The recent surge in attacks against Israelis....

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: nightbringr

You keep on with this fantasy tale about how heroic it would be to run over a kid with a car. Was a car even involved.

As this grisly video shows, Ahmad Manasra, a 13-year-old Palestinian boy, is lying on the ground, bleeding from multiple gunshot wounds and struggling to cry out for help while an Israeli settler shouts obscenities at him. Throughout the length of the video, none of the officers or bystanders attempt to give the dying boy first aid or comfort as he bled out on the sidewalk, his lungs audibly filling with blood as he tried to speak.

According to Middleeastrising.com, Ahmad was being chased through the Pisgat Zeev neighborhood in Jerusalem — which was seized from Palestinians and annexed in 1967 — by a mob of Israeli settlers alleging he stabbed two Israelis. When Ahmad came across a group of police and IDF soldiers, police opened fire without attempting to search for a weapon or detain him. The settler filming the video shouted “Die! Die, you mother #er, die! Die, you faggot, die! Die, you son of a bitch!” The man shouted the slurs in both Hebrew and Arabic, to make sure Ahmad knew exactly what he was saying

LINK

Indeed we have. With people like you that think any thug, murderer, attempted murderer or more can simply be rehabilitated and turned out on the street without facing punishment for their crimes. 

What sort of punisment do you think is fair for someone attempt to murder someone else? Are you one of those eye for an eye types? Vigilante.

According to the geneva conventions SUmmary execution is legal when a un uniformed terrorist is captured or shot as they are in effect a Illegal combatant. You ar e not required to render aid to such a individual. Its not being a vigilante. IF he tried to kill someone with a weapon h e deserved what came after.(although the one abbas is talking about is alive)

a reply to: yuppa

Israel is not trying to operate under guidelines that are acceptable to the Geneva convention. They are operating under guidelines that are acceptable to us. I am telling you it is not acceptable to me. And I am also saying that the last time I saw a rally for Israel outside the Vancouver Art Gallery (a popular place for politics) there was 4 people...

a reply to: nightbringr

Then we agree on this fact. Funny thing is, 83% of countries worldwide recognize Israel as the true owners of the land.

Did you bother to read the date of when they recognized Israel? 1948.

Oh i see! You only object when America has its hand in things. This makes you a hypocrite with an obvious anti-western agenda! Great when China does it, but god damn those Yanks if they try!

Yes I object when my taxes goes toward murdering people excuse me for being human maybe you should try it once.

And you and all the rest of your ilk will say "Good riddance".

No me and my ilk will say you reap what you sow. But I'm sure you and your ilk will be more than happy to give up all your land so they will have a place to go to.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: buster2010

Your 'vision' of the future for Israel is contradicted by the fact that even Islamic nations are forming accords with Israel. Egypt, Jordan and now Saudi Arabia. Add in weapons deals with Pakistan, UAE, Morocco and Algeria.

It seems your goal is moving in the opposite direction........

Right now the people of Jordan are calling for it's leaders to break all ties with Israel. SA will go along with Israel as long as it's to their advantage when they have gotten what they want then they will dump Israel. Those other nations rank so low they hardly deserve to be recognized.

a reply to: buster2010

Now there's a nice peace of spin. Egypt, the largest of the Muslim nations, ranks so low as to hardly deserve recognition.

The 'people' of Jordan yeah, right. I'd say more likely is the people of Jordan have zero desire to have Israel as an enemy and have enjoyed their peace with Israel.

Buster2010, however says otherwise.

What did you do? Issue a Fatwa?.......

a reply to: buster2010

yep, right next door to your place....

originally posted by: buster2010
Did you bother to read the date of when they recognized Israel? 1948.

This article isnt about 1948, its about who still recognize them until this very day.

Try and keep up.

originally posted by: buster2010
Yes I object when my taxes goes toward murdering people excuse me for being human maybe you should try it once.

Yet you dont complain when Chinese pay tax to murder and suppress Tibetians and others. Huh. I suppose your only self-righteous when you have to pay for the bullets.

originally posted by: buster2010
No me and my ilk will say you reap what you sow. But I'm sure you and your ilk will be more than happy to give up all your land so they will have a place to go to.

Id have not the slightest problem giving up a slice of Canada to house Israelis. Im sure you wouldnt say the same.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: yuppa

Israel is not trying to operate under guidelines that are acceptable to the Geneva convention. They are operating under guidelines that are acceptable to us. I am telling you it is not acceptable to me. And I am also saying that the last time I saw a rally for Israel outside the Vancouver Art Gallery (a popular place for politics) there was 4 people...

IF they are "occupying" like you all say they are then the Geneva convention does come into play. Its very specific about illegal combatants. Did th e stabber terrorize th e public? yes. was h e in a uniform? no. ANd actually th e US army also goes by Geneva conventions as well if its in a zone its temporarily occupying and omething like that happens. The people stabbing are not in uniforms and therefore illegal combatants because they are acting for a group not themselves.

I just leave this here..

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I have serious doubts as to your motivations on this issue.

Having said that, the ONE point you make that allows me to think otherwise is your example of the Canadian shooting incident. I don't know it, but based on the posts that you two have made, I will make one attempt to clarify.

You perhaps recall the incident of the three U.S. off duty servicemen it France that subdued and disarmed the individual on that train. Yes?

They were labelled heroes. Properly and I assume you'd agree with that assessment. They were unarmed, the 'perp' was not.

At the extreme opposite end is this running over of a 13 year old by means of a car.

The commonality between the two is stopping at all costs the potential of, or any further, harm. Humor me on this point. Please.

You cite the Canadian shooting as the police went too far in that there were far too many bullets fired at this person, (paraphrased).

What the arm-chair quarterbacks in Canada omit is the well known fact that individuals that go to the extremes that this one apparently had, are often on drugs. Be they psycho-tropics, meth, various others well back over the drug era, they are very resistant to wounds. Multiple rounds required to overcome the adrenalin, sometimes even eventual fatal shots.

In these situations, especially if there are hostages, one shoots until the perp goes down. Period. Those officers will be exonerated, as they should be, IMO.

Back to the Israeli situation. The Israeli mindset faces similar overall situations since '48. Is there overreaction? Paranoia?
Inevitable. That is part of the insanity of war.

Having said that, stopping the act, as in both cases I cite in the above, trumps all other considerations. Once again, PERIOD.

That is the mindset. Applying normal considerations of police activity to an extreme, as in the Canadian case, doesn't apply. Hostage safety and self-preservation also trumps.

Agree or not, it is what it is.

If you, in fact, have a different agenda and are only using this as a 'soft' entry point to further weaken the Israeli position, you will ignore my point or move on to another.

Which will it be, I wonder...

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I have serious doubts as to your motivations on this issue.

Having said that, the ONE point you make that allows me to think otherwise is your example of the Canadian shooting incident. I don't know it, but based on the posts that you two have made, I will make one attempt to clarify.

You perhaps recall the incident of the three U.S. off duty servicemen it France that subdued and disarmed the individual on that train. Yes?

They were labelled heroes. Properly and I assume you'd agree with that assessment. They were unarmed, the 'perp' was not.

At the extreme opposite end is this running over of a 13 year old by means of a car.

The commonality between the two is stopping at all costs the potential of, or any further, harm. Humor me on this point. Please.

You cite the Canadian shooting as the police went too far in that there were far too many bullets fired at this person, (paraphrased).

What the arm-chair quarterbacks in Canada omit is the well known fact that individuals that go to the extremes that this one apparently had, are often on drugs. Be they psycho-tropics, meth, various others well back over the drug era, they are very resistant to wounds. Multiple rounds required to overcome the adrenalin, sometimes even eventual fatal shots.

In these situations, especially if there are hostages, one shoots until the perp goes down. Period. Those officers will be exonerated, as they should be, IMO.

Back to the Israeli situation. The Israeli mindset faces similar overall situations since '48. Is there overreaction? Paranoia?
Inevitable. That is part of the insanity of war.

Having said that, stopping the act, as in both cases I cite in the above, trumps all other considerations. Once again, PERIOD.

That is the mindset. Applying normal considerations of police activity to an extreme, as in the Canadian case, doesn't apply. Hostage safety and self-preservation also trumps.

Agree or not, it is what it is.

If you, in fact, have a different agenda and are only using this as a 'soft' entry point to further weaken the Israeli position, you will ignore my point or move on to another.

Which will it be, I wonder...

Oh no! A 65 year old that thinks everyone is on drugs and must be executed!!

RUUUUUUNNN!!!!!

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I have serious doubts as to your motivations on this issue.

Having said that, the ONE point you make that allows me to think otherwise is your example of the Canadian shooting incident. I don't know it, but based on the posts that you two have made, I will make one attempt to clarify.

You perhaps recall the incident of the three U.S. off duty servicemen it France that subdued and disarmed the individual on that train. Yes?

They were labelled heroes. Properly and I assume you'd agree with that assessment. They were unarmed, the 'perp' was not.

At the extreme opposite end is this running over of a 13 year old by means of a car.

The commonality between the two is stopping at all costs the potential of, or any further, harm. Humor me on this point. Please.

You cite the Canadian shooting as the police went too far in that there were far too many bullets fired at this person, (paraphrased).

What the arm-chair quarterbacks in Canada omit is the well known fact that individuals that go to the extremes that this one apparently had, are often on drugs. Be they psycho-tropics, meth, various others well back over the drug era, they are very resistant to wounds. Multiple rounds required to overcome the adrenalin, sometimes even eventual fatal shots.

In these situations, especially if there are hostages, one shoots until the perp goes down. Period. Those officers will be exonerated, as they should be, IMO.

Back to the Israeli situation. The Israeli mindset faces similar overall situations since '48. Is there overreaction? Paranoia?
Inevitable. That is part of the insanity of war.

Having said that, stopping the act, as in both cases I cite in the above, trumps all other considerations. Once again, PERIOD.

That is the mindset. Applying normal considerations of police activity to an extreme, as in the Canadian case, doesn't apply. Hostage safety and self-preservation also trumps.

Agree or not, it is what it is.

If you, in fact, have a different agenda and are only using this as a 'soft' entry point to further weaken the Israeli position, you will ignore my point or move on to another.

Which will it be, I wonder...

Oh no! A 65 year old that thinks everyone is on drugs and must be executed!!

RUUUUUUNNN!!!!!

That's what I thought......

a reply to: nwtrucker


You keep imagining from safely in your armchair how the Israelis must feel about the situation. But you never seem to think about what the Palestinians must be going through. You blame the Palestinian parents for the death of their children and say that if they would just leave, they wouldnt have to worry. Your not even thinking about the situation.

You picked a side first and then started brainstorming ideas to support it. It is not like you come back to neutral whenever a new circumstance arrises. You look at each circumstance from the side you have chosen.


What bugs me the most about Israel is they force me to take the side of Islamists. I dislike islam just as much as judaism. Both of them have nasty curse words to describe my religion
But the Israeli flag is Jewish religious symbol. Thats not cool in my books.

Why would you think one religious people would feel right about living and paying taxes to a flag of another religion. Why doesnt the US put a holy cross on their flag and see how many people still want to live there.

You say that muslims can live there in peace if they want then why did benny devide the population with reigion saying Jews need to vote or Islam could get control.

Israel says that Israel is a nation for all religions and then when they are defending its existance they say that Jews have a right to a nation of their own. Israel talks out of both sides of her mouth. I cant reapect that.

Then there are the hundreds of UN resolutions against Israel that they refuse to even consider. While they depopulate the Palestinians from their land, they claim that everyone is trying to persecute Jews. Its not even an adult arguement. Those require facts. It is just a soundbite. No facts to support it. Whi is buldozing whos land? And they bulldozed right over a reporter. That is how little they care about the rule of law.

Jews can live freely in any nation in the world. Even Iran whos current Jewish population has turned down bribe money from Israel to leave Iran. The Jews wont leave Iran. They are safe and happy in Iran.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm not suggesting that Israel is without it's issues. As you say the Islamists leave a bit to be desired as well.

I personally know Jews that have left Iran. I also know Muslims who have left Iran...more Muslims than Jews!! The Jews that left Iran I'm familiar with went to the U.S.. The Muslims, as well. One particular Muslim in know works at the same company I do, he was lashed for drinking and 'partying'. Even though the same religious leaders did the same many times themselves. Afterwards, he and his brothers cornered and slobber-knocked every one of those leaders. His father was told get them out of the country or they were dead men. He did so.

Many tales on both sides of inequities, however.

It's perfectly obvious if the right of return issue is 'non-negotiable' as Hamas and Palestinian Authority insists, then that democracy known as Israel will be trumped by the Muslim majority and, in effect, A 'Jewish State' will cease to exist.

Fair? Nope. Either way.

Someone is going to get the short end of the stick in this one. An impasse.

The difference between you and me, that I can see, is I'm perfectly fine with your choice. That's your business.

You, however, resort to name-calling, recriminations...on and on due to the fact that myself and others take the other side. You think you know what is 'right'. Everyone else is wrong when none of this is absolute. None of it.

I do not expect a peaceful resolution to this.

My druthers lay with the Jewish State....run as they see fit.

U.N. resolutions draw zero interest from me. That body's hypocrisies trump all. They need to be relegated to disaster relief, humanitarian aide and the like. All else, ignored as nothing more than rhetoric....

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm not suggesting that Israel is without it's issues. As you say the Islamists leave a bit to be desired as well.

I personally know Jews that have left Iran. I also know Muslims who have left Iran...more Muslims than Jews!! The Jews that left Iran I'm familiar with went to the U.S.. The Muslims, as well. One particular Muslim in know works at the same company I do, he was lashed for drinking and 'partying'. Even though the same religious leaders did the same many times themselves. Afterwards, he and his brothers cornered and slobber-knocked every one of those leaders. His father was told get them out of the country or they were dead men. He did so.

Many tales on both sides of inequities, however.

It's perfectly obvious if the right of return issue is 'non-negotiable' as Hamas and Palestinian Authority insists, then that democracy known as Israel will be trumped by the Muslim majority and, in effect, A 'Jewish State' will cease to exist.

Fair? Nope. Either way.

Someone is going to get the short end of the stick in this one. An impasse.

The difference between you and me, that I can see, is I'm perfectly fine with your choice. That's your business.

You, however, resort to name-calling, recriminations...on and on due to the fact that myself and others take the other side. You think you know what is 'right'. Everyone else is wrong when none of this is absolute. None of it.

I do not expect a peaceful resolution to this.

My druthers lay with the Jewish State....run as they see fit.

U.N. resolutions draw zero interest from me. That body's hypocrisies trump all. They need to be relegated to disaster relief, humanitarian aide and the like. All else, ignored as nothing more than rhetoric....

Those are some nice anecdotal stories you have there. The only name I have called anyone here is a vigilante. And for good reason.

Your entire arguement is soaked in anger and violence. You see no peacefull outcome becauae you seem to believe that violence is the only solution for anything.

Here is a thought. Take down the star of david a replace it with a flag that represents more than just Jews. Elect a body of government that is not drawn by religuous background.

If you think that the Jews have a right to their own nation and that they should be allowed to use violence to gain and maintain it then I hate to be the one to tell you but that makes you a violent religious extremist. A supporter of terrorism and a threat to all civilizations. You should think about that before you keep spreading your violence across the internet.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm not suggesting that Israel is without it's issues. As you say the Islamists leave a bit to be desired as well.

I personally know Jews that have left Iran. I also know Muslims who have left Iran...more Muslims than Jews!! The Jews that left Iran I'm familiar with went to the U.S.. The Muslims, as well. One particular Muslim in know works at the same company I do, he was lashed for drinking and 'partying'. Even though the same religious leaders did the same many times themselves. Afterwards, he and his brothers cornered and slobber-knocked every one of those leaders. His father was told get them out of the country or they were dead men. He did so.

Many tales on both sides of inequities, however.

It's perfectly obvious if the right of return issue is 'non-negotiable' as Hamas and Palestinian Authority insists, then that democracy known as Israel will be trumped by the Muslim majority and, in effect, A 'Jewish State' will cease to exist.

Fair? Nope. Either way.

Someone is going to get the short end of the stick in this one. An impasse.

The difference between you and me, that I can see, is I'm perfectly fine with your choice. That's your business.

You, however, resort to name-calling, recriminations...on and on due to the fact that myself and others take the other side. You think you know what is 'right'. Everyone else is wrong when none of this is absolute. None of it.

I do not expect a peaceful resolution to this.

My druthers lay with the Jewish State....run as they see fit.

U.N. resolutions draw zero interest from me. That body's hypocrisies trump all. They need to be relegated to disaster relief, humanitarian aide and the like. All else, ignored as nothing more than rhetoric....

Those are some nice anecdotal stories you have there. The only name I have called anyone here is a vigilante. And for good reason.

Your entire arguement is soaked in anger and violence. You see no peacefull outcome becauae you seem to believe that violence is the only solution for anything.

Here is a thought. Take down the star of david a replace it with a flag that represents more than just Jews. Elect a body of government that is not drawn by religuous background.

If you think that the Jews have a right to their own nation and that they should be allowed to use violence to gain and maintain it then I hate to be the one to tell you but that makes you a violent religious extremist. A supporter of terrorism and a threat to all civilizations. You should think about that before you keep spreading your violence across the internet.

What you omit is that same U.N. created Israel.

You use the cliques. I wish Israel survival. If that's extremism it solely due to the usual patter of labelling any view outside the direction one intends as 'extremist'. It is worn out and many see through it.

Your violence is manifested in your posts. It's your hate and obsession that drips from your words...LOL.

Your 'idea' of peace is Israel losing. It is gonna happen.....deal with it.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I'm not suggesting that Israel is without it's issues. As you say the Islamists leave a bit to be desired as well.

I personally know Jews that have left Iran. I also know Muslims who have left Iran...more Muslims than Jews!! The Jews that left Iran I'm familiar with went to the U.S.. The Muslims, as well. One particular Muslim in know works at the same company I do, he was lashed for drinking and 'partying'. Even though the same religious leaders did the same many times themselves. Afterwards, he and his brothers cornered and slobber-knocked every one of those leaders. His father was told get them out of the country or they were dead men. He did so.

Many tales on both sides of inequities, however.

It's perfectly obvious if the right of return issue is 'non-negotiable' as Hamas and Palestinian Authority insists, then that democracy known as Israel will be trumped by the Muslim majority and, in effect, A 'Jewish State' will cease to exist.

Fair? Nope. Either way.

Someone is going to get the short end of the stick in this one. An impasse.

The difference between you and me, that I can see, is I'm perfectly fine with your choice. That's your business.

You, however, resort to name-calling, recriminations...on and on due to the fact that myself and others take the other side. You think you know what is 'right'. Everyone else is wrong when none of this is absolute. None of it.

I do not expect a peaceful resolution to this.

My druthers lay with the Jewish State....run as they see fit.

U.N. resolutions draw zero interest from me. That body's hypocrisies trump all. They need to be relegated to disaster relief, humanitarian aide and the like. All else, ignored as nothing more than rhetoric....

Those are some nice anecdotal stories you have there. The only name I have called anyone here is a vigilante. And for good reason.

Your entire arguement is soaked in anger and violence. You see no peacefull outcome becauae you seem to believe that violence is the only solution for anything.

Here is a thought. Take down the star of david a replace it with a flag that represents more than just Jews. Elect a body of government that is not drawn by religuous background.

If you think that the Jews have a right to their own nation and that they should be allowed to use violence to gain and maintain it then I hate to be the one to tell you but that makes you a violent religious extremist. A supporter of terrorism and a threat to all civilizations. You should think about that before you keep spreading your violence across the internet.

What you omit is that same U.N. created Israel.

You use the cliques. I wish Israel survival. If that's extremism it solely due to the usual patter of labelling any view outside the direction one intends as 'extremist'. It is worn out and many see through it.

Your violence is manifested in your posts. It's your hate and obsession that drips from your words...LOL.

Your 'idea' of peace is Israel losing. It is gonna happen.....deal with it.

You omit that the UN gave the '48 boarders not the '67 boarders that was taken from a preemtive strike against its neighbors. Expanding boarders like that is not legal, is it?

Israel is carving up land and home, adhering to no laws. And then you stand there and say "deal with it..."

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Are Jews allowed to enter Mecca? or any non muslim for that matter? No.

Does this make Islam a violent extremist religion?

I dunno.... u tell me.

Would the roman catholic church give up the vatican grounds to other religions? No

Does this makethem a violent extremist religion?

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: buster2010

yep, right next door to your place....

So you are not willing to give up your land to the nation you worship to the point of idolatry? What a hypocrite.

a reply to: nightbringr

This article isnt about 1948, its about who still recognize them until this very day. Try and keep up.

Read the article again but slower this time. Many nations say that Israels expansion is illegal.

Yet you dont complain when Chinese pay tax to murder and suppress Tibetians and others. Huh. I suppose your only self-righteous when you have to pay for the bullets.

Why should I care? People of my nation go without so we can keep sending money to the biggest welfare nation on the planet.

Id have not the slightest problem giving up a slice of Canada to house Israelis. Im sure you wouldnt say the same.

You're right I wouldn't. Helen Thomas said it best.