“Once again, this Council fails to address the situation in Israel and in the Palestinian territories with any semblance of balance. There is no mention of indiscriminate rocket attacks by Hamas into Israel or the tunnels used to cause mayhem.” It is good to see someone from the Obama Administration actually speaking the truth about Israel.
“U.N. launches probe into alleged Israeli crimes in Gaza,” by Stephanie Nebehay and Tom Miles, Reuters, July 23, 2014 (thanks to Kenneth):
GENEVA, July 23 (Reuters) – The United Nations on Wednesday launched an international inquiry into human rights violations and crimes that may have been committed by Israel during its military offensive in the Gaza Strip.
The U.N. Human Rights Council condemned the Israeli assault which it said had involved “disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks”, including aerial bombing of civilian areas, collective punishment, and the killing of more than 650 Palestinians.
At the end of an emergency session, the 47-member forum adopted a resolution presented by Palestinians by a vote of 29 states in favor, 1 against (the United States) with 17 abstentions (including all nine European Union members).
“We came here to try to achieve together with you at least minimum justice for children who are being dismembered, for women whose bodies are lying in the streets, to find some justice for those who are being exterminated,” said Ibrahim Khraishi, ambassador of the Palestinian observer mission to the U.N. in Geneva.
Israel and its ally United States rejected the probe, calling it one-sided and counterproductive amid efforts to clinch a ceasefire. Israel has observer status at the talks.
Israel ambassador Eviator Manor, in remarks before the vote, told the forum: “Why does this Council believe that naming and shaming Israel will get it anywhere?
“Throughout the entire escalation of events, Israel has always acted with maximum restraint, fully committed to international law in general and the laws of armed conflict.”
Israel had established its own special commission of inquiry “with a scope beyond what is required under international and criminal law,” Manor said.
“Hamas is the aggressor. Hamas is the one committing war crimes … Open your eyes to reality,” he said.
POSSIBLE WAR CRIMES
U.N. High Commissioner Navi Pillay said that Israel may have committed war crimes by killing civilians and shelling houses and hospitals during its offensive in Gaza that began on July 8.
She also condemned the firing of rockets and mortars by Palestinian militants into Israel, saying such acts also constitute breaches of international law.
Pillay, citing cases Israeli air strikes and shelling hitting houses and hospitals in the crowded coastal enclave, said: “These are just a few examples where there seems to be a strong possibility that international humanitarian law has been violated, in a manner that could amount to war crimes.
“Every one of these incidents must be properly and independently investigated,” she said.
Pillay, a former U.N. war crimes judge, said that any warning by Israel to Gaza residents ahead of strikes must be “clear, credible and allow sufficient time for people to react”.
Gaza fighting continued to rage on Wednesday, displacing thousands more Palestinians in the battered territory as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said indirect truce talks between Israel and Hamas had made some progress.
The Geneva forum convened the special one-day session at the request of the Palestinians, Egypt and Pakistan.
Israel, which accuses the Council of bias, boycotted the Geneva forum for 20 months, resuming cooperation in October.
Its envoy Manor defended Israel’s air strikes and ground assault on Gaza as being necessary to defend the Israeli people.
The Council “cannot be supportive of an organization that is no different than al-Qaeda, ISIS (Islamic State), Boko Haram, Hezbollah and other extreme radical Islamist organizations that negate the very essence of human rights,” Manor said.
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki hit back, accusing Israeli forces of perpetrating “heinous crimes” by destroying whole neighborhoods and killing entire families.
The U.N. aid agency OCHA said at least five entire families, with 36 people, had been killed in the past few days.
The United States said that Kerry was seeking to secure an immediate ceasefire based on the Nov. 2012 ceasefire agreement.
U.S. ambassador Keith Harper, calling for a vote, said that the resolution was “destructive” and a “political and biased instrument”.
“Once again, this Council fails to address the situation in Israel and in the Palestinian territories with any semblance of balance. There is no mention of indiscriminate rocket attacks by Hamas into Israel or the tunnels used to cause mayhem,” he said.
Yep.
islamisdeath says
War crimes like for instance advising civilians where they will strike and at what time so they can leave. Yep I agree that is just pure evil well that and daring to fight back against people who are shooting missiles into Israeli civilian locations. Go get ’em UN!
Idiots! the majority of these dead women and children are dead because their own fighters are using them as human shields. Will the UN file charges against the Pali’s for that? No of course not.
Absurd!
Huck Folder says
It’s not “The UN”, but its UNHCR, as corrupt and evil an entity as its misbegotten predecessor. It needs to be disbanded and replaced by something unbiased and not overpowered by the 57 strong OIC bloc; maybe give the OIC ONE vote only! If you have a strong stomach, read the stranger than fiction story of the UNHRC’s monomania with Israel, and the execrable hatemonger ‘Special Rapporteur’: “Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 “, Mr. Richard Falk (United States). Shame on you US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council
“Secretaries General Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-moon, former president of the council Doru Costea, the European Union, Canada, and the United States have accused the council of focusing disproportionately [euphemistic!] on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.”
“The UN General Assembly [30% islamic] elects the members who occupy the UNHRC’s 47 seats. The General Assembly [30% islamic] takes into account the candidate States’ contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights, as well as their voluntary pledges and commitments in this regard.”
“promotion and protection of human rights”?
“voluntary pledges and commitments in this regard”?
You have had such humanitarian luminaries in the UNHRC as Pakistan, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, and the People’s Republic of China.
That group would happily elect Idi Amin Dada (if he were still alive) or Robert Mugabe (still leeching) as President, and never understand the farce.
“The General Assembly, [193 members, 30% islamic] via a two-thirds majority, [129 votes] can suspend the rights and privileges of any Council member that it decides has persistently committed gross and systematic violations of human rights during its term of membership. The resolution establishing the UNHRC states that “members elected to the Council shall uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights”.” [Yeah!]
The OIC bloc thus controls 44% of the two-thirds requirement. Worse, 193 – 57 = 136 non-OIC controlled votes. If the UN GA wanted to remove an islamist country like Sudan, without the help of the umma, they could get their 129 vote from the 136 with only seven votes ‘spare’, and there are usually some contrary votes 9China? Russia?) and some abstentions.
Put another way, if eight more states are created or overrun by the worshippers of mo, and join the OIC, islam will have a chokehold on this bastard child of bastard parents.
The UNHRC’s record speaks for itself, and its history will condemn it:
“As of 2014, Israel had been condemned in 50 resolutions by the Council since its creation in 2006—the Council had resolved almost more resolutions condemning Israel than on the rest of the world combined. The 50 resolutions comprised almost half (45.9%) of all country-specific resolutions passed by the Council… By April 2007, the Council had passed eleven resolutions condemning Israel, the only country which it had specifically condemned. Toward Sudan, a country with human rights abuses as documented by the Council’s working groups, it has expressed “deep concern”.
The council voted on 30 June 2006 to make a review of alleged human rights abuses by Israel a PERMANENT feature of EVERY council session. The Council’s special rapporteur on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict is its only expert mandate with no year of expiry. The resolution, which was sponsored by Organisation of the Islamic Conference, [who else?] passed by a vote of 29 to 12 with five abstentions. Human Rights Watch urged it to look at international human rights and humanitarian law violations committed by Palestinian armed groups as well. Human Rights Watch called on the Council to avoid the selectivity that discredited its predecessor and urged it to hold special sessions on other urgent situations, such as that in Darfur.”
The ONLY hope is that a two-thirds majority of civilized countries in the GA, (minus the OIC schmucks) rewrites the rules yet again, and gets it right.
el-cid says
Very informative post. Thank you.
When you say “it is not the UN” you may be overlooking the organizational dysfunction that leads to the creation of UNHCR and the UNRWA that are dedicated to the destruction of Israel and do nothing to help the Palestinian Arabs who are still the downtrodden of the earth.
The OIC block, despite VAST oil wealth, give virtually nothing to Palestinian Arabs or the PA. They maintain the Palestinian Arabs in there misery as pawns to manipulate the West, just as they can count on an automatic sizable minority of anti-Jewish Westerners to automatically identify with their propaganda in the press.
Then there are the career diplomats who go after Israel because it helps them get ahead.
Who are these “civilized countries” that would rewrite the rules? We can count on Stephen Harper and maybe the Czech Republic. Then?
tonykeywest says
Palistinians admit to using human shields . Deal with that UN. \
Jovial Joe says
Let the UN go the way of The League of Nations. Start afresh admitting only those countries that believe in Universal human rights (that will exclude all 57 Muslim States). A useless and corrupt Islamised body.
Tommy Guns says
So true Jovial Joe. In principle the U.N. was a great idea, but in recent years it has dissolved into useless irrelevance. It has become such a farce in terms of human rights and the condemnation of muslim atrocities. Besides, what does the U.N. do other than blow a lot of ‘hot air’?????
45charlie says
Great reason for Israel to finish what they started. No ceaserire.
el-cid says
Charlie,
We MUST win the propaganda war. That is the real battle. Hamas’s logic is unassailable through battle. They are willing to sacrifice any number of Palestinian Arabs from their offices in Qatar. It would be a great victory for Hamas if Gaza were razed to the ground. With ISIS succeeding in Iraq, they are convinced that they have the Western World on the run.
The enemy hates all Western Civilization as much as they hate Israel. We must get that message across. The Palestinian Arab man-on-the street is not our enemy–he is a poor slob who is a pawn in a vicious game and has a Al Qaeda type terrorist gang running the neighborhood. He has no where to turn.
flakmusic says
@el-shit,
“We MUST win the propaganda war. That is the real battle”
Was your expressing, on the other thread, the obscene hope that Mohammedans slit our (European’s) throat your contribution to winning that war?
Well, no matter. Just get lost, stupid creep.
Transmaster says
Israel since you will get no justice out of the anti-Semitic UN go ahead and finish the job, root out a kill Hamas root and branch, destroy UN ambulances carrying Hamas thugs, kill them all. The howls from the UN will be no worst. Nothing is said about the massacre of Christians by the Jihadists. The UN is a totally a totally corrupt, and bankrupt organization.
dumbledoresarmy says
From the article – “At the end of an emergency session, the 47-member forum adopted a resolution presented by Palestinians by a vote of 29 states in favor, 1 against (the United States) with 17 abstentions (including all nine European Union members).”
I’d like to know who the gutless abstainers were. If they were all non-Muslim states, then they should have been voting with the US – NO to this “let’s hate Israel” resolution that was proposed by the local Arab Muslims (aka “Palestinians”), who are nothing but the shock-troops – or cannon-fodder – of the Jihad against the Jews.
Let’s find out who exactly voted Yes, and who abstained.
If any of them happen to be countries of which we (assorted jihadwatchers) are citizens, then it’s up to us, as applicable, each in our respective countries, to write blistering letters to our heads of state and our foreign affairs ministers.
Angemon says
dumbledoresarmy posted:
“I’d like to know who the gutless abstainers were. ”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/who-voted-and-who-didn-t-for-un-investigation-of-potential-war-crimes-in-gaza-20140723
Mirren10 says
Thanks for that information, Angemon.
I shall be writing some blistering ( but icily polite ) letters to my soi disant PM, et al.
Richie says
And where is the UN condemnation of the rabid Jew hatred carried out by Muslims worldwide? Where is the UN condemnation of the genocide of Christians by Muslims throughout the world?
The silence is deafening
jewdog says
I read a disturbing account that said that since the IDF had warned Arab civilians in advance before an operation, many soldiers were ambushed and killed. Israel needs to stop being so nice to its enemies.
I remember Bill Warner once saying that there is no fairness in Islam. Right, because it is a supremacist ideology with no universal concept of humanity or golden rule. It is simply a primitive, tribal system of good believers and evil unbelievers. Now the primitives have a lot of money and influence.
Wellington says
The UN (Useless Nations) continues to demonstrate to anyone with even half a brain that it is not merely irrelevant (if only this) but is actually and regularly engaged in aligning with barbarians against the forces of civilization (often by way of tu quoque reasoning but many times by even “less” than this—-as here).
My God, the UN is even to the left of the Obama Administration (N.B., far leftism has an uncanny though thoroughly predictable way of morphing into far rightism, for instance all the stupid far leftists in the West making common alliance with the many reactionary, far rightist Islamic elements—–well, after all, totalitarianism crushes liberty whether it is far left or far right and so no wonder these freedom haters from opposite parts of the political spectrum are allies).
I would greatly relish an American President with the balls enough to formally withdraw the USA from the UN. It would be a great move—–for America, for Western Civilization, for freedom everywhere and for other good things.
Hey, I can dream, can’t I? Besides, sometimes dreams come true.
EYESOPEN says
I agree,Wellington. Get the U.S. OUT of the UN, and the UN out of the U.S. (That will also rid us of their “Agenda 21” crap!)
Covadonga says
Are the EU nations officially coordinating their foreign policy now?
If so, shouldn’t they give up all but one of their general assembly seats?
Or else the US should demand 54 seats for ourselves, since we have 50 states, plus Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam.
Just asking. I’m not up to speed on the finer points of the EU Constitution, such as it is.
Jan Fourowls says
Under UN Resolution 16/18 as passed in 2011 and acceded to by Barack Hussein Obama II on behalf of all Americans, I speak out against the UN and UN mouthpiece Pillay for: Their intolerance of any ideology in the Middle East except Islam, their de facto advocacy of Islamic religious hatred against the Jews (as well as jizya- and Quran-confirmed Islamic hatred of Christians), and their internationally reported travesty of one-sided targeting of Israel instead of terrorist Hamas that constitutes further incitement of terrorist Muslims to discrimination, hostility and/or violence against Jews and the nation of Israel, the Jewish homeland — as indicated further by the following points:
Hamas, terrorist organization listed as such since 1997 by the U.S. Department of State — a Department which has remained mainly true to its purpose as presidential administrations come and go.
Hamas, dedicated by its charter to destroy Israel and the Jewish people, by any means necessary including using its own soldier-citizens as human shields and not evacuating the soldier-citizens from the strike zones from which it is initiating terrorist activities after Israel has given advance warning to the soldier-citizens who are participating in the chronic terrorist rocket launches by Hamas from Gaza into Israel — all the better to increase the Hamas Gaza soldier-citizen aka “civilian” casualty rates and play a victim card in the global press and before the U.N. because that’s the cheat-to-win tactic of an intolerant and religiously discriminatory terrorist organization which uses propaganda to augment its other cheap shots.
Hamas, which has dug underground and militarily equipped terrorist tunnels originating from Gaza mosques, houses, schools and hospitals to points of entry up into the sovereign national territory of Israel.
Hamas, chosen by the soldier-citizens of Gaza to be its terrorist government with their obviously full knowledge that they were living and working under and for a terrorist organization.
Hamas, given $47 million by POTUS Obama even though I certainly did not want any of my tax dollars going to support an intolerant, discriminatory, violent and hostile terrorist organization.
Hamas, intolerant of religious diversity or civilized freedoms, and dedicated to using terrorism for hostility and violence.
Media war including the stage of the U.N.? Hamas, hell yes. Wouldn’t any reasonable person just expect Hamas as an intolerant, discriminatory, violent and hostile terrorist organization to stage and photoshop images as well as rhetoric provided to the press?
But not the U.N.’s Pillay at least insofar as her grandstanding as an intolerant and discriminatorily anti-Israel pro-terrorist for the press. Not the unreasonable pro-terrorists who have brought to the U.N. their intolerance, discrimination, hostility and violence as 29 “Palestinian” states dominating the U.N. on all matters involving Israel. The “Palestinian” intolerance is blinding. The discrimination, heinous. The hostility, unparalleled. The violence initiated by terrorist Hamas? Continuing.
John McIntosh says
It’s time we suspend payments to the UN via the OIC who can’t seem to tell the truthl
EYESOPEN says
Although this is a cartoon, it portrays very vividly – as well as for “those in Rio Linda” – exactly the tactics of the so-called “palestinians” and their water carriers of hamas.
Mirren10 says
**Brilliant** cartoon, EYESOPEN, and so true !
Slobberingfits says
From my reading breathing as a non muslims is a war crime. Im sure the UN sees it the same way.
Daniel Triplett says
Netanyahu will never gain Obama’s or UN approval.
The Israelis should just tune them out and go Dresden on Hamas, the PA, Hezbollah, and Iran.
That’s their best solution, and the only strategy that will truly bring them lasting peace.
Reality Check says
Dmiller says
It’s time to fire the UN.
Mirren10 says
Israel should just totally ignore this bs, and finish the job.
”There is life after public opinion”.
Especially when the ‘public opinion’ ( ie: the UN ) is based on lies, anti-Semitism, hatred (and **fear** of Israel), and pandering to islam.
I’ve just written to the Israeli Embassy in the UK, pointing this out, and expressing my 100% solidarity with Israel. Everyone here should do the same.
Buraq says
Countries that abstained were; Austria, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, the Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Gabon, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Montenegro, South Korea, Romania, the Republic of Macedonia, and the United Kingdom.
Just one question to ask these clowns ……… Friend or faux?
dumbledoresarmy says
Navi Pillay, a good little UN dhimmi busily carrying water for the jihad against the Jews.
As described in the article:
“Pillay, citing cases [of] Israeli air strikes and shelling hitting houses and hospitals in the crowded coastal enclave (and carefully ignoring abundant evidence that Hamas is using these buildings as arsenals and as sniper nests – dda), said: “These are just a few examples where there seems to be a strong possibility that international humanitarian law has been violated, in a manner that could amount to war crimes.
“Every one of these incidents must be properly and independently investigated,” she said.
“Pillay, a former U.N. war crimes judge, said that any warning by Israel to Gaza residents ahead of strikes must be “clear, credible and allow sufficient time for people to react”.”
(Time to react…yes, time for the jihadis to prepare their ambushes and boobytraps, eh, Ms Pillay?? – dda).
Here is what Hugh Fitzgerald, former frequent commenter and contributor at this forum some years ago, has to say about Navi Pillay.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/55231
duh_swami says
Mahoundians are right with their title, ‘stupid kuffar’.
It doesn’t fit everyone, but it is perfect for the loony kuffar who are in charge at the UN, most of the MSM, and liberal/leftist mental midgets
everywhere. These people have Pinocchio noses and get cheap thrills assaulting Israel. Israel has been accused of everything but stealing the kitchen sink, and that’s coming as UN Resolution 666…
Pathetic, ainit?
john says
Surely the problem here is balance and proportionately. Most of us agree that the Islamification of the world by Jihad is a bad thing and should be resisted. But how did we come to a point where Israel is fighting Hamas? We got here because Israel refused to deal with the PLO in any meaningful way for decades. And when it finally did make a deal it sought after every turn to undermine Yesser Arafat and demand his removal and elections. Elections in which Hamas were triumphant and which Israel refused to recognize even though they were judged by an Internationale panel to be fair.
Over and over again, the west has assumed and people here on this site have argued that Israel is the antidote to violent Islam. This drives moderate Arabs and social reformers on the other side into a ‘hobson’s choice’ situation of siding with Israel (‘the robber of Arab land’) or with the hard right Islamist’s.
Doesn’t history teach us there is a third path?
In a word ‘Ataturkism’ see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Kemal_Atat%C3%BCrk#Establishment_of_the_Republic_of_Turkey)
I do no propose to re-fight here the rights and wrongs of the 1948 settlement that took 60% of the state of Palestine and gave it to the new fledgling state of Israel leaving 40% to the native Palestinians. Nor do I want to talk about the fact that the settlement that saw Israeli withdrawal from the west bank and Gaza which was so much applauded as ‘far reaching’ and ‘generous’ only offered the Palestinian authority somewhat less than 40% of the 40% they were granted in the 1948 UN deal or 16% of the original land of Palestine. What I do want to talk about is how we came to where we are now, today.
We are not here because as the mainstream media suggests Israel is defending itself against bombardment by Hamas Rockets. No, that is not correct. The correct time line of the current phase of fighting is as follows:
1: 22/05/2014 – Israeli Sniper shoots dead two Palestinian Children
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/cnn-camera-catches-israeli-soldier-who-fired-killed-palestinian-teen
2: 12/06/2014 – Three Israeli children kidnapped and shot by Palestinians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_kidnapping_and_murder_of_Israeli_teenagers
3: 12/06/2014 – Israeli forces enter West Bank to make mass arrests bulldoze houses.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/01/israeli-jets-gaza-netanyahu-hamas-teenagers-deaths
4: 23rd/24th/06/2014 A series of rockets were fired at Israel in response to the military incursion.
5: 05/07/14: – Palestinian boy kidnapped and burnt alive by Israelis.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/05/palestinian-boy-mohammed-abu-khdeir-burned-alive
6: 08/07/2014: – 157 rockets fired on Israel from Palestine.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-hamas-war-goes-into-sixth-day-israel-steps-up-air-strikes-after-rocket-barrage-on-central-israel/
7: 08/07/2014:- Israel begins ‘Operation Protective Edge’
http://www.thejournal.ie/gaza-isreal-new-strikes-1559212-Jul2014/
Now of course some will say, but what about this event in May 2014 on this side, and what about that event in April 2014 on the other side. But as far as I can tell trying to be balanced and proportionate. This is a true record of how we came to where we are now. 800+ Palestinians dead thousands wounded (many women and children) 30+ Israels dead about the same wounded (mostly soldiers and largely adult men). Is this proportionate or balanced?
If we want to win moderate Arabs to our cause (freedom and equability for all) then this is not the message or the method to use, and it is quite clear in my view, that Israel is the wrong messenger.
Jovial Joe says
The fundamental premise of your long-winded exercise in apologetics is that there is such a thing as ‘moderate’ Islam. ‘Moderation’ in Islam comes down to this: we’ll let you live Jew (or Kufar of any kind) if you submit to our rule and pay us protection money; otherwise we’ll cut your head off in deference to our ‘perfect’ role model. In the face of that ‘moderation’ Israel has the absolute right to defend itself. To be a ‘moderate’ Arab would be to abandon Islam and if there are apostates out there willing to come to terms with Israel on that basis, all well and good.
John says
Jovial Joe,
if you had bothered to read the first link I had posted on ‘Ataturkism’, you would see that it advocates the following:
“.. secularism was implemented in the fledgling Turkish state, it was initiated by the abolition of the centuries-old Caliphate in March 1924. The office of Shaykh al-Islām was replaced with the Presidency of Religious Affairs (Turkish: Diyanet). In 1926, the Mejelle and shari’ah law codes were abandoned in favor of an adapted Swiss Civil Code and a penal code modeled on the German and Italian codes. ” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kemalism#Secularism
When did I mention the words moderate Muslim? Never, not once. I was and am suggesting that we could draw the teeth from all forms of Islam by encouraging a complete separation of church and state, which by the way was also a tenet of Fatah under Arafat.
“The State of Palestine is the state of Palestinians wherever they may be. The state is for them to enjoy in it their collective national and cultural identity, theirs to pursue in it a complete equality of rights. In it will be safeguarded their political and religious convictions and their human dignity by means of a parliamentary democratic system of governance, itself based on freedom of expression and the freedom to form parties. The rights of minorities will duly be respected by the majority, as minorities must abide by decisions of the majority. Governance will be based on principles of social justice, equality and non-discrimination in public rights of men or women, on grounds of race, religion, color or sex, and the aegis of a constitution which ensures the rule of law and an independent judiciary. Thus shall these principles allow no departure from Palestine’s age-old spiritual and civil heritage of tolerance and religious coexistence.” Taken from the Palestinian National Charter 1964/68, http://www.pac-usa.org/the_palestinian_charter.htm
I am a supporter of this forum and believe Mr. Spencer has been invaluable in showing the real dangers we in the west face from (unqualified) Islam, but let us not presume because one party in the conflict is wrong, the other is by definition right. Please do me and this forum the courtesy of addressing my actual argument, and not your “straw man” version of my argument which is too feeble to stand on its own.
Jovial Joe says
This is the same Fatah that has recently found common cause, once again, with Hamas; an organisation that has quite a different charter. You are such a dupe it is painful to witness. Please learn about taqiyya and the deceptive front that a Muslim must show the world when they are placed in an inferior position; such as Fatah’s secular constitution you mention; a constitution that would be torn to shreds were they ever to triumph with their terrorist brothers in arms. As to your question whether Israel should be considered right just because Hamas are in the wrong; that’s easy – any movement or people on earth would be in the right, simply by default, their enemy is Islam. It’s the vilest ideology that has ever existed or that could ever possibly exist.
coookiebaker says
John,
People like you add fuel to the violence.You ignore the fact that much of Israel was repurchased a lot of it with Rothschild money.Sold by greedy Arab “leaders’.Second it is highly debatable these “Palestinians” are who they say they are.And they were offed to stay, in fact begged to stay in Haifa and other places in 1948.Yet, once again their wealthy “leaders”went to their safe summer mansions in Lebanon and thought wiping the new state of Israel was a slam dunk.And encouraged them to leave.
If you want to really intellectually honest.Then why are you not out protesting in front of Caroline Kennedy summer place, inherited form her late mother.It is built on sacred , to them. Wampanog land.Except for the Jews no one on earth is not a transplant of some sort.
duh_swami says
Phew…and double phew…I didn’t think a pile of petrified bovine fecal matter could smell that bad. Open a window Maggie and air this place out.
John says
duh_swami,
Your inability to even address one single point I raised tells me all I need to know about your grasp of the situation we find ourselves in. My post contained facts, details and reasoned arguments. Your post, was the ad-hominem attack we all so rightly complain that Muslims resort to. I stand over my views, you must stand by your ‘filth’.
duhy_swami says
You deserve it. Go preach to some else…I don’t care what you think…Don’t like that? Tooo bad…
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“Surely the problem here is balance and proportionately.”
Nope. The problem here is that anti-semites try to masquerade themselves as “human rights activists” and look the other way when “palestinians” attack Israel, Israelis or jews but immediately call foul if Israel exerts the right to defend itself. There’s no “balance” or “proportionality” in the war against terrorism, including islamic terrorism, you don’t go out and get 5 terrorists if they kill 5 civilians. You go out and get them all. Here’s a nice article regarding the civilian casualties in Gaza:
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-israeli-genocide-in-gaza/
“Most of us agree that the Islamification of the world by Jihad is a bad thing and should be resisted.”
It should not be “resisted”, it should be fought back with all of our might.
“But how did we come to a point where Israel is fighting Hamas?”
It’s simple: Israel refuses to be obliterated so Israel fights back. Don’t try to pin responsibilities on Israel when Israel proved over and over that it wants peace while hamas wants Israel razed to the ground and all the jews dead.
“We got here because Israel refused to deal with the PLO in any meaningful way for decades.”
How do you “meaningfully” deal with an organization whose charter refuses to acknowledge your right to exist and it flat out states it wants you dead?
“Over and over again, the west has assumed and people here on this site have argued that Israel is the antidote to violent Islam.”
What a load of rubbish. It’s nice that you’re taking creative writing classes but that’s not the overall view of the majority of westerners. Oh, and there’s no such thing as “violent islam” or “peaceful islam”. There’s only islam, and i doubt most regulars here think otherwise.
“This drives moderate Arabs and social reformers on the other side into a ‘hobson’s choice’ situation of siding with Israel (‘the robber of Arab land’) or with the hard right Islamist’s.”
So now you’re saying that “moderate Arabs” are driven to “hard right Islamist’s” because some people here (allegedly) said that “Israel is the antidote to violent Islam”? Yeah, not only you’re not making much sense you’re also disregarding all the evidence that the hate of Israel is as prevalent in “Palestine” as oxygen:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/un-textbooks-palestinian-children-explosively-anti-semitic-anti-american-and-anti
Also, stop calling Israel “the robber of arab land”. If someone stole land from someone else it was the arabs from the jews, not the other way around
“I do no propose to re-fight here the rights and wrongs of the 1948 settlement that took 60% of the state of Palestine and gave it to the new fledgling state of Israel leaving 40% to the native Palestinians. Nor do I want to talk about the fact that the settlement that saw Israeli withdrawal from the west bank and Gaza which was so much applauded as ‘far reaching’ and ‘generous’ only offered the Palestinian authority somewhat less than 40% of the 40% they were granted in the 1948 UN deal or 16% of the original land of Palestine. What I do want to talk about is how we came to where we are now, today. ”
Oh boy, the anti-semitism, lies and re-writing of history approach a critical point in there. I’ll just leave this here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZY8m0cm1oY
“We are not here because as the mainstream media suggests Israel is defending itself against bombardment by Hamas Rockets. No, that is not correct.”
