Author Topic: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive  (Read 2109 times)

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #165 on: November 02, 2005, 01:02:05 PM »
i can't be arsed to read all that

Too bad that you have time to read articles with omitted facts and to post them but you don't have time to read the honest truth only because it's complex and because it shatters all of the misconceptions you've grown used to.

Yes because if you believe it, then it must be the honest truth.... like "Palestinians have in no way been victims of Zionism"... LOL...

See this has nothing to do with what I think because all I did was pasting it for you to read it, you are the one assuming. Read it and see for yourself whether it is the truth- this is not like your bullshit articles man, you can actually see for yourself - THESE ARE FACTS.

P.S Saying that The Palestinian leadership played only a secondary role in harming the Paletinian people is laughable. The only reason Israel had for retaliating was because they refused to uproot terrorism with in their authority, how come you don't get this?

I said "if you believe it"... that means you accepting it as the truth... which you obviously do, so why do you say "this has nothing to do with what I think".... I'm assuming that you accept it as the truth? LOLLL yeah... nice try, dumbfuck... just because you make assumptions about me, doesn't mean I have the need to make them about you... another case of you having no response and resorting to non-sense.

Yes, you accept those as facts... and I consider "my bullshit articles" (whatever you're referring to) as facts...

You're talking about the present time... I'm talking about the past... what about Israeli terrorism in the mid 20th century? Again, it seems like you don't know what the argument at hand is... so you just choose one and run with it.. and away from the truth at the same time.


LMAO man you're so damn funny....I don't have to believe something that is factual, obviously you haven't even read it(- cross reference it with the bibliography if you want), I'm not arguing on whether it is the truth- IT SIMPLY IS (lol..just like the civil war in the U.S)... you're coming up with such pathetic bullshit...at least read it before bullshiting about what's true and what's not.

And this is the problem that you CONSIDER your shit to be factual meaning that you view it as such- In your opinion those are facts something that means YOU'RE THE ONE DEALING WITH OPINIONS after having said you're only dealing with pure facts....see, I don't consider, I know. If you read it or do some in-depth research YOU'D KNOW TOO- it comes to clearify historical errors you can find in many books you may have been taught upon or taught by people influenced by those books.

And about your half assed references to Jewish underground groups - it's obvious you don't even know what you're talking about, you're just mentioning shit so it will seem like you have something to say, these people rose after the Brits started backing down from the Balfour Declaration which was suppose to be their primary goal ,yet you choose to ignore the fact The Arab States declined the "partition plan" when the Palestinians could have most of the land (as if land was/is even the issue here.... you're so naive), while planing to eliminate the state of Israel and also as a result created the refugee problem.Your entire argument is based on the fact Israel is occupying land right? If the "Partition Plan" was to be accepted by the Arab Higher Committee back then would we be having this discussion right now???-THEY PLANED TO ELIMINATE ISRAEL, THEY DID NOT WANT TO CREATE A PALESTINIAN STATE---these are facts my friend. Who is to blame when the Jews accepted the "Patition Plan" despite being allocated with a tiny part of the land and the Palestinians chose to flee under the attack threats of the Arab States. How can you ignore all this, GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS PAGE AND READ THE HISTORICAL ORDER OF EVENTS.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2005, 01:06:18 PM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

J @ M @ L

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
  • Karma: -115
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #166 on: November 03, 2005, 02:30:47 AM »
"I don't have to believe something that is factual"
If this is your thesis statement, then you have 7 pages of posts to back this up with, and now I know why we're not getting anywhere :)

"I'm not arguing whether it's the truth.. it simply is"
Wow, I wonder why I didn't think of that one. "just like the civil war in the U.S."
PALESTINIANS HAVE BEEN AND ARE VICTIMS OF ZIONISM.... I'm not arguing whether it's truth... IT SIMPLY IS... just like the U.S. dropping bombs on Japan.

When I stated that: "Yes, you accept those as facts... and I consider "my bullshit articles" (whatever you're referring to) as facts... "  it was meant as sarcasm, which is why I used the word bullshit... I was simply showing you what you sound like... and now you agree that this is expressing one's own opinion, and not facts... so I have made my point, and your dumbass has proven it.

edit: my sig says it all  :)
« Last Edit: November 03, 2005, 02:49:53 AM by JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel »
my throat hurts, its hard to swallow, and my body feels like i got a serious ass beating.

LOL @ this fudgepacker
 

J @ M @ L

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
  • Karma: -115
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #167 on: November 03, 2005, 02:44:18 AM »
Anyways, I'm arguing with people who claim it's the soldiers' choice to bulldoze homes and not the government's... and that Zionism hasn't affected Palestinians.... LOLLLL...


You're just making shit up, everything you say has no value, because it's based on lies. When have I said it's the soldies choice to bulldoze homes? I said if innocent people were getting harmed, it was due to the soldiers error, not the government...It's not my fault you have a hard time understanding.

I never knew it was the "government" bulldozing homes and killing innocent people, I thought it was the Israeli soldiers performing these actions (PLURAL... BULLDOZING HOMES AND KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE... GET IT?). Oh wait, it was..."Government" does not approve the killings of innocent people, I Geezy has been saying that...

Don't take the I Geezy route and make false accusations because you've been proven wrong.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2005, 02:46:39 AM by JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel »
my throat hurts, its hard to swallow, and my body feels like i got a serious ass beating.

LOL @ this fudgepacker
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #168 on: November 03, 2005, 06:41:00 AM »
"I don't have to believe something that is factual"
If this is your thesis statement, then you have 7 pages of posts to back this up with, and now I know why we're not getting anywhere :)

"I'm not arguing whether it's the truth.. it simply is"
Wow, I wonder why I didn't think of that one. "just like the civil war in the U.S."
PALESTINIANS HAVE BEEN AND ARE VICTIMS OF ZIONISM.... I'm not arguing whether it's truth... IT SIMPLY IS... just like the U.S. dropping bombs on Japan.

When I stated that: "Yes, you accept those as facts... and I consider "my bullshit articles" (whatever you're referring to) as facts... "  it was meant as sarcasm, which is why I used the word bullshit... I was simply showing you what you sound like... and now you agree that this is expressing one's own opinion, and not facts... so I have made my point, and your dumbass has proven it.

edit: my sig says it all  :)


LOL It's like saying " THE SKIES ARE PINK"....You have to distinguish Historical Facts from interpretations, you're trying to pass your interpretations AS THE TRUTH and I'm  pointing out the historical facts which you choose to ignore in your statements. What is factual however is that Palestinians for years now have been victims of their self-proclaimed leaders and freedom fighters and you my friend are trying to blur the discussion with your kiddy shit- THIS IS PROVEN- no denying this. You keep saying that "well yes they may have been hurt by their leadership but Israel is at greater fault..." not realising that the demeanor of their leadership and it's accomplices holds as its agenda to kill civilians on both sides, they are the ones provoking Israeli retaliation-IF THE PALESTINIAN LEADERSHIP FOUGHT TERRORISM on its own Israel would never have to preform foiling operations on Palestinian territory but since their leadership is in support of terrorism Israel has no other choice than to retaliate AND THEY EXPECT ISRAEL TO STRIKE since these terrorists live within the peaceful population and even while trying to keep these strikes focused there is no way to avoid innocent deaths (And they know it and YOU know it) completely, THE ONLY WAY TO AVOID THESE DEPLORABLE VICTIMS ON BOTH SIDES is for the Palestinian leadership to start fighting terrorism, something IT IS NOT WILLING TO DO....Do you realise that they wouldn't be building this stupid wall we both oppose if the Palestinian Leadership was willing to uproot terrorism within itself???-  According to the statistics it helped reducing terrorist acts drastically, what would you do if you were a Defence Minister of a terrorism stricken country after confronting such figures when it isn't even fully built yet, can you honestly blame them considering the lives at risk?- You seem to condemn this wall more than you condemn terrorist acts and what a wierd way condemning such acts you have when you don't even fully acknowledge their repercussions- They don't only kill Israelis they also trigger the deaths of peacful poor Palestinians who DO NOT DESERVE TO DIE and the leadership, instead of fighting Palestinian terrorism, condones it and waits for Israel to retaliate so it could later receive more indetification and compassion from this Propaganda Drenched World that bases its views upon feelings instead of exploring the causes. I have Palestinian(Israeli Arabs) friends in college and they also view the Palestinian leadership as the primary obstacle on the way to peace and since they have relatives/in laws in the autonomy they say this is a very widespread view among the Palestinian population although they WANT Israel to be more compromising since the leadership does not reflect the consensus (so it is upon Israel to protect Palestinian civilians as well according to them even though they aren't Israeli citizens as a country that upholds democracy) in the autonomy but they SEE THE TRUE CAUSES to the problem and I'm wondering what drives you in this discussion, do you simply want to be right ? "win an argument"? Come on, this is serious business, A VERY COMPLEX BUSINESS, you need to look beyond the propaganda you've been fed and beyond the disinformation....Study this and you'll find out many interesting details....The articles I brought weren't to prove you wrong,I can't correct someone who had been fed unadulterated propaganda along with disinformation for so long , I brought them so you could see for yourself!- There's nothing argumentative or polemic about them, there's nothing anti-Palestinian or pro-Israeli- only FACTS!

P.S

INFO:

Black September-
The name given to the armed conflict in September 1970 that occurred after Palestinians living in Jordan threatened the regime and provoked King Hussein to attack the PLO. The PLO was routed and thousands of Palestinians fled to Lebanon. Later a terrorist faction of the PLO took the name Black September.

YOU DON'T PLAY THE GAMES THAT ARE NOWADAYS PLAYED WITH ISRAEL WITH NON-DEMOCRATIC REGIMES....I wonder if there's a UN resolution? :)


West Bank-
Territory west of the Jordan River that Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War. Long known as Judea and Samaria, this 2263-square mile territory is home to a Palestinian population of more than one million, as well as about 240,000 Jewish residents.

Now tell me where was their self-determination agenda when they belonged to Jordan?Was Jordan ever chraged with occupation by the "International Law", or by its representatives on this board, you guys? How exactly such figures of Jewish population would threaten such an agenda(after the west bank had been captured by Israel)? 20% of our population is Palestinian and we are an established democracy....IF THEY WERE TO CREATE A DEMOCRATIC STATE WOULD THE PALESTINIAN MAJORITY be jeopardised considering these figures and the fact the Palestinian natural increase is much-much higher?


« Last Edit: November 03, 2005, 07:33:39 AM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #169 on: November 03, 2005, 11:42:53 AM »
Anyways, I'm arguing with people who claim it's the soldiers' choice to bulldoze homes and not the government's... and that Zionism hasn't affected Palestinians.... LOLLLL...


You're just making shit up, everything you say has no value, because it's based on lies. When have I said it's the soldies choice to bulldoze homes? I said if innocent people were getting harmed, it was due to the soldiers error, not the government...It's not my fault you have a hard time understanding.

I never knew it was the "government" bulldozing homes and killing innocent people, I thought it was the Israeli soldiers performing these actions (PLURAL... BULLDOZING HOMES AND KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE... GET IT?). Oh wait, it was..."Government" does not approve the killings of innocent people, I Geezy has been saying that...

Don't take the I Geezy route and make false accusations because you've been proven wrong.

It's too bad you have a tough time getting what I'm saying. If I didn't know you better, I'd think you were one of the typical WCC members who can't comprehend too much. I said bulldozing homes and killing innocent people, meaning the wrong homes were being bulldozed by the Israeli soldiers, which caused innocent people to die. Do you get it yet?
 

J @ M @ L

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
  • Karma: -115
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #170 on: November 03, 2005, 08:28:28 PM »
Wrong homes? LOL.. what wrong homes?
When it comes to bulldozing homes, they're all the WRONG homes.
my throat hurts, its hard to swallow, and my body feels like i got a serious ass beating.

LOL @ this fudgepacker
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #171 on: November 04, 2005, 02:19:40 AM »
Jamal! I want to show you now what you've been subjected to(you and every other propaganda victim):



The picture that moved hearts: This picture was taken near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, on Friday, April 6, 2001, by Evelyn Hockstein, a Reuters photographer. A Palestinian child was caught by Israeli policemen, and, in his fear - he wet his pants. Undoubtedly, this picture is very moving, and everyone can share the pain and panic of the child, that led to such an embarrassing moment.

The Palestinians, who truly understand the power of the image, spread this picture worldwide, through the media and e-mails, but - they did not explain the photo's background. A few minutes before the above picture was taken, another Reuters photographer, Natalie Behring, had taken the following picture -- which was not as widely distributed (please notice the child in the center of the picture):





On April 13th 2001 the head of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, abuses the same child and the truth by inviting the boy to his bureau in Ramallah and gives him words of encouragement for the above acts of violence (Aliam newspaper, April 14th 2001). They pose commonly displaying the picture with the wet pants ...




On April 13th 2001 the head of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, abuses the same child and the truth by inviting the boy to his bureau in Ramallah and gives him words of encouragement for the above acts of violence (Aliam newspaper, April 14th 2001). They pose commonly displaying the picture with the wet pants ...






The Egypt State Information Service, Aug 5, 2003) is abusing the child and the truth on its "Photo Album" of "Scenes Disturb World conscience" - the boy is this time a "terrified Palestinian girl".


more:




The Photo that Started it All (Honest Reporting, May 2002/updated by Middle East Info Dec 9, 2003): On the day the Intifada broke out, Tuvia Grossman was riding a taxi to visit the Western Wall. He was unwittingly thrust into the international limelight -- and nearly killed in the process.

On September 30, 2000, The New York Times, Associated Press and other major media outlets published a photo of a young man -- bloodied and battered -- crouching beneath a club-wielding Israeli policeman. The caption identified him as a Palestinian victim of the recent riots -- with the clear implication that the Israeli soldier is the one who beat him.

The victim's true identity was revealed when Dr. Aaron Grossman of Chicago sent the following letter to the Times:

Regarding your picture on page A5 of the Israeli soldier and the Palestinian on the Temple Mount -- that Palestinian is actually my son, Tuvia Grossman, a Jewish student from Chicago. He, and two of his friends, were pulled from their taxicab while traveling in Jerusalem, by a mob of Palestinian Arabs, and were severely beaten and stabbed.

That picture could not have been taken on the Temple Mount because there are no gas stations on the Temple Mount and certainly none with Hebrew lettering, like the one clearly seen behind the Israeli soldier attempting to protect my son from the mob.

In response, the New York Times published a half-hearted correction, which identified Tuvia Grossman as "an American student in Israel" -- not as a Jew who was beaten by Arabs. The "correction" also noted that "Mr. Grossman was wounded" in "Jerusalem's Old City" -- although the beating actually occurred in the Arab neighborhood of Wadi al Joz, not in the Old City.

In response to public outrage at the original error and the inadequate correction, The New York Times reprinted Tuvia Grossman's picture -- this time with the proper caption -- along with a full article detailing his near-lynching at the hands of Palestinians rioters.


The photo of a bloodied Tuvia Grossman became a symbol in the struggle to ensure that Israel receives the fair media coverage that every nation deserves.

In April 2002, a District Court in Paris ordered the French daily newspaper "Liberation" and the Associated Press to pay damages to Grossman in the amount of 4,500 Euro.

The Court condemned the Associated Press for "mispresenting [Grossman] as a member of the Palestinian community," while the court censured "Liberation" for "publishing the litigious picture with a comment edited the same faulty way, giving the picture a meaning and a scope it could not have."


===== ARAB ABUSE =====

Even more remarkable is that Arab groups have adopted Grossman's photo to use in their own propaganda campaigns, cynically using a bloodied Jew as a symbol of the Palestinian struggle.



An official Egyptian government website (Egypt State Information Service) is using the Grossman photo on its "Photo Gallery" of "Scenes Disturb World conscience".


The Palestinian Information Center, www.islam.net incorporated Grossman's photo onto its homepage banner.  The graphic was removed from the site, but is reprinted here:




Additionally, some Arab groups have called for a boycott of Coca-Cola, for doing business with Israel, and have circulated a series of posters to state their case. One poster shows Grossman's bleeding face juxtaposed with the Coca-Cola logo, and the tag line: "By supporting American products, you're supporting Israel."





Snopes.com reports that, ironically, since Ramallah is home to a Coca-Cola bottling facility that employs about 400 local residents (and indirectly creates employment for hundreds more), and Coca-Cola industries throughout the Middle East are operated as local businesses, any boycott of Coca-Cola in Middle Eastern countries is likely to cause more monetary harm to Arabs and Palestinians than it is to Americans or Israelis.

Snopes.com notes another irony: Pepsi is also on the Arab boycott list, with claims that the name "Pepsi" is an acronym for 'Pay Every Penny to Save Israel' or 'Pay Every Penny to the State of Israel.' As the Associated Press once noted, "Calling Pepsi a 'Jewish product' is ironic, given that Pepsi was one of many multinationals that wouldn't do business in Israel during the 40-year Arab commercial boycott of the Jewish state."

And of course the biggest irony of all is that the image chosen in the poster to represent Palestinian suffering was none other than Tuvia Grossman who nearly beaten to death by a Palestinian mob.





PALESTINIAN WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE THROES OF ISLAMIKAZE TERRORISM

Raphael Israeli

Policy Paper No. 139, 2002

Apologia
Even prior to September 11, and certainly much more so thereafter, Muslim clerics such as radical Sheikh Qaradhawi, the Sheikh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Tantawi, and Sheikh `Akrama Sabri, the hand-picked Mufti of the Palestinian Authority, and many others who took up residence in the West, such as Sheikhs al-Bakri and al-Masri who settled in London, pronounced themselves in favor of the Islamikaze killings for the sake of Islam, especially against Israelis. Tantawi is perhaps the most duplicitous among them, for unlike others, who have been either clearly for (and this is the majority of those who articulated their thinking) or emphatically against, Tantawi has shown both by first attending the Alexandria Interfaith Conference in early 2002, where those acts of terror were denounced, but then his position constantly eroded. He came first to justify the Wafa Idris act of terror; the first perpetrated by a Palestinian woman, and then accepted in fact the indiscriminate attacks against civilians as legal. His position is particularly sensitive because while he responds to the Egyptian establishment and has to toe the official anti-terrorist line espoused by his government which appointed him, he is also in a responsible and prestigious enough location to heed the popular resentment of the masses against the US and Israel.

The involvement of women, first as victims of terror and then as its progenitors, was brought up by Syrian-born Sheikh `Umar al-Bakri, who took refuge in London and advocated at some point that “all homosexuals there ought to throw themselves down from the Big Ben,” called the British MPs “monkeys”, and vowed that the flag of Islam would “fly high on 10 Downing Street and at the Elysee”. He justified and defended the September 11 New York and Washington horrors, which for him came as a “compensation for the atrocities the US had committed against Islam”, and exhorted Muslims to unite and fight, sacrifice themselves and their wealth in order to gain access to Paradise and to make the difference between “truth and falsehood, belief and heresy, oppressors and oppressed, the alliance of Satan against the Alliance of Allah”. After the American attack against Afghanistan was launched, he issued a fatwa against Pakistani President Musharraf and other Muslim leaders who let their territory be used by Americans against a fellow Muslim state. In that verdict, for what it is worth, he raised, inter alia, many aspects of the status of women in Islam and in general, in the context of what we call terrorism and he insists on dubbing jihad. For him, the Muslims who collaborated with the US were murtaddun (apostates), if “at all they were Muslims to start with”, and since they are involved in the war against Muslims, the sentence of murtadd harbi (an apostate who should be fought) applies to them, to wit:

His life is free prey [it is permissible to kill him],
 

His marriage becomes invalid, as does his guardianship of his children and relatives,
 

His property is free prey and he will not be able to bequeath it,
 

He cannot be buried in a Muslim cemetery,
 

He must be treated with animosity and hatred...,
 

There is no difference between a man and a woman... It is permissible to shed the blood of a woman who is a heretic (harbiyya), even if her fighting is limited to singing... Thus acted the Prophet against the fighting women of the Qureish tribe. He permitted their blood to be spilled and even ordered them killed, although he generally prohibited killing women.

