Is This Correct Or Lefty PC Gone Mad?

[Napster]

You're forgetting(or ignoring)the fact that Israel took out a Hamas leader before that

for a steak meal?

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I was just asking Mr Century a question to see if he saw the fault as being in one camp only. Not looking to move this on right now as I need my beauty sleep but it surprises me when people from UK pick one as being the aggressor with this unless they have a strong connection either way. History would indicate that neither side is blameless.

Perhaps we pick the side that doesn't support those that kill our citizens in suicide bombings or our soldiers in Afghanistan. Perhaps we some distaste with a people who would attempt to destroy a hospital where they had received humanitarian care because it was Israeli. Perhaps neither side is blameless, but only one side is hideously barbaric.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

There is no such nation as Palestine and there never was.

That's funny as I thought Palestine had just been recognised by the UN as a state.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/29/united-nations-vote-palestine-state

 

[londonblue]

You're forgetting(or ignoring)the fact that Israel took out a Hamas leader before that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/24/israel1?INTCMP=SRCH

I thought long and hard (believe it or not!) about starting this thread because there was a very high chance that it would turn into a debate on the Middle East. We've done that to death ('scuse the pun) in the past, and I didn't want to go over old ground.

The thread was supposed to be about whether or not a school had done the right thing by accepting that Israel isn't a country, and forcing a teacher to do the same because a muslim pupil complained.

However, since you bring this up, did you know that in the last 12 years 12000 rockets have been fired into Israel? Did you also know that in the week leading up to Israel taking out the Hamas Military (note, not political) leader 600 rockets were fired into Israel, and that a number of people were injured? Thankfully no-one was killed.

I am friends with and Israeli on Facebook who posted this on the 14th November (before the attack on Hamas):

"There is nothing worse than calling your mum to find out she is OK and she has to run to the [bomb] shelter in the middle of call {sic} cause there is another attack."

She also posted this on the 11th November:

"This has been going on too long and the world doesn't care...

30 rockets
1 day

Fired from Gaza to Israel Nov 11"

I could continue but I've work to do...

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I had no idea about the precise number of rockets fired into Israel.

Do you know how many Israeli rockets were fired into Gaza in the recent conflict and how many people died on both sides?
The figures demonstrate that Israel obviously has a far greater and much more effective firepower capacity than Hamas.(Along with a great deal more underground shelters too).

I was fully aware that Israel assassinated a Hamas military leader(it says so in the article link).

I notice you make no comment on the UN's vote to recognise Palestine as a state.Personally, I happen to believe the conflict will only be resolved if a two-state solution can be found.

Btw,I think you'll find it was post 31 that first took this thread onto the topic of the recent Israel/Gaza conflict.

 

[MK Shrimper]

I notice you make no comment on the UN's vote to recognise Palestine as a state.Personally, I happen to believe the conflict will only be resolved if a two-state solution can be found.

Thats the answer and always has been. Why the USA/UK can't accept that I'll never know. They've got their mid-east ally, Palestine has it's own country, surely everybody happy.

 

[londonblue]

do you not think the same applies to the Israelis?

You might find this interesting:

[video=youtube_share;NX6vyT8RzMo]http://youtu.be/NX6vyT8RzMo[/video]

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Still no comment on the UN's recognition of a Palestinian state?

 

[londonblue]

I had no idea about the precise number of rockets fired into Israel.

Indeed. And that doesn’t include the number of suicide bombs and bus bombs etc, things that I myself have witnessed.

Do you know how many Israeli rockets were fired into Gaza in the recent conflict and how many people died on both sides?
The figures demonstrate that Israel obviously has a far greater and much more effective firepower capacity than Hamas.(Along with a great deal more underground shelters too).

I don’t know, and I don’t really care. Israel’s response wasn’t a terrorist attack on civilians, and was executed at a time when both sides were effectively at war. I also don’t know how many rockets we have fired in Iran...
I also don’t buy into the “Israel are bad because more Palestinians have died than Israelis”. To me that is just ridiculous and simplistic, and is skewed by two things. Firstly Hamas put their own people in the way to ensure there are deaths, and secondly because Israel has spent many millions of dollars on bomb shelters. They didn’t happen to be where they’re needed by accident. I wonder why Hamas haven’t done the same? It isn’t all that difficult to dig a hole in the ground and put a door on it, which is what most shelters in Israel are.

I was fully aware that Israel assassinated a Hamas military leader(it says so in the article link).

Correct. They didn’t go after a political leader or a civilian. They went for the guy who leads and supports all the attacks on Israel. It seems to me that he was a legitimate target, although I would rather no-one was killed on either side.

I notice you make no comment on the UN's vote to recognise Palestine as a state.Personally, I happen to believe the conflict will only be resolved if a two-state solution can be found.

Why should I? We weren’t discussing that.

Btw,I think you'll find it was post 31 that first took this thread onto the topic of the recent Israel/Gaza conflict.

Once again, I think you’re so used to be blamed for things on here you have come to expect it. I wasn’t apportioning blame, just pointing out that I didn’t want to get into this...

 

[londonblue]

Still no comment on the UN's recognition of a Palestinian state?

I've been in the gym. 10k in 49 mins and 49 seconds. I was quite pleased with that...!

See above.

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

I've not seen any mention, either, in the interests of fairness, of the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip that's been in place for the past five years, or an Israaeli minister's vow earlier this month to send Palestinians "back to the Middle Ages". Neither of those actions seem indicative of a country that wishes to co-exist peacefully with its neighbours.

I'd also say it's more than a coincidence that Netanyahu is seeking re-election shortly in a nation that pulls together in times of conflict. That's just me being cynical though.

 

[londonblue]

I've not seen any mention, either, in the interests of fairness, of the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip that's been in place for the past five years, or an Israaeli minister's vow earlier this month to send Palestinians "back to the Middle Ages". Neither of those actions seem indicative of a country that wishes to co-exist peacefully with its neighbours.

I'd also say it's more than a coincidence that Netanyahu is seeking re-election shortly in a nation that pulls together in times of conflict. That's just me being cynical though.

Israel is a democracy, and everyone is is entitled to voice their opinion. Sometimes you get an idiot that says things that the rest don't agree with. You will find that the huge majority of Israelis want peace, and you won't find that opinion any where near the Israeli constitution. You will find, however, the destruction of Israel in the Hamas constitution. Apparently it's the first paragraph.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I've not seen any mention, either, in the interests of fairness, of the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip that's been in place for the past five years, or an Israaeli minister's vow earlier this month to send Palestinians "back to the Middle Ages". Neither of those actions seem indicative of a country that wishes to co-exist peacefully with its neighbours.

I'd also say it's more than a coincidence that Netanyahu is seeking re-election shortly in a nation that pulls together in times of conflict. That's just me being cynical though.

Surely the Palestinians would have to go forward to the Middle Ages?

And they don't want a two state solution. They want Israel to be destroyed.

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

I just want it all to stop. I'm really not fussed who's started it, who's to blame. Civilians on both sides are getting killed rather than the protagonists themselves. It seems so pointless.

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

I just want it all to stop. I'm really not fussed who's started it, who's to blame. Civilians on both sides are getting killed rather than the protagonists themselves. It seems so pointless.

Reminds me of the situation in Ireland. Both sides had ****ed up monumentally in the past, and both had a right to blame the other. Knowing our government was sitting down with terrorists hurt, but sometimes you have to bite your lip, swallow your pride, and just do what's right.

 

[A Century United]

The Palestinians have not been recognised as a State, but they have been granted Observer status at the UN, which is a step on the way. The Oslo peace accord, which the Palestinians signed, specifically stated that they should not apply for Observer status as progress towards Statehood should be linked to concessions from BOTH sides. The Israelis have made a number of concessions. Each time the Palestinians have failed to reciprocate - can anyone name one concession to peace that they have made?

I am in no doubt that Israel does many regrettable things. But remember that when Palestinian civilians are killed, it is not an intentional act by Israel. The Palestinians target Israeli civilians as a matter of policy. Where is the outcry over that?

Reference is always being made to the 1967 borders. Why is Israel now in possession of land which prior to 1967 it didn't have? Because they were attacked without provocation or warning by their Arab neighbours, who fully intended to wipe Israel off the map. Israel beat them. Should they hand the land back? Some of it (but certainly not the Gollan heights, which are strategically vitally to Israel) but it has to be a matter of negotiation around a table and while the Palestinians are failing to stick to their agreements time after time, it won't happen. And why should the Palestinians stick to these agreements? They are winning the propaganda war* and the longer they can keep this "Illegal Blockade" in place (and they don't in the least want it lifted) the more they are getting concessions from the World's nations, without having to give anything in return. By giving the Palestinians Observer status, the UN has made peace less likely, not more.


