Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Self Defense????? Author: Mark7 [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 23:30:17 08/06/01 Mon In reply to: JeffF 's message, "Stop putting words in my mouth" on 07:37:35 08/03/01 Fri Let me see... I take a tank, buldoze my neighbour's house to make room for a new house for my Russian cousin, I take away his rights and when his 12 year old throws rocks at me I shoot him from the tank with a machine gun. Then I claim self-defense. Now, you tell me what jurry in the US would give me a self-defense case for shooting a 12 year old who trows rocks? Actually they do. The jurry is the US, and this jurry has decided to give guns and money to those doing exactly this. I talked with many Jews, some in the US, most from Israel about the Palestinians. Each time I am shocked by the insensitivity they show to the fate of those people they displaced. It makes me think that those 10 commandments are just a Jewish joke played on stupid gentiles. You say Israel shouldn't care about international laws? Well, it seems to me it is international laws Jews claim when they ask for reparations from Germany or other countries that stole their valuables. Same international laws is just garbage when it comes to the values (land) confiscated by Jews from Palestinians. YOu know what is the problem with your thinking? It makes Saddam Husein look like he was doing the right thing. If interantional laws doesn't count, and Israel can refuse to define it's borders, and refuse rights to millions of conquered people simply because of their ethnicity and religion, this makes Hitler and Saddam right. Because all it counts is who has the bigger gun. Right now, Israel has the bigger gun, because it is paid for by American taxpayers because our politicians both Dem and Reps are bribed by Jewish lobbies. And because most Americans are too ignorant of international politics and history to know they are part of a huge and horrible crime. But if international laws don't count when it comes to Palestinians why would they count when it comes to Jews? It's sick to see that the same American who sheds tears for Ana Frank, doesn't give a damn about the 12 year old Palestinian shot today. If all that matters is power, Hitler won. Because it means the Nuremberg trials are nothing but the vengeace of the winner over the loser. And Saddam is right in wanting the nuclear weapon, or the chemical or whatever would make sure that some "biblical scholars" won't claim his country as the next Israel. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Nuremberg Trials Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:10:58 08/07/01 Tue While I have no sympathy for most of the Nazis that were hung or incarcerated, the Nuremberg Trials WERE the justice(vengence too) of winner over loser. That is one of the main problems with the whole concept of International Law. The Nazi Admiral Doenitz was partly charged with shooting unarmed men in the water. When his attorneys tried to show times when America and Britain did the same thing, the judges ruled that out as a defense. Now, if you can't defend yourself by claiming that people on the other side did the same thing and were not charged, what is a trial except the celebration of victory by the winner. That's why the Balkans trial is better. Notice that people from all sides are being charged with crimes. We may hold Milosevic primarily responsible but that's not an excuse for the crimes committed by those on the Croation or Bosnian side. International law should count only when it's not blatantly one sided. Because the UN has been biased against Israel for years, Israel cannot pay any attention to it. If it wants to take a more objective stance, than Israel can listen. As for rocks, you may not understand that the purpose is to injure and kill people but I do. I almost lost an eye as a kid, so don't act like rocks are some harmless weapon. I know Gary's right, since you insist on always misquoting and distorting what people are saying and I should ignore you, but I can't bring myself to let your rants just stand there unchallenged.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Except for the US Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:05:16 08/07/01 Tue The Balcan trials may have brought people to justice, it failed to bring any US crimes to light. Many reports indicated that the operator of the missile that distroyed a bridge and a train full of Serbian women and children had plenty of time to divert the missle. MOre so, the Army lied about the incident and showed a film where they were fast forwarding in order to defend the officer (unnamed). The fact is that this officer had more than a minute to decide, and he decided that a million dollar missile is worth more than the lives of few Serbian peasant women and children. He probably was an officer and a gentlemen, not a terrorist. What exactly am I distorting?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: If that's true Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:12:34 08/07/01 Tue and it was a delibarate action, then he should come to trial. If International law and trials are going to have any meaning,then any crimes committed by any sides should be tried. If there's nothing to it,there can be an acquital. Some of those charged in the Balkans have been acquited. Even at Nuremberg, three people were found not guilty. The one thing to be careful about here though is whether it was all his decision or whether there were orders. One of the problems when Lt. Calley was charged with crimes in the Vietnam error, was that those above him who issued orders were not charged. It is not right to charge just the person carrying out orders without charging those who issued them.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Distortions Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:16:46 08/07/01 Tue It's your habit of putting words in people's mouth, first trying to claim that I was saying Israel was acting on behalf of God and morality when I hadn't mentioned either one and then claiming that I was saying all Israelis were perfect and all Palestinians were terrorists. It's the usual way you jump to extreme conclusions like deciding when you decided I liked Ronald Reagan because I didn't like Clinton, which was not a logical conclusion and not based on anything I actually said.