So why do people hate Israel?

[RayManKiller3]

I'm not here to rub your tummy and massage your damaged ego. I attempted to show you why things are the way they are. The fact that you are too brainwashed or stupid to take it onboard is what drives people to "tell you like it is".

You're quick to whine about your damaged ego, but don't have a second's thought for a nation of people who have been reduced to living in fear like hunted animals, disenfranchised, beaten, starved and murdered for over 100 years.

That is why I don't care what you "think",... you have the logic and understanding, of a pot plant.

Don't bother typing if your not going to say something of worth... calling me "brainwashed" and "stupid" is a good way to persuade me. If your going to debate then you must learn that proper speaking all the way through is the best method. I have not resorted to calling you names, yet I think a lot of what you said is the biggest piece of BS I ever heard.

You justifying terrorism in the name of "defense" is odd to me. In fact you are the only one I ever heard defend terrorism... After saying something like that, can you really question someone else's morality. I don't see how anyone can rightfully say someone is "whining" through text, but whatever. It would have been more correct to say complaining

A 1 state solution will not work, simple as that.

I do care about the Palestinians, I would love for them to have their state; but a few is enough to damage the majority (i.e I will not fully sympathize with a nation who is actively engaging in terrorism). I will sympathize with its people, even if they are/were my enemies, but the leaders are the ones who bring it upon their own. It either becomes up to another nation to help those people and/or the people themselves...

for example: Do you think many in Russia actually hated and feared Americans more than their own leaders? Do you think Americans hated Russians (the people)? No, it was the authorities that brought about problems and the unwillingness to help those people under that authority. If you do not get my meaning here, then I don't know how else I can simplify it for you.

The Palestinians need to shape up before asking for help; these are denouncing violent acts (terrorism) and not engaging in violent acts against anyone. After the Palestinians shape up, do you believe other muslim terrorists are going to let it slide even though they are not Palestinian! We know what these outside (non-Palestinian) terrorist are going to do; they are going to claim the Palestine authority working with Israel a traitor and start targetting them (even if working with Israel for peace was desired by the Palestinian people).

 

[RayManKiller3]

It is this statement that always amuses me it is the same thing as when I hear "I don't want to cause trouble... but" and "I don't want to appear racist... but" there is an old saying that says "nothing said before the but means anything"

As for your reading of my quote well that is symbolic of the argument you have posted, you have taken fragments and twisted them to justify your argument where most people would read it as "diminishing power" you have read it as "no power".

That old saying can only be used in certain situations.

Supporting a country do not = agreeing with its actions and supporting it.

A lot of people read things and twists its (intended) meaning just so you know.. It can be done purposely or accidentally; I already stated this in an earlier post about distortion of quotes. It is done all the time; lawyers do it and political figures do it as well. Not sure if you knew, but not all of that post was just for you.

I pointed out certain things that kept me at my stance. I was hoping you would respond by pointing out (in one post) all of your major grievences that makes you feel Palestinians are more right than Israel with some backing.

As I said before; I do not see no evidence in history that backs Palestine's existence more than Israel... If I am correct, it is usually not the people of a region (except in democracy) that host authority over it. Considering the U.N giving Israel its state is a legal move, while it can be contested, it is improbable to be reversed.

I mainly am not discussing Israel's right to exist legally. Legal thinking was thrown out the window once the country grew another generation.

How can it be contradictory, if I could see a way to remove Israel from the map without creating a humanitarian nightmare of epic proportions I would push the 1 state solution however I can not see a way to do this therefore I push the 2 state solution.

It is still contradicting.. because your stance is a 2 way solution (due to it being the safer option), you should condemn Palestine for not wanting peace same as Israel. After all, both are playing hard-ball, not just Israel. The only way it would not be contradicting is if you changed stance to a 1 state solution... I guess I can be being a smart### about it, so I will drop it.

 

[MontyB]

I would also suggest that sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "lalalalalalalalalalalal" at the top of your voice isn't listening either.

This argument is stuck firmly on one point, neither side can agree on a start point.

If as Spike and myself do believe that the land is Palestinian/Arab/Syrian or what ever you want to call the original inhabitants then terrorism as a form of defence is perfectly acceptable when you do not have the ability to fight in a conventional manner and I would use the various resistance movement of WW2 to justify the argument.

If on the other hand you believe the land belongs to a bunch of European refugees invoking religious doctrine then obviously you do not accept terrorism is an acceptable defence although that would also bring up questions about how they pushed the British out of the region.

The problem for Israel in pushing the "terrorism can not be rewarded" argument is that Israel are the founders of modern terrorism so I guess what goes around comes around.

But I think the over riding reality in this is that no one is being convinced, no opinions are changing this thread has run its course as everything has been said repeatedly and it is falling on deaf ears, if we still had moderators I think they would be better off closing it and letting it disappear so the next one can repeat the process.

 

[senojekips]

Alright I think I get your meaning here,

Let's kill all Israelis, wipe them out and burn every document and piece of the old Testement mentioning them that no one will every remeber even their truimphs or tradegies....

If that is your understanding, all i can say is that I won't even bother trying to correct you as you obviously haven't got the wherewithall to understand what is being said, (several times). I never said that, YOU did,... how many times do i have to tell you my ideas? How many times do you have to deliberately misunderstand what has been written in plain English the last time only several pages ago.

You profess to be even handed but all you have contributed to this debate is the constant bleating about "What will happen to the Israelis" never once have you considered that they are the occupiers and they like anyone who has committed criminal acts, are totally responsible for whatever may happen to them as a result of their crimes.

This is another example of the futility of talking to pro Zionists, they read things that are not there, and try to base their argument on it.

You are typical of your kind,... you are too used to having everything your own way, a firm believer in "Might is right" and damn the consequences for the poor bastards on the receiving end.

 

[Yossarian]

If that is your understanding, all i can say is that I won't even bother trying to correct you as you obviously haven't got the wherewithall to understand what is being said, (several times). I never said that, YOU did,... how many times do i have to tell you my ideas? How many times do you have to deliberately misunderstand what has been written in plain English the last time only several pages ago.

You profess to be even handed but all you have contributed to this debate is the constant bleating about "What will happen to the Israelis" never once have you considered that they are the occupiers and they like anyone who has committed criminal acts, are totally responsible for whatever may happen to them as a result of their crimes.

This is another example of the futility of talking to pro Zionists, they read things that are not there, and try to base their argument on it.

You are typical of your kind,... you are too used to having everything your own way, a firm believer in "Might is right" and damn the consequences for the poor bastards on the receiving end.

Might is not right, and you stated that you don't care what happens to the Israelies, I see no point in softening those words now.

Like the cycle of fire, if anything is to be accomplished in this dispute, then there is a imperitive need to break the cylce of violence,

No break through in the rights of Palistinians can happen while Israel is allowed to persecute them as they please, no break through for equality for the Palitstinians will ever occur as long as Israel Feels directly threatened , by threatened I mean lives and property not .

"their evil zionists plot to doom the world to their treachery"

Neither side will ever coexsists like other societies in the world right now, because they are locked in a bitter struggle of fear and distrust of each other, no agreement to give and recieve will ever be made as long as the region exsists in a state of dreadful fear and hate.

The cycle of distrust, and the dangouros minorities who seek inspiriation from violent extremism, and the support such actions will only act as to keep the Palestinians locked under a set of conditions that will keep them on the border of living in a occupied third world state.

As for the Israelis, they shall remain questionable and held in a very negative view and under direct threat if they to fail to try and break this cycle.

If both cannot sacrifice for the other then both will parish, and to fallback on extremist views for the use of violence will only make this nose bleed worse.

And God help the average Palestienian, or non affiliated Israeli, for if people resort to extrism out of convience, nobody else will.

Because regardless of view point, somethings are just wrong, you don't have to look at the label of the culture to see that.

If both parties continue as they are, then both are screwed...

 

[RayManKiller3]

I would also suggest that sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "lalalalalalalalalalalal" at the top of your voice isn't listening either.

This argument is stuck firmly on one point, neither side can agree on a start point.

If as Spike and myself do believe that the land is Palestinian/Arab/Syrian or what ever you want to call the original inhabitants then terrorism as a form of defence is perfectly acceptable when you do not have the ability to fight in a conventional manner and I would use the various resistance movement of WW2 to justify the argument.

If on the other hand you believe the land belongs to a bunch of European refugees invoking religious doctrine then obviously you do not accept terrorism is an acceptable defence although that would also bring up questions about how they pushed the British out of the region.

The problem for Israel in pushing the "terrorism can not be rewarded" argument is that Israel are the founders of modern terrorism so I guess what goes around comes around.

But I think the over riding reality in this is that no one is being convinced, no opinions are changing this thread has run its course as everything has been said repeatedly and it is falling on deaf ears, if we still had moderators I think they would be better off closing it and letting it disappear so the next one can repeat the process.

Nay; I do not accept terrorism as justified in any situation. Especially if the terrorism breaks out into hives (attacking other countries who are against them).

I accept guerrilla tactics (depending on the situation), but terrorism is unforgivable. The act of attacking civillians of one country or another is outrageous. Then you might as well say you support nuclear attacks (if that country feels like it will be crushed). They both are the same thing, indiscriminate attacks. I know war isn't pretty, but even in the case of self-defense, it is unlawful. Remember, this is attacking civillians, not combatants. How is killing unarmed people defense?

I am not sure if you mixed up guerillas warfare with terrorism as they are not relevant to one another except guerillas hide in civillian areas.

I believe no one will be convinced either; were stagnated. The point is I want to see why you hold your views, as I have shown why I hold mines. Of course you can argue there is no point, but without understanding each other, we will just see the other as incorrect ans resort to Seno's method (insults and such).

The fact they were given the land by the U.N and (Britain included, which ruled the area at that time) makes it hard to dispute Israel's existence regardless of how they came into being. I would definately be against the creation of Israel and their terrorist actions at that time, but that time passed. Once you give terrorism what it wants, it won't and rightfully shouldn't take kindly to a reverse in mind. especially after they claimed soveriegnty.... Remember this Palestine was never a soveriegn nation, so it is quite desputable about why they legally hold grounds for a state except the fact that the region was named Palestine and they lived there. Israel have just as much right to exist there because of that reason....

However, I rather not debate legality as it would force me to keep gathering sources which probably won't be heeded anyways lol. If you want to discuss legality then I can (reluctanly). I think VDKMS does a real good job at debating legality, so I would rather leave it to him.

 

[senojekips]

Might is not right, and you stated that you don't care what happens to the Israelies, I see no point in softening those words now.

Where did I attempt to soften my words? That would be completely against my ethics. I may harden them, but never would I be guilty of softening my opinion of this Middle Eastern Nazi like regime. What actually happened was that you realised you had no case and tried to put words in my mouth by telling outright lies, in a childish attempt to escalate the argument.

Alright I think I get your meaning here,

Let's kill all Israelis, wipe them out and burn every document and piece of the old Testement mentioning them that no one will every remeber even their truimphs or tradegies....

Remember,.... that was what YOU said,... what I said, two pages ago, is quoted below. You are using the same tactics as the Israelis do, first you say or do something totally outrageous to escalate the argument and then you whine like a small child and want sympathy when you get the reply that you deserve. Sorry, but I've seen it all before.

If you want my personal opinion as to what should happen to the Israelis, I'd say, "you moved here, so you can move out if you don't want to live under the new ruling".

If you are going to tell lies, you will need to improve your memory, a LOT. Oh,... and don't worry too much about us forgetting the Israeli"s tragedies, it will be a long, lonnnng time before the world forgets what they did to the Palestinian people.

 

[LeEnfield]

The Israelis built a wall to protect them selfs from raids from across what they saw as the border. Now in the Bethlehem area they are moving that wall even further into what is considered Palestine territory. Yet if there is a protest the people that protest are called terrorist and shot.

 

[VDKMS]

There are far more uses of the word "country" than you are aware of. Ask any English speaking member. Other than that, "ownership" of land (or "country") needs no "Government" or leader. We've been through all this before, possibly several times. (As usual)

You are very wrong. You can only have ownership if there is a rule of law and you can only have rule of law through a government or leader how primitive that may be. Because without rule of law and leadership who has the authority to accept your claim of ownership or to mediate or judge a conflict of ownership between two or more persons/companies.

For the Palestinians rule of law and government were the Ottoman Empire, then the British Mandate and thereafter Israel (their part of the region of Palestine) and from 1993 the PO (for their part of the region of Palestine).

And don't forget to look at the reasons why the Palestinians settled for ratbag political leadership like Hamas, who were only elected for one reason,.... They would resist Israel. It took 20 years of Israeli terror, before the Palestinians resorted to this extreme measure, as it was their only choice, whereas Zionist leaders had been openly speaking of the removal of the Palestinian people from their own country from Israel's earliest days and before. The evidence of which is there for all to see to this day,... and getting worse by the day.

Hamas' election campaign was a religious one. They never spoke about liberating Palestine but about a Muslim waqf that had to be redeemed for Islam. The biggest reason why they got so many votes was that the Palestinians were fed up with the corruption of Fatah.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
-- David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

Ever searched for that quote in the book "Ben-Gurion: a biography" by Michael Bar-Zohar? I don't think so because it is not written in it! Another fake! You can look up the book at Google books. You do not verify the things you find do you? As long as it is somewhere on the web and you like it (anti) you just swallow it.

That quote is fabricated.

One thing I think you can be sure of, is that, if there were no Israeli terror visited upon the Palestinian people, the world would never have ever seen political groups like Hamas, or for that matter Al Qaeda, or a dozen other fundamentalist Muslim terror organisations.

I already showed you why Al Qaeda was founded.
Hamas was founded to liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation and to establish an Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.
In short, all fundamentalist Muslim terror organisations strive for a country ruled by sharia law.

 

[VDKMS]

If as Spike and myself do believe that the land is Palestinian/Arab/Syrian or what ever you want to call the original inhabitants then terrorism as a form of defence is perfectly acceptable when you do not have the ability to fight in a conventional manner and I would use the various resistance movement of WW2 to justify the argument.

If on the other hand you believe the land belongs to a bunch of European refugees invoking religious doctrine then obviously you do not accept terrorism is an acceptable defence although that would also bring up questions about how they pushed the British out of the region.

That comparison doesn't hold. Germany invaded France and the French resistance defended their country. The Ottoman Empire was invaded by English (including Jewish units), Australian, Indian, New Zealand, French and Arab troops (maybe I forgot some othhers). There was no Arab Palestinian resistance.

The problem for Israel in pushing the "terrorism can not be rewarded" argument is that Israel are the founders of modern terrorism so I guess what goes around comes around.

What do you mean by "modern" terrorism?

But I think the over riding reality in this is that no one is being convinced, no opinions are changing this thread has run its course as everything has been said repeatedly and it is falling on deaf ears, if we still had moderators I think they would be better off closing it and letting it disappear so the next one can repeat the process.

Most of us are in favor of a 2 state solution with pre-1967 borders, even those who prefer a different one. I think you can call that a positive note.

I would prefer a different one. Give the whole of Palestine to the Israelis, not because of pro-zionism or pro-whatever but because they have shown how to run a country. Their people prosper, have an advanced economy and with the backing of a superpower their borders will be safe. Unfortunately this is impossible so I choose for the 2-state solution. Giving Palestine to the Palestinians will not be the end of the conflict but the start of a new beginning. If the whole of Palestine becomes Muslim ground they will start to get the other lost Muslim grounds back. And that are Spain and the Balkans.

 

[VDKMS]

Originally Posted by Yossarian
Alright I think I get your meaning here,
Let's kill all Israelis, wipe them out and burn every document and piece of the old Testement mentioning them that no one will every remeber even their truimphs or tradegies....

Originally Posted by senojekips
Remember,.... that was what YOU said,... what I said, two pages ago, is quoted below. You are using the same tactics as the Israelis do, first you say or do something totally outrageous to escalate the argument and then you whine like a small child and want sympathy when you get the reply that you deserve. Sorry, but I've seen it all before.

You either didn't understand what Yossarian ment or you don't want to. His above quote is just a sentence out of a reply. But this is not the first time you take something out of its context.

If you are going to tell lies, you will need to improve your memory, a LOT. Oh,... and don't worry too much about us forgetting the Israeli"s tragedies, it will be a long, lonnnng time before the world forgets what they did to the Palestinian people.

Like paying Palestinian workers double or triple the pay than what they can earn in the PO or Gaza?

 

[VDKMS]

The Israelis built a wall to protect them selfs from raids from across what they saw as the border. Now in the Bethlehem area they are moving that wall even further into what is considered Palestine territory. Yet if there is a protest the people that protest are called terrorist and shot.

Even if these walls enhance security for Israel it is a sad thing. But Israelis and Palestinians react to it differently. The Palestinians protest and get shot (not all of them I think) according to you. But is the response of the Israelis not better?

Visit Palestine
Breaking The Walls

- Registration instructions at the bottom of this page -

For the last decade, it has been nearly impossible for Israelis and Palestinians, the two peoples who share this land, to meet in a plain and normal encounter. The 'Breaking the Walls' tours of Visit Palestine allow us to bring people from both sides of the 'fence' and to break the mental walls that were created at the backdrop of the forced physical alienation.

We aim to create a meeting place for Israelis and Palestinians, to give faces to faceless people and to learn names of unknown roads.

We believe that as more and more Israelis and Palestinians will meet one another, in their home towns and cities, both sides will be able to hear each other directly and discover the 'other side'. Once we build trust and create bonds between us, whoever is truly looking for Peace will be able to find it.

To achieve this, we offer day trips to the least toured places by Israelis in recent years – Area A territories, areas under the civilian and security control of the Palestinian Authority.

Entering Area A territories is done with the IDF's approval as well as with the collaboration of the Palestinian Authority.

You can find the link here

The moral of this story, the Palestinian bangs his head against the wall and the Jew tries to make a profit out of it.

 

[Yossarian]

The moral of this story, the Palestinian bangs his head against the wall and the Jew tries to make a profit out of it.

Which is exactly why both parties will have to make drastic changes in doctrine if they are to achieve peace, and a new found prosperity to be shared by both peoples.

Both will have to adopt a new outlook on the other and cease a number of activies, with the most difficult of these changes being for them to begin to trust each other.

I could not agree more wholly.

 

[MontyB]

I would prefer a different one. Give the whole of Palestine to the Israelis, not because of pro-zionism or pro-whatever but because they have shown how to run a country. Their people prosper, have an advanced economy and with the backing of a superpower their borders will be safe. Unfortunately this is impossible so I choose for the 2-state solution. Giving Palestine to the Palestinians will not be the end of the conflict but the start of a new beginning. If the whole of Palestine becomes Muslim ground they will start to get the other lost Muslim grounds back. And that are Spain and the Balkans.

Which brings me back to the statement "it is a pity Palestinians are not white Christians", one of the overriding impressions you have left me with in a quite few of your posts is that doing wrong is perfectly fine to achieve an outcome that suits us.

You have backed up this view with anti-Shiaria law posts and I agree that it is not something I want to live under but if other people do then more power to them, now you start the elitist crap about "Israel has developed land and made it a prosperous place" BS, I hate to break it to you but if a thief turns a stolen $100 into a million he is still a thief and if you don't like that your neighbour only mows his lawns once a month instead of weekly you still don't have the right to take over his property.

You will never see an end to these problems by committing wrongs and selling the positives.

 

[senojekips]

You either didn't understand what Yossarian ment or you don't want to. His above quote is just a sentence out of a reply. But this is not the first time you take something out of its context.

What I posted was quoted directly from his post, I suppose you are going to tell us that it was "not in his diary" and therefore untrue. He clearly did make the statement and there is no doubt that he did deliberately and falsely attribute it's intent to what I had said, in an attempt to escalate the argument. And as I said earlier, this is a typical well documented Zionist ploy. Provoke people and then play the "sympathy card" when there is a justified reaction.

It's odd that you should have to make excuses for him,... what, have you suddenly realised that his stupidity is a liability to your sorry argument?
I've never known any group like the Zionists and their rabid followers, that so often have to use the excuse that they are, misquoted, misunderstood or that their murderous actions were "accidental". So much so, that they actually have to run classes to teach people how to edit information presented on the Internet to give it a pro Zionist slant. I ask myself, why would any group even need to do this?

It's a bit like, and no doubt related to, the age old question, "If Jews have been so despised and distrusted everywhere they have gone for the last 2000 years, why is this so? Once again no other group in history seems to suffer or have suffered this "alleged" long running hatred. Perhaps the goings on in Palestine today and the constant lies and denials of the Israeli leadership are a good indication of why this might be so?

I'm as Jewish as Bennie Netandyahoo, but I don't seem to have any of these problems, but then again I suppose the fact that I don't steal from, beat, harass and murder my neighbours might have some bearing on this.

 

[Yossarian]

It's quite adamantly clear as previously mentioned this thread has run it's course, I can say with assurance that we are all now polarized to our prespective corners and not much else can be milked out from this topic.

 

[VDKMS]

What I posted was quoted directly from his post, I suppose you are going to tell us that it was "not in his diary" and therefore untrue. He clearly did make the statement and there is no doubt that he did deliberately and falsely attribute it's intent to what I had said, in an attempt to escalate the argument. And as I said earlier, this is a typical well documented Zionist ploy. Provoke people and then play the "sympathy card" when there is a justified reaction.

You always fail to see the big picture. You only look at anti-zionist words, phrases and websites without reading the whole story or even verify if what is written is true. BTW there is no Zionist ploy just as there is no Zionist conspiracy. I have nothing against Zionism but I am not fond of Haredi Jews.
You must also learn the difference between what someone says (opinion) and official statements (policy).

It's odd that you should have to make excuses for him,... what, have you suddenly realised that his stupidity is a liability to your sorry argument?
I've never known any group like the Zionists and their rabid followers, that so often have to use the excuse that they are, misquoted, misunderstood or that their murderous actions were "accidental". So much so, that they actually have to run classes to teach people how to edit information presented on the Internet to give it a pro Zionist slant. I ask myself, why would any group even need to do this?

That's an old story which isn't valid anymore. I already proved that. The media isn't as neutral as it should be. Look here.
Look at the Photo of Tuvia Grossman published on September 30, 2000, by the New York Times, the Associated Press, and other media outlets .

The truth was that the "Palestinian" guy was 20-year old Tuvia Grossman, a Jewish American student from Chicago who had been studying at a Yeshiva in Israel, the Israeli police officer in the photograph actually came to his rescue by threatening his Palestinian assailants.
You asked :Why would a group need to do this? I think the example above speaks for itself.
BTW the NYT needed two corrections to get the story strait, but damage was done.

It's a bit like, and no doubt related to, the age old question, "If Jews have been so despised and distrusted everywhere they have gone for the last 2000 years, why is this so? Once again no other group in history seems to suffer or have suffered this "alleged" long running hatred. Perhaps the goings on in Palestine today and the constant lies and denials of the Israeli leadership are a good indication of why this might be so?

I'll give you the simple answer : jealousy. Jews have traditionally been one of the most industrious people's, and if you look even today they are. Jews have also been some of the most economically successful people in history as well.

Nobel Prizes have been awarded to over 800 individuals, of whom at least 20% were Jews, although Jews comprise only 0.2% of the world's population.

Albert Einstein (March 14, 1879 - April 18, 1955)
Leonard Bernstein (August 25, 1918 - October 14, 1990)
Woody Allen (December 1, 1935 - )
all are (were) Jews.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Businessman Sheldon Adelson, Russian mogul Roman Abramovich, Oracle founder Lawrence Ellison and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg rank among the world's richest Jews

The Forbes 400: A Demographic Breakdown.
30 Jews in the top 100

I'm as Jewish as Bennie Netandyahoo, but I don't seem to have any of these problems, but then again I suppose the fact that I don't steal from, beat, harass and murder my neighbours might have some bearing on this.

That's your opinion but here's a fact : Israel's 'Rosa Parks' refuses to take back seat

 

[senojekips]

You always fail to see the big picture.

You support a universally despised regime that continually commits Crimes against Humanity, and you have the gall to say that I don't see the big picture??

In your book, the theft of a peoples country and the harassment, beating and gratuitous murder of those who resist is OK, and you tell me that I don't see the big picture?? If that is Zionist humour, I'm afraid the non Zionist world doesn't get it.

That's an old story which isn't valid anymore. I already proved that. The media isn't as neutral as it should be. Look here.

Proved? as usual. you haven't proved anything,... maybe in your own mind, as small as it is, although I have little doubt that the media is often far from neutral,... considering that most of it is owned by Jews.

A plan by the pro-Israel pressure group CAMERA to skew the online encyclopedia Wikipedia in a pro-Israel direction appears to have collapsed after it was exposed by EI (Electronic Intifada). On 21 April, EI , published emails and action alerts posted by CAMERA staff and collaborators on a closed listserv instructing would-be editors how to game the Wikipedia system so they could impose their hard-line pro-Israel agenda undetected.

An example:
“So, for example, imagine that you get rid of or modify a problematic sentence in an article alleging that ‘Palestinian [sic] become suicide bombers to respond to Israel’s oppressive policies.’ You should, in parallel leave a comment on that article’s discussion page (either after or before making the change). Avoid defending the edit by arguing that ‘Israel’s policies aren’t ‘oppression,’ they are defensive. And anyway Palestinians obviously become suicide bombers for other reasons for example hate education!’ Instead, describe how this sentence violates Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. One of the core principles is that assertions should adhere to a Neutral Point of View, usually abbreviated NPOV. (The opposite of NPOV is POV, or Point of View, which is basically another way of saying subjective statement, or opinion.) So it would be best to note on the discussion page that ‘This sentence violates Wikipedia’s NPOV policy, since the description of Israel’s policies as ‘oppressive’ is an opinion. [ bolding by senojekips] In addition, it is often noted by Middle East experts that one of the reasons Palestinians decide to become suicide bombers is hate education and glorification of martyrdom in Palestinian society …’”

The fact that they felt a need to attempt this "undetected" and quickly removed the evidence against them is as good as an admission of organised wrongdoing. Did you notice the piece about calling Israel's policies oppressive, being described as merely "an opinion". In which case I suppose, the Holocaust being a Crime against Humanity, would also merely be only an opinion?

As a result of attempts like this it is fast becoming common knowledge that Israel is (and has been for a long time) attempting to rewrite history, infiltrating many small lies, to support larger lies. You can't deny videos posted by the groups themselves. No other country in the world feels the need to rewrite history, because no other country attracts so much hatred, and "Where there's smoke, there's usually fire"

I'll give you the simple answer : jealousy.

Sorry, but that doesn't stand up to even the most casual scrutiny, The Jews of 17th- 20th century Poland and Russia were dirt poor and had absolutely no influence, as were the majority of Ashkenazi Jews throughout most of their European history, and yet they were detested and despised by all. I think that maybe you have been taking pages out of CAMERA's instruction book on "skewing" the truth.

 

[MontyB]

You always fail to see the big picture.

I think what you should have said was "You always fail to see my point of view" and that applies to you as well as everyone else in this thread.

I think it is very clear that your big picture is not the same as everyone elses big picture nor is it any more valid.

 

[VDKMS]

You support a universally despised regime that continually commits Crimes against Humanity, and you have the gall to say that I don't see the big picture??

In your book, the theft of a peoples country and the harassment, beating and gratuitous murder of those who resist is OK, and you tell me that I don't see the big picture?? If that is Zionist humour, I'm afraid the non Zionist world doesn't get it.

The only thing you see and are looking for are announcements and articles about anti-zionism and minimizing Palestinian attacks. That's the small picture. Did you know that Palestinian support for those attacks are very minimal?

Poll No. 180 from Nov. 02, 2011 (Palestinian Center For Public Opinion)
And asked to respond to the question: “Which of the following ways or options, according to your opinion, is the best for ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state: a) the negotiations up to the reaching of a deal between the Palestinians and the Israelis, (b) the non-violent resistance (peaceful popular demos), (c) working along with/ through the United Nations, (d) to hold an international conference that is authorized to impose a solution on all parties concerned, (e) violence, military actions, or (f) otherwise ?”, (17.6%) said “the negotiations up to the reaching of a deal between the Palestinians and the Israelis”, (20.9%) “the non-violent resistance (peaceful popular demos)”, (23.4%) said “working along with and through the United Nations”, (17.9%) said “by holding an international conference that is authorized to impose a solution on all parties concerned”, (5.5%) said “violence, military actions”, (10.5%) “otherwise”, and (4.2%) said “ I don’t know”

Valley of Peace initiative
- The regional area of Gilboa and Jenin has a long history of cross-border cooperation. In December 2008, community leaders from both sides of the border met to pursue cooperation on a variety of topics.
- Olives of Peace is a joint Israeli-Palestinian business venture to sell olive oil. Through this project, Israelis and Palestinians have carried out joint training sessions and planning. It has also led to Palestinian oil production being enriched by Israeli ingredients. It has produced olive oil which has been sold under the brand name "Olives of Peace.
- As of 2011, there are about 50 factories in the West Bank industrial region where Jews and Palestinians work together.

Or look here : Projects working for peace among Arabs and Israelis

In 2010, 82 Palestinians were killed by Israelis (Source: B'Tselem) and 188 Palestiniand died in traffic accidents (UN Global status report on road safety).

Proved? as usual. you haven't proved anything,... maybe in your own mind, as small as it is, although I have little doubt that the media is often far from neutral,... considering that most of it is owned by Jews.
The fact that they felt a need to attempt this "undetected" and quickly removed the evidence against them is as good as an admission of organised wrongdoing. Did you notice the piece about calling Israel's policies oppressive, being described as merely "an opinion". In which case I suppose, the Holocaust being a Crime against Humanity, would also merely be only an opinion?

Yes I did, in my post #75 from tread About Arabs in the Israeli Army (Page 8)
and I quote:
"You said : "Wikipedia being a site where the Jewish pro Zionist group CAMERA are known to operate"
This argument is invalid because it was exposed in 2008"

I've put in bold "are known to operate" said by you because they were exposed before they did anything. But they are not alone, “Wikipedians for Palestine,” a closed Yahoo group established in January 2006, allegedly engaged in similar practices, inviting Wikipedians “to combat anti-Palestinian and pro-Zionist bias in the English language version of Wikipedia.” The group has since been deleted, along with its archives.
The example you gave is purely hypothetical and not valid.

In a report just released on its Web site, Honest Reporting claims that Electronic Intifada, and not CAMERA, is “manipulating Wikipedia to achieve its ideological goals.”
"A closer look at Wikipedia’s inner workings, however, reveals there is more to the story. Research carried out by Social Media expert Dr. Andre Oboler, a Legacy Heritage Fellow at NGO Monitor, reveals that it was EI, not CAMERA, that manipulated Wikipedia to achieve its ideological goals."

Sorry, but that doesn't stand up to even the most casual scrutiny, The Jews of 17th- 20th century Poland and Russia were dirt poor and had absolutely no influence, as were the majority of Ashkenazi Jews throughout most of their European history, and yet they were detested and despised by all. I think that maybe you have been taking pages out of CAMERA's instruction book on "skewing" the truth.

Learn your history. Almost everyone was dirt poor during that period because of famine , diseases and wars. BTW Poland did not exists in the 20th century.