To MINE, HR APRIL 23 2012 By Avi
Documentary of Moslem brutal attack on Graves of Australian Defenders
Dear MINE and all those who think like you
You will probably enjoy every second of the following documentary evidence. You probably count it as a celebration when the Moslems destroy the Australian War Memorial Toombs and break the Christian and Jewish Memorial Stones of those who have sacrificed their lives to Protect Humanity from the Sadists of the last century.
You criticize Jews and Israel as much as you can. What would you do if some Jews would do what some of Moslems do?
As you can see in the documentary, not one Moslem, not a pack of them’ but a cult of them act so brutally against the dead, against other’s symbols, believes, culture, and heritage. And YOU dear mindless MINE, not only have no word of criticism, but most possibly enjoy and even support their primitivity and brutality!!!
Offence on graves of death, is a starting point of offence against humans.
There is a saying: “where books are burned, humans will be burned”
I say: “Where the graves are attacked, humans will be attacked as well”
I also say: “Where the symbols and signs of a culture are attacked, eventually also humans will be attacked”
So stop the “symbolic” attack before it is too late! NO tolerance and no forgiveness for verbal mines of mindless “MINES”.
No, the media has largely ignored this one rather than ‘overlooked in mainstream media’ for PC reasons, or fear of their lives if they report from those countries or deal with those same Moslems, because ‘that religion of peace’ values death of its detractors even if the criticism is obvious, rational and well-documented. Also, isn’t it easier to criticize one that doesn’t fight back with murder and terrorism in reply to such commentary?
A fair assumption is that these little Palestinian boys are just imitating their elders with little expectation of a sometimes fatal blow. But these stone throwing practices are frequently highly skilled and deadly/. Once you’ve experienced it yourself, you will be forever shocked at how a mere child can be so lethal. If the reports are accurate, although they’re so easily contrived lies these days, we all bemoan any cruelty particularly to children and women, but sadly not when they are capable of such unjustified cruelty to innocent others. Of course, one’s uninformed historical and political views may often revert to puerile sentimentality, not full understanding of the complex issues
No amount of media manipulation will alter the fact that Zionism results in rank discrimination and eventually persecution of non-Jews. It’s clear that the majority of Jews are rejecting Zionist principles. How many Jews have you heard about lately who are “making Aliyah” i.e. emigrating to Israel? Instead, large numbers of Israelis are constantly leaving Israel for other countries, even Germany (!). The time is coming when this social experiment, Zionism, will find up on the same trash heap with the other social experiments of the 20th Century (Socialism, Communism, etc.)
Why is an answer necessary. After you will read the book by the Journalist Joan Peters, “from time Immamorial” you will under a bit more of why there are muslims In Israel. The reason is better than why is France today more than 10% muslim every other child born in Spain and Holland is Muslim. England is not in a better situation. The spider legs of Islam is choking the world. and if somebody doesn’t do something about it all the countries in Europe will have a Muslim president like the United States of America.
Israel is suffocatingly tiny and a large number of Israelis get away, if they can, for months at a time. There are, I hear, thousands of Israelis working in the Silicone Valley and at universities all around the world. A great deal is shared to mutual advantage and to Israel’s reputation in basic and applied science, having won alrady more than 7200 patents. Other isms were chiefly socio-economic experiments. Zionism has synthesized the wisdom of millenia; it evolves and is not rigidly stagnant but is available to the world, not imposed like other isms.
Zionism asks only that the Jews have their own state. Had it not been for Zionism there would be no Israel and Jews would forever be subject to more holocausts.
Zionism does not as you falsely state lead to discrimination against non Jews. But non Jews and, indeed, Jews who deny Jews their own state and wish to annihilate that state can not and should not be treated with kid gloves.
I would like to know where you get your statistics about the numbers of Jews immigrating to and emigrating from Israel. If there are such stats they probably come from the same sources as your other anti Israel misinformation. Those sources that you prefer to believe and there are many are the real manipulators of information. As are people like you.
Zionists asking that Jews have thier own state is perfectly reasonable, it’s how that was done and the aftermath that has created the problem.
It’s not perfectly reasonable that Zionism should ask that Jews have their own state if that means that millions of non-Jews should have their lives destroyed for generations. Do you agree?
“It’s not perfectly reasonable that Zionism should ask that Jews have their own state if that means that millions of non-Jews should have their lives destroyed for generations. Do you agree?”
NO.
Millions of non Jews were not displaced as you imply. The pseudo Palestinians for the most part left at the behest of their leaders, hoping to return in days to grab what the supposed-to-be dead Jews left.
The PP’s are the only refugees in history that, thanks to the UN and their brother Arabs, can pass their refugee status to their descendants.
Approximately 700,000 Arabs became refugees. Approximately 850,000 Jews from Arab lands became refugees.
They are the only refugees in history that have not been able to integrate within a single generation with the populations of the countries to which they fled.
The Jews have all been settled and integrated, mostly in Israel but also in some other countries.
The PP’s cause such disruption and turmoil that they are unwelcome wherever they go. Their Arab brethren want them kept as refugees so that their willing tools like J.B. can use them against Israel.
But it’s extraordinary that you don’t agree. You’re saying then, I think, that the creation of a Jewish state would be reasonable even if that meant uprooting millions of non-Jews?
We’re not yet at the point of discussing whether or not any of that actually happened, merely the theoretical point of whether such a scenario is reasonable. You’re saying that you think it is, I’m saying that I think it isn’t.
The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.
The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.”"” That is perfectly correct- And considering the existence of the 1.5 million Israeli Muslims (Out of a population of 7 million)
Across the board -In the Judiciary, the Knesset, the universities, the military, in medicine, sports and the arts.
With positions of judges, MP`s, Mayors, lecturers, generals and majors.
In fact it was a Muslim judge that tried and sentenced Katsav the Israeli ex- president for rape!
I think the Israelis have honoured that- dont you!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree: 40
steve mann
3:27 pm
Apr 25, 2012
We sure have been here before- so here is the same answer as before-
56 Islamic states- of which 12million Indians were displaced to invent it- Should that go back to the Hindu`s?
49 Roman Catholic-
20 Protestant
12 Eastern Orthodox
4 Hindu.
Zionism is not the point. The point is hate directed towards Jews. I am 85 years of age and have the experience of knowing what I am writing about. WW2 was a grand experience in that respect. I never witnessed more hate than that period. But, proudly, I did not let hate consume me. For the second time I enlisted in another war: The Korean War
“But it’s extraordinary that you don’t agree. You’re saying then, I think, that the creation of a Jewish state would be reasonable even if that meant uprooting millions of non-Jews?”
NO. That is what YOU are saying.
You have invented a hypothetical case that can never happen.
WHY have you done this?
“The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.”
Yes I think it is reasonable assuming that the Arabs do nothing to prejudice their own and the Jews’ civil and religious rights. They have, however, done that from well before the founding of the state of Israel and continue increasingly today.
Because there was no reply button next to it, for some unknown reason, that’s happened before now.
There is barely a country that failed to come about without someone being “Inconvenienced”
That may be true, although I can’t immediately think of any others in modern history that parallels what’s happened here over many years now.
So I ask you again-
Pakistan was created out of India- 12 million Indians displaced- 1 million died in the process-
Is that similar to your analogy?
I cannot think why that’s relevant, but I’m happy to answer. No, it’s not similar, the power that created the mess – Britain – didn’t stay in permanent military occupation of a subjugated people, as has happened in Palestine, in flagrant violation of many UN resolutions.
Should Pakistan not be an Islamic state?
Pakistan can be whatever sort of state it likes.
Should all the Hindus rejected from West and East Pakistan as it was- be returned?
Yes, If they want to return. I have no idea what the situation is in that regard. Similarly, Muslims who fled to what became Pakistan should be allowed to return to India if they want to, perhaps they are so allowed, I don’t know.
