All the more reason to indicate your neglect in giving them a home vs. moaning and whining until the Israel situation "works itself out". It's all empty words until you step up to the plate to put actions behind those words.
I don't know how you come about equating "adopt a family" with "ethnic cleansing". In bunge's logic, you might be a racist.
They have homes. you seem to think it's okay to drive them away from these homes. Systematically. Which is by definition ethnic cleansing.
I don't think you get the "gag". Yeah, keep looking for it. I think it is on page 23.
It's not in any major photojournalist outlet, as far as I can tell. So I'd like artman to tell where he got it. And if indeed it is from that rally at all.
Now as far as who stared this freaking war...Arabs stole their land. STOLE IT. Oh, they also tried to ethnically cleanse the area. An accusation often thrown at Israel too..of course if that were true, and they put as much effort into it as the Arabs did, their wouldn't be a war right now..just an Israel.
Well, what if the Native Americans stole California. Would the aboriginal people of the area be accused of stealing it, especially if the UN approved, no created, the conditions for the transfer of the land to the Natives?
woah!?! ... what have you been reading. You used to be somewhat fair minded...
But, people who purposely place their children in harms way must take some of the blame if they are harmed.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
The entire country is a war zone.
So by virtue of being in "Palestine" it's your fault. That's what you're saying and that makes no sense. You're born there so you'll be fired upon by tanks. Rethink your words.
So by virtue of being in "Palestine" it's your fault. That's what you're saying and that makes no sense. You're born there so you'll be fired upon by tanks. Rethink your words.
No, being in palestine means they are in palestine. They live in a war torn country and it is dangerous, that is true. However, there are those that purposely place their children even more at risk, greatly so, and you find that practice ok...nice.
No, being in palestine means they are in palestine. They live in a war torn country and it is dangerous, that is true. However, there are those that purposely place their children even more at risk, greatly so, and you find that practice ok...nice.
I think the response of segovius was a fair enough rebuttal, but in case you need someone to be more clear....
You say the Palestinians need to take some of the blame for this incident. To believe that you would have to ignore basically all of the facts of the situation.
You would think that the Israelis would be even a little aware of world censure and cool things down a bit - hell, even Bush is feeling like a mug for giving Sharon a blank cheque (again) but no, you'd be wrong.
This time it kicks off with a three year old girl taking two (that's two - not one which could be an 'accident') sniper bullets to the head.
Is there any reason at all why any country on the face of this planet can have permission to continue in this way whatever the circumstances ? Is there anyone who has ever done so and been allowed (and supported) in their actions ?
I can't believe this
at the risk of sounding 'anti-semitic' these assholes are assholes are assholes!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if the shooter was one of these ultra-right racists who just think of Palastinians as animals, or, if it was some sort of psycho who gers a thrill from killing the most beautifull things in the world: innocent children!!
I can understand the horror now, of chilldren's deaths, since the birth of my daughter . . . . I could think of nothing more horible than something happening to her
I can no longer give any positive words for Israel: they are now acting like the same kind of monsters as suicide bombers, escept that they have great weapons and uniforms . . . sad
You say the Palestinians need to take some of the blame for this incident. To believe that you would have to ignore basically all of the facts of the situation.
What I said was "You are right, those children shouldn't have died. And the peaceful demonstration shoudldn't have included armed members." Both are true. I didn't at anytime blame the Palestinians for the death of the children. The deaths were wrong. If they were intentional, then Israel should own up to it. The default assumption sems to be that since it is Israel, then it must have been intentional. With that presupposition, then you are right, only one side is ever to blame.
This part of our conversation started with my comment on the media ignoring palestinian children involved in the intifada, at the request of Arafat for PR reasons. By your statements, using children in armed warfare is okeedokey. Nice world you live in. Now before you deny that you are okay with child combatants, please remember your statement "So you consider a one year old 'involved' and complicit in the intifada? When their parents dresses them up, you consider them a valid target? That's sick in the head." And while i would hardly consider them complicit, I would consider a child dressed up in a bomb belt, loaded with explosives and and few ball-bearings for real skull shredding effect, a valid target. I would hold their parents resonsible for their deaths. It seems you would only blame Israel. Typical.
......the victim repeatedly bashed his face against a soldiers fist causing severe bruising to the knuckles whilst several other suspects provocatively placed themselves in danger by insisting on being Palestinians.
In one disgraceful case of malicious sabotage several people deliberately caused wanton damage to an Israeli missile by obstructing its flightpath with their bodies.....
Ahh ok, I am starting to get it. Since Palestine is an already dangerous place and Israel is to be blamed at all times, it is ok for Palestinians to use children as pawns and weapons in the Intifada...I mean they are already oppressed, so that makes it ok. gotcha.
to add to your quotes above "In another act of heineous aggression, the murderous Jewish people went out of their way to ruin another public street. The zionists had the nerve to leave a swath of mayhem when they left their legs, arms and heads laying in the street after another wonderful martyrdom action."
You would think that the Israelis would be even a little aware of world censure and cool things down a bit - hell, even Bush is feeling like a mug for giving Sharon a blank cheque (again) but no, you'd be wrong.
This time it kicks off with a three year old girl taking two (that's two - not one which could be an 'accident') sniper bullets to the head.
Is there any reason at all why any country on the face of this planet can have permission to continue in this way whatever the circumstances ? Is there anyone who has ever done so and been allowed (and supported) in their actions ?
Where did you see that it was 2 sniper shots that killed her? I checked the Guardian, Haaretz and bbc and saw only the she was shot twice. Guardian says she was shot by an Israeli tank, not the best sniper platform. If she was targetted randomly by the Israeli army, then the soldier sho did it should be tried and hung, as should anyone who gave him that specific order. To be fair, which seems lacking when it comes to Israel, she could have been shot by Palestinain militants. It's not as though they haven't been know to kill a few innocents to make a point.
at the risk of sounding 'anti-semitic' these assholes are assholes are assholes!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if the shooter was one of these ultra-right racists who just think of Palastinians as animals, or, if it was some sort of psycho who gers a thrill from killing the most beautifull things in the world: innocent children!!
Do you wonder the same thing when Jews are killed? I mean, there is a common sentiment in the region that Jews are animals or less. Or is that kind of attitude not wrong when it is directed at jews.
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
I can understand the horror now, of chilldren's deaths, since the birth of my daughter . . . . I could think of nothing more horible than something happening to her
And can you the understand an Israeli soldier, whose children or relatives have been butchered, feeling the same horror and anger?
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
I can no longer give any positive words for Israel: they are now acting like the same kind of monsters as suicide bombers, escept that they have great weapons and uniforms . . . sad
And would you then have lost all you positive words for Paletinians, given that they have targetted children?
pfflam, not to deminish your feelings over this, but you post sort of demonstrates a point. There is rightfully much grief and anger over the death of a palestinian child. Rarely do you see such an unconditional outpouring when a jew dies. A post such as your in a thread about an israeli death would have additionally contained, or been responded to with blame cast at Sharon or Israeli policy or someother way to conditionally express anger, but point the finger at the victim.
Now before you deny that you are okay with child combatants, please remember your statement "So you consider a one year old 'involved' and complicit in the intifada? When their parents dresses them up, you consider them a valid target? That's sick in the head." And while i would hardly consider them complicit, I would consider a child dressed up in a bomb belt, loaded with explosives and and few ball-bearings for real skull shredding effect, a valid target.
How does my statement implicate me? That's a connection I don't see how you're making. I would deny your claim, but I honestly can't see the logic behind it. If you clarify, I could either amend my original statement or counter your claim.
As for your statement, sick in the head, like I said. A one year old is not a valid target. Your cut and dried version of reality would be harmful to the world if you had any influence.
If they were intentional, then Israel should own up to it. The default assumption sems to be that since it is Israel, then it must have been intentional.
I think I've been very clear about the default assumption. It's not valid to fire tank rounds at or near a crowd of people even if they have guns. Even if they're firing their guns at you. There are limits, and Israel crossed the line regardless of intent. Every conservative/anti-Palestinian here has ignored this fact that I've had to repeat several times.
There is rightfully much grief and anger over the death of a palestinian child. Rarely do you see such an unconditional outpouring when a jew dies.
