Israeli forces kill dozens in Gaza as U.S. Embassy opens in Jerusalem

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Nothing against Israel. My agenda is decidedly anti the hateful religionist supremacist ideology of Zionism, as I have stated many times before. No doubt this will not help and you will regurgitate the troll again.

 

Well, if Israel does not have a vast arsenal of non lethal weapons (if that's true? ..link), perhaps it should stop exporting them and stockpile them more. Israel would have done itself more PR favors if it had used more non lethal force at the fence or in many cases none at all hundreds of yards from the fence against demonstrators running away.

 

An independent investigation might ascertain who was egging on whom...the Israeli high command/politicians with its shoot to kill policy or Hamas. 

 

"Nothing against Israel."

 

Pull the other one.

 

You are against Israel's existence. You wish to see it replaced by another construct, which most people, including Israelis will not recognize as Israel. That is what your agenda amounts to. Foisting a supposedly multicultural "vision" on people (from both sides) largely not interested and incapable of maintaining it. This, in a region not especially known for tolerance. The upshot of your faux vision is creating a Palestinian Muslim majority country - and you pretend to have nothing against Israel. Well well.

 

"if that's true? ..link"

 

And you talk about trolling. Posted more than once (and discussed), in at least a couple of topics.Unless mistaken, you even replied to the same on a previous topic. Most recently appears here:

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1038253-israeli-forces-kill-dozens-in gaza as-us-embassy-opens-in-jerusalem/?page=22&tab=comments#comment-12991569

 

Doubt you possess any actual expertise or knowledge when it comes to dealing with violent protests. As far as I'm aware there's a lack of actual, detailed explanation portraying exactly how such means would have been effectively employed. I think that casualty figures would have been higher, if protestors would not have been much deterred and a mass storming of the fence had to be prevented. As for Israel's PR failures, it would have been the case either way - and why would you even pretend to care?

 

The so called "independent investigation" is not currently mandated to investigate the Hamas angle. It focuses solely on Israel. And you pretend outrage that Israel won't cooperate with it....yeah, totally nothing against Israel. Sure thing.

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

I am not anti Semitic. Find a single instance of Jew hatred in my posts. Put up or shut up.

 

Why should Palestinians pay the price for other countries' and religions' persecution of Jews?

 

As I have said many times, I support compensation/repatriation (if they want it) for all genuinely ethnically cleansed peoples as part of a peace settlement in this conflict..Jews, Christians and Muslims.

 

I have no problem with Israel being a haven for any Jew in the world who is genuinely persecuted, but not to have supremacist rights over all other peoples in Palestine based purely on religion, and refuse them the right to return to their homes simply because it would upset the demographics.

 

This argument that it's OK for Zionists to dispossess and basically do what they like to Palestinians because people who shared the same religion lived there some thousands of years ago, as have many other peoples and religions!, has got to be one of the most farcical in the Zionist playbook...debunked many times before. Jerusalem has been Palestinian longer than London has been English.

???? in response to your paragraph one... if this is not suggestive of anti Jew sentiment, nothing is... but that’s only my opinion

 

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

Nothing against Israel. My agenda is decidedly anti the hateful religionist supremacist ideology of Zionism, as I have stated many times before.

Meanwhile... continually demonising Israel’s actions, whilst ignoring worse actions against Jews, by Muslims, is arguably anti Jewish... anti Semitic, as you won’t recognise this point.( as is your aggressive use of the term Zion and Zionist)

 

that said, I’m not sure about putting up or shutting up, as I don’t recall saying anyone hated Jews, although I definitely did say biased and anti Semitic... but... as above... proven imho

 

next... Palestinians are paying the price for electing and following a terrorist organization who’s founding charter calls for the obliteration of jews... historically they have been subjected to near extermination by others with a similar intent, so being nervous about the Palestinians is kind of understandable.... if you take a non anti Semitic view, for a minute ( two should not be needed)

 

and then paragraph three.... it doesn’t matter if you support repatriation of hundreds of thousands of Jews, or rebirthing the millions already exterminated, because it’s a crappy argument, as the areas that they would need to be repatriated too, aren’t really viable options for them.... unless you think 250,000 Jews could return to Iran. ( obviously I don’t)

 

paragraph four... what... isreal only for persecuted Jews, is that it? No... bad wording I assume. Meanwhile, the origional 1948 partition of the area, was stupid and indefensible by a sovereigns nation, with one area of the origional state of isreal, being ten miles wide, making it damn near open to sniper fire for the entire section of the nation (let’s not forget the tragedy of sniper fire over Sarajevo)

 

thats it’s about demographics is something you keep regurgitating, which doesn’t make it true. With a population of 9 million in Israel, 6.5 million of which are Jews, 10,000 non Jews won’t effect demographics.

 

i need a better explaination to understand your point on this... if you have already made the point, I missed it somewhere back there in the previous 32 pages, so please point me to the post (thanks in advance on that one)

 

but again (a point you consistently ignore, amplifying my opinion that you are anti Semite).. this is not really about religion... it’s about defending a border being assaulted by a terrorist organization who’s gazetted intent has always been to obliterate the Jewish people

 

regards your last paragraph... Palestine has been a country since November 15, 1988.... (still not a UN member state) so... really? Now you want to get back into history with me.