You mean its not relevant because it fails your agenda-
However read your answer again- and think-
Why were there no UN resolutions re- India under British rule?
There were no UN resolutions against Britain when Palestine was under its mandate was there?
And what resolutions has Israel not adhered to that hold international laws- certainly not 242!
And what about the 1st UN resolution 181 to whit the Arabs refused to accept.?
It would appear that you expect more from Israel than you do from her adversaries-
And this is the problem with you thesis-
“Fri. 29 Jul. 2011 @ 13.06 –
Hamas foreign minister reiterates Hamas’ rejection of two-state solution and commitment to gaining ‘Palestine in its entirety’ by force.
Hamas’ foreign minister, Mahmoud Al-Zahar, recently conducted a television interview in which he once more set out Hamas’ rejection of Israel’s right to exist. He argued that ‘Palestine in its entirety is Islamic waqf land, which cannot be relinquished’:
‘At this moment in time, we say to you, first of all: We want Palestine in its entirety – so there will not be any misunderstandings. If our generation is unable to achieve this, the next one will, and we are raising our children on this. Palestine means Palestine in its entirety, and Israel cannot exist in our midst.’
Al-Zahar also declared that Hamas would view any Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, or a compromise agreement with the Palestinian Authority, as only a ‘first stage’ towards the destruction of Israel in its entirety. He asserted that this was the key difference between Hamas and their secular rivals, Fatah.”
When you can Israel how to resolve this- then I will listen to your views- Until then I suggest you visit the pro Hamas web sites and persuade them to change their attitude.
In reply to your reservations regarding the pain that is implicit in nation building, you have only to begin with the embattled nations of Africa and the relatively new nations cut out of the Middle East. Syria’s minorities and others of neighboring Arab countries are other cases in point.Incidentally, when you speak of the discomforts that Israel imposes on recalcitrant Arabs, do consider please what Syria is doing to its own minorities and what it would gladly do to the Jews of Israel. In our studies we consider the barbarism of past ages and some of us fail to realize the same kind of barbarism lurks in many regime’s breast this very hour.
I’m not convinced that the Balfour Declaration was more than a proposal representing the best British instincts and gratitude. It had no legal validity and it was issued with the whole of Palestine and Transjordan in mind. By 1922, with the creation of TransJordan, the possible Jewish homeland was reduced by 80%. With the British Mandate, thousands more Arabs poured in from neighboring states seeking employment and further reduced the size of the prospective homeland.
And today, we note that many thousands of NGO sponsored African Moslems are pouring across the Sinai into Israel and demanding refugee status. Note the riots in south Tel Aviv!
Since 1902, so many cunning conspiracies….
Why were there no UN resolutions re- India under British rule? I don’t know.
There were no UN resolutions against Britain when Palestine was under its mandate was there? I don’t know.
It would appear that you expect more from Israel than you do from her adversaries, because it’s Israel that’s got the guns, and refuses to implement many UN resolutions and flouts the Geneva Convention.
As you say, certainly not 242. Nor many others that you’ll be familiar with.
John you must really read the actual convention- Not just listen to what you have been told.
“No. The relevant clause, Article 49, prohibits the “occupying power” from transferring population into the “occupied territory.” Aside from the fact that the territory is not occupied, but disputed, Morris Abrams, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, had pointed out that the clause refers to the forcible transfer of large populations. By contrast, the settlements involve the voluntary movement of civilians. The U.S. Department of State, accordingly, does not view Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention as applicable to settlement activity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. For that reason, the official U.S. position has been over the years that settlements are legal, even though successive administrations have criticized them on political grounds. (Only the Carter administration for a short time held that settlements were illegal; this position was overturned by the Reagan administration.) “
I don’t have the exact figures on hand, but Israel has grown bitter about the scandalous UN partiality and the many Islamic members who time and after time manage topass resolutions perhaps 20 or 30 times as for any other nation. There are obvious bloody outrages occurring elsewhere that are never the victims of UN resolutions. It’s a newspaperman’s dream: the country is so small, there are so many points of view expressed with vivid, unafraid intensity in many western languages. Jews by their very culture allow for all kinds of advanced and colorful ideas that make the correspondents’ job all the easier. The media certainly have missed the big
story: the neglected Mizrahi Jewish refugees
Yes, <> is correct in the sense you meant it. Most native English speakers don’t understand how to use the apostrophe correctly, although the rule is simple (with a few exceptions, mainly related to pronouns and proper nouns), it’s just not taught in schools for some mad reason. If the word does not end in s, then add ‘s. If the word does end in s (as with your word, regimes), then add an apostrophe on its own (there’s an exception – possessive pronouns such as its don’t take an apostrophe – but it’s does, when it’s an abbreviation for it is).
Scandalous UN partiality? Why? How many other countries are in military occupation of a neighbour and have been for generations?
I understand that you think that you are attempting to be objective, but perhaps you would be better served by first reading Joan Peters’ book with its minor faults. I think that you are hiding behind fences that you yourself set up against a comprehensive, balanced view of all the facts and issues involved.
I don’t believe that the Palestinians have moved voluntarily. The territory is occupied by Israelis, they should not be there. The territory is not disputed, even if it were, which it is not, why would anyone think that Israel had any rights over it.
I’m not interested in the US position, I’m interested in what the world, through the UN, says, and, as you said, resolution 242, and many other resolutions, say the Israelis should not be there.
Oh dear! I can see that whatever I say you will never accept- However-
Lets exclude the American take- Here -Resolution 242 para 1- calls for respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognised borders.
There is absolutely no call in the resolution for a return to the armistice demarcation lines.
So now to basics- who were Palestinians? for there are no such people now- The people you seemed to be talking about are the refugees who were left after the 48/50 war- for it was not only Muslims who were given the name Palestinian- There were Hebrews, Christians and others pre 47.
And who created these refugees- Jordan and Egypt. What part are they being asked to play in the statehood of these people- None- Why? Only Israel is being asked to give, give, give. and she has.
Israel land mass under 8000 square kilometers-
Jordan land mass 34500 square kilometers
Egypt land mass 387000 square kilometers.
I know you keep saying it was their land- Well it was not.
However Israel has now relinquished the Gaza to these refugees-
And has recognized the Palestinian Authority with Abbas as its leader-
Its time for Jordan to surrender part of the East Bank to assist in facilitating a new state- So that Israel can have defensible borders- For as sure as there are little green apples- When this new state comes about Hamas will surely take it over- as in Gaza- and Israel will have yet more rockets fired on her.
Well, never say never, and we do agree on the Balfour Declaration, but you’re probably right that I’m unlikely to accept much of what you say.
Resolution 242 says, as you well know, “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. You do know that, do you?
We both perfectly well know the people we’re talking about – the people living in what is now Israel in the few years after WW2. I agree with you that these people included Muslims, Jews and Christians. Let’s call them “Palestinians” as a nice simple, short term, shall we.
Now here’s a difficult one – you say that Jordan and Egypt created these refugees. Really? The refugees fled in fear of attack by Jordanians and Egyptians? Really?
What have land areas got to do with anything?
Where did I say it was their land? Whose land did I say it was?
It’s time for Jordan to surrender part of the East Bank? Really? Who says so? Why is it time?
And yes, Israel is likely to continue to have rockets fired at it until it implements the many and various UN resolutions, conforms to its international treaties, returns stolen land, etc etc, you know the rest.
You appear to me to be stubbornly wrongheaded. Take just your interpretation of 242. It says ‘territories”. Had it said THE territories, you might have had some possible justice on your side, but it doesn’t so that it is generally interpreted as “some part of the territories” and not ALL of the territories. That was resolved some time ago.
Arabs fled the Haifa area, for example, although they were firmly advised by both the British and the local Jewish leadership to stay put. Notice that UNRWA has specified Arabs who were resident 1946-48 as being qualified. Had they said 1900 or 1880, there would be some justice.
Please don’t invoke the holy name of the UN. It has become a farcical, impotent, corrupt body.
How about implementing 1701 in Lebanon for starters as stipulated?! I used to have vanity plates on my car with UNESCO for a license. Thirty years ago, I realized my misplaced idealism. The plates must now be in a county landfill no less estimable than the UN.
I agree that the UN has become a farcical, impotent, corrupt body.
Just look at this resolution, drawn completely at random from the many that apply to Israel. It’s perfectly clear, so why isn’t it enforced, that’s what I want to know, and I’m glad you agree…….
“Israel, as the occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”. Resolution 471. I won’t go on.
242 is absolutely clear-
It says “Withdrawal from TERRITORIES”
And simultaneously the ceasing of hostilities against Israel- Both Arafat in his time and certainly Hamas have sworn that hostilities will never cease until Israel is demolished.
These other areas are surely key to a settlement- More and more and from within Jordan there is talk of the West Bank refugees being part of Jordan.
“Jordanians, for decades, were avid proponents of the ‘Jordan is Palestine’ position. They used that position as justification for the annexation of the West Bank, arguing that Palestine was one single, indivisible unit, and that Jordan was the legitimate governing body of Palestine…
‘We are the government of Palestine, the army of Palestine and the refugees of Palestine.’ Prime Minister of Jordan, Hazza’ al-Majali, 23 August 1959
‘Palestine and Transjordan are one.’ King Abdullah, Arab League meeting in Cairo, 12 April 1948
‘Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is one people and one land, with one history and one and the same fate.’ Prince Hassan, brother of King Hussein, addressing the Jordanian National Assembly, 2 February 1970
‘Jordan is not just another Arab state with regard to Palestine, but rather, Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan in terms of territory, national identity, sufferings, hopes and aspirations.’ Jordanian Minister of Agriculture, 24 September 1980
‘The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.’ King Hussein 1981″
FOR YOUR BRAIN TRUST AND SYSTEMS PROGRAMMING STAFF:
Here’s an idea for turning up the heat on news media when a story is inaccurate or biased: You can add useful information to your webpage automatically. Every subscriber will be provided lists of names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. that he/she can click on. For a subscriber, sending an email or finding a phone number will be as easy as pie. Your effectiveness will be multiplied greatly.
In what follows, I’ve enumerated the simple steps you can use to implement this. It’s not the only way to get it done easily.
When sending out a call to your subscribers, i.e., to encourage them to write letters, etc., you would ordinarily generate a message about a given dishonest news item and post it on your website. You would be asking them to write to their congressman, their editor, a journalist, a local TV or radio station, etc. The problem is that 95% or more of your subscribers will read your webpage and think that is a good thing to do, but will do NOTHING, because of the difficulty of finding the names, addresses, email addresses or phone numbers of their congressman, editor, etc…. and because they just don’t simply “have the time right now”
Here’s how to MULTIPLY your effectiveness by attaching a unique “response page” to the above webpage:
1. Prepare a master address book in which each item is the name, address, zip code, phone number and email address of a publisher, a correspondent, a politician, an organization. Try to make it inclusive of all such persons or organizations, in any particular order. These are people and organizations that ought to be alerted to the false stories honest reporting uncovers.
2. Update the list from month to month. It could turn out to be a file of several thousand entries.
Note: These two tasks are easy. May require 0.10 FTE per year to staff it.
3. Have your programmer write a program that will automatically create a random sample of, say, 50 names drawn from the complete file, plus up to 10 names drawn from that file that are in a designated State or Zip code area.
4. Give this program the capacity to implement the following actions:
1) check your present list of subscribers, choose the first subscriber, identify that subscriber’s State and/or Zip code;
2) draw a random sample described in 3. above; 50 names from the master list.
3) from that sample, generate three lists to be attached to your webpage
a. name and address
b. name and email address
c. name and phone number
4. Also from the master list, draw a random sample of 10 names with the constraint that they contain the State or Zipcode of the subscriber, and do not duplicate the 50 names already selected. Add them to 3a, 3b and 3c. or display them as three more lists.
5. Repeat these steps for each subscriber. Implement steps 1-5 above in order to produce randomly selected lists tailored to each subscriber’s location.
In short, the process will tailor your webpage to your subscriber’s location, giving the subscriber up to six lists to choose. If the subscriber elects to write a letter, the name and address list (3a) can be used for easy merge-mailing. If he or she elects to send email, list 3b can be used. If he or she elects to phone, list 3c is right in front of one’s nose.
Features:
1. A subscriber has the capability of choosing any number of persons or organizations to contact, up to the 60 contacts provided. It is as easy to write to all 60 as to write to just one.
2. A subscriber can decide whether to use letter, email or phone, or all three.
3. Because of the randomization process, recipients of mail will receive different mail from different subscribers at different times; i.e., there will be greater diversity of response and greater amounts of local (constituent) interest, as well as greatly increased volume of mail or phone calls.
Paul J. Hoffman
1120 Royal Lane
San Carlos, CA 94070
I have been arguing Israels case on the You Tube video of Finklestien on BBC Hardtalk. This is the response from its uploader: and I have now been blocked!
@mombser2 – Please stop abusing the comments section with your understanding of history. the audience is quite capable of making their own mind about what is happening in the middle east and we’ve had enough of your rants. I dislike removing comments but you’re pushing your luck sir.! so please,? enough!
what abuse I gave I do not know- My history taken from well known articles of Joan Peters- Nonni Darwish- Waleed Shoebatt- and HR information-
Who said freedom of speech was dead- ME.
I loved the media watchdog slideshow. Wonderfully clear and organized.
I’d suggest, however, that one slide might need reviewing.
One slide said:
Fact: Polls demonstrate Israelis support peace.
And there were two bars on the graph that were labeled: “Israelis in favor of a two-state solution” and “Israelis opposed to a two-state solution”
One can come away from this slide that the majority (“in favor of a two-state solution”) wants peace while the people who oppose a two-state solution don’t want peace. I don’t think this is the implication you wanted to make. I, for one, am not in favor of a two-state solution, but I definitely want peace.
If you’re not in favour of a two-state solution, does that mean that you’re in favour of a one-state solution or that you prefer the status quo, ie no solution?
I’m not sure. Whatever it takes to increase peace in Israel. My feeling is that the two-state solution won’t do that. I still wonder how many of my cohorts in the 37% who don’t favor a two-state solution would bristle at the implication that they don’t support peace.
Until Israel can be guaranteed secure boarders 1 state , 2 states or a dozen states- is irrelevant talk.
Words of Mahmoud Abbas – from a disatation of a thesis whilst studying at Moscow University. – “The architect of the strategy for the destruction of Israel – not with one stroke, but gradually…”
Here I quote from The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement. (HAMAS)
“Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts,
. The Islamic Resistance movement is but one squadron that should be supported… until the enemy is vanquished and Allah victory is realized. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine…….” “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavours. Palestine is an Islamic land”…..
Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and the rest of Jihadis in the Middle East all say the same-
So until that attitude changes- if ever- then there can not be any genuine peace.
Unless you have a different solution?
Why should Israel be the only state in the world with “guaranteed secure borders”?
And why should Israel be the only state in the world that is allowed to inconvenience its neighbours in order to achieve that unreasonable and unattainable goal?
We have been the victims of a carefully contrived Moslem strategy and public relations campaign no less skillful than MacDonalds. Given its promised Judea and Samaria, Israel has generally very defensible borders.
The Moslems are still licking their wounds from having lost Spain and Israel; they’re determined to get them back.But please do read background materials and do acknowledge that 850,000 N.African Jews were made refugees while 700,000 Arabs became refugees. Both issues must be publicized and settled.
Agree or Disagree: 10
steve mann
1:30 pm
May 31, 2012
You actually talk like you have been there.
Why would any country compromise if it could not secure safe borders- You make no sense!
Inconvenience- What do you know- With the help of Israel, the US and the EU in 2008 the PA gdp was higher than that in the UK. Inconvenience- just because Israel keeps people waiting at crossings checking for suicide bombers- you call an inconvenience-
Go to Syria there you will see inconvenience.
Agree or Disagree: 10
ESLombard
3:43 am
Jun 04, 2012
The inconveniences are directed AT Israel; Israel would rather not be forced to remind craven cowards and misguided bullies that Israel is to be respected. I’m no authority on the subject, but my understanding of “eye for an eye” in its full sense was intended as “NO MORE than an eye for an eye.” That injunction was meant probably as incumbent upon all Jews in dealing with each other. My own observation is that Israel, in dealing with its sometimes horrific neighbors,
must always be prepared to take far more than one eye. The Arabs have been so misguided by their malevolent leaders who use a strong brew of hate to control the Arab street!
Agree or Disagree: 10
M. Sphardi
2:46 pm
Jun 01, 2012
In a series of documents beginning in 1842 and 1913 to 1920? it was repeatedly PROPOSED that the area in question, Palestine and TransJordan, be a Jewish homeland. By 1922, only what we call Palestine was contemplated as a Jewish homeland. All the British good will evaporated when the political wrangling prevailed. I can’t give time to researching the ambiguities and niceties of British politics, but all through history, I think you’ll agree, proposals mean little until facts on the ground are established. It is my perhaps quirky thought that it is justice for BOTH peoples that must be meted out: justice for the Jews from Arab countries AND justice for the Arabs from “Palestine”.
16/6/12 I have just read todays Yediot. Please refer t pp 18-19 and the article by a thoughtless, if not stupid reporter called AKIVA NOVIK [ and I think I shall include the editor as well ] on how cetain Jewish persons are showing young children in the Gush how to use guns
Only 2-3 weks ago we had the regular complaint against the Gazan childrens summer schools teaching their tiny tots to be good shaheedim with army uniform and guns.And we know these kids are brainwashed!
Why o-why if we have some idiot on our side doing something similar must it take up a 2 page spread ? How can I plead pro Israel advocacy with such articles in a prime Israeli newspaper?
Why indeed publish it?
Much as we certainly deplore anything said or done about the Jews or Israel or Zionism or…., it is the sign of a FREE society that one may do or say both brave and craven things. Do think of all the societies in the world where that is not possible, and celebrate, if you can, that Israel has the freedom to be human in every sense of the word. Be proud in spite of the embarrassment. Would you prefer, as in Russia or most of the Moslem world, that such news be suppressed? Maybe it would be more comfortable, but it certainlty would not honestly allow for the rich diversity of humanity and humane expression that is Israel.
When our enemy has the finger on the pulse of world media and many left wing revisionist ears it behoves a free society to have a greater modicum of common sense. A free society always has a degree of censorship. Occasionally it has to be used.
We all know that Israel has practiced military censorship from the very beginning. Censorship of regrettable minor events would better be reported with wit, clinical analysis, ridicule, etc. There are plans afoot within Arab ranks to develop a well produced TV program directed to the larger world. That’s something that Israel has attempted via radio, but a Jon Stewart like program directed at the widest possible audience and as a kind of duel with the Moslem world might go a long way toward a modicum of understanding without the warfare. A few commercials might even make it profitable instead of as costly as bombs and lost lives.
If it is so- and as Beverly Smith says- The environment often dictates certain actions that we find unthinkable- And whilst I am not giving any “Buts” per sae` – Can you imagine what would have happened to an Israeli boy caught in Gaza or the PA controlled area-
I can well believe this youth was throwing stones at the soldiers- and unlike in the UK teaching a lesson to this type of hooliganism isn`t carried out with an ASBO. or a putting on the “Naughty Step”
To Gloria Lenon, HR, 2012–07–08
“I need to know if this is true or not”
Last week, before I got your question at HR, I happened to meet a Jewish Rabi at my age born and raised in Esfahan, Iran. On his forehead I saw a sign of old injury. I was curious to see whether it had been caused by any accident.
But I was NOT really surprised when he told me how as a small boy at sleep, in the hands of his father, he got injured, by a stone which had been thrown at his head, by a Moslem Youngster.
What is the “real truth” behind Moslems throwing stones at non-Moslems?
How did the photographer, at that scene in Hebron, knew
• when to look?
• where to stand?
• at where to look?
• what…
To Gloria Lenon, HR, 2012–07–08
“I need to know if this is true or not”
Dear Gloria
I also would, whole heartedly, join you in the quest after the truth. From time to time, after even 60 years or so, that has past since then, I still feel a sudden pain on my scull where, as a little Jewish boy in Shiraz, Iran, felt the blow of a stone thrown upon my head by a Moslem boy at my age.
Almost every other Jewish boy at Moslem countries has experienced at least once a blow like that. Nobody has ever filmed these. Neither the countless times that we have been, humilated, beaten up, and chaised away.
Now, that I am old, I think that we Jews do not have a good PR practice!
Those types of situations are existing in an environment where hate and control is upsetting to any environment, and the obvious reaction is bound to be anger– on both sides. That’s why so few of us “like” war of any kind!!!
Avi
11:03 am
Apr 23, 2012
To MINE, HR APRIL 23 2012 By Avi
Documentary of Moslem brutal attack on Graves of Australian Defenders
Dear MINE and all those who think like you
You will probably enjoy every second of the following documentary evidence. You probably count it as a celebration when the Moslems destroy the Australian War Memorial Toombs and break the Christian and Jewish Memorial Stones of those who have sacrificed their lives to Protect Humanity from the Sadists of the last century.
Watch below and enjoy it:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f03_1330829653&p=1
You criticize Jews and Israel as much as you can. What would you do if some Jews would do what some of Moslems do?
As you can see in the documentary, not one Moslem, not a pack of them’ but a cult of them act so brutally against the dead, against other’s symbols, believes, culture, and heritage. And YOU dear mindless MINE, not only have no word of criticism, but most possibly enjoy and even support their primitivity and brutality!!!
Offence on graves of death, is a starting point of offence against humans.
There is a saying: “where books are burned, humans will be burned”
I say: “Where the graves are attacked, humans will be attacked as well”
I also say: “Where the symbols and signs of a culture are attacked, eventually also humans will be attacked”
So stop the “symbolic” attack before it is too late! NO tolerance and no forgiveness for verbal mines of mindless “MINES”.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Ed
2:36 pm
Apr 24, 2012
Palestinian sentenced to death for selling his home to Israelis:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/palestinian-sentenced-death-selling-home-jews_640592.html
Obviously, the story has been overlooked by mainstream media.
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Dusan Milutinovic
2:30 pm
Jun 03, 2012
No, the media has largely ignored this one rather than ‘overlooked in mainstream media’ for PC reasons, or fear of their lives if they report from those countries or deal with those same Moslems, because ‘that religion of peace’ values death of its detractors even if the criticism is obvious, rational and well-documented. Also, isn’t it easier to criticize one that doesn’t fight back with murder and terrorism in reply to such commentary?
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
ELombard
6:25 pm
Jul 08, 2012
A fair assumption is that these little Palestinian boys are just imitating their elders with little expectation of a sometimes fatal blow. But these stone throwing practices are frequently highly skilled and deadly/. Once you’ve experienced it yourself, you will be forever shocked at how a mere child can be so lethal. If the reports are accurate, although they’re so easily contrived lies these days, we all bemoan any cruelty particularly to children and women, but sadly not when they are capable of such unjustified cruelty to innocent others. Of course, one’s uninformed historical and political views may often revert to puerile sentimentality, not full understanding of the complex issues
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Harry Lax
2:36 am
Apr 25, 2012
No amount of media manipulation will alter the fact that Zionism results in rank discrimination and eventually persecution of non-Jews. It’s clear that the majority of Jews are rejecting Zionist principles. How many Jews have you heard about lately who are “making Aliyah” i.e. emigrating to Israel? Instead, large numbers of Israelis are constantly leaving Israel for other countries, even Germany (!). The time is coming when this social experiment, Zionism, will find up on the same trash heap with the other social experiments of the 20th Century (Socialism, Communism, etc.)
Hot debate. What do you think?
1 
8
steve mann
10:34 am
Apr 25, 2012
So “Harry” In that case explain the existence of the 1.5 million Israeli Muslims (Out of a population of 7 million)
Across the board -In the Judiciary, the Knesset, the universities, the military, in medicine, sports and the arts.
With positions of judges, MP`s, Mayors, lecturers, generals and majors.
In fact it was a Muslim judge that tried and sentenced Katsav the Israeli ex- president for rape!
SO HARRY BOY EXPLAIN!!!!!!!!
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Jan Freed
5:10 pm
Jun 12, 2012
Sorry, but that is simply not the case. Obama is a Christian. But, don’t let facts get in your way.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Yaakov Hillel
6:48 pm
May 21, 2012
Why is an answer necessary. After you will read the book by the Journalist Joan Peters, “from time Immamorial” you will under a bit more of why there are muslims In Israel. The reason is better than why is France today more than 10% muslim every other child born in Spain and Holland is Muslim. England is not in a better situation. The spider legs of Islam is choking the world. and if somebody doesn’t do something about it all the countries in Europe will have a Muslim president like the United States of America.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
1
M. Sphardi
12:59 am
Jun 03, 2012
Israel is suffocatingly tiny and a large number of Israelis get away, if they can, for months at a time. There are, I hear, thousands of Israelis working in the Silicone Valley and at universities all around the world. A great deal is shared to mutual advantage and to Israel’s reputation in basic and applied science, having won alrady more than 7200 patents. Other isms were chiefly socio-economic experiments. Zionism has synthesized the wisdom of millenia; it evolves and is not rigidly stagnant but is available to the world, not imposed like other isms.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Mickey Oberman
4:50 am
Apr 25, 2012
Zionism asks only that the Jews have their own state. Had it not been for Zionism there would be no Israel and Jews would forever be subject to more holocausts.
Zionism does not as you falsely state lead to discrimination against non Jews. But non Jews and, indeed, Jews who deny Jews their own state and wish to annihilate that state can not and should not be treated with kid gloves.
I would like to know where you get your statistics about the numbers of Jews immigrating to and emigrating from Israel. If there are such stats they probably come from the same sources as your other anti Israel misinformation. Those sources that you prefer to believe and there are many are the real manipulators of information. As are people like you.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
John Bradford
11:14 am
Apr 25, 2012
We’ve been here before….
Zionists asking that Jews have thier own state is perfectly reasonable, it’s how that was done and the aftermath that has created the problem.
It’s not perfectly reasonable that Zionism should ask that Jews have their own state if that means that millions of non-Jews should have their lives destroyed for generations. Do you agree?
Agree or Disagree:
1 
5
Mickey Oberman
1:09 pm
Apr 25, 2012
“It’s not perfectly reasonable that Zionism should ask that Jews have their own state if that means that millions of non-Jews should have their lives destroyed for generations. Do you agree?”
NO.
Millions of non Jews were not displaced as you imply. The pseudo Palestinians for the most part left at the behest of their leaders, hoping to return in days to grab what the supposed-to-be dead Jews left.
The PP’s are the only refugees in history that, thanks to the UN and their brother Arabs, can pass their refugee status to their descendants.
Approximately 700,000 Arabs became refugees. Approximately 850,000 Jews from Arab lands became refugees.
They are the only refugees in history that have not been able to integrate within a single generation with the populations of the countries to which they fled.
The Jews have all been settled and integrated, mostly in Israel but also in some other countries.
The PP’s cause such disruption and turmoil that they are unwelcome wherever they go. Their Arab brethren want them kept as refugees so that their willing tools like J.B. can use them against Israel.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
John Bradford
1:25 pm
Apr 25, 2012
But it’s extraordinary that you don’t agree. You’re saying then, I think, that the creation of a Jewish state would be reasonable even if that meant uprooting millions of non-Jews?
We’re not yet at the point of discussing whether or not any of that actually happened, merely the theoretical point of whether such a scenario is reasonable. You’re saying that you think it is, I’m saying that I think it isn’t.
The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
steve mann
3:30 pm
Apr 25, 2012
The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.”"” That is perfectly correct- And considering the existence of the 1.5 million Israeli Muslims (Out of a population of 7 million)
Across the board -In the Judiciary, the Knesset, the universities, the military, in medicine, sports and the arts.
With positions of judges, MP`s, Mayors, lecturers, generals and majors.
In fact it was a Muslim judge that tried and sentenced Katsav the Israeli ex- president for rape!
I think the Israelis have honoured that- dont you!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
steve mann
3:27 pm
Apr 25, 2012
We sure have been here before- so here is the same answer as before-
56 Islamic states- of which 12million Indians were displaced to invent it- Should that go back to the Hindu`s?
49 Roman Catholic-
20 Protestant
12 Eastern Orthodox
4 Hindu.
You object to ONE Jewish state!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
steve mann
3:28 pm
Apr 25, 2012
56 Islamic states- of which 12million Indians were displaced to invent Pakistan- Should that go back to the Hindu`s?
Correction to other post.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
John Bradford
3:35 pm
Apr 25, 2012
I don’t believe that I’ve said I object to a Jewish state. I can’t imagine why I would, because I don’t.
Let me rephrase the question – “is it reasonable to create a state for a group of people when that causes distress to others?”
I think the answer to that question, which in essence is the one I posed, must surely be no, mustn’t it?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
6
steve mann
3:39 pm
Apr 25, 2012
There is barely a country that failed to come about without someone being “Inconvenienced”
So I ask you again-
Pakistan was created out of India- 12 million Indians displaced- 1 million died in the process-
Is that similar to your analogy?
Should Pakistan not be an Islamic state?
Should all the Hindus rejected from West and East Pakistan as it was- be returned?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Jules Tabak
12:07 pm
Apr 25, 2012
Zionism is not the point. The point is hate directed towards Jews. I am 85 years of age and have the experience of knowing what I am writing about. WW2 was a grand experience in that respect. I never witnessed more hate than that period. But, proudly, I did not let hate consume me. For the second time I enlisted in another war: The Korean War
Jules
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Mickey Oberman
2:43 pm
Apr 25, 2012
John Bradford,
“But it’s extraordinary that you don’t agree. You’re saying then, I think, that the creation of a Jewish state would be reasonable even if that meant uprooting millions of non-Jews?”
NO. That is what YOU are saying.
You have invented a hypothetical case that can never happen.
WHY have you done this?
“The Balfour declaration said “…..it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….” Do you think that’s reasonable, I do.”
Yes I think it is reasonable assuming that the Arabs do nothing to prejudice their own and the Jews’ civil and religious rights. They have, however, done that from well before the founding of the state of Israel and continue increasingly today.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
John Bradford
3:38 pm
Apr 25, 2012
You’re not saying that it is reasonable and you’re not saying that it isn’t?
But at least you agree with me that the Balfour declaration is reasonable, that’s a start.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
steve mann
3:46 pm
Apr 25, 2012
John when are you going to answer my question-?
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
John Bradford
4:03 pm
Apr 25, 2012
Because there was no reply button next to it, for some unknown reason, that’s happened before now.
There is barely a country that failed to come about without someone being “Inconvenienced”
That may be true, although I can’t immediately think of any others in modern history that parallels what’s happened here over many years now.
So I ask you again-
Pakistan was created out of India- 12 million Indians displaced- 1 million died in the process-
Is that similar to your analogy?
I cannot think why that’s relevant, but I’m happy to answer. No, it’s not similar, the power that created the mess – Britain – didn’t stay in permanent military occupation of a subjugated people, as has happened in Palestine, in flagrant violation of many UN resolutions.
Should Pakistan not be an Islamic state?
Pakistan can be whatever sort of state it likes.
Should all the Hindus rejected from West and East Pakistan as it was- be returned?
Yes, If they want to return. I have no idea what the situation is in that regard. Similarly, Muslims who fled to what became Pakistan should be allowed to return to India if they want to, perhaps they are so allowed, I don’t know.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
steve mann
4:34 pm
Apr 25, 2012
You mean its not relevant because it fails your agenda-
However read your answer again- and think-
Why were there no UN resolutions re- India under British rule?
There were no UN resolutions against Britain when Palestine was under its mandate was there?
And what resolutions has Israel not adhered to that hold international laws- certainly not 242!
And what about the 1st UN resolution 181 to whit the Arabs refused to accept.?
It would appear that you expect more from Israel than you do from her adversaries-
And this is the problem with you thesis-
“Fri. 29 Jul. 2011 @ 13.06 –
Hamas foreign minister reiterates Hamas’ rejection of two-state solution and commitment to gaining ‘Palestine in its entirety’ by force.
Hamas’ foreign minister, Mahmoud Al-Zahar, recently conducted a television interview in which he once more set out Hamas’ rejection of Israel’s right to exist. He argued that ‘Palestine in its entirety is Islamic waqf land, which cannot be relinquished’:
‘At this moment in time, we say to you, first of all: We want Palestine in its entirety – so there will not be any misunderstandings. If our generation is unable to achieve this, the next one will, and we are raising our children on this. Palestine means Palestine in its entirety, and Israel cannot exist in our midst.’
Al-Zahar also declared that Hamas would view any Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, or a compromise agreement with the Palestinian Authority, as only a ‘first stage’ towards the destruction of Israel in its entirety. He asserted that this was the key difference between Hamas and their secular rivals, Fatah.”
When you can Israel how to resolve this- then I will listen to your views- Until then I suggest you visit the pro Hamas web sites and persuade them to change their attitude.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
M. Sphardi
5:11 am
Jun 03, 2012
In reply to your reservations regarding the pain that is implicit in nation building, you have only to begin with the embattled nations of Africa and the relatively new nations cut out of the Middle East. Syria’s minorities and others of neighboring Arab countries are other cases in point.Incidentally, when you speak of the discomforts that Israel imposes on recalcitrant Arabs, do consider please what Syria is doing to its own minorities and what it would gladly do to the Jews of Israel. In our studies we consider the barbarism of past ages and some of us fail to realize the same kind of barbarism lurks in many regime’s breast this very hour.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
M. Sphardi
5:13 am
Jun 03, 2012
correction: regimes’
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
M. Otero
8:53 pm
Jun 03, 2012
I’m not convinced that the Balfour Declaration was more than a proposal representing the best British instincts and gratitude. It had no legal validity and it was issued with the whole of Palestine and Transjordan in mind. By 1922, with the creation of TransJordan, the possible Jewish homeland was reduced by 80%. With the British Mandate, thousands more Arabs poured in from neighboring states seeking employment and further reduced the size of the prospective homeland.
And today, we note that many thousands of NGO sponsored African Moslems are pouring across the Sinai into Israel and demanding refugee status. Note the riots in south Tel Aviv!
Since 1902, so many cunning conspiracies….
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
John Bradford
4:52 pm
Apr 25, 2012
No, I don’t mean that.
Why were there no UN resolutions re- India under British rule? I don’t know.
There were no UN resolutions against Britain when Palestine was under its mandate was there? I don’t know.
It would appear that you expect more from Israel than you do from her adversaries, because it’s Israel that’s got the guns, and refuses to implement many UN resolutions and flouts the Geneva Convention.
As you say, certainly not 242. Nor many others that you’ll be familiar with.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
5
steve mann
11:26 pm
Apr 25, 2012
John you must really read the actual convention- Not just listen to what you have been told.
“No. The relevant clause, Article 49, prohibits the “occupying power” from transferring population into the “occupied territory.” Aside from the fact that the territory is not occupied, but disputed, Morris Abrams, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, had pointed out that the clause refers to the forcible transfer of large populations. By contrast, the settlements involve the voluntary movement of civilians. The U.S. Department of State, accordingly, does not view Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention as applicable to settlement activity in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. For that reason, the official U.S. position has been over the years that settlements are legal, even though successive administrations have criticized them on political grounds. (Only the Carter administration for a short time held that settlements were illegal; this position was overturned by the Reagan administration.) “
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
M. Sphardi
5:34 am
Jun 03, 2012
I don’t have the exact figures on hand, but Israel has grown bitter about the scandalous UN partiality and the many Islamic members who time and after time manage topass resolutions perhaps 20 or 30 times as for any other nation. There are obvious bloody outrages occurring elsewhere that are never the victims of UN resolutions. It’s a newspaperman’s dream: the country is so small, there are so many points of view expressed with vivid, unafraid intensity in many western languages. Jews by their very culture allow for all kinds of advanced and colorful ideas that make the correspondents’ job all the easier. The media certainly have missed the big
story: the neglected Mizrahi Jewish refugees
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
John Bradford
10:21 am
Jun 03, 2012
Yes, <> is correct in the sense you meant it. Most native English speakers don’t understand how to use the apostrophe correctly, although the rule is simple (with a few exceptions, mainly related to pronouns and proper nouns), it’s just not taught in schools for some mad reason. If the word does not end in s, then add ‘s. If the word does end in s (as with your word, regimes), then add an apostrophe on its own (there’s an exception – possessive pronouns such as its don’t take an apostrophe – but it’s does, when it’s an abbreviation for it is).
Scandalous UN partiality? Why? How many other countries are in military occupation of a neighbour and have been for generations?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
John Bradford
10:31 am
Jun 03, 2012
For some reason, the word regimes’ did not appear inside the angle brackets
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
steve mann
11:05 am
Jun 03, 2012
There is no occupation- You can not be occupying a land that the original ruler did not want-ie Jordan.
However better examples are Yemen, Nigeria and Sudan- Theydont occupy anyone- They just kill them or drive them out to another country.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
M. Sphardi
9:03 pm
Jun 03, 2012
I understand that you think that you are attempting to be objective, but perhaps you would be better served by first reading Joan Peters’ book with its minor faults. I think that you are hiding behind fences that you yourself set up against a comprehensive, balanced view of all the facts and issues involved.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
John Bradford
12:07 am
Apr 26, 2012
I don’t believe that the Palestinians have moved voluntarily. The territory is occupied by Israelis, they should not be there. The territory is not disputed, even if it were, which it is not, why would anyone think that Israel had any rights over it.
I’m not interested in the US position, I’m interested in what the world, through the UN, says, and, as you said, resolution 242, and many other resolutions, say the Israelis should not be there.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
steve mann
11:20 am
Apr 26, 2012
Oh dear! I can see that whatever I say you will never accept- However-
Lets exclude the American take- Here -Resolution 242 para 1- calls for respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognised borders.
There is absolutely no call in the resolution for a return to the armistice demarcation lines.
So now to basics- who were Palestinians? for there are no such people now- The people you seemed to be talking about are the refugees who were left after the 48/50 war- for it was not only Muslims who were given the name Palestinian- There were Hebrews, Christians and others pre 47.
And who created these refugees- Jordan and Egypt. What part are they being asked to play in the statehood of these people- None- Why? Only Israel is being asked to give, give, give. and she has.
Israel land mass under 8000 square kilometers-
Jordan land mass 34500 square kilometers
Egypt land mass 387000 square kilometers.
I know you keep saying it was their land- Well it was not.
However Israel has now relinquished the Gaza to these refugees-
And has recognized the Palestinian Authority with Abbas as its leader-
Its time for Jordan to surrender part of the East Bank to assist in facilitating a new state- So that Israel can have defensible borders- For as sure as there are little green apples- When this new state comes about Hamas will surely take it over- as in Gaza- and Israel will have yet more rockets fired on her.
If , now after 67 years
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
John Bradford
12:23 pm
Apr 26, 2012
Well, never say never, and we do agree on the Balfour Declaration, but you’re probably right that I’m unlikely to accept much of what you say.
Resolution 242 says, as you well know, “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. You do know that, do you?
We both perfectly well know the people we’re talking about – the people living in what is now Israel in the few years after WW2. I agree with you that these people included Muslims, Jews and Christians. Let’s call them “Palestinians” as a nice simple, short term, shall we.
Now here’s a difficult one – you say that Jordan and Egypt created these refugees. Really? The refugees fled in fear of attack by Jordanians and Egyptians? Really?
What have land areas got to do with anything?
Where did I say it was their land? Whose land did I say it was?
It’s time for Jordan to surrender part of the East Bank? Really? Who says so? Why is it time?
And yes, Israel is likely to continue to have rockets fired at it until it implements the many and various UN resolutions, conforms to its international treaties, returns stolen land, etc etc, you know the rest.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
2
M. Otero
1:56 pm
May 31, 2012
You appear to me to be stubbornly wrongheaded. Take just your interpretation of 242. It says ‘territories”. Had it said THE territories, you might have had some possible justice on your side, but it doesn’t so that it is generally interpreted as “some part of the territories” and not ALL of the territories. That was resolved some time ago.
Arabs fled the Haifa area, for example, although they were firmly advised by both the British and the local Jewish leadership to stay put. Notice that UNRWA has specified Arabs who were resident 1946-48 as being qualified. Had they said 1900 or 1880, there would be some justice.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
M. Sphardi
5:44 am
Jun 03, 2012
Please don’t invoke the holy name of the UN. It has become a farcical, impotent, corrupt body.
How about implementing 1701 in Lebanon for starters as stipulated?! I used to have vanity plates on my car with UNESCO for a license. Thirty years ago, I realized my misplaced idealism. The plates must now be in a county landfill no less estimable than the UN.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
John Bradford
10:36 am
Jun 03, 2012
I agree that the UN has become a farcical, impotent, corrupt body.
Just look at this resolution, drawn completely at random from the many that apply to Israel. It’s perfectly clear, so why isn’t it enforced, that’s what I want to know, and I’m glad you agree…….
“Israel, as the occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”. Resolution 471. I won’t go on.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
steve mann
1:19 pm
Apr 26, 2012
242 is absolutely clear-
It says “Withdrawal from TERRITORIES”
And simultaneously the ceasing of hostilities against Israel- Both Arafat in his time and certainly Hamas have sworn that hostilities will never cease until Israel is demolished.
These other areas are surely key to a settlement- More and more and from within Jordan there is talk of the West Bank refugees being part of Jordan.
“Jordanians, for decades, were avid proponents of the ‘Jordan is Palestine’ position. They used that position as justification for the annexation of the West Bank, arguing that Palestine was one single, indivisible unit, and that Jordan was the legitimate governing body of Palestine…
‘We are the government of Palestine, the army of Palestine and the refugees of Palestine.’ Prime Minister of Jordan, Hazza’ al-Majali, 23 August 1959
‘Palestine and Transjordan are one.’ King Abdullah, Arab League meeting in Cairo, 12 April 1948
‘Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is one people and one land, with one history and one and the same fate.’ Prince Hassan, brother of King Hussein, addressing the Jordanian National Assembly, 2 February 1970
‘Jordan is not just another Arab state with regard to Palestine, but rather, Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan in terms of territory, national identity, sufferings, hopes and aspirations.’ Jordanian Minister of Agriculture, 24 September 1980
‘The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.’ King Hussein 1981″
Since then whats changed!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Paul Hoffman
11:14 am
May 03, 2012
FOR YOUR BRAIN TRUST AND SYSTEMS PROGRAMMING STAFF:
Here’s an idea for turning up the heat on news media when a story is inaccurate or biased: You can add useful information to your webpage automatically. Every subscriber will be provided lists of names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. that he/she can click on. For a subscriber, sending an email or finding a phone number will be as easy as pie. Your effectiveness will be multiplied greatly.
In what follows, I’ve enumerated the simple steps you can use to implement this. It’s not the only way to get it done easily.
When sending out a call to your subscribers, i.e., to encourage them to write letters, etc., you would ordinarily generate a message about a given dishonest news item and post it on your website. You would be asking them to write to their congressman, their editor, a journalist, a local TV or radio station, etc. The problem is that 95% or more of your subscribers will read your webpage and think that is a good thing to do, but will do NOTHING, because of the difficulty of finding the names, addresses, email addresses or phone numbers of their congressman, editor, etc…. and because they just don’t simply “have the time right now”
Here’s how to MULTIPLY your effectiveness by attaching a unique “response page” to the above webpage:
1. Prepare a master address book in which each item is the name, address, zip code, phone number and email address of a publisher, a correspondent, a politician, an organization. Try to make it inclusive of all such persons or organizations, in any particular order. These are people and organizations that ought to be alerted to the false stories honest reporting uncovers.
2. Update the list from month to month. It could turn out to be a file of several thousand entries.
Note: These two tasks are easy. May require 0.10 FTE per year to staff it.
3. Have your programmer write a program that will automatically create a random sample of, say, 50 names drawn from the complete file, plus up to 10 names drawn from that file that are in a designated State or Zip code area.
4. Give this program the capacity to implement the following actions:
1) check your present list of subscribers, choose the first subscriber, identify that subscriber’s State and/or Zip code;
2) draw a random sample described in 3. above; 50 names from the master list.
3) from that sample, generate three lists to be attached to your webpage
a. name and address
b. name and email address
c. name and phone number
4. Also from the master list, draw a random sample of 10 names with the constraint that they contain the State or Zipcode of the subscriber, and do not duplicate the 50 names already selected. Add them to 3a, 3b and 3c. or display them as three more lists.
5. Repeat these steps for each subscriber. Implement steps 1-5 above in order to produce randomly selected lists tailored to each subscriber’s location.
In short, the process will tailor your webpage to your subscriber’s location, giving the subscriber up to six lists to choose. If the subscriber elects to write a letter, the name and address list (3a) can be used for easy merge-mailing. If he or she elects to send email, list 3b can be used. If he or she elects to phone, list 3c is right in front of one’s nose.
Features:
1. A subscriber has the capability of choosing any number of persons or organizations to contact, up to the 60 contacts provided. It is as easy to write to all 60 as to write to just one.
2. A subscriber can decide whether to use letter, email or phone, or all three.
3. Because of the randomization process, recipients of mail will receive different mail from different subscribers at different times; i.e., there will be greater diversity of response and greater amounts of local (constituent) interest, as well as greatly increased volume of mail or phone calls.
Paul J. Hoffman
1120 Royal Lane
San Carlos, CA 94070
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
steve mann
6:38 pm
May 14, 2012
“Uploaders’ Comments (krimane )
I have been arguing Israels case on the You Tube video of Finklestien on BBC Hardtalk. This is the response from its uploader: and I have now been blocked!
@mombser2 – Please stop abusing the comments section with your understanding of history. the audience is quite capable of making their own mind about what is happening in the middle east and we’ve had enough of your rants. I dislike removing comments but you’re pushing your luck sir.! so please,? enough!
what abuse I gave I do not know- My history taken from well known articles of Joan Peters- Nonni Darwish- Waleed Shoebatt- and HR information-
Who said freedom of speech was dead- ME.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Phil
3:50 am
May 31, 2012
I loved the media watchdog slideshow. Wonderfully clear and organized.
I’d suggest, however, that one slide might need reviewing.
One slide said:
Fact: Polls demonstrate Israelis support peace.
And there were two bars on the graph that were labeled: “Israelis in favor of a two-state solution” and “Israelis opposed to a two-state solution”
One can come away from this slide that the majority (“in favor of a two-state solution”) wants peace while the people who oppose a two-state solution don’t want peace. I don’t think this is the implication you wanted to make. I, for one, am not in favor of a two-state solution, but I definitely want peace.
Again, great slideshow!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
John Bradford
7:34 am
May 31, 2012
If you’re not in favour of a two-state solution, does that mean that you’re in favour of a one-state solution or that you prefer the status quo, ie no solution?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Phil
8:34 am
May 31, 2012
I’m not sure. Whatever it takes to increase peace in Israel. My feeling is that the two-state solution won’t do that. I still wonder how many of my cohorts in the 37% who don’t favor a two-state solution would bristle at the implication that they don’t support peace.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
steve mann
12:04 pm
May 31, 2012
Until Israel can be guaranteed secure boarders 1 state , 2 states or a dozen states- is irrelevant talk.
Words of Mahmoud Abbas – from a disatation of a thesis whilst studying at Moscow University. – “The architect of the strategy for the destruction of Israel – not with one stroke, but gradually…”
Here I quote from The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement. (HAMAS)
“Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts,
. The Islamic Resistance movement is but one squadron that should be supported… until the enemy is vanquished and Allah victory is realized. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine…….” “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavours. Palestine is an Islamic land”…..
Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and the rest of Jihadis in the Middle East all say the same-
So until that attitude changes- if ever- then there can not be any genuine peace.
Unless you have a different solution?
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
John Bradford
12:56 pm
May 31, 2012
Why should Israel be the only state in the world with “guaranteed secure borders”?
And why should Israel be the only state in the world that is allowed to inconvenience its neighbours in order to achieve that unreasonable and unattainable goal?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
M.Sphardi, PhD
1:18 pm
May 31, 2012
We have been the victims of a carefully contrived Moslem strategy and public relations campaign no less skillful than MacDonalds. Given its promised Judea and Samaria, Israel has generally very defensible borders.
The Moslems are still licking their wounds from having lost Spain and Israel; they’re determined to get them back.But please do read background materials and do acknowledge that 850,000 N.African Jews were made refugees while 700,000 Arabs became refugees. Both issues must be publicized and settled.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
steve mann
1:30 pm
May 31, 2012
You actually talk like you have been there.
Why would any country compromise if it could not secure safe borders- You make no sense!
Inconvenience- What do you know- With the help of Israel, the US and the EU in 2008 the PA gdp was higher than that in the UK. Inconvenience- just because Israel keeps people waiting at crossings checking for suicide bombers- you call an inconvenience-
Go to Syria there you will see inconvenience.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
ESLombard
3:43 am
Jun 04, 2012
The inconveniences are directed AT Israel; Israel would rather not be forced to remind craven cowards and misguided bullies that Israel is to be respected. I’m no authority on the subject, but my understanding of “eye for an eye” in its full sense was intended as “NO MORE than an eye for an eye.” That injunction was meant probably as incumbent upon all Jews in dealing with each other. My own observation is that Israel, in dealing with its sometimes horrific neighbors,
must always be prepared to take far more than one eye. The Arabs have been so misguided by their malevolent leaders who use a strong brew of hate to control the Arab street!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
M. Sphardi
2:46 pm
Jun 01, 2012
In a series of documents beginning in 1842 and 1913 to 1920? it was repeatedly PROPOSED that the area in question, Palestine and TransJordan, be a Jewish homeland. By 1922, only what we call Palestine was contemplated as a Jewish homeland. All the British good will evaporated when the political wrangling prevailed. I can’t give time to researching the ambiguities and niceties of British politics, but all through history, I think you’ll agree, proposals mean little until facts on the ground are established. It is my perhaps quirky thought that it is justice for BOTH peoples that must be meted out: justice for the Jews from Arab countries AND justice for the Arabs from “Palestine”.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
dbdent
5:18 pm
Jun 18, 2012
16/6/12 I have just read todays Yediot. Please refer t pp 18-19 and the article by a thoughtless, if not stupid reporter called AKIVA NOVIK [ and I think I shall include the editor as well ] on how cetain Jewish persons are showing young children in the Gush how to use guns
Only 2-3 weks ago we had the regular complaint against the Gazan childrens summer schools teaching their tiny tots to be good shaheedim with army uniform and guns.And we know these kids are brainwashed!
Why o-why if we have some idiot on our side doing something similar must it take up a 2 page spread ? How can I plead pro Israel advocacy with such articles in a prime Israeli newspaper?
Why indeed publish it?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
ESLombard
8:00 pm
Jun 18, 2012
Much as we certainly deplore anything said or done about the Jews or Israel or Zionism or…., it is the sign of a FREE society that one may do or say both brave and craven things. Do think of all the societies in the world where that is not possible, and celebrate, if you can, that Israel has the freedom to be human in every sense of the word. Be proud in spite of the embarrassment. Would you prefer, as in Russia or most of the Moslem world, that such news be suppressed? Maybe it would be more comfortable, but it certainlty would not honestly allow for the rich diversity of humanity and humane expression that is Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
dbdent
8:40 pm
Jun 18, 2012
When our enemy has the finger on the pulse of world media and many left wing revisionist ears it behoves a free society to have a greater modicum of common sense. A free society always has a degree of censorship. Occasionally it has to be used.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
ESLombard
11:49 pm
Jun 18, 2012
We all know that Israel has practiced military censorship from the very beginning. Censorship of regrettable minor events would better be reported with wit, clinical analysis, ridicule, etc. There are plans afoot within Arab ranks to develop a well produced TV program directed to the larger world. That’s something that Israel has attempted via radio, but a Jon Stewart like program directed at the widest possible audience and as a kind of duel with the Moslem world might go a long way toward a modicum of understanding without the warfare. A few commercials might even make it profitable instead of as costly as bombs and lost lives.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Gloria Lenon
10:36 pm
Jul 07, 2012
I need to know if this is true or not, and the real story behind it. It is all over Facebook
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/its-shame-they-didnt-kill-him-israelis-react-video-soldiers-kicking-palestinian
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
steve mann
11:25 am
Jul 08, 2012
If it is so- and as Beverly Smith says- The environment often dictates certain actions that we find unthinkable- And whilst I am not giving any “Buts” per sae` – Can you imagine what would have happened to an Israeli boy caught in Gaza or the PA controlled area-
I can well believe this youth was throwing stones at the soldiers- and unlike in the UK teaching a lesson to this type of hooliganism isn`t carried out with an ASBO. or a putting on the “Naughty Step”
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Avi
12:32 am
Jul 09, 2012
To Gloria Lenon, HR, 2012–07–08
“I need to know if this is true or not”
Last week, before I got your question at HR, I happened to meet a Jewish Rabi at my age born and raised in Esfahan, Iran. On his forehead I saw a sign of old injury. I was curious to see whether it had been caused by any accident.
But I was NOT really surprised when he told me how as a small boy at sleep, in the hands of his father, he got injured, by a stone which had been thrown at his head, by a Moslem Youngster.
What is the “real truth” behind Moslems throwing stones at non-Moslems?
How did the photographer, at that scene in Hebron, knew
• when to look?
• where to stand?
• at where to look?
• what…
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Avi
12:27 am
Jul 09, 2012
To Gloria Lenon, HR, 2012–07–08
“I need to know if this is true or not”
Dear Gloria
I also would, whole heartedly, join you in the quest after the truth. From time to time, after even 60 years or so, that has past since then, I still feel a sudden pain on my scull where, as a little Jewish boy in Shiraz, Iran, felt the blow of a stone thrown upon my head by a Moslem boy at my age.
Almost every other Jewish boy at Moslem countries has experienced at least once a blow like that. Nobody has ever filmed these. Neither the countless times that we have been, humilated, beaten up, and chaised away.
Now, that I am old, I think that we Jews do not have a good PR practice!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Beverly Smith
5:33 am
Jul 08, 2012
Those types of situations are existing in an environment where hate and control is upsetting to any environment, and the obvious reaction is bound to be anger– on both sides. That’s why so few of us “like” war of any kind!!!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0