More Slaughter At The Israel Border
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
Defensive last resort . . . One might ask what other resort the excluded Palestinians have. One of the factors that Mandela raised was the lack of education. Another was the fact that his organisation was declared a terrorist organisation and banned by the USA. He brought up that the Africans were excluded from their own land. There was also the fact that non-violence had achieved nothing.
As far back as 1961 he'd decided that violent protest was the only way. The manifesto, which he wrote, stated: ‘. . . we have no choice but to hit back by all means in our power in defence of our people . . .’ Who d’you think he meant by ‘our people’? More to the point, who were excluded?
There's been a whitewash of Mandela. He was a terrorist. Yet he’s an icon. It seems now though that we all agree with what he was doing despite it being terrorism plain and simple. He would have been released had he signed a declaration not to indulge in terrorism.
The west legitimised the regime: football, rugby, cricket, F1 and more all fell back on the lame excuse that sport was greater than politics.
The nature of the SA rule was corrupt and corrupting. It was oppressive in the extreme. The South African police opened fire on stone throwers at Sharpville. The police were inside their armoured vehicles but, it seems, felt able to shoot and kill dozens of unarmed demonstrators and wound many more.
And you still think it can’t be compared to Gaza?
As with SA, we in the west get very little in the way of balanced reporting. Is Hamas as bad as has been painted? I don't know but somehow, like Mandela and Umkhonto we Sizwe, I doubt it.
One might ask what other resort the excluded Palestinians haveAs far back as 1961 he'd decided that violent protest was the only way. The manifesto, which he wrote, stated: ‘. . . we have no choice but to hit back by all means in our power in defence of our people . . .’ Who d’you think he meant by ‘our people’? More to the point, who were excluded?
There's been a whitewash of Mandela. He was a terrorist. Yet he’s an icon. It seems now though that we all agree with what he was doing despite it being terrorism plain and simple. He would have been released had he signed a declaration not to indulge in terrorism.
The west legitimised the regime: football, rugby, cricket, F1 and more all fell back on the lame excuse that sport was greater than politics.
The nature of the SA rule was corrupt and corrupting. It was oppressive in the extreme. The South African police opened fire on stone throwers at Sharpville. The police were inside their armoured vehicles but, it seems, felt able to shoot and kill dozens of unarmed demonstrators and wound many more.
And you still think it can’t be compared to Gaza?
As with SA, we in the west get very little in the way of balanced reporting. Is Hamas as bad as has been painted? I don't know but somehow, like Mandela and Umkhonto we Sizwe, I doubt it.
These few words speak volumes, I don't know how many Palestinians have nothing more than a tent or semi destroyed building as their home and next to no possessions but the figure must be a big one and gets increased by Israel far too often, yes they do have a life but not as we know it
The Dangerous Elk said:
Penelope Stopit said:
One might ask what other resort the excluded Palestinians have
These few words speak volumes, I don't know how many Palestinians have nothing more than a tent or semi destroyed building as their home and next to no possessions but the figure must be a big one and gets increased by Israel far too often, yes they do have a life but not as we know it
If they concentrated on spending the billions of $$$ poured into the place in helping their people rather than paying for Martyrs and rockets then they may have more than they have now !These few words speak volumes, I don't know how many Palestinians have nothing more than a tent or semi destroyed building as their home and next to no possessions but the figure must be a big one and gets increased by Israel far too often, yes they do have a life but not as we know it
Gameface said:
Penelope Stopit said:
Gameface said:
Carry on being disgusted, while the rest of us live in the real world.
Your ignorance is unquestionable, this is happening in the real world but you don't care because you're on the other side of the fence
You comment for The rest of us
Who are the rest of us that you comment on behalf of? Do you need to be part of a group or something?
You are ignorant and me stating this has nothing to do with me attempting to insult you in any way, I'm posting a fact, If you weren't ignorant you wouldn't have posted as you have done above
Using emoticons as you have been doing in this topic also comes across as.......
Edited by Penelope Stopit on Saturday 19th May 20:20
Gameface said:
Dindoit said:
Non-lethal combinations of tear gas, water cannon (including their famous "skunk"), rubber bullets and arrests would not have seen civilians killed.
Still banging on about water cannons. 
Arrests? You're utterly deluded.
Gameface said:
No-one else was offended by comment. Just you. Which says an awful lot.
I would never comment for someone like you.
