Settlers Gone Wild

dmytryp · Dec 7, 2008

I am going to bed. You all behave or you will be censored

Bravo · Dec 7, 2008

dmytryp said:
Not really
(And this is even if we put aside what happens in the rest of the world and ME -- where Israel certainly has nothing to do with it)

A 2006 poll of Bethlehem's Christians conducted by the Palestinian Centre for Research and Cultural Dialogue, found that 90% reported having Muslim friends, 73.3% agreed that the Palestinian National Authority treats Christian heritage in the city with respect and 78% attributed the ongoing exodus of Christians from Bethlehem to the Israeli travel restrictions in the area

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem#Second_Intifada

P.S. Your assertion about jewish origins breakdown is incorrect. Most of the sephardic jews are decendants of those expelled from arab countries in '48

what are we talking about right now?

i was referring to the settlers.

dmytryp · Dec 7, 2008

Bravo said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem#Second_Intifada

Hve you read the links provided inside the link? I will only quote a couple

The Fatah and Arafat's intelligence network intimidated and maltreated the Christian population in Bethlehem. They extorted money from them, confiscated land and property and left them to the mercy of street gangs and other criminal activity, with no protection.

... the judicial system of the PA that operates in Bethlehem ... is plagued by irregularities and distortion of justice. Of note in this regard is the failure to provide protection to Christian land-owners, which Moslem migrants from Hebron are taking over. The following is one example. The Comtsieh family (a Christian family) has a plot of land with a building that serves as a business center in the city. Several years ago a Moslem family from Hebron took possession of the building and started to use it without permission. The Comtsieh family filed a claim with the judicial system and after long and arduous court hearings, the court ruled in the claimant's favor. However, the verdict was never enforced by the police and representatives of the family from Hebron later appeared with a new court verdict (signed by the same judge who ruled in the claimants' favor previously), canceling the previous verdict and ratifying the Hebron family's ownership of the property.

The Christian community in the areas administered by the Palestinian Authority (PA) is a small but symbolically important one. About 35,000 Christians live in the West Bank and 3,000 in Gaza,[SIZE=-2]1[/SIZE] representing about 1.3 percent of Palestinians. In addition, 12,500 Christians reside in eastern Jerusalem.
This population is rapidly dwindling, however, and not solely as a result of the difficult military and economic situation of the past two years. Rather, there are numerous indications that the Christian population is beleaguered due to its Christianity. Taken in context of the condition of Christians in other Middle Eastern countries, this picture is especially credible and troubling.

Bravo said:
what are we talking about right now?

i was referring to the settlers.

Oh, ok. Then, clearly there are no arabs among them. Heck, Israeli arabs object vehemently to any suggestion of turning them to PA in case of an agreement (so much for national unity, I guess)

Bravo · Dec 7, 2008

this is really obfuscating the original assertions of ceth, who said that gaza and the w. bank belong to jews just as much as it belongs to arabs. that made absolutely no sense since:

a) european jews were the ones who sought to distinguish all jews from arabs, they were the ones who wanted to divide the land based on religion not ethnicity.

b)it makes no sense to allow someone who wants to destroy and/or kick you out of your land into your homes. most jewish settlers view arabs as cockroaches who need to be crushed or expelled. they also have no problem taking the majority of the water from the arabs and dumping their garbage on arab property. and

c) they also belong to a foreign country. who on earth would allow someone from another country to occupy your land? this position of yours was a real red herring ceth.

Bravo · Dec 7, 2008

back to the christian thing: ceth made the statement that christians are not part of the palestinian cause, that's not true at all. just talk to some christian members of the diaspora, virtually anyone you talk to supports palestine and is opposed to israel taking arab land. some snippets from articles:

Christians share the harsh fate of Palestinian Muslims in the wake of the disastrous second intifada. The head of Roman Catholic Palestinians, Latin Patriarch Michael Sabbah, told me: ؟The world has abandoned the Palestinians....
oreign Ministry officials assert concern for their country؟s Christians. But the Rev. Firas Aridah, the Catholic pastor here, worries his flock is losing its young generation. ؟They are after our water,؟ he told me, referring to Aboud supplying 20 percent of the West Bank؟s ground water. The bitterness is intense. Israel؟s 2001 destruction of 500 olive trees, in reaction to a settler؟s murder, left scars. So did the army bomb planted in Santa Barbara؟s shrine in 2002 because of suspicions that terrorists were meeting there.
؟

robert novak article, reprinted here: http://www.palestineremembered.com/GeoPoints/_Abud_543/Article_2453.html

