Tobbaco

[Catoni]

16 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

And how is that different from Christianity?  Ever been to Africa and seen all the churches?  One after the other as you head down the road.  Baptist, Catholic, etc, etc, etc.

        Yes.... but where is their equivalant to ISIS, Al Quaeda, The Armed Islamic Group, Boko Harum, Al Shabaab, Abu Sayyaf, the Taliban,  and the Mullahs of Iran ...ad infinitum ?  

              Do these Christians permit Muslims to build mosques? 

     Many Muslim areas do not allow you to build a Christian church or Synagogue or temple of any other religion. 

[Catoni]

24 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Islamophobic trolls both.

Not sure that Hamas in the OP is attempting to take over the world from the border fence in Gaza while being shot at with live rounds. I think they'd settle for justice in their homeland.

"Not sure that Hamas in the OP is attempting to take over the world from the border fence in Gaza while being shot at with live rounds."

      You're quite right.  They're too busy firing rockets at Jewish villages, and brainwashing potential sucide bombers.

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, Catoni said:

        Yes.... but where is their equivalant to ISIS, Al Quaeda, The Armed Islamic Group, Boko Harum, Al Shabaab, Abu Sayyaf, the Taliban,  and the Mullahs of Iran ...ad infinitum ?  

              Do these Christians permit Muslims to build mosques? 

     Many Muslim areas do not allow you to build a Christian church or Synagogue or temple of any other religion. 

Agreed! The Muslim militants are much more violent.  But Christians still burn mosques down.  And a lot of the Muslim anger is due to the West's exploitation of Africa and the Middle East.  Here's but one example.

 

https://www.politico.eu/interactive/in-pictures-belgium-congo-colonial-past/

 

Quote

Decades after Belgium ended its colonial rule in Congo in 1960, and a century after the atrocities committed in Congo Free State — a region exploited by King Leopold II as a source of wild rubber, palm oil and ivory under a brutal rule that killed at least 10 million Congolese — Belgians are slowly beginning to confront this troubled history.

 

Memories are long.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

Quote

 

Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in the city of Ismailia in March 1928 along with six workers of the Suez Canal Company, as a Pan-Islamic, religious, political, and social movement.^[64]

......

According to al-Banna, contemporary Islam had lost its social dominance, because most Muslims had been corrupted by Western influences.

......

Al-Banna was populist in his message of protecting workers against the tyranny of foreign and monopolist companies.

 

 

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, Catoni said:

        Yes.... but where is their equivalant to ISIS, Al Quaeda, The Armed Islamic Group, Boko Harum, Al Shabaab, Abu Sayyaf, the Taliban,  and the Mullahs of Iran ...ad infinitum ?  

I am not sure why you included the Iranian mullahs in there as, as far as I am aware, they do not commit acts of terror themselves. They may sponsor the acts of others, but history, historical and modern, is full of examples of governments covertly supporting nefarious organisations. That aside, none of the  overtly terrorist organisations you list are formally sanctioned by any internationally recognised body - they are collectives who adhere to particular interpretations of their holy scripture. The other major religions of the world are not without their crazies too - they may not be so prevalent but it does not mean that they don't exist and it doesn't mean that they are no less extreme.

 

11 minutes ago, Catoni said:

     Many Muslim areas do not allow you to build a Christian church or Synagogue or temple of any other religion. 

 Many Muslim areas are perfectly fine with other religions too. 

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I am not sure why you included the Iranian mullahs in there as, as far as I am aware, they do not commit acts of terror themselves. They may sponsor the acts of others, but history, historical and modern, is full of examples of governments covertly supporting nefarious organisations.

The Iranian Mullahs are at the heart of terrorism in the region.

[RuamRudy]

11 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The Iranian Mullahs are at the heart of terrorism in the region.

