Israel milks the Holocaust cow... Wow. There are what - 15 million Jews worldwide. 6 million or so were killed by Europeans 60 years ago, and anti-semitism is not only rampant in Europe, but anti-semetic muslims are immigrating into Western Europe at a breathtaking rate. Why on earth would the Jews want to remind anyone what happens when this gets out of hand?

Israel is fighting islamic terrorists. The USA is fighting islamic terrorists. If not friends, we are aligned with common interests.


Firstly, equating the holocaustand European ghettoization of Jews with what's going on in Palestine is so patently offensive I don't know where to start.

As to the actual substance or your point here, exactly what "nation" has its people stuff into ghettos? Egypt? Jordan? Israeli?

As for Arafat, he had around 4 billion dollars I believe. Why didn't he just divide it evenly with his precious people and they all could have stopped "languishing in poverty."

As usual bias and wrong. The USS Liberty was an accident caused by the US lying to Israel. Saudi Arabia and Egypt have both spied upon the US and passed that information on to Russia and China. Israel has not ever passed on any secrets to China or any other country period. The person that started that claim was a Soviet spy. The US is one that is currently spying on Israel.

As usual you are 180 degrees from the true.

carlitoswhey

Because for as long as they can promote the idea of an anti semitic Europe, Americans like you will continue to believe it I suppose.

It doesn't matter any more that the overwhelming bulk of Europeans are not anti semitic and had nothing to do with the Holocaust. It doesn't matter that the Holocaust was carried out largely in secret and most Europeans, even most Germans had no clue as to what was being undertaken in the death camps.

None of that matters any more, because thanks to Israel's excellent propaganda, as far as conservative America is concerned, it was Europe that killed six million Jews.

And never mind about the thirty million Soviet and Slav undesirable's who were murdered by Stalin. You won't see any Oscars going to films about them. Nor will you see many Hollywood stars putting in a sterling performance's about the Holocaust of Chinese civilians where so many died, but no one even bothered to count the corpses.

I strongly recommend you go and see 'Hotel Rwanda' as soon as you can, because that film is literally, one of a kind!


We're ALL fighting Islamic terrorists. The difference is, most countries engaged in that struggle haven't carried out the mass ethnic cleansing of Muslims.

Its curious that when ever a European synagogue gets burned down, we get to hear so much static from America about how 'Anti Semitic' we are.

But when an IDF tank drives over a pregnant woman, or a settler executes a 75 year old Palestinian olive farmer we get to hear about how Israel is 'defending itself from terrorism'.


Why?

What makes Jews so much more important that the Warsaw ghetto, or eve just the memory of the Warsaw Ghetto, is so much more significant than the Gaza strip? Did you know the nazi's built a wall around the Warsaw Ghetto, and called the Jews terrorists?

Even as they build their wall, the Israeli's vow, 'never again'.


ALL of them.

Which is exactly the point.


Because he was a corrupt former terrorist.

Now you tell me. Sharon was going to kill the terrorist Arafat in Beirut when he was Minister for Defence. He had the chance to do it and get away with it, but he didn't.
Why not?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

loreng59

Not according to the crew of the USS Liberty. They watched their ship mates being machine gunned to death in the water by Israeli's close enough to have read their uniform insignia.

One Israeli pilot even refused to continue the attack once he identified the USS Liberty as an American ship and was later thrown in jail for refusing his orders.

How curious then that I read about this ten years after the Soviet Union had collapsed. Amazing.




Yes, I must be since I disagree with you.

I was crafting a response to the entire post till I got to this point. After reading this, I figure it would be pointless. When you encounter something like this, you either decide to continue to beat you head against the wall, or you simply walk away from it.

I think I'll try that walking method now.

You sure about that?






This is a great attitude. And Americans wonder why "the rest of the world hates us..."



It calls for them to leave territory:

"Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;"

Which they haven't done. That was one of many possible ways I was trying to prove to you that the West Bank and Gaza were considered occupied territory. You're putting words in my mouth.




So now you all the sudden care what the UN thinks? Of course the above statement is your opinion and thus (just to follow your stance on opinions)....who cares?

overlandsailor

This is exactly what I mean. What you are actually doing here is accusing me of being anti semitic because I accuse Israel of taking advantage of the Holocaust.

This illustrates perfectly my point. The Holocaust was undertaken against many different people, Jews being the majority of these. It was never undertaken against Israel, but in your mind, and in the minds of millions of Americans like you, the Holocaust has become a symbol to identify Europe as an enemy and Israel as a friend.

The truth of the Holocaust is long lost on you. The truth that the word Holocaust refers to the slaughter of innocent people, and not just Jews, but all innocent people, that Holocaust is STILL happening in Africa, means nothing to you.

Instead, Holocaust just means anti Israel.

Your welcome to walk away, but remember this, no problem ever got solved because people walked away from it. Ethnic cleansing it taking place now. Even as I type there are innocent people being murdered on the basis of their ethnicity.

Ok, this discussion is killing me.



No, you are wrong here. The "Holocaust" refers to the Nazi campaign to exterminate the Jews. The word "holocaust" has come (since that date) to refer to large-scale genocide. See the difference between the two? The fact is that there is a difference, and one worth preserving. Unlike what happened in Rwanda, or the Sudan, Cambodia, China, the Soviet Union, Ethiopia, etc., the Holocaust was a deliberate and exhaustive attempt to wipe out over person of a specific ethnicity on the face of the earth; and this effort was undertaken at great labour and expense... and while it was carried out "in secret" you are deluding yourself if you excuse the populace of Germany, Austria, Poland, the Czech, etc., from complicity. My grandmother remembers all too well being driven from her home. The people may not have known exactly what was happening to their friends and neighbours, but they knew damn well that it wasn't pleasant.

Ok, so now lets get back on topic. Can we please try and tone down the rhetoric a bit? Moif, it seems to me that you are guilty of some of the same thinking that you are accusing everyone else of in this debate. You make the same generalizations that everyone else does. Yes, Israel has in fact engaged in terrorist actions. Ariel Sharon was responsible for the massacres of civilian populations in both the West Bank and in Southern Lebanon. But if the leadership of Israel makes the entire country liable, then the Palestinian nation has no legitimacy either. Let us not forget that they did not accept resolution 242 until the early 1990's.

The fact is, quite simply, that there are two people who now have a claim to the shared land of Israel. Say what you will about the Israeli's (and I note that both people are saying pretty much anything without checking their emotions, or factual veracity) history, it is only mirrored by the deplorable tactics of the Palestinians and their Arab neighbours; so in that sense they are both guilty. However, the majority of people in both groups just want to live their lives in peace; so in that sense they're both innocent. The Israeli's have a claim to that land because most of them have lived there all their lives, and they have no other place to go. But it is also the home from the Palestinians. Legitimately or not, the U.N. did grant Israel certain territories in 1947... and the UN accepted different boundaries in 1949. The Golan was annexed 'legally' from Syria in following conflicts; which leaves us with Gaza and the West Bank. Israel has no place in those territories, and most Israeli's know that. Unfortunately the reality of bombings, which are not likely to stop with an Israeli withdrawal, are much harder to ignore.

This is a great point moif. We won't see films about the millions killed in the Soviet Union, because ... hollywood and the film industry loved the Soviet Union! Walter Duranty of the New York Times won a pulitzer prize for writing about how great the Soviet Union was! People like me would love for the world to understand the sheer evil that was communism in practice - how would you suggest we get this message out?

Other than some very brave individuals, who were found in greater numbers in places like Holland and Scandinavia, Europe damn well knew that their jewish neighbors were disappearing. You are wrong. We have all heard the stories of french collaborators sending jews out of france and of the brave dutch who wore stars of david out of sympathy. If Adolf Hitler himself spoke at length about 'the jewish problem' at every single speech, if the great Max Schmeling had to expatriate his manager for fear, if your doctor stopped coming to his office one day, you could figure out that something was going horribly wrong for the Jews.


1 - Europeans are becoming more and more anti-semitic. Whether vandalism in German or French cemeteries, or assaults, or Mid-East policy, it is clear. Didn't Europe censor their own report on anti-semitism once its results showed it was prevalent and primarily young muslims, just last year? I could make a list so long it would crash the AD server.
- French compare the holocaust to the plight of blacks in america (in 2004!) and calls remembrances of the Shoah "pornographic" (in french)
- Or that France 2 television is so biased that it stages the death of the little Palestian boy Mohammed Al-Dura, hero of the anti-Israel movement. Sorry, "peace" movement. link
- Why would that surprise anyone when the Palestinians faked funerals and inflated the death count of the so-called "massacre of Jenin," where they literally had a funeral procession, then the dead guy jumps off and they start again with a new one! video link

The fact is that Europeans killed the Jews. It happened. The extremists in Europe are becoming so dangerous that they are starting down the slippery slope that the holocaust never happened, they are appeasing the Islamic immigrants (hello Chirac) to win re-election, they are tolerating the murder of anyone who questions the Islamists (hello theo van Gogh). It is only going to get worse if educated and reasonable people such as yourself buy into this whole Palestinian death cult vs. seeing the real story for what it is. Which is Anti-Semitism.

'.

This should be simple. The Warsaw wall was built to keep Jews in. To keep them in poverty, isolated, weakened in body and mind and spirit, to get them ready ultimately for killing in the worst way. The Israeli wall is built to keep terrorists out. Israel is merely controlling their border, and it is already saving lives. Your inability to note the difference of a wall keeping people out vs. in is puzzling to me.

I see. Well, what you are quoting is the Mandate for Palestine which was created in accordance with Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. That does not make it part of the Covenant. There were, I believe, 14 Mandates created under the Mandate system established under Article 22 -- each with their own mandate agreement. So, the aim of Article 22 was not (nor was it the aim of any article in the Covenant) to give land to the Jews... Article 22 only created the Mandate System. The Mandate refers to Article 22 as the basis for the Mandate agreement (meaning, again, it was created in accordance with that Article).

So, no... the Mandate for Palestine is not the Covenant of the League of Nations, it is a legal document created in accordance with Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations (a separate legal document) establishing Palestine as a mandate under the Mandate System.


The UN Charter does not state anything about giving land to Jews -- even in the Article you quote.

So, you are actually stating that the Mandate of Palestine -- created in accordance with Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations -- gives all of the land to the Jews and that the UN Charter accepts the mandate as a trusteeship territory without change to the provisions set down in the Mandate agreement. This is completely different than the claim that the Covenant of the League of Nations and the UN Charter gives all of the land to the Jews.

So, first... the Mandate does not give all of the land to the Jews... nor does it aim to make the whole of Palestine a Jewish State.

To illustrate why, one must look at the Balfour Declaration on which the Mandate bases many of its provisions.



This does not mean that all of Palestine would become the national home for the Jewish people. Nor does it mean that all of Palestine was intentended to become a Jewish State. This becomes apparent when you look at the successive drafts of the declaration.

Successive Drafts and Final Text of the Balfour Declaration

The first draft, approved by the Foreign Office and the Prime Minister and presented to the Cabinet, very specifically advocates what can be nothing other than a Jewish State:



The draft that Balfour, himself, submitted for consideration similarly reflects this idea:



Theses drafts were not accepted however and language was adopted that does not explicitly advocate the establishment of a Jewish State or giving all the land to the Jews. "That" and "as the" were replaced with "in" and "of a". This is a significant change. If the aim of the Balfour Declaration was to advocate the establishment of a Jewish State, why the change?

Ultimatejoe

No its "The" Holocaust that refers to the Nazi campaign to exterminate the Jews.

There is a importance difference between the two. The Oxford English dictionary definition of the word which says:

Plainly the word Holocaust can be applied to any large scale attempt to exterminate or destroy another people. That it isn't says more about how we perceive the Holocaust of peoples other than the Jews. Its almost as if these people don't count.


I'm sorry but I disagree entirely. The evil motivations behind ethnic cleansing and mass murder make no difference to me one way or the other and neither does the ethnic identity of the victims. Murder is murder. Mass murder is mass murder. Ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleanisng and Holocaust is Holocaust.


Well, most of my grandmothers family never survived the Holocaust, so I tend to get a tad touchy when I, as a European, have to endure the pointed finger over European anti semitism by people who gladly excuse the use of military weapons against old men and pregnant women by the IDF.


The difference is, despite their rhetoric and wishful thinking, the Palestinians have never imposed a state on the Israeli's.

The Palestinians may be guilty of many things, but ethnic cleansing the region to make way for an apartheid state is not one of them.

And yes, I consider Israel apartheid. How else can I describe a nation founded on a religious/ ethnic identity?


Yeah, except one side was a bunch of terrorists and the other was a 'democracy'.

I'm sorry but I don't see how a nation that refers to itself as a democracy can be excused for indulging in terrorism. Terrorism is crime. Pure and simple. Any state that uses terrorism is a criminal state.

And a democracy that uses terrorism and consistently fails to bring its leadership to account, is far worse than any terrorist group.


If that is true, then why does the CIA fact book refer to the Israeli Jewish population as being 80% immigrants?


Israel has every right to exist. That is not my contention and never has been.

Israel has no right to act the way it does however. Its WRONG to excuse IDF soldiers for murdering innocent people. No 'war' or 'defence' against terrorism excuses the use of military weapons against civilian targets or the deliberate destruction of homes and lands belonging to people of another ethnic group.

Israel rewards land theft.

carlitoswhey

The reason you don't see films about these other mass murders is because no one cares.

Jews have gone out of their way to remind us of the Holocaust and that is why its remembered.

Israel has taken advantage of this and used it as one method of maintaining US support for Israel. European anti semitism has become another.

The fact is, European anti semitism is in fact Islamic anti Israel hatred. Very very few Europeans (That is to say, people born in in Europe) are anti semitic. The problem is caused by the mass influx of Islamic immigrants (the bulk of whom are themselves semites) into Europe and short of mass deportation there is nothing we can do to prevent these people from holding the views they have. All we can do is require they respect the law and arrest them when they don't.

That is the reality of the 'anti semitism' in Europe.

But, to listen to conservative America one would think we Europeans were already firing up the gas chambers.

Even here at AD, I am constantly confronted by ridiculous accusation that the EU funds Islamic terrorism against Israel.


Tell me carlitoswhey, if this knowledge was as wide spread as you believe, then why were the US and USSR troops so surprised when they found the death camps?

People may have understood the Jews were being taken away, but no one in the wildest imagination foresaw the death camps. People talked of the Jews being 'taken away', not as being killed.

Its very easy to sit in judgement with the clarity of hindsight, but even in Denmark, where the Jews were smuggled out, it was not understood that the Jews were being exterminated in death camps.




And, who are you to pass judgement on us for this? Your entire nation was built on its own Holocaust. The fact, is that there are Holocaust memorials and museums all over Europe. Every major city has a reminder, set in stone as to the existence of the Holocaust.

Every school child is taught about the Holocaust, and many of us, myself included were taken, as school children to see places like Auschwitz with our own eyes.

Our televisions show films, documentaries and commemorate the anniversaries of the Holocaust constantly. Right now, even as I type there is a film on Swedish TV about Anne Frank.

I've stood in a gas chamber at Auschwitz and seen it with my own eyes. I don't need to be told by Americans as to what European anti semitism is. It killed a significant proportion of my mothers family. My (non Jewish) paternal grandfather, like millions of other )non Jewish) Europeans was also dragged off to Germany to be a slave but this receives scant attention from any one today.

I am well aware of the reality of European history thank you. All of it, not just the bits about the Jews.

I am also aware that the vast majority of Europeans will do all they can to never allow such atrocities to occur again and that when such things happen, as they did in the former Yugoslavia, we will do all we can to stop them and bring to trial those responsible.


All this tells me is that you don't understand the reality of what your saying.

You don't understand that Palestinians are themselves semites.

You don't understand the serious and possibly dangerous changes that are taking place in Europe against Islamic immigrants because of the murder of Theo van Gogh and other crimes that have been committed by Muslim immigrants.

You don't understand that Jaques Chirac also answers to the 90% of Frenchmen who are not Muslims

and you don't understand that criticism of Israel is NOT anti semitism.

Yeah… it’s a wall so consequently, like all walls It conveniently does both.

Prison walls for example keep inmates in, and the rest of the world out.

The fact that you, a European, are making some of the same arguments as these very Islamic terrorists should frighten us all. Jews control the media, they play on the so-called Holocaust for sympathy, they terrorize innocent the poor innocent Palestinians who want to kill them. It's all very disappointing to me.

As for controling the "beliefs" of the Islamic immigrants, this is a great place to start, and both America and Europe have a lot of work to do here. Eliminating the extremist Wahabbi views from Saudi-funded mosques would be a good start.


I have also been to concentration camps and seen with my own eyes. I also saw the beaches where the heroic British, French and US forces entered Normandy to start the extrication of the Nazis from Western Europe. I wish that the Germans would keep the lessons that they learned more closely.
German Shoah beliefs trouble Jews in survey
*40 percent said Jews exert too much influence on world events, and 20 percent said they have "too much influence" in Germany.

*59 percent agreed with the statement, "Many people in Germany are afraid to express their true feelings about Jews."

*17 percent of Germans "prefer not" to have Jews as neighbors, though more Germans would prefer not to have Gypsies, Arabs, Turks, Africans or Poles as neighbors.
Another example Poll: Over 50% of Germans equate IDF with Nazi army
Six decades after the mass extermination of six million Jews in the Holocaust by Nazi Germany, more than 50 percent of Germans believe that Israel's present-day treatment of the Palestinians is similar to what the Nazis did to the Jews during World War II, a German survey released this weekend shows.

51 percent of respondents said that there is not much of a difference between what Israel is doing to the Palestinians today and what the Nazis did to the Jews during the Holocaust, compared to 49% who disagreed with such a comparison, according to the poll carried out by Germany's University of Bielefeld.

The survey also found that 68 percent of Germans believe that Israel is waging a "war of extermination" against the Palestinians, while some 32% disagreed with such a statement.
...
62 percent of respondents in the poll said that they were sick of "all this harping" of German crimes against Jews, while 68% said that they found it "annoying" that Germans today are still held to blame for Nazi crimes against Jews.

The telephone poll of 3000 "non-migrant" respondents, which was taken in May and June, did not come with a margin of error.
moif, non-migrant Germans are sick of "all this harping" and find it "annoying" that Germans are held to blame for what the ... Germans ... did to the Jews. Are we not on our way to a new anti-Jewish sentiment in Europe?


And yeah, you guys did a great job in Yugoslavia. Way to go. Hardly any Muslim men and boys were slaughtered at Srebrenica or Bosnian women raped and pilaged by the Serbs. Haranguing, having meetings, talking and negotiating and condemning is what Europeans mean by doing "all they can to never allow such atrocities to occur again." If Bill Clinton and the US Congress didn't have such courage, you guys would now be negotiating with Greater Serbia to join the EU in 2012.



Clerics in England encourage terror attacks on 10 Downing Street are excused and coddled by the British.
ITV news
It is a statement that will horrify and disgust people across Britain, but he made these statements without any fear of prosecution.
On the tape he was heard to say: "You want to call us extremist, yes I am extreme.

"Somebody he fly aeroplane and he decide to fly the aeroplane over 10 Downing Street.... It's another self-sacrifice operation...

"What people call suicide operations they mean somebody he wear explosives or he carries explosives and he go and he blow it in the building with the people...

"Martyrdom is what you want.

"Make sure you have nothing left behind you to think about or cry for and fight in the name of Allah."

So, an imam calls for jihad in Britian. What do those brave Europeans do? Well, all they can...

Mr Bakri Mohammed, 46, has indefinite leave to remain in the UK ...

The good news is that they are thinking of charging him under the terrorism act.

That's all well and good but of course you allude to the sweeping changes that Theo van Gogh's murder will bring about. Sweeping changes indeed. The Dutch are self-censoring so as not to further annoy their muslim immigrants.
MUSLIMS VS. FREE SPEECH IN THE NETHERLANDS

Can angry young Muslims dictate what is and is not acceptable in the traditionally open-minded world of Dutch arts? In the last few weeks, it appears, the answer has been yes.
The Netherlands' main film festival, now going on in Rotterdam, canceled a showing of a short documentary denouncing violence against Muslim women that was made by Theo van Gogh, who was killed 10 weeks ago. An Islamic militant is accused of the crime.

The film's producer said he had pulled the film on the advice of the police after receiving threats.

At about the same time, a Moroccan-Dutch painter went into hiding after a show of his work opened on Jan. 15 at a modern art museum in Amsterdam. The museum director said the painter, Rachid Ben Ali, had received death threats linked to his satirical work critical of violence by Islamic militants.
...
In Amsterdam, a city known for its ebullient cultural life, local people say threats to painters have not been heard since the occupation by the Nazis during World War II.
Note that last line. Chilling.

So, is this an isolated incident? No, of course not.
Here you can read about the story of a man arrested for displaying a painting with the words "thou shalt not kill" in response to van Gogh's murder.
Again, chilling. You can see the painting here.

To veer back on topic, the reason American is a legitimate arbiter in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is that we are on the right side. Europe is in a somewhat more fluid position. You are right about the potentially "dangerous" changes in Europe in response. Neo-fascists and nationalists are going to gain power as the people see that their liberal governments are unwilling to meet this threat. But, this is nothing new in Europe, is it...

(NOTE - several quotes in Italics as this thing won't let me use so many quotes. All are sourced with links)

It is obvious that the word holocaust does not refer specifically to the death of Jews at the hand of the Nazi's. Just as 9/11 is really only just a day in September that happens every year. However, when people refer to the Holocaust, they are referring to what has come to be known as this specific period in time... just as when people refer to 9/11 they are referring to that specific event. It says nothing about how people perceive other holocausts. The argument is absurd.

[quote=moif,Feb 20 2005, 06:51 PM]
[QUOTE]People may have understood the Jews were being taken away, but no one in the wildest imagination foresaw the death camps. People talked of the Jews being 'taken away', not as being killed.

Its very easy to sit in judgement with the clarity of hindsight, but even in Denmark, where the Jews were smuggled out, it was not understood that the Jews were being exterminated in death camps. [/QUOTE]

Exactly. Historians speak of the Holocaust as un-imaginable because it was just that. Literally. When someone now mentions Auschwitz, it immediately evokes images of human skeletons [/B]as seen in the photographs[/B]. But how does one who has never seen those photographs imagine the amount of horror that goes into those pictures? If I tell you, please you must believe me, Aliens are eating newborn babies out in the wilderness of Lapland even as I write this, does any of you actually take me seriously?

[QUOTE][quote=carlitoswhey]The fact is that Europeans killed the Jews. It happened. [/quote][/QUOTE]

To specify. The fact is, Christians killed the Jews. Christians who probably considered themselves perfectly good Catholics and Protestants. It happened. And it could happen again.

Christians have been the worst anti-Semitics around. So when moif says

[QUOTE]Israel is not a US alley. It has never helped to defend the USA[/QUOTE]

it can also be turned the other way round. The fundamental right-wing Christians in the U.S. are no friends of Jews, even if they loudly support the State of Israel. The dispensationalists actively and aggressively seek to convert Jews. Jerry Falwell openly speaks of Antichrist as a male Jew. These fundamentalists do not want peace in the ME, because it would postpone the end times. Instead, they welcome the current violence. For them, Jews are only a means to an end, which is the Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ. I would say this is nothing more than anti-Semitism in another name.

Yes I read the entire decision, not just some of Barak's comments, and yes the Supreme Court did not agree with his minority opinion.

Yes leave some territory, not all of it, in fact it state's to secure and internationally recognized borders. The authors stated that on purpose because the 1949 was neither. And I suppose that the withdraw from the Sinai was nothing? They didn't withdraw is what you are saying? Boy sure fooled the world there.

Do I care what the UN thinks, I think the UN should be disbanded - so no I couldn't care less. I was merely pointing out how racist an organization it is. The have one set of rules for democracies, a second for dictatorships and a third just for Israel.

entspeak I do not understand? The Mandate for Palestinian outright states that it is "for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations" how else can it possibly be meant? It is as clear as day that it is an amendment to Article 22.

The UN Charter accepted the mandates from the League of Nation as they were written, that's what it says.

As for all the land, no that is not what I said. In fact 78% of the mandate territory was given to the Arabs. It is called Jordan. So no the Jews did not get all the territory, they were given 22% of the original territory. So hardly all, but the mandate did say that they were to get all of that 22%. Just remember the Arabs have had over 3/4 quarters of the land that was to go to the Jews, now they want the rest.

entspeak

If the argument is indeed absurd, then please enlighten me as to which names the other mass murders of the last hundred years are referred.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


carlitoswhey

link I'm far from the only person who see's the resemblance with the Warsaw ghetto.


Yeah, well, considering I never made those arguments I'm rather surprised that your disappointed. I guess you will read in to what I write what ever you choose.
I never wrote that the Jews control the media.
I never said they played on the Holocaust for 'sympathy'.
I never said Palestinian terrorists were innocent.


And how do you punish some one who has not carried out any crime? Indeed, how do you decide which Muslim is a 'Wahabbist'?

Are you aware that these 'Wahabbists' probably also exist in the USA?

Are you also aware that many Muslims in the USA are just as scared as Israel claims the Jews in Europe are?

Are you aware that Ariel Sharon prompted many Jews to leave 'anti semitic' France and come to Israel, and that very few actually did?

Are you aware that the reason why Sharon urges Jews to come to Israel is because many Jews are fleeing Israel, and the most popular destination of these Israeli ex pats, is actually Germany?

Are you aware that Israel is so scared of 'anti semitic' Europe that it is seriously considering joining the EU?


First of all, so what? Germany does not represent Europe. Neither does France.

Second, so what? There are plenty of people in Israel who have made the same comparison. Even in Arial Sharon's own government! Does that make them anti semitic as well?

I'm not denying that xenophobia and racial hatred still exist in Europe. What I'm saying is that it exists everywhere. Even in the USA, even in Israel. And you don't have the right to pass judgement on us in this respect. Your nation was founded on ethnic cleansing and slavery!

What irritates me is this passing judgement on Europe based on the actions of minorities. I don't care what you find on the internet with regards to racism in Germany. I know many Germans are racist. My brother lives there.

I also know that the Germans are pacifists who won't suddenly revert to being Nazi's, no matter how much you insist they will.

I also know that no matter how much you try to portray Europe as anti semitic with regards to the Jews, the truth is, it is the Muslims who are at risk in Europe today. Not the Jews.


When the Serb artillery opened fire on my brothers battalion, destroying the Danish compound, and when a Kroat sniper took a pot shot at him, I can assure you, he was not 'Haranguing, having a meeting, talking, negotiating or condemning'.

As I said in my last post, we will do all we can to stop such atrocities and bring to trial those responsible.

Perhaps I should remind you that Bill Clinton sent in the bombers to stop the Kosovo massacre's. It was NATO that ended the war in Bosnia and it was under NATO that the Danes were finally allowed to fire back.

What happened in Yugoslavia was not a simple clear cut case of America 'saving' Europe despite how it was portrayed in the US media.


And as for your definition of anti semitic. Try looking up what the word Semite means. A member of any of the people supposed to be descended from Shem, son of Noah, including Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, Babylonians and Phoenicians.

It speaks volumes that Anti semitic now means anti Jewish, when semitic refers to more than just the Jews.


I can't access the article, but I'll take your word for it.

Having said that. The sweeping changes I am referring to are the political reverberations that are passing through Europe on a national level. The petty street brawling of some Dutchmen over a street painting are nothing in comparison to the rise of nationalism that Van Gogh's death, and other similar incidents has invoked.

For example. as you are aware, there has just been an election here in Denmark, and for the second election running, the nationalists were the de facto winners. These nationalists do not care about the Jews, or Israel. Their prime motivation is to stop the influx of Islamic immigration. This is the danger to which I refer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


With regards to your German opinion poll. A few years ago a poll was undertaken in Europe and of the 7,500 Europeans who were asked the question; 'tell me if in your opinion it [Israel] presents or not a threat to peace in the world'. 59% said they thought it did. Israel was outraged

When a similar poll was asked in the USA, 43% of Americans admitted that Israel was in the top ten of most dangerous threats to World peace.

If you follow this link, you can see how these polls are used as propaganda.

Europe is roughly 400 million+ people.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


One final point.

I am not am 'anti semite'.
I strongly disapprove of the tactics used by Israel to ensure its continued growth at the detriment of innocent Palestinian people.

This does NOT mean I approve of Palestinian terrorism.

Please don't be so naive to think that all this wall is doing is stopping terrorism nor is it saving lives, Israeli or Palestinian. This wall has devestating effects both socially and economically for the Palestinians. However, that is another debate and I hope we can bring this one back on topic.

It wasn't even built for that purpose. It was built to keep the Palestinian people in, to make it easy to control THEM not the terrorists. It was also a way of placing the innocent majority of the Palestinian people into a enforced siege, whereby the powers in Israel can easily control their passage generally, and make it very hard for them to go their jobs within Israel so that they quit, to name just two aspects. The terrorist aspect was only one facet of it.


And yet, this nation is supported by the US, and isn't seen as one of the countries that need to be made to toe the line. Funny that.



Right. And what that whole chunk you quoted says is that Jews can live freely and integrate, within Palestine. I'm not exactly clear about that backs up your point about giving LAND to the Jews. All it seems to say is that it enforces their rights. At the time it needed to be enforced. Now the rights of the Palestinians need the same legal support and enforcement.

You used an analagy about kids throwing stones at school. Well, in this one its the BIG kid that threw the first stones, the little kid fights back, and the big kid continues to throw bigger stones, while complaining to the teachers that the little kid is just asking for it, and how he's doing no wrong, while holding the little kid in a headlock.



Oh please, you American's have a fantastic record of your own. You should be really proud... for all your talk, the real effect of the US contingient in the region was very overplayed compared to that of the local EU and Nato forces. World police, but only when it serves your agenda to do so.


You serious? Well, i guess it would mean that the US could just go in to countries and "give them democracy" without fear of international rebuke (not that they care anyway). And that would allow Israel to openly wipe out the Palestinians and, something that only the likes of the UN (a grouping of nations to a common cause) have prevented from happening so far. They could then finally start to take on (and take over) the rest of the middle east.

The reason that you don't like the UN is simply because it means that America and the likes of Israel aren't completely free and unopposed to just do what the hell they want.

I'll ask you this, do you think Israel as done anything wrong in their behaviour towards Palestine, because i'm yet to see you admit any guilt on their part.

You are quite wrong there. The Arabs can leave anytime they want, just not through Israeli territory. They can and do travel anywhere they want. And to say that Israel has no right to say who can and can not work in their country is the point. Europe is building a fence in Morocco to keep illegals from entering Europe, but Israel has to allow them to enter their country, what pure arrogance and hypocrisy!

There is no arogance or hypocrisy involved here.

The difference lies in the simple fact that the Europeans aren't shooting at the Morrocans!

Nor is Israel building its wall for the purposes of controlling immigration. Indeed, Israel welcomes immigrants to do the dirty jobs vacated by the Palestinians.

I see so where is the ICJ and UN over Kasmer? Why has there never been a single meeting over this? Or Saudi Arabia's fence in Yemen? Why only Israel?

Actually Israel welcomes immigrants in general, not for specific jobs.

So, on the one hand, the US people shouldn't be stopped from owning guns on the basis that a few people commit crimes with them. And yet its perfectly fine for Isreal to treat the whole of Palestine as they are with this wall, on the basis of a minority carrying out terrorist activity. Whilst again it was appalling for the Jews to be stopped from going to work in a country they'd been working in for decades, by the Nazis.

And who's hypocritical? As for arrogant, same old, same old. Don't really see where it was relevant either. That came from another topic.

No-one ever said the UN was faultless (don't make me laugh!!!) or consistant. However, when something is wrong, it doesn't really matter to the discussion whether the same rules have been consistantly held to. It goes without saying that they should be.

Israel has the most basic obligation that all nations have, to protect it's population. Who's being hypercritical, I would say you. India used to be a British colony, do all Indians have a right to enter England? Do they have a right to jobs in England? I would bet the answer would be no. All countries have a right to determine who can enter and who can not. All that is except Israel it seems.

I truly believe that the Nazis did a bit more than stop people from crossing borders. Call me crazy but somehow the Concentration Camps were not exactly for illegal border crossings.

But to say that UN does use the same rules when dealing with Israel is more than an understatement of the first magnitude. None of the rules that apply to every other nation of the face of the world applies to Israel.

we're going to go back to colonialism now, to justify Israels behaviour towards Palestine? Why not include discussion of the crusades, treatment of Native Americas, slaves and everything.

For the sake of clarity, we have a healthy and growing indian and ethnic population. I don't know the whole immigration laws, but then it ISN'T part of Britain now, so your point is entirely non-valid. We don't prevent the French, Germans etc from entering.


You think? But as discussed and raised more than once in this discussion, many parallels have been drawn between the two. You can't take, as support for the Israeli wall, the line that it's not as bad as what the Nazis did.


Very true. they seem to be able to get away with far more murder and retaliation than any other country that claims to be civilised and open. If we did that to Ireland, there would be wholescale reprisals.

On India, no no and no. My point about India is that they are not members of the EU and have no right to either enter or work in England. 'Palestinians' are not Israelis they have no right to enter or work in Israel. They can and do immigrate to Israel. Over 100,000 have already done so. Then and only then do they have a right to be in the country.

I have never brought up the Nazis to claim otherwise is false. I have never compared a Israeli action to a Nazi action.

They have never gotten 'away' with anything. Take out the 'If' England has committed the actions that Israel is accused of. They did in South Africa and in the "Mandate of Palestine" if you want the facts they too can be brought out. There was no reprisals, there were no meetings, and nothing was ever said about it. I am stating that Israel is accused of crimes that they did not commit and that the world consistently ignores the facts and believes every single Arab lie without ever checking any facts.

Yet, even when presented with facts showing otherwise, Israel is never seen to have done harm or wrong. Israel can do no wrong.

This has become pointless... Thankfully Sharron is more willing to discuss this issues and the resolution. I could never be a diplomat, because in the end, i just give up discussing it. I'm going to have to agree to disagree with you.

Someone had a great quote on here, which i'll have to steal... "If at first you don't succeed, try, try, and try again. Then give up. There's no use being a damned fool about it.
W C Fields"

There has never been a single meeting over Kashmir?

Considering UN Security Council resolutions 39 (1948) and 47 (1948), and the fact that the UN peacekeeping operation at the ceasefire line between India and Pakistan in the State of Jammu and Kashmir was established in 1949, I should think there has been a meeting or two over "this."

As to Saudi Arabia fence vs. Yemen, Yemen was to submit a memorandum to International Court of Justice over the fence case in February 2004, where there would have been at least one "meeting" over the case. Alas, according to Yemen (February 2004), Saudi Arabia has agreed to stop building a fence along their common border.

Actually the wall hadn't been started in 1948 and there is no UN Peacekeeping operation in Kashmir. So the answer is no there has been no meeting concerning India's construction of a security fence in Kashmir.

FYI Saudi Arabia doesn't agree that they have stopped the construction.

The UN seems to think it has an ongoing UN peacekeeping operation called UNMOGIP (United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan) at the ceasefire line between India and Pakistan in the State of Jammu and Kashmir from "January 1949 to present."

UNMOGIP: United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan

I should also think the current Italian Chief Military Observer of this group, Major-General Guido Palmieri , as well as the countries contributing military personnel (a.k.a. "peacekeepers") to UNMOGIP, Belgium, Chile, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Uruguay
disagree with your unsubstantiated blanket claim that "there is no UN Peacekeeping operation in Kashmir."




Incorrect.

The UN Security Council has discussed the construction of the said security barrier for instance in this meeting in 11 October 2004. It says the Meeting expressed its serious concern on the building of a fence along the Line of Control (LOC) in occupied Kashmir by India in contravention of international and bilateral agreements, which may impede the ongoing normalization process. The Meeting called upon India to stop the fencing activity and requested the international community particularly the United Nations and UNMOGIP to take note of the Indian actions and to ensure respect and implementation of all international and bilateral agreements on LOC.

I stand corrected on both counts. They do seem to do a considerable amount of shooting without the UN saying or doing much about it. Hummm kind of like the uselessness in Lebanon.

Still waiting for a General Assembly meeting and a ICJ ruling. Care to bet if that occurs anytime in our lifetimes?

Being part-Jewish myself, I thought over several times before commenting on that statement... I think what Moif was trying to say is that Holocaust (deservingly) gets a lot of attention now, with memorials, museums, Anti-Defamation Leagues, anniversaries, etc. However, disasters and genocides of similar proportions (such as the Armenian Genocide in 1915-1918, when Ottoman Empire made an attempt to deliberately and systematically destroy the Armenian people) get virtually no press and public attention at all. Why these crimes against humanity get so little attention outside of Armenia and Armenian diaspora?

I believe the real question is, without the UN presence and involvement (in which the United States of America is an active participant), would there be A. less shooting or perhaps B. more shooting or C. perhaps a full-scale nuclear war? At any rate, I am glad the belligerent parties have a diplomatic forum wherein to discuss their political dissensions instead of having to fight it out the caveman-way.

Has Pakistan submitted the case to the ICJ, do you know?

As to the "General Assembly," perhaps I should contact Ambassador Patterson and ask her what is she doing about it on behalf of the United States of America?

English Horn

Allow me to clarify what I mean.

The Holocaust was an atrocity undertaken against the Jews by the Nazi's, and their collaborators.

Israel is a nation founded AFTER the Holocaust.

That a large proportion of Jews who survived the Holocaust settled in Israel does not give Israel the right to capitalise on the Holocaust at the expense of other nations.

There were many victims involved in the Holocaust as well as the other Nazi human rights crimes, and no one owns that suffering, not even survivors living in Israel or their children.

Why not?

Because there are just as many Jews, and others alive today who's families suffered in the Holocaust and who are not Israeli. (My own family belongs to this catagory.)

Thus, when I see or hear Arial Sharon and his Likudnik friends, many of whom were Palestinians before they were Israeli's and who never suffered in the Holocaust, and who's connection to the Holocaust is merely one of ethnicity, then I am forced to deduce that Israel uses the Holocaust to its political advantage.

I see this in many ways. For example, last year an Israeli artist took part in an art exhibition in Sweden. He showed a work of art that dealt with a Palestinian suicide bomber and which was apparently so shocking that the Israeli ambassador, went to the exhibition with the stated aim of destroying the work of art, and proceeded to do so.
He was then ejected from the art gallery, shouting and screaming at the gathered Swedes and calling them, and all Europeans, 'anti semitic'.
The next day, Ariel Sharon publically thanked the ambassador for his vigiliance against European amti semitism.

The fact that the work of art in question was made by an Israeli was completely ignored by Sharon and the other Israeli's who, over the course of the next few weeks, continued to spout bile about European and Swedish anti semitism making countless references to the Holocaust and the Nazi's.

Similar events happened here in Denmark whan Karmi Gillon (sp?), a former Israeli intelligence chief, and known as an advocate of torturing Palestinian terrorists for information was made ambassador. Many Danes complained that Gillon had been made ambassador on the grounds that he had publically advocated torture which is a human rights abuse. It was widely felt that such a person was not a good man, and should not be made welcome in Denmark.
The Danish state ignored this and accepted Gillon as Israel's ambassador as it would any other non criminal person.
Gillon and in particular, Bejamin Netenyahu made public statements that in effect, we Danes are all anti semites who, given the chance, would like "to see the Holocaust brought back".

These are just a few incidents where Israeli's have thrown anti semitism, and the Holocaust in our faces. I could relate many more, even of a personal nature. For example, when I visited Auschwitz, I was held back from visiting a memorial to make way for a group of school children from Israel. My family died in the death camps, but because I was not an Israeli Jew, I had to let Israeli's jump the line. A small thing, but a clear indication of how Israel is perceived by most people, to own the Holocaust.

My personal contention is, that the Israeli's do not own the Holocaust. In fact, they have no more right to exploit it than any one else. The Holocaust is universal to all Jews and all humanity.
It is not the exclusive property of Israeli Jews!

Further more. I am met, online with an endless tirade of sneers and belittling comments from Americans on the subject of Europe's attitude to Israel, and upon investigation of such remarks, I am often led back to Israeli American sites which actively promote the notion that Europe is 'anti semitic', meaning 'anti Israel'. I am constantly confronted by stories told by immigrant grandmothers or parents as to how the Jews had to flee Europe and how 'Europe killed the Jews'.

This, contemporary anti European attitude based on the personal accounts of immigrants who left Europe many decades is unfair and blatently dishonest.

Editted for spelling

An amendment? And the other mandates created at the time? Are they amendments as well? So there were 14 amendments to Article 22? No. None of them are amendments. They are agreements drafted in accordance with Article 22. Each agreement had to be adapted to each particular region because of this provision of Article 22:


So each Mandate agreement had to be specifically tailored to the needs of the region. This is one reason for the statement about "giving effect to the provisions of Article 22".



Basically, yes... Nothing in Chapter 12 of the Charter was meant to, in and of itself, change the existing mandate agreements established under the League of Nations.



This is confusing. You state that the Jews did get 22% of the mandate territory and the mandate stated that the Jews were supposed to get all of this 22%, but somehow the Arabs got over 3/4 of the land that the Jews were supposed to get? And where exactly does the Mandate state that the Jews were supposed to get all of any percentage of land?