If you live in the US, Are Hamas and Hizballah Terrorist Organizations?

[Coyote]

Another poster already proved it was a lie!

Another Nazi poster named Jos. Strange bed fellows. LOL

i think it was marg, among other jewish posters, who objected to the casual and frivolous use of the term "NAZI". i stopped using it and many of the pro-palestinian posters did as well (bravo guys), or certainly were more considerate in its useage. personally, i did so because i imagined some people were sensitive to its being used.

perhaps you should also quit using it as well. it certainly should be worth your consideration, not to mention the fact that it does make you appear to be a bit histrionic.

When you consider what the Nazi's did, the ignorant use of Nazi imagery and accusations is at modern day political figures and posters here is just plain ignorant at best - and a slap in the face of those few, still around, who survived the Holocaust. Sometimes, I honestly think that those who use that term to disparage those who disagree with them are just as bad as the nutty Holocaust deniers.

 

[Coyote]

A pithy soundbite if ever there was one. Of course soundbites aren't noted for their accuracy any more than sherri is noted for her insight and wisdom here.

all it means is that there are two sides to a story. to say otherwise is a bit dictatorial, don't you think?

as a soundbite, it does seem accurate to me, by the way. soundbites are not noted for their inaccuracy either.

There aren't always 'two sides' - for example, the defenders of the Holocaust who insist that the Nazis never deliberately sought to kill off any group of people, that there were no cyanide shower rooms at Auschwitz, no crematoria, etc etc. Are they a 'side'? NO. The 'side' would be open support for the Nazi ideology and goals: the 'revisionists' are covert about their support.

We also DO see such open support for genocide among some of the spokespeople for HAMAS and Hezbullah - which I think may well make them terrorists all by itself.

And sometimes there are more than simply two sides........ I think that in the ME there are many 'sides' - and that is part of the difficulty.

Exactly...and the other issue with the ME is there are NO angels. Every side has commited it's share of atrocities yet thinks it has the highroad.

 

[Coyote]

Another Nazi poster named Jos. Strange bed fellows. LOL

i think it was marg, among other jewish posters, who objected to the casual and frivolous use of the term "NAZI". i stopped using it and many of the pro-palestinian posters did as well (bravo guys), or certainly were more considerate in its useage. personally, i did so because i imagined some people were sensitive to its being used.

perhaps you should also quit using it as well. it certainly should be worth your consideration, not to mention the fact that it does make you appear to be a bit histrionic.

Just a quick question. Why should Nazi be off the table considering both sunni and shite love nazis.

Do they?

 

[Coyote]

i think it was marg, among other jewish posters, who objected to the casual and frivolous use of the term "NAZI". i stopped using it and many of the pro-palestinian posters did as well (bravo guys), or certainly were more considerate in its useage. personally, i did so because i imagined some people were sensitive to its being used.

perhaps you should also quit using it as well. it certainly should be worth your consideration, not to mention the fact that it does make you appear to be a bit histrionic.

Just a quick question. Why should Nazi be off the table considering both sunni and shite love nazis.

And Zionists are Nazis, too. I guess we could just call each other Nazis all day. Would that help the quality of our discussions?

No.

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

 

[Sunni Man]

Just a quick question. Why should Nazi be off the table considering both sunni and shite love nazis.

And Zionists are Nazis, too. I guess we could just call each other Nazis all day. Would that help the quality of our discussions?

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

I can agree with that statement.

Because the Zionists are far worse than the nazis ever were...........

 

[Hossfly]

You didn't deny being a supporter of a Known terrorist organization either
Homeland Security

Boro heyvoun, Khar khodeti. Ridam be gabr khomieni.
Farsi Baladi, bacheh kooni? Areh?
^^
This is why I want you to stay. Ha ha ha.

Here we use English, try to use it to, immigrant

But, Yousef Mohammed, since you are supposedly living in Spain, surely you habla Espanol along with your native Farsi.

 

[Hossfly]

liar,and you have no link!

What would Zionism be without lies?

Journalist Badih Chayban in an 23 October 2002 article in The Daily Star wrote that Nasrallah said, "If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide
Hassan Nasrallah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Daily Star - Politics - Nasrallah alleges ‘Christian Zionist’ plot

Notable Quotes

Would you like more links, Frau Sherri ????

Another poster already proved it was a lie!

Instead of always spitting out "lie" or "liar," is anyone stopping you from contacting the sources and asking them where they got that stuff about Nasrallah?

 

[Hossfly]

And Zionists are Nazis, too. I guess we could just call each other Nazis all day. Would that help the quality of our discussions?

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

I can agree with that statement.

Because the Zionists are far worse than the nazis ever were...........

This is a joke, right?

 

[Sunni Man]

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

I can agree with that statement.

Because the Zionists are far worse than the nazis ever were...........

This is a joke, right?

Nope.........

 

[Coyote]

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

I can agree with that statement.

Because the Zionists are far worse than the nazis ever were...........

This is a joke, right?

More like delusional I'm thinking.

 

[RoccoR]

reabhloideach; MHunterB; SherriMunnerlyn; et al,

The principles and concepts are interlocking. The Palestinians don't get to pick and choose which of the concepts and principles they want to comply with --- and discard the rest, claiming they are legal and justified. The Palestinians don't have a special exemption to conduct hostile operations.

One side's terrorist is the other side's freedom fighter!

A pithy soundbite if ever there was one. Of course soundbites aren't noted for their accuracy any more than sherri is noted for her insight and wisdom here.

all it means is that there are two sides to a story. to say otherwise is a bit dictatorial, don't you think?

as a soundbite, it does seem accurate to me, by the way. soundbites are not noted for their inaccuracy either.

(COMMENT)

While an argument can be made (a very weak argument), that the Palestinians can rebel against the decisions of the UN, the Allied Powers, and International Law by Treaty and Resolution; they don't have the right to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

Reaffirming also the inalienable right to self-determination and independence of all peoples under colonial and racist regimes and other forms of alien domination and foreign occupation, and upholding the legitimacy of their struggle, in particular the struggle of national liberation movements, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States (see below) in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

SOURCE: A/RES/46/51. Measures to eliminate international terrorism

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.

In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

States have a duty to refrain from acts of reprisal involving the use of force.

Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

SOURCE: DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO

In fact, there are protocols in place balance the need to ensure peace with the need to demonstrate the right of self-determination. The primary goal is to settle their international disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter.

3. Calls upon all States to fulfil their obligations under international law to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in other States, or acquiescing in or encouraging activities within their territory directed towards the commission of such acts;

4. Urges all States to fulfil their obligations under international law and take effective and resolute measures for the speedy and final elimination of international terrorism and to that end, in particular:

(a) To prevent the preparation and organization in their respective territories, for commission within or outside their territories, of terrorist and subversive acts directed against other States and their citizens;

(b) To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts;

Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

SOURCE: International Humanitarian Law - Fourth 1949 Geneva Convention

SOURCE: A/RES/46/51. Measures to eliminate international terrorism

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[sealadaigh]

Also Kach and Kahane Chai - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia are designated foreign terrorist organisations

Yes they are. so?

Off topic post! Ha ha ha.

yeah, well i sorta gotta think that it is far more on topic than discussions about other poster's alleged hemmorhoidal issues and medications for such conditions and whether their intestines have reached their full capacity..

 

[Coyote]

And Zionists are Nazis, too. I guess we could just call each other Nazis all day. Would that help the quality of our discussions?

Nazi's are Nazi's. There is no equivalent in modern times.

I can agree with that statement.

Because the Zionists are far worse than the nazis ever were...........

The best comparison that can be made with Zionists is that of colonists in America and the doctrine of Manifest Destiny. It was arrogant, brutal, and ethnic cleansing was certainly part of the process - but it was nothing approaching the Hitler's Nazi Germany and the systematic slaughter of human beings.

 

[RoccoR]

SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

Vigilanteism is not the right action in any event. Two wrongs don't make a right.

BUT you ignore the violations of intl law of Israel which are in the nature of state terrorism. If you want to sling the terrorist label around, then do it on both sides, it is present in unlawful targetings of civilians and civilian objects by both sides.

(COMMENT)

Yes, and there are proper channels to address these issues.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians don't have any legitimate grievances in the way the Israelis have administered the Occupied Territories, but it is not up to the Palestinians to take the law into their own hands.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Sunni Man]

SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

Vigilanteism is not the right action in any event. Two wrongs don't make a right.

BUT you ignore the violations of intl law of Israel which are in the nature of state terrorism. If you want to sling the terrorist label around, then do it on both sides, it is present in unlawful targetings of civilians and civilian objects by both sides.

(COMMENT)

Yes, and there are proper channels to address these issues.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians don't have any legitimate grievances in the way the Israelis have administered the Occupied Territories, but it is not up to the Palestinians to take the law into their own hands.

What law should the Palestinians obey?

Their rights have been violated and their land stolen.

So they have every right to seek justice by any and all means available.........

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

Vigilanteism is not the right action in any event. Two wrongs don't make a right.

BUT you ignore the violations of intl law of Israel which are in the nature of state terrorism. If you want to sling the terrorist label around, then do it on both sides, it is present in unlawful targetings of civilians and civilian objects by both sides.

(COMMENT)

Yes, and there are proper channels to address these issues.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians don't have any legitimate grievances in the way the Israelis have administered the Occupied Territories, but it is not up to the Palestinians to take the law into their own hands.

What law should the Palestinians obey?

Their rights have been violated and their land stolen.

So they have every right to seek justice by any and all means available.........

International law provides that Resistance to Occupation is lawful and that can include armed resistance. But the provisions of intl law generally make attacks on civilians unlawful, prohibiting direct attacks, disproportionate attacks and indiscriminate attacks.

 

[Coyote]

SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

Vigilanteism is not the right action in any event. Two wrongs don't make a right.


(COMMENT)

Yes, and there are proper channels to address these issues.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians don't have any legitimate grievances in the way the Israelis have administered the Occupied Territories, but it is not up to the Palestinians to take the law into their own hands.

What law should the Palestinians obey?

Their rights have been violated and their land stolen.

So they have every right to seek justice by any and all means available.........

International law provides that Resistance to Occupation is lawful and that can include armed resistance. But the provisions of intl law generally make attacks on civilians unlawful, prohibiting direct attacks, disproportionate attacks and indiscriminate attacks.

Which pretty much damns both Israel and the Palestinians.

 

[Hossfly]

I love the way people cherry-pick from their sources sometimes...... Here's some of what was left out of the above:

According to the US-Israeli organisation MEMRI, in a speech aired on Al-Manar and Al-Jazeera in 2006, Nasrallah expressed support for alleged Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy calling him a "great French philosopher" who "proved ([ [sic]]) that this Holocaust is a myth".[47]
During the 2006 Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah declared in a speech aired on Al-Manar TV and Al-Jazeera TV that: "If there had been a Muslim to carry out Imam Khomeini's fatwā against the renegade Salman Rushdie, this rabble who insult our Prophet Mohammed in Denmark, Norway and France would not have dared to do so. I am sure there are millions of Muslims who are ready to give their lives to defend our prophet's honour and we have to be ready to do anything for that."[47][48]
On 24 February 2012, in a speech in Nabi Sheet for the "remembrance of the fallen martyrs Abbas al-Musawi, Ragheb Harb, and Imad Mughniyah," Hasan Nasrallah said, "I say that the American administration and the American mentality lacks nothing from Satanism. But that kind of behavior and that kind of mistreatment of holy books [referring to the Quran burning incident in Afghanistan in February 2012[49]] and prophets, and the prophets' sanctities, and others' sanctities; this behavior is Israeli and let us say it is Jewish, between quotation marks, - now they will say that this is anti-Semitism - [but] the Holy Quran told us about this people: how they attacked their prophets, and how they killed their prophets, and how they affronted their prophets, and how they affronted Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, and how they affronted Mary, peace be upon her, and how they affronted Allah's great messenger Mohammad, May God exalt and bring peace upon him and his family. This [behavior] pattern about affronting holy books, and prophets, and messengers, and sanctities; this is their mentality, and maybe they want to push things more and more toward a religious war worldwide."[50]

MEMRI is a propaganda Rag, anyone sees the word MEMRI, we know all we will read is lies! No need to even read what is written, because it is all trash!

I just read 6 critiques of MEMRI. They all whined that MEMRI doesn't play fair. Only yours claims MEMRI's translations are false. How do you explain that?

They are always whining some source is Zionist propaganda, even when an article is written by a Muslim Arab. Don't they think that we believe that so many of their sources are Arab propaganda rags or Leftist Jews' propaganda rags (like one of Frau Sherri's favorite sites Mondoweiss or something like that)? Meanwhile, nobody is stopping Frau Sherri or any of her like-minded friends from finding someone who speaks Arabic and who can translate the Arabic in MEMRI. If the speech is in Farsi on MEMRI, Frau Sherri wouldn't have to look too far for a translator.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

What law should the Palestinians obey?

Their rights have been violated and their land stolen.

So they have every right to seek justice by any and all means available.........

International law provides that Resistance to Occupation is lawful and that can include armed resistance. But the provisions of intl law generally make attacks on civilians unlawful, prohibiting direct attacks, disproportionate attacks and indiscriminate attacks.

Which pretty much damns both Israel and the Palestinians.

There is violence, both sides choosing violence. And there are war crimes, both sides choosing war crimes. And there are many people on both sides choosing nonviolence, committed to nonviolence, in Nabi Saleh, in Bilin, in At Tuwani, and many other places throughout Israel and Palestine, and they are Jews and Christians and Muslims. Sometimes, I think the real struggle is between choosing violence or nonviolence.

 

[Coyote]

International law provides that Resistance to Occupation is lawful and that can include armed resistance. But the provisions of intl law generally make attacks on civilians unlawful, prohibiting direct attacks, disproportionate attacks and indiscriminate attacks.

Which pretty much damns both Israel and the Palestinians.

There is violence, both sides choosing violence. And there are war crimes, both sides choosing war crimes. And there are many people on both sides choosing nonviolence, committed to nonviolence, in Nabi Saleh, in Bilin, in At Tuwani, and many other places throughout Israel and Palestine, and they are Jews and Christians and Muslims. Sometimes, I think the real struggle is between choosing violence or nonviolence.

That is well said Sherri - I do agree - and, again...it is a complicated situation