Terrorism of Zionism

[zubin]

Mike you don't have to respond to this if you don't want. But if you do respond, I recommend you take your time. If you would like to end this conversation, I recommend that you gather some kind of positive conclusion so we can end it nicely.

[mike435]

dont worrry about the conlution i have gaind many

what bothers me is this

that you are willing (i want to use defend but that would be baiased on my part and you dont like defending hamas i dont see why but anyays) be objective on what hamas does?
what bothers me is that you are willing to look past the labaling becuase it is labaling?

i cant belive that you are objective on a group that uses hate and kills innocance intentionaly? for me being objective somwhats equates defend but i can see how defend is bayased so i wont use it

i am getting the feeling that you are no longer arguing with me for the sake of truth but just for the sake of winning the argument

the real problem here is that israel see's it unfit and immoral to negotiate with a group the delibretly inentionaly goes after the life of innocent israeli citizens? i was going to use terorist group but according to you that is to harsh and to byased so fine.

why should you car about a group that kills you inentionaly?

what frustrates me is that how can you someone who seems very educated definatly more than me can arrive at this conclution of being objective with hamas?

it makes me wonder if concentration or higher or accelarated knowledge in area of humanitys and libral arts take away from a persons wisdom?



like philosophy, physcology

[zubin]

that's absolutely ridiculous. From an objective analysis, it is clear that your arguments made no sense and that you contradicted yourself left and right. Your very last point here is that:

why should you care about a group that kills you intentionally?

Yet, in your earlier posts you said:

I don’t know what HAMAs’s mindset is the image of hams has only been painted by what I have seen in the news but I will go and research that.

Someone who doesn't know what Hamas' mindset is is putting me and the whole of objective sciences down because Hamas "intentionally kills you".

Do I have to point out it for you that "intention" is part of someone's mindset? If you understand that intention is part of someone's mindset, you can easily see how your argument is as nonsensical as a horse with wings. We're not in fantasyland here Mike, we're in the real world, talking about real things.

It's clear as day if you're willing to look out the window that I'm not defending anyone here. I've even agreed to immoral aspects of Hamas' behavior a few times. It's simply easier for me to be objective. I'm privileged not to have any allegiances, and have never had an allegience, while you are clearly born into a society that stigmatizes free thought that goes outside the status quo. But many, whether Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Spanish or African free themselves to look at the world objectivity and become privileged. And this doesn't mean the destruction of Israel or the defending of terrorism. It is simply liberation of the mind to look at things objectively, to understand all sides, accept one's faults, and find solutions that both work and are justified. No one may know the solutions, but at least if someone isn't scared of their culture shunning them away, they will be open to their culture's mistakes which may be enough to get things going. You may be right in every single thing you say, and I may be wrong. But you have shown that your strict allegiance is more important to you than objective discussion. The question you have to ask yourself is if you want to be privileged or not. I'm telling you that there are many liberating benefits to it, and I even go with the motto that "the unexamined life is not worth living". Maybe you should think about what is worth what. If you've already thought about it, and you prefer blind allegiance, I'm personally curious to why. Maybe I'm missing something.

[mike435]

blined alligence

look read my responses with out the pregetious that i have alligence even if i had alligiance

you talke about the image of hamas being painted yea i did say that, that was before my own research into hamas, and after that my hate for the group was even more elavated when i not only noticed anti zionism but anti semitisom as well to.

you talk about using objectivity lets use on Nazis to why not and why not we use it on neo cons or democrats

you keep refering to me not being able to define mind set of hamas and their for i should not be able to interpit theri intention

how can you objectivly with out a blined eye be objective of intentional killing of kids, does the suicide bobmber or hamas not know that at a disco tec they will kill mostley young teens who are their just to party

ramin what is their to intierprit if a group does that HOW CAN YOU BE OBJECTIVE

please show me the objectivity in intentionaly killing a chiled in knowingly you will kill a chiled doing it
show me how it would be ok for hamas to this and it would be ok for theme to have no moral dilemas

why are you creating a refuge for evil under the banner of objectivity

go read about hamas objectivly see their views the stand points

wikipedia is a good starting point after that try to colaborate their stated facts against what hamas website says that way you will know were hamas stands.

