Norway lays down Palestine state approval terms amongst money worries

[Lars77]

“The Palestinians must be willing to start negotiations on final status issues. The text must recognise Israel’s right to exist and not delegitimize the State of Israel, either directly or indirectly.”

Declaring that the Norwegian Parliament underwrites these views, he tells Aftenposten, “We, who are friends of both Israel and the Palestinians, but above all the peace process, have communicated this message .”

“They should obligate themselves to modern principles of state anchored in the UN charter, such as universal human rights and the rule of law, when talking of a Palestinian state,” the Foreign Minister continues, saying he feels there is broad governmental support for these views.

The FM cautiously endorsed Palestine’s UN recognition bid in July, following talks and a working lunch with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. As part of efforts to strengthen ties between the two countries Norway has also agreed to a Palestinian embassy in Oslo, allowing a Palestinian representative to have a rank of ambassador.

http://theforeigner.no/pages/news/norway-lays-down-palestine-state-approval-terms-amongst-money-worries/

[azurnoir]

1. what if Israel continues or even expands settlement building?

does Norway address that? sounds a bit like backpedaling IMO, conditions for Palestinians only but not for Israeli's? with friends like that.......

[Kurska]

8. Of course the conditions are on the Palestinians, they are the ones who are asking for something.

The Palestinians want to be rewarded with a state, the Israelis already have theirs.

[vminfla]

2. A reasoned, principled response

nt

[vminfla]

3. A nation sanctioned by the UN that does not recognize Human Rights is an abomination

It would be an embarrassment to the UN to sanction such a state. Quite frankly, these should be central tenets and requirements of such a vote.

[Violet_Crumble]

4. There's been quite a few sanctioned by the UN in the past...

Why is it a problem for you now?

[vminfla]

5. No sense in repeating the mistakes of the past

Let's start fresh now and ensure that this state has everything that it needs to be a successful state that will not harbor or promote state-sponsored terrorism as seen by the ilk of Hamas.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. That seems a bit selectively unfair...

I mean, you want a new state to exist next to one that already harbors and promotes state-sponsored terrorism as seen by the ilk of the extremist settlers in the Occupied West Bank.

[shira]

33. Comparing Hamas state-sponsored terror to settler acts? What a joke! n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Yeah, I forgot. It's merely 'settler acts'. Silly me!

Baruch Goldstein, Kahanists, those who murder and attack Palestinians, the 'price-tag' attacks, they're not terrorists, they're naughty and misguided, but all the time loveable larrikins with a pioneering spirit next to none! ;)

There's no point in comparing state-sanctioned terrorism and trying to make out one is less acceptable than others. It's the same as comparing two rapists and trying to make out one isn't as bad as the other...

[shira]

48. Think Israelis would rather have settler style attacks the past 60 years than Hamas/PLO?

Calling settler acts state sponsored is ridiculous. Gangs rule areas in certain cities across the USA wile kids are bullied in US school systems relentlessly. Neither is an example of state sponsored terror, but rather a breakdown WRT law and order.

Try again.

[Violet_Crumble]

52. Huh? That makes no sense at all....

The settlers are supported by the government, both in allowing them to remain in the West Bank despite their terrorism, and the IDF training and arming some of them. If that's not state-sanctioned terrorism, then that's one strange way of defining it you've got going...

I see yr not aware that in the examples you gave, yr talking about illegal activity of citizens of the US inside the US itself. Those things are criminal, and I doubt anyone would argue that. The difference in the West Bank is that it's NOT part of Israel, yet some Israeli citizens are murdering and attacking Palestinians while Israel supports them staying there....

Try again...

[shira]

54. If Israel encouraged and cheered on Baruch Goldstein, making a hero/martyr of him...

Oh, never mind.

Bye.

[Violet_Crumble]

59. I'm pretty sure you haven't got the slightest clue about state-sanctioned terrorism...

Whether or not a terrorist gets 'encouraged and cheered' has absolutely no bearing at all on whether something's state-sanctioned terrorism. For example, when the US mined Nicaraguas harbours and supported the Contras, it was state-sanctioned terrorism regardless of whether anyone cheered about it or not. Hope that helps.

[shira]

68. I know more than you. You thought OCL was state sanctioned terror and you were wrong about that. NT

[Violet_Crumble]

79. Clearly you don't. Refer to my previous post for an explanation as to why...

And as you have a tendency to make up shit about what I think and say, and I can't recall saying that OCL was state-sanctioned terrorism, please give me a link to where I said it....

[shira]

85. You called Livni and Olmert war criminals for OCL. Clearly, you believe they sanctioned terror...

..at the state level. I can't even count the number of times you pointed to "evidence" of Israeli war crimes in Gaza.

So no, you have no clue as to what you're carrying on about...

[Violet_Crumble]

95. I can't remember if I called them that or not. But I clearly didn't call OCL state-sanctioned terror

Or else you would have backed up yr claim with a link to where I said it. You really have to stop making things up about what people say....

War crimes and state-sanctioned terrorism are not one and the same. War crimes are committed during an armed conflict. State sanctioned terrorism are, as evidenced by the examples I've given you and you've promptly ignored, where a state will give sometimes clandestine support to terrorists, or will carry out attacks on states that it isn't in a state of armed conflict with (US mining the harbours of Nicaragua). I guess there would be instances where a war crime could also be an act of state-terrorism, but not all war crimes are state-terrorism.

So, yeah. Keep on telling me it's me who doesn't know what I'm talking about if it makes you feel better about yrself...

[shira]

102. You did. You think Livni should've been arrested when visiting the UK.

Why should she have been arrested?

[Violet_Crumble]

107. No, I didn't call OCL state-sanctioned terrorism...

You were given a chance to provide a link to where I said it, just in case I had forgotten I'd said it, and you didn't. As I've suggested to you many times, you should stick to what people actually say instead of pulling stuff out of the air...

Just to add some detail, even though you think you know more than me on the subject, the term terrorism doesn't have a legal definition like genocide does, for example, so what is and isn't considered to be terrorism or state-sanctioned terrorism can be debated. Some (and that has included some 'supporters' of Israel in this forum) have tried to argue that states can't commit acts of terrorism, and as yr so up on what the UN says, you'd know that the UN doesn't use the term 'state terrorism'. Just thought I'd mention that so you can add another point that yr in strong disagreement with the UN on. Some people are strongly opposed to the study of state terrorism being included in studies on terrorism because they think that the concept of terrorism doesn't apply to states. I disagree with that stance. How else could the death squads of El Salvador (proudly supported by the US), the US mining of Nicaraguan habours, or the complicity of Israeli governments in aiding and abetting Israeli terrorists in the West Bank be described?

[King_David]

6. Are you OK with that ?

The UN recognizing a state that legally discriminates against LGBT ?

[Violet_Crumble]

11. The UN's recognised a lot of states that legally discriminate against LGBT...

Do you want a list?

[King_David]

20. This century ?

I do not think that LGBT discrimination

should be supported or encouraged by

rewarding offenders with recognition .

There should be zero tolerance.

And it should be a no brainer for

anyone posting on DU and all progressives

in general .

[Violet_Crumble]

44. Why only limit it to the past 11 years?

Those of us who are LGBT allies should demand that recognition be removed from ALL states that discriminate. That includes Israel and the US. That should be a no brainer for anyone posting on DU and all progessives in general.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[King_David]

92. I do not have to

It aint me with the biases and issues.

[Violet_Crumble]

96. Well, there does appear to be a fair bit of minimising of discrimination against LGBTers in yr posts

And, yes, I have a massive bias against those who minimise homophobia in countries like the US and only focus on it in Muslim countries.

[King_David]

117. Strange argument

What is most revealing is that there is a whole bunch of people pretending to be progressives

but take them away from the Jewish and or Israeli topic and

add an LGBT rights issue THEN the real right wing in them appears .

Gay rights are not negotiable . Why would the USA ever recognize

A country that is going to criminalize or probably worse in Gaza , people like myself.

I know you don't give a fuck , but Obama does.

As far as being "civil"? .. Coming from you that's a ha ha ha moment.

[Violet_Crumble]

118. Not at all. What's strange about supporting LGBT equality in all places?

How is that right-wing or not progressive? It's not.

Either yr not aware, or even worse, are aware and just don't care, about the discrimination and lack of equal rights for LGBTers in the US. People who truly support LGBT rights are opposed to all discrimination, and those who are only opposed to it selectively and use it as a tool to argue against the creation of a Palestinian state, have an entirely different agenda. That's why I strongly urge you to read the LGBT forum and educate yrself on LGBT issues...

Funnily enough, I don't find you accusing half of this forum of being homophobes, RW, etc to be the slightest bit civil. You did claim only a few days ago you were going to try to be civil, but that looks like it didn't last more than one or two posts. OTOH, I try to be civil, even to those who have made malicious accusations towards me, and if you feel I'm slipping up in that regard, feel free to alert on any of my posts :)

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

97. How is being opposed to all homophobia being clueless?

I see that trying to be civil thing didn't sit real well with you. Can't say I'm the slightest bit surprised...

[King_David]

94. The president, who was discussing the Palestine statehood bid, said: “No country should deny people

'The president, who was discussing the Palestine statehood bid, said: “No country should deny people their rights because of who they love, which is why we must stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians everywhere.”


TOUCHDOWN !!!

[Violet_Crumble]

98. But many states in the US deny them their rights. That doesn't seem to bother you...

Nor does it seem to bother you that gay marriage in Israel is illegal. I'd suggest that Obama start standing up for the rights of gays and lesbians in the US as well instead of using it as a political weapon to single out the Palestinians, lest he be seen by more and more people as being a hypocrite and a massive disappointment on LGBT rights...