This verdict, which allowed the killing of Muslim women under certain circumstances, appeared under the emblem of “The Shari`ah Court of the United Kingdom”, and was signed jointly by al-Bakri himself, under his title of “Shari`ah Court Judge in London”, and Muhammad al-Musa`ari, the Secretary General of the Committee for Protection of Legitimate Rights in Saudi Arabia, which lends to it authority and respectability. Its English version, however, was slightly different and signed by “Muslim Jurists from Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United Kingdom”, with the names of the original two signatories, al-Bakri and al-Musa`ari, appearing at the bottom, with their phone numbers for further inquiries. In this version, the Qur`anic verse was added which threatened that the punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Prophet and strive to make mischief in the land, is only this – that they should be murdered or crucified, or their hands and feet should be cut off on opposing sides, or they should be imprisoned.

And the section about the women of Qureish who were killed by the Prophet, was replaced by a paragraph that reads:

Therefore we ask Muslims with the capability, especially the armies of Muslim countries, to move quickly and to capture those apostates and criminals involved in these crimes, especially the ruler of Pakistan, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia and Rabbani of Afghanistan.

The exposure of women to harrowing physical mutilation, on authority of the precedent set by the Prophet, though it was concealed in the English version, where women were omitted from those horrors, together with the determination to dissolve marriages of “apostate” men, naturally had an impact on the developing debate on the active participation of Muslim women (and by extension also children), in the Islamikaze attacks as actors, or on suffering the consequences thereof as passive spectators. For once the taboo was lifted on involving women (and children) in the course of Muslim violence during this brand of jihad, or in the hardships that resulted, no obstacles could be envisaged any longer for exempting them from taking part in that struggle. Here, we shall focus on Palestinian women and children, because their people, who have been engaged in a murderous battle against Israel, have become the chief model of Islamikaze in the Muslim world. The Palestinians have emerged in effect, not only as the most active agents in the implementation of the idea, but have also widened the circle of its membership beyond the few self-sacrificing radicals, into a legitimate national form of struggle in which women and children have taken the initiative, or were led, to partake. Unlike al-Bakri and al-Masri’s fantasies where they articulate their wishful thinking to confront the world, bring down the West, kindle a world Islamic revolution and subvert their Western countries of exile from within, Palestinian clerics are unified by the theme of what they perceive as a concrete, daily and all-pervasive national struggle to which they are pushed to provide theological responses. And once they sanctified Islamikaze as a legitimate form of struggle, indeed encouraged it, they could not exclude women and children from it, nor refute them when they pressed for participation. Other Muslim clerics were also dragged into the debate, but let us first focus on the Palestinian clerics’ stated positions on Islamikaze, which by necessity generated the inclusion, first of individuals who did not belong to the Islamists of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but were members of the avowedly “secular” Fatah and al-Aqsa Brigades, followed by women and then children, in those horrendous acts of terror.










« Last Edit: November 04, 2005, 03:03:38 AM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #172 on: November 04, 2005, 02:25:32 AM »
Follow up(to the above^, another example):




"Lebanese model Nathaly Fadlallah models the 'Dress of Revolution,' designed by Saudi haute couture designer Yehya al-Bashri. The dress was part of a collection featured at an Arab fashion festival in Beirut on September 17, 2002 to demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian uprising against Israel."

The dress is covered with faux bloodstains from the waist to the knees, and below the knees it shows an Israeli tank against a background of burning buildings.

Needless to say, in Saudi Arabia, the home of the designer, the same woman would be imprisoned as a "prostitute" for daring to dress like that.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2005, 02:27:55 AM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #173 on: November 04, 2005, 02:38:14 AM »
And even more to the point:

Delegitimization and Antisemitism
t Is anti-Zionism different from antisemitism?


Israel, as a democracy, is receptive to fair and legitimate criticism. However, all too often Israel is singled out and held up to standards not applied to any other state. Although valid criticism of Israel has absolutely no connection to antisemitism, some of the unreasonable condemnation has its roots in antisemitic attitudes, often disguised as "anti-Zionism." Just as in the past Jews were the scapegoat for many problems, today there are attempts to turn Israel into an international pariah.

"Antisemitism" is the name given to the form of racism practiced against the Jewish people. Though the literal interpretation of antisemitism would appear to denote hostility to all Semitic peoples, this is a fallacy. The term was originally coined in Germany in 1879 to describe the European anti-Jewish campaigns of that era, and it soon came to define the persecution or discrimination against Jews throughout the ages.

Hatred of the Jewish people is an age-old phenomenon, traditionally associated with expressions of xenophobia and religious intolerance. Antisemitism has taken different forms and used various motifs throughout history. In modern times, it has been promoted by extreme nationalistic and even racist ideologies. Severe antisemitism exists in Arab countries today.


Egyptian version (1994) of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
   
Egyptian version (2001) of antisemitic tract "The International Jew"
 


Antisemitism reached its peak in the Holocaust. Over 6 million Jews (one third of the world's Jewish population) were brutally and systematically murdered during World War II.

Modern antisemitism in Europe, after being repressed for decades, has erupted with renewed fury in recent years in a new form: "anti-Zionism," or hatred of the State of Israel.

Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people - an expression of their legitimate aspiration to self-determination and national independence. The Zionist movement was founded to provide an ancient people with a sovereign state of its own, in its ancestral homeland. Israel is the modern political embodiment of this age-old dream.

The goal of anti-Zionism is to undermine the legitimacy of Israel, thereby denying the Jewish people their place in the community of nations. Denigration of Zionism is therefore an attack on Israel's basic right to exist as a nation equal to all other nations, in violation of one of the fundamental principles of international law.

Just as antisemitism denies Jews their rights as individuals in society, anti-Zionism attacks the Jewish people as a nation, on the international level. Similar to the use of "the Jew" as a scapegoat for many a society's problems, Israel has been singled out for disproportionate and one-sided condemnation in the international arena.

Anti-Zionism is often manifested as attacks on Israel in the United Nations and other international forums. Over the years, many a meeting and event of the international community has been exploited as an opportunity to condemn Israel - no matter what the subject matter, no matter how tenuous the tie to the conflict in the Middle East.

Moreover, it is no coincidence that the recent censure of Israel in international forums and the media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in antisemitic incidents in many parts of the world.

As a nation dedicated to the principles of democracy, Israel believes that criticism, whether by other nations or our own people, is a powerful force for positive change. However, there is a clear distinction between legitimate calls for improvement and the attempt to delegitimize Israel by consistently singling it out and holding it up to standards not applied to other states. All this ignores the context in which Israel must strive to survive in the face of violent attacks against its citizens and, all too often, against its very existence.
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #174 on: November 04, 2005, 03:36:16 AM »
And to be even more exact:


What is the status of the territories?

Control over the West Bank and Gaza passed to Israel in 1967 in a war of self-defense. For nearly a quarter of a century afterwards, the Palestinians rejected every Israeli overture, missing opportunity after opportunity to peacefully resolve the dispute through negotiation. Yet as long as the future status of the West Bank and Gaza is subject to negotiation, Israel's claim to these disputed territories is no less valid than that of the Palestinians.



 
 
Israel's current presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip dates back to 1967 and the Six Day War. However, these territories had formed the cradle of Jewish civilization during biblical times and Jewish communities existed there over thousands of years. Modern-day Israel has deep ties to the many historical sites located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Yet Israel's claim to these territories is based not only on its ancient ties, religious beliefs and security needs; it is also firmly grounded in international law and custom.

It is important to remember that Israel's control of the territories began as a result of a war of self-defense, fought after Israel's very existence was threatened. It has continued due to the intransigence of Israel's Arab neighbors, who steadfastly rejected Israel's many offers of peace, including its post-Six Day War message that it would exchange most of the territory in return for peace. In 1979 Egypt and in 1994 Jordan finally signed peace treaties with Israel. But the Palestinians have yet to do so.

It has been asserted that Israel's continued presence in the territories violates UN Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967, one of the cornerstones of the peace process. This allegation ignores both the language and the original intent of 242. The framers of this resolution realized that the pre-1967 borders were indefensible, and deliberately chose to use the term withdrawal "from territories" (and not "from all the territories" as the Palestinians claim) in order to indicate the need for changing any future borders.

Moreover, Resolution 242 (and Resolution 338 of 1973) places obligations on both sides. The Arab regimes cannot demand that Israel unilaterally withdraw while they ignore their own responsibilities and the need for negotiations. They deliberately overlook the fact that 242 calls for the "termination of all claims or states of belligerency" and the "right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Israel's presence in the territories is often incorrectly referred to as an "occupation." However, under international law, occupation occurs in territories that have been taken from a recognized sovereign. The Jordanian rule over the West Bank and the Egyptian rule over the Gaza Strip during the years 1948-1967 resulted from a war of aggression aimed at destroying the newly established Jewish State. Their attacks plainly violated UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (also known as the Partition Plan). Accordingly, the Egyptian and Jordanian seizures of the territories were never recognized by the international community. As neither territory had a prior legitimate sovereign, under international law these areas cannot be considered as occupied and their most accurate description would be that of disputed territories.

Palestinian spokespersons not only claim that the territory is occupied, they also allege that occupation is - by definition - illegal. However, international law does not prohibit situations of occupation. Rather, it attempts to regulate such situations with international agreements and conventions. Therefore, claims that the so-called Israeli "occupation" is illegal - without regard either to its cause or the factors that have led to its continuation - are baseless allegations without foundation in international law.

Palestinian efforts to present Israel's presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as the primary cause of the conflict ignore history. Palestinian terrorism predates Israel's control of the territories (and even the existence of the State of Israel itself). The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was founded in 1964, three years before Israel's presence in the territories began. Moreover, Palestinian terrorism has often peaked during those periods when a negotiated settlement was closest at hand, whether at the height of the Oslo process in the mid-1990s or after Israel's unprecedented peace proposals at Camp David and Taba in 2000.

The West Bank and Gaza Strip are best regarded as disputed territory over which there are competing claims that should be resolved in peace talks. The final status of these disputed territories can only be determined through negotiations between the parties. Attempts to force a solution through terrorism are ethically indefensible and only serve to encourage further violence and terrorism.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2005, 03:47:51 AM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #175 on: November 07, 2005, 10:47:21 AM »
^^Some nice reads.
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #176 on: November 07, 2005, 12:06:22 PM »
LOL I'm afraid not even your recommendation will open Jamal's eyes to the truth, man! He won't even read it.
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

J Bananas

  • Guest
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #177 on: November 07, 2005, 12:14:04 PM »
I like how this 8 page thread has about 3 people contributing
 

EARNERTON

  • Lil Geezy
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: -1
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #178 on: November 09, 2005, 08:41:42 AM »
all I know is mossad were in control of everything around an in Arafats home arrest situation, they knew if they got rid of him, they could then totally take the piss wit the palestinians, theirs all types of untraceble poisons out there, truss me on that, he didn't die from know AIDS like the cover story the Israeli goverment put out, those french doctors exposed that, you know, for real, they couldn't find what took him out, but it was suspect, truss, it was a suspect death
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
Re: Arafat Death Probe Inconclusive
« Reply #179 on: November 09, 2005, 09:51:49 AM »
Hell, I would've been proud if it was true I suppose, the way all Jews around the world had been when Nazi war criminals were executed.
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?