WHO IS OPPOSING PEACE IN GAZA ?? (544)
Hugz
So the self described Hamas military wing known as Izzedeen al-Qassam Brigades is not a military to you? Just a bunch of unemployed guys running around looking for chicks or, how would you describe this force that has a command structure and describes themselves as a military unit?
Hugz
In response to: With no military force....
So the self described Hamas military wing known as Izzedeen al-Qassam Brigades is not a military to you? Just a bunch of unemployed guys running around looking for chicks or, how would you describe this force that has a command structure and describes themselves as a military unit?
Hugz
------ This thread is Locked ------
Hugz believes that Israel is the only country on earth that publicly jails activists without trial.
Nobel peace laureate Suu Kyi, the face of Myanmar’s beleaguered opposition, has been detained without trial for about 13 of the past 19 years, despite a worldwide campaign calling on the country’s military rulers to release her.
In many countries, especially in Asia, a system of long-term detention has been developing. Prisoners are kept in poor prison conditions year after year and the authorities do not grant them the basic right to a trial.
Hugz
Nobel peace laureate Suu Kyi, the face of Myanmar’s beleaguered opposition, has been detained without trial for about 13 of the past 19 years, despite a worldwide campaign calling on the country’s military rulers to release her.
In many countries, especially in Asia, a system of long-term detention has been developing. Prisoners are kept in poor prison conditions year after year and the authorities do not grant them the basic right to a trial.
Hugz
------ This thread is Locked ------
Drewski: Hugz
So the self described Hamas military wing known as Izzedeen al-Qassam Brigades is not a military to you? Just a bunch of unemployed guys running around looking for chicks
Hugz
So the self described Hamas military wing known as Izzedeen al-Qassam Brigades is not a military to you? Just a bunch of unemployed guys running around looking for chicks
Hugz
thats not what they do????
Anyway, I think Hamas' military branch can be considered a militia. So, under definition militia falls under military. However, one can argue that they are not military for the fact that they don't wear uniforms...or if you want to say they are military and a member of Hamas is captured, he can be considered a spy for being out of uniform, which would allow the israelis to legally execute them...
------ This thread is Locked ------
An autopsy was conducted on March 24, 2003 at Israel's National Center of Forensic Medicine in Tel Aviv. The final report was not released publicly, but in their report on the matter Human Rights Watch asserts a copy was provided to them by Craig Corrie, with a translation supplied by the U.S. Department of State. In the report they quote Professor Yehuda Hiss, who performed the autopsy, as concluding that "her death was caused by pressure on the chest (mechanical asphyxiation) with fractures of the ribs and vertebrae of the dorsal spinal column and scapulas, and tear wounds in the right lung with hemorrhaging of the pleural cavities."
On June 26, 2003, the Jerusalem Post quoted an Israeli military spokesman as saying that Corrie had not been run over and that the driver had not seen her:
"The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in... The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened."
Yes, you can travel freely in Israel. But if one comes to Israel to assist the terrorists using the guise of being a peace activist, then you will be a persona non grata. Now that should be a simple thing to comprehend I hope.
The Israeli army's report, which was seen by the The Guardian, said that the army was searching for explosives in the border zone when Corrie was "struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death ... The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved," (The Guardian, April 14, 2003).
Corrie's parents tried to sue Catepillar Co. in the U.S. for the fault that the driver was unable to see Corrie. The suit was thrown out of court. Her parents were almost kidnapped in Gaza by militants looking for American hostages.
"The International Solidarity Movement, to which Corrie belonged, was directly responsible for illegal behavior and conduct in the area of Corrie's death and their actions directly led to this tragedy."
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk.
The ISM does not hide its incitement to violence. Asif Mohammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were British nationals of ISM. They carried out a suicide bombing in a pub next to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that is frequented by Embassy personnel. Hanif and Sharif entered Israel under the guise of “peace activists” and “alternative tourism” On March 27, 2003, ISM was caught harboring Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya. He was arrested by the IDF in ISM's office, where a handgun was also found, after two foreign ISM activists helped Sukiya hide. These foreign activists tried to bar IDF soldiers from entering ISM offices, knowing that Sukia was there.
On June 26, 2003, the Jerusalem Post quoted an Israeli military spokesman as saying that Corrie had not been run over and that the driver had not seen her:
"The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in... The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened."
Yes, you can travel freely in Israel. But if one comes to Israel to assist the terrorists using the guise of being a peace activist, then you will be a persona non grata. Now that should be a simple thing to comprehend I hope.
The Israeli army's report, which was seen by the The Guardian, said that the army was searching for explosives in the border zone when Corrie was "struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death ... The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved," (The Guardian, April 14, 2003).
Corrie's parents tried to sue Catepillar Co. in the U.S. for the fault that the driver was unable to see Corrie. The suit was thrown out of court. Her parents were almost kidnapped in Gaza by militants looking for American hostages.
"The International Solidarity Movement, to which Corrie belonged, was directly responsible for illegal behavior and conduct in the area of Corrie's death and their actions directly led to this tragedy."
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk.
