Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Topic closed!!!
Subject: Intelligent Political Discussion Thread
I for one, do not use Abu-Shushu's arguments. There is also a debate between us. However do not worry, we are friends, Abu-Shshu and myself. Despite our difference in political point of views we even support each other in Hattrick...
regarding your point 3.
I agree that relocating is not the solution. I would even support relocating some Israelies who settled in the west bank, for true peace. We already did that in Gaza, but unfortunately this experiment fell to bring peaceful attitude towards us.
And again - I am all for peace.
However, it does not have to be relocation. During some of the talks (which you urge Israel to do, and we indeed do), it was suggested to exchange territories. Give some big muslim cities in exchange for other areas. They should just turn to become citizens of the new Palestinian state, that WAS disscussed (but rejected. not by Israel).
The main criticism came from the arabs temselves. The arabs who live in Israel . They prefer to belong to Israel, than to be part of the palestinian independant stae.
It seems that some arabs who know from first wittnessing eye, prefer the humitarian approach of Israel over what they would have received from their brothers.
regarding your point 3.
I agree that relocating is not the solution. I would even support relocating some Israelies who settled in the west bank, for true peace. We already did that in Gaza, but unfortunately this experiment fell to bring peaceful attitude towards us.
And again - I am all for peace.
However, it does not have to be relocation. During some of the talks (which you urge Israel to do, and we indeed do), it was suggested to exchange territories. Give some big muslim cities in exchange for other areas. They should just turn to become citizens of the new Palestinian state, that WAS disscussed (but rejected. not by Israel).
The main criticism came from the arabs temselves. The arabs who live in Israel . They prefer to belong to Israel, than to be part of the palestinian independant stae.
It seems that some arabs who know from first wittnessing eye, prefer the humitarian approach of Israel over what they would have received from their brothers.
Were saying thats war' not war works...
We were attacked and got away with lands. most of it wasnt even any one land
Like Germany was punished for its aggression I dont see any difference with Arab nations.
We had over 700 casualties from terrorist attacks on civilians, and you barely see photos on the media. Because we see it as a bad thing to do, all that Palestinians do is to get pictures out to the media. Not only this is against human rights, memory of the death and using people to gain publicity.
We were attacked and got away with lands. most of it wasnt even any one land
Like Germany was punished for its aggression I dont see any difference with Arab nations.
We had over 700 casualties from terrorist attacks on civilians, and you barely see photos on the media. Because we see it as a bad thing to do, all that Palestinians do is to get pictures out to the media. Not only this is against human rights, memory of the death and using people to gain publicity.
I hope there is some debate between you. Sometimes it is a bit difficult to predict, but fairly often reasonable arguments get countered by one of phrases of bigotism. I wanted to cover that side before I started my argument;)
regarding your point 3.
I agree that relocating is not the solution. I would even support relocating some Israelies who settled in the west bank, for true peace. We already did that in Gaza, but unfortunately this experiment fell to bring peaceful attitude towards us.
One of the big problems israel has, is its stance on PR. While the rest of the world, barred Kim Jung Il, knows that on public stage, actions get scrutinized and tries to show some political mindedness in their walk/talk (even ahmadinejad does this), Israels policy has always been . This creates an impression (true or not) of self-righteousness and self-importance and it rallies everybody against your cause, even if they normally wouldn't. And more importantly, signs of goodwill, like the one you described, won't get picked up or won't be seen as goodwill, but as political horsetrading.
Under the bush administration, that "we don't care what anybody else thinks" mentality is exactly what lost him all the goodwill of being attacked by terrorists in 2001 and what made america so hated around the world. So it is a quite important factor to keep your eye on. And you definitely can't blame the rest of the world for thinking this way.
regarding your point 3.
I agree that relocating is not the solution. I would even support relocating some Israelies who settled in the west bank, for true peace. We already did that in Gaza, but unfortunately this experiment fell to bring peaceful attitude towards us.
One of the big problems israel has, is its stance on PR. While the rest of the world, barred Kim Jung Il, knows that on public stage, actions get scrutinized and tries to show some political mindedness in their walk/talk (even ahmadinejad does this), Israels policy has always been . This creates an impression (true or not) of self-righteousness and self-importance and it rallies everybody against your cause, even if they normally wouldn't. And more importantly, signs of goodwill, like the one you described, won't get picked up or won't be seen as goodwill, but as political horsetrading.
