Saturday, July 19, 2014

I Support Israel. The Palestinians? Not So Much.

So we see the usual nonsense arising from the strife in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Foolish pundits and other idiots, like the president, calling for restraint from the country that is in greatest danger of attack.  I cannot help but wonder at how this has happened, other than outright, albeit unreasonable disdain for Israel. 

As I understand it, this began with the kidnapping and murder of three Jewish teens, though I believe one was an American (I could be wrong here).  It was followed by the murder of a Palestinian teen.  In the latter case, the perpetrator(s) was/were found and arrested.  The perp(s) in the first case is/are still at large, if not lauded as wonderful for killing Jews.  With the commission of the second act, that was all the provocation the Palestinians, led by Hamas, that was needed for the launching of missiles into Israel.  (According to Caroline Glick, 80% of the Israeli population is now within range of Pallie missiles)

I'm not sure of the exactness of the above, but what follows is the routine.  The Pallie/Hamas attacks are launched from amongst the Palestinian population.  They use homes, schools, hospitals and even their own houses of worship to house their arms and launch their missiles.  This, they believe, allows them to protect themselves as they feel relatively confident that the Israelis will balk at attacking these sites for fear of harm to civilians.  In the meantime, they launch literally hundreds of rockets at Israeli targets, with the express purpose of killing as many Israelis, civilian or otherwise, as possible. 

What is the response of the world?  The Israelis are the aggressors who need to show restraint.  Consider this taken from Allen West's website:

"If you want to know just how demented Bill Clinton and his ilk are, take in this quote: “In the short to medium term, Hamas can inflict terrible public relations damage on Israel by forcing it to kill Palestinian civilians to counter Hamas.” So now Hamas is winning because it’s “forcing” Israel to kill civilians?"
(Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2014/07/bill-clinton-hamas-winning-forcing-israel-kill-palestinians/#vaoElYsIgoLOoXHo.99)
 
Can you believe it?  If you've been paying attention, you really have no choice.  
 
I say, "Damn the public relations consequences!"  The Pallies are complicit in their own deaths by allowing Hamas, or whomever is running that evil show, to purposely put them in harm's way.  I believe the Israelis should disregard the consequences and lay waste to as much of Hamas controlled territory as possible.  
 
But wait, Art!  That's fighting evil with evil!  No.  That's doing what is necessary to protect one's people.  What's more, aggressors do not respond to diplomacy, as we've seen since the institution of Israel back in the 1940's.  What does provoke the proper response is pain, and lots of it.  When the Palestinians are tired of burying their dead, when there are seemingly more dead than are those left alive to bury them, then perhaps they will also tire of bringing about their own destruction through seeking the destruction of others.  

It's a sad reality that this is the way wars are won.  Some wish to believe there are "Just War" theories that work in the real world.  That peaceful solutions are possible when dealing with true evil.  Others are too timid to admit who the truly evil are.  We did not win WWII with this attitude.  

Some insist that those like me are proponents of  "war as solution" or "war as the only solution" or "war as the first choice of solutions".  None of this is true.   None of this reflects reality.  The sad truth is that there are times when war is the only solution and against the radical islamists who seek to dominate and subjugate the world, there is no evidence in history that suggests they are likely to be talked into any peace with those who do not want to serve allah as they demand.  

There is also little evidence that there exists enough civilian Pallies who are not down with the islamist cause and determination to eliminate Israel.  These are people who believe it is a good thing to have their children kill themselves killing others.  They are not of any concern to me.  Not against the lives of those who would like nothing more than to lay down their arms once and for all, but cannot and expect to survive surrounded by those who hate them.  

I reiterate that I do not care about a "two state" solution to this crisis.  The Pallies don't deserve a state of their own and have not given any evidence that they ever will.  They never had one in the first place.  They aren't even a real nation.  They were formed for the purpose of attacking Jews.  There are only two options as I see it:  They can change their ways and befriend Israel (and the world) or die.  Period.

105 comments:

Feodor said...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/18/israeli-soldier-posts-instagram-palestinian

Marshall Art said...

A few notable things:

First, you again post something with no comment. Obviously, you lack the integrity, courage and/or intelligence (safe money is on all three) to show why the link is relevant in any way to my post. But I've no doubt the following includes your position:

1. Indeed, nothing in this article does anything to mitigate the point of my post. Not in the least.

2. The fact that an article speaking of the actions of some young (kids, actually) members (allegedly) of the Israeli military expressing strong anti-arab sentiment does not mean that they are intending to act on their passions.

3. The fact that any member of the Israeli military, the Israeli population or any supporters of Israel bear strong anti-arab sentiment is to be expected amongst those who live as targets of a murderous population.

4. Acts depicted in this article are roundly criticized and punished by Israeli authorities, as well as criticized by the vast majority of Israelis and their supporters.

5. If that was an Israeli kid in the sights of an arab's weapon, the kid would be dead now, with the action likely highlighted on youtube, and hailed as a great thing by the majority of Palestinians and arabs in general.

6. Only assholes would put up an article like this to suggest some moral equivalency between Israel and those who wish to wipe Israel from the pages of history.

7. I guess that's why you exist. To be an asshole.

Feodor said...

Here is my comment on your integrity as a christian:

Marshall Art said...

Thus proving my point about your lack of courage, integrity or intelligence. You exist only to cast aspersions, regardless of their truthfulness, which is never a personal requirement of yours.

What's more, I've never claimed any lofty achievement of sainthood, but only that I understand the faith far better than do you.

Marshall Art said...

BTW, all subsequent off topic remarks by you will be deleted. Stay on topic and make even lame attempts at intelligent opinion, and I'll let them stand.

Feodor said...

"I say, "Damn the public relations consequences!" The Pallies are complicit in their own deaths by allowing Hamas, or whomever is running that evil show, to purposely put them in harm's way. I believe the Israelis should disregard the consequences and lay waste to as much of Hamas controlled territory as possible. "

This kind of inhuman logic will destroy Israeli society, much less lead them to lose their security absolutely.

When Israeli soldiers start lining up children's heads in the sites, they will only be able to return to their families and friends by way of medications, therapy and terrific anger toward their commanders and national leaders.

You are the kind of person that would take them down their own Vietnam. That is why nothing can be mentioned about your integrity as a christian. It doesn't exist.

But that you start with this, "... calling for restraint from the country that is in greatest danger of attack..." is just so utterly and stupidly wrong. Hamas has fired hundreds of home made missiles and killed how many? And Israel has killed how many? You can't even read the news much less the gospel.

How's that for topical?

Marshall Art said...

"How's that for topical?"

Insipid. Superficial. Lacking in depth. Unintelligent. Note:

"Hamas has fired hundreds of home made missiles and killed how many? And Israel has killed how many?"

So here's a story:

Once upon a time there lived a desperately insecure false priest named feodor. He so badly needed to have people perceive him as an intellectual that he bored to tears all who had the misfortune of encountering him. The people began to loathe his presence to the point of taking swings at him every time they got close enough, in order to inflict pain and suffering. But the people failed to make contact. feo would run when he saw them coming, he would duck and cower, he would fall the the ground into a fetal position and soil himself and no matter how they tried, the people never made solid contact with their punches. By feo's reasoning, because they missed, he was never under attack.

Because Hamas is incompetent in their attacks, and because Israel is good at blocking their attacks with their missile defense, you think Israel is not the country in greatest danger of attack? Really? You're truly that stupid?

What evidence has the muslim world ever provided that would indicate to you that threats to Israel's existence would cease once and for all? What evidence has the Palestinians ever given? There has never been a peace proposal by the Palestinians that wouldn't result in a more vulnerable Israel. There has never been a peace proposal by Israel that wouldn't have resulted in a more peaceful and lasting friendship.

You can't even understand the news, or history, much less the Gospel. You're a fraud, and not a very good one.

Feodor said...

You're too stupid to debate the Israeli-Palestinian complexity, so I'll have to leave it with how stupid you're internal "logic" is. You continue to say Israel as at greater danger despite Egypt cutting Gaza off and no other arab country assisting -- ever, since the Yom Kippur war.

And in the current conflict, a casualty ratio of 30 to 1 Palestinian to Israeli, can't make you step back from your idiocy.

Nor, I'm sure, will the civilian deaths at a UN school prick any conscience on your part. These were women and children who had fled their homes and sheltered at the school because Israeli leaflets warned them to flee their homes.

Suffice it to say that millions have told Likud that allowing illegal settlements, occupying Gaza, and brutal inhuman force will bring exactly the opposite of what they claim they want.

Now it's your turn to do your usual. The lukewarm cold souled twisting that causes God himself to spit in disgust.

Marshall Art said...

"You're too stupid to debate the Israeli-Palestinian complexity..."

Typical cowardly deflection on your part, as you again abdicate any responsibility to support your position. For if a topic is too complex for one of my limited capabilities, how stupid are you, an allegedly highly educated intellectual with supposedly superior capabilities if you are unable to explain it in terms simple enough even for me.

But it is NOT complex. It is as simple to understand as Dennis Prager explains it: One side wants the other side dead. It has been that way since "the Prophet" began his false religion 1400 years ago. The Palestinians demand what they have no legitimate claim to demand. It was never "their" land. They were never "driven off". They left when Israel became a state in hopes that a collection of arab states would wipe them off the face of the earth, leaving the land to those who then began calling themselves Palestinians, as if they were an actual nation in the first place. They chose wrong as Israel kicked butt in defending themselves. They've never relented in their desires to annihilate the Jews.

As for Egypt, they once had a peace agreement that was legitimate, though it resulted in the assassination of their president by Jew hating muslims. Now, they're "cutting off" of Gaza might not be for Israel's sake like Jew haters like yourself would like to insist.

And assists? They certainly get enough from most UN nations who also see them as the aggressors for being superior in their military capabilities in defending themselves, and pretending that they ever occupied the territories of others. I do not consider land taken after defeating aggressors, strategic to their future defense, as occupation, and no honest person of integrity could. It would not have been taken had they not been attacked with the hope of their total annihilation.

You continue to refer to body count as a means of determining the aggressor, just like all Jew-haters do. This is such evil dishonesty of a type that no longer surprises me when it comes from you, for you are no more Christian than the muslim terrorists seeking Israel's total destruction. But it doesn't determine the aggressor, but rather, it determines who has no business being one due to their military incompetence. Israel goes out of its way to target only scumbag combatants, while those same scumbags target Israeli civilians. You dare suggest Israel is the attacker. Shame on you, though you have no shame in your unChristian pride.

Here is another perspective of the alleged attack on the UN school. Like Hamas itself, you automatically assume the destruction is the result of Israeli shelling. That has yet to be determined, and should it be so, Israel is likely to atone, unlike your homeboys, Hamas, who would celebrate the loss of Israeli civilians and reward the perpetrators.

Now it's your turn to do your usual. Obfuscate and pretend you actually understand Christianity enough to know upon whom God would spit with disgust.

Feodor said...

The Israeli government helped form Hamas. But you're too stupid to go over the complexities of Israeli/Palestinian issues.

Craig said...

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/shalom-motherfr/

Another perspective.

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html?chocaid=397

This is the charter of the "good guys".