Right, i guess all the reports of hamas launching rockets against Israel are another conspiracy for which the arabs have a soft spot for:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCTbAxq9bi4
“800+ Palestinians dead thousands wounded (many women and children) 30+ Israels dead about the same wounded (mostly soldiers and largely adult men). Is this proportionate or balanced?”
Who gives the numbers of dead and wounded? Hamas? Here’s a quote from my earlier link:
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-israeli-genocide-in-gaza/
“Of the 604 report casualties in Gaza, as of Sunday, 82% were men, and 66% of those men were between the ages of 18 and 38, which is an age range that one could safely assume contains the majority of the terrorists Israel has targeted in it’s bombing campaign. In contrast, while nearly 50% of Gazans are under 14 years of age, this group accounts for only 18% of the casualties, statistics which are hardly indicative of the targeted killing of children (these numbers were arrived at through careful analysis of data provided by Al-Jazeera reporting). While it is impossible at this point to know the proportion of civilians killed versus enemy combatants, what is known is that Israel has killed 200 confirmed militants. I believe it is far from a stretch in light of the statistics listed above to assume that another 100 enemy combatants lie among the dead of Gaza. By these conservative estimates, we can assume that approximately 300 civilians have been killed in the Gaza strip, which I do not deny is a terrible tragedy.”
“If we want to win moderate Arabs to our cause (freedom and equability for all) then this is not the message or the method to use, and it is quite clear in my view, that Israel is the wrong messenger.”
“Moderate Arabs”? As in, the christian Arabs who are joining the IDF in increasingly larger numbers?
http://time.com/15479/israeli-army-christian-arabs/
Or by “arabs” you mean “muslims”? If so, how about you provide an islamic basis for “freedom and equality for all”, backed with quotes from the quran and ahadith? As for Israel being the wrong messenger, that’s a laugh. Israel is not working under the american “win hearts and minds” assumption which has proved over and over to be ineffective. The only message Israel should be trying to convey is that they’re not someone who should be trifled with. You target their civilians and they’ll act in such a way as to protect them as best as they can, international community be damned.
45charlie says
Excellent post !
John says
Angemon are you a “zenoiphibic Jewish shill” because you support Israel, more strongly than many Israeli’s do by the way. Your hate filled tirade is pity-full. And I would have addressed your arguments, as at least you tried to address mine, but I am gradually becoming aware, freedom of speech is only welcomed here when it supports those who agree with the consensus.
By the way I have been on my fair share of protest marches in support of and against many issues, have you read the constitution lately. Freedom of speech is worthless without tolerance and an opposing view, if all you guys want on this forum is “yes, I agree” and “that’s right”, you perhaps should join the other side, as I thought our side encouraged plurality and descent from the mainstream view.
Thanks for the compliment by the way, glad to see “the creative writing” course wasn’t a total waste of time. LOL
Jovial Joe says
John, stop feeling sorry for yourself and consider this: had you been around in the ’30s would you have wanted to give the Nazis ‘a fair and balanced’ hearing? Because there were plenty at the time who did just that, being either cowards or ignoramuses. Now which are you?
Wellington says
The fact that you would call Angemon’s very effective rebuttal of so many of your contentions a “hate filled tirade” says far more about than you realize.
Frankly, I find your “arguments” hardly worthy of the name. They are rooted in an assumption that there are a lot of moderate Muslims out there who would acknowledge Israel’s right to exist and leave Israel alone if only Israel would play ball more fairly. Hard to believe anyone believes nonsense like you’ve put out but, in fact, loads do, for instance John Kerry and the many silly people who work under him at the State Department.
What the Arab Muslim world and the Muslim world at large wants is no Israel. One knows this or should know it. No third alternative. Israel is in a fight for its very existence and talk about “balance and proportionality” is baloney.
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“Angemon are you a “zenoiphibic Jewish shill” because you support Israel, more strongly than many Israeli’s do by the way.”
If i were a xenophobe then i wouldn’t be siding with Israel since i’m not Israeli. Whether “many” Israelis support Israel or not (and you give no source for your claim) means nothing to where i stand on the issue. If many muslims are in favor of child marriage and warfare against and subjugation of non-muslims does that take anything of my stance against child marriage and the equality of all people under the law? Of course not.
“Your hate filled tirade is pity-full.”
So, supporting Israel’s right to defend itself is a “pity-full” “hate filled tirade”? That tells me more than i ever needed to know about you. But feel free to point out where the “hate” is on my “tirade”, i could use a laugh or two 😉
Now, regarding your rant about free-speech. Free speech exists in order to give someone the right to speak his mind to those who are willing to listen to it. It does not shield you from the consequences of what you say, and you can be hold responsible for what you say. That’s why we have laws on libel, slander, sedition or hate speech, only to name a few. No one here is preventing you (or anyone else, for that matter) from speaking your mind. For a site that’s commonly labeled as being “right-wing”, “extremist” or “hate-mongering”, JW has a very liberal comment policy. It takes a lot to get your comments removed, like, for example, calling for the genocide of an ethnic or cultural group.
With that said, the defence of Israel’s right to defend itself IS the minority view, not the mainstream view, as you falsely claim. And just because some of us openly disagree with your demonization of Israel doesn’t mean we need to “join the other side”, it just means we can recognize crap when we see it. The very logic behind your notion is absurd. In fact, your cry of foul and call for “plurality and descent from the mainstream view” is more of an attempt to stifle our speech than our disagreement with what you say – free speech is good as it’s you demonizing Israel, but when people disagree with you then they don’t have the right to speak their views and should instead “join the other side” or “tolerate” what you say without a peep.
Jovial Joe says
Not only xenophobic; we’re racist too apparently. He’s well schooled in the slanderous arts of the Left, I’ll give him that.
Angemon says
Yes, we’re terrible, terrible people for siding with Israel and abhorring Hamas’ attacks on civilians or its usage of human shields. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to adjust my monocle before I go club baby seals while twirling my villainous mustache. Mwahaha! 😀
Jovial Joe says
I’ll just put my jodhpurs and jackboots on and I’ll be right with you!:)
45charlie says
Balance ??? How do you get balance with Muslim thugs targeting civilians?
Arafat was an insane Muslim Hamas is an insane Muslim group. It must be destroyed regardless of the innocent deaths. Israel is finally doing what it has to do. There is no political solution & never will be.
The tragedy here is that the UN & the USA have not stood up against Hamas & for Israel. It requires a reoccupation of Gaza by Israel or a boots on the ground in Gaza by a peace keeping force to combat Hamas in the own turf.
I have a friend who served as a peace keeper in Egypt in 73. He is firmly behind Israel. I blame the UN & the Obama administration ultimately for this mess.
Mirren10 says
”Doesn’t history teach us there is a third path?
In a word ‘Ataturkism’ see here”
Well, you clearly haven’t noticed, but Erdogan is very busy dismantling all traces of ‘Ataturkism’, and dragging Turkey down to the 7th century Islamic natural level.
Can you actually **use** the internet, or is someone doing it for you ?
Coookiebaker says
I have an idea, lets move the whole U.N. to Gaza!.Then maybe” they” will see first hand woman holding babies shooting at the IDF, or children with guns aiming at the IDF.How about the puppies being lobbed in slingshots?.Then they can read the textbooks” UNRAW, pays for with American tax dollars that are nothing but violent lies and hate filled diatribes about killing the Jews.And perhaps they will get the same treatment the IDF gets from Gaza militants, breaking the Geneva Convention by stealing Israeli uniforms , and shooting uniformed identifiable soldiers!
And if they need an ambulance, too bad it is busy transporting bombs.
On second thought John Kerry should have to work out his “peace” sham from there too.
John says
Jovial Joe,
For all you know I was around in the 1930’s, it seems to me your ability to jump to unwarranted conclusions without any facts is the mark of the self same ” ignoramus” you speak of. I however am not required or willing to enter into your childish mind games. By the way, I am much amused by your suggestion I am some how offended. You must not debate very often if this kind of thing upsets you so much.
Also, I looked at your, how can I say this politely, ‘Potted history of Israel’ in 11 minutes, hardly cold hard facts would you say! I enclose in rebuttal two maps both freely available online to bolster my contention that Israel got 60% of the land in the first place.
Map 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#mediaviewer/File:UN_Palestine_Partition_Versions_1947.jpg UN proposal 1948
and offered 40% of the remaining 40% to the Palestinians in the Oslo settlement .
map 2: http://www.iris.org.il/images/oslob3.gif
I am sorry I have no time to review all your other “compelling” links, but again I ask in this as for all things balance.
PS
I am opposed to Nazism, Jihad and totalitarianism of all kinds (just in case you had another zinger along the same lines coming my way)
Jovial Joe says
You are confusing my posts with Angemon; I gave you no links. Not the sharpest tool in the box are you; kinda put the ‘dim’ in dhimmi. I’m done with you anyway.
John says
Easy mistake to make Jovial Joe, you all sound exactly the same to me.
“Israel good, Arab bad”.
Have a nice day
Jovial Joe says
It’s Israel good, Islam bad. Stop casting racist aspersions on everyone. There are plenty of decent Arabs who don’t follow the evil cult. Jeez.
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“Easy mistake to make Jovial Joe, you all sound exactly the same to me.
“Israel good, Arab bad”.
Have a nice day”
Notice that i pointed out that it was Yahia who was using “Arab” as a synonym of “muslim”. I also pointed out that christian Arabs are joining the IDF in increasingly larger numbers. Are the arabs joining the IDF bad?
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“I enclose in rebuttal two maps both freely available online to bolster my contention that Israel got 60% of the land in the first place.”
What land? Nearly 80% of Palestine and the Jewish National Home, as defined by the League of Nations, was allocated to what became Transjordan by the British in 1921. The UN partitioned the remaining 20-something% into two states. With Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank in 1950 and Egypt’s control of Gaza, Arabs controlled more than 80 percent of the territory of the Mandate. So Israel got roughly 20% of the land it had been originally assigned to it and they they complained? No, they tried to make the best of it.
But since you linked to a map from iris.org.il, i’ll assume you consider it a reliable site. Here’s the PLO chart:
http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm
Notice articles 19 and 20:
“ Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and to their natural right in their homeland, and inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong. ”
The PLO charter states that they’ll never recognize Israel or any Jewish state, and claim that Jews have no religious or historical ties with “Palestine”. You stated earlier that Israel needed to deal with the PLO in a “meaningful way”. How is Israel supposed to deal in a “meaningful way” with someone who refuses to acknowledge a Jewish state and claims that there are no religious or historical ties linking the Jews to Palestine?
“I am sorry I have no time to review all your other “compelling” links”
Yes, they’re mostly text as opposed to moving pictures and sound.
“I am opposed to Nazism, Jihad and totalitarianism of all kinds (just in case you had another zinger along the same lines coming my way)”
Except for the jihadis who refuse Israel’s right to exist. Those you seem to agree with.
Mirren10 says
**Excellent** rebuttals from you. ,Angemon, and Wellington.
I’ve nothing further to add, really, except the following little gem, which illustrates what a total piece of bs the whole ‘palestinian’ thing is, anyway.
Out of their own mouths:
Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2002/07/14501/#o8Zuhl1D5xqmejxK.99
**The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel**
I realise of course, the above will be wasted on the meretricious anti-Semite, ‘John’, but facts and rationality are wasted on such as he, anyway.
John says
To all who posted on my view of how we came to where we are in the current phase of the Israeli Palestinian conflict .
If documenting (with sources) the events that lead to the current situation makes someone “Anti Semitic” and I speak now directly to (Mirren10, Angemon) then we all need to step back and review our world picture.
Where in my text did I once criticize anyone’s religion? In fact the only comment I made in that regard was to say I believed Islam in all its guises should “have its teeth drawn”. I spoke of Israel, but you heard ‘Jew’ evil here is in truly in the eye of the beholder. I unlike you do not judge people en mass, lumping all good and bad into one easy to fear or hate category. I prefer my thoughts to be my own, and consider not the prejudged, regurgitated views of others.
My purpose in posting what I did was to set the record straight, on what I saw as an injustice, justice is I hope still a non controversial word with no ‘Antisemitic’ overtones. I find justice defined in my dictionary as
“a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people” it goes on to say “Synonyms:- fair-mindedness, equity, equitableness”
‘Equitableness’ equal treatment, is that not what we claim is the bulwark of our freedoms, and the very reason we despise those who would categorize us by gender or religion and thereby seek to subjugate us. But equitableness cannot be tempered, we cant claim to be a little fair, slightly fair, or believe in partial equality. Equal is equal or nothing. So I ask, that those who read this excellent forum, review again my initial post and consider, is it just on the basis of it alone, to make the vile charge of ‘antisemitism’ against me . I accept people get angry and frustrated in debate and things are said or written that in retrospect may wish to be withdrawn. I hope on reflection and review, this wholly unwarranted slander on my character is withdrawn by those who made it.
In conclusion, I was asked earlier by someone to backup my claim some here support the Israeli position more strongly than people in Israel do. I am happy to supply two sources for that claim. And I hope that it is clear I have not once mentioned my own religious beliefs throughout this debate, and one may assume that at least some of the people quoted in the articles below are Jewish, which begs the question, can you be Jewish and ‘antisemitic’ simply for not supporting every policy of the government of Israel?.
Anti-war voices in Israel
http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-24/anti-war-voices-israel-face-threats-and-violence
Israeli Soldiers refuse to serve
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/07/23/we-are-israeli-reservists-we-refuse-to-serve/
Jovial Joe says
Buddy, it was you who generalised all J-Watchers as ‘all the same’ and anti-Arab. It was you, therefore, who was casting racist aspersions. No one is disputing your right to comment, to the extent that Robert and Marc permit it; but you’re sounding way too whiney now and there are far more important things for us to worry about than the slight you feel you’ve suffered. By all means continue contributing but please, get over yourself. Regards.
John says
Once again Jovial Joe you miss the point. Firstly I have no objections to people criticizing my views, I welcome it as part of healthy debate. But calling people vile and slanderous names is not debate and should not be tolerated.
Also you say I started this by saying “all J-Watchers as ‘all the same’, read again my post, what i said was, “you” and i believe from the context of the post it was clear I meant all those who had replied to my post, not all Jihad Watch subscribers. “you all sound the same” not that you are all the same. Nor did I call anyone Anti Arab, as a piece of rhetoric and to show I meant it as such, I said “Israel good, Arab bad” seemed to some up the view of those who had contributed to that point.
If by the way you can find one positive this you or anyone else who posted saying nice or decent things about the Arab people in this thread, I will happily withdraw even that rhetorical comment.
Jovial Joe says
Angemon said a decent thing about Arabs in this thread, namely that there are Christian Arabs who are joining the IDF in greater numbers. As for my posts to you I never once mentioned the word ‘Arab’ so where do you get off accusing me ‘rhetorically’ of being anti-Arab? In fact, what purpose do you think you’re serving in pursuing this at all?
Jovial Joe says
He doesn’t need defending by me but Angemon said a decent thing about Arabs, namely that many Christian Arabs are joining the IDF. Care to withdraw your rhetorical slander? As for my posts to you, I never once mentioned the word ‘Arab’ so where do you get off accusing me, ‘rheotorically’, of being anti-Arab? In fact what purpose do you think you are serving at all by pursuing this?
John says
Jovial Joe,
My comment was “Israel good, Arab bad”, this is slanderous to you? And I am not nit picking, I am aware that Angemon mentioned “Christian Arabs are joining the IDF” first I have no source for this assertion, and second I said about an Arab people, not individuals Arabs. The reason I said that was, Israel is being held up here as wright, not individual Israelis, but Israel, if you are not anti Arab for balance tell me which Arab states you do like and why.
John says
Jovial Joe,
My comment was “Israel good, Arab bad”, this is slanderous to you? And I am not nit picking, I am aware that Angemon mentioned “Christian Arabs are joining the IDF” first I have no source for this assertion, and second I said about an Arab people, not individuals Arabs. The reason I said that was, Israel is being held up here as right, not individual Israelis, but Israel, if you are not anti Arab for balance tell me which Arab states you do like and why.
Jovial Joe says
All Arab States are Sharia governed to one degree or another so valuing universal human rights and the freedom of speech and expression as I do, I am sympathetic to none of them. That would include Iran as well of course (Persian rather than Arab) and Turkey (non-Arab), an ostensibly secular state but one, now, where blasphemers are jailed for mocking Islam. Any ‘state’ that incorporates Sharia is an afront to humanity and it’s citizens, the first victims of that inhumanity. Why, which Arab states are you sympathetic toward?
Angemon says
The disgusting, lying islamic shill posted:
“I am aware that Angemon mentioned “Christian Arabs are joining the IDF” first I have no source for this assertion, and second I said about an Arab people, not individuals Arabs.”
First, I gave a link to back my claim:
http://time.com/15479/israeli-army-christian-arabs/
Here’s what you said about it:
“I am sorry I have no time to review all your other “compelling” links”
Even if i didn’t post a link which you refused to acknowledge, what i said can be easily verifiable with a simple google search, so it’s not like there are no sources for what i said, it’s just that you need to pretend there aren’t in order to keep your argument going.
Second, you said before that “I unlike you do not judge people en mass“, but now you’re here saying you’re talking about the Arab people and not individual Arabs. How does that work? That’s what happens when your only goal is to reply to individual posts out of spite – you say one thing here, another thing there, without caring if you’re being consistent or shooting yourself in the foot.
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“Also you say I started this by saying “all J-Watchers as ‘all the same’, read again my post, what i said was, “you” and i believe from the context of the post it was clear I meant all those who had replied to my post, not all Jihad Watch subscribers.”
Actually, what you said was
“Easy mistake to make Jovial Joe, you all sound exactly the same to me.
“Israel good, Arab bad”.
Have a nice day”
That was in reply to Jovial Joe saying that you confused my post with his post. If you weren’t referring to all JW you should have wrote “the two of you sound exactly the same to me”.
Angemon says
The disgusting islamic shill posted:
“To all who posted on my view of how we came to where we are in the current phase of the Israeli Palestinian conflict .
If documenting (with sources) the events that lead to the current situation makes someone “Anti Semitic” and I speak now directly to (Mirren10, Angemon) then we all need to step back and review our world picture.”
“Documenting with sources”? You mean, when you claimed that Israel took 60% of the state of “palestine” when there was no state of palestine to begin with? Israel didn’t even exist then, how could it take something from another non-existing state? The territory reserved for Israel and “Palestine” came from the former Ottoman Empire. Your presentation of the subject was skewed, incomplete and biased against Israel, who you refereed to as “the robber of arab land”. It’s you who need to take a step back and look at your world picture, not those who called you on your crap.
“Where in my text did I once criticize anyone’s religion?”
Semantics won’t save your sorry ass here. Anti-semitism is prejudice, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group. Clearly your hate of Israel falls under “national group”.
“In fact the only comment I made in that regard was to say I believed Islam in all its guises should “have its teeth drawn”.”
And you disingenuously mentioned Ataturk. It’s true that Ataturk abolished the caliphate. It’s also true that he’s reviled for doing so, that the muslim brotherhood was created with the purpose of reinstating the caliphate and that Turkey is rapidly re-islamizing. If you truly believe there’s a separation between islam as a religion and islam as a political system they you’re either woefully ignorant or outright stupid. But i suspect you know better and you’re just trying to spread confusion in the JW ranks.
“I spoke of Israel, but you heard ‘Jew’ evil here is in truly in the eye of the beholder. I unlike you do not judge people en mass, lumping all good and bad into one easy to fear or hate category.”
So you blame Israel for the conflict in Gaza but you claim you’re not judging people en mass? How does that work? The irony here is that you claimed that “we all look the same” to you: “Israel good, Arab bad”. But you get an A for effort. Well, not really.
“I prefer my thoughts to be my own, and consider not the prejudged, regurgitated views of others.”
Then stop regurgitating islamic/nazi propaganda.
“My purpose in posting what I did was to set the record straight, on what I saw as an injustice, justice is I hope still a non controversial word with no ‘Antisemitic’ overtones. I find justice defined in my dictionary as
“a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people” it goes on to say “Synonyms:- fair-mindedness, equity, equitableness”
‘Equitableness’ equal treatment, is that not what we claim is the bulwark of our freedoms, and the very reason we despise those who would categorize us by gender or religion and thereby seek to subjugate us. But equitableness cannot be tempered, we cant claim to be a little fair, slightly fair, or believe in partial equality. Equal is equal or nothing.”
What a crock of bull. If you’re really interested in “equal treatment” then you should be supporting Israel, the only real democracy in the Middle East. Israeli Arabs and muslims have more rights in Israel than in any Arab muslim country. Even your demagogy is wrong – free speech is the bulwark of our freedom, not “equality”. Tell me, is a man who takes a life equal to the man who saves a life, be it at the eyes of the law or at the eyes of their fellow men? Are the men who build a building and the men who build a plane equal to the men who fly said plane into said building? Would you consider as equals people who danced in the streets when those 3 Israeli teens were killed and people who arrested the killers of that “palestinian” kid? If your answer is “No” then you have to take back everything you said and stand with the only state in the Middle East where everyone has the same rights and obligations, regardless of their ethnicity or religion – Israel.
“So I ask, that those who read this excellent forum, review again my initial post and consider, is it just on the basis of it alone, to make the vile charge of ‘antisemitism’ against me . I accept people get angry and frustrated in debate and things are said or written that in retrospect may wish to be withdrawn. I hope on reflection and review, this wholly unwarranted slander on my character is withdrawn by those who made it.”
The “vile charge of ‘antisemitism’” will remain until you stop skewing history against Israel and stick to facts.
“In conclusion, I was asked earlier by someone to backup my claim some here support the Israeli position more strongly than people in Israel do.”
You were? Where? You (or whoever posted before under your screen-name) said that i supported Israel more than many Israelis and, as far as i can tell, that was it.
“And I hope that it is clear I have not once mentioned my own religious beliefs throughout this debate, and one may assume that at least some of the people quoted in the articles below are Jewish, which begs the question, can you be Jewish and ‘antisemitic’ simply for not supporting every policy of the government of Israel?.”
Your speech is full with loaded words and false claims. It’s true that not everyone in Israel agrees with the position of the Israeli government. But your links do not support your previous claims. You said that I “support Israel, more strongly than many Israeli’s do“, then you changed it to “some here support the Israeli position more strongly than people in Israel do“. You went from “many Israeli’s” to “people in Israel“. Now, “people in Israel” offers no palpable quantifier, it gives no idea of how many “people in Israel” oppose the government or the war in Gaza. It could be 3 people. It could be all of the Israeli people. Do yourself a favour: pick a quantifier and stick with it. As for the dissident voices in Israel, it’s the sign of a flourishing democracy: they’re free to speak against the government just like this kid is free to speak in favour of it:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/17/self-described-zionist-arab-teen-faces-death-threats-for-pro-israel-videos/
_Proud Infidel says
By far the largest perpetrator of “war crimes” is the UN itself, who permit their UNWRA institutions to be used as storage/hiding/launch sites for Hamas weapons. And when the weapons are discovered, the UN allows them to be turned right back over to Hamas.
Jovial Joe says
Angemon: John’s gone very quiet. I really wanted to know which Arab state he liked and why. It’s my guess that he lives in one of those states and gave himself a nice Christian sounding name to come and ‘revert’ us infidels back to Islam. Just a suspicion.
Mirren10 says
‘John’ sounded like a typical leftard loonwatcher, to me.
He couldn’t stand up to the logical and factual pasting he got from you and Angemon. 🙂
Kudos, guys !
Jovial Joe says
Thank you Mirren. Your interjection, however, re the Palestinian interview from ’77, was new to me and greatly appreciated.
Semeru says
I’ve nothing further to add, really, except the following little gem, which illustrates what a total piece of bs the whole ‘palestinian’ thing is, anyway.
The following “little gem” is also another piece of BS
Out of their own mouths:
Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein.
Yes it is very true the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview , but accordinding to Trouw it was with, Zuhair Mohsen, leader of the pro-Syrian Palestine guerilla organisation, Al Saika.
Mohsen, who also heads the military operations branch of the Palestine Liberations Organisation, the PLO, and is also a member of the executive committee of the PLO
Here’s what he said:
and here’s is what he really said
Notice it is not the same as what Mirren 10 claims he said
“There is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are part of one nation, the Arab people. I myself have relatives with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people. Just for political reasons we endorse our Palestinian identity. This is because it is in the national Arab interest to stimulate the existence of Palestinians as opposed to zionism. Yes, the creation of a distinct Palestinian identity had only tactical reasons. The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel.”
The article then continues
“The logic of Mohsen is actually quite simple: “Because Golda Meir states that there is no such thing as a Palestinian people, I say that there is a Palestinian people, different from Jordan.”
Strategy
Also, Mohsen’s strategy is quite simple: A separate Palestinian entity should protect the national interests inside the then remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian government can not speak in name of the Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria. Jordan is a country with defined borders. It can not, for instance, make a claim on Haifa or Jaffa, while I have rights on Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem and Beer Sheva. Jordan has jurisdiction only over Jordanians and Palestinians living in Jordan.
A Palestinian state would be entitled to represent all Palestinians in the Arab world and elsewhere. Once we obtain all our rights in all of Palestine, we should not delay for one moment the unification of Jordan and Palestine.”
So Mirren 10
The article you linked to, not only changed what was written in the interview but also blankets out the fact that Zuheir Mohsen was a leader of the pro-Syria as-Sa’iqa . As-Sa’iqa is a Palestinian Ba’athist political and military faction created and controlled by Syria. It is linked to the Palestinian branch of the Syrian-led Ba’ath Party, and is a member of the broader Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
More importantly Mohsen was also a member of the National Command of the Syrian Ba’ath, Mohsen essentially followed the line of as-Sa’iqa’s Syrian Ba’athist ideology which interpreted the Palestinian question through a perspective of pan-Arab nationalism – despite the fact that in some respects this contravened the PLO charter, which affirms the existence of a Palestinian people with national rights
So here is the real article
We are Palestinians just for a political objective
Donderdag, Maart 31, 1977 / Last Modified: Zaterdag, December 31, 2011
By James Dorsey, Trouw, March 31, 1977 (translation from the original Dutch article).
Note of Likud Holland: still fascinating article in which a Palestinian leader admits that the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is only an invention to harm Israel.“He is our leader. Many thousands, just like me, believe in him.” This is said by one of the 5 lifeguards of Zuhair Mohsen, leader of the pro-Syrian Palestine guerilla organisation, Al Saika.
http://likud.nl/1977/03/we-are-palestinians-just-for-a-political-objective-likoed-nederland/
Angemon says
I said it before and i’ll say it again: the resident defender of indonesian atrocities scans posts for keywords and then copy/pastes info from more often than not dubious sources, more often than not without even mentioning the source. Not only that, he goes out of his way to twist said info to make it fit with his agenda. Notice the strikethrough part of his post, which is a description of the article itself:
“Note of Likud Holland: still fascinating article in which a Palestinian leader admits that the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is only an invention to harm Israel.”
Heck, just look at the title of the article:
“We are Palestinians just for a political objective”
So he copied from an article saying that a “palestinian” leader admits that the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is only an invention to harm Israel, he left the part where it says that a “palestinian” leader admits that the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is only an invention to harm Israel and he’s telling us it says the exact opposite.
Not the sharpest scimitar in the mosque.
This is straight from the article:
“According to Mohsen there is no such thing as a distinct palestinian people.”
It goes right before this:
““There is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are part of one nation, the Arab people. I myself have relatives with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people. Just for political reasons we endorse our Palestinian identity. This is because it is in the national Arab interest to stimulate the existence of Palestinians as opposed to zionism. Yes, the creation of a distinct Palestinian identity had only tactical reasons. The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel”
Notice that it says exactly what Mirren said – there’s no “palestinian” people and the creation of a “palestinian” state had only tactical reasons – to continue the fight against Israel and for arab unity. But we can rule out the arab unity bit. How is it that claiming a new state and a new arab people is supposed to be a step towards arab unity rather than division or dissension?
This is how Mohsen is described in the article:
“Zuhair Mohsen, leader of the pro-Syrian Palestine guerilla organisation, Al Saika.
Mohsen, who also heads the military operations branch of the Palestine Liberations Organisation, the PLO, and is also a member of the executive committee of the PLO”
So Mohsen was a “palestinian” leader of a pro-Syria faction of the PLO. Quite different from “Zuheir Mohsen was a leader of the pro-Syria as-Sa’iqa . As-Sa’iqa is a Palestinian Ba’athist political and military faction created and controlled by Syria.”
Like i said, not the sharpest scimitar in the mosque.
Angemon says
To be fair, it’s not his job to be online replying to every post. Probably 😉 . I may have been wrong in assuming he’s on the muslim side, given his chicanery regarding race he can very well a neo-nazi. It wouldn’t be the first time one would try to gather anti-Israel support portraying “palestinians” as victims. Or maybe is like Mirren suggests and he’s a run-of-the-mill leftist and/or loonwatcher. In the end, it doesn’t really matter. He can cry and scream he’s for “balance” or “equality”, or that he has “no sources” regarding the number of christian arabs joining the IDF all he want. Facts are not on his side so his positions are indefensible. Israel has the right to defend itself and if he’s really shocked with the number of deaths i can only imagine how outraged he must be with the numbers of muslims killed by other muslims:
Semeru says
Notice that it says exactly what Mirren said
No it is not exactly what Mirren said
The revised BS Version quoted by Mirren
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.
The unrevised
“There is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are part of one nation, the Arab people. I myself have relatives with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are one people. Just for political reasons we endorse our Palestinian identity. This is because it is in the national Arab interest to stimulate the existence of Palestinians as opposed to zionism. Yes, the creation of a distinct Palestinian identity had only tactical reasons. The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel.”
In the revised version It claims that “The Palestinian people does not exist.”
Yet in the original version Mohsen says there is no difference difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Well if Palestinians do not exist, how can he compare them to Jordainians Syrians and Lebansese. Also if they do not exist, then how can he claim that he has relatives with Palestinian citizenship.
One more important fact, why does the source to the BS version leave out much of
i)Mohsens back ground
ii) The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel.
Mohsens background has a lot to do the continued fight for Arab unity and against Israel. This can be better understood by reading Daniel Pipes Book Greater Syria
(Tala°z‘ Harb at-Tabrir ash-Sbdbiya), better known as As-Sa’iqa, served as Damascus’s main Palestinian vehicle. A classified 1979 report by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)dubbed Sa’iqa “a Trojan horse maneuvering for Syria within the Palestinian movement,” and noted that its aims “at any given moment are identical with those of Syria.
All [Sa’iqa’s] exploits in the Middle East and Western Europe were authorized, and perhaps planned, by the Syrian Army G-2 [intelligence].
Sa‘iqa was established in September 1966 to amalgamate the Palestinian organizations sponsored by Syria. It soon became the second largest group in
the PLO, with five thousand men by late 1968.
When Asad took power, he purged Sa’iqa and imposed direct control over it by appointing his ally a long-term member of the Syrian Ba’th Party, to run Sa’iqa. Zuhair Mohsen who headed it from 1970 until his assassinitiin 1979, he was described in the DIA study as “completely subservient to the Syrian government . . . a tool of Syrian policy.” In addition, members of the Syrian Ba’th Party (which had already acquired Pan-Syrian overtones) staffed most of the key positions in Sa’iqa. Further, the organization was reorganized in 1976 in ways designed to increase Ba’th party control over it.
Sa’iqa served Asad as an instrument to gain control over his two primary
targets, the PLO and Lebanon. With regard to the PLO, Asad sought to make
Sa’iqa the decisive group within that organization. In March 1975, he pro-
posed “to establish a single Syrian-Palestinian political leadership military command”, Arafat refused, rightly seeing this as an attempt by Asad to
dominate the PLO. He turned down a similar offer in 1982. Asad sent troops
against the PLO in Lebanon in 1976 to this same end. On several occasions,
Asad tried to replace Yasir ‘Arafat as head of the PLO with Zuhair Mohsen
On one occasion, in April 1976, ‘Arafat wrote of Syrian efforts to “liquidate
the PLO and to set up Zuhair Mohsin as leader of the [Palestinian]
resistance.
Assad goals was not for a Palistianian state, but for a return to Bilad ash-Sham (greater Syria)
“Palestine was mentioned [by the Arab geographers) only as part of Syria or
Bilad ash-Sham.It is part of the Syrian soil and was never separated from
Syria through its long history. Syria comprised a geographic region larger than the political and geographic region known today as Syria. It included all of Lebanon, Jordan,Palestine, parts of Southem Turkey, and the province of Alexandrerta. It was a compact and integral unity, a single family within clear, marked boundaries
The artificial entities [after World War I] were wholly consumed in solving
internal problems, to the point that they disregarded the natural and essential goal of reestablishing the unity of Bilad ash-Sham
Assads goal was the return of Golan Heights but not as a border Area, but as to be central Syria.
Angemon says
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. God, you’re dumb. I feel ‘m getting dumber just by reading the nonsense you post on a regular basis.
“Well if Palestinians do not exist, how can he compare them to Jordainians Syrians and Lebansese. Also if they do not exist, then how can he claim that he has relatives with Palestinian citizenship.”
In order for your self-defeating “argument” – if one can dignify your ramblings with that word – to make sense you’d have to go against what Mohsen states regarding arab unity. Now go sit in the corner until you learned your lesson. Mohsen makes a distinction between nationality and ethnicity. He also states that he regards “palestine” as a tool to fight Israel.
“One more important fact, why does the source to the BS version leave out much of
i)Mohsens back ground
ii) The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel. ”
You’re claiming Mirren left out much of “Mohsens(sic) back ground(sic)”? Whoa, talk about tu quoquery. The one who left out Mohsen’s background was you. You left out that Mohsen was a “palestinian” leader of a PLO faction, remember? Here’s how you described him:
“Zuheir Mohsen was a leader of the pro-Syria as-Sa’iqa . As-Sa’iqa is a Palestinian Ba’athist political and military faction created and controlled by Syria”
Also, here’s what Mirren said:
“The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity.”
And yet, you claim Mirren left out that “the creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel“. Gaslighting won’t get you anywhere. It may work when you’re dealing with the product of cousin marriage in Pakistan or Indonesia, but here it will only get you a one way ticket to Joketown.
Semeru says
Piss of u tedious prick
What Mirren posted was not from the interview with Trouw
Angemon says
“Piss of u”? Lol, you can’t even insult right 😉 I’d usually insult you back out of principle but i doubt i can put you down more than you already put yourself. In any case, this is a public forum and i don’t intend to “piss of” just because you argued and counter-argued yourself between a rock and a hard place.
As for what Mirren posted not being from the Trouw interview, you already claimed that, and you tried to prove it not by linking to the Trouw interview itself but to an article containing a(partial?) translation and analysis of said interview titled “We are Palestinians just for a political objective”, which points out that, according to Mohsen, a “palestinian” leader, the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is an invention to harm Israel. That pretty much confirms what Mirren said. So yeah, what Mirren said still stands. In fact, thanks to your efforts to discredit Mirren, it stands even stronger. Now, I know you’re having a hard time distinguishing the concepts of “ethnicity” and “nationality” but since you think I’m tedious i won’t bother explaining them to you. It’s clear you enjoy being ignorant.
Pro-tip: next time you want to counter-argue someone don’t link to an article supporting the argument you’re trying to counter.
Semeru says
As for what Mirren posted not being from the Trouw interview, you already claimed that, and you tried to prove it not by linking to the Trouw interview itself but to an article containing a(partial?) translation and analysis of said interview titled “We are Palestinians just for a political objective”
Well if the article I linked to is a (partial?) translatation and analysis of the said interview WHY DOES THE SITE WRITE
Donderdag, Maart 31, 1977 / Last Modified: Zaterdag, December 31, 2011
By James Dorsey, Trouw, March 31, 1977 (translation from the original Dutch article).
It clearly says translation from the original Dutch article
Not a partial translation, or an a analysis
So Mr Smart arse prove that the aricle at the Likoed Nederland, is a partial translation. Better still why don’t give a link to the full and unabridged original translation
Mirren posted a bastardized version.
Angemon says
Duncemeru posted:
“It clearly says translation from the original Dutch article
Not a partial translation, or an a analysis
So Mr Smart arse prove that the aricle at the Likoed Nederland, is a partial translation. Better still why don’t give a link to the full and unabridged original translation
Mirren posted a bastardized version.”
This tactic of twisting things and responding to things I never said is a waste of time, don’t you think? First of all, I don’t need to prove anything because I said “(partial?)“. See, i know you’re not accustomed with the English language, but I’m not stating that the article is just a part of the interview, I’m wondering if it is. That’s what the parenthesis and question mark are there for. Secondly, if anyone needs to provide a link to the original interview it’s the person who claims that what Mirren said was not in the interview. That would be you. Thirdly, saying it’s a “translation from the original Dutch article” is no warranty that everything in there came from the original dutch article or that the article was fully translated anymore than saying “chocolate cake” means the cake is only composed of chocolate.
As for my wondering about if that is the whole interview. Well, we have instances such as:
“Note of Likud Holland: still fascinating article in which a Palestinian leader admits that the notion of a ‘Palestinian people’ is only an invention to harm Israel.”
or
“The logic of Mohsen is actually quite simple: “Because Golda Meir states that there is no such thing as a Palestinian people, I say that there is a Palestinian people, different from Jordan.””
The former is clearly not present in the 1977 interview and the latter seems to be an analysis of what Mohsen said, which can be a part of the 1977 original interview or not. But if you claim that the whole interview is there and that there’s no analysis in there I shall proceed under that assumption.
The thing is, if you’re going to claim that everything in there was in the interview then you have to face this:
“According to Mohsen there is no such thing as a distinct palestinian people.”
If, like you claim, that’s the whole interview and there are no analyses being made, then the part where it says that Mohsen claims there’s no such thing as a distinct palestinian people is in line with what Mirren posted and as such what Mirren posted is not a “bastardized version” since it accurately depicts Mohsen’s stance on “palestine” and “palestinians”. See, you can’t have your chocolate cake and eat it too. I just knew you were going to take the “(partial?)” bait and contradict me out of spite 🙂 .
