Israel attacks civilians

[MHunterB]

"The IOA-controlled municipality of Jerusalem cut off those trees on Tuesday in preparation for constructing road 21.

The Israeli antiquities authority launched a campaign of digging in the area to make sure that no ancient relics were underground before starting the infrastructure building."

The rest of the story - which was the middle of the article cited. I believe this situation is called 'eminent domain' in the us.

And I now believe it's obvious that the poster deliberately sought to distort the situation and mislead readers. I see no reason to trust this individual to be honest or straightforward on ANY related topic.

'eminent domain'?

How can a foreign government get eminent domain?

That's not the immediate point: the immediate point was your deception. You effectively LIED.

As to 'eminent domain': an 'occupying power' has the right AND duty to maintain proper infrastructure in areas that it occupies.

But the areas are not truly 'occupied': they are 'disputed' - which is another situation.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

"The IOA-controlled municipality of Jerusalem cut off those trees on Tuesday in preparation for constructing road 21.

The Israeli antiquities authority launched a campaign of digging in the area to make sure that no ancient relics were underground before starting the infrastructure building."

The rest of the story - which was the middle of the article cited. I believe this situation is called 'eminent domain' in the us.

And I now believe it's obvious that the poster deliberately sought to distort the situation and mislead readers. I see no reason to trust this individual to be honest or straightforward on ANY related topic.

'eminent domain'?

How can a foreign government get eminent domain?

I agree. They have no sovereignty rights in the land. What it really is is ethnic cleansing.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

"The IOA-controlled municipality of Jerusalem cut off those trees on Tuesday in preparation for constructing road 21.

The Israeli antiquities authority launched a campaign of digging in the area to make sure that no ancient relics were underground before starting the infrastructure building."

The rest of the story - which was the middle of the article cited. I believe this situation is called 'eminent domain' in the us.

And I now believe it's obvious that the poster deliberately sought to distort the situation and mislead readers. I see no reason to trust this individual to be honest or straightforward on ANY related topic.

'eminent domain'?

How can a foreign government get eminent domain?

That's not the immediate point: the immediate point was your deception. You effectively LIED.

As to 'eminent domain': an 'occupying power' has the right AND duty to maintain proper infrastructure in areas that it occupies.

But the areas are not truly 'occupied': they are 'disputed' - which is another situation.

No, educate yourself about the law, it is all spelled out by The International Court Of Justice opinion on the Wall. East Jerusalem and the West Bank and Gaza are occupied, Israel is an Occupier of the lands and they have no sovereignty rights at all in these lands. Poor woman, with all your messed up ideas about these lands, and thinking the ownership is disputed. You just cannot confront the truth about the Occupation or the evils embraced by Zionism either.

 

[P F Tinmore]

"The IOA-controlled municipality of Jerusalem cut off those trees on Tuesday in preparation for constructing road 21.

The Israeli antiquities authority launched a campaign of digging in the area to make sure that no ancient relics were underground before starting the infrastructure building."

The rest of the story - which was the middle of the article cited. I believe this situation is called 'eminent domain' in the us.

And I now believe it's obvious that the poster deliberately sought to distort the situation and mislead readers. I see no reason to trust this individual to be honest or straightforward on ANY related topic.

'eminent domain'?

How can a foreign government get eminent domain?

That's not the immediate point: the immediate point was your deception. You effectively LIED.

As to 'eminent domain': an 'occupying power' has the right AND duty to maintain proper infrastructure in areas that it occupies.

But the areas are not truly 'occupied': they are 'disputed' - which is another situation.

The area is only disputed by the assholes in Israel. The rest of the world knows that they are occupied.

 

[MHunterB]

Obviously it's no use trying to have a discussion with individuals who do not accept that Israel IS a sovereign nation.

It also becomes obvious that individuals are prejudiced when they refer to an entire nation as 'assholes', etc. Or when they refer to OPINIONS as 'law'. And when they refuse to acknowledge the 'ethnic cleansing' by any other party BUT Israel while prattling on and on about 'confronting truth' - that's just too much hypocrisy for me to ignore.

Of COURSE we each have our own POV and there is some bias inherent in our views - but when individuals keep insisting that their views are 'the truth', there can't be a discussion.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Obviously it's no use trying to have a discussion with individuals who do not accept that Israel IS a sovereign nation.

It also becomes obvious that individuals are prejudiced when they refer to an entire nation as 'assholes', etc. Or when they refer to OPINIONS as 'law'. And when they refuse to acknowledge the 'ethnic cleansing' by any other party BUT Israel while prattling on and on about 'confronting truth' - that's just too much hypocrisy for me to ignore.

Of COURSE we each have our own POV and there is some bias inherent in our views - but when individuals keep insisting that their views are 'the truth', there can't be a discussion.

Obviously it's no use trying to have a discussion with individuals who do not accept that Israel IS a sovereign nation.

You have preconditions for discussions. What kind of discussions are those?

 

[MHunterB]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

 

[MHunterB]

Oh, and I do not have 'preconditions' for discussion. The word includes the concept of an exchange of ideas and information, of mutuality, etc. - while some on any 'side' refuse to acknowledge the other 'side's' POV as it actually IS, then they have made any 'discussion' impossible.

Some examples of such - Trying to discuss evolutionary mechanisms with 'creationists': trying to discuss ethics with 'believers' who insist that the ONLY morality comes from their religion....... trying to discuss the actions of Nazi Germany during its too-long existence with people who subscribe to the Nazi 'philosophy' to any degree.

Trying to attempt discussion with 'truthers' about the events of 9/11......

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

Fair enough. Israel sits inside Palestine's borders by military force.

I call that an occupation.

You can post something to the contrary if you wish.

 

[MHunterB]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

Fair enough. Israel sits inside Palestine's borders by military force.

I call that an occupation.

You can post something to the contrary if you wish.

Since nobody ever bothered to declare a sovereign nation named 'Palestine' it is apodictic that your statement is a lie. 'Mandates' are not nations.

What you are actually saying is that you refuse to recognize the right of Israel to be a nation. That is an unrealistic POV - and if there's no 'right' for Israel to exist, then how can there be a 'right' for this still- nonextant "Palestine" to be created?

You appear to be negating your own argument. But then it's not an actual 'argument': it's just some words that you continue to toss out as though they are a 'trump card'.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

Fair enough. Israel sits inside Palestine's borders by military force.

I call that an occupation.

You can post something to the contrary if you wish.

Since nobody ever bothered to declare a sovereign nation named 'Palestine' it is apodictic that your statement is a lie. 'Mandates' are not nations.

Of course that is not true. The Palestinians fought for the independence of their country all during the mandate and beyond. The Palestinian flag was flying in the 1930s. Palestinian leaders declared Palestine in 1948 only to have the UN divide it into three areas of occupation the following year. A country does not cease to exist when it is under occupation.

It is true that mandates are not nations. The mandate was assigned to Palestine and Palestine continued to exist after the end of the mandate The mandate was to provide temporary assistance to Palestine

What you are actually saying is that you refuse to recognize the right of Israel to be a nation. That is an unrealistic POV - and if there's no 'right' for Israel to exist, then how can there be a 'right' for this still- nonextant "Palestine" to be created?

You appear to be negating your own argument. But then it's not an actual 'argument': it's just some words that you continue to toss out as though they are a 'trump card'.

 

[theliq]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

No Marg,that is not true,Israel have done some great things,but they the Zionists and different Jewish Terrorist Organizations have done some really terrible things too.

Just sayin steve

 

[MHunterB]

What did I post that is 'not true' - and where is the support of what you are claiming?

It was never intended that all the Mandate should be for an Arab state of 'Palestine' - which appears to be your contention.

As I stated, you appear to be denying that any territory whatsoever was intended to become a Jewish state.

 

[MHunterB]

Ones where the participants actually consider one another's words. While some parties have the POV that 'Israel is always completely in the wrong', that precludes a discussion because they are incapable of doing anything other than bashing Israel and hence anyone who does not likewise bash Israel.

No Marg,that is not true,Israel have done some great things,but they the Zionists and different Jewish Terrorist Organizations have done some really terrible things too.

Just sayin steve

Steve, if you want to deny that any other posters on here have the view I've described, that's fine.
Just don't expect me to reply to any of your posts after such rubbish.

I haven't taken a POV that absolutely everything Israel does is always right, as you know. So there's no need to bring up the topic of Israeli errors, poor judgement and etc.

You further appear to be suggesting that Zionists *are* a 'Jewish terrorist organization'..... well, the one I'm part of, our one little Southern New England group of 9 chapters, just raised about $40,000 for breast cancer research in one annual project. I am fed up with people who can ONLY talk about Zionism as a negative.

 

[P F Tinmore]

What did I post that is 'not true' - and where is the support of what you are claiming?

It was never intended that all the Mandate should be for an Arab state of 'Palestine' - which appears to be your contention.

As I stated, you appear to be denying that any territory whatsoever was intended to become a Jewish state.

It was not to become a Jewish state.

Read the mandate.

Read the 1939 white paper that clarified the goal of the mandate.

If you could be more specif in your question I will answer.

 

[georgephillip]

Oh, and I do not have 'preconditions' for discussion. The word includes the concept of an exchange of ideas and information, of mutuality, etc. - while some on any 'side' refuse to acknowledge the other 'side's' POV as it actually IS, then they have made any 'discussion' impossible.

Some examples of such - Trying to discuss evolutionary mechanisms with 'creationists': trying to discuss ethics with 'believers' who insist that the ONLY morality comes from their religion....... trying to discuss the actions of Nazi Germany during its too-long existence with people who subscribe to the Nazi 'philosophy' to any degree.

Trying to attempt discussion with 'truthers' about the events of 9/11......

Two planes.
Three steel-framed skyscrapers.
2.5 seconds of documented free fall acceleration.
Multiple celebrating Semites.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0]The FREE-FALL ACCELERATION of WTC Building 7, David Chandler, AE911truth.org - YouTube[/ame]

Some of the same elements that get rich from the existence of a Jewish State in a sea of Arab hostilism got even richer from the events of 911; not that apologists for Empire would care.

 

[Hossfly]

Oh, and I do not have 'preconditions' for discussion. The word includes the concept of an exchange of ideas and information, of mutuality, etc. - while some on any 'side' refuse to acknowledge the other 'side's' POV as it actually IS, then they have made any 'discussion' impossible.

Some examples of such - Trying to discuss evolutionary mechanisms with 'creationists': trying to discuss ethics with 'believers' who insist that the ONLY morality comes from their religion....... trying to discuss the actions of Nazi Germany during its too-long existence with people who subscribe to the Nazi 'philosophy' to any degree.

Trying to attempt discussion with 'truthers' about the events of 9/11......

Two planes.
Three steel-framed skyscrapers.
2.5 seconds of documented free fall acceleration.
Multiple celebrating Semites.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0]The FREE-FALL ACCELERATION of WTC Building 7, David Chandler, AE911truth.org - YouTube[/ame]

Some of the same elements that get rich from the existence of a Jewish State in a sea of Arab hostilism got even richer from the events of 911; not that apologists for Empire would care.

Pure fantasy. It didn't happen because it was a David Copperfield illusion.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Two people were critically wounded by live fire on Friday as hundreds of protesters rallied across the West Bank to protest the death of a Palestinian prisoner last week.

Mahmoud Audah, 20, was shot in the head with live fire during clashes with Israeli soldiers at Qalandia checkpoint, locals told Ma’an. He was transferred to Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem where he is said to be in a critical condition.

Palestinian journalist Jihad al-Qadi was shot in the abdomen by Israeli forces while covering clashes outside Ofer detention center, Ma’an’s correspondent said.

Al-Qadi was operated on by doctors and had to have part of his liver removed.

- See more at: Two Palestinians Critically Wounded by Live Fire | Palestine Chronicle

 

[georgephillip]

Oh, and I do not have 'preconditions' for discussion. The word includes the concept of an exchange of ideas and information, of mutuality, etc. - while some on any 'side' refuse to acknowledge the other 'side's' POV as it actually IS, then they have made any 'discussion' impossible.

Some examples of such - Trying to discuss evolutionary mechanisms with 'creationists': trying to discuss ethics with 'believers' who insist that the ONLY morality comes from their religion....... trying to discuss the actions of Nazi Germany during its too-long existence with people who subscribe to the Nazi 'philosophy' to any degree.

Trying to attempt discussion with 'truthers' about the events of 9/11......

Two planes.
Three steel-framed skyscrapers.
2.5 seconds of documented free fall acceleration.
Multiple celebrating Semites.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0]The FREE-FALL ACCELERATION of WTC Building 7, David Chandler, AE911truth.org - YouTube[/ame]

Some of the same elements that get rich from the existence of a Jewish State in a sea of Arab hostilism got even richer from the events of 911; not that apologists for Empire would care.

Pure fantasy. It didn't happen because it was a David Copperfield illusion.

Sure thing, Killer.

"Over the past decade, contracting for America’s spy agencies has grown into a $50 billion industry that eats up seven of every 10 dollars spent by the U.S. government on its intelligence services.

"Today, unbeknownst to most Americans, agencies once renowned for their prowess in analysis, covert operations, electronic surveillance and overhead reconnaissance outsource many of their core tasks to the private sector.

"The bulk of this market is serviced by about 100 companies, ranging in size from multibillion dollar defense behemoths to small technology shops funded by venture capitalists."

And My Lai was just a bad dream.

Former high-ranking Bush officials enjoy war profits - Salon.com

 

[georgephillip]

Two people were critically wounded by live fire on Friday as hundreds of protesters rallied across the West Bank to protest the death of a Palestinian prisoner last week.

Mahmoud Audah, 20, was shot in the head with live fire during clashes with Israeli soldiers at Qalandia checkpoint, locals told Ma’an. He was transferred to Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem where he is said to be in a critical condition.

Palestinian journalist Jihad al-Qadi was shot in the abdomen by Israeli forces while covering clashes outside Ofer detention center, Ma’an’s correspondent said.

Al-Qadi was operated on by doctors and had to have part of his liver removed.

- See more at: Two Palestinians Critically Wounded by Live Fire | Palestine Chronicle

"Israeli soldier Mor Ostrovski, 20, has sparked controversy after posting this image on his Instagram account.

"An Israeli soldier has sparked outrage by posting a photograph appearing to show the back of a Palestinian boy's head in the crosshairs of his sniper rifle on a social networking site.

"The context of the picture, posted on the personal Instagram site of Mor Ostrovski, 20, could not be verified but the aggressive message is clear. The minarets and Arabic architecture of the village captured in the background suggest the boy and the town are Palestinian. Ostrovski is an Israeli soldier in a sniper unit."