The Good Shepherd Church in the northern West Bank city of Nablus, and the Palestine Forum, held an activity on Wednesday at night commemorating the Nakba. Members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, representatives of Private and Governmental Institutions participated in the protest.

http://www.imemc.org/article/54887

Father Raed Abu Sahlia, 38 years old, is the Catholic Parish Priest of Taybeh, the last Palestinian village that is entirely Christian, numbering Catholics, Orthodox and Melchites among them, situated at the outskirts of Ramallah.

"We Palestinians have got to disprove three false myths. A theological one, an ideological one and a historical one. The theological myth consists in the fact that the State of Israel is hiding behind the Bible in order to affirm the right of return for God's Chosen People. But God can not be discriminatory, he does not prefer one people over another. It is a messianic and millenaristic reading of the Bible for the creation of the State of the Chosen People. It is not an accident that groups of intransigent American Christians ("Fundamentalist Christians") unconditionally support the State of Israel, seeing it as the beginning of the Reign of the End of Times, in which the Messiah will return. According to these groups, Christ will destroy the mosques. The presence of Fundamentalist Christians is a danger in this conflict. The Israelis themselves have had to "contain" them because they wanted to organise a bombing at some mosques."

http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2004/12/christians-of-palestine-living.html

has there been discrimination against christians within palestine? yes, but that still doesnt change the fact that most christians within palestine support the palestinian cause.

Oh, ok. Then, clearly there are no arabs among them.

what on earth are we talking about right now? i have no clue.

Heck, Israeli arabs object vehemently to any suggestion of turning them to PA in case of an agreement (so much for national unity, I guess)

and of course they would. who's suggesting people should live under the PA?

dmytryp · Dec 7, 2008

Bravo said:
this is really obfuscating the original assertions of ceth, who said that gaza and the w. bank belong to jews just as much as it belongs to arabs. that made absolutely no sense since:

The case can be made for it in general (however weak). A much stronger case can be made for places like Hebron.
EDIT: my points were mainly in refernce to your claim that "jews ae the only ones doing it".

Bravo said:
a) european jews were the ones who sought to distinguish all jews from arabs, they were the ones who wanted to divide the land based on religion not ethnicity.

What? What are you talking about? Are we talking about settlers or general Israel history. (As an aside, I am yet to see arabs propose to leave the settlers as a minority in Palestine to come. Something that indicates they want to separate from the jews just as much as you claim the jews want to separate from them)

Bravo said:
b)it makes no sense to allow someone who wants to destroy and/or kick you out of your land into your homes. most jewish settlers view arabs as cockroaches who need to be crushed or expelled. they also have no problem taking the majority of the water from the arabs and dumping their garbage on arab property.

I already explained to you why this generalization of settlers is pure bs. After seeing that, you insist on spouting it. I can only attribute this to one thing, but I would be breaking the forum rules.

dmytryp · Dec 7, 2008

Bravo said:
back to the christian thing: ceth made the statement that christians are not part of the palestinian cause, that's not true at all. just talk to some christian members of the diaspora, virtually anyone you talk to supports palestine and is opposed to israel taking arab land. some snippets from articles:

robert novak article, reprinted here: http://www.palestineremembered.com/GeoPoints/_Abud_543/Article_2453.html

http://www.imemc.org/article/54887

http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2004/12/christians-of-palestine-living.html

has there been discrimination against christians within palestine? yes, but that still doesnt change the fact that most christians within palestine support the palestinian cause.

Bottom line -- christians leave PA (did so in droves during Arafat's rule). In major part due to persecution from their fellow arabs. This follows the pattern from other places like Lebanon, Iraq etc.

Bravo said:
and of course they would. who's suggesting people should live under the PA?

You did note the part about "in case of an agreement"? Why wouldn't it be logical to join them to a palestinian state (I don't agree to this stance, by the way, but for the sake of arguement)? They see themselves as palestinians. They support the cause. So, why not?

As for "who is suggesting people should live under PA"? Essentially, you, Steve and every other guy that insists on one state solution and the right of return. Because this is what it comes down to, after you remove the pretty rhetoric. The blatant truth of these goals is an Arab state with Jewish minority. Give self determination to Palestinians, take it away from the Jews. Pure and simple. And even if we disregard the "self-determination" bit, given recent muslim history of treatement of minorities, how can you expect any rational man to agree to this?

dmytryp · Dec 7, 2008

One final post since this is not going anywhere.

Every single ethnic conflict on Earth (except israeli/palestinian) ended in one of two ways -- either subjogating (and in many cases destruction) of one people or separation of two ethnicities with population exchanges of the corresponding minorities. The only conflict that defies this is israeli/palestinian conflict. It does so because the arabs reject the notion of a Jewish state. They either insist on one state with arab majority or two states with arab majority. This is the harsh truth. And it is the reason why this conflict remains unresolved.

I'll finish with two quotes by Golda Meir:

There will be peace when they hate our children less than they love their

If arabs lower down their weapons there will be peace. If we lower our weapons, there will be no more Israel.

SC Harrison · Dec 8, 2008

dmytryp said:
As for "who is suggesting people should live under PA"? Essentially, you, Steve and every other guy that insists on one state solution and the right of return. Because this is what it comes down to, after you remove the pretty rhetoric. The blatant truth of these goals is an Arab state with Jewish minority. Give self determination to Palestinians, take it away from the Jews. Pure and simple. And even if we disregard the "self-determination" bit, given recent muslim history of treatement of minorities, how can you expect any rational man to agree to this?

I've never wanted a one-state solution for Israel/Palestine, Demytry. I fully realize that would produce a Jewish minority, which would likely result in a civil war that would make 1948 seem like a walk in the park. When I point out that Palestinians in the Occupied Territory don't have citizenship in Israel, that's merely to demonstrate that Israel considers them "foreign". Meaning the land they live in is also foreign territory, and Israelis settling there is an invasion of sorts.

I'm actually a pretty big fan of Balkanization, especially in cases where cultural and ethnic differences between peoples makes it impossible for them to reside together fairly and amicably. Basically that means I believe a two-state solution is the only way to go in the I/P conflict. And that does mean that some Israelis will end up living under Palestinian rule, which (I think) something like 10% of settlers said they would be willing to do. But as long as the settlement expansion is allowed to continue, that future two-state solution becomes more and more complicated. Which I believe is one reason many Israelis support the movement, unfortunately.

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

dmytryp said:
Bottom line -- christians leave PA (did so in droves during Arafat's rule). In major part due to persecution from their fellow arabs. This follows the pattern from other places like Lebanon, Iraq etc.

cool. christians arabs still overwhelmingly support palestine though.

You did note the part about "in case of an agreement"? Why wouldn't it be logical to join them to a palestinian state (I don't agree to this stance, by the way, but for the sake of arguement)? They see themselves as palestinians. They support the cause. So, why not?

why would they go to a third world moth eaten nation over a powerful first world one? you're making too much of this.

most palestinians right now want to leave, they all support the fight for independence, but they there's no jobs nothing there.

As for "who is suggesting people should live under PA"? Essentially, you, Steve and every other guy that insists on one state solution and the right of return. Because this is what it comes down to, after you remove the pretty rhetoric. The blatant truth of these goals is an Arab state with Jewish minority. Give self determination to Palestinians, take it away from the Jews. Pure and simple. And even if we disregard the "self-determination" bit, given recent muslim history of treatement of minorities, how can you expect any rational man to agree to this?

i think belgium and malaysia serve as good models for bringing different ethnic groups under one nation.

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

dm said:
I'll finish with two quotes by Golda Meir:
There will be peace when they hate our children less than they love their children

idiotically offensive and inflammatory. it's really quite sad that you decided to peddle this propaganda slogan here. yeah those palestinian mothers who are crying whenever one of their children die from an israeli missile are just acting.

you're right about this conversation being done.

dmytryp · Dec 8, 2008

SC Harrison said:
I've never wanted a one-state solution for Israel/Palestine, Demytry. I fully realize that would produce a Jewish minority, which would likely result in a civil war that would make 1948 seem like a walk in the park. When I point out that Palestinians in the Occupied Territory don't have citizenship in Israel, that's merely to demonstrate that Israel considers them "foreign". Meaning the land they live in is also foreign territory, and Israelis settling there is an invasion of sorts.

Ok, I can't resist. One last post.
First, I answered why the settlement issue is an overinflated smoke screen in post 29.

