Israel wants the Palestinian Gas

[Little John]

The irony is, of course, that Palestine had been home to a minority population of Jews who had been fully tolerated and integrated along with the minority Christian population for centuries previously. Yep, it's f***ed up the world and for the reasons you cite.

[vtsnowedin]

VTSNOWEDIN

Read this and understand the truth about the creation of Israel. Educate yourself.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/history.html

You point to that blast of wind as a history source?
Oh gee they have secret meetings and ceremonies !!! Pretty common in those days. Secret work, secret hand shakes or other recognition tells were used to make your membership seem special.Such nefarious organizations as the Elks, the Shriners, Lions Moose and the Junior Grange all had secret work and ceremonies.
And then after all that huff and puff about secret activities without any real result being sited for any of it there is this near the conclusion.

However, until World War II and Nazi atrocities against Jews, the majority of Jewish Americans did not support Zionism. From its beginnings in Germany, Reform Judaism had rejected Jewish nationalism, and in the U.S. the Reform movement embraced universalism. Historian Rafael Medoff writes that an 1885 proclamation specifically "denounced the concept of a Jewish return to the land of Zion."

Rafael Medoff, Militant Zionism in America: The Rise and Impact of the Jabotinsky Movement in the United States, 1926-1948 (Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 2006), 26.

In 1897 the Central Conference of American Rabbis passed a resolution that stated, "We affirm that the object of Judaism is not political nor national, but spiritual, and addresses itself to the continuous growth of peace, justice and love in the human race, to a messianic time when all men will recognize that they form 'one great brotherhood' for the establishment of God's kingdom on earth."

Naomi Cohen, The Americanization of Zionism, 1897-1948 (Hanover: Brandeis UP, 2003), 43.

So for all that secrete evil work at the highest levels over a hundred years had not drawn a majority into the fold. Must be they weren't very good at it.

[another_exlurker]

Another brief history lesson for you vtsnowedin, from the British who set up Israel in the first place, seeing as how you don't seem to trust the first 2 chapters of a book by an historical analyst published in an article that you clearly didn't bother to read properly.

In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country.

That's the same Lord Balfour who came up with the Balfour Declaration. It was written in 1917 in the form of a letter to Lord Rothschild:

Foreign Office

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you on behalf of His Majesty’s government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved, by the Cabinet:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours,

Arthur James Balfour

The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country may never be remedied. What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.

Lord Sydenham was speaking at the time and has been consistently proven right.

[Little John]

So, in the weasel words of our respective governments and our ever compliant MSM, a "truce" may be soon called. Which, of course, means the genocidal massacre of the Palestinians may soon stop, for the moment at least. Not that the underlying, ongoing, low-level, slow-motion genocide will stop. That will, no doubt, continue in the manner that passes for normal in that hellish place. We just won't get to see it on our TV and computer screens on daily basis.

Until the next time that is. And then the next.

Vtsnowedin, you and your country’s various governments (and my country’s governments too, by kowtowing association with yours) are apologists for and facilitators of mass murder and for the most monstrous injustice of the modern world. An injustice that has provided the engine of much of the festering resentments and conflicts between the Muslim world and the rest of us. Whatever befalls your country as a consequence (and mine, to only a slightly lesser extent, for that matter), is no more than you should expect. Whether you are representative of your fellow citizens, I do not know. I certainly hope not. I can say that a large proportion of my country's citizens are utterly opposed to your and my government's policies in this matter. Not that it's made a damned difference thus far. As for Israel itself: nothing less than total annihilation eventually awaits it.

So, tell me VT? Where does an intelligent man who has a moral centre like any other human, place this monstrosity in his moral landscape? What kind of psychological lock and key must he hide his ugly apologetics behind in order that he may live with them?

[UndercoverElephant]

Whether you are representative of your fellow citizens, I do not know. I certainly hope not.

Most of them are considerably worse than him.

[vtsnowedin]

So, in the weasel words of our respective governments and our ever compliant MSM, a "truce" may be soon called. Which, of course, means the genocidal massacre of the Palestinians may soon stop, for the moment at least. Not that the underlying, ongoing, low-level, slow-motion genocide will stop. That will, no doubt, continue in the manner that passes for normal in that hellish place. We just won't get to see it on our TV and computer screens on daily basis.

Until the next time that is. And then the next.