I am not disputing that at all, but the post I was responding to (1) implied that the Mullahs were executing attacks themselves rather than sponsoring them; (2) made no mention of any other state sponsors of violence. It may seem pedantic, but I think it leads to a blinkered picture of what is already a very fuzzy picture.

[craigt3365]

21 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I am not disputing that at all, but the post I was responding to (1) implied that the Mullahs were executing attacks themselves rather than sponsoring them; (2) made no mention of any other state sponsors of violence. It may seem pedantic, but I think it leads to a blinkered picture of what is already a very fuzzy picture.

Understood!  A very fuzzy picture for sure.  One few of us really understand.

[Ron19]

An off topic troll post has been removed.

[Srikcir]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

Israelis may express support for things in general, and be more reluctant when it comes down to actual details.

Apparently even when Israel's Supreme Court ruled against, for example, the government's illegal seizure of Palestinian houses that were built on privately owned Palestinian land in order to build Israeli settlements, there is no rule of law. Netanyahu simply ignored the Court ruling and was not held accountable.

Where does that leave Israeli's who also opposed Netanyahu? The nation is beginning losing its democratic legitimacy if its citizens are left with diminishing sovereign power to affect abuse of power.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Apparently even when Israel's Supreme Court ruled against, for example, the government's illegal seizure of Palestinian houses that were built on privately owned Palestinian land in order to build Israeli settlements, there is no rule of law. Netanyahu simply ignored the Court ruling and was not held accountable.

Where does that leave Israeli's who also opposed Netanyahu? The nation is beginning losing its democratic legitimacy if its citizens are left with diminishing sovereign power to affect abuse of power.

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that Israeli is a perfect democracy or ever will be one. It's hard to find countries like that anywhere on the planet. 

[wabothai]

On 12/8/2017 at 9:10 AM, Catoni said:

Recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, (which in reality it is, and has been at least since 1948) is something that both Democratic and Republican presidents have been promising to do for decades.

    Finally, Donald Trump is the president who kept the promise.    Shocking ? ?

What's wrong with recognizing reality?    Oh.... it get's terrorists and the far left upset.  Well.... good ! 

For your information trumper, most people in the world are upset

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that Israeli is a perfect democracy or ever will be one. It's hard to find countries like that anywhere on the planet. 

That's a way, way too easy answer. There is a very legitimate point made about democracy in Israel, and you come back with a very general statement referring to other countries. And you often accuse others of deflecting?

Edited December 9, 2017 by stevenl

[Morch]

6 hours ago, car720 said:

Ok.  So tell us the alternatives.

I have trouble with this one myself.  On one hand you have a people who feel that they have been overrun and kicked out of their own country ( a lot like many other indigenous peoples) and on the other hand you have people who feel that they have owned the place for 3,000 years even though they had no recognize existence until recently but subscribe to the right of conquest theory.   A lot like Australia really.

Who has the moral high ground and why?

 

The poster I replied to routinely presents two distinct images of the Palestinians, both contrived. On the one hand, the Palestinians are presented as passive, naive,  bearing no responsibility or accountability for anything much. They are perpetual victims, and as such all criticism and condemnation ought to be suspended. On the other hand, the very same people are touted as prime candidates for either founding a progressive state of their own or prepped to embrace them Western values of liberalism and multiculturalism, by integrating with Israelis. That these presentations are not compatible with each other, never mind reality gives a hint as to most of his nonsense.

 

So when framing things as either a violent struggle or surrender - that's more a point of view suggested by a poster who is a wannabe political activist, rather than a balanced take. One cannot ignore the series of bad choices and crap leadership which got the Palestinians to where they are.

 

The only real gains they ever made toward achieving their national aspirations happened when they negotiated and accepted that this comes with certain concessions. Each instance in which diplomacy was derailed and the route of violence taken, resulted in worsening their circumstances. To put this in context - had the Palestinians accepted the original partition plan, they would have been in a way better position relative to what they may get today. The same applies for each and every consecutive instance. And with each new opportunity botched, the returns get smaller. Is it fair? Probably not. Such is life.

