**Breaking news from Israel

[Fledermaus]

Nope, rather than admit that you lied about the subject matter of the post I replied to being about Israel and the point it was trying to make was insanely stupid you tried to make out that there was some confusion in my understanding. I showed , conclusively, that on both points you were wrong and also being dishonest about the exchange itself.

If your mission was to show your own stupidity and dishonesty then you have definitely accomplished it here

And there you go again.

Rather than move on you triple down on your ignorance of context.

You can't help yourself.

Like the Titanic you just plow on to your literal doom.

Blah, blah, blah....

 

[oneworld2]

Your ilk have made Sabra and Shatila about Israel instead of about the faction that was engaging in a mass murder, that's how much your ilk care for corpses and that's how much your ilk uses corpses to create corpses elsewhere.

Nope, the Israeli enabling of it , without which it couldn't have happened at all , is what has " made it about Israel ". Your wish to make false claims about it here is why it has been focused on again. You got caught out spreading Israeli propaganda and were subjected to a truth offensive that exposed it and you. Unable to respond to that you played , and continue to play , the " let's try to derail this with inflammatory remarks aimed at initiating an emotional reaction " which has also failed.

Your claim was shown to be Israeli hasbara which also shows imo your complete lack of respect for those killed and a wish to defend those that made the deaths possible with the full knowledge of what would happen. Which actually leaves you guilty of trying to misrepresent the facts so as to defend people that enabled the mass slaughter of innocent people. As I said , irony meters should be removed from the area.

BTW How does my telling the truth about Israeli complicity in the mass murder of Palestinians ,in essence getting the Phalangists to do their dirty work for them , " create corpses elsewhere " ?

And how does your attempt at defending those who enabled , assisted and abetted those bent on committing mass murder support you claim that you are avidly against the " murder of innocents " and all of those that wish to take part in carrying it out ?

 

[oneworld2]

And there you go again.

Rather than move on you triple down on your ignorance of context.

You can't help yourself.

Like the Titanic you just plow on to your literal doom.

Blah, blah, blah....

No problem moving on for me , I just wasn't prepared to allow your ridiculous assumption that it was my confusion that created the issue. It wasn't , it was your dishonesty and unbelieveably stupid comments in the post itself . You are just unable to accept the responsibility for it .

It is a confused person that fails to understand why the people living in a place that isn't under a complete blockade might not complain about shortages of materials and why a people that are might. It is also a confused person that doesn't know what country they were talking about and had to have it shown to them in a quotation

 

[oneworld2]

I told you you would ignore what I wrote.

I owe myself a dollar for winning that bet...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn't ignore it , I actually quoted it in full and added the secondary quote so you need to hand over that money to me . Talking of avoidance...why didn't you answer the question that your comments inspired ?

 

[oneworld2]

C. The i justices are real, just like the countless others, many much worse, that happened in the 1940s. They continue not because of Israel but because of Arab state conduct and Palestinian rejectionism

So the injustices are " real " now are they ? Not what you said earlier , to quote you........

To right abstract "injustices" which are both historically not that unjust, relatively speaking,

I would say the ousting of an indigenous people to make way for an immigrant community bent on taking the land for themselves might have enjoyed some support in the 17th-18th century but in the 20th-21st centuries people will see it as an authentic injustice that is in fact extremely unjust and definitely not " abstract "

That the Arab states also bear a huge responsibility for the poor state of the Palestinians is absolutely true but the original injustice from which their woes began is firmly grounded in the commitment to and the creation of the Israeli state. To refuse to accept that is to only try to fool yourself imo

Palestinian rejectionism is fully understandable and has been referred to/explained earlier. Your complete silence on Israeli rejectionism remains consistent

 

[CJ 2.0]

Saying" if there was no Israel there would be no Palestinians " is like saying" if there was no USA there would be no native Americans" imo. They were there and had been there for a very very long time, they didn't start appearing in the late 19th century like the European Zionists had. Regardles of whether a Jewish state was set up it is clear that those that had lived under the Ottoman empire went on to live in states of their own all over the ME. It is thus ridiculous to try to peddle the idea that the Palestinians would have somehow remained a British colony if it were not for Zionism.

palestinians would still be people, absolutely. No one is pretending they wouldnt be, so your little strawman is meaningless.