The ISM does not hide its incitement to violence. Asif Mohammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were British nationals of ISM. They carried out a suicide bombing in a pub next to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that is frequented by Embassy personnel. Hanif and Sharif entered Israel under the guise of “peace activists” and “alternative tourism” On March 27, 2003, ISM was caught harboring Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya. He was arrested by the IDF in ISM's office, where a handgun was also found, after two foreign ISM activists helped Sukiya hide. These foreign activists tried to bar IDF soldiers from entering ISM offices, knowing that Sukia was there.
------ This thread is Locked ------
LILLYLADY: An autopsy was conducted on March 24, 2003 at Israel's National Center of Forensic Medicine in Tel Aviv. The final report was not released publicly, but in their report on the matter Human Rights Watch asserts a copy was provided to them by Craig Corrie, with a translation supplied by the U.S. Department of State. In the report they quote Professor Yehuda Hiss, who performed the autopsy, as concluding that "her death was caused by pressure on the chest (mechanical asphyxiation) with fractures of the ribs and vertebrae of the dorsal spinal column and scapulas, and tear wounds in the right lung with hemorrhaging of the pleural cavities."
On June 26, 2003, the Jerusalem Post quoted an Israeli military spokesman as saying that Corrie had not been run over and that the driver had not seen her:
"The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in... The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened."
Yes, you can travel freely in Israel. But if one comes to Israel to assist the terrorists using the guise of being a peace activist, then you will be a persona non grata. Now that should be a simple thing to comprehend I hope.The Israeli army's report, which was seen by the The Guardian, said that the army was searching for explosives in the border zone when Corrie was "struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death ... The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved," (The Guardian, April 14, 2003).
Corrie's parents tried to sue Catepillar Co. in the U.S. for the fault that the driver was unable to see Corrie. The suit was thrown out of court. Her parents were almost kidnapped in Gaza by militants looking for American hostages.
"The International Solidarity Movement, to which Corrie belonged, was directly responsible for illegal behavior and conduct in the area of Corrie's death and their actions directly led to this tragedy."
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk.
The ISM does not hide its incitement to violence. Asif Mohammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were British nationals of ISM. They carried out a suicide bombing in a pub next to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that is frequented by Embassy personnel. Hanif and Sharif entered Israel under the guise of “peace activists” and “alternative tourism” On March 27, 2003, ISM was caught harboring Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya. He was arrested by the IDF in ISM's office, where a handgun was also found, after two foreign ISM activists helped Sukiya hide. These foreign activists tried to bar IDF soldiers from entering ISM offices, knowing that Sukia was there.
On June 26, 2003, the Jerusalem Post quoted an Israeli military spokesman as saying that Corrie had not been run over and that the driver had not seen her:
"The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in... The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened."
Yes, you can travel freely in Israel. But if one comes to Israel to assist the terrorists using the guise of being a peace activist, then you will be a persona non grata. Now that should be a simple thing to comprehend I hope.The Israeli army's report, which was seen by the The Guardian, said that the army was searching for explosives in the border zone when Corrie was "struck as she stood behind a mound of earth that was created by an engineering vehicle operating in the area and she was hidden from the view of the vehicle's operator who continued with his work. Corrie was struck by dirt and a slab of concrete resulting in her death ... The finding of the operational investigations shows that Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved," (The Guardian, April 14, 2003).
Corrie's parents tried to sue Catepillar Co. in the U.S. for the fault that the driver was unable to see Corrie. The suit was thrown out of court. Her parents were almost kidnapped in Gaza by militants looking for American hostages.
"The International Solidarity Movement, to which Corrie belonged, was directly responsible for illegal behavior and conduct in the area of Corrie's death and their actions directly led to this tragedy."
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk.
The ISM does not hide its incitement to violence. Asif Mohammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif were British nationals of ISM. They carried out a suicide bombing in a pub next to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that is frequented by Embassy personnel. Hanif and Sharif entered Israel under the guise of “peace activists” and “alternative tourism” On March 27, 2003, ISM was caught harboring Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya. He was arrested by the IDF in ISM's office, where a handgun was also found, after two foreign ISM activists helped Sukiya hide. These foreign activists tried to bar IDF soldiers from entering ISM offices, knowing that Sukia was there.
This in in reference to Rachael Corrie.
You're free to travel Israel but if you want to go there to assist the terrorists, under the guise of a peace activist tourist, then you will be a persona non-grata.
------ This thread is Locked ------
Oops, I repeated myself. It's late at night so I'm going to shut down for the night. I made all my points clear in the first Rachael Corrie posting. Disregard the next one.
------ This thread is Locked ------
LILLYLADY: This in in reference to Rachael Corrie.
You're free to travel Israel but if you want to go there to assist the terrorists, under the guise of a peace activist tourist, then you will be a persona non-grata.
You're free to travel Israel but if you want to go there to assist the terrorists, under the guise of a peace activist tourist, then you will be a persona non-grata.
Typically - Visit Israel - see some nice occupation walls
but don´t go to the other side or we might kill you - that´s what they are saying ! But as they arrest even Jewish peace activists from Israel - also very much declared as non-grata. PERHAPS THEY ASSIST TERRORISTS??
Anyone who assists the Palestinians in any part of their pledge in keeping their land is non-grata and confronted with Israels Army. Many organizations complain about that.
Anything happens its their responsability not Israels - and you can´t make this wrongs a Israelis right by this sort of declarations, as they come always ready with answers prefabricated by their legal departments - testimonies are not heared at all -
That must change! The UN Envoys took plenty of records - hopefully it will get a hearing.