Just in case you return to each of yr three posts that I ever so thoughtfully replied to with another three post response to each, leaving me nine posts to reply to, it might be a good idea to get yr 'thoughts' in order and attempt to leave one coherent response devoid of abuse and malicious accusations of homophobia. I mean, really. Surely no-one is silly enough to think that supporting Palestinian statehood makes someone a homophobe?

[King_David]

22. If slavery were legal in PA

Territories or if it were illegal to be black skinned

would such a country be admitted and recognized?

( would the DU community encourage it ?)

[shira]

31. They'd be for such a state. It will be an apartheid state like Gaza now....

Recall that refugees in camps are denied the same rights as citizens. Most Gazans are refugees even if they don't live in camps. They're not citizens.

The so-called pro-Palestinian contingent here (actually it's anti-Israel as well as anti-Palestinian) don't have a problem with that.

[Violet_Crumble]

45. It's not. But no state that legalises slavery should be recognised imo n/t

[shira]

49. The PA will legalize apartheid and ethnic cleansing. Should such a state be recognized? n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

53. No, it won't. But Israel's already done all that. Let's remove its recognition! n/t

[shira]

56. Refugees within the WB and Gaza won't be citizens. Jews will be ethnically cleansed.

No sense denying it.

[Violet_Crumble]

58. At the risk of provoking a flood of crap links to anti-Palestinian sources...

I'll just point out that rational folk will go on what the PA actually does rather than what extremely partisan anti-Palestinian types carry on about what they reckon will happen.

[shira]

61. Lebanon's Daily Star and Tablet aren't anti-Palestinian sources...

Interview: Refugees will not be citizens of new state
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Politics/2011/Sep-15/148791-interview-refugees-will-not-be-citizens-of-new-state.ashx

That's apartheid.

Q&A: Maen Rashid Areikat
http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/48834/qa-maen-areikat/

That's ethnic cleansing.

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

While your strategy is to find any excuse to disqualify Israel from UN membership - apparently if Israel isn't perfect it doesn't belong to the UN - the point I'm trying to get across to you is that there isn't anything remotely positive to point to WRT Palestinian statehood. It's all bad news. The reason I brought up freedom of speech and press is b/c that would be reason enough IMO for hope that the Palestinians would turn things around eventually.

[Violet_Crumble]

62. No,but neither of them claimed what you said...

You claimed the PA would do those things. The PA has said nothing of the sort. You really need to remember what you claim and then carefully read what yr going to link to to ensure that both match up...

While your strategy is to find any excuse to disqualify Israel from UN membership - apparently if Israel isn't perfect it doesn't belong to the UN

That's yet another big fail on the attempt to read minds. My strategy is a simple one, and that's to show up the massive hypocrisy of those who make endless excuses about why Palestine shouldn't be a member of the UN by pointing out that the things they're complaining about would exclude Israel as a member as well.

[shira]

67. I see. So these representatives of the PA are talking out their asses?

When the PA (Fatah) rules it's illegal to sell land to Jews and attaches a death penalty to such an act, you don't see that as racist?

When Abbas says no Israeli civilian (settler) presence in a future Palestine, that's not ethnic cleansing?

Currently, the PA doesn't allow refugees to be citizens within the West Bank. They can't vote as non-citizens, for example. But you don't see that as apartheid?

[Violet_Crumble]

80. They're ambassadors, not the PA...

I guess I've been reading things wrong all this time and when ambassadors from other countries, including the racist idiot who was the Israeli ambassador here, say anything, they're actually the government talking and expressing the government position. Would you like me to supply you with a list of what yr now claiming is the view of the Israeli government? Or does yr 'logic' not extend to Israel?

Currently? The PA isn't in a position to give citizenship even if they wanted to. Israel controls who can and can't live in the Occupied Territories, and they won't let them return. I suggest you spend just one microsecond criticising Israel for that...

[shira]

86. The PA right now is racist WRT giving the death penalty for selling land to Jews...

Abbas has said very clearly that not one Israeli settler (Jews) will be allowed in a Palestinian state.

The PA continues not to allow refugees currently living within the West Bank in camps to become citizens with equal rights (apartheid).

===========

It's not just the ambassadors.

You couldn't be more wrong.

[Violet_Crumble]

99. It's not racist at all....

Jews aren't a race. And what you said was complete nonsense anyway. Have you got any proof at all that any Palestinian who sold land to Daniel Barenboim (he's an Israeli Jew who was granted Palestinian citizenship a few years back) would be given the death penalty? More than likely yr now conflating the term 'Jew' and 'settler' in order to yet again demonise Palestinians...

You made a false claim when you said the PA would legalise apartheid and ethnic cleansing, and now yr trying to wiggle yr way out of it. If you want to come across as slightly credible, you need to be able to not just supply links to back up yr claims, but links that lead to something that actually gives examples of yr claim. You failed to do so...

I do have to wonder why folk who have head explosions when the terms 'apartheid' and 'ethnic cleansing' are used in regard to Israel behave as though they think they earn some sort of Frequent Mention points each time they fling them round in regard to Palestine...

[shira]

103. Yes, keep denying and playing your games. Have a nice day! n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

109. I had a lovely day, thank you!

I'm not sure what 'games' you think I'm playing, but it would be nice if you could drop the silly attacks and try to defend what you say rationally :)

[shira]

106. It's ugly antisemitism. As to apartheid, the PA currently practices it....

...against refugees living within camps INSIDE the West Bank under PA authority. These are people born in that land denied equal rights (like voting, getting visas/passports).

As to ethnic cleansing, Abbas has said he is against the presence of any Israelis in a future Palestinian state. He means Jews when he refers to Israelis.

Note: Wafa, the official Palestinian news agency published on July 28 its version of Abbas’ briefing to the Egyptian media, quoting him as saying: “I'm willing to agree to a third party that would supervise the agreement, such as NATO forces, but I would not agree to having Jews among the NATO forces, or that there will live among us even a single Israeli on Palestinian land”. This version was reprinted by Palestinian newspapers al-Quds and al-Hayat al-Jadida on July 30 and by other Arab newspapers.

A few days later Wafa published a new version of Abbas’ interview to the Egyptian media, where he was quoted as saying: “We have no objection to the presence of a third party after the (Palestinian) state is established, and we don’t oppose that the third party will be NATO or any other force. However, I will not agree that an Israeli, even if he is a Muslim, will be present on my land, but I’ll agree only (to the presence) of a third party. The reason for that is stemmed in the fact that the Israeli is the heir of the occupation, while the presence of the third party is temporary as are the Multinational Forces in your country (Egypt) and UNIFIL in Lebanon.”

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3929819,00.html

Of course, you'll probably deny this - claim it's a rightwing lie against the centre left PA - and that it demonizes Palestinians.

[Violet_Crumble]

108. Antisemitism? So yr claiming Daniel Barenboim isn't Jewish?

But, Shira. Yr constantly equating Jews and Israelis. Why would it upset you so when an Arab allegedly does the same thing?

Also, considering Israel's carrying out a brutal occupation of the West Bank, no-one who's the slightest bit rational would complain if at the moment (things of course would change if Israel allowed a two-state solution where it lived peacefully alongside a Palestinian state) they don't want citizens from the country that's done that to them to be citizens.

btw, when I refer to demonisation of Palestinians, I'm referring to the attitudes you display in yr posts. The way you hold them to a completely different standard that Israel, amongst other things...

[shira]

124. Barenboim is an exception, just like the Ayatollahs love the Neturei Karta...

You can't be serious. Why not also bring up Amira Hass, the Neturei Karta, and Adam Shapiro?

:shrug:

Well maybe you are serious. In that case, an Israel under Betenyu rule (Lieberman and company) should expel all Arabs except for a handful who are the most loyal hasbarists they can find. They can use the same excuse as the PA, which you have no problem with. That way, you can't accuse Israel of bigotry or racism.

Comical.

[Violet_Crumble]

127. I must respectfully disagree

You haven't yet provided a shred of evidence to back up yr initial claim that 'The PA will legalize apartheid and ethnic cleansing.'. You haven't provided anything where the PA themselves state that they would definately do this. If you had, I would be opposed to it, obviously, but you haven't.

Now onto what you said in this most recent post: 'In that case, an Israel under Betenyu rule (Lieberman and company) should expel all Arabs except for a handful who are the most loyal hasbarists they can find. They can use the same excuse as the PA, which you have no problem with.'

There's several problems with that comment:

1. Yr trying to compare a state that's existed for decades to territory occupied by Israel where Israel exerts ultimate control over who lives there. The current situation where Israeli citizens move there, taking land from the Palestinians and living under a completely different set of laws than Palestinians is both untenable and discriminatory in the extreme. It's not a 'what if' or 'I reckon this is what will happen' scenario. It's actually happening now.

2. Yr comparing Daniel Barenboim to a 'loyal hasbarist'? Do you even know who he is or his work in bringing Israelis and Palestinians together through music?

3. I'm not sure what 'same excuse' yr talking about, as you haven't provided any evidence that supports yr claims...

[shira]

128. First thing you wrote...

"You haven't yet provided a shred of evidence to back up yr initial claim that 'The PA will legalize apartheid..."

The PA already practices apartheid against Palestinian refugees currently residing within the West Bank under its autonomy, both in and outside refugee camps. These Palestinians born in the West Bank are not allowed to vote in PA elections, get visas, etc.

Same as in Gaza for those born there and denied the same rights as other Palestinians. And Gaza hasn't been occupied for 6 years now...

[Violet_Crumble]

130. A few questions...

1. How do you define apartheid?

2. What PA elections are you talking about?

3. Doesn't Israel control who enters or leaves the West Bank and Gaza? My understanding is that while the PA issues passports, I'm pretty sure they don't issue visas, as it'd be an exercise in futility as they have no control over who enters or leaves.

[King_David]

137. OK got it

No to slavery but discriminating against ,Jailing or killing Gays is OK.

