http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6169107.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6168309.stm http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1968965,00.html
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/06/D8LRJ7A00.html http://www.thepoliticalpitbull.com/2006/12/video_dennis_ross_says_carter.php
Kenneth Stein is a jew (in case you have not noticed his last name) and is trying to silence and discredit Carter.
That Carter is anti-Semite and pro-Palestinian so what else would you expect from him? It's the same argument. Two different views and one man that's been a part of the BS for twelve years finally had enough of the one-sided ficticious views, and quit. I expect nothing less. He made a wise choice. Congratulations, no more kool-aid! Carter has a history of sympathy towards terrorists and dictators. Who would possibly expect anything less?
Out of curiosity, is there any evidence that blacks were bombing "white only" structures during apartheid?
Yes, they did. The blacks fought for their freedom in South Africa. When you are occupied like the palestinians and treated worse then animals, you not only have the right but the duty to fight the occupiers and fight your rights. I have noticed one thing. When europeans have invaded lands and the native people have fought for their lands and their rights, the europeans have always labelled them terrorists for fighting back. Somehow, the europeans expect the indigeneous population to accept their rule and submit to them. This happened in South Africa where Nelson Mandela and other ANC members were labelled "terrorists", in Algeria, where the french colonisers were calling the algerian freedom fighters "terrorists" and most recently in Iraq, where the iraqi fighters are called "terrorists" and "anti-iraqi forces". Somehow, it is ok for white folks to conquer people by force but it is not ok for the conquered people to fight back.
And this was during the long stretch of the occupation of south Africa? Do you have any sources? And just now, I would like to make sure that I understand you right. According to your views, the Palestinian people will not be happy with Gaza, and the west bank, but rather wish to take back all of the lands known either as Israel or as Palestine? And I highly doubt that the Palestinian people have been treated worse than animals. If an animal, or a group of animals were attacking the people of a country, and killing them, the government would take their forces and do their best to exterminate that population of animals, down to perhaps a hand full being left in zoos. The Israeli government has made repeated attempts at peace, and has attempted (although unsuccessfully) to target their attacks on those attacking the Israelites. Further, it is not exclusively Europeans who are occupying Israel, the state of Israel is made up of Jews and other Hebrews from every corner of the globe. And I actually have a rather distinct dividing line on what leads me to call someone a terrorist, or a military force. If they make their attacks primarily upon civilian targets, they are terrorists. If they target military forces or targets, whether civilians are caught in the cross fire or hit due to faulty intelligence or not, I call them a military force… though I must say I often add the qualifier that they must be wearing military uniforms to be considered members of a military force (and thus prisoners of war) under the Geneva convention. Unfortunately, in large scale conflicts, there is more and more a concept of ‘total war’ is used, where it does not matter what you hit, as long as it denies the military some form of resource… such as bombing a food processing plant to deny troops canned and non-perishable foodstuffs. Out of curiosity. Are you a Palestinian? If not, what makes you an interested party in this particular conflict?
Carter doesn´t exist.....he only want to have press...and the only way is talking bad about jews... We all know these kind of behavoir...its not new at all. Poor silly Carter...
Like in the case of Israel. Israel was Israel long before islam was ever invented. Arabs have occupied Israel for over a thousand years and the Jews finally bought/reclaimed their rightful land that had been occupied all these years. There is no entity with more experience at occupying other's lands, than islam. It set out and conquered by the sword. What lands did they return to their former owners?
I hate this shit. I have a racial backgrounds that has murder each each other over time; but I'm not going pick a piece of my blood as good or evil....that's bullshit. The mogolians conquered parts of Europe...raping and pillaging along the way (suggestions that they went as far as Spain). The moors conquered parts of Sicily, raping and pillaging along the way. Hell, ever wonder why 'white' europe has much darker hair around it's southern routes? It wasn't by mere chance. Shit happens in history...stop acting like one race is the evil one.
GTech, so if I follow what you are saying (I am not very bright), it is ok to ethnically cleanse an area of its current population just because 1000s of years ago, a different population used to live there. Under the same logic, would it be ok, let's say, for black south africans to kick out all the whites and make it a "black" state??? Or does this rule only applies to the jews? Also for your info, the jews did not buy or reclaim "their" lands. The Western World gave away over 73% of british-mandated Palestine to the Jews and did not give a damn about its current population who was made up for the most part of arabs.
Have you been to Israel, chief? The state isn't just white jews...it has arabs in it as well. Jewish 76.4% (of which Israel-born 67.1%, Europe/America-born 22.6%, Africa-born 5.9%, Asia-born 4.2%), non-Jewish 23.6% (mostly Arab) (2004) No one bitches how Jordan or Egypt took land (from the 'palestines') as well, but fuck-it...they're the same color, I guess. Doesn't matter, as much as the 'evil' white man taking land!? Or the fact they tried their ass off to prevent an independent state, because...maybe it would end their proxy war against Israel.
Can't say I'm following your twist here. I've made no reference to ethnic or religious cleansing, but I would submit that if someone where truly concerned about such, the first thing that comes to mind is the ethnic and religious cleansing by islamists in Darfur. Perhaps this can explain things better: http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.25260/pub_detail.asp Incorrect. Israel claimed it's territory as proposed by the UN. The Palestinians could have done the same, but rejected. Did someone say "peace and tolerance?" Further (regarding: not give a damn about its current population who was made up for the most part of arabs.) Looks like a pretty even split, with slightly more going to the Jewish side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel Remind me again, what territories have muslims given back when they conquered them? Does "zero" sound familiar? Did someone mention "peace and tolerance?" Like I said, Israel was Israel long before islam was ever invented. No entity has more experience in occupying others land, than islam.
Not to mention the fact that Tibet would really rather not be a part of China, but you don't see them bombing others. To be fair, until recently the IRA was a rather militant group that one might characterize as being a terrorist group, but when given a chance at peace, and a share in government, they took it, and quickly became more moderate.
So Islam was invented??? What about Judaism and Christianity??? So if you are so sure that Islam was invented, how can you know that Judaism and Christianity were not invented as well??
After my last reply, if this is the only thing you take exception with, I'd call it a success I expected more participation on your part.
Personally, I would phrase it "the birth/creation of Islam" but I might have made a verbal mis-step as well. To put another spin on the word, couldn't it be said that God "invented" the world and "invented" man?