And pleace stop declaring other posters in this Thread an Anti-Jewish - and Hamas supporters. Nobody gives you titels !!
History was widely discussed - Zionists plan is happy to find and create always an enemy to justify their actions !
As for the foodhold of Hamas in Gaza - is to big extent their own fault and all could have been different if Westbank and Gaza would have been joined!
Israel will get nowhere in creating more enemy by their actions against Civilians and pushing the borders with illigal settlemnts -bulldozing down Palestinian homes and building walls through their land in the way they do.
Its largely critizised by Jewish communities and Israelis alike!
And as Israel did not want to talk to Hamas, when Hamas wanted an agreement - so instead Israel started the offencive in Gaza, this was stated also by Jewish press, as little help for the election campaign.
Lets hope world leaders find a way to Status Quo - and with a little goodwill or pressure .. Israels policies will hopefully change.
Fact is that you can´t lock up the people of Gaza without providing for their livelihood and then bomb the whole population down in saying their tunnels are disturbing peace - its a cheap excuse to blame alone Hamas on that one !
------ This thread is Locked ------
LILLYLADY: Oops, I repeated myself. It's late at night so I'm going to shut down for the night. I made all my points clear in the first Rachael Corrie posting. Disregard the next one.
YES - you keep repeating yourself - but so do I -
Good Night !
------ This thread is Locked ------
Highfidelity
Did you and Hugz take an oath of some kind not to inform yourselves? She has stated that she does not have to read the charter of Hamas and has proved herself more than a few times that she has not. Now, you prove that you have not either otherwise you would know that Hamas does not negotiate or, sit down to talk peac.
What they say........
In response to: And as Israel did not want to talk to Hamas, when Hamas wanted an agreement
Did you and Hugz take an oath of some kind not to inform yourselves? She has stated that she does not have to read the charter of Hamas and has proved herself more than a few times that she has not. Now, you prove that you have not either otherwise you would know that Hamas does not negotiate or, sit down to talk peac.
What they say........
In response to: Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, Initiatives and International Conferences
initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.” The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.
initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.” The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.
------ This thread is Locked ------
Quoting here part of an long article written by VIRGINIA TILLEY
May 12, 2006 Way before the Gaza escalation took place !
"
First, it is simply unbelievable. All agree that Israel's withdrawal of major settlement blocs in the West Bank (especially, the major cities of Ma'ale Adumim, Ariel, and Gush Etzion) is not foreseeable. The Israeli government itself has declared them permanent. No international actor or combination of actors has the political will and/or clout to change Israeli policy. Israel will not withdraw the major settlement blocs under any circumstances short of a national emergency. Hamas's suddenly waxing nice will not constitute that emergency.
Second, the argument adopts specious Israeli claims about Arab logics that only dwindling ranks of Israel's die-hard supporters still believe. Israeli propaganda holds that Arab "hatred" for Israel is irrational, born solely of Judeophobia, religious zealotry, and cultural backwardness, and that tough measures can therefore leverage Arab capitulation to reality even while the occupation continues. In this view, Israel's hold on the West Bank is not really an "occupation," serving a program of land annexation, but only a benign "administration," forced on Israel by collective Arab and Palestinian unwillingness to recognize Israel's "right to exist."
The funding cut-off endorses this fantasy in holding that Hamas has rejected Israel's authentic "promise of peace" due to its rejectionist Islamic dogma and not because Hamas has graphic evidence that Israel has no intention of permitting Palestinians a viable state. In this twisted view, cutting vital funds should make Hamas rethink this "irrationality," abandon its "extremism," recognize Israel's "right to exist," and end all hostile actions toward it. Hamas and the PA will then be rewarded (it is hinted vacantly) with a return to the Road Map.
Aside from its transparent tomfoolery (full awareness the US and Israel are eliminating the conditions for the Road Map as quickly as possible), deeper problems plague this papery notion. For if we look more closely at what Hamas is being asked to do, none of it makes sense either.
What does a "right to exist" mean exactly? There is no "right to exist" for states under international law. The formula has arisen in international diplomacy uniquely regarding Israel. It does not mean simply diplomatic recognition, which is the "fact" of existence. It does not mean recognizing Israel's "right to self-determination," either, or we would be using that famous term.
Let us pretend for a moment that Hamas is being asked to recognize Israel in the normal diplomatic sense. In this case, however, the EU position is unsupportable, because diplomatic recognition of a state routinely requires one bit of vital information: "right to exist" where? Israel's borders are not set. Even its plans for those borders are not known; with impressive brashness, Mr. Olmert has announced that we will not know until 2010.
It is entirely legitimate for Hamas to require firm confirmation of Israel's borders before recognizing it. It should also be incumbent on the international community to confirm where those borders will be before insisting that Hamas recognize Israel's "right" to them. Otherwise, recognizing Israel's "right to exist" could be construed to mean that Israel has a "right to exist" within whatever borders it chooses in coming years.
cont.//..
May 12, 2006 Way before the Gaza escalation took place !