 

The Palestinians would gain nothing from cutting relations with the USA, which still funds them generously. There is no credible alternative mediator readily available. There is no way that these "days of rage" will change Trump's decision. The Arab/Muslim world is in no position (and frankly, are less interested) to provide much support other than relatively mild expressions of solidarity and outrage. 

 

A course of action advocating violence will go nowhere, and will only result in more Palestinian casualties. Some posters may be all for that, as it serves to fuel both their pet agendas and supposedly, will eventually discredit Israel and the USA. Not that it's overly clear if, how or when this will happen, but shouldn't worry them keyboard warriors. Some say - why not take up a non-violent struggle? It's a good question, and not too complicated to answer for anyone with a bit of first hand experience with Arab and/or Palestinian culture. Simply doesn't resonate well with local ethos. There are bits of this, but diluted in their message and inconsistent in application. How about changing course and opting for equal civil rights, then?! Yeah....and just drop that dream of independence and sovereignty, be citizens of Israel? Not an overwhelming winning proposition, not even with the actual interpretation being somewhat removed from the above mentioned kumbaya version.

 

Only two worthwhile things out there. Get back on the negotiations track, and cut the best deal available, while accepting it is going to come short of expectations. Otherwise, focus inwards - internal reconciliation, political and social reform, rebuild institutions associated with statehood, and launch a diplomatic campaign resting on a solid foundation. While applying either, engage the Israeli public directly - build a better understanding, rapport and trust with those forces more receptive to the Palestinian position.

 

As for the rest of your post, I don't really believe  that you any such "trouble", considering the biased and incorrect way you phrase your "argument" and faux question.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, dexterm said:

As I have written many times and again above, but which you seem to have trouble comprehending. So I'll try yet again.

 

I do not support nor recommend a violent resistance..it will only get Palestinians killed. Israel is the only one with a standing heavily weaponized trained army in Palestine. But I can understand the rage of an indigenous people who have been ethnically cleansed from their land twice now, been illegally occupied for the last 50 years, and in the case of Hamas in Gaza been illegally blockaded by Israel for 10 years and seen hundreds of their children slaughtered by Israel's frequent disproportionate weapons testing in the open prison they must call home. I understand why Hamas is enraged. I do not condemn their violent resistance because they have a right to do so in international law.

 

I do not support/encourage violent resistance, because it will only get Palestinians murdered and injured by Israeli thugs. Israel seems to be winning in the violence stakes at the moment: 2 Palestinians dead, and hundreds injured.
I do not condemn them for doing what they have a right to do. Who am I sitting miles away from experiencing their suffering to do so. And I am not going do Zionists' dirty work for them. You are quite capable of besmirching Hamas yourself.
I don't think I can say it more clearly than that.

 

There are different ways of expressing rage.

What I do support, encourage and recommend is passive resistance shaming Israel before the world through social and international media.
And, now that Trump has killed the two state peace process, I wholeheartedly support the passive resistance that PA politician Saeb Erekhat is advocating. 
'Palestinians now appear left with only one viable option, which Palestinian official Saeb Erekat expressed Wednesday: “Now is the time to transform the struggle for one state with equal rights for everyone living in historic Palestine, from the river to the sea.”'
https://972mag.com/trump-confirms-what-israelis-and-palestinians-already-know/131315/

 

I said in a recent thread Trump's speech is a game changer.  The charade is over. I hope the aim of the struggle now moves to one everyone understands.

 

Waffle. And dishonest waffle at that.

 

You have justified and supported Palestinian violence on these forums more than once. Even when the victims were civilians, and even when they were nowhere near the West Bank, East Jerusalem or the Gaza Strip. You may go through this charade of I'm-not-supporting-violence-but-perfectly-understandable-and-I'm-not-going-to-condemn-it all you like. I'm not buying it for a second, and I doubt many do.

 

That you cannot acknowledge anything that might reflect negatively on the Palestinian side, is just an admission of not being able to discuss related issues in anything approaching an objective manner. It renders anything you post suspect, at best. More like a propaganda channel, really. All you have on offer are one-sided tirades, heavily peppered with hyperbolic vehemence and vitriol. You cannot seem to be able to address any question without getting on a soap box first.

 

There is no need to "besmirch" Hamas. It does a perfectly good job at it all by itself. And besides, what is exactly considered "besmirching" in your mind? Pointing out that Hamas advocates violence? It does so openly. Pointing out that this course of action is unlikely to bear any meaningful fruit? You agree to this yourself. So other than blindly defending Hamas, what are you on about?

 

What you support is mindless demonization of anything to do with Israel. What you support is Israel's ceasing to exist - your standard issue spins notwithstanding. Notably, you do not even mention support of the Palestinians among those things you support. It's all about hate. Similarly, the rage (or rather, faux rage) expressed, is not actually about the Palestinian casualties themselves. If this was so, if Palestinian lives were more important than the pet agenda, perhaps there would have been the odd word of criticism directed also at those Palestinian leaders stoking the flames. As it stands, even this is completely partisan when it comes to your posts.

 

Blaming Trump for everything is a cop out. Pretty much the same thing you and other allege Trump is doing. In your world it would seem that the Palestinian can take no other action than engage in violence, clash with the Israeli security forces, suffer casualties and withdraw from upcoming negotiations. I don't think for a second that you do not realize all of these are choices - and that other choice could and can be made. This was always so, whether you feel like acknowledging it or not.

 

Trump's statement is not a positive development with regard to the two-state peace process. But "kill" is an overkill assertion. It's propaganda speak. Provocative as the statement was, it doesn't actually say anything that the Palestinians cannot accept.

 

With all due respect to Saeb Erekat - whom does he represent? And further, should anything a wily lead negotiator for the Palestinian side says ought to be taken at face value? I will remain skeptical on both counts. What I do not have any illusions about is that this is not a viable course of action, nor a positive one. It does not even stem from the co-opted sentiment, but is rather aimed at achieving dominance through other means.

 

You say a whole lot of things on many related threads. Doesn't make the vast majority of them things correct or balanced. Same goes for calling Trump's speech a "game changer". There were numerous instances, events, actions and whatnot related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that were termed in a similar manner. Many of them are barely remembered. Many have become the new normal or even canon.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Apparently even when Israel's Supreme Court ruled against, for example, the government's illegal seizure of Palestinian houses that were built on privately owned Palestinian land in order to build Israeli settlements, there is no rule of law. Netanyahu simply ignored the Court ruling and was not held accountable.

Where does that leave Israeli's who also opposed Netanyahu? The nation is beginning losing its democratic legitimacy if its citizens are left with diminishing sovereign power to affect abuse of power.

 

Another one of them off topic forays....

 

There were various Supreme Court rulings and political going-ons with regard to related issues. I don't think that your summary is completely accurate, but delving into minute specifics would be quite outside the scope of the current topic.

 

To address the wider issue - yes, the current coalition government's actions and attitude do erode and degrade Israel's democracy. Is it really anywhere close to regimes such as Turkey's Erdogan or Israel's immediate neighbors? No. Is it comparable with Western paragons of democratic ideals? No. Somewhere in between, for now.

 

As for Israelis opposing Netanyahu - there are two active investigations into corruption and bribery cases, and two others, potentially worse, in the background. A recent attempt by Netanyahu's cronies to silence law enforcement agencies about them cases, failed spectacularly (with one of them henchmen facing his own set of charges now). There are weekly demonstrations related to these cases.

 

If posters need a reference point, Trump and the USA would do, to a degree. Not same same, though.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

That's a way, way too easy answer. There is a very legitimate point made about democracy in Israel, and you come back with a very general statement. And you often accuse others of deflecting?