Vtsnowedin, you and your country’s various governments (and my country’s governments too, by kowtowing association with yours) are apologists for and facilitators of mass murder and for the most monstrous injustice of the modern world. An injustice that has provided the engine of much of the festering resentments and conflicts between the Muslim world and the rest of us. Whatever befalls your country as a consequence (and mine, to only a slightly lesser extent, for that matter), is no more than you should expect. Whether you are representative of your fellow citizens, I do not know. I certainly hope not. I can say that a large proportion of my country's citizens are utterly opposed to your and my government's policies in this matter. Not that it's made a damned difference thus far. As for Israel itself: nothing less than total annihilation eventually awaits it.

So, tell me VT? Where does an intelligent man who has a moral centre like any other human, place this monstrosity in his moral landscape? What kind of psychological lock and key must he hide his ugly apologetics behind in order that he may live with them?

You jump to conclusions about me and often seem to only read or understand part of what I say. I stated near the beginning of this thread that I was not trying to take sides in this matter, but apparently anyone who points out any hole in your arguments is a raving zealot in total opposition to you. I pointed out that the present boundaries of Israel were established on the battle field just as the previous ones at the time of the Muslim conquest were. This is a fact and I made no statement that it was morally right for land to change hands that way. But if we are giving land back to the original owners how far back are you going to go? The Romans under Caesar perhaps, or one of the Egyptian Pharaohs that owned it off an on, or perhaps the builders of the Jericho that Joshuah defeated. Ones 'case is just as good as another.
And then I caution you that those that fight to the death might very well die and the odds are not in the Palestinians favor. This is also a fact not a judgement about who should win. Your assertion that Israel is going to be wiped out and the land returned to the inhabitants of the Gaza strip is idealistic but not very likely. Even if some strongman Muslim or sect managed to seize it from the Israelis they would be the lords of it and the residents of Gaza nothing more then serfs.
The leaders of Gaza are not very smart. They shoot 2400 rockets and kill just 43 Israelis and in return have received air and artillery strikes that have killed at least 1000 of their civilians. So for every 2.4 rockets you shoot off one of your children dies? Good plan that.
And then you have the receiving of cement and resteel to build schools which was diverted to build tunnels. Bet they will not get much more of that or anything else that could be used to make or deliver a weapon. Got any other good plans up their sleeve?

[biffvernon]

The leaders of Gaza are not very smart. They shoot 2400 rockets and kill just 43 Israelis and in return have received air and artillery strikes that have killed at least 1000 of their civilians. So for every 2.4 rockets you shoot off one of your children dies? Good plan that.

It doesn't appear at first glance to be a good plan, but the alternative must, to them at least, appear to be abject surrender to the occupying force. What they are attempting, with so little hope of success given their puny weapons, is to see that UN Resolution 242, which was signed by the government of the USA, is upheld. For those that believe in International Law, it might be the only good plan available.

And before listening to any Israeli government spokesperson, this article should be required reading. It is very illuminating.

Israeli spokesmen have their work cut out explaining how they have killed more than 1,000 Palestinians in Gaza, most of them civilians, compared with just three civilians killed in Israel by Hamas rocket and mortar fire. But on television and radio and in newspapers, Israeli government spokesmen such as Mark Regev appear slicker and less aggressive than their predecessors, who were often visibly indifferent to how many Palestinians were killed.
There is a reason for this enhancement of the PR skills of Israeli spokesmen. Going by what they say, the playbook they are using is a professional, well-researched and confidential study on how to influence the media and public opinion in America and Europe. Written by the expert Republican pollster and political strategist Dr Frank Luntz, the study was commissioned five years ago by a group called The Israel Project, with offices in the US and Israel, for use by those "who are on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel".

Every one of the 112 pages in the booklet is marked "not for distribution or publication" and it is easy to see why. The Luntz report, officially entitled "The Israel project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary, was leaked almost immediately to Newsweek Online, but its true importance has seldom been appreciated. It should be required reading for everybody, especially journalists, interested in any aspect of Israeli policy because of its "dos and don'ts" for Israeli spokesmen.

More at:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 30765.html

[UndercoverElephant]

So, in the weasel words of our respective governments and our ever compliant MSM, a "truce" may be soon called. Which, of course, means the genocidal massacre of the Palestinians may soon stop, for the moment at least. Not that the underlying, ongoing, low-level, slow-motion genocide will stop. That will, no doubt, continue in the manner that passes for normal in that hellish place. We just won't get to see it on our TV and computer screens on daily basis.

