EU blocks illegal Zionist interests in West Bank and Golan

I disagree. In my view, the social character of labour is of fundamental importance. It was Aristotle who characterized man as a 'social animal' and indeed human beings have always lived in groups, never as isolated individuals. Similarly, their labour has, from the earliest of times, always been social and cooperative in nature.

When, for example, early Stone Age people hunted for big game, they did so collectively as a nomadic band or group. The most important point about my conception of human nature is that, while it establishes certain major continuities, it also contains a dynamic element in the form of social labour.

As human beings transform their environment they also transform themselves and their relations with others. As they exercise their capacity to meet their needs so their capacities increase and develop. As certain basic needs are met, so those needs expand and new needs arise. The need for food as such becomes a need for food of a certain quality. The need for clothing develops from a need for skins and furs to a need for money to but ready made clothes in shops.

As the form of production changes so does the organisation of society. As we move from hunting and gathering to agriculture to craft manufacture and industry, so we move from the small nomadic clan to the settled village t the town to the modern nation. In the process human behaviour and attitudes change radically.

Maybe we are splitting hairs here. You put my conception of human nature down to evolutionary development, whereas I recognise that this is part and parcel of a fluid human nature which is not fixed.. I believe that far from being the case that one cannot change human nature, the capacity for change and development is an essential part of human nature. It is one of the key things which distinguishes us from other animals.

 

I think perhaps were are splitting the proverbial hear. I do not dispute what you have written until your concluding paragraph.

I do not reject the notion that some of human nature is fluidly evolving.
However, I believe that a considerable amount of our behaviour is driven by evolutionary homornal responses which constitute a considerable share of what we call human nature. I tend to think that our hormonal responses are fairly fixed. It is only those aspects of our culture and behaviour that are a result of our intelligence and accultration that are fluid.

As an aside. Social and archeological anthropology are minor hobbies of mine - I am enjoying this exchange immensely.

 

There is a Palestinian state but no Palestinian nation. Please come back when you understand the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

Until; then we will have to be content with your emotional drivel.

 

A sound reason. Left wing hand wringers love the underdog, even if that underdog is wrong and, we all know they hate strength and conviction hence, it is and has been an obvious case study in what the Left is all about. Palestinians commit terrorism and Israel defends itself ergo - Palestinians are legitimately 'fighting' and Israel is terrorizing.

Golly, you don't know why you even take a side?

 

Nope. Suggesting that they will do what they can to continue on but will not acquiesce to claptrap in order to compromise their defense.

China is where the new money is as is Russia. Add in oil rich SA who is second only to Israel an enemy of Iran and you have lots of buisiiness that wants cutting edge weaponry and technology not to mention freinds in the Mediterranean to port their ships. This could be the worst mistake the EU has ever committed itself to.

I was agreeing with you as I don't see any Antisemitism in the argument that you posted.

I think you didn't pick up a paper or, had a sheltered childhood.

“Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs... Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home”
― Mahatma Gandhi

""We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem."

Yasser Arafat,
Former Chairman of the Palestine Liberation"

"In fact, the U.N. laid the essential groundwork for the establishment of Israel by passing U.N. Resolution 181 in 1947, which called for the partition of British Mandate Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. Following Israel's independence in 1948, the Jewish State became an official member of the international body.

Since that time, however, the U.N. has more often than not demonstrated hostility and antagonism toward Israel by disproportionately criticizing Israeli policies, singling out Israel for human rights offenses, and prohibiting Israel from the full participation enjoyed by other members.

Since Israel’s establishment, Arab member states of the U.N. have used the GA as a forum for isolating and chastising Israel. With support from third-world nations, particularly the Non-Aligned Group, and others, the Arab states have had little difficulty passing harsh anti-Israel resolutions through the GA. Even today, the strength of these groups in the world body allows them to continue rebuking Israel. While anti-Israel resolutions are easily passed in the GA, this is not the case in the Security Council, where resolutions are binding in nature, as the United States has consistently used its veto power to prevent the passage of such resolutions.

In the 1970s the Arab bloc used its power to establish several U.N. committees and divisions of the Secretariat which primarily carry out the anti-Israel agenda. Among these are: The Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat; The Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices in the Territories; and The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. Today, these bodies continue to be deeply engaged in promoting programs and initiatives that are harshly critical of Israel.

Some U.N. agencies have also exhibited anti-Israel sentiments. For example, between 1974 and 1978 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) instituted financial sanctions against Israel, passed hundreds of resolutions criticizing Israel‘s activities in the West Bank, and denounced Israel's archeological and restoration efforts in Jerusalem.

Among the most harmful anti-Israel U.N. resolutions was the notorious General Assembly Resolution 3379, equating Zionism with racism, which passed in November 1975 by a vote of 72 to 35. That resolution declared “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination... [and] is a threat to world peace and security. “The resolution was meant to deny Israel's political legitimacy by attacking the moral basis for its existence. This resolution remained on the books for many years until it was finally repealed in December 1991, following the Madrid Conference, as a goodwill gesture in support of Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called Resolution 3379 the low point in Jewish-U.N. relations."

The tide is turning as leftists grab more power and pretend that reality no longer exists. Only one party in this struggle has the complete and utter destruction of the other as their whole and center goal.

As i stated above you misconstrued my comment about antisemitism;

By enemies I take it you mean the ones who declared war rather than live in peace and prosperity as per 181 and instead, killed their own children and ensured a life of perpetual war as they continue their dream - not of peace and prosperity but of not haivng in Israel living next to them in peace.

One would think that every century there is a point where for fifteen seconds at least they would have a moment of sanity. This came to the Jordinians and Egyptians with the Syrians close but not quite. Palestinians have yet to reach this lofty perch.

 

You'd better check out ' nation ' in your Big Book of Difficult Words.

As opposed to what ? Come on, fill in the blanks. Right wing .....--------.........---------

 

"na·tion (nshn)
n.
1.
a. A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
b. The territory occupied by such a group of people: All across the nation, people are voting their representatives out.
2. The government of a sovereign state.
3. A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality: "Historically the Ukrainians are an ancient nation which has persisted and survived through terrible calamity" (Robert Conquest).
4.
a. A federation or tribe, especially one composed of Native Americans.
b. The territory occupied by such a federation or tribe."

I see. They are the same tribe, especially one composed of Native Americans.

No. As opposed to those who don't vilify Israel.

 

Its not about compromising their defences, in any way. that is a totally bogus argument. Unless of course you happen to support annexation in which case, perhaps you should examine the status of arabs in east jerusalem.

China will continue to gain in economic strength, but it isn't going to be a smooth ride by any means. India has monumental obstacles to overcome in its economic ascendency. Any straight line projection of their economic development that does not factor in the huge social challenges yet to be faced, the massive infrastructure costs of delivering simple things like flushing toilets, and in China's case the widespread turmoil that will accompany the final collapse of the commie regime, is so much garbage.

Russia is as corrupt a country as one can find on the map today.

Sorry not in my argument, but in Post #5, Gilos posting of a hebrew article mentions it frequently.

Oh dear, I did not claim that there was no criticism or hate or simple animosity against Israel in the world, I claimed that for the most part the world had a much much more favourable and sympathetic view of Israel than today.

Quoting Arafat to make your point is spurious.

I am well aware of the various outrageous decisions made by the UN, as well as the perfectly valid ones. But only idiots would suggest that a Human Rights committee that is populated by a number of totalitarian AND anti-semitic governments has the moral or legal qualification to judge Israel.

Again, you seem to confuse any criticism with anti-Israeli sentiments, thereby reinforcing my point about the "anti-semitism/zionism/Israeli" first line defence often used by the Israelis.

Since I first began observing the conflict (1967) I have seen a sea change in attitude towards Israel. Not for the better I might add. It appears your sources of history do not sufficiently examine the contemporary international position of Israel vis a vis its enemies.

You lost me here.

I was referring to the structure of your argument.

Are you actually attempting to de-odorize Israel crap? when I say enemies, I mean exactly that, sans the emotional and distorted editorial nature of your question.

Interseting how on the one hand you reject the UN and on the other you quote the UN. And UN181 was equally ignored by the Israelis, but don't let history get in the way.

Its not sanity, its pragmatism. The Jordanians recognized they had their own problems with the Palestinians and gave up their claims. The Egyptians had no choice if they wanted to get their territory back and in doing so abandoned the palestinians. The Syrians were simply too vain to actually compromise.

I do agree that the Palestinians have always opted for emotional idealism in stead of pragmatism in their ridiculously incompetent quest for national sovereignty.

 

Bloated posturing The Palestinians have survived everything that the US of AIPAC/Zionists have thrown at them over six decades. They have withstood the ill-will of one of the world's most powerful States- and its dwarf client- and put an end to the brutal Zionist plan of a ' Greater Israel '. They have achieved recognition as a State at the United Nations, full membership of UNESCO, access to the world's international courts and the full support of the European Union as a State under belligerent occupation. Your comments are wretched in their silliness.

 

Yes it is. If they pull back to pre '67 lines they will get attacked from the same territory they sacrificed so much to stop those attacks in.

Thanks for that brief. Anyhow, there is lots of money from other parts of the world that would love an inside track to Israel and high tech.

Still have a massive weapons market and lots of money for pursuit of same.

To explain again I agree that the bulk of the anti Israel claptrap is not antisemetic but rather just left wing blathering.

As I said, that is due to there being far more left wing groups and governments than there were in the fifties and sixties. As well, the reason why I included Arafat was to lay down the time in which the Hamasbara propaganda began as the world started to pay attention to the terrorists when he took the stage.

Don't take a poll on these forums as many would disagree with you.

Explained above.

Explained above.

Please explain.

Yes enemies. Remember, Israel did not attack the Arabs.

How was it ignored by the Israelis prior to being attacked by the Arabs?

- - - Updated - - -

Golly, at least it isn't the dreaded 'Neo Zionists.'

 

A dunderhead might agree with you- ....but.....there wasn't any neoZionism sixty years ago.

 

Thank goodness as the US of Lilliputian Ultra Zionists and their hordes of Neo Zionists would be climbing the beanstalk as we speak.

 

I think you'd best learn something about it before performing any more such antics in public;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Zionism


Questions later.

 

Often time's if the posture is bloated enough it soars right over the head of reader, thereby denying them of the opportunity to pragmatically evaluate the truth of the matter.

As for my own posturing, I don't think you want to wander down the road of the palestinians being arab league puppets: pariahs in much of the arab world; saddled with a litany of corrupt and incompetent leadership; unable to create a united government; idiotically dedicated to a ridiculous "victim" strategy by repeatedly becoming bloody punching bags; unable to make the necessary compromises, etc.

To be clear I do not direct this at the millions of innocent palestinians who jsut want to live their lives in peace like everybody else on the planet. I direct this at their political and religious leadership and the numerous gangs of thugs that control the neighbourhoods. Gangs of varied political stripe I might add that go far beyond simply resistence to the occupation, from marxist to democract to fascist to Islamist.

Your rather short list of "victories" for palestinian nationalist dreams is miniscule recompense for the blood, misery, hatred and humiliation of the past 45 years or so. The inordinate price paid by the palestinians is indicative of both the incompetence of their leadership and the manipulation of their arab cousins whose primary goal has been the elimination of Israel, not the establishment of a palestinian nation.

I could also list the various aspects of the failure of the Israelis to resolve the issue, but since we both know there is a very powerful minority in Israel that has always been dedicated to eretz israel and remain so to this day, neither of us is deluded by intransigent emotion based partisanship in this matter.

The use of the canard US of AIPAC is antisemitic since it is nothing more than a feeble extention of the protocols' global jewish conspiracy.

 

This makes no sense whatsoever. The "attacks" you mention were commando infiltration raids and some artillery fire from golan (often with Israeli provocation). No tanks, not armies streaming over the hills, etc. etc. etc.

And as for their sacrifice in 1967, Israeli losses were insignificant in comparison to the arabs.

Yes there is no doubt about it.
But something tells me that any blase dismissal of the EU when they are merely re-iterating a political position it has held since its inception and applied it to some concrete economic factors (although relatively minor in the grand scheme of things) is foolish and hypocritical. the only difference between the EU's position and Israel's patron is that the EU decided to affix some concrete ramifications to Israeli annexation attempts.

But the russians prefer to sell, not buy and are direct competitors, although the Russians are far larger.

Left wing blathering? You mean all right wing criticism is antisemitic?

Seriously? you actually think its a right/left issue? That is wrong on two levels, the first being there premise there are more "left wing groups and governments" than in the 50/60/s and neither the conflict nor support for Israel is about right or left ideology.
Using Arafat would indicate that you now agree with my statement that prior to 1967 Israel enjoyed strong, sympathetic support. I believe that erosion of Israels' goodwill did not really start to accelerate until the first Intifada.

yes, like I said.

review the threads.

What?!! Of course the Israelis have attacked the arabs. NUMEROUS times, and vice versa. You might want to pick up an independent history book somewhere or even one of the evil leftie new historians of Israel - who by now have outgrown the moniker since so much of their work has become mainstream historic fact.

Israeli Declaration of Independence.

 

Syria controlled the Golan in ‘67 and attacked Israel from there with massive artillery bombardments. They over ran it in ’73 and Israel recaptured it.

115 soldiers. Amazing what well motivated and equipped soldiers can do against odds superior numbers in a well-defended location when their leadership is crap.

Interesting read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War#Golan_Heights

I would agree as well that it is destined to mean naught however, if it does mean more than that then Israel has many ways to discount it’s effects never the less.

Indeed however, I was not referring to the Israelis selling Russia western weapons but rather Israeli improved versions of same and, improvements on Russian weapons that the Russians and Chinese could then in turn sell to the world.

Nope.

Egads! Jonsa believes HRW, AI and other NGOs are right wing!

Not at all. I believe nobody gave a darn until the PLO began hijacking Air liners and shooting up airports etc. Then it became fashionable to root for the little guy.

Did. Again, please explain.

In 1948 the Arab League declared War on Israel and attacked. Now you are going to tell us all that that didn’t happen?

Looking but I don’t see anything there that resembles Israel ignoring 181.

“ WE HEREBY DECLARE that, with effect from the moment of the termination of the Mandate being tonight, the eve of Sabbath, the 6th Iyar, 5708 (15th May, 194, and until the setting up of the duly elected bodies of the State in accordance with a Constitution, to be drawn up by the Elected Constituent Assembly not later than the first day of October, 1948, the People's Council shall act as a Provisional Council of State, and its executive organ, the People's Administration, shall constitute the Provisional Government of the Jewish State, to be called "Israel".

THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open to the immigration of Jews and for the Ingathering of the Exiles from all countries of their dispersion; will promote the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; will be based on the precepts of liberty, justice and peace as invisaged by the prophets of Israel; will uphold the full social and political equality of all its citizens, without distinction of race, creed or sex; will guarantee full freedom of conscience, worship, education and culture; will safeguard the sanctity and inviolability of the shrines and Holy Places of all religions; and will dedicate itself to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

THE STATE OF ISRAEL is prepared to cooperate with the agencies and representatives of the United Nations in the implementation of the Resolution of the General Assembly of November 29, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the economic union over the whole of Eretz-Israel.

WE APPEAL to the United Nations to assist the Jewish people in the building-up of its State and to admit Israel into the family of nations.

WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State if Israel to return to the ways of peace and play their part in the upbuilding of the State, on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its bodies and institutions - provisional or permanent.

WE EXTEND our hand of peace and unity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.

WE APPEAL to the Jewish people throughout the Diaspora to rally round the Jews of Eretz-Israel in the task of immigration and development and to stand by them in the great struggle for the fulfillment of the age-old dream - the redemption of Israel.

PLACING OUR TRUST IN THE ROCK OF ISRAEL, WE AFFIX OUR SIGNATURES TO THIS PROCLAMATION AT THIS SESSION OF THE PROVISIONAL COUNCIL OF STATE, ON THE SOIL OF THE HOMELAND, IN THE CITY OF TEL-AVIV, ON THIS SABBATH EVE, THE 5TH DAY OF IYAR, 5708 (14TH MAY,194.”

 

A ' Palestinian nation ' already exists, of course- and existed even prior to the Zionist invasions. Palestinian Jews were part of it Creating a formal State for that nation has been the goal of the Palestinian resistance to illegal occupation of their territory, a territory recognised as a Palestinian State by an overwhelming majority of other world States. Your efforts to diminish their successes in that area to date are paltry and mean-spirited , displaying an unhealthy support for illegal occupation and associated ethnic cleansing.

It's actually a conjunction of an initialism and an acronym which accurately describes the disproportionate power of Zionists and Israel Firsters in Washington. It is in no way anti-'jewish' and I counsel you to desist in your disrespectful claims that my contributions are anti-jewish or that I am myself, by implication, anti-jewish.

 

And palestine has existed before anything 'jewish' whether a state or a belief.

isnt that the guy that dropped a couple nukes on civilians?

Shall the world use his methodology of chemotherapy on israel?

 

Are you serious? Massive artillery bombardments? How about responding to Isareli provocation in the greenzone?
Moshe Dyan would violently disagree with you.

I am aware of Syria almost recapturing the Golan, but they once again were able to snatch defeat from clutches of victory.

Yep, the military history of the conflict is strewn with unbelievable Israeli competence and equally unbelievable arab incomptenance. Seems they are much better at killing each other than killing jews.

As do most countries. You'll notice that draconian sanctions against Iran haven't stopped iranian oil sales and foreign imports.
For instance, if you want a ferrari or a rolls royce or a rolex watch in Tehran, you can easily buy it.

I guess you aren't one to consider the reprecussions of such actions. You think for a nanosecond the US would endorse such a course? Not in a gazillion years. And despite the fact Israeli supporters think that the IDF is invincible, if it wasn't for US military aid and joint weapons development programs, Israel wouldn't be around today.

Hopefully the Israeli leadership is slightly more cognizant of which side of the bread the butter is on.

So all NGO's are left wing organizations. Interesting take. Bullcrap but it does explain a lot about your perspective.
Your premise is still fallacious regardless of your lame deflection.

Guess you weren't around then. Pick up a history book or two on the subject, you might learn something of the time before you were born. You have it bass ackwards. Arafat's antics further alienated the palestinians in global public opinion, culminating in the universal outrage and disgust of Black September's Munich Massacre. You don't seem to have a handle on what was actually going on in the world in the 60's 70's and 80's. World opinion began to substantively change during the 6 years of the first intifada which actually provided the Israeli impetus for the Oslo Accords.

Who is denying that? re-read what I wrote. Again, go back to the history books.
If you are telling me that jews did not attack arabs (and vice versa) on numerous occasions prior to 1948's declaration and after, it would appear you get your history books from the fantasy section.

What are the borders of Eretz Israel?

 

His pal HBendor, who is closer to the ground, will be able to inform him of this weeks border update.

 

No palestinian nation ever existed. A palestinian territory did, but it did not have national status. In fact it was a conquered colonial possession.

I agree that palestinian resistence since 1994 has been more or less about the establishment of a palestinian nation based on the green line. Prior to that it was a secondary consideration, with the first being the "liberation of all of historic palestine", meaning the eradication of Israel. Hamas still holds this wetdream near and dear.

That you should inflate the magnitude of palestinian "victories" while dismissing their outrageously excessive cost in human blood, humilation, misery and cash is not surprising.

You are well aware of my position on the settlements and the occupation, yet you repeatedly accuse me of supporting them. Why exactly is that? The new put up or shut up rules will put an end to your spurious implications, but perhaps you'd like the opportunity to prove I support the occupation and/or ethnic cleansing prior to them kicking in. If not, enjoy it today for tomorrow you will require evidence of your salacious accusations.

Nope. It is a salacious and spurious canard. It does not accurately describe the disproportionate power of the zionists at all, it is an accusatory specious piece of propaganda. It is a direct accusation that the US is controlled by a lobby group of jews. It is a contemporary extension of the anti-semitic protocols of zion jewish global conspiracy.

Despite your counsel I stand by my belief that its use is nothing more than re-packaging attempt of historic and virulent anti-semitic propaganda.

And thanks for the advice.

I shall continue to call it like I see it and not give a damn about others' perceptions and/or mispreceptions of the implications of same.

 

Good for the EU, but the US will jump in to make Israel whole again.

 

there's a subject you should familiarize yourself with before making such ridiculous comments. Its called history.

Confusing radiation therapy with chemotherapy does nothing for your credibility.

 

history has proven with UNEQUIVOCAL EVIDENCE, that palestine existed, well before anything jewish, israelis or the hypocrits that keep misleading

i didnt make the call.

Read what the prophets told the bigots, back then. within the literature (tanackh).

The combining of the chemotherapy analogy and what a doctor prescribes is found in looking at the big picture: if the LIES and LIARS (cancer) cannot be cut out, then to save the life (mankind) chemotherapy, makes sense.

I was just pointing out what fits the situation both of the theological prophecies and the most recognizable choice that many can ascertain, to a cancer victim.


.

.


.

 

really? then please supply us with some of this unequivocal evidence of palestine existing prior to jews existing.

Have you read the new rules in effect tomorrow?

http://www.politicalforum.com/announcements-community-discussions/312806-announcement-new-infraction-system-revised-rules.html#post1062896640

10. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPINION AND FACT

Anyone is free to express any opinion they wish, as long as it's within the guidelines, or assert any fact. However, for the purpose of civil and productive discussion, it's sometimes important to differentiate between the two. If a poster asserts something as a specific historical fact, they must be prepared to substantiate it as fact if challenged to do so by another poster, through a link that is credible in the judgment of moderators or administrators.

If a moderator calls upon you to verify an assertion and you are unable to do so, you must be willing to acknowledge that it is an opinion rather than a fact, or that - even though you believe it to be true - you can not substantiate it. If you continue to assert as absolute fact something that you can not validate, it may be considered thread derailment. The fact that someone is asking another poster for a cite does not necessarily mean that a moderator will agree that one is necessary, and asking for frivolous cites may also be regarded as thread derailment.

I believe its called the put up or shut up rule.

Do you always go thru such contortions when your gross errors are pointed out to you?

Its clear you are equating nuclear bombs with chemotherapy. Or do you not understand your own words?
.

.


.[/QUOTE]