 

Rome renamed the joint kingdoms of isreal and Judah, Palestine, after quelling the Jewish revolts two thousand years ago, to disinherit the Jewish people from their homelands, which was theirs, till then, by conquest, just as England became Norman, by conquest (with resultant change in the ruling dynasty, accompanied with displacement by Norman’s and persecution and disinheritance of Anglo saxons)

 

but it I digress... back to how long Palestine has existed. The term was first used to describe the area between Asia Minor and Egypt, by the Greeks, around 600BCE.... it was a geographical description, including such areas as the judean mountains (think about that... judean mountains... jud... jews... that do anything for you?... no?) 

 

but wait.... the joint kingdoms of isreal and Judah existed under Joshua and king David circa 1000BCE... what? That’s 400 years before Herodotus started calling the area Palestine.

 

so... basically... everything you say is wrong, as you would know, if you stopped looking at this from a simplistic anti Semitic point of view... and that brings us back to paragraph one

Edited May 19, 2018 by farcanell

[Morch]

40 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Oh I see...I think so anyway..your post was confusing. Is it the right of return thing you are on about?

 

Israel could continue to be a safe refugee haven for any Jew in the world who is genuinely persecuted, with a whole host of other resident visa categories..family reunion, marriage, retirement, religious studies, startup entrepreneurs, skilled etc just like any other true modern democracy.

 

But not just to be able to step off the plane from New York and on the basis of religion alone claim instant citizenship and a housing package on land confiscated from Palestinians, now languishing in refugee camps who still hold the title deeds to their homes. That's the supremacist bit I object to.

 

You object to the injustice of the Palestinians being driven from their homes. The argument is that the tragedy suffered by the Jews does not justify this. Two wrong don't make a right and all that. Yet, you advocate a Palestinian Right of Return, to the detriment and at the expense (to be clear, not in the financial sense) of the Israelis. So in this case, the previous principal is ignored.

 

The rest of your crapola is just lame deflection.

 

 

 

[Scott]

Posts removed.  

[dexterm]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

"Nothing against Israel."

 

Pull the other one.

 

You are against Israel's existence. You wish to see it replaced by another construct, which most people, including Israelis will not recognize as Israel. That is what your agenda amounts to. Foisting a supposedly multicultural "vision" on people (from both sides) largely not interested and incapable of maintaining it. This, in a region not especially known for tolerance. The upshot of your faux vision is creating a Palestinian Muslim majority country - and you pretend to have nothing against Israel. Well well.

 

"if that's true? ..link"

 

And you talk about trolling. Posted more than once (and discussed), in at least a couple of topics.Unless mistaken, you even replied to the same on a previous topic. Most recently appears here:

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1038253-israeli-forces-kill-dozens-in gaza as-us-embassy-opens-in-jerusalem/?page=22&tab=comments#comment-12991569

 

Doubt you possess any actual expertise or knowledge when it comes to dealing with violent protests. As far as I'm aware there's a lack of actual, detailed explanation portraying exactly how such means would have been effectively employed. I think that casualty figures would have been higher, if protestors would not have been much deterred and a mass storming of the fence had to be prevented. As for Israel's PR failures, it would have been the case either way - and why would you even pretend to care?

 

The so called "independent investigation" is not currently mandated to investigate the Hamas angle. It focuses solely on Israel. And you pretend outrage that Israel won't cooperate with it....yeah, totally nothing against Israel. Sure thing.

A just two state solution is the only way Israel can remain predominantly Jewish and democratic. It's people like me who are best friends of Israel. People like you and Zionists apologists are digging a deeper hole for the Israeli Jewish population which is sliding inevitably into a one state solution with very unpleasant overt apartheid in the interim.

 

If my ultimate ideal is a multicultural secular democracy (you know the sort of place most of the forum members here actually live in..as an Israeli maybe you arent aware of such a concept!) you are all for hypocritically maintaining the present racist supremacist Zionist state, even though you admit that the occupation is illegal and that Palestinian refugees lost their homes in Israel during the Nakba, but still you support Zionist Israel's refusal to allow Palestinian refugees to return because it would upset Israel's phoney Jewish demographics majority

 

Israel can only be a predominantly Jewish state and a democracy within two states, or an apartheid regime, where the minority of Jews control the lives of a majority of Palestinians..what we have now. Far more eminent people than I such as Obama and John Kerry and others have said the same.

 

Your link is a premium Haaretz that forum members and I cannot open and yes you are mistaken I did not reply to it , because I did not see it so I am completely unaware of what you are rabbiting on about.

 

If fewer unnecessary deaths on the fence means better PR for Israel, I am all for it. You who don't seem to care either way.

 

>>You are against Israel's existence. You wish to see it replaced by another construct, which most people, including Israelis will not recognize as Israel.
 
Well that's the dilemma that you and Israel must face. You can't have a modern civilized democracy and a state with preferential treatment solely for the minority religion.

No doubt folks in the south after Jim Crow and white South Africans after 94 bemoaned change. Life just aint going to be the same no more.

Get over it!

Work out a just peace agreement for 2 viable state where Israel could retain some of its predominantly Jewish character, or work out mechanisms for a peaceful gradual transition to one man one vote in one state.

 

Otherwise this week's events will simply repeat themselves or escalate. Things cant stay like this forever.

[dexterm]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You object to the injustice of the Palestinians being driven from their homes. The argument is that the tragedy suffered by the Jews does not justify this. Two wrong don't make a right and all that. Yet, you advocate a Palestinian Right of Return, to the detriment and at the expense (to be clear, not in the financial sense) of the Israelis. So in this case, the previous principal is ignored.

 

The rest of your crapola is just lame deflection.

 

 

 

I can't believe what you are writing. Are you saying that Palestinians must justifiably suffer being ethnically cleansed into Gaza and the West Bank to pay for the tragedy Jews suffered in the Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany?

[dexterm]

8 hours ago, farcanell said:

???? in response to your paragraph one... if this is not suggestive of anti Jew sentiment, nothing is... but that’s only my opinion

 

Meanwhile... continually demonising Israel’s actions, whilst ignoring worse actions against Jews, by Muslims, is arguably anti Jewish... anti Semitic, as you won’t recognise this point.( as is your aggressive use of the term Zion and Zionist)

 

that said, I’m not sure about putting up or shutting up, as I don’t recall saying anyone hated Jews, although I definitely did say biased and anti Semitic... but... as above... proven imho

 

next... Palestinians are paying the price for electing and following a terrorist organization who’s founding charter calls for the obliteration of jews... historically they have been subjected to near extermination by others with a similar intent, so being nervous about the Palestinians is kind of understandable.... if you take a non anti Semitic view, for a minute ( two should not be needed)

 

and then paragraph three.... it doesn’t matter if you support repatriation of hundreds of thousands of Jews, or rebirthing the millions already exterminated, because it’s a crappy argument, as the areas that they would need to be repatriated too, aren’t really viable options for them.... unless you think 250,000 Jews could return to Iran. ( obviously I don’t)

 

paragraph four... what... isreal only for persecuted Jews, is that it? No... bad wording I assume. Meanwhile, the origional 1948 partition of the area, was stupid and indefensible by a sovereigns nation, with one area of the origional state of isreal, being ten miles wide, making it damn near open to sniper fire for the entire section of the nation (let’s not forget the tragedy of sniper fire over Sarajevo)

 

thats it’s about demographics is something you keep regurgitating, which doesn’t make it true. With a population of 9 million in Israel, 6.5 million of which are Jews, 10,000 non Jews won’t effect demographics.

 

i need a better explaination to understand your point on this... if you have already made the point, I missed it somewhere back there in the previous 32 pages, so please point me to the post (thanks in advance on that one)

 

but again (a point you consistently ignore, amplifying my opinion that you are anti Semite).. this is not really about religion... it’s about defending a border being assaulted by a terrorist organization who’s gazetted intent has always been to obliterate the Jewish people

 

regards your last paragraph... Palestine has been a country since November 15, 1988.... (still not a UN member state) so... really? Now you want to get back into history with me.

 

Rome renamed the joint kingdoms of isreal and Judah, Palestine, after quelling the Jewish revolts two thousand years ago, to disinherit the Jewish people from their homelands, which was theirs, till then, by conquest, just as England became Norman, by conquest (with resultant change in the ruling dynasty, accompanied with displacement by Norman’s and persecution and disinheritance of Anglo saxons)

 

but it I digress... back to how long Palestine has existed. The term was first used to describe the area between Asia Minor and Egypt, by the Greeks, around 600BCE.... it was a geographical description, including such areas as the judean mountains (think about that... judean mountains... jud... jews... that do anything for you?... no?) 

 

but wait.... the joint kingdoms of isreal and Judah existed under Joshua and king David circa 1000BCE... what? That’s 400 years before Herodotus started calling the area Palestine.

 

so... basically... everything you say is wrong, as you would know, if you stopped looking at this from a simplistic anti Semitic point of view... and that brings us back to paragraph one

>> I don’t recall saying anyone hated Jews, although I definitely did say biased and anti Semitic
.. that's a contradiction. I think you had better sort out your terminology. Irrational hatred of people solely because they are Jews and anti Semitism are the same thing.

I am neither.

 

Zionism was originally solely a political ideology that is the basis of most of Israel's laws today that grants preference to one religion over another. Google it. I despise all forms of discrimination.

 

You argument that Israel should not be criticized, because others have done terrible things too is meaningless whataboutery.

 

Palestinians in the area that Israel presently controls (Israel, West Bank and Gaza) outnumber Israeli Jews. 6.8 million to 6.5 million. And that's not even counting Palestinians in refugee camps in neighboring countries  and the wider Palestinian diaspora.
https://972mag.com/palestinians-are-the-majority-is-it-apartheid-yet/134125/

 

A minority of Jews is controlling the lives of the majority Muslims and Christians throughout Palestine without giving them equal civil and human rights, nor allowing them to return to their homes. That's called apartheid.

 

 

[Thorgal]

11 hours ago, farcanell said:

But if you want to go biblical, verses historical.... Noah landed on the slopes of mount Arafat.... and his heirs inherited the Middle East etc etc ( yer, right... let’s not talk biblical)

 

Mount Arafat ? (should be Ararat...)

 

I doubt history is the answer in such threads.

...but it's worth a shot...

Edited May 19, 2018 by Thorgal

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, dexterm said:

I can't believe what you are writing. Are you saying that Palestinians must justifiably suffer being ethnically cleansed into Gaza and the West Bank to pay for the tragedy Jews suffered in the Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany?

And he is also writing Palestinians don't have the right to return because Israel has it now.

 

Hypocrisy at its best.

[simple1]

37 minutes ago, stevenl said:

And he is also writing Palestinians don't have the right to return because Israel has it now.

 

Hypocrisy at its best.

If you are responsible for the security of Israeli citizens would you authorise 'right of return' for Palestinians; don't you think it really is the only realistic option not to permit. Don't know if Israel has compensated those who 'lost' their properties, if not Israeli government should.

[stevenl]

14 minutes ago, simple1 said:

If you are responsible for the security of Israeli citizens would you authorise 'right of return' for Palestinians; don't you think it really is the only realistic option not to permit. Don't know if Israel has compensated those who 'lost' their properties, if not Israeli government should.

It shows the hypocrisy of the Israeli government, and in this case the poster who mentions it in passing, finding it the most natural thing in the world.

[simple1]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

It shows the hypocrisy of the Israeli government, and in this case the poster who mentions it in passing, finding it the most natural thing in the world.

Am I correct you're comparing the Jewish 'right of return'. If so don't believe in current circumstances. likely for years to come, Israel has any option but to decline Palestinian requests. 

[farcanell]

7 hours ago, dexterm said:

>> I don’t recall saying anyone hated Jews, although I definitely did say biased and anti Semitic
.. that's a contradiction. I think you had better sort out your terminology. Irrational hatred of people solely because they are Jews and anti Semitism are the same thing.

I am neither.

 

Zionism was originally solely a political ideology that is the basis of most of Israel's laws today that grants preference to one religion over another. Google it. I despise all forms of discrimination.

Good morning dex

 

im having to break your post up a bit.... there’s just too much fun to be had, and I need to go on a diet, entailing smaller mouthfuls.

 

alrighty.... paragraph one

I believe your saying I need to sort out my terminology, because I said or inferred that a Jew hater is not (nessesarily) an anti Semite..... and that being biased, does not (nessesarily) mean one is a Jew hater

 

firstly... I added in ( nessesarily) because obviously at the bad boy end of the scale, an antisemite, can indeed be a Jew hater, which is kind of obvious.... but, imho, there is a scale, and wonder of wonders, google agrees with me. Here’s the guts of what wiki says..... antisemitism is hostility to, prejudice or discrimination against Jews. A person holding these views is an antisemite. Antisemitism is also considered to be a form of racism.

 

so.... in my opinion, by continually and stridently referencing one side of the conflict only, with no regards whatsoever to the other, you are repeated demonstrating a prejudice (prejudice... usually an unfavorable position held against others for their.... etc etc... beliefs)

 

so... having sorted out my use of terminology, I have again countered your erroneous postings, as my use of the term is indeed correct and valid. This also holds true for the use of the term “ biased” ( biased... a prejudice against one thing, person or group, usually in a way considered to be unfair)... it’s unfair not to consider both sides of the argument, which is what you are doing, by and large ( yes.. maybe you can throw in an expert from a post were you say poor Jews... but I doubt it, and anyway...., the overwhelming preponderance of your antiemetic comments would drown that out

 

so again... my terminology is correct... and now you know the correct usages that these words convey... hopefully a learning curve for you

 

now... paragraph two

Zionism is the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland in the historical land of Israel, with the actual word first being used in 1890 in a students journal called “self emancipation”

modern zionism grew in popularity due to ongoing persecution of the Jewish diaspora, and as an imagery response to other nations exclusivity policies against Jews (you know what I mean.... well cited by me already... denied citizen ship etc or made enemies of the state of egypt in 1970 etc etc)

so... it’s a popularist movement to restore Jews to their historical homelands of Israel, which yes, does have political connotations, but that does not mean it drives modern isreally political thinking, as a whole.... if it did, then the 30% (or thereabouts) of non Jews in isreal, would not exist

that said... your use of the term, which was originally used in relationship to the peaceful return of Jews to their historical homelands  (google founder) has been consistently negative, inferring.... back to the top of the page we go... again ( which is why I need to use smaller pages)

 

now... to be perfectly clear... you say you despise all forms of discrimination ( the last six words of the quote I’m referencing)... that’s cool... good man

 

however... your posts do not reflect condemnation for anyone other than the Jews of isreal, despite being given many opportunities to do so, the vast majority of your posts remain antiemetic ( maybe 100% antiemetic, but I err to avoid trawling through your posts for one or three pro Jewish words) Ergo...it follows that you don’t despise equally. Ergo... biased. Ergo... antiemetic

 

it gladdens my heart to see that you are becoming accustomed to being found to be demonstrably wrong

[farcanell]

7 hours ago, dexterm said:

You argument that Israel should not be criticized, because others have done terrible things too is meaningless whataboutery.

My argument is not that isreal should not be critised because of past wrongs.... no no no not at all.

 

my argument is that you cannot critise isreal, without looking at the other point of view. You seem ignorant of the other point of view,  so my posts have by nessesity, been biased towards the isreally point of view, to highlight that there is a reasonable and just reason for their current actions and state of being. (maybe not reasonable and just to you... but to some... mainly to those prepared to accept opposing POVs)

 

again. You are biased against Jews, and refuse to acknowledge their point of view.... which, by definition (correct unconfused terminology) makes your postings appear antiemetic ( even if you are not)

 

heres an an interesting fact... some people believe that the holocost never happened... they deny it.... they are blind to different points of view)

 

so... more things your wrong about.... never mind.