And perhaps those of you on the left who support the Palestinian cause could ponder on the answer to the question, "Where do Gay Palestinians flee to, to avoid persecution (and death) in Gaza and the West Bank......?"

*Why did the BBC commission a report into whether it had been displaying an anti-Israeli bias (paid for by the licence payer) and then when they received it, refuse to publish it and then use more licence payer's money in the courts blocking any attempt to access it under FOI legislation? Over £300k, in fact.

 

[Rob Noxious]

And perhaps those of you on the left who support the Palestinian cause could ponder on the answer to the question, "Where do Gay Palestinians flee to, to avoid persecution (and death) in Gazza and the West Bank......?"

Shurely shome mishtake?! > http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...n-pictures-of-Middle-East-hotel-booze-up.html

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

The Palestinians have not been recognised as a State, but they have been granted Observer status at the UN, which is a step on the way. The Oslo peace accord, which the Palestinians signed, specifically stated that they should not apply for Observer status as progress towards Statehood should be linked to concessions from BOTH sides. The Israelis have made a number of concessions. Each time the Palestinians have failed to reciprocate - can anyone name one concession to peace that they have made?

I am in no doubt that Israel does many regrettable things. But remember that when Palestinian civilians are killed, it is not an intentional act by Israel. The Palestinians target Israeli civilians as a matter of policy. Where is the outcry over that?

Reference is always being made to the 1967 borders. Why is Israel now in possession of land which prior to 1967 it didn't have? Because they were attacked without provocation or warning by their Arab neighbours, who fully intended to wipe Israel off the map. Israel beat them. Should they hand the land back? Some of it (but certainly not the Gollan heights, which are strategically vitally to Israel) but it has to be a matter of negotiation around a table and while the Palestinians are failing to stick to their agreements time after time, it won't happen. And why should the Palestinians stick to these agreements? They are winning the propaganda war* and the longer they can keep this "Illegal Blockade" in place (and they don't in the least want it lifted) the more they are getting concessions from the World's nations, without having to give anything in return. By giving the Palestinians Observer status, the UN has made peace less likely, not more.


And perhaps those of you on the left who support the Palestinian cause could ponder on the answer to the question, "Where do Gay Palestinians flee to, to avoid persecution (and death) in Gaza and the West Bank......?"

*Why did the BBC commission a report into whether it had been displaying an anti-Israeli bias (paid for by the licence payer) and then when they received it, refuse to publish it and then use more licence payer's money in the courts blocking any attempt to access it under FOI legislation? Over £300k, in fact.

Great post ACU. The BBC's reporting of the Palestinian situation is utterly reprehensible,and its effect is felt in this country where the wretched Palestinian savages win the PR Battle daily.

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

Having voted for Conservative, Lib Dem and Labour in the past - both locally and nationally - I have no particular left or right leaning. It gives way, I feel, to tired, inherited thinking, with people sort of seeing politics almost like their football team. You're either blue or red and you can never change.

So whilst I haven't been specifically asked to ponder on certain questions posed, I can make at least an attempt. It won't be unbiased - nobody's personal views ever are - but they won't born of a 'towing the party line'.

The answer to the first question is, of course Israel, who have the most progressive laws to protect the rights of their gay community. It looks like something for which they should be, and are, given huge credit.

If a gay Palestinian flees and applies for asylum, however, it appears they are not protected. Instead many are placed under house arrest and / or deported back to where they fleed. As in all walks of life, scratch below the surface and things are never quite what they seem.

As for the report, this is memory serving me, so of course I stand to be corrected. Wasn't this called the Baden Report or Balen Report or something similar? If this is the report being referred to, this was with regards to reporting of events in the early / mid 00's rather than the present day. It certainly would have been way before the current actions.

I recall the media furore at the time. As I understood it - again I stand to be corrected - the BBC had said the report wasn't an inquiry, which would be subject to the Freedom of Information Act, but an internal report checking its own standards of journalism, which isn't. I'm sure if a document is about the subject or journalism or art, the FOI Act can't be enforced.

Whether I think it's right they kept their findings to themselves is irrelevant (I don't, as it happens). It's the law itself and the way that judges think that should perhaps be put under the spotlight. It certainly has nothing to do with the current conflict.

 

[buffalowolf]

Why worry all the worlds troubles will be over in 3 weeks time," END OF THE WORLD COMES 21ST DECEMBER 2012" hehehe