Hamas are terrorists..the western world must make a stand on all fronts. The Jewish nation is standing up to them and deserve our support. I am saddened by the civilian casualties though on both sides.

The Jewish law has it, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; one would now hope that they accept the global response of outrage to the slaughter of Palestinians under the same terms. Jews anywhere on the globe will now live a much more insecure existence

Does Israel have a right to exist ? Yes, alongside the multitude of other ethnic and religious groups across the Middle East.

Does Palestine have a right to exist, with a government of its own ? Yes, of course, alongside the multitude of other ethnic and religious groups across the Middle East, including Israel.

A two-state solution is preferable to these interminable wars, with the civilian populations on both sides caught in the middle. If both sides claim ALL the territory of both, then I would prefer, ultimately a single secular state, but that is obviously a hell of a long way off. In the meantime, two states, each running their own affairs without interference from the other, is what any progressive person should have to settle for.

If Hamas keeps firing rockets into Israel, then it is quite legal - and necessary - for Israel to retaliate. When Israel offers a cease-fire, and Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel, then the retaliation must continue.

Hamas has been doing this for many years now, and seems to have learnt the mathematics of it, calibrating its aggression, calculating how much retaliation it can expect in return, until the people of Gaza have enough of it all. And around we go.

Joe

Yes but how!?
When Hamas continue to cower like craven cowards, hiding behind women and children!
Israel just can't win!
If they don't react!
Then an emboldened Hamas, will up the ante! And take the current war outside Gaza's borders!
Personally, I would continue the campaign, until Hamas hollers uncle, and sues for a lasting peace!
This off and on again risible rubbish, just allows them to rearm and redeploy, and can only continue, until ordinary Palestinians stand up to them; saying, if we are going to be killed anyway, then it should be at a time and place of our own choosing; and against the very madmen, who are patently prosecuting/perpetuating this war!
Rhrosty.

Until the Israeli gov't stops harassing the Palestinians in the illegally settled West Bank, stirring up trouble then the Palestinians will retaliate. The deaths of all those killed on the heads of Netanyahu and his fascist cronies.

A snapshot...

“We’re not really running a capitalist system. We are running a credit system. Instead of using savings, we are using credit. Credit, the way we are doing it now, is really a form of counterfeiting. If you look at the $72 trillion shadow banking system that we have operating right now, that is generating this credit . . . it collapsed in 2008 . . . and now it’s on a hairy edge. “I think 2008 was an early warning signal of the magnitude of the problem.

One of the top priorities at the Bilderberg meeting was the Ukraine crisis and sanctions being not so effectively pushed by President Obama.

On Thursday, the European Central Bank (ECB) took the historically unprecedented step of lowering certain of its interest rates below 0%.

The Jewish Encyclopedia: “Khazars, a non-Semitic, Asiatic, Mongolian tribal nation who emigrated into Eastern Europe about the first century, who were converted as an entire nation to Judaism in the seventh century by the expanding Russian nation which absorbed the entire Khazar population, and who account for the presence in Eastern Europe of the great numbers of Yiddish-speaking Jews.

These worldviews are developed, promulgated, and defended by a network of think tanks, committees, public policy schools, and government agencies that don't always agree on what should be done (or which problems deserve most priority) but that are all committed to using U.S. power a lot. ... foreign policy is shaped by a bipartisan class of foreign policy do-gooders who spend years out of power maneuvering to get in, and spend their time in office trying to advance whatever their own pet project(s) might be. Having scratched and clawed to get themselves on the inside, the people who run foreign policy are not likely to counsel restraint, or to suggest that the United States and the rest of the world might be better off if Washington did a bit less. After all, what's the point of being a big shot in Washington if you can't use all that power to try to mold the world to your liking?

Not only has Israel lost the propaganda war but the objects of both sides when assessed show Hamas is likely to achieve it's objective and Israel has admitted it cannot achieve any of its objectives.

Just as was the case in Lebanon.

Negotiations are taking place to lift the Israeli illegal blockade of Gaza. That will be lifted.
That was Hamas aim and it's success on taking on Israel over this issue and succeeding lifts their status as representative of Gaza n's if not all Palestinian's. Result total victory at the cost of 2000 lives.
Israelis stated objectives were to destroy Hamas, demilitarized Gaza and destroy the tunnels. It had limited success in claiming to destroy about one third of the tunnels. Result total capitulation at the cost of a 100 Israeli lives.

So who won?

No - one until both sides adopt the philosophies of the western liberal democracies. The philosophies of forgiveness and peacefulness. And expunge from their dark age based religions the evil philosophies of revenge and violence which the extremists on both sides use as justification for continuing, advocating and rationalizing the violence.
David you fall into which catagory?

Another laudable and logical article.

Not even the unfortunate name "Wiesel" a la weasel words can get in the way of the rolling thunder of truth.

With outside money flowing into Israel to sustain its Defence Force and Arab oil money flowing into Gaza to buy and build more rockets the livelihoods of the army of journalists in the region is assured.

Mr. Singer, the Israelis have killed far more people in this conflict than Hamas have, so who is evil?

I don't care about religion, politics or war, but I do care about human lives, and both these warring sides should be charged with murder on a grand scale...

Isn't the Palestinian gov't stating that a ceasefire must include the lifting of the illegal (collective punishment) blockade. Surely a ceasefire must entail both sides reverting to no form of invasion/intimidation which obviously includes the blockade. Why hasn't the Israeli gov't even considered (rejected) the ceasefire conditions put forward by the Palestinian gov't.

Oh here we go again.

Singer starts with “One month of fierce fighting between Israel and Hamas has resulted in an enormous propaganda victory for Hamas as horrific pictures of dead and wounded Gazan children and civilians, their destroyed homes and other buildings have appeared daily in social media and newspapers around the world.”

This is so reminiscent on Netanyahu's quip about 'telegenically' dead Palestinian children and both come from sick minds. He is trying to make the argument that because the photographs show Israel as a nation prepared to bomb along side or in UN shelters, or the homes of Hamas officials containing their families, or wholesale leveling of entire neighbourhoods then the subsequent approbation from the rest of the world is a victory for Hamas. What is bad for Israel must be good for Hamas despite having 1800 of its citizens who were alive a month ago now dead. What a contorted sense of morality.

He then speaks of “Hamas is attempting to gain continuing success in its campaign to denigrate and demonize Israel.”. My god Hamas doesn't have computer labs full of paid university students stalking social media;

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/08/14/israel-pay-students-propaganda_n_3755782.html

It doesn't have extensive and powerful lobbying groups hammering the Western media nor does it have a slick media production unit like the IDF. What it does do is give a relatively free reign to foreign journalists. It is their reports and images that has so vividly shown the evil wrought and so soundly denigrate and demonize Israel, and rightly so.

Next Singer trots this out;

“Hamas rejected the continuation of a 72 hour ceasefire that ended at 8.00 am on 8 August – hoping to again induce Israel into retaliating against Hamas and the myriad other terrorist groups embedded in Gaza as they continue their indiscriminate firing of more than 3300 rockets so far into Israeli population centres from rocket launchers positioned in Gazan civilian population centres.”

No Hamas rejected a ceasefire that did not include negotiations on ending the crippling and illegal blockading of these blighted people, again rightly so.

Cont...

Cont..

Then he goes on to quote Gregory Baskin, and how the Hamas charter refuses to recognise the Jewish state of Israel, but Baskin makes this very solid point; “Outright, Hamas believes Israel does not have the right to exist. It recently, however, formed a government with Fatah, the major Palestinian political group, and the newly formed Palestinian Unity Government does recognize the State of Israel.”

Finally he has the audacity to inflict on us the following quote from Elie Wiesel;

“What we are suffering through today is not a battle of Jew versus Arab or Israeli versus Palestinian. Rather, it is a battle between those who celebrate life and those who champion death. It is a battle of civilization versus barbarism.”

In 1948 Elie Wiesel ”became involved with the Irgun, translating articles from Hebrew to Yiddish for its periodicals.” In other words he was in the propaganda section of a recognised terrorist organisation responsible for the King David hotel bombings and during the time he was involved committed among other terrorist acts the Deir Yassin massacre. It “took place on April 9, 1948, when around 120 fighters from the Irgun Zevai Leumi and Lohamei Herut Israel Zionist paramilitary groups attacked Deir Yassin near Jerusalem, a Palestinian Arab village of roughly 600 people.”

“Around 107 villagers were killed during and after the battle for the village, including women and children—some were shot, while others died when hand grenades were thrown into their homes. Several villagers were taken prisoner and may have been killed after being paraded through the streets of West Jerusalem, though accounts vary.”
Wikipedia

Weisel and Singer need to tell us was this a 'battle of civilization versus barbarism' or alternatively they can spare us the hypocrisy.

Susan you say "Mr. Singer, the Israelis have killed far more people in this conflict than Hamas have, so who is evil?"

How many are killed on what side does not an argument make.

By your logic Susan, Churchill was in the wrong when he flattened Dresden in February 1945 with up to 25,000 German civilians killed. And Truman was wrong when in August 1945 he ordered the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which pulverised 135,000 Japanese.

These two men saved more Allied lives with their actions. And brought forward the end of the war.

Susieonline.

The RAF and US Fifth Air force killed far more German civilians than the Luftwaffe killed British civilians.

Which side was therefore evil? The western democracies or the Nazis?

Think before you type.

Dear Lego and Jonathon

Here is the lesson that shows the difference between the Jews of Israel and the Christian west. It is a difference of philosophy.

Yes the west destroyed cities and killed civilians, in pursuit of a just peace.
After the war the west punished war criminals, rebuilt the Cities and economies of our enemies. We encouraged reconnection with the world.
We didn't exact retributions. We learned that lesson after the first war. We learn lessons and try not repeat mistakes. We did not repress with lengthy occupation nor indulge in stealing our former enemies lands. We became friends, allies and traded with our former enemies.

That was consistent with our philosophies of forgiveness and peacefulness.

Now these people you support, can you show me how they emulate our western behaviours?

You can't you can only show part parallels all of which in isolation are in essence evil, when adopted without the just war, the consequent forgiving, assistance, peacefulness and freedom.

Cheers and may my god bless you. The one you support only seems to seek vengeance and retribution.

Well we cannot accuse Grahamy of bias. Hamas was created by Israel to eliminate the PLO. They needed a real enemy to justify the extermination of the Palestinians.

ISIS was created by the Israel/USA,but like Saddham Hussein whom the US created,they have got out of control and look like taking the largest oil supplies in the Kurd region. The Kurd region is the 9th largest oil producing region on the planet.

We all agree that Hamas is evil & must be defeated. I don't know why Israel stopped. They should have gone house to house throughout the entire length of Gaza. It's only about 40k, X 12km. Killed all the Hamas leaders, destroyed all the arms of Hamas & removed any weapons from all Muslim people in Gaza & the West Bank. Any Muslim caught with a weapon is considered a Terrorist & killed immediately.

Let's not buggarize around with Political Correctness just because some sooky woofs might cry.

If you want to join more dots, listen. Prior 1936 Jews and Palestinians lived in harmony. Along came the Rothschild Banking family of the Khazars from Kharazira and decided they needed their own country. Hence the beginning of Zionism.

The Rothschilds are the major owners of the US Federal Reserve, Bank of International Settlements and thus control the IMF and World Bank. They control our pollies and most of our big corporations via the power of money creation. This is why Israel is untouchable.

Loudmouth,

"If Hamas keeps firing rockets into Israel, then it is quite legal - and necessary - for Israel to retaliate. When Israel offers a cease-fire, and Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel, then the retaliation must continue.

Hamas has been doing this for many years now, and seems to have learnt the mathematics of it, calibrating its aggression, calculating how much retaliation it can expect in return, until the people of Gaza have enough of it all. And around we go."

Perhaps you might read this:

"Israel has broken my heart: I’m a rabbi in mourning for a Judaism being murdered by Israel"

http://www.salon.com/2014/08/04/israel_has_broken_my_heart_i%E2%80%99m_a_rabbi_in_mourning_for_a_judaism_being_murdered_by_israel/

"I always told myself that the dominant humanity of the Jewish people and the compassionate strain within Torah would reassert itself once Israel felt secure.

That belief began to wane in the past eight years when Israel, faced with a Palestinian Authority that promoted nonviolence and sought reconciliation and peace, ignored the Saudi Arabian-led peace initiative that would have granted Israel the recognition that it had long sought, an end to hostilities, and a recognized place in the Middle East, refused to stop its expansion of settlements in the West Bank and imposed an economically crushing blockade on Gaza. Even Hamas, whose hateful charter called for Israel’s destruction, had decided to accept the reality of Israel’s existence, and while unable to embrace its “right” to exist, nevertheless agreed to reconcile with the Palestinian Authority and in that context live within the terms that the PA would negotiate with Israel.

Yet far from embracing this new possibility for peace, the Israeli government used that as its reason to break off the peace negotiations..."

"But it is the brutality of that assault that finally has broken me into tears and heartbreak...."

Ima and markjohnconley:

Illegal blockade? Not according to the UN 2011 Palmer report:

"The Panel therefore concludes that Israel’s naval blockade was legal"

You might hold a personal opinion that the blockade is not legal, but that's as far as it goes.

And Mark, the Israeli government does not object to the lifting of the blockade, as long as it includes the demilitarisation of Gaza. I guess they got tired of having rockets raining down on them, not really sure why.

Ima:

You bring the example of your fantasy Christian Western society again, and the efforts to rebuild the cities and economies from the destruction inflicted on the Axis powers during WW2. Can I remind you once again that when Israel left Gaza in 2005, it left substantial infrastructure behind to assist Gaza to rebuild its economy. There was no revenge inflicted on Gaza by Israel, no blockade, no occupation and no retribution. How did this experiment turn out? The philosophy you promote has been tried and failed miserably.

“We didn't exact retributions. We learned that lesson after the first war. We learn lessons and try not repeat mistakes”

If memory serves there was a second world war after the first, disproving your theory again.
And let’s be realistic. Your notions of forgiveness and Christian philosophies belong in the bible or in poetry, not in international relations. Countries act on national interest, nothing else. This has always been the case and always will be.

Arjay:

You never fail to entertain. ISIS was created by Israel? I must have missed that priceless piece of information. Was it in the SMH this morning?

Regarding your theory about Khazars and the peaceful coexistence of Jews and Arabs prior to 1936: please google the violent Arab riots of 1921 and 1929. The fascinating theory about the mass conversion of Khazars to Judaism has already been debunked. And as for the alleged control the Rothschilds hold over the IMF, World Bank, our governments, fast food joints and global warming – was this something they decided on during the last Elders of Zion meeting?

Dear Avw,

Quote;

(Reuters) - Israel's naval blockade of the Gaza Strip violates international law, a panel of human rights experts reporting to a U.N. body said on Tuesday, disputing a conclusion reached by a separate U.N. probe into Israel's raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship.

The so-called Palmer Report on the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid, but its naval blockade of the Hamas-ruled strip was legal.

A panel of five independent U.N. rights experts reporting to the U.N. Human Rights Council rejected that conclusion, saying the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

End quote

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913

Dear SR:

The "so-called" Palmer report was an official UN report. No doubt there are some "so-called" human rights experts who disagree with it (lead by Richard Falk, not surprisingly), just like other such experts agree with it. So what?

As for your previous comment, "...Hamas rejected a ceasefire that did not include negotiations on ending the crippling and illegal blockading...":
Leaving aside your rejection of the UN support regarding the legality of the blockade, your statement is incorrect. Hamas rejected the ceasefire not because it did not include negotiations on the ending the blockade. According to Israeli negotiators the blockade can be lifted as soon as Hamas agree for Gaza to be demilitarised. It is demilitarisation that Hamas refuse to accept, even if the blockade is lifted in return. The reason is obvious: they wish to prolong the violence. This is not some benevolent organisation we are dealing with here. They have zero regards for Israeli civilians or their own. By taking their weapons and arsenal of terror away from them you take away their reason for existence. Think ISIS, or Boko Haram, as examples.

You further quote Gregory Baskin in saying that Hamas formed a government with Fatah. This, unfortunately, changes nothing. Have they changed their charter? Have they renounced their stated ambition to eliminate Israel?

Dear Avw,

Sorry mate but you really should resist the urge to be a conniving young fellow. You have challenged references to the 'illegal blockade' with the Palmer Report which clearly makes a distinction between the land and air blockade and the naval one.

“The naval blockade is often discussed in tandem with the Israeli restrictions on the land crossings to Gaza. However, in the Panel’s view, these are in fact two distinct concepts which require different treatment and analysis.”

And

“We therefore treat the naval blockade as separate and distinct from the controls at the land crossings. … the legal elements of the naval blockade are analyzed on their own.”

So its conclusion regarding the blockade of Gaza?

“The Panel underlines the reaffirmation by the Quartet on 21 June 2010, shortly
after the flotilla incident, that the situation in Gaza, including the humanitarian and
human rights situation of the civilian population, was unsustainable, unacceptable and not
in the interests of any of those concerned. That appears also to be a widespread view in
the international community. It is clear that the restrictions Israel has placed on goods
and persons entering and leaving Gaza via the land crossings continue to be a significant
cause of that situation.”

Still the Palmer Report was fraught and Falk was perfectly correct in challenging the notion that the naval blockade can be separated from the rest of the land and air blockade enforced by Israel.

You have been rather naughty haven't you.

Cont..

LEGO,

'The RAF and US Fifth Air force killed far more German civilians than the Luftwaffe killed British civilians.

Which side was therefore evil? The western democracies or the Nazis?'

The words 'moral' and 'simpleton' come to mind.

Jonathon,

'By your logic Susan, Churchill was in the wrong when he flattened Dresden in February 1945 with up to 25,000 German civilians killed.'

The Germans had well and truly lost the war by February 1945. Most fair minded people would agree that the bombing of Dresden was unnecessary and didn't speed up the end of the war at all.

'And Truman was wrong when in August 1945 he ordered the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which pulverised 135,000 Japanese. These two men saved more Allied lives with their actions. And brought forward the end of the war.'

Oh, I get it. So Israel starts a war to kill Palestinian civilians so they can finish the war more quickly to save lives. That's logical. Why don't you just use a nuclear bomb too?

Next you'll tell us Hamas fighters are the Wehrmacht and the firecrackers they send over are by Wernher von Braun. Truth is the V1s and V2 used by the nazis were probably a fair bit more sophisticated than the missiles used by Hamas some 70 year later.

To paraphrase Churchill, you guys certainly do think differently.

Thank you, dane,

"The Germans had well and truly lost the war by February 1945. Most fair minded people would agree that the bombing of Dresden was unnecessary and didn't speed up the end of the war at all...."

I was watching a program recently on one of the men who took part in Bomber Command in the bombing of Dresden. Apparently he and his fellows were shunned to an extent after. They were not accorded a heroic reputation, were quietly ignored for their efforts in obeying orders to raze Dresden - there's no honour in hideous overkill.

The bombing of Dresden was "wrong" - as is the hideous assault of unarmed civilians being chased up and down the streets of Gaza, massacred where they cowered in homes, schools and hospitals.

The reason Israel is losing the "propaganda" war is because in these days of rapid communication - the world was apprised instantly of what they were doing - and no amount of whitewash or mitigation can erase what our eyes were seeing.

To Julianthenutter.

Pick up some history books instead of your Christian rose closured glasses.

For 400 years the British have gone to war in Europe for a sound political reason. They will not tolerate any European nation using military force to subjugate all of Europe, because they are smart enough to figure out that they will eventually be invaded as the last man standing. They don't do it to save the world, they do it for survival. Proclaiming that you are killing millions for a higher good is a cultural universal. Hitler did exactly the same thing, except unlike the British, he really did believe what he was doing was moral. He proclaimed that he had to save Europe from Jewish Communism and he too thought that killing millions was worth the price.

The reason why we had show trials of Nazis instead of the other way around, is because we managed to narrowly win, instead of the Germans. If the Germans had won, they would now be saying that they were the ones who only went to war for a just cause.

Russia and Poland annexed German land as reparations, and I think that France grabbed a bit of Germany too. We helped the Germans and the Japs primarily because we did not want to drive them into the Communist camp. We hanged hundreds of Germans 12 at a time, and most of the poor bastards were just ordinary bureaucrats and soldiers who were obeying orders they dared not to disobey.

During WW2, the allies were aware of what the Germans were doing to the Jews and the Gypsies, and they did nothing. Despite pleas from Jewish organisations for the allies to bomb the railways leading into the camps, the Allies refused. The reason why our peaceful and forgiving Christian civilisations refused is probably because they agreed with what Hitler was doing. I don't know if that is true, but the Jews sure as hell believe it. That is why they realised that they would never be safe from their persecutors unless they had a country of their own.

The Jews went back to Israel which has been their ancient homeland since the day they stole it from somebody else. But that is hardly unique. Go back in history and every modern state today is the product of a stronger tribe overcoming a weaker one.

But the racist Arabs reacted to the Jews self immigrating into Israel in a similar way to racist Australians reacted to the self immigrating "refugee" boat people. They didn't like it. It is funny how people like yourself can see Australian racism but are unable to recognise Arab racism.

But unlike Australians, the Arabs reacted violently The Arabs are much more racist and violent than Australians because their religion teaches them to be that way. The Muslims know that Palestine is Muslim because they stole it from the Christians and Jews, fair and square. No multiculturalism for the Muslims. No partition of the caliphate. No your side of the fence, and our side. Islam is uppermost.
You do what we say, or you have to fight all of us.

And that is what it all boils down to. There is a geographic location and only one culture can rule it. Neither side will compromise. The Jews need it for survival, and the Muslims want it because the existence of Jewish state is an affront to their God.

The Jews wanted partition but the Muslims did not. Even now they will not accept Israel's right to exist.
And the more the Muslims will not accept it, and the more they use military force and terror to crush Israel, and the more the Muslims show the world what happens to their defeated enemies, the more land the Israelis will take from the Muslims. Because taking resources from the enemies who are sworn to your annihilation is a practical military necessity. The Jews know all about annihilation and this time they are not going quietly. The British mass murdered German civilians to ensure their own survival and the Israelis are doing similar with infinitely less civilian casualties. What I see is moral equivalence.

Great post Lego --though I think it will go straight over the heads of nutter and co.

And just to add a footnote. Here's an excerpt from a Muslim source:

“The 1967 war, in which Israel defeated several Arab countries, rubbed salt in the wound by underscoring the collective weakness of Muslim countries…But the loss of Jerusalem to Israel was a blow not just to Arab countries,but Muslim around the world… with the loss of Aqsa Mosque to Israel, many Muslims felt that ISLAM HAD LOST ITS FORMER GLORY “
Khaled Abou El Fadl [Professor of Law at the University of California] in his book “The Great Theft: Wresting Islam From The Extremists”

Dear SR:

The Palmer inquiry made no determination as to the legality of the restrictions on land crossings between Gaza and Israel. Bringing up this issue is therefore irrelevant and adds nothing to this discussion. The inquiry did, however, make a clear determination that the naval blockade was perfectly legal, and that fact IS relevant. In any case, unlike the naval blockade, Israel is clearly not capable of imposing a complete land blockade as it does not surround Gaza on all sides.

Your isolated quotation from the Palmer report regarding the cause of the situation in Gaza should be read in context, as I'm sure you are aware. It should be read with the following comment in mind:

"Israel has faced and continues to face a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza... More than 5,000 [rockets] were fired between 2005 and January 2009, when the naval blockade was imposed. Hundreds of thousands of Israeli civilians live in the range of these attacks... It seems obvious enough that stopping these violent acts was a necessary step for Israel to take in order to protect its people and to defend itself"

Richard Falk has been criticised or denounced by so many countries and organisations, including the US, the UK, Canada, the EU and the UN Secretary General, with repeated calls demanding his resignation. It is hard to imagine that anyone still takes him seriously. An avid anti-Semitic, he is a confused individual who supports terrorism, churns out wrong analyses (his praise of Ayatollah Khomeini is a great example), and an enthusiastic supporter of conspiracy theories, such as the one regarding the 9/11 attacks. His true colours and heavy bias in relation to this conflict are very clear. Your reliance on such "experts" only helps to detract from your argument.

I will resist the temptation to return your personal jibes. Regardless of what I think of you personally it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. But feel free to continue attacking me personally if you believe it strengthens your claims.

"....More than 5,000 [rockets] were fired between 2005 and January 2009, when the naval blockade was imposed. Hundreds of thousands of Israeli civilians live in the range of these attacks... It seems obvious enough that stopping these violent acts was a necessary step for Israel to take in order to protect its people and to defend itself"

Between 2001 and 2014 - 28 people have been killed by Hamas rockets.

Not condoning them...just putting some perspective on the range and effectiveness of these "rockets".

<<Between 2001 and 2014 - 28 people have been killed by Hamas rockets>>

I wonder how many were injured or traumatized--"trauma studies" are BIG BIG BIG in academia when it relates to such issues as American slavery or Palestinians.

SPQR,

Yes..I imagine many more were injured and many more again traumatised.

Psychologically, it is a real problem.

Israel now has Iron Dome to help.

However, it would be far better if Israel worked toward a solution instead of undermining agreements, blockading Gaza, continuing settlements on the West Bank....etc

Much, much better than rolling into the ghetto they've created and slaughtering the people herded there.

Simple, Poirot - stop the rockets and recognise the right of Israel to exist. Perhaps all else that you say you seek will follow from those two decisions of Hamas.

Joe

Avw
my god still loves you even in you ignorance. The west is based in the philosophies of forgiveness and peace. You seem to not understand that we often err but we acknowledge our mistakes and do our best not to repeat them.

Germany's rise of National Socialism was a direct result of the reparations imposed on Germany after the first ware. After the second war we did things differently.

Our philosophies are often at the centre of our international relations.

Have you read my poetry? Someone in Israel has. Now if I was paranoid or paralysed by fear ...

Lego
You should read the new testament. Christs Sermon on the Mount. He still loves you.
Spqr
Actually like the good Aussie I am I let it go through to the keeper. It was just too wide. Seriously it wouldn't have troubled even the 11th man.

"Stop the rockets and recognise the right of Israel to exist"

A deceitful mantra that is at last, thankfully, being engulfed by a worldwide backlash and not only from the victims.

Well may the German conquerors (temporary, thanks to Allied thousand-bomber raids and millions of marching feet) have whined that the reprisal massacres at Lidice and Oradour-sur-Glane and the Ardientine Caves and many other places could have ceased if the Resistance submen had only stopped taking potshots at the occupying Übermenschen.

All they had to do was stop the Resistance and accept the right of the Third Reich to exist.

And to occupy others' homelands.
And to expand its land grabs daily.
And to protect its hold on grabbed territory.
And to demand the material support of the rest of the world.
And, peculiar to the Third Reich, not to have to compensate anyone for the damage "Aryan" aggression did only a couple of decades ago.

It's not only the voices of the likes of foreign lobbyist David Singer that are bleating with alarm. Google the Washington Zionist think tank Middle East Forum to see how the criminals are running for cover under the non-consulted umbrella of world Jewry. Yup, y'got it. The backlash is "antisemitism, stupid".

‘I will resist the temptation to return your personal jibes. Regardless of what I think of you personally it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. But feel free to continue attacking me personally if you believe it strengthens your claims.’

From the person who posted the following:

‘Frankly, I don't think your reading, if you indeed do any of it, extends beyond radical left wing publications producing the usual Israel hating material.’
Posted by Avw, Thursday, 31 July 2014 7:27:07 AM

‘My reading extends from the Christian New Testament, the Old Testament, the classic Greeks, Romans, Russians, Europeans, the Romantics through the great liberal traditions, the British classics, American classics. I have read all the great moralists from Augustine , Aquinas, Gregory and much of the encyclical literature of the 20th century Catholic church.
I subscribe to the great western Liberal traditions and reject socialism in all its forms. I have read much of the traditions of the literature of the Hebrew and Muslim religions. I have read some Asian literature and have a little knowledge of eastern spirituality.’
Posted by imajulianutter, Sunday, 3 August 2014 6:05:48 AM

‘yet all you can do is boast about the number of (largely irrelevant) books you've read’
Posted by Avw, Monday, 4 August 2014 11:29:08 PM

Don’t you feel even a little hypocrisy avw?

‘Christianity was not denounced by you as a "backward religion", presumably because it preaches to turn the other cheek, which happens to conform to your childish hippie mentality.’
Posted by Avw, Monday, 4 August 2014 11:29:08 PM


And of course not because it underlines our whole western civilisation which you no doubt also find childish and hippie?

Avw we westerners don’t repeat our more stupid mistakes.
You blokes just put your heads down and stupidly keep hitting blindly at the same brick wall.

How can anyone be expected to debate reasonably with your gymnastic performances?

Johnathan J Ariel,

"How many are killed on what side does not an argument make."

Oh yes it does, particularly when the debate concerns (1) just conduct in a war or, indeed, whether a war is just. You're begging the question, historians don't all agree on whether or not the destruction of Dresden or the use of nuclear weapons against Japan was morally or strategically defensible.

Suseonline has a valid argument.

As to the Zionist war against the Palestinians, it has no ethical justification, therefore it's an unjust war.

leggo, see Irgun and Lehi (Stern gang) ......

Post limits.

Cont..

Don't you think calling for Palestinians to give away their right to defend themselves is hypocritical in the extreme. Apparently we are asked to accept that Israel's right to defend itself allows it to get away with war crimes. If Hamas disarmed how are they going to protect themselves the next time Israel's blood lust is stirred again by Likud? Are they to watch Palestinians shot in the streets, hundreds kidnapped, beaten, tortured, their houses and businesses destroyed, all without lifting a finger?

Speaking of Likud here is their Charter, tell me how it differs from Hamas in denying another peoples their right to nationhood?

a. “The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.”

b. “Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel. The government will flatly reject Palestinian proposals to divide Jerusalem”

c. “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.”

d. “The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel.

Re your reply to the first part of my post.

Either you were fully appraised of the report yet chose to stretch its limited determination on the naval blockade into a judgement about the legality of the entire blockade thus deserving of the label 'conniving' or you were ignorant of the content of the report to such a degree that you and quoted it blindly. Given your familiarity with aspects I was inclined to go with the former but assume the following was an admission;

“The Palmer inquiry made no determination as to the legality of the restrictions on land crossings between Gaza and Israel. Bringing up this issue is therefore irrelevant and adds nothing to this discussion.”

If that is the case I withdraw the 'conniving' label.

Ima:

I haven’t read your poetry, I prefer to face reality rather than live in fantasy, such as "The west is based in the philosophies of forgiveness and peace". It's time to face facts: international relations are not dictated by any lofty notions of "forgiveness and peace". They never were, and never will be. Countries act according to their national interests based on their needs at the time. Was it peace and forgiveness that drove the Americans into Korea and Vietnam? Or the British into the Falklands, French into Vietnam and Algeria, French and British into Suez (the list goes on and on)? Or is it possible that they simply took action based on their interests?

We in the real west, rather than some imaginary western society in a faraway parallel universe, act pragmatically and operate according to the needs of our society. You blokes just keep your head in the clouds dreaming about a fictional world order based on some utopia described in one version of the bible. How can anyone be expected to have a logical argument with a fantasy?

My assessment regarding your reading material and how irrelevant it was to our conversation was a valid point and not a personal jibe. It was an honest opinion based on your comments. I only raised it following your attempt at attacking the scope of my reading material:

"...fortunately my reading unlike yours appears to be broader in scope than the daily propaganda sheets and talking points of the Israel propaganda factory"

Posted by imajulianutter, Thursday, 31 July 2014 5:31:49 AM

Is this the real hypocrisy?

I didn't accuse you of being "a conniving young fellow" or "rather naughty". Can you see the difference? Coming from someone who accuses people of being "genocidal liars" for daring to confront his theories as you have, without providing a shred of evidence to back his accusation, don't you think it's a little rich for you to consider my comments a personal jibe? In any case, I'm sure SR can look after himself and has no need for you to protect his interests.

Hey V dub

My reading list you find irrelevant and mired in fantasy is a reading list promulgated by the greatest Western minds as the history of western philosophy.
Have a perusal of Bertrand Russell and the efforts of Jacques Barzun.

Nothing I have said would find them disagreeing with me.

I could imagine both scathing in their criticizm of you at your disavowing the results of our enshrined western traditions and your attempt to trash them in favor of the traditions of some dark age religious dominated mid eastern culture.

Btw enshrined in the Israeli constitution is that the laws of Israel are to be based in the ancient Hebrew bible. Is that a realist position given that those traditions have resulted in ejection from Egypt, ejection from Palestine by the Romans, progroms in Russia and other east European lands, genocide in Germany, and rocket attacks by Hezbollah and Hamas.

Have a quick check of George Washington's farewell address. Pay particular attention to his remarks about foreign relations. It is quite poignant and reflection will show how a great philosophy is being under mind by influence peddling.

Over time our great western traditions will correct from the current deviate practices and re align with our nobler traditions.

Jez that western hippie embodied in our western traditions must really get up your nose.

Reckon you suggest the emperors might try to crucify our western hippie?

Do you think that might work eh?

You really have betrayed your loathing of the west in your current propaganda effort.

Name one Hebrew poet for me please. I don't know of any. I have read poets from most cultures.
Why do you disdain people who value poetry. It is a multi culture value. Often used for communication of the expression of philosophical thought.

Nutter,

Heine. Sassoon. Pasternak. Philo. Mandelstam. Ginsberg.

I'm not into poetry, but that's a start for you ......

Joe

And Leonard Cohen, of course :)

Imanutter:

You really need to understand the difference between philosophy and pragmatism, between fantasy and reality. So far you do not seem to grasp the distinction. Philosophy and poetry, regardless of how grand and lofty it can be, is different to the actual behaviour of nations. I am presenting you with facts: behaviour of western nations over the past forever has been dictated by practical requirements, and you bring in philosophy and poetry. How much more detached can you be from reality?

"...your attempt to trash them in favor of the traditions of some dark age religious dominated mid eastern culture..."

Can you please point out where I favoured the traditions of some dark age religious dominated mid eastern culture? Is this another fantasy?

"...enshrined in the Israeli constitution is that the laws of Israel are to be based in the ancient Hebrew bible. Is that a realist position given that those traditions have resulted in...rocket attacks by Hezbollah and Hamas"

The laws of Israel are indeed based on the ancient Hebrew bible, just as the laws of all western nations are. In case you are not aware of it, the Ten Commandments, most of which are enshrined in laws today throughout the West, came from there. That ancient Hebrew bible that you seem to be in such contempt of is actually an integral part of Christianity and Islam as well. Although it makes no difference to me what bible you choose follow, your God might not be so forgiving for dismissing such a large part of his text. As for the rocket attacks, Hamas and Hezbollah are simply adhering to their own part of the bible (the part calling for the annihilation of Jews), not because Israeli law happens to have adopted the Ten Commandments.

Cont -->

--> Cont

It is pointless to bring up George Washington’s farewell address. Once again, you need to recognise the difference between rhetoric and pragmatism.

"Over time our great western traditions will correct from the current deviate practices and re align with our nobler traditions"

Maybe, if they survive that long. But they haven't yet, and this is the first time you are acknowledging it. Maybe there is hope for you yet.

"You really have betrayed your loathing of the west in your current propaganda effort"

My loathing of the west? When did I give you that impression? I suppose if you process my posts through your fairytale filters you might reach that conclusion. In reality I wouldn't live anywhere else. I consider the pragmatic approach taken by western nations as an asset, not a drawback. The west would have ceased to exist long ago if it blindly followed the nonsense you are advocating.

As for Hebrew poets, I have already indicated to you that poetry does not appeal to me, but if you're really interested I'm sure Google and Wikipedia can assist you in your quest.

Contrary to your claim, I have no issue with people who value poetry. The problem arises when some people are unable to distinguish between poetry and reality.

Thanks Joe. I'll read them all with interest.

Out of interest do you know how many reside or resided outside Europe or The US. Yes it is significant as those who didn't a re likely to be unaffected by western traditions and in essence likely to portray a purer community philosophical sense.
Thanks again. I'll be reading much this weekend.

Cheers Joe.

It's interesting to visit a Singer site now and again and see how many people are still dancing to his mischievous, divise tune which seeks to confuse the issues so that Israel, with U.S. help, can continue its imperial quest to establish Greater Israel!

As I read through the comments, I know I've read them all before, many times. Nothing changes, nothing is achieved, just the same old arguments ad nauseum!

Singer should've been choked off ages ago. Why feed a poisonous vine?

Hey V dub
Mate I am going to relish the opportunity you have given me.

I am writing it now and is to be along these lines.

Philosophy does not disparage pragmatism nor does it exclude it's use. Philosophy emerges from the community through the arts.

Pragmatism disparages and excludes philosophy. Pragmatism only is imposed from the top onto the community.

I would like to know your background before I present my argument as I don't want to cause offense. Education, ethnicity, gender, age etc ... just in case.
I'm an Anglo naturalised Australian, 60, male with a girlfriend, with no formal qualifications, retired, writer and poet. I live on my yacht.
I believe in no God but like the ancient Egyptians I believe in the ideas of Thoth. I also put great store in the teachings of the son of God. Particularly The Sermon on the Mount.

It is interesting you think we should all ignore the words and wisdom of the founding fathers of the greatest liberal democracy the world has ever seen.
Their wisdom in all it's diversity still applies today, even if it is being enslaved by its total support to an outside dark age influence. That is the message of Washington. Those elements are starting to reassert in the Capital of The US. Washington.
You'd fear that.

You say you don't preach the Israeli propaganda.
Probably you don't but all you say is always in alignment or supportive of everything Israel. In that you allow us to judge you on that support. You support a government inflexibly based in a dark age set of rules which now are dominated by the vengeance and violence aspects of those rules.
In such you are completely at odds with all ideas in which western liberal democracies are based.

You are thence not one of us.

Nutter,

" ....not one of us".

"Us" ?

Please count me as " .... not one of us".

Joe Lane
Henley Beach, Adelaide

Dear SR:

Are you aware that Israel does not surround Gaza from all sides? Israel controls the borders of Gaza to the west, north and east, but not to the south. Don’t you think that trumpeting the land blockade of Gaza by Israel is just a little misleading (conniving if you prefer), given that Gaza shares a border with another country? How can you blockade an area without surrounding it?

Rather than concentrating on technicalities, don't you agree that an effort should be made to get Hamas to agree to demilitarise Gaza so that any blockade can be lifted? They are not using their weaponry in order to "defend themselves" as you claim. They are using it for attacking Israeli civilians and have been doing so for the past decade. Israel has had no presence in Gaza since 2005. The only Palestinians "shot in the streets" of Gaza are those opposing Hamas, and they are being shot at by armed Hamas thugs. Don’t you think it's quite reasonable for the Israelis to insist on removing the terror weapons before agreeing to allow open borders?

Regarding the Likud charter that you brought up, we already have the head of the Likud party, Benjamin Netanyahu, endorsing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, effectively nullifying the points you quoted in your post from their old conservative charter. We are still awaiting Hamas leadership to accept Israel's right to exist. I, for one, am not holding my breath.

Dear Avw,

You wrote;

“Israel controls the borders of Gaza to the west, north and east, but not to the south. Don’t you think that trumpeting the land blockade of Gaza by Israel is just a little misleading (conniving if you prefer), given that Gaza shares a border with another country? How can you blockade an area without surrounding it?”