Don't you usually argue with people about Alfa Romeos? You are seen as figure of fun on those threads.
Our interaction is at an end.
Feel free to have the last word. You seem like the type of person who craves it.
This is what you do, it is to be expected of you, you're ignorance is endlessI would never comment for someone like you.
Don't you usually argue with people about Alfa Romeos? You are seen as figure of fun on those threads.
Our interaction is at an end.
Feel free to have the last word. You seem like the type of person who craves it.
I am more than a little pissed off about what's happened at the Israel border recently, I am also pissed off with people like you that knock others for being bothered about what's happened
Thanks for pissing me off more, I hope you feel good about your pathetic comments in this topic
You have posted complete and utter nonesense to this topic in an attempt to piss people off and when I have challenged your comments all you are capable of is walking away after posting more nonesense
Gameface said:
BJG1 said:
Gameface said:
Carry on being disgusted, while the rest of us live in the real world.
In that real world, an 8 month old child died after inhaling tear gas dropped by the IDF and an unarmed teenager was killed after being shot in the back. Dozens of others too, including women, children and journalists. Those actions are indefensible. In reading through this topic I have noticed that there is something really strange going on here and I think I understand what it is but do stand to be corrected
Many people have recently been murdered at Israels border, many posters have added more news to this topic, many posters have posted how they feel about the murder of these people
I am not sure what some people are lacking but they have decided to use this topic to post about the murder of people as though there is nothing wrong with it, more of a problem is the fact that some posters are attemting to justify murder or they don't class the shooting of demonstrators as murder
This is all very frightening to me, anyone not saddened by the murder of people.....
Which brings me on to the point I wanted to make, I think I understand why some posters are posting as if the murders of demonstrators is not a problem
Some posters are getting a kick out of posting here and using this topic for a bit of fun, they are enjoying pissing people off, if they aren't enjoying pissing people off then what is their reason for showing a lack of concern about what's happened and why are they knocking those that are concerned
I am pretty confident that some posters are having their fun here in this topic
Obviously I am aware of the fact that I have weakened and possibly fallen into their trap, so be it, I am pissed off
Many people have recently been murdered at Israels border, many posters have added more news to this topic, many posters have posted how they feel about the murder of these people
I am not sure what some people are lacking but they have decided to use this topic to post about the murder of people as though there is nothing wrong with it, more of a problem is the fact that some posters are attemting to justify murder or they don't class the shooting of demonstrators as murder
This is all very frightening to me, anyone not saddened by the murder of people.....
Which brings me on to the point I wanted to make, I think I understand why some posters are posting as if the murders of demonstrators is not a problem
Some posters are getting a kick out of posting here and using this topic for a bit of fun, they are enjoying pissing people off, if they aren't enjoying pissing people off then what is their reason for showing a lack of concern about what's happened and why are they knocking those that are concerned
I am pretty confident that some posters are having their fun here in this topic
Obviously I am aware of the fact that I have weakened and possibly fallen into their trap, so be it, I am pissed off
TwigtheWonderkid said:
^^^THIS.
Why is it that even those that sympathise with Israel to some extend are well aware of their failings, and certainly don't support them 100%, whereas those sympathetic to the Palestinians utterly refuse to accept they ever put a foot wrong?
Please post some examplesWhy is it that even those that sympathise with Israel to some extend are well aware of their failings, and certainly don't support them 100%, whereas those sympathetic to the Palestinians utterly refuse to accept they ever put a foot wrong?
irocfan said:
Penelope Stopit said:
of the 47ish countries in that list just over 1/3 are Muslim or 'left-leaning' countries (who traditionally do not support Israel) so the picture is not as clear as you'd like to make out.
As an aside would this be the same UN who had the PLO leader address them and gave a standing ovation, have had countries with dreadful human-rights abuses head them up etc etc?
How many Jewish terror groups have hijacked planes or ships and then either executed or tried to execute their Palestinian captives?
Munich mean anything to you?
Entebe?
Achille Lauro?