What you’ve done so far illustrates not only your inability to critically analyze arguments but also your lack of prowess to reason and think logically. This explains why you are constantly raising objections which can and have been used against you. Off-topic curiosity: Are you in Pakistan or Indonesia?
Finally, a little nugget:
“Better still why don’t give a link to the full and unabridged original translation”
The way you word it makes it seem like you know the article contains an abridged, non-original translation and that there’s an original translation somewhere else. Which makes me wonder: if that’s the case why not link to it directly? I, for one, wouldn’t mind seeing the original article in the Dutch language.
PS: I’d much rather be a “Mr Smart arse” than a wild ass, like you 😉
Semeru says
Agrononse you are a lying piece of shit
I said it before and i’ll say it again: the resident defender of indonesian atrocities
I have never defended Indonesian atrocitiesPointing out that Indonesian christian Generals participated in the East Timor Invasion,is not defending Indonesia atrocities, the generals where Indonesian. Also pointing to the fact that USofA and the west supported the Indonesia invasion,is not defending Indonesia atrocities.
scans posts for keywords and then copy/pastes info from more often than not dubious sources, more often than not without even mentioning the source
True, I do google posts for keywords and then copy/pastes,but are they so dubious, you where very quick to take key words from a cut/paste job I done about pig fat, and give the link, You could not find any source to back your claim that pig fat was used to cover bullets is the siege of malta, and you accuse me of not being the brightest blade, when you could find the key words to uncover a source, are such a CP that you could not figure out that lard is another key word for pig fat, if you where not such a CP you could have found the source without leeching the keywords from my cut/paste
Now back to the issue,
CP agrononse writes many of my sources are dubious, well in this case I would say that Likud Nederland which is a Dutch/Jewish/Israei site is far more reliable than world net daily
Neither site gives a link or scan to the article, but Likud does send a scan of the article upon request info@likud.nl thus in my eyes Making Likud less dubious WND
Any way Mirren posted a bastardized version
Angemon says
Duncemeru posted:
“Agrononse you are a lying piece of shit”
Awww, the wittle baby is mad! Do you want a banana to suck on or do you prefer to keep sucking on your past and present failures?
I could go and give a detailed reply to the 3/4s of his post dedicated to lying about me, which is a reply to a remark I made a couple of days and several posts ago – duncemeru isn’t exactly the fastest orangutan in the jungle. But that would be straying from the subject of this argument so I’d be playing his obfuscation game. Instead, I’ll just give the link to the argument he mentions and whoever is interested can go and check for themselves how he’s lying about what transpired there:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/05/we-r-going-to-over-power-u-soon-in-shallah
The only two things worth singling out from his lying rambling are these: one, he admits he scans posts for keywords and copy/pastes replies based on said keywords, and two, he accuses me of having done the same. You know, like a 3-year-old throwing a tantrum: “Oh yeah? Well, if am then you are too!!!”. I admit, I chuckled.
So, back to the topic at hand:
“CP agrononse writes many of my sources are dubious, well in this case I would say that Likud Nederland which is a Dutch/Jewish/Israei site is far more reliable than world net daily”
Here’s what i said about Likud:
“if you claim that the whole interview is there and that there’s no analysis in there I shall proceed under that assumption.”
I’m not exactly trying to cast doubts on the content of that post, am I? Much to the contrary, I agreed in going through your assumption that what was in that article was also on the interview. Like this:
“According to Mohsen there is no such thing as a distinct palestinian people.”
This proves Mirren right. And since you defended that what’s in the LND article is in the Trouw interview… Well, I’m sure you can figure it out for yourself. Maybe
“Neither site gives a link or scan to the article, but Likud does send a scan of the article upon request info@likud.nl thus in my eyes Making Likud less dubious WND
Any way Mirren posted a bastardized version”
And Likud writes this:
“According to Mohsen there is no such thing as a distinct palestinian people.
“There is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are part of one nation, the Arab people. […]This is because it is in the national Arab interest to stimulate the existence of Palestinians as opposed to zionism. Yes, the creation of a distinct Palestinian identity had only tactical reasons. The creation of a Palestinian state is a new means to continue the fight for Arab unity and against Israel.””
Mirren wrote this:
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.”
What Mirren said is an accurate depiction of Mohsen’s ideas. It’s not a word-by-word transcript of the interview (it could hardly be, seeing how WMD and LND are probably using different translations), but that detracts nothing from Mirren’s statement. And you know that, and that’s why roughly 3/4s of your post were spent lying about me and old arguments you lost to me, and the remaining was pretending i said Likud was unreliable and rehashing your debunked “Mirren posted a bastardized version” crap.
Face it kid, you made a claim, you got called on it and you failed to deliver. You can keep repeating “waaahh, waaahhh, Mirren posted a bastardized version” as long as you want because it won’t change a thing. As for everyone else, they can just read what Mirren says, what’s on Likud and make their own conclusions. And i bet the majority of them will agree that what Mirren said stands. As far as I’m concerned, you’re the poster boy (well, one of them) of how islam destroys the capacity to critically think and analyze and replaces it with repetition and parroting. Hence why all you can do is repeat “waaahh, waaahhh, Mirren posted a bastardized version” but you can’t use logical reasoning to prove your claim. Now go do whatever it is you usually do with your cousins, be it swing in a vine or swell the numbers of mooselimb ranks.
Angemon says
Duncemeru posted:
“you accuse me of not being the brightest blade”
Wrong. What i I said was “not the sharpest scimitar in the mosque“. I said it twice, for that matter. No one even wrote the word “blade” prior to you. You blatantly lie about what i say and yet you expect us to take your assertions regarding what Mirren says? What a joke you are mate 😉
Semeru says
Have you read the full, non bastardized article yet. You should, it pretty much confirms what Daniel Pipes wrote in his book Greater Syria.
Angemon says
Duncemeru posted:
“Have you read the full, non bastardized article yet.”
Which article? The one you linked to or the one whose existence you unwillingly hinted at? If you’re talking about the former, do you mean before or after I quote from it and explained to you how and why it supports Mirren’s comment?
I also read the article Mirren linked, hence why i came to the conclusion that Mirren didn’t post a “bastardized” version of it. Well, not anymore than you did. See, none of you posted a link to the original interview in Dutch, so one can say both of you posted a “bastardized” version of it. But mooselimbs are not exactly known for their self-criticism, so I don’t expect you to acknowledge it. In the end, what Mirren said stands, and what you posted proves it.
Anyway, looking to how things are now, it should be clear I’m not the one who needs to read it. In fact, given how you admitted you scan for keywords and copy/paste replies from the internet, chances are you haven’t read it. After all, if we can’t trust you to tell the truth about what I said here regarding you not being the sharpest scimitar in the mosque, how can we trust your assertions regarding anything? Ironically, it seems you chose the wrong time not to copy/paste something – sharpest scimitar in the mosque – 😉
You know what? I’ll probably start calling you Cleopatra. Because you’re the queen of denial. Oh, I’m sorry, English is clearly not your first language and you seem to be very lacking in logical reasoning so it’s probably better if I explain it to you, otherwise you just might go “waaahh waaahhh angemon called me Cleopatra out of nowhere”. See, “denial” and “the Nile” have a somewhat similar pronunciation. And given how you’re trying your best (which, truth be told, doesn’t amount to much) not to acknowledge what Mirren said is accurate, a possible explanation is that you’re in denial. And Cleopatra of Egypt is known as the “queen of the Nile”.
Finally, if you read the article, how about you point out where it says
“Likud does send a scan of the article upon request info@likud.nl”
Because I see no mention of it anywhere in there. Were you (or your raging flamer cry-baby alter ego, whoever posted that) just lying again when you said that?
Semeru says
I wrote
“Likud does send a scan of the article upon request info@likud.nl”
To which the tedious prick agrononse replied
Because I see no mention of it anywhere in there. Were you (or your raging flamer cry-baby alter ego, whoever posted that) just lying again when you said that?
Well well well. Likoed Nederland do send a scan of the original artilceas they say on their site, but not on the english page.
Here we go
NB Er circuleert op internet een andere tekstversie, dat is echter een terugvertaling uit de Engelse vertaling. Dit is de letterlijke tekst zoals die in Trouw stond. Een scan van het artikel is bij ons op te vragen.
http://likud.nl/2011/01/het-palestijnse-volk-bestaat-niet/
And yes I have run the scan through a OCR X app and google translated it.
Angemon says
Cleopatra posted:
“Well well well. Likoed Nederland do send a scan of the original artilceas they say on their site, but not on the english page.”
All the same. It’s not on the article page, which goes to prove that I read it.
“And yes I have run the scan through a OCR X app and google translated it.”
Yeah, sure you did /sarc off. In any case, here’s what you said:
“Likud does send a scan of the article upon request info@likud.nl thus in my eyes Making Likud less dubious WND”
We already proved that Likud’s english translation backs up what Mirren said about the “palestinian” people being an invention to fight Israel. Had you actually had the original text translated and if it said something different you’d have posted it here. Since you didn’t, one of two things is happening: 1) – you’re engaging in a bit of obfuscation by focusing on my remark that none of you linking to the original interview. 2) – The original interview, even through the language butchering google translate, stays accurate to the english translation likud did and what Mirren said still stands.
Also, don’t forget about the apology you owe me. I said that you were “not the sharpest scimitar in the mosque“. In fact, I said it twice. But you claimed i said you were not the “brightest blade”. Once again, you lied about what I said. Where’s my apology?