No, conniving would be to give the illusion that Israel has no control over the Gaza-Egypt border. The agreement with the Egyptian government is that the border is to be maintained to Israeli requirements. Prior to handing the administration of the Rafah crossing to the Egyptians the IDF demolished large numbers of Palestinian homes and built the steel fence which sits along a very extensive buffer zone. Israel's staunchest ally the US has also provided a large amount of funding to strengthen the borders fortifications. Now except on rare occasions whatever Israel and the US dictate is complied with by the Egyptians.

You asked;
“Rather than concentrating on technicalities, don't you agree that an effort should be made to get Hamas to agree to demilitarise Gaza so that any blockade can be lifted?”

Not at all. A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process the peace process one iota. A compliant Fatah has seen huge areas on the West Bank now occupied by settlers and hopes for a two state solution becoming more and more like a pipe dream. Hamas would be mad to give up its weapons as they most certainly have a right to defend themselves plus they are the only thing that keeps Israel at the table. Hamas has said that the blockade can not continue in its current form for these to be a lasting ceasefire. The Israelis are in the process of complying.

Cont..

Cont..

Hamas has a far more legitimate right to say it is acting in order to defend itself. As a power maintaining a brutal occupation Israel does not have that right. It is acting to maintain that occupation and to preserve avenues for more settlement expansion which is directly forbidden by the Geneva Convention.

And please spare us the line about Hamas attacking civilians. Just in the current conflict alone the count was 4 on the Israeli side compared to around 1500 Palestinians. It is an affront to common decency to be making that remark over the mangled remains of hundreds of dead Palestinian children.

Next you wrote this;

“Regarding the Likud charter that you brought up, we already have the head of the Likud party, Benjamin Netanyahu, endorsing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, effectively nullifying the points you quoted in your post from their old conservative charter.”

It would be a task to find a more two-faced, duplicitous, lying, sneering, leader of a country than Mr Netanyahu. How can anyone except for a zealot believe he wants an independent Palestinian state when he has driven so much of the settler expansion of the West Bank and continues to do so. It now looks like a cancerous organ with less than half still available to the Palestinians. The only difference between Hamas leadership and Netanyahu is that they do not tell the rest of the world such lies. He is dedicated to fulfilling the Likud charter and his supporters know it.

As engaging as the tit for tat has been I would like to ask you a question if I may, we can keep it a hypothetical if you like;

What is the more legitimate action, planting a bomb in a late night club in a major city of an occupying and invading nation that kills primarily those serving in its forces, or a 500lb high explosive bomb dropped on the house of a resistance leader an occupied and invaded peoples which kills most of his immediate family?

Dear SR:

Israel does NOT have any control over the border crossing between Gaza and Egypt as you suggest and there is no illusion about it. Under the Oslo accords, Israel was, in fact, entitled to keep the sliver of land between Egypt and Gaza under its control, yet it agreed to hand it over to Egypt on the condition that Egypt prevents weapon and people smuggling across the border. Don’t you think that if the Israelis were so committed to maintaining a tight blockade, keeping that land would have served their purposes? At any rate, Israel today has no control over Gaza’s southern border, as far as the ability to blockade the Gaza Strip. This can be clearly seen as Egyptian restrictions on the border crossing change according to the political mood in Egypt, not according to any dictates from Israel or the US.

“A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process [progress?] the peace process one iota”

You bring the example of “compliant Fatah” in the West Bank and the presence of settlements there. One major flaw in your argument is that Fatah was also controlling Gaza when Israel withdrew in 2005, pulling all Israeli settlements out of the territory. Hamas and its arsenal of terror weapons was not entrenched in Gaza then, therefore to imply that their violence and non-compliance today caused the end of settlements in Gaza back then is a gross distortion of facts. If anything, it is the withdrawal that caused the violence, not the other way around.

Clearly Hamas weapons are not used to defend themselves, and most certainly not to defend Gaza civilians. They are used to attack Israeli citizens. How many examples can you point to when Qassam rockets were used to defend Gaza? How will removing these rockets from Gaza harm their defence capabilities? Don’t you agree it will be a positive steps as it robs those evil Israelis from the excuse to attack Gaza?

Cont -->

--> Cont

The “brutal occupation” that you mention is another furphy, as we already know there has not been any Israeli presence in Gaza for many years, brutal or otherwise. As for the disparity in the number of civilians killed on both sides, this is due to the fact that Israel invested huge sums in defence technology, whereas Hamas poured all it had into terror weapons. Not one shelter was built for Palestinian citizens, as much of the available construction material was instead diverted into the construction of many kilometres of concrete tunnels designed to spread terror. Tunnels, mortars, rockets – all designed to hit civilians.

You are entitled to have your personal opinion about Netanyahu, but he did signal a change to the Likud policy, which is a hell of a lot more than what Hamas has done to date. Do I believe or trust him? How much do you trust any politician? Of course they can and will change their mind as circumstances change. This is not the case, unfortunately, with religious fanatics such as the ones controlling Gaza.

As to the hypothetical question you raised: plating a bomb in a night club in a major city and indiscriminately killing civilians is never legitimate, and I hope you are not suggesting that it is. When such terror acts are carried repeatedly by ruthless fanatics, it is the duty of any country to protect its citizens and stop these attacks. From what we have seen, the Israeli army made repeated attempts to protect civilians prior to any strikes, dropping leaflets, calling and texting neighbours, “roof knocking” etc. You might argue that this is not enough, but can you name any other army that went to this length to minimise civilian casualties? Did Hamas bombers inform the patrons of the night clubs before sending the terrorists in?

Imanutter:

I really have no desire to make this exchange any more personal. Personal jibes could be fun sometimes, but let’s keep personal details to a minimum.

Just a few final comments about your last post.

I'm not saying we should ignore the words and wisdom of the Founding Fathers of the US, or any other reasonable intellectuals for that matter. What I am saying is that western countries act according to their interests, not blindly following some lofty philosophies or your favourite biblical stories.

Contrary to what you believe, I don't support everything Israel does. In the case of the Gaza conflict however I do believe justice is mostly on their side.

“You support a government inflexibly based in a dark age set of rules…In such you are completely at odds with all ideas in which western liberal democracies are based”

Let’s look at this dark set of rules in Israel:

- freedom of speech and media
- free and fair elections
- equal rights for women
- equal rights for non-Jewish Israelis
- freedom of religion
- freedom of language and culture
- equal rights for sexual minorities

While it's not perfect, overall the above set of rules is generally complied with in Israel, making in far more similar to the values of a western society than Hamas. None of these rules are respected by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Not one.

“You are thence not one of us”

No, I am most definitely not one of you, and this is obvious. If I had your God on my side I would thank him for it.

To clarify one more thing – you seem to believe that I have an intense dislike of the US. I thought I clarified in my last post that this is definitely not the case.

This is my 4th post for today so I will probably not be able to respond again anytime soon. I'm not sure anything else can be added to this discussion, and in any case I like having my Sundays free of any political discussions. Will you miss me?

Very good posts, AVW, you are a real pleasure to read.

Steelredux seems to be overcome with the idealism of the founding fathers of the USA. It does not occur to him that those people who mouthed the high ideals about "all men are born free and equal" were slave owners. Whatever ideals they claimed to profess were soon sublimated to self interest. Winston Churchill noted that every revolutionary society begins with the highest ideals but always ends in corruption.

If the founding fathers of the USA were right about everything, I wonder what Steelie and julianutter think about the "right to bear arms?"

Steelredux and Iamajulianutter both appear to be idealists who put ideals over practical reality. They both think that reality must fit the ideal which they believe is the answer to everything. Please note how they always keep coming back to the argument that somebody has made some human right, or the UN says this or that, or some philosopher has said something, so this is how everything must be.

Such a position is indicative of a person who is an idealist and who thinks that altruism always takes precedence over self interest. It goes a long way in explain why so many educated Australians who hold high ideals always oppose the interests of their own people.

Anyway, that is my take on the matter. Please do not reply as I can see you have your hands full deprogramming our two Manchurian candidates. These two have trouble thinking for themselves and they parrot the ideals of others then try to make reality fit the ideal with a lot of pushing and shoving of the facts.

AVW,

I echo Legos comment -- good post.

Having just come away from a debate with Palestinian advocates on another thread. I can well relate to this point of yours:<<None of these rules are respected by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Not one>>.

I am not a Jew or a Zionist, but I can well understand why any sort of fair outcome would be hard to negotiate with the persons like those who claimed to represent the Palestinian on that thread.

My oh my - the comments condemning Israel's inherent right of self defence to end Hamas terrorists indiscriminately targeting Israeli population centers is truly amazing.

# diver dan
Will Syrians, Lebanese and Ukrainians living anywhere on the globe live a much more insecure existence as their native countries seek to defend themselves?

#Loudmouth
The two -state solution creating three states in former Palestine is dead. The one- state solution is dead in the water. The only possibility is direct negotiations between Isreal, Jordan and Egypt to allocate sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza between them.

#Rhosty
You hit the nail on the head. Fresh elections for the first time in eight years need to be held to give Gazan and West Bank Arabs a voice in their future.

#markjohnconley
What came first - the Israeli chicken that unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in 2005 or the Hamas Egg that took control of Gaza in 2007 and started its campaign of terror against Israel's civilian population?

#Albie Manton
Seems you posted to wrong article.

#plantaganet
The press have a new name -Press- titutes. They sell themselves for a story fed to them by Hamas propagandists.

#Suseonline
Have you posted anywhere to express your revulsion at the deaths of 180000 people in Syria or the slaughter currently being carried out by the Islamic State?

More to follow when I have the time ....

Hi Joe

Seems I'd recommend the reading of Siege red Samson to all the protagonists in all wars.

He despised war and the havoc they wreck.

Great read.
Truly a great western poet.

Nutter,

You mean Siegfried Sassoon ?

Dear Avw,

It is an assault on our intelligence if you are putting the proposition that Israel has no control over the Gaza border with Egypt. Why on earth do the Gazan people have to drag virtually all their supplies through hundreds of tunnels hundreds of metres long if this were true? Sure during the Morsi rule of around a years there were some lifting of the restrictions on people, especially those on pilgrimage, but by and large the Israeli blockade on goods was honoured in principle by the Egyptians. You might argue that there was a blind eye turned toward the tunnel operations, especially by bribed locals, but you can't say the overt restrictions on food, medicine, seeds, fertilisers, building materials, fuel, cars, machinery etc would not have been in place without the insistence from Israel.

This next statement from you I will put down to ignorance;

“You bring the example of “compliant Fatah” in the West Bank and the presence of settlements there. One major flaw in your argument is that Fatah was also controlling Gaza when Israel withdrew in 2005, pulling all Israeli settlements out of the territory. Hamas and its arsenal of terror weapons was not entrenched in Gaza then, therefore to imply that their violence and non-compliance today caused the end of settlements in Gaza back then is a gross distortion of facts. If anything, it is the withdrawal that caused the violence, not the other way around.”

Mantras and platitudes can not replace the facts.

This is a map of Gaza prior to the Israeli pull out in 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/middle_east_enl_1118332206/html/1.stm

It is clear to see how it was being carved up by Israeli settlements and access corridors. Without resistance this illegal occupation would have continued to spread and Gaza would have resembled the West Bank today. The first mortar was fired at a settlement in January 2001. After that a steady barrage was maintained, mostly by non-PA elements despite heavy reprisals by the IDF. The vast majority of mortars were directed at the occupier's settlements within Gaza.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2001

Cont..

Cont..

It wasn't until July that a mortar shell was fired in the West Bank into an Israeli settlement and such attacks were spasmodic and very rare.

The Gaza attacks included rockets only after October 2001.

2002 - 17 rockets and 455 mortar shells

2003 - At least 123 rockets and 514 mortars

2004 - 882 mortar shells and 276 Qassam rockets

2005 - 574 mortar shells and 286 Qassam rockets in the early part of the year.

Wikipedia

Israel withdrew its settlements and forces in September. It took 5 years from start to finish and a lot of Palestinian lives but the armed resistance by the Gazan population saw an end to the occupation of the Gaza Strip. Clearly the Qassam rockets played a part in defending Gaza from direct occupation and they continue to defend it from future encroachment by Israeli settlers.

This sir is history, you are entitled to present a different narrative but please do me the courtesy of attempting to do so based on the facts.

For those living in the West Bank to have any chance of removing the occupiers from their land can you give me any other viable option with a realistic chance of success other than using mortars and rockets? The PA has acted like the Vichy government did in France and where has it got them? Is it really such a surprise that Hamas would have the support it has within Gaza? They are standing and fighting against the occupation and I have no doubt that their insistence that any current cease fire includes an easing of the Israeli blockade will succeed.

Next you wrote;

“Not one shelter was built for Palestinian citizens, as much of the available construction material was instead diverted into the construction of many kilometres of concrete tunnels designed to spread terror. Tunnels, mortars, rockets – all designed to hit civilians.”

No, most of the construction material was used to create buildings for Gazans to live in, to build hospitals and schools that had been destroyed during Operation Cast Lead.

http://vimeo.com/101819495

Cont...

Cont...

Indeed what you're saying is that Hamas should have known that Israel would be back to inflict the civilian population with death and destruction so should have put all this material into bomb shelters.

To my question.

For the record I think both actions are reprehensible but let us break this down a little. Military training to kill Palestinians is compulsory in Israel and most adults of fighting age are either on active service or able to be called up as reservists. In an Israeli night club the vast proportion of those in attendance would be of military age and trained therefore a bomb placed in this environment would have a good chance of targeting mainly service personnel.

Compare that to this report from Bt'Selem;

“Airstrikes on homes formed a major part of the policy implemented by the Israeli military from the start of this bout of fighting in Gaza. The scope of these airstrikes as well as the length of time that they persisted indicate that they were likely authorized by senior military and political officials, and were also granted advance sanction by the Military Advocate General Corps and the Ministry of Justice.”

“As part of that policy, homes were bombed every day, more and more civilians were killed and entire families were obliterated. Even compared to previous bouts of fighting in Gaza, the number and frequency of incidents this time around was unusually high, with many people killed each time, mostly civilians who did not take part in the hostilities. For instance, on 20 July 2014 an airstrike on a building in Bani Suheila – a neighborhood northeast of Khan Yunis – killed 26 people from the Abu Jame' family, including 19 minors and five women; the bombing of a residential buildings on 26 July 2014 killed 20 members of the a-Najar family, including 12 minors, six women, and a 60-year-old man; an airstrike on an apartment building in Khan Yunis on 29 July 2014 killed 35 people from four families – including 18 minors and eight women.”
http://www.btselem.org/gaza_strip/20140811_a_death_foretold

Which is the least legitimate action?

Joe, yes Sassoon, bloody auto text on my phone changes everything.

Jo you are one of us. We have different opinions. I and you subscribe to the view we should respect each other.

That is the philosophy that underpins our interaction and our community.

v dub on the other hand trashes the whole relevance and concept of philosophy.

Then does he then share our values?

The answer, if he is unable to recognise the links between our philosophical evolving and our community behaviours, is no.

Why not?

That answer lies in the fact both you and I are prepared to be open about ourselves. Both you and I belong to a society that has evolved over time.

Take the bible for instance. Over time we have had at least 5 bibles. Each changed to meet evolving circumstances and community beliefs. eg the position of women in community. At one time our bible told us they were the chattels of men. Throughout each re write of our bible and beliefs there have been changes to reflect the changing place of women in society. Our development of views on these came from the community and our bible changed to accommodate these changes. The bible was last re written by the Catholic Church in the 1960's.

The Islamic Quran and the Jewish Bible have never evolved and today women in both religions cannot even preach in their temples or mosques. Essentially they are books of rules, with conflicting rules. There is no philosophical process allowing change. They are stuck in the practises of the past and will go on repeating the behaviours.

In the west philosophy allows us to evolve. Our great minds say all philosophy comes from the community and we change. In the mid east there is no philosophy only rules handed down by gods and they cannot change the rules. Sadly both religions have rules for peace and violence and it very much depends on the leadership whether peace or violence reign.

Clear?

That is why v dub isn't one of us. All the expression of his attitudes show that.

hey v dub

there you go again.

how about

the 50 year occupation.
the land stealing.
the detentions.
the repression.
the collective punishments.
the refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions.
the inclusion of only the Jewish book as a basis of law.
the conscription of Jews only.
the refusal to allow the return of refugees.
These are fundamentally not the ways of Western Liberal Democracies.

We have evolved away from these things. We are able to do that because we want to.

Israel cannot evolve because, like it's enemies, it is run by a bunch of terrorists, who have preference for the violence contained in their ancient books of rules.

The west is successful, it lives in peace and is self-reliant. We believe the people decide the nature of the community. The community and our beliefs evolve through the discussion of ideas, usually through our arts and particularly those with a community voice and discussion of philosophy. We are not dictated to by an ancient book of rules or stifled by the dictates of any particular religion.

You have shown in your comments here you loathe the activities which mark us as western. So why wouldn't it be natural for us to deem you loathe the US. The US is the practice and embodiment of our beliefs. It practises our community's underlying philosophy.

You are not one of us.

Dear SR:

Other than the ability to smuggle weapons of terror, one of the main reasons for the tunnels is the income it provides Hamas with:

“…according to an investigative report published in the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, there are at least 600 millionaires living in the Gaza Strip…The Palestinian millionaires…have made their wealth thanks to the hundreds of underground tunnels along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt…Palestinians estimate that 25% of the Hamas government's budget comes from taxes imposed on the owners of the underground tunnels”

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3308/gaza-millionaires

It’s in the interest of Hamas to keep the tunnel business flourishing.

Any restrictions on the transfer of goods between Egypt and Gaza are controlled by Egypt, not by Israel. The prevailing government in Egypt decides when and what restrictions to apply, as per your admission “…during the Morsi rule of around a years there were some lifting of the restrictions…”. Are you saying that Israel lost its absolute control over the crossing for the duration of the Morsi regime and then somehow gained it back? Isn’t it far more reasonable to conclude that the changing government in Egypt decided on what controls to apply? Egypt is tightening control not because of some imaginary dictate from Israel, but because of concerns about terrorism threatening its own security, as was evident by the killing of Egyptian border guards by terrorists.

The violence you quote emanating from the Gaza Strip in 2001 was part of the second intifada and was not unique to Gaza. Many more violent incidents occurred in the West Bank. Your conclusion that somehow the violence in Gaza caused the evacuation but the violence in the West Bank did not is just selective silliness.

Cont -->

--> Cont

Please don’t insult my intelligence any further by insisting that Qassam rockets play a defensive role. I previously asked you how many examples can you show where these rockets were used for defence. So far you’ve provided none, other than insisting that this is the case.
From Wikipedia:

“These [Qassam] rockets cannot be fired to target specific military objectives in or near civilian areas, and are mainly meant to “harming civilians”, as Human Rights Watch stated”

By their very nature these rockets cannot be used for defence. They can only be used for terror purposes. This, sir, is a real fact.

The video clip you thoughtfully provided shows the lively property market in Gaza, somewhat demolishing your previous allegation that Gaza is under siege. Localities under siege do not usually have a bubbling property market with luxury developments valued at millions of dollars. The clip does nothing to detract from the fact that a large proportion of the construction material entering Gaza was diverted to the terror tunnels. The video also confirms that Hamas benefit greatly from the existence of the tunnels as I mentioned at the beginning of this post.

Yes, Hamas should have known that Israel would be back to retaliate for the thousands of rockets is lobbed across the border at Israeli towns. They would have continued to launch rockets for years if necessary to ensure that Israel retaliates. Since retaliation for their terror activities was a certainty, don’t you think protecting their civilians should have been a priority, rather than wasting more and more resources on terror tunnels?

