Jewish Woman Talks About Palestinian Plight

[SherriMunnerlyn]

This is a very informative video that is close to an hour long about the conflict presented by a Jewish woman who spent 5 months living in the Occupied West Bank.

 

[Hossfly]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7COIYtIJNrI&feature=youtube_gdata_player This is a very informative video that is close to an hour long about the conflict presented by a Jewish woman who spent 5 months living in the Occupied West Bank.

Don't waste time watching any of this video. This pitiful creature in the video is a liar, a fake and as phony as a 3 dollar bill.


The truth about Anna Baltzer: Defaming her grandmother?s legacy | Opinion - Conservative

Did Head of Anti-Israel Organization Anna Baltzer Fabricate Background to Gain Legitimacy? | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

 

[RoccoR]

Hossfly, SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

A dissenting opinion.

It doesn't matter who the the narrator is. It is about the intent and content. Maybe we need to hear Anna Baltzer from a different perspective. (See the video.)

[ame="http://youtu.be/ZY4HkaQFFh8"]Baltzer & Finkelstein Discussion @ The New School[/ame]​

This is a very informative video that is close to an hour long about the conflict presented by a Jewish woman who spent 5 months living in the Occupied West Bank.

Don't waste time watching any of this video. This pitiful creature in the video is a liar, a fake and as phony as a 3 dollar bill.

(COMMENT)

I think you should hear her perspective. She doesn't promote violence. But, she has a position. Understand what it is. Then, you can better understand the view on the "Occupation" (which I have some sever reservations about in terms of the wisdom of Israel and fair administration) and some of the critical objections they have.

I have never suggested that the Palestinian does not have a cause for action. My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective, and the threat to territorial integrity.

So, I say, it is very worth the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Hossfly, SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

A dissenting opinion.

It doesn't matter who the the narrator is. It is about the intent and content. Maybe we need to hear Anna Baltzer from a different perspective. (See the video.)

Baltzer & Finkelstein Discussion @ The New School​

This is a very informative video that is close to an hour long about the conflict presented by a Jewish woman who spent 5 months living in the Occupied West Bank.

Don't waste time watching any of this video. This pitiful creature in the video is a liar, a fake and as phony as a 3 dollar bill.

(COMMENT)

I think you should hear her perspective. She doesn't promote violence. But, she has a position. Understand what it is. Then, you can better understand the view on the "Occupation" (which I have some sever reservations about in terms of the wisdom of Israel and fair administration) and some of the critical objections they have.

I have never suggested that the Palestinian does not have a cause for action. My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective, and the threat to territorial integrity.

So, I say, it is very worth the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective...

You say that a lot. What would you suggest that would work for them?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think it is time for the two parties to submit into Quartet administered Binding Arbitration.

A dissenting opinion.

It doesn't matter who the the narrator is. It is about the intent and content. Maybe we need to hear Anna Baltzer from a different perspective. (See the video.)

Baltzer & Finkelstein Discussion @ The New School​

Don't waste time watching any of this video. This pitiful creature in the video is a liar, a fake and as phony as a 3 dollar bill.

(COMMENT)

I think you should hear her perspective. She doesn't promote violence. But, she has a position. Understand what it is. Then, you can better understand the view on the "Occupation" (which I have some sever reservations about in terms of the wisdom of Israel and fair administration) and some of the critical objections they have.

I have never suggested that the Palestinian does not have a cause for action. My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective, and the threat to territorial integrity.

So, I say, it is very worth the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective...

You say that a lot. What would you suggest that would work for them?

(COMMENT)

I think that the Palestinians have to reject the Hamas driven Covenant and recognize the State of Israel.

I think the Palestinian reject all forms threat and violence to achieve political ends.

There are a list of things I think the Israelis should do, but --- that's for another time.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think it is time for the two parties to submit into Quartet administered Binding Arbitration.

A dissenting opinion.

It doesn't matter who the the narrator is. It is about the intent and content. Maybe we need to hear Anna Baltzer from a different perspective. (See the video.)

Baltzer & Finkelstein Discussion @ The New School​

(COMMENT)

I think you should hear her perspective. She doesn't promote violence. But, she has a position. Understand what it is. Then, you can better understand the view on the "Occupation" (which I have some sever reservations about in terms of the wisdom of Israel and fair administration) and some of the critical objections they have.

I have never suggested that the Palestinian does not have a cause for action. My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective, and the threat to territorial integrity.

So, I say, it is very worth the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective...

You say that a lot. What would you suggest that would work for them?

(COMMENT)

I think that the Palestinians have to reject the Hamas driven Covenant and recognize the State of Israel.

I think the Palestinian reject all forms threat and violence to achieve political ends.

There are a list of things I think the Israelis should do, but --- that's for another time.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco you are correct. During the Clinton years the Palestinians enjoyed a great period of peace and cooperation with the Israelis. The Israelis helped supply arms and training to help the creation of a police force and law and order. There were Israelis who were investing and partnering with the Palestinians building factories and businesses in the West Bank and Gaza. It looked liked the Palestinians were turning the corner, had Arafat not decided a take-all approach and walk away from getting 97% of what he was asking for, destroying all the progress that had been made. Of course Clinton's thirst for establishing a legacy before he leaves office didn't help either.

What you are missing is that this conflict has an ideological component fueled by radical internally and externally by Islamists in the region and Arab / Muslim states who also use it as a way to distract their people from their own corruption and oppression. In other words, no amount of land will suffice the Palestinian appetite but the entire destruction of the state of Israel, as long as these internal and external factors exist. Israel needs to annex the West Bank and move on.

 

[RoccoR]

Roudy, et al,

Yes, there seems to be some ring of truth in this.

What you are missing is that this conflict has an ideological component fueled by radical internally and externally by Islamists in the region and Arab / Muslim states who also use it as a way to distract their people from their own corruption and oppression. In other words, no amount of land will suffice the Palestinian appetite but the entire destruction of the state of Israel, as long as these internal and external factors exist. Israel needs to annex the West Bank and move on.

(COMMENT)

Yes, there are some active and vocal elements within the Palestinian Community that believe the entire country of Israel is really an Occupation of Palestine; and thus, will not be appeased by a lesser Palestine. But over time, this unreconcilable group will diminish in both numbers and counterproductive rhetoric.

On the issue of "Annexation;" I think it has become a mute point in three important ways.

The demographics become dangerous to a vast majority of Israelis that see Israel as the last refugee for Jewish survivors. Such an annexation would be a quasi-one state solution, and no one believes that will fly with the Palestinians. So again, you have an internal security problem and the potential for a future civil war. With annexation comes Israeli citizenship. Annexation just complicates the issue. No Israel want a war, Israeli-on-Israeli.

Even if the conditions were such that the Palestinian would accept Israeli Citizenship and annexation, with citizenship comes the right to vote. First, no Prime Minister/Party would survive the political fallout from such a decision; assuming they could even get it past the Knesset. Second, that would put a minimum of 1.7M Arabs on the roles for the West Bank, and another 1.7M for the Gaza Strip [(3-4 Million min.)(over half the current population of Israel)].

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power, transportation and air travel, fire & police protection. The laws have to be amended and phased in, to be compatible to the parent body. All this, and more cost money. Just desalinization plants and up-grading Gaza Ports to accomodate both trade, commercial traffic and fishing will be a huge undertaking. All this will be bore by the Israeli taxpayer, because the Gaza Strip and West Bank have no substantial contribution to make, no craftsmanship to offer, and haven't demonstrated the ability to even handle relatively small projects (let alone something of this magnitude).​

No, I don't think Annexation is a viable option. It sounds good, but the Palestinian simply costs way too much to drag into the 21st Century. And as EU and other regional nations tire of parasitic nature, Palestine always asking for a handout, what income they have will dry-up eventually.

No, I don't think Annexation (although technically possible) - is - politically and economically impossible. Maybe it caused have been a solution 20 or 30 years ago; but, not now.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think it is time for the two parties to submit into Quartet administered Binding Arbitration.

A dissenting opinion.

It doesn't matter who the the narrator is. It is about the intent and content. Maybe we need to hear Anna Baltzer from a different perspective. (See the video.)

Baltzer & Finkelstein Discussion @ The New School​

(COMMENT)

I think you should hear her perspective. She doesn't promote violence. But, she has a position. Understand what it is. Then, you can better understand the view on the "Occupation" (which I have some sever reservations about in terms of the wisdom of Israel and fair administration) and some of the critical objections they have.

I have never suggested that the Palestinian does not have a cause for action. My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective, and the threat to territorial integrity.

So, I say, it is very worth the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

My objection to Hamas and the people of Palestine is their violence and terrorism to achieve their objective...

You say that a lot. What would you suggest that would work for them?

(COMMENT)

I think that the Palestinians have to reject the Hamas driven Covenant and recognize the State of Israel.

I think the Palestinian reject all forms threat and violence to achieve political ends.

There are a list of things I think the Israelis should do, but --- that's for another time.

Most Respectfully,
R

So you think surrender is Palestine's best option.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Roudy, et al,

Yes, there seems to be some ring of truth in this.

What you are missing is that this conflict has an ideological component fueled by radical internally and externally by Islamists in the region and Arab / Muslim states who also use it as a way to distract their people from their own corruption and oppression. In other words, no amount of land will suffice the Palestinian appetite but the entire destruction of the state of Israel, as long as these internal and external factors exist. Israel needs to annex the West Bank and move on.

(COMMENT)

Yes, there are some active and vocal elements within the Palestinian Community that believe the entire country of Israel is really an Occupation of Palestine; and thus, will not be appeased by a lesser Palestine. But over time, this unreconcilable group will diminish in both numbers and counterproductive rhetoric.

On the issue of "Annexation;" I think it has become a mute point in three important ways.

The demographics become dangerous to a vast majority of Israelis that see Israel as the last refugee for Jewish survivors. Such an annexation would be a quasi-one state solution, and no one believes that will fly with the Palestinians. So again, you have an internal security problem and the potential for a future civil war. With annexation comes Israeli citizenship. Annexation just complicates the issue. No Israel want a war, Israeli-on-Israeli.

Even if the conditions were such that the Palestinian would accept Israeli Citizenship and annexation, with citizenship comes the right to vote. First, no Prime Minister/Party would survive the political fallout from such a decision; assuming they could even get it past the Knesset. Second, that would put a minimum of 1.7M Arabs on the roles for the West Bank, and another 1.7M for the Gaza Strip [(3-4 Million min.)(over half the current population of Israel)].

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power, transportation and air travel, fire & police protection. The laws have to be amended and phased in, to be compatible to the parent body. All this, and more cost money. Just desalinization plants and up-grading Gaza Ports to accomodate both trade, commercial traffic and fishing will be a huge undertaking. All this will be bore by the Israeli taxpayer, because the Gaza Strip and West Bank have no substantial contribution to make, no craftsmanship to offer, and haven't demonstrated the ability to even handle relatively small projects (let alone something of this magnitude).​

No, I don't think Annexation is a viable option. It sounds good, but the Palestinian simply costs way too much to drag into the 21st Century. And as EU and other regional nations tire of parasitic nature, Palestine always asking for a handout, what income they have will dry-up eventually.

No, I don't think Annexation (although technically possible) - is - politically and economically impossible. Maybe it caused have been a solution 20 or 30 years ago; but, not now.

Most Respectfully,
R

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power,...

Indeed, Palestine's infrastructure has been bombed and bulldozed for decades.

It has nothing to do with their abilities.

 

[P F Tinmore]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpQn5WQk_5A]HAMAS GROWS STRONG! With INCREASING support from WEST BANK Palestinians with Israeli HELP - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Roudy]

HAMAS GROWS STRONG! With INCREASING support from WEST BANK Palestinians with Israeli HELP - YouTube

Russian News? Pfffft!

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I'll be honest. I don't understand Israeli political strategy.

VIDEO: HAMAS GROWS STRONG! With INCREASING support from WEST BANK Palestinians with Israeli HELP

(COMMENT)

Political strategy and counterinsurgency strategy are often at opposite ends of the spectrum. On the political side, the goal is to achieve some agenda. On the counterintelligence/counterinsurgency/counterterrorism (CI/CT) side of the spectrum, the objective is to either adjust the environment to naturally suppress the requirements for a successful threat, or to actively seek-out and neutralise critical aspects that are essential to the viability of the threat. In this case, the Israeli political agenda (such as the growth of Israel settlements beyond the 1967 borders) seems to be intended to aggravate the environment to further the growth of the threat. Whether or not it was intended, the effect was the same.

(THIS WILL SOUND SO ODD!)

The CI/CT countermeasure to this particular problem is the help set the conditions that neutralizes growth and reverses the effects of the political agenda. In this case, the Israeli CI/CT strategy would be to conduct such operations as to induce the Palestinian Authority (PA) to announce independence consistant to the boundaries of the Green Line [(1967 Borders)(or such boundaries that may be agreed upon)]. This would be intended to induces a reverse refugee flow from Israeli settlements back to Israel; or grant dual citizenship to the settlers and bring them under Palestinian Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Roudy]

Jews have a right to settle in Judeah, the ancient ancestral homeland of the Jews, which part of that is hard to understand? The fact that Muslims want a "Jew free / Muslim only" area ruled by Islam all over the Middle East doesn't mean they're going to get it. Like I said before Jews should keep settling and eventually annex the area and get it over with. There are already 300,000 Jews there and more are coming everyday.

Once Syria and Iran fall, so will Hamas and Hezbollah and that will remain the only viable option for the Palestinians in the West Bank, to join the rest of the Arabs in Israel that live and prosper as Israelis. The Palestinians can have Gaza in all its gory glory.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Roudy, et al,

Yes, there seems to be some ring of truth in this.

What you are missing is that this conflict has an ideological component fueled by radical internally and externally by Islamists in the region and Arab / Muslim states who also use it as a way to distract their people from their own corruption and oppression. In other words, no amount of land will suffice the Palestinian appetite but the entire destruction of the state of Israel, as long as these internal and external factors exist. Israel needs to annex the West Bank and move on.

(COMMENT)

Yes, there are some active and vocal elements within the Palestinian Community that believe the entire country of Israel is really an Occupation of Palestine; and thus, will not be appeased by a lesser Palestine. But over time, this unreconcilable group will diminish in both numbers and counterproductive rhetoric.

On the issue of "Annexation;" I think it has become a mute point in three important ways.

The demographics become dangerous to a vast majority of Israelis that see Israel as the last refugee for Jewish survivors. Such an annexation would be a quasi-one state solution, and no one believes that will fly with the Palestinians. So again, you have an internal security problem and the potential for a future civil war. With annexation comes Israeli citizenship. Annexation just complicates the issue. No Israel want a war, Israeli-on-Israeli.

Even if the conditions were such that the Palestinian would accept Israeli Citizenship and annexation, with citizenship comes the right to vote. First, no Prime Minister/Party would survive the political fallout from such a decision; assuming they could even get it past the Knesset. Second, that would put a minimum of 1.7M Arabs on the roles for the West Bank, and another 1.7M for the Gaza Strip [(3-4 Million min.)(over half the current population of Israel)].

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power, transportation and air travel, fire & police protection. The laws have to be amended and phased in, to be compatible to the parent body. All this, and more cost money. Just desalinization plants and up-grading Gaza Ports to accomodate both trade, commercial traffic and fishing will be a huge undertaking. All this will be bore by the Israeli taxpayer, because the Gaza Strip and West Bank have no substantial contribution to make, no craftsmanship to offer, and haven't demonstrated the ability to even handle relatively small projects (let alone something of this magnitude).​

No, I don't think Annexation is a viable option. It sounds good, but the Palestinian simply costs way too much to drag into the 21st Century. And as EU and other regional nations tire of parasitic nature, Palestine always asking for a handout, what income they have will dry-up eventually.

No, I don't think Annexation (although technically possible) - is - politically and economically impossible. Maybe it caused have been a solution 20 or 30 years ago; but, not now.

Most Respectfully,
R

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power,...

Indeed, Palestine's infrastructure has been bombed and bulldozed for decades.

It has nothing to do with their abilities.

Come on, no Arab or Muslim country has ever been successful. Why should the Palestinians be any different?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Roudy, et al,

Yes, there seems to be some ring of truth in this.


(COMMENT)

Yes, there are some active and vocal elements within the Palestinian Community that believe the entire country of Israel is really an Occupation of Palestine; and thus, will not be appeased by a lesser Palestine. But over time, this unreconcilable group will diminish in both numbers and counterproductive rhetoric.

On the issue of "Annexation;" I think it has become a mute point in three important ways.

The demographics become dangerous to a vast majority of Israelis that see Israel as the last refugee for Jewish survivors. Such an annexation would be a quasi-one state solution, and no one believes that will fly with the Palestinians. So again, you have an internal security problem and the potential for a future civil war. With annexation comes Israeli citizenship. Annexation just complicates the issue. No Israel want a war, Israeli-on-Israeli.

Even if the conditions were such that the Palestinian would accept Israeli Citizenship and annexation, with citizenship comes the right to vote. First, no Prime Minister/Party would survive the political fallout from such a decision; assuming they could even get it past the Knesset. Second, that would put a minimum of 1.7M Arabs on the roles for the West Bank, and another 1.7M for the Gaza Strip [(3-4 Million min.)(over half the current population of Israel)].

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power, transportation and air travel, fire & police protection. The laws have to be amended and phased in, to be compatible to the parent body. All this, and more cost money. Just desalinization plants and up-grading Gaza Ports to accomodate both trade, commercial traffic and fishing will be a huge undertaking. All this will be bore by the Israeli taxpayer, because the Gaza Strip and West Bank have no substantial contribution to make, no craftsmanship to offer, and haven't demonstrated the ability to even handle relatively small projects (let alone something of this magnitude).​

No, I don't think Annexation is a viable option. It sounds good, but the Palestinian simply costs way too much to drag into the 21st Century. And as EU and other regional nations tire of parasitic nature, Palestine always asking for a handout, what income they have will dry-up eventually.

No, I don't think Annexation (although technically possible) - is - politically and economically impossible. Maybe it caused have been a solution 20 or 30 years ago; but, not now.

Most Respectfully,
R

The expense. Both the West Ban, and Gaza Strip have the infrastructure of a third world country. Nearly every aspect of these areas need up-graded and improved; public utilities, electric power,...

Indeed, Palestine's infrastructure has been bombed and bulldozed for decades.

It has nothing to do with their abilities.

Come on, no Arab or Muslim country has ever been successful. Why should the Palestinians be any different?

What does that have to do with Israel bombing and bulldozing Palestinian infrastructure?