|
Post by k5125 on Apr 23, 2005 15:38:39 GMT -5
I agree. Israel isn't perfect and has done some bad things in the past, but not nearly to the extent of some of its more hostile neighbors.
And correct. Israel is nothing like North America and what happened to the native americans. Its two completely different situations. No similarities at all.
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on Apr 23, 2005 15:47:51 GMT -5
Yeah true, the situation isn't as seen on CNN, if you want an excellent Website denouncing the malpractices and bias of some of the world's leading media regarding the Middle East conflict, go to : honestreporting.com
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Apr 23, 2005 16:24:29 GMT -5
Yeah true, the situation isn't as seen on CNN, if you want an excellent Website denouncing the malpractices and bias of some of the world's leading media regarding the Middle East conflict, go to : honestreporting.comAnybody who thinks that the American media holds an anti-Israel bias in its reporting is a blind idiot. If anything the bias is pro-Israeli, and very much so. They act like the Israelis are the ones suffering, when the number of Palestinains dead is three or four times that of the Israelis. Furthermore, any death of Israeli civilians gets far greater mention than a similar event happening to Palestinians.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Apr 23, 2005 16:25:16 GMT -5
I agree. Israel isn't perfect and has done some bad things in the past, but not nearly to the extent of some of its more hostile neighbors. Although I am a supporter of the state of Israel, that is simply not true. Israel has had more acts of state-sponsored terrorism than Egypt, Lebanon, or any of its Arab neighbors for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Apr 24, 2005 0:53:35 GMT -5
Anybody who thinks that the American media holds an anti-Israel bias in its reporting is a blind idiot. What's with all the name-calling? Is everyone who posts here these days so rude? The mostly liberal American media has conveyed a less-than-objective image of Israel and the Middle East conflict. Israelis are often portrayed as colonialist oppressors. They build apartheid walls and run over innocent peace activists with bulldozers. Don't even get me started on the Arafat documentaries. Oy gevalt. That's so unfair. It's not that bad; try 2 - 2.5 times higher. Really, though, context is so passe.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Apr 24, 2005 1:14:52 GMT -5
The media barely gave a mention to the tragic and deliberate death of Rachel Corrie. The media barely mentions the countless dead Palestinian children. The media doesn't even give insight into the sheer torture of even living in Israeli-occupied Palestine. On the other hand, it glorifies Israel as a gleaming liberal democracy (not untrue) under unreasonable attack from ruthless terrrorists. Most Americans think the state of Israel was established before the Palestinians existed! Give me a break.
|
|
|
Post by murphee on Apr 24, 2005 1:20:58 GMT -5
I think that you are exaggerating a bit about the media as I did read many articles about Rachel Corrie in the mainstream media and also accounts of the difficulties Palestinians face.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Apr 24, 2005 1:28:50 GMT -5
The media barely gave a mention to the tragic and deliberate death of Rachel Corrie. Whether you think the media adequately covered her death or whether or not it was deliberate is inconsequential. It's all subjective. At the end of the day, Corrie should be held accountable for her actions. She chose to climb in front of a moving bulldozer. Period. Because it's so pro-Israel, right? Maybe the reason they don't mention the 'countless' dead children is because they constitute a small percentage of the overall Palestinian casualties. The percentage of Israeli children killed is much higher. It's kind of a slippery slope you see. It kinda was. Before Israel was created the word Palestinian referred to Jews. It wasn't until the '60s that Syrian Arabs discovered their ancient Palestinian roots.
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on Apr 24, 2005 7:05:34 GMT -5
Alexandrian, I didn't insult you or anything, so please refrain from the name-calling. First, to be honest I am not sure about the media coverage of the Middle East conflict in the US because I don't live there but I can assure you that in many countries in (Western) Europe, the media is clearly biased towards the Palestinians. The site I mentioned just takes a critical look at the clear and undeniable bias of many media sources. As I said, I can't speak of the US but it is very evident that there is a certain pro-Palestinian bias in many newspapers and other media in various European countries. Secondly, Flowin Prose is right, the term 'Palestinian' was applied to the Jews living in Palestine, so saying that there has been a specific Palestinian identity before the 1940's approximately is just not true. Of course, I am not denying that there was a very large Arab population in the territory, but a distinct Palestinian sense of identity and nationalism didn't exist at the time, they just considered them Arabs and wanted to be absorbed into Syria. Also, another point I would like to mention is that Arabs have not been there for over 1,000 years like some peple would make you believe, many were immigrants from surrounding Arab nations that flocked to the region in various waves during the late 19th and first half of the 20th century. I wasn't going to address any of your other points in your first post of this thread, but I would just like to mention that saying that Uganda was the Zionist's ultimate priority is straight-out denying the facts. Uganda was proposed by the British, after Herzl's unsuccessful attempt to create a charter, and was presented during the Sixth Zionist Congress as a desperate attempt to help Russian Jews who were fleeing the numerous pogroms and persecutions they were victims of. This proposal caused much debate and controversy. In the first Zionist Congress, the aim of Zionism was clearly stated, and this was the establishment of the Jewish homeland in Palestine (which is just logical). This said, I am also enthusiastic about good relations with Egypt, it could provide many benefits to the two countries and I'd hope it would be a model for other surrounding Arab nations to follow.
|
|
|
Post by CooCooCachoo on Apr 24, 2005 7:05:56 GMT -5
Regardless of what you may have seen on CNN, Israel is not about colonialism. Israel is not North America. Israel is the Jewish state. Jews have been persecuted in their host nations for 2,000 years, and now they can go home. That may sound sappy to an American gentile like yourself, but I don't expect you to understand. You're not Jewish. ...Yep. It's going to have to be a 2-state solution because of people like you. Kiss half the land goodbye, and watch the 20% grow, as Palestinians realize the only way to have a fair chance in life is to outbreed crazies like you. I don't know... I generally think pre-folding your toilet paper before the sabbath doesn't bring one closer to the almighty, but who am I to say... Here's a list of halacha FAQs that most non-Jewish people will find pretty amusing... www.halacha.com/narchives.htmlAir Conditioner drip pans prohibited on the Sabath? Tearing the plastic packaging off of a game is up for debate? But I guess any attempt to mock or pass judgement on something like this would simply justify why Jews need their own State. ...I'd be adding to 2 millenia of oppression. Anti-Semetism will run rampant where ever people perceive Jewish people to be acting unreasonably, or unfairly. Jewish people who talk about how much Israel has "given" to the Palestinians, in terms of peace offers, ignore the blatantly obvious fact of what Israel has "taken" to begin with. ...This kind of logic is deeply offensive, and leads Palestinians to lash out when the perceive additional injustices. Europe will always feel funny about speaking out against Jews, or Jewish actions, even when they are wrong. But Israel/Jewish power should not come out of guilt, but out of good relations with it's neighbors, and out of good families, and owning up to some of it's own craziness. People like YOU should not be REPRESENTING Israel. ...You do it a disservice.
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on Apr 24, 2005 7:19:15 GMT -5
I don't know... I generally think pre-folding your toilet paper before the sabbath doesn't bring one closer to the almighty, but who am I to say... Here's a list of halacha FAQs that most non-Jewish people will find pretty amusing... www.halacha.com/narchives.htmlAir Conditioner drip pans prohibited on the Sabath? Tearing the plastic packaging off of a game is up for debate? But I guess any attempt to mock or pass judgement on something like this would simply justify why Jews need their own State. ...I'd be adding to 2 millenia of oppression. This is definitely NOT typical of the vast majority of Jews and are examples of the Orthodox interpretation. Orthodox Jews are a minority, representing only 6% I believe in Israel and probably even less in other countries in the world. This said, I don't see why you should be mocking this, I could easily find peculiarities of other religions to mock them as well, but don't do so, because it is a lack of respect. Anti-Semetism will run rampant where ever people perceive Jewish people to be acting unreasonably, or unfairly. Jewish people who talk about how much Israel has "given" to the Palestinians, in terms of peace offers, ignore the blatantly obvious fact of what Israel has "taken" to begin with. ...This kind of logic is deeply offensive, and leads Palestinians to lash out when the perceive additional injustices. Europe will always feel funny about speaking out against Jews, or Jewish actions, even when they are wrong. But Israel/Jewish power should not come out of guilt, but out of good relations with it's neighbors, and out of good families, and owning up to some of it's own craziness. Could you please specifiy what exactly it has taken? This is still intriguing me, because if you are referring to the land occupied after the 1967 war it is clearly an example of Arab self-inflicted damage that occurred as a consequence of not respecting the armistice agreements.
|
|
|
Post by CooCooCachoo on Apr 24, 2005 11:39:10 GMT -5
This is definitely NOT typical of the vast majority of Jews and are examples of the Orthodox interpretation. Orthodox Jews are a minority, representing only 6% I believe in Israel and probably even less in other countries in the world. This said, I don't see why you should be mocking this, I could easily find peculiarities of other religions to mock them as well, but don't do so, because it is a lack of respect. ...Again, a lack of quantitative measure is lacking in your weighing the matters of importance in this thread. "Lack of Respect" is what the Israelis have had by backing nutball Settlers in the region, who take potshots at Palestinians. Highlighting some of the more stricter, perhaps more neurotic adherances to the Sabbath is not so much a lack of respect, as showing what some people have chosen to do to themselves. What a dull boring task it is to educate you. More significant than making war, is making the peace. The fact that Israel signed a piece of paper means nothing. ...It's pretty clear the steps they took after this piece of paper was signed, did not win the peace. Maybe the U.S. should leave Israel alone, cut ties, and let Israel do it's own "self-inflicted damage" as you so aptly put it. ...I'm really not thrilled about my country supporting Israel. I would, if Israel had a viable plan for the future, ...but it does not.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Apr 24, 2005 12:30:31 GMT -5
...Yep. It's going to have to be a 2-state solution because of people like you. What do you mean? Gaza, Judea and Samaria combined aren't 'half the land'. That said, the West Bank is disputed and Israel will be allowed to annex major settlements. Let's not deviate from the real issue. You said: ...Often Orthodox Jewish religious leaders create more and more esoteric standards in an effort to exclude people (JEWISH PEOPLE) from the Jewish label in order to suit theor own purposes.Reform and Conservative Jews from North America are accepted and granted Jewish status in Israel. The same goes for most Jews. However, if you aren't from North America, your mother wasn't Jewish and you didn't have an Orthodox conversion, religious authorities won't consider you Jewish. If you don't have a Jewish mother, you have to have converted to Orthodox Judaism, even if your father was Jewish. Got it? And people like you ignore the fact that Palestinians have taken just as much from Jews. 50,000 Public Figures in Russia Seek Ban on Jewish GroupsWhat's that supposed to mean?
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Apr 24, 2005 12:51:46 GMT -5
...Again, a lack of quantitative measure is lacking in your weighing the matters of importance in this thread. In my opinion, you're just talking to hear yourself speak. You have yet to legitimize your argument with facts or cite credible sources. Instead, you resort to insults and mock things you don't understand. The rest of your post illustrates my point completely. You're talking, but are you saying anything? Okay? This should be interesting... Wait a second, I thought you were going to educate him? I thought you were going to educate us?! What happened? Actually, Curious6 was referring to the PA, not Israel. Maybe Bush should fire Condoleezza Rice and appoint you Secretary of State! You know better than her how to handle foreign relations. You are the smartest man in the world, after all. /sarcasm off Empty rhetoric? Check!
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on Apr 24, 2005 13:50:35 GMT -5
...Again, a lack of quantitative measure is lacking in your weighing the matters of importance in this thread. This one is funny. You start talking about religious practices, deviating completely from the argument we were having, I respond to it, and then you say that there is a 'lack of quantitative measure'. I am not the one to blame if you don't know how to argue a point and, as a result go deliberately off-topic to divert attention from the discussion. "Lack of Respect" is what the Israelis have had by backing nutball Settlers in the region, who take potshots at Palestinians. I don't see why settlers shouldn't be allowed to be in territories that have been captured as part of a defensive move. If countries can go to war without risking any territorial losses imagine how it would be... What a dull boring task it is to educate you. Educate me on what? I have yet to see you make one historic reference. The only thing you are doing is just stating your opinion without backing up anything you say. More significant than making war, is making the peace. The fact that Israel signed a piece of paper means nothing. ...It's pretty clear the steps they took after this piece of paper was signed, did not win the peace. Maybe the U.S. should leave Israel alone, cut ties, and let Israel do it's own "self-inflicted damage" as you so aptly put it. ...I'm really not thrilled about my country supporting Israel. I would, if Israel had a viable plan for the future, ...but it does not. I wonder to what piece of paper you are referring? If you are talking about the armistice agreements post-1948 war then your argument doesn't hold. It is clear that the 'steps they took' were solely defensive moves in order to prevent further attacks. By the way, Israel does have a viable plan for the near future which includes the withdrawal from Gaza.
|
|