The casual anti-Semitism of the left

[djAdvocate]

Jun 22, 2011 10:49:14 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

This article encapsulates very well the casual attitude of acceptance many on the left have for the rabid anti-Semitism of the Palestinian "cause". Besides the fact that a lot of lefties think it's "cool" to support the Hamas-led Palestinian "Third Intifada", it seems it is de rigueur in the "hip" tech world to support this genocidal campaign as well.

This article discusses two issues around the irresponsibility of both Apple and Facebook allowing Third Intifada apps and pages, respectively, to be offered through their companies. The Israeli government was prompted to request these be removed from the companies sites due to the danger of inciting violence.

I wonder if Facebook and Apple would carry a page or an app that called for violent protests against and the deaths of all blacks in America. Somehow, I doubt it...

pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/06/22/israel-asks-steve-jobs-to-remove-third-intifada-app-from-ipads/

Israel’s Minister of Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Minister, Yuli Edelstein, has sent a letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs requesting the removal of an iPad application, “The Third Intifada,” that includes the incitement of violent, indeed lethal, “protests” against Israel. The same group, the Arabic-language “Third Intifada,” ran afoul of Facebook’s rules and was banned in March, 2011 because it sought to cause deadly violence to Israelis.

According to a news story in today’s Al Arabiya,

“In a letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, Mr. Edelstein wrote: “I am convinced that you are aware of this type of application’s ability to unite many toward an objective that could be disastrous.”

” ‘ThirdIntifada’ offers users a stream of news stories and editorials in Arabic, announces upcoming protests, and includes links to nationalistic Palestinian videos and songs, according to Reuters…

“In May, United States attorney Larry Klayman sued Facebook and its co-founder Mark Zuckerberg for more than $1 billion over the “Third Palestinian Intifada” page, claiming the site had failed to remove the page quickly enough, Reuters reports.

“Meanwhile Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon spoke out and said the creation of the Apple application and the Facebook page outlines a new pattern in attempts to provoke attacks.

” ‘Companies like this that have a global reach also have a responsibility, and they are aware of this responsibility, and I am sure that Apple will act in the same way [as Facebook],’ Mr. Ayalon told Israel’s Army Radio.”

anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things. to conflate them is to fall into a propaganda trap.

[privateinvestor]

anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things. to conflate them is to fall into a propaganda trap.

Maybe but if you ask anyone who is familar with the IDF you might be surprised to learn they prefer to NOT have the USA involved at all in their war with the Palestinians....

[djAdvocate]

Jun 23, 2011 10:48:20 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

anti-Israel and anti-Jew are two different things. to conflate them is to fall into a propaganda trap.

Maybe but if you ask anyone who is familar with the IDF you might be surprised to learn they prefer to NOT have the USA involved at all in their war with the Palestinians....

that would be just ducky as far as i am concerned, as well.

[privateinvestor]

that would be just ducky as far as i am concerned, as well.

Our military had a rough time understanding how the IDF dealt with the Palestinians . And the IDF told our military to butt out when we served with them in Lebanon almost 30 years ago. And as far as I know which may not be that much things have not improved but are probably worse IMHO

[deziloooooo]

Jun 23, 2011 11:38:24 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

that would be just ducky as far as i am concerned, as well.

Our military had a rough time understanding how the IDF dealt with the Palestinians . And the IDF told our military to butt out when we served with them in Lebanon almost 30 years ago. And as far as I know which may not be that much things have not improved but are probably worse IMHO

"The first Marine-Israeli contact occurred on 5 January, when an Israeli tank entered Company K's positions in the eastern portion of the Marine perimeter. Claiming to be lost, the Israelis were quickly escorted out of the Marines' territory. Colonel Stokes happened to be visiting Company K that day, and he ". . . refreshed the [Israeli] tank company commander's memory on the extent of USMC boundaries around the Beirut International Airport and [on] land navigation."2

Again, on 6, 8, and 10 January, the Israelis attempted to enter U.S. positions and to set up direct conferences between Colonel Stokes and their commander. In each case, the Israelis were not allowed into Marine lines, and they were reminded that requests to confer with Colonel Stokes had to go through diplomatic channels. In commenting on this matter of dealing with the Israelis on a face-to-face basis, Colonel Stokes later expressed some of his frustrations and a military professional's point of view by saying:


Ground commanders do a much better job of dealing with and clarifying their own tactical matters than do staff officers and diplomats. If there had been a free and timely flow of required info between this officer and Brig Amnon (*Lifkin, senior Israeli officer in the area] and LtCol Matthews, [CO, BLT 3/8] and LtCol Landsberg (Israeli tank unit commander], the last 30 days may have been much quieter for us in south Beirut. The above may not be possible, but it is logical.23
In addition to the incursion into their territory, Marines had to contend with the repeated Israeli patrol practice of reconnaissance by fire, which they began on 9 January. "These patrols were characterized by intermittent firing of small arms, main tank guns (firing usually being directed toward vacant buildings and into open fields or tree groves both west and east of the Sidon Road.)"24 The Sidon Road patrols generally moved from south to north, and upon reaching the proximate position of Marine Company L, the patrol would move south and take up a position,, where it remained al day. These patrols were generally comprised of one to four armored vehicles (armored personnel carriers or tanks), followed closely by 5 to as many as 14 dismounted soldiers. Although the patrols became predictable and routine, the firing clearly became a threat to the safety of U.S. forces. It was quite clear Colonel Stokes that he had to discuss the matter face to face with the senior Israeli officer in the area, and so he insisted upon such a meeting. With the assistance of Ambassador Dillon, he was able to arrange. one.25

Colonel Stokes met with Brigadier General Lifkin to discuss the Sidon Road problem and other matters of mutual concern. The Israeli general agreed to establish a direct radio link between his headquarters


--44--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Copyright 1983. Don Wright. The Miami News. Reprinted with permission.
and that of the Marines. This was done on 30 January. Four days earlier, the Israeli practice of reconnaissance by fire had ended, although patrolling continued.26

In February, the understanding with the Israelis over boundaries and the conduct of patrols--which was thought to be a settled matter--was found to be not so clearly understood as originally thought. The single-most notable demonstration of this lack of understanding occurred on 2 February, when three israeli tanks attempted to go through Captain Charles B. Johnson's Company L position.

At about 0800, from his observation post, Captain Johnson, together with the advance party of the British MNF contingent,27 observed an Israeli patrol coming up Old Sidon Road from the south. This was normal. Half an hour later, he spotted a north-to-south patrol, which also was normal. It consisted of three tanks, two armored personnel carriers (APCs), and dismounted troops. "Again, we're seeing them about 3,000 meters off. We could see that far, all the way down the Sidon Road."28

The only thing that was unusual about this patrol was that the troops ere dismounted, for the Israeli patrols in the previous two weeks had all been mounted. Captain Johnson] then went on to say:


. . . sometime between 0830 and 0900, one of my surveillance people . . . spotted three additional tanks coming on the road . . . the one they had built along the railroad tracks, and then they [the tanks] broke off the road and they continued up the railroad tracks right up to the edge of the university grounds. . . . That's when I knew something was up. There were three tanks road. . . There was no tactical reason for them to do that. . . . They brought tanks right through the middle of Shuwayfat, which is a Muslim area and it's relatively dangerous to do that.29
What Captain Johnson had spotted were three tanks ng from the north and three tanks coming from the south. He couldn't see them when they were in the town, but they were spotted shortly after as they left it and broke through the orchard on the western side of the Sidon Road into the buffer zone between the road and the university. The tanks were heading for a section of the fence where Captain johnson had confronted an APC-mounted Israeli patrol on 20 January. The COmpany L commander quickly got in his jeep and went to the spot the tanks were approaching. Captain Johnson didn't think that:


. . . they would actually try to come through a joint Marine-lebanese checkpoint like that. But once it developed, I was very concerned that if the tanks were allowed to move forward, there was a very dangerous situation, because the road they were on . . . went right through the heart of the

--45--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


university . . . divided the Marine company and the Lebanese company.30
Johnson feared that if the tanks attempted to pass, a firefight might erupt between the Lebanese and the Israelis. If a fight ensued, the Marines would have to support the lebanese. He wasn't worried about the Marines' fire discipline, but he was concerned about that of the Lebanese soldiers.

As the Israeli tanks approached the fence, Captain Johnson jumped out of his jeep, ran up to the tanks, and stood in the center of the road. The lead tank stopped about six inches in front of Johnson, would told the Israeli lieutenant colonel in the lead tank, "You will not pass through this position." After a short pause, the Israeli dismounted, spoke with Johnson, and then climbed back aboard the tank, saying that he was going through. Johnson later stated that he replied, "You will have to kill me first."31 He drew his pistol, chambered a round, and held the weapon at the ready position. There was another pause as the Israeli officer apparently spoke over his radio to his headquarters. The lead tank then pulled slowly to the side of the road with Captain Johnson walking alongside and then the two others suddenly revved up their engines and whipped forward toward the fence.

The young Marine captain jumped on the lead tank, grabbed the Israeli officer, and yelled at him to order his tanks halted. The tank commander complied and then purportedly told Johnson, "One thing we don't want to do is kill each other." Johnson answered, "Yes, but if you keep doing things like this, the likelihood is going to occur."32

While the local Arab radio stations were telling and retelling the story of the American who stopped the three Israeli tanks singlehandedly, the Israeli press was accusing Captain Johnson of having liquor on his breath and being drunk. Worse, they called the whole affair a misunderstanding on the part of the Marines. Confronted by evidence, among other things, that Johnson was a teetotaler, the Israelis quickly toned down, and finally stopped such comments when they saw they were not going to be given credence.

Within a few minutes of the confrontation, Johnson's battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel Matthews, arrived on the scene. He had observed part of what happened and asked Johnson a full and immediate report, "And I gave him the whole thing . . . and we spent about 20 minutes walking the ground an so forth."33 Matthews then said they should tell the whole story to Colonel Stokes, who went back to the fence area with Johnson and rewalked the area where the confrontation took place. The MAU commander reported the incident through the chain of command. The next day, 3 February, Israeli and American diplomats met in Beirut, where they agreed to mark the boundary lines more clearly so there would be no future misunderstandings.

A routine, daily press conference was held at 1600 on the afternoon of the 2d at Colonel Stokes' headquarters. The most important topic concerned a ricochet 75mm tank round that had landed in Company I's positions. Nothing was said about Captain Johnson's experience until the press stormed back into the compound at 2300 that evening, undoubtedly having been queried by their home offices why stories had not been filed on the U.S.-Israeli affair. When the reporters asked Colonel Stokes why he hadn't told them about it, he replied that no one had asked, and said further, ". . . it's not my job to determine what's newsworthy and what's not. . . ."34

Normally a quiet officer despite his impressive military presence, Captain Johnson was told by his CO that he was going to have to submit to the questions of the print and television reporters at a press conference, much as he disliked the prospects of such an encounter. A by-product of this instant fame was heavy mail. A large number of former Marines and retired servicemen wrote and sent messages of support. "A lot of children wrote from schools and they were really nice letters. A lot of people wrote. I got hundreds of letters." Captain Johnson also received a message from the Commandant after the 24th left Lebanon. "It was a wonderful message to my men, how he was proud of the men," Johnson said. In retrospect, Johnson never felt that what he had done was wrong. "I had no doubt in my mind that what I had done was the right thing. . . . I had regret that it happened, but I did not have any regret in what I had done."

[holyofholes]

PI, Forget Jimmy Carter. Tell me this - take the standard definition of an apartheid state, and then tell me if in your own judgment Israel matches the definition. I am not asking you is apartheid is right or wrong, just whether Israel matches the definition.

[privateinvestor]

PI, Forget Jimmy Carter. Tell me this - take the standard definition of an apartheid state, and then tell me if in your own judgment Israel matches the definition. I am not asking you is apartheid is right or wrong, just whether Israel matches the definition


Hey Cheesy....don't know but Israel has lots of Arabs, Palestinians, Muslims, and Christains living in their country without too many restrictions but I have never been to Israel so you are asking the wrong guy... But I lived in the south when Blacks were segregated and treated like second class citizens....when we came back from a deployment and went into Jacksonville North Carolina to celebrate the blacks couldn't accompany us and had to go to a separate section of town... And don't think this is the case in Israel today with non Jews..??

I don't know if this answers your question or not but it is the best I could come up with...

[holyofholes]

Israel has lots of Arabs, Palestinians, Muslims, and Christains living in their country without too many restrictions

Not too many restrictions?

[privateinvestor]

Not too many restrictions? [/quote][/color]


Ok how restrictive is living in Israel for Non Jews?? Again I am not sure but would not called the restrictions the same as an Apartheid State

[holyofholes]

You made the claim that there are not too many restrictions, even though you have never been there and clearly haven't researched it either. Google "wiiki Palestinian freedom of movement" and get back to me. Freedom of movement incidentalyl is a most basic right. I am not even talking of voting rights.

[privateinvestor]

Sorry I will pass Cheesy ..really not interested in how the Arabs live in Israel or how restrictive their lives there are.

I don't know and don't care in the least..

[holyofholes]

That's what I thought. You prefer to make judgments about Israel without any facts, as the facts are not going to show Israel in a good light.

[holyofholes]

Look, can we have a deal? You obviously know nothing about the real situation in Israel. I obviously cannot do anything to change your mind about the blind support you are going to provide to Israel. So we are at an impasse.

I propose a compromise. Every time you BS about Israel without any knowledge whatsoever, can you please make that clear? Like, for example, add a disclaimer that your pulled your opinion out of your arse? Then I won't have to knock it down.

[privateinvestor]

Jun 23, 2011 20:12:21 GMT -5 @holyofholes said:

That's what I thought. You prefer to make judgments about Israel without any facts, as the facts are not going to show Israel in a good light.

Opponents of the analogy state that the West Bank and Gaza are not part of sovereign Israel and are governed by the Palestinian Authority, so cannot be compared to the internal policies of apartheid South Africa, and that restrictions are only imposed on those territories by Israel for reasons of security.[12][13] In regards to the situation within Israel itself, critics of the analogy argue that Israel cannot accurately be called an apartheid state because Israeli law is said to guarantee Arab citizens of Israel the same rights as other Israeli citizens without distinction of race, creed or sex.[14][15][16][17][18] They also note that Israel's Arab citizens can run in elections and become ministers in the Israeli government.[19] Some critics consider the analogy defamatory and reflecting a double standard when applied to Israel and not neighboring Arab countries, whose policies towards their own Palestinian minority have been described as racist and discriminatory.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Some opponents of the analogy say it is a manifestation of anti-semitism.[15][28

[marshabar1]

[privateinvestor]

[Look, can we have a deal? You obviously know nothing about the real situation in Israel. I obviously cannot do anything to change your mind about the blind support you are going to provide to Israel. So we are at an impasse.

I propose a compromise. Every time you BS about Israel without any knowledge whatsoever, can you please make that clear? Like, for example, add a disclaimer that your pulled your opinion out of your arse? Then I won't have to knock it down. [/quote][/color]


Again Cheesy FYI having a compromise with you would be like having a compromise with the Devil and that is not my thing..

...... I think the use of the word "Apartheid State" to describe Israel's treatment of Arabs within the state of Israel is a bum rap from little I know about it.. But I have seen that term used before by those who are anti-semites or Pro Palestine...


Here's what wiki says about Israel laws for the Arabs within their country:

[a href="In regards to the situation within Israel itself, critics of the analogy argue that Israel cannot accurately be called an apartheid state because Israeli law is said to guarantee Arab citizens of Israel the same rights as other Israeli citizens without distinction of race, creed or sex.["]In regards to the situation within Israel itself, critics of the analogy argue that Israel cannot accurately be called an apartheid state because Israeli law is said to guarantee Arab citizens of Israel the same rights as other Israeli citizens without distinction of race, creed or sex.[[/a][/u]

[deziloooooo]

Jun 23, 2011 20:01:58 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Not too many restrictions?

[/color]


Ok how restrictive is living in Israel for Non Jews?? Again I am not sure but would not called the restrictions the same as an Apartheid State [/quote]


Thats good in your mind..guess you were never the one who was "apartheid "me thinks.

There are some restrictions a State should take in a situation such as Israel, in a continuous state of , if not war, the next best thing to it, but when one doesn't allow people to be hired , non defense areas, say retail sales in a mall, if they haven't finished their three year military obligation, the signs out side the shops say so, and the Arab Israeli's are not allowed to serve, makes it kind of tough to get those folks to qualify, kind of the old poll tax that was done in the South to me.

Schools are not allowed to teach their own history of their people?
Curriculum is all set up by the State with no input from the parents of the children or at least educators who are the same as these children.

Roads, power, infrastructure into the villages of these people second rate compared to that given to the Jewish settlements, even the new citizens who just enter the country over the those who have been there forever..

Just for a few of the happenings, basically more , 'In your face " to make sure they know their place, kind of what happened in those areas of our South that you are familiar with..but which you possible just accepted as the ways are, or even possible, the way they should be too, just possible..not really knowing your feelings there.

[privateinvestor]

Hey Cheesy this article seems to throw water on your Apartheid Analogy with Israel...Discrimination?? Yes Restrictions?? Yes but Apartheid?? No... But again I am not an expert on Israell but maybe ed or marsha can shed more light on this


Israel’s citizens enjoy full equality before the law. This includes not only Jews from a vast array of ethnic and racial backgrounds – including many who would have been the victims of apartheid had they lived in South Africa – but the Muslim and Christian Arabs who make up one-fifth of the population.
Unlike Blacks in apartheid South Africa, Arab citizens of Israel have full political rights. They vote and participate in the political process, with Arab Knesset representatives across the spectrum, from the Communist and Arab nationalist parties through to the Likud. Salim Jubran, an Israeli Arab, is a judge on Israel’s Supreme Court.
In Jerusalem, the 120,000 Arab residents of the city are entitled to Israeli citizenship, but the vast majority have retained their pre-1967 Jordanian passports and therefore remain in Israel on the basis of permanent resident ID cards. In both 1996 and 2005, Arab Jerusalemites were permitted to vote in elections to the Palestinian Authority. The extraordinarily low turnout on both occasions was duly noted by observers. In the case of the post-Arafat elections in 2005, disillusionment with PA corruption, as well as the decision of the Palestinian Election Commission that all but 6,000 of the voters had to cast their ballots outside of Jerusalem, were the main reasons cited for the turnout.
Israel is one of the few countries in the Middle East and wider Islamic region where Christians, as well as Muslims and Jews, can freely worship. This stands in contrast with Saudi Arabia, where Islam is the only religion permitted, and with Iraq and Pakistan, where Christians have faced attack from Islamist terror groups.
Arab students and professors study, research, teach and – above all – argue and debate on all of Israel’s university campuses. At Haifa University, selected for a boycott by Britain’s Association of University Teachers (AUT), some 20 percent of the student body is Arab.
No reasonable person would dispute that discrimination is a problem in Israel. But the nature and scale of the discrimination is not exceptional. And discrimination is not the same thing as apartheid.

www.adl.org/Israel/apartheid/apartheid_analogy.asp

[deziloooooo]

Possible not apartheid but then again citizens not treated the same as all citizens, even though the Wicki says they have the rights. The reality of is what is important.

However, to actually live there as a citizen but to be looked at differently, not by other citizens but by the State itself, that was what was so bad about the segregation here, IMHO, it wasn't the citizens so much but the State, the courts and the elected , who enforced the laws and the differences, thus supporting and encouraging the actions of the citizenship, that was what was so bad.

It seems in many quarters the same is being done here, and not just because of security reasons, just because they can..keep them in their place, make sure they know who is in charge.
---------------------------------------------------

Can equality exist in the Jewish state?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Found a article , new one in al Jazeer that raises some very disturbing points about the Arab Israeli treatment in Israel, as a minority.

New laws being passed by a very hard line , conservative administration and PM, and if they are really needed , or many just more "in your face " type draconian rules , possible to encourage movement out of Israel proper , to the territory's.

Or just more separation of the Israeli Arab from the populace , a new kind of apartheid , similar to the South African type or possible the segregation of our own Pre Civil rights era here in the States.

There is also much harrassment of the Arab legislators by their fellows in the kbnesset, onme had tro go into exile, another sripped of her credentials, looked upon as atraitor byt he hard line legislatures, seven of them actually attacked physically over the years by Israeli security services , things you expect in many of the Arab countries surrounding th State but not happening in the State by their own services. Very desturbing to me.

What ever the reason, to me it seems that for a democracy, which Israel is, and which they shout to the world as being one, there are basic rights of citizens , a certain segment of them , that is being curtailed purposely to see that they may have rights as state citizens but not the same ones as the majority, which after a while could also be put on other groups in the society, possible even opposition parties.

Why not? Once down that road, the going is always easier for the next group of regulations and legislation to be passed.

Grant you that al Jazeer has their own agenda, but this is a thought piece of a commentator , and I did some googling and a lot of this is happening, with different concerns being expressed, not all good, and that is also from Israeli's just not the Arab Israelis.


Because it is a piece from al jazeer , to just dismiss it, your right , but not by me, some storys our main stream really are not comfortable to carry and report on, sorry to say, but true.
-------------------------------------------------------

english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2011648192849821.html
-------------------------------------------------------
[Click on links to read articles]
--------------------------------------------------------
Opinion

Can equality exist in the Jewish state?

As right-wingers dominate the Knesset, Arab citizens of Israel say institutional discrimination is getting worse.
Kieron Monks Last Modified: 04 Jun 2011 17:33

Arab citizens of Israel face discrimination in employment, education, and housing opportunities [GALLO/GETTY]

"In 2005, following the arrest of several high profile Arab politicians and lobbyists living in Israel, the Shin Bet security agency made a statement justifying their actions: "The security service will thwart the activity of any group or individual seeking to harm the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel, even if such activity is sanctioned by the law."

The statement highlighted a fundamental tension between democratic freedom in Israel, and the need to maintain its Jewish character. Thwarting harm to that character has been extrapolated to require controls on Israel's Arab minority in many departments of society, from education to the right of dissent. The need to ensure Jewish demographic and institutional domination has prompted a raft of controversial policies and practises.

The conflict is most revealing at the level of political representation. Israel can point to the presence of 14 Arab Knesset members out of 120 as evidence of its civil rights credentials. Proportionally this is a reasonably fair reflection of a minority that accounts for 18 per cent of Israel's population; given that the Arab community habitually votes in lower numbers.

In practise, the mandate to represent Arab concerns dictates that they work against - rather than with - the rest of parliament. Knesset Member Haneen Zouabi of the Balad party is open about her role being fundamentally oppositional. "I was elected to speak for those who voted for me, not to reinforce the Zionist consensus," she says. "My role is to represent injustice and to make it more visible." Zouabi has long argued against the legitimacy of a Jewish state for allowing "institutionalised discrimination", instead favouring "a bi-national state not based on ethnicity".

She has suffered for her beliefs. After participating in the 2010 Gaza flotilla, aimed at breaking the Israeli siege, a seven to one majority voted to strip her of parliamentary privileges. Likud Knesset Member Danny Danon called for her to be tried for treason, and there were attempts to disqualify her party from elections. The hostility was so great that Zouabi was forced to travel with an armed escort. A year later she remains a pariah in parliament, branded a traitor and a terrorist-sympathiser.

Exiling civil rights

Others have suffered more. Azmi Bishara, also of the Balad party, was the leading voice of the Arab civil rights campaign. Despite attempts to disqualify him, Bishara became the first Arab citizen to run for the office of Prime Minister. Throughout his career Bishara faced numerous investigations from the Shin Bet. He was forced to resign in 2007, and went into exile abroad, in the wake of spurious charges of espionage.

Such attacks on Arab politicians are not exceptional, and some have been more serious than political expulsion. A 2002 report from the Human Rights Association of Nazareth documented nine cases of Arab Knesset Members being assaulted by security services over the preceding two years, seven of whom were hospitalised. In addition, the state had opened 25 criminal investigations against Arab Knesset Members over the same time period."

[privateinvestor]

Jun 23, 2011 20:05:56 GMT -5 @holyofholes said:

You made the claim that there are not too many restrictions, even though you have never been there and clearly haven't researched it either. Google "wiiki Palestinian freedom of movement" and get back to me. Freedom of movement incidentalyl is a most basic right. I am not even talking of voting rights.

OK Cheesy but I think that wiki may not be the best source to argue whether or not Israel is an Apartheid State or not??? It seems some Arabs or Muslims probably think so but as I said I could care less what they think....so deal with it...or let ed 1066 give his views on this issue since he knows more about Israel than I do..

Israel says they are not an Apartheid State and that is good enough for me..

Have A Nice Day In The Neighborhood)

P.I. (Not to be confused with P._I.)

[santorumolet]

Israel says they are not an Apartheid State and that is good enough for me..

It is precisely this kind of informed, balanced, intelligent view that conservatives are known for.

let ed 1066 give his views on this issue since he knows more about Israel than I do..

I can give Ed's views for him. Anyone who questions anything Israel does is automatically anti-Semitic. Again, a paragon of brilliance, that Ed is.

[moon/Laura]

interesting.. يا إلهي انها مليئة البلهاء‎ - translates to "Oh my God it's full of idiots"

clearly chessy thinks we are... so sad..

[heretodaygonetmrw]

Jun 24, 2011 20:43:42 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

interesting.. يا إلهي انها مليئة البلهاء‎ - translates to "Oh my God it's full of idiots"

clearly chessy thinks we are... so sad..

You fell for it huh? I was wondering how many else have done the same.

[marshabar1]

heretodaygonetdy?

[moon/Laura]

what pathetic little lives they lead.. nothing else to do but troll..

[privateinvestor]

Cheesy as a Boston Irishman I am not that knowledgeable about Israel and I am more interested in how Whitey Bolger is doing in my hometown...So again I will pass the buck to one who knows more about Apartheid, discrimination or whatever in Israel...if that is OK with you?? Although I did work with the IDF in my other life a long time ago..but that is a story for another time.

P.I. ( The Pack Sgt at Arms)


Btw this is ed1066's thread and I was just passing through to see how you were behaving last night...in case you are curious??

[deziloooooo]

Jun 24, 2011 20:29:43 GMT -5 @santorumolet said:

Israel says they are not an Apartheid State and that is good enough for me..

It is precisely this kind of informed, balanced, intelligent view that conservatives are known for.

let ed 1066 give his views on this issue since he knows more about Israel than I do..

I can give Ed's views for him. Anyone who questions anything Israel does is automatically anti-Semitic. Again, a paragon of brilliance, that Ed is.

You havebeen here for six posts and you have it down already?..Mazeltov..