• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel debates 'loyalty' law

Apocalypse said:
Is that supposed to be some sort of an excuse, Mira?
Was Kuntar truly received as a hero in Lebanon because he spent a lot of time in Israeli prison, for murdering Israeli civilians, or was it just because he murdered Israeli civilians?
It's hard to face the truth isn't it?
Click to expand...


No, it's unexcusable and I have no trouble facing the truth. I have always criticised those who deserve criticism even when they are my own people. Unfortunately I don't see that happening on the other side.
 
Mira said:
No, it's unexcusable and I have no trouble facing the truth. I have always criticised those who deserve criticism even when they are my own people. Unfortunately I don't see that happening on the other side.
Click to expand...
Who deserves criticism on the other side?
The IDF, for defending its people in the most morally way possible, dropping leaflets to alarm the citizens before attacking and even calling homes who live near a target building and telling them to clear the way? Is that what you'd call the equal extremist "on the other side"?

Also, you claimed that the Israeli citizens cheered the IDF even though news came out that most of the deaths are women and children. Well that was because we have an experience with those lies. There was one time some years ago during the Arafat era that the IDF has made a raid on a Palestinian village. Arafat hurried to go to the press and claimed over 3,000 innocents were killed. It was revealed however, after nearly every nation in the world has finished criticizing Israel, that about 50 people died in this raid, and most of them were terrorists.

Cast Lead operation was no different. Right now we have two casualties figures; the Palestinians' figures and the IDF figures.
IDF figures claim 709 militants and 295 civilians were killed, while the Palestinian figures claim 491 militants and 926 civilians were killed.
I know which side to beleive.
 
Gaza: War, from a distance
When Jon Snow went to report on the conflict in Gaza, he was barred from entering the conflict zone, along with other Western journalists. It's wrong, he says


There have been two versions of the assault on Gaza played out over the past three weeks. One is the moderated account aired in the West; the other is the unexpurgated account of civilian deaths filmed in vivid close-up inside Gaza.

Has the Western account, restricted by the Israeli ban on journalists in the conflict zone, been so reduced as to dull the scale of protest? Has the volume of images of death injury and destruction played and replayed in the Arab media served to radicalise and enrage the Islamic world still further? Thus creating a gulf so unbridgeable that it defeated even the passage of a unanimous UN call for a ceasefire? I want to take you on a personal journey that I made to the region last week.

I am standing on the so-called "hill of shame" – a strange bump of terrain with three trees on top and a cascade of camera's tents and television dishes pouring down the other side. This is as close as the world's media has come to the Israeli invasion of Gaza. I have been unable to clarify whose "shame" the hill celebrates. Is it the stream of ordinary Israelis who come to cheer the booms of Israeli bombs and shells and the plumes of resulting smoke? Is it the shame of reporters stymied in their attempts to reach Gaza? Either way it has made me think again about war reporting.

Gaza: War, from a distance - TV & Radio, Media - The Independent
 
Mira said:
Gaza: War, from a distance
When Jon Snow went to report on the conflict in Gaza, he was barred from entering the conflict zone, along with other Western journalists. It's wrong, he says


There have been two versions of the assault on Gaza played out over the past three weeks. One is the moderated account aired in the West; the other is the unexpurgated account of civilian deaths filmed in vivid close-up inside Gaza.

Has the Western account, restricted by the Israeli ban on journalists in the conflict zone, been so reduced as to dull the scale of protest? Has the volume of images of death injury and destruction played and replayed in the Arab media served to radicalise and enrage the Islamic world still further? Thus creating a gulf so unbridgeable that it defeated even the passage of a unanimous UN call for a ceasefire? I want to take you on a personal journey that I made to the region last week.

I am standing on the so-called "hill of shame" – a strange bump of terrain with three trees on top and a cascade of camera's tents and television dishes pouring down the other side. This is as close as the world's media has come to the Israeli invasion of Gaza. I have been unable to clarify whose "shame" the hill celebrates. Is it the stream of ordinary Israelis who come to cheer the booms of Israeli bombs and shells and the plumes of resulting smoke? Is it the shame of reporters stymied in their attempts to reach Gaza? Either way it has made me think again about war reporting.

Gaza: War, from a distance - TV & Radio, Media - The Independent
Click to expand...
Israel cheers the IDF for defending it, just like every other nation cheers its own army.
When it bombed Gaza Israelis knew that it does its best to avoid civilian casualties. We also knew it's unavoidable, as the Hamas terrorists just take them as human shields and launch the rockets from their houses.
Also, about the journalists not being able to get into the strip, that was because journalists tend to run into the danger zone, and we didn't wish to pull a Russia on them.
 
Apocalypse said:
Israel cheers the IDF for defending it, just like every other nation cheers its own army.
When it bombed Gaza Israelis knew that it does its best to avoid civilian casualties. We also knew it's unavoidable, as the Hamas terrorists just take them as human shields and launch the rockets from their houses.
Also, about the journalists not being able to get into the strip, that was because journalists tend to run into the danger zone, and we didn't wish to pull a Russia on them.
Click to expand...

read the whole article please before you comment.