Cont -->

--> Cont

“Military training to kill Palestinians is compulsory in Israel…”

Really? The Israeli military trains its recruits specifically to kill Palestinians? Can you provide any evidence to back this absurd allegation?
Of course there is no such evidence. We are, however, aware of the Hamas combat manual (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/08/04/Hamas-Combat-Manual-Endorses-Use-of-Civilian-Human-Shields) encouraging the use of civilians as human shields to maximise civilian casualties. So who is trained to harm Palestinian civilians here? The Hamas manual, by the way, refutes your allegation that the IDF deliberately targets Palestinian civilians.

Furthermore, you say

“In an Israeli night club the vast proportion of those in attendance would be of military age and trained therefore a bomb placed in this environment would have a good chance of targeting mainly service personnel”

You are justifying terrorism against civilians by suggesting there’s a good chance that some service personnel might also be struck. In that case, bombing shopping centres is also justified for the same reason. Surely you can also rationalise the Qassam rockets fired at Israeli cities, as again, some service personnel might possibly be hit. The 9/11 attack was therefore also justified, there must have been some US servicemen that fought against Muslims in those building. Where do we stop? Blowing up an Israeli kindergarten is next, as we can assume that some of those kids might grow up to be servicemen and women before too long. Congratulations, you are now qualified for a full Hamas membership, having fully adopted their mentality and terror principles.

Dear Avw,

As I think I have only one post left I am going to address this point you have made and get to the rest later. You wrote;

“You are justifying terrorism against civilians by suggesting there’s a good chance that some service personnel might also be struck. In that case, bombing shopping centres is also justified for the same reason. Surely you can also rationalise the Qassam rockets fired at Israeli cities, as again, some service personnel might possibly be hit. The 9/11 attack was therefore also justified, there must have been some US servicemen that fought against Muslims in those building. Where do we stop? Blowing up an Israeli kindergarten is next, as we can assume that some of those kids might grow up to be servicemen and women before too long. Congratulations, you are now qualified for a full Hamas membership, having fully adopted their mentality and terror principles.”

I totally abhor both actions and think it is pure terrorism targeting people in their homes or cafes or playing on a beach or sheltering in a school. In total you have probably written nearly 1500 words after I put my question to you and not once did you address the Israeli side of the equation. You only see one side's behavior as expressing that 'mentality and terror principles'. You sir are therefore justifying terrorism particularly against civilians, the kind that has seen over 1500 of them dead and thousands more maimed and injured.

I directly asked you what would be the least legitimate because I don't think either act has legitimacy in a civilised world. You refused to answer. Our prime minister said, when cuddling up to the Sri Lankan leader whose government has like Israel accused of war crimes, that 'difficult things happen in difficult circumstances'.

If Israel wants to claim 'difficult circumstances' then how much more difficult is it for the Gazans?

I think the reason you have not answered the question is that you can't and to a degree I sympathise. But they are still burying their children in Gaza.

Steelredux's premise that Palestinians are freedom fighters valiantly battling oppressors would be a valid point, provided that the Palestinians were part of a group of very nice hobbits who only want to be left alone to live in multicultural peace with their neighbours.

Reality is somewhat different.

Most people can see poetic justice in the world's most foremost ethnic cleansers being ethnically cleansed by one of their primary victims. Steelredux's premise would also make a lot of sense if he could show that the Palestinians are very happy to compromise with the Israelis and give them some territory of their own to call home. But since the Palestinian Arabs are demanding the total extermination of Israel then they can hardly complain when the people they wish to exterminate shoot back.

The problem boils down to one piece of territory coveted by two cultural/religious groups. The Jewish side has tried to find peace through compromise, but the Muslim side totally refuses to compromise and nothing less than the total extermination of the Jews or their complete subjection within an Islamic state will satisfy the Muslims.

With only two choices available, be exterminated or fight, the Jews must protect themselves and do a bit of ethnic cleansing themselves. But the Jews are a lot more humane about it than the Muslims have ever historically been. They don't behead, rape and or indulge in mass executions. They keep building settlements on Arab land and make the Muslims feel unwelcome in their country. They also shoot back at the Muslims when they try to kill Jews

Dear SR:

“I totally abhor both actions and think it is pure terrorism targeting people in their homes or cafes or playing on a beach or sheltering in a school”

There doesn’t seem to be a great deal of abhorrence on your part given that you go out of your way to justify terrorism against civilians on the premise that there’s “a good chance of targeting mainly service personnel”, yet completely ignore repeated efforts by the IDF to avoid civilian casualties by issuing warnings prior to strikes. Are you really unable to see the obvious difference?

“…not once did you address the Israeli side of the equation”

You’re right, I’ve addressed the Israeli side of the equation not once, but many times. See the previous paragraph as an example. The fact that you choose to ignore it doesn’t mean I’m not addressing it. As I mentioned in an earlier post, you might think that the IDF could make a greater effort to avoid civilian casualties, but there is a world of difference between accidental civilian deaths and deliberately targeting civilians. My previous question to you, can you name another army that takes such precautions prior to strikes, went unanswered.

As for my answer to your question, I have already made it very clear what I think. At the risk of repeating myself I’ll spell it out again: targeting civilians as Hamas have been doing repeatedly for decades is pure terrorism, and the most repulsive action any group can take. There can be no excuse for it, certainly not because you think some service personnel might possibly be hit. The IDF engagements are targeting militants and terror infrastructure and are designed to avoid civilian casualties. There is no doubt which is the least legitimate action.

LEGO and SPQR

Thanks for your kind words. I have been reading your posts with great interest as well.
LEGO, I don’t think you can define the Israeli actions as ethnic cleansing, given that the number of Palestinians in the West Bank has increased 5 fold and in Gaza 20 fold since the establishment of Israel.

Christ no Lego the Israelis never indulge in anything illegal. Just ask Singer and V dub. They'll tell you that.
They are both Israeli propagandists pretending to adopt our western ways. Both are wolves in sheep's clothing aiming to change us to be the same as them. So that we support their outrageous behaviours.

Hey V dub your last couple of post softened your disparaging of our philosophical and literary tradition, and now you are ignoring me. Gee mate that is what all the other propagandists do when they find they cannot refute my position.

You obviously have had your instructions and your masters have told you not to argue my philosophical points and to ignore me. They know they can't win this particular debate.

You are just so easy V dub. Your belief in the ancient book is flawed and incompatible with western traditions. Oh you can wear our clothes but your heart wears a dark veil.

Lego
you have summed up the situation perfectly.
Jews are allowed to steal Palestinians' land. Palestinian' are not allowed to defend themselves from this invasion. If they shoot back Israelis are then allowed to ethnically cleanse the lands they have stolen.

Good on you lego. My god still loves you.

v dub and Singer must be appalled you have simplified things for us all. Well done. Obviously their propaganda has never been understood clearly by anyone especially the simpletons.

Dear Avw,

With respect you most certainly have not answered my question. You answered a rewrite of your own construction.

Here is what you posted;

“At the risk of repeating myself I’ll spell it out again: targeting civilians as Hamas have been doing repeatedly for decades is pure terrorism, and the most repulsive action any group can take. There can be no excuse for it, certainly not because you think some service personnel might possibly be hit. The IDF engagements are targeting militants and terror infrastructure and are designed to avoid civilian casualties. There is no doubt which is the least legitimate action.”

Here is what I asked;

Let us take away words like 'occupiers' and 'resistance fighters' and put the question directly.

Which is the least legitimate? Planting a bomb in a night club in Tel Aviv where the vast majority of those in attendance are of fighting age and have been militarily trained to engage Palestinians as opposed to dropping a 500lb bomb on the family home of a Hamas member?

Hi Steele,

Not really the right questions: does Israel have the right to exist ? Yes ? No ? Should Israelis be pushed into the sea ? Yes ? No ?

I don't support the building of settlements in the west Bank, as it happens. But I do think that, along with a multitude of other ethnic and religious groups across the Middle East, Israel has a right to exist. Hamas doesn't. Ergo, rockets. Ergo, Israeli retaliation. And so it will go.

The history of the Middle East, over the last few thousand years, has been one of migrations and invasions - the Arabs themselves burst out of south-central Arabia to dominate the entire region from Iraq across to Mauretania, and they certainly weren't the first to 'burst out' and dominate parts of the region.

Meanwhile, Yazidis and Christians, who have been in their regions for at least fifteen hundred years, invading nobody, ethnically-cleansing nobody, beheading and raping nobody, are being massacred and ethnically-cleansed. Yes ? No ? By the allies of Hamas - Yes ? No ?

Palestinians have the right to exist in Palestine. Israelis have the right to exist in Israel. Yazidis and Christians and Kurds and Turkomans in Iraq, Alawites and Druses and God-knows-who-else in Syria. To list all the ethnic groups across that region would take up all of my 350 words.

So live and let live. It might make a change in the Middle East.

Joe

Joe

We all agree with you about the right to exist.

Now go tell vdub and Singer to give the Palestinians back their stolen land, to allow access to the World for the Gazans and to allow refugees to return to their lands and homes.

That is the nub of today's problem.

As an aside the US have downgraded their military support for Israel. It is no longer automatic and that action has been supported not only by Obama but also congress. Both sides in the US congress support this.

The next US presidential election is going to be very interesting. No longer is their going to be blind endorsement of Israel by both sides. There is a huge backlash coming.

Israel stupidly lost far more than this latest war.

Photos of dead kids never help.

@Ima,

<<We all agree with you about [Israels] right to exist.>>

ALL Ima?

If you think that you are being led along by the nose.

I posed that question repeatedly to a fellow on another thread who presented himself as moderate and he refused to answer it --EVERYTIME. And I have a sneaking suspicion that your sidekick Steele maybe seeking to wipe Israel from the map as well.

Dear SR:

You question is loaded with misleading conjecture and bears no resemblance to reality. “a night club in Tel Aviv where the vast majority…have been military trained to engage Palestinians”? You’re assuming that most of the patrons in that nightclub are service personnel. Let’s ignore those who have not yet been conscripted. Overlook the ones who have already been discharged. Disregard any foreign tourists that might be visiting the club. Overlook Israeli Arabs, Druze and other citizens who have exemption from service. Even assuming there were some service personnel in that club, your flawed conclusion is that they must have all been trained to kill innocent Palestinians, ignoring military clerks, cooks, and other service personnel who had no combat training.

Let me give you not one, but two clear answers.
Your original question, involving a hypothetical scenario on a different planet in a parallel universe, where an evil military force deliberately targets the home of a noble freedom fighter, presumably to kill as much of his family as they can, and that same military packs a large number of its service recruits who are specifically trained to kill those noble freedom fighters, into a night club, then yes, that club is a valid target.
In reality though, removing all the false assumptions and misleading descriptions and returning to planet Earth, your question should be asked thus:
Which is the least legitimate? Planting a bomb in a nightclub in Tel Aviv, where the overwhelming majority of those in attendance are citizens who have no involvement in the conflict, as opposed to targeting the home of a radical Hamas terrorist leader, after issuing warnings to civilians of the impending strike and urging them to stay away? I think they answer to this question is quite clear. Or do I really need to spell it out for you?

I noticed that you have still not replied to any of the question I have put to you. For example:
- Can you name another army that takes such precautions as the IDF does prior to strikes to avoid harming civilians?

Imanutter:

No, I am not ignoring you, it’s just that I am limited to 4 posts in 24 hours. It’s simple math really. I realise you miss my feedback terribly but unfortunately you just have to be patient.

Let’s analyse some of the wisdom in your latest posts:

You say that I trash the whole relevance and concept of philosophy. This is after I posted
“I'm not saying we should ignore the words and wisdom of the Founding Fathers of the US, or any other reasonable intellectuals for that matter”
Are we speaking a different language here? What part of this sentence did you fail to comprehend? Do I need to wrap some biblical verses around my text to make you understand?

You refuse to face reality that nations are not ruled by a bible, regardless of whether that bible was last revised 3000 years ago or in the 1960s, or whether it has cute little angels merrily dancing on its cover. While one version of the bible makes just as much (or little) sense to me as another, and there are a lot more than 5 versions by the way, one could put forward the argument that your modified, ever evolving bible is no longer the true bible as it was changed many times to suit the requirements of different interest groups throughout the centuries.
How can you accuse others of adhering to a dark-age set of rules, when your extreme fanaticism in considering your own version of the bible to be the only true bible is no different to the theories of Islamist fanatics? How is your insistence that yours is the ultimate text that should be used to guide our lives, with everyone else being so utterly wrong, any different to those “dark age based religions”?

Cont -->

--> Cont

“You have shown in your comments here you loathe the activities which mark us as western”

What gave it away? Was it my previous post stating “My loathing of the west? … In reality I wouldn't live anywhere else. I consider the pragmatic approach taken by western nations as an asset, not a drawback”
Once again, maybe we speak a different language, but to me it sounds like I’m praising the west, not loathing it. Maybe it’s time to update your 1960s version of the bible so you can comprehend modern English?

“Your belief in the ancient book is flawed and incompatible with western traditions”

What belief are you talking about? Are you paying attention at all to the discussion we are having here? What gave you the idea that I believe in any book, ancient or otherwise? Is this something you picked up from your obsession with poetry?

In conclusion let me again express my thanks that you do not consider me as “one of you”.
Let’s move on.

Dear Avw,

As I have just vented my spleen at our Mr Singer I will indulge you.

To your list of those who may well be harmed in a bombing attack on a Tel Aviv nightclub.

Those 'who have not yet been conscripted'. - “Whilst the drinking age in Israel is 18, many clubs and bars in Tel Aviv won’t serve or allow entry to people this young – with minimum ages varying dramatically, sometimes as high as 25”
http://www.touristisrael.com/tel-aviv-nightlife/394/

Those 'who have already been discharged”. - Many of those who were called up in the latest conflict were those no longer serving full time but reservists. I have been reading the blog of one such individual who is 44 years of age and a father of 3 children.

Those who are “foreign tourists that might be visiting the club”. - True but in times of war tourist numbers do significantly decline.

“Israeli Arabs, Druze and other citizens who have exemption from service.” - Two of the largest groups given exemptions are;

"Yeshiva students who declare that "Torah study is their artistry" could delay their conscription as long as they continue their studies, under the so-called Tal Law until it has been cancelled.”

"Female draftees who state that they maintain a religious way of life are exempt from military service, and many of them choose to volunteer for an alternative national service called Sherut Leumi.”
Wikipedia

I'm not sure how many of these would be found in a night club.

So let us run with the statistic of 60% of those attending are of fighting age and have had military training. Let us also recognise that it is very unlikely there are children, elderly, or infirmed present.

Are you seriously saying that that would be less legitimate than the bombing of the a-Najar family home in which 20 were killed?

The next post is the death toll of that bomb. I will leave it stand without commentary.

Khalil a-Najar, 60
Samir Hussein Muhammad a-Najar, 58
Ghaliah Muhammad a-Najar, 56
Sumayah a-Najar (Abu Yusef), 50
Samar a-Najar, 27
Riham a-Najar (Abu Jame'), 25
Kifah a-Najar, 24
Iman a-Najar (a-Raqab), 23
Majed a-Najar, 19
Rawan a-Najar, 17
Ahmad a-Najar, 14
Baraah a-Raqab, 11
Hani a-Najar, 7
Mu'taz a-Najar, 6
Ulfat a-Najar, 4
Islam a-Najar, 3
Amir a-Najar, 2
Samir Hussein Samir a-Najar, 1.5
Ghaliah Muhammad Samir a-Najar, 1.5
Amirah a-Najar, 8 months
http://www.btselem.org/gaza_strip/201407_families

Finally to pick you up on a couple of spurious points you have made.

You wrote;

You claim some sort of exemption for Israel's atrocities because of its “issuing warnings to civilians of the impending strike and urging them to stay away”.

So what is Hamas was to say at the start of the conflict; 'We are issuing a warning to all those south of Jerusalem that we will be firing rockets into this area and all civilians will need to evacuate for their own safety' – would that just make it all okay?

We often hear about the bravery of those families living in Sderot right next to the Gaza border.

www.google.com.au/maps/place/Sderot,+Israel/@31.5267045,34.597413,14z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x15028152b5bc422b:0x9eca44351ad2130a

Sderot’s brave determination in the face of continuous Palestinian terror has revealed to the Israeli public and the entire world, a unique and unusual model of courage and resilience. It is said to embody the following:

Quote;

  Obstinate Jewish/Israeli self-sacrifice;

  Stubborn commitment to values and faith;

  Brotherly love and camaraderie in the face of great danger and difficulty;

  Shouldering pioneering Zionism’s greatest challenges – making the desert bloom, absorbing new immigrants and standing up to Israel’s enemies.

Sderot personifies many different expressions of valor including:

  The determination of the original residents of the Sderot Refugee camp who built a city in the wasteland;

  The fortitude of the Ethiopian immigrants who experienced extreme hardship and suffering on their way to the Land of Israel;

  The daily courage of today’s residents of Sderot who with their bodies and souls defend the borders of the Land of Israel and with the courage of their hearts set the tone of our collective stamina as a nation.

End quote.

But apparently Palestinians who do not evacuate from large swathes of the Gaza Strip either deserve every bomb or are deployed unwillingly as Hamas' human shields. Why are they not brave and resilient? In fact swap Palestinian for Israeli/Zionism and Gaza for Sderot and it has just as much validity unless of course you see the Palestinians as lesser human beings.

Dear SR:

Would it help if I counter your list of Palestinian civilian deaths with a list of Israeli civilian dead? Are we reduced to competing on the length of our death lists to achieve dramatic effect?

With the exception of Hamas and other terror organisations, no one has any interest in civilians deaths. For many reasons it's certainly not in Israel's interest to harm civilians, including internal/external public opinion in addition to the obvious humanitarian aspect and the risk of stirring up Palestinian emotions. To believe, as you do, that they deliberately target civilians is illogical and makes no sense. There's a world difference between accidentally causing deaths after issuing warnings, and the deliberate, calculated targeting of civilians with the intent to terrorise and maximise death toll.

You ask, “So what is [if] Hamas was to say at the start of the conflict; 'We are issuing a warning to all those south of Jerusalem that we will be firing rockets into this area and all civilians will need to evacuate for their own safety' – would that just make it all okay?” – this is an absurd example that is akin to Israel warning Gazans that there will be a strike “somewhere in Gaza”. “south of Jerusalem” is an area close to half of Israel's terrirory and many times the size of Gaza, making such a warning absolutely useless. It's completely different to the leaflet dropping, phone calls, text messages and ‘roof knocking’ that warn civilians of an impending strike on a specific location in response to a terror attack.

Let’s indulge your assumption, for a moment, that the Israelis are in fact interested in killing as many Palestinian civilians as possible. Do you have any doubt that they could have eliminated the entire population of Gaza over the first few days of the current conflict, with no need to risk the lives of any Israeli servicemen by deploying ground forces? Why would the Israelis warn civilians prior to strikes if they are targeting them? Once again, your assumption lacks any common sense and is plain silly.

Cont -->

--> Cont

From claiming that “the vast majority of those in attendance” in that nightclub are Israeli servicemen you are now down to 60%, a small step in the right direction towards reality. Of course your assumption of 60% service personnel collapses in a heap once we include the other targets chosen by your brave freedom fighters, such as Israeli buses and shopping centres. Unless you are also saying that only army recruits ride buses and go shopping in Israel?

If you truly believe your claims that the potential presence of Israeli servicemen justifies blowing up a nightclub, then, as I previously pointed out, you can use this same reasoning to justify any terror attack in Israel, whatever the target is. Your logic, therefore, is no different to that of any extremist terrorist organisation.