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: putting words in people's mouths Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:29:57 08/07/01 Tue In the tread that got me banned in IS, as Alice you suggested just that. That Israel wants peace, and the Palestinians don't. This is a constant theme in American media, and it is a big lie. Israel doesn't want peace, it wants to extend the settlements. You can't be serious about expecting peace when you slowly take away by force land that is not yours. And nobody in the US seems to be able to articulate the Palestinian side of the story. Are all journalists stupid? NO, they just get banned, like I do. Hope this is a Canadian site, so I get a chance to stay.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: putting words in people's mouths Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:27:10 08/07/01 Tue It is true that I've said the Palestinian leadership needs to show that they are serious about peace. You say it's a lie that the Palestinians don't want peace. Fine. What steps are they taking to show that they are seriously interested in peace? Many people in the US can articulate the Palestinian side. James Zogby of the Arab American anti-discrimination league does a good job, so does former Senator Abzorek. The political columnist Anthony Lewis always has sympathetic articles to the Palestinians and against the settlements in the New York Times. A Canadian site? There are a lot of Canadians here, but I think Pam is from Oklahoma.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I said Palestinians cannot afford this peace Author: Mark7 [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:08:19 08/08/01 Wed I never said Palestinians WANT peace. I said they cannot afford THIS peace. This peace means Palestinians have to be second hand humans either in Israel, or in Jordan, or in Lebanon or in a refugee camp. Would you accept a peace where you had to wear the yellow star on your jacket? I wouldn't. I am honest enough to admit that I would do exactly what the Palestinians are doing. Fight to the end. You are not honest to admit you would do the same. I also said Israelis LIE when they say they want peace, because they cannot afford this peace either. I believe you are dishonest when you say Israel wants peace, I believe you are smart enough to know they can't afford it. They have to put the million Russian Jews somewhere, and where would a better place be, than in a settlement among Palestinians with a Uzi in their hand? What I say is this: I want my country the US of A to stay out of this conflict. I want the US to withdraw it's support to either side, financial and military. I don't want any alliance with Israel, because it brings me nothing, except makes me a killer of Palestinian children so my politicians can take bribes from Jewish lobbies. I want the US to enforce International Law on Israel like they did on Yugoslavia. I want all trade, aid stopped, until Israel abides by International Law, withdraws the settlements, defines it's borders, and offers compensation to ALL Palestinians who had land or wealth confiscated, whether they are in Palestine or not. Oh, I want to stop all war reparations owed Jews stopped also until they offer Palestinians war reparations also. I believe if we did this, there would be peace, and if Russian Jews want to kill Arab children for their land, then they should do it on their own money, not mine.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: My last comments here Author: JeffF [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 11:31:45 08/08/01 Wed Since you were kind enough to give me the last word, the last time we debated the Arab-Israeli conflict, I will return the favor. This will be my last post in this thread regardless of what you say in reply. Israel can't afford peace? No, you could need be more wrong, though some Isralis make the same mistake. It is the constant state of war that Israel cannot afford. They cannot war either economically or in terms of the emotional drain that it causes. If they could afford the constant need for war in economic terms, they would not need US aid. No, Mark if I was a Palestinian who had been offered my own state, I would not fight. Do you have any idea what Barak offered them? It was almost everything in exchange for nothing. Too late, he found out that they weren't interested in peace. At any rate, that's what negotiations are for. If they can't accept the peace that has been proposed, let them come back to the table and make their own proposal. Nobody can dictate the terms of peace if peace will last, but unless they are seriously interested in talking instead of shooting, there is no chance for peace. You say "this peace" like the shape of peace is a foregone conclusion. Israel proved consistently in negotiations with Egypt and Jordan that she is always willing to have peace with security guarantees in exchange for land. That's been consistent. As for reparations, personally, I'm not particularly in favor of them any more. I mean, there has to be a statute of limitations and the present government of Germany has nothing to do with the Nazi period. Except for Jews in truly dire economic straits, I would accept ending them alltogether. Germany has done a lot to restore relations with the Jewish community and I think it's time we accept the good will of the current German leadership and return the favor by not making economic demands. Of course, the Jews who were sent to camps are far different than the Arabs who voluntarily left their houses in 1947 and 1948 at the urging of Arab leaders. As for International law, I repeat, if you want it to have any validity, it has to be even handed. The problem with international law is that it's often as blatantly one sided as your post. I can accept Israelis being charged for any crimes against civilians in the current situation, if and only if all Palestinians who participated in terror against Israeli civilians are also charged. If it works like the Balkans and anybody from any side who committed atrocities is charged, I'll accept that, but if it's just biased against Jews, forget it. Now, I'll let you have the last word if you want it. Obviously, neither your opinion nor mine will have much effect on the policy of the US, Israel or the Arabs.