Page 1 of 3 [ 43 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Neotenous Nordic
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Age: 1931
Posts: 275

18 Nov 2015, 8:15 am

Considering the increased aggression towards arab nations in the middle east as a result of the Paris attacks, it appears that the representation of the political picture is rather one-sided.

Therefore, it is necessary to also bring to the attention the war crimes commited by the zionist state of Israel, which has been ongoing since the mid 20th century.
The crimes in question are of such nature that any other perpetrator would be prosecuted and tried. But somehow, that is not the case with Israel.

Following is a collection of cases that show the war crimes this nation has gotten away with, crimes that any other nation would have been severely punished for. I feel it is necessary for the reader to know about this, to counter the one-sided media representation and to give an idea about why the arabs are upset. Because the media tends to imply that "arabs are just like that, it's who they are". But once you see for yourself what they have been subjected to by the zionists and the U.S, then perhaps it all starts to makes sense?

Let's start first with Norwegian doctor and activist Mads Gilbert, who has risked life and limbs to treat the Gaza victims of zionist bombing. He has done no crime other than try to make life a little more bearable for the civilians that Israel has crippled with their bombings. For this, the Israeli alleged he was "cooperating with Hamas" and called him a terrorist. Apparently, it is terrorism to put brakes on the genocide. I guess that's the rhetoric? He was banned from entering Gaza having done nothing but treat the civilians who the zionist state had crippled. Read for yourself:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/11/norwegian-doctor-mads-gilbert-banned-gaza-20141115244546404.html

Here is a video of Mads Gilbert with colleague Erik Fosse, another humanitarian hero, talking about the results of the Gaza bombings. It is difficult to watch, you have been warned:



If you want to read for yourself what Israeli newspapers write about him, here is a shocking example. According to them, it is "anti-semitic" to treat the victims of the bombings, and letting people know about it is an "agitation towards the jews".

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Mads-Gilbert-and-the-theater-of-the-absurd-407051

You see, in Norway, we get to know about this. How many Americans know about this? The U.S and Israel are allies, and therefore it is not diplomatically feasible for the U.S to report on this. But what exactly has Israel given back to the U.S for he 7 million USD it receives each day in foreign aid? What would the average American think if he/she knew that his/her tax money are financing the systematic genocide of civilians in Gaza, which has been ongoing since the mid 20th century? Is there a media bias to talk about? I think so. I think it is important for Americans to know about this now, more than ever, since the zionists have wasted no time using the recent Paris attacks as justification for more aggression towards arab nations. And it is the U.S who has to do this, not them.

All you have to do as Americans, is to stop pouring 7 million USD into Israel a day, and it will be a fair fight. Do they really need 7 million USD a day to fight against children who are throwing rocks?
Here's a video of the IDF spending your tax money on shooting palestinian children from a rooftop, high fiving each other. I have avoided embedding the video due to its graphic nature:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUibXSgILv0

In fact, there are so many atrocities to address I can not possibly get to it all in one post.

Zionist sympathisers will obviously try to frame the fact that these war crimes are brought to light as I somehow having ill intentions towards jews.

I don't. It is in the best interest of jews to speak out against this and to get on the right side of history. The more you agitate towards arab nations, the more you stir up the jihadis. Those people are angry for a reason. It is not fair that the media only shows one side of the story and gives diplomatic immunity to Israel.

Is it not hypocrisy to call a humanitarian icon like Mads Gilbert an "anti-semite" and a "terrorist collaborator" for simply treating the victims of the incessant Gaza bombings?

Should not jews speak out against this? Because after all the anti-arab sentiment, and the lack of jewish voices standing up for arabs, are people likely to want to stand up for the jews in the future if that should be needed? Is it not expected that jews seek to differentiate themselves from the genocidal zionist attitudes if they are to ask for sympathy and help to fight "anti-semitism"?

If treating the civilian victims of zionist bombings is considered "anti-semitism" what then does that say about the prevailing idea of jewish identity among jews?

These are problem areas that must be addressed, and it is in the best interest of jews to start regarding Palestinians and arabs as actual human beings with human rights. It is an important part of a diplomatic process that hopefully can lead towards the prospect of peace in the middle east.