But there is zero chance they would be an independent polity and based on the developments and attitudes of people in the region in pre WWI there would be no Palestinian national identity and without any doubt those who believed themselves to be syrian or egyptian or part of the jordanian identity (which was created by the british) would have succeeded in getting all or part of the territory included in those states or as part of a pan arab state if one warlord or another had managed in the levant what the house of saud did in arabia.

Again, it is very important that facts, judgment and reality play a role in any analysis.

And like most of your commentary you tend to start things at curiously daft places in order to present a skewed view. Such as the reference to the Abolitionists. Clue , if there had been no slave trade to begin with there would have been nobody needed to take on the mantle of Abolitionists later on. Obvious and logical really but not to people like yourself apparently

And you again ignore everything of substance. It’s line reading Brave New World with you guys tbh.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Rant on, but the truth remains that the facts of Sabra and Shatila massacres , contrary to your claim , show that not only was it assisted by Israelis , it was actually completely enabled by them. Those innocent people at least deserve to have the truth spoken about how and who was involved in the crimes committed against them that led to their horrific and surely terrifying deaths. Something you seek to deny them whilst ridiculously implying that you care about them

So , once again we see your bid to distort the factual record in the service of Israeli propaganda being shown for the obvious misrepresentation , and in this case pretty sickening and odious misrepresentation, it is. It is also a bid to hide from view the actions of those that played a crucial role , the crucial role in fact , in the enabling of the massacres themselves knowing full well the likely outcome of their decisions , which is a defence of those complicit in the violent deaths of almost entirely innocent old men , women and kids . People should probably remove any irony meters that might be in the vicinity bearing in mind your self aggrandizing alleged positions of the last couple of posts here.

He’s right. Detach it from whether you can blame Israel and it becomes meaningless to you.

Fine, Israel was totally and completely 10,000% responsible. If we concede that (which is false but whatever) it does not change one bit the point that you only care about it because of the connection to Israel. If it wasn’t connected to Israel, you wouldn’t care.

 

[CJ 2.0]

You must have a very perculiar personal definition of what it is to be independent to come out with such nonsense. As I said to you earlier , and afair don't recall you responding , the chief negotiator on the Israeli side is on record as saying that had he been negotiating for the Palestinian side he too would have rejected the offers you claim , with nothing being offered to support it , are offers of authentic independence . I suggest that they are in fact anything but authentic independence that would lock in forever many of the dire circumstances that the people find themselves in and completely undermine the viability of the new state

Revisionist garbage and half truths, which are typical obfuscation from the anti-Israel side.


Arafat didn't negotiate - he just kept saying no | World news | The Guardian

You guys are running obstruction, as usual. The Palestinians could have had a state 20 years ago. Maybe not as big as they want, maybe subject to constraints until they could make the institutional and cultural changes necessary to show they were not interested in continuing to threaten Israel, but real sovereignty and a real opportunity to build some sort of positive national identity.

But instead they planned and launched a terrorist war against Israel’s civilian population, in the hope of unravelling the entire Israel project.

They obviously failed, but the key observation that only propagandists lie about is that the Palestinians were never for one second interested in ending the conflict and never for a second were prepared to end their claim to Israel.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CJ 2.0]

So the injustices are " real " now are they ? Not what you said earlier , to quote you........

Dude, reading comprehension. I literally said they were not that unjust relatively speaking, which is different than saying there was no injustice.

I would say the ousting of an indigenous people to make way for an immigrant community bent on taking the land for themselves might have enjoyed some support in the 17th-18th century but in the 20th-21st centuries people will see it as an authentic injustice that is in fact extremely unjust and definitely not " abstract "

Yeah, there have never been any population exchanges between waring ethnic groups in the 1940s or afterwards. There wasn’t a sizeable international consensus about it in the first half of the 20th century or even in the 1990s in Yugoslavia.

The injustice the Palestinians faced were largely a result of Arab actions. The Arabs in Israel have it better than anywhere else in the middle east. They were not cleansed the way Jews were in the Arab world. The Jews never planned to do what the Arabs announced was their intention right from the beginning and which was routinely planned and talked about by others all over the world.

Like with not caring about palestinian casualties and injustice when it you can’t blame Israel about it, you also have a singular inability to compare Israel and the Jewish fight for independence with any other conflict at the same time or afterward.

You need everything about Israel to be in a vacuum, cause otherwise your narrative falls apart and your knowledge deficit becomes obvious.

That the Arab states also bear a huge responsibility for the poor state of the Palestinians is absolutely true but the original injustice from which their woes began is firmly grounded in the commitment to and the creation of the Israeli state. To refuse to accept that is to only try to fool yourself imo

The injustice resulted from the Arab response. The Arabs in Jordan, who accepted conquest by the Hasemites, in Saudia Arabia by the Sauds, the Syrians by the Alewites. Did they face the same level of injustice? In many ways they were worse off than the Arabs in Israel and those in the territories. And those Arabs in the territories could have continued to be Egyptian and Jordanian subjects had it not been for continued Arab attempts to destroy Israel, just like the Arabs in the territories would not be under occupation if they were prepared to take one of the many peace offers from the Israelis.

Palestinian rejectionism is fully understandable and has been referred to/explained earlier. Your complete silence on Israeli rejectionism remains consistent

Don’t really care if you understand it. Because whatever the views at the time, it was wrong in the 1950s and it was wrong in the 1960s and it is wrong today. But sure, continue to justify and run obstruction in pursuit of “justice”. It only harms the Palestinians, but as with your constant ignoring of the issues facing Palestinians in the rest of the Arab world, we know you don’t really care about the Palestinians at all.

 

[Fledermaus]

No problem moving on for me , I just wasn't prepared to allow your ridiculous assumption that it was my confusion that created the issue. It wasn't , it was your dishonesty and unbelieveably stupid comments in the post itself . You are just unable to accept the responsibility for it .

It is a confused person that fails to understand why the people living in a place that isn't under a complete blockade might not complain about shortages of materials and why a people that are might. It is also a confused person that doesn't know what country they were talking about and had to have it shown to them in a quotation

And the beat goes on...

You are the Energizer Bunny of confused context.

You just keep going, and going, and going....

Never understanding why I laugh at you.

 

[oneworld2]

D. Support for a just resolution doesn’t need law at all. It means dealing with how to improve lives for people now, not getting a do over on what has happened. You focus on “justice” so that you can keep chirping against Israel’s existence.

Actually a just resolution is wholly reliant on the departure point being grounded in the appropriate laws if it has any chance of surviving and your rejection of that is sadly instructive of why so far all attempts have failed.

There is an Israeli wishlist which is basically a list of demands that they have no title to under the law. This has been the point of departure so far and that's why they continue to represent a huge obstacle to a just resolution and, hopefully the lasting peace only a just resolution will offer . To basically strip the Palestinians of all of the rights the law affords them ( and everyone else btw ) to gain access to the negotiating table is both unjust and wholly racist by its very nature. That you don't appear to be concerned by any of this is an indication of your contempt for justice imo and your ability to accept the racist framework which has been used for previous negotiations.

As for my alleged aversity to the continuing existence of the state of Israel it just doesn't stad up to scrutiny. As a long term and just about still supporter of the two state solution any notion that I wish the state to cease to exist is hobbled from the outset. I just think that to try to oust an entire people in order to create it was a huge mistake and an immoral act. I am all in favour of rescuing people from persecution and offering a haven from any abuses but I think that it shouldn't then allow them to persecute and abuse others.

The above is compounded by an insistance that any agreement be based in the law to give it the maximum chance of success. Hardly a view that would be supported buy anyone wishing to see either state go under and it's people lose their self determination. Nah , it's just one of those standard pro Israeli smears you have all done so well to learn and regurgitate. When put under the spotlight it hardly registers before it dies

 

[oneworld2]

He’s right. Detach it from whether you can blame Israel and it becomes meaningless to you.

Nope, he was shown to be engaging in a misinformation campaign so as to try to hide Israeli enablement of and assistance to the massacre of innocent Palestinians. He was proven to be spouting hasbara nonsense in the defence of people complicit in a massacre after stating his alleged opposition to those involved in the murder of innocent people. Evidently this is complete junk aimed at fooling himself and others that he is some sort of a higher moral being. So no he was not right he was shown to be completely and utterly wrong , so much so he never even once referred to the evidence of complicity I provided. BTW neither have you .

It's actually hard to believe that the both of you aren't fully aware of the circumstances surrounding such an infamous event/massacre in this conflict so it is reasonable to conclude imo that his denials and your silence on them are inspired by a wish dupe people into a false reading of the event itself. Usual service is resumed

The only thing that is meaningful to me is to try to get to the truth and through the myths of this conflict and that's why we clash. You people want to peddle the myths

Fine, Israel was totally and completely 10,000% responsible.

You seem upset that the truth has surfaced and now you want to rant, what does that say about you ?

For the enabling of it ? Absolutely, Israeli people were 100% responsible for it as I have already proven with the facts you want to ignore

If we concede that (which is false but whatever) it does not change one bit the point that you only care about it because of the connection to Israel. If it wasn’t connected to Israel, you wouldn’t care.

I am a student of this conflict and as such it is relevant to the subject so I care about it. I care about the understanding of/truth behind all sorts of other horror stories too but a claim was made here that was evidently aimed at misinforming people of the truth of that massacre and as I knew it was a deliberate attempt to dupe people took it on myself to set the record straight. Recall I never even mentioned it in the first place , I just reacted to the lies people were prepared to tell about it. What does your silence on them and your hissy fit over the truth coming out say about you ?

 

[oneworld2]

palestinians would still be people, absolutely. No one is pretending they wouldnt be, so your little strawman is meaningless.

But there is zero chance they would be an independent polity and based on the developments and attitudes of people in the region in pre WWI there would be no Palestinian national identity and without any doubt those who believed themselves to be syrian or egyptian or part of the jordanian identity (which was created by the british) would have succeeded in getting all or part of the territory included in those states or as part of a pan arab state if one warlord or another had managed in the levant what the house of saud did in arabia.

Again, it is very important that facts, judgment and reality play a role in any analysis.



And you again ignore everything of substance. It’s line reading Brave New World with you guys tbh.

The very fact that there is an independent set of Arab nations completely undermines your assertion that there would be no Palestinian state. The pan Arabism of Nasser and co would not have been allowed by the West regardless of the question of the creation of the state of Israel. Israel has just served as a useful western collaborator in a region of extreme global importance due to its mineral deposits.

Would there have been a need for Abolitionists if there had not been aa slave trade to begin with ? How is the recognition of the logicality of that " ignoring everything of substance " ?

Discussing things with people like you is like reading 1984 again...ignorance is strength , war is peace etc etc it all comes flooding back lol

 

[Fledermaus]

No problem moving on for me

Why lie?

Your last few posts haven't been moving on. They have been rants demonstrating your lack of understanding context.

 

[oneworld2]

Why lie?

Your last few posts haven't been moving on. They have been rants demonstrating your lack of understanding context.

Your posts are nothing but the projection of your own dishonest and ignorant character onto others.

You lied about the post not being about Israel when it clearly was and was shown to so when it was quoted so you then dishonestly lie that it was taken out of context. Flopping from one lie to the next in order to hide your own ignorance of what you had alreadyy posted and displaying an arrogant stupidity in not even being bothered to actually take the time to read back and acknowledge that I was right about your post

You showed a staggering stupidity by wondering why there were no complaints about shortages of building materials in Israel but plenty from Gaza seemingly unable to work out that one is under a total blockade and the other is not.

This is the level of your commentary here and elsewhere , your own dishonesty and ignorance projected onto others that are actually able to argue and support their points, while you flounder around in complete disarray calling others for the behaviour only you are displaying.

You got called out lying about Israel " owning Gaza " and doggedly refused to acknowledge the ignorance of this subject needed to even think that , avoiding admitting it was ignorant and false rubbish in post after post until another member confronted you on it and you finally conceded but in the most childish way possible with a " Is U happy now ? " reply

The only reason I even bother replying to your woefully ignorant and completely bigoted posts is that I actually fear that some people might fall for some of the junk that makes up the bulk of them. Anyone displaying that level of bigotry is a lost cause in my experience the problem is to try to stop it infecting others

 

[Fledermaus]

Your posts are nothing but the projection of your own dishonest and ignorant character onto others.

You lied about the post not being about Israel when it clearly was and was shown to so when it was quoted so you then dishonestly lie that it was taken out of context. Flopping from one lie to the next in order to hide your own ignorance of what you had alreadyy posted and displaying an arrogant stupidity in not even being bothered to actually take the time to read back and acknowledge that I was right about your post

You showed a staggering stupidity by wondering why there were no complaints about shortages of building materials in Israel but plenty from Gaza seemingly unable to work out that one is under a total blockade and the other is not.

This is the level of your commentary here and elsewhere , your own dishonesty and ignorance projected onto others that are actually able to argue and support their points, while you flounder around in complete disarray calling others for the behaviour only you are displaying.

You got called out lying about Israel " owning Gaza " and doggedly refused to acknowledge the ignorance of this subject needed to even think that , avoiding admitting it was ignorant and false rubbish in post after post until another member confronted you on it and you finally conceded but in the most childish way possible with a " Is U happy now ? " reply

The only reason I even bother replying to your woefully ignorant and completely bigoted posts is that I actually fear that some people might fall for some of the junk that makes up the bulk of them. Anyone displaying that level of bigotry is a lost cause in my experience the problem is to try to stop it infecting others

Another case of not "moving on".

Another case of not understanding context.

Another case of ad hominem rather than discussion.

Carry on.

Oh, and who owns Gaza now?

 

[DarkWizard12]

Neither Netanyahu or Gantz are going anywhere. The election returned a stalemate. It should be notable, however, that all traditional right wing parties form a majority. It's just lieberman refuses to play ball. The left is in a permanent minority in israel, and the only thing that keeps them afloat is the squabbling between the right wing and the centrist parties.

 

[oneworld2]

Another case of not "moving on".

Another case of not understanding context.

Another case of ad hominem rather than discussion.

Carry on.

Oh, and who owns Gaza now?

Nothing of any value to reply to here so I will wait until your future displays of ignorance of the subject and comment on those

 

[oneworld2]

Revisionist garbage and half truths, which are typical obfuscation from the anti-Israel side.


Arafat didn't negotiate - he just kept saying no | World news | The Guardian

Knowledgeable commentators know that after the first Iraq war the PLO were in a no mans land and it was then that the Israelis saw an opportunity to try to push through a deal to favour themselves by using Arafats desperate position for their own ends.

You might need to actually see what a high level negotiator of the times has to say about the situation before you lamely and predictably try to rubbish what people say for an assumed ideological victory

Here we see the chief Israeli negotiator involved in the Camp David negotiations stating thet had he been negotiating for the Palestinian side he too would have rejected the deal

quote Shlomo Ben Ami.......

SHLOMO BEN-AMI: Yes, yes. Okay, the last third part of the book, as Dr. Finkelstein says, there is the diplomat, and this same diplomat still behaves in a way as a historian when he says in this book that Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David, as well. This is something I put in the book. But Taba is the problem.

and before this to illustrate the point I made earlier above ( from the same interview ) ........

SHLOMO BEN-AMI: Well, the Oslo peace process was an agreement — it started as an agreement between two unequal partners. Arafat conceived Oslo as a way, not necessarily to reach a settlement, but more importantly to him at that particular moment, in order to come back to the territories and control the politics of the Palestinian family. Don’t forget that the Intifada, to which Oslo brought an end, started independently of the P.L.O. leadership, and he saw how he was losing control of the destiny of the Palestinians. His only way to get back to the territories was through an agreement with Israel. So in Oslo, he made enormous concessions.

In fact, when he was negotiating in Oslo with us, an official Palestinian delegation was negotiating with an official Israeli delegation in Washington, and the official Palestinian delegation was asking the right things from the viewpoint of the Palestinians — self-determination, right of return, end of occupation, all the necessary arguments — whereas Arafat in Oslo reached an agreement that didn’t even mention the right of self-determination for the Palestinians, doesn’t even mention the need of the Israelis to put an end to settlements. If the Israelis, after Oslo, continued expansion of settlements, they were violating the spirit of Oslo, not the letter of Oslo. There is nothing in the Oslo agreement that says that Israelis cannot build settlements. So this was the cheap agreement that Arafat sold, precisely because he wanted to come back to the territories and control the politics of Palestine.

Fmr. Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami Debates Outspoken Professor Norman Finkelstein on Israel, the Palestinians, and the Peace Process | Democracy Now!

Paints a different picture to the one you are trying to express here.

To me Barak is telling his side of the story for his own benefit and reputation which is okay but it is no different than Arafat acting for his own interests in the events highlighted above

 

[Fledermaus]

Nothing of any value to reply to here so I will wait until your future displays of ignorance of the subject and comment on those

Who owns Gaza now?

It's a simple question.

 

[oneworld2]

Revisionist garbage and half truths, which are typical obfuscation from the anti-Israel side.


Arafat didn't negotiate - he just kept saying no | World news | The Guardian

You guys are running obstruction, as usual. The Palestinians could have had a state 20 years ago. Maybe not as big as they want, maybe subject to constraints until they could make the institutional and cultural changes necessary to show they were not interested in continuing to threaten Israel, but real sovereignty and a real opportunity to build some sort of positive national identity.

But instead they planned and launched a terrorist war against Israel’s civilian population, in the hope of unravelling the entire Israel project.

They obviously failed, but the key observation that only propagandists lie about is that the Palestinians were never for one second interested in ending the conflict and never for a second were prepared to end their claim to Israel.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A more broad reply to the rest of what is undeniable that which you accuse others of " Revisionist garbage and half truths "

You acknowledge that and demand that........" Palestinians maybe subject to constraints until they could make the institutional and cultural changes necessary to show they were not interested in continuing to threaten Israel, ".............. so in the spirit of none racism.......... what steps and/or restrictions were demanded or should have been placed on Israel so they were not in a position to threaten or continue to threaten/abuse Palestinians ?

See it's the same racist rhetoric that is used to frame the discussion " What about Israels security and the threat to the lives of its people posed by Palestinians ? "....... fine....... but in the spirit of none racism " what about the security for the Palestinian state and the threat posed to its people by Israelis ? " Why do you only ever present a very racist framework ? Why should you be allowed to deny them their rights until they change in ways that might benefit you with no reciprocal demands be placed on your own side ? Which leads us to this comment of yours ...

" But instead they planned and launched a terrorist war against Israel’s civilian population, in the hope of unravelling the entire Israel project. " any evidence to support that claim ?

I can tell you that the Israeli side had a plan in place (Field of Thorns ) to retake and possibly expel the people of Area C with thr drills for this starting as early as April 2000 months before Sharon heightened tensions to exploding point at the Al Aqsa mosque and the subsequent riots saw the IDF kill Palestiians in droves before any suicide bombings against Israelis took place. I have pointed this sequence of events out to you before and you afair have always chose to be quiet on how the sequence of events actually played out

 

[Fledermaus]

A more broad reply to the rest of what is undeniable that which you accuse others of " Revisionist garbage and half truths

Who owns Gaza now?

It's a simple question.

And what "race" is Palestinian?

You keep babbling about "racism" yet cannot define what "race" either Palestinians or Arabs are.