 

The answer was (and is) relevant and to the point, if not details (bearing in mind this isn't even the topic). That posters pretend not to grasp that democracies aren't black and white, nor one-size-fits-all, is a sad testament as to the level of discussion.

[Catoni]

2 hours ago, wabothai said:

For your information trumper, most people in the world are upset

     I doubt very much that most people in the world wish to side with Hamas and Hezbollah...  Is so, then there is little hope for the human race if they wish to sink that low.

    But if they are upset.... then they're a little late....Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since at least 1948.  They should have been upset back then.  Trump admitting to it is simply recognizing a fact.  Nothing more.

    Sorry you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.  Who were you hoping for ?   Hillary ?  Or Bernie ? 

[wabothai]

5 minutes ago, Catoni said:

     I doubt very much that most people in the world wish to side with Hamas and Hezbollah...  Is so, then there is little hope for the human race if they wish to sink that low.

    But if they are upset.... then they're a little late....Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since at least 1948.  They should have been upset back then.  Trump admitting to it is simply recognizing a fact.  Nothing more.

    Sorry you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.  Who were you hoping for ?   Hillary ?  Or Bernie ? 

Sorry to disappoint you. I did not speak of hamas nor hezbollah. I speak of the orange war mongering clown pissing off and endangering the lives of many around the world. By the way 2 have already died because of the clown's irresponsible decision.

Edited December 9, 2017 by wabothai

[observer90210]

Things had calmed down for a while, but now  seems the fireworks will light up once again....this is sad for the innocent, on both sides of the wall

[Catoni]

14 minutes ago, wabothai said:

Sorry to disappoint you. I did not speak of hamas nor hezbollah. I speak of the orange war mongering clown pissing off and endangering the lives of many around the world. By the way 2 have already died because of the clown's irresponsible decision.

   

 

14 minutes ago, wabothai said:

Trump is in the U.S. He's nowhere near Israel.  Any people over there dying is because of themselves... not Trump.    Trump is not their mother or father to watch over them.  They are adults over there. With Hamas and Hezbollah and their brainwashed minions making their own horrible decisions..  

 "...war mongering clown pissing off and endangering the lives of many around the world."    I remember when leftists/socialists/ communists talked like that about Ronald Reagan.  When he got elected my socialist sister-in-law yelled "Oh no.. Reagan's the most dangerous man in the world. He's going to kill us all."  Turned out that Ronald Reagan was one of the better presidents the U.S. has had in the past 100 years.  Reagan and his friend, Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of Britain, (the "Iron Lady"), together helped bring the communist Soviet Union to an end. 

     But comrade, you still didn't answer my question:   Who were you hoping to take the presidency ?  Hillary or Bernie ? 

     

[Grouse]

This was a TOTALLY unnecessary move by Delta Tango. Sort of thing that will trigger another 911 downstream. Moronic move, self inflicted wound, own goal, faux pas, tragic. The resulting loss of life can be laid at Delta Tango's small feet.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

This was a TOTALLY unnecessary move by Delta Tango. Sort of thing that will trigger another 911 downstream. Moronic move, self inflicted wound, own goal, faux pas, tragic. The resulting loss of life can be laid at Delta Tango's small feet.

 

Not that I object to the take on the value of Trump's move. But responsibility for the "resulting loss of life" will not be his alone. People do have a choice about how they react. Other leaders have a choice whether to stoke flames or not. Giving a free pass to violence because Trump is moron doesn't make sense.

[Grouse]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Not that I object to the take on the value of Trump's move. But responsibility for the "resulting loss of life" will not be his alone. People do have a choice about how they react. Other leaders have a choice whether to stoke flames or not. Giving a free pass to violence because Trump is moron doesn't make sense.