Your elaborate quote regarding the citizens of Sderot is largely irrelevant, we know that Hamas rockets are threatening half of Israel and not only the tiny community of Sderot. In fact we also know that quite a number of those rockets fell on Palestinian communities in the West Bank, and even within Gaza itself. In any case who is the more resilient party is besides the point. I have no doubt that the Gaza civilians are indeed brave and resilient, one would have to be resilient to be able to live under Hamas oppression for so long.

I see you still have no reply to the question I put to you earlier.

AVW,

<<Would it help if I counter your list of Palestinian civilian deaths >>

I don't really think Steele is too concerned about civilian deaths, be they Palestinian or Israeli. He only ever seems to develop great concern about such things when they're caused by Israeli or US weaponry. I think it's all part of a cleverly crafted sales pitch.

Dear Avw,

Thank you, we now have the nub.

You wrote;

“If you truly believe your claims that the potential presence of Israeli servicemen justifies blowing up a nightclub, then, as I previously pointed out, you can use this same reasoning to justify any terror attack in Israel, whatever the target is. Your logic, therefore, is no different to that of any extremist terrorist organisation.”

Which of course could just as easily be written as;

If you truly believe the claims that the potential presence of Hamas members justifies blowing up their home or their mosque or dropping bombs next to UN schools, then, as I have been at pains to point out, you can use this same reasoning to justify any terror attack in Gaza, whatever the target is. The Likud/IDF logic, therefore, is no different to that of any extremist terrorist organisation.

Enough said.

Steele,

That really is a silly comparison - are Israeli nightclubs full of active servicemen launching rocket attacks on Gaza ? Are you suggesting that the IDF is exploiting civilian facilities, such as nightclubs, schools or hospitals, from which to attack Gaza ?

Given Hamas' declaration that Israel should never exist and that all Jews should be expelled, pushed into the sea, I'm beginning to see the sense - from Israel's point of view - in establishing settlements on the West Bank and, if Hamas maintains that position, pushing the boundary of Israel across to Jordan.

After all, if Hamas ever got control of all of Palestine, after Israel demolished every settlement and pulled entirely out of the West Bank, do even you think that Hamas would not launch rocket attacks from all along the new borders ?

For Israel, it's existential, visceral; for Hamas, it's merely scoring a point for Allah, poking a stick in a non-Muslim's eye.

Joe

to Julianutter.

If the United Nations passed a resolution ordering you to commit suicide by drinking a cup of hemlock, then I am sure you would chugalug it with gay abandon. You would not dream of doing anything "illegal".

But the Israelis are not that stupid. They have no intention of committing suicide just to please the UN.

vdub

your attitudes are shared by Singer, lego, and all the other Muslim Haters, the IDF and 87% of Jewish Israelis.

They are not western attitudes.

The day you criticise any of those 'contributors' and antagonists instead of supporting everything they do or say is the day I'll consider you maybe not one of them.

Currently you are nothing more than an Israeli propagandist trying to appear reasonable. And you are failing miserably at that.

In case you do as you always do ... deflect.
Me I'm balanced. I abhor the evil teachings of both Judaism and Islam equally. I subscribe to Christ's teachings and our western traditions
I dare you to say the same..

Dear SR:

We could of course re-write this as you suggest however it would be incorrect for several reasons, all of which you choose to ignore. Let me summarise them again for you.

First, Israeli strikes follow intelligence regarding the exact location of the terror target, unlike the theory held by both you and Hamas insisting that a bus is a valid target because it might possibly have some Israeli servicemen riding it. Intelligence can be flawed, of course, but it’s infinitely better than pure guesswork and nothing but wishful assumptions.

Second, Israel forewarns civilians prior to any strikes, as is very easy to demonstrate. When was the last time Hamas issued a warning to their chosen civilian target, whether it's the town the rocket is aimed at, the bus or the nightclub they were going to blow up?

Third, IDF strikes are designed to hit the target and minimise collateral damage. As can be clearly seen in multiple video clips on the Internet from the latest conflict, when a building is struck, little damage is inflicted on the surrounding area. Hamas rockets, on the other hand, are aimed at no particular target, only in the general direction of major population areas. No specific target exists when deploying what appears to be your favourite and most legally accepted method - planting a bomb in a civilian target such as a nightclub, making sure plenty of nails and steel balls are added in to ensure the highest possible casualty rate.

Fourth, Israeli military leaders are not hiding themselves in residential buildings amongst civilians. Lethal Israeli arsenal is never stored in places of worship or schools. Attacks against terror targets in Gaza never originate from the grounds of Israeli hospitals. In Gaza, however, all of the above are common practice, turning these public spaces into military targets and Palestinian civilians into human shields.

I am still waiting for you to address the question I asked in my earlier post. You have written close to 2,500 words since, but so far you’ve made no attempt to tackle my question.

Nutter:

“your attitudes are shared by Singer, lego, and all the other Muslim Haters, the IDF and 87% of Jewish Israelis”

Interesting. 87% of Jewish Israelis share my attitude that western countries use pragmatic approach and are not controlled by the bible? Would you care to point out where you obtained this fascinating statistics from? I haven't seen David Singer or LEGO mentioning any of this.

I’ve done some Googling in an attempt to follow your advice and research the teachings of Christ and the practices of his followers. I came across a site that lists a large number of noble deeds done by devoted followers of Christ, such as yourself. Should I be following some of their examples? If I do, would you grace me with acceptance as a true member of your western society?

http://www.666christiancrimes.com

Ah V dub

It is not up to me to judge sinners. I think sins can be condemned and up to God to judge and condemn sinners.

You think you have the right to condemn both sins and sinners. Your book entitles you to do that.

Therein lies the difference between us.

I and my god still love you even with your arrogance.

Thanks for that link Avw.

One of my hobbies is doing a "World Time Line" I've taken various other Time Line book & combined them, plus other dates I found. I'll add the detail of this link to my Book.

Have you got a Time Line Link for Atrocities committed by Moslems, that would be great, please.

Foxy: Question: A bad place to fall asleep?

Answer: Hanging over a Three Stand Coil Barbed Wire entanglement on Christmas Morning right in front of the Gun Pit, Bien Hoa, SVN, 1965

Steelie: Why on earth do the Gazan people have to drag virtually all their supplies through hundreds of tunnels hundreds of metres long if this were true?

All their supplies? You mean Weapons, don't you? Ordinary supplies are not stopped, but you knew that.

Foxy: Did you know that the extremist - who took his young son to Syria was a total nut-job he had serious mental problems here in Australia, he suffered from schizophrenia, and needed medical care. Yet people are blaming all Muslims for this lunatic's behaviour.

There's not enough Medical Help in Australia to deal with all the Moslems that have mental issues. I suggest that they go overseas to get professional help. Like Syria/Iraq.

NC: Nelson Mendella, John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, Nobel Laureate Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, Antony Loewenstein, Karen Armstrong, Gideon Levy, Stephen
Professor Noam Chomsky, Uri Avnery, Ilan Pappe.

When all said & done the opinions expressed by these peoples are personal & opinions have about as much meaning as yours & mine. They really mean nothing. Just as many prominent people have the opposite view, as shown in this forum.

I may get some of these mixed up, I hope not.

Steelie: So what is Hamas was to say at the start of the onflict; 'We are issuing a warning to all those south of Jerusalem that we will be firing rockets into this area and all civilians will need to evacuate for their own safety' – would that just make it all okay?

That would be great, & they could give the Co-Ordinates for the Base Plate too.

Foxy: If you want to exclude people like Iftikar from this country because he's a Muslim - you may also be doing this country a great disservice. You may also be excluding people like Dr Munjed Al Muderis - who ran from war-torn Iraq and came to this country as an asylum-seeker - today he's a miracle worker who fits amputees with radical robotic limbs.

I do not doubt that there Moslem people who would be of great benefit to Australia. People who go out of their way to assimilate & join in with Australian Culture. Like Dr Al Mudres. But, given a choice between the two, I take it you would chose Iftikhar & his ilk? Hmmm.

Foxy: Multiculturalism? I feel people who immigrate & retaining their own Culture exclusively is wrong. I am of mixed decent. English, Irish, Scot, Dane & Swede. I celebrate Paddy's Day, Burn's Day, Bastille Day, etc, but I don't wear a kilt or leather shorts 24/7, & I don't "insist" on everybody "hating" anybody who is not White Anglo/Saxon. Other than that I celebrate Australian Culture. I can also celebrate Greek, Italian, French, etc, cultures. I don't insist other people MUST adopt on being those Cultures 24/7 or I will kill them one day.

I don't insist & demand that everybody change to MY culture or I kill you if you don't. Therein lies the difference.

Foxy: It is natural to develop our own set of prejudices. However, it is noble to rise above them.

I tried to be prejudiced once & failed. At least one of my friends were one I the things I thought I'd be prejudiced against, then I found I had some of those things too. So I gave up. Now I research things thoroughly, Decide what I do & do not "like," depending on "their" prejudices. I do not "hate."

I "dislike" Moslems because they are prejudiced against anyone who is not Moslem. & As Iftikhar says, "There is no such thing as a Moderate Moslem." I "dislike" people who treat; Disabled People, Pensioners, War Veterans, etc,. badly. I dislike people who think Australian Laws should be abandoned in favour of Sharia Law. I "dislike" people who treat women as only chattels. I "dislike" people who say Australian Culture is bad & Australians MUST adopt Islamic Culture. I "dislike" Fanatics of any description.

I "avoid" NUT cases. (not the mentally disabled, different thing) I "avoid" people who are just plain nasty for the sake of being nasty, (as in bad neighbours, etc.) I "avoid" Grubs (as in people who live in filth. As seen on TV occasionally.) I "Avoid" people who are Criminals. (Druggies, etc.)

Foxy: Of the thousands of international students studying in Australia, a significant number are Muslims from countries such as Malaysia, India and Pakistan. Many have settled in Australia under the government's "skilled migration" program after completing studies at their own expense and are making a great contribution to our society.

I do have a problem with this. These students come here to study & never leave. Why aren't they MADE to go back to their own country to contribute in lifting them out of the 3rd. World. Not enough money there eh. Well too bad. That makes them economic Migrants. The "Hair dresser" Scam has been going on for years. Most only go to one or two classes then stay.

Foxy: If you are unhappy with the state of affairs as they currently exist in England - concerning the education of Muslim children perhaps you should contact the leading Muslim Communities in ways that this problem could be solved.

Like migrating back to the Middle East where Moslem children can learn to hate Infidels without any interference.

Foxy: There are solutions to your problem - but simply complaining about them won't solve anything for you.
Do something about it now! Organize a mass Migration back to the Middle East.

Foxy: Talking about "mindsets" - we're each burdened with prejudice: I'm against downright mistruth,

Then you must not like yourself very much.

Awwwh Jb

but you support a culture that also has violent and vengeful heritages. Judaism.

And you expect us to change our traditional culture and behaviours to support and accommodate their stupidities.

Do you realise there is someone who comments on online opinions who has shown he supports the holocaust but who is now an avowed Israeli supporter. And you accept silently his support.

Don't you think that might reflect on your activities. I mean you are seen standing shoulder to shoulder with a person who supports the Jew Hating Nazis?

Why does that not cause you to question why the position you support also attracts such supporters?.

Jayb, a good series of posts there --great to see you back on the front line .

Jayb, sorry I don’t have a link to the material you’re after.

I thought that this topic was dying, so I have been remiss in replying to posts directed at me.

First customer Julianutter. You are creating a strawman argument by claiming that I support the Israeli theft of Palestinian land, and support the idea that Palestinians are not allowed to defend themselves. My premise is, that the Muslims have stolen Israeli land which the Israelites stole from the pagans, and the Israelis want their land back. They were once happy to share it, but the Palestinians wanted it all for themselves.

The Palestinians are part of a religious group who are the world's foremost ethnic cleansers. They have a history of ethnically cleansing every country that they have invaded or been allowed to immigrate into. The moral question is therefore, is it right for people who have been previously ethnically cleansed by the Muslims to return to their country and ethnically cleanse the invaders who still maintain that they are going to ethnically cleanse the Israelis again? Answer the damned question.

Every "westerner" can recognise the principle of self defence, and that is why most "westerners" support Israel. Especially since most "westerners" are coming to despise the Muslims and everything they stand for.

To AVW.

You disagree with my premise that the Israelis are ethnic cleansers. As a Jew, I can certainly understand your sensitivity to that charge. Your argument is that the Jews could not be ethnically cleansing the Palestinians because the Palestinian population keeps growing. But there is more than one way to skin a rat.

The Israeli tactic, is to keep building settlements on land claimed by the Palestinians and gradually squeeze them out by making their remaining territory economically unviable. The hope is that the Palestinians will give up and go away. That is presently not working because the Muslims are experts ethnic cleansers themselves and they will not allow the Palestinians to immigrate into their own societies and thereby solve the whole Israel/Palestine problem. Nothing less than the entire extermination of the Jews and their culture from a land conquered previously by Islam will satisfy them.

Lego a history lesson.

The Jews were thrown out of Palestine by the Romans long before the Arabs conquered Palestine and forced their language and their religion on the local inhabitants.

The Muslims never stole Jewish lands. The majority of the people of Palestine lived there continuously, and they became converts to Islam. Few Jews have as continuous a tenure to the lands of Palestine.

The original Hebrews who were thrown out of Egypt stole the land from the original Philistines. Shouldn't they claim Egyptian lands? Oh that's right the extremists do. Greater Israel and the Zionists claim their god gave them all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Your lack of knowledge and belief in the lies you are fed is again on display.

Many Jews would have the same historical claim on the lands of Palestine as I have. None.

'Have you(vdub) got a Time Line Link for Atrocities committed by Moslems, that would be great, please.' Jb

'Jayb, sorry I don’t have a link to the material you’re after.' vdub

Guess why not Jb?
Go on v dub tell him why not.

lol you blokes make me laugh.

Nutter: The Jews were thrown out of Palestine by the Romans long before the Arabs conquered Palestine.

Not all of them, only the trouble makers. Ok, there was a lot.

Nutter: The Muslims never stole Jewish lands.

Yes they did. "and forced their language and their religion on the local inhabitants."

Nutter: The majority of the people of Palestine lived there continuously, and they became converts to Islam.

Did not "become" converts. It was convert or die. Nothing has changed.

Nutter: Few Jews have as continuous a tenure to the lands of Palestine.

Well since it ceased to be Roman "Syria Palestine" sometime in the 3rd. Century & did not become Palestine again until 1923. I don't see how you can claim that.

cont

cont

Nutter: The original Hebrews who were thrown out of Egypt stole the land from the original Philistines.

Sort of true, They were the remains of the Exodus after the Hittites took over the Throne of Egypt. "There came a Pharaoh who knew not Joseph"

Nutter: Shouldn't they claim Egyptian lands? Oh that's right the extremists do.

The Philistines came from the Islands south of Greece when The Island of Santorini Blew up. The survivors thought they would go to Egypt but as Egypt was in a drought at the time they couldn't absorb them. The Egyptians settled them on the land that wasn't being used at the time. The area from the southern tip of Gaza to just north of Tyre. This was all Egyptian lands at the time anyway. They became the Philistines or the Sea People.

Nutter: Greater Israel and the Zionists claim their god gave them all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates. No, that was the people of the Exodus who became the Hebrews when they came in from the Desert after wandering for 40 years.

Nutter: Your lack of knowledge and belief in the lies you are fed is again on display.

I guess you get all your knowledge from the Bible & nowt else. Like the Moslems get all their knowledge from the Koran & are about as silly as one another, & the Torah for the Jews. I suggest you do your research elsewhere.

Nutter: Many Jews would have the same historical claim on the lands of Palestine as I have. None.

Careful there. If you trace you family history back you may find that, way back, you are descendant from some Jews. My Ancestry History goes back to Kohath ben Levi 275BC.

Nutter: Guess why not Jb? Go on v dub tell him why not.

Well I guess Avw didn't look. I did, there's plenty to chose from.

http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/crusades_timeline.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9W1S89aDDc. (Parts 1 - 4)
http://sikh.freedombulwark.com/
http://factreal.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/muslim-crusades-started-four-centuries-before-the-western-crusades/

Shall I go on?

Julianutter, a history lesson and a social lesson.

The Jews were ethnically cleansed by the Egyptians 3,700 years ago and they crossed the Sinai and ethnically cleansed the pagans in the area we now call Palestine/Israel. They have had a continuous presence in Israel/Palestine since that time, which is more than I can say for the Muslims. After settling in Israel, they were one of the few people's in the world who were content with their territory and they were never expansionist. They just wanted to be left alone. But they were ethnically cleansed by the Babylonians under Nebuchnezzar because they would not submit to Babylon. They were then ethnically cleansed by the Romans because they were only one of two races to ever challenge the might of Rome through insurrection. (the other was Britain) But they kept coming back. They are still coming back. This time they have nuclear weapons and they are not leaving.

The Ottoman Muslims did not ethnically cleanse them by force, they just squeezed the Jewish lemon until the pips squeaked, to give the Jews the right idea about converting to Islam. That is ethnic cleansing too. Palestine was never a country, it had always been a province within somebodies empire. The Jews have as much right to declare a certain ungoverned and near anarchic region as "their country", as the Australians have to declare an ungoverned and almost empty continent of Australia as "their country."

Now for your immigration double standard. Immigrants to Australia are considered "Australians" even though they were never born here. But by some application of double think, you feel that Jewish immigrants to Israel can not enjoy the same privilege.

What about refugees returning to Palestinian lands jb?

Better still imajulianutter!

How about all of those descended from the imperialist, Muslim invaders return to the Arabian peninsula from whence they came.

Most did. They left behind their religion and language. It lasted because it was required to be Muslim to engage in trade and the language of trade was Arabic.

Strewth why don't you accept history like us westerners. We know we can't change it so we learn from it.
You haven't and you try to continually rewrite it.

Nutter,

SOPQR has a point - in the name of Allah, Arabs invaded right across north Africa, down into Sudan, and right up to the current Turkish and Iranian borders. Pre-630 ACE, Arabs were more or less confined to the western Arabian Peninsula, unless you want to count all the Bedouin. Pre-630 ACE, the population of what is now Israel and Palestine would have been mostly Christian and Jewish.

Of course, that's all water under the bridge. That was then, this is now. What does the world do about a re-bursting of a reactionary ideology across that huge swathe of territory from Afghanistan to the Atlantic ? Find excuses for its fascist excesses ? After all, it's not American. Oh well, there's a role for the pseudo-Left 'usefuls'.

Joe

imajulianutter

<<Most did. They left behind their religion and language. It lasted because it was required to be Muslim to engage in trade and the language of trade was Arabic.>>

LOL Your knowledge of ancient history is as woeful as your knowledge of recent history!

And what's this mean: <<Strewth why don't you accept history like us westerners>>

Who is "you"?
Like your Hamas allies you assume anyone who doesn't swallow your half baked stories hook line and sinker must be a Jew or Zionist --I am neither.

But having recently crossed swords with the Hamas cheer squad I am much, much more appreciative of Israel wanting to keep a firm border between it and them

No sp

you are a Palestinian/Muslim/Arab Hater and you seek war hence are also a warmonger... and a liar.

Show me where I have allied myself with Hamas and it's violence? You can't you liar.

I hate all violence and it's perpetration.

Hi Joe

So the Arabs were imperialists just like the current set of Jews. Yep. I agree.

The trouble with your justification is the west no longer indulges in territorial imperialism. It is no longer part of our philosophy or practise.

You merely reinforce my position: the Jewish religion like Islam is welded to the past but it tries to equate Israeli practises by likening them to western practises. Sadly that argument fails because we have abandoned most of the dominating practises we once indulged. (Financial imperialism and domination are separate from territorial imperialism)

The propaganda is aimed at propagandising the belief, among westerners, Israel is behaving as the west behaves.

We don't behave like Israel.

We don't behave like Islamists either.
Islamists don't try to pretend they act like us and nor do they claim to be like us.

Islamists don't wear our clothes and their hearts are unveiled
Israelis might wear our clothes but their hearts are veiled.

Try reading the views of G. K. Chesterton and Winston Churchill, avoid the anti Semitics like Hitler and Stalin and all the other socialists. Not much has changed.

cheers Keith

Joe

we won't defeat the expansion of dark age religion by adopting the tactics of dark age religions.

it will be defeated by example and preference. It is the extremists who hand onto dark age beliefs.

There is little violence nor expansion of violence in the most populous Muslim nation on earth. It is not Arab. Nor is there any violence in the Muslim community that has existed in Australia for over 150 years. It is not Arab either.

Islam in most of the Mideast is not Arab either. Cultures such as Syrian, Iranian, Iraqi, Lebanese, Egyptian and Palestinian host Islam and the Arabic language.

The Israelis try to portray Islam as only Arabic and violent. Arab culture is extremely violent. The cultures of the populations of most Muslim countries are peaceful.

Now watch those who spew hare.

nuts: Try reading the views of Winston Churchill, avoid the anti Semitics like Hitler and Stalin and all the other socialists. Not much has changed.

W. Churchhill, "Islam is a scourge on humanity."

nuts: it will be defeated by example and preference. It is the extremists who hand onto dark age beliefs.

No, It's a basic tenant of Islam to kill infidels. E.G.;

Sura (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike
off every fingertip of them"
Telling people to kill unbelievers.

Sura (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (Margin note. "at home") and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (Margin note. "at home"). Unto all (Margin note . "Faith") Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (Margin note. "at home") by a special reward."

jb

Churchill, like me, was equally scathing of Islam and Judaism.
Chesterton, like me, was scathing of Judaism's undermining western civilisation.

You are lopsided in your criticisms. You seem only be able to read with a single eye or not read at all critically.

You need balance son. Maybe a second lobotomy might help.

<<You are lopsided in your criticisms>> say imajulianutter.

Now there's a pot v kettle situation if ever there was one!

Hey liar

I condemn all violence and vengeance. You only criticise the violence and vengeance of one side.

Yep who is unbalanced?

Hey nutter.

How about violence committed in self defence? Or in protecting the innocent?

Pacifists can only exist within tolerant societies protected by men with guns. If the Amish, the Quakers, or the Mennonites lived in Iraq today, they would be in big trouble.

LEGO:

Sorry , I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on the issue of ethnic cleansing. The Israeli tactic that you speak of might be related to security concerns and the need to encourage establishment of Israeli presence in the West Bank as a possible barrier to future Palestinian aggression against them, or to political consideration for influencing negotiations about the exact borders between Israel and a future Palestinian state. However ethnic cleansing it is not. We have our resident nutter here telling us that Israel’s deeds are equivalent to the Nazi extermination of WW2, and that is simply ludicrous.

One must remember that the ethnicity of Israeli Arabs is the same as that of the Palestinian Arabs. The fact that no one is squeezing the Israeli Arabs out indicates that the conflict is not related to the ethnicity of the Palestinians, but is related to security and national considerations.

Dear Avw,

Indeed, the purpose of Israel's continued presence in the West Bank is due to security concerns, for otherwise, the fanatic and violent Jewish settlers would start a civil war within Israel, which it cannot afford. If Netanyahu personally could have his way, then all those settlements would be gone long ago, but he has settler-supporting opponents from within his coalition, including within his own party, which he cannot do much about. He's walking on eggshells.

Dear Yuyutsu,

That is true, evacuation from the settlements could place Netanyahu’s governing coalition at risk, and this is a political manoeuvre he will have to carefully plan. It is also true that there are fanatic and violent settlers there that would fiercely resist evacuation from their settlements. However the settlers are still a minority that can be controlled. Most of the Israeli residents beyond the 1967 lines are not fanatic extremist but average folks drawn to the area because of the affordability of housing there. Given the right incentives, they will be happy to move.

Israel has pulled out of settlements before back in 2005, overcoming the protests and violent resistance of the fanatics, there’s no reason why they can’t do this again given the right conditions.

Jez Lego even vdub finds your view on the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians objectionable.

Can't have anyone acknowledging the actions of Israel as ethnic cleansing old boy.

vdub there you go again exposing that intellectual weakness.

Now you are trying to say it's mot ethnic cleansing because it isn't racially based and based on security concerns.

Wow have you seen the definition of ethnic cleansing? Of course you have, I've repeated it for you. What Israel is undertaking in both Gaza and the west bank fit's the description.

Why do you keep at it? You only sound sillier and sillier.

'Israel has pulled out of settlements before back in 2005,'

lol its state backed and funded settlers were forced out of Gaza.

'... average folks drawn to the area because of the affordability of housing there.'

lol yeah the land cost nothing, it was stolen. And now you think the original owners should buy it back. Exactly what century are you living in?

'...overcoming the protests and violent resistance of the fanatics,'

lol What Jewish fanatics? Are you sure? Aren't they supported, trained and armed by the Israeli government. Isn't that what Islamic terrorist supporters do?

Seems Netanyahu's chickens are coming home to roost.

hey vdud notice how the focus has turned away from Gaza to the West Bank, as I predicted ... using logic.

Liar
'How about violence committed in self defence? Or in protecting the innocent?'

What other interpretation can be put on this statement?
'I condemn all violence and vengeance.'

Dear Iamjulianutter,

<<'I condemn all violence and vengeance.'>>

Condemnation is cheap.

Avoiding violence in practice, is harder - not other people's violence, but your own: physical violence, verbal violence, even mental violence.

- Yes, including calling others 'Liar' and addressing them with derogatory modifications of their name.

Therefore, while it is agreed that the ideal is to never harm even an ant, not even a snake who is about to bite us, but to turn the other cheek instead, it is also agreed that this highest standard is for saints, not for ordinary people, who can be justified for acting violently in self defence.

Even while I may not identify with the national objectives of Israel as a state (nor of any other state), as my family lives in Israel, if the defence of my family requires ethnic cleansing of others, which I hope it doesn't, then I tell you straight in the face with no trace of shame, that I support it. Whoever is dreaming of killing my family should know that this will result in the extermination of their own people.

Good night.

Yu

Lego said I support the violence of Hamas.

That was a lie. He is fully aware of my position. He will not retract his lie. I am quite justified in calling him a liar.

The justification you have used to condone ethnic cleansing was the same justification the Nazis used in Europe.

Have you no shame?

Yu

Now what about vengeance?

Do you realize even vdub baulks at endorsing ethnic cleansing.

Dear Imajulianutter,

<<I am quite justified in calling him a liar.>>

That would be a personal attack, which is against the forum rules. It would also be off-topic and not contribute anything to the discussion.

If saying 'liar' to LEGO was necessary in order to save your life or your family, then I would justify this unsaintly behaviour - but I fail to see how that could be the case. Instead, you could simply state "No, I do not support the violence of Hamas" and leave it at that.

<<The justification you have used to condone ethnic cleansing was the same justification the Nazis used in Europe.>>

Fantastic! So the Nazis in Germany conducted their ethnic cleansing in order to save my family in Israel? I suppose I should thank them then, shouldn't I?

Also, embedded in that statement is an assumption as if I condone ethnic cleansing, which I don't and which I never said: what I said that if what it takes to save my family is X, then I support X. If X is "to mow my lawn" then I support mowing my lawn, if X is "to scratch my bum" then I support scratching my bum and if X is "to ethnically cleanse the tribe which attacks my family", then I support ethnically cleansing of that particular tribe at this particular time. Obviously, once the threat to my family is over, I no longer support that ethnic cleansing.

<<Now what about vengeance?>>

It's normally a bad and stupid thing to have. Why do you ask?

<<Do you realize even vdub baulks at endorsing ethnic cleansing.>>

Do you believe in ghosts who write in this forum? for there is nobody here answering to the name 'vdub'.

Yuyutsu: That would be a personal attack, which is against the forum rules. It would also be off-topic and not contribute anything to the discussion.

Yes, you have to watch Graham with that. Any attack on Moslems, Greenies, the Politically Correct & Ultra Lefties is seen as "bad." Of course, any attack on the Right, Middle, Anti PC, etc, is fair game. Apparently that the Game. Not that I'm suggesting that Graham is biased at all. I'd never do that.

Personally I'm for a bit of Religious Cleansing Starting with some Middle Eastern Religion & some really Spacey ones, then on to some strange Religious Brotherhoods.

Back to the Subject. I see Iran has said that it will rearm Hamas with some really good Missiles & Rockets. I can't see the blockade being lifted for very long. I guess the Israeli's have said, "we'll give them enough rope to hang themselves with." & They will.

Dear Jayb,

<<Personally I'm for a bit of Religious Cleansing>>

I wonder how you are going to achieve this: are you going to use drones to spy the windows looking for gentle old ladies to slaughter who secretly pray to Allah for peace? or are you going to pardon those pretenders whom you find illicitly raiding the fridge on Ramadan because they are not truly religious/Muslim at heart?

The problem is that unless God tells you, you have no idea who is religious and who isn't - but suppose you could have your way, then you would be killing many innocents while leaving behind the real baddies.

You.

You really are trying to defy logic.

You say you don't condone ethnic cleansing but you do condone ethnic cleansing as a consequence in defending your family.

Mate that is exactly what the Nazis said ... and did.

It is exactly what the Israelis said ... and did.

You support what both Israel and the Nazis have said ... and done.

That mate is an example of logic.

You

I didn't just say I condemn the violence of Hamasaki.

I said I condemn all violence and vengeance... from both sides.

Is that too difficult for you to grasp ... too?

You avoid the issue of vengeance. Too difficult for you too yu?

Dear Imajulianutter,

<<Mate that is exactly what the Nazis said ... and did.>>

Fantastic again! Are you saying that the Nazis condoned ethnic cleansing as a consequence in defending my family?

<<It is exactly what the Israelis said ... and did.>>

Israel is an extremely pluralistic society, so no two Israelis say... or do... the same. Nevertheless, in practice their army does protect my family from slaughter, many times over, so I need to be thankful to them. On the other hand I do not recall Nazis ever defending my family, ever.

<<I said I condemn all violence and vengeance... from both sides.>>

True, and I responded that condemnation is cheap.

<<You avoid the issue of vengeance.>>

I wasn't aware that there was any such issue or controversy. I am not a mind-reader, so please tell me what IS the issue about ven
geance and why have your brought it up?

Hi Nutter,

You lost me there - are you saying that the Jews in Germany were firing rockets into German towns, so the Nazis used this as a pretext for collecting, concentrating and exterminating them ?

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest that, quite possibly, not a single Jew ever fired a single rocket into a single German town. Of course, you may assert something different since it would be essential to your case.

But he who asserts must provide evidence: as Hitchen's Razor shows, an assertion without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Joe

Joe
It seems to me you were lost, in more than one way, long before I came on the scene.

Mate you should read Churchill and Chesterton. Both say the same as I say.

Perhaps they will be lost on you too?

Tell me after you have read their views on Judaism and Islam.

Yu

see as I suspected the issue of vengeance is too difficult for you to address.

It is a fundamental belief of Judaism and one used by the Israelis extremists in government to justify their use of violence and conducting an ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank. (Take a look at the unseemly argument in the Israeli cabinet after the the peace was forced on Netanyahu by the Yanks when they cut of the supply of munitions.)

Now that I have simplified things for you try and address that issue in your simple way.

Thanks for clarifying your question, Imajulianutter:

The fact that some Jews/Israelis do what they do for stupid and wrong reasons, doesn't change the fact that they are protecting my family there. I obviously do not agree with their motives, but I am relieved that due to their actions my family is alive and well, so I thank them for that.

Hi Nutter,

Your appeal to the authority of a couple of conservatives can be dismissed, using Hitchens' Razor, as any appeal to authority can.

Perhaps you could try to answer my question. Or are you content in using any feeble excuse to attack the right of Israel to exist ? Even of Jews to exist ?

Good luck.

Joe

Loudmouth

Mate dismiss great western liberal democratic philosophers and heroes as conservatives is behaviour typical of low brow socialists.

You seem confused in your beliefs, unkind people would suggest shifty.

I am having a giggle at your gymnastics especially when your foot is stuck firmly in your mouth.

Watch for my response to your good Samaratin parable. It really is funny. Probably tomorrow. I want to share it with my literary mates at breakfast first.

They always appreciate lead footed stupidity.

Nuts: I want to share it with my literary mates at breakfast first.

So what you are saying is you don't have an answer & have to get professional advice from other nutters.

Hi Nutter,

Still waiting :) And just to remind you, an appeal to authority without evidence is still an appeal without evidence, and can be dismissed - without the need for evidence.

Should Jews exist ? Should Israel exist ? A one-word answer will suffice.

And I object to being called low-brow socialist: I don't think that I'm a socialist any more, after a lifetime of believing.

But low-brow, I don't mind :)

Joe

Yes.

Now Hapless Loudmouth you say the same for Palestine and the Palestinians.

After you've said yes Hapless Loudmouth define the borders?

I am prepared to do that too. Are you?

3508BC O288AD ... 1938 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988 1998 2008 now or 3008 or any year ending in 8 over the past 5 milenium. Take your pick.

Lol

You really can't cut it.

As I say ... Hapless loudmouth.

Hey, nuts. Just what did Churchill & Chesterton have to say about islam?

The militant Muslim is the person cutting the head of the infidel while the moderate Muslim holds the victims feet.
- Dr M. Sabieski (Professor of Philosophy)

There is in Islam a paradox which is perhaps a permanent menace. The great creed born in the desert creates a kind of ecstasy of the very emptiness of its own land, and even, one may say, out of the emptiness of its own theology. A void is made in the heart of Islam which has to be filled up again and again by a mere repetition of the revolution that founded it.
- G. K. Chesterton

Excerpt about Islam from the book "The River War" by Winston Churchill. (1899)

'How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!,'

'Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

'The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

'A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

'The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

'Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

'No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.'

[Deleted for abuse.]

You blokes really are stupid. All of you.

You say all Muslims are violent.
When I say some Jews and some Muslims are violent you attack and abuse me.

You say the Koran is violent.

When I say both the Koran and Hebrew bible contain both peacefulness and forgiveness as well as violence and vengeance you attack and abuse me.

You say Muslims are intent on a genocide of Jews.
When I say some Muslims and some Jews are intent on genocides you attack and abuse me.

When you say all Muslims or the 'Muslim World' are violent.

You attack and abuse me when I point out peaceful Islamic secular countries like Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia.

When you say I support or are friendly with Islamists because I overwhelmingly make statements that are anti Jewish or Israel.

I laugh at you.

There are no Muslims in here supporting the violence of other Muslims. If they were I'd debate with them as I have you lot.

There are in here Jews and non Jews supporting the violence of the Jews of Israel.

Doesn't that say something.

The fact Muslims haven't entered this debate supporting the violence of some Muslims tends to suggest to me Muslims in Australia overwhelmingly don't support violence and vengeance.

You disgraceful lot are evidence a few Jews outside Israel, if you are, and a few non Jews overwhelmingly support violence and vengeance.

If any of you are under the illusion I was doing anything other than stringing you all along until you had completely exposed yourselves ...well don't be so stupid.

Graham asked me once if he should not allow any discussion of the mid east.

I said no. This is why.

Nuts: I laugh at you.

You are supposed to put "Ha!" behind that. You have to quote properly.

I.e. "I laugh at you..., Ha!" (puny individual)

Loudmouth wrote "Should Jews exist ? Should Israel exist ? A one-word answer will suffice."

Does anyone notice that these two questions and one sentence make an unholy trinity which is at the core of the lie of Zionism?

OK I'll answer Loudmouth's questions - but it takes two words: Yes. No.

A simple as that.

Because I don't do simple very well I'll elaborate to make the answer even clearer: Jews should exist as equals in their own homelands like the rest of us. There are literally dozens of countries that are homelands in Europe, the British Isles, the Americas, Oceania, for Jews living alongside the rest of us as equals not as ethnic overlords. Australia is mine. Israel is a cobbled together "country" for those Jews who are persuaded that God chose them as overlords - and who have whined for seven decades and still counting that those their spooky "God" chose to be submen just won't accept the overlords. They keep firing rockets at then. Evil! Evil!

Those who do the persuading are inexorably losing their power to persuade the rest of us. How many megadeaths will we accept in a nuclear war to back their play? How many politicians who would be led into commitment to such a war would we accept in parliament? My own answer is none, and not even one scratched finger. Or one dollar. Anyone care to raise it?

Hi Julian,

So ...... five million people are supposed to pack up and disperse to God knows where ? And what, move back into their homes in Poland and Hungary which have now been occupied by others for decades ?

Good luck with that.

Now BTT: when Hamas throws in its lot with Islamic State, whose side will you be on ?

Get stuck in :)

Joe

Loudmouth: So their arrogant grab of other people's territory has backed the overlords into a corner, hasn't it?

Not five million by the way. Half of those five million individual people were born in Palestine and have every right to remain there, along with the other Palestinians including the current four million or so exiles. AS EQUALS, not as overlords.

The civilised world contains about 700 million inhabitants. Three million Jewish immigrants to come and re-integrate themselves with society. AS EQUALS, much as that sticks in the Zionist racists’ craw. Not insuperable and not as nearly costly as ending up a global pile of ash as a world war would mean. If they accepted life as individual equals they would be a much more welcome source of immigration than the Moslems who are flooding in now, setting up hostile enclaves.

Hamas linking up with IS is a hypothetical being seized on by some as a bogeyman to blackmail the world into accepting global war if necessary (e.g. starting with aggression against Iran as demanded by Israel) to rescue the Zionist project. Where I personally stand is very small beer, but it is essentially with anybody who seeks the ideological elimination of Islam and the physical elimination of its warriors wherever they go ape in search of conquest for their cult. That is a duty not to "God-chosen" overlords but to fellow-human beings and the ongoing Enlightenment on which our civilisation rests. Loudmouth's hypothetical is a red herring to duck answering the racist question of rescuing Israel's overlordship over the submen

EJ could you point me to ANY Islamic majority Country where ANY unbelievers are treated as FULL equals.

That is, to follow their own Religion, unfettered by Jizyah Taxes & other restrictions, such as on dress, driving, alcohol, etc. The right not to be harassed by the different factions of islam. I don't care what they do to each other, just not to be violent or harass, say Jews, Christians or Hindus, Yardi's etc. Equal Schooling of their choice provided by the Government, equal employment opportunities in Government & other positions of Management, equal rights to be an elected member of the Government.

No, why is that? Anyone?

When it comes to Zionists, One World Order, Rosicrucians, Masons, Buffalos, Jaycees, Lions, Rotary, the USA, Russians or Chinese, any of these would be a mile in front of having the World under a Caliphate. Or is that a "Call it Hate." Wouldn't you agree?

Dear Julian,

AS EQUALS - that would be fabulous!

But of course it's a dream, it cannot happen, it's all hypothetical. Once Pinocchio plants his money in the ground and a tree of coins grows thereof, then and only then would I believe that the Arabs of the Middle-East will allow non-Muslims to live there as equals - alas, they are not even willing to treat each other as equals, how more so the infidels!

Let the cat guard your own cream: My family (who were born in Israel and that same place before Israel was established) might still be called all manner of derogatory things - but the small difference is that they are alive and well and will remain so, protected by the Israeli army, while your cream will all be eaten away by your overlording cat who wouldn't even share it equally with you.

Hi Jules,

Here's another hypothetical: that Israel will make common cause with Iran, although perhaps neither would admit it, against the fascist Islamic State. Before Christmas.

Another hypothetical: that the al-Nusra Front will join the Islamic State, perhaps on its own volition, perhaps under orders from al Qa'ida. Before Christmas.

That might force a strange, bits-and-pieces, on-and-off, working arrangement between Assad, the US, Iran, Israel and Russia, each with its own battle-front and preoccupations.

Meanwhile the Saudis will tut-tut from the sidelines, even though Islamo-fascism is, at least in part, something of their own creation.

Like it or not, the US will be drawn back into a war to keep Iran and the Saudis apart at all costs.

Gaza will be little more than a speck on the radar in all that.

Joe

Dear Avw,

On the 16th of last month I put to you;

“A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process the peace process one iota. A compliant Fatah has seen huge areas on the West Bank now occupied by settlers and hopes for a two state solution becoming more and more like a pipe dream. Hamas would be mad to give up its weapons as they most certainly have a right to defend themselves plus they are the only thing that keeps Israel at the table.”

News from yesterday;

“JERUSALEM, Aug 31 (Reuters) - Israel announced on Sunday a land appropriation in the occupied West Bank that an anti-settlement group termed the biggest in 30 years, drawing Palestinian condemnation and a U.S. Rebuke.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/31/israel-west-bank_n_5745498.html

Prior to the latest invasion of Gaza Fatah helped the Israelis move in on Hamas members in the West Bank, it assisted in raids, in kidnappings, in destruction of Hamas charities and their actions spoke of echoes of the Judenrat.

“Often, a Judenrat had a group for internal security and control, a Jewish Ordnungspolizei. They also attempted to manage the government services normally found in a city such as those named above. However, the requirements of the Nazis to deliver community members to forced labor, deportation or concentration camps placed them in the position of helping the occupiers.”
Wikipedia

Then it was people now it is land being delivered up to the occupiers.

A heck of a lot of Gaza may well lay in ruins thanks to the Likud war criminals but at least the land remains intact. It is the largest contiguous piece of Palestinian land in the world.

Many of us hear Emiliano Zapata's words “I rather die on my feet than live upon my knees.” and think it is a noble sentiment, that is until it is applied to the Gazans.

I for one wish them the best in their struggle for freedom and in any other situation so would you. Why is this different?

Shadida Steele: Hamas would be mad to give up its weapons as they most certainly have a right to defend themselves plus they are the only thing that keeps Israel at the table.”

If Hamas gave up its weapons the Israeli's wouldn't have any reason to defend itself against the never ending Rocket & Mortar attacks. There wouldn't be any War & the Palestinians could live in peace in Gaza.

Shadida: in destruction of Hamas charities.

Or the fronts for arming Hamas.

Shadida: It is the largest contiguous piece of Palestinian land in the world.

Actually shouldn't Gaza be given back to the Philistines after all it what the Egyptians gave them after their island of Thea (now Santorini) blew up.

Shadida: I for one wish them the best in their struggle for freedom and in any other situation so would you.

Nah, they'll fail because their average IQ is about well below 80 whereas the Israelis average IQ is about 100 to 115.

Dear SR:

I’m afraid your “News from yesterday” quote doesn’t make your point any more valid.

You said:

“A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process the peace process one iota”

We know that several wars have been fought in the territory since the militarisation of Gaza following the violent takeover by Hamas. The barrage of rockets from Gaza into Israel continues unabated. Are you suggesting that hostilities and bloodshed are preferred to the negotiations taking place in the West Bank? Are you suggesting the violence somehow advances the cause of peace?

Parts of Gaza may well be in ruins, but it’s mostly thanks to Hamas criminal actions and the support they get from westerners such as yourself advocating the continuation of violence and terror. It is hardly any consolation that your land is intact when your home is in ruin, your friends and relatives are casualties, death squads are roaming the streets, you have no power, no water and are fearful for your life on a daily basis. In comparison, the West Bank is a Palestinian paradise. Are you seriously suggesting that the Gazans are better off and their West Bank brothers should follow them on their path to destruction?

As for Fatah helping the Israelis to move in on Hamas members in the West Bank: as tempting as it might be to bring up Nazi Germany, unfortunately it’s completely irrelevant. Far from being on the same side, Fatah loathe Hamas just as much as they do Israel. Hamas murdered a large number of Fatah members when they violently took power in Gaza, and are now threatening to overthrow the PA in the West Bank. It is clearly in the interest of Fatah to assist the Israelis to round up as many Hamas members as possible.

“I…wish them the best in their struggle for freedom and in any other situation so would you. Why is this different?”

The path you are urging them to follow is violent path to destruction, not to freedom. How has the violence over the past 10 years advanced the peace process one iota?

Avw: Are you suggesting the violence somehow advances the cause of peace?

silly question. We are talking about the Middle East. There will "never" be peace. There has never been a time of real peace in the Middle East, "ever."

Avw: Are you seriously suggesting that the Gazans are better off and their West Bank brothers should follow them on their path to destruction?

Hamas will try to Capitalize on what happened in Gaza with propaganda & influence the West Bank into attacking Israel. Hopefully they won't be persuaded, but they will be & we will see the destruction of the West Bank & Israel remove the Palestinians from there permanently. It's really up to them, but Arabs, with such a low IQ they'll take the bait.

AVW: Fatah loathe Hamas just as much as they do Israel.

Your enemy will side with you against a third party if it will put him in power then once in power he will attack you. That's the way it has been since the rise of city states some 8000 years ago.

Dear Avw,

You said;

“I’m afraid your “News from yesterday” quote doesn’t make your point any more valid.”

Of course it does, particularly from the outside, but I understand with your perspective it would be difficult to see it.

Permit me to look at each of your points with that different (perhaps more legitimate) perspective and see what we are left with.

You said;

“We know that several wars have been fought in the territory since the militarisation of Gaza following the violent takeover by Hamas.”

What violent takeover by Hamas are you talking about? Their party Change and Reform won the 2006 Palestinian Legislative elections with an outright majority of seats. The withdrawal of aid by the major donor countries and the extremely harsh blockade of Gaza by Israel meant the Palestinian version of the 'Ordnungspolizei' took the opportunity to violently seize control against the wishes of the majority of the Palestinian people.

You said;

“The barrage of rockets from Gaza into Israel continues unabated.”

And the attacks on Gaza continue unabated, so does the blockade, the targeted assassinations, the shooting deaths of rock throwing teenagers in the West Bank, the settler violence, the demolition of Palestinian homes, the theft of water, the brutal crack downs, the cancer of Israeli settlers and the Occupation.

You asked; “Are you suggesting that hostilities and bloodshed are preferred to the negotiations taking place in the West Bank?”

What negotiations are you talking about? All the people of Gaza see is a continued theft of land in the West Bank and an Israeli government determined to use any excuse to take more. While the Gazans trade lives to hold on to their land we have Israelis are trading lives for land that is not theirs. Every time there are Israeli lives lost the default reaction is to demolish more Palestinian homes, to announce fresh settlements and to steal more land. It has become so monotonous that only the blind could fail to see what is happening.

Cont..

Cont..

You asked; “Are you suggesting the violence somehow advances the cause of peace?”

No so the Israelis should stop using it. However we know they would rather more Palestinian land than entertain a sustainable peace because that is exactly how they act.

You wrote; “Parts of Gaza may well be in ruins, but it’s mostly thanks to Hamas criminal actions and the support they get from westerners such as yourself advocating the continuation of violence and terror.”

Gaza is in ruins because of Israeli bombs, mortar shells, missiles, and artillery rounds. What criminal actions from Hamas are you talking about? They responded to the kidnappings and killings of their people in the West Bank. Why isn't an armed response to attack permitted by Hamas but it is when it is done by Israel.

You asked; “Are you seriously suggesting that the Gazans are better off and their West Bank brothers should follow them on their path to destruction?”

I ask; 'Are you seriously suggesting that the West Bank Palestinians are better off and their Gazan brothers should follow them on their path to destruction', one that sees huge chunks of their land stolen every year, with zero chance of statehood, never free from occupation and with zero rights including the right to defend themselves?

You wrote; “As for Fatah helping the Israelis to move in on Hamas members in the West Bank: as tempting as it might be to bring up Nazi Germany, unfortunately it’s completely irrelevant. Far from being on the same side, Fatah loathe Hamas just as much as they do Israel.”

The Vichy government hated the French resistance fighters.

You wrote; “The path you are urging them to follow is violent path to destruction, not to freedom. How has the violence over the past 10 years advanced the peace process one iota?”

Israel is not offering freedom but at best a form of soft occupation, a continuous theft of land, of the unabated cancer of settler appropriations. I would fight not to have a future like that as would most people. Why can't Gazans?

Dear SR:

I maintain my assessment that the quote you provided has no relevance to the point you are trying to make. Saying “Of course it does” does not make it any more valid. You have so far failed to provide any shred of evidence to back up your claim that Hamas terrorism will somehow advance the cause of statehood and peaceful coexistence, and this land appropriation quote adds nothing to support it either.
Here is another news article from a couple of days ago:

“The Jerusalem Local Building and Planning Committee on Wednesday approved a large construction plan for an Arab neighborhood in East Jerusalem over the objections of right-wing city councillor”
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/.premium-1.613997

Does this then prove the opposite – that the lack of terrorism from the West Bank encourages additional land to be given to the Palestinians there?
Sorry, you have to try harder.

“What violent takeover by Hamas are you talking about?”

I realise that you choose to bury your head in the sand and ignore the violence used by Hamas to take complete control over Gaza because it does not fit your narrative. This does not mean it didn’t happen. Here is one link documenting the violent takeover of Gaza by Hamas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)

Seeing how keen you are on looking up to Nazi Germany for illustrating your points, Hamas provides a good example for how the Nazis came to power: first use the democratic process to gain seats, then seize absolute power and eliminate all opposition by any means necessary.

If the above link still does not convince you of the violent nature of Hamas, maybe this will:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Hamas_political_violence_in_Gaza

There are thousands of such example all over the Internet. All you have to do is search.

Cont -->

--> Cont

Buried as an afterthought at the bottom of your paragraph you seem to finally admit that Hamas “…took the opportunity to violently seize control against the wishes of the majority of the Palestinian people”. Why then are you asking me “What violent takeover?” at the top of that same paragraph? Does this mean you both agree and disagree that the Hamas takeover of Gaza was a violent process? Do you take pleasure in presenting both sides of the argument and debating yourself? Please let me know who wins your argument in the end.

“And the attacks on Gaza continue unabated…”

“Gaza is in ruins because of Israeli bombs…”

You appear to be oblivious to the concept of cause and effect in relation to the Gaza war, yet you should know perfectly well that all strikes by Israel are in response to the continuous barrage of rockets into its territory, a criminal act that has been going on for many years. Can you name any other country on this planet that would have put up with a fanatic enemy sworn to its destruction lobbing daily rockets onto its territory, without retaliating to such attacks?

No rockets are fired at Israel from West Bank towns, and what a surprise, there are no Israeli strikes on any West Bank towns either. Even a blind person can see that the Israelis are responding to the continuous attacks from Gaza. Yet you shamelessly try to invert reality by suggesting that the Israeli response to the Hamas rockets somehow triggered the rockets in the first place?

Cont -->

--> Cont

“What criminal actions from Hamas are you talking about?”

From previous discussions I realise that we do not see eye to eye on the subject of terrorism. You fully embrace terror acts and support them wholeheartedly, while I detest them. Your rationale for being such an enthusiastic supporter of terrorism is the off chance that some armed forces personnel of your enemy might possibly be killed among the scores of civilians in a night club or a packed commuter bus. This possibility, according to you (as well as Hamas, ISIS and similar distinguished societies) justifies any terror atrocity against civilians. I am therefore not surprised in the least that you fail to see the ongoing terrorist acts by Hamas against Israeli civilians as criminal. I find it only slightly more surprising to learn that you don’t even view the Hamas actions against Palestinians – the violent elimination of opposition, summary executions of Palestinian citizens, use of civilians as human shields etc – as illegal. In your twisted view of the world, Islamic terrorism is completely justified, but any resistance to it is illegal.

“They [Hamas] responded to the kidnappings and killings of their people in the West Bank”

Once again, you fail to see the simple relationship between cause and effect. The arrests of Hamas members in the West Bank was in response to the Hamas kidnapping and killing of the three Israeli teenagers. Are you suggesting that Israel should have allowed the perpetrators to get away with it – just because they are members of your favourite organisation? In any case, it’s not as if Hamas was overflowing with peaceful intents prior to this incidents. Their attacks against Israeli civilians have been going on ever since they completed the violent takeover of Gaza. Any arrests of their members by Israel is clearly unrelated.

Cont -->

--> Cont

"Are you seriously suggesting that the West Bank Palestinians are better off and their Gazan brothers should follow them…”

Yes. Absolutely. Without a shadow of a doubt. It is crazy to think otherwise.
Your alternative only leads to death and destruction. While it might be consistent with the mentality of Islamic extremism, it is not compatible with the logic of most sane people.
Palestinians in the West Bank experience economic growth, lower unemployment, increase in wages and prosperity and higher life expectancy. At the same time their brothers in Gaza experience poverty and high unemployment. They are ruled by a ruthless autocratic regime that runs death squads to perform random arrests and executions. A regime that uses all the available resources on terror infrastructure or to enrich its leaders rather than for the betterment of its people. Gazans have to put up with being used as human shields in the occasional violent conflict with Israel, triggered by their own fanatic governing body whenever it decides to escalate the violence.
Unless you are a complete lunatic and becoming a fanatical shahid is your ultimate goal, what way of life would you prefer – the West Bank or Gaza?

“The Vichy government hated the French resistance fighters”

Sorry, your example is still irrelevant. The Vichy government was installed and created by the Germans, owed its existence to them, and fully cooperated with them. Fatah was neither installed nor created by Israel. It makes its own choices when to cooperate with and when to oppose Israel. Any comparison between Vichy and Fatah does not hold water.

“Israel is not offering freedom but at best a form of soft occupation…”

Israel is acting out of self-defence. An independent Palestinian state could have been in existence since the 1940s if it wasn't for the continuous Arab belligerence against Israel.
It is the Islamic fanaticism that is the real cancer not only in the Middle East, but the entire world. The sooner we all realise the importance of removing this cancer from the world the better off we would all be.

Hi SR,

There's another well-established principle that seems to have been forgotten: that, if country A launches an attack on a neighbour country B, not only has country B the right to push any aggression back but also to seize the territory of country A from which the aggression has been launched. Thus, Israel's right to seize the Golan Heights after Syria launched attacks on Israel in 1967, and similarly Israel's right to seize the Sinai from Egypt.

On that principle, the regions in Gaza from which Hamas have been firing rockets against Israel can be occupied by Israel: certainly they would have an internationally-recognised right to launch counter-attacks of their own to eliminate the threat of more rockets from that territory.

Maybe Hamas, under pressure from Gaza inhabitants, has temporarily realised that to fire rockets into Israel invites retaliatory air-strikes and artillery bombardment. Ergo, stop the rockets, and the counter-offensive stops.

For how long is the $ 64 question.

Joe

Want to know why steele is so keen on moslims?

The Pendennis Nine:

1. Khaled Sharrouf is married to convert Tara Nettleton. Sentenced to 4 years.
2. Khaled Cheikho Sentenced to 20 years.
3. Moustafa Cheikho Sentenced to 19½ years.
4. Mohamed Ali Elomar Sentenced to 21 years.
5. Mohammed Omar Jamal Sentenced to 17 years.
6. Mazen Touma Sentenced to 20 years.
7. Abdul Rakib Hasan. Divorced by convert wife, Shahida Steele, with whom he had four children. Largely abandoned by his family.
Sentenced to 19½ years.
8. Omar Baladjam. Sentenced to 20 years.
9. Mirsad Mulahalilovic. Since his release, he has established another painting business and is living in Belmore.

Named in a 2010 US embassy cable as one of 23 Australians under ASIO surveillance due to links with al-Qaeda.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/terrifying-legacy-emerges-from-success-of-operation-pendennis-20140823-106ow0.html#ixzz3BO5NTELL

With you all the way Avw & Has been.

Why has the Israeli gov't killed 32 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank since June this year?
Who are the terrorists?

If 1462 Israeli civilians had been killed in 50 days there would be international outrage. Why not for the Palestinians?

"Jews have been attacked in Paris, London, Sydney, Rome, Frankfurt and Austria.", thank god Palestinians are safe in the occupied territories, phew

Dear Avw,

The point I had been earlier making was that the resistance by Gazans, although resulting in the slaughtering of their citizens by the war criminals of the Likud Party, has meant that after seeing off the occupiers they have been able to hold on their land. The compliance by those in power in the West Bank have seen the settler cancer grow and land appropriated at frightening rates. To then hear that there was a new record land grab by the Israelis in the West Bank surely validated my point in spades. Why on earth would you consider it doesn't. That my friend would be illogical.

The only counter evidence you provided was the announcement of housing approval in an Arab neighbourhood of East Jerusalem which is OCCUPIED TERRITORY! And this from you was ridiculous;

“that the lack of terrorism from the West Bank encourages additional land to be given to the Palestinians there”

It is not Israeli land to 'give' to anyone, it is Palestinian territory. At best the Israelis have deigned to allow the Palestinians to keep a parcel of their own land, how bloody kind of them.

There had to be some announcement to deflect some of the condemnation from the international community from the initial land grab but in the words of the Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat “The planning of neighborhoods in East Jerusalem by the Jerusalem municipality is a clear expression of Israel’s sovereignty over every part of the city and the unified strength of Jerusalem.” It is a clear expression of something called a military occupation.

This next piece from you does you little credit;

“Buried as an afterthought at the bottom of your paragraph you seem to finally admit that Hamas “…took the opportunity to violently seize control against the wishes of the majority of the Palestinian people”.

Please refrain from misrepresenting my points as it takes time and effort to correct the record and is not conducive to the discussion.

Cont..

Cont..

In the 'Battle of Gaza' in 2007 it was the Palestinian 'Vichy' government (Fatah) who illegitimately went against the democratic will of the Palestinian people and took power, after which they attempted to take control of the only means the Gazans had of defending themselves;

“In January 7, 2007, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the Hamas-led Interior Ministry's paramilitary police force, the most powerful armed unit outside his control in factional fighting, to be incorporated into the security apparatus loyal to him.”
Wikipedia

Why on earth would they have complied? What would have kept at bay renewed Israeli settler activity in Gaza or IDF incursions done at will?

You write;

“You appear to be oblivious to the concept of cause and effect in relation to the Gaza war, yet you should know perfectly well that all strikes by Israel are in response to the continuous barrage of rockets into its territory, a criminal act that has been going on for many years. Can you name any other country on this planet that would have put up with a fanatic enemy sworn to its destruction lobbing daily rockets onto its territory, without retaliating to such attacks?”

Which can just as easily be written as;

'You appear to be oblivious to the concept of cause and effect in relation to the Gaza war, yet you should know perfectly well that all strikes by Hamas are in response to the continuous missile strikes and incursions into its territory and a brutal blockade which is a a criminal act that has been going on for many years. Can you name any other peoples on this planet that would have put up with a fanatic enemy acting in every way to deny their statehood and self determination, an enemy hell bent on continuous assassinations, kidnappings, torture, house demolitions and air strikes without retaliating to such attacks?'

Cont..

Cont..

You assert;

“No rockets are fired at Israel from West Bank towns, and what a surprise, there are no Israeli strikes on any West Bank towns either.” No, instead a record amount of their territory is stolen from them while the Gazans did not lose a metre.

Now this is where I get really pissed because of this crap from you;

“You fully embrace terror acts and support them wholeheartedly, while I detest them.”

Mate, what a truly miserable misrepresentation of my point. I condemned both the planting of a bomb in a night club as well as the dropping of a bomb on a Hamas member's house that kills the majority of his family. I called both acts terrorism which they most certainly are. You sir defended the second as a legitimate act therefore you sir are the defender of terrorism, of the obliteration of families, of the slaughter of civilians. How much terrorism was inflicted by Hamas on the Israeli population compared to that inflicted by the IDF? There is absolutely no doubt for most thinking people who the true terrorists were in the latest conflict.

Next you wrote this;

“Once again, you fail to see the simple relationship between cause and effect. The arrests of Hamas members in the West Bank was in response to the Hamas kidnapping and killing of the three Israeli teenagers. Are you suggesting that Israel should have allowed the perpetrators to get away with it – just because they are members of your favourite organisation?”

Cont..

Cont..

It appears that an Hamas affiliated group was responsible for the killing of the Israeli teenagers. The act happen a week after the autopsy results on the deaths of the West Bank Palestinian teenagers killed on Nakba Day were released showing that they had been shot with live ammunition not the rubber bullets as claimed by the IDF. While I most certainly don't agree with their method, to use your own words 'Are you suggesting that they should have allowed the perpetrators to get away with it?'
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-Autopsy-finds-live-fire-killed-Palestinian-teen-during-Nakba-Day-clashes-356036

Or is violent reaction illegitimate just when Palestinian teenagers are killed?

The rest of your post is mostly mantra although this was particularly so;

“It is the Islamic fanaticism that is the real cancer not only in the Middle East, but the entire world. The sooner we all realise the importance of removing this cancer from the world the better off we would all be.”

Here is a truer version;

'It is Israeli settler fanaticism that is the real cancer not only in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but the entire world. The sooner we all realise the importance of removing this cancer from the world the better off we would all be

All that from a Terrorist sympathizer.

Do Hamas moslems lie? Hmmm... Let's see.

The Hamas dead in Gaza. Propaganda at its finest! Photo op gone wrong. The dead are moving when they think the camera is off.

http://moonbattery.com/?p=49247
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfCJ23umcBI

It's a miracle!

Dear SR:

The point you are trying to make is the following:

“A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process the peace process one iota”

In other words, you would have us believe that if we demilitarise Gaza – remove the weapons and arsenal of terror – thereby eliminating the trigger for armed conflicts - it will not advance peace. By the same token, why do we bother with the reduction of nuclear warheads in the world? Why don’t we encourage all nuclear nations to increase their armaments as much as they like? According to your logic, this should not harm the cause of world peace one iota, and we should all feel that much safer.
Your ridiculous assertion makes no sense, and no land appropriation or any other conceivable fact about this conflict will make it any more palatable.

But it gets worse. You then continue to state

“Hamas would be mad to give up its weapons as they most certainly have a right to defend themselves plus they are the only thing that keeps Israel at the table”

Two wrong statements in the one sentence, unfortunately in this case two wrongs don’t make a right. Hamas are not defending themselves with their weapons, they are using it to attack civilians. And it is certainly not keeping Israel at the table, if anything it’s the reason for breaking up any negotiations.

I note that you still refuse to even acknowledge the slaughtering of Gaza citizens at the hands of Hamas thugs, via summary street executions of so-called “collaborators” or anyone who opposes them, by using their own civilians as human shields, or the occasional terror rocket that happens to fall on Gaza or West Bank neighbourhoods. They continue their indiscriminate rocket fire at Israeli towns in the full knowledge that their criminal acts will eventually invite retaliation. I have asked you before, but received no reply: Can you name any other country on this planet that would have put up with a fanatic enemy sworn to its destruction lobbing daily rockets onto its territory, without retaliating to such attacks?

Cont-->

-->Cont

“It is not Israeli land to 'give' to anyone, it is Palestinian territory…”

Not yet it isn’t. If anything it’s ex-Jordanian/Egyptian territory. It never belonged to an entity called Palestine. It’s currently a territory in dispute, pending an agreement on the establishment and exact borders of a new Palestinian state. Until such a state is established, it is not Palestinian territory.

“This next piece from you does you little credit…Please refrain from misrepresenting my points…”

Can you explain how I misrepresented your point? You present both side of the argument – Hamas did and did not take control of Gaza by violent means. How did I misrepresent your point in any way? Your post is ambiguous at best, if not purposely misleading.
You should try to avoid being misleading and ambiguous, or better still, decide on your position rather than presenting both alternatives.

“Why on earth would they [Hamas] have complied [with the president’s call]?”

Because, my dear SR, according to Palestinian political structure, the president is the commander-in-chief of all armed forces. They are therefore required to comply with his call, even if, God forbid, it goes against your wishes.

Your re-writing of my paragraph is again nothing but a clumsy attempt at distorting reality, not to mention a lack of originality. You know perfectly well that the Israeli raids are in response to Palestinian rockets, not the other way around.
Question: Why are there no Israeli air raids on the West Bank? Let me help you with the answer – it’s because the Palestinians in the West Bank do not launch rockets into Israel.
Another question: Why do we have long periods when there are no Israeli raids on Gaza, yet there is no letup in the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel? What attacks are those rockets responding to when there are no attacks? Let me help you again because I know you’ll have difficulty answering this correctly: the rockets are not responding to anything. They are simply attacking Israeli civilians as per the policy embedded in the Hamas charter. It’s really that simple.

Cont-->

-->Cont

“Now this is where I get really pissed because of this crap from you…”

I know what you mean. I would also get really pissed off if I woke up one day to find that I actually support terrorism. Making such a discovery about yourself is guaranteed to ruin anyone’s day.
You and I have had a long discussion about your justification of terrorist acts. According to you, terror acts are justified, even though they are deliberately targeting civilians, because there is a possibility that a member of the enemy armed forces might, by chance, be hit in addition to all other civilian casualties. That, according to you, is acceptable collateral damage. Make no mistakes about it: by justifying and legitimising terror acts as you do repeatedly, you ARE supporting them. There can be no justification for terrorist acts targeting civilians, no matter how hard you try, or how much you hate the victims of those terror acts.

Let’s clear all the nonsense and summarise what you consider to be the more legitimate action:

Cont-->

-->Cont

On one side we have the Israeli Defence Force, controlled by a democratically elected government. The IDF, when authorised by the government, responds to deadly rocket attacks from Gaza by attacking terror weapon caches, terror infrastructure and terrorist leaders. The IDF often provides advance warnings to minimise casualties among Gaza civilian. While it doesn’t always stop unfortunate collateral damage, it goes a long way to prevent it. Accidental death of civilians often results in an enquiry. Civilians are never intentionally targeted.

On the other side we have Hamas, illegally ruling Gaza with an iron fist, where democratic elections are nothing but a faded memory. They exclusively target civilians, either using rockets aimed at towns and cities or suicide bombers targeting civilian public places such as night clubs and buses. Any terrorist who succeeds in blowing up Israeli civilians is revered as a saint and often gets a public square named after him/her. Hamas stated aim is to destroy Israel and all its citizens as well as Jews all over the world. At the same time they don’t hesitate to murder their own people who dare opposing them.

Faced with the above two choices, you embrace Hamas. Not only you choose to support a terrorist organisation, you also justify their terrorist acts, reasoning that civilian casualties in a terror act are acceptable, because there is a possibility that enemy recruits might also be hit. Using your reasoning, 9/11 was a justified act, out of the 3000 civilians killed there must have been at least a dozen recruits serving in the US armed forces. The Bali bombing was justified because surely one or two ADF personnel might have been at the club at the time. London bombing? Justified for the same reason. Bombing a kindergarten? Justified! Surely some of those little bastards will grow up to be soldiers in some infidel army.

This thinking puts you firmly in the camp of Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIL, Boko-Haram etc. I can certainly see why you are “really pissed”. Can I suggest you stop justifying terrorism – maybe you’ll feel a little better about yourself.

Dear Avw,

Well there certainly seems to be rather large dollops of Singer appearing in your posts which is disappointing as I have certainly tired of his belligerence, evasiveness, and general slipperiness. But I will press on.

To your persistent misrepresentation of my equivalence argument. You are either being wilfully ignorant or pathological in your refusal to accept the point that if you deem a bomb set in a Israeli nightclub as terrorism, which I have repeatedly confirmed I do, then you must deem a bomb targeting the house of a Hamas leader (where the expectation of his wife and children being present is very high) as terrorism too, which I also do. You do not. That means you can be justly accused of supporting, condoning and even rejoicing in terrorism.

Indeed well may you say “I would also get really pissed off if I woke up one day to find that I actually support terrorism.” because that is exactly what you do.

Having cleared that up I shall move on.

You have taken issue yet again with my statement; “A compliant, demilitarised Gaza will not process the peace process one iota”.

You have not told me what would then keep the settlers out of Gaza? What would stop the kidnappings? The demolitions? The curfews? The checkpoints? The settler violence? The theft of land? None of these occur routinely in Gaza but they are a feature of life for those in the West Bank which is to all intents and purposes demilitarised.

You asked;

“Question: Why are there no Israeli air raids on the West Bank? Let me help you with the answer – it’s because the Palestinians in the West Bank do not launch rockets into Israel.”

And because they do not launch rockets the Israelis deem they can get away once again with settler incursions, with kidnappings, with demolitions, with curfews, with checkpoints, with settler violence, with land theft and with killing of Palestinian teenagers.

Cont..

Cont..

You see you want peace on Israel's terms, one that would never see an independent Palestinian state, one forever without the means to defend itself, unable to progress its people from being Israeli serfs into a viable nation. By 'process' I mean the steps that are required to see both peoples with their own nations which is the only way to achieve sustainable peace.

The current 'murder' of Likud war criminals is utterly determined for that to never happen. They are utterly committed to stripping land from the Palestinians and the only thing keeping them from doing so at an even greater rate is the heroic resistance of the people of Gaza. The Likud criminals are certainly not afraid of the very compliant Fatah nor of an almost equally compliant US.

Your flagging of nuclear arsenals is pertinent though. Mutually Assured Destruction is accepted as the reason the world's two largest superpowers have kept the peace between themselves for so long. And where do you think those missiles are targeted? At each others civilian cities.

Just as Israel has deliberately targeted thousands of Palestinian homes, even to the extent of purposefully demolishing swathes of apartment blocks with no military objective, to put pressure on the Gazans to in turn pressure Hamas, so why then is it somehow only illegitimate when Hamas does the same. I think both are deplorable but once again you choose to ignore the far greater sinner, the slaugterer of hundreds upon hundreds of civilians.

But ultimately sir the toll in the last conflict has utterly delegitimised any supporter of the Likud criminals of decrying Hamas targeting civilians. There are 1800 reasons why you can never, ever, do so again without eliciting well deserved derision.

And what on earth is this piece of rubbish?

“Why do we have long periods when there are no Israeli raids on Gaza, yet there is no letup in the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel?”

Cont..

Cont..

You tell me when there has been 'long periods' without attacks on Gaza, assassinations of Hamas members, without a crippling and illegal blockade, without targeted strikes, or without sniper bullets. There haven't been.

However there has been a long period, over 6 years in fact, since the last suicide bomber struck in Israel and there has only been a single bomb strategically placed anywhere in Israel over the same period. Considering the utter slaughter conducted by the Likud war criminals over that time including Cast Lead, Pillar Defence, and Protective Edge there is every reason to consider Hamas as restrained in their tactics. There was no restraint in the tactics of Israel this year.

Finally to Hamas killing those spying for Israel. There is no doubt that the web of Israeli spies in Gaza is extensive, even including the son of a founding member of Hamas who even betrayed his own father.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100629/us-israel-hamas-spy/

They are why Israel is able to target highly secret meetings of Hamas officials. In less fraught times Hamas has recognised that the 'collaborators' are often recruited under duress by the Israelis and have in the past conducted amnesties and education campaigns to address the problem.
http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/10450-reining-in-israeli-collaborators-in-gaza

In the midst of bombings and invasion less civilised methods have been employed, much to Hamas' discredit. Many countries still have the death sentence for treason including the US and Israel. It was the fact that these were summary executions without due process that condemns them.

“In Israel, capital punishment is allowed only during wartime and only for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, treason, and crimes against the Jewish People. The current Arab-Israel conflict is considered a war, and the committing of any of the crimes can result in the death penalty.”

Wikipedia

Steele: the slaugterer of hundreds upon hundreds of civilians.

The Hamas dead in Gaza? How do we know that? We only have Hamas's word for that, & in light of the following. Is it true?

http://moonbattery.com/?p=49247
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfCJ23umcBI

Steelie: 'It is Israeli settler fanaticism that is the real cancer // the world the better off we would all be.

Yes, we can see that. I.e.; Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Oman, Nigeria. Pakistan, Afghanistan. I feel you would be much happier in one of these countries with people that support your stance on the World & beliefs. Have you ever thought of moving to one of them?

Steelie: You see you want peace on Israel's terms, one that would never see an independent Palestinian state, one forever without the means to defend itself.

As opposed to having a Hamas run State. Their wouldn't be an Israelie left in a week. They would be all summery executed. Wouldn't they?

Palestinian State? Palestine only existed from 1923 to 1948. There is no such thing as a Palestinian anyway. It's just a Terrorist organization, PLO. The Arab people in Gaza only want to live in Peace but the various factions, PLO, Fatah, Hamas won't let them.

Steelie: There is no doubt that the web of Israeli spies in Gaza is extensive, even including the son of a founding member of Hamas who even betrayed his own father.

The son of the founder of Hamas told the World the truth about Hamas & Daddies pi$$ed off. I guess telling the truth to the People of Gaza is not a Hamas thing.

Your EX is lonely & hasn't seen you for a while. He wants a visit in jail.

Dear SR:

Evasiveness? Slipperiness? While I cannot comment on your dissatisfaction with Singer’s articles, I have certainly addressed and refuted most of your points – far from being evasive. Slipperiness definitely appears to be a very common trait of your posts: you support terror acts by defending and justifying them, then say that you don’t. You deny Hamas criminals took over control of Gaza by violence, then you say they did. You get ‘pissed’ when I point out the inconsistency in your posts, claiming I misrepresented your point. Which one of your conflicting points did I misrepresent – the one for or against? Are you simply hedging your bets both ways? Why are you blaming the messenger for pointing out the glaring inconsistencies? At the same time you continue avoiding the hard questions I put to you repeatedly many times now, and you say I’m the one being evasive? You falsely accuse me of “rejoicing in terrorism”, and I’m the one being belligerent and slippery?

As for your obvious support of terrorism, your hypocrisy is truly staggering. While you claim you do not support terrorism, your repeated justification of it reveals the exact opposite. In a previous post you gave the example of the three Israeli boys kidnapped and murdered by Hamas operatives in June, suggesting it was a response to Palestinian teenagers being shot back in May, allegedly by the IDF. You concluded with the triumphant question “are you suggesting that they [Hamas murderers] should have allowed the perpetrators to get away with it?”
This clearly demonstrates how similar your line of thinking is to that of any common terrorist: What perpetrators are you talking about? Are you suggesting the three Israeli boys or members of their families shot and killed Palestinians? What exactly were those boys getting away with, according to you, that is so terrible requiring summary execution at the hands of your admired assassins? I guess once you embrace terrorism the way you have it’s easy to overlook such trivialities. Let’s just kill someone to make us feel better, anyone will do.

Cont-->

-->Cont

Now that we’ve dealt with your feigned grievances, let’s continue disproving your other points.

“You see you want peace on Israel's terms, one that would never see an independent Palestinian state, one forever without the means to defend itself…”

Please point to any of my posts where I stated the above. Failing that, try to stick to what I say, not what you imagined I said. The one thing I strongly support is the removal of terror arsenal from Gaza. Terror weapons, by definition, are NOT used for defence. They are used to terrorise people. You should look this up before making false claims about what I want.

You keep harping on that ridiculous assertion that terrorism carried out by Hamas criminals somehow has a positive effect on Israeli/Palestinian relations. Do you really believe that the ‘heroic’ terrorism from Gaza keeps Israel at the negotiating table? Are you really that ignorant or naïve to believe such illogical rubbish? And how are terror attacks on Israeli cities far from Gaza related to stopping settlements within Gaza? The mind boggles.

“…why then is it somehow only illegitimate when Hamas does the same”

Because, as I already stated many times, only to be ignored by your misguided righteousness, they are NOT doing the same. You keep overlooking one crucial difference: Hamas criminals deliberately and exclusively target the homes of civilians who have nothing to do with the conflict. No IDF bases are targeted by any Qassam rockets. Israel, on the other hand, only targets terrorist leaders’ residences, as well as terror weapons which are often held by Hamas in civilian neighbourhoods for human shielding. Israel makes repeated efforts to avoid harming others, any civilian deaths are accidental and regrettable. No Israeli has a public square named after him/her for killing Palestinian civilians, unlike many such examples on the Palestinian side. I understand why you need to keep ignoring this and I sympathise, because once you acknowledge these little facts your entire argument collapses in a heap of drivel and your immoral enthusiastic justification of terrorism is exposed in its full glory.

Cont-->

-->Cont

“You tell me when there has been 'long periods' without attacks on Gaza…”

Periods without Israeli attacks on Gaza have certainly been far longer than period with no terror rockets launched by the Hamas illegal entity in Gaza. Once again (because you keep ignoring it) – keep in mind that there is a world of difference between deliberately targeting civilians and the accidental death of civilians while going after your much admired terror role-models.

“However there has been a long period, over 6 years in fact, since the last suicide bomber struck in Israel and there has only been a single bomb strategically placed anywhere in Israel over the same period”

This is certainly not for lack of trying by your favourite terror bandits. There have been countless attempts to carry out terror acts within Israel, most of which are foiled by the authorities, not unlike similar attempts in Europe, the US, Australia and other such localities where infidels reside. Unfortunately it is inevitable that one day, some horrific terror act will again succeed. You will then be able to claim your moment in the sun, justifying this despicable act and glorifying the sub-humans who carried it out as ‘heroic fighters’.

You say

“It is Israeli settler fanaticism that is the real cancer not only in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but the entire world. The sooner we all realise the importance of removing this cancer from the world the better off we would all be”

Time and time again you choose to pick one of my sentences, swap some keywords around and convert it to your needs, due to, I guess, lack of other credible material to support your claims. You might consider this a clever strategy, but unfortunately for you, after this word-surgery this sentence no longer makes any sense. Can you explain how is “Israeli settler fanaticism” the “real cancer” in “the entire world”? How many Israeli settlements are there in Australia? How many are there in the US or Canada? Can any be found in Europe? Are Israelis building settlements in China, Russia or Japan?

Cont-->

-->Cont

Come to think of it, are there any Israeli settlements anywhere else in the world? How is this “the real cancer…in…the entire world”, according to you? Let’s compare it with Islamic fanaticism: we are afflicted with it in abundance throughout the Middle East, in places like Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Africa we now have Islamic fanatics controlling large areas of Nigeria and Somalia, routinely conducting terror acts in Libya and Tunisia, while others are making repeated attempts to seize power in Egypt. In the Americas we had your heroic freedom fighters involved in the 9/11 and countless other terror attempts, most of which have luckily been foiled. In Europe we have Islamic fanatics dismembering people in the streets of London. Plenty of other extremists are actively seeking to establish Sharia law in large parts of the continent, and bombings of public places have taken place in London and Spain. In Asia we have Islamic fanatics in Indonesia, Russia, the Philippines and they now start raising their ugly heads in Western China. Here in Australia we have no shortage of our own fanatics wishing to convert our society to a Sharia abiding nation, and we are about to increase our terror alert to High. Now that’s what I call a REAL cancer affecting the ENTIRE world.
I suppose the lesson for you is the need to be careful when ripping off someone else’s statement and attempting to convert it to your needs – it could blow up in your face.

Deal with it steelie.

http://news.yahoo.com/hamas-quietly-admits-fired-rockets-civilian-areas-212636053.html

Keeping your head down steelie, now that the Terrorist alert has gone to "High."