exact specific statement yes with video. I said that part of hamas ideology was to kill all jews, you claimed that was bollox. So i then grab one out of literally thousands of videos with hamas leaders and palestinian clerics saying to kill every last Jew, push them into the sea with some of the videos having 10-20 thousand people in background chanting yes yes allah willing death to all Jews.
Do you honestly believe the "death to all Jews" is a bigger issue than, for example, the UN withdrawing their aid workers from Gaza as Israel are attacking them and that they need a firm guarantee of their safety?

No I do not believe that, you put words in my mouth. I'm talking about big picture you are addressing todays incident. As far as the UN is concerned it is a war zone and no one on this board know exactly whats going on. Yes, at this point watching day by day i think the israeli action has gone too far.

But no one address the unfortunate big picture fact that during cease fires in past, when hamas gov needs to get aid, they have in the past and will in the future get weapons hidden in some of those shipments by other groups. These weapons have been found before so then they start to dig tunnels to get them in. The question is how to get aid food and help to the Palestinian people without hamas sneaking in weapons in with aid which they have done in past. This hamas act keeps entire missile suicide bombings going and endangers all Palestinians to israeli weapons but hamas does not seem to care because they know palestinian deaths will help their cause.


And other very unfortunate fact is these poor Palestinains that just want to get the hell out of gaza cannot. They cannot go to israel and egypt does not want them either. Here is quote from UN spokesman yesterday.


Johan Eriksson
UNWRA Spokesperson
Wednesday, January 7, 2009; 2:00 PM

"Johan Erickson UN: Because they are locked inside Gaza. They are not allowed to leave the area. They cannot go into Israel and Egypt does not allow them to enter. UNRWA has a mandate given by the UN General Assembly to provide humanitarian relief to all registered Palestine refugees until there is a just and comprehensive political solution of the refugee problem.

In the other post war countries, for instance, Syria and Lebanon, Palestine refugees are not given citizenship. They are barred from many professions and they are facing severe obstacles if they try to create a life outside the refugee camps. Therefore, it is not feasible to expect that Palestine refugees in Gaza and the West Bank would be able to settle in the neighboring countries."

What is solution to that problem I just posted up there in the UNs own words? Israel attack and even Egypt, Syria and Lebanon do not want these poor refugees. This is gigantic problem. And if UN cannot figure it out i think this forum will not be able to either.

Chang
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:38 pm

Post by Chang » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:12 pm

Machinesworking wrote:
Chang wrote:
friend_kami wrote: one video clip to judge a whole people?
you need a reality check man.





I'm going to take knotkrankys advice and not be to passionate about things.

I was responding to an exact specific statement yes with video. I said that part of hamas ideology was to kill all jews, you claimed that was bollox. So i then grab one out of literally thousands of videos with hamas leaders and palestinian clerics saying to kill every last Jew, push them into the sea with some of the videos having 10-20 thousand people in background chanting yes yes allah willing death to all Jews.

Now you might say to me, well can you blame them? Look at all israel war crime?

But my point was originally valid, and my counterpoint to your bollox answer was also with literally thousands of such videos out there and Hamas does not try to hide or deny this belief in the first place. Cleric after cleric after hamas leader can be seen saying the same thing over & over again on the net, cnn, bbc etc. Death to the Jews. I could probably find 1,000 links to such videos.
Post back with a Hamas political leader saying the same and I might believe it, but fundamentalist religious leaders always are more extreme than the politicians in a country. In the USA it's the same.
You said Hamas not some cleric or another, big difference.
But why does that matter in the first place? If the clerics were saying we dont want to kill British people, we just want to see the destruction of Britain itself would it matter?
Yes it does. Odd that you can't get this one? A country is an ideological state, a human being is a human being. They are separate things, no matter how people delude themselves on this.

My British analogy was lost in translation and not exactly what i was trying to say. I will try to retype what i meant in this.

Khazul wrote "Actually thats bollox - hamas want the destruction of the Israeli state - israei state is not jews." As if to say that is ok. To me it is not. Israel should have a country. I was try to just switch out words really.

Like "Actually thats bollox - hamas want the destruction of Britain - Britain is not British people." I dont think the destruction of Britain is ok either. That what I was trying to show.

Make no sense to me, but again maybe im not getting translation exactly right.


I'm very very sorry for the other night Machinesworking, i not meant what i said to you. I had a few beers and everyone attack me at same time and i acted like an ass please accept my apology. Chang.

Post Reply