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, farcanell said:

My argument is not that isreal should not be critised because of past wrongs.... no no no not at all.

 

my argument is that you cannot critise isreal, without looking at the other point of view. You seem ignorant of the other point of view,  so my posts have by nessesity, been biased towards the isreally point of view, to highlight that there is a reasonable and just reason for their current actions and state of being. (maybe not reasonable and just to you... but to some... mainly to those prepared to accept opposing POVs)

 

again. You are biased against Jews, and refuse to acknowledge their point of view.... which, by definition (correct unconfused terminology) makes your postings appear antiemetic ( even if you are not)

 

heres an an interesting fact... some people believe that the holocost never happened... they deny it.... they are blind to different points of view)

 

so... more things your wrong about.... never mind.

Yes, mind.

 

You're putting somebody down as an anti-semite, because he doesn't like the zionist policies of the Israelian government. And then referring to the holocaust deniers, trying to put someone down even further, is a no go to me.

[farcanell]

8 hours ago, dexterm said:

That's called apartheid.

LOl... no... it’s not.

isreal has a gazetted population of 9 million... 6.5 million are Jews, leaving some 2.5 million others... these others are protected by laws (their effectiveness is debatable... but not their existence)

apartheid did not protect the black Africans of South Africa..

 

anyway... moving on.... if the non Jewish percentage of the population exceeds the Jewish percentage, then it follows that the Jews could be outvoted... because they would be able to vote, which was not the case with black South Africans.. so again.. not apartheid.

 

now... what you really mean ( I think) is that their policy of not allowing Muslims to return, is akin to apartheid ( akin because apartheid is domestic... uurgh... so not apartheid)... in that comparison, the opinion piece written by a very Muslim sounding character, may well have merit.

 

but, as a stand alone comment... wrong... again

[dexterm]

46 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Good morning dex

 

im having to break your post up a bit.... there’s just too much fun to be had, and I need to go on a diet, entailing smaller mouthfuls.

 

alrighty.... paragraph one

I believe your saying I need to sort out my terminology, because I said or inferred that a Jew hater is not (nessesarily) an anti Semite..... and that being biased, does not (nessesarily) mean one is a Jew hater

 

firstly... I added in ( nessesarily) because obviously at the bad boy end of the scale, an antisemite, can indeed be a Jew hater, which is kind of obvious.... but, imho, there is a scale, and wonder of wonders, google agrees with me. Here’s the guts of what wiki says..... antisemitism is hostility to, prejudice or discrimination against Jews. A person holding these views is an antisemite. Antisemitism is also considered to be a form of racism.

 

so.... in my opinion, by continually and stridently referencing one side of the conflict only, with no regards whatsoever to the other, you are repeated demonstrating a prejudice (prejudice... usually an unfavorable position held against others for their.... etc etc... beliefs)

 

so... having sorted out my use of terminology, I have again countered your erroneous postings, as my use of the term is indeed correct and valid. This also holds true for the use of the term “ biased” ( biased... a prejudice against one thing, person or group, usually in a way considered to be unfair)... it’s unfair not to consider both sides of the argument, which is what you are doing, by and large ( yes.. maybe you can throw in an expert from a post were you say poor Jews... but I doubt it, and anyway...., the overwhelming preponderance of your antiemetic comments would drown that out

 

so again... my terminology is correct... and now you know the correct usages that these words convey... hopefully a learning curve for you

 

now... paragraph two

Zionism is the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland in the historical land of Israel, with the actual word first being used in 1890 in a students journal called “self emancipation”

modern zionism grew in popularity due to ongoing persecution of the Jewish diaspora, and as an imagery response to other nations exclusivity policies against Jews (you know what I mean.... well cited by me already... denied citizen ship etc or made enemies of the state of egypt in 1970 etc etc)

so... it’s a popularist movement to restore Jews to their historical homelands of Israel, which yes, does have political connotations, but that does not mean it drives modern isreally political thinking, as a whole.... if it did, then the 30% (or thereabouts) of non Jews in isreal, would not exist

that said... your use of the term, which was originally used in relationship to the peaceful return of Jews to their historical homelands  (google founder) has been consistently negative, inferring.... back to the top of the page we go... again ( which is why I need to use smaller pages)

 

now... to be perfectly clear... you say you despise all forms of discrimination ( the last six words of the quote I’m referencing)... that’s cool... good man

 

however... your posts do not reflect condemnation for anyone other than the Jews of isreal, despite being given many opportunities to do so, the vast majority of your posts remain antiemetic ( maybe 100% antiemetic, but I err to avoid trawling through your posts for one or three pro Jewish words) Ergo...it follows that you don’t despise equally. Ergo... biased. Ergo... antiemetic

 

it gladdens my heart to see that you are becoming accustomed to being found to be demonstrably wrong

Good morning.

 

I am indeed biased against two things:
Zionism, which is a hateful supremacist ideology that insists that Judaism is superior to Islam and Christianity in all areas of life in Palestine: immigration, marriage, places of residence... its apartheid based on religion. Zionism and democracy don't mix, because if the majority Palestinian population (people like the protesters in the OP) is allowed to return, Jews would be a minority. And on purely racist grounds, Zionists wont accept that.

My other bias is against the current right wing government of Israel, because it is behaving very very badly.

 

You are confusing anti Zionism with anti Semitism. Not the same thing. There are many Jews world wide and even Israeli Jews who like me are anti Zionist too. I could list hundreds of Jewish organisations and Jewish individuals who are anti Zionist..surely you can't accuse Jews of being Jew haters.

 

From its very inception Zionists knew that the land they wanted to colonize was already inhabited by Palestinians that they would have to dispossess if they were to have a Jewish state. It was not the "we come in peace [although uninvited] to share process" you portray. It was achieved by power of superior weaponry, finances, organisation, an initial leg up by the previous colonial power Britain and friends in high places especially the USA today. And that process of dispossession is still continuing today all over Israel and the West Bank, and the refusal to allow the OP Palestinian demonstrators to return.

 

The Nakba a 4 part documentary on youtube, with eye witness accounts from both sides,  will give you a true background to the conflict.

[farcanell]

8 hours ago, dexterm said:

Palestinians in the area that Israel presently controls (Israel, West Bank and Gaza) outnumber Israeli Jews. 6.8 million to 6.5 million. And that's not even counting Palestinians in refugee camps in neighboring countries  and the wider Palestinian diaspora.

I saved the best for last... it’s best, because in this wee bit, is the truth, or near enough to it. ( that said, let’s not quibble about the wider diaspora of Palestinians, because again, that’s biased, as it does not recognise a similar diaspora of Jews in other countries)

 

now let’s consider this realistically, from the other point of view,( you know, the non anti Semitic biased view).... if Hamas was to come to power in greater isreal, with the “obliteration” of jews as a founding principle, what do you think would happen? ( be truthful and unbiased... there’s a good chap)

 

ergo... not allowing Hamas to come to power in isreal, is a matter of national (state) defense, which makes perfect sense to Israelites, if not to you.

 

but consider, for a moment, what could happen is isreal adopted a similar charter to Hamas... mmmm... indeed... a gruesome thought. But thankfully, isreal is far more responsible and aware of its international obligations and laws governing a sovereign state, which Palestine is not

 

and finally, for bonus points... again, let’s look at the term Palestinian.

palestinians are all persons, Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, who hail from the area deemed to be Palestine, which is geographical in nature.... palestinians are not exclusively Muslims.... just as Europeans are not exclusively polish ( the geographical center of Europe)... so whilst insisting Israelites are Zionist devils, please start to reference those you champion, as Muslims... you know... to be fair etc

 

now that we are being fair... question... should current Israelites allow citizenship to a religouse group who has vowed to “obliterate” them all?

 

easy question... yes or no will do as an answer

 

 

 

 

[dexterm]

42 minutes ago, farcanell said:

My argument is not that isreal should not be critised because of past wrongs.... no no no not at all.

 

my argument is that you cannot critise isreal, without looking at the other point of view. You seem ignorant of the other point of view,  so my posts have by nessesity, been biased towards the isreally point of view, to highlight that there is a reasonable and just reason for their current actions and state of being. (maybe not reasonable and just to you... but to some... mainly to those prepared to accept opposing POVs)

 

again. You are biased against Jews, and refuse to acknowledge their point of view.... which, by definition (correct unconfused terminology) makes your postings appear antiemetic ( even if you are not)

 

heres an an interesting fact... some people believe that the holocost never happened... they deny it.... they are blind to different points of view)

 

so... more things your wrong about.... never mind.

Sorry, I dont agree with your argument that it's OK for European Zionist colonizers to ethnically cleanse Palestinians because they themselves were ethnically cleansed by Nazi Germans 3,000 miles away.

 

You are quite right: there are in this world Holocaust deniers and anti Semites full of irrational hatred for Jews...I'm not one of them. I think all racism is a form of mental illness, severe inferiority complex: putting down one group to make oneself feel superior.

[farcanell]

12 minutes ago, dexterm said:

You are confusing anti Zionism with anti Semitism. Not the same thing. There are many Jews world wide and even Israeli Jews who like me are anti Zionist too. I could list hundreds of Jewish organisations and Jewish individuals who are anti Zionist..surely you can't accuse Jews of being Jew haters.

Well... according to most of the rest of the world, anti Zionism is the same thing as antisemitism.... so... you know... maybe rethink that one

 

[farcanell]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Sorry, I dont agree with your argument that it's OK for European Zionist colonizers to ethnically cleanse Palestinians because they themselves were ethnically cleansed by Nazi Germans 3,000 miles away.

Great... because I have never made that argument... not once

 

you told me, several pages ago to put up or shut up.... so... please... do point me to any reference regards ethical cleansing... of anyone, by myself

[Morch]

9 hours ago, dexterm said:

A just two state solution is the only way Israel can remain predominantly Jewish and democratic. It's people like me who are best friends of Israel. People like you and Zionists apologists are digging a deeper hole for the Israeli Jewish population which is sliding inevitably into a one state solution with very unpleasant overt apartheid in the interim.

 

If my ultimate ideal is a multicultural secular democracy (you know the sort of place most of the forum members here actually live in..as an Israeli maybe you arent aware of such a concept!) you are all for hypocritically maintaining the present racist supremacist Zionist state, even though you admit that the occupation is illegal and that Palestinian refugees lost their homes in Israel during the Nakba, but still you support Zionist Israel's refusal to allow Palestinian refugees to return because it would upset Israel's phoney Jewish demographics majority

 

Israel can only be a predominantly Jewish state and a democracy within two states, or an apartheid regime, where the minority of Jews control the lives of a majority of Palestinians..what we have now. Far more eminent people than I such as Obama and John Kerry and others have said the same.