[zubin]

blined alligence

look read my responses with out the pregetious that i have alligence even if i had alligiance

you talke about the image of hamas being painted yea i did say that, that was before my own research into hamas, and after that my hate for the group was even more elavated when i not only noticed anti zionism but anti semitisom as well to.

How are they anti-semitic? There are various degrees of anti-semitism, and some are not even close as anti-semitic as the others. Hamas can only be reverse racist at best, given that Israel's racism has helped the displacement of Palestinians. Many people argue that reverse racism is justified.

you talk about using objectivity lets use on Nazis to why not and why not we use it on neo cons or democrats

Sure. Let's use objectivity with them. What's the point?

you keep refering to me not being able to define mind set of hamas and their for i should not be able to interpit theri intention

You blabbed some definition of terrorism based on mindset and you labelled Hamas as terrorist when saying you didn't know their mindset. This is enough to show that you are not objective and are just playing games to brainwash people to support Israel. Thank you very much. If Israel has arguments, it needs premises.

how can you objectivly with out a blined eye be objective of intentional killing of kids, does the suicide bobmber or hamas not know that at a disco tec they will kill mostley young teens who are their just to party

You obviously don't know enough about psychology and mindsets. Its not as simple as "the intentional killing of kids". Plus, the founders of Israel targetted civilian populations to gain power and form the state of Israel. So according to your argument, Hamas shouldn't recognize Israel.

show me how it would be ok for hamas to this and it would be ok for theme to have no moral dilemas

I didn't say what they're doing is right. I said your arguments are all flawed.

why are you creating a refuge for evil under the banner of objectivity

why do you like to go out of your home at night and murder people?

wikipedia is a good starting point after that try to colaborate their stated facts against what hamas website says that way you will know were hamas stands.

lol

[zubin]

blined alligence

look read my responses with out the pregetious that i have alligence even if i had alligiance

you talke about the image of hamas being painted yea i did say that, that was before my own research into hamas, and after that my hate for the group was even more elavated when i not only noticed anti zionism but anti semitisom as well to.

you talk about using objectivity lets use on Nazis to why not and why not we use it on neo cons or democrats

you keep refering to me not being able to define mind set of hamas and their for i should not be able to interpit theri intention

how can you objectivly with out a blined eye be objective of intentional killing of kids, does the suicide bobmber or hamas not know that at a disco tec they will kill mostley young teens who are their just to party

ramin what is their to intierprit if a group does that HOW CAN YOU BE OBJECTIVE

please show me the objectivity in intentionaly killing a chiled in knowingly you will kill a chiled doing it
show me how it would be ok for hamas to this and it would be ok for theme to have no moral dilemas

why are you creating a refuge for evil under the banner of objectivity

go read about hamas objectivly see their views the stand points

wikipedia is a good starting point after that try to colaborate their stated facts against what hamas website says that way you will know were hamas stands.

There are just so many ways that Palestinians can say the exact same things about Israel. In their perspective, Jews are producing a refuge for evil by defending Israel, because there are so many different immoral and terrorizing things done to them by Israelis, including the very same type of terrorism Israel is accusing Hamas of doing: targeting civilian populations. But there are other forms of terror coming from Israel that Palestinians can easily see as immoral.

So your argument totally falls apart, at least so far. If Israel shouldn't recognize Hamas, then Hamas and all Palestinians shouldn't recognize Israel. That's great Mike, great argument.

[donsaeid]

جايگاه انديشه به نژادي در صهيونيسم


مطالعات جديد بيانگر آن است كه شخصيت*هاي برجسته و پيشگام در نظام صهيونيسم، به منظور تضمين داشتن نسلي «بهتر» در پي عقيم نمودن افراد به اصطلاح پست، يعني كودن*ها، فقرا و بيماران بوده*اند و به اصطلاح در پي تحقق به نژادي در جامعه نوپاي خود بوده*اند؛ تجربه*اي كه تنها تصور بر آن است كه آلمان نازي آن را تجربه كرده است.


چكيده:

مطالعات جديد بيانگر آن است كه شخصيت*هاي برجسته و پيشگام در نظام صهيونيسم، به منظور تضمين داشتن نسلي «بهتر» در پي عقيم نمودن افراد به اصطلاح پست، يعني كودن*ها، فقرا و بيماران بوده*اند و به اصطلاح در پي تحقق به نژادي در جامعه نوپاي خود بوده*اند؛ تجربه*اي كه تنها تصور بر آن است كه آلمان نازي آن را تجربه كرده است.

عقيم نمودن بيماران رواني و تشويق به زاد و ولد در بين خانواده*هاي برجسته و محدود نمودن خانواده*هاي شرقي و ايجاد ممانعت در روند زندگي افراد بي*هدف، نمونه*اي از پيشنهادهايي است كه نه جزو برنامه*هاي رايش سوم كه مورد حمايت شخصيت*هاي برجسته نظام صهيونيست در اسراييل در خلال قيموميت دولت بريتانيا بود. اين انديشه كه با هدف بهبود ويژگي*هاي وراثتي نسل خاصي و يا به تعبيري ديگر، تحقق «به نژادي» بود، با حمايت گسترده*اي روبه*رو شد. اين حمايت كه براي ساليان سال پنهان شده بود، در نتيجة مطالعه*اي كه به ريشه*هاي ايدئولوژيكي و فكري نظام سلامت در اسراييل مي*پردازد، فاش شد.

در جامعه يهودي، پيش از تشكيل حكومت كنوني در دهه 1930، مراكز مشاوره*اي بودند كه به مشاوره زوج*هايي مي*پرداختند كه خواهان ازدواج و فرزنددار شدن بودند. در اتريش و با به قدرت رسيدن نازي*ها، مراجعه به آن*ها اجباري شد. در اين كشور، هدف اين مراكز دقيقاً رفتارهاي جنسي و ازدواج به ويژه موضوع منع بارداري در موارد خاص بود. آن*ها با توزيع رايگان و ارزان قيمت وسايل ضد بارداري در بين فقرا، در پي رسيدن به هدف خود بودند. اين مراكز در تل*آويو فعاليت خود را در بخش*هاي مهاجرنشين اين شهر آغاز نمودند.

آنچه در پي مي*آيد يافته*هاي ساشلاو استولدليس درباره تاريخ خدمات بهداشتي در دهه 1950 است كه موضوع پايان*نامه وي با نظارت پروفسور شيفزا شوارتس بوده است.

پدر نظريه به*نژادي، محقق بربتانيايي فرانسيس گالتون بود. وي اين واژه را كه به معناي «با اصل و نسب» است، براي نخستين بار در اواخر قرن نوزدهم به كار برد. هدف چنين به*نژادي*اي، بهبود نسل بشري بود. وي طرحي پيشنهاد نمود تا زاد و ولد در بين «بهترين مردم» در جامعه گسترش و در بين «بدترين عناصر جامعه» متوقف شود.

عقيم سازي اجباري

در سال*هاي پايان قرن نوزدهم و آغاز قرن بيستم، گالتون پيروان بسياري براي نظرات خود يافت، به*طوري كه انديشه*هايش در كشورهاي اروپايي و از جمله آلمان، فرانسه، ايتاليا، دانمارك، سوئد، بلژيك و نيز ايالات متحده و حتي كشورهاي جنوب آفريقا رواج يافت. در اين كشورها قوانين مختلفي تصويب شد كه به دولت اجاره مي*داد تا فقرا، مجرمين، كودن*ها، مسلول*ها، بي*عرضه*ها و افراد بيمار را به اجبار عقيم نمايد. تنها در ايالات متحده و تا سال 1935، حدود 20 هزار ديوانه، كودن، مهاجر، اقليت*ها و افراد با ضريب هوش پايين به اجبار عقيم شدند كه عمدة آن*ها هم ساكنان كاليفرنيا بودند. اين قانون در ايالات كاليفرنيا در سال 1979 لغو شد. طبق نظر دكتر فيليپ ديلي، پزشك و مدير اجرايي مركز عقب*ماندگي ذهني شريدر در سال 1986، حداقل در ايالات متحده، قانون عقيم*سازي عقب مانده*هاي ذهني (از جمله در اركانزاس، كلرادو، جرجيا، مينوستا، مي*سي*سي*پي، كاليفرنياي شمالي، كاليفرنياي جنوبي، ورمونت، اوتا و مونتانا وجود داشت. استواليس در اين*باره مي*گويد: «تصور بر آن است كه به*نژادي تنها در آلمان اتفاق افتاده است. اما اگرچه آلمان در حقيقت وحشتناك*ترين نماد به*نژادي بود، اما اين جنبش پيروان بسياري داشت و در هر كشوري، جنبه*اي از آن مورد توجه قرار گرفت. نكته قابل توجه آنكه، هم در آلمان و هم در اسراييل، رابطه*اي بين به*نژادي، سلامت و ملي*گرايي به وجود آمد. وي كه براي نخستين بار به طور اتفاقي با متون مرتبط با به*نژادي روبه*رو شد، در اين*باره مي*گويد: «در سميناري در مقطع كارشناسي ارشد، متني را ارائه دادم كه يكي از اساتيد در واكنش به آن گفت، چرا در ضمن ارائه آن بدين نكته اشاره نكردي كه اين متن ترجمه شده است؟ و من پاسخ دادم كه اين نه متني ترجمه شده كه متني اسراييلي است.»

پس از آن بود كه وي به تحقيق در اين*باره پرداخت و دريافت كه پزشكان و شخصيت*هاي معروف بسياري در گوشه و كنار به حمايت از جريان به*نژادي پرداخته*اند. حاميان اين انديشه، شخصيت*هاي برجسته*اي در نظام نوظهور پزشكي فلسطين يعني بنيان*گذاران، مديران و طراحان نظام سلامت اسراييل بودند.

از برجسته*ترين شخصيت*هاي اين جريان، دكتر جوزف مير پزشك سرشناس بود كه به مدت 30 سال مدير انجمن حفاظت سلامت كلاليت بود. استواليس در اين*باره مي*گويد: از اواسط دهه 1930، وي در اين سمت به تبليغ آموزش*هاي به*نژادي در بين مادران جوان پرداخت و آنان را نسبت به مسئوليت و تعهدشان در قبال داشتن فرزندان سالم و انحطاط و تباهي ناشي از عدم رعايت آن آگاه نمود. به عنوان نمونه، دكتر مير در سال 1943 در نخستين صفحه* اثر خود با عنوان «مادر و فرزند» مي*نويسد: «چه كسي محق بچه*دار شدن است؟ پاسخ به اين پرسش در به*نژادي يعني علم بهبود نژاد و حفظ آن از تباهي نهفته است. اين علم هنوز جوان است و نتايج مثبت آن مهم و عظيم است. مواردي كه در ذيل مي*آيد، نه نمونه*هايي نادر در جوامع و به طور خاص در جامعه عبرها كه نمونه*هايي رايج در اين جامعه است؛ جامعه*اي كه 1800 سال در تبعيد به سر برده و هم*اكنون به زادگاه خود بازگشته است. آيا به راستي متعهد به داشتن فرزندان سالم از لحاظ جسمي و روحي نيستيم. به عقيده ما، به*طور كلي به*نژادي و به*طور خاص ممانعت از انتقال اختلالات وراثتي، بزرگ*ترين ارزش است. پزشكان، ورزشكاران و رهبران ملي بايد به تبليغ اين انديشه بپردازند كه اگر مطمئن نيستند كه فرزندانشان از لحاظ جسمي و روحي سالمند، آن*ها را به دنيا نياورند.»

ليس در ادامه تحقيقاتش بود كه به نمونه*هاي متعددي از تبليغ اين انديشه در كتاب*ها و نشريات آن دوران رسيد. وي در اين*باره مي*گويد: «حمايت دكتر مير و ديگر افراد برجسته در نظام سلامت اسراييل از اين انديشه، براي ساليان سال است كه پنهان نگه داشته شده است. امروزه هيچ*كس در مورد اين فصل از تاريخ صحبتي به ميان نمي*آورد. در اواسط دهه 1950. مجموعه مقالات مير درباره به*نژادي در كتابي جمع*آوري شد كه البته مقاله*اي كه پيشتر بدان اشاره شد، در آن نيامده بود و علت آن هم اين بود كه يكي از ويراستاران كتاب در يادداشتي نوشته بود: «هم*اكنون و پس از تجربه به*نژادي نازي*ها، انتشار اين مقاله خطرناك است.»

ليس در اين*باره مي*گويد: «در خلال سال*هاي پاياني دهه 1930 بود كه نوعي ترس و رعب نسبت به به*نژادي در جامعه شكل گرفت و اين واژه*اي كه عمدتاً به نازي*ها نسبت داده مي*شد، ديگر به كار گرفته نشد و به سرعت سازمان*ها و نشريات حامي به*نژادي نام*هاي خود را تغيير دادند و سعي نمودند از ارائه هرگونه نشانه*اي كه مبيّن ديدگاه و نظريه آن*ها باشد، خودداري نمايند.»

ليس در ادامه مي*گويد: «صهيونيسم در دوره زماني و در فضاي ايدئولوژيكي خاصي كه انديشه*هاي مختلفي رواج داشت، شكل گرفت. تعدادي از پزشكان اسراييلي در اروپا تحصيل كرده بودند و در آن دوره زماني در كنار پزشكي، نظريه به*نژادي هم آموزش داده مي*شد.»

اما دكتر مير اولين پيشگام صهيونيست حامي به*نژادي نبود. مطابق مطالعات دكتر فالك، متخصص ژنتيك و مورخ علم در دانشگاه هبرو، ديگر متفكران بزرگ صهيونيست و از آن جمله ماكس نورداو، تئودور هرزل و دكتر آرتور رابين مدير انجمن جهاني صهيونيست از حاميان و مورجان به*نژادي بودند كه هدف آن*ها احياي ملي جنبش يهود بود.

رابين در كتاب خود با عنوان «جامعه*شناسي يهوديان» مي*نويسد: «در زماني كه اروپاييان بسياري در پي اجراي سياست به*نژادي هستند، يهوديان نه تنها در جريان پاك*سازي نژادي شركت نكردند، بلكه به همه اين اجازه را دادند تا حتي بيمارترين بچه*ها نيز بزرگ شوند و ازدواج كنند و حتي كار به جايي رسيد كه حتي كرها و كورها هم ازدواج كنند. ما بايد براي حفظ خلوص نژاد خود از بچه*دار شدن اين افراد جلوگيري كنيم.»

ليس مي*گويد: «بسياري از مردم به*نژادي را نوعي موضوع نظري مي*دانستند، اما حاميان اين جريان در اسراييل حتي انجمني تأسيس كردند كه هدف آن تحقيق درباره جنبه*هاي نژادي يهوديان و شيوه بهبود آن بود. آنچه كه سبب شد، بسياري به دكتر مير و گروه وي بپيوندند، نه انديشه نظري اين جريان كه واقعيت*هاي عملي آن بود. آن*ها در پي عملي ساختن اين جريان بودند.

نخستين انجمن در سال 1931 در تل*آويو شروع به كار كرد كه هدف آن توسل به شيوه*اي جذاب براي اغوا و انتخاب در بين مردم بود. در اينجا بود كه دكتر مير پزشكان را متعهد به سقط جنين نوزاداني مي*دانست كه احتمالاً فرزنداني خلاف خواست آن*ها بودند. ليس در اين*باره مي*گويد «ميريام آهرانموا متخصص زنان در مجموعه مقالات خود با عنوان «بهداشت ازدواج» به ارائه دستورالعمل*هاي به*نژادي براي والدين به ويژه در سنين 20 تا 25 سالگي مي*پردازد. وي اشاره مي*كند كه بيماري*هايي چون سفليس، سوزاك، سل، الكليسم، اعتياد به موادمخدر و بيماري*هاي روحي و عصبي از جمله مواردي است كه مي*تواند به صورت موروثي به نسل*هاي بعد انتقال يابد.» ليس در ادامه مي*نويسد: « در كتاب «مادر و فرزند» كه در سال 1935 منتشر شد، بحث به*نژادي در بين پزشكان به*طور جدي مطرح و گسترش يافت. اما اين سؤال مطرح مي*شود كه چرا آن*ها به زور متوسل نشدند؟ واقعيت آن است كه نظام شكل گرفته در اسراييل در آن دوره، قدرت و نفوذ فوق*العاده*اي بر مهاجران و پناهندگان داشت اما قدرت نظام پزشكي در آن دوران محدود بود. اين نظام، نظامي بود كه پاياپاي نظام سياسي شكل گرفت، تقويت شد و همواره با نارسايي*هايي همراه بود. كمبود پزشك، پرستار و تجهيزات پزشكي از نمونه*هاي بارز آن بود.

اما آيا به راستي به*نژادي از تاريخ حذف شده است؟ اگر چه اين فصل از تاريخ و فرهنگ غرب بسته شده اما آيا واقعاً امروزه اثري از به*نژادي وجود ندارد؟

ليس در پاسخ بدين سؤال مي*گويد:

«تفكر به*نژادي هم*اكنون تفكري زنده و پوياست. هم*اكنون اين انديشه در آزمايش*هاي پيش از زايمان و معاينات ژنتيكي مطرح مي*شود. مادران ترغيب مي*شوند تا فرزندان سالم به دنيا آورند؛ چرا كه فرزنداني غير از آنچه موردنظر است، مسأله*اي مشكل آفرين در جامعه اسراييل محسوب مي*شوند.»

[mike435]

look at the PA
israel goes to great lencths to make somthing work with the PA
why becuase i think the PA does genuinly want peace with israel


there is somthing flawed if israel can recognize the PA and not HAMAS
it means that israel does want peac and if it has peac it will give peace but not at the cost of apeasing a terrorist orginization like hamas

[zubin]

look at the PA
israel goes to great lencths to make somthing work with the PA
why becuase i think the PA does genuinly want peace with israel


there is somthing flawed if israel can recognize the PA and not HAMAS
it means that israel does want peac and if it has peac it will give peace but not at the cost of apeasing a terrorist orginization like hamas

I'm just curious mike. Do you have any logic behind your arguments or do you just like to say things without a basis and without consideration of counterarguments? Are you in denial of the fact that:

• Israel has targetted civilian populations in the past
  
• That it continues to use disproportionate means of securing its existence
  
• That it has continuously coerced Palestinians of their homeland and nation?

Do you really want to be one of those people who no one can "talk with" because they have adopted a view and are never willing to consider it false?

[mike435]

I'm just curious mike. Do you have any logic behind your arguments or do you just like to say things without a basis and without consideration of counterarguments? Are you in denial of the fact that:

• Israel has targetted civilian populations in the past
  
• That it continues to use disproportionate means of securing its existence
  
• That it has continuously coerced Palestinians of their homeland and nation?

Do you really want to be one of those people who no one can "talk with" because they have adopted a view and are never willing to consider it false?

israel fallowes rule of conduct maybe sometimes there are soldirs that go on their own williy nilly but the idf a whole does have codes of conduct and codes of engament
which does get enforced
one of their many codes of cunduct ihuman dignity
i dont see a code for hman diginity on the hamas doctrin anyways be objective with these people that of your choosing

now civilian population israel does stand it groun and like an electric fence and after you have ignored all sighns and have touched it you get electrcuted that is the check points and stuff

now assasianted killing unfortanity with those innocent people do die it is very unfortanate but now matter how mcuh you complain and stuff that is the reality the cheapest way to prevent more killing on both sides especialy israeli side is ti kill the terorist or master mined

belive me israelis are extremly cheap in every aspect of life especialy military life the strive for efficiancy and Conservation so they would be the last to want to use to much force remeber each missle or smart bomb is 100k that like 4 class rooms they could built

and couersing lets see
is it coarsing when you say i wont give you wat you want until you satisfy basic human norms
in other words is it coarsing if you say i wont give what you want(ie dissputed land) until you give my basic human rights ( security and constant attack of my life)

look you bring up good points i am stiking to what i have said but now i will think more about it if the tables had turned

[zubin]

israel fallowes rule of conduct maybe sometimes there are soldirs that go on their own williy nilly but the idf a whole does have codes of conduct and codes of engament
which does get enforced
one of their many codes of cunduct ihuman dignity

are you telling me that Israel respects human dignity in action, DAR AMAL?

You have not proven that in any way. In fact, I've brought many examples of how Israel does not care about human dignity in its foundation and in its current behavior.

i dont see a code for hman diginity on the hamas doctrin

Who cares if you don't see it. What matters is if it's there or not.

now civilian population israel does stand it groun and like an electric fence and after you have ignored all sighns and have touched it you get electrcuted that is the check points and stuff

Did you know that before it became the powerful country that it is now Israel targetted cilivians populations? According to your definition of terrorism, this makes Israel a terrorist state and no one should recognize Israel.

now assasianted killing unfortanity with those innocent people do die it is very unfortanate but now matter how mcuh you complain and stuff that is the reality the cheapest way to prevent more killing on both sides

Where's your proof for this? There are many other ways Israel could bring peace rather than killing officials and collateral damage against civilians.

and couersing lets see
is it coarsing when you say i wont give you wat you want until you satisfy basic human norms
in other words is it coarsing if you say i wont give what you want(ie dissputed land) until you give my basic human rights ( security and constant attack of my life)

These things will be coercion when you add the fact that Israel displaced Palestinians and killed Palestinians both intentionally and flagrantly.

[mike435]

israel did use terrorisom

irgun and i think the other group called matgal or somthign

what was their targets majority

british soldires
rail stations
and a horific attack on a hotel which did infact target civillians a sad moment

but mostley it was british soldires and probably arabs two but i guss they were both to busy fighting the british to focous on each other

[zubin]

then you have to be sympathetic to even Hamas, as in their perspective, they are dealing with the terrorist.

Its a hard thing to swallow, but it would be much more noble to understand the enemy's perspective and justifications, and act accordingly. If you can't say Hamas is a terrorist anymore in comparison to Israel, then you have to accept equality and be willing to negotiate with them.

Both sides have bloody hands, which means equality, and that both sides should be allowed to negotiate and be equally respected.

[mike435]

look the only thing i want to get out of this sub convirsation is that why do you care so much about hamas

after all this disscutions you agree that violance is bad
you agree disrespect for human dignity is bad
you agree that terrorising a human is bad

and hamas qualifys on all those aspects yet you still are protecting theme
how come i dont see that same condamnation you are using against israel being used against hamas

not based on my standards

[zubin]

The reason why we're talking about Hamas is first that you didn't respond to an earlier post of mine, and so I asked one of the many questions I have about Israel's behavior:

wow just read it been waiting for it

there is so much i want to counter on that i dont even know how to orginize it.

if you dont mined would be ok if we select perticular things from now on
example you pick some points that you really want me to explain my position and i will pick some point that i want to explain my position in.

why dont you repost things that you really want me to explain my self in.
if you want all i am ok with that too.

Sure. My main question for you for now is why Israel shouldn't negotiate with Hamas directly, regardless of Hamas' stance, and make the key compromises of 1967 plus the return of at least a large portion of refugees and prisoners which Hamas demands.

The reason why I asked this question is not to "protect" Hamas as I've said many times. The point is peace. You can not achieve peace with double standards, death, and destruction. Yet a confrontation by Israel with Hamas means those very things.

I've consistently explained to you that the actions you accuse Hamas of doing, and your reason for labelling them with the t-word, are the same actions that Israel has done in the past, and that your arguments were flawed for a variety of other reasons. You have not shown me or anyone in any way that Israel, however wonderful and free a country it is at the moment, is better than Hamas in relation to the conflict, and has any right to label Hamas while not labelling itself.

I was truly looking for your argument so I can see whether Israel has good arguments for its actions. According to your arguments, Israel does not have a good case for its actions. The point is not the "protecting" of Hamas or any other non-sense that you keep deriving from your psychological analyses of me. Rather, it is again, to see if Israel has good arguments for its behavior. As this does not seem to be the case, at least according to this conversation so far. The conclusion is that Israel's behavior, labelling and attitudes must change, because there's just no justification provided for them. The truth is pointing towards equality and much better behavior from Israel. When this equal footing is realized, there can be compromises from both sides and peace.