<strong>LIke those seven nuns who got hurt when the started shelling a church yesterday?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe if the pussy Palestinians didn't storm the church with guns blazing, taking refuge in a house of worship. But of course you have no problem with that.............................................. .........
Yeah i was perplexed by that statement too. They storm a church and shoot at Israeli soldiers from with-in.... but the Israelis can't shoot back? Just because they're in a church? Yeah that makes sense.
i've got that(or a similar) marking on my scalp... i always thought it was 999 though and it's right inside the hairline... it looks kinda like a tatoo but it's welpy too, like it was burned in... anyhoo, i've had it since before i can remember and my folks always maintained that it was just a birthmark.
cuss, 666 is just a derivative of my birthdate. No markings on me, sorry.
A MUST READ for all here. Its an email from an Israeli full of history, current events and a view you're unlikely to find in the news, especially in Europe. Its a long letter, but very well written:
Sadam just raised the price on a suicide bomber. you (well, your family) now get $25,000 if you blowyourself up and take out some jews on your way out. Nice.
so yer saying arafat's not behind the suicide bombings? that he couldn't stop them if he wanted to?
hmm, interesting...
cuss
p.s. i finally got around to reading 'danny's' letter. it's sad... but i found one thing that disturbs me a bit too much. he said that the palestinians would kill any jews on sight. well, if they were hasidics i could see that working well.... otherwise, how can you tell them apart?
Well, I read Danny's letter to. And found it quite moving, as it echoes the fright and security concerns of my other Israeli and Palestine friends.
But he is totally wrong on two things.
1. Firstly a lot of non-arabs and non-muslims live in the palestinian territory, and have done so for decades. Even caucasians (!), A LOT of them... Americans study at the the University in Ramallah, and Christian pilgrims have been the main source of income (tourism) in places like Nazareth and Betlehem. (Both in the palestinian territories)... Jews live there as well, and a jewish peace activist has been the guest of Arafat for the last days. (I'm not sure if he is there now).
2. Secondly, his history references are totally wrong. Both on the Balfour Declaration and his version of the Sinai war in 1973 and the following peace. His other historical references are also quite "biased" and reflect the standard zionist way of justifing the occupations and anexing of palestinian land and property.
The fact that this is published on a right-wing site, that has absolutly nothing positive to say about the palestinians, and nothing negative to say about the Israelis...
---
I'd also like to bring your attention to this article written by Yossi Beilin, the former Israeli justice minister in the government led by Ehud Barak, and Yasser Abed Rabbo, the minister of culture and information in the Palestinian Authority.
A Mideast Partnership Can Still Work
by Yasser Abed Rabbo and Yossi Beilin
Last week we and 50 of our colleagues Â? Palestinian and Israeli political and cultural leaders Â? signed a declaration that was published simultaneously in Israeli and Palestinian newspapers. Our declaration did not attempt to solve every aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather, at this most tragic and difficult of times in the Middle East, it attempted to state unequivocally those principles on which we believe a solution can be based.Â*
In our statement, we called for an end to bloodshed, an end to occupation, a return to negotiation and the realization of peace between our peoples. None of us would have signed this statement if we did not believe its objectives could be achieved. Even in the midst of ongoing violence, we do not believe we are deluding ourselves when we profess our belief in the fundamental humanity of the other side, or our faith that we do have partners for peace in each other and that a negotiated solution is still possible.Â*
Lost in the noise and clouds of war is the fact that a formula does exist for resolving all the outstanding issues in our conflict: the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which would lead to the existence of two sovereign national states Â? Israel and Palestine Â? which would be the fulfillment of the aspiration of both peoples, Palestinian and Jewish, to statehood based on the 1967 borders, with both capitals in Jerusalem. Israeli and Palestinian negotiators made great progress in their discussions of this solution during the talks that took place between November 1999 and January 2001.Â*
As two people who participated in the negotiations at Taba in January 2001, we can personally testify to having been extremely, even agonizingly, close to reaching an agreement. In our assessment, the main missing ingredient was quality time, as is needed in any negotiation in which both sides must give up what they desire for what is possible.Â*
Over the past year, an impression has been created by some of the participants that the talks at Camp David represented the final word on the search for Middle East peace. This distortion of that event ignores both President Bill Clinton's ideas offered to us in December 2000 Â? ideas that were welcomed by both sides, with each side having different reservations Â? and the strides forward made at Taba that built on these ideas. In the Taba talks, we progressed, perhaps for the first time, from general principles to specific details, in candid and honest discussions on even seemingly intractable issues like refugees and Jerusalem. Such was the sense of forward momentum at Taba that in a joint closing statement, the Israelis and Palestinians stated that they had "never been closer to reaching an agreement" and that "the two sides are convinced that in a short period of time and given an intensive effort and the acknowledgement of the essential and urgent nature of reaching an agreement, it will be possible to bridge the differences remaining and attain a permanent settlement of peace between them."Â*
It is time now to pick up where we left off. We can build on those discussions and renew that dialogue. We have faith that the overwhelming majority of our citizens, both Palestinians and Israelis, will not only accept such an agreement, but actually yearn for it and understand that it is the only viable solution to the current situation of violence and economic decay.Â*
There are those on both sides who do not share our vision, and, tragically, who see violence as the route to an absolutist Â? and yet ultimately unachievable and disastrous Â? end. Unfortunately, time is on their side, not ours. The longer we wait before returning to the table and reaching an agreement, the more blood will be spilled, the more hearts will be hardened.Â*
We must move now to end the dehumanization of the other side and revive the option of a just peace that holds out promise for a future for both our peoples. Both sides have made mistakes over the past year, but we have had our fill of mutual accusations and blame. Finger pointing will not point the way to peace. The immediate need is for the full implementation of the recommendations of the Mitchell Committee, including the cessation of violence, a total freeze on settlement activity, implementation of outstanding agreements and a return to permanent-status negotiations. These steps will need to be monitored by an objective third party.Â*
We and our colleagues have pledged to work together and within our respective communities to rebuild trust and rekindle hope. We call on people of good will throughout the world, and especially in the United States, to help us by adding their voices to our pursuit of a permanent peace between our peoples Â? a peace allowing both peoples to live in freedom and security as equal neighbors.
---
These two guys started working together for peace after visiting South Africa, where the had talks with the South African president Thabo Mbeki on the South African peace and reconciliation process. The most central lesson beeing that to strengthen the other party economically and socially, not weakening and destabilising them is essential to a trustworthy peaceprocess...
personally, i can't tell the diffs between a coptic, a christian, a jew or an arab.... so why don't you help me outsider?
Are you blind or just stupid. (WTF is a coptic?) And you're mixing totally different things. Chistians and jews are religious groups. Arabs are a race. I can't tell the difference between a christian arab and a muslim arab just by looking at their face. But I could make a pretty good distinction by the way they dress and act. Same for a white christian and white muslim. They dress differently and act differently. And if I'm not mistaken only jewish people wear yarmulkes so if I saw someone with one on their heads I don't think I'll mistake them for a muslim or a christian.
<strong>personally, i can't tell the diffs between a coptic, a christian, a jew or an arab.... so why don't you help me outsider?
Are you blind or just stupid. (WTF is a coptic?) And you're mixing totally different things. Chistians and jews are religious groups. Arabs are a race. I can't tell the difference between a christian arab and a muslim arab just by looking at their face. But I could make a pretty good distinction by the way they dress and act. Same for a white christian and white muslim. They dress differently and act differently. And if I'm not mistaken only jewish people wear yarmulkes so if I saw someone with one on their heads I don't think I'll mistake them for a muslim or a christian. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I have MD friends , jew muslims catholic or agnostic : cannot see the difference by the way they dress : basically we wear the same type of wear. the way they act : they may be some small differences, but you cannot discover them in a glimpse.
For the Kippa (i think you refer to it as yarmulkes) i wear it when i enter in a synagogue for a wedding event : do not make me a jew either.
I admit that what you say is true, when people wear the specifics clothes of their religions, but not everypeople wear the specific clothes or act in a special way.
No but where I live there are MANY jews and you can see them by their yarmulkers. Not all jews wear them but we were talking about the situation of in Israel taking a wrong turn and ending up in a Palistinian neighborhood. I'm sure those in that neighrborhood who just look for trouble can pick out a jew 500 meters away.
Jews live there as well, and a jewish peace activist has been the guest of Arafat for the last days.
Man, Israel really needs to take a propaganda lesson from you leftist pinkies. You, and them Arab jackals just totally out class them in every turn. ?jewish peace activist?? heheh. Why not call them for what they are? Jewish Arab activists. Or Jewish Arafat activist.
quote
Sources: The numbers in this table are estimates constructed from the following:
quote:
Both on the Balfour Declaration and his version of the Sinai war in 1973 and the following peace. His other historical references are also quite "biased" and reflect the standard zionist way of justifing the occupations?
And I?m sure when your revisionist "historians" complete their work on the holocaust, you?ll be there to peddle their ?non-biased? garbage too. Don't unswer. We've already seen your true color...
we do away with the holocaust revisers purty quick... in fact, any city with a pop over say 500k in the US. has a holocaust museum or at least an exhibit running at all times.
peace now brother, right ferkin' now....
cuss
p.s. shrubby put the kybosh on both sides today... you bess' listen up. you bess' start emailin' yer man sharon and tell him that y'alls gotsta live there together, so put the tanks in reverse.... or we'll be over in short order to break shit, pave it over and cover the whole damned region with wal-marts.
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: little cuss ]</p>
New, the info in that letter are all correct. You are trying to read into whats right or wrong in the letter based upon what you believe to be true even though its not. That man is not a zionist, he's an Israeli. Not all Israeli's beleive the Palestinians need to be forced out of all the lands. He has worked with palestinians and helped them. If you feel so strongly against Israel that you can dismiss what than man says than theres no point in arguing with you................................
Hey, Nice to read history seen from the outside...
I especially like this section:
[quote]
It is difficult to say whether the outcome did greater honour to Sweden or to Norway. Let us say that it not only did honour to both, but also to civilization.
The separation, as it turned out, harmed neither country. On the contrary, it was probably helpful to both. The conflict, which could only have grown uglier and more dangerous, was disposed of. Sweden was better off economically in the years to follow than if it had had to carry on its back a poverty-stricken province, as likely would have been the case. Norway, although it went through hard times in its struggle to develop a modern and prospering economy, did succeed in doing so, and with a verve and inventiveness that it is hard to imagine Norwegians could have exercised had the government and people been preoccupied with bitter political grievances. Today each country is the other's best customer. <hr></blockquote>
Kind of gives hope to everybody, doesn't it?
Even though I could comment on small flaws everywhere in the document, I have to say that on the whole it gives a pretty good and ballanced version of what happend...
Comments
No, just Sharon
quote:
I didn't say that. I said my statement was only targeted at Sharon. Not "everybody else". Read the thread before you respond...
He did. And so did I.
quote:
Yes, I admit it, Those sources seem like trash compared to yours...
Garbage in, garbage out.
mika.
[ 04-03-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
<strong>LIke those seven nuns who got hurt when the started shelling a church yesterday?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe if the pussy Palestinians didn't storm the church with guns blazing, taking refuge in a house of worship. But of course you have no problem with that.............................................. .........
i've got that(or a similar) marking on my scalp... i always thought it was 999 though and it's right inside the hairline... it looks kinda like a tatoo but it's welpy too, like it was burned in... anyhoo, i've had it since before i can remember and my folks always maintained that it was just a birthmark.
do you have one?
cuss magus of midian oklahoma
A MUST READ for all here. Its an email from an Israeli full of history, current events and a view you're unlikely to find in the news, especially in Europe. Its a long letter, but very well written:
<a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/658193/posts"; target="_blank">http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/658193/posts</a>;
.................................................. ..
I think suicide bombers are about to skyrocket.
hmm, interesting...
cuss
p.s. i finally got around to reading 'danny's' letter. it's sad... but i found one thing that disturbs me a bit too much. he said that the palestinians would kill any jews on sight. well, if they were hasidics i could see that working well.... otherwise, how can you tell them apart?
But he is totally wrong on two things.
1. Firstly a lot of non-arabs and non-muslims live in the palestinian territory, and have done so for decades. Even caucasians (!), A LOT of them... Americans study at the the University in Ramallah, and Christian pilgrims have been the main source of income (tourism) in places like Nazareth and Betlehem. (Both in the palestinian territories)... Jews live there as well, and a jewish peace activist has been the guest of Arafat for the last days. (I'm not sure if he is there now).
2. Secondly, his history references are totally wrong. Both on the Balfour Declaration and his version of the Sinai war in 1973 and the following peace. His other historical references are also quite "biased" and reflect the standard zionist way of justifing the occupations and anexing of palestinian land and property.
The fact that this is published on a right-wing site, that has absolutly nothing positive to say about the palestinians, and nothing negative to say about the Israelis...
---
I'd also like to bring your attention to this article written by Yossi Beilin, the former Israeli justice minister in the government led by Ehud Barak, and Yasser Abed Rabbo, the minister of culture and information in the Palestinian Authority.
A Mideast Partnership Can Still Work
by Yasser Abed Rabbo and Yossi Beilin
Last week we and 50 of our colleagues Â? Palestinian and Israeli political and cultural leaders Â? signed a declaration that was published simultaneously in Israeli and Palestinian newspapers. Our declaration did not attempt to solve every aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather, at this most tragic and difficult of times in the Middle East, it attempted to state unequivocally those principles on which we believe a solution can be based.Â*
In our statement, we called for an end to bloodshed, an end to occupation, a return to negotiation and the realization of peace between our peoples. None of us would have signed this statement if we did not believe its objectives could be achieved. Even in the midst of ongoing violence, we do not believe we are deluding ourselves when we profess our belief in the fundamental humanity of the other side, or our faith that we do have partners for peace in each other and that a negotiated solution is still possible.Â*
Lost in the noise and clouds of war is the fact that a formula does exist for resolving all the outstanding issues in our conflict: the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which would lead to the existence of two sovereign national states Â? Israel and Palestine Â? which would be the fulfillment of the aspiration of both peoples, Palestinian and Jewish, to statehood based on the 1967 borders, with both capitals in Jerusalem. Israeli and Palestinian negotiators made great progress in their discussions of this solution during the talks that took place between November 1999 and January 2001.Â*
As two people who participated in the negotiations at Taba in January 2001, we can personally testify to having been extremely, even agonizingly, close to reaching an agreement. In our assessment, the main missing ingredient was quality time, as is needed in any negotiation in which both sides must give up what they desire for what is possible.Â*
Over the past year, an impression has been created by some of the participants that the talks at Camp David represented the final word on the search for Middle East peace. This distortion of that event ignores both President Bill Clinton's ideas offered to us in December 2000 Â? ideas that were welcomed by both sides, with each side having different reservations Â? and the strides forward made at Taba that built on these ideas. In the Taba talks, we progressed, perhaps for the first time, from general principles to specific details, in candid and honest discussions on even seemingly intractable issues like refugees and Jerusalem. Such was the sense of forward momentum at Taba that in a joint closing statement, the Israelis and Palestinians stated that they had "never been closer to reaching an agreement" and that "the two sides are convinced that in a short period of time and given an intensive effort and the acknowledgement of the essential and urgent nature of reaching an agreement, it will be possible to bridge the differences remaining and attain a permanent settlement of peace between them."Â*
It is time now to pick up where we left off. We can build on those discussions and renew that dialogue. We have faith that the overwhelming majority of our citizens, both Palestinians and Israelis, will not only accept such an agreement, but actually yearn for it and understand that it is the only viable solution to the current situation of violence and economic decay.Â*
There are those on both sides who do not share our vision, and, tragically, who see violence as the route to an absolutist Â? and yet ultimately unachievable and disastrous Â? end. Unfortunately, time is on their side, not ours. The longer we wait before returning to the table and reaching an agreement, the more blood will be spilled, the more hearts will be hardened.Â*
We must move now to end the dehumanization of the other side and revive the option of a just peace that holds out promise for a future for both our peoples. Both sides have made mistakes over the past year, but we have had our fill of mutual accusations and blame. Finger pointing will not point the way to peace. The immediate need is for the full implementation of the recommendations of the Mitchell Committee, including the cessation of violence, a total freeze on settlement activity, implementation of outstanding agreements and a return to permanent-status negotiations. These steps will need to be monitored by an objective third party.Â*
We and our colleagues have pledged to work together and within our respective communities to rebuild trust and rekindle hope. We call on people of good will throughout the world, and especially in the United States, to help us by adding their voices to our pursuit of a permanent peace between our peoples Â? a peace allowing both peoples to live in freedom and security as equal neighbors.
---
These two guys started working together for peace after visiting South Africa, where the had talks with the South African president Thabo Mbeki on the South African peace and reconciliation process. The most central lesson beeing that to strengthen the other party economically and socially, not weakening and destabilising them is essential to a trustworthy peaceprocess...
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: New ]</p>
personally, i can't tell the diffs between a coptic, a christian, a jew or an arab.... so why don't you help me outsider?
my granny's got a hook nose,
cuss
Are you blind or just stupid. (WTF is a coptic?) And you're mixing totally different things. Chistians and jews are religious groups. Arabs are a race. I can't tell the difference between a christian arab and a muslim arab just by looking at their face. But I could make a pretty good distinction by the way they dress and act. Same for a white christian and white muslim. They dress differently and act differently. And if I'm not mistaken only jewish people wear yarmulkes so if I saw someone with one on their heads I don't think I'll mistake them for a muslim or a christian.
<strong>personally, i can't tell the diffs between a coptic, a christian, a jew or an arab.... so why don't you help me outsider?
Are you blind or just stupid. (WTF is a coptic?) And you're mixing totally different things. Chistians and jews are religious groups. Arabs are a race. I can't tell the difference between a christian arab and a muslim arab just by looking at their face. But I could make a pretty good distinction by the way they dress and act. Same for a white christian and white muslim. They dress differently and act differently. And if I'm not mistaken only jewish people wear yarmulkes so if I saw someone with one on their heads I don't think I'll mistake them for a muslim or a christian.
I have MD friends , jew muslims catholic or agnostic : cannot see the difference by the way they dress : basically we wear the same type of wear. the way they act : they may be some small differences, but you cannot discover them in a glimpse.
For the Kippa (i think you refer to it as yarmulkes) i wear it when i enter in a synagogue for a wedding event : do not make me a jew either.
I admit that what you say is true, when people wear the specifics clothes of their religions, but not everypeople wear the specific clothes or act in a special way.
we know you can tell the diffs and that's all that counts.
right?
cuss
p.s. B. Boutros-Ghali is a coptic christian.
Jews live there as well, and a jewish peace activist has been the guest of Arafat for the last days.
Man, Israel really needs to take a propaganda lesson from you leftist pinkies. You, and them Arab jackals just totally out class them in every turn. ?jewish peace activist?? heheh. Why not call them for what they are? Jewish Arab activists. Or Jewish Arafat activist.
quote
Sources: The numbers in this table are estimates constructed from the following:
quote:
Both on the Balfour Declaration and his version of the Sinai war in 1973 and the following peace. His other historical references are also quite "biased" and reflect the standard zionist way of justifing the occupations?
And I?m sure when your revisionist "historians" complete their work on the holocaust, you?ll be there to peddle their ?non-biased? garbage too. Don't unswer. We've already seen your true color...
mika.
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
we do away with the holocaust revisers purty quick... in fact, any city with a pop over say 500k in the US. has a holocaust museum or at least an exhibit running at all times.
peace now brother, right ferkin' now....
cuss
p.s. shrubby put the kybosh on both sides today... you bess' listen up. you bess' start emailin' yer man sharon and tell him that y'alls gotsta live there together, so put the tanks in reverse.... or we'll be over in short order to break shit, pave it over and cover the whole damned region with wal-marts.
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: little cuss ]</p>
mika.
the "poster child" of conflict resolution ...
ok New, read this and tell me if you agree..
<a href="http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/ideas/features/norway.html"; target="_blank">http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/ideas/features/norway.html</a>;
mika.
[ 04-04-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
I especially like this section:
[quote]
It is difficult to say whether the outcome did greater honour to Sweden or to Norway. Let us say that it not only did honour to both, but also to civilization.
The separation, as it turned out, harmed neither country. On the contrary, it was probably helpful to both. The conflict, which could only have grown uglier and more dangerous, was disposed of. Sweden was better off economically in the years to follow than if it had had to carry on its back a poverty-stricken province, as likely would have been the case. Norway, although it went through hard times in its struggle to develop a modern and prospering economy, did succeed in doing so, and with a verve and inventiveness that it is hard to imagine Norwegians could have exercised had the government and people been preoccupied with bitter political grievances. Today each country is the other's best customer. <hr></blockquote>
Kind of gives hope to everybody, doesn't it?
Even though I could comment on small flaws everywhere in the document, I have to say that on the whole it gives a pretty good and ballanced version of what happend...