<p align="center"><img border="0" src="http://somd.com/news/kingscorner/images/king-head.GIF" alt="King's Corner" width="336" height="143"></p>Before I get into my next rant I would like to take a moment to congratulate SOMD.com for reaching their seventh year of operation. David and Dee Jay, keep up the good work and I wish for your continued success. You guys have added quite a bit of fun to my life ever since I discovered you and through your efforts I have been able to meet some really interesting and great people via this medium. For that, I thank you. Now onto my rant.

With everything going on in the world these days there are many things that I could write about. For instance, we have the war in Iraq, the ongoing effort in Afghanistan, the problems with North Korea, the anti-war demonstrations, the impotency of the UN, the French, the Germans, the Russians, and the list goes on and on.

Looking towards the future and from our foreign policy perspective, I have been pondering as to what will be next and what would show the world that we, the USA, are attempting to do the right thing for not only us but the entire world. If I had any say as to what should be our next priority I would say that we need to continue focusing on the Middle East and specifically the Palestine/Israel situation.

As many of you know, at least those that have read my thoughts here on SMOD.com, I firmly believe that the root problem in that region is the issue of the Palestinian state and the way that the Israelis have been occupying and settling land that they have no right to. This has been a thorn in the world’s side ever since the UN created the independent state of Israel. Now please don’t take this to mean that I don’t feel that the Israelis aren’t entitled to a home nation of their own, nor do I believe that Israel alone is responsible for all of the problems that have been encountered. There is more than enough blame to go around and some of it is ours due to how we have acted.

My issue is that neither the US nor the UN has done anything effective to resolve the matter. In my mind, the fact that we ignore the aggressive actions of the Israelis while providing them with the tools to continue this aggression is repulsive. Hell, when Iraq attacked Kuwait we jumped right in and kicked them out. When Iraq failed to comply with UN resolutions our Congress authorized the President to resolve it, including the use of force. But with issues involving Israel we just seem to turn our heads and ignore what it is that they are doing without regard as to the legitimacy of their actions. All we ever hear from our government is that they are a democracy in this unstable part of the world, a staunch ally deserving of our assistance, and they are only doing these acts for their self protection. I disagree with this assessment.

If Israel is a democracy why don’t they have a constitution declaring and establishing protections and rights for all of their inhabitants? To date there is no Israeli constitution or the equivalent. The treatment and benefits afforded their citizens are based on religious preferences and if you aren’t Jewish you are a second rater. The rules that they follow change regularly and there is no consistency as to what is or isn’t lawful. I ask, is this really a democracy?

From a diplomatic standpoint, how can we prosecute other evils of the world while we ignore what many in this region view as a continued wrong being suffered by the Palestinians? When the UN created Israel they defined a specific geographical area for their nation and the remaining lands were to be for the establishment of an independent Arab nation with Jerusalem being an open city under neither nations control. As we all know it is nothing close to that. Israel has taken control of many square miles of territory that they have no business being in. This is an injustice that needs to be dealt with and they should be compelled by the world to withdrawal from Palestine and to remain within their established borders. This would be the right thing to do, we demand it of others, and we should demand it of Israel too.

I know many of you feel that land gains made by the Israelis from the many conflicts should be viewed as spoils of war. Fortunately the UN has agreed that acquisition of territory by war violates the principles of the UN Charter. UN Resolution 242 (1967) called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces and for the recognition and maintenance of territorial sovereignty for all nations in the region, including the not yet established Arab state. This however has not yet come to fruition as Israel continues to occupy and build settlements in the land destined for that Arab state.

If the US is to be consistent and credible in meeting the collective obligations of achieving peace and security in the Middle East, and throughout the world (as agreed upon by our becoming a member of the UN), we need to re-examine our blind support of the Israeli government and the horrendous acts that they continue to inflict upon a suffering people. We cannot afford to have these differing standards of support for the nations in this region. We must be seen as a nation of principle, one that does the right thing, and it is time that we start acting that way.

If we took such a path I believe that much of the violence in that region and the hatred directed towards us would be dissipated. Continuing on our current course of action will only guarantee that we will remain the target for every fanatic Arab that believes our goal is their extinction. If we did this I think that we would gain the attention, and maybe the respect and cooperation, of many others around the globe. After all, isn’t doing the right thing what we have been told that we are all about?

I recently saw that the U.S. Department of State rated Israel as one of the nations with the poorest record on human rights issues. I sincerely hope that we do act here to rid the world of the conflict there in the Middle East. But I am not sure if that can ever happen.

Great column, Ken! :clap:

How about the example of Ireland? For 800 years there were atrocities committed by both sides, with the revenge mentality getting worse century after century. Each side focused on the other's actions and not on the real problem -- the lack of Irish independence. Recognizing that problem didn't mean excusing the killings.

I hope it doesn't take 800 years to reach the point were Israel and an independent Palestine to tolerate one another's existence.

Hey, Ken - did you hear that they found a PLO training camp right outside of Baghdad? :bubble: Said the set up rivaled Camp Pendleton. So I guess you and ol' Saddam have something in common. :really:

Rick Leventhal just reported it on Fox - there won't be a link until tomorrow.

Originally posted by Tonio

I hope it doesn't take 800 years to reach the point were Israel and an independent Palestine to tolerate one another's existence.

I still worry that an independent Palestine will invite troops from other Arab nations to come in with all of their weaponry, and sit near the border with Israel.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Hey, Ken - did you hear that they found a PLO training camp right outside of Baghdad? :bubble: Said the set up rivaled Camp Pendleton. So I guess you and ol' Saddam have something in common. :really:

Rick Leventhal just reported it on Fox - there won't be a link until tomorrow.
Yeah, and there are actually Israelis OCCUPYING land that isn't theirs. Do you think that might have something to do with having to train on the outside because Israel won’t allow them to develop towards an established nation?

I take it that you believe that the only nation in the Middle East that should have a military or a police force is Israel and that Palestine has no right to self-defense?

Take some time and show or explain why it is acceptable for the Israelis to be occupying and settling the territory beyond their borders when we have said it isn’t acceptable, at least for those that aren’t Israeli. I won’t hold my breath waiting for an answer.

Originally posted by Frank
I still worry that an independent Palestine will invite troops from other Arab nations to come in with all of their weaponry, and sit near the border with Israel.
What border are you talking about, the one defined by the UN or the one established by the Israelis well inside of the Arab land? And as long as they sit on the border is that really a problem? AS I recall we did the same thing in Germany during the cold war and I don't remember many major problems with that and it seemed to work out okay. Why not give it a chance?

...emerges into the post-Saddam era that the political climate will grow within Israel and the US to be very accommodating to the Palestinians.

This "climate" is predicated on two things:

1. Things go fairly well in Iraq which presupposes a nationwide desire to move towards democracy and away from the tribalism that so marks much of the hostility in the region; not a given, but a hope. Thus, IF stability moves along, with all the fits and starts that should be expected AND the national thugs are brought to justice, AND the local fiefdoms, Syria and Saudi come to mind, don't muddy the waters too much then we can move to the other stumbling block:

2. Arrafat. The Palestinians MUST marginalize the more radical factions in their midst and choose a leader who truly wants to move towards peace and progress for Palestinians, someone with credibility that Yassir sorely lacks. This would fly in the face of the last 10 years or so of shooting themselves in the foot every time there is pressure on Israel to play nice.

So, in short, we're looking for pretty much the entire history of the region to move into the past and a new resolve towards peace to take hold.

Israel CANNOT make much more (what they see as) concessions in terms of a land buffer between themselves and those overtly and/or covertly hostile to their existence.

Conversely they cannot withstand US government pressure, US public opinion and domestic public opinion that things are truly getting better, vis a vis Iraq and regional democracy and stability, therefore they will be expected (and hopefully want to) truly pursue peace with constructive, likeminded neighbors.

So, the wild card: Radical Islam and hatred of Israel...??? Will this continue to sabbotage peace?

It would help if the Palestinians weren't homocide bombing everyone in sight. :bubble: Also Arafat has proven that he will NEVER accept an agreement that's palatable to both sides. Guess why? Because the issue at hand ISN'T a Palestinian "homeland" - the issue is racial and religious hatred. If the issue was a homeland, Arafat would have accepted the deal that Clinton tried to swing for him.

I have never heard that Israel has "one of the poorest" human rights records - I would like to see some source material on this.

It seems to me that the warring parties come to an agreement, the Palestinians start rioting and killing people, the Israelis tighten down to protect themselves, Arafat delivers a statement that praises all Palestinian "martyrs" and urges more killings, then Ken King writes a column saying how mean the Isrealis are and how the Palestinians deserve a homeland. :lol:

Originally posted by Larry Gude
2. Arrafat. The Palestinians MUST marginalize the more radical factions in their midst and choose a leader who truly wants to move towards peace and progress for Palestinians, someone with credibility that Yassir sorely lacks.

You're right about that, Larry. Arafat is a murderer. If it weren't for him, the Palestinians would right now be celebrating 20 years of nationhood. And you know what? The Israelis should also take that advice. At times Sharon has been as bloodthirsty as Arafat.

When I read your article for the first time a few days ago I instantly thought OMG Ken King is an anti-semite! I was shocked.

After all, I was raised to believe, Isreal=Good Palestine=Bad. Until now, I never questioned those thoughts.

The article stirred emotions I wasn't even aware that I had. After days of research I am astounded and humiliiated at my own ignorance.

The Isreali "Occupation" was an invasion........ A bloodbath .

I was shocked to learn that since 1967 the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has imposed curfews and shot Palestinians who were caught outside after hours on sight .

I also had no idea that the Israeli
government openly and without regard diverts water away from Palestinian farmland and families to serve the Jewish settlements that they have established within Palestine.

I've been complaining loudly about the UN's "recent" inability to enforce critical resolutions. Guess what? There's nothing "recent" about it!

35 years ago the United Nations
passed resolution 242.

The resolution calls for:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in Palestine;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

35 years ago and still, no Isreali compliance.

No wonder the entire region is "Suicidal"!

I have been fully re-educated an humbled. Thank you for the article Ken. It forced me to finally look at the situation. :smile:

Originally posted by Kain99

35 years ago the United Nations
passed resolution 242.

The resolution calls for:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in Palestine;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

35 years ago and still, no Isreali compliance.



Has the US administration pushed this compliance issue with the UN? And we thought Iran or N. Korea would be next, but it looks like israel might be on deck. Time for all countries to be held accountable for compliance to UN resolutions.

Look, Ken! You're building a coalition! :lol:

Vraiblonde, you are of French ancestry aren't you? :loser: What I have said is that Israel is illegally occupying and settling territory that they have no right to. That if they were brought back within their borders some of the hatred expressed towards us for supporting this illegality and supposed democracy would dissipate. My comments were about doing the right thing. I know your concept of the right thing has to do with nuking all Arabs, but that isn’t how any but a few see it.

Arafat is a sore but no worse then Sharon, they both have agendas that keep war going and keep them from trying peace. The differences are that one has invaded the other, one has advanced military capability over the other, and one receives billions of dollars of aid from the USA that could be better spent resolving this conflict instead of lopsidedly supporting it. Israel is in the wrong whether you like it or not and they need to be dealt with just as we would deal with any other nation doing what they are doing. Allowing them to continue is, to put it simply, French.

Arafat is a sore but no worse then Sharon Hello hello hello! Reality paging Ken King! How many peace attempts have there been? With how many different Israeli leaders? Sharon, Barak, Netanyahu, Rabin...who am I missing? The only constant has been...Arafat. Coincidence? I think not.

Ooh! Ooh! The Marines are raising the old Iraqi flag on the statue of Hussein they're trying to take down. Talk about making a statement!

If the issue was a homeland, Arafat would have accepted the deal that Clinton tried to swing for him.

And that's what I thought to! Until I read the details of "The Deal" Palestinians would have been forced to drive 50 to 100 miles around in order to reach cities that were only 10 miles away. The thought process was, they couldn't have Palestinians driving through Isreali territory. The deal stunk and when you read it you'll understand why Arafat stomped out of Camp David with a chip on his shoulder.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Hello hello hello! Reality paging Ken King! How many peace attempts have there been? With how many different Israeli leaders? Sharon, Barak, Netanyahu, Rabin...who am I missing? The only constant has been...Arafat. Coincidence? I think not.
The reality check is that all of those Israelis and others have advanced the occupation and settlement buildup within the occupied territory, and done so with our dollars in military support. There have been no attempts by Israel to comply with the UN demand (I guess since they are supposed allies they don't have to play by the rules). Who are you missing, let's see Begin, Ben-Gurion, Eshkol, Sharett, and Meir and guess what, the constant is that Israel has been occupying the territory since their inception and they keep occupying more and more. Coincidence? Doesn't look that way to a reasonable mind, how do you see it?

Originally posted by bluto
Perhaps the Jews could give the Palestinians some beads, dishes, and blankets infected with small pox... Nah. Been done too recently.

