Forum:Israel/Palestine

Click here to add a new section to this page

Israeli executes Arab teen running from mob
A video shows that, once again, authorities in Israel simply lie about the circumstances of why they murder Arabs: Israeli authorities claimed that 19-year-old Fadi Samir Alloun was killed while attempting to carry out a stabbing attack.

But videos posted online show that the youth was executed in cold blood as he was chased by a mob of Israeli Jews baying for his blood.

As the video above begins, voices can be heard in Hebrew shouting – apparently at police – “Shoot him! He’s a terrorist! Shoot him!” and “Don’t wait! Shoot him!” Video here.


 * Another example of blatant racism by police authorities, assuming their class and race is right and the other is wrong by default. This is not all that different from white cops shooting blacks in America; in both instances, one group is the oppressor while the other is the oppressed. Like the whites, the Israelis are better off economically than the Arabs (blacks), and are given a pass. I would not be shocked if this leads to a Third Intifada (Palestinian Uprising). Even now, Israel is bombing Gaza. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:14, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There's speculation a third intifada is started. Today Israel barred Palestinians from entering Jerusalem's Old City. Violence has broken out all over Jerusalem. Israel is bombing Gaza.---Mona- (talk) 02:54, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Studied counter-terrorism in Israel. Brilliant professors, many of them secular, liberals who would tell me that being Arab in Israel is like 80% like being black in the US. Many similar issues going on there.--BlackProg (talk) 03:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The situations in the U.S. And Israel are so vastly different that it's best to just observe each situation for what it is and not get into an oppression contest. That trivializes everyone. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 03:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * An oppression contest? Really? I'm pretty sure the reason BlackProg used that analogy was to try to put what is going on over there in perspective for the rest of us who don't know anything about it (like me).
 * Look, I understand where you're coming from because I'm a lefty and social justice activist too. But please try to understand what someone intends to communicate before you talk down to them and denigrate their contribution as "trivializing everyone". Or better yet, just don't bring that over-the-top jumping-to-conclusions nonsense here to begin with, because it greatly damages the public's perception of:
 * The issues you and I are advocating for
 * The people we're trying to help, and
 * Social justice activism in general
 * And honestly, I very much like the work that RationalWiki does and I don't want to see it turn into another Tumblr in which the slightest perceived inconsequential mishap against one's personal blend of political correctness brings all constructive dialogue to a complete standstill in favor of a pissing contest. Eoan (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Just to give some non-electronic-jihad perspective on this thing... The notably not-Israel-friendly Huffington (or as I like to call it Fluffington) Post says that The Palestinian in question was armed and had attacked Israelis. Now of course I would have prefered a non-lethal solution, but in some cases you have to make a split second decision and if you got a gun and an armed bad guy in front of you, you're likely to say "screw the bad guy". So before we condemn the soldiers for what they did (and indeed by extension once again the state of Israel [Notice how the line of debate is totally different from when a person dies through police in the US?]), I would like to have some context and not some propaganda hatchet piece by Electronic Jihad or Mona. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 12:42, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The "hatchet piece" in EI included the allegation of a stabbing and I quoted that -- so there's your "context," but no evidence so far connects the teen to a stabbing. And whatever else is true, moral people do not execute a fleeing teen in cold blood. The video clearly shows the teen running from a mob screaming for his death and that he was shot when he was a not a threat to anyone. And btw, your whataboutery fails even as whataboutery -- I am very critical of the outrageous death toll of Americans kill by cops.---Mona- (talk) 13:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well I should have been clearer: Even if an unarmed human being is shot dead by police, nobody calls for an "end to the occupation". Nobody questions the right of the US to exist. Nobody calls for boycott divestment and sanctions until any of the objectives are met. And most of all, nobody questions the general right of a state to enforce its laws with force and deadly force if necessary. And we have to be perfectly clear here: An armed person with a knife attacked (most likely with the intention to harm and kill and possibly with the intent to draw retaliatory fire) one or several persons and was shot dead by security forces (military, if I recall correctly). This is an entirely different situation from what "black lives matter" is rightfully protesting against. And you have to keep in mind that there are currently non-negligible Palestinian terrorist groups who do even worse things thaen kniving people in the street. I have not yet heard of African Americans that blow themselves up in a crowded street in Dallas. If and when such things happen, there will of course also be a different response by security forces in the US. And to reiterate: I would have preferred to see the horrible human being with the knife rot in jail thaen him being shot dead, but maybe a non-lethal solution was impossible. As Israel is an open democracy with independent courts and a place where the law reigns supreme (none of these things are btw true for any of Israel's neighbors) I am sure there will be an investigation that will clear any wrongdoing if there was any. Unfortunately Electronic Jihad will have moved on to the next hatchet piece once the truth comes out. As they no doubt did when the Gaza flotilla turned out to have been not "peaceful" at all... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Thank God Israel is not as bad as it's neighbors" becomes a tired response when that's all you have to throw out for defense. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC).
 * That many people in the region do the same thing doesn't justify them doing it...nor does it justify calls for the disillusion of the country and forcible evacuation of citizens when they do it like every other asshole. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if the teen was "threatening to harm anyone" or not: it would seem logical to me that security forces treat a fleeing assailant as being still dangerous and to be neutralized as fast as possible - and, y'know, maybe planning to stab someone else in the future, for the same reason, if not stopped right away. I'd of course have preferred a non-lethal solution, but the fact is that solutions of this kind as reliable as a bullet to the chest aren't a thing yet. The moral path ain't as straightforward as "you don't shoot someone" in these cases... As for the crowd - give them a break. Again, waiting for an investigation on this. PS: I'm not particularly Zionist, nor am I right-wing in my sensibilities or callous towards the plight of ordinary palestinians - but let's remain reasonable here. NewFrenchHotness (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I haven't looked into this, but already I see Avenger is misusing source material for his own agenda. Huffington Post doesn't claim the Palestinian was armed or was attacking Israelis. The only people claiming this in the article are the police spokesperson, read again: "A Palestinian man was shot dead on Monday by Israeli police troopers after he stabbed and lightly wounded one of them at a military checkpoint in the occupied West Bank, a police spokeswoman said. [. . .] The army said the man approached a group of soldiers, telling them he felt unwell. As he drew near, he pulled out a knife and stabbed one of them. Another soldier shot him." In other words, Avenger has distorted the meaning of what was claimed, attributing a saying to a news source rather than the spokesperson, who has a self-serving interest in the matter and is not the most reliable source given the soldier's role in preserving a military occupation. Come on, I know you can do better than that. ChrisAmiss (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That makes it sound a little more legitimate, honestly, though this is so very new it would be good to have more information instead of very early preliminary sources. If someone goes forward and tries to murder a soldier, and as they react the guy turns away from the backup so he gets shot in the back, it's less like the previous iterations where it seems like the guy was at one side of the crowd and trying to get away when shot...far away from conflict or the soldiers.  It would be nice to wait to who the evidence supports.


