Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41
Thanks Tree20Thanks

Thread: On Waiving the Jerusalem Embassy Act (or Not)

  1. #31
    Member allegoricalfact's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,771
    Thanks
    603

    From
    the Sussex Downs
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Who, exactly, is calling for democracy? "Destroying Israel" is not a path to democracy. Fuck, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are still slaughtering gay people. That's not democracy either.

    It's very easy for those with atrocities in their past to sit on the wealth of their ancestors actions, and decry those who currently do the same thing (albeit on a FAR lesser scale). Where are you; the United Kingdom? The nation that fathered the intercontinental slave trade? Sure, the U.K. abolished slavery on their own land, and eventually ended the slave trade, but the U.K. made tremendous wealth in the process, and the benefits of that wealth are enjoyed today, so don't sit on your borderless island, and pretend otherwise.

    If the Palestinians truly want peace, they need to present a peace treaty. Israel has done this more than once. But there has never been a peace treaty authored by the Palestinian government. Rather, they make alliances with those whose primary platform is the eradication of Israel. If they want peace, they've got a pretty fucked up way of showing it.



    Again - If Palestinians want peace, they should make an overture. If they want to pursue the eradication of Israel, then Israel is being GENEROUS by maintaining the status quo rather than eliminating nations who would destroy them.
    'Destroy South African apartheid' was not a call to violence, it was a call for a fairer and democratic system.

    Most of the middle bit of your post is irrelevant but then that is the norm for the genocidal maniacs, lusting the blood of Palestinian children, Israeli supporters - maniacal nonsense is all they are capable of. As the blood drips from their lips ......

    Palestine has never had, to this day has not, got an army or any organized military force. Under International law ...''the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”

    A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights

    For what do we have? We have Israel and Occupied Palestine = occupied - DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS?

    I do doubt it - It means that Zionist Israeli Jews are citizens and thus tried in civil courts - it means that Palestinians, Christian Muslim or other, are under occupation and thus, children to, are tried in Israeli military courts.

    Israel is talking about bring in capital punishment - beheading, they mean to use - on political prisoners - I wonder if they will borrow executioners from their sister Saudi Arabia.

  2. #32
    Member allegoricalfact's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,771
    Thanks
    603

    From
    the Sussex Downs
    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    Turkey is preparing to set up a Palestinian embassy in East Jerusalem...
    Did you watch the video I posted above, of our duplicity in WWI and after the fall of the Ottomans (Turks)? I know some of it but not all - it is worth watching.

  3. #33
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,894
    Thanks
    30272

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by allegoricalfact View Post
    ... Palestine has never had, to this day has not, got an army or any organized military force. Under International law ...''the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”
    ... Except for the Palestinian National Security Forces, which number around 50,000, and have been around for 20 years. Furthermore, one does not need a military force to author a peace treaty. Only a pen, paper, and a genuine interest to see peace for all parties involved.

    Israel is talking about bring in capital punishment - beheading, they mean to use - on political prisoners - I wonder if they will borrow executioners from their sister Saudi Arabia.
    Where on earth are you getting this? Israel has capital punishment, and they've used it twice. One was Meir Tobianski, an IDF officer charged with treason, and executed (firing squad) in 1948. The other was German Nazi SS-Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann, who was hung in 1962. Perhaps you've heard of him. That's a comprehensive list of all of the capital punishments carried out since Israel was founded. Now, if you expand the definition of "capital punishment" to include everyone who was killed in acts of war, the number goes up, but you're also twisting the definition of the term beyond all recognition.

    There is nothing in the 1982 document suggesting that Israel had any interest in "beheading political prisoners." And the fact that none have been beheaded in the subsequent 35 years supports this.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  4. #34
    Member allegoricalfact's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,771
    Thanks
    603

    From
    the Sussex Downs
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    ... Except for the Palestinian National Security Forces, which number around 50,000, and have been around for 20 years. Furthermore, one does not need a military force to author a peace treaty. Only a pen, paper, and a genuine interest to see peace for all parties involved.



    Where on earth are you getting this? Israel has capital punishment, and they've used it twice. One was Meir Tobianski, an IDF officer charged with treason, and executed (firing squad) in 1948. The other was German Nazi SS-Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann, who was hung in 1962. Perhaps you've heard of him. That's a comprehensive list of all of the capital punishments carried out since Israel was founded. Now, if you expand the definition of "capital punishment" to include everyone who was killed in acts of war, the number goes up, but you're also twisting the definition of the term beyond all recognition.

    There is nothing in the 1982 document suggesting that Israel had any interest in "beheading political prisoners." And the fact that none have been beheaded in the subsequent 35 years supports this.
    Lol They are trained by the US and work with Israel. Palestine does not have a military force and never has had a military force.