"
First, it is simply unbelievable. All agree that Israel's withdrawal of major settlement blocs in the West Bank (especially, the major cities of Ma'ale Adumim, Ariel, and Gush Etzion) is not foreseeable. The Israeli government itself has declared them permanent. No international actor or combination of actors has the political will and/or clout to change Israeli policy. Israel will not withdraw the major settlement blocs under any circumstances short of a national emergency. Hamas's suddenly waxing nice will not constitute that emergency.
Second, the argument adopts specious Israeli claims about Arab logics that only dwindling ranks of Israel's die-hard supporters still believe. Israeli propaganda holds that Arab "hatred" for Israel is irrational, born solely of Judeophobia, religious zealotry, and cultural backwardness, and that tough measures can therefore leverage Arab capitulation to reality even while the occupation continues. In this view, Israel's hold on the West Bank is not really an "occupation," serving a program of land annexation, but only a benign "administration," forced on Israel by collective Arab and Palestinian unwillingness to recognize Israel's "right to exist."
The funding cut-off endorses this fantasy in holding that Hamas has rejected Israel's authentic "promise of peace" due to its rejectionist Islamic dogma and not because Hamas has graphic evidence that Israel has no intention of permitting Palestinians a viable state. In this twisted view, cutting vital funds should make Hamas rethink this "irrationality," abandon its "extremism," recognize Israel's "right to exist," and end all hostile actions toward it. Hamas and the PA will then be rewarded (it is hinted vacantly) with a return to the Road Map.
Aside from its transparent tomfoolery (full awareness the US and Israel are eliminating the conditions for the Road Map as quickly as possible), deeper problems plague this papery notion. For if we look more closely at what Hamas is being asked to do, none of it makes sense either.
What does a "right to exist" mean exactly? There is no "right to exist" for states under international law. The formula has arisen in international diplomacy uniquely regarding Israel. It does not mean simply diplomatic recognition, which is the "fact" of existence. It does not mean recognizing Israel's "right to self-determination," either, or we would be using that famous term.
Let us pretend for a moment that Hamas is being asked to recognize Israel in the normal diplomatic sense. In this case, however, the EU position is unsupportable, because diplomatic recognition of a state routinely requires one bit of vital information: "right to exist" where? Israel's borders are not set. Even its plans for those borders are not known; with impressive brashness, Mr. Olmert has announced that we will not know until 2010.
It is entirely legitimate for Hamas to require firm confirmation of Israel's borders before recognizing it. It should also be incumbent on the international community to confirm where those borders will be before insisting that Hamas recognize Israel's "right" to them. Otherwise, recognizing Israel's "right to exist" could be construed to mean that Israel has a "right to exist" within whatever borders it chooses in coming years.
cont.//..
------ This thread is Locked ------
cont.//..
"As the Palestinians stand to lose most of what is left of their homeland to this fuzziness, Hamas is refusing to endorse it. Is this extremist Islamic intransigence, warranting a funding freeze? Let us run a little thought experiment: Would Canadian, or Norwegian, or English, or French governments be called on the international carpet for not recognizing the "right to exist" of a neighboring state that is, with military force, settling its own ethnically defined population within contiguous walled cities and enclaves in Canadian, Norwegian, English or French national territories, while promising to carve those nations into "cantons?"
Absent clear borders, recognizing Israel's "right to exist" must mean something else. And of course it does. Clearly implicit in the term is Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.
In other words, the "right" Hamas is being required to endorse is that Israel can legitimately compose itself as a state in Palestine that is populated and run primarily by Jews, primarily for Jews. Such a state would thus be authorized by Hamas to sustain whatever laws and policies necessary to preserving its Jewish majority, even rejecting the return of Palestinian refugees mandated by international law. Or building a massive Wall on Palestinian land designed to protect the Jewish state from the "demographic threat" of mass non-Jewish citizenship-i.e., the Palestinians. Israel's would also be legitimized for past actions on the same agenda, such as expelling the Palestinians from their homes in 1948, and for its future plans, such as confining Palestine's indigenous people to cantons.
Israel's leadership has declared all these measures necessary to preserve Israel as "a Jewish and democratic state," as phrased in Israel's Basic Law (and reiterated by Mr. Sharon, Mr. Olmert, and almost every Israeli party across the political spectrum). Yet it is not the fact of this open policy of ethnic cleansing, but Israel's right to pursue it, that is expressed in the phrase, "right to exist."
Hence bitter reluctance by the PLO, the Arab states, and much of the Muslim world to do so for many decades. They abandoned that position in 1989-90, as a pragmatic gesture toward a two-state solution. Cannot the EU then insist that Hamas recognize Israel's "right to exist" if the PLO, the PA, and all other governments in the world have recognized it?
The problem is that the quid pro quo that supported this recognition, formalized in the Oslo process, is now clearly wrecked by Israel's unilateral annexations of land. Carving the West Bank into cantons has eliminated any hope of a viable Palestinian state. The two-state solution is not working. In these conditions, should Hamas recognize Israel's "right to exist" if it is recognized to be eliminating Palestinian sovereignty altogether?
The more embarrassing problem, however, is that the EU itself has not explicitly recognized Israel's "right to exist" in this sense. Nor has Canada, or Norway. The United Nations has not done so, either. They haven't, because they can't."
cont.//..