 * Certainly not as presented in the original post, where a mob chased the youth down, cornered him, and soldiers just blew him away. However, I'll wait for the investigation.  -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken EmeraldCity. The first sentence quoted in my seminal post in this section states: "Israeli authorities claimed that 19-year-old Fadi Samir Alloun was killed while attempting to carry out a stabbing attack." The video shows a teen fleeing a mob yelling for his death, not a teen stabbing anyone.---Mona- (talk) 18:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course I am wrong, I'm not toeing the line and having an opinion of my own. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 18:43, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh for goodness sake, EmeraldCity, surely you know that you made an error of fact; facts, by definition, are not opinions. The original post included precisely the information you said it did not.---Mona- (talk) 04:28, 6 October 2015 (UTC) Israel murders kids all the time. Twelve-year-olds. A 17-year-old who threw a rock at a vehicle with in IDF colonel in it, who lied about shooting the boy dead to defend his life. The boy was shot in the back while fleeing -- again, a video tells the truth. One could spend all day linking to stories about Israel executing or wounding Arab kids and lying about why or how. They lost the benefit of the doubt long ago.---Mona- (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Adding: Israel threatened to arrest a 3-year-old for throwing stones and ransacked his parents' home. What The Most Moral Army does to kids is awful:

Human Rights Watch has condemned Israel over its "abusive arrests" of Palestinian children as young as 11 and of using threats to force them to sign confessions.

Israeli authorities regularly failed to inform parents of their children's arrest or whereabouts, the New York-based watchdog said in a report in July.

"Forces have choked children, thrown stun grenades at them, beaten them in custody, threatened and interrogated them without the presence of parents or lawyers, and failed to let their parents know their whereabouts," the report said. ---Mona- (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Nice strawman. I don't think anyone here has stated that Israeli police or the IDF are absolutely infaillible, incorruptible forces of good stafed only by superhumans: they are capable of mistakes like everyone else, especially under pressure (of course, every police and army force should be trained to remain cool-headed under pressure). Do you think that crowd just decided to get together and yell for the death of a Palestinian teen ? I do not know exactly the code of conduct of the Israeli army, but I wouldn't be too surprised if a fleeing enemy was still considered as a potentiel threat. An investigation needs to happen, obviously, but you've already come to your conclusion.


 * Also: your articles don't really go into enough detail, or are really too vague for me to judge. Twelve-years-olds getting shot is something ghastly indeed, but the circumstances are kind of important to know if this is "murder" or "shooting a teenager in self-defense". They also didn't arrest the three-years-old, in the end (will you blame them for being a little pissed when stones have been thrown at them, especially if such an occurence appears to be recurring ?). NewFrenchHotness (talk) 20:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

"They also didn't arrest the three-years-old, in the end" HAHAHAHAHAHA So, like seriously, that's what you think is a great defense of this event? Armed soldiers storm a home to rout out a toddler, but gee, they decided not to arrest him "in the end." God, I love the Internet.---Mona- (talk) 04:37, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * As I've said before, the only way anything will happen is if/when both sides take a look at what the British and Irish did and conclude that it's just not worth it any more. There's no one side to this that's even close to being innocent, so until they both decide they've had enough of blowing each other to smithereens nothing will happen. Then once they do there'll almost certainly be an equivalent to the RIRA pop up, and if they can resist that as well as the British and Irish then things can truly clear up. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 00:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised Mona found a way to shoehorn anti-Israeli sentiments onto this site. Yes, a dead 12-year-old is horrible, but you do have to consider that the officers didn't know what was happening, and just arresting an allegedly armed teenager who was most likely below the poverty line isn't going to calm these guys' nerves down. It happens to commonly here where I live, and let me tell you, it ain't pretty. Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 03:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "a dead 12-year-old is horrible, but you do have to consider that the officers didn't know what was happening," Uh-huh, well, I believe Palestinians are just a bit sick and tired of "having to consider" the lies and outrageous "justifications" issuing from Israel. More land stolen every day by fanatical and violent settlers, their children killed, penned up in the open air prison of Gaza...yeah, they sure have to "understand" a lot.---Mona- (talk) 04:33, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The apologetics I'm seeing for the shooting of a 12 year old is disturbing. Imagine if the roles were reversed and a Jewish child walked towards Hamas fighters. If I were a propagandist, I could argue that because Jewish settlers have been known to launch price tag attacks on Palestinians or tearing down olive trees, then it would only be natural for a Palestinian militant to treat a Jewish child settler with caution and fire upon him or her based on past experiences of settler attacks. Of course to even suggest a notion would probably be considered antisemitic, but I guess that's what happens when you have double standards. ChrisAmiss (talk) 04:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Bingo: "Of course to even suggest a notion would probably be considered antisemitic, but I guess that's what happens when you have double standards."---Mona- (talk) 04:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Looking at it that way, I think Mona makes some sense. I think it's just me, but this sort of thing happens all the time in the city I live in. Some mentally ill guy, homeless person, gangster, whatever almost always end up killed by officers, so I grew up with the notion that the police are in a constant fight or flight mode for some reason. I don't know where you come from, but in the city I live in, this shit happens all the damn time... Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 04:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The racism and violence Palestinians face from Israelis is different from even the worst blacks suffer in the U.S., by many magnitudes. Both are heinous, but the former is a world apart in degree.---Mona- (talk) 05:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I concede that Palestinians face severe and horrible punishment and discrimination, (mad props Mona) and it doesn't really compare to the time a guy got shot up in front of our rival high school because his parents aimed for a better life north of the border, but it doesn't give an excuse to automatically condemn all of Israel. It's like if everyone is condemning the federal government because a police officer murdered Freddie Gray. Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 05:05, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "but it doesn't give an excuse to automatically condemn all of Israel." Well, actually it does if you mean the nation-state as opposed to all who live there. Israel is founded (with great assistance from Zionist terrorists) on ethno-religious supremacism that "required" colonizing and stealing land from the indigenous population and ensuring what remained of that population was no more than 30% of the nation. Thw racism, violence and horrendous policies necessary to such actions and policies of course outraged the affected Arab population, which reacts like any severely oppressed peple would; often with counter-violence. Israelis broadly hate Arabs. Examples of Jewish Israeli individuals, groups and mobs screaming and saying vile things about the oppressed Arabs are legion.---Mona- (talk) 15:33, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Under that same logic, is a cartel member a Mexican terrorist? So, if a man gets killed by the local sheriff, does that give an excuse to condemn capitalist terrorists who have helped the US government attain power? Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think Mona is saying that all Zionists are terrorists, and Mona didn't even mention Mexicans, so I don't know why that's coming up. I actually think that you, Zexcoiler Kingbolt, are trying to imply that Mona holds a right-wing view towards Mexicans, which I don't think is the case. When Mona refers to 'Zionist terrorists', she means that Zionists have intentionally engaged in violence towards civilians for political goals, which is born out by the evidence. Mona is saying that the nation-state/polity that is "Israel" was founded upon a doctrine, Zionism, that strongly implies racial superiority and tacitly approves of violent methods of ethnically cleansing an area of land that rightfully belongs to one race. That's very similar to what Nazis thought about German superiority. I don't see Mona or anyone else saying all Israelis are terrorists, just as no one is saying all Palestinians are terrorists. The point is the nation-state has adopted an authoritarian and racist ideology that is mostly responsible for the violence we see there today. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 00:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'm not trying to imply that anyone holds right-wing views to any people, and secondly, thanks for clearing that up. Sometimes my bias gets in the way and my analyzation is shit, too. Well, I guess I owe -Mona- and Pbfreespace3 a big apology. Sorry. Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 00:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