 

Your link is a premium Haaretz that forum members and I cannot open and yes you are mistaken I did not reply to it , because I did not see it so I am completely unaware of what you are rabbiting on about.

 

If fewer unnecessary deaths on the fence means better PR for Israel, I am all for it. You who don't seem to care either way.

 

>>You are against Israel's existence. You wish to see it replaced by another construct, which most people, including Israelis will not recognize as Israel.
 
Well that's the dilemma that you and Israel must face. You can't have a modern civilized democracy and a state with preferential treatment solely for the minority religion.

No doubt folks in the south after Jim Crow and white South Africans after 94 bemoaned change. Life just aint going to be the same no more.

Get over it!

Work out a just peace agreement for 2 viable state where Israel could retain some of its predominantly Jewish character, or work out mechanisms for a peaceful gradual transition to one man one vote in one state.

 

Otherwise this week's events will simply repeat themselves or escalate. Things cant stay like this forever.

 

I don't see you as neither side's "friend". Your positions and style of presentation got little to do with an attainable and sustainable peaceful resolution. The lame attempts to misrepresent my views as objecting to a peaceful resolution conforming with a two-state paradigm, is dishonest. My views on this issue have been aired on many a topic. My views aren't similar to Israel's right wing's, and you are well aware of it.

 

Doubt your assumptions about posters' nationality are based on much, even if though present as fact. Waffling on about "multicultural secular democracy", without referencing how this applies or relates both to the ME or to the wishes of either people does not convey neither knowledge, nor common sense. Deciding these are the best circumstances and stage to conduct a social engendering experiment, would require much better reasoning than appears (or rather, missing from) in your rants.

 

What I support is not making the situation worse, which seems to be where most of your posts direct to. Hard to see how allowing a mass migration of Palestinians into Israel (especially without prior agreement and understandings) would result in anything but chaos and mayhem. The added "ideological" nonsense and fake interpretation you insist to lay on my views is yours, not mine. Instead of implying or making up rubbish about my position, perhaps find a single post in which I object to a two-state solution, or convey support for other options. Until then, you simply lie and troll.

 

With regard to the State Comptroler's report - as per script, you first cast doubt that something posted is real. Then bring up some bogus argument as reason not to accept it, followed by ignoring the point made. Same as you did with regard to Hamas owning up to their own casualties, back when the protests started. Those not pretending to be totally clueless can easily find a rendition of the article elsewhere (you certainly can, as demonstrated in the past). Allow me to take the "unaware" with a truckload of salt. Notably, no actual, meaningful comment on the effectiveness of viability of non-lethal means in the circumstances - just another deflection, then.

 

Considering all your posts are aimed at generating and highlighting bad PR for Israel, the faux support for "better PR for Israel" seems dubious, if not plain disingenuous. In my experience, there's little chance Israel wouldn't get bad PR out of such instances - that's a factual observation, which you twisted  to a question of "caring".

 

My personal dilemmas are mostly mundane, thanks. As for my political views - either demonstrate I identify with the nonsense you spew or go trolling elsewhere (fat chance of either...).

.

Working out a peace agreement requires, at minimum, two parties. Your posts consistently gloss over one Palestinian faction clearly not into that, with the other not being committed or able to commit. That Israel exhibits similar trends is true, but the impression you seek to create, whereby this got nothing to do with Palestinian positions is absurd and misleading.

[dexterm]

45 minutes ago, farcanell said:

I saved the best for last... it’s best, because in this wee bit, is the truth, or near enough to it. ( that said, let’s not quibble about the wider diaspora of Palestinians, because again, that’s biased, as it does not recognise a similar diaspora of Jews in other countries)

 

now let’s consider this realistically, from the other point of view,( you know, the non anti Semitic biased view).... if Hamas was to come to power in greater isreal, with the “obliteration” of jews as a founding principle, what do you think would happen? ( be truthful and unbiased... there’s a good chap)

 

ergo... not allowing Hamas to come to power in isreal, is a matter of national (state) defense, which makes perfect sense to Israelites, if not to you.

 

but consider, for a moment, what could happen is isreal adopted a similar charter to Hamas... mmmm... indeed... a gruesome thought. But thankfully, isreal is far more responsible and aware of its international obligations and laws governing a sovereign state, which Palestine is not

 

and finally, for bonus points... again, let’s look at the term Palestinian.

palestinians are all persons, Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, who hail from the area deemed to be Palestine, which is geographical in nature.... palestinians are not exclusively Muslims.... just as Europeans are not exclusively polish ( the geographical center of Europe)... so whilst insisting Israelites are Zionist devils, please start to reference those you champion, as Muslims... you know... to be fair etc

 

now that we are being fair... question... should current Israelites allow citizenship to a religouse group who has vowed to “obliterate” them all?

 

easy question... yes or no will do as an answer

 

 

 

 

I don't champion any religion. I am a 110% atheist.

 

I champion the fight against social injustice. I don't like bullies. If the internet or I had been around in the 1930s I would have been championing gays, Romany, Jews, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Quakers and the disabled against fascism.