Gaza: War, from a distance - TV & Radio, Media - The Independent
 
when you're finished with that, please take a look at this

here are few marks on the road where the missiles hit the innocents of Marjayoun. But there are the memories of what happened immediately after the Israeli airstrike on the convoy of 3,000 people after dark on 11 August: a 16-year old Christian girl screaming "I want my Daddy" as her father's mutilated body lay a few metres away from her; the town mukhtar discovering that his wife, Collette, had been decapitated by one of the Israeli missiles; the Lebanese Red Cross volunteer who went into the darkness of wartime Lebanon to give water and sandwiches to the refugees and was cut down by another missile, and whose friends could not reach him to save his life.



There are those who break down when they recall the massacre at Joub Jannine - and there are the Israelis who gave permission to the refugees to leave Marjayoun, who specified what roads they should use, and who then attacked them with pilotless, missile-firing drone aircraft. Five days after being asked to account for the tragedy, they had last night still not bothered to explain how they killed at least seven refugees and wounded 36 others just three days before a UN ceasefire came into effect.



Robert Fisk: Untold story of the massacre of Marjayoun leaves blame on both sides of the border - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent
 
Apocalypse said:
The article didn't tell me something I haven't already known. Al-Jazeera showing dead bodies on their channel ain't really new either. I don't know if they do it to incite hatred or not, but it really doesn't matter as the result is the same result.
Click to expand...


They show it because no other news outlet was allowed in. They were already inside and reporting.

In short, I have no problems with admitting my people's mistakes and would like to see you do the same.

The only way to peace is to face our faults and move ahead. Don't you agree ?
 
Last edited:
Mira said:
and there are the Israelis who gave permission to the refugees to leave Marjayoun, who specified what roads they should use, and who then attacked them with pilotless, missile-firing drone aircraft.
Click to expand...
It was no secret that mistakes have been done in the IDF's handling of the operation, mistakes that led to civilian casualties. You can read the IDF report on the operation if you desire more information about it. However, you don't really claim that the IDF has deliberately killed civilians, do you?
 
Mira said:
They show it because no other news outlet was allowed in. They were already inside and reporting.

In short, I have no problems with admitting my people's mistakes and would like to see you do the same.

The only way to peace is to face our faults and move ahead. Don't you agree ?
Click to expand...
I completely agree, but that doesn't mean I'll stand for faults I don't believe in.
 
Apocalypse said:
I completely agree, but that doesn't mean I'll stand for faults I don't believe in.
Click to expand...

Even when they are put right under your nose ?
 
Mira said:
Even when they are put right under your nose ?
Click to expand...
You can try and put them under my nose but I'll warn you it has an allergic reaction to lies.
 
Mira said:
The Al Jazeera television station admitted Wednesday that its coverage of Israel's release of convicted Lebanese terrorist Samir Kuntar violated the station's own code of ethics. The admission came in response to a threat by Israel's Government Press Office to boycott the satellite channel unless it apologized.

In an official letter, a copy of which was obtained by Haaretz, Al Jazeera's general director, Khanfar Wadah, wrote that "elements of the program" broadcast in Kuntar's honor on the night of Saturday, July 19, "violated [the station's] Code of Ethics," and he "regards these violations as very serious."

Al-Jazeera apologizes for 'unethical' coverage of Kuntar release - Haaretz - Israel News
Click to expand...

Was this guy fired?
 
Goshin said:
Can we get a source on this OTHER than Al-jazeera? I don't consider them exactly "objective".
Click to expand...

I saw an article on it in the Jerusalem Post yesterday but can't seem to get it again.

However I found this article today on Uri Avery's site

Uri Avnery's weekly english article

I don't know how strong Al-Jazeera was but I think you will find he puts his ideas across quite strongly. From what he says it does look quite concerning.
 
Last edited:
Korimyr the Rat said:
Israel is a nation-state, and this law looks like an attempt to keep it that way.

Maybe instead of condemning it, Western nations should consider it. Our cultural identities are just as at risk.
Click to expand...

Out cultural identities may or may not be at risk. But as soon as we start authorizing the government to act against the rights and liberties of the individual, we loose this Republic which was fought for, bled for, died for by many patriots before us.
 
I think the impetus for this proposal is the behavior of some Israeli-Arab members of the Knesset during times of friction and/or war between Israel and Palestine. These Israeli-Arab MKs clearly support the forces that are at war with the nation they are citizens of. To be blunt, this is nothing less than open Fifth Column activity.

Imagine al-Quida sympathizers in Congress praising bin-Laden and passing sensitive Congressional information from D.C. to AQ leaders.

