Things are getting ugly fast over there.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/31/bloody-clash-off-gaza-coast-leaves-10-dead/
The site is conservative leaning, but there are videos, stories and analysis that I found informative.
What does that mean -- "conservative leaning" ??
Reading that certainly left me with the impression of an apologist attempt to rationalize what is by definition piracy; taking a ship or plane away from the control of those who are legally entitled to it. (And in international waters, no less. Remember the USS Liberty?? And all the espionage cases??)
They are not just now getting ugly...they have been getting ugly since the 1920's when Jewish 'interests' were attacking British and Palestinian interests in Palestine. And the Arabs were attacking British at the same time. What is the definition of "freedom fighter"?? What is the definition of "terrorist"??
I don't have any particular interest one way or the other, but the propaganda in this country is incredible in its bias. Couple of facts for some possible balance...maybe?? (And no, I don't believe that the creation of Israel was the prelude to the end times. By definition - again - no man shall know the hour or time of His coming...etc, etc.)
Since 1967 the Israeli's have ignored 223 UN resolutions. Iraq ignored about 60, yet we went to war with them.
Since 1948, depending on who is actually doing the estimates, it is said that there have been anywhere from 65,000 to about 2 million Palestinians killed in the 'troubles' (had to throw a little Irish reference in there.)
Israel has lost about 2500 since 1920 - their estimate. See next.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2000/1/Terrorism%20deaths%20in%20Israel%20-%201920-1999
Ever since childhood, I can remember hearing about shootings, killings, bombings where 1, 2 or 20 or 30 Israeli's were killed. And the followup attacks on Palestinians killed 100, 300, 1500.
I realize the Palestinians lost. But they sure don't seem to have accepted it even in the face of massive comparative losses. At what point between the 65,000 and 2 million would the bar of genocide be exceeded?? (My personal opinion is that somewhere around 1 million, we are definitely talking genocide, but then I have also known people who think that 100,000 would qualify. It's a judgement call I guess...)
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 31, 2010, 10:02:41 PM
I realize the Palestinians lost. But they sure don't seem to have accepted it even in the face of massive comparative losses.
I believe that is part of their culture. Difficult for us "Western" culture folks to understand.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 31, 2010, 10:16:29 PM
I believe that is part of their culture. Difficult for us "Western" culture folks to understand.
It's always...da jooooooos!
Ah, yes... part of their culture. You mean the culture that drives them to have their homes back?
Kind of like every Indian tribe in North America? You remember from history who "massacred" George Armstrong Custer... and who fought from the time there were about 15 million until about 1900 when there were about 300,000 left? Or the Cherokee who are still fighting back against the white devils by sticking it to them with casinos?
Or Irish freedom fighters/terrorists who have fought since early 1600's against their occupation and the attempts to exterminate them?
Yeah, I guess maybe it is part of their culture. Isn't it part of yours?? It certainly would be mine!
The Israeli leader "Nuthead" as I call him was quite wise not to meet with Obama in face of what they, the Israelis did with those ships.
Heck is wrong with these people?
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 31, 2010, 10:25:51 PM
Ah, yes... part of their culture. You mean the culture that drives them to have their homes back?
No, I was thinking of the part of the culture that makes them unable to forgive and try to live in the present. The part of the culture that appears to make peace impossible at any price. Notice I did NOT say they should forget the past.
Except for the fact that Israel is still building (invading) on land that Israel itself has determined to be part of the final agreement - whatever that is.
So, by that argument, we should just try to live in the present where there are 20 million illegals from south of the border that have reclaimed territory that was for hundreds of years, theirs anyway, and from whom the US government conducted an illegal war of conquest to take it from them...
Or the Irish should just lay down and take the fact that the English are still an invasion force into their nation and have conducted for over 400 years - until the most recent of modern times - a war and public policy of extermination and all around general genocide? They shouldn't be trying to change today's reality at all, huh?
If that is so, then the same idea must apply to the idea of abortion. The law has been settled for about 40 years. I can't understand why people would still be even arguing about it - just forgive, accept it and live in the present.
That sentiment right there is the source for the concept of the idea that those who don't know the past are doomed to repeat it.
Here is what an Israeli officer said;
"We did not expect such resistance from the group's activists as we were talking about a humanitarian aid group," one unnamed naval lieutenant told Israel's Army Radio.
"The outcome was different to what we thought, but I must say that this was mainly because of the inappropriate behavior of the adversary we encountered."
I guess it would be considered inappropriate to try to defend oneself when a military invasion force is committing an act of piracy on the high seas (international waters). Yeah...that's it...that's the ticket....inappropriate.
Can you spell "S-O-M-A-L-I-A"?? As in pirates?
Hey, just another massacre and confiscation of property (the ships) and illegal detaining of civilians. Same ol', same ol'....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2010, 04:58:11 PM
Here is what an Israeli officer said;
"We did not expect such resistance from the group's activists as we were talking about a humanitarian aid group," one unnamed naval lieutenant told Israel's Army Radio.
"The outcome was different to what we thought, but I must say that this was mainly because of the inappropriate behavior of the adversary we encountered."
I guess it would be considered inappropriate to try to defend oneself when a military invasion force is committing an act of piracy on the high seas (international waters). Yeah...that's it...that's the ticket....inappropriate.
Can you spell "S-O-M-A-L-I-A"?? As in pirates?
Hey, just another massacre and confiscation of property (the ships) and illegal detaining of civilians. Same ol', same ol'....
Helen Thomas channeling her inner heironymouspasparagus:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/helen-thomas-rails-at-robert-gibbs-over-white-house-stance-on-israeli-flotilla-attack/
Sorry for the graphic imagery.
Whether they did the correct thing (attacking a ship trying to run their blockade), the Israelis are on the crap end of the PR stick here. There's virtually no way you can kill peaceful protesters and come away smelling like a rose -- whether they are armed with sticks and rocks or not.
Quote from: we vs us on June 01, 2010, 06:41:37 PM
Whether they did the correct thing (attacking a ship trying to run their blockade), the Israelis are on the crap end of the PR stick here. There's virtually no way you can kill peaceful protesters and come away smelling like a rose -- whether they are armed with sticks and rocks or not.
They are and will always be considered the aggressor. Oh, here is what was found aboard the "peaceful protesters" boat:
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2010, 12:56:48 PM
Except for the fact that Israel is still building (invading) on land that Israel itself has determined to be part of the final agreement - whatever that is.
So, by that argument, we should just try to live in the present where there are 20 million illegals from south of the border that have reclaimed territory that was for hundreds of years, theirs anyway, and from whom the US government conducted an illegal war of conquest to take it from them...
Or the Irish should just lay down and take the fact that the English are still an invasion force into their nation and have conducted for over 400 years - until the most recent of modern times - a war and public policy of extermination and all around general genocide? They shouldn't be trying to change today's reality at all, huh?
If that is so, then the same idea must apply to the idea of abortion. The law has been settled for about 40 years. I can't understand why people would still be even arguing about it - just forgive, accept it and live in the present.
That sentiment right there is the source for the concept of the idea that those who don't know the past are doomed to repeat it.
How far back do you want to go? When is time zero? Should the Native American tribes be conducting war on all caucasians? Real war, not casino building. Should the Alaskan natives be slaughtering the current residents of Alaska. (No stupid comments about Sarah Palin please.) What about the Hispanics? Should the descendants of the South American Natives be killing all the mixed breeds? Should the descendants of the Saxons be driving the Normans back to France? I don't remember right now if the Anglos were in the British Isles before the Saxons but I think so. Which ever was first should kill all the descendants of the other. Here's a biggie, should the Europeans drive the Muslims back to the middle east (again). Actually, the Muslims drove others from the middle east and around the Mediterranian since Islam didn't get started until around 700 AD (or whatever the politically correct term is now) so they definitely weren't much of anywhere first. (Christianity has had its less than savory moments too.) Shouldn't the descendants of whoever was there first be trying to get rid of the current occupiers? Are you trying to start another Crusades?
Your attitude of teaching hate through the centuries is why we are doomed to repeat war after war.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 01, 2010, 10:24:09 PM
... (No stupid comments about Sarah Palin please.)...
Please don't hate me Red...
"Stupid is as stupid does"....
Couldn't resist it!
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 01, 2010, 10:24:09 PM
Your attitude of teaching hate through the centuries is why we are doomed to repeat war after war.
I don't think Israel's oppression of the Palestinians has been going on for centuries. It's going on today.
I'm not an Israel hater by any means, but I still think what they're doing in Gaza is beyond deplorable.
Quote from: Hoss on June 01, 2010, 11:47:30 PM
Please don't hate me Red...
"Stupid is as stupid does"....
Couldn't resist it!
Thereby making you just as stupid.
Quote from: nathanm on June 02, 2010, 12:28:24 AM
I don't think Israel's oppression of the Palestinians has been going on for centuries. It's going on today.
I'm not an Israel hater by any means, but I still think what they're doing in Gaza is beyond deplorable.
And I am not an Israel lover. They do some pretty deplorable things. The Palestinians are just as deplorable in my mind. I believe that if the Palestinians would stop launching rockets and sending suicide bombers, the Israelis would make an honest effort at peace. The Palestinians have repeatedly proven otherwise. I'm sure that we could go on about artificial political borders all over the world but I'm not really interested. The three major religions in the area all claim some rights to the area. All three have stolen the ground from someone else.
Attacking a ship in international waters is stupid. You know that if a bunch of Palestinians attacked an Israeli ship in international waters, you know damned well it would be labeled a terrorist action. Or piracy, at the least.
Hell, even Israeli newspapers such as Haaretz think this move was boneheaded.
There have been several times when Palestinians had cease fires for some fairly extended times over the past 60 years. (Probably just pausing to reload...) And each time, Israel did something confrontational.
At least for this go round (since 1920), the Israeli's are the invaders. Palestinians are probably just as culpable, but they don't have the billions per year from the US to help arm themselves. (1800 years ago, it was the other way around.)
So, how far back should we go?
Talk radio goes back 18 months when talking about all the Bush stuff (so they don't talk about it). Is that long enough?
In Guidoworld, the Palestinians have always and will always be considered the aggressor. So we know for an absolute fact that his time frame goes back no further than 1948 (1 year after the 1947 takeover of Palestine by Israel). And since the Muslims around the area took (violent) exception to that several times over the following decades, I guess that makes them aggressors. But if one steps back just one little extra step - just a year or two - then the Israeli's were the aggressors and at that point had a long history of terrorism in that territory.
So, how far back should we go before forgetting everything that went before?
When do long standing conflicts and hatreds become irrelevant?
Why do most American's not have a clue about why so much of the world really doesn't like us very well, almost to the point if dislike (maybe hate)? And please, spare me the plaintive bleat about how many want to come here. It ain't because the like us, it is a clear case of "follow the money".
More from the "peaceful protesters"
Quote from: guido911 on June 02, 2010, 01:08:47 PM
More from the "peaceful protesters"
Is there a reason you think that victims of piracy ought not fight back?
Quote from: nathanm on June 02, 2010, 04:53:20 PM
Is there a reason you think that victims of piracy ought not fight back?