Until the next time that is. And then the next.

Vtsnowedin, you and your country’s various governments (and my country’s governments too, by kowtowing association with yours) are apologists for and facilitators of mass murder and for the most monstrous injustice of the modern world. An injustice that has provided the engine of much of the festering resentments and conflicts between the Muslim world and the rest of us. Whatever befalls your country as a consequence (and mine, to only a slightly lesser extent, for that matter), is no more than you should expect. Whether you are representative of your fellow citizens, I do not know. I certainly hope not. I can say that a large proportion of my country's citizens are utterly opposed to your and my government's policies in this matter. Not that it's made a damned difference thus far. As for Israel itself: nothing less than total annihilation eventually awaits it.

So, tell me VT? Where does an intelligent man who has a moral centre like any other human, place this monstrosity in his moral landscape? What kind of psychological lock and key must he hide his ugly apologetics behind in order that he may live with them?

You jump to conclusions about me and often seem to only read or understand part of what I say. I stated near the beginning of this thread that I was not trying to take sides in this matter, but apparently anyone who points out any hole in your arguments is a raving zealot in total opposition to you. I pointed out that the present boundaries of Israel were established on the battle field just as the previous ones at the time of the Muslim conquest were.

Rubbish. The battle wasn't fair, because Israel had massive financial and military support from the United States. Anyone reading your posts might think that Israel had always been there, and that it is just a normal country, with a normal history, whose boundaries had been determined via wars, just like most countries. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

This is a fact and I made no statement that it was morally right for land to change hands that way. But if we are giving land back to the original owners how far back are you going to go? The Romans under Caesar perhaps, or one of the Egyptian Pharaohs that owned it off an on, or perhaps the builders of the Jericho that Joshuah defeated. Ones 'case is just as good as another.

Utter crap. There is no other case in the entire history of the world that can be compared to this one. Not one.

And then I caution you that those that fight to the death might very well die and the odds are not in the Palestinians favor.

Either you didn't read my posts from yesterday, or you didn't understand them. In a fight to the death, there can only be one loser, and that is Israel. You seem to think, as do the Israelis, that their military superiority, which is dependent on the United States, can lead them to ultimate victory in this conflict. It cannot. Firstly the US is not going to be in a position, forever, to support them. But more importantly, Israel is not just fighting 1.5 million people in Gaza and another 4 million in the West Bank. It is in conflict with the entire muslim and arab world. And in a "fight to the death" between Israel and the entire muslim and arab world, Israel cannot win. It can inflict serious damage on its opponent, but it cannot win.

There can be no military victory for Israel that lasts. Long-term Israeli security could only be won politically, but every muslim/arab who dies because of Israel's actions make that harder.

The leaders of Gaza are not very smart. They shoot 2400 rockets and kill just 43 Israelis and in return have received air and artillery strikes that have killed at least 1000 of their civilians. So for every 2.4 rockets you shoot off one of your children dies? Good plan that.

And what would you do if you were the leader of Gaza, Mr Smartypants?

It is quite clear from reading your posts that you have not actually put yourself in the position of the Palestinians. You are apparently unable to understand this conflict from any perspective other than that of Israel and the US.

And then you have the receiving of cement and resteel to build schools which was diverted to build tunnels.

And you would have done what, precisely?

I am very much looking forward to your answer to this question.

[another_exlurker]

Here's a question no one seems to be asking:

Israel's stated reasoning for the invasion and bombing/shelling of Gaza is to eliminate the Hamas supply tunnels. If that is the case, why aren't they using ground penetrating radar to locate them and then blow them up?

[UndercoverElephant]

Here's a question no one seems to be asking:

Israel's stated reasoning for the invasion and bombing/shelling of Gaza is to eliminate the Hamas supply tunnels. If that is the case, why aren't they using ground penetrating radar to locate them and then blow them up?

I thought the tunnels were to allow access into Israel so Hamas could kidnap Israelis in the middle of the night. Apparently they have found tranquilisers and handcuffs in the tunnels to make this process easier. Sounds a bit unlikely to me.