"As the Palestinians stand to lose most of what is left of their homeland to this fuzziness, Hamas is refusing to endorse it. Is this extremist Islamic intransigence, warranting a funding freeze? Let us run a little thought experiment: Would Canadian, or Norwegian, or English, or French governments be called on the international carpet for not recognizing the "right to exist" of a neighboring state that is, with military force, settling its own ethnically defined population within contiguous walled cities and enclaves in Canadian, Norwegian, English or French national territories, while promising to carve those nations into "cantons?"
Absent clear borders, recognizing Israel's "right to exist" must mean something else. And of course it does. Clearly implicit in the term is Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.
In other words, the "right" Hamas is being required to endorse is that Israel can legitimately compose itself as a state in Palestine that is populated and run primarily by Jews, primarily for Jews. Such a state would thus be authorized by Hamas to sustain whatever laws and policies necessary to preserving its Jewish majority, even rejecting the return of Palestinian refugees mandated by international law. Or building a massive Wall on Palestinian land designed to protect the Jewish state from the "demographic threat" of mass non-Jewish citizenship-i.e., the Palestinians. Israel's would also be legitimized for past actions on the same agenda, such as expelling the Palestinians from their homes in 1948, and for its future plans, such as confining Palestine's indigenous people to cantons.
Israel's leadership has declared all these measures necessary to preserve Israel as "a Jewish and democratic state," as phrased in Israel's Basic Law (and reiterated by Mr. Sharon, Mr. Olmert, and almost every Israeli party across the political spectrum). Yet it is not the fact of this open policy of ethnic cleansing, but Israel's right to pursue it, that is expressed in the phrase, "right to exist."
Hence bitter reluctance by the PLO, the Arab states, and much of the Muslim world to do so for many decades. They abandoned that position in 1989-90, as a pragmatic gesture toward a two-state solution. Cannot the EU then insist that Hamas recognize Israel's "right to exist" if the PLO, the PA, and all other governments in the world have recognized it?
The problem is that the quid pro quo that supported this recognition, formalized in the Oslo process, is now clearly wrecked by Israel's unilateral annexations of land. Carving the West Bank into cantons has eliminated any hope of a viable Palestinian state. The two-state solution is not working. In these conditions, should Hamas recognize Israel's "right to exist" if it is recognized to be eliminating Palestinian sovereignty altogether?
The more embarrassing problem, however, is that the EU itself has not explicitly recognized Israel's "right to exist" in this sense. Nor has Canada, or Norway. The United Nations has not done so, either. They haven't, because they can't."
cont.//..
------ This thread is Locked ------
cont.//..
This may take some people by surprise, but the UN has not used the term "Jewish state" since 1947. Resolution 181 then called for a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state," with gerrymandered borders designed to craft Jewish and Arab majorities in each state. But the attempt was rendered obsolete when Zionist forces established "Israel" on a much greater swath of territory that had, in total, held a substantial Arab majority, and expelled most of the Arab residents. As refugees, according to the Geneva Conventions, those Arab residents have the right to return to their homes, villages, towns and cities. But their return would eliminate the Jewish majority in what became "Israel," so Israel hasn't allowed this.
Hence the UN cannot confirm Israel as a Jewish state (i.e., a state that can legitimately sustain a Jewish majority) without contradicting international law regarding the right of refugees. When the UN refers to "Israel" today, it does not understand Israel as the "Jewish state" in the old ethnic-majority terms of 1947, because Israel can be granted no "right" to an ethnic demography that would prevent the return of refugees"
Virginia Tilley is associate professor of Political Science and International Relations, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, and author of The One-State Solution: A Breakthrough for Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Deadlock. She is currently at the Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg, South Africa".
This may take some people by surprise, but the UN has not used the term "Jewish state" since 1947. Resolution 181 then called for a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state," with gerrymandered borders designed to craft Jewish and Arab majorities in each state. But the attempt was rendered obsolete when Zionist forces established "Israel" on a much greater swath of territory that had, in total, held a substantial Arab majority, and expelled most of the Arab residents. As refugees, according to the Geneva Conventions, those Arab residents have the right to return to their homes, villages, towns and cities. But their return would eliminate the Jewish majority in what became "Israel," so Israel hasn't allowed this.
Hence the UN cannot confirm Israel as a Jewish state (i.e., a state that can legitimately sustain a Jewish majority) without contradicting international law regarding the right of refugees. When the UN refers to "Israel" today, it does not understand Israel as the "Jewish state" in the old ethnic-majority terms of 1947, because Israel can be granted no "right" to an ethnic demography that would prevent the return of refugees"
Virginia Tilley is associate professor of Political Science and International Relations, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, and author of The One-State Solution: A Breakthrough for Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Deadlock. She is currently at the Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg, South Africa".
------ This thread is Locked ------
highfidelity: cont.//..
This may take some people by surprise, but the UN has not used the term "Jewish state" since 1947. Resolution 181 then called for a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state," with gerrymandered borders designed to craft Jewish and Arab majorities in each state. But the attempt was rendered obsolete when Zionist forces established "Israel" on a much greater swath of territory that had, in total, held a substantial Arab majority, and expelled most of the Arab residents. As refugees, according to the Geneva Conventions, those Arab residents have the right to return to their homes, villages, towns and cities. But their return would eliminate the Jewish majority in what became "Israel," so Israel hasn't allowed this.
Hence the UN cannot confirm Israel as a Jewish state (i.e., a state that can legitimately sustain a Jewish majority) without contradicting international law regarding the right of refugees. When the UN refers to "Israel" today, it does not understand Israel as the "Jewish state" in the old ethnic-majority terms of 1947, because Israel can be granted no "right" to an ethnic demography that would prevent the return of refugees"
Virginia Tilley is associate professor of Political Science and International Relations, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, and author of The One-State Solution: A Breakthrough for Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Deadlock. She is currently at the Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg, South Africa".
Very Interesting,the kind of ""People" you are quoting.This may take some people by surprise, but the UN has not used the term "Jewish state" since 1947. Resolution 181 then called for a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state," with gerrymandered borders designed to craft Jewish and Arab majorities in each state. But the attempt was rendered obsolete when Zionist forces established "Israel" on a much greater swath of territory that had, in total, held a substantial Arab majority, and expelled most of the Arab residents. As refugees, according to the Geneva Conventions, those Arab residents have the right to return to their homes, villages, towns and cities. But their return would eliminate the Jewish majority in what became "Israel," so Israel hasn't allowed this.
Hence the UN cannot confirm Israel as a Jewish state (i.e., a state that can legitimately sustain a Jewish majority) without contradicting international law regarding the right of refugees. When the UN refers to "Israel" today, it does not understand Israel as the "Jewish state" in the old ethnic-majority terms of 1947, because Israel can be granted no "right" to an ethnic demography that would prevent the return of refugees"
Virginia Tilley is associate professor of Political Science and International Relations, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, and author of The One-State Solution: A Breakthrough for Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Deadlock. She is currently at the Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg, South Africa".
------ This thread is Locked ------
callibya: Israel is open for tourism. You're free to travel there. But you may not be so easily able to travel and speak your mind freely in some of the Arabic countries. You're a woman, western and outspoken.
Hugz.. Israel is open but you have to be deaf and blind or you'll face the real men there.....
"Rachel Corrie" case...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErEK8pTFT1k
If you're stupid enough to stand in front of a Construction Vehicle,where the Operator can't see you,what do you expect?Hugz.. Israel is open but you have to be deaf and blind or you'll face the real men there.....
"Rachel Corrie" case...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErEK8pTFT1k
------ This thread is Locked ------
Here is the reason for Israel bulldozing some of the homes in Gaza.
To avoid detection of the tunnels, the Palestinians build them in civilian homes. In 2002, the IDF discovered 33 tunnels and, through mid-October 2003, another 36 were found. These tunnels connected Gaza and Egypt.
Large-scale Israeli operations against the tunnels coincide with intelligence reports that the Palestinians were attempting to smuggle more sophisticated weapons such as Katyusha rockets and Stinger missiles. And yes, the Katyusha rockets have been fired.
And a tunnel built coming from Lebanon was used to abduct Israeli soldiers.
Attacks against Israeli citizens are often treated by the media in an entirely different way than similar atrocities committed against other nationalities. Many press outlets are reluctant to call attacks against Jews terrorism and frequently attach more benign labels to the murderers such as “gunmen” or “militants.” For example, when a Palestinian woman walked into a crowded beach restaurant in Haifa and detonated a bomb that killed 21 people, including four children on October 4, 2003, the Reuters account said she had waged an “attack” and that the bombing showed that Palestinian officials had failed to “rein in the militants.”
One of the best examples of how the press sometimes distinguishes terrorist attacks against other nations was a list of “recent terror attacks around the world” disseminated in November 2003 by the Associated Press. The list cited 15 terrorist incidents during the five-year period between August 1998 and August 2003. During that period, more than 800 Israelis were murdered in terrorist attacks, but not one of the incidents in Israel made the list.
Similarly, when AP released its Year in Photos 2003, six of the 130 photos chosen related to human suffering in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All six were of Palestinians.REUTERS, AP, THE NEW YORK TIMES FORGET ISRAEL
Both the two biggest news agencies in the world, Reuters and AP, continue to ignore terror against Israel. (Almost every major news outlet in the world relies on one or both of these agencies for its core foreign news leads.)
I attach below, "Reuters chronology - Worst guerrilla attacks since September 11" (November 9, 2003, Reuters), that accompanied its reports of Saturday's suicide bombing in Saudi Arabia..
Pakistan, Tunisia, Yemen, Bali, Kenya, Chechen attacks in Moscow, attacks against Indians in Bombay. These are all included, but none of the terrorist attacks in Israel, many of which resulted in more death and injury than those cited by Reuters.
Furthermore, the Associated Press, in its bulletin "Recent Terror Attacks Around the World" (November 8, 2003) also omits reference to Israel, while including attacks in the Philippines, Kenya, Yemen and elsewhere. (Associated Press bulletin attached below).
Honest Reporting, the media watchdog organization that today also draws attention to the AP bulletin (though not to the Reuters one), points out that the New York Times Online also devotes a special section to world terror that leaves out attacks in Israel.
-- Tom Gross
To avoid detection of the tunnels, the Palestinians build them in civilian homes. In 2002, the IDF discovered 33 tunnels and, through mid-October 2003, another 36 were found. These tunnels connected Gaza and Egypt.
Large-scale Israeli operations against the tunnels coincide with intelligence reports that the Palestinians were attempting to smuggle more sophisticated weapons such as Katyusha rockets and Stinger missiles. And yes, the Katyusha rockets have been fired.