When many people are shot dead like they were in the recent shootings at the Israeli border, it is often the case that the UN will investigate those shootings
The majority of us as people expect shootings like the above to be investigated
I marked off a few countries that for some reason or other are against or not 100% in favour of these shootings at the israel border being investigated
My remarks about some of the countries are only my opinion and are not based on fact, I have attempted to reason why some gave an ABST vote
Bearing in mind that many people have been shot dead - Why do some countries give ABST - Yes we know all about America and why they vote "No"
All I have done is point the finger in a touch b
hy manner at some countries that may well regret their lack of support for a much needed investigationNow, should you or anyone else be opposed to these shootings being investigated.......
jonby said:
There are a number of potential definitions of the word slaughter in this context but I would imagine for most, it implies indiscriminate killing, killing on a mass scale, killing without care or thought, etc. This has clearly not been a slaughter by those definitions - the stats say something completely different
So why do people as per the last few pages insist on repeating the word slaughter when now explicitly referencing that slaughter as being about less than 10 people out of tens of thousands of demonstrators ?
In the same vein, why do people use the word genocide to describe the Israeli's actions when again, the numbers clearly show something different ?
In both instances, it's not that there is some grey area where the stats are being manipulated to prove one person's point or the other. Instead it clearly cannot be that Israel is intent on murdering an entire people with a multi million population (i.e.g genocide) given the in relative terms, minute number of people killed against Israel's military power
If people genuinely want peace, do they not realise that it's completely counter productive to use such terms ? Whether talking to the Israeli government or supporters of Israel, the only thing that using such terms does is put people on the defensive because the terms are so evocative and most importantly, are clearly entirely inappropriate to describe Israel's actions, It's not about asking people to be sensitive or politically correct. It's asking them to be correct full stop.
You mean you spent time in coming up with this? Then you end your post with a full stop and followed it with a .So why do people as per the last few pages insist on repeating the word slaughter when now explicitly referencing that slaughter as being about less than 10 people out of tens of thousands of demonstrators ?
In the same vein, why do people use the word genocide to describe the Israeli's actions when again, the numbers clearly show something different ?
In both instances, it's not that there is some grey area where the stats are being manipulated to prove one person's point or the other. Instead it clearly cannot be that Israel is intent on murdering an entire people with a multi million population (i.e.g genocide) given the in relative terms, minute number of people killed against Israel's military power
If people genuinely want peace, do they not realise that it's completely counter productive to use such terms ? Whether talking to the Israeli government or supporters of Israel, the only thing that using such terms does is put people on the defensive because the terms are so evocative and most importantly, are clearly entirely inappropriate to describe Israel's actions, It's not about asking people to be sensitive or politically correct. It's asking them to be correct full stop.
What does all this full stop business mean?
franki68 said:
There are some blatantly obvious explanations,ignorance and the dreaded AS,but the odious Norman Finkelstein once said that is ok to say this sort of rubbish even though it is not true,because it raises a reaction.
Unfortunately the only reaction it has raised is in creating more of a seige mentality amongst normal Israelis.
What do you class as a normal Israeli, baring in mind that I never use the word when relating to people as I feel it is meaningless?Unfortunately the only reaction it has raised is in creating more of a seige mentality amongst normal Israelis.
jjlynn27 said:
UNFFM said:
The UN fact-finding mission investigated four incidents in which Palestinian civilians were coerced, blindfolded, handcuffed and at gunpoint to enter houses ahead of Israeli soldiers during military operations. The mission confirmed the continued use of this practice with published testimonies of Israeli soldiers who had taken part in the military operations.
That's even before we get to the use of white phosphorus. Were hamas firing misiles from civilian neighbourhoods? Without doubt.
Were hamas using civilians as human shields? Without doubt.
Both sides are as bad as each other.
Israel has a massive military that they are using to confront the Palestinians that have stones, guns, and explosives
Solocle said:
Penelope Stopit said:
It is not possible for us to judge if both sides are as bad as each other
Israel has a massive military that they are using to confront the Palestinians that have stones, guns, and explosives
Yes, the Palestinians lack the same military capacity. Why then do they insist on firing missiles into Israel?Israel has a massive military that they are using to confront the Palestinians that have stones, guns, and explosives
Because it's win/win. If they kill Jews, that's a win. If Israel responds (and they must), and innocent civilians die, they get international sympathy and pressure. No civilians died? Just take of your Mujahdeen's Hamas bandana.
The fact is, Hamas gain from Palestinian deaths. Israel loses. But, if that border was breached, one armed terrorist could slaughter dozens of Israeli civilians. Israel is a country with the rule of law, there's already talk of a Supreme Court case reviewing the IDF's terms of engagement. Which are to use non-lethal means when possible.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff