Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue.

[fanger]

But here we are in an American election year and Bernie Sanders is calling for a more “even-handed” approach to the Palestinians; Vice President Joe Biden has expressed his “overwhelming frustration” with Benjamin Netanyahu; even Hillary Clinton – who, of course, is going to be the next US President – has managed (just) to refer to “damaging actions” by Israel, “including with respect to settlements”.

Not exactly earth-shattering stuff, and they’ve all uttered the usual prayers. America is committed to Israel’s security which is “non-negotiable” (Clinton) and the US is Israel’s “only absolute friend” (Biden). The future President Clinton picked up 56 rounds of applause when she addressed Aipac, Israel’s most powerful lobbyists, in New York last month – that’s 18 more rounds than Netanyahu got when he addressed Congress a year ago, but he also received 23 standing ovations from the would-be Knesset members who represent American voters.

Let’s not get romantic. La Clinton even offered “a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding” with Israel to Aipac, made the usual references to “Palestinian terrorists” and “Iran’s continued aggression”, and repeated the mantra that “Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations” – albeit not, perhaps, unto the Palestinian ‘nation’.

“I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties,” she announced, “to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council”. In other words, goodbye to UN Security Council Resolution 242 – Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 – which was supposed to be the foundation stone of the whole wretched peace process.

Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”.

This was not strictly accurate, although a close reading of La Clinton’s text shows that her references to Palestinians were more in the form of an appendage to Israeli security than a denunciation of Palestinian “suffering” – a word that Sanders has actually used about the occupied Arabs of Palestine.

Bernie believes “Israel must have the right to exist in peace and security, just as the Palestinians must have the right to a homeland in which they and they alone control their political system and their economy”. To that extent, it’s the usual stuff: no mention of Palestinian security – that will be left to Israel – but they can do what they like inside their pathetic little “homeland”.

Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

 

[Militants]

This treat we must fix to smaller USMB = Israel and Palestine. 1 pcs of 15, 16 or 17 pcs.
The Flame Zone we need also.

 

[Hollie]

But here we are in an American election year and Bernie Sanders is calling for a more “even-handed” approach to the Palestinians; Vice President Joe Biden has expressed his “overwhelming frustration” with Benjamin Netanyahu; even Hillary Clinton – who, of course, is going to be the next US President – has managed (just) to refer to “damaging actions” by Israel, “including with respect to settlements”.

Not exactly earth-shattering stuff, and they’ve all uttered the usual prayers. America is committed to Israel’s security which is “non-negotiable” (Clinton) and the US is Israel’s “only absolute friend” (Biden). The future President Clinton picked up 56 rounds of applause when she addressed Aipac, Israel’s most powerful lobbyists, in New York last month – that’s 18 more rounds than Netanyahu got when he addressed Congress a year ago, but he also received 23 standing ovations from the would-be Knesset members who represent American voters.

Let’s not get romantic. La Clinton even offered “a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding” with Israel to Aipac, made the usual references to “Palestinian terrorists” and “Iran’s continued aggression”, and repeated the mantra that “Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations” – albeit not, perhaps, unto the Palestinian ‘nation’.

“I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties,” she announced, “to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council”. In other words, goodbye to UN Security Council Resolution 242 – Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 – which was supposed to be the foundation stone of the whole wretched peace process.

Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”.

This was not strictly accurate, although a close reading of La Clinton’s text shows that her references to Palestinians were more in the form of an appendage to Israeli security than a denunciation of Palestinian “suffering” – a word that Sanders has actually used about the occupied Arabs of Palestine.

Bernie believes “Israel must have the right to exist in peace and security, just as the Palestinians must have the right to a homeland in which they and they alone control their political system and their economy”. To that extent, it’s the usual stuff: no mention of Palestinian security – that will be left to Israel – but they can do what they like inside their pathetic little “homeland”.

Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

We know what might happen. "Fisking" becomes a verb.

Urban Dictionary: Fisking

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.
Here we have a great example of a fisking of a clearly biased writer.

 

[fanger]

a point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or a news story.
well off you go then with your ¨ point-by-point debunking ¨
your time starts ...Now?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You nailed it there saying HELLERY is going to be the next POTUS.I cant believe people think Trump has any chance.that is wishful thinking on their part same as the ron paul fans were in a fantasyland that he had a chance.

He has as much chance as Ron Paul did and that is because like Paul, he would serve the interests of the american people instead of the interests of Israel.

Mass murderer Hellery will bow down to the interests of Israel and serve them and betray americans same as every president since LBJ has and that is why she will get elected.cool to see someone like you who gets this.that she will be the president since she will serve Israel.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is truly embarrassing to watch our politicians line up at AIPAC with their knee pads on..

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

So how are you applying this belief?

But here we are in an American election year and Bernie Sanders is calling for a more “even-handed” approach to the Palestinians; Vice President Joe Biden has expressed his “overwhelming frustration” with Benjamin Netanyahu; even Hillary Clinton – who, of course, is going to be the next US President – has managed (just) to refer to “damaging actions” by Israel, “including with respect to settlements”.

Not exactly earth-shattering stuff, and they’ve all uttered the usual prayers. America is committed to Israel’s security which is “non-negotiable” (Clinton) and the US is Israel’s “only absolute friend” (Biden). The future President Clinton picked up 56 rounds of applause when she addressed Aipac, Israel’s most powerful lobbyists, in New York last month – that’s 18 more rounds than Netanyahu got when he addressed Congress a year ago, but he also received 23 standing ovations from the would-be Knesset members who represent American voters.

Let’s not get romantic. La Clinton even offered “a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding” with Israel to Aipac, made the usual references to “Palestinian terrorists” and “Iran’s continued aggression”, and repeated the mantra that “Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations” – albeit not, perhaps, unto the Palestinian ‘nation’.

“I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties,” she announced, “to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council”. In other words, goodbye to UN Security Council Resolution 242 – Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 – which was supposed to be the foundation stone of the whole wretched peace process.

Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”.

This was not strictly accurate, although a close reading of La Clinton’s text shows that her references to Palestinians were more in the form of an appendage to Israeli security than a denunciation of Palestinian “suffering” – a word that Sanders has actually used about the occupied Arabs of Palestine.

Bernie believes “Israel must have the right to exist in peace and security, just as the Palestinians must have the right to a homeland in which they and they alone control their political system and their economy”. To that extent, it’s the usual stuff: no mention of Palestinian security – that will be left to Israel – but they can do what they like inside their pathetic little “homeland”.

Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

(COMMENT)

So, this is one man's (Bernie Sanders) opinion; who has a big mouth on the media pulpit.

And just what did you expect.

"Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”. "
​

The Palestinians have more terrorist organizations that have conducted more attacks on the Republics of the world, than any other nation with a citizenry that openly supports and assists terrorism.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What would be even more embarrassing is to see US Political Personalities lock step behind the leaders of designated terrorist organizations.

It is truly embarrassing to watch our politicians line up at AIPAC with their knee pads on..

(COMMENT)

Remember, without regards to the deflection about criteria, the US has designated a half-dozen (or so) Arab Palestinians as terrorists organization. Here are a few:

• 10/8/1997 HAMAS

• 10/8/1997 Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)

• 10/8/1997 Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)

• 10/8/1997 Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)

• 10/8/1997 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)

• 10/8/1997 PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
​

Just because YOU believe in and provide passive support to --- and tacitly approve of --- organization threatens the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States; does not mean that you should criticise those that take an opposing point of view.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

 

[Hollie]

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

I'm afraid, your skewed version of "fact", is simply more of your bias toward Pom Pom flailing for your Islamic terrorist heroes.

 

[RoccoR]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The U.S. designated the ANC and many other movements as terrorist groups and the U.S. has supported terrorist groups such as the Contras and the Muhajedeen in Afghanistan. Who a country places on a list of terrorist groups is a political decision.

Our partiality towards and the financing and arming of Israel, which uses its arms to kill Muslims (and Christians in the case of Palestine) is one of the reasons we now have a majority of the world's billion plus Muslims, the common people, as enemies. Supporting unpopular leaderships in the Muslim world does not help either.

 

[montelatici]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What would be even more embarrassing is to see US Political Personalities lock step behind the leaders of designated terrorist organizations.

It is truly embarrassing to watch our politicians line up at AIPAC with their knee pads on..

(COMMENT)

Remember, without regards to the deflection about criteria, the US has designated a half-dozen (or so) Arab Palestinians as terrorists organization. Here are a few:

• 10/8/1997 HAMAS

• 10/8/1997 Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)

• 10/8/1997 Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)

• 10/8/1997 Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)

• 10/8/1997 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)

• 10/8/1997 PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
​

Just because YOU believe in and provide passive support to --- and tacitly approve of --- organization threatens the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States; does not mean that you should criticise those that take an opposing point of view.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you still pimping Israel's terrorist propaganda crap?

 

[MJB12741]

But here we are in an American election year and Bernie Sanders is calling for a more “even-handed” approach to the Palestinians; Vice President Joe Biden has expressed his “overwhelming frustration” with Benjamin Netanyahu; even Hillary Clinton – who, of course, is going to be the next US President – has managed (just) to refer to “damaging actions” by Israel, “including with respect to settlements”.

Not exactly earth-shattering stuff, and they’ve all uttered the usual prayers. America is committed to Israel’s security which is “non-negotiable” (Clinton) and the US is Israel’s “only absolute friend” (Biden). The future President Clinton picked up 56 rounds of applause when she addressed Aipac, Israel’s most powerful lobbyists, in New York last month – that’s 18 more rounds than Netanyahu got when he addressed Congress a year ago, but he also received 23 standing ovations from the would-be Knesset members who represent American voters.

Let’s not get romantic. La Clinton even offered “a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding” with Israel to Aipac, made the usual references to “Palestinian terrorists” and “Iran’s continued aggression”, and repeated the mantra that “Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations” – albeit not, perhaps, unto the Palestinian ‘nation’.

“I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties,” she announced, “to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council”. In other words, goodbye to UN Security Council Resolution 242 – Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 – which was supposed to be the foundation stone of the whole wretched peace process.

Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”.

This was not strictly accurate, although a close reading of La Clinton’s text shows that her references to Palestinians were more in the form of an appendage to Israeli security than a denunciation of Palestinian “suffering” – a word that Sanders has actually used about the occupied Arabs of Palestine.

Bernie believes “Israel must have the right to exist in peace and security, just as the Palestinians must have the right to a homeland in which they and they alone control their political system and their economy”. To that extent, it’s the usual stuff: no mention of Palestinian security – that will be left to Israel – but they can do what they like inside their pathetic little “homeland”.

Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

Well hey, look at the bright side. You Pali supporters will have a choice between Trump who wants you all out of our country or Hillary the Israel firster. Repeat after me --- God Bless the USA!

 

[Hollie]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

"...but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps."

I mean, what a shame that the Arabs-Moslem squatters were forced from their homes in 1948 when the failed genocide by the Arab-Moslem armies was begun.

And, I think we can agree that the treatment of the Pal'istanians by the Arab-Moslem world is terrible. Those Pal'istanian internment camps in Jordan and elsewhere in the Arab-Moslem Middle East..., oh, the humanity, (sniff sniff).

 

[montelatici]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

"...but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps."

I mean, what a shame that the Arabs-Moslem squatters were forced from their homes in 1948 when the failed genocide by the Arab-Moslem armies was begun.

And, I think we can agree that the treatment of the Pal'istanians by the Arab-Moslem world is terrible. Those Pal'istanian internment camps in Jordan and elsewhere in the Arab-Moslem Middle East..., oh, the humanity, (sniff sniff).

Thank you for agreeing that the native people of Palestine were forced from their homes by European invaders.

 

[Hollie]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

The fact is, Israel has the most powerful terrorist organization in the world, the IDF, and has killed 1000s more times the innocent civilians than any Palestinian national liberation has or will ever kill.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

"...but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps."

I mean, what a shame that the Arabs-Moslem squatters were forced from their homes in 1948 when the failed genocide by the Arab-Moslem armies was begun.

And, I think we can agree that the treatment of the Pal'istanians by the Arab-Moslem world is terrible. Those Pal'istanian internment camps in Jordan and elsewhere in the Arab-Moslem Middle East..., oh, the humanity, (sniff sniff).

Thank you for agreeing that the native people of Palestine were forced from their homes by European invaders.

I never agreed to that. Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

As you should know, the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters were not "native people".

 

[montelatici]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

"...but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps."

I mean, what a shame that the Arabs-Moslem squatters were forced from their homes in 1948 when the failed genocide by the Arab-Moslem armies was begun.

And, I think we can agree that the treatment of the Pal'istanians by the Arab-Moslem world is terrible. Those Pal'istanian internment camps in Jordan and elsewhere in the Arab-Moslem Middle East..., oh, the humanity, (sniff sniff).

Thank you for agreeing that the native people of Palestine were forced from their homes by European invaders.

I never agreed to that. Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

As you should know, the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters were not "native people".

How can the people that were living in Palestine for thousands of years before the Europeans arrived be squatters. How can people born in Europe be natives of Palestine. Do you have a different definition of native than the standard one?