 

There are various ways to gradually incorporate Palestinians into Israeli society (not necessarily by opening the fence overnight), and I am sure when that finally happens, Israelis are smart enough to establish security checks and balances to control all extremists who want to undermine the state including their own religious and ultra Nationalist fanatics.

 

ONE state solution.
Personally I would like to see a secular one state true modern democracy encompassing all the peoples who call themselves Palestinians and Israelis...Jews Muslims Christians. With a constitutional separation of State from any religion becoming a dominant voice in lawmaking. Other tweaks too such as citizenship being a privilege earned through voluntary community service eg army, voluntary work, paying taxes for x years etc; private religious schools to be financed 100% by parents so that children grow up mainly in state schools without the religious venom of their parents. Lots more ideas too.

 

TWO state solution
Again with security checks and balances. Based on the well known formula: return to 67 borders with land swaps, shared capital Jerusalem, compensation/recognition of all refugees (both Jews and Palestinians).
The two peoples after decades of living side by side in peace and prosperity grow to trust each other.

 

TWO state confederation.
Palestinians and Jews have the right to live work and worship wherever they like but have voting rights in separate states.

Other possible models too.

 

All 3 of course would have teething troubles with remnants of fanatics on both sides wishing to destroy the peace.
 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

And he is also writing Palestinians don't have the right to return because Israel has it now.

 

Hypocrisy at its best.

 

That's, at best, a misrepresentation of what I posted and my standing positions.

 

I consistently differentiate between rights (or supposed rights) of both sides, prevailing conditions, a realistic take on the possibility of them being materialized, and the likely implications of such.

 

For example, claiming that the Palestinians possess the Right of Return, and that it can and should be fully applied regardless of any other considerations are different claims. That people got rights, does not always imply that these can be addressed to the letter, or even to the people's satisfaction. This isn't an "ideological" point of view, but a pragmatic, realistic one.

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Yes, mind.

 

You're putting somebody down as an anti-semite, because he doesn't like the zionist policies of the Israelian government. And then referring to the holocaust deniers, trying to put someone down even further, is a no go to me.

As you like... but my version is that I’m “putting someone down” because they will not look at the opposing point of view.

 

citing the holocost is simply a method of hilighting that there are different points of view. ( and if I was putting someone down over this, it would be the scum skinhead and neo nazi organizations spewing their filth, not someone I was trying to engage in a meaningful discussion)

 

Anyway.... That’s whats nessesary in a debate, or argument, especially when doing so with someone intent on completely ignoring the opposing point of view

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, dexterm said:

After wading through your usual turgid obfuscation, your bottom line is you dont wish the current Israeli and and your version of reality to be disturbed: a state based on the supremacist ideology of Zionism.

 

The OP demonstrators and I are telling you that in the 21st century that type of apartheid has to change.

Get over it.

 

Your time would be better spent figuring out ways of allowing the two peoples to live in peace together rather than head in the sand constantly defending the apartheid status quo.

 

You keep blatantly misrepresenting my posts, adding fake interpenetration in line with your made up versions of my views. About as dishonest as expected.

 

The current situation is bad. You constantly push for actions which would make it worse. There is no scenario in which allowing mass migration of Palestinians into Israel will not result in more chaos, mayhem and bloodshed. Your posts fail to address or even register this point.

 

Not particularly interested in your warped take on Zionism, or its constant application to whatever. Considering you can't even bring yourself to address problematic trends and ideology on the Palestinian side, or their implications, the one sided torrent of nonsense is less than meaningless.

 

Your time would be better spent not pretending I haven't addressed, on numerous posts and topics, ways to advance and allow a peaceful resolution.

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Again I cant believe what you write. Are you saying it is a "wrong" for Muslims Christians and Jews to live peacefully together? 

 

Obviously, I haven't written or said any such nonsense. That's something you made up. Again.

 

All to cover the impossibility of the selectively applied "two wrongs  don't make a right" bit

 

 

 

[roobaa01]

5555 the uk is relocating its embassy to jerusalem bravo mr. president d. trump is right again.

israel has correctly protected its borders in selfdefence against muslim terrorists .

 

wbr

roobaa01

[Morch]

9 minutes ago, dexterm said:

I thought at first you genuinely wanted to know the background to the conflict. I can see now that your material is standard Zionist mythology troll playbook stuff debunked many times on this forum. I wont be feeding the trolls any more.

 

Your extreme, hateful, and one-sided version of things is neither genuine, nor have your "debunked" anything much. There is no requirement to accept your tirades and propaganda as gospel, or even correct.

[farcanell]

Just now, dexterm said:

I thought at first you genuinely wanted to know the background to the conflict. I can see now that your material is standard Zionist mythology troll playbook stuff debunked many times on this forum. I wont be feeding the trolls any more.

Funny funny funny man

 

i have consistently refuted all your posts, so you drop this in, as you apparently lack the capacity to fairly research the background to the conflict, insisting on demonizing isreal, with no recognition of what they are opposing, in trying to preserve their own heritage.

 

and hey.... right there in that post, ( that illicited this pathetic response),  is the charter points for an Israelite state, if you like.... vs the charter of the group you support, which is “to obliterate” the Jewish people

 

???? which is a better, more peaceful charter, to promote shared use of the shared Arab homelands now called Palestine.?

 

Notable is that you consistently refuse to answer the direct questions put to you, in favor of trying to reinvent your arguments, in other rather disingenuous terms.

 

well done?