Under the bush administration, that "we don't care what anybody else thinks" mentality is exactly what lost him all the goodwill of being attacked by terrorists in 2001 and what made america so hated around the world. So it is a quite important factor to keep your eye on. And you definitely can't blame the rest of the world for thinking this way.
"However, it does not have to be relocation. During some of the talks (which you urge Israel to do, and we indeed do), it was suggested to exchange territories. Give some big muslim cities in exchange for other areas. They should just turn to become citizens of the new Palestinian state, that WAS disscussed (but rejected. not by Israel). "
This is another issue. We don't get much information about the talks that dó go well.
Which is a pity.
It happened to the serbs and the russians in recent history as well. Show us some decent reports to enlighten us. (please, no more of that childish propaganda ;)
This is another issue. We don't get much information about the talks that dó go well.
Which is a pity.
It happened to the serbs and the russians in recent history as well. Show us some decent reports to enlighten us. (please, no more of that childish propaganda ;)
"We had over 700 casualties from terrorist attacks on civilians, and you barely see photos on the media. Because we see it as a bad thing to do, all that Palestinians do is to get pictures out to the media. Not only this is against human rights, memory of the death and using people to gain publicity. "
I am very willing to accept this. 700 is a high number.
But you can't use this number in a way that makes that you want to look like only israeli's died. For example like without referring to the 1300 that died in the gaza conflict alone. We all know that the deathrate on palestine side is much higer. It comes off as a bit weird of a defence to say 'they are killing us' when the casualties on the other side are much higher.
It is deplorable that both sides have casualties. That is a much better way to describe the situation. Caused by a terrorist or not, it is the end result you want us all to rally against.
I am very willing to accept this. 700 is a high number.
But you can't use this number in a way that makes that you want to look like only israeli's died. For example like without referring to the 1300 that died in the gaza conflict alone. We all know that the deathrate on palestine side is much higer. It comes off as a bit weird of a defence to say 'they are killing us' when the casualties on the other side are much higher.
It is deplorable that both sides have casualties. That is a much better way to describe the situation. Caused by a terrorist or not, it is the end result you want us all to rally against.
"It seems that some arabs who know from first wittnessing eye, prefer the humitarian approach of Israel over what they would have received from their brothers."
well, for starters, it is a much the safer side of the border, probably:)
well, for starters, it is a much the safer side of the border, probably:)
We debate here internally, sometimes more than outside.
However, did you ever figure out that what seems to be a group thinking is a result of being constantly attacked?
Each time we take measures of protection we are accussed of aggressiveness.
Each time we try to defend from being blamed of human oppression we actually fight another flavor of group thinking.
We are sometimes good at what we do, but propaganda and PR are not our best skill. Apparently.
The fact that you did not get the information (regarding exchange of territories) could maybe be a valid proof that not all you knew so far was true, and not everything that happened was told to you efficiently.
I don't say we do not fall into propaganda. But we face real good competition in this field.
Did you know that the largest biggest demonstration in Israel's huistory was about peace? about getting out from Lebanon? Against our government?
Another large demostration was to support the government for their peace efforts? That unfortunate demonstration where our prime minister was shot?
You can say a lot about Israel. I do't know what you know about the Israelies themselves. Yes we are self opinionated, which is why we really cannot be fooled by any propaganda. Yes we debate here and between us just the same.
And yes, when we feel attacked, which you may or not disagree, we unite for defence.
(edited)
However, did you ever figure out that what seems to be a group thinking is a result of being constantly attacked?
Each time we take measures of protection we are accussed of aggressiveness.
Each time we try to defend from being blamed of human oppression we actually fight another flavor of group thinking.
We are sometimes good at what we do, but propaganda and PR are not our best skill. Apparently.
The fact that you did not get the information (regarding exchange of territories) could maybe be a valid proof that not all you knew so far was true, and not everything that happened was told to you efficiently.
I don't say we do not fall into propaganda. But we face real good competition in this field.