Second, the very term "Occupied Territory" suggests "foreign". And Israel had said over and over during years that it didn't want them (we tried to give Gaza back to Egypt when the peace treaty was signed). Including right after the '67 war (something that led to the famous "three no's" by the arabs). The problem is, because of geographic and strategic reasons Israel can't just relinquish the Territories and allow an enemy entity form in them. Just look at what happened in Gaza. If something similar happened in the West Bank, Tel Aviv would be in range for Qassams.

Finally, why is this insistance on the Green Line ('67 borders)? I mean other than adopting the palestinian narrative. There was never Palestine in those borders, or in other borders for that matter. Jordan that ruled those lands after '48 signed a peace agreement with Israel and relinquished any claims for the West Bank. And most importantly, palestinians themselves never agreed to those borders prior to something like the ninetees. After the Six Day war the UN and Israel suggested a settlement in those borders and were answered by "no" by the Arab League. Palestinians adopted this narrative of '67 borders only after it became clear they wouldn't be able to push us into the sea. Some of them still hold to the belief that this is only the first step in getting all the land westward from the Jordan river. So, why should Israel blindly accept this narrative and accept these borders as gospel? I think the settlement will be based on those approximate lines with territory exchanges plus/minus several percents of the territory, but why the blind adoption of '67 lines as if they are written in stone?

dmytryp · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
i think belgium and malaysia serve as good models for bringing different ethnic groups under one nation.

a. different cultures
b. were there prolonged military coflicts between the ethnic groups in that land? If not, they serve nothing as they aren't equivalent. The balkans, India/Pakistan and the likes are much more of an equivalent.

dmytryp · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
idiotically offensive and inflammatory. it's really quite sad that you decided to peddle this propaganda slogan here. yeah those palestinian mothers who are crying whenever one of their children die from an israeli missile are just acting.

you're right about this conversation being done.

You simply don't get it. This "slogan" as you call it is the harsh reality of palestinian society and its behaviour in the past. Sure every mother grieves the loss of a child, but the group as a whole demonstrated over the years that destroying Israel and killing jews is much more important to it than their own state, the fate of its children and society. Heck, Hamas still demonstrates this. I don't subscribe to the notion that they are stupid. They know full well what their actions bring. They know full well that the ones that suffer as consequences of their actions is the regular folks, the children and Palestinian society in general. Yet they don't care. If they can lob rockets at Israel and kill even one Jew, they are satisfied. And arab countries and the palestinian elites acted this way for decades since the beginning of the conflict. The quote is spot on. You find it offensive to you? Start petitioning the likes of Mash'al, Nasrallah, Arafat, Abu Masen and the rest.

EDIT: You actually dare lecturing me about inflamatory and offensive after you called half a million jews that you have no real knowledge about "racist religious zealots"?
You know who Shalhevet Pas was? The Dolphinarium bombing? Muhammed-a-Durah? Tell me how this is inconsistent with my quote?

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

within virtually every thread, dm, you eventually show your true colors.
it's sad but at least predictable.

dont ever change.

dmytryp · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
within virtually every thread, dm, you eventually show your true colors.
it's sad but at least predictable.

dont ever change.

i never conceal my true colors. i wear them proudly on my sleeve. The same can't be said about you. And your point certainly holds true for you.

robeiae · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
idiotically offensive and inflammatory. it's really quite sad that you decided to peddle this propaganda slogan here. yeah those palestinian mothers who are crying whenever one of their children die from an israeli missile are just acting.

I think both quotes are much more reflective of reality than you are willing to admit.

And you did say this: "having 435,000 heavily armed racist, religious zealots protected by the full might of the israeli military is nothing short of criminal."

You really can't call anything inflammatory in this thread after that assertion, Bravo. Nor can you accuse anyone else of peddling propaganda.

Joe270 · Dec 8, 2008

idiotically offensive and inflammatory. it's really quite sad that you decided to peddle this propaganda slogan here. yeah those palestinian mothers who are crying whenever one of their children die from an israeli missile are just acting.

Both quotes ring true, no matter how much spin Palestinian sympathizers try to put on things. Spin this:

Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations.
Yasser Arafat

Seems pretty supportive of Golda's quotes to me.

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

the actual quote is this:

Golda Meir said:
Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.

robeiae said:
I think both quotes are much more reflective of reality than you are willing to admit.

you're willing to say that palestinian parents would rather see their children killed than live peacefully with israel?

i know you have a difficult time with analogies, but humor me for a moment. imagine any other ethnicity replaced in that statement:

"Peace will come when the Catholics of N. Ireland will love their children more than they hate the British."

"Peace will come when the blacks of s. africa will love their children more than they hate the whites"

"Peace will come in the balkans when the bosniansl love their children more than they hate the serbs"

this takes an extremely complex issue and tries to make it come down to a simple matter of one side (the weaker party) being responsible for the mess because they do not love their children as much as the other side does. as if they always wanted to sacrifice their kids for war and bloodshed.

the average israeli who repeats these kind of racist statements really believes that the arabs are subhuman, something that is incapable of love for his/her children. that's why you dont get as much outrage when arabs are killed compared to jews, even when arabs are blatantly killed in an aggressive terrorist manner. you just dont get the same level of outrage as you get when a jew dies, because jews and people in america view jewish life as worth more than an arabs.

in fact, i used that s. africa example for a particular reason, there was a time when the apartheid regime specifically used the same sort of rhetoric, they claimed that blacks simply didnt care/love their kids the same way whites did. and that's why there was such a high death rate among children.

IMO, jews of all people should be careful about trying to demonize another group, using these sorts of statements does an incredibly disservice to any argument they make.

And you did say this: "having 435,000 heavily armed racist, religious zealots protected by the full might of the israeli military is nothing short of criminal."

You really can't call anything inflammatory in this thread after that assertion, Bravo. Nor can you accuse anyone else of peddling propaganda.

and how was that NOT true? israeli settlers are overwhelmingly religious, and overwhelming believe that god gave them the land. arming people like that to teeth IS criminal. and standing by and watching them as they go around on a rampage in palestinian villages is also criminal. and tearing down arab homes and taking over that land for these religious zealot fucks is also criminal.

i would absolutely love to see how that was untue and inflammatory.

robeiae · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
and how was that NOT true? israeli settlers are overwhelmingly religious, and overwhelming believe that god gave them the land. arming people like that to teeth IS criminal. and standing by and watching them as they go around on a rampage in palestinian villages is also criminal. and tearing down arab homes and taking over that land for these religious zealot fucks is also criminal.

i would absolutely love to see how that was untue and inflammatory.

And egging on suicide bombers is what? Dancing in the streets to celebrate their martyrdom is what?

As to your statement, come on. You can categorically assert--meaning you can actually prove--there are 435,000 RACIST religious ZEALOTS, can you?

The point is Bravo, by your standard here, the Palestinians are NO FUCKING DIFFERENT. But you won't accept that, will you? You'll defend them.

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

robeiae said:
As to your statement, come on. You can categorically assert--meaning you can actually prove--there are 435,000 RACIST religious ZEALOTS, can you?

yes.

Out of the 119 Israeli settlements in the West Bank, 8 are Ultra-Orthodox (sometimes known as Haredi). 46 are Religious Zionist, 45 are secular and 20 have a mixed religious and secular population.

Religious Zionists have been at the forefront of the settlement movement. Associated with the Gush Emunim settler movement and the National Religious Party, Religious Zionists see their presence in the West Bank as fulfilling a biblical mandate and hastening the coming of the Messiah.[2] They see themselves as performing the central role in repopulating the Land of Israel, where Jewish kingdoms existed in ancient times, and as the vanguard of a theocratic Jewish state.[3] Many Religious Zionist settlements, for example Kiryat Arba in Hebron, were founded around biblical sites, giving residents a sense of connection with their biblical roots

http://www.fmep.org/analysis/analysis/israeli-settler-groups-in-the-west-bank

then there are the secularists:

They are mainly attracted to the West Bank for economic reasons, settling in large, stable settlements; indeed, many Russian immigrants who settle in the West Bank do so without knowledge of the region’s contentious political situation.[27] Despite that, for the most part, Russian immigrants have taken a hard-line, nationalistic approach to negotiations with the Palestinians, traditionally supporting secular right-wing parties.

"The scope of the conflict will be much larger than it is today and than it was during the disengagement" from Gaza, Yuval Diskin was quoted as telling the Cabinet last month. "Our investigation found a very high willingness among this [settler] public to use violence - not just stones, but live weapons - in order to prevent or halt a peace process."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/02/world/main4642623.shtml?source=RSSattr=World_4642623

so let's run through that: the overwhelming majority of settlers are religious zionists, who believe that god gave them the land. even among the secularists, you have most people supporting right-wing candidates and right-wing ideology.

i think even dm would admit that russian jews that are in israel are among the most hardline when it comes to the palestinian issue.

thank you

The point is Bravo, by your standard here, the Palestinians are NO FUCKING DIFFERENT. But you won't accept that, will you? You'll defend them.

what standard are we talking about?

the simple fact is that most settlers are religious fanatics (as i just showed and you will no doubt dismiss as statistical error) who believe god loves them more than he loves arabs and the arabs should not be on the land.

the other simple fact is that virtually all settlers in the w. bank are siphoning off huge chunks of arab water and are dumping their polluted water into arab water. they are all part of this process. they also play a role in the demolition of arab homes whenever their communities need to "expand".

they are all complacent in subjugating a population because of ideology.

Joe270 · Dec 8, 2008

you're willing to say that palestinian parents would rather see their children killed than live peacefully with israel?

Yes.

http://www.israelinsider.com/channels/security/articles/sec_0049.htm

Friday night's bombing outside a Tel Aviv discotheque, which took the lives of 20 young Israelis. The suicide bomber was identified as 22-year-old Saeed Hotary, a Jordanian who had been living in Kalkilya.

"I am very happy and proud of what my son did and I hope all the men of Palestine and Jordan would do the same,'' Saeed's father Hassan told The Associated Press.

imagine any other ethnicity replaced in that statement:

No other group sends their children out to murder people by blowing themselves to bits while their parents stand by proudly.

Of course, all your words of support for the Palestinian 'diplomacy' ring hollow when the leaders constantly say things like this:

We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state.

--Yasser Arafat

The Palestinian plan is transparent, the elimination of Israel.

robeiae · Dec 8, 2008

Bravo said:
yes.

http://www.fmep.org/analysis/analysis/israeli-settler-groups-in-the-west-bank

then there are the secularists:

Your own quote here undoes your claim. The secularists are NOT religious zealots.

And nothing you have given demonstrates there are 435,000 RACISTS. You've just appended that on as a generalization to make them even worse and--yes--to be inflammatory.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/02/world/main4642623.shtml?source=RSSattr=World_4642623

so let's run through that: the overwhelming majority of settlers are religious zionists, who believe that god gave them the land. even among the secularists, you have most people supporting right-wing candidates and right-wing ideology.

i think even dm would admit that russian jews that are in israel are among the most hardline when it comes to the palestinian issue.

thank you

So in running through it, you admit your classification was, in fact, wrong. Again, no evidence of racists and an admission that the secularists are not religious zealots and, in fact, are oftentimes unaware of the political situation.

You want to try again?

But look, my point is not to defend or classify the settlers at all. Rather, my point is that you freely generalize about them in the most contentious manner, than claim any similar generalization re Palestinians is somehow inflammatory and/or propaganda.

Then, you throw your hands up and say "you're out" because others are not willing to talk about this without going overboard...

the simple fact is that most settlers are religious fanatics (as i just showed and you will no doubt dismiss as statistical error) who believe god loves them more than he loves arabs and the arabs should not be on the land.

And most members of Hamas and supporters of Hamas and the like believe what, with regard to the Jews?

Bravo · Dec 8, 2008

robeiae said:
Your own quote here undoes your claim. The secularists are NOT religious zealots.

And nothing you have given demonstrates there are 435,000 RACISTS. You've just appended that on as a generalization to make them even worse and--yes--to be inflammatory.

anyone who believes that god gave their race a particular plot of land, and that god made their race the chosen, better race is a racist. and anyone who believes that the race currently occupying that land needs to move out, is a racist.

and the secularists who believe that jews have more of a right to the land than arabs are racists as well.

So in running through it, you admit your classification was, in fact, wrong. Again, no evidence of racists and an admission that the secularists are not religious zealots and, in fact, are oftentimes unaware of the political situation.

and in fact, if you read the article you would see that a) the vast majority of settlers are religious zealots, and b) even the secularists hold extremist views regarding the arabs.

But look, my point is not to defend or classify the settlers at all.

that's definitely how you as well as many others here, including ceth & joe, are coming across.

i do not see a single instance of any of you guys condemning this rampage or the pogrom of last month. it's just excuse after excuse here. it's all very unsurprising.

Rather, my point is that you freely generalize about them in the most contentious manner, than claim any similar generalization re Palestinians is somehow inflammatory and/or propaganda.

my generalization was directly backed up within this thread: settlers are overwhelmingly religious zealots and their religious beliefs are based on racism.

the generalization that you supported, i.e. that palestinians do not care about their children, has only been supported by anecdotal "evidence" and nonsensical analogies.

it is a highly offensive, highly invalid claim that shows you, dm, ceth, and joe have very little regard for palestinian lives. which once again isnt very surprising, but let's call it what it is.

when people say that hamas is a terrorist group, i think everyone keeps quiet because even though it's a complex organization where only one wing is dedicated to militancy, at it's root the majority of people who belong to hamas have radical, extremist views. so we let "generalizations" slide there.

but suddenly, here you are, defending a group where 70% of it's members believe that god gave them their land, and a good chunk of the rest of the 30% holds extremist views about arabs.

talk about red herring.

Then, you throw your hands up and say "you're out" because others are not willing to talk about this without going overboard...

without going overboard?

saying palestinians do not love their children isnt going overboard?

oh that's right, you thought that quote was "reflective of reality".

And most members of Hamas and supporters of Hamas and the like believe what, with regard to the Jews?

this is your final grand attempt to deflect from what these settlers are doing.

still no condemnation, and no acknowledgment that the VAST majority of the settlers are religious fanatics, huh?

sometimes your attempts to obfuscate the issues with rhetorical gymnastics is fun, but at times like this it comes across as petty and obnoxious.

eta:

actually i take that back rob, it was pretty surprising to see someone who i consider to be quite intelligent to take the position that you did here.

i might not agree with most of your politics, but usually you tend to be quite careful about what you say and how approach the issues. i definitely did not expect to see you embrace meir's statements and then go on and try to defend (or the very least spin) the settler movement.

changing things up every once in a while does keep the spice in relationships though. so, thank you

Joe270 · Dec 8, 2008

the generalization that you supported, i.e. that palestinians do not care about their children, has only been supported by anecdotal "evidence" and nonsensical analogies.

When people put their children into explosive vests, when they encourage their children to commit suicide to murder other people, that pretty much confirms the premise.

No analogy needed. That is clear evidence. Their murderous rage against the Jews sees no limits, even including the willful killing of their own children.

So tell me more how much they love their children, how they are such nice people who love the world and sing kumbaya every night.

Your rhetoric is propaganda, shown so by the news of homicide bombers on our news programs.

it is a highly offensive, highly invalid claim that shows you, dm, ceth, and joe have very little regard for palestinian lives. which once again isnt very surprising, but let's call it what it is.

The Palestinians are the ones who have very little regard for Palestinian lives. We aren't the ones strapping bombs onto their bodies, remember?

That's calling it what it is. You're the one who brought this up, now you don't like it, so you attack other members because your position is completely indefensible.

No one who loves their children would blow them to bits just because of their racist hatred for another group. The Palestinians do, now don't they?

Don't blame me, or the others here for stating exactly what the facts show to be completely true.

when people say that hamas is a terrorist group, i think everyone keeps quiet because even though it's a complex organization where only one wing is dedicated to militancy, at it's root the majority of people who belong to hamas have radical, extremist views. so we let "generalizations" slide there.

Hamas is a terrorist group. No amount of 'legitimizing' it will make that untrue.

The mafia has legitimate businesses, too, and lawyers, and bought-and-paid for politicians, that doesn't make it a legitimate business by any stretch of the imagination.

Hamas is only trying smoke-screens and delaying tactics while they pursue their stated true aim: the total destruction of Israel.

Settlers Gone Wild

dmytryp

Bravo

Socialitest

dmytryp

Bravo

Socialitest

Bravo

Socialitest

dmytryp

dmytryp

dmytryp

SC Harrison

Dances With Hamsters

Bravo

Socialitest

Bravo

Socialitest

dmytryp

dmytryp

dmytryp

Bravo

Socialitest

dmytryp

robeiae

Touch and go

Joe270

Bravo

Socialitest

robeiae

Touch and go

Bravo

Socialitest

Joe270

robeiae

Touch and go

Bravo

Socialitest

Joe270