24 minutes ago, Jara said:

 

6 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Cute.

Why don't you comment on the content in the videos.

Hint, you instinctively won't agree with the assertions, so articulate to me why they're factually wrong.

Can you ?

What assertions? The kind of assertions Netanyahu makes???? Don't you have anything better to do???? Some of us have brains and we like to use them..

Edited May 22, 20186 yr by dieter

25 minutes ago, Jara said:

Hey - hang on - before you ignore me - that last sentence makes no sense - Balwyn's physically challenged son of...wtf? Have you forgotten to take your tablets again?

I don't think I'm being paranoid, but I suspect PD is referring to me. Interesting that the Censors on this site allow this kind of racial vilification...

Fortunately, though, I don't live in Balwyn. Close, PD, but not quite on target. Keep aiming young man, you'll get there in the end is my advice to you...

1 minute ago, dieter said:

I don't think I'm being paranoid, but I suspect PD is referring to me. Interesting that the Censors on this site allow this kind of racial vilification...

Fortunately, though, I don't live in Balwyn. Close, PD, but not quite on target. Keep aiming young man, you'll get there in the end is my advice to you...

Ok now I get it. No wonder he doesn't like you - you know,  how those Russians hate Germans...

 

 

Good article. I'd challenge the Russian to refute it but I think he's got me on ignore. And even if he hasn't he'd probably just reply with a YouTube clip of Netanyahu's mother-in-law. 

27 minutes ago, Jara said:

Good article. I'd challenge the Russian to refute it but I think he's got me on ignore. And even if he hasn't he'd probably just reply with a YouTube clip of Netanyahu's mother-in-law. 

I'm glad you took the trouble to read it. Unfortunately, Israel has subjected the world to an unrelenting barrage of lies and propaganda about Hamas, completely ignoring that essentially it helped establish it because they wanted to counter Arafat.

The barrage was repeated by Greg Sheridan - something he does at every opportunity - on Q and A on Monday.

Interesting character, Greg Sheridan. I recall him predicting that before the current pope was 'elected' his mate George Pell would get the nod. Now that would have been an interesting scenario...

Also, I urge you to read Shlomo Sand's books, and Ilan Pappe's, and Miko Peled's 'The General's son.'

Edited May 23, 20186 yr by dieter

1 hour ago, Jara said:

Good article. I'd challenge the Russian to refute it but I think he's got me on ignore. And even if he hasn't he'd probably just reply with a YouTube clip of Netanyahu's mother-in-law. 

It's hard not to laugh at the irony here.

Stanley Cohen acted as a lawyer to the master-mind of the World Trade Centre bombing.

He's also defended Hamas, Hezbollah, and members of al-Qaeda.

Netanyahu's mother-in-law could provide a more reasoned analysis than the garbage posted here. 

There's nothing to refute in that article - it's fact-free and full of the emotive language that is the hall-mark of the Israel-hating mob.

There's plenty of factual, well-argued legitimate criticism of Israeli policy, but this ain't it.  

Here's a few questions for you Jara.

Do you support the notion of a Jewish homeland, in Israel?

If not in Israel, where should a Jewish homeland be located?

If not at all, why should there be 20 + Arab nations - including an additional one in Israel - but not a Jewish one?

If you do, should the Palestinians / Arab nations have accepted the Peel Partition Pan, which would have given them large areas of modern-day Israel?

Should they have later accepted the UN Partition Plan, which also promised them large areas of modern-day Israel?

3 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

Stanley Cohen acted as a lawyer to the master-mind of the World Trade Centre bombing.

He's also defended Hamas, Hezbollah, and members of al-Qaeda.

Robert Richter represents George Pell.

 

 

Edited May 23, 20186 yr by dieter

21 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

Here's a few questions for you Jara.

Do you support the notion of a Jewish homeland, in Israel?

If not in Israel, where should a Jewish homeland be located?

If not at all, why should there be 20 + Arab nations - including an additional one in Israel - but not a Jewish one?

If you do, should the Palestinians / Arab nations have accepted the Peel Partition Pan, which would have given them large areas of modern-day Israel?

Should they have later accepted the UN Partition Plan, which also promised them large areas of modern-day Israel?

These are essentially non-sequiturs, Grapeviney. THis has nothing to do with accepting a Jewish homeland. No-one, even Hamas and the PLO, does not accept Israel as a fait accompli - despite all the propaganda and lies to the contrary. All Hamas and the PLO want is a state of their own, the right of return and termination of the strangulation of Gaza.

Also, the UN Partition Plan was forced on the Palestinians and before they made the choice of whether to accept or not the Israelis began their merciless onslaught of ethnic cleansing. Even Benny Morris admits this: it's a well known 'secret'. ( What's worse is that Benny Morris justifies it.)

Also, have a good look at what the Un planned as its subdivision of Israel and palestine, look at what Israel became after the ethnic cleansing, and we won't even mention what Israel is now since it's occupation of Golan, the West Bank, since it's relentless programme of settlers and creating isolated unconnected enclaves  for the native population...

Your arguments, Grapeviney are prejudiced and full of emotive non-sequiturs. 

Re the Peel plan:

Report of the Palestine Royal Commission
Peel Commission Partition Plan, July 1937
Created	July 1937
Ratified	7 July 1937[1]
Purpose	Investigation of the causes of the 1936 Arab revolt in Palestine

The Peel Commission, formally known as the Palestine Royal Commission, was a British Royal Commission of Inquiry, headed by Lord Peel, appointed in 1936 to investigate the causes of unrest in Mandatory Palestine, which was administered by Britain, following the six-month-long Arab general strike in Mandatory Palestine.

On July 7, 1937, the commission published a report that, for the first time, stated that the League of Nations Mandate had become unworkable and recommended partition.^[2] The British cabinet endorsed the Partition plan in principle, but requested more information.^[3] Following the publication, in 1938 the Woodhead Commission was appointed to examine it in detail and recommend an actual partition plan.

The Arabs opposed the partition plan and condemned it unanimously.^[4] The Arab High Committee opposed the idea of a Jewish state^[5] and called for an independent state of Palestine, "with protection of all legitimate Jewish and other minority rights and safeguarding of reasonable British interests".^[6] They also demanded cessation of all Jewish immigration and land purchase.^[5] They argued that the creation of a Jewish state and lack of independent Palestine was a betrayal of the word given by Britain.^[3][7]

The Zionist leadership was bitterly divided over the plan.^[5] In a resolution adopted at the 1937 Zionist Congress, the delegates rejected the specific partition plan. Yet the principle of partition is generally thought to have been "accepted" or "not rejected outright" by any major faction: the delegates empowered the leadership to pursue future negotiations.^{[5][8][9][10]} The Jewish Agency Council later attached a request that a conference be convened to explore a peaceful settlement in terms of an undivided Palestine.^[5] According to Benny Morris, Ben-Gurion and Weizmann saw it 'as a stepping stone to some further expansion and the eventual takeover of the whole of Palestine''

I also note your total silence about me urging people to read the alternative Israeli Narrative, the narrative written by Jews who have no track with the brutality of the Israeli regime, historians like Pappe, Sand etc, notable critics like Peled.

 

Edited May 23, 20186 yr by dieter

1 minute ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

What keeps a man from posting absolute rubbish like this: half a brain.

1 hour ago, Grapeviney said:

It's hard not to laugh at the irony here.

Stanley Cohen acted as a lawyer to the master-mind of the World Trade Centre bombing.

He's also defended Hamas, Hezbollah, and members of al-Qaeda.

Netanyahu's mother-in-law could provide a more reasoned analysis than the garbage posted here. 

There's nothing to refute in that article - it's fact-free and full of the emotive language that is the hall-mark of the Israel-hating mob.

There's plenty of factual, well-argued legitimate criticism of Israeli policy, but this ain't it.  

Here's a few questions for you Jara.

Do you support the notion of a Jewish homeland, in Israel?

If not in Israel, where should a Jewish homeland be located?

If not at all, why should there be 20 + Arab nations - including an additional one in Israel - but not a Jewish one?

If you do, should the Palestinians / Arab nations have accepted the Peel Partition Pan, which would have given them large areas of modern-day Israel?

Should they have later accepted the UN Partition Plan, which also promised them large areas of modern-day Israel?

 

Hopefully Dieter's answered some of your questions, but here's a few comments.

 

OK, the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information - I didn't say it was - what I liked about it was it was presumably written by somebody who shared my horror at the ongoing, one-sided massacres of unarmed protesters.

 

Do I support a Jewish homeland? My ancestors came from County Cork, were driven out by British imperialism. What would the folks there think about me coming back 180 years later to claim the family farm? Not much, I suspect.

A Jewish homeland would have been a great idea if they could have found an empty one, but they couldn't (didn't they even consider The Kimberly? Africa? Brazil?) The fact that the Zionists came back and stole, with the aid of British imperialists, Palestinian land was a disaster for which we are all still paying a price. The fact that they are still being allowed to do it is an inditement on us all.

All this stuff about Peel commissions, Sykes Picot, Balfour  etc is all colonialist crap: there should have been only one question: did the existing inhabitants want it? If they didn't, end of story.

I have every sympathy for the Jews of Europe and their terrible history - I think I mentioned I had friends there - their parents had gone through horrific experiences at the hands of the Nazis - I heard about some of them first-hand - but you don't alleviate one suffering by inflicting another on somebody else.

 

That said, obviously, Israel is there now - it's not going anywhere, so of course I "accept" it, whatever that means  - as i also said, I really liked the place - when I first went there, in the late eighties, I was working in Aboriginal communities in Central Australia, and could see similarities - my friends there were supporters of the peace movement - they were regarded as lefty radicals by the mainstream, as was I in Central Australia, but theirs was a tougher gig and I admired their courage.

 

The only solution I can see at present is the two state one. Maybe, with time, education and the growth of secularism, the old enmities will fade. 

 

 

19 minutes ago, Jara said:

 

Hopefully Dieter's answered some of your questions, but here's a few comments.

 

OK, the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information - I didn't say it was - what I liked about it was it was presumably written by somebody who shared my horror at the ongoing, one-sided massacres of unarmed protesters.

 

Do I support a Jewish homeland? My ancestors came from County Cork, were driven out by British imperialism. What would the folks there think about me coming back 180 years later to claim the family farm? Not much, I suspect.

A Jewish homeland would have been a great idea if they could have found an empty one, but they couldn't (didn't they even consider The Kimberly? Africa? Brazil?) The fact that the Zionists came back and stole, with the aid of British imperialists, Palestinian land was a disaster for which we are all still paying a price. The fact that they are still being allowed to do it is an inditement on us all.

All this stuff about Peel commissions, Sykes Picot, Balfour  etc is all colonialist crap: there should have been only one question: did the existing inhabitants want it? If they didn't, end of story.

I have every sympathy for the Jews of Europe and their terrible history - I think I mentioned I had friends there - their parents had gone through horrific experiences at the hands of the Nazis - I heard about some of them first-hand - but you don't alleviate one suffering by inflicting another on somebody else.

 

That said, obviously, Israel is there now - it's not going anywhere, so of course I "accept" it, whatever that means  - as i also said, I really liked the place - when I first went there, in the late eighties, I was working in Aboriginal communities in Central Australia, and could see similarities - my friends there were supporters of the peace movement - they were regarded as lefty radicals by the mainstream, as was I in Central Australia, but theirs was a tougher gig and I admired their courage.

 

The only solution I can see at present is the two state one. Maybe, with time, education and the growth of secularism, the old enmities will fade. 

 

 

Well put, Jara.

Like, you, Jara, my sympathies are absolutely and totally for the people whose lives were totally ruined by the Nazis, even more so for the poor, innocent people who lost their lives during that period. However, I simply fail to understand how the survivors of this massive tragedy can then turn around and inflict what the Israelis have inflicted on the Palestinians. My understanding is that the figure of dead Palestinians since and including 1947 is astronomically high and of course will be heatedly disputed by the Zionists. What is indisputable is that the ratio of deaths is obscenely high and makes the claim that Israel is 'defending' its borders so outrageous that it beggars belief.

You may have heard of a television Drama series shown on SBS called The Promise. It was made by a Jewish director Peter Kosminsky about the last period of British rule in Palestine and it is based on many interviews with British soldiers and personnel who served during that period. Kosminsky stated in an interview about his film that almost all of the British servicemen were totally sympathetic to the Jewish people of Palestine when they first arrived, but almost to a man, by the time they left their sympathies were all with the Palestinians.

4 minutes ago, dieter said:

Do I support a Jewish homeland? My ancestors came from County Cork, were driven out by British imperialism. What would the folks there think about me coming back 180 years later to claim the family farm? Not much, I suspect

I have often wondered how Israel supporters in the USA and Australia would react if the UN decided to give the USA and Australia back to the original inhabitants...

10 minutes ago, Jara said:

Hopefully Dieter's answered some of your questions, but here's a few comments.

OK, the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information - I didn't say it was -

The fact that the Zionists came back and stole, with the aid of British imperialists, Palestinian land was a disaster for which we are all still paying a price. 

No, deiter hasn't answered anything, and he never will. His contributions are nothing more than vile, anti-Israel spam - in your own words, 'the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information.' LOL, there's a master-piece of understatement. 

And I don't know what makes you think that 'we're all paying the price'. You're not paying anything. Have you ever had a Qassam rocket fired at your house, or your local pizza place blown to pieces? Ever get scared riding a public bus that one of the other passengers might be a suicide bomber? 

38 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

No, deiter hasn't answered anything, and he never will. His contributions are nothing more than vile, anti-Israel spam - in your own words, 'the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information.' LOL, there's a master-piece of understatement. 

And I don't know what makes you think that 'we're all paying the price'. You're not paying anything. Have you ever had a Qassam rocket fired at your house, or your local pizza place blown to pieces? Ever get scared riding a public bus that one of the other passengers might be a suicide bomber? 

Ever had phosphorus bombs delivered to your house, your school, your hospital? 

Ever been shot at by the best armed snipers in the world for attending a demonstration?

Ever been confined to a ghetto like your relatives were and the people of Gaza are?

Ever had your town ethnically cleansed, every single inhabitant murdered? Look up Deir Yassin. Read Benny Morris confirming it. And that's just for a start in terms of the number of villages and towns which suffered the same fate.

Edited May 23, 20186 yr by dieter

Another 5 minute lesson for Demonland's resident bigots.

 

42 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

No, deiter hasn't answered anything, and he never will. His contributions are nothing more than vile, anti-Israel spam - in your own words, 'the Cohen article wasn't exactly chock-full of hard information.' LOL, there's a master-piece of understatement. 

And I don't know what makes you think that 'we're all paying the price'. You're not paying anything. Have you ever had a Qassam rocket fired at your house, or your local pizza place blown to pieces? Ever get scared riding a public bus that one of the other passengers might be a suicide bomber? 

When I said "we", I meant the world. The establishment of Israel was one of the prime reasons for the current Muslim hostility towards the West, which threatens and degrades us all. When I say "we", I am sympathising with both the children shot in Gaza and the children being blown up in pizza places in Tel Aviv (and as a matter of fact, I have travelled on buses wondering if there's a suicide bomber on board - have travelled twice through much of the Middle East, very conscious of the fact that I was a Westerner. Haven't had any rockets fired at my house - have you?). 

 

Could I ask you a question? Do you agree with my basic premise: That the establishment of Israel on Palestinian land was a tragedy? 

 

Here's another: how do you think the arrival of millions of Jewish settlers in Palestine in the thirties and forties would have looked to you had you been a young Palestinian losing the land that his family had farmed for generations?

8 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Another 5 minute lesson for Demonland's resident bigots.

 

Thanks, Pro - that was very informative, but in all those descriptions of the Balfour Declaration, the Anglo-American Concorde or whatever it was, etc.  I must have missed the bit where they asked the existing inhabitants of the country what they thought about foreigners  coming in and taking their land.

 

I'm surprised, actually - I'd have thought you, of all people, would have been sensitive about foreigners coming into the country. You don't seem to like them coming into yours.

5 minutes ago, Jara said:

 

Could I ask you a question? Do you agree with my basic premise: That the establishment of Israel on Palestinian land was a tragedy? 

 

Here's another: how do you think the arrival of millions of Jewish settlers in Palestine in the thirties and forties would have looked to you had you been a young Palestinian losing the land that his family had farmed for generations?

1. No, I don't, and I don't agree that it was Palestinian land. It's Jewish land as much as it is Palestinian land, and that's why the partition plans made so much sense.

2. I can't look at Jewish migration to Palestine in the 30's and 40's as anything other than a blessing, especially in the context of what was happening in Europe and how few other nations put out the welcoming mat to the Jews. I only wish more of them had made it to the Promised Land, because then 6 million wouldn't have been slaughtered in the ensuing Holocaust. 

3 minutes ago, Jara said:

Thanks, Pro - that was very informative, but in all those descriptions of the Balfour Declaration, the Anglo-American Concorde or whatever it was, etc.  I must have missed the bit where they asked the existing inhabitants of the country what they thought about foreigners  coming in and taking their land.

 

I'm surprised, actually - I'd have thought you, of all people, would have been sensitive about foreigners coming into the country. You don't seem to like them coming into yours.

Great stuff, Jara...

1 minute ago, Grapeviney said:

1. No, I don't, and I don't agree that it was Palestinian land. It's Jewish land as much as it is Palestinian land, and that's why the partition plans made so much sense.

2. I can't look at Jewish migration to Palestine in the 30's and 40's as anything other than a blessing, especially in the context of what was happening in Europe and how few other nations put out the welcoming mat to the Jews. I only wish more of them had made it to the Promised Land, because then 6 million wouldn't have been slaughtered in the ensuing Holocaust. 

What precisely, Grapeviney, is The Promised Land?

I agree entirely that if more Jews had gone to Palestine it would have been better for all mankind. If they then, had they gone there, become useful and co-operative immigrants, Palestine could now be like Australia, and many other nations, a democratic melting pot. Instead, somehow the Zionists deemed it right and proper and just that once they got there, they would take the place over and make it a homeland only for Jews.

I find that totally inhumane and tragic, especially in the context that the first Zionist settlers were welcomed by the native population. It was only when the penny dropped about the real intention of Zionists that the natives became restless. Like I say, Grapeviney, imagine that wherever you live was declared as Aboriginal land. I' would just love to see and witness your reaction...

At the bottom of all this, I suspect, is the foundation notion that somehow Jews are entitled to Palestine because god gave  it to them. I make this assumption because you use the term The Promised land.

I admit I don't understand this notion that god is a real estate agent. I really don't. Nor do I believe any rational being on the planet believes this either. Yet, on the other hand, however, as certain friends of mine are fond of saying...

Maybe I simply know too many Jews who really despise every aspect of Zionism, I know too many Jews, in other words, who aren't afraid to face what Israel really has become.

And also, unfortunately, for the likes of you and ET and PD, I know too much about the real history of what really happened and is happening  in Gaza and the Occupied territories. I know too much about the illegal settlements, I know too much about how Netanyahu and Lieberman and his like are inhumane, lying, fascist lunatics.

42 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

1. No, I don't, and I don't agree that it was Palestinian land. It's Jewish land as much as it is Palestinian land, and that's why the partition plans made so much sense.

2. I can't look at Jewish migration to Palestine in the 30's and 40's as anything other than a blessing, especially in the context of what was happening in Europe and how few other nations put out the welcoming mat to the Jews. I only wish more of them had made it to the Promised Land, because then 6 million wouldn't have been slaughtered in the ensuing Holocaust. 

I'll look at this more thoroughly later on, but let clarify. Why exactly are you saying it was Jewish land? (I'm not sure what period you're talking about - do you mean when Israel was established?)

 

Re your second point, of course its heart-breaking that more people didn't escape the Nazis. 

8 minutes ago, Jara said:

I'll look at this more thoroughly later on, but let clarify. Why exactly are you saying it was Jewish land? (I'm not sure what period you're talking about - do you mean when Israel was established?)

 

Re your second point, of course its heart-breaking that more people didn't escape the Nazis. 

It's Jewish land because the Jewish people originated there, thousands of years ago, and have maintained physical, cultural and religious ties to it ever since.

And just to further clarify, I don't use the term 'Promised Land' for any religious reasons; I like the phrase, just as I do the Land of Milk and Honey.

12 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

It's Jewish land because the Jewish people originated there, thousands of years ago, and have maintained physical, cultural and religious ties to it ever since.

And just to further clarify, I don't use the term 'Promised Land' for any religious reasons; I like the phrase, just as I do the Land of Milk and Honey.

So if some Wurundjeri elders knock on your door tomorrow to say they want their land back, you will be saying fair cop mate, here’s the keys! 

13 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

So if some Wurundjeri elders knock on your door tomorrow to say they want their land back, you will be saying fair cop mate, here’s the keys! 

Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking, although it's hardly likely to happen. Could I suggest another scenario?

At present everybody's worried (quite rightly) about Chinese expansion to the north.    They've already got the Darwin port, vast parcels of land, growing military bases. Suppose, in the not too distant future, they were to ally themselves with the Aboriginal population of the NT (about 60,000 people - a quarter of the Territory's population, who've maintained "physical cultural and religious ties to the land")? 

 

By your logic, Grape, this alliance would be legally entitled to drive out the white inhabitants, cram them into the slums of Tennant Creek and shoot them when they demonstrate?