They need something more... Biblical. If they're gonna use a repeat, the first born son thing hasn't been done in a while.

Originally posted by Kyle
They need something more... Biblical.


It seems the "sand storm from Allah" didn't work as well as the Arabs thought to keep the infidels out of Rag-dad, so much for that idea.

If I recall correctly, when the UN partitioned Palestine in 48 into 2 states, 1 for the jews and 1 for the arabs the jews accepted the deal however the arabs did not and invaded as a result of the invasion the jews took the land that was supposed to be for the Arabs.

Do not say that the Israelis should be held accountable to the UN when no other nation is, except those that are weaker than us. I remember when the Nicaragua (sp) took us to the world court and won because the CIA was mining their harbors. Did we listen no

And by the way why didn't we help the Rwandans, when over a million were killed by knife and fire.

And by the way why didn't we help the Rwandans, when over a million were killed by knife and fire.


...survey says...NOT IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST

As sad and horrific as things were/are in that part of the world, the UN knew it was coming, the Clinton admin knew it was coming and did...nothing.

The UN, well, who knows? Clinton, I don't fault him for it.

The Middle East is in our national interest from several angles:

Energy stability
Preservation/promotion of democracy
and
National Security


...that and it PO's KK

hehehehehe

Okay, Ken, we're talking about "real" reality, not your "alternate" reality. :lol:

If the Palestinians could go for 1 month without homocide bombing Israeli civilians, maybe they'd have some credibility. What do you expect Sharon to do when stuff like that happens? Send flowers?

WE DON'T MAKE CONCESSIONS TO TERRORISTS - they can act like they're halfway civilized or we come "free" them.

Originally posted by Ken King
What border are you talking about, the one defined by the UN or the one established by the Israelis well inside of the Arab land? And as long as they sit on the border is that really a problem? AS I recall we did the same thing in Germany during the cold war and I don't remember many major problems with that and it seemed to work out okay. Why not give it a chance?

The one separating the West Bank and the rest of Israel. Yeah we did the same in Germany - for good reason. There were Russian tanks on the OTHER side, and like the Arabs, had repeatedly shown they had the will to use them. The Russians did NOT use them, because they were facing a world superpower with nuclear missiles pointed at their noses. The Palestinians however, attack the Israelis every single day. Why SHOULD they give it a chance?

I don't have this perception that land taken during a war - especially a war they didn't start - must be "returned" to the people who had it before the war. That's the nature of war. The Arab nations surrounding Israel attacked them, and lost. They lost their land. Too bad. In a supreme effort of spite - they refused for the displaced persons entry into their country, thereby CREATING the situation.

Okay, Ken, we're talking about "real" reality, not your "alternate" reality.
My “reality” is based on the way we are currently acting and claiming the high ground, which I support. Yours seems steeped in bigotry and a willingness to accept the behavior from one nation while denying the same to another.

If the Palestinians could go for 1 month without homocide bombing Israeli civilians, maybe they'd have some credibility. What do you expect Sharon to do when stuff like that happens? Send flowers? Okay, if Israel would return to within their borders I would bet that one month would go by without incident. What is the difference between a homicide bomber and an Israeli assault helicopter killing LIPs? We pay for and endorse one of these means, the other removes the using party as well as the invading party.

WE DON'T MAKE CONCESSIONS TO TERRORISTS - they can act like they're halfway civilized or we come "free" them.
Sure we do, the Israelis have been terrorizing the area for many years, because you close your eyes to it doesn’t make it untrue. Which side has killed and displaced more local inhabitants? Which side is still displacing the people and taking the land?

The one separating the West Bank and the rest of Israel. Yeah we did the same in Germany - for good reason. There were Russian tanks on the OTHER side, and like the Arabs, had repeatedly shown they had the will to use them. The Russians did NOT use them, because they were facing a world superpower with nuclear missiles pointed at their noses. The Palestinians however, attack the Israelis every single day. Why SHOULD they give it a chance?

I don't have this perception that land taken during a war - especially a war they didn't start - must be "returned" to the people who had it before the war. That's the nature of war. The Arab nations surrounding Israel attacked them, and lost. They lost their land. Too bad. In a supreme effort of spite - they refused for the displaced persons entry into their country, thereby CREATING the situation.
Some one needs to check the history as to what went on between 1917 and 1948 to see why this was such a problem for the Arabs. I doubt if you will, as you have no desire to do what is right according to the agreements that Israel, most other nations, and we have entered into.

You ask why it should be given a chance? Because it is the right thing to do by our nation and we demand it of others, but I guess as long as we are fat, dumb, and happy (nothing personal, just the expression that we have all heard) to hell with the rest of the world. Now that is an attitude that would make Vraiblonde proud.

...if things go cool in Iraq then there will be immense pressure for Israel to make a fair deal with the Palestinians. In fact, positive cooperation by Saudi and Jordan and others may be contingent on a deal by Israel.

And that WILL be contingent on the homocide bombings stopping.

Thus Arafat most likely riding off into the sunset.

Logically, the killing in the Middle East is gonna flair up big time because I don't believe Israel really wants any kind of peace with the Palestinians that doesn't include keeping the land that they've taken and the Palestinains don't want any kind of peace that includes a live Israel.

I'm speaking of the extremists on both sides, including ones in other countries, (cough, cough, saudi ) thus Iraqi peace and democracy is gonna have some serious hurdles.

Originally posted by Ken King
Some one needs to check the history as to what went on between 1917 and 1948 to see why this was such a problem for the Arabs. I doubt if you will, as you have no desire to do what is right according to the agreements that Israel, most other nations, and we have entered into.


I probably WON'T, because I have already read about a half-dozen books on the history of the Arabs, and the Middle-East conflict within the past twelve months. I simply don't agree with the Arab perspective, which refuses to accept Israel's existence in ANY capacity. They don't just want Jews out of the West Bank and the "occupied" territories - they want them out of Palestine altogether. And that won't happen.


You ask why it should be given a chance? Because it is the right thing to do by our nation and we demand it of others, but I guess
<snipped because it was *pointless* drivel>


It should NOT be given a chance as long as the Palestinians demonstrate the wish to push all of the Jews into the ocean. As long as any peace agreement requires the Arabs to recognize Israel's right to exist there - it will never happen.

Originally posted by Frank
I probably WON'T, because I have already read about a half-dozen books on the history of the Arabs, and the Middle-East conflict within the past twelve months. I simply don't agree with the Arab perspective, which refuses to accept Israel's existence in ANY capacity. They don't just want Jews out of the West Bank and the "occupied" territories - they want them out of Palestine altogether. And that won't happen.

Let’s get beyond the Arab perspective for a minute and go with what the WORLD perspective was when Israel was formed. They were given a very specific parcel of land, to call their own. It appears that they weren’t satisfied to simply maintain their borders. From what I have seen they want all of the left over Ottoman territory not claimed by the other Arab nations that sprang up there.

The UN has stated from the very first conflict that Israel must return to within their defined borders and Israel ignores the mandate, just as Iraq ignored the mandates laid upon them.

It should NOT be given a chance as long as the Palestinians demonstrate the wish to push all of the Jews into the ocean. As long as any peace agreement requires the Arabs to recognize Israel's right to exist there - it will never happen.

Egypt recognizes the fact that Israel has a right to exist and I think if Israel returned to their defined legitimate territory that other Arab nations could accept them over time. Now going back to the general Arab perspective, as long as Israel maintains the occupation and settling of the occupied areas I am positive that the resentment and violence will continue against Israel and the status quo will be maintained. This is unhealthy for all parties involved and the world as a whole.

For over fifty years we have seen the results of neither side budging and continued violence from both sides. It makes sense to me that if one truly tried to rectify the problem they would start at the beginning where everything was established and live within those borders. I’m not saying it will be easy and granted it might not work. What I am saying is that it should at least be attempted.

I fully understand and embrace that Israel has a right to exist in peace, but I also feel that the Palestinians deserve that same chance. I also understand that Arafat and his tactics are less than desirable and he shares an equal amount of blame for the continuance of violence. Israel also needs to share a portion of the blame and do what is right within the international agreements that they have subscribed to.

I’m having a tough time figuring out why many don’t see the same. For some reason there are many people in our country that only see the evil as coming from the Palestinians. We see more outrage against the homicide bombers then against the homicides committed by the Israeli military using the hardware we either gave them or helped them acquire. Because of our acceptance of these acts by the Israelis (and our help given to them), is it any wonder why we are despised by most of that region?

I’m having a tough time figuring out why many don’t see the same. Kain and Dems do. *she bats her eyelashes*

An independent Palestine must be created with the partition of Jerusalem between Palestinian and Israeli zones. Israel should shoulder some of the blame for the problem (it does take two to tango right?). They have a deplorable record on human rights, their leaders resemble military dictators, and for half a century they have not been able to stop the violence. Continued settlement in the Israeli country by Jews is incredibly stupid and must be stopped. Why bait the Palestinians even more? With an independent Palestine, radical Arabs' claims would not be accepted by the majority of Muslims and these damn suicide bombings would mostly end. Peace can only be achieved if both sides receive some gratification.

Originally posted by demsformd
An independent Palestine must be created with the partition of Jerusalem between Palestinian and Israeli zones. Israel should shoulder some of the blame for the problem (it does take two to tango right?). They have a deplorable record on human rights, their leaders resemble military dictators, and for half a century they have not been able to stop the violence. Continued settlement in the Israeli country by Jews is incredibly stupid and must be stopped. Why bait the Palestinians even more? With an independent Palestine, radical Arabs' claims would not be accepted by the majority of Muslims and these damn suicide bombings would mostly end. Peace can only be achieved if both sides receive some gratification.
No, Dems, let’s do it as defined with Jerusalem being independent from both of these countries. A self-governing demilitarized city. I’m talking about trying it as it was intended, following the blueprint as it were. It’s never had a chance to work for many reasons and shared blame of many nations.

I find it strange to be in agreement (for the most part) with you for a change. I hope people see that I am looking at this (and have for some time) from the perspective of how we have agreed to act through our membership in the world and of the very principles that define us as Americans. It has nothing to do with who I like, what color their skin is, which God they pray to, or any such measurement. I simply see this as how we should act considering we have obligated ourselves to do so in the international arena. I like the legal structure of things. It helps keep the game fair.

I too feel that this would squelch out that insistent whine of the radical Muslim factions, thereby removing this motivation to threaten us because of what Israel is or has done. Doing what is right could demonstrate that cooperation amongst differing people will make the world, and us, safer.

I need some clarification on one thing. Is this a mistype or something? “ Continued settlement in the Israeli country by Jews is incredibly stupid and must be stopped. ” What is wrong with Israel settling their own country? It’s the occupied territory that they need to vacate, isn’t it?

Ken, yes it is very interesting that we do agree in principle on this issue. (We did on the war too.) Either I'm getting insanely conservative or you're getting way too liberal. Or maybe we're just moderates.

The settlement that I was discussing in the earlier post referred to the migration of Jews to disputed territory in the eastern part of the nation. This in essence is provoking Palestinians to feel threatened and think of the settlement as an act of war. There was an interesting piece about this two years ago on 60 Minutes. I wonder if I can find something about that program to refresh my memory.

Further, your idea on the decentralization of Jerusalem sounds workable and another possible solution to this terrible conflict.

Originally posted by Ken King
From what I have seen they want all of the left over Ottoman territory not claimed by the other Arab nations that sprang up there.


That's ridiculous. This is so ridiculous, I'm inclined to believe you have other motivations besides looking at this rationally.



The UN has stated from the very first conflict that Israel must return to within their defined borders and Israel ignores the mandate, just as Iraq ignored the mandates laid upon them.


We as a nation also ignore them.
Unlike you - and especially after the Iraq war - the UN can take a swan dive into the East River. They are not the world government, and I could give a crap what they think. It would have been NICE to go into the war with their support - but we don't need their permission. The hell with them.



Egypt recognizes the fact that Israel has a right to exist and I think if Israel returned to their defined legitimate territory that other Arab nations could accept them over time.


You're dreaming - it didn't work up until 1967, and I'm not betting it will change.




I’m having a tough time figuring out why many don’t see the same. For some reason there are many people in our country that only see the evil as coming from the Palestinians. We see more outrage against the homicide bombers then against the homicides committed by the Israeli military using the hardware we either gave them or helped them acquire. Because of our acceptance of these acts by the Israelis (and our help given to them), is it any wonder why we are despised by most of that region?


I've no love for Israel - a friend of mine, a Navy pilot was shot down and killed by Israelis. I know what they're capable of, in the name of their national security. I also have never been convinced that Israelis act against anyone who isn't a legitimate terrorist or military target - UNLIKE the Palestinians, who specifically attack the innocent and helpless. If the Palestinians attacked only the Israeli military and government, I could understand their side - but as long as they specifically target civilians who have done NOTHING to them - I can't see their side.