Gotcha . Thanks

[azurnoir]

138. Give us proof that IDF or IOF defends Palestinian Gays living in the West Bank

this is the at least third time I've asked and so far all I get is being compared to Anne Coulter and other attacks which leads me to believe you have nothing, what have you got? nothing but false accusations and Orwellian reasoning Military occupation and colonization for the sake of human rights?

[King_David]

139. Sorry can't emotionally

Discuss this topic with some people here..
Very bizarre responses to gay issues

[azurnoir]

140. I take it answer is you do not have any proof or IDF does not protect Gay Palestinians

as some Gay Palestinians have stated they do not and yes that most likely is quite painful for you

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[King_David]

144. NO nt

[azurnoir]

146. No you do not respect the wishes of Palestinian Gays?

or no you will not back up your own statement? will you help someone else do it though?

[King_David]

147. No I think you need some education on the LGBT topic

Start with the difference between orientation and preference

and then continue with human rights for all minority groups.

You desperately need it.

Which is strange on a Progressive forum.

[azurnoir]

148. what is strange to me is that one who so claims to 'support Gay Rights" will only support

his Gay Palestinian Brothers and Sisters through the narrow focus of continued Israeli military occupation along with continued 'settlement' or colonization, quite frankly your continued resorting to insults only highlights the very weakness of your argument

[King_David]

149. I can not continue this insulting conversation

Bye bye..

[azurnoir]

150. well ok then? n/t

[shira]

143. When so-called progressives embrace nazis like Gilad Atzmon...

...and fear denouncing him (or Helen Thomas) because such a thing would be considered "rightwing" and anti-Palestinian, you can't be surprised that these so-called anti-racists in league with Nazis like Atzmon care in the least for gays.

[azurnoir]

145. aha so you are saying that I embrace Gilad Atzmon or that I am a Nazi is that it?

well let's see what you've got BTW I am not the one endorsing a guy who associates with Pam Geller am I?

[shira]

151. What do you think of Richard Falk, John Mearsheimer, Jonathan Cook, the FG movement....

...and all of his other adoring fans who love promoting Atzmon's work?

I'm endorsing Marcus' work at PMW, not his political views - which neither one of us is familiar with. He doesn't write opinion pieces. He translates Arab media.

[azurnoir]

152. Marcus's work Palestine Media Watch are a part of his political views

as to the rest there are times I agree with them and times I do not it depends on the work in question, you seem to want to crstalize everything each one of these people has done in the claimed endorsment of Atzmons book, but tell us would you apply the same standard to Sari Nusseibeh whom in the past you have endorsed here is a sample of a recent article he penned

Why Israel can't be a 'Jewish State'

The Israeli government's current mantra is that the Palestinians must recognise a "Jewish State". Of course, the Palestinians have clearly and repeatedly recognised the State of Israel as such in the 1993 Oslo Accords (which were based on an Israeli promise to establish a Palestinian state within five years - a promise now shattered) and many times since. Recently, however, Israeli leaders have dramatically and unilaterally moved the goal-posts and are now clamouring that Palestinians must recognise Israel as a "Jewish State".

In 1946, the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry concluded that the demand for a "Jewish State" was not part of the obligations of the Balfour Declaration or the British Mandate. Even in the First Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897, when Zionists sought to "establish a home for the Jewish people", there was no reference of a "Jewish State". The Zionist Organisation preferred at first to use the description "Jewish homeland" or "Jewish Commonwealth". Many pioneering Zionist leaders, such as Judah Magnes and Martin Buber also avoided the clear and explicit term "Jewish State" for their project of a homeland for Jews, and preferred instead the concept of a democratic bi-national state.

Today, however, demands for a "Jewish State" from Israeli politicians are growing without giving thought to what this might mean, and its supporters claim that it would be as natural as calling France a French State. However, if we consider the subject dispassionately, the idea of a "Jewish State" is logically and morally problematic because of its legal, religious, historical and social implications. The implications of this term therefore need to be spelled out, and we are sure that once they are, most people - and most Israeli citizens, we trust - will not accept these implications.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/201192614417586774.html

[shira]

153. Seriously? Translating Arab media points to a political view?

I'd say those people and organizations who promote Atzmon's work and find ways of excusing his Nazi style antisemitism are heinously vulgar rightwingers, as Atzmon is indistinguishable from David Duke. You don't agree, right? Why?

As to Nusseibeh, I read that article a few days ago and lost more respect for him as a result because he's about as moderate and "liberal" a Palestinian as you'll find.

[azurnoir]

154. PMW is not a neutral organization and I said nothing about my opinion of Atzmon's work

I said it seemed you wished to 'crystallize' the works of Meirsheimer, Falk, Cook and the Free Gaza movement in their supposed endorsement Atzmon but then again you have proclaimed them antisemites in the past, as to Atzmon and David Duke I actually don't pay too much attention to either of them nor do I Pam Geller or Geert Wilders a bigot is a bigot is a bigot and they are flip sides of the same coin IMO

[shira]

155. So how would a neutral organization do PMW's work differently?

As to Mearsheimer, Falk, Cook and others who promote Atzmon's work, you don't believe that harms their credibility or reputations as advocates for Palestinians?

[azurnoir]

156. PMW dedicates itself to finding the most negative possible when it comes to Palestinian leaders

and Pam Geller promotes it, as to the rest what is apparent ids that you feel and have felt that their supposed promotion Atzmon's work somehow delegitmizes them but if it wasn't that it would be something else

[shira]

160. Most anti-Israel blogs look for the most negative things possible WRT Israel.

So what does that say about them? Does that mean they're the mirror opposite image of PMW, whatever that means?

What would you say about anti-Israel sources promoting David Duke? No biggie there even though that's WAY nasty far rightwing? Because if that does make a source problematic, Atzmon is basically David Duke as the 2 are indistinguishable in their views on Israel. If David Duke is enough to blow up the credibility of an anti-Israel source, why not Atzmon?

[azurnoir]

164. quite frankly I have never seen any sources anti-Israel or otherwise promoting David Duke

but I am sure you can ante up some

as to who is identical in their views of Israel recently there was a post here that stated Dennis Kucinich was also 'identical' to David Duke where Israel is concerned so does this mean that Kucinich and Atzmon are also identical in their views of Israel?

quite frankly I am not familiar with Atzmon or Duke as I have stated prior I am a bit more familiar with Geller as her site was posted on the front page here at DU due to her writing about the Occupy Wallstreet Movement and from when Peter Daou used to run his column in Salon, she seems an extremist however that she promotes PMW does not seem to faze you in the slightest yet you seek to completely delegitimize anyone who ever repeated a of Atzmon's in anything but a completely negative light the best that can be said is "to each his own"

That being said IMO there is no one critic or promoter of Israel that is 100% or even 85% everyone has an opinion

eta wrong form of there or their and it bugged me

[shira]

165. So if an anti-Israel source promotes Duke, that blows up their credibility - right?

David Duke is the former grand wizard of the KKK, rightwing, and is a modern day neo-nazi.

Atzmon's writings are also neo-nazi style and David Duke is a big fan of his work.

=====

Assume what I just wrote about Duke and Atzmon is true. Would you say someone who promotes these vulgar people - being familiar with their body of work WRT Israel and Jews - can be considered antisemitic? And if not, how's about their credibility? Permanently damaged or no?

=====

You wrote:

as to who is identical in their views of Israel recently there was a post here that stated Dennis Kucinich was also 'identical' to David Duke where Israel is concerned so does this mean that Kucinich and Atzmon are also identical in their views of Israel?

quite frankly I am not familiar with Atzmon or Duke as I have stated prior I am a bit more familiar with Geller as her site was posted on the front page here at DU due to her writing about the Occupy Wallstreet Movement and from when Peter Daou used to run his column in Salon, she seems an extremist however that she promotes PMW does not seem to faze you in the slightest yet you seek to completely delegitimize anyone who ever repeated a of Atzmon's in anything but a completely negative light the best that can be said is "to each his own"

The post you're thinking about does not state Kucinich is identical to David Duke.

Gellar promoting PMW doesn't bother me anymore than Gellar promoting Dershowitz or Eli Wiesel. Again, we don't know Itamar Marcus' political views, do we? Are they closer to Pam Gellar's or Alan Dershowitz's? Big difference there, don't you think? PMW's work alone doesn't make it a hate site. I find nothing wrong with monitoring Palestinian media for hate and incitement. It's important people know about that. It certainly shouldn't be censored, ignored, or denied.

[bemildred]

157. Translation is a difficult art, and translations are generally considered to be new works.

It is not easy, straightforward, or mechanical. Compare a few different versions of the Xtian Bible and you will get the idea. Or a couple different translations of The Brothers Karamazov.

[azurnoir]

158. I would think translations such as Arabic to English where there are no common

reference points would be particularly difficult and if anyone is in doubt read Ma'ans Arabic version using Google translate it renders it to near gibberish

[bemildred]

161. Well, I'm a reader, not a linguist or translator, but yeah.

Semitic languages are, IIRC, Indo-European, but don't really divide the world up into the same memes as romance languages, which I would think would be clear to any English and Hebrew speaker who thought about it. You are not always working with the same concepts, although one can "explain". It's probably easier to go from Hebrew to Arabic and back than to, say, Russian and back, while keeping the meaning "right". But this is all in ADDITION to the problems of translating idiomatic usages, allusions, and metaphors properly.

[shira]

159. Are you aware of any credible sources that have shown PMW to be dishonest....

...or highly biased in their translation efforts?

[bemildred]

162. I really don't give a shit.

Being honest and unbiased have little to do with each other, one can be both very honest and very biased. Nobody thinks they are biased, yet people cannot function without prejudice and discrimination, brand marketing is built on that, everybody is necessarily biased, that is how your brain works. People who think they are unbiased or objective are delusional.

The issue is whether the writer or speaker would agree that the translation of the work is "good", otherwise, it belongs to the translator, not the author. Half the time, in politics, you cannot even get the author to admit later, in public, that he said what he said.

Edit: just to be clear: if the the translation is not referred back to the author for approval, you cannot consider it the authors work, it is somebody elses work, however well it may or may not be related to the authors work. This is a problem with authors who are dead, which is why reading different translations of old works, or reading translations of the same work in different languages is interesting, it gives you a sense of how feeble is language's grasp on the world.

So what I would need is: either a caveat about the accuracy of the translation or approval from the authors of the texts being translated, and that is pretty much applicable to any translation I see.

[shira]

163. So after 15 years and hundreds (thousands?) of translations later, there's no evidence suggesting...

....that PMW is doing or has previously done something wrong.

Correct?

For all you know, PMW is pretty damned accurate.

You just don't like their work and are betting somewhere along the line they messed up. Now if only you can find it....

[bemildred]

168. No, the problem is I have no evidence that they do anything right.

They are adversarial to the translated, there are no little notes about usages and ambiguities, nothing about checking their work with the translated or some other sympathetic or neutral source, etc. In other words, they are not neutral observers, and I have seen nothing to show their methods are rigorous. (And yes, yes I do think translators should be anxious to provide a sympathetic, accurate view of the translated text, without that you have nothing.) So that leaves them in a position slightly below the NY Times when going on about Ahm-an-idjit's blather, and in the neighborhood of Iranian News when going on about the USA, i.e. not worth a bucket of warm spit unless support can be found elsewhere.

[shira]

169. Seriously? You'd think after 15 years, a pro-Palestinian or Leftist source would have demonstrated

...by now that PMW has done something wrong.

Anything.

As it is, you have nothing.

Your proof of wrongdoing is non-existent. You just have 'faith', maybe some religious belief, that they're somehow wrong.

[bemildred]

170. I have said what I have to say on the difficulties of translation,

and it seems clear that, as usual, no actual communication is occurring here, so I will toddle along now.
:hi:

[Jefferson23]

166. My comment is completely off topic, but your embedded link

is very interesting and reminded me of the work of Steven Gutstein, who has been tweaking a model he developed
for ASD. From your OP, fascinating! A’s, Bayes, C’s

By studying babies and young children, scientists can test whether probabilistic reasoning is present before life experiences begin sculpting the mind. Babies haven’t been alive long enough to develop strong beliefs about how the world works. If babies act Bayesian, then they may have been born that way. ( end )

From Gutstein:


“Instead of studying a person’s possession of a capacity or an idea, the focus is on the active changes involved in an unfolding event or activity in which people participate." -Barbara Rogoff



First Things First: What is Dynamic Intelligence?




We use the term dynamic intelligence to represent a collection of specific cognitive, self, interpersonal and communication abilities. This is in contrast to the abilities we refer to as static intelligence—skills measured by standard I.Q. tests. Dynamic intelligence is a gift that evolves throughout our lifetime allowing us to adapt to an increasingly complex, continually changing world. Uniquely, it provides the tools to successfully solve complicated problems, prioritize multiple demands, carry on meaningful relationships and achieve long-term goals. Jobs, friendships, marriages and most aspects of daily life are primarily dynamic in nature.



Descriptions of how we employ dynamic intelligence in our daily lives are quite easy to generate. We worry about how we will have enough money for our children’s college. We try to estimate the resources we will need to complete a work project to a client’s satisfaction. We make multiple contingency plans, knowing that we can never really predict what will happen in the future. We evaluate whether we are making sufficient progress in our weight loss plan, or whether it is time to try something else. We struggle to prioritize among scores of demands and desires that pull on our limited time and money. We read a book containing important information and, on a sentence-by-sentence basis, determine if our level of understanding is sufficient, or whether we should stop to re-read particular passages. We find ways to collaborate with people, even though they have significantly different areas of expertise and unique ways of thinking and perceiving the world. In doing so we enrich ourselves by gaining multiple perspectives and integrate our contributions to create something that is more than just the sum of each of our minds. One of our most amazing, but unappreciated mental feats, is our ability to effortlessly relate to a single object, person or problem from any number of multiple, completely different perspectives in an amazingly short span of time. Dynamic intelligence frees us from the tyranny of being locked into any single stimulus-response chain.



We conduct this amazing mental symphony throughout our waking and, most probably, our sleeping lives. We do it with little thought or reflection. Yet, we have not always been so proficient. Somehow we learned to function in this amazing manner. We just don’t remember how we learned to do it. Respected scientists like Jerome Bruner, Barbara Rogoff, Alan Fogel and Alan Sroufe, believe that the neural and cognitive foundations for dynamic intelligence are typically constructed through thousands of special types of experiences choreographed through the guidance of parents and close family members.



By the end of the first year of life, infants are able look at things from multiple levels and multiple perspectives, improvise and put things into context. Dynamic intelligence comes from our ability to retain and store certain types of memories, in a very specific way, creating an intricate by-product of growing neurological pathways. While typically developing children store proud memories of experiences where they have met challenges and overcome obstacles, developmentally disabled children are more likely to retain memories in an isolated fashion, small pieces of information that do not provide tools or building blocks for future self-learning.



Development of functional dynamic collaboration impacts how the world fits together for the individual and addresses such relevant real world issues as:



Inferential Thinking

Hypothetical Thinking

Reflection

Planning

Preparation

Social Coordination

Friendship

http://www.rdiconnect.com/pages/Dynamic-Education-Program.aspx

[bemildred]

167. I can go on about these subjects ad nauseum.

But am travelling and not in a position to spend the time the next couple of weeks. So I bookmarked the thread, and I'll try to pick it up later.

[bemildred]

171. Yes, that's in the same subject area, but looking at it with a slightly different frame.

I will mention "Goedel, Escher, Bach" and the importance of recursion or self-reference in how our sort of symbolic intelligence comes about and how if functions, but otherwise I will leave it until I have time ...

[Jefferson23]

172. Sounds good, have safe travels. n/t

[bemildred]

173. Well, I'm heading into the Bible Belt ...

:-)

[bemildred]

174. OK.

1.) First off, it seems obvious that humans are not good at math and logic. Even simple computers can blow us right out of the water. Now why is that? What is all that super-dooper wetware in our heads FOR? Clearly it is doing something, something worthwhile, brains are expensive, and we evolved them quickly too. I see two answers: language and society, and real-time experience and perception. As societies develop and become more complex, those two answers tend to merge, as our reality becomes more and more dominated by social constructs and demands. It deserves notice that the "language and society" part is what we are (more or less) distinguished by, compared with other species.

2.) So you could say that the brain is constantly, since the day you pop out of the chute, building up a semantic model of the world around you; and at the same time constantly checking and amending that semantic model against experience as it happens. (Notice the recursion, the mind amends itself.) And this semantic model is what allows you to so rapidly see and react to the world around you as it happens. And that is something that you can still do far better than computers.

3.) So I suppose you can see how the Bayesian idea and your "dynamic intelligence" fit into this scheme. I can point out that it is precisely the self-amendment that makes you "unpredictable", we can change, and that is the source of our capacity for autonomy and agency in the world.

4.) And then there is a line of thought that starts with our feeble capacities in logic and reason, which concludes with the realization that those capacities cannot have been all that useful when we were still wild, it was only later in the context of civilization that they came to enjoy their current vogue, when doing the math became interesting and valuable.

[bemildred]

175. Then there is this:

Can markets be rational when humans aren't?

Program Description

In the aftermath of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, NOVA presents "Mind Over Money"—an entertaining and penetrating exploration of why mainstream economists failed to predict the crash of 2008 and why we so often make irrational financial decisions. The program reveals how our emotions interfere with our decision-making and explores controversial new arguments about the world of finance. In the face of the recent crash, can a new science that aims to incorporate human psychology into finance—behavioral economics—help us make better financial decisions?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/mind-over-money.html

[bemildred]

176. Another one:

The man sitting in front of Mary Ellen O’Toole was, she says, a well-mannered guy. “He was low-key. He was nice. He didn’t swear.” He was very proud of his work, which he described in polite, pleasant tones.

His name was Gary Ridgway. His other name was the Green River Killer. His work was killing at least 49 women in Washington state throughout the 1980s and 1990s. He did it all while maintaining marriages, parenting and churchgoing, and he seemed very much the word neighbors often use to describe men who turn out to have headless torsos in their freezers.

---

The niceness paradox. O’Toole worked as a profiler for the FBI for 30 years, based in Quantico, Va. She interviewed the Unabomber. She worked on the Polly Klaas abduction, the Red Lake school shooting and the investigation of David Parker Ray, the Toy-Box Killer who tortured women in a high-tech homemade dungeon.

What she found was that the most dangerous criminals were often the ones who came across as the most harmless. That’s how they were able to continue harming people.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20111031/FEATURES06/310310025/Book-warns-your-gut-not-an-FBI-profiler

[King_David]

7. I agree

NO STATE that legally discriminates against LGBT (FOR EXAMPLE ) should be recognized.

EVER !!!

[Kurska]

9. 100% agreeing with this. Gay rights, women's right and minority rights needs to mandatory.

A state that doesn't really represent the majority of the people living in proposed state shouldn't be allowed.

[King_David]

10. + 1

This should be a 'no brainer' for ALL progressives.

[azurnoir]

15. so you apparently believe the US should not be recognized eiither right ? n/t

[shira]

30. How can you be for such a Palestinian state but against a Jewish liberal state? n/t

[azurnoir]

34. I am not against Israel's existance as you seem to imply

and if Israel wants to call itself the Jewish State fine but requiring the Palestinians to recognize Israel as the state of a sole ethnic group is wrong,especially seeing as how not all Israeli's are Jews

and your contentions as what will be a future Palestinian state are just that claims and contentions

[shira]

35. But Israel's already a Jewish state and recognized as such. You're against Israel as it is?

To be clear, you're against Israel being a Jewish State?

You're for its right to exist but against it being a Jewish State?

[azurnoir]

36. as I said in my previous post I am against Israel forcing other states or peoples

to recognize it as the Jewish State if Israel wants to call itself the Jewish State fine if other nations or states choose to call it that fine and seeing as how you claim it already is just that why make it a stumbling block for the 'Peace' Israel so claims to want?

[shira]

37. You already said you believe Israel as a Jewish state is racist/discriminatory....

That's why you believe it's wrong for Palestinians to be required to view it that way.

So you're against Israel as is, but are for Palestine being a racist, apartheid, terror state.

[azurnoir]

38. I believe as I said it is wrong for any other state or peoples or nation

to forced to recognize Israel as the Jewish state not just Palestinians as you claim

[shira]

39. Awww, why not just admit it?

The words were meant to identify the groups at the time

they are now being cynically used to further the artificially created hegemony of the majority Religious/ethnic in Israel and to deny the rights of group that was scattered to create that hegemony
The PLO/PA recognized Israel's right to exist as a state more than a decade ago, the recognition of a Jewish state was tacked on after the fact, if Israel wishes to call it self the Jewish state fine, to use that as a requirement of Palestinians indicates Israel wishes to use that specific Religious/ethnic identification for other purposes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x361621#361633

Perhaps that is why Israel wants to be the Jewish State to make itself clear

about multiculturalism to its non-Jewish citizens. to let them know their place?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x359148#359392



You're against a liberal democratic Jewish state but for a totalitarian, apartheid, racist, terrorist Palestinian one.

You just don't want to admit it b/c you realize how insane your position is.

[azurnoir]

40. you are calling Abbas a totalitarian, apartheid, racist, terrorist?

or all Palestinians totalitarian, apartheid, racist, terrorists and I'm supposedly the bigot here okay then

as to my past comment I stand by them nothing in those comments denies the existence of Israel nor do they countermand what I said above

but thanks for posting them I do not have repeat myself that way

[shira]

41. The ruling parties of Palestine are totalitarian, racist, apartheid, terrorists...

And they're going nowhere for the forseeable future.

They do NOT represent the Palestinian people who have few civil/human rights under their rule.

I couldn't possibly support an Israel like that as an Israel like that wouldn't have any right to exist.

======

Supporting the birth of an extremely regressive, totalitarian, far rightwing Islamist regime while being against a liberal Jewish democracy is insane, to say the least, especially on a liberal/progressive board.

[azurnoir]

42. Jewish state good Palestinian state bad in your mind apparently

your mindset is and has been on display for all to see

[shira]

50. Not quite, but definitely Palestinian state good and Jewish state bad in your mind.

My point is that liberal democracy is good (and should be enthusiastically supported) while totalitarian, dark regime is bad (and should be denounced in every way, shape, and form).

[azurnoir]

63. I have not said the state Israel bad or should not exist have I ?

what I have said is that an exclusivist Religious/ethnic state is bad, especially when it is indeed a multi-ethnic state such as Israel and one that has quite a history of discrimination against it's Religious/ethnic minorities to me this is little different than the US proclaiming itself the Protestant/Anglo-Saxon state

[shira]

69. Wait - is Israel an exclusivist religious/ethnic state now in your opinion?

Or just headed that way - in your opinion - once the PA accepts Israel as a Jewish state?

[azurnoir]

70. Israel's demand as a precondition for the Palestinians is quite revealiing

of its intentions as is this

Nefesh B'Nefesh's "Go North" program encouraging aliyah into Israel's Northern traditionally Arab area's

http://www.nbn.org.il/gonorth/program_options03.html

[shira]

71. So you believe Israel will rip the mask off once the PA recognizes it as a Jewish state?

They'll send Jews into mostly Arab parts of Israel and toss them out? Do other nasty things they wouldn't dream of doing now b/c they're just pretending to be liberal?

Yes, No?

[azurnoir]

72. my link shows that is already happening

Avigdor Lieberman prompts land swaps that would put Arab area's on Israel's border in Palestine a recent study found growing discrimination in Israel, perhaps things will change a bit when a more 'centrist' government is elected

[shira]

73. So IOW, you've got nothing. Great. n/t

[azurnoir]

74. what would you call 'seed communities' of Aliyah makers in predominately Arab area's? n/t

[shira]

76. What do you call African Americans moving into predominantly white suburbia?

You don't have a problem with that, do you?

[azurnoir]

78. are the African Americans moving enmass to displace Whites at the encouragement of African American

political organizations? then yes I would have a problem with that as I would any group attempting such a thing wouldn't you as liberal I would certainly think so

[shira]

84. Where do you see Jews attempting to displace Arabs? n/t

[azurnoir]

87. why would there be a campaign for those making Aliyah to move into the area

of Israel that is one of the most heavily Arab populated ?

[shira]

88. Why the hell not? Jews should be encouraged to live anywhere within Israel.

There's simply no call whatsoever for those making Aliyah to displace Arabs.

You just made that up.

I don't have a problem with a similar Israeli Arab initiative to move big numbers of Arabs into Jewish areas, like settlements - where that is ALREADY happening. They're not trying to displace Jews there.

Your view is simply bigoted.

[azurnoir]

89. oh no never the program has nothing to do with Arabs puleez

no one is being fooled here by this not even you who tries to pretend its all so innocent but still what about Lieberman's plan to swap Arab area's in the of an agreement, what about the current attempt to annex the occupied territories, what about the JNF's scheme to forcibly relocate Bedouins? what about the fact that over 50% of Israeli Jew feels Arabs should be 'encouraged' to leave Israe,l what about the recent study showing growing discrimination against Israel Arabs and other minorities in Israel

[shira]

90. That's it? You've got nothing but paranoid delusional conspiracy theory. Pathetic! n/t

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

100. They've got nothing but throwing shit against the wall, hoping it sticks.

And they can't stand having to defend themselves rationally.

When challenged, they go into attack mode attempting to discredit, demonize, or ridicule those challenging them.

As though doing that defends whatever silly argument they make.

======

It pisses them off something fierce that they can't enjoy throwing their feces around without being challenged and exposed for their weak tactics.

It's not "fun" for them anymore.

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

Heh heh...

[shira]

104. Yeah, that was just proven with the ridiculous allegation Jews are trying to displace Arabs...

...in northern Israel. Not a shred of proof for that allegation.

Shit thrown against the wall....

[Violet_Crumble]

110. I was talking about some 'supporters' of Israel...

In this thread. Are you following now?

[vminfla]

112. Wait -- Do you expect the PA to accept Israel as a Jewish State?

I do not see the PA accepting Israel's right to exist.

[shira]

113. Nah, it will never happen. Just asking for argument's sake.

I've recently come to the conclusion Israel just needs to end the occupation immediately. Pull out from at least 60% (Israel offered this and it was rejected 1-2 years ago) and annex the rest. Make more land available based on negotiations. If the Palestinians still want peace and more land, they have to come to the table. It's in their court. I figure since the PA recently asked for the 1947 Partition borders in their UN bid, there's nothing wrong with Israel temporarily annexing up to 40% of the WB. At least the occupation is over and there are no more excuses. If one rocket comes over the border, the PA/Hamas are responsible and they pay dearly. Peace isn't coming anytime soon, so Israel takes the initiative this way.

[Violet_Crumble]

114. The Palestinians have already accepted Israel's right to exist...

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

[shira]

116. Hamas is now in the gov't and they don't recognize Israel's right to exist. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

119. Not yet, they're not...

There's a plan to form a unity government, but it hasn't happened yet. And even if they were, there's parties in the current Israeli government that don't recognise Palestine's right to exist....

But back to what I'd originally posted. Claiming that the Palestinians haven't recognised Israel's right to exist is blatantly untrue, as that recognition was officially made back in 1993...

[azurnoir]

14. would that include thwe US? n/t

[King_David]

16. That question is insulting

The US does not criminalize,Jail ,kill or hang their gay citizens.

Such comparison is ludicrous , bigoted and insulting.


The US has a long way to go

If only the countries in the middle east ( Israel Excluded)

Had a fraction of gay rights as the US many lives

would be saved and many people would be free.

No country that allows for Hymen beings to be

criminals just for the way they were born should

be recognized by ANY country , let alone a progressive

Country .

EVER

[azurnoir]

18. so much huffing and puffing in that post

will you again try to foist off on us that being Gay is illegal in the West Bank and Jordan or will you admit to the truth that being Gay has been legal under Jordanian law for 30+ years longer than it has in Israel

[King_David]

19. I will survey tomorrow

The gay bars and clubs and gay community clubs

in Ramallah and Gaza... OK ?

Legal ? Do not insult .Your insistence if such

Is very troubling indeed especially on a progressive forum .

[azurnoir]

23. well you do that now here however is a listing of Gay rights in West Asia

This page was last modified on 25 September 2011 at 20:58.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#Western_Asia

it's done as a graph so I can't cut and paste oh and a hearty thanks to shira who originally posted this link

[King_David]

24. You excusing the inexcusable is insulting to say the least

"Across the Green Line in the West Bank and Gaza, however, the picture is very different. The penalty for same-sex acts under Palestinian law is not entirely clear, though in practice this is less significant than the extra-judicial punishments reportedly meted out by the authorities and the threats that gay men face from relatives intent on preserving family ‘honour’."


http://jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled87d.html?articleid=218


( I an quite sure DU does not want to turn this into
Yet another homophobic thread like the last one )

[azurnoir]

25. I am quite sure your accusations?of homophobia are unfounded

you seem resort to that when someone disagrees with you? and you have been proven wrong on this yet again

[King_David]

26. I am uncomfortable as a DU member

Continuing this topic with you.

This is not even up for discussion .

( on a Democratic website)

I know DU has it's problems that they are trying very hard to rectify .

[azurnoir]

27. Yes I am sure you are uncomfortable on this

but I am willing to discuss it with you again as to DU's problems I seem to remember reading claims 'somewhere' that it's an antisemtic website too but both accusations are IMO quite untrue

[King_David]

28. Goodbye. nt

[azurnoir]

21. delete n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Israel didn't recognise Human Rights when it was admitted to the UN...

I wouldn't go so far as to call it an abomination, though. If you feel that strongly about it, go for yr life...

[King_David]

17. In 2011 to admit such a country

It would be an abomination.

And I cannot believe any progressive person

should support recognition of a country that denies basic

Hymen rights Taliban style .

[Violet_Crumble]

46. Hymen rights? Is that some new Just Say No abstinence movement?

I wouldn't support recognition of any country that denies basic human rights, but the Palestinians aren't denying basic human rights, so they're fine as far as I'm concerned...

[shira]

32. Which human rights did Israel not recognize in 1948? n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

47. Let's start with discrimination against LGBT folk...

Then let's move on to the disregard for the human rights of Palestinians within Israel's borders.

[shira]

51. In 1948? When Israel's liberal/socialist credentials were as good as any other country?

It's not that Palestine needs to be perfect on all issues, but at the very least on its way to ensuring freedom and civil/human rights to all.

Free speech/press would be enough of a start for me WRT Palestine being accepted into the UN...

[Violet_Crumble]

55. You asked. I told you the answer.

After being told that Israel did discriminate against LGBT folk and against the Palestinians inside Israel, now you've switched to complaining about free speech/press issues. Probably not a good thing to bring up, considering Israel's got some issues in that regard...

Israel ranks low for freedom of press, after Gaza war media ban

Israel placed No. 93 out of 175 countries on a 2009 international index of press freedom, released by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on Tuesday.

The 2009 ranking meant Israeli lost its place as the top country for press freedom in the region, falling behind Kuwait at No. 60, Lebanon at No. 61 and the United Arab Emirates at No. 86.

Israel's dramatic drop - 47 spots since last year - came as a result of its press regulations dictated to international media during the Gaza offensive earlier this year.

"Israel has begun to use the same methods internally as it does outside its own territory," said Reporters Without Borders, adding that journalists had been arrested and imprisoned and that military censorship also posed a threat.

But as a result of actions during Israel's war against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip in December and January, Reporters Without Borders ranked the country at No. 150 for its "extraterritorial actions."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-ranks-low-for-freedom-of-press-after-gaza-war-media-ban-1.5765

[shira]

57. LOL! Bye. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

60. Have a lovely night! n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

123. That's, what, three quarters of the world's nations? More? Certainly including Israel.

Respect for human rights is an exception, not a rule.

[shira]

29. Ironic. Those for a discriminatory Palestinian state are against recognition of a Jewish state.

This Palestinian state will be Islamist, running primarily via sharia law against gays, women, and religious minorities.

Those for such a regressive, dark regime happen to be against a liberal/progressive Jewish state.

And this on a liberal/progressive discussion board.

Go figure.

:eyes:

[Violet_Crumble]

64. Bullshit. I support the creation of a Palestinian state...

Plus, Israel was officially recognised as a state many decades ago, and I strongly support its continued existence.

So now the PA, the bulk of which is made up of Fatah, which is politically centre-left and is a member of the Socialist International is not only 'totalitarian' and 'fascist', but has now been magically turned into an Islamist group? Hey, I think you neglected to mention that in their spare time they mug little old ladies and all those Nigerian spammers fleecing the gullible out there? They're actually the PA!

And this on a liberal/progressive discussion board.

Go figure.

Yeah, go figure. As you mentioned women in yr post, I thought I'd share a recent post by a 'supporter' of Israel about women. And this on a liberal/progressive discussion board, no less!

'It's hard to be a man. Because some men and boys are taught every day by the media and by certain feminist organizations that you are bad, inferior and unclean because you have a penis. You're flawed, imperfect, while women are pure creatures that can do no harm(The worst bullying I suffered in high school was by women, btw).'

[shira]

66. Fatah is center left? ROTFLOL! That's some seriously funny shit.....

What on earth makes it center left? Because some dumbasses at Socialist International say so?

FYI, the PA draft constitution states Islam is the state religion and calls for sharia being the primary source of legislation.

<pause for effect>

"OH SHIT! All along we were led to believe it would be a secular democracy! DAMN, DAMN, DAMN!"

:eyes:

Violet, an Islamic state with sharia legislation is in no way compatible with anything leftwing FYI.

-------

Also the PA (Fatah) is to the far right of Likud on pretty much every single issue. AFAIK, there's not one single issue in which they're to the left of Likud. Maybe the dipshits over at Socialist International should include Likud into the family since they're WAY farther to the left than the center-lefters in Fatah.

:)

The bottom line is you support the birth of a totalitarian, apartheid, racist, Islamist terror regime that pretty much has no f-ing chance of shifting left of where they're currently at (which is to the right of Likud). That's pretty damned bad, Violet. An Israel with Likud democratically in control the next 50 years would suck for about a million reasons but would never be as bad as a Palestine under PA rule. It would still be a secular democracy. An Israel with someone like Baruch Goldstein running a totalitarian dictatorship would have ZERO support here, and for good reason. Why do you feel it's necessary to defend something as awful as a PA led Palestine?

[vminfla]

75. Kinder, Gentler terrorists

They are the kinder, gentler terrorists. Tastes great, less killing.

I mean, just because their name means "conquest" it does not mean "conquest" in the bad way.

[shira]

77. Can you think of one way in which Fatah (PA) is centre-left? I can't think of 1 example. n/t

[vminfla]

132. Fatah was only responsible for 1/4th of all terrorist bombing attacks

That is center left, right?

[Violet_Crumble]

81. Maybe you should take the time to learn about politics...

If you did, you'd learn that just because a political party is an Arab one, that doesn't automatically make them 'fascists' or 'totalitarian' or 'Islamist'. Just to start off, Wikipedia has a listing for Fatah that lists them as centre-left. I guess you'd best rush over there and change it!

'Because some dumbasses at Socialist International say so?'

Dumbasses? Dipshits? It's amazing what appears on a liberal/progressive forum. You've got no idea at all who the Socialist International are, do you? They're the global umbrella organisation for LW parties around the world, including the ALP here, who right now are another centre-left party....

So, are you saying that no country that has religious courts is a democracy? Because Israel has religious courts and you've argued strongly that it's a democracy. I'm guessing that as with much else that you say, there's a different standard set for Israel...


Also the PA (Fatah) is to the far right of Likud on pretty much every single issue.

Really? I wasn't aware that you had so much time and knowledge and could read Arabic to know every bit of legislation the PA passes on every single issue. How do you manage it? Or are you just making up stuff yet again? As for yr continual defence of the current Israeli government, apparently the fact that it contains extremists who want to expel Israeli-Arabs from Israel would be to the left of anything Arab...

The bottom line is you support the birth of a totalitarian, apartheid, racist, Islamist terror regime...

The fact is I don't support anything like that at all, so stop making things up.

[shira]

83. Can you name a couple things in which the PA is left of Likud? If not, point proven.

As to religious courts in Israel, when the Sanhedrin starts lashing and beheading folks for Torah violations, please let me know. The fact is, the PA is clear that the PRIMARY source of legislation in a future Palestinian state is sharia. It's disingenuous pretending an Islamic society running in that manner is in any way leftwing.

As to your supporting the birth of a racist, apartheid, totalitarian Islamist regime - what other way is there to view it? Abbas' PA assigns the death penalty for selling land to Jews (racist) and doesn't allow Palestinian refugees WITHIN the West Bank to become citizens (apartheid). It's highly unlikely a future Palestine will move significantly to the left. But you support it anyway.

[Violet_Crumble]

101. Well, unlike the Likud, the PA recognises the other state...

But let me guess. In topsy turvey world, Likud are harmless almost-liberals who would never have a party platform that states all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan is part of Israel.

The Jordan River as a Permanent Border

The Jordan Valley and the territories that dominate it shall be under Israeli sovereignty. The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel. The Kingdom of Jordan is a desirable partner in the permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in matters that will be agreed upon.

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


And look! There's more. Imagine my surprise to find out the Likud have long been totally opposed to a Palestinian state, and still are!

Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

Settlements

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.

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

I see. So religious courts aren't an issue for you unless they're lashing and beheading people? Okay, then. Give me some examples of that happening in the West Bank.

As to your supporting the birth of a racist, apartheid, totalitarian Islamist regime - what other way is there to view it?

Yet again, I don't support any racist, apartheid, totalitarian states that are Islamist regimes, and despite you repeating the same bullshit constantly, Palestine is not in that category. You have no understanding of what the terms mean, and only fling them around as an almost automated response...

See one of my other responses in this thread for a rebuttal of the untrue comments you made in the last paragraph...

[shira]

105. Wrong again. Netanyahu called for "two states for two people" in 2009...

..and that's farther than the PA has gone.

I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate how the PA is farther to the left than Likud.

One example.

How hard is this if the PA is truly centre-left?

=====

The fact is they're in no way leftwing and you should be embarassed that you can't find one example for which they're to the left of Likud.

[Violet_Crumble]

111. I see. So according to you the Likud Platform is a bunch of lies?

I posted for you exactly what their platform is and provided a link. You asked me to give one example of how Likud were more RW than the PA and you got it. That you don't like it isn't my problem, but pretending it doesn't exist is just silly...

Someone who has no idea what totalitarian, fascist, or other political terms means trying to tell me what's a fact when it comes to politics is something that if they had a shred of self-awareness, I'd be telling them they should be embarrassed by such a complete lack of knowledge in that area...

[shira]

115. The Likud head called for 2 states AND offered 60% of the land back over a year ago...

Those would have been temporary borders that would help bring on more negotiations.

That's way farther than the PA/Fatah (Abbas) would go. And of course Abbas rejected it.

========

OTOH, the PA's application letter to the UN last week called for 1947 Partition borders. That's a call to demand land that is recognized as Israel's, beyond the '67 lines. That's hardly recognition of Israel. It's like Mexico recognizing the USA, but only part of it because they want Texas and other southwestern states as their own.

I also showed you video several times with Abbas stating he doesn't believe Hamas should recognize Israel. The problem is Hamas is NOW part of the government.

========

Why not just admit the PA is not farther left on ANY issue when compared to Likud?

I think you're confused with the fact that compared to Hamas, the PA is centre-left. That still puts them FAR to the right of Likud, but within the Palestinian context they're centre-left.

[Violet_Crumble]

120. So you are saying the Likud platform is a load of lies?

Again, here's the Likud platform specifically stating its opposition to a viable and independent Palestinian state, and stating its support of settlements. Now unless you've got some really good explanation as to why they'd have a party platform stating something that's the complete opposite of what you claim, then I'm guessing you'll just continue to ignore their platform...

The Jordan River as a Permanent Border

The Jordan Valley and the territories that dominate it shall be under Israeli sovereignty. The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel. The Kingdom of Jordan is a desirable partner in the permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in matters that will be agreed upon.



Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

Settlements

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.



http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm

As for yr claim about an 'offer' of 60% of the occupied West Bank, only a complete idiot would find an 'offer' of a possible interim state with temporary borders, and with little to nothing in the way of sovereignty to be in any way acceptable.

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2011/1038/re104.htm

OTOH, the PA's application letter to the UN last week called for 1947 Partition borders.

No, that's not true at all. The application referred to General Assembly Resolution 181, which is the Resolution that lends legitimacy to Palestinan statehood in the same way it lent legitimacy to Israeli statehood. Also, Abbas clearly states in his speech to the UN that the PA is calling for a state consisting of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

From the transcript of his speech:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I confirm, on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, which will remain so until the end of the conflict in all its aspects and until the resolution of all final status issues, the following:

1. The goal of the Palestinian people is the realization of their inalienable national rights in their independent State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on all the land of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, which Israel occupied in the June 1967 war.


http://manila-paper.net/abbas-un-speech-on-palestinian-statehood-transcript-video/12630

As anyone looking at this rationally can see, on one hand there's the PA agreeing to two viable and independent sovereign states existing with the Green Line as the border, and on the other hand, the intransigent, extremely right-wing, and expansionist Likud not only opposing Palestinian statehood, but stating that the Jordan River will be the permanent eastern border of Israel. This is the example I gave you when you requested it of the Likud being far to the right of the PA...

I also showed you video several times with Abbas stating he doesn't believe Hamas should recognize Israel.

And again you neglect to mention that that same video was of Abbas stating that he expects and demands recognition of Israel from his government. What he said was that he doesn't demand it from anyone who's not in the government.

Why not just admit the PA is not farther left on ANY issue when compared to Likud?

Uh, because I don't like being dishonest, that's why?

I think you're confused with the fact that compared to Hamas, the PA is centre-left.

No, no confusion on my part at all. While the PA is far to the left of Hamas, it appears yr quite confused as to what this discussion's supposed to be about, and that was Fatah and Likud. If you do feel the need to respond, how about focusing on Fatah and Likud?

[shira]

121. Paper position vs. words/actions....

The leader of Likud has publicly come out against the Likud platform, in favor of 2 states, and has offered a temporary solution of 60% of the WB to the Palestinians - where close to 97% of all WB Palestinians currently reside. That would have effectively been the end of the occupation. Only 3% of WB Palestinians would be under official IDF rule. But you and Fatah/PA are against it. This move would have been a giant step towards 2 states. Again, you and Fatah/PA are against it - against ending that occupation. The leader of Likud was all in favor of it. Palestinians would have had self-rule in their own state and would only have been expected to negotiate in good faith for the rest. I suspect the main reason you and the PA/Fatah are against it is because you can't let go of the occupation. You need it to bash Israel and it's why you guys still argue Gaza is occupied. :eyes:

Meanwhile, despite signing a paper recognizing Israel, the PA has a very long and RECENT history of encouraging incitement against Israel's very existence...
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=485

In addition, as you know, Abbas will not recognize a Jewish state and denies there's a Jewish nation. These are all extreme rightwing (Hamas/David Duke) positions.

Abbas' PA (Fatah) is so influential through its state controlled media and institutions (schools, mosques) that it's no wonder 2/3 of all Palestinians are ultimately for a one-state (the phased solution) once 2 states are agreed upon, which is what Fatah/PA wants. Its ambassadors and representatives constantly say it. They're for 2 states ultimately becoming one. It's why they recognize Israel now but not a Jewish state (which makes RoR impossible). Of course, unless it's Abbas saying it, it doesn't matter to you. And even if he does say it, the PA recognized Israel nearly 20 years ago so it doesn't matter in your opinion. A signed piece of paper trumps words/deeds.

Respondents were asked about US President Barack Obama’s statement that “there should be two states: Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people and Israel as the homeland for the Jewish people.”

Just 34% said they accepted that concept, while 61% rejected it.

Sixty-six percent said the Palestinians’ real goal should be to start with a two-state solution but then move to it all being one Palestinian state.

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=229493

That's the PA/Fatah position in a nutshell. To recognize Israel's existence within a 2 state framework but ultimately work towards one state. I could provide you with LOTS more proof of this if you'd like, but I doubt it would make a bit of difference. A signed piece of paper means more....

At best for you, the official PA/Fatah is no better than the official Likud position WRT 2 states when taking all things into account, including words/deeds.

On every other political issue - and I know you realize this - Likud is to the left of the PA/Fatah. Socially, economically, educational, etc... For some reason, you believe that if Fatah is to the left of Likud on one issue (and they're not) they are to the left of Likud generally speaking. Comical.

What's also funny is that you accuse DU forum participants here of being rightwingers. Yet every single one of them is for 2 states, and on every issue bar none are to the left of Fatah/PA, which you still believe to be generally centre-left. That's hilarious. So it would appear in your opinion that anyone spewing PA/Fatah talking points are more leftwing than any DU forum participant here you've labeled a rightwinger who is pro-Israel

I want to know why a leftwinger such as yourself views the extremely rightwing PA/Fatah more favorably than Likud.

[Violet_Crumble]

122. What deeds? And I forgot that Nutty is so damned honest with what he says!

That 'bit of paper' you dismiss is an official document. There's a lot of difference between a document like that and someone talking shit, which is what Nutty does on a regular basis...

Did you read anything in my post at all? Because despite what I said, yr still continuing with that 60% offer line. To refresh yr memory, here it is again:

'As for yr claim about an 'offer' of 60% of the occupied West Bank, only a complete idiot would find an 'offer' of a possible interim state with temporary borders, and with little to nothing in the way of sovereignty to be in any way acceptable.'

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2011/1038/re104.htm

You'd find it acceptable that there'd be little to nothing in the way of sovereignty for the Palestinians? See, that's how Nutty doesn't deviate from the Likud Platform that I've posted several times here. Under the section titled self-rule, it says this: 'The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.'

I see you also chose to ignore that Abbas made it very clear last week at the UN that the Palestinian state consists of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Unlike the Israeli govt, who not only refuses to recognise a Palestinian state, but has annexed East Jerusalem, and strongly supports the settler movement, the PLO has long recognised Israel's right to exist, has reiterated that many times since, the most recent being the speech last week. btw, could you point out to me examples of the Palestinians occupying Israel or annexing any part of Israel? I must have missed it, but as yr arguing that the former is far less right-wing than the latter, I'm sure you'll fill me in with details :)


On every other political issue - and I know you realize this - Likud is to the left of the PA/Fatah. Socially, economically, educational, etc...

Using the word 'left' in the same sentence as 'Likud' should be declared a crime against humanity. And are you unaware of the massive protests that have been going on in Israel against the current Israeli government? Also, as I've mentioned before, it's highly doubtful you have the language or the comprehension skills required to read through pieces of legislation to make any sort of informed comparison...


Now for a bit of advice. When talking about what I think, what I realise, and what I believe, leave it to the expert on the matter. That'd be me. I'll tell people what I believe and what I think, so you should stick to talking about what you realise and believe, and stop making things up about me. I tend not to accuse other DUers of being right-wing, and generally keep my opinions to myself, so cut the crap and try just for once to focus on issues rather than trying to make things personal...

[shira]

125. Nutty's 60% offer was championed hard by Barak and Peres. You didn't know that?

I know it's easier to pretend the 60% offer was some pile of crap nefarious offer from the extreme rightwing. That way it's easier for you to dismiss it.

The fact of the matter is that it appears you're one of the many pro-Palestinians here who wish for the occupation to continue. You're against every measure Israel has taken, from agreeing to the Clinton Parameters to the Olmert offer. From the Gaza withdrawal to the 60% West Bank offer. Israel gets zero credit for all those things. All of these would have ended occupation, the one biggest issue you allegedly have with Israel. But just like the most extreme rightwing Hamas and PLO rejectionists, you agree with them. No deal until all's perfect. All or nothing. The PLO and Hamas are the rational ones and Israel is always to blame.

Really now, what would you do without the occupation? I can't imagine many within Kadima, Labour, and Meretz against the 60% offer, the Clinton Parameters, Olmert's offer, the Gaza withdrawal, etc. But you are and you can't keep claiming all that is Likud rightwing crap.