Did you know that the largest biggest demonstration in Israel's huistory was about peace? about getting out from Lebanon? Against our government?
Another large demostration was to support the government for their peace efforts? That unfortunate demonstration where our prime minister was shot?
You can say a lot about Israel. I do't know what you know about the Israelies themselves. Yes we are self opinionated, which is why we really cannot be fooled by any propaganda. Yes we debate here and between us just the same.
And yes, when we feel attacked, which you may or not disagree, we unite for defence.
(edited)
"However, did you ever figure out that what seems to be a group thinking is a result of being constantly attacked?"
oh, yes.
Group thinking is my area of specialisation, btw;)
In short: high status minority under threat form very close knit groups. Not always for the better of their own group. But your internal group dynamics is something you should manage yourself, I believe.
"..which is why we really cannot be fooled by any propaganda. "
Don't fall into this trap. You only have the information that you have been given. The scope of the information is propaganda in itself. We suffer from the same, btw, which is why I think these fora (and esp. this one) are so important.
Last time, about the georgian war, a certain serb gave me a long and hard lesson in NATO war propaganda with showing some detailed numbers of strikes, attacks and more stuff I actually didn't care to read that much into such detail but the main message was clear: even if your reporters report fair, you still are biased by which topics they talk about.
But I can find myself in most of your post.
(edited)
oh, yes.
Group thinking is my area of specialisation, btw;)
In short: high status minority under threat form very close knit groups. Not always for the better of their own group. But your internal group dynamics is something you should manage yourself, I believe.
"..which is why we really cannot be fooled by any propaganda. "
Don't fall into this trap. You only have the information that you have been given. The scope of the information is propaganda in itself. We suffer from the same, btw, which is why I think these fora (and esp. this one) are so important.
Last time, about the georgian war, a certain serb gave me a long and hard lesson in NATO war propaganda with showing some detailed numbers of strikes, attacks and more stuff I actually didn't care to read that much into such detail but the main message was clear: even if your reporters report fair, you still are biased by which topics they talk about.
But I can find myself in most of your post.
(edited)
quote
Don't fall into this trap. You only have the information that you have been given. The scope of the information is propaganda in itself.
While I see what you mean, it is not likely that I was given any information.
On contrary. AT least in the last matter the Israeli government did not respond too many hours. The damage is done.
But back to the main point. I don't thing I a GIVEN information. I live in a plural society, I travel a lot, I have all the web open to me, and just as in my business I figure out the picture from all pieces of information, I cannot be fooled by propaganda. Even if it was sophisticated, which it is not.
I have a question to you, which I have asked several time during our debates. However, let's keep it in the context of our current discussion.
Do you still believe that those people on the boat came in clean hands, just for a principal deminstration and protest? Do you still insist that Israel staged the videos as propaganda?
Be careful although I did not really want to set up a trap.
If you said that Israel doctored the videos, than you somehow accept that "unjustified" aggression (saying the least) would be a valid argument, which could also influence question 1
(edited)
Don't fall into this trap. You only have the information that you have been given. The scope of the information is propaganda in itself.
While I see what you mean, it is not likely that I was given any information.
On contrary. AT least in the last matter the Israeli government did not respond too many hours. The damage is done.
But back to the main point. I don't thing I a GIVEN information. I live in a plural society, I travel a lot, I have all the web open to me, and just as in my business I figure out the picture from all pieces of information, I cannot be fooled by propaganda. Even if it was sophisticated, which it is not.
I have a question to you, which I have asked several time during our debates. However, let's keep it in the context of our current discussion.
Do you still believe that those people on the boat came in clean hands, just for a principal deminstration and protest? Do you still insist that Israel staged the videos as propaganda?
Be careful although I did not really want to set up a trap.
If you said that Israel doctored the videos, than you somehow accept that "unjustified" aggression (saying the least) would be a valid argument, which could also influence question 1
(edited)
"Do you still believe that those people on the boat came in clean hands, just for a principal deminstration and protest? Do you still insist that Israel staged the videos as propaganda?"
Mind you, the context is that of a blockade by which israel stops all building materials and but a quarter of neccesary (UN standards) goods needed to live. A blockade with a political goal and a terrible humanitarian fallout. A blockade that is (but shouldn't be) 'allowed' by the international political community, but hated by most of the rest of world. So, this is the context most of the rest of the world views this.
Yes, the goal was to grasp the international media's attention and to force the international political community to start dealing with the blockade and its humanitarian fallout. Instead of turning a blind eye to it.
Pretty much the same as those 'save the wales against whaling expeditions' they show on discovery channel. With people who have pretty much the same mindset. If you watched one of those shows, you'll understand what I am saying.
I don't entirely agree with their action, but I entirely agree with their goal.
Aside from that, the actions of the IDF are unjustifiable.
There are religious Jews, secular Jews, and Jews who choose to be Atistem.
According to Jewish law, if you are born by Jewish mother, then you are Jewish , and you can change religion only by religious conversion , but that does not require me to believe in God or being religious.
I do not like religions in general because a lot of wars happened because of the extreme interpretations of religion .
Fatah (Part of P.L.O) is not a secular or an atheist organization, some of them yes but then again many of them are traditional or religious, but they really do not fanatics like Hamas , But even before the violence took over the Gaza Strip by Hamas there were religious fanatic Palestinians And they where those who set the agenda Unfortunately
The reason they did not agree to sign peace agreements are diverse, some of it because of religious reasons and influence by extremist Islamic countries that do not agree to recognize Israel as Jewish state and they are just waiting for that in Israel they will have a majority of Muslims so they can once again expel the Jews from Israel or cause us to live as dhimmis , as prescribed in the Koran .
(edited)
According to Jewish law, if you are born by Jewish mother, then you are Jewish , and you can change religion only by religious conversion , but that does not require me to believe in God or being religious.
I do not like religions in general because a lot of wars happened because of the extreme interpretations of religion .
Fatah (Part of P.L.O) is not a secular or an atheist organization, some of them yes but then again many of them are traditional or religious, but they really do not fanatics like Hamas , But even before the violence took over the Gaza Strip by Hamas there were religious fanatic Palestinians And they where those who set the agenda Unfortunately
The reason they did not agree to sign peace agreements are diverse, some of it because of religious reasons and influence by extremist Islamic countries that do not agree to recognize Israel as Jewish state and they are just waiting for that in Israel they will have a majority of Muslims so they can once again expel the Jews from Israel or cause us to live as dhimmis , as prescribed in the Koran .
(edited)
Aside from what Chuck?
Read the article above reported by the Al-Jazira reporter from Lebanon who was on the boat, telling exactly the same story as the Israeli government propaganda.
Listen to the interview with those Turkish/Yemenite recruits seeking martyrdom as a reason for joining this cruise.
Listen to evidence of foreign (non Israeli) military officers who know what the are talking about and give evidence in the ultra-silly Human Rights Council.
You just seem so smug in your supposed Israeli-prosecution role that you fail to understand that you are simply a very 'Useful Idiot'. I mean no disrespect here (in this case) and please check out the wikipedia article of this name (click the link).
It seems as if you draw some sick pleasure from our stance forgetting that we here in Israel are YOUR first line of defence against YOUR enemies... just as much as they are ours.
I wholly respect your right to hold on to your views as much as I will fight for the right of every Arab-Israeli parliament member to have his/her say even when calling for the destruction of the State of Israel who gave them that right in the first place.
However, while you keep blaming us with brutality, being brain-washed and overall as wrong, you never for once even recognise that you might be wrong. Israel and every single person here - obviously including me - considers different views, you somehow are exempt from even considering another's view point.
Anyhow,... I Copy/Paste here part of an answer I gave someone some months ago regarding terminology of the words Jews, Israel, Hebrew(s) & Zionists. I hope it'll shed some more light on the meaning of those words.
1. Israel:
>a. Land of - the geographical location hereabouts in the middle-east, referring to the home of the Jewish nation, the Israelis and more such like. The area, location an so on.
>b. State of - the official, UN declared/recognised (-who gives a monkey's) country. Organised state and governing institutions.
>c. People of - according to the independence declaration the citizens of the country from all religions, genders, etc who hold a national ID and/or passport.
>___ of - The Independence Declaration also denotes that this state is the Jewish state and home of the Jews.
2. Jews:
>a. origin - the name comes from the word Yehuda, a name of one of the Hebrew tribes. It is a Greek mispronunciation.
>b. timeline - it is a very late name dating to the Roman period, ie only the last 2000 years.
>c. religion - a monotheistic religion, origin of Christianity and Islam and a few other religions. This religion shaped and maintained the life of the Hebrews for over 5000 years, at least based on archaeological and historical research.
>d. Connotation - the Jewish nation/people survival skills and long lasting history couple with their unique and non-violent tenets of faith have turned the 'Jews' into a human psyche scapegoat. The word itself has grown and developed to mean something unsavoury and has served as a curse or derogatory name throughout history. The roots of hatred or plain xenophobia are so ingrained in the human soul that Jews have often been the easiest choice for these fears and as aggression targets. It is not even a missionary religion, as a ground rule refusing conversions and not accepting 'new members'.
3. Hebrew:
>a. Language - one of the oldest spoken languages in the world, revived from a 'mere' holy scriptures language for prayers into the modern Hebrew. Biblical Hebrew is as remote from modern Hebrew as that of Shakespeare from modern English, ie we could talk to each other but it would sound a little funny.
>b. people/nation - the true and correct name of our nation from the days of Abraham(or there abouts if he ever existed) until today. And while a Christian Arab living in Nazareth of today is an Israeli (citizen of the sate of Israel), he is not one of the nation of Hebrews who are Jewish by religion.
You English person as Christian, would never be considered as a Christian citizen but as a British one, or even English, if you wish to delve into local politics, but calling us Jews is wrong or at least equivalent as calling you a Christian citizen. Especially when you consider modern political, economical or security issues involving the state of Israel.
For example, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) have also Bedouin, Druze and Cherkese (not sure of their correct Latin name) people, Jews, Muslims and Christians as religions and straight, gay and others in between all serving the Israeli State home of the Jewish people (foremost) AND others.
4. Zionist:
>a. Definition - A Jewish (or non Jewish) person who believes (but not always necessarily practices) that the Land of Israel is the home of the Jewish people. Do note I said 'Land of Israel' and not necessarily State of Israel.
>b. Anti-Zionist Jews - There are a few Anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects, numbering a few thousand members worldwide who believe that the Land of Israel should ONLY belong to the Jewish people IF the Third Holy Temple is erected at the time of the coming of the Massayah and a wholly religious way of life rules the land. These few groups are used in propaganda by the Iranians as they actively oppose the existence of the State of Israel which is a secular state.
I hope this clarifies some of the word and their correct usage.
I, btw, am an atheist belonging to the Jewish nation and a citizen of the Sate of Israel,... Ohh... and a Zionist. ;-)
(edited)
Read the article above reported by the Al-Jazira reporter from Lebanon who was on the boat, telling exactly the same story as the Israeli government propaganda.
Listen to the interview with those Turkish/Yemenite recruits seeking martyrdom as a reason for joining this cruise.
Listen to evidence of foreign (non Israeli) military officers who know what the are talking about and give evidence in the ultra-silly Human Rights Council.
You just seem so smug in your supposed Israeli-prosecution role that you fail to understand that you are simply a very 'Useful Idiot'. I mean no disrespect here (in this case) and please check out the wikipedia article of this name (click the link).
It seems as if you draw some sick pleasure from our stance forgetting that we here in Israel are YOUR first line of defence against YOUR enemies... just as much as they are ours.
I wholly respect your right to hold on to your views as much as I will fight for the right of every Arab-Israeli parliament member to have his/her say even when calling for the destruction of the State of Israel who gave them that right in the first place.
However, while you keep blaming us with brutality, being brain-washed and overall as wrong, you never for once even recognise that you might be wrong. Israel and every single person here - obviously including me - considers different views, you somehow are exempt from even considering another's view point.
Anyhow,... I Copy/Paste here part of an answer I gave someone some months ago regarding terminology of the words Jews, Israel, Hebrew(s) & Zionists. I hope it'll shed some more light on the meaning of those words.
1. Israel:
>a. Land of - the geographical location hereabouts in the middle-east, referring to the home of the Jewish nation, the Israelis and more such like. The area, location an so on.
>b. State of - the official, UN declared/recognised (-who gives a monkey's) country. Organised state and governing institutions.
>c. People of - according to the independence declaration the citizens of the country from all religions, genders, etc who hold a national ID and/or passport.
>___ of - The Independence Declaration also denotes that this state is the Jewish state and home of the Jews.
2. Jews:
>a. origin - the name comes from the word Yehuda, a name of one of the Hebrew tribes. It is a Greek mispronunciation.
>b. timeline - it is a very late name dating to the Roman period, ie only the last 2000 years.
>c. religion - a monotheistic religion, origin of Christianity and Islam and a few other religions. This religion shaped and maintained the life of the Hebrews for over 5000 years, at least based on archaeological and historical research.
>d. Connotation - the Jewish nation/people survival skills and long lasting history couple with their unique and non-violent tenets of faith have turned the 'Jews' into a human psyche scapegoat. The word itself has grown and developed to mean something unsavoury and has served as a curse or derogatory name throughout history. The roots of hatred or plain xenophobia are so ingrained in the human soul that Jews have often been the easiest choice for these fears and as aggression targets. It is not even a missionary religion, as a ground rule refusing conversions and not accepting 'new members'.
3. Hebrew:
>a. Language - one of the oldest spoken languages in the world, revived from a 'mere' holy scriptures language for prayers into the modern Hebrew. Biblical Hebrew is as remote from modern Hebrew as that of Shakespeare from modern English, ie we could talk to each other but it would sound a little funny.
>b. people/nation - the true and correct name of our nation from the days of Abraham(or there abouts if he ever existed) until today. And while a Christian Arab living in Nazareth of today is an Israeli (citizen of the sate of Israel), he is not one of the nation of Hebrews who are Jewish by religion.
You English person as Christian, would never be considered as a Christian citizen but as a British one, or even English, if you wish to delve into local politics, but calling us Jews is wrong or at least equivalent as calling you a Christian citizen. Especially when you consider modern political, economical or security issues involving the state of Israel.
For example, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) have also Bedouin, Druze and Cherkese (not sure of their correct Latin name) people, Jews, Muslims and Christians as religions and straight, gay and others in between all serving the Israeli State home of the Jewish people (foremost) AND others.
4. Zionist:
>a. Definition - A Jewish (or non Jewish) person who believes (but not always necessarily practices) that the Land of Israel is the home of the Jewish people. Do note I said 'Land of Israel' and not necessarily State of Israel.
>b. Anti-Zionist Jews - There are a few Anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects, numbering a few thousand members worldwide who believe that the Land of Israel should ONLY belong to the Jewish people IF the Third Holy Temple is erected at the time of the coming of the Massayah and a wholly religious way of life rules the land. These few groups are used in propaganda by the Iranians as they actively oppose the existence of the State of Israel which is a secular state.
I hope this clarifies some of the word and their correct usage.
I, btw, am an atheist belonging to the Jewish nation and a citizen of the Sate of Israel,... Ohh... and a Zionist. ;-)
(edited)
really man, you lost all credit to warrant any more serious replies. Don't try to calim any moral high ground from the fact that I am trying to ignore your posts. Any serious reply would result in you shouting: "bias and ignorant bigotry"
This pretty sums op your mentality:
"...I mean no disrespect here (in this case) and please check out the wikipedia article of this name (click the link).
It seems as if you draw some sick pleasure... "
Yes, I disagree with you because of the sick pleasure I get from it, the sick jew-hating racist that I am.
This pretty sums op your mentality:
"...I mean no disrespect here (in this case) and please check out the wikipedia article of this name (click the link).
It seems as if you draw some sick pleasure... "
Yes, I disagree with you because of the sick pleasure I get from it, the sick jew-hating racist that I am.
Now you have removed the veil in a theatrical fashion, the question is whether you can do it with your conscience too? Ignorance, Xenophobia and boredom might hinder you, but I'm holding my fingers crossed for you. There might be salvation for you too, don't lose hope. ;-)
why do you keep chatting with these how come only to attack ?
(edited)
(edited)