Originally posted by Frank
That's ridiculous. This is so ridiculous, I'm inclined to believe you have other motivations besides looking at this rationally.
Really, have you ever looked at a map of what they were given and one of where they now occupy or have annexed? It shows a very clear “growth” over what was the “yet to be named Arab state”.

We as a nation also ignore them.
Unlike you - and especially after the Iraq war - the UN can take a swan dive into the East River. They are not the world government, and I could give a crap what they think. It would have been NICE to go into the war with their support - but we don't need their permission. The hell with them.
Oh, it was the entire UN that didn’t support our efforts in Iraq? It was blocked by those with special concerns on the Security Council. Show me a resolution damning our act? Don’t think you will find one, it was silent support just as most of us in the US have remained silent about our support for the war on Iraq.

You're dreaming - it didn't work up until 1967, and I'm not betting it will change.
Of course I’m dreaming, for a better world. How about you, placing your money on Armageddon? It did work in 1967, why not now?

I've no love for Israel - a friend of mine, a Navy pilot was shot down and killed by Israelis. I know what they're capable of, in the name of their national security. I also have never been convinced that Israelis act against anyone who isn't a legitimate terrorist or military target - UNLIKE the Palestinians, who specifically attack the innocent and helpless. If the Palestinians attacked only the Israeli military and government, I could understand their side - but as long as they specifically target civilians who have done NOTHING to them - I can't see their side.
And you probably won’t ever be convinced, though there is plenty of evidence to counter your perspective. Many “innocent civilians” have been killed on both sides. The only difference is in the technique.

As to the attacking of civilians I have always maintained that it is unacceptable, just as occupying and colonizing another’s land, I deplore both. I however “understand” why the Palestinians are going after “soft targets”. They do not possess the ability to take on the US backed and equipped Israeli military. Another argument for why they attack them (and this is speculation on my part and not a justification for these attacks) is that Israel requires all citizens to do a minimum two-year stint in the military. The Palestinians could see them as those who have waged war upon them or those that will. Again, not justifying this act, but trying to understand what it is like to be under a boot for over half a century.

Originally posted by demsformd
Ken, yes it is very interesting that we do agree in principle on this issue. (We did on the war too.) Either I'm getting insanely conservative or you're getting way too liberal. Or maybe we're just moderates.
Moderates are what most of us are. Independent thinkers based on the situation and not party lines. Many of us are closer together then we might believe. It all depends on what it is we are talking about.

The settlement that I was discussing in the earlier post referred to the migration of Jews to disputed territory in the eastern part of the nation. This in essence is provoking Palestinians to feel threatened and think of the settlement as an act of war. There was an interesting piece about this two years ago on 60 Minutes. I wonder if I can find something about that program to refresh my memory.
Calling it "Israeli country" is what I was referring to. I don't see it as their land (outside of what was defined when they became an independent country). There should be no disputed area as it was clearly defined by the UN.

Further, your idea on the decentralization of Jerusalem sounds workable and another possible solution to this terrible conflict.
Not my idea, this is what was planned but never came about.

The reason for this, is beucase the support is limitless. The US is like a loving parent, that ignores the psychotic behavior of a spoiled dangerous teanager. Instead of enfocing limits by withholding rewards for dangerous behavior, the US continues to reward, no matter what self-indulgent act, or crime, the child commits. Love is blind, but in the end will kill the neighbor's kid, disgrace the parent, and destroy his own future.

In the case of Israel, the world has made it clear...Israel must stop stealing land (stop paying settlers to build on the wrong side of the border, now 200,000 Settlers?), and give back what it is stolen. The Arabs who's land is being stolen, have gone to war with the only limited means they have available to the impoverish armies (terrorism and suicide attacks). I don't condone it or any other killing, but lets state what it is....a war. The fact that they can't afford jet fighters to deliver the bombs, and must use their own bodies, does not make them more or less guilty than a nation that can afford them. 99.9% of all who die in a war are innocent.

The US has responded to this conflict, by throwing more money at the spoiled child Israel.

So, now we here is the key. The situation cannot be resolved, as long as the US continues its protection of Isreal.

You can't have much faith in Sharon's willingness to bargain.

HERE IS WHY:

It is like a real estate transaction, in a way. (Ironically, since the war is essential a real estate dispute).

In any negotiaion, both sides must need the deal, in order to deal in good faith to a conclusion that either can accept.
In this case, if the Arabs can make a deal, they will have be able to discontiue living in hell, and get their lives back. They are very motivated to negotiate.

On the other hand, If the Israelis make a deal, it will mean they have stop stealing land.

If not deal is struck, the Israelis can keep stealing land. So it is in their interest to stirng the peace process along for years, continually failing at it. They will get more land from this, and more money from the USA as they have been doing for years. The goal of expanding Israel (at any cost to anyone) will go forward.

So the Iraelis have good reason to pretend to negotiate, without ever comming to a real solution. Apparently the only force that could make the negotiate is the USA. If the USA says we will cut off your funding, and we will send peace keepers to the territories....the Iraelis would have a very very good reason to make a deal the next day.

The settlements are 95% of the overall dispute with the Arab world. Until the US forces Israel to make peace, the entire ARAB world will continue to hate the USA for allowing it to continue. The Israeli military success, their ablity to control the territories, all of it is entirely dependent upon USA support, and the Arabs know that too.

If you are an Arab, in a love-hate relationship with the USA at this point as so many seem to be, and you are smart, I think you might conclude that the only way then to solve the problem, is to wake the USA up. You might decide that you need to bring the war here, and not allowi it to be fought only on foreign soil, where the American people cannot see if first hand. You might feel that if we empower Israel to subjugate them, the only way to stop Israel is to stop our support, or make the American people understand it, or suffer becuase of it.

Hence the Bin Ladens of the world may choose to attack us here in the US, and may feel that is their only course or action. I have to wonder , how much are these Israeli settlements going to ultimatley cost the USA? How much will trying to defend injustice cost? Aren't we the good guys who do not support injustice?

While we cannot tolerate attacks upon us, we might be most effective in stopping them if we also attempt to stop the injustice that makes the Arabs hate America. We did not have Arab enemies before Israeli practices created them for us. The Arab nations last year jointly stated that they will make full and permanent peace with Israel if it will give back stolen land (land that the USA and the UN have both said is not theirs).

"Give me liberty or give me death" Patrick Henry was not a Palestinian suicide bomber, but it seems he might have been.

Arabs did not like Saddam. The one thing they did love him for, was that he had the guts to stand up against the USA and Israel, over an over again. If it was not for this, I wonder if he could have stayed in power. Therefore, it can been seen that the injustice in Israel helped prop him up.

Israel is here to stay. It is one thing to defend her against attack, it is another to help her attack her neighbors. We are America and that is not what I want American to do in my name as an American. The cost is terrible, for the Arabs, for the USA, and ultimately for Israel too.

I am begining to think that while we have the army over there we should also free the great people of Israel from their dictatorial regime that threatens and attacks neighoring countries. At very least, all financial support to Israel should stop, until they decide to negotiate in good faith. The 10 Billion just handed to them, was insanity.

Rachel Corrie, you were an American Patriot of the highest order. You stand in the ranks of Patrick Henry, shoulder to shoulder. (Rachel died and 23 last month defending a Palestinian home against and Iraeli bulldozer)

Look, Ken! Another one! This makes you, Kain, Dems and Jack - shoot, you could get a pinochle game going! And this one thinks Patrick Henry might have been a suicide bomber! :roflmao:

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Look, Ken! Another one! This makes you, Kain, Dems and Jack - shoot, you could get a pinochle game going! And this one thinks Patrick Henry might have been a suicide bomber! :roflmao:
I don't think of this as a popularity contest. We at times must do the right thing and reigning in Israel is one of those things. I see potential benefit in having them comply with the UN resolutions and the charter they signed.

Originally posted by Ken King

Of course I’m dreaming, for a better world. How about you, placing your money on Armageddon? It did work in 1967, why not now?


Well if you're going to dream - why not just drop our whole military program and "dream" that everyone will just decide to be nice? Wouldn't THAT be a better world?

The Arabs have shown for half a century - they want to kill every Jew in Palestine. They don't want them there. Some of the Arab press is just hair-curling in its hatred.

It is dreaming to think, if you just GIVE them what they want, they'll stop the bombing and killing. THEY started it. Repeatedly. THEY don't seem to give a crap about what the UN thinks - they want Israel gone, UN or not.



And you probably won’t ever be convinced, though there is plenty of evidence to counter your perspective. Many “innocent civilians” have been killed on both sides. The only difference is in the technique.



*TECHNIQUE*? Oh please. I remember having an argument with an Arab about how the Israelis used an F-14 to kill an infant in the street. Of course, in the incident he described, the Israelis took out a terrorism command center or some place of military value. I asked him "do you really think they scrambled that F-14 for the SOLE purpose of shooting at a child in the street?". I think it is tragic, but civilian loss of life is collateral damage - they are not the INTENDED targets. I'd like to SEE that body of evidence, because I've never seen anything anywhere, where Israelis blow up civilians, kill civilians, blow up restaurants, school buses, children and others - intentionally. Innocent civilians ARE the target of the Palestinians - and your response is to give them what they want, so they'll just - you know - STOP killing. Appease them.


As to the attacking of civilians I have always maintained that it is unacceptable, just as occupying and colonizing another’s land, I deplore both.


So do I but with ONE proviso - you attack me, and LOSE - I take your land. Attack me AGAIN, and lose - I take MORE of your land. You know, it's not a difficult principle. You attack me, I take you to court, you lose a few years of freedom. It's a just consequence of attacking someone else. What do you think SHOULD have been the outcome of several unprovoked attacks on Israel, resulting in a handful of wars? A written apology?


I however “understand” why the Palestinians are going after “soft targets”.


Such a nice euphemism. That would mean, unarmed people minding their own business, right? You know, women, children - that kind of thing. "Soft" targets. Ain't English great?

Yes, that makes sense. So, if I can't get back at the govt, I will blow up a federal building, and kill innocent people, right? If I am mad at YOU, but I can't deal with you, I'll just beat the hell out of your mom. Aside from blatant cowardice - you "understand" this? I sure don't, and I don't want to. Yes, it kinda makes "sense" in a perverse sort of way. But I see no reason to reward it.

Originally posted by Ken King
I don't think of this as a popularity contest. Good thing! :lol:

Ken, I'm honestly trying to see your POV here - I respect you and you've changed my mind before on issues I thought I was solid on. But I'm just having a hard time working up any sympathy for the Palestinians and their self-made "plight".

To me this matter is very simple - the Palestinians started it, they deserve what they get. They terrorize Israeli civilians, the Israeli government smacks the sh*t out of them. They terrorize some more, the army smacks them around some more. Maybe one day they will figure out that what they're doing isn't the best way to get what they "want". And I put that in quotes because I, like Frank, don't believe that's what they're really after.

We, as a nation, have made a pledge to root out terrorism and destroy terrorist organizations. The Palestinians certainly fall under that category. So there you have it - simple.

Originally posted by Frank
Well if you're going to dream - why not just drop our whole military program and "dream" that everyone will just decide to be nice? Wouldn't THAT be a better world?

The Arabs have shown for half a century - they want to kill every Jew in Palestine. They don't want them there. Some of the Arab press is just hair-curling in its hatred.

It is dreaming to think, if you just GIVE them what they want, they'll stop the bombing and killing. THEY started it. Repeatedly. THEY don't seem to give a crap about what the UN thinks - they want Israel gone, UN or not.
Its one thing to dream of a better world and it’s another to be unrealistic. What is so unrealistic about there being an independent Israel and a sovereign Palestine?

The Israelis have been killing as many, if not more, then the Palestinian throughout this ordeal. Many Arab deaths occurred when the Israelis attacked refugee camps. The Israelis don’t bother to discern the combatants from non-combatants, but you demand it of the Palestinian. There is a word for that.

Also it isn’t giving them what they want, it is what was decided by the UN as part of the deal that brought Israel about. Shouldn’t that be adhered to?

*TECHNIQUE*? Oh please. I remember having an argument with an Arab about how the Israelis used an F-14 to kill an infant in the street. Of course, in the incident he described, the Israelis took out a terrorism command center or some place of military value. I asked him "do you really think they scrambled that F-14 for the SOLE purpose of shooting at a child in the street?". I think it is tragic, but civilian loss of life is collateral damage - they are not the INTENDED targets. I'd like to SEE that body of evidence, because I've never seen anything anywhere, where Israelis blow up civilians, kill civilians, blow up restaurants, school buses, children and others - intentionally. Innocent civilians ARE the target of the Palestinians - and your response is to give them what they want, so they'll just - you know - STOP killing. Appease them.
Some place of military value means anywhere that an Arab might be, you don’t get, you won’t get it and you will never get it as long as you harbor these feelings towards Arabs. Also when, if ever, did we sell or give the Israelis an F-14? I know of many other types of weaponry but no F-14s to my knowledge. There have been many attacks upon the refugee camps over the years. I will dig out some facts for you later as you have obviously glossed over them in your extensive research.

So do I but with ONE proviso - you attack me, and LOSE - I take your land. Attack me AGAIN, and lose - I take MORE of your land. You know, it's not a difficult principle. You attack me, I take you to court, you lose a few years of freedom. It's a just consequence of attacking someone else. What do you think SHOULD have been the outcome of several unprovoked attacks on Israel, resulting in a handful of wars? A written apology?
Several unprovoked attacks, what the hell are you talking about? Israel is the master of pre-emption and all attacks after the initial battles in 1948 have been started with attacks by Israel. International law states that acquisitions of lands as a result of conflict are illegal. It isn’t my opinion; it is the world’s opinion, and one that we as a nation ascribe to.



Such a nice euphemism. That would mean, unarmed people minding their own business, right? You know, women, children - that kind of thing. "Soft" targets. Ain't English great?.
Have you been keeping up with what is going on or shooting from the hip? Both sides have gone after soft targets forever. The difference is in the way they do it. One with military might the other with the homicide bombers.

The difference is in the way they do it. One with military might the other with the homicide bombers. Did you read this after you wrote it? Why are the Palestinians so "helpless" that they have to rely on homicide bombers instead of the military or even diplomacy? Why aren't their Arab brethren coming to their aid? I understand that Israel is under the protection of the big bad US of A - but wouldn't you think all the other Arab nations would get together and lend the Pals some support and credibility?

Why don't they?

Originally posted by vraiblonde Ken, I'm honestly trying to see your POV here - I respect you and you've changed my mind before on issues I thought I was solid on. But I'm just having a hard time working up any sympathy for the Palestinians and their self-made "plight".

To me this matter is very simple - the Palestinians started it, they deserve what they get. They terrorize Israeli civilians, the Israeli government smacks the sh*t out of them. They terrorize some more, the army smacks them around some more. Maybe one day they will figure out that what they're doing isn't the best way to get what they "want". And I put that in quotes because I, like Frank, don't believe that's what they're really after.

We, as a nation, have made a pledge to root out terrorism and destroy terrorist organizations. The Palestinians certainly fall under that category. So there you have it - simple.
Palestinians started it? Interesting, I thought the initial conflict started by established Arab nations (Egypt, Jordan, Syria) in that area, Palestine wasn’t recognized as a country yet (still isn’t), remember they are the “yet to be named” state. Israel has kept the land, they claim for self-defense reasons but then build settlements into it and move civilians there into harm’s way. If it were a no man’s zone without Israeli settlements their argument would almost be believable.

My POV is simple, do what your nation has agreed to do. Israel, as a member of the UN, is supposed to act within the structure of the charter. They aren’t, plain and simple. It isn’t about sympathy for a suffering people; it’s about disgust and condemnation for a nation that ignores the rules that they have agreed to comply with.

You believe that they want to kill all the Jews; the Arabs believe that Israel wants to kill all the Muslims; and I think if the partition plan was given a chance it might actually work towards a peaceful resolution. There are “hardliners” on both sides of this struggle that want to see the demise of the other and that is what we need to move away from. I have yet to hear why you and many others are so afraid of working towards peace and only want to see the status quo maintained or the removal of Arabs from the land dedicated to them.

Did you read this after you wrote it? Why are the Palestinians so "helpless" that they have to rely on homicide bombers instead of the military or even diplomacy? Why aren't their Arab brethren coming to their aid? I understand that Israel is under the protection of the big bad US of A - but wouldn't you think all the other Arab nations would get together and lend the Pals some support and credibility?

Why don't they?
Why are they so helpless? They don’t have the support of the only world power (namely us), they don’t have superior weaponry (from us) or anything other than small arms, and they haven’t played upon the sympathy of the non-Arab world. The other Arab nations aren’t helping because they know that if they did we would get in the middle of it; not to do the right thing, but to blindly follow our supposed ally. These nations can’t even deal with the millions of refugees and others displaced by the half-century conflict that has been going on. And there is also the little deal with Israel’s WMDs and their inclination to preemptively strike at others as their history has shown.

I have really enjoyed reading this thread. From my point of view the main arguement centers around motive. Are the Palestinians angry over the "occupied" territory or do they simply hate Jews?

I think it's obvious (now) that the answer is both. In the begining *Biblical times* thousands of years ago, the land was Isreal's.

This "war" has it's foundation in religious beliefs. They fight over this tiny peice of land "The Temple Mount" because Jews as well as Christians believe it sacred. This peice of land is important to Muslims because it is important to Bible believing Jews and Christians.

Muslim's feel strongly that they must be demonstrated "superior" to any other religion. The mosque and the shrine coupled with Muslim sovereignty on the Temple Mount demonstrate that Islam is superior to Judaism and Christianity.

It is critical to Muslims to prove that Allah is - greater than the God of Israel, greater than the God of Christianity.

This conflict has roots so deep and long reaching that I fear nothing can stop it.

Politically, Isreal should abide by International Law. Religiously they fear Armageddon if they do.

This has been a very interesting thread and there is some very good dialogue here. I am in no way sympathetic to the Palestinians' tactics to accomplish their goals but we must understand here that the Israelis use many of them same tactics. Ken, Kain, and Jack have some very good points that I agree with and the others have valid points (but I do not adopt them).

I think I have a very unique prespective on this issue. I have lived in the MidEast for 10 years and personally know Palestinians who I have talked with.

One of the biggest myths about this whole issue is that it is a fight between Christian/Jews and Muslims. This is absolutely not the case. The Palestinian population is made up of predominately Christian. About 60% of palestinians are Christian. Being a member of Hamas does not make a person Muslim. It does hoever make them a member of a group attempting to fight for the dignity of a people. It is more appropriate to call this a fight between an indigenous population and an immigrant population.

Probably the next biggest myth about the situation in Isreal and the Palestinians is that the Arab population are the terrorists that started this fight. To this I would simply point out that nearly 100% of the Isreali leaders over the 50 years of the existence of Isreal were members of Jewish terrorist groups operating against the Arabs and British before the creation of the state of Isreal. The aim of the Jewish terrorists groups was to force the creation of the state of Isreal, which they were successful in doing. Check the website http://www.etzel.org.il/english/ for an extensive history, written by an Isreali Professor, on these groups.

The next thing that Americans fail to understand from the Arab standpoint is the extreme hatred of Americans when it is Isreal that is causing all the pain ans suffering for the Palestinians. The Arab community sees Isreal as another state in the United States. This is a very common perception in the Arab World and in some schools is tauhgt to the children. I cannot tell you how many times I have told Arab friends of mine that they are wrong about this and explain to them that Isreal is not a US state. The reasons for this is because of the fact that the US blindly follows and approves of what Isreal does. When the US got beligerent with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council for trying to block the US from acting against Iraq with their veto power the Arab world became furious. There have been numerous times that the US has been the single descenting vote for resolutions to crack down on Isreal thus doing exactly what Frans, Germany, Russia and China threatened to do. I do agree with what the US did in Iraq, however I think they should be doing the same thing in Isreal. Basically, as long as the US stands behind Isreal and allows Isreal to do what it wants without any chance of facing consequences the US will be in the cross-hairs of terrorists organizations.

The next big misunderstanding in the west is about Mulsims and exactly what Islam is all about. Islam is a religion that was founded after Christ. They view Christ as the son of God and on their "heiracrchy" (for lack of a better word) of prophets he is the most revered. They study and follow the teachings of the Old and New testament but in the Quran (where the bible is baseically repeated) there are a few differences. However these differences are major in their implications. In the eyes of most Muslims, christianity is the closest religion to Islam than any other religion. This is a whole different argument, but suffice it to say that their Allah is the same God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob that Christianity believes in.

If you look at both sides of this argument it can be said that there is fault on both sides and the blood has flowed both ways across the geographical boundries. In closing thispost I would like to repeat a newpaper article to make this point:

On July 6, an Arab porter, went into the market in Haifa, placed a large parcel beside one of the barrows in the center of the market and left. Shortly afterwards there was a heavy explosion, which killed 21 and injured more than 50. A week later a similar incident took place in Jerusalem Eight were killed and more than 30 injured.

When did this happen, Who did this and why? Here's the complete text verbetim:

On July 6, 1938, a member of the Irgun, disguised as an Arab porter, went into the Arab market in Haifa, placed a large parcel beside one of the barrows in the center of the market and left. Shortly afterwards there was a heavy explosion, which killed 21 Arabs and injured more than 50. A week later a similar incident took place in Jerusalem. A member of the Irgun concealed an electric mine in the Arab market in the Old City. It exploded shortly after the end of the prayer service in the mosque, when a large crowd had emerged onto the street. Eight Arabs were killed and more than 30 injured.


Ever wonder where the Palestinians learned how to commit terroristm to get what they want? The Palestinians have seen from history that it works.

Originally posted by ThayerP
I think I have a very unique prespective on this issue. I have lived in the MidEast for 10 years and personally know Palestinians who I have talked with.

Welcome to the Forum. :cheers:

How in the world did you find this forum to chat on??


Interesting view.......thanks.

Well, I graduated from LHS in '80 and check thi SOMD site every once in a while. Haven't been in SOMD since about '84 though. I'm sure it's changed quite a bit since then.

Maybe I'll come back to SOMD for a visit sometime.

Originally posted by ThayerP
Maybe I'll come back to SOMD for a visit sometime.

It has changed, that's for sure.

The story about the girl who "threw" herself in front of the Bulldozer was such a great "spin job" by the isreali press.

Here's the link to the press release put out by the International Solidarity Movement who she was working with. These are the eye-witness accounts and pictures from just before the incident happened.

Also, I am expressly prohibited from throwing myself in front of any vehicles by my wife and four children. :)

Originally posted by ThayerP
Also, I am expressly prohibited from throwing myself in front of any vehicles by my wife and four children. :)


There ya go, if you can't beat them, out breed them. :lmao:

No link, btw!

Here's the link....

http://www.palsolidarity.org/

:blushing:

Originally posted by ThayerP
Here's the link....

http://www.palsolidarity.org/

:blushing:


Sorry bud, but I can't feel to sorry for someone that doesn't move the freak out of the way when a dozer is closing fast upon you.

Actually, the bulldozer had been at that location for several hours, the girls had a red construction vest and bullhorn and she had actually climbed up to talk to the bulldozer driver several times. The bulldozer ran over her then put the blade down and backed up over her dragging the blade across her.

Hardly an accident and hardly throwing herself in front of a bulldozer.

O.K. If that's a problem, try this one from April 5, 2003 and explain how it was his fault:

Today at about 6.30 pm Brian Avery, 24, of New Mexico was shot in the face by a burst of machine gun fire from an Israeli Armoured Personnel Carrier. The circumstances surrounding his injury are as follows:

Today the Israeli army of occupation operating in the Jenin area imposed its second day of curfew on the people of the city. Groups of young men and boys continued their resistance to the curfew by venturing out onto the streets to throw stones at tanks and other military vehicles.

At about 6.30 pm Brian and another ISM activist were at the ISM’s Jenin headquarters when they heard the sound of gunfire coming from the centre of the city, about two blocks away. They left the apartment to investigate and had traveled about a hundred metres when saw two armoured personnel carriers advancing towards them at low speed. There were no Palestinians on the streets in the area, armed or otherwise.

At the sight of the armoured vehicles both activists stood still and raised their hands above their heads.

When the first armoured personnel carrier was 50 metres from them it fired a burst of machine gun fire (an estimated 15 rounds) at the ground in front of them so that they were sprayed by a shower of broken bullets and stones. Tobias, Brian’s companion, leapt aside. He had fled about three steps when he looked back to see Brian lying face down on the road in a pool of blood.

Tobias and Brian were then joined by four other ISM activists who had arrived at the scene of the shooting by a different route. All six of them rushed to help him as the two armoured vehicles rolled past without stopping. He was conscious but when he raised himself from the ground they saw that his left cheek has been almost totally shot off.

The activists then performed first aid on him and phoned for an ambulance which took him to the Martyr Doctor Khalil Suleiman Hospital in Jenin where he was treated for shrapnel wounds to his face including bone fractures below the eyes, lacerations of the tongue and lacerations of his left cheek. A specialist was called in to examine his injuries and recommended that he be transferred immediately to a hospital in Afula in Israel but his departure was delayed because the Israeli military refused to grant his ambulance safe passage for more than an hour.

From Afula Brian was transported to a hospital in Haifa by helicopter.

Under the Israeli Army’s own rules of engagement soldiers are not permitted to fire warning shots with mounted weapons. They may fire warning shots with light hand-held weapons and must aim away from the people they are warning.