This situation is analogous to the US in Iraq, or even the police on the streets. Yea, they're fighting nasty people sometimes, but you still have to show restraint especially when you're in a situation of almost absolute power. There are limits and rules that need to be followed regardless of how your enemy acts and what your enemy does. If you act as badly as your enemy, but do so willingly against all laws that you do have the power to follow, you're worse than your enemy.
Torture in the prisons of Iraq is not OK no matter what information that person may have. Tank fire on civilians is not OK, even if there were some gunmen in the crowd.
This is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
As for your statement, sick in the head, like I said. A one year old is not a valid target. Your cut and dried version of reality would be harmful to the world if you had any influence.
I never said anything about one years olds. But, your reasoning really shows why the children are being used as combatants...Guess they have to be 18 before the bomb belt they are wearing works properly..pretty smart bombs they've got over there.
This is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
This is a very weak arguement. I have yet to read of Israeli gas chambers.
This situation is analogous to the US in Iraq, or even the police on the streets. Yea, they're fighting nasty people sometimes, but you still have to show restraint especially when you're in a situation of almost absolute power. There are limits and rules that need to be followed regardless of how your enemy acts and what your enemy does. If you act as badly as your enemy, but do so willingly against all laws that you do have the power to follow, you're worse than your enemy.
Torture in the prisons of Iraq is not OK no matter what information that person may have. Tank fire on civilians is not OK, even if there were some gunmen in the crowd.
his is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
oh, but you forget. Torture is legal in Israel.
I think a parallel with apartheid south africa is more fitting. I really don't think anything can be likened to nazi-germany.
Comments
Originally posted by Randycat99
All the more reason to indicate your neglect in giving them a home vs. moaning and whining until the Israel situation "works itself out". It's all empty words until you step up to the plate to put actions behind those words.
I don't know how you come about equating "adopt a family" with "ethnic cleansing". In bunge's logic, you might be a racist.
They have homes. you seem to think it's okay to drive them away from these homes. Systematically. Which is by definition ethnic cleansing.
Originally posted by Randycat99
I don't think you get the "gag".
It's not in any major photojournalist outlet, as far as I can tell. So I'd like artman to tell where he got it. And if indeed it is from that rally at all.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Overly vague...when?
Now as far as who stared this freaking war...Arabs stole their land. STOLE IT. Oh, they also tried to ethnically cleanse the area. An accusation often thrown at Israel too..of course if that were true, and they put as much effort into it as the Arabs did, their wouldn't be a war right now..just an Israel.
Well, what if the Native Americans stole California. Would the aboriginal people of the area be accused of stealing it, especially if the UN approved, no created, the conditions for the transfer of the land to the Natives?
woah!?! ... what have you been reading. You used to be somewhat fair minded...
Originally posted by Tulkas
But, people who purposely place their children in harms way must take some of the blame if they are harmed.
Originally posted by Tulkas
The entire country is a war zone.
So by virtue of being in "Palestine" it's your fault. That's what you're saying and that makes no sense. You're born there so you'll be fired upon by tanks. Rethink your words.
Originally posted by Randycat99
The response to your statements is simple. Prove that the rally was not.
Because of the Geneva Convention I don't have to. It isn't legal to use tank fire on individuals, even armed ones. Fancy that.
Originally posted by bunge
So by virtue of being in "Palestine" it's your fault. That's what you're saying and that makes no sense. You're born there so you'll be fired upon by tanks. Rethink your words.
No, being in palestine means they are in palestine. They live in a war torn country and it is dangerous, that is true. However, there are those that purposely place their children even more at risk, greatly so, and you find that practice ok...nice.
Originally posted by Tulkas
No, being in palestine means they are in palestine. They live in a war torn country and it is dangerous, that is true. However, there are those that purposely place their children even more at risk, greatly so, and you find that practice ok...nice.
I think the response of segovius was a fair enough rebuttal, but in case you need someone to be more clear....
You say the Palestinians need to take some of the blame for this incident. To believe that you would have to ignore basically all of the facts of the situation.
Originally posted by segovius
You would think that the Israelis would be even a little aware of world censure and cool things down a bit - hell, even Bush is feeling like a mug for giving Sharon a blank cheque (again) but no, you'd be wrong.
Israel starts new Rafah incursion
This time it kicks off with a three year old girl taking two (that's two - not one which could be an 'accident') sniper bullets to the head.
Is there any reason at all why any country on the face of this planet can have permission to continue in this way whatever the circumstances ? Is there anyone who has ever done so and been allowed (and supported) in their actions ?
at the risk of sounding 'anti-semitic' these assholes are assholes are assholes!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if the shooter was one of these ultra-right racists who just think of Palastinians as animals, or, if it was some sort of psycho who gers a thrill from killing the most beautifull things in the world: innocent children!!
I can understand the horror now, of chilldren's deaths, since the birth of my daughter . . . . I could think of nothing more horible than something happening to her
I can no longer give any positive words for Israel: they are now acting like the same kind of monsters as suicide bombers, escept that they have great weapons and uniforms . . . sad
Originally posted by bunge
You say the Palestinians need to take some of the blame for this incident. To believe that you would have to ignore basically all of the facts of the situation.
What I said was "You are right, those children shouldn't have died. And the peaceful demonstration shoudldn't have included armed members." Both are true. I didn't at anytime blame the Palestinians for the death of the children. The deaths were wrong. If they were intentional, then Israel should own up to it. The default assumption sems to be that since it is Israel, then it must have been intentional. With that presupposition, then you are right, only one side is ever to blame.
This part of our conversation started with my comment on the media ignoring palestinian children involved in the intifada, at the request of Arafat for PR reasons. By your statements, using children in armed warfare is okeedokey. Nice world you live in. Now before you deny that you are okay with child combatants, please remember your statement "So you consider a one year old 'involved' and complicit in the intifada? When their parents dresses them up, you consider them a valid target? That's sick in the head." And while i would hardly consider them complicit, I would consider a child dressed up in a bomb belt, loaded with explosives and and few ball-bearings for real skull shredding effect, a valid target. I would hold their parents resonsible for their deaths. It seems you would only blame Israel. Typical.
Originally posted by segovius
......the victim repeatedly bashed his face against a soldiers fist causing severe bruising to the knuckles whilst several other suspects provocatively placed themselves in danger by insisting on being Palestinians.
In one disgraceful case of malicious sabotage several people deliberately caused wanton damage to an Israeli missile by obstructing its flightpath with their bodies.....
Ahh ok, I am starting to get it. Since Palestine is an already dangerous place and Israel is to be blamed at all times, it is ok for Palestinians to use children as pawns and weapons in the Intifada...I mean they are already oppressed, so that makes it ok. gotcha.
to add to your quotes above "In another act of heineous aggression, the murderous Jewish people went out of their way to ruin another public street. The zionists had the nerve to leave a swath of mayhem when they left their legs, arms and heads laying in the street after another wonderful martyrdom action."
Originally posted by segovius
You would think that the Israelis would be even a little aware of world censure and cool things down a bit - hell, even Bush is feeling like a mug for giving Sharon a blank cheque (again) but no, you'd be wrong.
Israel starts new Rafah incursion
This time it kicks off with a three year old girl taking two (that's two - not one which could be an 'accident') sniper bullets to the head.
Is there any reason at all why any country on the face of this planet can have permission to continue in this way whatever the circumstances ? Is there anyone who has ever done so and been allowed (and supported) in their actions ?
Where did you see that it was 2 sniper shots that killed her? I checked the Guardian, Haaretz and bbc and saw only the she was shot twice. Guardian says she was shot by an Israeli tank, not the best sniper platform. If she was targetted randomly by the Israeli army, then the soldier sho did it should be tried and hung, as should anyone who gave him that specific order. To be fair, which seems lacking when it comes to Israel, she could have been shot by Palestinain militants. It's not as though they haven't been know to kill a few innocents to make a point.
Originally posted by pfflam
I can't believe this
at the risk of sounding 'anti-semitic' these assholes are assholes are assholes!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if the shooter was one of these ultra-right racists who just think of Palastinians as animals, or, if it was some sort of psycho who gers a thrill from killing the most beautifull things in the world: innocent children!!
Do you wonder the same thing when Jews are killed? I mean, there is a common sentiment in the region that Jews are animals or less. Or is that kind of attitude not wrong when it is directed at jews.
Originally posted by pfflam
I can understand the horror now, of chilldren's deaths, since the birth of my daughter . . . . I could think of nothing more horible than something happening to her
And can you the understand an Israeli soldier, whose children or relatives have been butchered, feeling the same horror and anger?
Originally posted by pfflam
I can no longer give any positive words for Israel: they are now acting like the same kind of monsters as suicide bombers, escept that they have great weapons and uniforms . . . sad
And would you then have lost all you positive words for Paletinians, given that they have targetted children?
pfflam, not to deminish your feelings over this, but you post sort of demonstrates a point. There is rightfully much grief and anger over the death of a palestinian child. Rarely do you see such an unconditional outpouring when a jew dies. A post such as your in a thread about an israeli death would have additionally contained, or been responded to with blame cast at Sharon or Israeli policy or someother way to conditionally express anger, but point the finger at the victim.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Now before you deny that you are okay with child combatants, please remember your statement "So you consider a one year old 'involved' and complicit in the intifada? When their parents dresses them up, you consider them a valid target? That's sick in the head." And while i would hardly consider them complicit, I would consider a child dressed up in a bomb belt, loaded with explosives and and few ball-bearings for real skull shredding effect, a valid target.
How does my statement implicate me? That's a connection I don't see how you're making. I would deny your claim, but I honestly can't see the logic behind it. If you clarify, I could either amend my original statement or counter your claim.
As for your statement, sick in the head, like I said. A one year old is not a valid target. Your cut and dried version of reality would be harmful to the world if you had any influence.
Originally posted by Tulkas
If they were intentional, then Israel should own up to it. The default assumption sems to be that since it is Israel, then it must have been intentional.
I think I've been very clear about the default assumption. It's not valid to fire tank rounds at or near a crowd of people even if they have guns. Even if they're firing their guns at you. There are limits, and Israel crossed the line regardless of intent. Every conservative/anti-Palestinian here has ignored this fact that I've had to repeat several times.
Originally posted by Tulkas
There is rightfully much grief and anger over the death of a palestinian child. Rarely do you see such an unconditional outpouring when a jew dies.
This situation is analogous to the US in Iraq, or even the police on the streets. Yea, they're fighting nasty people sometimes, but you still have to show restraint especially when you're in a situation of almost absolute power. There are limits and rules that need to be followed regardless of how your enemy acts and what your enemy does. If you act as badly as your enemy, but do so willingly against all laws that you do have the power to follow, you're worse than your enemy.
Torture in the prisons of Iraq is not OK no matter what information that person may have. Tank fire on civilians is not OK, even if there were some gunmen in the crowd.
This is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
Originally posted by bunge
As for your statement, sick in the head, like I said. A one year old is not a valid target. Your cut and dried version of reality would be harmful to the world if you had any influence.
I never said anything about one years olds. But, your reasoning really shows why the children are being used as combatants...Guess they have to be 18 before the bomb belt they are wearing works properly..pretty smart bombs they've got over there.
Originally posted by bunge
This is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
This is a very weak arguement. I have yet to read of Israeli gas chambers.
Originally posted by bunge
This situation is analogous to the US in Iraq, or even the police on the streets. Yea, they're fighting nasty people sometimes, but you still have to show restraint especially when you're in a situation of almost absolute power. There are limits and rules that need to be followed regardless of how your enemy acts and what your enemy does. If you act as badly as your enemy, but do so willingly against all laws that you do have the power to follow, you're worse than your enemy.
Torture in the prisons of Iraq is not OK no matter what information that person may have. Tank fire on civilians is not OK, even if there were some gunmen in the crowd.
his is the reason I would consider the role of the Israelis more analogous to Nazi Germany. Their abuse of the position of power over a relatively helpless population.
oh, but you forget. Torture is legal in Israel.
I think a parallel with apartheid south africa is more fitting. I really don't think anything can be likened to nazi-germany.
Originally posted by Tulkas
I have yet to read of Israeli gas chambers.
I guess the bulldozers aren't good enough for you?