    Under the british Mandate which they inherited. It was abolished for murder in the early '50s -

    ''There is no capital punishment in Israel. It was abolished in the first years of the state, with the memory of the execution of the underground (“terrorists” as the British called them) still fresh.
    That was a moment of celebration, an uplifting one, and right after the vote all the members of the Knesset came to their feet. On that day I was proud of my country, the country for which I had shed my blood.

    Two people have been executed in Israel. One was a Jerusalem engineer by the name of Meir Tobianski, who was shot to death in the first days of independence. He was accused of passing on secret information to the British, who passed it on to the Arabs. Shortly thereafter it turned out he was innocent. The second time the death penalty was imposed was on Adolf Eichmann.
    A personal confession: I can’t even kill a cockroach. Not even a fly. That’s not a conscious decision, it’s almost physical. I wasn’t always like that. Around my 15th birthday I joined a “terrorist organization” – Etzel. At that time Etzel placed bombs in Arab markets and killed women and children in revenge for similar actions by the Arabs. I was too young to take part myself in those operations, but my friends and I distributed leaflets in city squares that proudly announced them. So I was at least a partner to those actions, until I left Etzel because of my increasing opposition to “terrorism.”

    But the real change came later, when I was injured in the 1948 war. For a few days I lay in my hospital bed without being able to eat, drink or sleep. I could only think. The result was my inability to hurt any living thing, including human beings.

    I welcomed the Knesset decision to abolish the death penalty with all my heart.

    But a few days ago, somebody remembered that the death penalty had not been totally abolished. An obscure clause in the military code of justice has left it on the books. Now there is a call to activate it. The terrorist who murdered three members of a family in Halamish was injured but not killed on the spot, as almost always happens. And the whole right-wing lot in the government burst out in a chorus of demands to implement capital punishment. Benjamin Netanyahu joined in as well.

    Rational analysis shows that imposing the death penalty is a huge mistake. Executing a person whose people see him as a patriot causes anger and hunger for revenge. For every person who is executed, 10 others come to take his place.

    I’m speaking from experience. I joined Etzel a few weeks after the British hanged a young Jewish man, Shlomo Ben-Yosef, who had fired on an Arab bus full of women and children, but hit no one. He was the first Jew to be executed during the British Mandate. Years later, when I had already become an opponent of “terrorism,” I was infuriated every time the British hanged another Jewish “terrorist.”

    Another argument against the death penalty is what I described above: the dramatic impact inherent in it. From the moment the verdict is delivered, the entire world – and of course the entire country – becomes part of the event. From Tel Aviv to Timbuktu, from Paris to Pretoria, millions of people wake up who have no interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but whose lives have been burst into by the condemned man.

    Israeli embassies will be flooded with messages from good people; human rights groups in every country will intervene. Protests will take place in many cities and they will grow from week to week. The occupation of the Palestinian territories, which until then had been a small issue in media outlets, will become the center of world attention. Editors will dispatch reporters, commentators will fill pages. A few heads of state will approach Israel’s president and ask for clemency.

    The closer the execution date comes, the greater the pressure will be. Calls will increase worldwide to boycott Israel. Israeli diplomats will send emergency messages to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem. The embassies will increase protective measures. The Israeli government will hold emergency meetings. Some ministers will recommend reducing the punishment. Others will argue that this will show weakness and encourage terror. Netanyahu, as always, will waver among all the opinions.

    How will the condemned man be executed? Hanging? Decapitation? And if decapitation, by hand or guillotine? Shooting? Lethal injection? Electrocution? And who will carry out the execution? Will someone be hired? A volunteer? A firing squad?

    I know that this argument might lead to the conclusion that attackers should be killed on the spot. That is indeed the second focus of the arguments that are now tearing Israel apart. Elor Azaria, a soldier and combat medic, shot an Arab assailant in the head as he lay bleeding on the ground. A military court sentenced him to 18 months in prison and confirmed this sentence on appeal. Many believe he should be released. Others, among them Netanyahu, call for him to be pardoned.


    No matter how you look at it, the death penalty is barbaric and stupid and has been abolished in all civilized countries except for certain states in the United States (which are difficult to call civilized). When I think about this issue, I always remember heartrending lines by Oscar Wilde in his poem “The Ballad of Reading Gaol.” Wilde was imprisoned there, and seeing a man condemned to death he wrote:

    “I never saw a man who looked / With such a wistful eye / Upon that little tent of blue / Which prisoners call the sky ...”


    https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.805468

  5. #35
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    34,157
    Thanks
    26938

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    Turkey is preparing to set up a Palestinian embassy in East Jerusalem...
    no surprise there.

  6. #36
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    34,157
    Thanks
    26938

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Who, exactly, is calling for democracy? "Destroying Israel" is not a path to democracy. Fuck, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are still slaughtering gay people. That's not democracy either.

    It's very easy for those with atrocities in their past to sit on the wealth of their ancestors actions, and decry those who currently do the same thing (albeit on a FAR lesser scale). Where are you; the United Kingdom? The nation that fathered the intercontinental slave trade? Sure, the U.K. abolished slavery on their own land, and eventually ended the slave trade, but the U.K. made tremendous wealth in the process, and the benefits of that wealth are enjoyed today, so don't sit on your island, free from bordering countries, and pretend otherwise.

    If the Palestinians truly want peace, they need to present a peace treaty. Israel has done this more than once. But there has never been a peace treaty authored by the Palestinian government. Rather, they make alliances with those whose primary platform is the eradication of Israel. If they want peace, they've got a pretty fucked up way of showing it.



    Again - If Palestinians want peace, they should make an overture. If they want to pursue the eradication of Israel, then Israel is being GENEROUS by maintaining the status quo rather than eliminating nations who would destroy them.
    Are you aware of this?

    The Arab Peace Initiative (Arabic: مبادرة السلام العربية‎), also known as the "Saudi Initiative", is a 10 sentence proposal for an end to the Arab–Israeli conflict that was endorsed by the Arab League in 2002 at the Beirut Summit and re-endorsed at the 2007 Arab League summit and at the 2017 Arab League summit.[1] The initiative calls for normalizing relations between the Arab region and Israel, in exchange for a full withdrawal by Israel from the occupied territories (including East Jerusalem) and a "just settlement" of the Palestinian refugee problem based on UN Resolution 194. The Initiative was initially overshadowed by the Passover Massacre, a major terrorist attack that took place on March 27, 2002, the day before the Initiative was published.[2]

    The Israeli government under Ariel Sharon rejected the initiative as a "non-starter".[3] Wikipedia

  7. #37
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,894
    Thanks
    30272

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Are you aware of this? (The Arab Peace Initiative)
    Absolutely. And though it was not written by the Palestinians, it wasn't all bad. But it suffered from major flaws. First and formost, it waived the bilateral negotiations. The initiative was what it was, with no negotiable aspects. But the real kicker? The Arabs were unable to sell the plan to Hamas, because it called on all parties to establish "normal relations with Israel." That was a deal-breaker for Hamas, as it runs against the grain of their stated goal to "eradicate Israel." It binds Israel such that they would have to break the treaty in order to retaliate against Hamas.

    Furthermore, the Arab Initiative didn't actually solve the problem with regard to Palestinian refugees. "Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194." That's a direct translation. No outline of what the "just solution" might be, just "insert miracle here."

    The Palestinians need to come up with a first draft on their own. Not the Saudis. And they need to work with Israel to refine the treaty such that everyone gets some of the things they want, and no one gets everything they want.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  8. #38
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    34,157
    Thanks
    26938

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Absolutely. And though it was not written by the Palestinians, it wasn't all bad. But it suffered from major flaws. First and formost, it waived the bilateral negotiations. The initiative was what it was, with no negotiable aspects. But the real kicker? The Arabs were unable to sell the plan to Hamas, because it called on all parties to establish "normal relations with Israel." That was a deal-breaker for Hamas, as it runs against the grain of their stated goal to "eradicate Israel." It binds Israel such that they would have to break the treaty in order to retaliate against Hamas.

    Furthermore, the Arab Initiative didn't actually solve the problem with regard to Palestinian refugees. "Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194." That's a direct translation. No outline of what the "just solution" might be, just "insert miracle here."

    The Palestinians need to come up with a first draft on their own. Not the Saudis. And they need to work with Israel to refine the treaty such that everyone gets some of the things they want, and no one gets everything they want.
    Its a good thing Egypt and Israel didn't insist they needed everyone onboard to come to terms with each other, isnt it.

  9. #39
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,894
    Thanks
    30272

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Its a good thing Egypt and Israel didn't insist they needed everyone onboard to come to terms with each other, isnt it.
    Hamas HAD to be on board. They're one of the key players in the whole mess.

    The Egypt / Israel peace treaty was the result of at least a year of intense negotiation. It's not like either party demanded a signature on the first draft. And unlike the Arab Peace Initiative, they didn't try to boil a very complex situation down to ten lines.

    Complete text of the Egypt/Israel Peace Treaty
    Last edited by Djinn; 18th December 2017 at 07:01 AM.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  10. #40
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    34,157
    Thanks
    26938

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    The Egypt / Israel peace treaty was the result of at least a year of intense negotiation. It's not like either party demanded a signature on the first draft. And unlike the Arab Peace Initiative, they didn't try to boil a very complex situation down to ten lines.

    Complete text of the Egypy/Israel Peace Treaty
    What was said about Egypt back then isn't all that different from what is being said now. And Egypt did have some conditions for peace that had to be met.

    A peace proposal has been made. It can be accepted as a place to start, or discounted.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 96
    Last Post: 27th January 2017, 03:18 PM
  2. Terror in Jerusalem
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 6th November 2014, 08:59 AM
  3. UFO hovers over Jerusalem
    By Inkslinger in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12th February 2011, 06:51 PM
  4. The Jerusalem Mosque
    By ...of J.Temperance in forum World Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 9th February 2007, 04:27 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed