My Country is Under Attack. Do You Care?

those rockets can do. didn't they learn when israel went into gaza in '08?

i also care about the innocent palestinian people who want peace.

...instead of oppressing Palestinians, building settlements, tearing down their livelihoods, and oh, you know, running an apartheid state. But that's not what you wanted to hear, was it?

firing those missiles is not going to help.

Israel is never going to give back any land that settlers now occupy or have forced into the wider state of Israel. If Israel were remotely interested in peace in the long run then any land taken by them would be held as ransom for peace.

if she were elected she'd level the settlements? of course she didn't win.

the whole situation makes me very sad. did you ever see the movie "another road home"?

i try to stay away from this forum, but i had to answer the OP because i do care.

Regardless of what any politician says unless it is written in blood then it is meaningless.

I care as well about Israel/Palestine, and an peace is going to have to come with a dose of salt for each side to swallow.

Tell me, do you pretend to care about Palestinians?

I just don't pretend to ignore that Israel allows its citizens to set up illegal settlements.


Tell me, do you pretend to care about Palestinians?

...via terror against Israel's civilians?

It's strange that when Israelis burn down Palestinian olive groves it is not considered terror.

Only Palestinians do evil things, right?

I'll restate this.

I care about both the Palestinians and Israelis.

In addition...I'm not going to be a cheerleader for the Israelis or their war machine. I used to support them 100%. Now not so much.

Conversely I am also not a cheerleader for Palestinian rocket attacks.

I have never been a fan of apartheid states.

If they don't have rockets then they will throw rocks, and in both cases they will be met with Israeli tanks.

But then why are you not nearly as critical of them as you are any perceived violation caused by Israel?

Illegal Israeli settlements are illegal. Encroaching on Palestinian lands are illegal.

Keeping an apartheid state over another group of people is illegal, immoral and inherently evil. If the roles were reversed and the Palestinians were doing this to Israelis then it would still be apartheid and wrong.

Spare me any more of you false outrage.

Sovereignty is the kind of thing where a peopel actually has it in fact, or they don't have it at all. So when have the Palestinians been sovereign over anything?

I'll wait.

the land that settlers occupied that Israel already gave back?
Doesn't that kind of prove you wrong from the get go?

In fact, none of the things you describe are relevant in Gaza. Yet that is where the rockets are being launched from. Not the West Bank, which does have those issues.

Now what?

Israel can always attack Gaza again and eliminate a few more collateral points.

It seems you believe Palestinians have an understandable right to resist via rockets and suicide bombers against Israelis.

And that explains why you don't sympathize with the victims of such attacks.

of Gaza. It lets in what it wants to. I don't use a Hookah, but thanks for the offer.

....until well after Hamas took over Gaza; after a spike in rocket attacks.

So why do you think rocket attacks immediately increased after the Gaza withdrawal (before the blockade)?

======

WRT the blockade, it's quite porous as Gaza shares a border with Egypt. FYI, Israel doesn't control Egypt and their Muslim Brotherhood now.

when my suggestion would be to let the UN handle Gaza.

The way you are spinning in those shoes, my friend, would make a Whirling Dervish dizzy.


"Israel doesn't control Egypt and their Muslim Brotherhood now."

Would it like to, or will it declare them terrorists and try to blockade them?

In case you missed it, Hamas is at war with Israel.

The blockade has been declared legal even by UN standards (Palmer Commission).

And it's not much of a blockade if Egypt decides not to play along, is it? Tell me, have you ever once condemned Egypt as severely for their role in the blockade as you have Israel?

it still comes up as apartheid.

So the blockade is apartheid?

Tell me, in your own words, what do you think the definition of apartheid is and how is Israel guilty of it?

There are no settlements in Gaza. No "Israeli only roads" in Gaza. No checkpoints in Gaza.

not the best incentive for Israel to give back even more land.

Not that long ago Palestinians routinely commuted to well paying jobs in Israel. Then the bombings started. The Palestinians never fail to choose violence.

Does that mean that any Palestinian land outside of Israel can be re-purposed and have settlements, albeit illegal, built on it...you know to show em who is boss?

the settlements will have to be removed as part of a negotiated peace.

... there is nothing that stops the expansion of settlements.

Hamas can't have it both ways.

considering they control the territory that the rockets are being fired from.

You realize there are still refugee camps in Gaza (under Hamas rule) in which Palestinians there do not have the same rights as other Palestinians in Gaza?

Palestinians bad. Israelis good.

Any thoughts on the way Palestinians are denied the most basic rights under Hamas or, in Lebanon, under that regime?

Or is this only about Israel being bad?

In post 11 they said: 'I care as well about Israel/Palestine, and an peace is going to have to come with a dose of salt for each side to swallow.'

For someone like me who bothers to read what people say when they post, it's a bit of a nobrainer as to who to believe. You, who doesn't appear to read what other people say. Or the person who was posting and telling another DUer what their own position was. I'd like to say I'm torn on it, but I'm not...

...this person cares a bit about Israeli victims of terror. If I wrote I cared about Palestinians and wrote nothing else suggesting that was the case, you'd have every reason to doubt my sincerity.

they will never get what they want through violence. Never.

Tell that to the illegal Israeli settlers when they shoot at Palestinians and burn down/tear up their olive groves. It seems to work out splendidly for them.

I've heard it before. Palestinians bad. Israelis good.

attacking Israel simply maintains the status quo. If Hamas is satisfied with that then ok. If not they need to change their methods.

... settlers go away.

Sounds like a really good reason for Fatah to come back to the table.

and Israel is able to do that too, and that's not counting the additional 250,000 in East Jerusalem, hey if that is to be believed I have a bridge to sell you it's one heck of a deal..........

that Israel claims and not all of Israel as some here like to claim

...and return to exact 1949 armistice lines?

You support that?

as Israel allowed Palestinians to return to their homes after 1947-1948

eta but no armed 'Israeli security' forces or IDF should be allowed to remain

It's completely unrealistic, and if you believe the Palestine Papers, Abbas already agreed to land swaps. Your position is closer to Hamas' then Fatah.

As you well know.

Olmerts offer replaced 100% of the swapped land.

What's the deal with the future state of Palestine having to be free of Jews? Are Christians, Druze Bahai etc also unwelcome citizens?

Seems to me that it makes a lot more sense to keep west bank business intact Jewish owned or not, then you get to collect taxes.

so here ya go-again

Shaul Arieli of the Council for Peace and Security, which developed a map with a final border as part of the Geneva Initiative, said Israel's capacity to swap territory with a future Palestinian state is more limited than what Olmert reportedly proposed.


http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/haaretz-exclusive-olmert-s-plan-for-peace-with-the-palestinians-1.1970



Nabil Abu Rdainah, Abbas's spokesman, told the official Palestinian news agency WAFA that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plan showed a "lack of seriousness."

Under the proposal, Israel would return to the Palestinians 93 percent of the West Bank, plus all of the Gaza Strip, when the Palestinian Authority regains control over the Gaza Strip, which the militant group Hamas seized from forces loyal to Abbas in June 2006.

Olmert presented Abbas with the proposal as part of an agreement in principle on borders, refugees and security arrangements between Israel and a future Palestinian state



http://www.haaretz.com/news/pa-rejects-olmert-s-offer-to-withdraw-from-93-of-west-bank-1.251578


Netanyahu: I won't carry out an Olmert-Abbas peace deal if elected

Opposition leader favored by polls to sweep elections if held today rejects proposal to divide Jerusalem, says would toss out agreement between current PM, Palestinians


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3533242,00.html

Livni tells France's Kouchner: I oppose Olmert's peace plan

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told her French counterpart Bernard Kouchner that she opposes the agreement in principle that outgoing prime minister Ehud Olmert has offered Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

"I do not believe in far-reaching proposals and an attempt to expedite matters, especially in light of the political situation," Livni, the prime minister-designate, told Kouchner on Sunday.


http://www.haaretz.com/news/livni-tells-france-s-kouchner-i-oppose-olmert-s-peace-plan-1.285402

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=6380

eta Olmert resigned 8 days after presenting Abbas with this plan, there is little way this plan would have been finalized in 8 days, much less implemented.

... where Palestinians get all the West Bank and Jerusalem has sailed (sailed, docked and been decommissioned)

Every year they hold out for that, they will get less. A real good incentive to come to the table sooner rather than later.

they have no real choice do they?

almost went back to the '67 borders and arafat turned it down. the palestinian people were betrayed by him.

Not this canard again.

...and the Palestinians would have had their own state on nearly 100% of pre-67 West Bank/Gaza, as well as East Jerusalem.

I suppose you're against them having their own state free of occupation and settlements.

It's the Israelis' fault rockets are falling on their heads today.

How much land would the Palestinians get today? Nearly 80%, 60%, 50%?

It's funny how it keeps on slipping away.

Israel keeps on turning a blind eye to those illegal settlements and the subtext is that the Palestinians have it coming to them.

It must be the Palestinians fault that their olive groves are burnt down and they are chased off their land.

"The same deal can be cut today."

Somehow I don't really believe that BiBi will follow through on that.

Were you for that, as well as the Clinton Parameters in 2000-01?

The Palestinians would have their state free of settlements and occupation; on close to 100% of pre-67 lines.

============

Bibi had nothing to do with either offer.

They were rejected without any counter-offers.

Israel is never going to give it back.

Israel made offers twice in 8 years.

It appears you're against the Palestinians having their own state free of occupation and settlements on nearly 100% of pre-67 lands.

... don't negotiate. Just keep wishing that your enemy will go away and leave it all to you.

Recipe for utter failure.

Since BiBi won't negotiate with Hamas how are they supposed to negotiate?

Just keep wishing that your enemy will go away and leave it all to you. Sounds like BiBi's take on things as well.

Or Just keep wishing that the Palestinians will go away and leave it all to you.

... they have their Palestinian State ... a Juden-free country where they rule with total autonomy ... much good may it do them.

PM Netanyahu has repeatedly agreed to condition-free talk with the PA to negotiate a Fatah-led state in the West Bank. it is Fatah who refuses to negotiate.

... it is not an attitude conducive to peace.

Where?!

... but, unlike MLK's dream of equality and peace, Arafat's dream was that someday, the Jews (yes Jews, not Israelis) would pack their bags, leave everything they've built and walk away. After all, his dream told him, they've done it before, time after time, for centuries. When the going gets tough, the Jews get going.

Arafat sold this dream to his people -- "If we make things hot enough for the Jews, they will leave.", he told them. They will leave their houses and their cars, their hospitals and universities, they will leave all of their infrastructure behind for the Palestinian Arabs to enjoy. "It will happen, sooner or later", he told them and they believed it. "Maybe the next rocket or the next suicide bombing will push them away, but someday they have to leave.", that was his promise to the Palestinian Arabs.

And many in the West, facilitators of Arafat's dream, believed it as well. "If we demonize the Jews, they will be ashamed and leave their only home." "After all, Europe is safe again, right? America is safe, right? Why would they want to stay in inconvenient Israel if there are so many nicer places where they can run to?", they told the Palestinian Arabs, and they had hope is Arafat's dream

But, what Arafat and his facilitators don't know, can't realize, can never comprehend, is that the Jews are done running. The Holocaust finally opened the Jews eyes to the fact, there is no place safe enough, no place nice enough, sooner or later, EVERYONE will turn. When things get bad, when it is politically expedient, the Jews will once more be blamed for people's collective woes the cycle of persecution will begin again.

So, the Jews aren't moving this time, they're going to stay, they're going to fight, and they're going to win. And the more they are provoked, the more they will retaliate -- who would ask less of ANY human being?

So, Arafat's dream is now a nightmare for the Palestinian Arabs and the sooner from which they wake, the sooner their lives will improve.

Anyone got the jury results for this? Telling someone who's trotting out the Holocaust to score points in some 'argument' they're trying to make that Palestinians hate Jews that they're playing the Holocaust card isn't antisemitism.

btw, holden. Arafat's dead. Yr talking about him in the present tense. I guess you missed it coz yr so wrapped up in trying to convince someone, anyone, that the Palestinians are a bunch of antisemites and trying to incite similar hate against them that you claim they have towards Israelis. Yes, they're Israelis and a sizeable percentage of Israelis aren't Jewish, so stop equating Israelis with Jews. It's antisemitic.

For anyone who is on a jury where the alerter is trying to claim that telling another DUer they're playing the Holocaust card makes that person an antisemite, the fact is the term doesn't make someone an antisemite. Here's just one of many examples (the ADL has also accused US politicians of playing the Holocaust card in the past, and only the most extreme 'supporter' of Israel is going to try to say they or newspapers like Ha'aretz are antisemitic).

Israel must stop overplaying the Holocaust card

We don't have to give up on the Holocaust - it is our history and holds central lessons for all human beings - but we have to stop using it as a justification for Israeli policies.

By Anshel Pfeffer | May.27, 2011 | 1:04 AM |

The Israeli right wing claims to have legitimate arguments why Israel should be very wary of retreating from parts of the West Bank. Do they really need the Holocaust to shore them up? And if they do, doesn't that say something about those arguments?

The problem with Holocaust overuse is that it moves the focus from the present to history and allows all sides to the argument to get in on the game. When Netanyahu cites the six million, he is giving credence to the Palestinian claim that they were those made to suffer for the genocide of the Jews in Europe. He is directly bolstering the Nakba claims. Netanyahu would be the first to agree that the murders of six million European Jews do not justify the displacement of 600,000 Palestinians, but that the cause of an independent Jewish state in the historical Land of Israel was a just one, long before 1939. The Holocaust merely served to emphasize the need for that state.

<snip>

We don't have to give up on the Holocaust - it is our history and holds central lessons for all human beings - but we have to stop using it as a justification for Israeli policies. And we don't have to be afraid of the Nakba. Injustices were carried out by both sides in 1948, but if Israel would have lost, there is no question that the atrocities would have been of a totally different order. But anyway, that is history and bringing the Holocaust into the equation only forces Israel to opposing historical claims. Despite all our failings, Israel is enough of a success story to argue its case based on today's realities.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

... has had, and continues to have, a significant influence on the thinking of Jews worldwide, including Israeli Jews? Would you prefer to believe it was as if never happened?

How is pointing out that the single most devastating event in Jewish History since the Roman Expulsion influences the thinking of Jews is "playing the card"?

On the contrary, as I pointed out, those who deny that the Holocaust influences contemporary Jewish thought is going to misunderstand the resolve of Jews to keep the land of Israel. Yassir Arafat based his entire strategy for dealing with Israel based on pre-Holocaust Jewish thinking. Any strategy of that kind is doomed to failure. The sooner the Palestinian Arabs and their facilitators realize that, the sooner the Palestinian Arabs can develop a constructive strategy for making peace with Israel.

*pre-emptive note to any jury if this post is alerted. Despite the claim of the alerter, the phrase 'playing the Holocaust card' isn't antisemitic. It's been used by the ADL to chide US politicians who compare the other side to Nazis, and by the mainstream Israeli media when talking about Netanyahu invoking the Holocaust to defend his govt's abuse of the Palestinian people. So before you vote on whether to hide or not, please Google the phrase and take a look at the results*

Someone who invokes the Holocaust to hide behind it to shield criticism from their own revolting stances are defininately playing the Holocaust card. And that's what you did, and have done since you've arrived at DU. You brought up the Holocaust. You equated Israelis with Jews, which is antisemitic, and I wouldn't be surprised if you alerted on that post and misled the jury. See, there's nothing antisemitic in pointing out that Republicans in the US have been playing the Holocaust card in invoking the Holocaust to bolster whatever warped thing they're supporting, be it opposition to reproductive rights or equating their Democratic opponents to Nazis. There was nothing antisemitic in the poster who replied to you pointing out exactly what you were doing, which was playing the Holocaust card to try to shield yr own views from criticism. Or are you going to try to claim that the mainstream Israeli media are antisemitic when they rightly accuse the RW loonies like Netanyahu of playing the Holocaust card when they invoke the Holocasut to justify their own actions in the Occupied Territories?

What has Holocaust denial got to do with anything the now-nuked poster said to you? Are you seriously going to try to accuse anyone who thinks yr playing the Holocaust card of being a Holocaust denier?

I think everyone who has even the most basic knowledge of the I/P conflict has worked out that you know nothing about Arafat or about Palestinians. Anyone with any shred of knowledge or understanding wouldn't be sitting there not only making out that Palestinians are hatefilled monsters, but that it's solely up to them to work out a 'peace strategy' with the country that's carrying out a brutal occupation of them. They realise that when it comes to working something out, it's going to take both sides as well as a third impartial party to keep things in line.

One last thing. Yr claim that you were innocently invoking the Holocaust to talk about how it influences Israeli thinking is total BS. Not unless multiple mentions of Arafat and what an antisemite he supposedly was somehow translates to that. You went on and on about Arafat, invoked the Holocaust, then carried on some more about Arafat. So don't compound it by adding to the BS levels...

And yr still to retract stuff you said where you carry on as though the word Israeli equals Jew. It doesn't, and it's antisemitic to do so...

... is you.

Guilty conscience?

What was the poster nuked for? That's something that you don't have to guess, as it's right in front of yr eyes if you have the ability to click on their profile...

I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology for yr dishonest and nasty accusations, which ironically was yet another accusation of antisemitism, because I know from experience you never admit yr wrong...

So, just to clarify things here. Do you believe the now-nuked DUer who pointed out that you were playing the Holocaust card in yr post was antisemitic for uttering the phrase 'the Holocaust card'?

How the hell is that "playing a card"? It was a simple historical analysis of post WW2 Jewish thinking. No where in his post did he claim that the Holocaust justifies the occupation or abuse of Palestinians.

The reply was anti-semitic because it attacked holden for basically even mentioning the Holocaust.

Are posters here allowed to mention the Holocaust Violet? Do we need to check with you first to make sure it's an acceptable use of the term?

Jesus fucking christ.

Then he invoked the Holocaust to bolster his 'argument' towards the ends. That's not a 'simple historical analysis of post WW2 Jewish thinking' by any stretch of the imagination. I've read plenty of simple and more complex historical analysis back when I was at uni and none of that resembled what that poster did. What they did in invoking the Holocaust out of the blue was similar to what Republicans have been doing with it, and what Netanyahu does.

Do you think Ha'aretz and JPost are antisemitic for 'attacking' Nutty for 'basically even mentioning the Holocaust'? Because to claim saying that someone who points out that another person is invoking the Holocaust to bolster their argument (in this case the argument was how Arafat, and by extension the Palestinians, was ever so hatefilled and wanting to murder all Jews) is antisemitic is beyond ridiculous. Just because someone you don't like says something you don't like to one of yr buddies doesn't make them antisemitic..

It's pretty clear yr not comprehending what the discussion is about because those weird questions at the end are really bizarre. Whether the lack of understanding is deliberate or not, I don't know, and don't particularly care...

FYI - you're the one defending a now banned from DU anti-semite.

Arafat was a psychopathic terrorist who actively called for murdering Jews. (Ps there are videos)

But feel free to keep defending him. It's very entertaining.

Peter, put up your sword, as they say.

Here's a fact - the DUer who was nuked wasn't an antisemite, nor did they say anything antisemitic. You can choose to continue to ignore that, but telling someone they're playing the Holocaust card when they're invoking the Holocaust to hide their own views behind isn't antisemitic, not unless you think Republicans who've been told they do it are victims of antisemitism...

Here's another fact - frothing at the mouth about Arafat doesn't pass as being factual. It comes across like frothing at the mouth and trying to create monsters out of thin air. And getting back to yr claim that the poster was merely innocently talking about how the Holocaust has affected Jewish thinking post-WW2, it looks like yr now conceding that it wasn't about that, but about Arafat. The fixation with someone who's been dead for quite a few years now is kind of strange, fwiw...

Because they claim that the now banned poster was antisemitic, I'm simply echoing their sentiment.

Let's back up a bit, in my opinion, playing the "Holocaust card" means using the Holocaust to help justify things like settlement growth and pre-emptive attacks on Iran, Bibi and his coalition have engaged in this. Holden made a completely different assertion, simply put he thinks that the Holocaust affected the way Jews think about Israel and I agree. The development and settlement of Israel would have occurred without the Holocaust but it did, quite obviously change the way Jews think about the world.

I've been on the MIRT and doubt that anyone else who has been would claim they were. Im not aware of what the alert said, nor the discussion that went on in MIRT, but based on just that one post it was a bad nuke with all due respect to any of my former team involved in it

If that poster had a track record of antisemitic posts and had aimed it at someone who wasn't invoking the Holocaust to use as a weapon in their I/P battle. It wasnt that long ago they tried it on me by insisting I'd made a Holocaust comparison when I hadn't. I appreciate you explaining about how you think the term is legitimately used, and we strongly disagree on holdencaufields use of it, though I agree on all else. They were using it the same way Nutty and his ilk do.. When theirs long spiels related to I/P and great pains taken to portray the Palestinians as raving antisemitic, and it's capped off with something along the lines of: 'when people say Israelis they mean Jews! The Holocaust taught us that we can't back down an inch from the Ayrabs blab blah' that's not by any stretch of the imagination a discussion of how the Holocaust affected Jewish thinking or how it's affected Israel and the existential fears it feels and how it's foreign policy can be impacted.

The nuking message didn't say the peron was antisemitic, btw. It said the phrase was.

... when you completely change the wording and intent of what someone writes do you assume no one will scroll up an inch or two and see for themselves what you're doing?

Do you assume you're the only person to whom anyone is listening?

I know that anyone who does read yr post will spot the way you equate the words Istraeli and Jew and how you spend paragraphs ranting about Palestinians being antisemitic before invoking the Holocaust to bolster yr argument.

Btw, the post where you pulled the same stunt and falsely accused me Holocaust comparisons isn't in this thread, but I can go find it if you want to pretend otherwise.

... "I'm rubber, you're glue" strategy. An aggressive gambit. Personally, I would have thought "Liar, liar pants on fire" might be less risky. But, fortune favours the bold.

Of course I equate Jew and Israeli in the context of Arafat's philosophy because that's what he did. The historical record is rife with quotes from Arafat where he clearly says his war is against Jews, not Israelis. PLO terror attacks orchestrated by Arafat were perpetrated not just against Israelis but against non-Israeli Jews. Arafat wasn't dreaming a of a day when non-Jewish Israelis would leave Palestine, but when Jews would leave Palestine. I'm more than aware of the multicultural demographics of Israel, Arafat (apparently) was not. The legacy of Arafat's dream of a Juden-free Palestine was the topic of my post.

But, instead of trying to explain my seemingly straightforward posts to you -- a Sisyphean labour -- I will let people read what I wrote and compare it to your re-translation and judge for themselves.

You can put that down as yet another mistake on yr part, like falsely claiming I brought up antisemitism out of the blue.

Y'know, apart from blaming the Palestinians for everything, you now blame Arafat for you and yr habit you've had long before this thread of equating Jews and Israelis. At least try to own what you say and stop trying to blame others for it. When it comes to yr fantasies about Arafat and the Palestinians, how about you actually try to learn something about the people rather than insisting on portraying them as raving antisemites?

What you wrote was NOT what you claimed it was. You were hiding behind the Holocaust to bolster yr continued arguments where you portray Palestinans as Jew-haters. You weren't discussing post-WW2 thinking of Jews at all. Not unless you thnk frothing at the mouth about Arafat and the Palestinians is in some way discussing post-WW2 Jewish thinking regarding the Holocaust. And if anyone thinks it is, then they're going to have a very hard time explaining the difference between you doing it and Netanyahu doing a similar thing when they hide behind the Holocaust to shield themselves from criticism...

btw, just in case anyone doesn't know what post yr trying to pass off as being a discussion of post-WW2 Jewish thinking on effects of the Holocaust, here it is It's a long, fanatical, and completely ignorant tirade about Arafat and more of the Palestinians are antisemites crap that you've posted in this forum on a regular basis...

'Yassir Arafat had a dream ...


... but, unlike MLK's dream of equality and peace, Arafat's dream was that someday, the Jews (yes Jews, not Israelis) would pack their bags, leave everything they've built and walk away. After all, his dream told him, they've done it before, time after time, for centuries. When the going gets tough, the Jews get going.

Arafat sold this dream to his people -- "If we make things hot enough for the Jews, they will leave.", he told them. They will leave their houses and their cars, their hospitals and universities, they will leave all of their infrastructure behind for the Palestinian Arabs to enjoy. "It will happen, sooner or later", he told them and they believed it. "Maybe the next rocket or the next suicide bombing will push them away, but someday they have to leave.", that was his promise to the Palestinian Arabs.

And many in the West, facilitators of Arafat's dream, believed it as well. "If we demonize the Jews, they will be ashamed and leave their only home." "After all, Europe is safe again, right? America is safe, right? Why would they want to stay in inconvenient Israel if there are so many nicer places where they can run to?", they told the Palestinian Arabs, and they had hope is Arafat's dream

But, what Arafat and his facilitators don't know, can't realize, can never comprehend, is that the Jews are done running. The Holocaust finally opened the Jews eyes to the fact, there is no place safe enough, no place nice enough, sooner or later, EVERYONE will turn. When things get bad, when it is politically expedient, the Jews will once more be blamed for people's collective woes the cycle of persecution will begin again.

So, the Jews aren't moving this time, they're going to stay, they're going to fight, and they're going to win. And the more they are provoked, the more they will retaliate -- who would ask less of ANY human being?

So, Arafat's dream is now a nightmare for the Palestinian Arabs and the sooner from which they wake, the sooner their lives will improve. '

Maybe you could email them something with the inflammatory subject line 'Do you deny the Holocaust?'? I'm sure even the ruggedly RW JPost would have a bit of a laugh at that nonsense...

Here's some links to mainstream media outlets accusing folk of playing the Holocaust card. I hope you've got an army of email writers ready to express yr outrage, as there's a hell of a lot of people using it. Guess they're all anti-Israel antisemites, hey?

http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/netanyahu-cant-go-wrong-claiming-that-iran-is-planning-another-holocaust/

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=264851

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israel-must-stop-overplaying-the-holocaust-card-1.364297

http://www.globalresearch.ca/playing-the-holocaust-card-will-romney-visit-auschwitz/32098

One can address the use of the Holocaust in justifying Israeli policies without using that phrase- which demeans and diminishes the Holocaust. Just as the use of the phrase "racism card" is rejected by people for diminishing the history of racism in the U.S., the phrase "holocaust card should be rejected. Neither phrase is respectful of painful histories. Would you approve of people referring to a "Nakba card"? I sure as hell wouldn't.

It's amazing so many of them survived the jury system.

...to denounce and condemn the evil Zionists. Hundreds of missiles flying into Israel? Whatever. Syria? Who cares.

NOW it's time to put on those party hats!

Evil Zionists!

Good Hamas...

Massive attacks on Gaza, 18 dead so far, 150 wounded and the press here is talking about 3 dead in Israel.

The media here tends to be a bit biased at times on the whole thing.

...deliberately targeted by Hamas vs. the IDF response that has killed mostly terrorists (hiding deliberately among civilian human shields).

To even attempt to put most of the blame on Israel (or even the same blame b/w Israel/Hamas) for what's happening now couldn't be more wrong.

but yet this I suppose is an accident, because Israel does not possess any targeting systems right?

Deaths of civilians raise Gaza death toll to 15

The death toll in the Gaza Strip rose to 15 on Thursday as a Palestinian child succumbed to wounds sustained earlier and a man's body was found buried in the rubble of an Israeli airstrike.

Eighteen-month-old Walid al-Abadleh succumbed to his injuries sustained in an Israeli airstrike east of Khan Younis in southern Gaza early Thursday.
..............................................................................

On Wednesday evening, a pregnant woman, a 7-year-old boy and an 11-month-old baby were among at least eight Palestinians killed when Israel broke an Egypt-mediated truce by assassinating Hamas military commander Ahmad al-Jaabari.

Armed groups have fired a barrage of mortars at Israeli military sites and across the border. A rocket fired from the Gaza Strip on Thursday struck an apartment building in southern Israel, killing three Israelis.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=537864

Yes, they are very deliberately going after civilians.

And they're very proud of that.

And here you are focusing exclusively on Israeli actions vs. Hamas?

Why?

I presented facts and you ignore the fact that the only 'targeted' attacks by Hamas were against IDF odd how that has not been mentioned

If I throw grenades into a crowd of people while blindfolded, am I not targeting those people?

Ridiculous.

...throughout the past few weeks leading to this war, when hundreds of rockets were falling into Israel.

Maybe you guys should have voiced some very strong condemnation at Hamas - knowing in advance what Israel would do in defense. Hamas takes silence by the pro-Palestinian crowd as tacit support for rockets.

UN methods were working so they turned to Hamas. That is what happens when you keep losing to a big right-wing killing machine which is Israel with the aid of the USA:
found this for you to read. Israel has killed more palistinians 8 to 1 so who are the terrorists?

This position paper illustrates how despite recent developments, Israel continues to control Gaza’s airspace and territorial waters, the Palestinian population registry and passage of goods and people to and from Gaza. Israel still collects customs and value added tax for goods entering the Gaza Strip and maintains some physical presence in the Strip. Israel also controls Gaza’s infrastructure by virtue of its control over supply of electricity and other inputs to the system.

Does this mean Israel is still occupying the Gaza Strip? In this position paper, we refer to the “end of occupation” both in Gaza and in the West Bank as a process that takes place over time. We are currently located somewhere on the spectrum between occupation and the end of occupation, that is, a situation in which Israel has already relinquished some governmental powers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and allows Palestinian authorities to exercise them, yet continues to exercise other governmental powers, to the exclusion of others. Under these circumstances, it is impossible to say that the occupation of the Gaza Strip has ended and therefore, the international law of occupation continues to apply to Israel in the spheres in which it continues to exercise control over the lives of Palestinian residents.


http://www.gisha.org/item.asp?lang_id=en&p_id=1443

They were elected by people who knew exactly who they were voting for. Don't sell them short.

However, that election was like putting Republicans in charge of the House or Senate (with Obama still in power). Hamas has no right to "rule" anymore than the Republicans have the right to toss Obama out and rule the USA.

Are oppressed for years land taken homes stolen and the UN places many sanctions on Iseael and nothing changes and more and more paliatinians die those people turn to the extreme because all else has failed. When Israeli Zionists came to take the land why didn't they let the palistinians stay in their homes. You know coexist instead of bulldozing their homes and you know killing them?

I think you're confusing the Palestinian people with Hamas.

Hamas doesn't give a rip whether Israel acts like Ghandi or Mother Theresa and does everything right. Hamas still wants Israel gone and, best case scenario for Jews being ethnically cleansed.

"Hamas doesn't give a rip whether Israel acts like Ghandi or Mother Theresa and does everything right."

That's great since Israel doesn't act like either Ghandi or Mother Theresa.


My heart goes out to all the victims on each side.