Palestinian animals blow up civilian bus in Jerusalem

[P F Tinmore]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Killing innocent civilians is wrong...once you start to make that acceptable, then what kind of future are you building? It's that question often asked - do the ends justify the means?

When is it "ok" to kill innocent peolple?
When is it not?
Who decides?
How far do you go before it becomes an atrocity?

Are people living on stolen land exempt from retaliation? Are they, in fact, "innocent?"

If they bought the land they are living on in good faith, then yes, they are. Blame goes to the government that allows settlement building in contested areas.

OK, I understand your point. However, can Israeli citizens be that ignorant of their history.

And besides, Israel's government is hiding so far behind its citizens and military that it is unreachable. Should the Palestinians just sit on their hands while their country disappears out from under them?

It's not being "ignorant of history" - it is in which narrative you believe in - who's version of history is right? Civilians aren't combatents. If you think it's ok to bomb a bus, which could have burned alive many innocent people just going about their daily lives - then was it just to firebomb the Dawabshe family? Or massacre the civilians in Dier Yassin?

When does it go from rightious resistance to just plain murder?

Your response sidesteps my post. You did not address my stated points.

I don't believe in killing anyone.

Are the Israelis ignorant of their history? Do they know that settlements are illegally built on stolen Palestinian land? Probably not.

 

[Shusha]

I would have a whole lot more respect for Palestinian "resistance" if they were actually accomplishing something. Or even trying to accomplish something. But what is the POINT of blowing up a bus filled with innocent people? It gains them nothing. It serves no purpose. It moves us towards peace not one step, and indeed only entrenches Israel's (the Jewish people's) position. It JUSTIFIES Israel's actions -- the continued blockade and wall-building and security checkpoints and controls and arrests and lethal force.

What are they trying to do? What's the end game? And how does violent terrorism serve to reach that end?

 

[Shusha]

Should the Palestinians just sit on their hands while their country disappears out from under them?

Not at all. They should be actively working to BUILD something rather than on blowing up buses with innocents on them.

If I were the Palestinian government, I might be "strongly encouraging" (read: providing economic incentives) to Palestinian building projects in areas of Palestine they intend to keep in a two State solution. NOT in areas in direct competition with Israel. I would be encouraging Palestinians to move out of those areas and into areas where the Jewish is presence is not so strong.

Strategic building warfare rather than pointless terrorism.

 

[montelatici]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Nobody gives a damn about your antisemitic lies and utterly false comparisons. The Zionist movement is just as much of a national liberation movement, if not more, than the the so called Palestinian, which is a recently invented identity and movement based on IslamoNazism.

Plain fact of the matter is the Jewish people who are on their ancestral, religious, and cultural homeland have just as much of a right to defend their people from violent Palestinian terrorist animals, and are therefore entitled to use all means, violent and non violent, to do that.

I am not condoning violence just questioning why Israel should behave any differently than other nations who's duty it is to provide security and safety of it's citizens.

There is not much difference between Britain facilitating the colonization of Ireland with people of a different religion than the native people and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people. Or France doing the same thing in Algeria. They aren't false comparisons at all they are direct analogies.

The Zionist movement was a British sponsored colonial settlement enterprise, Jews were not under occupation in their native lands in Europe, there was nothing to liberate.

The Israelis can and do behave as the British did in Ireland and the French in Algeria. That wasn't my question or my point.

My question was why Palestinians are expected to behave differently than the Irish Catholics or the Algerians. No one can seem to answer that.

In addition, no one can answer why the vehemence against the Palestinians, who are far milder in their resistance than the Catholics in Ireland with the IRA or the Algerians contrasts so much from who the actions and bombings of the Irish Catholics and the Algerian FLN.

 

[Hollie]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Nobody gives a damn about your antisemitic lies and utterly false comparisons. The Zionist movement is just as much of a national liberation movement, if not more, than the the so called Palestinian, which is a recently invented identity and movement based on IslamoNazism.

Plain fact of the matter is the Jewish people who are on their ancestral, religious, and cultural homeland have just as much of a right to defend their people from violent Palestinian terrorist animals, and are therefore entitled to use all means, violent and non violent, to do that.

I am not condoning violence just questioning why Israel should behave any differently than other nations who's duty it is to provide security and safety of it's citizens.

There is not much difference between Britain facilitating the colonization of Ireland with people of a different religion than the native people and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people. Or France doing the same thing in Algeria. They aren't false comparisons at all they are direct analogies.

The Zionist movement was a British sponsored colonial settlement enterprise, Jews were not under occupation in their native lands in Europe, there was nothing to liberate.

The Israelis can and do behave as the British did in Ireland and the French in Algeria. That wasn't my question or my point.

My question was why Palestinians are expected to behave differently than the Irish Catholics or the Algerians. No one can seem to answer that.

In addition, no one can answer why the vehemence against the Palestinians, who are far milder in their resistance than the Catholics in Ireland with the IRA or the Algerians contrasts so much from who the actions and bombings of the Irish Catholics and the Algerian FLN.

You cut and paste this frequently even though it's been addressed more times than I can remember, so it's concerning that you keep cutting and pasting the same thing.

There was a legal process that established a homeland for the Jews in an area where they had a historical presence.

Why does your cutting and pasting not address the invasion and colonization by the Crusading Turks and later by the squatting / land grabbing Egyptians, Syrians and Lebanese?

You're quite arbitrary and capricious with your feigned sweaty, chest-heavy indignation.

But then, you knew that.

 

[Shusha]

...and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people.

Monte is so funny. See, colonization with a people of a different religion than the native people is perfectly fine if its Arab Muslims doing the colonizing. Those colonizers even get magically transformed into being native people -- but native people with a different language, culture and religion than the first native people -- who, of course, get magically transformed into foreigners and invaders.

 

[montelatici]

The native people converting to the religion of the rulers doesn't change the nativeness of the people. When the Palestinians converted to Christianity, when it became the state religion of Rome, it did not change their nativeness. Nor did the people of Palestine change when most converted to Islam from Christianity.

I have never condoned settler colonization or conquering to spread a particular faith. The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people, there were too few of them for that, as a desert people. They conquered to spread their faith to the natives, unfortunately.

 

[Hollie]

The native people converting to the religion of the rulers doesn't change the nativeness of the people. When the Palestinians converted to Christianity, when it became the state religion of Rome, it did not change their nativeness. Nor did the people of Palestine change when most converted to Islam from Christianity.

I have never condoned settler colonization or conquering to spread a particular faith. The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people, there were too few of them for that, as a desert people. They conquered to spread their faith to the natives, unfortunately.

The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people?

Oh, dear. You do cause folks to chuckle at your ignorance of history. You should read a bit of islamo-history with specific regard to those Arabians who spilled out of the peninsula after the death of Muhammud (swish). The Imam at your madrassah can likely lend an assist.

 

[Roudy]

^^^^
Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee. What a bunch of garbage, now it's claiming that Arab / Muslims never invaded anyone or forced people to convert to Islam! One wonders which universe it lives on.

In the meantime, we know that it will be whining "unproportional response" when Israel avenges the death and maiming of the innocents the Palestinian terrorist animals are responsible for in the recent bus bombing. Personally I hope Israel sends at least 1000 of the Palestinian Muslim terrorist animals to their 72 virgin donkeys.

 

[Roudy]

The native people converting to the religion of the rulers doesn't change the nativeness of the people. When the Palestinians converted to Christianity, when it became the state religion of Rome, it did not change their nativeness. Nor did the people of Palestine change when most converted to Islam from Christianity.

I have never condoned settler colonization or conquering to spread a particular faith. The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people, there were too few of them for that, as a desert people. They conquered to spread their faith to the natives, unfortunately.

The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people?

Oh, dear. You do cause folks to chuckle at your ignorance of history. You should read a bit of islamo-history with specific regard to those Arabians who spilled out of the peninsula after the death of Muhammud (swish). The Imam at your madrassah can likely lend an assist.

Things are quite different on planet IslamoNazi. So is their news.

 

[Roudy]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Nobody gives a damn about your antisemitic lies and utterly false comparisons. The Zionist movement is just as much of a national liberation movement, if not more, than the the so called Palestinian, which is a recently invented identity and movement based on IslamoNazism.

Plain fact of the matter is the Jewish people who are on their ancestral, religious, and cultural homeland have just as much of a right to defend their people from violent Palestinian terrorist animals, and are therefore entitled to use all means, violent and non violent, to do that.

I am not condoning violence just questioning why Israel should behave any differently than other nations who's duty it is to provide security and safety of it's citizens.

There is not much difference between Britain facilitating the colonization of Ireland with people of a different religion than the native people and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people. Or France doing the same thing in Algeria. They aren't false comparisons at all they are direct analogies.

The Zionist movement was a British sponsored colonial settlement enterprise, Jews were not under occupation in their native lands in Europe, there was nothing to liberate.

The Israelis can and do behave as the British did in Ireland and the French in Algeria. That wasn't my question or my point.

My question was why Palestinians are expected to behave differently than the Irish Catholics or the Algerians. No one can seem to answer that.

In addition, no one can answer why the vehemence against the Palestinians, who are far milder in their resistance than the Catholics in Ireland with the IRA or the Algerians contrasts so much from who the actions and bombings of the Irish Catholics and the Algerian FLN.

Palestinian terrorist animals bomb a bus load of innocent civilians and this moron is still blaberring Islamic propaganda bullshit about "colonialization" for the 1000th time, as justification.

Not too different than supporting a fellow Islamonazi scum who protested why Nazis didn't kill all the Jews the other day, and in fact attacking a Jew who responded to that comment.

 

[montelatici]

The native people converting to the religion of the rulers doesn't change the nativeness of the people. When the Palestinians converted to Christianity, when it became the state religion of Rome, it did not change their nativeness. Nor did the people of Palestine change when most converted to Islam from Christianity.

I have never condoned settler colonization or conquering to spread a particular faith. The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people, there were too few of them for that, as a desert people. They conquered to spread their faith to the natives, unfortunately.

The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people?

Oh, dear. You do cause folks to chuckle at your ignorance of history. You should read a bit of islamo-history with specific regard to those Arabians who spilled out of the peninsula after the death of Muhammud (swish). The Imam at your madrassah can likely lend an assist.

No, of course large numbers of Arabians did not spill out of Arabia. What kind of population do you think lived in the Arabian desert, it could support only a small population? The whole Arab army at the Battle of Yarmuk where the Muslims defeated the Romans and led to the capture of Jerusalem consisted of no more than 40,000 Muslim troops. The Roman regular troops and Christian Arab forces numbered more than 100,000.

The Arabians were very few, the armies were mostly made up of recent converts and locals, led by an Muslim Arabian elite officer corps.

 

[montelatici]

^^^^
Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee. What a bunch of garbage, now it's claiming that Arab / Muslims never invaded anyone or forced people to convert to Islam! One wonders which universe it lives on.

In the meantime, we know that it will be whining "unproportional response" when Israel avenges the death and maiming of the innocents the Palestinian terrorist animals are responsible for in the recent bus bombing. Personally I hope Israel sends at least 1000 of the Palestinian Muslim terrorist animals to their 72 virgin donkeys.

Of course the Muslims invaded, who said anything different? Have you been drinking?

 

[montelatici]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Nobody gives a damn about your antisemitic lies and utterly false comparisons. The Zionist movement is just as much of a national liberation movement, if not more, than the the so called Palestinian, which is a recently invented identity and movement based on IslamoNazism.

Plain fact of the matter is the Jewish people who are on their ancestral, religious, and cultural homeland have just as much of a right to defend their people from violent Palestinian terrorist animals, and are therefore entitled to use all means, violent and non violent, to do that.

I am not condoning violence just questioning why Israel should behave any differently than other nations who's duty it is to provide security and safety of it's citizens.

There is not much difference between Britain facilitating the colonization of Ireland with people of a different religion than the native people and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people. Or France doing the same thing in Algeria. They aren't false comparisons at all they are direct analogies.

The Zionist movement was a British sponsored colonial settlement enterprise, Jews were not under occupation in their native lands in Europe, there was nothing to liberate.

The Israelis can and do behave as the British did in Ireland and the French in Algeria. That wasn't my question or my point.

My question was why Palestinians are expected to behave differently than the Irish Catholics or the Algerians. No one can seem to answer that.

In addition, no one can answer why the vehemence against the Palestinians, who are far milder in their resistance than the Catholics in Ireland with the IRA or the Algerians contrasts so much from who the actions and bombings of the Irish Catholics and the Algerian FLN.

Palestinian terrorist animals bomb a bus load of innocent civilians and this moron is still blaberring Islamic propaganda bullshit about "colonialization" for the 1000th time, as justification.

Not too different than supporting a fellow Islamonazi scum who protested why Nazis didn't kill all the Jews the other day, and in fact attacking a Jew who responded to that comment.

Now you are ranting. Just answer the question. Why do you expect the Palestinians would behave differently than any other people under the same conditions, such as the Irish Catholics or the Algerians or the non-white South Africans. It is just a question.

 

[Roudy]

^^^^
Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee. What a bunch of garbage, now it's claiming that Arab / Muslims never invaded anyone or forced people to convert to Islam! One wonders which universe it lives on.

In the meantime, we know that it will be whining "unproportional response" when Israel avenges the death and maiming of the innocents the Palestinian terrorist animals are responsible for in the recent bus bombing. Personally I hope Israel sends at least 1000 of the Palestinian Muslim terrorist animals to their 72 virgin donkeys.

Of course the Muslims invaded, who said anything different? Have you been drinking?

Have you? Time to kick the invaders, their religion, and their langauge out of Jewish holy land then.

 

[Hollie]

The native people converting to the religion of the rulers doesn't change the nativeness of the people. When the Palestinians converted to Christianity, when it became the state religion of Rome, it did not change their nativeness. Nor did the people of Palestine change when most converted to Islam from Christianity.

I have never condoned settler colonization or conquering to spread a particular faith. The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people, there were too few of them for that, as a desert people. They conquered to spread their faith to the natives, unfortunately.

The Arabians did not conquer to settle their people?

Oh, dear. You do cause folks to chuckle at your ignorance of history. You should read a bit of islamo-history with specific regard to those Arabians who spilled out of the peninsula after the death of Muhammud (swish). The Imam at your madrassah can likely lend an assist.

No, of course large numbers of Arabians did not spill out of Arabia. What kind of population do you think lived in the Arabian desert, it could support only a small population? The whole Arab army at the Battle of Yarmuk where the Muslims defeated the Romans and led to the capture of Jerusalem consisted of no more than 40,000 Muslim troops. The Roman regular troops and Christian Arab forces numbered more than 100,000.

The Arabians were very few, the armies were mostly made up of recent converts and locals, led by an Muslim Arabian elite officer corps.

Oh dear. Please do consult with the prayer leader at your madrassah regarding the Crusading Arabs who spilled out of the Arabian peninsula after the death of Muhammud (swish). The trail of death and destruction they created is a part of the historical record - of which you are ignorant.

 

[Roudy]

We can say that violence that kills civilians, even in an attempt to gain freedom from an oppressor is wrong. But, the fact is that practically no national liberation movement has ever been liberated without violence.

The women that brought bombs to bars and public places to kill French civilians are now considered heroines of the Algerian revolt against the French occupier. The bombing sequence is one of the most watched sequences in the Battle of Algiers. It is quite poignant.



Should the Palestinians behave any differently than the Algerians or non-white South Africans? If so, why?

I am not condoning violence just questioning why some believe the Palestinians should behave differently than other people seeking national liberation.

Nobody gives a damn about your antisemitic lies and utterly false comparisons. The Zionist movement is just as much of a national liberation movement, if not more, than the the so called Palestinian, which is a recently invented identity and movement based on IslamoNazism.

Plain fact of the matter is the Jewish people who are on their ancestral, religious, and cultural homeland have just as much of a right to defend their people from violent Palestinian terrorist animals, and are therefore entitled to use all means, violent and non violent, to do that.

I am not condoning violence just questioning why Israel should behave any differently than other nations who's duty it is to provide security and safety of it's citizens.

There is not much difference between Britain facilitating the colonization of Ireland with people of a different religion than the native people and facilitating the colonization of Palestine with people of a different religion than the native people. Or France doing the same thing in Algeria. They aren't false comparisons at all they are direct analogies.

The Zionist movement was a British sponsored colonial settlement enterprise, Jews were not under occupation in their native lands in Europe, there was nothing to liberate.

The Israelis can and do behave as the British did in Ireland and the French in Algeria. That wasn't my question or my point.

My question was why Palestinians are expected to behave differently than the Irish Catholics or the Algerians. No one can seem to answer that.

In addition, no one can answer why the vehemence against the Palestinians, who are far milder in their resistance than the Catholics in Ireland with the IRA or the Algerians contrasts so much from who the actions and bombings of the Irish Catholics and the Algerian FLN.

Palestinian terrorist animals bomb a bus load of innocent civilians and this moron is still blaberring Islamic propaganda bullshit about "colonialization" for the 1000th time, as justification.

Not too different than supporting a fellow Islamonazi scum who protested why Nazis didn't kill all the Jews the other day, and in fact attacking a Jew who responded to that comment.

Now you are ranting. Just answer the question. Why do you expect the Palestinians would behave differently than any other people under the same conditions, such as the Irish Catholics or the Algerians or the non-white South Africans. It is just a question.

Why do you expect the Jews to behave any differently than any country living under the constant threat of IslamoNazi terror. It's every nations duty to its citizens to take these subhumanoids out of their misery. We can see you are not phased by the constant murderous behavior exhibited by the Palestinians. In fact you are bending over backwards reciting the usual copy and paste bullshit that you've posted a million times before.

Save your whining for when Israel takes care of business.

 

[montelatici]

^^^^
Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee. What a bunch of garbage, now it's claiming that Arab / Muslims never invaded anyone or forced people to convert to Islam! One wonders which universe it lives on.

In the meantime, we know that it will be whining "unproportional response" when Israel avenges the death and maiming of the innocents the Palestinian terrorist animals are responsible for in the recent bus bombing. Personally I hope Israel sends at least 1000 of the Palestinian Muslim terrorist animals to their 72 virgin donkeys.

Of course the Muslims invaded, who said anything different? Have you been drinking?

Have you? Time to kick the invaders, their religion, and their langauge out of Jewish holy land then.

They Arabians that invaded and ruled are long gone. The Crusaders, Kurds, Mamluks and Ottomans saw to that. The people you want to kick out are former Christians, Jews, Samaritans etc. and are the native people of Palestine. Except for a very small number of native Arab Jews, the Israelis are from Europe and elsewhere outside of Palestine.

 

[Hollie]

^^^^
Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee. What a bunch of garbage, now it's claiming that Arab / Muslims never invaded anyone or forced people to convert to Islam! One wonders which universe it lives on.

In the meantime, we know that it will be whining "unproportional response" when Israel avenges the death and maiming of the innocents the Palestinian terrorist animals are responsible for in the recent bus bombing. Personally I hope Israel sends at least 1000 of the Palestinian Muslim terrorist animals to their 72 virgin donkeys.

Of course the Muslims invaded, who said anything different? Have you been drinking?

Have you? Time to kick the invaders, their religion, and their langauge out of Jewish holy land then.

They Arabians that invaded and ruled are long gone. The Crusaders, Kurds, Mamluks and Ottomans saw to that. The people you want to kick out are former Christians, Jews, Samaritans etc. and are the native people of Palestine. Except for a very small number of native Arab Jews, the Israelis are from Europe and elsewhere outside of Palestine.

You're certainly free to believe that.

 

[montelatici]

It's just historical fact.