[Phantom Hoover]

are you going to rathole into semantics about exactly how israel were screwing the palestinians over

[est1895]

Sandwich.  Have you heard of Rabbi Yehuda Glick?  Here is his story:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs4n0ZxyWyg

[Sandwich]

Exactly. They're actually both equally uncivilized, but it's the Israelis that get weapons and financial assistance from the US and NATO. They have nukes, modern weapons and superior technology. Therefore, the Israelis and their government need to be held to a higher standard. They may act like a 3rd world country at times, but are always armed like a 1st world one.

Wait, what? First of all, have you ever been to Israel that you speak of it from a position of such absolute knowledge? Second of all, whether you have or not, on what exactly are you basing your claim that Israel is "equally [as] uncivilized" as the Palestinians - or heck, vice versa? Thirdly, not having nukes, modern weapons, and superior technology is NOT an excuse to go on a murdering spree.

This stuff matters, there's a clear distinction between a claim that is 60 years old and one that is 600 years old. Elsewhere in the world (in a certain 2nd world country in the eastern Europe), property taken during WWII and after is often being returned to its original owners or their descendants. Israel is doing the very same thing Nazis and Commies used to. You can't just move people around against their will and expect them not to complain.

Wait, now I'm confused. You're saying that there is a difference between a newer claim and an older claim, and thus you're supporting Israel and the Jews being in their ancient homeland. I thought you were anti-Israel?

which is the reason why people call it the Apartheid Wall, and not the Landgrab Wall.

are you going to rathole into semantics about exactly how israel were screwing the palestinians over

Please don't bring up why the wall was built in the first place - wouldn't want it to seem logical, now would we? Especially don't bring up its effectiveness at accomplishing its task:

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Israel Security Agency report that in 2002, there were 452 fatalities from terrorist attacks. Before the completion of the first continuous segment (July 2003) from the beginning of the Second Intifada, 73 Palestinian suicide bombings were carried out from the West Bank, killing 293 Israelis and injuring over 1,900. After the completion of the first continuous segment through the end of 2006, there were only 12 attacks based in the West Bank, killing 64 people and wounding 445. Terrorist attacks declined in 2007 and 2008 to 9 in 2010.

So they blow us up, and we build a wall to stop them - and we're the ones screwing them over??

Sandwich.  Have you heard of Rabbi Yehuda Glick?  Here is his story:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs4n0ZxyWyg

I remember the news reports, sure, but I'd never seen any interviews with him (don't have a TV here) - thanks. I'm extremely familiar with that location where he was shot - the intersection you see at 3:03 is one my bus goes through on my way to work.

[Turambar]

just to be clear, is it your position that Israel is not Israel's place?

It's my position that it wasn't but it's way too late to do anything about it now.  I think the situation will just drag on forever as a constant generator of human suffering.

[Grizzly]

Please don't bring up why the wall was built in the first place - wouldn't want it to seem logical, now would we? Especially don't bring up its effectiveness at accomplishing its task:

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Israel Security Agency report that in 2002, there were 452 fatalities from terrorist attacks. Before the completion of the first continuous segment (July 2003) from the beginning of the Second Intifada, 73 Palestinian suicide bombings were carried out from the West Bank, killing 293 Israelis and injuring over 1,900. After the completion of the first continuous segment through the end of 2006, there were only 12 attacks based in the West Bank, killing 64 people and wounding 445. Terrorist attacks declined in 2007 and 2008 to 9 in 2010.

So they blow us up, and we build a wall to stop them - and we're the ones screwing them over??

Yeah, kinda.

I mean, I understand the purpose of border defenses. If a wall stops bombers, more power to you.

But why does that have to go trough palestenian territory, instead of sticking to the west of the 1967 lines? Why does it have to be built in such a way that it also protects the jewish settlers inside palestenian territory whose presence is in violation of the geneva conventions, which Israel signed? Why does it have to be built in a way that it seperates 240,000 palestenians from their relatives east of the wall?

[666maslo666]

Wait, now I'm confused. You're saying that there is a difference between a newer claim and an older claim, and thus you're supporting Israel and the Jews being in their ancient homeland. I thought you were anti-Israel?

Dont know why you are confused, it is really simple. It does not matter what happened thousand+ years ago, that is ancient history. But it does matter what happened in living memory, last 100 years.

Any land where Jews were the minority in 1950s and now is part of Israel, is stolen land. In a just world, Jewish settlers would be kicked out of this land and it would be returned to Palestinians.

But we dont live in a just world, we live in a world where might makes right, so that is probably not going to happen. The second best solution is to fence off based on ethnic lines and wait few hundred years, until the rightful anger of displaced Palestinians dies down.

[Bobboau]

So if Israel holds onto it for another 50 years it'll be all fine then? I mean I can argue either side of it, but that's just because neither side is particularly righteous.