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/surprising-study-on-terrorism-al-qaida-kills-eight-times-more-muslims-than-non-muslims-a-660619.html

Of course, there is very little outcry about the fact that Muslims kill more Muslims, than Israel has.

Marshall Art said...

Nice contributions, Craig. Unlike the troll, feo, you offer citations and let them speak for themselves, rather than make wild claims and expect others to prove or disprove. feo hasn't the integrity, courage or intelligence to make his case. He is only capable of making accusations. I would love to see his citations for his last ludicrous comment, because it makes perfect sense for Israel to help create their own destruction. But then, I'm not an intellectual.

Feodor said...

Craig can find it. He knows how to read. Google, "Israel helped create Hamas." Craig, and help your illiterate brother out.

Marshall Art said...

First of all, coward, Craig is not your lackey. If you make a charge, it is up to you to provide the source.

But nonetheless, I did google your nonsense the first time you stated it. Israel did not "help" to create Hamas. That is merely a headline to attract interest in the article, which plainly describes how choices made led to unintended consequences.

It also compares their choices with those our own nation made in supporting islamists against the Soviets. History has plenty of examples of such, and does not equate to "helping" as if consciously assisting. But of course it is not surprising that someone with your lack of honesty would be so eager to pretend it does. There's that lack of integrity and intelligence of which I spoke. Thanks for the proving the point.

In addition, this tangent is irrelevant (like you are) to the thrust of my post. It does not mitigate my point in any way. None of your offerings has.

Keep typing. You demonstrate your inferiority as if it's your goal in life.

Craig said...

MA,

Thanks,it just seemed like some more perspective would be helpful.

The more I read that Hamas charter, the less likely it seems that Israel had anything to do with it's creation.

I do disagree with your stand on a two state solution. As I see it, some sort of two state solution is the most reasonable answer. Of course, had the "Arabs" accepted the two state solution offered in 1948 (or even used the UN proposal as a starting point for good faith negotiations) we would be in a different position today. Unfortunately when one "state" refuses to acknowledge the right of the other state to exist, and stages multiple invasions to wipe said state off the face of the earth, problems arise.


I have to say I find the indifference to the Muslim killing Muslim numbers mystifying. When Hamas flings unguided rockets in the general direction of Israel, they have no way of knowing if the innocent civilians they kill will be Jewish, Muslim, or any one of the other religious/racial groups represented in Israel. Further, if one reads their charter, they don't care. They believe that the innocent Muslim civilians indiscriminately killed are some how made martyrs, rather than victims of terrorist violence.

But, hey, it's fashionable among some to uncritically support Hamas despite it's obvious flaws.

RE: Israel created Hamas. I'm not sure that the facts actually support the headlines.

For example;

"Hamas was established in 1987, and has its origins in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood movement,..."

"In 1987, several Palestinians were killed in a traffic accident involving an Israeli driver, and the events that followed–a Palestinian uprising against Israel's West Bank and Gaza occupation–led Yassin and six other Palestinians to found Hamas as an offshoot of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. The new group was supported by Brotherhood-affiliated charities and social institutions that had already gained a strong foothold in the occupied territories. The acronym "Hamas" first appeared in 1987 in a leaflet that accused the Israeli intelligence services of undermining the moral fiber of Palestinian youth as part of Mossad's recruitment of what Hamas termed "collaborators." Nonetheless, Israeli military and intelligence was still focused on Fatah, and continued to maintain contacts with Gaza Islamic activists. Numerous Islamic leaders, including senior Hamas founder Mahmoud Zahar, met with Yitzhak Rabin as part of "regular consultations" between Israeli officials and Palestinians not linked to the PLO"

At best, one could say that Israel saw and encouraged Hamas as an alternative to the PLO. Obviously, Hamas turned out to be a group of Islamic terrorists, rather than the more secular terrorists of the PLO.

That's the problem with the Google, once you search behind the headlines you find all sorts of interesting stuff.

Craig said...

MA,

Israel reaching out to Hamas in the hopes of using them as a foil or alternative to the PLO is also analogous to the the US and Britain entering into alliance with the Soviets, Tito, and to some degree Mao during WWII. Sometimes it is necessary to at least explore the possibility of working together with one group or nation in order to fight a larger,more dangerous, or more immediate threat. The risk as shown y may of the examples given is that once the alliance has outlived it's usefulness there is risk of further conflict.

Feodor said...

"Supporting is not helping."

Boy, you're one sharp cookie, Marshall.

Marshall Art said...

And you're one dull personality. It is, however, my bad for not being clear enough for a highly educated and well read person like yourself to truly understand, but I'll suspend reality to regard your response as a Christian-like request for clarification, rather than the typically desperate feo-like attempt to find fault it is. Supporting is not the same as "helping to form". The Israelis supported Hamas as an alternative to the secular terrorists with whom they were already dealing, as Craig so easily understood. They didn't do anything to create the organization, which would be "helping to form".

A little honesty on your part now and then might be difficult and painful for a false priest, but it would "support" your attempt to "appear" morally superior.

Feodor said...

Since Craig is much closer to simple logic than you, Marshall, and not a lackey as you point out (very helpful, Marshall, too - keep it up!), the following notes, address him in the main and you can read along. Right? As noted now:

1) I referred - as did the post, by the way - to Palestinians only; actually Gazans specifically. But you boys, hyped up by prejudice, jumped to all "muslims." Not exactly the same thing and not the subject of the post. A Marshall law which Marshall does not observe.

2) I didn't even refer to Palestinians in the first case, whom I don't think either of you consider or know much about for that matter. I referred to the Israeli public and it's social health. Note that, please. My concern was first for the moral and psychological health of Israeli society. Marshall can't engage with this because he's stupid.

But, Craig, I wonder if you recognize the ancient and traditional Christian argument for proportionality when waging a Just War? Or whether you recognize the moral argument for Just Wars at all? And if you by chance should do so, how would consider the principle of proportionality in this case? (And let me hasten to add - to keep you from stumbling yet again - "this case" is not about Israel and Iran but about Israel and Gaza.)

And do you think that, having their government and military engage in such disproportionate killing, the general society AND the soldiers themselves will fare well? Do you not think that disproportionate and brutal response causes psychological problems precisely because it causes inward moral guilt? And can you think of any recent examples from... somewhere else, let's say.

At any rate, I hope, Craig, you don't think that I am one those who "uncritically support Hamas despite it's obvious flaws." Because that would be lying. And we need to leave that for Marshall to do.

3). Craig, here is one of your sentences, "Unfortunately when one 'state' refuses to acknowledge the right of the other state to exist, and stages multiple invasions to wipe said state off the face of the earth, problems arise."

Your use of quotes around the word, state, here is interesting. I can only assume that you mean to suggest that Palestine is not quite really a state and Israel is real state.

Here are some facts for you which would reverse the roles you assigned in that sentence.
a) In 1945, no district of the land that would become the state of Israel [didn't exist yet], in no district was the land held by a majority of Jews. All districts were owned by a majority of Palestinians and all cities, including Jerusalem, were held by a majority of Palestinians. Often, the distribution was 80% to 20%, or 70% to 30%.

In the two decades from the end of WWI and 1945, the period of British occupying and governing what is now the state of Israel [didn't exist then] and was called Mandatory Palestine, major groups of Zionists assassinated English governors and bombed the main offices of the British government for Mandatory Palestine - the King David Hotel. Yitzhak Shamir, a former Prime Minister of Israel was a member of the attack.

So, it could be seen as the case, Craig, that when you say the Palestinians refused a two state solution (which at the time called for an internationally governed Jerusalem), it could be said, rather, that they refused to be robbed of their rightful land ownership (thousands possessed deeds going back three, four hundred years) and robbed of many of their major cities with all the commerce that entailed.

Feodor said...

An aside as a predictor that Marshall will join in with sheer lunacy about all this: So, those folks coaching little league, Marshall, are not helping to form young men? Folks leading Girl Scouts are not helping to form young women?

It's funny, Marshall, the way you trip over yourself trying to invest some ontological reality to the phrase you put in quotes, "helping to form," reminds me of Husserl, Heideggar, Derrida. Which is kind of like my asshole reminding me of the Crab Nebula.

At any rate, I really don't see how you can miss the obviousness that, while you keep screaming for more and more substance from me, we can't get going in any sense until you stop tripping over yourself to cover up logical senselessness, extreme defensiveness to the point where you misplace the meaning of "is," and all kinds of other smoke and mirrors, conscious and unconscious. You're like that square little plastic game where you (the square piece of plastic) have to move the tiny metal bead (your brain) through a maze of erected corridors (moral and ethical considerations, etc.). Except that in your labyrinth no corridor connects to any other. They are all blocked off. And there's no goal. There's just you, squeezing your little metal ball (brain) over ethical walls in order just to be able to move, but in the end, there's simply no where to go in your square plastic box. No goal. No point.
________________

4) Finally, Craig, you say that you don't think the facts support the headlines that Israel helped form Hamas. It's a shame that you just read the headlines. Here's what's below the headlines: "Surveying the wreckage of a neighbor's bungalow hit by a Palestinian rocket, retired Israeli official Avner Cohen traces the missile's trajectory back to an 'enormous, stupid mistake' made 30 years ago.
'Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation,' says Mr. Cohen, a Tunisian-born Jew who worked in Gaza for more than two decades. Responsible for religious affairs in the region until 1994..."

There's also this fact: Israel licensed the founder and founding group of Hamas as a "charity." This allowed them to build schools, clinics, hospitals, and libraries. And so Hamas was formed.

Feodor said...

Oh, and Marshall, the Israelis said it was their mortar but they didn't kill nobody.

Feodor said...

"Like Hamas itself, you automatically assume the destruction is the result of Israeli shelling. That has yet to be determined, and should it be so, Israel is likely to atone..."

Feodor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Feodor said...

And I forgot to mention that Theodor Herzl, the father of the Zionist movement, did not ask for Palestine originally from the British. He and his group asked for land carved out of the British colonial territories of eastern Africa.

So, Craig, given all the above, which one was the state and which one the "state" by 1945?

Craig said...

"...despite Egypt cutting Gaza off and no other arab country assisting -- ever, since the Yom Kippur war."

It would seem that the fact that Egypt (a Muslim country) has closed their border with Gaza, is somehow the fault of Israel? Strange logic, that.

It also seems that the failure of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq (all countries that have engaged in unprovoked attacks against Israel, while encouraging the Muslim residents of Israel to leave until after all the Jews were killed) to offer appropriate help to the palestinians (fellow Muslims) is also somehow the fault of Israel. Again interesting logic.

I'd suspect that there are passages in the Koran which would teach that Muslims should help fellow Muslims, but somehow that hasn't motivated the Muslim nations to help the palestinians. But, sure, let's blame Israel anyway.

"...a casualty ratio of 30 to 1 Palestinian to Israeli..."

What's the casualty rate of Muslims killing Muslims in Syria or Iraq? Why is that not a concern?

Why was it considered a war crime for the US to attack military targets in Iraq, yet it's not a war crime for Hamas to fling rockets at innocent civilians?

Craig said...

