UN announces record number of children displaced by Israel's demolitions

[Ulysses G.]

Huey is correct about this. In America even the Klu Klux Klan are allowed to express their hateful opinions publicly.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[kuffki]

And here you are defending those who do not believe or allow any freedom, which includes speech, opinion or beliefs.

And attack those who are democratic and do have and support freedoms of above mentioned.

Little hypocritical me thinks

o

I donot know what is more scary?

Someone who thinks like this or someone who thinks it's ok to speak out lin public showing his opinions.

Which part of unapproved construction is hard to understand?

Israel dud not go into Palestinian controlled territory and demolished the houses. Israel demolished unapproved buildings on it's territory with warnings.

I reckon Israel should throw out all Arabs, take their possessions build a china wall and let them do whatever they wish.

Israel"s treatment of Palestinians has reached a new low.

The daily harassment,intimidation, and murder is an act of terrorism by the State of Israel against the Palestinian people.

Western Jewish dominated media will give little or no coverage of Israel inhuman treatment of the Palestinians.

Too True. But what's new there?

It will remain that way until either the isrealis kill all, or the vast majority of, the Palestinians, similar to how Americans killed most of the indigenous tribes off. Or America either chooses not too or is no longer in a position too, back israel in it's apartheid and the pendulum of Karma swings back against the occupiers. But my guess is that the rest of the world will just stand by while isreal kills the Palestinians off, backed by shucking and jiving zionist apologist US politicians, paid too much to man up and do the right thing.

I would rather the US ditch isreal and back the Gulf States in return for cheap oil. They would do it too. Like imagine if the US made a deal with just the GCC countries. something like Oil for military protection. Put it too a vote in the US, israel's friendship or $2 a gallon gas. See how many Americans would support israel then.

I know what's more scary than either. Someone who thinks if you don't agree with him you should not have the right express your opinion publicly.

In the US we have the Bill of Rights, the first Amendment they spelled out was the Freedom of Speech. The Second, the right to keep and bear arms, so that we may defend that very first right from people of your mentality.

Either way untill it's deleted or I'm Banned or I change my mind, thats what I feel, and you don't have to like it, no more than I need to like whatever you have to say.

Its a forum of opinions.

[geriatrickid]

[ know what's more scary than either. Someone who thinks if you don't agree with him you should not have the right express your opinion publicly.

In the US we have the Bill of Rights, the first Amendment they spelled out was the Freedom of Speech. The Second, the right to keep and bear arms, so that we may defend that very first right from people of your mentality.

Either way untill it's deleted or I'm Banned or I change my mind, thats what I feel, and you don't have to like it, no more than I need to like whatever you have to say.

Its a forum of opinions.

Yes, indeed you are entitled to your opinion. However, it is your view that is based upon misinformation, taking events and facts out of conext and false assumptions. If I look at the economic data on housing, income, education in the Palestinian territories and concluded that the arabs were lazy uneducated disease ridden bums living on handouts, would that be a fair assessment? That's what the data shows, but I know that is not the case. It would be an erroneous conclusion.

I believe it is you that has a preconceived opinion and seeks out information to validate those views. Of course it is unfortunate that some arab dwellings were demolished. yet if one digs deeper one sees that in many cases, these were not true residential dwellings. In most cases they were second homes, building shells or structures that did not even meet the most basic of local building codes. If one were to try and erect a building in a developed country municipality that did not meet basic code, the structure would indeed be demolished. Go and look at the pictures of these structures.

[WeeGB]

For those too busy spreading zionist propaganda, this topic is about children being made homeless by Israels demolition policy. If the UN has published a statement that 67 of these kids have been treated this way in the past month, I would far rather believe that, than any of the pro-jewish comments on this forum. It is regrettable that Israels heavy handed policies, are more than likely increasing Palestinian resentment against them even further. This kind of behaviour will also only harden the middle east's attitude to Israels number one ally, the USA, who seem intent on continuing to ignore all acts of terrorism committed by Israel, and it's other "friends", such as Bahrein, and Saudi Arabia, while condemning countries it sees as a threat such as Iran and Syria. This whole demolition programme reminds me of the Nazis forcing jewish families from their homes in areas they occupied in World War II. Obviously lessons have been learned. How would you feel if you were a child, and your Dad built you a house to live in? Then an army of occupation came along and knocked it down, while you could see jews building more and more houses, for their kids to live in.

Seems to me that Israel and the USA are creating more terrorists than they are stopping.

[Ulysses G.]

Yes, indeed you are entitled to your opinion. However, it is your view that is based upon misinformation, taking events and facts out of conext and false assumptions.

geriatrickid's posts are full of verified facts about this situation, but some folks prefer to make up their own alternate realities about "pro-Jewish propaganda".