I think ground-penetrating radar only works if you have access to the surface. By the time they are that close, they might as well just go and look for the tunnels. It can't be done remotely.

[vtsnowedin]

Rubbish. The battle wasn't fair, because Israel had massive financial and military support from the United States. Anyone reading your posts might think that Israel had always been there, and that it is just a normal country, with a normal history, whose boundaries had been determined via wars, just like most countries. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

Your crying "No Fair" in a war? This isn't second grade you know. Please grow up.

This is a fact and I made no statement that it was morally right for land to change hands that way. But if we are giving land back to the original owners how far back are you going to go? The Romans under Caesar perhaps, or one of the Egyptian Pharaohs that owned it off an on, or perhaps the builders of the Jericho that Joshuah defeated. Ones 'case is just as good as another.

Utter crap. There is no other case in the entire history of the world that can be compared to this one. Not one.[/quote]

Alexander the great, William the conqueror, The Spanish conquistadors, Genghis-khan, Suleiman the magnificent. The English colonists in North America, The list goes on and on. [/quote]

And then I caution you that those that fight to the death might very well die and the odds are not in the Palestinians favor.

Either you didn't read my posts from yesterday, or you didn't understand them. In a fight to the death, there can only be one loser, [/quote]

Not true both dieing is quite possible.

and that is Israel. You seem to think, as do the Israelis, that their military superiority, which is dependent on the United States, can lead them to ultimate victory in this conflict. It cannot. Firstly the US is not going to be in a position, forever, to support them. But more importantly, Israel is not just fighting 1.5 million people in Gaza and another 4 million in the West Bank. It is in conflict with the entire muslim and arab world. And in a "fight to the death" between Israel and the entire muslim and arab world, Israel cannot win. It can inflict serious damage on its opponent, but it cannot win.

There can be no military victory for Israel that lasts. Long-term Israeli security could only be won politically, but every muslim/arab who dies because of Israel's actions make that harder.

Military superiority is just that, "Superiority" The US and the seven million Jewish citizens it has will always be a contender in the fight and it may very well become a war of the secular and Christian west against the Muslim world and the West will win that one handily. All it will take is enough Muslim atrocities to change Western public opinion to the point that "The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim" Talk to an American Indian if you can find one to see how that worked out for them.

The leaders of Gaza are not very smart. They shoot 2400 rockets and kill just 43 Israelis and in return have received air and artillery strikes that have killed at least 1000 of their civilians. So for every 2.4 rockets you shoot off one of your children dies? Good plan that.

And what would you do if you were the leader of Gaza, Mr Smartypants? [/quote]
Shoot anyone who dared to fire a rocket or build a tunnel.

It is quite clear from reading your posts that you have not actually put yourself in the position of the Palestinians. You are apparently unable to understand this conflict from any perspective other than that of Israel and the US.

And then you have the receiving of cement and resteel to build schools which was diverted to build tunnels.

And you would have done what, precisely?

Built schools.

I am very much looking forward to your answer to this question.

[/quote] There you are.

[UndercoverElephant]

Rubbish. The battle wasn't fair, because Israel had massive financial and military support from the United States. Anyone reading your posts might think that Israel had always been there, and that it is just a normal country, with a normal history, whose boundaries had been determined via wars, just like most countries. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

Your crying "No Fair" in a war? This isn't second grade you know. Please grow up.

Eh? You were claiming this was a war fought by Israel. If you're willing to admit it was actually a war fought by The United States then you might be making some sense. But then you'll also have to accept that the events on 9/11/2001 were a legitimate response as part of that war.

The truth is that you think Israel's war gains, bankrolled by the US, are just fine, but that the response is a shocking crime.

This is a fact and I made no statement that it was morally right for land to change hands that way. But if we are giving land back to the original owners how far back are you going to go? The Romans under Caesar perhaps, or one of the Egyptian Pharaohs that owned it off an on, or perhaps the builders of the Jericho that Joshuah defeated. Ones 'case is just as good as another.

Utter crap. There is no other case in the entire history of the world that can be compared to this one. Not one.

Alexander the great, William the conqueror, The Spanish conquistadors, Genghis-khan, Suleiman the magnificent. The English colonists in North America, The list goes on and on.

All those people fought their own wars. They did not involve a religious group being parachuted in from various other parts of the world, to found a new country based on a biblical prophecy, bankrolled and supported militarily by the most powerful country on the planet, which was itself controlled by a bunch of religous extremists.

You really can't see the difference, can you?

Military superiority is just that, "Superiority" The US and the seven million Jewish citizens it has will always be a contender in the fight and it may very well become a war of the secular and Christian west against the Muslim world and the West will win that one handily.

NO. If you think Europe is going to back Israel in a war against the muslim world then you are seriously mistaken. It may come down to a war between Israel/US and the muslim world, and the result will be the ascendancy of China and Russia as global superpowers, the end of US global hegemony, and the destruction of Israel.

Unlike the United States, Europe and the rest of the western world is not controlled by right-wing religious nutjobs.

All it will take is enough Muslim atrocities to change Western public opinion to the point that "The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim" Talk to an American Indian if you can find one to see how that worked out for them.

If you think America can defeat the entire muslim world like they defeated a load of native Americans wielding bows and arrows then you have another think coming.

The leaders of Gaza are not very smart. They shoot 2400 rockets and kill just 43 Israelis and in return have received air and artillery strikes that have killed at least 1000 of their civilians. So for every 2.4 rockets you shoot off one of your children dies? Good plan that.

And what would you do if you were the leader of Gaza, Mr Smartypants?

Shoot anyone who dared to fire a rocket or build a tunnel.

Ah I see!!! So if you're American or Israeli then the best policy is to fight to the end like a bulldog, but if you're a Palestinian/Muslim then the best policy is to submit unconditionally?

Stop believing what you watch on American TV and start thinking for yourself, VT.

[another_exlurker]

Here's a question no one seems to be asking:

Israel's stated reasoning for the invasion and bombing/shelling of Gaza is to eliminate the Hamas supply tunnels. If that is the case, why aren't they using ground penetrating radar to locate them and then blow them up?

I thought the tunnels were to allow access into Israel so Hamas could kidnap Israelis in the middle of the night. Apparently they have found tranquilisers and handcuffs in the tunnels to make this process easier. Sounds a bit unlikely to me.

I think ground-penetrating radar only works if you have access to the surface. By the time they are that close, they might as well just go and look for the tunnels. It can't be done remotely.

Then look for them on the Israeli side of the border. Which they presumably have seeing as how they already knew they were there.

Ah yeah, that's right, the supply tunnels go into Egypt and are, apparently, big enough to drive trucks through.

Still doesn't require airstrikes and shelling.

Meanwhile on US Sunday TV:

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was allotted time on several Sunday morning news shows during which he said his country bore no responsibility for the mounting civilians deaths in Gaza.

<snip>

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright also made an appearance on the show and said, "I am concerned about Israel. I am a great believer in the security of Israel and the moral authority of the Israelis. But I am very worried about what is going on in terms of their image."

<snip>

Israeli strikes have targeted a UN-run school serving as a shelter and hospitals, and the UN has said, "There is literally no safe place for civilians" in Gaza to go to find refuge.

Neither host asked Netanyahu if this, not Hamas, might be why the Gaza death toll now stands over 1,000, mostly civilians.

Original article.

[Little John]

Your country's problem, VT, is that when its position at top global superpower comes to an end, as it most assuredly will, the enmity it has earned up over the preceding century will mean that just about every other part of the planet is going to stick the knife in just as soon as they get the chance. The only way you avoid that is by staying top dog forever and that's not going to happen.

Do you actually realize just how much your country is now hated by a large swathe of the planet's population VT? I don't think you do, to be honest. I bet you think it's all just jealousy right?

[vtsnowedin]

All those people fought their own wars. They did not involve a religious group being parachuted in from various other parts of the world, to found a new country based on a biblical prophecy, bankrolled and supported militarily by the most powerful country on the planet, which was itself controlled by a bunch of religous extremists.

You really can't see the difference, can you?

Substitute the word sailing for your parachuted and you have a very good description of the Spanish Conquistadors who for Ferdinand and Isabella had driven the Moors from Spain then sailed to the new world and seized much of it for their own in the name of god. How they treated the natives was not very Christian but who keeps score of such things? Oh and nobody fights their own wars. Those with power and wealth amass armies of poor people and allies with armies of their own and get them to risk death for little reward. Always been that way and always will be.
You don't really believe the Palestinians ever attacked the Israelis on their own do you? Your young I suppose and don't actually remember the six day war.