1) Which makes my point, that the slaughter of Muslims by Muslims doesn't move that American left, but a relatively few people killed in response to attacks is worthy of outrage. I specifically used "Muslim", because the usual term "Arab" is not technically correct. I didn't use the term "Palestinian" since there is not currently,nor has there ever been a nation of Palestine. Finally, no prejudice, just trying to take a broader look at the situation as it exists, rather than cherry pick to support political preconceptions.

2)From what I've seen, I'd say that the Israeli public doesn't share your concern(polling data indicates that even Muslim Israelis support the responses because they don't want to become unwitting martyrs). Of course, the rest of the dead Muslims don't merit much outrage either.

I do understand both Just War Theory and proportionality, I just don't see that this digression makes sense. Hamas flings unguided rockets at innocent Israelis (of all faiths) while hiding behind civilian "human shields", Israel responds by attempting to target the source of the rockets. Seems reasonable to me.

I'd say that your lack of concern for the psychological damage caused by seeing friends and family killed by random rocket fire might also be a cause for concern. Therefore stopping the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians is a prudent and reasonable course for a nation to take.

3. I mean to suggest that Hamas is not a state, nor is there a state called Palestine. But aside from semantic nitpicking, the fact remains that a goal of Hamas is to eliminate Israel as an entity. How does one compromise with that?

Please feel free to cherry pick history to support your prejudices.

From 1517-until 1920 the area was under Ottoman rule and owned by them.

From 1920 to 1948 the area was rule by Britain under a mandate.

In 1947 the UN started the process to determine the next steps. The Arab Higher Committee boycotted the committee meetings.

On November 29, 1947, in Resolution 181 (II), the General Assembly recommended to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations, the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out in the resolution.[93] The Plan was to replace the British Mandate with "Independent Arab and Jewish States" and a "Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem administered by the United Nations". The Plan of Partition in Part 1 A. Clause 2 provided that Britain "should use its best endeavours to ensure than an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date and in any event not later than 1 February 1948". Clause 3. provided that "Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem ... shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948."

Following the exit of the Brits, Israel was attacked by military forces from Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Lebanon.

So, to try to isolate the current situation in Gaza from the larger situation in the Middle East, as well as from the lengthy history of unprovoked attacks on Israel by it's Muslim neighbors seems shortsighted and driven by preconceived notions.

4) The fact that you choose to omit a significant portion of what I actually said about the "Israel created Hamas" is telling.

"So, Craig, given all the above, which one was the state and which one the "state" by 1945?"

Quite clearly neither was a state in 1945.

Feodor said...

"It would seem that the fact that Egypt (a Muslim country) has closed their border with Gaza, is somehow the fault of Israel? Strange logic, that."

No, Craig, the remark is in response to Marshall's hysterical claims that Israel is under greater threat than Gaza in this crisis. My point is that no other country is rushing to Gaza's aid with their military - and not country ever has since the Yom Kippur war.

How this is Israel's fault, I couldn't say. You pulled that out of your fantasy.

I really don't know how you and Marshall ever got to be such bad readers and interpreters. One caution is that you assume so much from your own head. Just follow the path of what's being said and to whom it is being said.

And I must say that this note of yours that seems intended to be an argument of some kind that muslims have killed more muslims than Israel is really beside the point. What we have going on is disproportionate force being used to crush and kill a whole society and its infrastructure and institutions as a way to get a one political faction to give in. Muslims killing muslims around the globe is not pertinent unless you see people primary as an ethnicity and only secondarily as people.

Germans have killed more Jews than anybody. How are you on Germans, Craig?

Yours really is an inhuman argument, short as it is.

Feodor said...

1) "the slaughter of Muslims by Muslims doesn't move [the] American left.."

Craig, do you know how many organizations and contributory dollars go into supporting the safety and education of Afghani education for boys and girls?

Have you read the praise and celebration of Malala's courage in the face of the Pakistani Taliban and so many others like her? She's won 23 awards, all of which carry monetary reward to help her argue for her countrywomen. She's been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize as an example of the refusal of women to stay uneducated. Where have you been?

2) a casualty ratio of 30 to 1 Palestinian to Israeli seems reasonable to you. Ok. Tells me what I wanted to know.

3) You say the Ottoman's owned the land, but that's not true. Governing is not owning. They had no deeds. The Palestinians possessed the deeds.

You then go to quote UN resolutions for Israel setting out land for the Palestinians. From 1947. That's 67 years ago. 67 years ago. And in that time, Israel has broken 65 UN resolutions. And Israel has not allowed an international rule over Jerusalem

65. In 67 years. Who's acting illegally?

Can't cherry pick what's lying on the ground in front of you, Craig.

In 1945, Palestinians had owned and farmed the land for hundreds of years. The possessed deeds going back hundreds of years. They were in the majority and they were the administrators and managers of the institutions and regulations that governed the land. That's what a state is.

The Palestinians, Craig, revolted against British rule in 1920, 1929, and 1936. Sounds like a people fighting for their land, to me.

In 1948, 700,000 Palenstinians were driven out by a Civil War that started after the UN voted for partition, and they continued to have to flee during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Sounds like a dispossessed people to me.

To try to take one side of this conflict by conflating all Arabs as one is to say the we Americans suffered tremendous losses when Germany defeated France in 1870.

It's asinine. And, you allow the precedent that terrorism by Zionists was rewarded. Way to go.

4) The fact that you can't admit that the only way for Hamas to be viable was to be designated a charity by Israel is what is telling. And the fact that you cannot interpret the subtext of that. Palestinians have no authority for self-government or realization. They are fully occupied and fully unfree as a socio-political entity. When people exist in such conditions, they will not behave well. Who knew?

Today I saw the story of Wolf Blitzer touring a tunnel under Gaza. The Israel soldier giving him the tour seemed upset that the very electricity that Israel supplies Gaza was used in these tunnels. He didn't have the capacity - nor did Wolf - to note that Gazans are not allowed to generate their own electricity. Israel disallows this.

For strategy military reasons.

What life must be like lived that way.

Craig said...

"You continue to say Israel as at greater danger despite Egypt cutting Gaza off..."

You have provided no connection between the actions of Egypt and the actions of Israel, either in the context of the current crisis or the context of the war started by an unprovoked surprise attack on Israel on one of its holidays. I simply responded to your comment. If you can connect the two, by all means do so, if not then perhaps a bit more clarity would help.

"Yours really is an inhuman argument, short as it is."

It's easier to dismiss someone's argument as inhuman than to address it, I get that.

My essence of my argument is that Israel has a history since 1948 of defending itself against unprovoked attacks. It seems that one could make the argument that it is inhuman to indiscriminately kill (or attempt to kill) innocent civilians, and that it is not inhuman for a national government to prevent it's innocent civilians from being randomly being killed.

It's pretty simple. As soon as Hamas stops firing rockets, the fighting stops. I know that seems unreasonable to some, but I can't help that.

"And I must say that this note of yours that seems intended to be an argument of some kind that muslims have killed more muslims than Israel is really beside the point."

Demonstrating, perhaps, that you have not read clearly what I have written. If you have questions, ask them. don't assume. It's much more effective.

"What we have going on is disproportionate force being used to crush and kill a whole society and its infrastructure and institutions as a way to get a one political faction to give in."

Had Israel engaged in an unprovoked invasion of Gaza, and was engaged in systematically and indiscriminately killing everyone and destroying everything, I might agree with you.

Unfortunately, you can't over look the extended and repeated attacks by Hamas that led to the current situation. Further, you can't overlook the fact that if Hamas is going to use women and children to hide behind, they can't then reasonably claim that Israel is singling out civilians. Further, you can't overlook the fact that a stated goal of Hamas is generally the violent overthrow of any and all non Muslim countries, specifically including Israel.

"Muslims killing muslims around the globe is not pertinent..."

yeah, because who really gives a rats ass about Muslims dying in Syria, because it doesn't help move forward a political narrative.

"...unless you see people primary as an ethnicity and only secondarily as people."

Nope, what I do see is a history of Muslim nations using the plight of the palestinians as a pretext to move forward their agendas.

You'd think if the Muslims were serious, they just might help alleviate the suffering of their coreligionists.

I wonder why they don't.

Oh and BTW, your disproportionality argument doesn't seem quite so appealing if one looks at the totality of the post 1948 situation.

Feodor said...

"You have provided no connection between the actions of Egypt and the actions of Israel..."

Who are you? Are you really as dense as Marshall? Did I not literally say that this about Marshall's claim that Israel is under greater threat than Gaza? Did I not literally say that the fact that Egypt has abandoned Gaza and not been antagonistic toward Israel in more than thirty years means that Egypt poses no threat?

So................................... Gaza is under greater threat from Israel than Israel is from Gaza or anyone at the moment. 1,035 Gazans are dead. 6 Israeli soldiers. In the 2009 Israeli operation in Gaza, 1,417 Gazan deaths, 13 Israeli deaths - 3 civilians.

You say I cannot overlook Hamas attacks. You say I cannot overlook Hamas living in neighborhoods. You say I cannot overlook Hamas' goal.

How can you say I am? I'm giving you the numbers. Hamas attacks are almost meaningless and Israeli response is astoundingly out of proportion. And not once have I defended Hamas' ideology or goal. But in your hysteria, you read moral criticism of Israel's intransigent brutality and refusal to move toward a two state solution as equivalent to lauding Hamas. You're blind and will to be so.

Germans have killed more Jews than anybody, Craig. How are you on Germans?
_____________

"You'd think if the Muslims were serious, they just might help alleviate the suffering of their coreligionists."

Really? Are you serious? You really think of muslims as a cultic unanimity who are out to get everybody, aren't you?

Did you want us to invade the Soviet Union when they were tearing down the Orthodox church and killing its priests? Do you want to invade China now that they are oppressing and jailing christian clergy?

You're ridiculous.

Craig said...

"Did I not literally say that this about Marshall's claim that Israel is under greater threat than Gaza? Did I not literally say that the fact that Egypt has abandoned Gaza and not been antagonistic toward Israel in more than thirty years means that Egypt poses no threat?"

Given the lack of context, I suppose it's possible that this is what you meant. I can only look at what you actually wrote and respond to that.

" Gaza is under greater threat from Israel than Israel.."

What threat does Gaza live under that hasn't been brought on by the hostile actions of Hamas? How many times has Israel launched unprovoked attacks on it's neighbors? Unfortunately, the Muslim nations around Israel have a tendency to attack Israel and for some strange reason Israel responds to stop the attacks.

"But in your hysteria, you read moral criticism of Israel's intransigent brutality and refusal to move toward a two state solution as equivalent to lauding Hamas. You're blind and will to be so."

Sorry, to disappoint you, but no hysteria here, just a different view point. Also, no name calling or disparaging your intelligence. But a nice try nonetheless.

As to your flawed German analogy.

I ignored it the first time because it was a stupid analogy. But since it seems to be all you have, I'll say this. Hitler and his regime engaged in actions that can only be describe as evil. Hamas, by engaging in unprovoked random attacks on innocent civilians, is also engaging in acts that can be described as evil. Hitler was stopped, Hamas needs to be stopped. Both had the opportunity to stop their actions, Hitler chose not to, Hamas could stop toady and end the whole thing.

