Israeli "Settlers" and violence

[Lipush]

Sentiments.

Not actions.

What sort of sentiments do you think eventually led to actions?

A systematic demonization and dehumanization of an entire group of people (Jews) - what were the sentiments driving that? Anytime one group of people starts to see another group as less than human, it is very dangerous. Do you think they just woke up one morning and thought - wow, I want to cut some baby throats?

I do not wanna know what sentiment can lead to someone wishing to cut out an infants throat.

I don't see myself doing it no matter how pissed I might become. Once you do that, there is not much humanity left in you.

without excusing the itamar killings at all, perhaps it behooves israelis to know and understand, as hard as that may be, the who and what behind the darkness of sentiment that leads to such acts.

that is probably the first step towards peace and solution.

Perhaps.

But in Israel it is not seen that way.

Only reason why people mention the Itamar canage so much (more than other slaughters which took place in the same religious town) was that because of Tamar's heroism, is all. Tamar became the symbol of being the face of Israeli children today.

It amazes me, however, that she is not angry. She's very much mature and didn't call for punishment or retribution. I believe she might do some great things, one day, with that attitude, maybe even bring peace.

 

[Aurin]

I'll reillustrate it.

Suppose someone makes an argument for their case and they decide to use the word "glop". Many people, supporting this argument, continue to crusade their cause and all use the word "glop" as well. "Glop" is doing so well that it ends up being used to champion other arguments by the same people. It might even be used in the counter-arguments.

It has now gotten to the point that anytime you see someone use the word "glop" you gloss over it almost immediately. "Glop" has now become a term that people almost insert into their arguments like an ingredient to some argument-recipe. It's use has lost all meaning as it's just a standard-procedure addition to anyone trying to push their argument further.

Terrorist can be used to immediately express its definition, but as a consequence of being a pejorative word, it also fails to clarify anything in reality.

 

[Lipush]

Can you honestly tell us why people on this forum who want to appear as such wonderful "humanitarians" have never bothered to go to other forums and condemned what is happening to innocent people in other countries? It appears that these people are the ones with double standards. Do you really think that if this was a forum on, let's say Tibet, they would be going on and on about what the Chinese are doing to the Tibetans in Occupied Tibet. If the Chinese happened to be Jewish, maybe then they would.

This seems like a deflection to avoid engaging with the issue at hand.

I think the reason I/P gets so much attention is because many, many Americans are practically cheering on the genocide of Palestinians. I don't think anyone that defends Palestine wouldn't simultaneously defend other oppressed peoples, but who would they be arguing against and what argument would they be making? Very few people need convincing that atrocities are bad, but for whatever reason, many people need convincing that Israel isn't the victim some believe it to be.

"cheering on the genocide of Palestinians"

Please tell me it is some lame joke. Genocide?

You can't be real

"many people need convincing that Israel isn't the victim some believe it to be"

Nowhere we say we are the only ones suffering.

We do say people don't understand us.

 

[Aurin]

It's a response to why I/P is such a buzzword-debate.

I agree, people don't understand us. =)

 

[Lipush]

I might be mistaken, but from what I've read, certain posters have been critical of Israel and are accused of double-standards.

That would be correct

The "defending Palestinians terrorists" bit just seems like a play on words to continue to detract from the criticisms of Israel.

Depends who does it.

If Sherri criticizes Israel, she can pretty much take all her criticism and shove it. But there are posters who make good points, with theri high criticism of Israeli policies.

Also, just as an aside, the word "terrorist" has been overused in so many contexts that it's lost almost all meaning.

Oh, like the word "Apartheid"?

 

[Lipush]

It's a response to why I/P is such a buzzword-debate.

I agree, people don't understand us. =)

 

[Aurin]

I'd wager most people would need to google "apartheid".

But yes, the word doesn't clarify the details. It's just a sexy word for journalists to use in their titles.

 

[Lipush]

I can't imagine myself wanting to do that.

I also can't imagine myself ever living with such an act on my conscience.

I can't imagine hating enough for that.

But also, I have never:
been truly desperate
afraid for my life
in a situation where I knew there could be no justice for me
faced with corruption that would insure no justice
without a country
despised for who I am
afraid of losing my home for no reason I could fight
afraid of my family being killed
never knowing if I might be arrested for who I am
never been locked up without access to any source of help
never faced desperation
never faced a choice of doing something unspeakable or having my family suffer

There are a lot of situations I've never faced. If faced with life or death - or, more important, the life or death of my child or family - what would I choose to do? I know what I hope, but I've never faced it.

In the case of the Fogels, did they catch who was responsible? I can't imagine someone doing being any different from some of the cold blooded Nazi's who coldly and systematically selected Jews for human experimentation. I feel that same way about those who ordered white phospherous into Gaza as well. It's inhuman. And cold blooded.

And above all, they had to know it would hurt and maim innocents. But they couldn't have considered them humans. They had to be seen as less than human. Or how could a person do it?

For the Fogels, the killers have been caught, and they still feel proud of what they did.

Imagine a scenario. Yishai Fogel, he should be about 3 or 4 years old now, I believe. he lives with his uncles inside the green line, now.

When he asks Tamar, or Roi, or any others, "Where are mama and papa" (something that many Palestinian kids ask, as well, let us not forget or ignore that fact, for the sake of honesty and fairness) and Tamar will one day have to tell him, in that case, would it be "understood" if he will want revenge? against the people who took his parents away? would he go shooting some palestinian baby girl in her crub, just like was done to his sister?

Of course not, that would be insane and wrong and in so many ways disturbing. Tamar herself has been expelled from her home, and had her parents and her brothers killed, and she must have been so afraid when arriving the scene, so what? by that sense, any action of revenge by her, or remainging siblings, should be understood, right?

NO.

That's the main idea. I cannot put myself in her position, or in position of a Palestinian in the same situation. but go on open killing like that? I don't think I ever could, I would have killed myself beforehand.

i seem to recaall someone saying exactly..."war is cruel".

it almost sounded like an excuse.

That was a fact.

Excuses there are many.

(And wars you make with enemies, Seal. Not with 3 months old)

 

[Hossfly]

I'll reillustrate it.

Suppose someone makes an argument for their case and they decide to use the word "glop". Many people, supporting this argument, continue to crusade their cause and all use the word "glop" as well. "Glop" is doing so well that it ends up being used to champion other arguments by the same people. It might even be used in the counter-arguments.

It has now gotten to the point that anytime you see someone use the word "glop" you gloss over it almost immediately. "Glop" has now become a term that people almost insert into their arguments like an ingredient to some argument-recipe. It's use has lost all meaning as it's just a standard-procedure addition to anyone trying to push their argument further.

Terrorist can be used to immediately express its definition, but as a consequence of being a pejorative word, it also fails to clarify anything in reality.

If a person says, "I am going to kill you", that is terrorism.
Then if he kills you with a booby trap, that is terrorism.
Would that be a simple explanation or must you have a book written to explain the whys and wherefores?

 

[Aurin]

If a person says, "I am going to kill you", that is terrorism.
Then if he kills you with a booby trap, that is terrorism.
Would that be a simple explanation or must you have a book written to explain the whys and wherefores?

I don't need an explanation. I'm just pointing out that it's a word that fails to carry weight any longer when used in debate.

The illustration with the word "glop" was trying to elevate you to the level of distinction I was making, but you seem to be comfortable remaining where you are, lol.

 

[Lipush]

Also when speaking about "Settlers violence" are you refering to the settlers as a whole or to the hilltop youth?

Settlers are not at all violent, and if saying it like that, it would be an actual factual error.

 

[Hossfly]

If a person says, "I am going to kill you", that is terrorism.
Then if he kills you with a booby trap, that is terrorism.
Would that be a simple explanation or must you have a book written to explain the whys and wherefores?

I don't need an explanation. I'm just pointing out that it's a word that fails to carry weight any longer when used in debate.

The illustration with the word "glop" was trying to elevate you to the level of distinction I was making, but you seem to be comfortable remaining where you are, lol.

I know where I are and where you're coming from.
You can go back to your nom de plume anytime now. See ya around. Chow. Auf Wiederschnitzel.

 

[MHunterB]

Genocide of Palestinians ?? Yikes ! Arab propaganda at work !

Sorry for the confusion. Allow me to illustrate that the word "practical" was used for a reason.

Do you truly believe there isn't an Anti-Muslim bias in American culture? Many people strongly believe that the world would be rid of many issues if we "just bombed them all".

SO? Being an American isn't a vaccination against idiocy or bigotry, sad to say. There are the idiots who are anti-all kinds of things here - including anti-Jewish.

 

[MHunterB]

I might be mistaken, but from what I've read, certain posters have been critical of Israel and are accused of double-standards.

The "defending Palestinians terrorists" bit just seems like a play on words to continue to detract from the criticisms of Israel.

Also, just as an aside, the word "terrorist" has been overused in so many contexts that it's lost almost all meaning.

You're right: you DO misunderstand. It's not 'being critical of Israel' to state that "Israel should never have existed to begin with": that's basic opposition to an Israel of any size in any location. Which is an entirely different matter.

SOME OF the fine 'pro-Palestinian' posters here have declared that NO Israeli of any age, occupation, shape or condition should be tolerated within the WB anywhere. They have also stated their opinion that rock-throwing at Jewish children or civilian vehicles is 'justified' and 'a right of Palestinians to resist the Occupation' and so claim 'there are no Palestinian terrorists' ..... some of them have called all 500,000 settler Israelis 'war criminals' and basically stated they deserve to be killed simply for living where they do.

They've also insisted that Zionism is inherently racist and that Zionist Jews believe in Jewish supremacy. One of 'em frequently characterizes Jews per se as 'Christ-rejecters'.

 

[sealadaigh]

For the Fogels, the killers have been caught, and they still feel proud of what they did.

Imagine a scenario. Yishai Fogel, he should be about 3 or 4 years old now, I believe. he lives with his uncles inside the green line, now.

When he asks Tamar, or Roi, or any others, "Where are mama and papa" (something that many Palestinian kids ask, as well, let us not forget or ignore that fact, for the sake of honesty and fairness) and Tamar will one day have to tell him, in that case, would it be "understood" if he will want revenge? against the people who took his parents away? would he go shooting some palestinian baby girl in her crub, just like was done to his sister?

Of course not, that would be insane and wrong and in so many ways disturbing. Tamar herself has been expelled from her home, and had her parents and her brothers killed, and she must have been so afraid when arriving the scene, so what? by that sense, any action of revenge by her, or remainging siblings, should be understood, right?

NO.

That's the main idea. I cannot put myself in her position, or in position of a Palestinian in the same situation. but go on open killing like that? I don't think I ever could, I would have killed myself beforehand.

i seem to recaall someone saying exactly..."war is cruel".

it almost sounded like an excuse.

That was a fact.

Excuses there are many.

(And wars you make with enemies, Seal. Not with 3 months old)

your post was in response to these dead "enemies" of israel.

some of their ages are listed.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7069873-post4.html

thanks, sherri.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

I'd wager most people would need to google "apartheid".

But yes, the word doesn't clarify the details. It's just a sexy word for journalists to use in their titles.

THOSE people you speak of are those unfamiliar with Apartheid in South Africa. AND increasingly the numbers of the illinformed grow smaller. AND BDS grows stronger!

 

[Aurin]

They've also insisted that Zionism is inherently racist and that Zionist Jews believe in Jewish supremacy. One of 'em frequently characterizes Jews per se as 'Christ-rejecters'.

Ehhh, I'd have to agree that Zionism is inherently racist. The concept of a "chosen people" is also kind of racist. In a modern day society, I'd prefer embracing or even unifying varying people.

But I'm not really here to make a war on religion.

 

[irosie91]

the word APARTHEID today is used by ISA RESPECTERS today
as fraudulently as is the word "palestinian" and as fraudulently
as the KU KLUX KLAN --described the "sexual appetites" of black
men ------it is a buzzword------something like the DEICIDE MYTH
which isa respecters of both the jihadist and the nazi moities have
begun a ROBUST REVIVAL

 

[irosie91]

They've also insisted that Zionism is inherently racist and that Zionist Jews believe in Jewish supremacy. One of 'em frequently characterizes Jews per se as 'Christ-rejecters'.

Ehhh, I'd have to agree that Zionism is inherently racist. The concept of a "chosen people" is also kind of racist. In a modern day society, I'd prefer embracing or even unifying varying people.

But I'm not really here to make a war on religion.

good thing----"UNIFYING PEOPLE" esthetically seems SUPERB ----
historically---- UTOPIAN IDEOLOGIES ---have necessarily led to
TOTALITARIANISM-------and gross genocide. The more fervent the goal
to UNIFY PEOPLE ----the more gross the genocides

MARXISM IS A DELIGHT-----as a theory---it is a UTOPIAN
idealogy. PAX ROMANA ---(the roman empire pre
christianity) was another UTOPIAN IDEOLGY.
PAX ROMANA morphed into the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE
of CONSTANTINE----the founder of a legal code
upon which both shariah dhimmia and the Inquisition and
the Nuremburg laws are based -----and HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS KILLED IN GENOCIDES.

now think again.......utopian ideologies have been DOING
IT THRUOUT HUMAN HISTORY

an interesting and weird story----from the annals of "WTF --
DID THAT COME FROM"? This may be from the midrash---
I am not sure----the person who told me would have known
stuff from the Midrash ---the "drash">>> "What is the major
sin of SODOM AND GOMORRAH???" answer---"they had
a machine there that made all people THE SAME HEIGHT
AND WEIGHT" "ALL PEOPLE HAD TO LOOK AND ACT
AND THINK THE SAME"

I was fascinated----I heard it at a time I has also encountered
professionals from communist russia who told me about the
MENTAL HEALTH theories taught over there----insanity
defined as a result of "CAPITALISM" The term "CAPITALIST"
was synonymous with "INSANE" During the inquisition---a
priest was executed for denying that the wafer "eucharist" ---
was actually and truly "the body of CHRIST" Should we
discuss shariah law? <<< all of this crap is a manifestation
of UTOPIAN IDEOLOGY

PS----jesus of nazareth was crucfied for sedition against
PAX ROMANA Josephus Flavius survived to write
his "HISTORY OF THE JEWISH WARS" ----because he
agreed to adjust to PAX ROMANA

 

[Aurin]

I think we have a language barrier here because I struggle to follow your train of thought. It seems to be bouncing across numerous subjects.

Anyways, if I'm reading correctly, I don't think we should just collectively toss our arms up and forfeit our ability to rise above animal instincts. We should take more responsibility for our actions and allow ourselves the opportunity to become a greater influence.

Second, I do think that the totalitarian trend following socialistic ideologies is unfortunate. It's worth noting that socialism doesn't support totalitarianism though. It's just a typical response to desperation as we've seen through history. But just because we provide public schooling doesn't mean we now have a police state. It's an investment that can be focused on a spectrum.

Also, I feel the need to inform you that randomly capitalizing an inordinate number of words makes your post harder to read and in some circumstances takes away credence.