When he was shot Brian was wearing a fluorescent red vest with a reflective white cross on its back and front.

Originally posted by ThayerP
... Today at about 6.30 pm Brian Avery, 24, of New Mexico was shot in the face by a burst of machine gun fire from an Israeli Armoured Personnel Carrier. .... Awesome grouping.

Originally posted by ThayerP
Actually, the bulldozer had been at that location for several hours, the girls had a red construction vest and bullhorn and she had actually climbed up to talk to the bulldozer driver several times. The bulldozer ran over her then put the blade down and backed up over her dragging the blade across her.

Hardly an accident and hardly throwing herself in front of a bulldozer.

O.K. If that's a problem, try this one from April 5, 2003 and explain how it was his fault:


Again, if you’re not in front of a bulldozer, you don’t get run over!! The cause is honorable but self preservation should have kicked in there somewhere along the line!!


At about 6.30 pm Brian and another ISM activist were at the ISM’s Jenin headquarters when they heard the sound of gunfire coming from the centre of the city, about two blocks away. They left the apartment to investigate and had traveled about a hundred metres when saw two armoured personnel carriers advancing towards them at low speed. There were no Palestinians on the streets in the area, armed or otherwise.

At the sight of the armoured vehicles both activists stood still and raised their hands above their heads.

When the first armoured personnel carrier was 50 metres from them it fired a burst of machine gun fire (an estimated 15 rounds) at the ground in front of them so that they were sprayed by a shower of broken bullets and stones. Tobias, Brian’s companion, leapt aside. He had fled about three steps when he looked back to see Brian lying face down on the road in a pool of blood.

Tobias and Brian were then joined by four other ISM activists who had arrived at the scene of the shooting by a different route. All six of them rushed to help him as the two armoured vehicles rolled past without stopping. He was conscious but when he raised himself from the ground they saw that his left cheek has been almost totally shot off.

Again, if they hadn’t of been nosey and left their apartment (against curfew rules) they would not have been hurt.

I'm not saying that the people were right for hurting these folks, but I am saying that it is partially the fault of the victim for being in the vicinity.

Sure. It's real east to get have a good grouping when there are not bullets flying back at you and the target is wearing a florescent vest. Personally, I think they had pretty bad aium to miss such an easily spotted target. :rolleyes:

They seem about as well trained as the Iraqi's. It shouldn't be too hard to just roll on in and take control of that situation.

You do understand what the Curfew is that the Isreali's place on the Palestinians, don't you?

When they talk about curfews it is not like in the US where emergency vehicles are allowed at all times and people are not allowed out between say, 21:00 and 06:00. They are under a 24-hour curfew for anywhere from 3-days to two-weeks at a time. These types of curfews are what cause the Palestinians to protest against and throw rocks at the Isreali military. For shich they are shot.

Originally posted by justhangn
I'm not saying that the people were right for hurting these folks, but I am saying that it is partially the fault of the victim for being in the vicinity.
BS, if the Israelis had not been criminally attacking an undefended area these events would not have happened. The blame is theirs and theirs alone.

The eyewitness account by the photographer, and how it is being received by our government (ignored), is another example of how we blindly let Israel do whatever they want and that they are not held to the same standards that we demand from the rest of the world. No wonder many in the region hate our nation.

Originally posted by ThayerP
You do understand what the Curfew is that the Isreali's place on the Palestinians, don't you?

When they talk about curfews it is not like in the US where emergency vehicles are allowed at all times and people are not allowed out between say, 21:00 and 06:00. They are under a 24-hour curfew for anywhere from 3-days to two-weeks at a time. These types of curfews are what cause the Palestinians to protest against and throw rocks at the Isreali military. For shich they are shot.

Gotcha, no I didn't know that.

As far as I can tell, NO ONE wants the Palestinians!

Originally posted by Ken King
BS, if the Israelis had not been criminally attacking an undefended area these events would not have happened.


Agreed! But you don't think that IF the victims had NOT been there, they wouldn't have been hurt?

While we were fighting for the freedom of Iraqi's and the world wasn't watching...Should he not have pur his head in front of the fast moving bullet???

On 11 April 2003, 10 members of the International Solidarity Movement in Rafah, Gaza Strip, Palestine, were planning to set up a tent in an area that an Israeli tank often uses to shoot into the houses and streets of a refugee camp called Yibna. Several Palestinian community members had initiated the project, gathered the supplies, and accompanied us to the area at around 4:30PM. When we arrived to the area, the tank was already there and had been shooting into the street. A nearby Israeli security tower had also joined in and was firing repeated, single, sniper shots.
An American international was accompanied by two Palestinians to go closer and get a better look at the area, and was wearing our trademarked fluorescent orange jacket with reflective stripes. The tank and tower fired live rounds at the ground and buildings on both sides of her, making her movement difficult. She quickly returned to the rest of the group, that was positioned behind a large roadblock, but in view of the security tower. We made a consensus decision to call off the action, and return the next day as the Palestinians were uncomfortable with the gunfire.

At about 4:45PM, Shots began to hit the buildings and street around us, and we became concerned for some children who were playing on the roadblock near us. Many had scattered, but a few were left. Thomas Hurndall, a 21 year old activist from London, UK noticed that one small boy was still on the mound and under fire. He quickly lifted the boy and moved him behind the roadblock. Tom was about to leave, when he noticed two small girls still in front of the roadblock and in the line of fire.
He was moving to help them when an Israeli soldier in the tower, about 300 meters in front of him shot a high calibre sniper bullet directly into his head. He was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket with reflective stripes, and was in full body view of the tower. The British Embassy had been informed of his presence, who had in turn informed the Israeli Military.

Palestinians lifted his body and moved him to the pavement about 5 meters behind the roadblock. Two trained medics administered first-responder medical treatment, and used safety pads to try and stop the bleeding.
Palestinians then lifted him into a nearby taxi and rushed him to Al N ’gar Hospital. On the way, they took care to try and stop the bleeding.

At around 5:15PM, he was transferred in an ambulance to Europa Hospital in Khanunis. It takes about 30 minutes for an ambulance to get there as there is an Israeli road block on the main road. Without this obstruction it would only take 7 minutes.

After much negotiation with the British Embassy and the Israeli military, Tom was taken to a nearby Israeli settlement from which he was taken by helicopter to Saroka Hospital in B ’er Sheva, Israel. He is currently on full life support and in a head cast. Several of his friends have joined his bedside, and his parents are on the way.

Originally posted by justhangn
Agreed! But you don't think that IF the victims had NOT been there, they wouldn't have been hurt?
I guess you are of the mindset that any protestors deserve to die and I doubt if you will ever have a cause that you believe in strongly enough to stand up for. Just follow the sheep.

They were hurt when the Israelis acted further than acceptable. Even the Chinese didn't run over the kid in Tienemen (sp?) Square with the tank. Pretty amazing that the Chinese won't do what the Israelis will.

Originally posted by ThayerP
While we were fighting for the freedom of Iraqi's and the world wasn't watching...Should he not have pur his head in front of the fast moving bullet???


These actions are defenseless. You and anyone else knows this!! I am NOT defending the shooters......I am saying, "if you don't go there, you won't be shot."

So, your saying that people shouldn't go there and at least try to help?

While we fight in Iraq (which I think is a VERY GOOD THING) to wipe out weapons of mass distruction in the MidEast...This is what's happening to people that do go and try to help:

26 Apr 03
[Tulkaram Refugee Camp, TULKARAM]
Israeli soldiers fired an unidentified liquid nerve toxin on ISM volunteers late Saturday night as they attempted to reach a Palestinian home occupied by Israeli forces, lightly injuring one volunteer.

At approximately 10:30PM Saturday night seven ISM volunteers (American, British, Irish, Italian, and Palestinian) arrived on the scene of Israeli military harassment of Palestinian civilians in the Tulkaram refugee camp. A civilian home had been occupied by Israeli forces, which forced ten people, four of whom are children, into a room. The ISM volunteers witnessed, through a keyhole, numerous soldiers instructing the families to keep quiet and leading them into another room. The volunteers asked the army to open the door so they could check if the family was alright. Volunteers also reminded the soldiers that their actions were in violation of international law.

While the ISM volunteers attempted to reach the family, an army jeep pulled up to the narrow alleyway where they were standing. The soldiers fired an unidentified substance at them, which hit one of the activists in the eye causing him to lose consciousness several times. An ambulance arrived on the scene and took him to the Thabt Thabt hospital where doctors said he had been injured by a liquid nerve toxin. As of today, he has not regained the use of his eye.

Soldiers eventually left the occupied house at 4AM, after forcing the three families living there to stay in one room for six hours. The family members include a one and a half year old baby, and two senior citizens aged 65 and 75, one of whom is afflicted with a bladder ailment. Because the soldiers limit bathroom visits the elderly man reported being forced to wet himself repeatedly. This was the fourth time in two weeks that the Israeli Army has occupied the house.

Originally posted by Ken King
I guess you are of the mindset that any protestors deserve to die and I doubt if you will ever have a cause that you believe in strongly enough to stand up for. Just follow the sheep.

They were hurt when the Israelis acted further than acceptable. Even the Chinese didn't run over the kid in Tienemen (sp?) Square with the tank. Pretty amazing that the Chinese won't do what the Israelis will.

Hmmm..... I am saying that I am surprised that self-preservation didn't kick in when the girl was about to be run over.

I do think that some protestors take it way too far and need a good kick in the butt sometimes, but not killed.

I do believe that the people who killed these people should be punished.

Again, I am not defending the Israelis, I'm just saying that the protestors put themselves in harms way and then complain when they get hurt or killed.

It’s kind of like the journalist that had a fit for being shot at in Iraq……gee, you’re in a war zone, that’s what happens.

Originally posted by ThayerP
26 Apr 03
[Tulkaram Refugee Camp, TULKARAM]
Israeli soldiers fired an unidentified liquid nerve toxin on ISM volunteers late Saturday night as they attempted to reach a Palestinian home occupied by Israeli forces, lightly injuring one volunteer.

More people putting themselves in harms way but complaining of being hurt.

It's obvious that Israel is committing atrocities against these people and they should be stopped........but without a countries backing and pressure, these few people are doing nothing but dieing for a cause that most people don't know about and will probably never hear about.

Sure, I'd expect to get shot at if I were in a war zone as well. I DO NOT expect to get shot at (or run over by a D-9 bulldozer) when I am NOT IN A WAR ZONE. Come On.

The Isreali's have a history of antagonizing the Palestinians to provoke a response from them. Currently the US provides $12 Billion in military aid to Isreal PER YEAR. If Isreal did NOT have the Palestinian terrorists to justify this money they would be hit with economic disaster.

What they do and how they treat the Palestinians is how they keep the money coming. By provoking violent responses from a group of people they have turned into animals that are pushed into a corner with no way out.

Originally posted by ThayerP
Sure, I'd expect to get shot at if I were in a war zone as well. I DO NOT expect to get shot at (or run over by a D-9 bulldozer) when I am NOT IN A WAR ZONE. Come On.

The Isreali's have a history of antagonizing the Palestinians to provoke a response from them. Currently the US provides $12 Billion in military aid to Isreal PER YEAR. If Isreal did NOT have the Palestinian terrorists to justify this money they would be hit with economic disaster.

What they do and how they treat the Palestinians is how they keep the money coming. By provoking violent responses from a group of people they have turned into animals that are pushed into a corner with no way out.

You said it yourself, the Israelis have created a war zone. For that reason, being there protesting puts a person in grave danger.

I tell ya....if the protestors could publish this information in all of the liberal rags here in the US, it would cause quite a stir in regards to supporting Israel financially.

They've been fighting over the same pile of sand and camel dung for thousands of years. Just let them kill each other and be done with it!

Went for lunch. Sorry about the delay.

True. Isreal has turned this into a war zone. Let me ask you something else. I a country, the US, where the seperation of Church and State in the political decisions (nor the personal choices of politicians) is it right to support a country so heavily whose only claim to existence is based on a biblical claim to the land? Without that biblical claim there would not be an Isreal.
The Arab's would be living there in peace having gone through the Palestinian Mandate under the British, setup a political structure and been left to govern themselves.

Kyle, if it is such a useless peice of sand and camel dung then why does the US justify it's blind support of Isreal due to the "strategic value" of the land. If it IS so strategic then it isn't simply a pile of sand and camel dung, is it?

And to set the record straight they have not been fighting for thousands of years only since the creation of the state of Isreal in 1948. Before that there were jewish merchants living in all the arab countries and doing business there. The escalation of the fighting was when the UN decided that overnight the land no longer belonged to the indigenous people living there for generations but rather to a bunch of people who had come from Europe and the USSR to claim it as their land.

Before that the Jews had come in from Egypt when they were freed from their slavery there and given the land to live in. They decided to slaughter anybody who was living there.

The native peoples, jews/arabs/semites/canaanites/persians/pheonecians/what-the-f###ians have been fighting over there for several thousand years.

As for it's value.... It's worthless to me. The U.S. has an alliance with a nation that 13 others wish to exterminate in no uncertain terms. "push the jews into the sea" seems to be a phrase I've heard before.

If it were up to me I'd say make the entire eastern hemisphere burn but since it's not.... Let 'em kill each other and be done with it. :cheers:

Actually if you check on what a Semite is, a Semite is any of the tribes of people you listed, plus a few others. So you could have just said let the Semites fight it out among their different tribes.

The theme of leave 'em alone and let them work things out is one that a large number of Americans seem to hold to. This probably explains the total ignorance of a majority of Americans when it comes to that particular region. The one thing that you have to remember is that the region we are talking about has strategic value in a number of ways.

The Suez canal reduced shipping costs by a tremendous amount. Before the canal was built ships had to go around the horn of Africa to get to the Asian subcontinent. This had a profound affect on the cost of goods in Europe.

The Oil. That's pretty obvious. No matter how much people want to deny it the oil in that region dictates the economy in Europe and consequently the world.

The labor. Next time your out shopping take the time to look at clothing labels and see just how much of the clothes you buy are made in the MidEast. It accounts for approximately 40% of the clothing being sold in the US.

Religion. This may not be a high priority for some but for others it is extremely high. Isreal contains the most revered sites for Christians, Jews and Muslims. There are large numbers of all these religions in the US.


Of these four that I just mentioned Isreal is only crucial to ONE. And that ONE is not considered of strategic value to the US.

Why don't we just give back America to the Indians then? To say that Israel provokes the Arab populace into violent, cowardly, terrorist acts so that they will curry world favor is absurd. The peace process will never work until they figure out what to do with Jerusalem and I do not see them ever agreeing on that. Like it or not when most nations are founded the local populace is expelled. Here the Arabs insured their expulsion when they attacked. Israel accepted the UN partition, which would of left an Arab state. The other Arab nations created the problem when they refused to allow the Pal. into their countries and instead made them set up tent cities where the living conditions are horrible. Israel is not perfect but Jews were well within their rights to set up a place where they can be safe and free from the whims of tryannical governments so there is six millions reasons. The world did nothing then are you suprised that it hasn't changed?

I do not disagree with allow jews to go into a land and live. I do not disagree with the six million people killed in WWII in the concentration camps and ghettos that Hitler created.

The fighting and terrorism did not start at the time of WWII and the call for the creation of Isreal did not start at the time of WWII either. It started long before that. The terrorism and killing of innocent civilians did not start with the creation of Isreal. It had been ongoing for decades before.

What I DO disagree with is Isreal creating the same ghettos and city-prisons for the Palestinians to live in that Hitler created for the Jews in WWII. I DO disagree with the fact the Plestinians are not wanted by other arab states. Jordan, as one example, has an entire government branch dedicated to providing and maintaining records of Palestinians travel papers that allow them to travel to most contries. Like any other nationality, Palestinians want to be recognized as Palestinians and not Jordanians, Egyptians, Saudis, Kuwaitis or any other but Palestinians.

The difference between the American Indians and the Isrealis is that ultimately the American Indians integrated into our society because out government allows this. It is hard to find a person today in America whose family has been in the US for a number of generations where there is not some American Indian blood in the family.

This is entirely opposite in Isreal. Big difference.

Originally posted by Pettifogger
The peace process will never work until they figure out what to do with Jerusalem and I do not see them ever agreeing on that.
They don’t have to figure out what to do with Jerusalem if they comply with the UN plan for the creation of Israel and the Arab state. It was covered very clearly as to what would become of that city and surrounding religiously historic territory.
Like it or not when most nations are founded the local populace is expelled.
Not according to the plan, those Arabs living there were to be integrated into the new country of Israel. Those that left when the fighting started were to be allowed the right of return. Israel, however didn’t see it that way and has taken (aka stolen) their property.
Israel accepted the UN partition, which would of left an Arab state.
Of course the Jewish immigrants accepted the plan. The land taken from the Arab nations was given to them to establish their country. It would be stupid for them not to take what was initially the second choice of the Zionists.
The other Arab nations created the problem when they refused to allow the Pal. into their countries and instead made them set up tent cities where the living conditions are horrible. Israel is not perfect but Jews were well within their rights to set up a place where they can be safe and free from the whims of tryannical governments so there is six millions reasons. The world did nothing then are you suprised that it hasn't changed?
I would say that the UN created this problem and has done nothing to help resolve it. They have allowed the Israelis to continue the occupation and settling of lands in violation of International Law. As you have proclaimed that you are a lawyer, how can you support a nation that is continually violating the law?

Specifically the British Mandate says:

"the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Seems to me one of the same principles that the US was founded on. Unfortunately, as Ken pointed out, the Jewish people did not see things this way. When the British Mandate was published the Jewish terrorist organizations started the worst string of terrorist acts against the Arabs and Brisith population in 20 years to that point. Below is a link to the Mandate that the Arabs agreed to. Read it and see if you think it's fair or not.


http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm

Thayer, this is amazing. Very good points and perspective there. Great addition to our little debate here. Take a look at the politics section whenever you like. We could use a good discussion mate.

About the changes...yes this place has changed A LOT. I have moved in and out of somd since I graduated from law school and worked on the Hill and in the firm. The change that I saw when I moved back here in the 90s was dramatic. You would not even recognize this place. We even have a "Technology Corridor" here now.

Now if you want to look at the Biblical side of things you only need to look at Deuteronomy chapter 4 where the Isrealites were preparing to go into the promised land. God instructed them to follow the ten commandments in this land. It doesn't look like they are holding up to that.

In fact God said that it was up to them if they would live in peace and prosper or be burned from the face of the land.

Isreali's today should remember this when it comes to the Palestinians.

Thanks Dem. I think I'll check out that section.

SOMD, with a Technology Corridor. Is that an outgrowth of Pax River? I knew there were some companies setting up substantial presence there when I left in '84. I'll have to keep my eye on that as well.

Right not I need to keep my eye on the clock. Time to go home to the Family.

Till Tomorrow.

Thayer...signing off.

It actually is simple...but to understand it you must understand that is is all about land. Not religion, not anything else. The territories...Golan, West Bank, and Gaza, which we think of as Palestinan homelands....have been carpeted with Israeli towns (settlements). The Israelis have no intention of doing anything but continuing to take what little land is left.

What the Arabs, the Palestinans, and Bin Laden know is that there is no negotiation the Arabs can offer (short of leaving their homes entirely and giving everything to the Israelis ) that can be done that would cause the Israelis to make peace... this is becuase every year without peace (with fake negotiation) allows the Israelis another year to take more land...and THAT is what this is about.

If you have any doubts of this, look at the UN maps, you will see they have already taken just about all of it, and the idea of a Palestinan nation, is a joke for US television,...a myth. There is bascialy no land left for them anymore, it has mostly been stolen.

Look at the UN maps on this link, it tells the story better than words.

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/321d21fe3691e82885256ce900532889/96fd41bb37e40f8685256b98006ec72a!OpenDocument

Because the Arabs know that they notion of peace with Israel is fake, they know that they only have a simple choice. Be destroyed and dispossesed without a fight, or put up a fight any way the are able. Terrorism, all too sadly, is the only option they have before them. It is a lousy choice, but there is no other course available, other than accepting destruction by surrender. It is a choice between two evils. Isreal has said to them : "We are going to take your land, you will be slaves, and we will kill you as required, regardless of what you do" The Palestinans are responding "You very well may, but we will share the pain of this horror with you, and you will learn of our pain from your own" It is in the spirit of people to fight rather than accept destruciton without any struggle.

I do not say this to condone violence, but I am saying the Israelis are forcing it, and will contiue to do so, bucause the want the land AT ANY COST to themselves, and AT ANY COST to the Arabs, or AT ANY COST to America.

I always find it interesting when people argue a subject by telling you what the various parties are thinking and what their motivations are, as if they know these people personally or can read minds.

You all have a leg up on me since I've never had a conversation with any of the players nor do I have any ESP skills. All I can do is go by what the news people report.

Terrorism, all too sadly, is the only option they have before them. That's something else I find interesting - that there are people who wanted George Bush to negotiate endlessly with Hussein because "diplomacy works". Yet they're also typically the same ones who say "the only option the Palestinians have is terrorism".

If Yasser Arafat were serious about peace, he would have accepted or at least entertained the proposal Barak laid out at Camp David in 2000. But, if I remember correctly, Arafat was yelling NO and threatening to walk out before Barak even got the words out. There was no negotiation, no diplomacy - just a NO from Arafat.

If you're going to stick up for the Palestinians, you might think about not being so blind to their faults or so quick to excuse them when they strap bombs on themselves and blow up innocent Israeli civilians. But that's just a suggestion.

Originally posted by ThayerP
Actually if you check on what a Semite is, a Semite is any of the tribes of people you listed, plus a few others. So you could have just said let the Semites fight it out among their different tribes…. I’m aware of that, my intent was to address “What-ever-the-f### they call themselves at any particular time” they have been fighting for eons and will continue to do so until THEY decide they’ve had enough.


The Suez isn’t of any consequence, as it’s in no danger of being taken over by these Satanic Israelis you’re so worried about, nor is it in danger of being an Egyptian blockade.

… The Oil. That's pretty obvious. No matter how much people want to deny it the oil in that region dictates the economy in Europe and consequently the world…. As I recall Isreal/Palistine has no significant deposits of oil and since the world is already buying oil from every other Bronze Age hellhole over there…

… The labor. Next time your out shopping take the time to look at clothing labels and see just how much of the clothes you buy are made in the MidEast. It accounts for approximately 40% of the clothing being sold in the US…. Strange. I’ve got labels in my clothing from a lot of places but nowhere populated by Camels, Scorpions and terrorists. :rolleyes: Again, if it isn’t made there it would be somewhere else. NEXT….

… Religion. This may not be a high priority for some but for others it is extremely high. Israel contains the most revered sites for Christians, Jews and Muslims. There are large numbers of all these religions in the US…. Finally one that does happen to be of consequence to some. (Just not me)

If the Palestinians were to control this “Holy-Land” that is so important to all these peoples you’re so concerned about… How many of the Christian and Hebrews do you think would be able to safely traverse the border to visit these sites occupied by a terrorist government? Answer NONE.

How much preservation would be conducted to safeguard these sites by the likes of them? NONE (They have been digging through the foundation of the Mosque in Bethlehem that stands upon the former Temple grounds of biblical time. Either destroying or carrying off every thing they’ve found on the site of non-muslim origin.

This would not change unless a sympathetic authority took control of the site. In other words (non-terrorists)

Jordan, as one example, has an entire government branch dedicated to providing and maintaining records of Palestinians travel papers that allow them to travel to most contries. Then why doesn't Jordan give up some land for the Palestinians to call their own? They have a lot more of it than Israel does.

Does anyone but me find it ridiculous that this tribe is demanding that some little tiny country give up land for it to build a sovreign nation on when there are other countries in the region that have significantly more land to offer?

Imagine an American Indian tribe demanding that Rhode Island give up land so they can have a sovreign state, then strapping bombs on themselves and killing civilians to get their way.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
... Imagine an American Indian tribe demanding that Rhode Island give up land so they can have a sovreign state, then strapping bombs on themselves and killing civilians to get their way. Just as long as it's in New England! :yay:

Originally posted by vraiblonde
I always find it interesting when people argue a subject by telling you what the various parties are thinking and what their motivations are, as if they know these people personally or can read minds.
The motivations are obvious when you look at what actually takes place. After every conflict the Israelis have “held” the land they have conquered in violation of the Geneva Conventions. They have gone on and placed settlements in the occupied territory (another violation). Then they make an offer to the Palestinians that returns only a fraction of what is taken and are expected to accept it. It doesn’t take a mind reader to figure it out.

That's something else I find interesting - that there are people who wanted George Bush to negotiate endlessly with Hussein because "diplomacy works". Yet they're also typically the same ones who say "the only option the Palestinians have is terrorism".
Diplomacy would work if both of them wanted it to. As long as the Israelis maintain the occupation and repressive tactics I see it as not ever having a chance. What options do the Palestinians have in this struggle? They do not have an army nor the equipment to attempt a conventional war. Israel wouldn’t have one either if it wasn’t being given to them by our Government.

If Yasser Arafat were serious about peace, he would have accepted or at least entertained the proposal Barak laid out at Camp David in 2000. But, if I remember correctly, Arafat was yelling NO and threatening to walk out before Barak even got the words out. There was no negotiation, no diplomacy - just a NO from Arafat.
It was unacceptable from the beginning as Israel had no intention of returning to within their legal borders. Arafat, while not necessarily the best leader a nation could want, is doing what he should do. Namely protecting the interests of his people and the land that was designed for their country.

If you're going to stick up for the Palestinians, you might think about not being so blind to their faults or so quick to excuse them when they strap bombs on themselves and blow up innocent Israeli civilians. But that's just a suggestion.
No one is blind to what is going on, at least those of us commenting as pro-Palestinian. We have stated that we do not agree with the homicide-bomber. What I and others have said is that we understand why they have resorted to the tactic, because they have nothing else to fight with. What I think is blind is that you and others do not see what Israel is doing is wrong and illegal. Because they use sophisticated methods and arms doesn’t mean that they are right or better then the Palestinians.

Both sides have their faults, and plenty of them, but only one side is occupying and settling land beyond their borders. Only one side is repressing the inhabitants of the area with military firepower and brutality. Only one side is receiving military hardware from the US of A for use in the conflict.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Does anyone but me find it ridiculous that this tribe is demanding that some little tiny country give up land for it to build a sovreign nation on when there are other countries in the region that have significantly more land to offer?

What is ridiculous is that this tiny little country is taking another's land that is not theirs and you support it. What was done when Iraq tried the same thing with Kuwait? I guess we were wrong to boot them back within their borders and wrong now to re-establish an Iraqi nation as we should now own the land we just conquered.

What options do the Palestinians have in this struggle? They could find somewhere else to settle. But that would be too easy - much better to homocide bomb people and quibble over a patch of sand in some teeny tiny nation that just happens to be the only non-Arab country in the whole region.

You and I are seeing two very different things. I'm seeing a bunch of terrorists. You're seeing Freedom Fighters.

I'm also seeing some half-hearted grumbling from Jordan, Saudi and other Arab nations on behalf of the Palestinians, but no real support for them. Why not? Why aren't the Saudis, Jordanians and Egyptians demanding that the Palestinians be granted a homeland? Are they that afraid of the US?

And speaking of which, does the US really control everything in the world, including Middle Eastern nations? Why is this our problem?

Originally posted by Ken King
[b]… Diplomacy would work if both of them wanted it to. As long as the Israelis maintain the occupation and repressive tactics I see it as not ever having a chance…
So you’re saying these terrorists that want “The Zionist Devils Exterminated”, want to “Push the Jews into the sea” and call for the “Destruction of the Un-holy Israelis” are worthy of serious diplomatic effort?

Uh-huh!?!

…They do not have an army nor the equipment to attempt a conventional war. Israel wouldn’t have one either if it wasn’t being given to them by our Government. …

Gee what about Syria, Egypt, Jordan etal.? You know, the rest of those peaceful Muslims that were helping them “Slaughter the Israeli pigs”?

If the U.S. hadn’t helped Israel over the years they would have succeeded.

But since there may be a Jew living on some sacred muslim sand dune somewhere along the Jordan... I can see how the Palestinians have to use terrorism to eradicate those horrible Zionist Restaurant Diners :eek:, the Evil Jewish Pizza-Makers :eek: and those Devilish Israeli School Children and other Bus-Riders :yikes:

Wouldn't want them next door to me either. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by vraiblonde
They could find somewhere else to settle. But that would be too easy - much better to homocide bomb people and quibble over a patch of sand in some teeny tiny nation that just happens to be the only non-Arab country in the whole region.
So couldn’t Israel, the first choice for the Zionists was in Argentina, so why don’t they pack up and head there?

You and I are seeing two very different things. I'm seeing a bunch of terrorists. You're seeing Freedom Fighters.
I agree with that.

I'm also seeing some half-hearted grumbling from Jordan, Saudi and other Arab nations on behalf of the Palestinians, but no real support for them. Why not? Why aren't the Saudis, Jordanians and Egyptians demanding that the Palestinians be granted a homeland? Are they that afraid of the US?
Jordan, Syria, and Egypt have been smacked down by Israel (with its US supplied equipment) and I suspect that they do not desire to receive it again (especially from a nuclear capable country). I too have heard grumblings from the established governments, but the people in these other nations see that the US is blindly supporting the Israeli effort to conquer and possess the entire area of this dispute.

And speaking of which, does the US really control everything in the world, including Middle Eastern nations?
I say we don’t control everything but undoubtedly we do influence much, if not most, of what goes on.

Why is this our problem?
It is a world problem (the unrest and instability) not just ours. However, our influence in bringing about the designed plan for Israel and Palestine could legitimize our role as a peacemaker and lesson (maybe even eliminate) the attacks we face throughout the world by factions that use this as an excuse to inflict harm upon us and our interests.

Originally posted by Kyle
So you’re saying these terrorists that want “The Zionist Devils Exterminated”, want to “Push the Jews into the sea” and call for the “Destruction of the Un-holy Israelis” are worthy of serious diplomatic effort?

Uh-huh!?!



Gee what about Syria, Egypt, Jordan etal.? You know, the rest of those peaceful Muslims that were helping them “Slaughter the Israeli pigs”?

If the U.S. hadn’t helped Israel over the years they would have succeeded.

But since there may be a Jew living on some sacred muslim sand dune somewhere along the Jordan... I can see how the Palestinians have to use terrorism to eradicate those horrible Zionist Restaurant Diners :eek:, the Evil Jewish Pizza-Makers :eek: and those Devilish Israeli School Children and other Bus-Riders :yikes:

Wouldn't want them next door to me either. :rolleyes:
No, that isn’t what I have said. What I have said is that the UN plan has never received a fair chance to succeed and that plan is what established the legal borders of these nations.

So the Israelis have never just entered a refugee camp and indiscriminately killed women, children, and other non-combatants? Maybe that is why these people see that any target is a good target. You know, that old “eye for an eye” mentality.

There have been atrocities committed by both sides, but you only see it as being done by one of them. Do me a favor and learn about what has really been going on. Or is it that you enjoy needless suffering, killing, and the theft of land from a weaker opponent?

I want to reply to some of the posts made while I was not on:

To vraiblonde:

It is not incumbent on ANY other nation to provide a place for the Palestinians to live. They had a oplace to live and it was pulled out from under their feet because of pressure put on the British and International community by the Jewish terrorist organizations of the 30's and 40's. Once the goal of a state of Isreal was acheived these groups became the IDF and were legitimized. Then they turned their terror on the indeginous people that were living there. To throw the agrument of the American Indians back at you, why didn't Mexico or Canada give up some of their land for the American Indians to have a sovreign nation? That only seems fair to me by your standards. Remember, about once every five or ten years there is a lawsuit by the Indian tribes to recover land that was taken from them. One of these days they will win and get the nation your talking about.

The other Arab nations are supporting the Palestinians. They have fund raisers for the red cresent yearly for them. The problem becomes that the wetern media tends to these into fund raisers for terrorists because the name Palestinians is attached to it and the countries doing these get hit with diplomatic salvos from the west.



Also, if you have read my posts I am not reading minds, I do know a large number of Palestinians who still say they are from a particular village in Isreali area and if you say they are Jordanian you better be ready to apologize quickly.

To Kyle: I only have one thing to say. The definition of Ignorance is the act of ignoring the facts to a point where you don't understand them. I feel sorry for the eveil palestinian school children who are shot at daily as they try to go to school often to find the school closed and occupied by Isreali forces, the Palestinian restaurant owners who have to close their restaurants because there are not Palestinians to come to the restaurant due to 24-hour curfews. I cannot compare any Palestinian restaurant goers since there are none to speak of and the Palestinians who do go out don't have the money to go to a restaurant. Next time they show news coverage of Isreal and Palestine compare the infrastructure and buildings of the two and tell me which people are being oppressed by who.

As for the Palestinians controlling the "Holy-Land", in my opinion it would be better for the Christians and Muslims to control these sites than the Hebrews. The Christians and Muslims at least have respect for the Holy Sites unlike the Hebrews. Arab Christians and Muslims have controlled this area for centuries and there was never any problem with going to Bethleham or any other Holy-Site before the state of Isreal was created.

I think you Ken is right, Kyle. You need to do more research. Either that our your playing devil's advocate.


For Everyone:

If the Isrealis do not recognize the Palestinians areas as sovreign territory that is controlled by Palestine, why does the IDF call their military actions "incursions"?

Websters Definition: Incursion - An aggressive entrance into foreign territory; a raid or invasion.





To

Ken how can you say that the land is not theirs. The jews were expelled from it in 722 or there abouts. Unlike other beaten peoples the jews maintained their identity and never forgot their homeland.

Thayer, you stuck your foot in it, buddy.

After WWII, the UN passed the partition plan to create a Jewish state. Needless to say, the Arabs weren't thriled about this. The day after statehood was declared, Jordan, Egypt, Iran, Syria and a few others invaded brand new Israel, which began the War of Independence.

The ONLY supporter and weapons supplier for Israel was Czechoslovakia - yet they managed to not only kick Arab butt and run them off but also to capture more territory.

While David Ben-Gurion was extending a hand to his Arab neighbors in Israel's Proclamation of Independence, the Arab radio stations were saying things like "Arabs must undertake the liberation battle that will tear the hearts from the bodies of the hatefull jews and trample them in the dust". The Arab League Secretary General was quoted: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacare which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacares and the crusades".

In 1967, the Arabs again mobilized troops against Israel. Lyndon Johnson urged the Israelis to stay calm and not react militarily. Unfortunately, the Arabs weren't willing to cooperate and continued to mass troops and cut off waterways to Israel, basically strangling the Israeli economy. Israel had no choice but to defend itself, which led to the Six Day War, during which Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights, among others.

More later - must get to work. But I'm tired of the revisionist history that people like you and Ken King are trying to pass off.

"If Yasser Arafat were serious about peace, he would have accepted or at least entertained the proposal Barak laid out at Camp David in 2000. But, if I remember correctly, Arafat was yelling NO and threatening to walk out before Barak even got the words out. There was no negotiation, no diplomacy - just a NO from Arafat."



No... the offer was made knowing that it so ridiculously insulting to the inteligence of anyone how took a close look at it. There was notthing to do but reject it. Here is a link that goes through it step by step. Take a look, you will realize that if you were Arafat, you would reallize that once again you were being offerred nothing as a stalling tactic.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

vraiblonde:

I don't understand where I steped in it. The Arab-Jewish relationship went sour when Isreal waws created. This is what you simply restated for me. Thanks. The Arab countries of the region have come to accept, albeit behind the scenes that Isreal is there and will always be there because of the MegaPower support it has behind it. No political power in that region wants to antagonize the US, not even the Palestinians. With that in mind they simply want Isreal to give the Plestinians a small portion of the land that was originally promised to them with assurances that they will no longer be harrassed on a daily basis by the IDF.

Yes, the Palestinians fought and fled their land when isreal was created. In fact it was announced from the mosques by the Mullahs that Arabs were being evicted forcably by the Haganah and Irgun and those Arabs who resisted were being killed or imprisoned. The Isrealis even invaded Jaffa, an Arab town that was to be part of the Arab partition, BEFORE the British had even left it. The Isrealis called it the "struggle for Isreal's Independence". However, they were already to get Independence, simply not everything that they wanted. They had been made to concede a portion to the Arabs and they didn't want to do that.

It was in that context that the Arab countries united and came to the aid of the Palestinians. If the Arab Legue army had not agreed to the June 11 four week truce in 1948 allowing the haganah and Irgun fighters to regroup, train, import arms and reinforce fighters, they would probably have won the war and the situation would be different today. If the IDF had not violated the cease-fire the situation today would be different as well.

Originally posted by Pettifogger
Ken how can you say that the land is not theirs. The jews were expelled from it in 722 or there abouts. Unlike other beaten peoples the jews maintained their identity and never forgot their homeland.
I take it you are talking about BCE, go back further in history and prior to the existence of the Israelites the land was that of the Canaanites. The Israelites abandoned that land in 1700 BCE due to widespread famine and migrated to Egypt. They weren't expelled by force they chose to leave. It wasn't until sometime around 1300 BCE that they returned. Since then there have been many differing controlling powers over the centuries. The original "ownership" of the territory could be debated forever and really isn't significant as Israel (the nation we are discussing) was officially established by the UN in 1947, see UN Resolution 181.

This, in my mind, is the controlling document whereby Israel and the yet to be named Arab state are defined. After all, we are talking modern times and not what it was like or who owned what thousands or even hundreds of years ago. Resolution 181 lays out explicitly what property is to be Israel, what property is to be the Arab state and what is to be the independent city of Jerusalem.

Ken to say that the jews were not forced to leave Israel is absurd and has no basis in fact. The Assyrians took over the northern kingdom in 722 bce and expelled the residents, again in 597 bce the Chaldeans expelled the jews from Jerusalem, and as you know the Romans made them relocate as well. From the time of the great diaspora every year the jews repeated a saying at passover "Next year in Jerusalem." As I said before the jews never lost sight of their homeland and reclaimed it when they were able to.

Why are you so bent on continously bringing up the UN resolutions didn't we just have some sort of war that the UN did not sanction?

I don't agree with anybody saying that the Jews should be pushed back into the Sea or should be subject to Genocide. All the Jews had to do from the beginning of their occupying the land was to assimilate into the population and live side by side with the residents in peace. They didn't do this from the very beginning and this created a cycle of vengence that continues today. They were told to go in and "Possess" the land, not commit genocide.

Originally posted by ThayerP
I don't agree with anybody saying that the Jews should be pushed back into the Sea or should be subject to Genocide. All the Jews had to do from the beginning of their occupying the land was to assimilate into the population and live side by side with the residents in peace. They didn't do this from the very beginning and this created a cycle of vengence that continues today. They were told to go in and "Possess" the land, not commit genocide.

HUH? What Bible did YOU read?

Originally posted by Pettifogger
Ken to say that the jews were not forced to leave Israel is absurd and has no basis in fact.
Initially (1700 BCE) they weren't forced to leave, they did so by choice. So were they really that devoted to their land or simply their existance without concern for the land? There is no arguing that many differing powers controlled the areas of the years, but does that have any bearing on today's world?
Why are you so bent on continously bringing up the UN resolutions didn't we just have some sort of war that the UN did not sanction?
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t it the UN that established modern day Israel? Upon accepting the terms of that arrangement didn’t Israel become a member of the UN? Doesn’t the UN charter guide member nations on how they conduct affairs on an international basis and set the path that they should take to resolve issues? Didn’t we use UN resolutions and Iraq’s failure to comply with them as the major justification for the conflict that just took place?

Are you sure you are a lawyer or are you just trying to impress someone as a wannabe? The reason that I refer to the resolutions is that they are the basis for how the world (the same world group that created Israel) states a nation must act when their activities exceed what would be considered civilized by this representative body. These resolutions are grounded in international law and specifically the Geneva Conventions.

What Israel has done is take land beyond what was “granted” them when they were created by the UN. Until that time (in modern time reference) Israel was not recognized and the land had been a part of the Ottoman Empire which later fell to British and French control. Rehashing what took place thousands of years ago and who were the original owners is a waste of time and detracts from the current actuality of events (maybe you are a lawyer as this spin has been seen from many of your brethren).

This would be the same as if a person holding deed to a specific parcel of land started construction beyond the borders of the property. The actual land owner would be able to seek redress and have the construction halted and receive damages from the intruding party. What about that don’t you, as a lawyer, understand?

Originally posted by Frank
HUH? What Bible did YOU read?

The same Bible that the JEws, Christians and Muslims read. If you go back to Dueteronomy chapters 2 you will see exactly what I said. God instructed them to posses the land. If they had to fight armies, God helped. But killing all the women and children was a bit over the top. Then they looted everything from the cities that they committed genocide in.

Thanks for reminding me that most of you idiots here make fun of the person when they do not agree with you. The jews have a right to exist and they have a right to define their borders for the safety of their people. I just think it is funny to harp on about the UN resolututions when we regularily ignore them unless it is in our interests to not. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY. Look at how we have clamped down on civil rights after 9/11, look at how many people have been jailed for no crime.

Nowhere in any of MY posts will you find where I said the Jews have no right to Exist.

You will see where I say that the State of Isreal as it stands today is basically illegal.

You will find where I say that the methods used by the State of Isreal for their safety is what is mainly causing the lack of saftey.

You will find where I say that the blind support for the State of Isreal by the US Government is the main reason that the US safety is threatened.

As for the events after 9/11 and changes that have taken place. Please no :offtopic: subjects. Don't sidetrack the thread to something else all together.

Originally posted by Pettifogger
Thanks for reminding me that most of you idiots here make fun of the person when they do not agree with you. The jews have a right to exist and they have a right to define their borders for the safety of their people. I just think it is funny to harp on about the UN resolututions when we regularily ignore them unless it is in our interests to not. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY. Look at how we have clamped down on civil rights after 9/11, look at how many people have been jailed for no crime.
The only idiots I know are the ones that hide behind a pseudonym and claim that they are a lawyer yet have no understanding of law or international agreements. BTW butt head, who said that the Israelis have no right to exist. Show me or just shut up. Notice I call them Israelis as I am not as stupid as you to think that the only people living in that land are Jewish. Crawl back under your rock or go find some one like Scott Petersen to defend (I'm sure he could use your skill).

The right for a nation to exist is different fromt the right of a goverment to exist.

I am thinking that a government's right to exist, or it's disqualification for existance, is determined by whether it supports justice or the opposite. I think on this, all people just about everywhere would agree.

We decided the the Iraqi Government did not have a right to exist, and removed it.

It would also appear then that the Government of Israel, unjust as it is... making vilians of its own people as enslavers while stealing the land and taking the lives of its neighbors... does not have any more right to exist than that of Saddam. It is not significant that a country behaves democraticaly to it's preferred citizens, while enslaving many under it's control. Segregated justice is mockery.

The government of Israel is a regime. It is time for a regime change. Should it be afforded any more tolerance than Saddam? If we measure it be it's actions? Is it better or worse that Saddam?

You will find where I say that the blind support for the State of Isreal by the US Government is the main reason that the US safety is threatened.

...and 9/11 itself.... ask yourself if this could have happened....if there was any possibility of it happening....in the absence of the Israeli settlements.

Keep in mind that the settlements carpet the West Bank, Gaza, and Golan Heights completely, and that any Arab with a brain has figured out that Isreal isn't planning on giving any back that is worth keeping...Israel keeps paying new settlers to expand the settlements every day.

The Bin Ladens of the Arab world have other complaints about the USA, but this issue is 95% of the hatred. Take it away, and it gets very hard to find people willing to blow themselves up. Keep supporting this subjugation of a people, and your force them to the "give me liberty or give me death" alternative.

We are supporting a horror, and the Bin Ladens have concluded that the remedy is to bring the war home to us.

As Americans, we have given fantastically to Israel financially, and militarily to help it exist. Wether or not Israel was a "good idea" in the first place, doesn't even matter, it is there now. It is one thing to help it survive, it is another thing, and horrible thing, to help it conquer and futher disposess other nations.

We have given money, nukes, the World Trade Center, our respect in the world as a justice-driven nation, and now we chip a way at the constitution of our country, and it all comes down to one thing....Why the illegal expasion of Israel worth all this? It might be worth it to the goverment of Israel, but nobody else on the planet. It is all cost, no gain, and it is absent of honor.

Whether we like it or not $12 billion a year goes to Isreal. There is another thread in these forums discussing the need to increase money spent on education, specifically the teachers; maybe congress needs to reasses it's priorities.

Second, we just went into a country and removed a government for having weapons of mass destruction. The main thing was that they had them in the Middle East and this was causing the possibility for unrest there. WELL, If we are going to say that, then we need to take care of the biggest stockpile in the MidEast in the attempt to bring around peace there. Isreal.

:frown:

It would help if the Palestinians weren't homocide bombing everyone in sight. :bubble: Also Arafat has proven that he will NEVER accept an agreement that's palatable to both sides. Guess why? Because the issue at hand ISN'T a Palestinian "homeland" - the issue is racial and religious hatred. If the issue was a homeland, Arafat would have accepted the deal that Clinton tried to swing for him.

I have never heard that Israel has "one of the poorest" human rights records - I would like to see some source material on this.

It seems to me that the warring parties come to an agreement, the Palestinians start rioting and killing people, the Israelis tighten down to protect themselves, Arafat delivers a statement that praises all Palestinian "martyrs" and urges more killings, then Ken King writes a column saying how mean the Isrealis are and how the Palestinians deserve a homeland. :lol:



http://www.masada2000.org/index.html

http://www.masada2000.org/historical.html

Ken, you made some excellent points. Thank you for not being afraid to post the truth about the actual aggressors of conflict in the Middle East.

Take a look at this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2139573322514875771

Short 2 minute video of a typical Israeli.

Take a look at this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2139573322514875771

Short 2 minute video of a typical Israeli.


Oh Yeah I am sure thats a typical Israeli ......

Indict all Zionist Appeasers - WTF is all that about ?

Antisemitism ?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vanguard_(publication)


National Vanguard (publication)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

For the organization see National Vanguard (American organization)

National Vanguard is a magazine published by the National Alliance. (cover image [1]) The publication's first editor was Dr. William L. Pierce the founder of the National Alliance. Previously, National Vanguard was a tabloid newspaper first published in 1969. National Vanguard replaced an earlier newspaper called Attack ! which was published by the National Youth Alliance in 1978. Attack! was the newspaper for the National Youth Alliance from 1969 to 1974. In 1974 the group underwent a name change, back to the group name that Dr. William Pierce had been using, which was the National Alliance.

The name National Vanguard was started in October 1970 when Dr. William Pierce split from Matt Koehl. The had been running a publishing firm together called Midgard Books. Pierce renamed his new firm as National Vanguard Books, Inc. and Koehl renamed his NS Books. So, National Vanguard became the name for Pierce's book publishing and resale business in 1970. In 1978 the name of the newspaper "Attack!" was changed to "National Vanguard". In 1982 this newspaper went to a magazine format. In 2002 the magazine went to an all-color format.

The current publisher is Erich Gliebe.

The current editor is Richard Preston.

The magazine covers issues from a White Nationalist perspective.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vanguard_(American_organization)

National Vanguard is a defunct American white nationalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalist) organization based in Charlottesville, Virginia, founded by Kevin Alfred Strom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Alfred_Strom) and former members of the National Alliance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Alliance) . According to the group, "persons of Jewish descent, homosexuals or bisexuals, criminals, autistics, persons with a non-White spouse or sexual partner, or persons with more than an undetectable trace of non-White ancestry are specifically barred from National Vanguard membership.

So where is the next KLAN Mtg RC ............ :smack:


:whistle:

So where is the next KLAN Mtg RC ............ :smack:


:whistle:

You tell me. I'll bring some friends.

I think it's super that the UN has a position that lands captured during was must be returned, but why should this edict be given any more credence than any other edict that the UN offers up? The UN can proclaim anything it wants to, just like Cheyrl Crow, but that doesn't mean anyone has to take them seriously.

Countries go to war. It might be over religion, over land, over money, or just because a neighboring country is a bunch of a-holes. There's no piece of paper that the UN can spew out that'll change that fact. So, if no international body can resolve this fact of life, what can? What can help keep wars to a minimum? I think it's the reality of no do-overs. If a country declares war, then they are gambling with their lives, their national treasure, and their real estate. If they win, good for them. But if they lose, then there has to be consequences. "To the victor goes the spoils" has been the case throughout our history, and the UN telling the victor that the winner has to give back everything the loser lost flies in the face of that history, eliminates most risk from the equation, and eliminates much of the risk that keeps countries from going to war in the first place.

If any nation doesn't want to lose land, or national treasure, then they shouldn't go about picking fights that they can't win. I think if the Israelis did give back all the land they captured, they would just be telling their enemies that it's okay to attack us because you can kill a lot of our troops, and look real important to your people, and when you lose all you've lost is some troops and some hardware because we'll give everything else back to you. We just saw this happen in Lebanon. Third and fourth parties bait Israel to attack, they expend enough troops and hardware to make it look like a fight, then they start whining to the UN and pointing at Israel as a bully. Then the international community condemns Israel while you hear nothing about the atrocities of Hezbollah and the Iranians. That never would have happened if Israel has continued to take the strong stand and never given any concession back.

I think it's super that the UN has a position that lands captured during was must be returned, but why should this edict be given any more credence than any other edict that the UN offers up? The UN can proclaim anything it wants to, just like Cheyrl Crow, but that doesn't mean anyone has to take them seriously.

Countries go to war. It might be over religion, over land, over money, or just because a neighboring country is a bunch of a-holes. There's no piece of paper that the UN can spew out that'll change that fact. So, if no international body can resolve this fact of life, what can? What can help keep wars to a minimum? I think it's the reality of no do-overs. If a country declares war, then they are gambling with their lives, their national treasure, and their real estate. If they win, good for them. But if they lose, then there has to be consequences. "To the victor goes the spoils" has been the case throughout our history, and the UN telling the victor that the winner has to give back everything the loser lost flies in the face of that history, eliminates most risk from the equation, and eliminates much of the risk that keeps countries from going to war in the first place.

If any nation doesn't want to lose land, or national treasure, then they shouldn't go about picking fights that they can't win. I think if the Israelis did give back all the land they captured, they would just be telling their enemies that it's okay to attack us because you can kill a lot of our troops, and look real important to your people, and when you lose all you've lost is some troops and some hardware because we'll give everything else back to you. We just saw this happen in Lebanon. Third and fourth parties bait Israel to attack, they expend enough troops and hardware to make it look like a fight, then they start whining to the UN and pointing at Israel as a bully. Then the international community condemns Israel while you hear nothing about the atrocities of Hezbollah and the Iranians. That never would have happened if Israel has continued to take the strong stand and never given any concession back.


...about sums it up.


You still owe me $1 for Hillary.