"Really? Are you serious? You really think of muslims as a cultic unanimity who are out to get everybody, aren't you?"

Nope, you can tell that you are mistaken, because I never actually said anything remotely like this. But feel free to keep making stuff up if you feel it helps.

"Did you want us to invade the Soviet Union when they were tearing down the Orthodox church and killing its priests? Do you want to invade China now that they are oppressing and jailing christian clergy?"

Again, nope, never said anything about invading anyone. Please see my earlier comment about making stuff up.

"You're ridiculous."

Again, go for the condescension, name calling and disparaging comments, if it makes you feel better. I'm not sure it's productive, but you seem to get something from it.

I realize that it is ridiculous to think that the world might be better served if the Muslim nations helped those who share the same faith rather than persecute them or cynically use them to further political goals.

Just ridiculous.

Marshall Art said...

Time constraints prohibit my full engagement at this point in time, so at best I can only respond to a few points at best.

First, for Craig:

You'll have to forgive feo. He is too wrapped up in trying to be an asshole, his only true area of expertise. It is evidenced in statements like the following:

"...that would be lying. And we need to leave that for Marshall to do."

He projects in this manner quite a bit as if it is true, while never, ever providing anything in the way of proof. You've seen him do as much with his responses to you.
------------------------------------

"...the remark is in response to Marshall's hysterical ("hysterical"? Projecting again.) claims that Israel is under greater threat than Gaza in this crisis."

I note that feo has not done a thing to contradict or disprove my "hysterical" claim. But it is not a claim, it is a fact. The toad continues to insist that the effectiveness of the Israeli response to the unprovoked attacks by Hamas, compared to the relative impotency of Hamas' efforts determines who is being threatened by whom. OR, he measures such by the fact that it is near impossible to totally prevent civilian casualties when retaliating against a group of scumbags who purposely launch their assaults from amongst their civilian population. This is idiocy of a type only a highly educated, well read false priest like feo can muster (though he has his compatriots amongst too many leftists in this country).

There's only one honest (not something with which feo is familiar) way to assess who is threatened: Who has to duck and cover on a daily basis (the Israeli population) vs who teaches their children that Jews are monkeys and how to kill them. There is nothing about this issue that is more complex than that. One side wants the other dead and wiped off the face of the earth. That side, the Pallie side, is unworthy of a state until they can prove they are willing to live as peaceful, productive people of the cesspool they, themselves created after Israel withdrew from Gaza. I'd say at least three generations worth of peaceful friendly relations with their neighbors might be enough. I wouldn't bet money on it.

Craig said...

Marshall,

How positively hysterical you are to suggest that the residents of Gaza should seek to live in peace and harmony with their neighbors.

Feodor said...

I agree that the people of Palestine should be a people who seek to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors. Nothing I've written contradicts that.

What I have written is that Israel should be a people who seek to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors as well.

At the moment, the majority of both parties would seem to be opposed. Certainly the israelis have voted in a brutal and intransigent regime that refuses to move the ball of peace even a little down the road. Mr. Netanyahu has obstructed any progress.

As for the Palestinians, participation in voting may be questioned. The majority may be silent - cowed by a vicious Hamas regime.

They are also cowed by the numbers and facts that neither of you can pick up and engage with. Not just a 30:1 kill ration. Israel controls all aspects of Gaza when and if they want to. The borders are blocked. The sea is blocked. Attempts at commercialization are so blocked that Gaza has 50% unemployment and a devastated housing and institutional stock.

50% unemployment for 2 million people.

The two of you ask the poorest and weakest, those under two boots, Hamas and Israel, to turn it all around. All while you are ignoring the country that gets $3 billion in aid from the US - every year - and that has a $2.5 billion GDP per capita compared to $2 million for Palestine. That means the Israel has a GDP that is 1250 times that of Palestine. Even greater when we just consider Gaza.

And you guys think Palestinians can turn it around?

If Christ were alive today he'd say you guys were still rooting for the Romans.

Feodor said...

I like the way that Craig's main defense is his ignorance. "Well, I just couldn't understand. And that's your fault, Feodor."

Feodor said...

I take it back. Upon further reflection I remember that Marshall has engaged with the numbers. He doesn't care how many die.

Feodor said...

"I am a Zionist because the story of my forebears convinces me that Jews needed the homeland voted into existence by United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947, calling for the establishment of two states — one Jewish, one Arab — in Mandate Palestine.

What I cannot accept, however, is the perversion of Zionism that has seen the inexorable growth of a Messianic Israeli nationalism claiming all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River; that has, for almost a half-century now, produced the systematic oppression of another people in the West Bank; that has led to the steady expansion of Israeli settlements on the very West Bank land of any Palestinian state; that isolates moderate Palestinians like Salam Fayyad in the name of divide-and-rule; that pursues policies that will make it impossible to remain a Jewish and democratic state; that seeks tactical advantage rather than the strategic breakthrough of a two-state peace; that blockades Gaza with 1.8 million people locked in its prison and is then surprised by the periodic eruptions of the inmates; and that responds disproportionately to attack in a way that kills hundreds of children.

No argument, no Palestinian outrage or subterfuge, can gloss over what Jewish failure the killing of children in such numbers represents.

The Israeli case for the bombardment of Gaza could be foolproof. If Benjamin Netanyahu had made a good-faith effort to find common cause with Palestinian moderates for peace and been rebuffed, it would be. He has not. Hamas is vile. I would happily see it destroyed. But Hamas is also the product of a situation that Israel has reinforced rather than sought to resolve.

This corrosive Israeli exercise in the control of another people, breeding the contempt of the powerful for the oppressed, is a betrayal of the Zionism in which I still believe."

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9149193&postID=8629302803539564970

Craig said...

"What I have written is that Israel should be a people who seek to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors as well."

Yet you've provided no actual evidence that this particular fantasy is actually true.

"The two of you ask the poorest and weakest, those under two boots, Hamas and Israel, to turn it all around."

Actually this statement is blatantly false. I have suggested that it is bad form and not very constructive to lob rockets at innocent civilians and that stopping might be a good course of action. But no more than that.

Of course you ignore the roughly 1.2 billion in aid that the UN pumps into Gaza.

I like the way Foedor's main defense is condescension and ridicule, while ignoring anything contrary to his preconceptions.

Oh, and the way he just makes stuff up about people.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Israel has tried to live in peace since the founding of the nation. But Islam has a mandate to eradicate Israel from the map. It is the Islamic community which does not want peace until Israel ceases to exist.

People like Feodor are one of the reasons the problems in the middle east continue to exist - the continual blaming of Israel for the troubles.

Feodor said...

F: "What I have written is that Israel should be..."

C: "Yet you've provided no actual evidence that this particular fantasy is actually true."

Woo, boy, you are as bad as Marshall. Do you know your cases, Craig? As in grammar? Do you recognize the difference between "should be" and "is"?
_________________

"Of course you ignore the roughly 1.2 billion in aid that the UN pumps into Gaza."

Really? I'd like a reference for this please. I think you'll find that UNRWA aid goes to "Palestine refugees are defined as persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”

This would mean refugee camps in Jordan, Syria, etc.

Also, I think you'll find that Hamas declared this and other EU pledges as an act of war against Hamas.

Not exactly supporting your case, but rather mine. The UN and the EU are still trying to keep the effect of partition and Israeli obstruction from killing hundreds of thousand more dispossessed Palestinians.
_______________

I'm certain that the above will easily disabuse you of your claim that I am "ignoring anything contrary to his preconceptions. It's the case, instead, that I must further instruct you on the full depth of reality of things you find on the surface.
_______________

It's interesting that you use the phrase, "since the founding of the nation," knowing now as you do, from me, that Zionists used terrorism to found the nation, including a former Prime Minister.

And no one but a terribly dense ignorant person would call what's been going on since 1987 peace. And when Rabin moved toward peace, he was killed for it. And the assassin was lauded by hard line Zionists - and ginned up to do it by the current Prime Minister.

Feodor said...

Oh, my bad, Craig. Mr. Christian Militarism jumped in. Glenn, the last section, then, is for you.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Feodor,

Another asinine slanderous attack on me as being "Mr. Christian Militarism." What is your evidence to support such a charge?

Gee, when was there ever a nation called "Palestine" in the past 2000 years since the Israelites were forced out of their homeland? Never. There was no nation in the area until Israel was again formed in 1947. THEY have the historic claim to the land.

Interesting that you call it "terrorism" what Israel did to secure their own land. I suppose you think those who fought against the British in our Revolution were also "terrorists."

That SOME people committed terrorist acts is not denied, but that was not the norm, nor was it sanctioned.

Rabin wanted to placate the Muslims by giving up land. That is why he was hated - the people were tired of giving in and giving up land for peace that they never got. Again, no amount of "land for peace" will ever stop the Muslims from trying to eradicate Israel.

Oh, and Israel, when forming the nation, was more than happy to let the people living there remain, but it was the Muslim nations who told the people to leave so that they could destroy Israel. But those who told the people to leave refused to let them live in their countries, which is why the refugee camps were started - so as to continue to foment trouble with Israel.

Feodor said...

OK, this is what makes Glenn so funny as a biblical literalist: he doesn't know simple facts from scripture. There is a reason that Matthew and Luke don't have Jesus being born in the nation of Israel: it didn't exist. Matt. 2: 1: In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea.... (3:1: In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea.) Luke 1: 39: In those days Mary set out and went with hasted to a Judean town in the hill country.

By the time Jesus' birth there is no Israel. There is Judea, Idumea, Samaria, Galilee, the Decapolis, Perea, Nabatea, Trachonitis, Phoenicia, etc. These would be Roman provinces. Or, you could call the region Bethlehem was in, the kingdom of Herod. After Bar Kochba it was called Syrian Palestine. Before Christ it was Herodian Judea, Hasmonean Judea, Persian Judea, Babylonian Judea and was called Israel only in the time of David and Solomon - so, not after 586 BCE.

As for Palestine, my brother, the Egyptians first used the root of the word. The Greeks called it Palestine. Here's Aristotle describing the Dead Sea: "Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake (λίμνη) in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them."

And, as noted above, the Romans called it Syrian Palestine. During the whole of the Byzantine era it was called Palestine. All the way up to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire when the British gave the name of Palestine Mandate to the people and their institutions of government.

Interesting, Glenn, that you think assassinating non-warring governors and bombing non-warring government offices is not terrorism. As someone who lives in NY, I'll call you anti-American and 9/11 denier.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Feodor,

You're being mr ass again.

Israel as a people still existed even after the land passed through the Greeks and Romans. As a full nation before splitting into Judah and Israel, the people may have split into different spheres, but often the divided kingdom is still referred to as Israel. Then the Assyrians and Babylonians took the people into captivity, but the land still belonged to Israel the people because God gave it to them.

Even after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and eradicated a nationality of Israel, there were still Israelites living in the land while most were in the diaspora. The land was still Israel's land, and still promised to them by God.

Palestine was a term used to describe the area, as an insult to the Jews because they were naming it after their enemies the Philistines, so it became known as the area of Palestine -- BUT it was never a nation. No nation of Palestine ever existed - just the name to describe the territory that was continually fought over after Israel was conquered.

