or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Secretary of State Clinton: Israel sending deeply negative signals towards peace
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Secretary of State Clinton: Israel sending deeply negative signals towards peace

post #1 of 35
Thread Starter 
Look, I've made my position on this issue clear before.



I think it's time we as a nation took a step back and soberly examined our relationship with this unhinged regime. I'm sick of having my personal security endangered because my country chose sides in religious war, and happened to choose the people who want to amend the Geneva Convention in order to commit more war crimes

This is intolerable, and I no longer want to support it, either morally or with my tax dollars


PS Within the first two month's of Obama's administration, Netanyahu had his top aides talking to the press about how Obama had stacked his cabinet with "Self hating Jews". Seriously? Well fuck right off then.
post #2 of 35
Guess what. You're an idiot.
post #3 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
Guess what. You're an idiot.
Why? Because you disagree with my stance (shared by Sec. Clinton), or you just wanted to toss out a rude non sequitur in order to ruin my Saturday morning?
post #4 of 35
"Unhinged regime?" You're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

I agree with Secretary Clinton and Vice President Biden, and I'm very frustrated with Israel, but I think calling them an unhinged regime unworthy of our support is a moronic, unfounded statement, especially when we continue to send money and support to Saudi Arabia.

And honestly, this reflects badly on President Obama, too.
post #5 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
"Unhinged regime?" You're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

I agree with Secretary Clinton and Vice President Biden, and I'm very frustrated with Israel, but I think calling them an unhinged regime unworthy of our support is a moronic, unfounded statement, especially when we continue to send money and support to Saudi Arabia.

And honestly, this reflects badly on President Obama, too.
Yes, any government that acts the way they do and puts people like Lieberman (who apparently advocates nuking Palestine) in positions of power is one that I'd describe as 'unhinged'

BRB will return to comment on the rest of what you said in one second

EDIT: So, the second I criticize Israel my intelligence is called into question. Just like how most of it's critics end up labeled anti Semites I guess. Just like how President Obama was told he "hated jews" and protesters in Israel marched with signs that depicted him as a nazi... why? Because he had the audacity to hope (zing!) that they'd stop their illegal, antagonistic and unjust settlements.

Yes, I think they are unworthy of our support. In my opinion, that much has long ago been made clear

You can disagree with me, fine, but there is no reason to question my intelligence

PS: Did I say I was Pro-Saudi Arabia and anti- Israel? No.

And since I try to refrain from posting about this more than every few months (even though I post about China all the time, for some reason when you criticize the nation that has wrapped it's national identity up in it's religion, you get called a bigot), I'll take this moment to just add:

I do not think their nation should have been created in the first place. It was not their land. If we had to give them a patch of earth, I'd have been more than happy to carve out a big chunk of Austria or something. Kicking poor brown people out of their homes in order to make room for displaced white Europeans is one of the most tragic blunders made in the wake of the second world war. Doing it because someone's "god" said it was ok is just absurd.

But they are where they are now, for the time being, so they should make an effort to show humility and learn to get along with their neighbors. Getting off the "it's out divine right to live here!" horse would go a long way towards making people less resentful
post #6 of 35
So to counter your argument, would you call the number of countries that repeatedly call or have called for Israel to be wiped off the map or refuse to recognize its existence also unhinged

And Lieberman wasn't talking about Palestine, he was talking about Hamas, you fucking ninny.
post #7 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
So to counter your argument, would you call the number of countries that repeatedly call or have called for Israel to be wiped off the map or refuse to recognize its existence also unhinged

And Lieberman wasn't talking about Palestine, he was talking about Hamas, you fucking ninny.
Well, I'd call them angry. I think for most of them it's more a political calculation about shoring up support at home. I doubt many of them actually want to face the scenario of all out war with Israel. I think if people said "redraw the map" instead of 'wipe them off the map', it would sound alot saner. However, yes, if someone legitimately wants to wipe out a nation of people, you are unhinged

Which brings us to this guy:



Hamas is the legitimately elected government of Palestine, and he said that it would be Ok to use an atom bomb to stop them, civilian casualties be damned.

So yeah, if you nuke hammas you also nuke Palestine. That is sort of how a nuclear bomb works. They are big!
post #8 of 35
Thread Starter 
Here's a heart warming story for you

Headline? Israeli Army T-Shirts Mock Dead Palestinian Babies, Bombed Mosques




I told my mom about this last year and it made her cry
post #9 of 35
At this point, I'm not sure if PK actually believes what he/she professes to believe or is just the most patient and persistent of trolls. If it's the latter horn of the dilemma, I'm just glad the user has this outlet and hasn't started to force-feed the local shut-in neighbor to death.
post #10 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuchulain View Post
At this point, I'm not sure if PK actually believes what he/she professes to believe or is just the most patient and persistent of trolls. If it's the latter horn of the dilemma, I'm just glad the user has this outlet and hasn't started to force-feed the local shut-in neighbor to death.
Most of my friends and family are well sick of my opinions by now, I can assure you. CHUD is a great outlet for venting.

EDIT: BTW, did you see the Israeli army t shirt scandal link? Does anyone have an opinion on that? It's horrifying, IMHO
post #11 of 35
There are other tasteless T-Shirts around that nobody cares about.

Thing is, Israel is just as crooked, warmongering and hateful as practically any other country down there. It just happens to have a history with the west, and a lobby in the US, thus gets to play the "Get out of Jail free" card all the time.

Part of the problem is the fact that we CREATED Israel in the first place, thus feeling accountable for its existence and the troubles stemming from that fact. Mind you, quoting the scripture of a monotheistic religion as grounds for stealing land was never a good idea, anyway.
Then you got the other part, which is the close connection of the jewish religion with the state of israel, which means you trigger the "antisemitism" reaction a lot when criticizing the STATE of israel. Which, in turn, is a big No-No since WW2 at latest, and thus another roadblock.
Last but not least, Israel is quite good at playing the "last bastion of western influence" card in their area, which means its quite opportune to support Israels misbehaviour, in order to keep having a nice place down there from which to get intelligence and a possible staging ground for whatever meddling in the affairs of the mideast you plan on doing in the next decade or two.

But no, without these factors, its just another dump of warcrimes, hatred and religious extremists of many kinds.
post #12 of 35
Well, after a few thousand years of persecution culminating in the Holocaust, one can see why the Jews might want their own country and not be willing to kowtow to any other nation, even one that's supported them for decades.

As for the US, even if you disregard the moral and historical reasons for supporting Israel, the fact is it is the most stable country in the region, the most productive economically and has the best Intelligence bar none. You want them as an friend!
post #13 of 35
Wife of President who said "I am the most pro-Israeli president since Truman" has fit over Israeli intransigence.

IRONY OVERLOAD.
post #14 of 35
There are plenty of batshit crazy people wearing batshit crazy shirts here in the United States, too.

Look, Kate, I was a little harsh with you this morning, and I apologize. But if you're around these boards long enough, you know that for certain people, there are issues that are non-negotiable. For example, Nordling is unequivocally for universal health care and gay marriage. Seabass is vehemently anti-torture. I'm with them on those, but for me, I absolutely, 100% percent support the right of Israel to exist and to defend itself. That's non-negotiable. Do I think the way that Israel has gone about it has always been correct? No. Do I always agree with their policies? No. But I will not budge from the fact that this nation and these people have a right to exist, and to defend itself. And I get a little frustrated when you take your very broad paintbrush and go to town.

So there's that.
post #15 of 35
Don't feel too bad. She (or he - I'm pretty sure whoever it is a pathological liar) loves any attention she can get for herself.
post #16 of 35
Netanyahu has a track record of theft whilst not giving a hoot what the US or anyone else thinks. It's like we've suddenly travelled back to 1997. Replace Clinton's toothless rebuke with Madaline Albright's (after Netanyahu embarked on one of his frequent land-grabbing campaigns).

"We ask Israel to refrain from unilateral acts, including what Palestinians perceive as the provocative expansion of settlements".

Result: 7,012 new homes built on Palestinian land within the next six months.

Although I'll give Nentanyahu some credit for being nowhere near as bad as Ehud Barak - labelled by the US as "the most liberal and pro-Palestinian Israeli leader since Rabin" - who colonised the West Bank TEN TIMES as fast as Nentanyahu's Likud government.

When in 1998 Clinton invited Netanyahu to Washington to talk about this issue he just ignored him. The next day Albright told journalists that she was full of praise for the Israeli leader who was forging ahead with Jewish settlements. She said Netanyahu was "encouraging". He had produced "new ideas". He was "enthusiastic" about peace. She was "grateful" to Netanyahu and then said "It is up to Israel to decide what its security demands are". But when asked by journalists what those new ideas were she said "More details do not help us move forward".

The statistics are damning. Between 1967 and 1982, a mere 21,000 colonists had moved into the West Bank & Gaza. In 1990 the total stood at 76,000. By 2000 (three years prior to Clinton's exit) the figure had exploded to 383,000. Six months earlier an Israeli ministerial committee recommended building an additional 116,000 houses for colonists over the next 20 years.

I accept Israel's right to exist - but that doesn't mean I'm happy about the way this particular part of the Middle East was stolen from the Arabs who had lived there in peace for hundreds of years. I accept Israel's right to defend itself - but in any conflict there is such a term as PROPORTIONAL RESPONSE.

If some religious lunatic decides to strap a bomb to himself and murder half a dozen innocent Israeli civilians, this DOES NOT mean it is acceptable to launch a Hellfire missile into a densely-populated towerblock of Palestinian civilians in order to kill one terrorist. That is - IN NO WAY IMAGINABLE - proportional response.

Some statistics on Israel's Disproportional Response.

Since September 29, 2000:

121 Israeli children have died vs 1,441 Palestinian children.
1072 Israelis have died vs 6,368 Palestinians.
8,864 Israelis have been injured vs 39,019 Palestinians

Some other illuminating statistics:

During the fiscal year of 2009 the US provided Israel with AT LEAST 7 million dollars a DAY in military aid. It goes without saying the Palestinians received nothing.

Between 1955 and 1992 the Israelis were targeted by AT LEAST 65 UN Resolutions. The Palestinians were targeted by none.

Current number of Political Prisoners and detainees.

Held by Palestinians: 1
Held by Israel: 7,383

Demolitions of Israeli & Palestinian Homes (1997 - Present):

24,145 Palestinian Homes
0 Israeli Homes.

Currently there are 223 Jewish-only settlements and "outposts" built on confiscated Palestinian land. The Palestinians do not have any settlements on Israeli land.
post #17 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
There are plenty of batshit crazy people wearing batshit crazy shirts here in the United States, too.

Look, Kate, I was a little harsh with you this morning, and I apologize. But if you're around these boards long enough, you know that for certain people, there are issues that are non-negotiable. For example, Nordling is unequivocally for universal health care and gay marriage. Seabass is vehemently anti-torture. I'm with them on those, but for me, I absolutely, 100% percent support the right of Israel to exist and to defend itself. That's non-negotiable. Do I think the way that Israel has gone about it has always been correct? No. Do I always agree with their policies? No. But I will not budge from the fact that this nation and these people have a right to exist, and to defend itself. And I get a little frustrated when you take your very broad paintbrush and go to town.

So there's that.


Don't worry about it Bandu. Let's agree to disagree. I don't expect to get everyone to agree with me, but just to make my position heard. I can understand that you feel the way you do, but as an American citizen it's also my right to advocate that my government take a different path. What I do believe is that each of us has the right to voice our opinions without being shouted down for daring to speak out.
post #18 of 35
Rath, what about the Palestinians' right to exist? That's Kate's point, if I'm not mistaken. A lot of times when people make a case for them to have a country of their own, they're labeld as anti-semetics. (I'm not accusing you of this.) I agree that Israel should be allowed to exist as a nation, but the Palestinians should also possess that same right. All the fighting from both sides is unwarranted, but I am a pacifist and I know not everyone agrees with such an overall stance. Anyhow, I just wish Israel would quit making these unrightful settlements--and also that Palestinian authorities would not endorse and commit violence upon the Israelis (but, that's obviously not likely to happen anytime soon).
post #19 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Writhing Walt View Post
Rath, what about the Palestinians' right to exist? That's Kate's point, if I'm not mistaken. A lot of times when people make a case for them to have a country of their own, they're labeld as anti-semetics. (I'm not accusing you of this.) I agree that Israel should be allowed to exist as a nation, but the Palestinians should also possess that same right. All the fighting from both sides is unwarranted, but I am a pacifist and I know not everyone agrees with such an overall stance. Anyhow, I just wish Israel would quit making these unrightful settlements--and also that Palestinian authorities would not endorse and commit violence upon the Israelis (but, that's obviously not likely to happen anytime soon).
I hope Rath doesn't mind if I chime in on this, but I'd like to. While I believe the aggressive settlements on the post-1960s borders aren't helping the situation and Israel has a history of dramatic, disproportionate responses to provocation/war crimes, I think the Palestinian supporters are on shaky ground simply because the entire plan from jump street was a two state solution and the Arabs thought that they could just drive out the recent arrivals by force and lost.

Well, there's that and the fact that most of the people on the Palestinian side of the issue reject all of the Jews' historic claim to the land when the historic claim is pretty well grounded not only in Jewish sources but also the sources of the assorted empires that drove them forcibly from the land several times in history. The term "Palestine" comes from the Romans, who renamed the area after forcibly exiling the Jews after the first mass rebellion of the post-Second Temple period. Then there's the pesky fact that the Jews and Muslims built what's currently on the temple site together as a sort of "fuck you" to the Christians during the period of the Crusades.

Personally, I'd hope that the saner people in both groups would get behind the UN plan that creates two states with two non-Jerusalem capitols and turns Jerusalem into a international embassy-like area with equal access to the sit of the Temple to all the religious groups.
post #20 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuchulain View Post
Well, there's that and the fact that most of the people on the Palestinian side of the issue reject all of the Jews' historic claim to the land when the historic claim is pretty well grounded not only in Jewish sources but also the sources of the assorted empires that drove them forcibly from the land several times in history. The term "Palestine" comes from the Romans, who renamed the area after forcibly exiling the Jews after the first mass rebellion of the post-Second Temple period. Then there's the pesky fact that the Jews and Muslims built what's currently on the temple site together as a sort of "fuck you" to the Christians during the period of the Crusades.
Yeah, but no one involved with the taking of the land and the creation of Israel were the ones driven out. They were claiming ownership of a land that by modern standards they didn't own. This is where it falls apart for me every time I try to get a grasp on the state of Israel. I dated a girl of Palestinian descent for a time, and while she's obviously on one side of the fence, she has more first hand knowledge of the affairs there than most people reading about it on the news and in history books. The treatment of people who were forced out of their homes and lands based purely on a religious claim of pre-ownership is horrendous, the living conditions they are by and large subjected to equally bad. Those who left and migrated to other countries in the Middle East are treated as below second class citizens. All because, for a dose of irony, Palestinians don't have a country to call their own anymore. Israel's continued stance of not being for a co-existing relationship with Palestine as its own separate country doesn't help their case much.

I do think, for good or ill, Israel is here and it's not going away, but they need to stop with the high horse routine and extend some basic fucking humanity. Palestine does too, for that matter--someone is eventually going to have to be the bigger man and wash their hands of the past if we're ever going to move forward. Nobody's hands are clean in this situation, but personally, if you go back to where and how Israel began, the whole thing stinks like yesterday's diapers. So does America's, for that matter, but that's a different topic of reconciling personal feelings with accepting that what happened, happened.

Quote:
Personally, I'd hope that the saner people in both groups would get behind the UN plan that creates two states with two non-Jerusalem capitols and turns Jerusalem into a international embassy-like area with equal access to the sit of the Temple to all the religious groups.
This is actually right in line with what I've been saying all along, and there is a (slowly) growing faction of young Palestinians who advocate accepting Israel and focus on building their own country. It'd be nice if it would actually happen, but I fear the cycle of violence on both sides will always prevent it from becoming so.
post #21 of 35
'Historical claims' to lands should be rejected outright in my opinion. If there's any intent to keep a semblance of fairness in international politics, what goes for one must go for everyone. And 'Historical claims' to lands opens a can of Dune sandworms. Do Greeks have claim over Constantinople and the Aegean coast of Turkey? Do the Turks have claim of the Balkans up to the Danube? Do the Chinese have a legitimate claim over Taiwan? Notice that all these are much more recent events than the last time the land of Israel was in Jewish hands. History moves on and trying to undo it causes more trouble than it solves.

However in this case I agree that what's done is done. There are logical and informed plans to solve this but they demand mutual respect. Sadly the people in power on both sides have more to gain from continuing conflict than achieving peace. Unless the international community unanimously agrees to come down hard on both sides (fat chance) nothing will be ever solved.
post #22 of 35
Cuch and Greg said it better than I could, and I too support the idea of two states with a non-Jerusalem capital. My big point of contention was Kate's use of terms like "unhinged regime."
post #23 of 35
"Unhinged" is totally wrong. There's nothing unhinged about their actions. Arrogant and warmongering might be better words to use.
post #24 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
"Unhinged" is totally wrong. There's nothing unhinged about their actions. Arrogant and warmongering might be better words to use.
Well, to defend my remarks:


Despite the fact that Obama 'polls overwhelmingly well with the average Israeli'


Netanyahu's Brother-in-Law says Obama is an anti-semite and hates Jews

So, yes. Unhinged. If Craig Robinson* was going around talking to the press about how Netanyahu hates black people... and the only repudiation Obama offered was "I think Netanyahu is commited to the security of America**" then you know what? I'd call the Obama Administration unhinged.




Quote:
"When there is an anti-Semitic president in the United States, it is a test for us and we have to say: We will not concede. We are a nation dating back 4,000 years, and you in a year or two will be long forgotten. Who will remember you? But Jerusalem will dwell on forever," Ben Artzi said.
1) That's crazy talk

2) Israel is younger than John McCain, not older than Alexander the Great.

*Obama's basketball playing brother in law.

**All Netanyahu said in reponse to his brother's demented slur on President Obama was that he thought Obama was commited to Israel's security. Not a single word on the rest of what he said. As an American, I can tell you that's awfully strange behavior from the head of state of one of our so called "closest allies"
post #25 of 35
see, while i agree with some of what you say, your use of the term 'unhinged' is misguided.

Pol Pot, he was Unhinged. Idi Amin, Adolf Hitler. Thats unhinged.
post #26 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Jarvie View Post
see, while i agree with some of what you say, your use of the term 'unhinged' is misguided.

Pol Pot, he was Unhinged. Idi Amin, Adolf Hitler. Thats unhinged.
I mean that the machinery of government has become unmoored from common sense and self interest*. It's ludicrous to insult America that way. That's why it's unhinged, IMHO


But if we agree on everything but the word I used, I think it's a matter of us having a different definition in our mental dictionaries than a difference in how we view Israel.


*With climate change I fully expect the Middle East to become a very nasty place in the next 50 years (water wars, oil wars, religious wars). It's unhinged to act in a way that deliberately makes enemies of everyone around you when you're politically and ethnically isolated. This should be the time that Israel works towards building some sort of future where it's neighbors don't want it to sink into the sea. Plugging their ears and shouting "Nananana! I don't have to listen because I have 200 nuclear bombs and you have none!" does nothing to make them more secure or the region more stable. (IMHO)


EDIT: And yes, while Pol Pot and Hitler could also accurately be described as unhinged, I doubt anyone would choose that as the word that best defines them. Murderous, despotic, villainous all come to mind first, at least for me.
post #27 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Kate View Post
I mean that the machinery of government has become unmoored from common sense and self interest*. It's ludicrous to insult America that way. That's why it's unhinged, IMHO
Unlikely. The pro-Israel lobby is strong in the USA, and saying vthings like that is unlikely to materially affect the degree of support that Israel gets


Quote:
*With climate change I fully expect the Middle East to become a very nasty place in the next 50 years (water wars, oil wars, religious wars). It's unhinged to act in a way that deliberately makes enemies of everyone around you when you're politically and ethnically isolated. This should be the time that Israel works towards building some sort of future where it's neighbors don't want it to sink into the sea. Plugging their ears and shouting "Nananana! I don't have to listen because I have 200 nuclear bombs and you have none!" does nothing to make them more secure or the region more stable. (IMHO)
One suspects that their enemies are already well made, and not likely to be affected substantially by recent actions. Far from being unhinged, I could argue that they are fundamentally ultra-rational - akin to a 'strong defence is the best offence" theory.

Quote:
EDIT: And yes, while Pol Pot and Hitler could also accurately be described as unhinged, I doubt anyone would choose that as the word that best defines them. Murderous, despotic, villainous all come to mind first, at least for me.
I think you dropped 'evil' there. And unhinged.
post #28 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Clark View Post
The treatment of people who were forced out of their homes and lands based purely on a religious claim of pre-ownership is horrendous, the living conditions they are by and large subjected to equally bad. Those who left and migrated to other countries in the Middle East are treated as below second class citizens. All because, for a dose of irony, Palestinians don't have a country to call their own anymore. Israel's continued stance of not being for a co-existing relationship with Palestine as its own separate country doesn't help their case much.



.
I'd just like to point out that the Arab nations decided to treat the Palestinians as a separate "nation" within their borders rather than refugees who could assimilate in Egypt, Jordan etc. The Palestinian camps are as much a creation of Arab countries who consider Palestinians as living weapons aimed at Israel. If they want to help improve conditions, why not actually let these refugees become citizens?
post #29 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackstar View Post
Unlikely. The pro-Israel lobby is strong in the USA, and saying vthings like that is unlikely to materially affect the degree of support that Israel gets.


Sad but true

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackstar View Post
One suspects that their enemies are already well made, and not likely to be affected substantially by recent actions. Far from being unhinged, I could argue that they are fundamentally ultra-rational - akin to a 'strong defence is the best offence" theory..
It might seem that way, but I'm saying for the long term they are putting themselves in a much worse situation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackstar View Post
I think you dropped 'evil' there. And unhinged.
Many well respected Hitler scholars refuse to say he's evil. They (and I) view it as excusing the role his humanity played in the equation. If he was 'evil', he's some demonic force outside of normal human morality and we don't have to look inward to explain him. He's an 'other'.

If he's 'evil', you don't have to worry about the fact that a person (not that different from you or I) perpetrated some of the worst acts of the 20th century.

Calling him evil is a dodge, IMHO.

PS A fantastic book that covers this is EXPLAINING HITLER. It looks at how society deals with the issue of explaining what "went wrong' with Adolf as a kind of ultimate rorschach test. It looks at alot of different explanations (one teste, deviant, secret jew, etc), examines the historical evidence, and then puts it into context with the other explanations

post #30 of 35
Excellent, nuanced article about this issue in the New Yorker this week.
post #31 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
Excellent, nuanced article about this issue in the New Yorker this week.
My mom subscribes and I read that this morning. Good article, I agree.

PS As for those who still insist I'm wrong to use the word 'unhinged' when talking about Israel's government...

Might Israeli lawmaker Eitan Cabel disagree with you?


On the subject of the "surprise" settlement announcement
Quote:
"Is this another 'unfortunate' mistake? Is this another 'misunderstanding?'" said Cabel, a member of the Labor Party, which sits in the governing coalition.

"Netanyahu decided to spit into Obama's eye, this time from up close. He and his pyromaniac ministers insist on setting the Middle East ablaze."
post #32 of 35
Thread Starter 
I'm debating starting an "Racism in Israel" thread. There is a never ending stream of these kinds of horror stories coming from out of the "western" "democracy" of Israel, and a catch all seems like a good idea. This one I'm sticking in this thread because I think it speaks to the over all racism that seems to rule that country, and has so far derailed the peace process. If you guys think the thread I suggested is a good idea, next time they do something racist I'll start one


In the mean time..... Israel to expel non Jewish children born in Israel

Born to parents brought in to do cheap labor, they now are in danger of being kicked out. Why? Because they're a grave threat to civilization, that's why!

Says Israel's prime minister "This is a tangible threat to the Jewish and democratic character of the state of Israel"

It's like a nation that elected Tom Tancredo as it's leader.

Quote:
Many have children who were born in Israel and know no other home.

Some Israelis complain that illegal migrants are taking jobs away from citizens. Others worry that the non-Jewish workers could upset the Jewish nature of the society.
Rarely have I seen a democracy that is so in love with theocracy. I'm at the point where I'm ready to say that if our government won't stand up to this, it falls upon the American citizenry to boycott Israel (exports, tourism, boycott entertainers who perform there ETC). We did it for South Africa, after all.
post #33 of 35
My door is unhinged... anyone wanna fix it?
post #34 of 35
Thread Starter 

Horrible, but no, not the least bit surprising:

 

Quote:

 

Lynsey Addario, who was on assignment for the New York Times, had requested that she not be forced to go through an X-ray machine as she entered Israel from the Gaza Strip because of concerns for her unborn baby.

 

Instead, she wrote in a letter to the ministry, she was forced through the machine three times as soldiers "watched and laughed from above."

 

She said she was then taken into a room where she was ordered by a female worker to strip down to her underwear.

 

In the Oct. 25 letter sent by the newspaper said Addario, a Pulitzer Prize winner who is based in India and has worked in more than 60 countries, had never been treated with "such blatant cruelty."

Keep in mind, this is a woman who was captured by Gaddafi forces in Libya. Yet it took the Middle East's only "democracy" forcing her through an x-ray machine three times in order to take the title of cruelest treatment

post #35 of 35
Thread Starter 

SSDD

 

Quote:

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Vandals set fire to a mosque in the West Bank on Thursday and defaced it with Hebrew graffiti a day after a similar arson attack on a Jerusalem mosque. Suspicion fell on Jewish extremists widely assumed to be behind stepped-up violence against Palestinians and the Israeli military

 

The governor of the Palestinian city of Ramallah, Laila Ghanam, said arsonists doused the mosque in the village of Burqa with gasoline, then set it on fire

 

The Hebrew words for "war" and "Mitzpe Yitzhar" were painted in red on a wall, and the Israeli military said carpets and chairs were burned

 

The increasing frequency of the attacks, the sparse number of arrests and paucity of indictments have generated allegations that the Israeli government isn't acting forcefully enough against extremists after two years of violence

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Secretary of State Clinton: Israel sending deeply negative signals towards peace