Agreed but when another 911 rank atrocity occurs you will be able to trace some motivational roots back to Delta Tango

 

As for stoking the flames, Trump has just thrown a Molotov cocktail (Putin cocktail with a splash of polonium) on the flames to divert from his appalling situation.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Grouse

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Agreed but when another 911 rank atrocity occurs you will be able to trace some motivational roots back to Delta Tango

 

As for stoking the flames, Trump has just thrown a Molotov cocktail (Putin cocktail with a splash of polonium) on the flames to divert from his appalling situation.

 

And yet, the heading of the OP is:

Hamas calls for Palestinian uprising against Israel

Add them "days of rage" prescribed by Abbas, throw in comments from the region's usual suspects.

 

Terrorists wishing to carry out 9/11 stuff will come up with whatever. Trump's move adds another excuse for the list.

 

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Waffle. And dishonest waffle at that.

 

You have justified and supported Palestinian violence on these forums more than once. Even when the victims were civilians, and even when they were nowhere near the West Bank, East Jerusalem or the Gaza Strip. You may go through this charade of I'm-not-supporting-violence-but-perfectly-understandable-and-I'm-not-going-to-condemn-it all you like. I'm not buying it for a second, and I doubt many do.

 

That you cannot acknowledge anything that might reflect negatively on the Palestinian side, is just an admission of not being able to discuss related issues in anything approaching an objective manner. It renders anything you post suspect, at best. More like a propaganda channel, really. All you have on offer are one-sided tirades, heavily peppered with hyperbolic vehemence and vitriol. You cannot seem to be able to address any question without getting on a soap box first.

 

There is no need to "besmirch" Hamas. It does a perfectly good job at it all by itself. And besides, what is exactly considered "besmirching" in your mind? Pointing out that Hamas advocates violence? It does so openly. Pointing out that this course of action is unlikely to bear any meaningful fruit? You agree to this yourself. So other than blindly defending Hamas, what are you on about?

 

What you support is mindless demonization of anything to do with Israel. What you support is Israel's ceasing to exist - your standard issue spins notwithstanding. Notably, you do not even mention support of the Palestinians among those things you support. It's all about hate. Similarly, the rage (or rather, faux rage) expressed, is not actually about the Palestinian casualties themselves. If this was so, if Palestinian lives were more important than the pet agenda, perhaps there would have been the odd word of criticism directed also at those Palestinian leaders stoking the flames. As it stands, even this is completely partisan when it comes to your posts.

 

Blaming Trump for everything is a cop out. Pretty much the same thing you and other allege Trump is doing. In your world it would seem that the Palestinian can take no other action than engage in violence, clash with the Israeli security forces, suffer casualties and withdraw from upcoming negotiations. I don't think for a second that you do not realize all of these are choices - and that other choice could and can be made. This was always so, whether you feel like acknowledging it or not.

 

Trump's statement is not a positive development with regard to the two-state peace process. But "kill" is an overkill assertion. It's propaganda speak. Provocative as the statement was, it doesn't actually say anything that the Palestinians cannot accept.

 

With all due respect to Saeb Erekat - whom does he represent? And further, should anything a wily lead negotiator for the Palestinian side says ought to be taken at face value? I will remain skeptical on both counts. What I do not have any illusions about is that this is not a viable course of action, nor a positive one. It does not even stem from the co-opted sentiment, but is rather aimed at achieving dominance through other means.

 

You say a whole lot of things on many related threads. Doesn't make the vast majority of them things correct or balanced. Same goes for calling Trump's speech a "game changer". There were numerous instances, events, actions and whatnot related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that were termed in a similar manner. Many of them are barely remembered. Many have become the new normal or even canon.

>>You have justified and supported Palestinian violence on these forums more than once. 
...That I supposedly "justify" and "support" violence are your words, paraphrase and interpretation - not mine. You obviously view my posts in very hostile biased manner. Up to you.

 

>>That you cannot acknowledge anything that might reflect negatively on the Palestinian side
...The Palestinians are the indigenous people who the ones invaded, dispossessed, and occupied by mainly European colonialists not the other way round. I will not be a Zionist apologist.

I have often made my position very clear, unlike yourself even though repeatedly challenged to define what you actually support.  

 

The OP Hamas represent one form of resistance to the Zionist invaders. I personally think it's futile, and prefer more effective non violent methods, but it is their legal right to do so and who am I from an armchair 1000s of miles away to condemn them for exercising their right to resist.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, dexterm said:

>>You have justified and supported Palestinian violence on these forums more than once. 
...That I supposedly "justify" and "support" violence are your words, paraphrase and interpretation - not mine. You obviously view my posts in very hostile biased manner. Up to you.

 

>>That you cannot acknowledge anything that might reflect negatively on the Palestinian side
...The Palestinians are the indigenous people who the ones invaded, dispossessed, and occupied by mainly European colonialists not the other way round. I will not be a Zionist apologist.

I have often made my position very clear, unlike yourself even though repeatedly challenged to define what you actually support.  

 

The OP Hamas represent one form of resistance to the Zionist invaders. I personally think it's futile, and prefer more effective non violent methods, but it is their legal right to do so and who am I from an armchair 1000s of miles away to condemn them for exercising their right to resist.

 

I view your posts in the manner in which they are posted and in light of their content. Spin all you like - but justifications and support of Palestinian violence are not alien to your posts.

 

Regardless of what you feel toward Israelis or Zionism, that has nothing to do with refusing to acknowledge anything that might reflect negatively on the Palestinians. It simply paints your positions as extremely biased, highly subjective and partisan. Not really broadcasting a whole lot of connection to the "truth" you sometime go on about.

 

That you have made your extreme partisan position clear is your own business. Other than in your imagination posters are not required to make such extreme choices, and may hold less simplistic, hateful, vehement views than yours. to the extent you even had a point, its totally irrelevant.

 

The OP is about the Hamas. And the Hamas are all for violence. Obviously, being a self proclaimed (faux) humanist, you won't criticize this choice, and at the same time milk whatever is possible from each report involving casualties. The Palestinian Authority (or rather, the Fatah) have called for "days of rage" - clashes with the Israeli security forces, which, spin it all you like - amounts to pretty much the same as Hamas.

 

Being an armchair commentator thousands of miles away doesn't seem to hamper you from pronouncing judgement on anything else. Spare me the BS.

 

[Grouse]

I get so bored hearing about Israel. The Jewish people represent less than 0.1% of the world's population but goodness me they make a lot of noise!

 

Look, I get it. I've read the ancient history (Sharma's History of Jerusalem). I am horrified at what happened to the diaspora in Europe in the first half of the last century (my stomach turns every time I read Schindler's Lift!). BUT the UK gave you a homeland. Please play nicely with your neighbours, treat them well.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I get so bored hearing about Israel. The Jewish people represent less than 0.1% of the world's population but goodness me they make a lot of noise!

 

Look, I get it. I've read the ancient history (Sharma's History of Jerusalem). I am horrified at what happened to the diaspora in Europe in the first half of the last century (my stomach turns every time I read Schindler's Lift!). BUT the UK gave you a homeland. Please play nicely with your neighbours, treat them well.

 

This topic is about the Palestinians making noise, though. And the "neighbours" aren't all that into playing nice themselves.

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

This topic is about the Palestinians making noise, though. And the "neighbours" aren't all that into playing nice themselves.

Come on, you chaps are big enough to deal with the nomads? Show some largesse, some noblesse oblige!

 

Let them share Jerusalem equitably. It's all all nonsense anyway.

[Morch]

Just now, Grouse said:

Come on, you chaps are big enough to deal with the nomads? Show some largesse, some noblesse oblige!

 

Let them share Jerusalem equitably. It's all all nonsense anyway.

 

 

Quote

....nonsense....