You gave some history to the name, but you never demonstrated where it was a nation - only the designation of a territory governed by other people.

Israel was doing nothing more than re-capturing their land so that the would no longer be subjected to things like the Holocaust. The British refused to do as promised and became a target of war, as much as the surrounding Arab nations who didn't want Israel in that territory, because they don't want Jews to survive (Muslim leaders sided with Adolf because he was helping to get rid of the Jews).

You apparently have your own bias as to how people become independent against those who refuse to let them have their nation. So according to your definition of terrorists, England was NOT at war with the Colonies until AFTER colonialists started the war. So the colonials were terrorists by your definition.

You can call me "anti-American" and a "9/11 denier," but all those ad hominem attacks prove is that you are an ass who likes to use appellations which are false.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

For Feo

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-myth-of-israeli-collective-punishment/

Feodor said...

For Glenn, from a Jewish newspaper:

http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/.premium-1.608008?v=9D3E8191C0D2AFBE8F367C467342F6EB

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Sounds like a liberal.

There never was an intent to give up Gaza because of the need for security. IT was never intend to be allowed to be a separate "nation." It was one of those acts of giving land for peace, and the barbarian Muslims destroyed all the good Israel made of that land. They will do the same to every piece of land they take.

The proof is in the pudding. Did the barbarian Muslims become peaceful once they got Gaza? Absolutely not - it became a base for launching attacks.

By YOUR analogy, and the fraud of that liberal Jew (most Jews are liberal, by the way, especially in the USA), we should give the Mexicans Texas.

Feodor said...

Glenn, you're an intellectual coward. The author of the article you linked to begins his argument with this thesis: "Israel is fighting an enemy that insists on having all the advantages of a state and statelessness with none of the disadvantages."

From that first note, he's ruined.

What advantages of state does Palestine have? Do they control their own borders? They do not.

Do they control their ports? They do not.

Have they complete authority over Palestinian passports? No.

Do they control and supply thier own utilities? No.

Do they have a military for self-defense? No.

What "advantages of state" could you possibly identify?

As Roger Cohen recently wrote: "I am a Zionist because the story of my forebears convinces me that Jews needed the homeland voted into existence by United Nations Resolution 181 of 1947, calling for the establishment of two states — one Jewish, one Arab — in Mandate Palestine....

What I cannot accept, however, is the perversion of Zionism that has, for almost a half-century now, produced the systematic oppression of another people in the West Bank; that has led to the steady expansion of Israeli settlements on the very West Bank land of any Palestinian state; that isolates moderate Palestinians like Salam Fayyad in the name of divide-and-rule; that pursues policies that will make it impossible to remain a Jewish and democratic state; that seeks tactical advantage rather than the strategic breakthrough of a two-state peace; that blockades Gaza with 1.8 million people locked in its prison and is then surprised by the periodic eruptions of the inmates; and that responds disproportionately to attack in a way that kills hundreds of children. No argument, no Palestinian outrage or subterfuge, can gloss over what Jewish failure the killing of children in such numbers represents.

The Israeli case for the bombardment of Gaza could be foolproof. If Benjamin Netanyahu had made a good-faith effort to find common cause with Palestinian moderates for peace and been rebuffed, it would be. He has not. Hamas is vile. I would happily see it destroyed. But Hamas is also the product of a situation that Israel has reinforced rather than sought to resolve.

This corrosive Israeli exercise in the control of another people, breeding the contempt of the powerful for the oppressed, is a betrayal of the Zionism in which I still believe."

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Feodor,

You are an intellectual ass.

I'm not wasting my time with you any more on this string. You are anti-Israel, and facts will never get ion your way.

Feodor said...

Netanyahu and Likud are not the whole of Israel, Glenn. As always, the way of peace, not brutality will win with God's help. Not to mention that you need it, too to change your lying ways.

Craig said...

Not much time to deal with everything, but I had to note the 90 minute cease fire that Hamas broke. Surely the actions of folks yearning for peaceful coexistence.

Feodor said...

I know you conservatives have a hard time getting out of your rigid boxes but I didn't know your memory was so poor. As I wrote before, no one is defending Hamas, Craig. Try to hold two thoughts in your head at once: Hamas is nihilistic AND Israel is brutalizing the Palestinian people. This is the circular hell that needs to be stopped.

The world is criticizing the slaughter of Gazan peoples, though. You know, the women and children killed in UN shelter schools the locations of which the UN sends to Israel about 20 times just before an Israeli shell kills a few more. Or, when Gazan people are gathered in a food market and Israel - "committed" to strategic targeting - shells that, too.

The other main point is what this kind of behavior of the israeli government and military does to Israeli society. Using power to slaughter indiscriminately has an effect - despite Marshall's maniacal zeal. Or, rather, maybe we see the psychological effect of violent depravity in Marshall.

So Israel takes out all Gazan electricity; electricity runs the water supply. And they destroy the sewage system. So, sewage goes nowhere and there is no water. Diseases will compound and epidemics will waste more women and children.

Are these the actions of a people yearning for peaceful coexistence?

Craig said...

"Are these the actions of a people yearning for peaceful coexistence?"

No, they are the reactions of a society that would prefer not to have their innocent women and children terrorized by wanton, random rocket attacks and suicide bombers.

As to the UN school, I've seen reports suggesting that it was a Hamas rocket that went off course. I don't know that for sure, but I'd not let my knee jerk anti Israel stance prejudge that incident.

"This is the circular hell that needs to be stopped."

Which is, I believe, what Israel is trying to do. If Hamas is rendered impotent, then ground operation stops. It's pretty simple.

Feo, I know it's hard for you to grasp that not everything is about you, but in this case I'm not referring to you.


One interesting thing I've noticed coming from the American left (the spiritual but not religious left in particular), is the pacifists calling on Israel to stop the violence because violence never solves anything. Implicit in this plea, is that the violent tactics of Hamas will be rewarded. It's a great example of people who seem to have trouble with the concept that launching roughly 3000 rockets at your neighbor is the kind of behavior which might provoke a response. Further, if Hamas chooses to hide it's launching sites among civilians (according to their charter it's perfectly acceptable to use innocents as unwilling martyrs), why does it shock anyone that there are civilian casualties? Again, if one reads their charter, it's clear that Hamas wants (or at least accepts) these unwilling martyrs as a cost of doing business so to speak. But somehow, in the mind of some of the American left, it's up to Israel, to sit by, running to the bomb shelters on a daily basis. If Hamas cared about these civilians, perhaps they should spend the money they spend on rockets on protecting their civilian population.



Anyway, back to Feo, I find you concern for Israel touching, but somewhat misplaced. You express concern that the Gazan civilians killed in response to the Hamas attacks might impose some kind of psychological damage to the Israeli people, while seeming less concerned about the psychological (and physical) damage that living under the constant threat of attack might cause.

Again, your concern is touching, unfortunately the fact that you don't seem willing to assign any responsibility to Hamas is strange. Yes, you've condemned Hamas, but you still appear to be laying the blame for this almost entirely in Israel. As the statement below seems to indicate.

"What I have written is that Israel should be a people who seek to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors as well."

You quite clearly imply that Israel are not a people who "seek to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors". Yet we don't see Israel engaging militarily with any of their neighbors, except Hamas. I know it's hard to understand, but sometimes "harmony and peace" come by removing the threat.

Please, continue with the condescension, name calling and derision, it's such an effective tactic. I believe that it's time for me to slink off and nurse my hurt feelings.

Or not.

Craig said...

Feo,

How about this. Before you launch into a response to my last comment, let's try a simple direct question that I think might help me clarify things.

Would Israel be engaged in any military action against Hamas in Gaza if Hamas was not launching rockets and suicide bomb attacks from Gaza?

Craig said...

"The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) said it had found a cache of rockets at one of its schools in Gaza and deplored those who had put them there for placing civilians in harm's way. "This is yet another flagrant violation of the neutrality of our premises. We call on all the warring parties to respect the inviolability of UN property," said a spokesman."

Sorry, but even the UN says that Hamas is using UN shelters to hide munitions. Is this the action of a group that is yearning for peaceful coexistence?

Craig said...

"Hamas must stop attacking Israel with rocket attacks. That is how this started. It's completely unjustified and they need to stop as part of the ceasefire."

David Cameron

Feodor said...

"Are these the actions of a people yearning for peaceful coexistence?"

"No..."

Great, Craig! So we agree that Israel is not behaving in ways that will bring peace. And we agree that Hamas is vile.

Now that you are clear that where you stand (i.e. with Marshall: no violence is too violent), the only difference between is that you must think Israel's actions will bring about a solution. And I do not.

Given the history of the last 40 years since the Yom Kippur War or, if you prefer, the last 35 years since the Camp David accords, and how Israeli expansionist policies continued to provoke distrust in Palestinians (Secretary of State, James Baker's words, not mine)... I believe that it's clear that those who criticize Israel for disproportionate brutality are right. It's also clear that Israel just wants to keep the clock running without a two-state solution.

Feodor said...

As for the slaughter of the children, I've seen reports that Obama is to blame. These would be reports from cousins of the reports you throw up in order to smokescreen Israel.

Feodor said...

When Hamas is not launching rockets, Craig, you don't read the news from the region, do you?

When Hamas is not launching rockets, Israel continues to break international law and UN treaties to which it is a signatory by continuously building new settlements on Palestinian land. And then they fortify them.

When Hamas is not launching rockets, Craig, Israel continues to block any commercial trade by Palestinians. Israel controls the borders. Israel blockades the ports. Israel refuses delivery of fuel for the one, lone power plant producing that portion of electricity not supplied directly by Israel. When Hamas is not launching rockets, Craig, like this is the power plant than cannot operate in winters due to fuel shortages.

And this is the power plant that Israel just destroyed.

When Hamas is not launching rockets, Craig, Palestinian passports are controlled by Israel. And when Hamas is not launching rockets, Craig, Israel still refuses to let refugees back into Palestine from sixty, fifty and forty years ago --- refugees who only so because they were disposed of their land.

That is my answer to your question about when Hamas is no launching rockets. Facts with which you cannot engage.

And facts which will drive a brutalized people living in dense poverty to psychological passivity or madness. Thus.... Hamas, which Israel helped found, has a wedge.

Thanks to Israel's non-peace seeking behavior.

Craig said...

I guess asking for a simple straightforward answer was too much for you.

Given you inability to answer a straightforward question in a straightforward manner, and you insistence that Hamas bears minimal blame in this matter, I see nothing left worth exploring.

I follow the news from the region regardless of whether or not rockets are falling on Israel.

The fact remains, unprovoked random rocket, mortar, IED, and suicide attacks on ones neighbor are not the actions of a group looking for peace. Israel's reaction to said attacks fall squarely in the tradition of sovereign nations protecting their citizens.

Feodor said...

Yes, Craig, that's exactly what the whole world has been missing for the middle east all these many decades, a simple strait forward answer. Since you seem to think such a thing exists, please be sure to pass it up to Netanyahu. I just know he'll jump on any simple solution.