=====

Now back to the topic - Yes, Likud is to the left of the PA on everything - including the 60% land offer to end the occupation and grant the Palestinians a temporary state. Whether you like it or not, Nutty offered an end to the occupation - like Gaza it's a start - and your rejectionist boys from the PLO wouldn't have any of it. Of course, as in almost every issue, you agree with them and pretend they're part of the Left like you are, when they're nothing of the sort and are WAY farther to the right than Likud.

As to crimes against humanity, you're wrong. As bad as Likud is, it should be a crime against humanity to associate Fatah (PA) with the left. There's not one issue in which they're left of center.

=====

Lastly, you cited an Al Ahram article from one Khaled Amayreh. Here's a super stinky piece of anti-semitic bile (among many others from him) arguing Israel is really a Nazi state and that Helen Thomas was right all along...
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/06/24/khalid-amayreh-castro-is-right-so-is-helen-thomas/

Next you'll claim Amayreh is a fellow leftwinger...

:eyes:

[Violet_Crumble]

126. So what? I'm really not sure what yr point is...

I know it's easier to pretend the 60% offer was some pile of crap nefarious offer from the extreme rightwing.

There's no pretending involved, because a 'pile of crap nefarious offer from the extreme rightwing' is exactly what it was. You didn't answer the question I asked you, so I'll ask again: 'You'd find it acceptable that there'd be little to nothing in the way of sovereignty for the Palestinians? See, that's how Nutty doesn't deviate from the Likud Platform that I've posted several times here. Under the section titled self-rule, it says this: 'The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.'

The fact of the matter is that it appears you're one of the many pro-Palestinians here who wish for the occupation to continue.

Completely untrue! I strongly oppose the occupation and have been consistently clear in saying so. Anyone with an honest interest in what my views are can easily see for themselves by reading my posts in this forum...

You're against every measure Israel has taken...

Again, completely untrue. If yr interested in my views, rather than just inventing a mirror image of yr own, it's best to ask me. What the hell does you inventing things about what I believe have to do with what the discussion is supposed to be about, anyway?

All or nothing. The PLO and Hamas are the rational ones and Israel is always to blame.

Completely untrue yet again. I've been damn clear that I'm critical of all parties involved in the conflict, not just one...

I can't imagine many within Kadima, Labour, and Meretz against the 60% offer, the Clinton Parameters, Olmert's offer, the Gaza withdrawal, etc. But you are and you can't keep claiming all that is Likud rightwing crap.

Again, another completely untrue accusation about what my opinions supposedly are. I have NEVER said all that is Likud rightwing crap, so please stop making things up.

Now back to the topic - Yes, Likud is to the left of the PA on everything..

Wow. It took you that long into yr post to start discussing the topic rather than 'discussing' me! But just ignoring everything that's been said to you and parroting the same thing over and over just isn't an effective debate technique. You don't read Arabic, so you wouldn't know 'everything' when it comes to legislation. So how do you know that one is more Left than the other on everything? Also, I'll point you back to the post you replied to while ignoring everything I'd said: 'I see you also chose to ignore that Abbas made it very clear last week at the UN that the Palestinian state consists of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Unlike the Israeli govt, who not only refuses to recognise a Palestinian state, but has annexed East Jerusalem, and strongly supports the settler movement, the PLO has long recognised Israel's right to exist, has reiterated that many times since, the most recent being the speech last week. btw, could you point out to me examples of the Palestinians occupying Israel or annexing any part of Israel? I must have missed it, but as yr arguing that the former is far less right-wing than the latter, I'm sure you'll fill me in with details'. So, can you explain how refusing to recognise Palestine, supporting the settlers, and maintaining a brutal occupation makes them less RW than ones who have recognised Israel, and doesn't carry out any occupations? I just must not be LW enough to see it, what with me not being politically savvy enough to see that the Socialist International, the umbrella organisation for LW parties around the world are just 'dumbasses' and 'dipshits' ;)


and your rejectionist boys from the PLO wouldn't have any of it.

Whoa. I guess I should be grateful you focused on the topic for all of a few seconds before returning to talking about me. I don't have 'rejectionist boys'. Is it possible for you to discuss things without resorting to peevish childishness?

Of course, as in almost every issue, you agree with them and pretend they're part of the Left like you are...

Really? Me pointing out the fucking bleeding obvious that Fatah is a centre-left political party and a member of the Socialist International is agreeing with them on almost every issue? Just off the top of my head, I can think of quite a few things I wouldn't agree with them on. I won't bore you with details, as it'll spoil any future posts where you tell everyone I agree with everything the PA say ;)

As to crimes against humanity, you're wrong.

Yes, clearly I was meaning for what I said to be taken literally! Do you grasp the concept that there's nothing the slightest bit left-wing about Likud and their policies? Trying to argue they're more to the left than something else is really stupid, imo.

Lastly, you cited an Al Ahram article from one Khaled Amayreh.

Yes, I did. Before I quote back at you yr own words about not focusing on the source (I notice this only seems to apply if it's some utterly Islamophobic and bigoted source being quoted), may I point out that I googled for some info and came up with this. I've got no idea who the author is, but there's plenty more of the same out there..

This for example:

' Abbas countered in a position paper that Israel cede 98.2 percent of the West Bank, say the sources. He also offered to allow U.S. or other third-party troops to be stationed on Palestinian territory after Israel withdrew. But Netanyahu refused to read the paper. “He told , ‘I don’t have a mandate to negotiate anything until you accept the Israeli security concept,’” the Palestinian official says. The discussions broke off when Israel’s moratorium on settlement expansion ended days later.'

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/12/11/exclusive-details-on-mideast-peace-negotiations.html

And this:

'Abbas, however, told leaders of the Fatah movement on Saturday that he rejects the establishment of a Palestinian state in temporary borders, in an apparent response to media reports that Israel was trying to revive the proposal.

Instead, Abbas suggested that Israel and the Palestinians resume serious negotiations on the terms of full Palestinian statehood, adding that such talks should wrap up within two years.'

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=173815

Assuming that the lights would have gone out and you stopped reading after the subject line, I'm probably speaking into thin air now as I suggest you take a massive move away from yr current posting style and make a concerted effort to construct a post devoid of things like 'You're against...', 'You're (insert completely untrue accusation here)', 'You agree with', 'You can't keep claiming (insert something that I've never claimed in the first place), 'Your friends', 'Next you'll claim (insert some bizarre claim that's got nothing to do with what the 'discussion' is about)'. There's a bit of a heavy-handed focus on me there, and I'd prefer it to be a focus on the issue. It might be too much of a challenge, but if you tried to put together a post without using the words, 'you', 'you'll', or 'you're', something far less personalised and coming across as attacking will emerge. Then when that's mastered, those words can be reintroduced when used in benign ways. Try it. It's how I have to operate every day at work when I deal with situations that are infinitely more frustrating and full of inertia than anything I'd ever encounter at DU. btw, if DU gave us the ability to insert checkboxes into our posts, I would have put one underneath saying 'Have you read and understood this paragraph and agree to try it out?' Yes/No :)

[shira]

129. Peres and Barak are not rightwingers and they tried convincing Abbas to agree.

It's not that it would have guaranteed sovereignty or given Palestinians much of everything they wanted.

But it would have ended the occupation. I thought that's something you really want to see happen.

It's a huge start, like Gaza 5 years ago. Were you against that? Maybe it's better if Israel had never ended the occupation there? If you're for the Gaza pullout and end of occupation there, why not be for a similar end to West Bank occupation? That's kinda contradictory...

:shrug:

[Violet_Crumble]

131. Im aware that Peres and Barak* aren't RW. I'm not getting what yr point is here...

No, that 60% thing would most definately not have ended the occupation. Nutty's plan was limited autonomy in only 60% of the West Bank, no discussion at all of borders, with Israeli troops permanently stationed inside the West Bank.

Thanks for asking what I thought about the unilateral Disengagement. I was glad to see the settlements and the IDF removed from Gaza, though at the time right up until it started happening, I expressed doubts that Sharon would go through with it. I was happy to have my doubts proved wrong. See, the Disengagement was just one of a few examples of how Sharon was much more strategically and politically astute than the eternally inept Nutty. Sharon knew the massive economic drain the settlements and the associated IDF presence were having on Israel, and that there was no chance at all of the demographics in Gaza being affected at all by the presence of only a few thousand settlers (many of whom appeared to have an allergy to living in Israel, and headed straight for the West Bank settlements). He made a big move which was welcomed by the international community, and focused on strengthening Israel's hold on the West Bank, which holds a symbolic value for Israelis that Gaza doesn't. Nutty wouldn't have the foresight, savvy, or the balls to do that...


If you're for the Gaza pullout and end of occupation there, why not be for a similar end to West Bank occupation? That's kinda contradictory...

Not at all, because they're two entirely different things. For a start, the former was something solid, not just some 'offer' thrown out there in a fishing expedition. Secondly. every single settlement was removed from Gaza. If we pretend that Nutty's 60% thing was solid, the settlements would have remained. And Israel left all of Gaza, not just 50 or 60% of it...






* Barak is about as LW as the American Liebermann is. Barak betrayed the Left by deserting the Labour Party to join forces with the right-wingers. Rather than Left-wing, a more appropriate label for him would be Self-Serving Political Opportunist.

[shira]

133. So it's better to keep the occupation in place rather than end it in 60% of the West Bank? n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

134. No, that 60% thing would most definately not have ended the occupation.

That was the first line of the post you replied to, so I'll point you to it again...

[shira]

135. For that 60 percent, it certainly would have. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

136. No, it wouldn't have, and for the reasons I've already explained...

Here it is again: 'No, that 60% thing would most definately not have ended the occupation. Nutty's plan was limited autonomy in only 60% of the West Bank, no discussion at all of borders, with Israeli troops permanently stationed inside the West Bank.'