protests in Israel

Dear god; I'm debating with a 5 year-old. POLITICIANS MAKE DOMESTIC POLICY, both economic and social. Or does someone else?

 

Hint; when you get good advice, take it. Go act on a stage-you'll go down a storm at your nearest Comedy Store.

 

Your semantic weaseling is noted and is totally irrelevant. The point I am making is clear, the protestors are patriotic Israelis and zionists, their agenda is purely economic and social and has nothing in common with your and your ilks' virulently anti-Israel views. They want Israel to be stronger economically and socially, you want Israel to weaken and eventually disappear.

The attempts of the radical anti-Israel fringe to capitalize on legitimate economic demands of the Israeli working class are obvious, pathetic and desperate.

 

Ok, so you agree the protests are political, because politicians make policy? Good boy, you're learning. 'Semantic weaseling'? No, just trying to educate you. It's a tough job but someone has to do it.
Oh, and congratulations on trying to play the victim card; and who said anything about being anti-Israeli? I'm absolutely anti-Zionism but you clearly can't differentiate-or won't-because it suits your posturing.

 

Yawn! You can call it anything you like, I don't regard them political (the term has traditionally been used for protests demanding liberties, change of government, change of war policies etc as opposed to economic changes), you do and frankly I could not care less. The point is the views of the protesters are completely opposite to your virulenty anti-Israel views and your attempts to capitalize on them are disgusting.

Of course zionism: an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel . Your semantic weaseling and hair-splitting is once again noted.

 

You're embarrassing yourself. I'd stop digging right about now.

 

what cracked me up is he asked for some credible evidence from someone like the UN that Israel is oppressing (occupying) and when it was presented, would never address it.

 

Actually I asked for legal evidence confirming your accusations that the occupation is illegal. None of you Israel haters managed to come up with even a shred of such evidence. The closest was actually Margot who quoted a Palestinian representative saying that pending a political peace resolution of the conflict the occupation is in fact legal.

I also said that the Israeli protesters are honest hard-working patriotic Israelis who have nothing in common with your radical and rabid anti-Israel agenda and views and your hatred of Israel and that your attempts to capitalize on these legitimate democratic economic and social protests are desperate and despicable. Once again none of you little lying weasels was able to come up with a coherent response.

 

UN Security Council
Resolution 476
Date: 30 June 1980
Meeting no.: 2,242
Code: S/RES/476 (Document)

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

Vote: For: 14 Abs.: 1 Against: 0
Subject: Territories occupied by Israel
Result: Adopted

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

Security Council composition in 1980:
permanent members:
CHN FRA UK USA USSR

non-permanent members:
BAN GDR JAM MEX NIG
NOR PHI POR TUN ZAM

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


Middle East

United Nations Security Council Resolution 476, adopted on June 30, 1980, declared that "all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention".



United Nations Security Council Resolution 478, adopted on August 20, 1980, declared Israel's 1980 Jerusalem Law a violation of international law, and states that the Council will not recognize this law, and calls on member states to accept the decision of the council. This resolution also calls upon member states to withdraw their diplomatic missions from the city. The law declared Jerusalem to be Israel's "complete and united" capital.

The resolution was passed with 14 votes to none against, with the United States abstaining




and the last time i posted that, i included the link to the UN

it aint me that is weaseling...........................

i know what israel is doing is illegal

and the majority on the earth do too

it is the bigots and idiots that dont.

simply put; which are you?

 

The resolution was not about the occupation and most certainly did not declare it illegal. The resolution addressed one Israeli law (Jerusalem law) and declared it inconsistent with international law. This law is a totally separate legal matter which has not nothing to do with the legality of the occupation. Nice try bishadi but you failed too. And for a very simple reason - an occupation, pending political resolution of a military conflict, is totally and completely legal according to international law.

 

Comedy gold that one...You are not THE Borat by any chance?

 

So too, I seem to recall, did the Iranian president...Oh, just a minute, that's right, that was another Zionist lie as well....

 

The law does not accept indefinite military occupation and, besides, the Zionists, in their arrogance, have opted for illegal annexation. Nevertheless, Israel's home-cooked law in Jerusalem has been declared void. No foreign embassies exist there, not even the embassy of the US of AIPAC. Jerusalem was offered as international territory by Resolution 181 and the Zionists won't be allowed to cherry-pick the terms of UN Resolutions. Bishadi is correct. You ain't.

The section of your offering which I've highlighted is so desperately incorrect as to be hilarious. Unfortunately, Zionist brutality isn't funny.

 

The longer the Palestinians persist with this BS, the more they are going to lose. They fail to accept the consequence of their doing and find a solution that is just for all parties. Therefore the condemn themselves to decades of self inflicted misery.

 

Inflammatory tripe such as yours may well result in the Zionists finishing with a far smaller State than even Resolution 181 suggested. Military balances change, and it's only force- not reason- which has given the occupiers a toehold.
Zionists, go home. Whilst you still have a home to go to.

 

Where is that?

 

because the land occupied by the bigots is not israelis land. It was taken in 67 by force. Israel has a border that was approved in 48 and it does not include jeruselem.

that claim is either because of a reduced reading comprehension or because a liar is just a liar

40 yrs plus of law breaking and it is because of idiots, the occupation still exist.

ie.... no wonder the conflict still stands violent, liars are just liars

 

Ask them where they came from as the majority of them occupiers are from other countries hence 'occupiers'.

I mean, even the long necks comprehend that human beings that lived there were up rooted and sent into the concentration camp 'gaza' so that the freeloading bigots could move into the land.

ie..... even the israelis protestors recognize that, why cant you?

 

funny.... the thread is on israeli protestors telling their government to stop supporting the idiocracy.

kind of weird you aint read the thread before posting

the consequence of the last 70 yrs of oppression will be ww3

heck, then no matter the religious wingnut side, the place will be returned to thickets and no one gonna be there

the palestinians, didnt do anything. Ww2 came about and they were not in it, but then afterwards idiots pitied the 'self chosen' and enabled them to take over an occupied land after they terrorized the brittish for decades

the problem with the solution is few recognize who the bad guys are.

 

I wonder if we are about to witness the downfall of the criminal scum in the Knesset ?

 

Seems like someone is lying.

I wonder who

JERUSALEM — An aide to Israel's prime minister on Wednesday denied a claim that Israel offered asylum to Egypt's deposed President Hosni Mubarak several months ago.

The claim came from lawmaker Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a former Israeli defense minister, army general and longtime friend of the ousted Egyptian leader. He told Army Radio he proposed that Mubarak seek asylum in Israel's Red Sea port city of Eilat, on Israel's border with Egypt's Sinai desert.

He said the offer was made while Mubarak was still president, during a meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, an Egyptian resort also on the Red Sea.

"I met him in Sharm el-Sheikh and told him that the distance was very short, and perhaps this would be a good time for him to heal himself," Ben-Eliezer said. "I am sure the Israeli government would have accepted him, but he refused because he is a patriot."

Ben-Eliezer said the offer came from him and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Roni Sofer, an aide to Netanyahu, flatly denied that. "It never happened," Sofer told The Associated Press. "The prime minister never offered Mubarak asylum."

Ben-Eliezer's spokesman said he would make no further statements on Wednesday.

 

Any Zionists involved ?

 

Interesting enough in itself, but.......

There'd be ' Palestinian interest ' enough if the fascists, Lieberman and Netanyahu , were deposed and the Olmert government handed over to a war crimes court.

 

I suspect that Palestinians protesting would be deemed terrorists therefore considered fair game.

its OK for middle class Israelis to protest about perceived injustice - but not Palestinians.

 

Yes, the fascists' response to Israeli civil unrest will be to attack and rob Palestine. It's the sixty-year old script.