And that's just Gaza. Let's also talk about the fact that Israel tried to agitate towards Iran for acquiring nuclear weapons, despite Israel being in the possession of enough nukes to destroy the whole world many times over.

I do believe the media narrative is rather one sided, and the most important thing one can do is to bring attention to this with the hopes of moving towards a diplomatic solution. But for that to happen, those who can not be criticised must lose their diplomatic immunity and have to be held to the same standards as everybody else. That is only fair, no?

If nothing else, do keep this in the back of your head as the media undoubtedly will agitate further towards arab nations. Do keep in mind what they so conveniently ignore.



cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,738
Location: northeast US

18 Nov 2015, 8:31 am

thanks for this info. even from the US media, it is obvious that israel kills 10 palestinians for every jew attacked. and palestinian homes are being razed in favor of jewish settlements. bibi is trying to sneakily commit genocide. many israelis condemn him.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,930
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

18 Nov 2015, 10:23 am

cathylynn wrote:
thanks for this info. even from the US media, it is obvious that israel kills 10 palestinians for every jew attacked. and palestinian homes are being razed in favor of jewish settlements. bibi is trying to sneakily commit genocide. many israelis condemn him.


bibi is popular, and elected by the majority of Israelis tho.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 29,574
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Nov 2015, 11:01 am

I have been opposed to Israels treatment of the Palestinians for quite some time, it really is screwed up. It can be hard to even talk about it in the U.S a lot of times unless you want people accusing you of antisemitism. I read one article where they interviewed Israeli soldiers who claimed a lot of times orders would be to shoot anyone they see, even unarmed civilians when attacking Palestinian areas.

Not to mention Israel does its best to ensure the Gaza strip is essentially a ghetto, going as far as cutting off electricity, water and access to hospitals and such. I don't understand how so many people at least here in the U.S are such rabid supporters of Israel, is that really the kind of thing they want to condone?


_________________
All we do crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see
Dust in the wind
All we are is dust in the wind


0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

18 Nov 2015, 3:56 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
thanks for this info. even from the US media, it is obvious that israel kills 10 palestinians for every jew attacked. and palestinian homes are being razed in favor of jewish settlements. bibi is trying to sneakily commit genocide. many israelis condemn him.


bibi is popular, and elected by the majority of Israelis tho.


Israel has been through many government in the history of this conflict thought, not all hawkish.

Beyond major losses after conflict, there have been periods of little advancement on the fronts. I don't support settlements, but I do understand it from purely tactical sense. I don't think the settler move there for tactical reasons, but I think there is an Israeli defense tactic to make use of these people, for forward operating, buffer zone, etc.

The simple fact is the deal just before the Arab Israeli war better than any situation for the Palestinians before or since. The never had sovereignty as a people before this, they were always under someone.

We are talking about an area of land much bigger than Lebanon, with less people in it, and access to villages in Isreal. They were kicked out only after the Arab Israeli war.

So yes the Isreali side are far from saintly, but it is fair to say that the Palestinians are really slow learners. Things have never been so bad for them, and certainly in Gaza they can't blame it on settlements.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 29,574
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Nov 2015, 4:42 pm

0_equals_true wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
thanks for this info. even from the US media, it is obvious that israel kills 10 palestinians for every jew attacked. and palestinian homes are being razed in favor of jewish settlements. bibi is trying to sneakily commit genocide. many israelis condemn him.


bibi is popular, and elected by the majority of Israelis tho.


Israel has been through many government in the history of this conflict thought, not all hawkish.

Beyond major losses after conflict, there have been periods of little advancement on the fronts. I don't support settlements, but I do understand it from purely tactical sense. I don't think the settler move there for tactical reasons, but I think there is an Israeli defense tactic to make use of these people, for forward operating, buffer zone, etc.

The simple fact is the deal just before the Arab Israeli war better than any situation for the Palestinians before or since. The never had sovereignty as a people before this, they were always under someone.

We are talking about an area of land much bigger than Lebanon, with less people in it, and access to villages in Isreal. They were kicked out only after the Arab Israeli war.

So yes the Isreali side are far from saintly, but it is fair to say that the Palestinians are really slow learners. Things have never been so bad for them, and certainly in Gaza they can't blame it on settlements.


