Read this, correct and comment...

IP: beton:* / 192.168.1.* 29.12.02, 00:16
Try to imagine a house,
that you have been living in for many years.
Imagine land,
which you and your family cultivate from generation to generation.
Imagine
playing children in that house, women cooking a dinner and old people telling
a story.
Imagine people,
who come to your house, to your land
and throw you out form your house, from your land.
Imagine that
from this time you have to live in the open air, you dont have house, land,
job and theres nothing to eat.
Imagine
that you see a death of your son, husband and father.
Imagine your child,
shot in a street.
Imagine
that you are throwing a stone to a solider, who killed your son.
Imagine a solider,
who forbit you to enter a temple and pray for your killed family.
Imagine a solider,
who is shooting at you.
Imagine
that theres nobody who could halp you
Imagine
millions of such people.
Try to imagine
how do Palestinians must suffer?
    • Gość: nat Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.in-addr.btopenworld.com 29.12.02, 01:17
      I absolutely and unreservedly support the sentiments expressed in your text. I
      strongly believe that until the Palestinian problem is resolved by good will of
      the world leaders there is no prospect of peace in the Middle East nor in the
      world.
      • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 29.12.02, 12:12
        "(...)A soldier gets to the Territories and is conftonted with a terrible
        situation: thousands upon thousands of eople sunk in deep misery, poverty,
        humiliation.
        An then you get your orders and find out what your job is. Your job is to push
        these people deeper into misery, into poverty and humiliation, to keep them
        caged in towns and villages, not to let get out, not to let them earn a living,
        not to let them live the normal life. And then two things happen.

        First, you look around in disbelief, you take your head into your hands and
        ask: God, can this be true, is this really what I am supposed to do, how did I
        get here, how did I come to get such orders, to be asked to do such things?
        And the second thing which happens is that you cry out: 'I've been cheated!'
        All the propaganda aeguments collapse - that we are a peace-loving people,
        that the war was imposed on us, that we do what we must in order to fight
        terrorism... Everything collapses... (...)

        And then you are faced with the reality, the cruel reality! Fighting
        terrorism - what a joke?!? They are maintaining a hothouse of misery and
        poverty and hopelesness - our army does! - a hothouse where the plants of
        terrorism have the ideal conditions to grow. The government policy is to keep
        the terrorism hothouse going and flourishing. And the conclusion for you is
        simple, very simple! There are things that a decent person just does not do. A
        decent person does not starve people, does not humiliate people and does not
        traet people as if they were dirt... A decent person JUST DOES NOT DO THAT. Not
        under any circumstances."

        Words of 'refusnick', Yishai Rosen-Tzvi, who served a mil.-prison sentence for
        refusing to serve again, at the Demo. in Tel Aviv.
    • Gość: Aneczka Re: Imagine? It it isn't simple. IP: *.lubin.dialog.net.pl 29.12.02, 12:54
      Imagine that
      These people occupy your house, kill your family and shoot to you.
      And?
      You are still sure that you would be calmy?
      You wouldn't want to fight with them?
      To judge is simpler than put yourself in this position.
      In position these people who want to fight with Palistans - theirs anemy.
      Have you seen a war where fight only soldiers, because I haven't.
      Always innocent people perish in war.
      Nobody change this.
      • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Imagine? Imagine! IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 29.12.02, 17:19
        'A Jew to Zionist Fighters' - a poem by Erich Fried, one of the best known XX
        c. Jewish poets.

        "What do you actually want?

        Do you really want to outdo
        those who trod you down
        a generation ago
        into your own blood
        and into your own excrement
        Do you want to pass on the old torture
        to others now
        in all its bloody and dirty detail
        with all the brutal delight of torturers
        as suffered by your fathers?

        Do you really want to be the new Gestapo
        the new Wehrmacht
        the new SA and SS
        and turn the Palestinians
        into the new Jews?

        Well then I too want -
        having fifty years ago
        myself been tormented for being a Jewboy
        by your tormentors -
        to be a new Jew with these new Jews
        you are making of the Palestinians.
        And I want to help lead them as a free people
        into their own land of Palestine
        from whence you have driven them or in which you plague them
        you apprentices of Swastika
        you fools and changelings of history
        whose Star of David on your flags
        turns ever quicker
        into that damned symbol with its four feet
        that you just don't want to see
        but whose path you are following today"
    • Gość: wacko jacko Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.nyc.rr.com 29.12.02, 18:36
      Give me a fucking break.
      What a gibberish.
      Imagine your daughter riding a bus to school. She comes back in a coffin
      because she happen to be on the wrong bus.
      Imagine a few millions of people who have unelected leader, the leader who
      leads them to nowhere. The leader who is corrupt and senile. The leader who
      can't organize as simple a thing as a collection of garbage. The leader who
      plays politics at the expense of his own people. The leader who does not have
      control over his own government. Yet he refuses to step down to pave the way
      for some kind of lasting agreement with Israel so his people can prosper.
      Or maybe kipping the status quo is the way to hold on to the power.
      There are only two ways to achieve a lasting solution. One is to win the war
      with Israel and destroy it. Wipe it off the map. The other, to negotiate the
      peace agreement. Sign it, implement it and live by it.
      You are not going to win by blowing out the buses and restaurants as they are
      not going to win by engaging in police actions in occupied territories.
      The difference is, they now it. You seem to believe in fighting. Dream on.
      Sooner or later both sides will find themselves at the negotiating table. The
      sooner the better. I wish there was a Palestinian state next to Israel so the
      people can live normal lives. I guess I'm dreaming now.

      Your story is aimed at my heart. I wish it was aimed at my mind.
      There is no heart in politics. There is only a cold calculation.
      • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Read this! (correct and comment...) IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 01.01.03, 20:20

        "The Security Council DETERMINES that all measures taken by Israel to change
        the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or
        Status of the Palestinian or other Arab territories occupied since 1967,
        including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have NO LEGAL VALIDITY and that
        Israel's policy and practices of settiling parts of its population and new
        immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth
        Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
        and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and
        lasting peace in the Middle East."
        UN 'Resolution 465'
        • Gość: felusiak Re: Read this! (correct and comment...) IP: *.nyc.rr.com 01.01.03, 23:12
          I've never said that israeli settlements in the palestinian territories are
          legal nor have I expressed my support for them.

          To this day I have not seen a resolution against terrorist attacs on israeli
          civilians. UN is a meaningless, talking association. Any time there is a
          conflict, UN passes the resolution which is generally ignored. What kind of
          relevance does this body have? NONE.
          We had a resolution right after Iraq invaded Kuwait. It took US to enforce it.
          We had another one pertaining to Bosnia. It took US to enforce it.

          In July 2000 Mr. Arafat walked off the talks in Camp David. He rejected the
          deal which would potentially bring a beginning to a peacefull israeli-
          palestinian coexistance. Later in 2002 he regretted that decision.
          What was it? Bad timing or inability to compromise.

          By that action combined with his inability to control the outbreak of
          terrorist activity ( suicide bombings ) Mr. Arafat lost his credibility with
          United States, the only possible peace broker. It's time for him to pack it up
          and leave. There is a chance that new, more pragmatic leadership will reach
          some kind of an agreement with Israel.
          The other option is a total victory which means nothing else but total war.
    • greatwhite If you are one sided you are a part of a problem! 02.01.03, 04:23
      Washington Post recently reported that students and faculty at a growing number
      of universities are pressuring their schools "into selling their holdings in
      companies that do business with Israel, prompting a counter-campaign among
      Jewish groups that consider the effort part of a creeping tide of anti-Semitism
      on campus." Here's what I would say to both sides on this issue:
      Memo to professors and students leading the divestiture campaign: Your campaign
      for divestiture from Israel is deeply dishonest and hypocritical, and any
      university that goes along with it does not deserve the title of institution of
      higher learning.
      You are dishonest because to single out Israel as the only party to blame for
      the current impasse is to perpetrate a lie. Historians can debate whether the
      Camp David and Clinton peace proposals for a Palestinian state were for 85, 90,
      or 97 percent of the West Bank and Gaza. But what is not debatable is what the
      proper Palestinian response should have been. It should have been to tell
      Israel and America that their peace proposals were the first fair offer they
      had ever put forth, and although they still fell short of what Palestinians
      feel is a just two-state solution, Palestinians were now prepared to work with
      Israel and America to achieve that end. The proper response was not a
      Palestinian intifada and 100 suicide bombers, which are what brought Ariel
      Sharon to power.
      It is shameful that at a time when some Palestinians are writing that they made
      a historic mistake in not nurturing the Clinton peace offer, pro-Palestinian
      professors and students in America and Europe pretend that the only reason the
      occupation persists is because of Israeli obstinacy. This approach will never
      gain the Palestinians a state, and those who dabble in it are simply prolonging
      Palestinian misery.
      You are also hypocrites. How is it that Egypt imprisons the leading democracy
      advocate in the Arab world, after a phony trial, and not a single student group
      in America calls for divestiture from Egypt? (I'm not calling for it, but the
      silence is telling.) How is it that Syria occupies Lebanon for 25 years, chokes
      the life out of its democracy, and not a single student group calls for
      divestiture from Syria? How is it that Saudi Arabia denies its women the most
      basic human rights, and bans any other religion from being practiced publicly
      on its soil, and not a single student group calls for divestiture from Saudi
      Arabia?
      Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is vile. But singling out
      Israel for opprobrium and international sanction — out of all proportion to any
      other party in the Middle East — is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is
      dishonest.
      Memo to Israel's supporters: Just because there are anti-Semites who blame
      Israel for everything that is wrong does not mean that whatever Israel does is
      right, or in its self-interest, or just. The settlement policy Israel has been
      pursuing is going to lead to the demise of the Jewish state. No, settlements
      are not the reason for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but to think they do
      not exacerbate it, and are not locking Israel into a permanent occupation, is
      also dishonest.
      If the settlers get their way, Israel will de facto or de jure annex the West
      Bank and Gaza. And if current Palestinian birth rates continue, by around the
      year 2010 there will be more Palestinians than Jews living in Israel, the West
      Bank and Gaza combined. When that happens, the demand of the college anti-
      Israel movements will change.
      They won't bother anymore with divestiture. They will simply demand: "One Man,
      One Vote. Since Israel has de facto annexed the territories, and there is now
      just one political entity between Jordan and the Mediterranean, we want
      majority rule." If you think it is hard to defend Israel on campus today,
      imagine doing it in 2010, when the colonial settlers have so locked Israel into
      the territories it can rule them only by apartheid-like policies.
      This is not a call for unilateral Israeli withdrawal. This is a call for
      everyone who wants Israel to remain a Jewish state — and not become a
      binational state — to urge President Bush to renew the U.S. push for a two-
      state solution. If you think the Bush team is doing Israel a favor with its
      diplomacy of benign neglect, if you think the only campaign Jews need to be
      involved in today is with hypocrites on U.S. college campuses — and not with
      extremists in their own camp — you too are telling yourselves a very big and
      dangerous lie.
      • coloradosky Re: If you are one sided you are a part of a prob 02.01.03, 06:19
        Everyone protects their own thus wars and conflicts. There is never going to be
        peace in the Middle East on today's terms. We can debate this until each one of
        us is blue in the face. They hate each other too much and too deeply, and way
        too long. I am the last person anyone should call racist or chauvinist, but
        has anyone here ever had an argument with an Arab person from the Middle East?
        I have a couple of times, and there is no "arguing" with those folks. They see
        the world in their own way and there is nothing that could change their ways.

        The only humane thing to do for the rest of the world to solve this Israeli-
        Palestinian mess would be to completely ignore what goes on over there. A month
        later the Muslims would completely overrun Israel, just like they did to the
        rest of Africa and most of Asia. But we all know that this will never be
        allowed to happen.

        And the life goes on. Buses keep blowing up, innocents die, revenge fuels more
        revenge. Nothing changes.
        • _msperanski Re: If you are one sided you are a part of a prob 02.01.03, 06:50
          as long as there is oil or need for such...

          Misza
          • Gość: chickenShorts Re: If you are as circular as life... IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 02.01.03, 09:56
            felusiak,
            if you fail to see the obvious, then don't take offence throwing your arms in
            protest... Your 'patriotic' masturbatory spillings on this forum merit only
            responses that would somehow equal them... For the last time: the UN is what it
            is thanks mostly to the most powerful country behind it! The other one,
            beginning with 'I', even managed to 'beat' the first one in the number of
            either ignored or broken resolutions! But being under protection it is, what
            can UN do against it?
            Another obvious thing is this:
            Iraq would never have become an 'issue', had it not been for the Israel 'issue'!
            S. Hussein is a nobody and he would have been mooted like any other local
            warlord, had it not been for the Jewish State!
            Grow up or shut up!
            • Gość: felusiak it's beginning to get under my skin IP: *.nyc.rr.com 02.01.03, 16:45
              Chickenshorts
              all you do is mud the water. Murkier you make it the better.
              What is obvious to you is not obvious to me. Your take on Saddam is very
              interesting. I suppose Israel was behind the war with Iran as well as
              it was behind the invasion on Kuwait. And you said this to me for the last
              time? You need to read a little more, definitely not from your beloved
              Guardian. This time use more objective source so you can learn something new
              ( to you ). How about a book writen by a historian.
              I wonder if you can name the countries where people chose their leaders?
              Skip the obvious and concentrate on Africa and Asia. How many are there.
              Do you know that Syria is now a part of UN Council on Human Rights together
              with Zimbabwe? Isn't it a joke? If it isn't, what is?

              Thanks for your advice. I already grew up. I don't think there is a chance for
              me to shut up. In your dreams, kido.

              Next time try to respond to the merit in a less adolescent manner.

              At last I'd like to assure you of my support for your right to say anything
              you want. You can try to grow up but never shut up.

        • greatwhite Re: If you are one sided you are a part of a prob 02.01.03, 13:43
          Unfortunately you are right, Middle East will never be peaceful for as long as
          Jews and Arabs live side by side. I believe that sooner then later a new
          Palestinian country will be formed and accepted by the rest of the world, as it
          should, but that in itself will not change anything. Violence will go on for
          ever.



          coloradosky napisał:

          > Everyone protects their own thus wars and conflicts. There is never going to
          be
          >
          > peace in the Middle East on today's terms. We can debate this until each one
          of
          >
          > us is blue in the face. They hate each other too much and too deeply, and way
          > too long. I am the last person anyone should call racist or chauvinist, but
          > has anyone here ever had an argument with an Arab person from the Middle
          East?
          > I have a couple of times, and there is no "arguing" with those folks. They
          see
          > the world in their own way and there is nothing that could change their ways.
          >
          > The only humane thing to do for the rest of the world to solve this Israeli-
          > Palestinian mess would be to completely ignore what goes on over there. A
          month
          >
          > later the Muslims would completely overrun Israel, just like they did to the
          > rest of Africa and most of Asia. But we all know that this will never be
          > allowed to happen.
          >
          > And the life goes on. Buses keep blowing up, innocents die, revenge fuels
          more
          > revenge. Nothing changes.
    • grabdowski Re: Read this, correct and comment... 02.01.03, 11:34
      Gosh, its hard to imagine but I really support Palestinian and I wish they will
      have soon their own independent country.
      • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 02.01.03, 20:01
        I am going here against my better judgement but... no apologies!

        greatwhite:
        <'Critisizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is vile'>

        Yes! Certainly!

        <But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanctions - out of
        all proportions to any other party in the Middle East - is anti-Semitic>

        How come? Because of that inserted qualifier?

        <and not saying so is dishonest!>

        That 'dishonesty' is easily outweighted by the bilions of $US pumped into
        Israel on regular bases, great part of which goes on mainaining the status quo,
        that is, keeping 'the hothouses where plants of terrorism flourish'! The rest
        and not negligible sums are going on supporting new immigrants' setting up on
        stolen land. They don't work, they don't pay taxes! They live on the State's
        money! They spend their days swaying over Tora, that is, entrenching
        themselves and their children in the conviction that this is where they should
        be by the 'Biblical right'.
        Maybe that's where the diference between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism
        becomes fuzzy? But whose fault is it exactly?
        • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 03.01.03, 20:37
          "This wasteful governing by fear, by contempt for the basic dignities of life,
          this steady asphyxiaton of a dependent people, should be the very last means to
          be adopted by those who themselves know only too well the awful significance,
          the unforgetable suffering of such an existence."
          Thus spoke Y. Menuhin in 1991, upon receiving Israel's prestigious Wolf Prize.

          The outrage this caused, including some demanding the prize to be withdrawn,
          never affected Lord Menuhin's attitude towards Israel. In 1998 he said:
          "Those who insist on war should remember that those who want Jerusalem for
          themselves alone were always defeated because it is a city for eternity. What's
          extraordinary is that some things never die completely, even the illness which
          prevailed yesterday in Nazi Germany and is today progressing today in that land
          (Israel)"

          OK, that's history.

          Today!
          "...we are horrified by a government representing a country that we grew up
          loving and cherishing. Israel's defenders have a special vengeance for Jews who
          don't fall in line behind Sharon's scortched-earth policy because they give the
          lie to the charge that Israel's critics are simply anti-Semite."

          Especially in 'the land of brave & free'!

          www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=313235
          • Gość: wacko jacko Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.nyc.rr.com 03.01.03, 21:13
            ?
            Sharon's coming to power is a direct effect of palestinian suicide bombing
            campaign. Arafat walked off on Barak.

            Here is the difference. We both watching a soccer game. Competing teams are
            Pernambuco and Hula Gula Islands. Both teams play dirty. That's what I see.
            I have no horse in this race. You are rooting for Pernambuco.
            Next you are bringing a piece from France Futbol and past FIFA resolutions
            against Hula Gula Islands to prove you're right. And a bunch of quotes.
            • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 03.01.03, 21:35
              Gość portalu: wacko jacko napisał(a):
              > Competing teams are
              > Pernambuco and Hula Gula Islands. Both teams play dirty.>
              That's what I see.<

              Oh,OK, I don't mind soccer allegory but be kind enough to tell me which of
              the above teams represents the land occupied for the last 35years and which is
              represents the occupier, Pernambuco or Hula Gula?
              • Gość: wacko jacko Re: Read this, correct and comment... IP: *.nyc.rr.com 03.01.03, 23:30
                Gość portalu: chickenShorts napisał(a):

                > Oh,OK, I don't mind soccer allegory but be kind enough to tell me which of
                > the above teams represents the land occupied for the last 35years and which
                > is represents the occupier, Pernambuco or Hula Gula?

                It's Pernambuco. Nevertheless you are missing my point, as an observer you are
                not supposed to root for anyone. You watch the game and comment on what you
                see. What you are saying is that in a game, two years ago, Hula Gulans kicked
                Pernambucan goalkeeper in the groin, therefore Pernambucans can kick the shit
                out of Hula Gulans. Then I can say how about that goalkeeper punching Hula
                Gulan's player teeth down his throat causing him an unbeareable pain.
                And then we will enter a tailspin zone. After that, one can add there was no
                Pernambuco. The first game was actually between Hula Gula and Parador.

                When the parties enter the negotiations they leave emotions behind the door.
                They focus on the future. They negotiate hard and they compromise. Then a
                contract is signed and implemented. Or they just talk to make good impression
                and they walk off.
                At least you can give me that Arafat's shtick in Camp David.

                Have you seen "Black Hawk Down" ?.

    • Gość: Bert Joint Harvard - MIT ... IP: *.30.183.241.Dial.Boston1.Level3.net 04.01.03, 05:55
      ... Petition for Divestment from Israel

      We, the undersigned are appalled by the human rights
      abuses against Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli
      government, the continual military occupation and
      colonization of Palestinian territory by Israeli armed
      forces and settlers, and the forcible eviction from and
      demolition of Palestinian homes, towns and cities. We
      find the recent attacks on Israeli citizens unacceptable
      and abhorrent. But these should not and do not negate the
      human rights of the Palestinians.

      As members of the MIT and Harvard University communities,
      we believe that our universities ought to use their
      influence - political and financial - to encourage the
      United States government and the government of Israel to
      respect the human rights of the Palestinians. We
      therefore call on the US government to make military aid
      and arms sales to Israel conditional on immediate
      initiation and rapid progress in implementing the
      conditions listed below. We also call on MIT and Harvard
      to divest from Israel, and from US companies that sell
      arms to Israel, until these conditions are met:

      Israel is in compliance with United Nations Resolution
      242 which notes the inadmissibility of the acquisition of
      territory by war, and which calls for withdrawal of
      Israeli armed forces from occupied territories.

      Israel is in compliance with the United Nations Committee
      Against Torture 2001 Report which recommends that
      Israel's use of legal torture be ended.

      In compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention ("The
      occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its
      own civilian population into territories it occupies";
      Article 49, paragraph 6), Israel ceases building new
      settlements, and vacates existing settlements, in the
      Occupied Territories.

      Israel acknowledges in principle the applicability of
      United Nations Resolution 194 with respect to the rights
      of refugees, and accepts that refugees should either be
      allowed to return to their former lands or else be
      compensated for their losses, as agreed by the
      Palestinians and Israelis in bilateral negotiations.


      complete information is available at
      www.harvardmitdivest.org/
      MIT Faculty (52)
    • Gość: Bert Camp David Myth IP: *.30.183.241.Dial.Boston1.Level3.net 04.01.03, 06:02
      The myth of then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak's "generous
      offer" and "Israel's painful concessions" in the summer
      of 2000, and the consequent portrayal of Palestinian
      leader Yasser Arafat as a rejectionist in the media is a
      joke.
      The question "Didn’t Barak offer 95 percent of the
      occupied territories to Arafat at Camp David?" is
      exploited to the fullest and enters the mythology of
      Israeli propaganda. Repeated enough, people believe it.
      So just what was the offer made by Mr. Barak in July 2000?
      Barak wanted to bypass interim agreements and present
      Arafat with an all-or-nothing proposal, with no fallback
      options. He presented nothing in writing; proposals were
      stated verbally.
      Conclusions of what proposals might be were drawn from
      maps. Israel would not return to its 1967 borders.
      Barak's offer would have left the main Israeli
      settlements and their Jewish-only bypass roads intact.
      Palestinian villages would continue to be islands
      isolated from each other, Bantustans completely
      surrounded by Israeli military, who could and would
      blockade entire villages from travel. Except for three
      villages, Barak excluded the 28 Palestinian villages
      Israel illegally annexed to Jerusalem. Israel would
      accept no responsibility for the Palestinian refugee
      problem.
      Clinton promised Arafat that if the talks failed, Arafat
      would not be blamed. Yet, when the talks failed, Clinton
      placed all of the blame on Arafat and contributed to the
      misleading, simplistic propaganda of the "generous offer"
      by Barak, which was then picked up by and carried on in
      the media. Given the history of broken promises and
      increased land confiscation and accelerated settlement
      expansion under Barak, Arafat didn't trust these verbal
      promises. He wanted proof of Israel's seriousness in
      implementing the agreements previously made (and negated
      by Netanyahu), and feared that in accepting an
      all-or-nothing final status proposal, the entire basis of
      international legitimacy would be undermined.
      In the 1993 Oslo Agreement, by recognizing Israel's right
      to exist, Palestinians already gave up 78 percent of
      their land and accepted the formula "land for peace"
      within the context of U.N. Security Council Resolution
      242, which calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the
      occupied territories. This meant Palestinians were
      willing to settle for 22 percent of originally mandated
      Palestine. To put it bluntly: You take $100 from me and
      later offer to repay $22. I cut my losses and give up
      $78. Still later you want more of my remaining $22. In
      short, Arafat felt Palestinians had made real concessions
      in settling for the territories occupied since the 1967 war.
      Even a cursory look at a map of the settlements and their
      bypass roads amidst Palestinian cities and towns
      strikingly reveals the impossibility of a viable
      sovereign Palestinian state. Sovereignty presupposes
      contiguous territory. How many of us would agree to
      travel 40 miles from one town to another when the actual
      distance between them is only five miles?
      Jeff Halper, a professor at Ben Gurion University, calls
      it a "matrix of controls" a system of facts on the
      ground, settlements, military checkpoints, permits for
      travel, permits for building, closure political control
      over every aspect of Palestinian life. Israeli military
      decide if and when one can go to work, to market, to
      school, to the doctor or hospital, to church/mosque, or
      to visit relatives, leave one's home or one's village.
      Control means when and how much water will be allowed
      Palestinians. In a sense, control is as important as
      territory. A member of the Israeli peace group
      Gush-Shalom says, "Prisoners may occupy 95 percent of
      prison space, but it is the other 5 percent that
      determines who is in control."
      There is no way Arafat or the Palestinian people could
      have or should have accepted Barak's offer. Palestinians
      are not asking Israel for concessions, but compliance
      with international law not to give up, but to give back land.
      • Gość: chickenShorts Re: Camp David Myth IP: *.abo.wanadoo.fr 04.01.03, 13:10

        Thank you,(((Bert!)))
        cS
        PS
        I urge everyone to read Robert Frisk's article (the link again):

        www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=313235

        it partly explains this 'whacky Rev Jacko' phenomenon. Frightening!
        • Gość: Andy Re: suggestion IP: *.acn.pl 04.01.03, 13:43
          Can`t you moove above disscuses to the "Swiat" forum of Gazeta wyborcza?

          • Gość: wacko jacko Re: suggestion IP: *.nyc.rr.com 04.01.03, 17:05
            Andy, get over it. You don't have to participate. You can ignore it or even
            boycot it. Your call.

            I am terribly sorry for frightening chickenshorts. I have no gun and generally
            people regard me as a mild mannered person. I'm harmless.

            If in fact Mr. Arafat and his palestinian brothers could not and should not
            have accepted the israeli offer in Camp David, why did they participate in
            those talks? By engaging in negotiations, one has to be ready to compromise,
            hasn't he? Barak was pressured by Clinton to give up more than he was prepared
            to do in order to accomodate Arafat's demands. It does not matter whether it
            was 95% or 87%. That was the best offer ever made. If one wants the whole 100%
            then he has to fight for it with his guns to the end.

            The peace in the Middle East is only possible after Israel is defeated and
            wipped off the map. Any other outcome falls short of it. It can only be an
            armistice. Only total victory can assure the lasting peace.
            You, gentlemen seem not to take this simple truth into consideration.
            And that is frightening to me.

            BTW the piece by Robert Fisk is a pail of crap. Do you, gentleman, really
            believe that bringing the state of Israel to its 1948 UN mandated borders can
            result in a lasting peace? If so, have a drink. Brandy?
            • Gość: Andy Re: suggestion IP: *.acn.pl 04.01.03, 18:58
              I`m only affraid, you can spoil this forum talking about it.
              There is another place more convinient...think
              • Gość: wacko jacko Re: suggestion IP: *.nyc.rr.com 04.01.03, 21:36
                Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

                > I`m only affraid, you can spoil this forum talking about it.
                > There is another place more convinient...think

                And you Andy might be right. So in the real spirit of english only forum
                I ask anyone to translate ( isn't it what this is all about?)

                "Yo, I'm saying though
                I can't be holding my tougue like that though dog
                You know what I'm saying
                A yo, you know what I'm saying
                We detonated and all that you know what I'm saying
                But yo, this nigga Fakts One got me open
                I got to spit some shit
                I'm just going to let it loose like yo:.........."

                Translations are more meaningful and they don't kill the forum.
                Have fun.

              • gelatik_ suggestion 05.01.03, 15:59
                Gość portalu: Andy napisał(a):

                > I`m only affraid, you can spoil this forum talking about it.
                > There is another place more convinient...think


                Gazeta.pl > Forum > Edukacja Niedziela, 5 stycznia 2003




                English only (4481)


                Discussions, debates and conversations - all topics of conversation are welcome
                as long as they are in English :-)



Inne wątki na temat:
Pełna wersja