First, you totally misintepreted the chart. It does not in any way show how many Israeli arabs live in the west bank. Second, its seems you have a very odd view of what a citizen actually is. Palestinian Arabs are not citizens of Israel period. They may have some form of Israeli issued ID, but that does not make them citizens. And when somebody is described as having foreign citizenship, it means they are not a citizen of the country they are then in. They are citizens of a "foreign" or different country and do not have the same rights and priviledges as an actual citizen of that country. I am always interested in new facts. You didn't supply me with any.
The Israeli Arabs that live in the West Bank dont really want to vote, they wanted that citizenship just for they could enter Israel to reunite with their love ones! Didnt provided? thats why you kept arguing with me about lets say what is the obligations of an occupied force are? I provided you it and you argued with me about that obligations and how Israel do it! why? I gave you the obligations and how Israel is doing it from ICRC website and you kept atgue with me about it? I gave you facts and you ignored them . Or maybe when I showed you what is "Plan Dalet" was and you kept argue with me it is not true. You just argue on things that is more easy for you to answer.
Have you been reading this thread at all, Csareo. Or have you just watched the finishing line and not read that the horse everyone thought had won, had been disqualified. You appear to be totally unaware of the following Questions and Answers that have been addressed in this thread: 1) What started minor Chain 1 (hint - a) dead Palestinian babies / b) a misinformed Hamas) 2) What started serious Chain 2 (hint - assassination of Hamas leader; there was no b)) 3) What started Mega-Chain 3 (hint - bombardment of Gaza police training ground) It might perhaps at this point be opportune to sympathise with those who see the cause-and-effect FACTS in the chains as not supporting the Mantras that they believe for so long; that the so-called terrorist actions by Hamas were mere retaliations to prior IDF aggression I know that such shocking revelations as listed above can be disappointing and painful, especially when you have never been provided with ALL the facts, and even more so when your heroes start the conflicts, and your favourite villains are merely the retaliators. But that is no reason to deny the verifiable true facts. And if you cannot find data to refute them, then just maybe, they are exactly that .... true. When you reach the point where you cannot deny the initial cause of each chain; when you have no more ammo, except to mindlessly repeat the discredited mantas like you have just done, Csareo, then it might be wise to remember Isaiah 42:18: "Hear ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see"
Which actions and deeds are you referring to, Rocco?: a) That Hamas showed every good will to observe the truce of February 2005 that was initiated almost a full year before the elections were held in ? i.e. that they curtailed their "terrorist activities" with the one exception of potentially shared blame for the least significant Chain of Conflict; the first one on 23 September 2005? b) That Hamas gained the respect of the Palestinian people by their social support actions? c) That Hamas' plans of action had the Palestinian people as those whose problems needed to be addressed, while Fatah was interested in the best for their party? d) That no-one on this thread has been able to refute my research that the chains started (the earliest action in each) with Israeli aggression or human rights abuse? e) That even when Israel placed a crippling blockade on Gaza, Hamas stubbornly refuse to break the truce? Which of those actions are "to the contrary", Rocco? Or are you satisfied to harp back to the 1988 Charter, a Charter that bears startling similarities of State denial to that of Likud. I could therefore make your final claim for Israel in equal measure. You will have to harp back and also to ignore those Likud parallels (with FAR higher death tolls from the Israeli terrorist activities), because so far you have been stunning unsuccessful at showing Hamas to be the instigator of the Chains once a truce has been effected. Isaiah 42:18.
Do you have ANY data that estimates the number of Israeli arabs living in the west bank? ANY data at all? I am familiar with the obligations of an occupier to the occupied population, and Israel appears to be meeting those obligation for the most part. However, a citizen of an occupied territory is NOT considered a citizen of the occupier's nation and is not entitled to any of the rights, freedoms and protections that the occupier's citizens enjoy. No, I did not argue that it was not true. I merely argued that your contention that it was the sole reason for all of the palestinian refugees was wrong. No, I will debate any issue and am fully prepared to accept when I get my facts worng. Seems you appear to have some interpretation problems, tho.
For exemple, in 2012 there was 1,000 Israeli Arabs that lived and still living in Ramallah, without counting students and artists. The Arabs in the West Bank get freedoms, they can move where ever they like in the West Bank, axcept those who own Israeli citizenship, and for them they cant enter villages in area A but that is because Israel dont want that Israeli citizenship, Jewish/Muslim/Christian, will get hurt there, and even several Arabs that became Jewish explained. Freedom of speech they can do with rallyes. The obligation of the IDF in the West Bank is to protect all of those that live there no metter what religion they believe and not metter if they Arabs! and the IDF do it. I never said that Plan Dalet was the sole reason for the refugees! I just said (in the other thread) that Plan Dalet was a plan that the Hagannah have been formed and it was partly operated and Dir Yassin was the one who have been evecuated by force and the rest was evecuated by choice and with the help of the British. With facts there is no interpatetion problems!
where is the data? Look once and for all. The Palestinians ARE NOT israeli citizens. Its pretty damn simple. They cannot move freely within the west bank. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank_closures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_checkpoint http://972mag.com/photos-palestinian-activists-dismantle-israeli-roadblock/79909/ The IDF does not enforce local palestinian criminal and civil law. They enforce Israeli occupation law. And yes they do fulfill most of their obligations in this regard, although they still arrest children and even sometimes imprison them with adults, although re-occuring allegations of their torture are more PR spin than anything else. Neither side is infallibly right, despite what their invisible gods may whisper to them at night. Dir Yassin was not the only village to be evacuated by force. But the arab propaganda in response to the events of Dir Yassin, terrified many other local arabs who decided (quite reasonably in my view) to get the hell "outta dodge" with their families intact. The british didn't help "evacuate" anyone. I have to disagree. With facts and without facts, interpretation problems will continue to exist. Mainly because of individual bias, lack of context, not having ALL the facts, etc. AND THATS A FACT.
klipkap; et al, You and I see the same (or similar) timeline, yet --- interpret it differently. (COMMENT) Please don't get me wrong. Everyone generally appreciated the reduced anti-Israel conflict activity immediately following the withdraw. But the reduced activity was not a matter of benevolence on the part of the peace-loving HAMAS. The pervious period of occupation had a significant impact on HAMAS and the Military Wing in the production of war stocks and materials. The 2005 banner year for HAMAS was the opportunity for HAMAS to begin production and stockpiling of the was stocks and supplies. In the graphs below, you will see the the near linear rise in the Number of Mortar and Rocket Attacks during the period 2001 to Late 2008 (requiring staging and firing). And the greater duration covering the associated deaths with major events. You can see by the graph, that there is a cycle of activity (a sinusoidal pattern) of conflict deaths that existed before the unilateral withdrawal, and continued on after the unilateral withdrawal. Yet, there were no IDF troop concentrations in Gaza, nor were there any settlements in Gaza. Everything had been removed. Thus, the withdraw had little or no impact on the intensity of the conflict. Your thesis that there was some period of reduce conflict by HAMAS is questionable. Now, moving on down the timeline, you will notice that just when a new cycle rise is predicted, there is a major suppressive action taken on the part of the IDF (on 27 December 2008 the IDF target security installations, HAMAS fighters, and other conflict related facilities in the Gaza Strip. Hostilities between IDF and Hamas fighters continued through 18 January 2009 with an Israeli withdrawal a week later.). Afterwards, there is a period of significant reduction in Palestinian deaths associated with the conflict. In fact, some would say the Israeli Operation Cast Lead did more, as a combat result, to save Palestinian lives in the following year than did HAMAS. Peace and reduced casualties was not a matter of the HAMAS Leadership seeking peace, or anything of the sort. It was a natural outcome of the IDF destruction of HAMAS capabilities to wage war. The inability of HAMAS to engage in hostile action had a direct impact on the number of casualties the Palestinians suffered. (COMMENT) Again, HAMAS funds very little in terms of social support activities. Most of that is done by Non-Governmental Organizations, UN sanctioned activities, and funds raised in the Persian Gulf countries. There are also donations from Palestinian expatriates around the world, through its charities, such as the umbrella fundraising organization, the Union of Good. Some fundraising and propaganda activity also takes place in Western Europe. But as a whole, HAMAS is not capable of actually standing on its own without its parasitic bite. Much of what is called HAMAS social programs is really the work product of some other source --- relabeled as HAMAS. (COMMENT) This is a domestic Palestinian issue. Most Political parties around the world have had this type of charge levied against them. We, as Americans. simply don't care much about the internal politics in the Palestinian community. What we do care about is the open support of terrorism and the establishment of a Government that Supports Terrorism. (COMMENT) Nor have you been able to substantiate your claim. Your perpetual victim claims, and the settlement issues, are circular. (COMMENT) Hummm, crippling or not, The end of the suppression, containment and quarantine effort is only a matter of the Palestinian accordingly --- seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. (COMMENT) I see no chain in which HAMAS, under the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625), attempted in any way, to reach a just settlement of their international disputes through peaceful means; not before, not then and certainly not now. Any attempt to play the finger-pointing game on the Part of the Palestinians, is merely an example of how they exhibit their childish behaviors. Any time the Hostile Arab Palestinian wants to be taken seriously, all the have to do is drop their aggressive behaviors, put away their weapons, stop teaching Jihad as a way of life, and sit down and start negotiating in earnest. Otherwise, they are just what they say they are: perpetual victims, Jihadist and immature populations that support violence as a means of dispute resolution. Most Respectfully, R
You are absolutely correct!! And over the next day or two I will show you exactly why I totally reject your interpretation (I will do it in a step-by-step fashion so as to avoid mega-posts)
--- (continued) --- I can see that you do not come from a mathematical or statistical background. Because the first graph that you provided is an extraordinarily blunt tool, in fact no tool at all, in showing any trend with a frequency of less than three years. You attempt to use it to disprove the cycles of 6 months that I described in detail. Statistically it is totally inadequate for the task. It cannot even show the start and end of the ~6 month flare-ups (the Chains of Conflict), let alone demonstrate trends in these. As a result your conclusion insofar as it uses this graph, that my “thesis that there were some period of reduced conflict by HAMAS is questionable” is based on statistically completely invalid reasoning. Your second graph is more useful, although it is also fatally flawed in reflecting Hamas-Israeli actions because lumped into the post-2004 data is not only Gaza, but also the West Bank. Still, it has more merit. Let us therefore examine the purple bars below the line – i.e. the Israeli death; the top red line shows Palestinian deaths and that does not reflect Hamas activities, but Israeli ones, which are very illuminating, but not regarding your conclusions. Let's pay some detailed attention to it, shall we? We can see the peak of the 2nd intifada in 2002, ending in mid-2004 (remember, purple bars only; not red bars). This is when Hamas established its reputation as being “terrorist” - 2002 being the key year. Can you see how peak Israeli deaths in 2002 are preceded by EARLIER similar levels of Palestinian deaths? Can you also see how, long after Israeli deaths have gone into a major declining trend, verging on ceasing, the Palestinian deaths just keep on rolling on without significant decrease? Who is the terrorist? Who is the malevolent aggressor? From then onwards the graph only serves to show Israel as the mega-aggressor; one can hardly even see the purple bars (Israeli deaths) after late 2004. Yet, Rocco, you tell me this graph disproves Hamas’ attempts to achieve non-conflict. Would you care to retract your interpretation? (after a visit to SpecSavers? - I needed a magnifying glass for those post-2004 purple bars) It is just SO embarrassing for a serious debater, which I definitely consider you to be. P.S.: Many thanks for the second graph. I will use it in the conclusion of this thread. --- (to be continued) ---
I would underline how Hamas approached the "offer" of a truce. I quote Haniyeh from April 2007 [interview at Saudi daily Aljazeera] Now, I concede that the context of the moment generated some negative feelings in Hamas field, anyway from the declaration of PM Haniyeh I get that the matter of the recognition of Israel seems to be well stated in Hamas environment [and not in favor of the existence of that state ... this is what I understand from the beginning of the quoted declaration.
klipkap, et al, You have a tendency to jump to conclusions not held in evidence. (COMMENT) This is a leap. There are any number of reasons for using these graphs, the least of which, they were the best I could find, given the topic. (COMMENT) These graphs are merely raw data. You are correct in that they show trends at two different resolutions. The start and end of a cycle, in reality, is much different from the start and end of a cycle in the ideal environment with symmetrical data. But in this case, it doesn't take a Rhode Scholar to see that during the period of occupation the Israeli casualties were higher than after the withdrawal. (Remembering that the object of the Israelis is to "end casualties.") The reduction in casualties was the goal; but, the reduction was not sufficient to meet the desired expectation. And again, it doesn't take a genius to that after 2008, the reductions were even greater. (COMMENT) The intentions of security operations is neither to achieve proportionality or parity in casualties. It is to reduce the scope and nature of the threat such that Israeli casualties were reduced to the greatest extent possible. (COMMENT) Again, you missed the threat data, for which I don't have a chart. The security and suppression of fires operations are related to the threat presented by the HAMAS. Rocket and Mortar Fires are a threat. The counter-rocket and mortar (C-RAM) operations are directed at launch locations. The more rockets and mortars HAMAS fires into Israel, the greater the intensity of C-RAM. C-RAM is not a scare tactic. The intention of counter mortar and counter-rocket fires are to directly engage Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) involved in launching deadly projectiles into Israel with sufficient force as to suppress not only the current firing, but the will and capacity of the HoAP to effectively muster and fire in the future. This strategy reduces the potential for casualties within the Israel population. The fact that there is a disparate difference in the casualties between HoAP Firing and Israeli Return Fires is exactly the expectation desired. It is not a matter of terrorism, it is the suppression of fire to reduce casualties; based on HoAP launches. Sometimes, cross-border C-RAM fires (counter-fire) is not sufficient in reducing the hostile fires to an acceptable level. Some leaders would suggest that ANY hostile launches are too great a threat. There is a threshold to which a country in a defensive mode - will go on the offensive. I believe Operation Cast Lead was an example of such an event. IF and I repeat "IF" the HoAP is so concerned about the disproportionate losses they incur as a result of their offensive actions, THEN they must call a cessation to hostilities. (COMMENT) It is the HoAP Offensive action that is the principle cause. Not the response in kind. (COMMENT) You may consider me anything you want. I do not object. As long as HAMAS fires rockets and mortars, they are the offensive aggressor. It is as simple as that. And as the offensive aggressor, they should expect a response for the purpose of suppression. HAMAS has fired several hundred rockets into Israel in 2014. It cannot be the case that "Hamas attempts to achieve non-conflict." Most Respectfully, R
So you completely reject the concept of cause-and-effect. No matter who disturbed the peace first, if Hamas fires rockets, they are by your definition the offensive aggressor. Do you expect to be taken seriously? Sorry, Rocco, your debating quality has slipped precipitously downhill. I am amazed that the person who was so analytical about "181" and prompted so much re-examination of my position by me, could come up with such an F-grade piece of schoolboy of reasoning. I mean, really!!! I am at a loss for words. I leave you for a while because I get bored with that sort of logic quality. If or when I return, I will address what happened after the June 2008 ceasefire, and pick through the detail as to who started Chain of Conflict 4, the mother of all chains with a death toll of 13 Israelis versus 1400+ Palestinians. Guess who started it .... AGAIN!!! PS: I haven't even got near to 2014, so using it to talk to the hay-stuffed figure out in the field in just so pointless, because I am sure you haven't bothered to go through the data collection and analysis, because .... "Hamas fires rockets so they are guilty" Oy Vey!! I am quite disillusioned. There are more interesting things to do elsewhere.
klipkap, et al, I never discount the "cause-n-effect." But just cause must be justified. HAMAS has no justification. (COMMENT) Who initiated the opening of hostilities after the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza? From September 2005 through May 2007, Palestinian armed groups fired almost 2,700 rockets into Israel, killing 4 Israeli civilians, and injuring 75 civilians and at least 9 soldiers, according to the UUnited Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) (see Appendices III-V for casualty and weapons numbers). Remember, the Israeli's withdrawal on was completed by 26 August, 2005. HAMAS Rocket Fire resumed in September; but wait, there is more. But, one must also remember that HAMAS Jihadist action is NOT limited to Rocket and Mortar fire. HAMAS conducted a suicide-attack in Beersheba on 28 August 2005; merely two days after the withdrawal (the first use of armed force by a HAMAS), the aggressor by definition UNGA/RES/3314. (COMMENT) So sorry I'm not up to your standards. (COMMENT) Again, so sorry. (COMMENT) I doubt you will fair any better with me by advancing the timeline. (COMMENT) I'm deeply hurt! Most Respectfully, R
YOU provided the evidence with your 2nd graph. What a bizarre denial. Absolutely agreed, but the leap is yours. You now want to deny your own graph STRAWMAN ALERT!!!! 2008 will definitely be addressed, I can promise you. But they were!!! Your graph showed it clearly. The problem was, again as your brilliant graph so clearly shows, the Israelis kept on killing Palestinians .... YOUR evidence, Rocco. Horse bollocks, Rocco. It was the continuation of an Israeli strategy devised in 2001. The assassination had nothing to do with immediate threat. Come on, be a mensch, there had been peace for 9 months when Israel decided to embark on the 9 June 2006 assassination. You have been shown this. Allow me to remind you: Isaiah 42:18. You have been shown that Israel shared responsibility for the first Chain of Conflict, and was clearly the instigator of the 2nd and the 3rd. You have not refuted the fact, so that means you are in persistent denial. That is rank bad debating. I am sincerely disappointed. Keep denying, otherwise the Hasbara shatters ..... wait, what are these crumbs and bits and pieces everywhere? Ciao for another break. See you after 4th of July. My sincere thanks again for the brilliant graph.
I won't honey, you need time to clear up the mess. By the way, if you see Rocco, please thank him for the brilliant graph. I will be sure to use it fully before this thread reaches 500, with 2008 DEFINITELY included [Hint: 4 November 2008]. Toodle-oo. Time for some real fun.
I showed you! The IDF errest children that throw stones over Israeli cars. Would you find it acceptable if where you live children will throw rockes on you or on other people next to you? probably not! The checkpoints and the barriers that you have in the West Bank are ONLY for security manners! if the Arab would stop throw rockes and try to kidnape people and to kill babyes so probably al l the checkpoints will be removed! Just several days ago an Arab tried to kidnape Israeli citizens from their houses, would you dinf it acceptable? probably not. Would you like to see your govetnment errest and stop those people? yes! Checkpoints are when Israeli soldiers are in one place that happened there terrorist activity, and in that area the soldiers just stand and chack the one who LOOK OR ACT ODD! not everyone need to stop. The checkpints that do require that everyone that pass there will stop, they stop for under 3 minutes to chack their Palestinian I.D. with the commander, and the commander chack if the I.D. belongs to someone that did terrorist activity, and if he did he get arrested. BUT the rest of the Arabs continue to walk where ever the need to go. its like when police block one area in a street for chacks, is it odd? is it wrong? no. I never said that Dir Yassin was the only village that been ecavuated! There were many that were evacuated but the majority of those villages were evacuated by choice! The british did help! No one could have an interpretation problems with facts. Fact- war on Independence in America was between the British rule and the 13 British colonies on North America? or could you have interprate it wrongly? I doubt it.
You completely misread the table you showed me. Nowhere does it indicate how many ISRAELIS ARABS reside in the West Bank. It documents how many Israeli Arabs are in Israel and how many Palestinian arabs live in the west bank. I have no problem with arresting stone throwers of any age. Firstly, they don't just arrest stone throwers, they are far more indiscriminant than that. Second its not so much that the arrest them, its how they arrest these children and what they do with them once in custody. It should be a national shame. http://www.dci-palestine.org/sites/default/files/report_doc_solitary_confinemen t_report_2013_final_29apr2014. pdf http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-idf-must-stop-arresting-children.premium-1.512697 http://journal.georgetown.edu/2013/...ed-by-israel-defense-forces-by-raluca-besliu/ [video=youtube;ENpMxG8DgbY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENpMxG8DgbY[/video] http://www.jpost.com/Defense/EXCLUSIVE-Chief-West-Bank-Prosecutor-says-IDF-may-end-long-standing-night-arrests-of-Palestinians-341749 I totally get the security argument, and obviously there are millions of crossing annually between the WB and Israel where the security should be. But restricting palestinian movements from one town to another, creating detours four or five times longer than direct access is more an exercise in humiliation and oppression. The average wait times at crossings might be three minutes, but not at checkpoints. Those checkpoints are mainly there to protect the settlers in their illegal settlements. Many of the road closures etc are to provide security to Israeli settlements that shouldn't be there, in the first place. http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_movement_and_access_r eport_september_2012_english.p df http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_movement_and_access_r eport_september_2012_english.p df http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/israel-and-occupied-palestinian-territories/report-2013#section-14-3 Yes there were many villages that were "evacuated" at the point of an Israeli gun. The british did not help in any way to evacuate villages. They basically let the jews and the arabs fight it out between themselves, which is why the two year period before the end of the mandate and the partition plans supposed activation date are called a "civil war". Of course there can be MASSIVE differences in the interpretation of the same FACTS. The facts don't change, but the intepretations can vary. Take climate change for example - there are morons insist its a hoax and point to facts to "prove" their idiotic point, even tho scientists interpret those facts completely differently. Or perhaps closer to home, there are small but vocal group of white nationalists and neo-nazis who deny the holocaust, cherry picking facts to support their bigotted stupidity. Take for instance the FACT that the USS Liberty was bombed by the IDF. that's a fact. There are some people who intepret that FACT as an "friendly fire" accident while others claim it was a deliberate attack. Single fact, two polar opposite interpretations. Listen, I get you wanting to defend you country, but that doesn't mean you have to be blind to the facts that your country is not purely righteous nor are the palestinians purely evil. Israeli behaviour is always justified "in the name of security" but sometimes its merely an excuse not a reason.
Jonsa, et al, This discussion is rolling all over the map. The question is about HAMAS and their status as a "victim" (not the assignment of "evil"). (COMMENT) "your country (Israel) is not purely righteous nor are the palestinians purely evil" There is some truth in this. But it actually shifts the discussion from whether or not HAMAS is a victim in the period framed by 2006 thru 2008. Evil --- "in its most general context, is taken as the absence or complete opposite of that which is ascribed as being good. Often, evil is used to denote profound immorality." (From Wikipedia) This is a much different thing than "victim;" which is "person or thing that suffers harm, death, etc, from another or from some adverse act, circumstance, etc: victims of tyranny." (From Dictionary.com) The ideas and concepts behind "victim" and "evil" are very separate and distinct. HAMAS is an organization of people who are self-proclaimed Jihadists (a Muslim who advocates or participates in a jihad). Are all the people in or supporting HAMAS "evil?" Well, that is subjective to the understanding behind "Jihadists." The question becomes: Are there conditions or circumstances in which a Jihadist can be other than "evil?" Are all the people in or supporting HAMAS "victims?" Again, that is subjective to understanding the suppression of "Jihadists." The question becomes: Are there conditions or circumstances in which the suppression of Jihad is doing harm? Is there any condition in which a "Jihadist" can also be a "Victim?" This is where we should be headed in this discussion; this should be the cornerstone behind the analysis. Most Respectfully, R
For exemple in East Jerusalem (which it is part of the West Bank) in 2012 3,374 PALESTINIAN Arabs got their Israeli citizenship in the past dacede (2002-2012): http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...i-citizenship-in-past-decade.premium-1.471189 Th kids and the grown ups dont want that the IDF will errest the kids and even the kids themselves resisting arrest (according to the video) so what should the IDF do? go way and let the kids continue to throw rocks? Would you accept that police will let a thief go just because he resists errest? or should they errest him still? When the Children will stop throwing rocks and hurt Jews the IDF will not have to errest them! Restridting? but you just showed that the IDF let the Arabs pass from another road and not the road that were blocked! Is this restricting? no, when the IDF provided the Arabs an other way to move it is just to fulfill their right to move freely. So now it is not right to do so because the "Other way" is longer? If a road in your country that it takes short time to cross it then the other is blocked for maintance or what ever, and you have to go to a diffrent city to visit your grandmother that sick, would you stay at home because the shorter road is blocked or will you take the longer one? probably you will take the longer one. The British did a lot of things to the Arabs, things that hurted them. Thats why the Arabs started the "Great Arab Revolt", for exemple. So you say that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that of course relay on history facts, is a sciance manner? If an archiologist would finsd something from a preticuler historical time, for exemple from the Roman Empire, would a different archiologist could claim otherwise? absulotly not! The USS Liberty was bombed by the IDF, thats it. I'm not blind to anything, I'm relaying on facts. There is alot of things that Israel do that I dont agree with!