How can they not blame it on settlements being purposely built where they reside, in an attempt to get rid of them. Its like what they do in cities with a large homeless population, start building expensive housing and businesses to slowly force out the homeless and/or poor in general...except on a much larger scale. Cutting off access to basic resources on top of that is also a pretty nasty move.

Also I don't think civilans are ever an appropriate 'buffer zone'...if that is what you were implying.


_________________
All we do crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see
Dust in the wind
All we are is dust in the wind


0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

18 Nov 2015, 4:48 pm

If you want to understand the psychology of both side, you should think in term of neurosis especially how it is created, how it manifests and crucially how it is passed on through the generations.

My opinion is conflict resolution doesn't happen without incentive. There is no incentive for the political leader on either side becuase they have staked their whole political careers on their entrenched positions.

Therefore the incentive need to be created, and it needs a drastic solution.

One thing is for certain is the mediators and envoys don't work, they just enable. Kerry's last ego project, not only was a total failure, you could argue it in part helped trigger what came next in Gaza. It was so patently obvious that Bibi and Abbas had appetite to meet. They did cooperate on one thing: Doing whatever it took to kill the process. However this lead to some really regrettable actions.

The solution I think has a better chance of working, is to degrade diplomatic relations with both sides and remove all the international mediators/envoys. Don't respond to any rhetoric, but tell them in no uncertain terms if they are not meeting regularly in direct talks they will both be sanctioned and this can be ratcheted up. Anything designed to stall should result in action. They should come up with their own solutions rather than rely international plans or charters.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

18 Nov 2015, 5:09 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
How can they not blame it on settlements being purposely built where they reside, in an attempt to get rid of them. Its like what they do in cities with a large homeless population, start building expensive housing and businesses to slowly force out the homeless and/or poor in general...except on a much larger scale. Cutting off access to basic resources on top of that is also a pretty nasty move.


Settlements were removed from Gaza in 2005, and this was enforce by Isreal not the UN or some international force. So there has been 10 years and things have go steady worse since then. Hamas started attacks pretty much immediately after being elected.

You would expect people who hold a position on the conflict to at least know some of the history.

Sweetleaf wrote:
Also I don't think civilans are ever an appropriate 'buffer zone'...if that is what you were implying.


I disagree with human shields, a tactic used by both Hamas and al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades.

The buffer zone I'm referring to is the concept using the infrastructure, to create buffers from attack positions on isreal proper.

I have been very clear, I disagree with settlements completely. I'm just pointing out the absence of them doesn't necessarily equal peace.

This isn't a one sided conflict as it is often presented. It is also not purely down to a displaced population, becuase like I say in 1946 this could have been avoided, and that was beyond a fantastic deal compared to now. The truth is that there has been a political necessity to maintain a refugee status in neighboring Arab nations. This is despite the fact these countries have treated them poorly, when they could have been integrated.

It is really about controlling access to the "holy" areas, and not really about general land mass or population. If the two sides wanted peace they could have it tomorrow. This is why neurosis is an apt description, becuase it is a self destructive behaviour where they don't know how to get out of it.



xile123
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 495
Location: australia

19 Nov 2015, 6:05 pm

Spain ‘issues arrest warrant’ for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over 2010 Gaza flotilla attack

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and seven other former and current government officials are at risk of arrest if they set foot in Spain, after a Spanish judge effectively issued an arrest warrant for the group, it has been reported.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 36436.html



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

19 Nov 2015, 7:03 pm

xile123 wrote:
Spain ‘issues arrest warrant’ for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over 2010 Gaza flotilla attack

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and seven other former and current government officials are at risk of arrest if they set foot in Spain, after a Spanish judge effectively issued an arrest warrant for the group, it has been reported


What is the charge?

It is that they didn't have jurisdiction? You could argue that, and it has some validity.

However the boarding itself was done with with warning. They initially rappelled from a helicopter, and were armed with paintball guns, and baton rounds, which is on the lower end of non-lethal options.

Despite the flotillas intention to be peaceful, and I can assume that is generally the case. That was not the case of some of the people on board who attacked with knifes and iron bars.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,027

20 Nov 2015, 1:06 am

0_equals_true wrote:
xile123 wrote:
Spain ‘issues arrest warrant’ for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over 2010 Gaza flotilla attack

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and seven other former and current government officials are at risk of arrest if they set foot in Spain, after a Spanish judge effectively issued an arrest warrant for the group, it has been reported


What is the charge?

It is that they didn't have jurisdiction? You could argue that, and it has some validity.

However the boarding itself was done with with warning. They initially rappelled from a helicopter, and were armed with paintball guns, and baton rounds, which is on the lower end of non-lethal options.

Despite the flotillas intention to be peaceful, and I can assume that is generally the case. That was not the case of some of the people on board who attacked with knifes and iron bars.


The earliest form of international law is maritime law.

And under maritime law, if someone tries to board your vessel without permission in international waters, you can kill them for it. The perpetrators can also be charged in any court.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

20 Nov 2015, 1:19 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
The earliest form of international law is maritime law.

And under maritime law, if someone tries to board your vessel without permission in international waters, you can kill them for it. The perpetrators can also be charged in any court.


That is not how it works. Each country has its own version of Maritime law. Please show me where is saying you can kill people who board ships, except in reasonable self defense?

Read up on what happened to these soldiers before they were recused.



Neotenous Nordic
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Age: 1931
Posts: 275

20 Nov 2015, 2:16 pm

I guess these are the "human shields" the zionists claim hamas uses.

Oh wait, those are IDF soldiers.

Image

Norway collaborated with Sweden in sending a fish trawler boat, "Marianne" to aid Gaza people. But it was stopped and captured by Israel.

Here is the Norwegian article translated with Google:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nrk.no%2Fnorge%2Fisrael-stoppet-norsk-svensk-aktivistbat-1.12432481

As usual, Israel tried to claim the humanitarian aid to Gaza was an "aggression towards Israel" as if a fish trawler could do any harm. They have iron dome, 400 nuclear weapons and the U.S military in the back, and they want us to believe a fish boat poses any kind of threat to Israel.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

20 Nov 2015, 3:36 pm

Neotenous Nordic wrote:
I guess these are the "human shields" the zionists claim hamas uses.


IDF soldiers have been filmed using human shield whilst clearing building on occasion, something that is illegal. I guess they do it out of fear and the fact they want to go home alive. However this doesn't change the fact that Hamas regularly fires from civilian positions.

Norway was quite happy to sell Israel heavy water. Norway has sometimes seen itself as some kind of humanitarian mediator or world problem solver.

I don't believe that any of the envoys be the Norwegian, Swedish, Jordanian, Egyptian, Turkish, Arab League, US, UK are going to improve the situation. on the contrary you could argue they they prolonged it.

Change needs incentive, the only parties that can do that are the Israelis and Palestinians. However they are not willing to do that if we keep enabling them by going along with their rhetoric. It is not like there is mediator both sides would be happy with. Isolate them, refuse to protect them and if necessary sanction them until there is a political solution. What the political solution is that is something they will have figure out as long as they are actually doing it.

This whole good guys or the bad guys game, whist may be righteous position isn't actually going to turn anything around. Neither state is going to go away, anyone who thinks that is on cloud cuckoo land.

BTW the conflict is often seen as the most significant conflict in the region. Why is that? In term of numbers affected and all the conflict that have raged on it is is only one of many major conflict past an present. There seem to be lack of getting priorities in order.

Like I said, Palestinians would love to have the deal they had in 1946. They would have established a nation by now, much like Jordan did.

The reason for all of this it is not really about people but control of the holy land, and which religion is superior. That is why the whole region could do with secularism. Palestinians also cause suffering particularly Hamas, not all of the suffering is cause by Isreali aggression. There is a status that has to be maintained politically, even some of the surrounding Arab state are complicit in maintaining this status.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,237
Location: London

20 Nov 2015, 3:52 pm

The situation before Arab/Isreali war was like a slice of Battenberg Cake
Image

No party controlling the centre, no shortage of land, access to the Mediterranean and the East. What is not to like?

What's more, it was the first time every the Palestinians had any sovereignty of their own. Not under the British, Ottomans, Fatmids, Byzantines or Romans. If you could identity a group such as Palestinians. There are also Bedouin who have lived in the region just as long, who don't identity as Palestinian.

There were free to have this state and also like in villages in Israel. They had an area bigger than Lebanon with less people in it (and less diversity).