What's idiotic about your response is that I've written that Hamas is vile and nihilistic. Did you get that, Craig? Hamas is vile and nihilistic. And a terrorist group. Which is why I am astounded that you think we need to look to a vile, nihilistic, terrorist organization as the party that will change anything.

Compounded by the idiocy of NOT looking to the modern democratic nation state of Israel to change the dynamic.

You write as if you think the best strategy is to ask Hamas to change. But you don't put two and two together and realize that what we agree Hamas is is precisely the kind of people that will not change. And given that we are in near agreement of what Israel is (according to you) or has been at times and can be again (according to me), which is an internationally cooperating, leading participant in the peace process, you still can't put two and two together and realize that this is the only place to look for change in this conflict.

The only place we are leaving this is that you think the strategies of the last three to four decades are going to work.

Marshall Art said...

The idiocy is in assuming, pretending or insisting that the people who call themselves "Palestinians" are anything less than complicit in the vile and nihilistic actions of Hamas. You may recall that the people voted in favor of Hamas over Fatah. These are a people who send their own kids to kill themselves in a most heinous manner, in order to kill as many Israelis as possible. They dress their kids in military fatigues and teach them hatred of anyone who is Jewish, and they don't treat anyone not muslim much better.

Israel, ever since the Balfour Declaration, has offered to live in peace and protect the rights of non-Jews in what was called Palestine, an area largely inhabited by Jews since before Christ. They've given back Gaza and they shelled as a thank you. They've offered all sorts of "land for peace" arrangements only to be rebuffed by Palestinian leaders over "right of return" for people who abandoned their properties in hopes of Jewish annihilation in the late 1940's. These "refugees" are mostly not. At the same time, while these "refugees" were hoping for the end of the new state of Israel, there were also Jewish refugees of about the same number driven off, that is ACTUALLY driven off Arab lands, and no one speaks of them or their right to return to properties on which they had lived for generations.

feo's is an entirely one-sided perspective, while mine is one that attends to both sides equally and sees no justification for talk of moral relativism.

feo continues to speak of disproportionate responses by Israel, when what the truth is is that they are simply better at military tactics. Add to that the fact that Hamas purposely puts their own people in the way of any attack as a way to ramp up sympathy for them and hate for Israel, and it is no wonder far more arabs die than Israelis. That is not Israeli brutality like fools such as feo and his ilk like to pretend. That is military effectiveness compounded by Palestinian stupidity and evil.

As to what Israel does regarding border checks, blocking free travel in and out of Gaza, turning off power...all of that is the result of the constant attacks upon their people by those feo prefers to characterize as victims. Bullshit. They are willingly martyring themselves for the cause of islam as they see it.

Billions of dollars from various sources have flowed into Gaza in order to relieve the suffering and assist in their development. Instead of hospitals and homes and other services, they spend that money on missiles, tunnels and tools for use in the goal of Jewish annihilation.

The Pallies have no claim to that land or any. They are remnants of arabs from surrounding countries who have turned their backs on them in order to use them as propaganda tools in the common cause of destroying Israel.

My post suggests a clear path that is the one path all nations have used in order to win a war...and this is a war that will continue as long as Jew haters believe they have a chance of success and opportunity to try. Wars are won not by surgical strikes seeking to avoid civilian casualties. That takes the focus off the end goal, which is the total destruction or unconditional surrender of the enemy. I don't see arab Jew haters as willing to surrender, unless it is to regroup and start afresh. History has borne this out time and time again.

Thus, my suggestion is to hit them hard with extreme prejudice. This is not because I enjoy violence, but that I have seen absolutely no evidence of any kind that suggests Israel's enemies truly wish to live in peace with them. So, beat them into submission. So many lives will be saved in doing so. So much future suffering will be prevented.

Marshall Art said...

feo's responses throughout this "discussion" have been typical of a deceitful person like him. Calling me a liar, when he has never been able to prove I've lied about anything (and this is not even claim that I never lie at all, but never on this, or any other blog that he could ever find).

It also contains some incredibly stupid stuff from a guy who likes to posture himself as highly educated and well read with wisdom that should astound. Earlier, he made an incredibly (but oh so typically) idiotic statement that demonstrates both his deceit and his stupidity. He claims I am fixated on numbers and don't care how many die. What a preposterous lie the false priest puts forth. I would prefer the arabs stop attacking Israel, then no one would die. This has always been my position. But accepting that such will never happen until Israel puts itself in total jeopardy, the only logical solution requires an all out military option, destroying as much of the Hamas population as possible, even if it means their supporters (the Palestinians) die in the process. Allowing any room for movement by Hamas means Israelis are at risk.

But the idiot feo believes that Israel's responses, given with warnings that normal people would take as encouragement to get the hell out of the way of the attack, signify brutality on Israel's part. He continues to bring up the UN school. But those people had three days to book before the attack came and they were still there when it did. That's not Israel's fault and NO army sends people in to make sure the civilians have evacuated after having been given fair warning. It's not like Israel hasn't given warnings before. The Pallies purposely keep civilians around to die for propaganda purposes. Many of them are happy to do so.

The death ration cannot help but be slanted in Israel's favor. They care too much for human life for that to be otherwise, and the hateful arabs continue to state they love death.

Then, feo tries this idiocy about "support vs help to form". Little leagues and Boy/Girl Scouts have as their purpose the formation of adults of character. Israel did not seek to form Hamas, but only to supplant the secular terrorists who preceded them. That they regarded them as a charitable organization was a mistake they would rather not have made, but it was not to see them grow as much as it was to see Hamas secular predecessor disappear. So no. Israel did not "help form" Hamas. That's stupid.

Feodor said...

Only someone writing with a primitive mind can put these phrases together in less than five sentences:

"He claims I am fixated on numbers and don't care how many die... the only logical solution requires an all out military option, destroying as much of the Hamas population as possible, even if it means their supporters (the Palestinians) die in the process."

If ever insanity and idiocy were so married as they are in Marshall, it would take some hours, maybe days to remember.
_________________

"He continues to bring up the UN school. But those people had three days to book before the attack came and they were still there when it did. That's not Israel's fault and NO army sends people in to make sure the civilians have evacuated after having been given fair warning."

"United Nations officials accused Israel of violating international law after artillery shells slammed into a school overflowing with evacuees Wednesday, an attack that Palestinian and U.N. officials said killed at least 20 people and wounded dozens as they slept.It was one of the worst mass-casualty incidents of the three-week war. The building was the sixth U.N. school in the Gaza Strip to be rocked by explosions during the conflict.

The U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which operated the school-turned-shelter in the Jabalya refugee camp, said it had gathered evidence, analyzed bomb fragments and examined craters after the attack. Its initial assessment was that three Israeli artillery shells hit the school where 3,300 people had sought refuge.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said “all available evidence points to Israeli artillery as the cause” of the pre-dawn attack.

Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, a senior spokesman for the Israeli military, called the shelling of the U.N. school “a true tragedy,” and said the incident is under investigation."

Lieutenant Lerner seems to disagree with Marshall. As does international law.

This is just many of the ways in which you lie, Marshall. In this way, it is because you don't know the law. And when you are informed of the law, you lie by saying that it's not really a law or not a good one or not one that anyone has to follow. Even if Israel has signed on to it.

"Ban said Israel had received the precise GPS coordinates of the school from the United Nations 17 times."
____________

"The death ration cannot help but be slanted in Israel's favor. They care too much for human life for that to be otherwise..."

Unreal irrationality.

Feodor said...

Since Craig has bled all sense out and Marshall has been a zombie throughout, I'm out. No more reason to be made, just jousting with idiocy.

And, truth be told, I have to turn my attention to imminent vacation. Istanbul with daughter and Italy with my black wife the week after. Eat your heart out, Marshall.

Marshall Art said...

"Only someone writing with a primitive mind can put these phrases together in less than five sentences"

Only someone with a morally corrupted mind can pretend there is some incongruity in those phrases. I do indeed care how many die. But nothing Israel has ever done or tried to do to placate the feo-like evil that is the Palestinian arabs has ever done anything to end the killing because the feo-like evil that is the Palestinian arabs want to kill. They are the latest incarnation of the many centuries of muslim hatred for the Jews. They are the latest incarnation of those arab nations that sought to annihilate Israel following the formation of Israel in 1948. They are not victims of Israel. They are victims of themselves who are willing to kill their own to posture themselves as victims of Israel oppression.

Israel, from way back in the early 1900's, was willing to allow that all who had previously lived in the territory known as Palestine should have their rights and privileges protected. Nowhere in the Middle East to peoples of disparate ancestries have as much liberty and freedom to pursue one's happiness as in Israel, and that includes arabs who call themselves Palestinians.

At the same time, no where in the arab world do non-muslims enjoy any true liberty and freedom that isn't mitigated by the islamic despotism.

"If ever insanity and idiocy were so married as they are in Marshall..."

...it would take feo the rest of his life, and then some, and the sad, pathetic fraud could not make the case. It is enough for him to accuse and demonize.

feo defaults to the cowardly "too complex" defense, which is the leftist's common tactic when he cannot support his untenable position. "You just don't understand", he would say as the gaping flaws of his position are exposed.

But he is indeed so typical. He cherry picks points that support his position. He cites Israelis that side with him, as if that means those that don't are somehow wrong in their belief that stronger action is required to end the attacks. Every country has its Chamberlains, and Israel is not exception. He cites a leftist Peter Beinart, a loon with whom I am quite familiar having heard him as a weekly guest on the Hugh Hewitt show, and a piece he wrote for the Israeli version of the New York Times, and that's supposed to be worth something.

Marshall Art said...

What we're dealing with here is the typical lefty position in deciding right vs wrong. America is wrong because it is successful. Big corporations are wrong because they're successful. Israel is wrong because it is successful. To the lefty, achievement means someone did something to someone else and thus, they are suspect in every conflict. Israel is free and thriving, providing an atmosphere of entrepreneurship for everyone, including arabs citizens (who have all the rights every Jew has), so obviously they are evil and deserving of constant attacks by Palestinians.

Again, the situation is not complex and hard to understand: one side intends to see the other side destroyed. That side isn't capable of being successful in that endeavor. feo then sees them as the victim because the other side is successful in defending themselves.

feo accuses Netanyahu of obstructing progress in the peace process. This is blatant stupidity as Benny is tasked with the responsibility of protecting his people and nation. He knows his neighbors. feo doesn't want to know them, because he hates Jews. His hatred is evidenced by his position on this issue, his posting a single piece about one soldier and pretending that is commonplace and problematic to the point that it overshadows what provoked it...the continual shelling of Israel, suicide bombers and other forms of aggression by Gazans.

feo insists that Israel is the cause of the Gazans' suffering and inability to thrive. But he ignores the facts that lead to what he perceives as Israeli oppression, which is merely Israel's logical mistrust of a people that teach their children to hate Jews. This hatred permeates Gazan society and justifies the lengths to which Israel must go to protect themselves. What idiot, aside from feo, would expect anyone to trust those who constantly attack them and teach their kids to hate them?

Marshall Art said...

Here are two better explanations of the situation than anything feo has dug out from his backside:

http://wilderness-cry.net/tcn/palestinians/truth.html

http://www.targetofopportunity.com/palestinian_truth.htm

I chose them for the comprehensive yet concise presentation of the history of the dispute.

Here are some notable quotes:

"The existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity" - Zoheir Muhsin, head of the PLO Military Operations Department and member of the PLO Executive Council (1977)



"On no accounts will the Palestinians accept part of Palestine and call it a Palestinian state, while forfeiting the remaining areas which are called the State of Israel." - Rafiq Najshah, PLO representative in Saudi Arabia (June 9, 1980)



"The Struggle with the Zionist enemy is not a struggle about Israel's borders, but about Israel's existence. We will never agree to anything less than the return of all our land and the establishment of the independent state." - Bassam Abu Sharif, PLO spokesman (May 31, 1986)

There is also this:

http://zionism-israel.com/Balfour_Declaration_1917.htm

...in which we can see where feo referred to Zionist leaders requesting to set up in Africa. It is not as feo alludes and it is not something that reflected unanimous thinking at the time by Israeli leaders.

Marshall Art said...

feo spoke earlier of proportionality as some sort of "ancient Christian" tenet. What nonsense. We, as individuals, are instructed to turn the other cheek, but not to allow someone to kill us. This trumped OT law regarding "an eye for an eye" which only meant that, as individuals we are not to exact more than was done to us. Neither of these concepts refers to how a government protects its people from aggression by foreign forces. Indeed, God led the tribes of Israel to slaughter those who He judged as deserving of such. Israel now, is faced with constant unprovoked attacks by a people sworn to their total annihilation. My position is in support of swift and complete destruction of those people and those who support them barring their unconditional surrender beforehand. This is the only logical response to such an unrepentant reprobate aggressor. I wish it was not so, but nothing the Gazans suffer is not attributable to their own malfeasance. The change must come from them, not Israel. It should be enough that they have land to which they are not entitled. It hasn't been and as we can see from the links above, it is not so in their own minds. How does one negotiate with such people in a manner that results in confidence one hasn't just put one's self in continued jeopardy? feo can't hope to answer this very pertinent question because he pretends the two sides are, at best, equal in their motives giving Israel the edge in evil intent. What can I say? Assholes think like that.

Speaking of which, he once again thinks he mitigates that self-promoted opinion of himself by posting yet another comment of pretentious crap. Somehow, this false priest believes that I give a flying rat's ass about his vacation plans, or that I am some kind of covetous lefty that would "eat my heart out" over hearing of them. My, but he does like to project!

Feodor said...

A serendipity:

You should remember that the British were bombed and suffered assassination, as well, in both India and Northern Ireland -- in the case of Northern Ireland the terror came into London as well. The occupying British ideology made the same kinds of arguments as your excessively pro-Israel mind does and so much of the rest of England and the US.

What has finally stopped the bombings, the assassinations, the kidnappings of British people? Retaliation? No. England realized it had to leave India and Northern Ireland to govern themselves. The greater power had to bow. Only then were its people more safe. Kind of gospel-like process, really. Stop hating your enemy first, the enemy will, in time, stop hating you.

It's time for Israel to unilaterally allow Palestine to set up shop as a nation, to control its own borders, its own ports, its own passports, its own electricity, water system, sewage system, commercial licenses, land development... all of it.

Only then will the missiles stop.

Marshall Art said...

You're an idiot. The comparisons are lame. Neither the Irish or Indians wished to annihilate the entirety of Great Britain. Neither the Irish or the Indians were trying to pretend they were of a land that wasn't traditionally theirs, claiming a nationality that didn't exist. The British themselves were never considered Irish or Indian as the Jews were considered Palestinian.

Israel is not occupying a land that belongs to someone else, though they themselves are willing to spend the rest of eternity pretending that there is such a people called "Palestinians".

None of the above is a fortunate surprise to one who does not try to defend evil. It is obvious disparity where a weasel tries to sell commonality. Stop being a weasel. Stop trying to pretend you know what you are talking about. Stop with the obvious lunacy that you might in any way be intellectually superior to anyone. Repent and sin no more.

Feodor said...

The other thing is that the foods are totally different. Nothing alike.

Marshall Art said...

And stop trying to be clever. You aren't because you lack the intelligence to be so.

Feodor said...

OK, last (promise) comment: go to leave and happy we'll have several hours in Vienna on our way to Istanbul, but I couldn't bear to leave you guys in such ignorance.

Both of you seem to draw a lot of emotion from thinking that the Palestinian Authority or Hamas or both or just all Arabs or all Muslims throughout the world declare in charters that Israel should be destroyed, right?

Well, you guys, as always, are way behind the times and absolutely misinformed by your prejudicial sources of "news."

Here's a fact: Hamas too out that declaration in their charter in 2006.

Here's a counter fact, up to date within the last month, that exposes the imbalance of your ignorance: Netanyahu stated that Israel will never accept a real Palestinian state. "“I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: There cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."

Have fun spinning your instinctive needs to lie about this.

Marshall Art said...

We haven't lied about anything, and you've yet to prove we have. Good luck with that since we neither have lied or have a need to do so.

"Both of you seem to draw a lot of emotion from thinking that the Palestinian Authority or Hamas or both or just all Arabs or all Muslims throughout the world declare in charters that Israel should be destroyed, right?"

No. Way to pay attention. We've stated that Hamas has it in their charter. We've acknowledged that many arab leaders of muslim persuasion insist that Israel must be destroyed. We also acknowledge that there exist arabs and muslims that do not wish to bring harm upon anyone, but that they do not stand up to those who do in any measurable number. For example, I am quite aware that the son of the founder of Hamas rejects them entirely, and has converted to Christianity. Show some honor and integrity and resist your shameful urge to regard us with condescension and as if we are the haters. That reflects poorly on your already greatly tarnished character.

I have no issue with Netanyahu. He knows his opponents far better than lefty apologists for evil like yourself. He is quite right in taking his position due the history of the situation. Those who, unlike yourself, don't live with their heads up their backsides, realize the threat that exists and that to "relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan" is suicidal.

You'll need to learn something before you can accuse anyone of ignorance. I won't hold my breath.

Feodor said...

Ph"We've stated that Hamas has it in their charter."

That's the lie. Which you repeatedly tell so you can hype yourself up.

2006:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jan/12/israel

Feodor said...

That and the lie that Israel is peace loving altogether.

"In the weeks since then we have seen organized lynch mobs of Israeli youths prowling the streets of Jerusalem at night in search of Palestinians who have the misfortune to be passing by. Many restaurants and bars in downtown Jerusalem employ Palestinian waiters and kitchen staff; they tend to get off work around midnight or 1 AM, when they have to go home to their neighborhoods. Those are the dangerous hours. Dozens have been attacked. On July 25, two Palestinian men, Amir Jalal Shweiki and Samir Mahfuz, both twenty, were beaten unconscious near the northeast Jerusalem neighborhood of Neve Yaakov. They are still in the hospital. There have also been unconfirmed reports of incidents where the police either stood by or joined in with right-wing thugs, for example on July 24 when two Palestinians, Amir Mazin Abu Eisha and Laith Ubeidat, who were delivering bread to stores on Jaffa Road in downtown Jerusalem, were savagely attacked.

A particularly terrible case occurred in early July when a train of the Light Rail, the electric tram, was surrounded in the border between east and west Jerusalem by an Israeli mob screaming “Death to Arabs!” A Palestinian Ph.D. student in Islamic studies at the Hebrew University, a woman well known to my colleagues, was caught in the tram and witnessed passengers trying to shove another Palestinian woman, a young mother with her baby, out of the carriage, into the hands of the mob."

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/aug/02/palestine-hatred-and-hope/?insrc=hpss

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Feo needs to actually read the Qur'an and the Hadiths which teach the destruction of Jews. They teach that the world is to be made submissive to Islam.

Feo also needs to just look at the history of Islam.

Ah, but the facts get in the way of his revisionist history.

Feodor said...

Mr Militant Christian has not and will not follow his own advice. He's just repeating what he's heard.

"And they say: None shall enter the garden (or paradise) except he who is a Jew or a Christian. These are their vain desires. Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.

And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists."

The Quran claims that Muslims take their place ALONG WITH Jews and Christians in salvation because all three believe in the one God.

And the there is this snippet of history which Glenn knows nothing about, nor countless others. Or even modern day Turkey and Indonesia.

And why does Glenn not know or perceive? Because he's a racist hater.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0316168718?pc_redir=1406785561&robot_redir=1

Feodor said...

[2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.

Marshall Art said...

There is no, as yet, widespread acceptance of any changes to the Hamas charter. As islam allows for lies to be told in support of islamic goals, one must take anything Hamas says with a grain of salt and a wait and see attitude. This is the attitude currently held by those like Netanyahu, who understand the character of Israel's foes.

Finding cases of Israeli acts of violence does not change the equation at all, especially since nothing said here by me, Craig or Glenn suggest absolute angelic perfection in the whole of Israel. That would be of the type of deceitfulness you find so compelling in your cherry-picked links to less than common occurrences. Are their Israelis who have come to hate anyone who even looks like those who have for decades carried out unprovoked attacks on the Israeli population? No doubt, and only a liar like yourself, feo, would suggest anyone here has tried to state otherwise.

What is true is the history of the region as has been presented here as the impetus for the strife in this region and the fact of islamic, "palestinian" and Hamas hatred for Israel and its people. Is that hatred absolute throughout the whole of even Gaza, much less the muslim world? Again, only you would suggest that such reflects the position of those of us in support of Israel over the illegitimate claims and demands of those calling themselves "Palestinians".

There's no dancing going on here that isn't done by you. There is no lying or hype or spinning of the realities of the situation being done by anyone but you and other Jew haters who see only the results of Pallie behavior and insist on calling it Israeli oppression. You support the lie.

The fact remains. Of the two people, only one side is in danger of constant attack by the other. Only one side is victimized by the widespread hatred of the other. It is not the Pallies, who are in their situation because of the the actions of their leaders and the civilians who support them. To pretend that a nation like Israel should withstand constant attacks upon its people and remain Christlike in their response is idiocy of the highest order, and if there is anyone uniquely qualified to be a useful idiot for the pro-Pallie cause, it is you. Rational people are not surprised that there would exist among the Israelis both the extremely fed up as well as the self-loathing you cite as expert sources on the reality of the situation.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Feo the ass has libeled me again. With as many lies as he tells, he must be a tool of Satan.

I am NOT a "militant Christian" - never have been. Nor am I a "racist hater"

And he really has no clue about what Islam really teaches - he just spews the same old media propaganda. I've read the Qur'an and much Hadith.

Islam has one agenda - the subjugation of the world. Enablers like Feo and his Idol Obama are part of the problem.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Try reading this one, FEO:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/what_does_hamas_want.html

And how about we cite all the chronologically later surahs in the Qur'an after Mohammed was angry with the Jews for not accepting him as a prophet?

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Here's information about how innocent Feo's heroes the Hamas are:
http://www.idfblog.com/blog/2014/08/04/captured-hamas-combat-manual-explains-benefits-human-shields/

Craig said...

"Yes, Craig, that's exactly what the whole world has been missing for the middle east all these many decades, a simple strait forward answer."

This is why it is pointless to have conversations of this sort with people like Feo and Dan.

I quite clearly asked Feo a simple direct question, for which he should have been able to provide a simple direct answer.

Not only did he choose not to answer the question asked, he then decided to misrepresent both my original question as well as my response to his non answer.

Frustrating, yes. Surprising, no.



One must, however, find dome level of irony in the whole Finnish reporter witnesses rockets being fired from a hospital, then complaining when people pick up the story and widely report it. It makes one wonder how much of the "news reporting" which folks like Feo use to reinforce their preconceptions is really anywhere close to accurate.

Marshall Art said...

Note feo's muslim quote of August 4, 2014 at 5:47 PM, as well as this:

"The Quran claims that Muslims take their place ALONG WITH Jews and Christians in salvation because all three believe in the one God"

feo hasn't the intelligence, or perhaps it's his famous lack of honesty (hard to tell---it could be both) to see the obvious problem. What islam is teaching is based on their understanding of their god. Jews and Christians DO NOT believe in the same God, just as feo doesn't believe in the One True God of Judeo-Christian tradition. The God of Jews and Christians is NOT the same god of the muslims. The only way Jews and Christians can believe in the same god as muslims is to convert to islam. This is easy for a fake and a false priest like feo, but for those truly devoted to their faith, not so much.

Craig said...

For someone who was quick to point out that he had to leave this conversation, it's interesting to see how he just can't leave.

Of course, he also had to point out the he (and his black wife) are jetting off to Europe to go hobnob with Robin Leach or whatever. Must be nice to have the time and disposable income.

One can't forget that the fact that Feo is married to a black woman gives his some sort of assumed superiority in his mind. Next thing you know he'll tell us she's Palestinian as well.

FYI, there is a great interview with a representative of Hamas out there where he is asked about the whole "wipe Israel off the map" part of their charter, his response is a masterpiece of failing to actually answer the question while managing to blame everyone else but Hamas.



In a spirit of fairness, I will agree with a couple of things Feo seems to be saying.

1. IF the destruction of the UN site is demonstrated to be the fault of Israel, (especially if it was intentional) then Israel should do whatever is needed to make restitution. I would say the same about the power plant.

2. I also agree that Israel (and Egypt) should loosen the restrictions on Gaza.

However I have some concerns about #2.

a. There needs to be a legitimate government that can enforce laws, borders, etc in place and recognized by the international community.

b. There would need to be an immediate and total cessation of all attacks across the border from both sides.

c. Hamas, must be disarmed, and disbanded.

d. There would need to be some mechanism in place that would allow swift and decisive action in the even of continued attacks from Gaza into Israel, as well as delineated sanctions against Israel in the event of an unprovoked attack into Gaza.

Personally, I suspect that Israel could wash her hands of Gaza tomorrow, give Hamas everything they ask for, and it wouldn't do a thing to stop the rocket, mortar, and suicide bomber attacks. Again, I find it somewhat ironic that the pacifist left says violence never works, yet they support Hamas getting what they want as a result of violence.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Here's one for Feo:

http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemoshelian/2014/08/05/critical-of-israel-then-you-do-better-at-getting-rid-of-hamas-without-harming-any-palestinians-n1874465/page/full

Craig said...

MA,

A thought just hit me about your title to this post.

While I agree with the general sentiment, I'd suggest that it's not the "Palestinians" who are the problem. The problem is the PLO or Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood or any of the militant terrorist groups. In reality these groups probably treat the ordinary "Palestinians" worse than Israel ever has.

I realize it's a bit nit picky, but it's probably worth making the distinction.

Marshall Art said...

Craig,

While I can appreciate the sentiment that there's a difference between a people and their leaders or rulers, I don't know that it necessarily applies here. At least not to the extent that their defenders would suggest. They appear, by and large, far more in tune with the goals of Hamas, or even Fatah or the PLO, for my taste. As I mentioned earlier, I still remember the dancing in the streets on 9/11, and I the videos I saw included many women amongst the celebrants. They seem quite willing to send their children with suicide vests. They seem overjoyed at the murder of Jews and the "martyrdom" of their own. I don't think it takes a genius to see the danger of having Hamas place weapons batteries and ammo dumps amongst the civilian population and neighborhoods, in their schools, hospitals and mosques. In addition, I've never heard of any faction within the palestinian civilian population that seeks assistance in fighting against Hamas on their own, as we saw in Iran (which Obama ignored). No. What seems to be the case is complicity on the part of the average pallie citizen. To what extent is hard to say with accuracy, but it does seem to me to be far more than a what a loving family could tolerate.

No doubt the citizens are likely under the thumb of the more deadly muslims, but how many of them are actually looking to get out from under it? That's the question for me and I haven't even heard the question asked. All we get is the rhetoric that they are an oppressed people victimized by Israel and their own leaders. When I hear of anything akin to an uprising of these people against Hamas or the MB, then I'll feel there is reason to reassess.

I will say, however, that I do hope such is true of the "ordinary" pallie. I just think it is not in Israel's interest, or ours, to assume any such thing based on their history.

Craig said...

MA,

I think that if you look at the history, the manipulation of the "Palestinians' by the various nations and organizations is just appalling. From the moment the various leaders told them to vacate Israel so the Jews could be wiped out, they've been marginalized and manipulated for the benefit of others.

I agree with your observations, I just think that given past history, I'd be slow to lump the man on the street in with the leaders.

Just my opinion.

Marshall Art said...

Well, I think it's not too massive a stretch to say we cannot be too confident either way as to the innocence or complicity of the "average" Pallie. I just think at some point, we'd hear something about some faction within that population that is serious about freeing themselves from all that manipulation, someone to whom it would make sense to support with both arms and money. At this point, I don't see anything remotely resembling such a faction. We've seen it before, just not with these people. Thus, I suspect they are more on the side of complicity than pure victimhood. I'd really like to see somebody step up. It has to come from within.

Craig said...

MA,

I don't totally disagree with you. I just think that the fact that the Muslim nations surrounding Israel have treated that "palestinians" worse than Israel has, while placing the blame on Israel is a factor that can't be ignored.

How many thousands of these people went to Jordan, where they were put in camps, kept in camps, and are (or their descendents( still in camps. Why is there a demand that Israel grant this mass of people citizenship, while Jordan (and other countries) refuse?

Anyway, I just wouldn't be quick to broad brush an entire group of people.

Craig said...

I heard a great statement today, I'll paraphrase.

There are two kinds of people, combatants and non combatants. Israel, in targeting combatants, inadvertently causes non combatant casualties. While Hamas intentionally targets non combatants.


Not to mention hides behind non combatants as more and more videos from Gaza are showing.

Unfortunately Hamas won't attack the Israeli combatants, won't protect it's own non combatants, while targeting Israeli non combatants. While expecting everyone to buy into the exact opposite.

Marshall Art said...

That's about the size of it.

Feodor said...

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rana-baker/palestinians-express-solidarity-people-ferguson-mike-brown-statement

Of course. All oppressed people recognize each other. Like the right thinking Jews and Palestinians recognize each other.
________________

Istanbul was fantastic! Muslims and Christians, Buddhists and Confucians all seeing the sights together and hosted by incredibly friendly Turks.

Vision of heaven.

Marshall Art said...

Wow! Can your fraudulent nature be more exposed than by the posting of this incredibly biased report? I don't think so. "False priest" apparently doesn't go far enough in describing the extremely low character of feo!

How unsurprising that feo finds value in the statement from a people who send their children to blow themselves up in order to kill civilian Israelis! How unsurprising that he regards rioters in Missouri as "oppressed people".

To feo, this is how it works: perceived "oppression" (that is, real or imagined) is best addressed by destroying the property of one's own neighbors and stealing their stuff.

This Ferguson case appears to be merely another example of someone choosing to ignore the request of a law enforcement officer (one who is highly regarded) and then whining about what results. This all could have been avoided had Brown simply acted like a law-abiding citizen in response to the officer who shot him. But since the store video suggests he was not beyond suspicion, he acted like a guilty person and is now dead as a result. The protestors are not justified in their protests.

And feo is not justified in his opinions that the people of Ferguson and the Pallies are "oppressed". What a sorry, pathetic individual he is!

Feodor said...

Sorry, can't joust with fools. Off to Capri for a week and then Rome for a few days with my dusky skinned wife. Expecting great food at Renata and Louisa in Rome. Ciao, o ye of little, grey -and cold protestant worlds.

Feodor said...

Except to say that the video shows young Mr Brown, of course, paying for his 50 cent cigars, Marshall, you racist thug.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

With all the lies Feo tells, are we really supposed to believe he goes on all these trips, who is wife is (if he is even married) or anything else he claims about his life?!?!?

The man uses a pseudonym so he can't be checked. He is a foolish false priest not to be trust with anything he says.

Marshall Art said...

feo has the audacity to call others "fools". He constantly behaves in a manner that belies his claims of being a Christian, a seminary grad, a teacher of the faith.

But, I haven't seen any footage showing Brown paying for anything. I've looked and haven't found any but the same clip showing him pushing around the much smaller store clerk. Apparently, we're not to assume anything about such a person even with this evidence. But, if feo has a clip showing him paying, he should present it.

What's more, I never said anything but that the clip shows him pushing around the clerk. How this makes me a racist thug, even a race baiter like feo couldn't explain.

feo loves stories like that that he can join in in twisting it into an example of racism and police brutality. He needs to perpetuate the stereotypes of a John Bull police force because he cannot speak to the real issues plaguing the black community. He isn't capable. Thus, that community will continue to suffer due to the enabling of idiots like him.

Feodor said...

http://sfbayview.com/2014/08/mike-brown-appears-to-have-paid-for-those-cigars/

And... The merchant never called the police. Because it wasn't a robbery, you presumptive racist thug.

Capri had a lot of rain today.

Marshall Art said...

You'll have to wait for a few days before I can take time to adequately respond to this latest pile of totally biased, leftist, race - baiting manure that is so typical of you. In the meantime, with your every post, you demonstrate that you are not the Christian you claim to be. Indeed, it is crystal clear.

Trần Văn Quảng said...

Kiem tra ten mien
Tao web mien phi
Mẹo vặt cuộc sống
Ten mien mien phi
Dien dan hoc seo
Làm đẹp

Trần Văn Quảng said...

Trung tâm inet cung cấp các dịch vụ về tên miền Kiem tra ten mien giúp các bạn check domain free
Chúng tôi cho phép các bạn tạo web miễn phí trên nền tảng webtin Tao web mien phi hoặc thiết kế web bán hàng trọn gói nếu các bạn có nhu cầu
Chuyên trang cung cấp các Mẹo vặt cuộc sống chia sẻ bí quyết làm đẹp, nấu ăn, mẹo vặt gia đình, kiến thức giới tính
Đăng ký nhận Ten mien mien phi tại trung tâm tên miền inet
Blog Trần Văn Quảng chia sẻ tâm sự, thủ thuật hay cùng những bài viết hay về cuộc sống, kinh doanh
Cách Ga choi hay .Hướng dẫn xem vảy gà chọi hay để giúp các bạn chọn được những chiến kê xuất sắc