Netanyahu is less of a liar than past Israeli PMs ( LET'S EXAMINE SOME FACTS ) Merkel, Sarkozy and Obama, do not believe Netanyahu, but it seems that they and their governments are pissssed off at him because he's not as good a liar as his predecessors in the Prime Minister's Office -- Does Benjamin Netanyahu lie more than other politicians? That, at least, is the impression one gets from various reports in the press. But does he lie more than other prime ministers about Israel's strong (lack of ) desire for peace with the Palestinians? To say that would be downright mendacious. The mouth speaks peace while the hand drives the bulldozer - the essence of Israeli policy. Yitzhak Rabin may have had a few slips of the tongue that gave hope to those of us who recoil from yoking God and real estate together. But it was during Rabin's second term that the bypass roads to the settlements were built, making Psagot and the Etzion Bloc part of Jerusalem. It was during his watch that Hebron was punished with a ruinous curfew because a Jew massacred Palestinian worshippers. It was during his tenure that the closure policy was perfected, cutting off the Palestinians in East Jerusalem and in the Gaza Strip from the other territories occupied in 1967. Succeeding Israeli governments merely continued down the same slope. -- The characterization of Netanyahu as a liar rests on two problematic assumptions. One, that consciously-chosen words are supposed to tell us something about intentions and policies. There is no area where Israel has used declarations by leaders to cover up intentions more than in our relations toward Palestinians (on both sides of the Green Line ). Contracts with architects, expropriation orders, checks to contractors. These are the words that speak the truth. The second assumption is that the prime minister is the one who makes the decisions. But when it comes to our attitude toward Palestinians, the democracy, for Jews, is paramount. Every prime minister was and is the loyal representative of the decisions of the majority of the Jewish public and their pockets. The majority that went to watch the air strikes on the Gaza Strip from a nearby hill and fills Mann Auditorium, the one that relaxes in parks that used to be Palestinian villages and stands to attention during the Holocaust Day siren. It's not mathematical gymnastics that give Netanyahu's coalition its stability. Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy and Barack Obama, we are told, do not believe Netanyahu. But it seems that they and their governments are pisSsed off at him because he's not as good a liar as his predecessors in the Prime Minister's Office. They're angry because he doesn't bother to cover up the gap between the words and the bulldozers. It makes it harder for them to conceal the falsehood in U.S. and European policy. A policy which supposedly seeks peace in the region and a state for the Palestinians; in practice, one that collaborates with Israel's aim to impose a capitulation arrangement on the Palestinians. Netanyahu is lying? On its website, the OECD states: "The common thread of our work is a shared commitment to market economies backed by democratic institutions and focused on the wellbeing of all citizens." Those who admitted Israel as a member knew that featured among the institutions backing its market economy are the Civil Administration, the Interior Ministry and the Jewish National Fund. Any resemblance between them and democracy and the well-being of all citizens is purely coincidental. A major explanation for the lie can be found in the truthful words of Andrew Shapiro, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs. "Israeli technology is proving critical to improving our Homeland Security and protecting our troops," he said on November 4 in remarks to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. And what's true for the United States is also true for its European allies. "[Jo]int exercises allow us to learn from Israel's experience in urban warfare and counterterrorism," Shapiro said - and without the occupation there would be no urban warfare. There's more: "[W]e don't provide assistance out of charity. We provide assistance because it benefits our security .. . we support Israel because it is in our national interests to do so." So who would get caught up in trifles like exercising the Palestinians' right to self-determination? קראו כתבה זו בעברית: לא נתניהו הוא השקרן http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...less-of-a-liar-than-past-israeli-pms-1.395844 ..
It's called: Latest World News. The description of it reads: Posts of newsworthy political items current within the last 72 hours. If you start a thread here, please be sure to include a link to the news event that the thread originates from. It should be an actual news event. If you want to talk about your political opinion, we have forums for that. Current events, religion, conspiracy theories, etc... we have all those too. Threads started that are obviously editorials, opinion pieces, a new user's rant about their most hated political figure (for example), and generally just not a news event will be moved to the proper forum. Please note: Make your settings show posts in this forum from the last day, last two days, or the last week. You can do this by scrolling down to the bottom left corner of the page, and setting it to reflect your preference. Posts that are inactive for longer than that will be moved to the appropriate forum Once a thread goes inactive for 72 hrs, the moderators will move it to another forum at their earliest convenience. 2) Creating threads: We will be taking a hard line with new threads, to keep the board from drowning in substanceless threads. The point of the forum is *discussion*; threads that don't promote discussion will likely be deleted. In particular, the following types of threads risk being deleted without notice: One-liner threads Threads containing just videos with little or no commentary (it's the video version of a one-liner) Threads that do nothing but promote the poster's blog or other outside site. Threads that lack elaboration, links or other content that might actually lead to discussion. Duplicate threads. We'll merge threads, within reason. But if there are already six threads on a topic, we'll probably just delete the seventh rather than go through the effort of merging it. If you want to avoid that, use the search function to check whether a thread already exists before starting a new one.
That article appeared just yesterday, ' Relevant ', and concerns the ongoing investigations into the Israeli Prime Minister's apparent penchant for untruths- as stated by at least one Western president. Lying Zionists, particularly of the fascist persuasion , must expect the same scrutiny as, say, fraudulent jpeg poseurs.
lol...for someone who runs to the mods at every turn, I thought youd know the rules a little better. Selective outrage at rulebreaking,I shouldnt be surprised...youre selective about every other complaints you make. First, its an oped...the link takes us right to Haaretz's opinion section. Second ".." isnt original debate stirring commentary. Once again their rules not mine.
Ah, but your complaint does not represent reality, ' Relevant ' as it only includes 'provable' facts.
Fact: This is an opinion piece,hence it is found in the opinion section of the website. Fact: Theres no additional content. It cannot even be called a one liner...because theres not even ONE line of commentary from the OP, its a no liner.
Making your argument with provable facts alone is not representative of reality, ' Relevant '. How do we know this ? Because Mr. Netanyahu says so, that's how. Clearly, Mr. Netanyanu is lying . This leaves you in the uncomfortable position of being caught attempting to derail a thread which supports that opinion.
Back to topic Let's just agree that they are all liars, thieves and murderers. It's what they are best at. There is not one since that Frankenstein was created that has been anything less.
ALL NEWS is just OPINIONS " How often have you rrecieved two different accounts (OPINIONS) "FACTUAL REPORTS - from "Eye-witnesses of the same incident. ? Was Saddams WMD's FACTS when reported OR OPINIONS ? btw - WOULD YOU HAVE OBJECTED IF THE OPINION WAS BRANDING SYRIA'S LEADER ASSAD + OTHER ARAB S LIARS ? read my siggy re facts + theories.