Piracy? So now you are an expert in international and maritime law. Here's an idea, let's allow a real lawyer to chime in on the legality of the IDF's boarding of the flotilla. Mind you, this is from the notoriously and rabidly conservative nutjob Alan Dershowitz:
QuoteThe second issue is whether it is lawful to enforce a legal blockade in international waters. Again, law and practice are clear. If there is no doubt that the offending ships have made a firm determination to break the blockade, then the blockade may be enforced before the offending ships cross the line into domestic waters. Again the United States and other western countries have frequently boarded ships at high sea in order to assure their security.
Third, were those on board the flotilla innocent non-combatants or did they lose that status once they agreed to engage in the military act of breaking the blockade? Let there be no mistake about the purpose of this flotilla. It was decidedly not to provide humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather the break the entirely lawful Israeli military blockade. The proof lies in the fact that both Israel and Egypt offered to have all the food, medicine and other humanitarian goods sent to Gaza, if the boats agreed to land in an Israeli or Egyptian port. That humanitarian offer was soundly rejected by the leaders of the flotilla who publicly announced:
"This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking Israel's siege on 1.5 million Palestinians." (AFP, May 27, 2010.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/israels-actions-were-enti_b_596285.html
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 02, 2010, 12:47:51 PM
So, how far back should we go before forgetting everything that went before?
When do long standing conflicts and hatreds become irrelevant?
Evidently more than 1000 yrs. The Crusades are still an everyday subject when it comes to explaining why Christians are so despicable.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 02, 2010, 06:46:27 AM
And I am not an Israel lover. They do some pretty deplorable things. The Palestinians are just as deplorable in my mind. I believe that if the Palestinians would stop launching rockets and sending suicide bombers, the Israelis would make an honest effort at peace. The Palestinians have repeatedly proven otherwise. I'm sure that we could go on about artificial political borders all over the world but I'm not really interested. The three major religions in the area all claim some rights to the area. All three have stolen the ground from someone else.
Give me a bloody break about those rockets that are launched. What does Israel retaliate with? Certainly not some rocket that does not kill thousands!!!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 02, 2010, 12:47:51 PM
There have been several times when Palestinians had cease fires for some fairly extended times over the past 60 years. (Probably just pausing to reload...) And each time, Israel did something confrontational.
At least for this go round (since 1920), the Israeli's are the invaders. Palestinians are probably just as culpable, but they don't have the billions per year from the US to help arm themselves. (1800 years ago, it was the other way around.)
So, how far back should we go?
Talk radio goes back 18 months when talking about all the Bush stuff (so they don't talk about it). Is that long enough?
In Guidoworld, the Palestinians have always and will always be considered the aggressor. So we know for an absolute fact that his time frame goes back no further than 1948 (1 year after the 1947 takeover of Palestine by Israel). And since the Muslims around the area took (violent) exception to that several times over the following decades, I guess that makes them aggressors. But if one steps back just one little extra step - just a year or two - then the Israeli's were the aggressors and at that point had a long history of terrorism in that territory.
So, how far back should we go before forgetting everything that went before?
When do long standing conflicts and hatreds become irrelevant?
Why do most American's not have a clue about why so much of the world really doesn't like us very well, almost to the point if dislike (maybe hate)? And please, spare me the plaintive bleat about how many want to come here. It ain't because the like us, it is a clear case of "follow the money".
Amen! Good post.
Dershowitz loses his argument in the first sentence; The second issue is whether it is lawful to enforce a legal blockade in international waters.
Yes, it is legal under international law to enforce a LEGAL blockade in intl. waters under the umbrella of self defense. (Art. 51 of UN charter). The question is, does Israel have a legal blockade here? There still seems to be many questions about that. Israel thinks so. That don't make it so. Most of the trend seems to be no, from the UN direction, and certainly world opinion now if nothing else, but there certainly is much noise and commotion left to endure before that is settled.
And just because the US does it, again, don't make it legal or right. The previous regime proved that over and over again.
Guido,
Do you really believe that piracy is something other than depriving the rightful owner of the lawful use of his/her property on the high seas? Something that justifies Israel's action? Beyond the fact that they have the biggest set of guns in the area?
Certainly don't have to be a lawyer to figure that one out, but a lawyer would certainly try to warp it around to mean something else. (Are you a lawyer by any chance??)
This (perhaps) tongue-in-cheek post from the Volokh Conspiracy set off a whole bunch of interesting discussion, including some on the legality of Israel's blockade:
http://volokh.com/2010/06/02/let-turkey-have-gaza/
Strange thread. . .
Liberals usually love Israel during election time.
@ heironymouspasparagus: Thank you for being a level headed well mannered debater who sticks to the topic at hand unlike most of the pinheads on this forum.
Let me point out a few things here. Israel has all the video evidence, we do not know what happened BEFORE the ship was boarded that could have provoked an angry attack by the victims of these pirates. This is why the Rachel Corrie has taken a pit stop, to install more surveilance cameras to catch any wrongdoing on film before proceding to Gaza. Secondly the weapons they found were literally sticks and stones to my knowledge NO israelis were killed yet 9 activisits were killed.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 03, 2010, 03:14:39 PM
Strange thread. . .
Liberals usually love Israel during election time.
"Liberals" are not the unified front you imagine. If we were, folks like yourself would have been in the political doghouse since Roosevelt and you'd have no hope of ever winning a majority in Congress or the Presidency until said unified front broke down.
This is why Democrats, despite their massive advantage in party affiliation don't see that translate into constant electoral wins.
You haven't been paying attention to the sniping at Obama coming from the lefties, all while you try to call him a red commie.
It also helps that you have a news network dedicated to pushing the right wing cause.
Back to the Israeli situation, they go far beyond what is necessary to prevent arms from being transported into Gaza. They are interdicting things like goats, cows, and children's toys. What possible justification do they have for that?
Quote from: Gaspar on June 03, 2010, 03:14:39 PM
Strange thread. . .
Liberals usually love Israel during election time.
Really? I thought it was the righties who had the love affair for the Israeli. Heaven forbid that we let Muslim countries be mad at them.
But yeah, in this case, Israel is in the wrong. Netanyahoo (purposeful misspelling) seems very divisive, especially when it comes to the two-state plan and essentially calling peace talks a waste of time.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on June 02, 2010, 10:49:52 PM
Give me a bloody break about those rockets that are launched. What does Israel retaliate with? Certainly not some rocket that does not kill thousands!!!!
What do you expect the Israelis to retaliate with? Water balloons? I guess you think it is perfectly acceptable for the Palestinians to launch rockets at civilian areas and that Israel should just sit back and ask for some suicide bomber chasers. (Chaser as in a chaser for a strong drink.)
Quote from: nathanm link=topic=15648.msg166352#msg166352 date=1275456504
I'm not an Israel hater by any means, but I still think what they're doing in Gaza is beyond deplorable.
/quote]
This is what's deplorable:
Altruismsuffers,
Level headed?? Oh, no...I stand accused and must now take great umbrage! Or not. Thanks, I guess. I suppose I will have to watch myself if am getting those kind of comments.
Palestinians celebrating -
That pretty much goes to the whole point. How far back do we keep score?? Do we count the 65,000 to 2 million Palestinians killed since 1920?? Or only the 2500 Israeli's killed in the same time frame?? Who wins the body count game?? Who wins the "hearts and minds" on that deal??
At exactly the same time they were celebrating 9/11, we had our own clowns out killing Muslims and Sikhs. Who is the worst on that deal??
Hoss, it is the right wing religious extremists who have this thing about Israel and how we must support them 'cause the end of days are pending soon, and they are looking for/expecting the apocalypse to happen starting there. I don't have a problem supporting Israel for the most part, but we can certainly apply some pressure there to cut out the crap. At this point, we are deep into it with them - back scratching arrangement - in that region. Definitely our proxie.
Political ad;
Read Walden!! (David Henry Thoreau)
Oh, cool!! Terminator II is on!!!
Must - go - watch - mayhem!!!
Quote from: guido911 on June 03, 2010, 06:27:41 PM
This is what's deplorable:
And what exactly does that have to do with what Israel is doing to them?
If I were in their position, I'd probably be pretty happy if something bad happened to Israel's staunchest supporter. I'm glad I'm not in their position.
It's not exactly the same but Oklahoma is similar to Israel in that the US Government moved the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw,Creek, and Seminole Tribes to Oklahoma where the Osage lived before the big relocation. I'll call time zero as 1800, just before the Louisiana Purchase since this is my post and I can call time zero any time I want. Also because I don't feel like spending the time to find out who was here before the Osage.
Judging from their posts on this thread, I expect Heironymous.., HoneySuckle, maybe Nathan and a few others would support the Osage Nation if they resumed their early displeasure by sending suicide bombers and rockets to homes of not only the 5 tribes but also all the blacks, whites, and other invaders of their territory. It's been less than 200 years, a blink of the eye compared to tensions in the middle east.
Quote from: nathanm on June 03, 2010, 09:38:55 PM
And what exactly does that have to do with what Israel is doing to them?
Not much, only that it's good to know who you are aligning yourself up with.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 03, 2010, 10:26:06 PM
Judging from their posts on this thread, I expect Heironymous.., HoneySuckle, maybe Nathan and a few others would support the Osage Nation if they resumed their early displeasure by sending suicide bombers and rockets to homes of not only the 5 tribes but also all the blacks, whites, and other invaders of their territory.
There's a big difference between understanding and support. There's also a big difference between what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and how the Osage are treated today. Granted, we were probably equally crappy to the natives in general when we forced them off the east coast and then kept forcing them westward as we decided to settle farther and farther west.
Some tribes we kicked off their land three or four times. Heck, we still refuse to honor the terms of a lot of the treaties we signed with them.
Guido, I'm not "aligning" myself with them. My world is not one where I have to agree with someone to think they're being mistreated.
So far, the most vehement complaints about the blockade runners treatment was that they were still in international waters.
Would it have been OK to blast them to the next ocean if they had been in Israel's territorial waters? It would have been interesting if the offending ship blew up as though it had been carrying explosives, missiles, etc.
[quote author=nathanm link=topic=15648.msg166635#msg166635 date=1275623919
Guido, I'm not "aligning" myself with them. My world is not one where I have to agree with someone to think they're being mistreated.
[/quote]
Oh bullcrap. 3,000 American's dead; let's party!!! :(
Quote from: nathanm on June 03, 2010, 10:58:39 PM
There's a big difference between understanding and support. There's also a big difference between what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and how the Osage are treated today. Granted, we were probably equally crappy to the natives in general when we forced them off the east coast and then kept forcing them westward as we decided to settle farther and farther west.
Some tribes we kicked off their land three or four times. Heck, we still refuse to honor the terms of a lot of the treaties we signed with them.
Guido, I'm not "aligning" myself with them. My world is not one where I have to agree with someone to think they're being mistreated.
I can understand a man stealing a loaf of bread for his family without supporting him. If he kills the shop owner getting the loaf of bread, understanding or not, he gets "bad press". I don't care if the shop owner called him nasty names before getting shot.
Imagine how we would treat the Osage today if they had continued to conduct raids on the "invaders" for the last 150 or so years.
Quote from: guido911 on June 03, 2010, 11:08:23 PM
Oh bullcrap. 3,000 American's dead; let's party!!! :(
What, you wouldn't be happy if 3,000 Iranians were killed in a terrorist attack? You should keep in mind that to these people, all we are is a bunch of hypocrites who enable Israel to continue oppressing them.
That doesn't mean I think it's right, only that I see where they're coming from, even as I continue to think that that sort of attitude needs to be wiped off the face of the Earth. If you refuse to understand what leads other people to believe what they believe, your only option to oppose them becomes war. We've seen how well that's worked out in Afghanistan and Iraq.
You could ask the Russians how it's working for them in Chechnya, if you need further corroboration of my point.
I'm just saying that seeking to understand someone does not mean you agree with their behavior.
All that said, the cause of the problems really comes from Saudi Arabia and Iran, who support the terrorist organizations that claim to be working in the Palestinians' interest but are really working to undermine Israel on behalf of the Saudis and the Iranians. None of that excuses Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, though. It's one thing to ensure weapons aren't being smuggled in. It's another thing entirely to deny them cattle and goats, build on territory that's supposedly not theirs, and so on.
I think we can all agree we'd be better off if Yitzhak Rabin hadn't been assassinated back in 1995. Somehow that set off another round of shittiness towards the Palestinians that hasn't stopped since despite the assassin being a Jew.
Quote from: Red Arrow on June 03, 2010, 11:13:02 PM
I can understand a man stealing a loaf of bread for his family without supporting him. If he kills the shop owner getting the loaf of bread, understanding or not, he gets "bad press". I don't care if the shop owner called him nasty names before getting shot.
Imagine how we would treat the Osage today if they had continued to conduct raids on the "invaders" for the last 150 or so years.
Where the analogy fizzles out completely is with the blockade. We never walled the Osage off in their cities and kept supplies from getting in. IMO that changes the complexion of things completely, and when the struggle becomes not for your state but for food, water, medical equipment -- basic survival -- then it's a very different game.
If the political problem is keeping score, the tit for tat never ends. This tends to be one of the problems in the middle east: grudges are tended, refreshed, and kept alive far longer than they should be. This obviously happens in other places, too, but the middle east cultures really relish their grudges. So, yeah, there's never an end to who did what to whom. It thus becomes a test of courage to see who can muster the political will to break out of the cycle. Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians have, though recently it's almost as if the Israelis have been working to keep that political will from coalescing.
Quote from: nathanm on June 03, 2010, 11:21:12 PM
What, you wouldn't be happy if 3,000 Iranians were killed in a terrorist attack?
Man you make things so easy sometimes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3808904
28,00 dead Iranians in an earthquake two years after 9/11. I do not recall the celebrations in the streets by us. Do you?
Quote from: guido911 on June 04, 2010, 10:05:32 AM
Man you make things so easy sometimes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3808904
28,00 dead Iranians in an earthquake two years after 9/11. I do not recall the celebrations in the streets by us. Do you?
Oh man, seriously...so you believed it was a natural earthquake and not a nuclear device planted underneath the faultline?
Wait wait...Nuc-u-ler
Quote from: Townsend on June 04, 2010, 10:13:18 AM
Oh man, seriously...so you believed it was a natural earthquake and not a nuclear device planted underneath the faultline?
Wait wait...Nuc-u-ler
No, it was a smuggled in IDF nuclear weapon that really caused the damage. Remember, it's always "da joooos"!
The point I was making is that with the massive number of Iranian dead, no one here took to the streets screaming Allahu God!
Quote from: guido911 on June 04, 2010, 10:23:00 AM
The point I was making is that with the massive number of Iranian dead, no one here took to the streets screaming Allahu God!
That only happens when the Bears win the superbowl.
DA BEARS
Who is the avatar, Townsend? Tell me that's not Val Kilmer, sheesh, he needs to go back and hang out around the Salton Sea for awhile.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 04, 2010, 11:29:26 AM
Who is the avatar, Townsend? Tell me that's not Val Kilmer, sheesh, he needs to go back and hang out around the Salton Sea for awhile.
It is indeed Kilmer. Not his best look. Drift alert, drift alert...Hard to port
Quote from: Conan71 on June 04, 2010, 11:29:26 AM
Who is the avatar, Townsend? Tell me that's not Val Kilmer, sheesh, he needs to go back and hang out around the Salton Sea for awhile.
Yes it is Val Kilmer.
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/val-kilmers-fat.jpg)
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/val-kilmer-fat-2.jpg)
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/Val-1.jpg)
Quote from: dbacks fan on June 04, 2010, 11:42:30 AM
Yes it is Val Kilmer.
"I love scotch. Scotchy scotchy scotchy"
And the "Real Genius" is thinking about a run for governor in New Mexico.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-11/val-kilmer-for-governor/ (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-11/val-kilmer-for-governor/)
Quote from: we vs us on June 04, 2010, 09:26:55 AM
Where the analogy fizzles out completely is with the blockade. We never walled the Osage off in their cities and kept supplies from getting in. IMO that changes the complexion of things completely, and when the struggle becomes not for your state but for food, water, medical equipment -- basic survival -- then it's a very different game.
The news I hear (from non-Fox sources) is that unless you consider guns, rockets, explosives, etc as humanitarian, the Israelis are willing to let aid through, overland, after inspection. If a complete blockade were true, there would be almost no one left in Gaza since they would have starved by now. No one is claiming the Gaza folks have it easy though. It's difficult to get someone to change their mind about their life choices if they are living well.
Quote from: dbacks fan on June 04, 2010, 11:53:09 AM
And the "Real Genius" is thinking about a run for governor in New Mexico.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-11/val-kilmer-for-governor/ (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-11/val-kilmer-for-governor/)
Never materlialized, apparently. The primaries were Tuesday, I didn't hear his name on the ballot.
Judging from their posts on this thread, I expect Heironymous.., HoneySuckle, maybe Nathan and a few others would support the Osage Nation if they resumed their early displeasure by sending suicide bombers and rockets to homes of not only the 5 tribes but also all the blacks, whites, and other invaders of their territory. It's been less than 200 years, a blink of the eye compared to tensions in the middle east.
What an inane, gratuitous crock of crap. You listen to Hannity WAY too much...take it over to NPR on occasion.
Clarification (in case anyone else cannot understand); what I say about the Middle East situation is to show a balance that just isn't present in the right wing - or any - propaganda.
Even more clarification; since about 1/2 of my family is either Cherokee, Osage, or Apache, I don't really want them to get involved in those types of activities. I've seen what the 7th Cavalry will do to unarmed, starving women, children and old people. Don't need a repeat.
Helen Thomas chimes in again (warning: please have eaten at least 2 hours earlier before viewing):
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdaG8zpruz
Quote from: guido911 on June 04, 2010, 02:48:24 PM
Helen Thomas chimes in again (warning: please have eaten at least 2 hours earlier before viewing):
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdaG8zpruz
I bet she was a total hottie when Ulyses Grant was a buck private.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 04, 2010, 03:26:03 PM
I bet she was a total hottie when Ulyses Grant was a buck private.
She offers some unique experience when it comes to dealing with the Jews.
She used to date some of the Pharaohs.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 04, 2010, 03:48:09 PM
She offers some unique experience when it comes to dealing with the Jews.
She used to date some of the Pharaohs.
Butch laughing his donkey off at your comment
(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q55/71conan/TN/bobblehead2.jpg)
Irish ship named after famous pancake heading to Gaza:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/10240856.stm
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 04, 2010, 12:35:01 PM
Clarification (in case anyone else cannot understand); what I say about the Middle East situation is to show a balance that just isn't present in the right wing - or any - propaganda.
Obviously not the impression I've gotten from your posts.
An open letter to Helen Thomas
By YORAM DORI
06/07/2010 06:32
In light of your recent remarks that Jews must "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home," I think I should tell you about my parents' families.
Dear Ms. Thomas, I read on numerous Web sites the remarks attributed to you (and I did not see any denial) that we, the Jews must "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Germany or Poland. I am convinced that you are aware of the events which took place during the years 1939-1945 but, to be certain, I think it appropriate to tell you a little about my parents and their families.
My mother was sent to Palestine from Germany in 1933 with the rise of the Nazis to power by her farseeing parents. The British blockade, which prevented Jews fleeing the Nazi horrors from entering, made it difficult for her and only the pretext of coming on a tourist visit enabled her to enter and remain alive. Her older sister, Sarah, her husband and three children aged 12, 10 and seven did not succeed in finding a way of coming to Palestine and were sent by the Nazis to Poland and from there, their journey to the Auschwitz gas chambers, was short. I understand that it is there that you wish to send me.
My father, who lived in Austria, also showed resourcefulness and immediately on the German invasion and sailed to Palestine. On the way – again the British blockade – he was forced to throw his passport into the sea so that, heaven forbid, they would not send him back to Austria, another country you wished I was moving to. His older brother and his wife, who did not go with him, were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.
My parents, who, as mentioned, with lifesaving initiative, fled from Europe before they were murdered, arrived in a desolated and barren country, worked in orchards, barely supported themselves and, by the way, were happy with their lot. In 1947 upon hearing of the UN resolution on the partitioning of the country, they danced in the streets, even though most of the area of Israel was torn from its sovereignty. For brands who survived the fire, it was enough.
The Palestinians and Arab countries, who gained most of the area, refused to accept the UN resolution and began a war to annihilate us. Only three years had passed since the liberation of Auschwitz and again we – the Jews – faced the danger of annihilation. To our joy, 600,000 Jews were victorious over millions of armed Arabs. It appears that justice has power and strength of its own.
IN THE 62 years of our existence, we have had seven wars, thousands of terror attacks, buses which have exploded in streets, firing into schools, mortars fired on kindergartens. Yet you wish to exile us back to the inferno, as if nothing happened 65 years ago in Europe, as if our hands have not been stretched out for peace since the establishment of the state?
We were victorious in the wars imposed upon us by Egypt and we signed a peace agreement with it after yielding all the territory and all the oil. We signed a peace agreement with Jordan. We yielded all the territory and much water. We withdrew from Lebanon to the international border and, in return, we received Hizbullah katyushas on our citizens. We left Gaza and in return, we received massive firing on our citizens in the South. Are you aware, Ms. Thomas, that many children from Sderot and the area around Gaza wet their beds until a late age out of fear of the Hamas missiles? And it is us that you wish to exile? Why? Because you think that we are weak or because it annoys you that we are not defeated?
As someone, who throughout his adult life has been a member of the Israeli "peace camp," notwithstanding you and your strange and angering views, my friends and I (and I hope also my government) will continue to turn over every stone and scour every corner to attain peace. Peace, which will enable us to the smallest extent to live and our neighbors, the Palestinians, to establish a country and to flourish and prosper. To achieve this, we are prepared to make great concessions, to give back all the territories gained as a result of wars which our neighbors forced on us. There is only one thing we want in return – life. A quiet life, a life without terror, a life without missiles, a life like the one you have in Washington and which I, in Israel, also deserve.
That old women is burnt up....She really stepped on her tit this time.......
So, I see now that the "time bar" is set at 1933? Is that something that everyone can agree on?
As for 600,000 winning over millions - well, it certainly didn't hurt to have the US helping a lot.
Oh, and by the way, while there were 6 million Jews killed by the Nazi's (certainly more than bad enough to be an abomination), there were another 8 to 9 million "other people" killed also by those same Nazi's. And Stalin killed about 20 million. And Japan/China war killed a few million more. And on and on. Estimates I have read in past say anywhere from 50 million to over 150 million during the course of that war. (I suspect 50 to 60 is closer to reality.)
There is nearly infinite capacity for human suffering and grief in this old world. And way too often, it is promulgated by so-called 'religious' interests.
Hey, while I am here, let me muddy the waters a little and remind us all once again of the 15 million or so natives to this continent who were exterminated until about 1900!
If we are going to engage in lamentations and wringing of hands, let's do it for everyone. (Or would that dilute the piety of the effort??)
Red,
Then read the posts. Just because Fox says 'fair and balanced' don't make it so....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 07, 2010, 12:36:13 PM
So, I see now that the "time bar" is set at 1933? Is that something that everyone can agree on?
As for 600,000 winning over millions - well, it certainly didn't hurt to have the US helping a lot.
Oh, and by the way, while there were 6 million Jews killed by the Nazi's (certainly more than bad enough to be an abomination), there were another 8 to 9 million "other people" killed also by those same Nazi's. And Stalin killed about 20 million. And Japan/China war killed a few million more. And on and on. Estimates I have read in past say anywhere from 50 million to over 150 million during the course of that war. (I suspect 50 to 60 is closer to reality.)
There is nearly infinite capacity for human suffering and grief in this old world. And way too often, it is promulgated by so-called 'religious' interests.
Hey, while I am here, let me muddy the waters a little and remind us all once again of the 15 million or so natives to this continent who were exterminated until about 1900!
If we are going to engage in lamentations and wringing of hands, let's do it for everyone. (Or would that dilute the piety of the effort??)
Red,
Then read the posts. Just because Fox says 'fair and balanced' don't make it so....
Wow! You have certainly cemented your stance here. Yes there are numerous atrocities committed by humans. They have little to do with the current subject, so unless your goal is to change the subject, your attempt is simply an effort to diminish one horrific act by exemplifying others. That is immature.
We all have differing points of view, but I would hope that we can agree that the systematic extermination of any race or religion of people is wrong.
Thanks for the mud, but no thanks.
Did you read the insert about abomination?
Goes again to the question I asked a little while back about what constitutes an abominable, genocidal type act? Is it the 2500 casualties suffered by Israel? Or the 65,000 suffered by Palestinians? Or a few dozen?
My official stance;
They are ALL bad! They are ALL unspeakably hideous! They are all disgusting, despicable acts of depravity!
And yet, we appear to have our "favorite" abominations to the exclusion of all others....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 07, 2010, 12:36:13 PM
Red,
Then read the posts. Just because Fox says 'fair and balanced' don't make it so....
I re-read the thread. All I can say is:
Just because heironymouspasparagus says "fair and balanced" don't make it so....
FWIW, my only reference to Fox (June 4, 8:55:26 AM) was to say my sources were NOT Fox.
Where is the balance in the discussion of Israel?? From the US side??
Just curious to see where any other side is mentioned. Especially on Fox.
And still nothing but dissemination - and no answer to the question I posed about what constitutes an abominable, genocidal, hideous act?? Is it just the numbers involved or ??
Wow! You have certainly cemented your stance here. Yes there are numerous atrocities committed by humans. They have little to do with the current subject, so unless your goal is to change the subject, your attempt is simply an effort to diminish one horrific act by exemplifying others. That is immature.
We all have differing points of view, but I would hope that we can agree that the systematic extermination of any race or religion of people is wrong.
No attempt to diminish anything. Actually an attempt to highlight. One might well be justified in trying to set aside the past and move to higher plains and dimensions IF there were any indication that the behavior had changed; if as a society there were a recognition of the wrongs of the past and a sincere attempt and possibly some small effort to act otherwise. There was a disconnect between that past and the present. Some obvious change in attitude?
Instead, since we are all still human; there is no real fundamental change in human nature, so the ties to the past are still strong. We continue to espouse principals until such time as we set them aside to regress to past behavior/attitudes.
I found this site. I've only had time to read a small portion of it but it seems to present facts. Maybe it will be 'fair and balanced".
http://www.palestinefacts.org/
Blog story about media spin.
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2010/06/reuters-brings-fauxtography-to-gaza.html
Red Arrow,
I read through some of it. Did you?? There is no mention of who put together the web site beyond "by a team of writers and editors who are knowledgeable of the history, politics, economics and military situation in the Middle East, based on information compiled from the best available sources."
So,...tell us what you think about "fair and balanced" from some of the quotes on the page. I would definitely encourage everyone to look around through this site. There is some good historical information there.
I am curious as to why someone would go to this much trouble/effort and not put their name on it. Would not be proud of the effort and want to accept credit for it. Are they ashamed of what they said or who they are? Are they trying to hide something?? (I could understand if it were me trying to stay anonymous due to inflammatory dogma, but the site doesn't seem to suffer from my particular proclivities.)
I do know someone who makes the claim of the third statement. His family (Christian Palestinian - a very tiny minority in the area) were forcibly - as in by guns pointing at their heads - removed from the family home. There are Israeli's living there today. I also know a couple of Jewish people who had most of the family slaughtered in Germany - which is a sad, tragic commonality to most Jewish families, if my interpretation of their reality is correct.
"Anyone who persists with the question of Israel's right to exist is one whose agenda is to eliminate Israel and its Jewish inhabitants."
"The early Arab attacks resembled the Arab Revolt of 1936-9, with attacks on villages and terrorism in the cities."
"There are now claims from Arab sources that millions of Palestinians were pushed off their land by the Zionists, then expelled by the new State of Israel in the War of Independence in 1948, followed by similar Israeli policies that continue today. What is the truth of these claims?"
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 08, 2010, 09:49:35 PM
Red Arrow,
I read through some of it. Did you??
What don't you understand about:
"I found this site. I've only had time to read a small portion of it but it seems to present facts. Maybe it will be 'fair and balanced". "? ? ?
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 08, 2010, 09:49:35 PM
I am curious as to why someone would go to this much trouble/effort and not put their name on it. Would not be proud of the effort and want to accept credit for it. Are they ashamed of what they said or who they are? Are they trying to hide something?? (I could understand if it were me trying to stay anonymous due to inflammatory dogma, but the site doesn't seem to suffer from my particular proclivities.)
Proud? Ashamed? Hide?
Afraid of retaliation for telling the truth?
Just guessing, same as you. I agree, it would seem someone would claim the site but if it is backed up with credible references does it really matter? No, I haven't had time to check it out any further than last night. I've had other priorities.
Now THAT is funny!!
Loved it!
You know who is kinda chickenshyte? Benjamin Netanyahu.
QuoteThe other day I was talking to a senior Obama administration official about the foreign leader who seems to frustrate the White House and the State Department the most. "The thing about Bibi is, he's a chickenshit," this official said, referring to the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, by his nickname.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/10/the-crisis-in-us-israel-relations-is-officially-here/382031/?single_page=true
Because the first thing that comes to my mind about Netanyahu is that is a coward. Here is a wiki link to the military outfit he served.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayeret_Matkal#Notable_Sayeret_Matkal_figures
I cannot find the military outfit Obama or Biden served which would justify their administration's reviling Bibi's service.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1D6pfMCEAII6-i.jpg:large)
Quote from: guido911 on October 28, 2014, 06:15:53 PM
I cannot find the military outfit Obama or Biden served which would justify their administration's reviling Bibi's service.
That's classified. You evidently do not have a need to know.
;D
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 28, 2014, 06:29:54 PM
That's classified. You evidently do not have a need to know.
;D
I'm thinking about the Rumsfeld quote on known knowns, etc...
Quote from: guido911 on October 28, 2014, 06:15:53 PM
Because the first thing that comes to my mind about Netanyahu is that is a coward. Here is a wiki link to the military outfit he served.
So when and why did he lose his nerve?
A lot of that explains some things that have been kind of puzzling for a while. In particular, the fact there has not been a hit on Iran yet. I think that article is right - it may well be too late, politically, to do that. And probably ineffective if done anyway.
And he has shown he has no interest in peace with anybody - he keeps building settlements. Against any/all international law. And how many UN resolutions**? I have no expectations that Israel will ever make peace with the area - there are just too many obstacles on both sides - but he isn't even making a convincing propaganda effort to even try to make the outside world think it might happen.
** UN resolutions - those worthless commentaries issued to make the UN look like it is at least thinking about a topic. Totally ignored by all sides. But interesting how over the years, both Israel and the US have made so much noise about the Palestinians ignoring resolutions when the Israeli's ignore even more...that's how politics works.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 28, 2014, 08:55:33 PM
So when and why did he lose his nerve?
A lot of that explains some things that have been kind of puzzling for a while. In particular, the fact there has not been a hit on Iran yet. I think that article is right - it may well be too late, politically, to do that. And probably ineffective if done anyway.
And he has shown he has no interest in peace with anybody - he keeps building settlements. Against any/all international law. And how many UN resolutions**? I have no expectations that Israel will ever make peace with the area - there are just too many obstacles on both sides - but he isn't even making a convincing propaganda effort to even try to make the outside world think it might happen.
** UN resolutions - those worthless commentaries issued to make the UN look like it is at least thinking about a topic. Totally ignored by all sides. But interesting how over the years, both Israel and the US have made so much noise about the Palestinians ignoring resolutions when the Israeli's ignore even more...that's how politics works.
You need to read up on the history of Israel. Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to settlements.
Quote from: guido911 on October 28, 2014, 09:08:06 PM
You need to read up on the history of Israel. Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to settlements.
Really? Beyond the fact they are being built in places that are illegal even under Israeli law??
Quote from: guido911 on October 28, 2014, 09:08:06 PM
You need to read up on the history of Israel. Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to settlements.
Which part of the history? The part before 1947 when the Israeli's were the terrorists for dozens of years in the same way the Palestinians have been since 1947?
Or the part where they went around to all the Palestinian's houses when they came to power and forcibly removed the occupants - many times at gun point, but always giving them at least 15 minutes to gather up what they could carry to take with them - Christian AND Muslim - in the same way that Andrew Jackson's goons did to the Cherokee's to start the Trail of Tears...? And yeah, I do know a few Palestinian Christians whose families were removed from their houses, that are now occupied by Israeli's - one lives here in town. Spoils of war go to the victors!
And no, I am not anti-Israeli any more than I am anti-American - I just don't leave a topic as I was taught in elementary school without trying to learn something about the real history behind the propaganda. The reality is they won, just as the US Army destroyed the plains Indians. History - something to be learned from, and hopefully don't repeat stupid stuff.
Not my monkeys, not my circus....