And a tunnel built coming from Lebanon was used to abduct Israeli soldiers.
Attacks against Israeli citizens are often treated by the media in an entirely different way than similar atrocities committed against other nationalities. Many press outlets are reluctant to call attacks against Jews terrorism and frequently attach more benign labels to the murderers such as “gunmen” or “militants.” For example, when a Palestinian woman walked into a crowded beach restaurant in Haifa and detonated a bomb that killed 21 people, including four children on October 4, 2003, the Reuters account said she had waged an “attack” and that the bombing showed that Palestinian officials had failed to “rein in the militants.”
One of the best examples of how the press sometimes distinguishes terrorist attacks against other nations was a list of “recent terror attacks around the world” disseminated in November 2003 by the Associated Press. The list cited 15 terrorist incidents during the five-year period between August 1998 and August 2003. During that period, more than 800 Israelis were murdered in terrorist attacks, but not one of the incidents in Israel made the list.
Similarly, when AP released its Year in Photos 2003, six of the 130 photos chosen related to human suffering in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All six were of Palestinians.REUTERS, AP, THE NEW YORK TIMES FORGET ISRAEL
Both the two biggest news agencies in the world, Reuters and AP, continue to ignore terror against Israel. (Almost every major news outlet in the world relies on one or both of these agencies for its core foreign news leads.)
I attach below, "Reuters chronology - Worst guerrilla attacks since September 11" (November 9, 2003, Reuters), that accompanied its reports of Saturday's suicide bombing in Saudi Arabia..
Pakistan, Tunisia, Yemen, Bali, Kenya, Chechen attacks in Moscow, attacks against Indians in Bombay. These are all included, but none of the terrorist attacks in Israel, many of which resulted in more death and injury than those cited by Reuters.
Furthermore, the Associated Press, in its bulletin "Recent Terror Attacks Around the World" (November 8, 2003) also omits reference to Israel, while including attacks in the Philippines, Kenya, Yemen and elsewhere. (Associated Press bulletin attached below).
Honest Reporting, the media watchdog organization that today also draws attention to the AP bulletin (though not to the Reuters one), points out that the New York Times Online also devotes a special section to world terror that leaves out attacks in Israel.
-- Tom Gross
------ This thread is Locked ------
Yes, I have to agree that there is a double edge sword with the Palestinian/Israeli situation with the U.N. especially in regards to the children. While the UN routinely adopts resolutions critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, it has never adopted a single resolution unequivocally condemning violence against Israeli citizens. One of the most dramatic examples of the U.N.'s double-standard came in 2003 when Israel offered a draft resolution in the General Assembly for the first time in 27 years.
The resolution called for the protection of Israeli children from terrorism, but it did not receive enough support from the members of the General Assembly to even come to a vote. Israel had introduced the resolution in response to the murder of dozens of Israeli children in terrorist attacks, and after a similar resolution had been adopted by a UN committee (later adopted by the full Assembly) calling for the protection of Palestinian children from “Israeli aggression.”
And this now leads to the question that really adds to the extra double edge. How is it that the U.N. calls for protection of the Palestinian children while turning a blind eye to the fact that they are trained from childhood to strap bombs to themselves and shoot a gun to kill Jews? The Hamas military training videos that they have very proudly released for the world to see validate that these children are indeed armed to the hilt with guns. Guess the U.N. must have turned a blind eye to the use of child soldiers in that case.
The resolution called for the protection of Israeli children from terrorism, but it did not receive enough support from the members of the General Assembly to even come to a vote. Israel had introduced the resolution in response to the murder of dozens of Israeli children in terrorist attacks, and after a similar resolution had been adopted by a UN committee (later adopted by the full Assembly) calling for the protection of Palestinian children from “Israeli aggression.”
And this now leads to the question that really adds to the extra double edge. How is it that the U.N. calls for protection of the Palestinian children while turning a blind eye to the fact that they are trained from childhood to strap bombs to themselves and shoot a gun to kill Jews? The Hamas military training videos that they have very proudly released for the world to see validate that these children are indeed armed to the hilt with guns. Guess the U.N. must have turned a blind eye to the use of child soldiers in that case.
------ This thread is Locked ------
Ma'ale Adumin is a suburb of Israel’s capital, barely three miles outside Jerusalem’s city limits, a ten-minute drive away. It is also the largest Jewish city in the territories.
The Gush Etzion Bloc consists of 18 communities just 10 minutes from Jerusalem. Jews lived in this area prior to 1948, but the Jordanian Legion destroyed the settlements and killed 240 women and children during Israel’s War of Independence. After Israel recaptured the area in 1967, descendants of those early settlers reestablished the community.
Ariel is the heart of the second most populous bloc of settlements. The city is located just 25 miles east of Tel Aviv and 31 miles north of Jerusalem. Ariel and the surrounding communities expand Israel's narrow waist (which was just 9 miles wide prior to 1967) and ensure that Israel has a land route to the Jordan Valley in case Israel needs to fight a land war to the east. It is more controversial than the other consensus settlements because it is the furthest from the 1949 Armistice Line, extending approximately 12 miles into the West Bank. Nevertheless, Barak’s proposal at Camp David included Ariel among the settlement blocs to be annexed to Israel; the Clinton plan also envisioned incorporating Ariel within Israel's borders.
The Gush Etzion Bloc consists of 18 communities just 10 minutes from Jerusalem. Jews lived in this area prior to 1948, but the Jordanian Legion destroyed the settlements and killed 240 women and children during Israel’s War of Independence. After Israel recaptured the area in 1967, descendants of those early settlers reestablished the community.
Ariel is the heart of the second most populous bloc of settlements. The city is located just 25 miles east of Tel Aviv and 31 miles north of Jerusalem. Ariel and the surrounding communities expand Israel's narrow waist (which was just 9 miles wide prior to 1967) and ensure that Israel has a land route to the Jordan Valley in case Israel needs to fight a land war to the east. It is more controversial than the other consensus settlements because it is the furthest from the 1949 Armistice Line, extending approximately 12 miles into the West Bank. Nevertheless, Barak’s proposal at Camp David included Ariel among the settlement blocs to be annexed to Israel; the Clinton plan also envisioned incorporating Ariel within Israel's borders.
------ This thread is Locked ------
Let us pretend for a moment that Hamas is being asked to recognize Israel in the normal diplomatic sense. In this case, however, the EU position is unsupportable, because diplomatic recognition of a state routinely requires one bit of vital information: "right to exist" where? Israel's borders are not set.
It is entirely legitimate for Hamas to require firm confirmation of Israel's borders before recognizing it. It should also be incumbent on the international community to confirm where those borders will be before insisting that Hamas recognize Israel's "right" to them.(quote-HiFidelity posting)
Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist at all so confirming Israels borders as a Hamas condition for Palestinian statehood is a moot point. Please read the Hamas constitution. Drewski has posted parts of it on this forum several pages back.
So I have to agree with HF's posting in the respect that it is only a pretend moment that Hamas would ever recognize Israel in any diplomatic sense. Hamas constitution does not allow for diplomatic negotiations to recognize Israel ever. Hamas can't even hold up to their word on a truce they agree on to stop firing rockets into Israel. They seem to do a lot of pretend moments to try to fool the world into thinking they want peace. And then Israel looks like the bad guy when blasting Hamas back? Nah, I don't think so!! JMO here!
It is entirely legitimate for Hamas to require firm confirmation of Israel's borders before recognizing it. It should also be incumbent on the international community to confirm where those borders will be before insisting that Hamas recognize Israel's "right" to them.(quote-HiFidelity posting)
Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist at all so confirming Israels borders as a Hamas condition for Palestinian statehood is a moot point. Please read the Hamas constitution. Drewski has posted parts of it on this forum several pages back.
So I have to agree with HF's posting in the respect that it is only a pretend moment that Hamas would ever recognize Israel in any diplomatic sense. Hamas constitution does not allow for diplomatic negotiations to recognize Israel ever. Hamas can't even hold up to their word on a truce they agree on to stop firing rockets into Israel. They seem to do a lot of pretend moments to try to fool the world into thinking they want peace. And then Israel looks like the bad guy when blasting Hamas back? Nah, I don't think so!! JMO here!
------ This thread is Locked ------
Just saw this on the BBC news.
Israeli planes hit Gaza tunnels.
The air raids on Gaza came after a Grad rocket hit the Israeli city of Ashkelon.
Israeli planes have bombed smuggling tunnels on Gaza's border with Egypt, the Israeli military says.
Ashkelon, a city of 122,000 people, is 12 km (7 miles) from northern Gaza.
The city is out of range of the standard rockets and mortars fired by Palestinian militants.
The two attacks are the latest from both sides since they declared separate ceasefires on 18 January after a three-week Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip.
Israel had warned of a harsh response to any further rocket fire from Gaza after the long-range Grad rocket hit Ashkelon on Tuesday.
It is the first attack on Israel involving a Grad rocket since the 18 January ceasefires.
Other rockets and mortars have been launched from Gaza, however, and Israel has bombed targets in the narrow coastal territory.
"I suggest Hamas doesn't fool around with us," said Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak.
Israeli planes hit Gaza tunnels.
The air raids on Gaza came after a Grad rocket hit the Israeli city of Ashkelon.
Israeli planes have bombed smuggling tunnels on Gaza's border with Egypt, the Israeli military says.
Ashkelon, a city of 122,000 people, is 12 km (7 miles) from northern Gaza.
The city is out of range of the standard rockets and mortars fired by Palestinian militants.
The two attacks are the latest from both sides since they declared separate ceasefires on 18 January after a three-week Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip.
Israel had warned of a harsh response to any further rocket fire from Gaza after the long-range Grad rocket hit Ashkelon on Tuesday.
It is the first attack on Israel involving a Grad rocket since the 18 January ceasefires.
Other rockets and mortars have been launched from Gaza, however, and Israel has bombed targets in the narrow coastal territory.
"I suggest Hamas doesn't fool around with us," said Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak.
------ This thread is Locked ------
This Thread is locked
More Threads
rarotonga
The world is as you see
What I Lack In Vocabulary
Icebergs Still Around
Salami, Salami, Baloney
How far is too far?
everything is changing
Reality Check
1830's Music
What's going on
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
What is "international peace agreements"?
You have been led astray by a biased media.