Many Israelis consider it as treason. But treason during wartime in Israel is a capital crime, and is one of only three capital crimes in Israel that proscribe the death penalty. No one wants that. I think this proposal is/was a legal manuever to deal with such insidious activity within the Knesset while avoiding indictments of treason. It's a complicated issue.
 
PeteEU said:
Its basicly fascism. To make it illegal to be critical of the state or parts of the state.
Click to expand...
This may be true, but we had loyalty oaths during WWII. It may not seem common in our time, but I think history shows it to be more common than one might think.
 
Red_Dave said:
Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Israel debates 'loyalty' law

Looks to me like a way to stifle perfectly legitimate dissent considering

[A] a one state solution has alot of good arguments going for it but by arguing for such a solution you are arguing against the existence of Israel as a Jewish state

The establishment of Isreal was, undeniably a disaster for the Arabs

But as Voltaire once said it is dangerous to be right when those in power are so very wrong
Click to expand...


Seems like a stupid idea to me, pandering to the extreme right in this case.
 
Laila said:
Seems like a stupid idea to me, pandering to the extreme right in this case.
Click to expand...
Actually the extreme right, the right, the center right, the center, and the center left. None of these alignments celebrate the subversive element.
 
Apocalypse said:
Israel cheers the IDF for defending it, just like every other nation cheers its own army.
When it bombed Gaza Israelis knew that it does its best to avoid civilian casualties. We also knew it's unavoidable, as the Hamas terrorists just take them as human shields and launch the rockets from their houses.
Also, about the journalists not being able to get into the strip, that was because journalists tend to run into the danger zone, and we didn't wish to pull a Russia on them.
Click to expand...

I suppose you've never set foot in Gaza. It is one of the world's most densely populated places. The "human shield" excuse is utter tosh. What do you suppose Hamas fighters are supposed to do? go expose themselves in open fields ?

The journalists always go to danger zones, they take the risk and many get killed or wounded, but they do their job. The IDF simply prevented them from doing their job. They did however divert them toward Israeli towns and villages hit by rockets. In the book of honest journalism, that is exactly what is qualified as bias.
 
Tashah said:
I think the impetus for this proposal is the behavior of some Israeli-Arab members of the Knesset during times of friction and/or war between Israel and Palestine. These Israeli-Arab MKs clearly support the forces that are at war with the nation they are citizens of. To be blunt, this is nothing less than open Fifth Column activity.

Imagine al-Quida sympathizers in Congress praising bin-Laden and passing sensitive Congressional information from D.C. to AQ leaders.

Many Israelis consider it as treason. But treason during wartime in Israel is a capital crime, and is one of only three capital crimes in Israel that proscribe the death penalty. No one wants that. I think this proposal is/was a legal manuever to deal with such insidious activity within the Knesset while avoiding indictments of treason. It's a complicated issue.
Click to expand...

Could I ask a couple questions, since I respect your opinion?

Does the loyalty law confined the the Knesser? What I have read, it does not seem to be, but I have found no real indepth story on this.

Also, what of the "Nakba Law" that is also a part of this story? What are your feelings on that?
 
American said:
This may be true, but we had loyalty oaths during WWII. It may not seem common in our time, but I think history shows it to be more common than one might think.
Click to expand...

Oh I know. The UK and even the US during WW2 were borderline fascist states. Many actions by both were no better than the actual actions of the real fascist states. The US interned the Japanese and the Brits put in place very restrictive laws on everything from free speech to movement and so on.

My only point is that no nation can claim to be a free and democratic nation if said nation implements such draconian laws even during times of war. You are not a democratic or free nation if you target part of your population with "loyalty" laws or any other law that limits their access to the same freedoms as the majority of the population.
 
Mira said:
I suppose you've never set foot in Gaza. It is one of the world's most densely populated places. The "human shield" excuse is utter tosh. What do you suppose Hamas fighters are supposed to do? go expose themselves in open fields ?
Click to expand...
This ain't no excuse to shoot rockets from a person's house. It simply tells Israel "If you're gonna shoot, we'll take down civilians with us."
I don't expect Hamas to launch rockets from open fields as it'd just be slaughtered easily. That doesn't mean I won't object to them shooting at our civilians while taking hostage their own. That is a double crime against humanity, and I cannot accept it.
The journalists always go to danger zones, they take the risk and many get killed or wounded, but they do their job. The IDF simply prevented them from doing their job. They did however divert them toward Israeli towns and villages hit by rockets. In the book of honest journalism, that is exactly what is qualified as bias.
Click to expand...
If the journalists were to die, it'd deal a much larger damage to Israel than blocking their entrance.
Israel did the right thing in not letting them in.
 
PeteEU said:
Oh I know. The UK and even the US during WW2 were borderline fascist states. Many actions by both were no better than the actual actions of the real fascist states. The US interned the Japanese and the Brits put in place very restrictive laws on everything from free speech to movement and so on.
Click to expand...
The world would be such a better place without people who use the word 'Fascist' three times per sentence. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom