Israel attacks civilians

[georgephillip]

"With some help, Hala managed to meet Benzion Pridan or the ‘Boogie Man’ as she refers to him. “'Pridan himself admitted that a mass grave exists under the parking lot in Tantura. Israel refuses to exhume the bodies.”

Drivel.

It's drivel to those whose relatives aren't buried beneath a parking lot.
You still haven't explained why one third of the residents to Mandate Palestine were allowed to inflict a Jewish state on their neighbors.

 

[docmauser1]

"With some help, Hala managed to meet Benzion Pridan or the ‘Boogie Man’ as she refers to him. “'Pridan himself admitted that a mass grave exists under the parking lot in Tantura. Israel refuses to exhume the bodies.”

Drivel.

It's drivel to those whose relatives aren't buried beneath a parking lot.

Why do arabs have to bury their own under a parking lot? What's so special about it? Is it a camel parking lot?

You still haven't explained why one third of the residents to Mandate Palestine were allowed to inflict a Jewish state on their neighbors.

Ah, that's simple. The hood was criminally insane and jews had to take affirmative action, of course.

 

[georgephillip]

Here's some more affirmative action heading your way, Drivel.

"If international civil society is serious about urgently ending Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights, including ending the occupation, then suspension of SWIFT transactions to and from Israeli banks offers an instrument to help bring about a peaceful resolution of an intractable conflict..."

"SWIFT links 8,740 financial institutions in 209 countries. Without access to SWIFT and its interbank payment network, countries are unable either to pay for imports or to receive payment for exports. In short, no payment — no trade."

Terry Crawford-Browne: To end the occupation, cripple Israeli banks | Israeli Occupation Archive

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here's some more affirmative action heading your way, Drivel.

"If international civil society is serious about urgently ending Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights, including ending the occupation, then suspension of SWIFT transactions to and from Israeli banks offers an instrument to help bring about a peaceful resolution of an intractable conflict..."

"SWIFT links 8,740 financial institutions in 209 countries. Without access to SWIFT and its interbank payment network, countries are unable either to pay for imports or to receive payment for exports. In short, no payment — no trade."

Terry Crawford-Browne: To end the occupation, cripple Israeli banks | Israeli Occupation Archive

That's a great idea......to use against Iran.

 

[docmauser1]

"If international civil society is serious about urgently ending Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights, including ending the occupation, then suspension of SWIFT transactions to and from Israeli banks offers an instrument to help bring about a peaceful resolution of an intractable conflict..." Terry Crawford-Browne

He's an obsessive driveling idiot, to be quoted by idiots, of course, trying to pull crippling israeli banks off will kill arab funds off. He'd be much better advocating a humanitarian transfer of arabs to arab lands.

 

[Wolverine1984]

RAFAH, (PIC)-- Israeli gunboats opened fire Tuesday morning at Palestinian fishermen and their boats off the coast of Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, without any reported injuries.

In another incident, the Israeli occupation forces (IOF) opened fire at dozens of farmers east of Rafah city.

Israeli gunboats target fishermen off Rafah coast

Excuse me, I really don't seem to get it at all.
Do you really think that when Israel attacks a boat, or approves an air strike they just do it for shit and giggles ?

It seems absurd to me that anyone would believe it.
Tell me what would be the point of shooting on 'innocent' farmers and civilians?

• If you are inclined to believe that Israel just wants to kill Palestinians for the heck of it, and because it is fun, why wouldn't they do it on a much larger scale ?
  
• If Israel does kill them on a larger scale how come the Palestinian population is now 6 times larger that in was in 1948? (You know when you systematically kill members of a certain group their population tends to go down and not up).

Israel performs surgical strikes and targets known terrorists , based on intelligence,
sometimes innocent people are getting hurt,and that is unfortunate.

No one had any problems when Hamas was killing Fatah and innocent people got hurt in the crossfire.

It seems the definition of the word innocent civilian in Gaza is only relevant to people who were hurt by the Israelis and no one else.

In conclusion:
The fact of the matter is if Israel would not have to worry about it's security, there would be no surgical strikes no death of innocent civilians and there would be peace.

 

[georgephillip]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

 

[Wolverine1984]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

Don't start nothin' won't be nothin'.

 

[georgephillip]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

Can you explain why Arabs alone, among all the military losers throughout history, are entitled to get back land they lost, after they start and lose a war?

 

[georgephillip]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

Don't start nothin' won't be nothin'.

You're ninety years behind the times (again)

"Following the absorption of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the British set about shoring up their rule by the tried and true strategy of pitting ethnic group against ethnic group, tribe against tribe, and religion against religion.

"When British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour issued his famous 1917 Declaration guaranteeing a 'homeland' for the Jewish people in Palestine, he was less concerned with righting a two thousand year old wrong than creating divisions that would serve growing British interests in the Middle East.

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem (1922), certainly had no illusions about what a
'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'”

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules | FPIF

 

[georgephillip]

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

Can you explain why Arabs alone, among all the military losers throughout history, are entitled to get back land they lost, after they start and lose a war?

Depends on your definition of "start."

Since it was Jewish military assaults in both the "Independent Arab" and "Jewish States" that resulted in the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs from their homes and businesses, I'm thinking the winning side is the one that started the conflict. (Unless you count Lord Balfour)

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

Don't start nothin' won't be nothin'.

You're ninety years behind the times (again)

"Following the absorption of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the British set about shoring up their rule by the tried and true strategy of pitting ethnic group against ethnic group, tribe against tribe, and religion against religion.

"When British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour issued his famous 1917 Declaration guaranteeing a 'homeland' for the Jewish people in Palestine, he was less concerned with righting a two thousand year old wrong than creating divisions that would serve growing British interests in the Middle East.

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem (1922), certainly had no illusions about what a
'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'”

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules | FPIF

Hostile Arabism. Who knew?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

Can you explain why Arabs alone, among all the military losers throughout history, are entitled to get back land they lost, after they start and lose a war?

Depends on your definition of "start."

Since it was Jewish military assaults in both the "Independent Arab" and "Jewish States" that resulted in the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs from their homes and businesses, I'm thinking the winning side is the one that started the conflict. (Unless you count Lord Balfour)

The Arabs attacked in 1948. Lost.
The Arabs started in 1967, Israelis finished. Arabs lost.
The Arabs attacked in 1973. Lost.

Did I forget any Arab losses? There were so many, sometimes I lose track.

 

[Wolverine1984]

The historical fact of the matter is if one third of the population of Mandate Palestine in 1948 had not imposed a Jewish state by force of arms on the majority of Palestine, Israel would not have to worry about its security today.

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.

Come on man, this is unreasonable.
Are you saying that Arab armies defensibly attacked Israel the day after the deceleration of it's independence?

 

[georgephillip]

It seems to me that more and more people are trying to bend historical facts to their needs.

By 'historical fact' you mean the fact that Israel was attacked by 4 Arab armies the day after it was declared as a state ?

And by 'imposed a Jewish state by force of arms ' you meant Israel had won a defensive war against its attackers ?

Indeed you are right , if Israel had not won that war , it would not have to worry about its security because all the Jews living in that place would be dead.

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.
If not for their presence, Israel would have conquered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River a full generation before it did.
Can you explain why Jews alone, among all the displaced tribes throughout history, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?

Those Arab armies were the ones playing defense.

Come on man, this is unreasonable.
Are you saying that Arab armies defensibly attacked Israel the day after the deceleration of it's independence?

I'm saying the Arab armies took defensive positions around the Arab State called for as part of the UN partition of Palestine.

Are you denying the existence of western imperial motives behind Israel's "independence?"

 

[georgephillip]

Don't start nothin' won't be nothin'.

You're ninety years behind the times (again)

"Following the absorption of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the British set about shoring up their rule by the tried and true strategy of pitting ethnic group against ethnic group, tribe against tribe, and religion against religion.

"When British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour issued his famous 1917 Declaration guaranteeing a 'homeland' for the Jewish people in Palestine, he was less concerned with righting a two thousand year old wrong than creating divisions that would serve growing British interests in the Middle East.

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem (1922), certainly had no illusions about what a
'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'”

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules | FPIF

Hostile Arabism. Who knew?

Is there any reason why Arabs would look favorably on those bent on stealing their land, water, and oil?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're ninety years behind the times (again)

"Following the absorption of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the British set about shoring up their rule by the tried and true strategy of pitting ethnic group against ethnic group, tribe against tribe, and religion against religion.

"When British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour issued his famous 1917 Declaration guaranteeing a 'homeland' for the Jewish people in Palestine, he was less concerned with righting a two thousand year old wrong than creating divisions that would serve growing British interests in the Middle East.

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem (1922), certainly had no illusions about what a
'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'”

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules | FPIF

Hostile Arabism. Who knew?

Is there any reason why Arabs would look favorably on those bent on stealing their land, water, and oil?

The Ottoman Empire lost.
The Arabs attacking Israel lost.
I'm noticing a pattern.

 

[georgephillip]

Can you explain why Arabs alone, among all the military losers throughout history, are entitled to get back land they lost, after they start and lose a war?

Depends on your definition of "start."

Since it was Jewish military assaults in both the "Independent Arab" and "Jewish States" that resulted in the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs from their homes and businesses, I'm thinking the winning side is the one that started the conflict. (Unless you count Lord Balfour)

The Arabs attacked in 1948. Lost.
The Arabs started in 1967, Israelis finished. Arabs lost.
The Arabs attacked in 1973. Lost.

Did I forget any Arab losses? There were so many, sometimes I lose track.

We're in agreement on 1973's aggressor.

In 1967 Israel struck first at Egypt days before killing 34 Americans on the USS Liberty.

The blame for 1948 belongs to Lord Balfour and Harry Truman.