[Sandwich]

Yeah, kinda.

I mean, I understand the purpose of border defenses. If a wall stops bombers, more power to you.

But why does that have to go trough palestenian territory, instead of sticking to the west of the 1967 lines? Why does it have to be built in such a way that it also protects the jewish settlers inside palestenian territory whose presence is in violation of the geneva conventions, which Israel signed? Why does it have to be built in a way that it seperates 240,000 palestenians from their relatives east of the wall?

Again this assumption that the West Bank is Palestinian territory and that the 1967 lines are relevant somehow to the argument at hand. Passive defensive measures must be placed between the aggressor and the intended victims to be effective. Palestinian homicide/suicide bombers were coming from Palestinian villages and cities to attack, terrorize, and murder Jews. Therefore, the fence+wall - which is not a national border of any sort - was erected to protect Israeli civilians from the Palestinian suicide bombers. It was not erected to defend only those Israelis living west of the Green Line. It was also not erected with concern given to the placement of various Palestinian relatives... heck, if family was that important to them, perhaps they should have tried to stop their sons and daughters from committing suicide with the goal of murdering innocent and random Israeli civilians?

Dont know why you are confused, it is really simple. It does not matter what happened thousand+ years ago, that is ancient history. But it does matter what happened in living memory, last 100 years.

Any land where Jews were the minority in 1950s and now is part of Israel, is stolen land. In a just world, Jewish settlers would be kicked out of this land and it would be returned to Palestinians.

History doesn't stop being irrelevant just because the people who lived through it have since died, or some other arbitrary date line you may come up with. On the contrary:



One of the things the Jewish people have learned quite well throughout history is that when someone threatens to wipe you off the face of the earth - listen to them, they're too often serious. This is why we're perplexed at the world's narrow focus on the Palestinian narrative of their "stolen homeland", while simultaneously ignoring the strident calls for the murder of every Jew on the planet, from every strata of Palestinian society. This is why Netanyahu has been so adamantly focused on fighting against this terrible Iranian nuclear deal - as the mullahs and ayatollahs of Iran have repeatedly called for Israel's annihilation over the years.

Anyway, back to the issue of the West Bank... there's a few videos (and rebuttals to those videos, and rebuttals to the rebuttals...) that are relevant to the situation. Let's watch them.

#1: First video, by Danny Ayalon:

#2: Rebuttal to #1, by a couple of Palestinian ladies:

#3: Independant rebuttal to #2, linked to by #4:

#4: Danny Ayalon refutes one remaining point from #2:

Anyway, how'd we get off on this tangent to begin with? This thread is about the current wave of Palestinian terror (mostly stabbings, but also some shootings and rock-throwings), and y'all's attempts to figure out how to justify murder.

[Grizzly]

Yeah, kinda.

I mean, I understand the purpose of border defenses. If a wall stops bombers, more power to you.

But why does that have to go trough palestenian territory, instead of sticking to the west of the 1967 lines? Why does it have to be built in such a way that it also protects the jewish settlers inside palestenian territory whose presence is in violation of the geneva conventions, which Israel signed? Why does it have to be built in a way that it seperates 240,000 palestenians from their relatives east of the wall?

Again this assumption that the West Bank is Palestinian territory and that the 1967 lines are relevant somehow to the argument at hand. Passive defensive measures must be placed between the aggressor and the intended victims to be effective. Palestinian homicide/suicide bombers were coming from Palestinian villages and cities to attack, terrorize, and murder Jews. Therefore, the fence+wall - which is not a national border of any sort - was erected to protect Israeli civilians from the Palestinian suicide bombers. It was not erected to defend only those Israelis living west of the Green Line. It was also not erected with concern given to the placement of various Palestinian relatives... heck, if family was that important to them, perhaps they should have tried to stop their sons and daughters from committing suicide with the goal of murdering innocent and random Israeli civilians?

The fourth geneva convention prohibits collective punishment. Israel signed the geneva conventions (and they have since passed into international law) and is bound by them.

Additionally, the fourth geneva convention specifically prohibit a nation from housing it's own civilians in territories it occupies (for any reason). By legitimizing Israeli's living east of the green line, Israel is effectively using it's own civilians as human shields. By international law, it should be getting them the **** out of there. This is not an attempt to justify murder, the question is more about how why should I feel sympathetic to the Israelian cause (or indeed, pay money to support it, as US citizens are doing) as it's really just as bad (Except much, much more deadly).

One of the things the Jewish people have learned quite well throughout history is that when someone threatens to wipe you off the face of the earth - listen to them, they're too often serious.

Then why don't the Israeli's annex the area entirely instead of this half arsed wall solution? Israel would be in a far better position to deal with any troublemakers as well as being capable of eredicating the poverty issues that permeate this violent issue. Or, it could recognize Palestina as a sovereign state, withdraw, and then treat them as an attacking nation when bad **** happens again, with all the duties that this entails. BUt the current situation, where Israel doesn't view the palestenians as either citizens or civilians of a foreign nation only ensures that terms like "Apartheid Wall" are quite justified - Because right now Israel is not treating the Palestenians as human beings by any stretch of the imagination.

[karajorma]

This thread is about the current wave of Palestinian terror (mostly stabbings, but also some shootings and rock-throwings), and y'all's attempts to figure out how to justify murder.

Actually no, you lost any right to say this thread was about that when you posted long arguments about the history of the conflict and the legitimacy of the wall. Since you've torpedoed the thread (and it was your thread to torpedo) this thread is now about the conflict in general and I'm going to take back my earlier threat to kick anyone out of the thread who talks about historic claims over the land. Don't like it? Next time try to actually stick to the topic.

[666maslo666]

History doesn't stop being irrelevant just because the people who lived through it have since died, or some other arbitrary date line you may come up with. On the contrary:

You can learn from history, but history certainly does stop being relevant for any practical purposes after some time has passed. If you want to claim that land where you used to live on a thousand years ago still belongs to you, then that is a completely ridiculous notion. On the other hand, if you want to claim that land where you used to live on 50 years ago and were forcibly displaced still belongs to you, then I entirely agree that it does.

[est1895]

Please watch this.  Sandwhich, this man Steven Ben-Denoon lives in Jerusalem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3DkvaKvlnk

[karajorma]

You can learn from history, but history certainly does stop being relevant for any practical purposes after some time has passed. If you want to claim that land where you used to live on a thousand years ago still belongs to you, then that is a completely ridiculous notion. On the other hand, if you want to claim that land where you used to live on 50 years ago and were forcibly displaced still belongs to you, then I entirely agree that it does.

I think what makes it important is whether or not there was an ongoing conflict. If two sides have been fighting over the same land for a thousand years then the conflict over who owns it doesn't seem as silly. But if one side has given up the fight, then they've basically accepted that the land is no longer theirs and moved on. You can't come back a thousand years later and make a claim that the land is yours again, cause now there are other people who can say "It's been ours for a thousand years and you haven't disputed that."

What really makes me laugh is that there are still Israelis fighting with the Swiss to get back Nazi gold. Their lack of irony amuses me.

[est1895]

Please checkout this article:

http://shoebat.com/2015/10/17/how-to-stab-a-jew-101/

[Sandwich]

Actually no, you lost any right to say this thread was about that when you posted long arguments about the history of the conflict and the legitimacy of the wall. Since you've torpedoed the thread (and it was your thread to torpedo) this thread is now about the conflict in general and I'm going to take back my earlier threat to kick anyone out of the thread who talks about historic claims over the land. Don't like it? Next time try to actually stick to the topic.

First of all, you are in no position to dictate to me what rights I have or don't have. Ignoring the issue of us both being admins, we're both human beings with equal rights to free speech (on HLP at least, regardless of where we may live at the time).

Secondly, you are in no position to dictate what this thread is or isn't about EDIT: Actually, That's not entirely true; you are in a position of authority on the forums, my apologies. The point I wanted to make was that if I want to correct an erroneous, off-topic statement, I can do so and then go right back to the original topic of the thread. If I'm in a conversation with someone about knitting, and someone else runs up yelling that the sky is red when it's actually blue, I'll darn well look up, see that the sky blue, tell them they're wrong if I darn well choose to, and go right back to talking about knitting.

Finally, I don't need your (evidently useless) (unjustified depiction, again, my apologies) threats to kick out people talking about historic claims to the land. I certainly appreciate and value your intentions to keep threads on-topic, and I would encourage you to continue doing so as you see fit. However, I was not the first person in this thread to bring up the history of the land and the legitimacy of the wall. Dragon responded directly to your warning, and in what could be termed a tone of rebellion, too:

Basically, let's make it official. Next person to make a historical claim to the land gets thrown out of this thread.

Says someone not from a country that spent its recent history fighting for its national identity. This stuff matters, there's a clear distinction between a claim that is 60 years old and one that is 600 years old. Elsewhere in the world (in a certain 2nd world country in the eastern Europe), property taken during WWII and after is often being returned to its original owners or their descendants. Israel is doing the very same thing Nazis and Commies used to. You can't just move people around against their will and expect them not to complain.

...and Bobboau and 666maslo666 started in on the fence/wall shortly thereafter.

Now I don't know if you were online at the time or not. Perhaps I saw those posts while you were sleeping. But they were posted, and I saw them and responded to try to address any inaccuracies in them. But now you return to this thread to see that people have gone off on a tangent, and you have the temerity to accuse me for not sticking to the topic, without so much as a word to Dragon? Nuh-uh. If you want to complain about how I didn't cut off the off-topic-ness right from the outset, fine - that would be perfectly justified. But don't go about accusing me with that condescending tone as if it was my fault for dragging things off-topic to begin with.

That's the same double-standards the world constantly applies to Israel - don't you dare do that to me.

[Sandwich]

Here's another article by a Palestinian scholar that everyone's going to completely ignore just because it's published by the Gatestone Institute and because it supports Israel - or rather, states the fugly truth about why the Palestinians are on a murdering spree:

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6669/palestinian-terrorists

• Palestinian terrorists are not driven by poverty and deprivation, as many have long argued. Instead, they are driven by hatred for Jews -- because of what their leaders, media and mosques are telling them.
• These young people took advantage of their status as permanent residents of Israel to set out and murder Jews. Their Israeli ID cards allow them to travel freely inside Israel. They were also entitled to the social welfare benefits and free healthcare granted to all Israeli citizens.
• Muhannad Halabi wanted to murder Jews because he had been brainwashed by our leaders and media, and was driven by hatred -- he was not living in misery and deprivation. The family's house in the village of Surda, on the outskirts of Ramallah, looks as if it came out of a movie filmed in San Diego.
• This conflict is not about Islamic holy sites or Jerusalem. Murdering a Jewish couple in front of their four children has nothing to do with the Aqsa Mosque or "occupation."
• For the terrorists, all Jews are "settlers" and Israel is one big settlement. This is not an intifada -- it is just another killing-spree aimed at terrorizing the Jews and forcing them out of this part of the world. It already succeeded in the rest of the Middle East and is now being done there to the Christians as well.
• The current wave of terrorism is just another phase in our dream to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. The terrorists and their supporters are not struggling against a checkpoint or a wall. They want to see Israel destroyed, Jews slaughtered, and the streets of Israel running with Jewish blood.

Stop trying to justify murder.

[Bobboau]

I only started the on about the wall because someone basically said "they should just build a wall" and I was like, "yeah, they're about 10 years ahead of you, and even then, because it was Israel doing it, it was called the 'baby eating murder wall of genocide' by everyone else."

[Grizzly]

Stop trying to justify murder.

I don't think anyone here is trying to justify murder. Everytime something happens in the area it is used as an justification for murder, leading to further and further escelation that ends in a lot of people dying horribly. Undoubtly these stabbings will be used as an justification of murder for someone else. That murder will then be used as a justification for a broader violent act, that broader violent act will be then used as a justification for an even broader violent act which will eventually end with a lot of people (mostly palestenians) dying.

This is something that has happened time and time again. Pointing out this cycle is not justifying murder, it's trying to stop people from giving eachother justifications.

That's the same double-standards the world constantly applies to Israel

Israel is not held to a double standard at all. That it percieves as such is part of the problem. It is similar to the problem I started my gun thread OP with, except with far deadlier consequences.

[Sandwich]

Stop trying to justify murder.

I don't think anyone here is trying to justify murder.

Glad to hear it. Where are the international calls condemning the Palestinians for all these violent acts of murder and attempted murder?

That's an honest question, by the way. I haven't heard any condemnations from over here. If the condemnations of Palestinian violence are being spread all over the news waves internationally, link me up please.

Israel is not held to a double standard at all.

I hate posting the same links twice, but apparently you either missed them the first time, or decided to utterly ignore them. Read them this time and get back to me:

http://www.unwatch.org/watch-ap-grills-state-department-for-double-standards-against-israel-in-light-of-afghan-bombing/

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/09/21/yemen-strikes-israel-and-double-standards-in-the-middle-east/

[Klaustrophobia]

Actually no, you lost any right to say this thread was about that when you posted long arguments about the history of the conflict and the legitimacy of the wall. Since you've torpedoed the thread (and it was your thread to torpedo) this thread is now about the conflict in general and I'm going to take back my earlier threat to kick anyone out of the thread who talks about historic claims over the land. Don't like it? Next time try to actually stick to the topic.

Wow.  What a bunch of horse ****.  Sandwich is NOT the one who started the thread down this path.  Sandwich makes post about living in the midst of awfulness.  A few posts go by, but it doesn't take long for the Israel blaming to start.  And then the full out bashing.  Just like EVERY OTHER GODDAMN TIME **** flares up over there and Sandwich posts about it.  I'm not going to tread lightly here, go ahead and threaten admin powers like you love to do.  I selected this next sentence very carefully, and I mean it with every fiber of my being:

If you seriously want to blame Sandwich for going on the defensive after the collective HLP holier-than-thou says "well, it's your own fault" to a post that was simply a statement of "hey guys, ****'s kinda bad around me right now," then **** you.