few of them are "evil". Many of them are simply ignorant "victims" of manipulators who cloak themselves in false piety to achieve power and their own political objectives True jihad is the inner struggle for what we would call "spiritual enlightenment". While most westerns precieve it to mean religious war and therefore is "evil", I believe in the end that true "jihad" is the road to Islamic reformation. Supporting Hamas does not qualify as being a victim by any stretch. Suppression of holy war is not victimization as this is the dominant interpretation of the meaning of jihad, when in fact it is the "last resort" so to speak. Suppressing the quest for spiritual enlightenment, suppressing every muslims duty to question both himself and his religious teachings, are two aspects of doing harm to the ummah. Countless conditions where a jihadist can be a victim. Particularly by those who do not believe that holy war is the primary pathway to achieving dar al salaam - global Islamic domination that precedes the end of days. Those that question the holy warriors such as the taliban are often summarily executed or imprisoned. Those that question cultural traits masked as aspects of the religion can be severely punished or killed. those that desire Islamic reformation and an end to secular killing and prejudice are often terrorized, punished or killed. the list is long and the unfortunately to western eyes representative of barbaric 7th century theocracy and ignorance.
I already qualified the exception of East jerusalem. Gee 300 per year or roughly 3400 individuals out of a total population of arabs in east jerusalem of 260,000 or so or 1.5% who have opted for citizenship. So despite the various reports that clearly show that these arrests are predominatly abusive in some fashion to children, you wish to ignore that. It is clear that arrests are made sometimes without evidence. Would you resist if you knew you were going to be beaten, put into solitary confinement, denied representation (they are kids after all), interrogated, arrested in the middle of the night in police raids? It isn't just about kids throwing stones, its about the brutal fashion in which some of these children are treated. Seriously? these are your arguments? Might work in high school, but in the real world, they are simply childish. Facts are facts. I provide you with mulitple references and you offer up the above nonsense? Yes, the "great arab revolt" of 36 to 39 was arabs fighting british. It was a nationalist movement by the arabs in an attempt to throw off the yoke of British occupation PRIOR to World War II. Now if you can actually demonstrate British participation in aiding and abetting either the jews or the arabs I would be most appreciative. Of course I concede that the bulk of the military materiel they left behind went to the arabs in 48. I guess my explanation sailed completely over your head. OH? So there is no rationale required? merely blind acceptance of the fact and let's move on? What a ridiculous position to take. Sorry but you are totally blind to a lot. You are relying on a subset of facts to FORMULATE YOUR PERSEPECTIVE AND OPINION. I am willing to concede you english is not your first language, but that only excuses so much. I am glad that there a lots of Israeli actions you do not agree with. But it seems that some of the more odious, oppressive and humiliation actions they take are not those that you disagree with.
So now you are saying that because they are only too little from the whole population in East Jerusalem it can be dissmised? By the way there are only little bit more then 3,500 Palestinians that have Israeli citizenship but there are planty that have perimant residency! To children errest in any way it is tariffaing situation to be in, of course, but if they dont want to get errested so why they continue to hurt Jews in the West Bank?
Jonsa, et al, I will not challenge the theory that many Palestinians are NOT "evil." But... there is a discussion to be had on the topic. (COMMENT) First, let me say that I believe that there are Islamic Palestinians that see "Jihad" as something other than "Holy War." And I, without religious reference, accept them as included in the set of Non-Violent Arab Palestinians (NvAPs); searching for something on the order of your description: "spiritual enlightenment". But in most cases, we are looking at the polar opposite; the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP). And I believe the HoAP of today is the one like the HAMAS Charter puts forward. (COMMENT) First, I agree that the targeted suppression of the NvAP (in search of enlightenment) is inappropriate and should not be an objective. However, the active support of HAMAS either politically, financially, or materialistically, is supporting "evil" (simplistic terms). HAMAS advocates openly the armed struggle by any means against Israel and her allies. It also renders moral support to the concept of "Bad Faith" participation in the negotiated efforts to achieve just and peaceful settlements of their disputes. Lastly, the means of "last resort" to imply that armed struggle is somehow justified is questionable. (COMMENT) Again, I agree that NvAP, previously discussed, could be a victim. However, support to the HAMAS version of Jihad is the same as supporting the efforts organizing or encouraging irregular forces or armed bands, for incursion into the territory of another State (Israel). HAMAS has used piracy, hijacking, bombing, rocketry and missile fire, diplomatic and military kidnappings, and assassination to assert their demands. HAMAS has attacked civilian targets not involved in the conflict; known to target the elderly and school children specifically. HAMAS was supported by 40%-to-45% of the vote. Which means that just under half of the Palestinians are in the HoAP category, rendering support to HAMAS hostile activity. Most Respectfully, R
