Yep you probably are reading that right. I first heard that on the Mike Gallagher show a couple weeks ago and it is not surprising one bit. In fact I believe Palestinians may already have been paying the bombers' families themselves. Praise be to Allah.
DMC (an infidel)
(edited by DMC on 3.4.02 1756)
It's me, it's me- It's D-M-C.
Originally posted by Ryan1420Bush just came on tv saying that he is sending Colin Powell to lead peace talks between Israel and Palestine. I just hope he is successful. I knew his administration couldn't mind it's own business..
Protecting the state that we artificially created on stolen land does sort of qualify as our business...
Not to start a holy war, but the land being "stolen" is largely Palestinian rhetoric. The land has traditionally been Jewish land, and there *never* has been a "Palestinian state." (Palestine is simply a generic term first used by the Romans to refer to the whole general area.) After you have 6 million of your people killed in mass murders and gas chambers, I think you deserve to have a safe haven in an area your people have long considered their traditional home. This is what the U.S. agreed to in the 1940s and I don't see any problem with it. In fact considering what happened to the Jews (which we must never, never forget) it was and is the absolutely RIGHT thing to do. Arabs living there who have been taught by their religion and their culture to *hate* Jews and never live along side of them simply have to deal with it or change their attitudes to come into the 21st century. We keep hearing about how Arabs have been "oppressed" in Israel, but I have never seen any evidence of this other than Israeli retaliations for and manuevers against crazy-ass suicide bombers. When I see solid evidence of how Palestinans have been categorically mistreated as a people in Israel, then I may change my mind.
Palestine was not a state in pre-WWII, but neither was Israel. Syria and Lebanon owned that land, and it was given to the Jews as a weak attempt to cover our asses for looking the other way in regards to the holocaust. One problem- it wasn't even our land to give. I always chuckle when the bigwigs spout off about "a nation's right to self-determination" while Israel sits there as a monument to our (America's) theory that in regards to foreign policy, we can do whatever the fuck we want. On September 2 a conference on racism was held in Durban, South Africa. A large number of non-governmental human rights advocacy groups submitted a report to the UN Comitte on Racism which described "Israel as a racist, apartheid state in which Israel's brand of apartheid as a crime against humanity has been characterized by separation and segregation, dispossession, restricted land access, denationalization, 'Bantustanization' and inhumane acts." The story can be found here. It's common knowledge that Israel destroys civilian buildings, including private residences of Christians and Arabs to retliate for Palestinian violence (which is usually directed at non-civillian targets). As much as "crazy-ass" Arabs hate the Jewish Israelis, the Jewish Israelis hate them right back. And Zionism allows them to make that hatred state policy.
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".
I'm not sure I buy the logic of 'Nazis trying to kill you entitles you to your own country'. But what's done is done.
I see plenty of hate to go around in the whole Middle East situation. I do believe that there is certain treament of Arabs that is second-class (like running off Arabs, tearing down homes, and building 'Jewish' communities in Arab towns). I agree with what John Gibson said yesterday, maybe while they are doing the "Operation Protective Wall" or whatever they are calling it, they should consider keeping their 'Jewish' communities on their side of the wall. And I do think Israel is somewhat less than careful when choosing their military targets. And is it really that much different if you die from a suicide bomber or die from a tank? You're still dead. Many Arabs want to see the elimination of Israel. But you can't tell me that many Israelies don't want to see all the Palestinians eradicated as well.
Frankly, I think we should just declare the two sides at war, and declare the U.S. neutral. Thus, we would withdraw all our funding. But I know that will never happen.
Dude, I don't know what planet you're living on, but the idea that Palestinians usually attack non-civilian targets, at least for the last year and a half, is a little laughable, don't you think? Second, anyone can rant and rave about Israel being an "apartheid" state, but how do we know the "story" is true? I would like to see some evidence first. When Israel retaliates for bombings, they strategically target official Palestinian buildings and even then sometimes seem to make sure they are cleared out so casualities are kept to a very minimum (at least that was the case before this recent wave of retaliations for the most recent mass death bombing). If that is an untolerable reaction to their people being blown up then I just don't know what else to tell you.
Yes, in a war innocent people are killed, but that is simply part and parcel of war. Walking into a religious ceremony and blowing up women and children simply because you hate them and want them to die is NOT, and I am totally stunned how anyone can defend ANY kind of Palestinian cause at this point. How dare we tell Israel what to do when WE go into a country, kill people and take control in order to preserve our freedom and prevent terrorism, but we handcuff Israel and tell them they have to keep dying simply because there are people in the world who hate Jews. Since when did "politics" equal anti-Semitism? Didn't we learn anything from WWII?
Here's some documentation on the apartheid policies Israel engages in: http://www.mediamonitors.net/mazin7.html the Israeli government confiscates land and demolishes homes to build Intel facilities
http://www.mediareviewnet.com/Letters/israelsa.html a letter to a publication that gives a laundry list of Israel's anti-Arab policies, with dates for reference
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2000/11/03/israeli_arabs/index.html the story of an Arabic Israeli's struggle with his government's anti-Arab policies
the last article is really the most pertinent...there's your "evidence"...it even has a picture
better yet, talk to anyone who lived in Lebanon in the 70's...see what they tell you about your benevolent and compassionate Israel
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".
Travis, allow me to offer my best response to the last article and then some final insights on my part.
First, municipal councils baring an Arab from living in a particular area should not necessairly equate the *entire government of Israel* as supporting *apartheid*. (Don't these kind of things still happen in America?) The article even admits that the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in defense of the Arab gentleman in that case, so I don't see where the oppression is. Yes, I'm sure many Jewish people, including the ones on those local councils, need to struggle against their distrust and even racism toward Arabs. But does racism justify killing people? What happened to the ideas of people like Martin Luther King and *peaceful* resistance? Or do you believe it is a great idea to have a worldview and religion which says it is good to kill people in the name of God?
Second, not fully trusting Palestinians and putting in measures to ensure Israeli security is not oppressive, it is simply what the government has to do because they have been and are surrounded by these people who *attack them first* and wish to kill them, as the past months have clearly pointed out! I still don't see how the Israelies are forcing the Arabs to kill them--Arabs *must* bear the first responsibility for their actions and must prove that they can live and *think* peacefully in order to coexist with the Jewish people. (Don't think that the idea that Palestinians want to push Israel into the sea is some kind of recent idea, they have been saying such things all along for years.) Until they can do that, I still don't see how the Israeli government is doing anything fundamentally wrong by attempting to protect its people from maniacs and a culture of maniacal thinking.
Even though this is never going to happen, probably mostly because the Palestinians would never agree to it, I say have Israel give the Palestinians total control over all their West Bank territories, but leave Jerusalem, the historic Jewish capital, totally to Israel. But even if such a peace could be brokered, do you really think the Palestinians would move to develop a vibrant state and country and leave peacefully with Israel, or would they keep their own people in poverty and simply launch more attacks against Jews from their homeland in order to destroy them? The real question here is *what are the Palestinians motives*? I may be wrong, but I believe we have been seeing more and more what their real motives are, and I'm glad the national media is finally paying attention to the area and to this issue so we can see this.
You seem to be implying that the Palestinians are hell-bent on killing all Jews, rather than simply having their own land and/or the same rights that Jewish citizens enjoy (I'm not sure if that includes the ridiculous benefits). By making such a broad and obviously biased statement, you just ended my interest of discussing this matter with you. You obviously believe everything you hear on the American news. Sorry 'bout your luck sport.
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".
Originally posted by TravisPalestine was not a state in pre-WWII, but neither was Israel. Syria and Lebanon owned that land, and it was given to the Jews as a weak attempt to cover our asses for looking the other way in regards to the holocaust. One problem- it wasn't even our land to give. I always chuckle when the bigwigs spout off about "a nation's right to self-determination" while Israel sits there as a monument to our (America's) theory that in regards to foreign policy, we can do whatever the fuck we want.
Well, maybe we CAN do whatever the fuck we want. There is absolutely NO factual, scientific, easily and concretely proven evidence that Hitler was wrong. Personally, I'm with DMC on this one. It's not about principle; it's about the hard reality of the holocaust, and the US/UN decision to do something about it.
And, frankly, fuck a nation's right to self-determination. Granted, that's a blanket statement, but look at every war ever. Shouldn't Germany have had the right to determine for itself that all Jews need to die? Shouldn't we leave Saddam alone and let him amass chemical and nuclear and biological weapons? Clearly, the answer is no.
(edited for stupidity by PalpatineW on 4.4.02 1500)
(edited by PalpatineW on 4.4.02 1503)
Do I lie to myself to be happy? In your case, Teddy, I think I can.
PWBuchanan sez: Well, maybe we CAN do whatever the fuck we want. There is absolutely NO factual, scientific, easily and concretely proven evidence that Hitler was wrong. Personally, I'm with DMC on this one. It's not about principle; it's about the hard reality of the holocaust, and the US/UN decision to do something about it.
So how was it Syria and Lebanon's responsibilty to atone for the holocaust? If we were really so ready to make up for the holocaust, why didn't we give some of OUR land to the Jews? Montana is SO right there, and so much nicer than Israel. Oh, wait, it's their "homeland", except for all those people who came out of Europe, where they CHOSE to go in the first place. According to the "homeland" theory we should evict the white people from Australia, the light skinned people from India, the British from Northern Ireland because DAMNIT, it's not THEIR land. Except we didn't stand by and let those people be slaughtered in the interest of minding our own business. Well, maybe the Irish. You contradict yourself in your post. "It's not about principle", but then you decry the holocaust and Saddam Hussein's alleged military stockpiling. So it's ok for the Jews to discriminate, but don't screw with THEM. Hm. You seem to be quantifying atrocities. "Apartheid is ok, just don't kill anyone." So Israel's in the clear. Was DeKlerk an ok guy then? Pol Pot didn't kill THAT many people, right? Stalin? Noreaga? If you're going to try to morally (there's that word) police the world, you can't play favorites. Eventually it'll bite you in the ass. So WHY does everyone hate Americans? Hmmmm....
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".
I said I may be wrong--I'm sure there are indeed Arabs who simply want to live peacefully and enjoy life and be prosperous. But why aren't these people doing more to make sure this kind of voice is heard and represents the official Palestinian cause? Instead, the Palestinian leadership is allowing and/or commanding suicide bombers to spead havoc in the country, and the people put up pictures of the bombers in their shops. I want to know how much of that is media propoganda, and how much is it a representation of the hard cold reality of how the large majority of Palestinians think and feel.
DMC
(edited by DMC on 4.4.02 1218)
It's me, it's me- It's D-M-C.
Originally posted by TravisPWBuchanan sez: Well, maybe we CAN do whatever the fuck we want. There is absolutely NO factual, scientific, easily and concretely proven evidence that Hitler was wrong. Personally, I'm with DMC on this one. It's not about principle; it's about the hard reality of the holocaust, and the US/UN decision to do something about it.
So how was it Syria and Lebanon's responsibilty to atone for the holocaust? If we were really so ready to make up for the holocaust, why didn't we give some of OUR land to the Jews? Montana is SO right there, and so much nicer than Israel. Oh, wait, it's their "homeland", except for all those people who came out of Europe, where they CHOSE to go in the first place. According to the "homeland" theory we should evict the white people from Australia, the light skinned people from India, the British from Northern Ireland because DAMNIT, it's not THEIR land. Except we didn't stand by and let those people be slaughtered in the interest of minding our own business. Well, maybe the Irish. You contradict yourself in your post. "It's not about principle", but then you decry the holocaust and Saddam Hussein's alleged military stockpiling. So it's ok for the Jews to discriminate, but don't screw with THEM. Hm. You seem to be quantifying atrocities. "Apartheid is ok, just don't kill anyone." So Israel's in the clear. Was DeKlerk an ok guy then? Pol Pot didn't kill THAT many people, right? Stalin? Noreaga? If you're going to try to morally (there's that word) police the world, you can't play favorites. Eventually it'll bite you in the ass. So WHY does everyone hate Americans? Hmmmm....
I've said this already, Travis, but I'll spell it out again so you and your brilliance can fully take it in. It's not about principle. Repeat, it's not about principle. Many millions of Jews died in the holocaust. Do you think it's *practical* to force these people to stay in Germany, etc.? And, again, I am not morally policing anyone. In fact, I tried to get this argument away from the concept of morality, but you keep returning to it, like a dog to his own vomit. The homeland excuse, obviously, is no more than rationalization, so people can reconcile Israel with their own morality and sense of right and wrong. And Saddam and the holocaust are not about principle, either. It's about not letting people die because maybe that's a good idea.
Do I lie to myself to be happy? In your case, Teddy, I think I can.
There are TONS of places the Jews could have gone post-WWII. America, maybe? The Gypsies didn't get their own country, and they're still around. Nobody FORCED anyone to stay in Germany after the war. Lots of Germans left of their own volition. Though let me agree- moving the Jews out of Germany was probably a good idea. And Stalin shipping them south rather than take the time to kill them- not bad either. Stealing land to give to these people- that's where it gets all fucked up. Especially since the people LIVING on the land at the time had no say in any of it. So it's practical to screw over the Arabs like that?
I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume you look at the Crusades and go "so what's the big deal?"....
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".
The homeland issue might have a bit more credibility if so many of the people currently living in the occupied territories/settlements weren't Jews who have come from the US and other countries in the last decade.
"You used it to shove your miserable daughter down our throats week in and week out...not anymore!" - Ric Flair gives me hope, Raw 3/18/02
"I thought it was cool how HHH just tossed Jericho out of the ring and made him vanish, possibly into another dimension, at the end of the match." - Dr. Unlikely says the funniest thing I've ever read on Wienerville.
Originally posted by TravisThere are TONS of places the Jews could have gone post-WWII. America, maybe? The Gypsies didn't get their own country, and they're still around. Nobody FORCED anyone to stay in Germany after the war. Lots of Germans left of their own volition. Though let me agree- moving the Jews out of Germany was probably a good idea. And Stalin shipping them south rather than take the time to kill them- not bad either. Stealing land to give to these people- that's where it gets all fucked up. Especially since the people LIVING on the land at the time had no say in any of it. So it's practical to screw over the Arabs like that?
I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume you look at the Crusades and go "so what's the big deal?"....
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you're too busy trying to look witty to actally read what I'm posting. The Crusades, Jihad, etc... These things are undertaken for "moral" reasons. They have no practical use. Whether Israel was created under a moral guise or not, it still has, to me, a practical use. Do you really think that America was going to let every Jew in Germany move here? We have enough immigration problems as it is.
As for your statement about stealing land - point taken. But, that's kind of like saying "There are plenty of other schools black people can go to in Alabama!"
Do I lie to myself to be happy? In your case, Teddy, I think I can.
Well then, Big Boy, why was it anyone's job to move the Jews in the first place? They can move themselves just fine. They moved into Germany in the first place. Your practicality argument fails in this discussion because practically speaking (and only as a matter of practicality) Hitler was simply exercising population control-you seem to be all about that..."every Jew in Germany" living here...) Hitler was practicing population control. But everyone knows thats not the case. The issue transcends mere practicality. Obviously we (the Western powers) were trying to cover for ignoring the holocaust in the first place, because a war with Germany (at the time) was not practical. If practicality was the issue, we could have easily stopped at victory over Japan, or immediately pulled out of Europe at the end of the war. But we didn't. I read what you wrote sluggo- and it was a very flawed argument.
Randomwrestling: Where every day is Dino Bravo Day, and we ALL "talk too much".