Edited June 10, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[kuffki]

For those too busy spreading zionist propaganda, this topic is about children being made homeless by Israels demolition policy. If the UN has published a statement that 67 of these kids have been treated this way in the past month, I would far rather believe that, than any of the pro-jewish comments on this forum. It is regrettable that Israels heavy handed policies, are more than likely increasing Palestinian resentment against them even further. This kind of behaviour will also only harden the middle east's attitude to Israels number one ally, the USA, who seem intent on continuing to ignore all acts of terrorism committed by Israel, and it's other "friends", such as Bahrein, and Saudi Arabia, while condemning countries it sees as a threat such as Iran and Syria. This whole demolition programme reminds me of the Nazis forcing jewish families from their homes in areas they occupied in World War II. Obviously lessons have been learned. How would you feel if you were a child, and your Dad built you a house to live in? Then an army of occupation came along and knocked it down, while you could see jews building more and more houses, for their kids to live in.

Seems to me that Israel and the USA are creating more terrorists than they are stopping.

so lets get it right.

When PA beats, tortures and kills its own citizens-thats perfectly acceptable

When Hamas tortures, kills, its own people, uses kids as human shields is also perfectly acceptable

HOWEVER

When Israel demolishes un-approved developments, which means built without a permit, which also means may not comply with Israel's building codes-thats bad Israel ????? Did i get it right

Parens of those kids who chose to ignore the rules and regulations are totally innocent and are not to blame?

Now correct me if i am wrong, but i always thought one of the main duties of a parent was to protect the kids with any means necessary, which includes shielding them from the bad and protecting from any harm coming their way.

So building a house without a permit on territory occupied by the "so called enemy", how does that fall into the parent duty?Parents were well aware of the possibility of demolition and possible violence, yet went ahead and did it anyways, So where should the blame rest one more time please?

Now, 67 kids. considering that they usually have 3-5 kids per family, that would mean approx 20 or so homes were demolished. Now put those "homes" into a condo or unit block and you have 1-2 unit blocks.

WOW thats real oppression

[slapout]

Both sides seem intent on attempting to get other countries to pick one side or the other. Individually, I would not piss on either one if they were on fire. The old second/third generation, Hatfield, McCoy feud comes to mind. Neither one knows for sure what/who started this mess, but believe the legends/stories they have heard about and relate them as truths.

[Scott]

Without weighing in on the rights or wrongs of destroying homes, it seems that it is a somewhat acceptable practice in the Middle East. While living in Iraq, I saw a number of demolished homes. When I asked about them, it was usually someone who had broken a law and part of the punishment was to demolish the dwelling.

It seemed quite strange to me, but seemed to be an understandable punishment for certain offenses.

[Ulysses G.]

Most countries use eminent domain to take property for the benifit of society at large, but no need with illegal dwellings.

[geriatrickid]

The UN needs to start off with a "No Fly zone" over the West Bank and Gaza to protect the civilians from aggressive dictatorship just like they have done in Libya.

That would interfere with Hamas totalitarian rule in Gaza.

How would a no fly zone respond to the issue of a dispute over construction? The Israelis aren't killing anyone, nor are they targeting civilans. The housing issue was a civil matter and no government would agree. Not the Chinese that bulldoze at whim for development, not the Indians that bulldoze slums, and not the Russians that have a similar issue brewing in some of their regions. Care to try another outlandish silly suggestion?

[Scott]

An off-topic post removed. This is not a general discussion topic about about Irael. Stick to the topic or refrain from posting.

[Pakboong]

I for one can accept a UN ruling pretty much as I would accept a ball/strike call in a baseball game.

I do not think the UN is made up of stupid individuals who are unable to consider building codes as part of the argument of one of the two sides. Biases aside, these are the folks we have democratically chosen to make those calls. If the next one goes completely against my view of the world, I don't think you will hear me whining about it.

Imagine the Thai government knocking down thousands of tin shacks occupied by illegals and legals alike that don't meet a building code. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that they don't meet any building code and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that the building code is not at issue. The UN would likely find themselves in the middle at some points and if the call goes in favor of the illegals, so be it. It is next to impossible for impoverished people to meet a first world building code.

In baseball, arguing balls and strikes will get you tossed from the game regardless of the validity of your argument. Persisting with the argument can get you banned for life.

[Naam]

Without weighing in on the rights or wrongs of destroying homes, it seems that it is a somewhat acceptable practice in the Middle East. While living in Iraq, I saw a number of demolished homes. When I asked about them, it was usually someone who had broken a law and part of the punishment was to demolish the dwelling.

It seemed quite strange to me, but seemed to be an understandable punishment for certain offenses.

is it also understandable that innocent members of that family living in the building are punished too? when the Nazis ruled my "fatherland" they introduced an ancient deplorable law called "Sippenhaft".

"Sippenhaft or Sippenhaftung (English: "kin liability") was a form of collective punishment practiced in Nazi Germany towards the end of the Second World War. It was a legalized practice in which relatives of persons accused of crimes against the state were held to share the responsibility for those crimes and subject to arrest and sometimes execution. Many people who had committed no crimes were arrested and punished under Sippenhaft laws introduced after the failed July 20 plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler in July 1944. A law of February 1945 also threatened death to the relatives of military commanders who showed what Hitler regarded as cowardice or defeatism in the face of the enemy."

[flying]

( disclaimer....I do not personally believe either is our (USA's) business )

so by your own logic you might as well make most Arab states in the middle east no fly zones. Nice try though considering the uneven wicket you are attempting to play on.

It is not my logic but....As my disclaimer states I could give a flying f... for any of it.

Aiding & abetting any of it is not only stupid but useless.

USA should not be involved in any of it. We should neither aid Israel in their killing( via aid financially or with weaponry) nor The Libyan Rebels in theirs ( via the same as above or using/aiding the UN )....Or as you say any of the other Arab States. Let them all work out their own crap or die trying

It is not our (USA's) place to decide nor take sides. Especially now when we are on a cliff ourselves.

Edited June 13, 2011 by flying

[Naam]

The UN needs to start off with a "No Fly zone" over the West Bank and Gaza to protect the civilians from aggressive dictatorship just like they have done in Libya.

That would interfere with Hamas totalitarian rule in Gaza.

How would a no fly zone respond to the issue of a dispute over construction? The Israelis aren't killing anyone, nor are they targeting civilans. The housing issue was a civil matter and no government would agree. Not the Chinese that bulldoze at whim for development, not the Indians that bulldoze slums, and not the Russians that have a similar issue brewing in some of their regions. Care to try another outlandish silly suggestion?

an outlandish and very silly suggestion is to [indirectly] claim that civilians were not and are not killed by bombs and rockets "not targeted at civilians".

[geriatrickid]

The UN needs to start off with a "No Fly zone" over the West Bank and Gaza to protect the civilians from aggressive dictatorship just like they have done in Libya.

That would interfere with Hamas totalitarian rule in Gaza.

How would a no fly zone respond to the issue of a dispute over construction? The Israelis aren't killing anyone, nor are they targeting civilans. The housing issue was a civil matter and no government would agree. Not the Chinese that bulldoze at whim for development, not the Indians that bulldoze slums, and not the Russians that have a similar issue brewing in some of their regions. Care to try another outlandish silly suggestion?

an outlandish and very silly suggestion is to [indirectly] claim that civilians were not and are not killed by bombs and rockets "not targeted at civilians".

Here we go again. There is a distinct difference between civilians that are unintentionally injured when used as shields and the intentional targeting of civilians. Israel does not target non combatant civilians nor does it use rockets or missiles when dealing with illegal construction. It was a civil matter and dealt with under civil procedures that have been around since the Ottoman rulers were the colonial rulers. Yes, we get it. You don't like Israel. Fine. get over it.

[flying]

Yes, we get it. You don't like Israel. Fine. get over it.

As opposed to the 4 or so Israel is never wrong crowd on this forum that shout down any mention of wrong doings?

Puleeze save your anti semite card for the press

[Naam]

Here we go again. There is a distinct difference between civilians that are unintentionally injured when used as shields and the intentional targeting of civilians. Israel does not target non combatant civilians nor does it use rockets or missiles when dealing with illegal construction. It was a civil matter and dealt with under civil procedures that have been around since the Ottoman rulers were the colonial rulers. Yes, we get it. You don't like Israel. Fine. get over it.

the question is should brush up your English, buy reading glasses or simply refrain from deliberately distorting my comments?

this is what i said:

[indirectly] claim that civilians were not and are not killed by bombs and rockets

by the way, whether i like Israel or not is nobody's business than mine. i have no reasons to like or dislike Israel. but i have valid reasons to dislike a lot of Israeli actions.

"unintentionally injured" as well as "collateral damage" (wherever it happens) = my àss!

[Ulysses G.]

Here we go again. There is a distinct difference between civilians that are unintentionally injured when used as shields and the intentional targeting of civilians. Israel does not target non combatant civilians nor does it use rockets or missiles when dealing with illegal construction. It was a civil matter and dealt with under civil procedures that have been around since the Ottoman rulers were the colonial rulers. Yes, we get it. You don't like Israel. Fine. get over it.

the question is should brush up your English, buy reading glasses or simply refrain from deliberately distorting my comments?

this is what i said:

[indirectly] claim that civilians were not and are not killed by bombs and rockets

Sorry, but he is a very well educated, native speaker of English and he did not distort your comments - maybe it is not as clear when translated into German.

As he said, there is a big difference between civilians that are unintentionally injured when used as shields (by terrorists) and the intentional targeting of civilians (by terrorists).

Edited June 13, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Scott]

Please discontinue the personal remarks to/about other posters.

Opinions about the topic are welcome. Opinions about other posters are not.

[Renbe]

An off-topic post removed. This is not a general discussion topic about about Irael. Stick to the topic or refrain from posting.

There was neither a need nor a reason to delete my post, as it was relevant, concise and true. The article is about the demolition of Palestinian houses by Israel. I clearly drew a comparison with the (non) demolition of Israeli houses in the occupied Palestinian territories, something which is prohibited by the Geneva convention, condemned several times by UN resolutions, and deemed illegal by the international community, including the USA. The same applies to the (non)demolition of the separation wall, build mainly on Palestinian land without approval or a permit, and condemned by the International Criminal Court in the The Hague, with the recommendation to demolish it. Therefor my post is not off-topic, and hardly something any objective observer would consider "a general discussion about Israel".

[Huey]

An off-topic post removed. This is not a general discussion topic about about Irael. Stick to the topic or refrain from posting.

There was neither a need nor a reason to delete my post, as it was relevant, concise and true. The article is about the demolition of Palestinian houses by Israel. I clearly drew a comparison with the (non) demolition of Israeli houses in the occupied Palestinian territories, something which is prohibited by the Geneva convention, condemned several times by UN resolutions, and deemed illegal by the international community, including the USA. The same applies to the (non)demolition of the separation wall, build mainly on Palestinian land without approval or a permit, and condemned by the International Criminal Court in the The Hague, with the recommendation to demolish it. Therefor my post is not off-topic, and hardly something any objective observer would consider "a general discussion about Israel".

You have to be very careful what you say about israel here Renbe I have seen people get banned by bias mods for less truth than what you spoke of.

[Jai Dee]

You have to be very careful what you say about israel here Renbe I have seen people get banned by bias mods for less truth than what you spoke of.

If you have any concerns with moderation of the forum please feel free to take up the issue with the individual moderator via PM, or alternatively you can email [email protected].

In the interim, as another moderator has already issued a public warning about personal attacks on other members, I wish to reinforce that warning.

The next violation will be rewarded with suspension from the forum.

[Scott]

Several posts discussing other posters and other off-topic matters have been deleted.

You have every right to your opinion about the article. Your opinion of other posters is irrelevant, off-topic and usually inflammatory.

[Steely Dan]

An off-topic post removed. This is not a general discussion topic about about Irael. Stick to the topic or refrain from posting.

There was neither a need nor a reason to delete my post, as it was relevant, concise and true. The article is about the demolition of Palestinian houses by Israel. I clearly drew a comparison with the (non) demolition of Israeli houses in the occupied Palestinian territories, something which is prohibited by the Geneva convention, condemned several times by UN resolutions, and deemed illegal by the international community, including the USA. The same applies to the (non)demolition of the separation wall, build mainly on Palestinian land without approval or a permit, and condemned by the International Criminal Court in the The Hague, with the recommendation to demolish it. Therefor my post is not off-topic, and hardly something any objective observer would consider "a general discussion about Israel".

You have to be very careful what you say about israel here Renbe I have seen people get banned by bias mods for less truth than what you spoke of.

As it stands illegal Jewish homes are twice as likely to be demolished as Palestinian ones, but that just doesn't fit with your mythology.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/131123

In essence, the report showed the Israeli officials are more than twice as likely to enforce building laws by demolishing buildings when those accused of illegal building are Jewish, rather than Arab.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Steely Dan

[Ulysses G.]

In essence, the report showed the Israeli officials are more than twice as likely to enforce building laws by demolishing buildings when those accused of illegal building are Jewish, rather than Arab.

Which just proves that the law is the law and it does not depend on one's religion in more enlightened countries.

[Steely Dan]

In essence, the report showed the Israeli officials are more than twice as likely to enforce building laws by demolishing buildings when those accused of illegal building are Jewish, rather than Arab.

Which just proves that the law is the law and it does not depend on one's religion in more enlightened countries.

Of course the invention of the Palestinian identity in 1967 and the stage managed attempts at portraying it's victimhood are part of a larger leftist-Islamist agenda, which is manifesting itself throughout Europe at the moment. Hence the hysterical reaction to Robert Spencer spelling out this truth during a recent visit to Germany.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aJefiPR1z0Q