"Israel kills toddler and pregnant mother in Gaza"
Among the reasons I find the activist journalists at Electronic Intifada invaluable; they report the under-reported facts of what actually happens when a people is occupied by one of the premier militaries in the world. This video shows Yahya Hassan embracing and bidding farewell to his baby daughter Rahaf in Gaza on Sunday.

“Wake up, my daughter,” the inconsolable father says, and asks relatives to “leave her with me.”

The toddler died along with her pregnant mother Nour Rasmi Hassan in an Israeli air strike.

Meanwhile, Israeli occupation forces shot dead two Palestinian boys in Gaza on Saturday and another child in the occupied West Bank on Sunday.

Israel claimed it was bombing two Hamas “weapons-manufacturing centers” after one of its anti-missile batteries intercepted a rocket fired from Gaza.

Maan News Agency also reports that Israel has shot 1,300 Palestinians with live, rubber bullets in October, including a 13-year-old boy who is dead. The Internet is abuzz with speculation that a third intifada has either started or soon will. That must be because of the inscrutable but awful religious doctrines of Muslims.---Mona- (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Judging by Electronic Jihad and similar blogs, Gaza has to populated by nobody except women, children, pregnant women and also babies, with the Hamas in general either being a philanthropic organization or a lie of teh evel Zioooooooooooonist media.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 14:12, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And Jews are some kind of fairy-tale creature like vampires that have to drink an ounce of Arab blood a day to survive. But what can one expect? UNRWA schools teach exactly that with UN money... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 14:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If the first and second intifada were good ideas that actually resulted in anything, then we wouldn't need a third one. It will only result in more needless deaths of Palestinians. Hentropy (talk) 23:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * not to mention needless deaths of Jews. And of course an ethnic cleansing and purge within the Palestinians... But shush... mentioning that constitutes whataboutism Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:41, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Today the Israelis shot a 10 15-yr-old (he really does look younger when fallen) Palestinian boy in cold blood and took his picture as he bled to death. (A Palestinian physician disseminated the picture on Twitter.)Youtube removed the video for having "shocking and disgusting content." But the iconic picture of him bleeding out is here. No oppressed people would tolerate what the Zionists have done to the Palestinians. No people. They will continue to mount resistance and many on both sides will die until the occupation and apartheid end.---Mona- (talk) 23:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sigh. There you go again. With your daily Jihad... Don't you ever get tired of anti Jewish and anti-Israeli propaganda? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:56, 12 October 2015 (UTC)


 * For the record even our resident anti-Zionist didn't get the age right on the first try. Goes to show how accurate her sources and her reading comprehension skills tend to be. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:06, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the only real outrage here is that a distraught Palestinian doctor tweeted the wrong age right after the event occurred. That dead boy bleeding out as the Israeli cops stand by and do nothing but kick him as the Zionist crowd screams “Die, you son of a whore!” is as nothing compared with my adopting the age first given on Twitter.---Mona- (talk) 00:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

In "liberal" Israel Avigdor Lieberman tops the list of those politicians who could best see to Israel's "defense." He beats out Netnyahu and is to the right of him. Liberman is the guy who says "disloyal" Palestinian Israelis should have their heads chopped off. This is the most popular politican in Israel:

In 2003, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Lieberman called for thousands of Palestinian prisoners held by Israel to be drowned in the Dead Sea and offered to provide the buses to take them there.

In May 2004, Lieberman proposed a plan that called for the transfer of Israeli territory with Palestinian populations to the Palestinian Authority. Likewise, Israel would annex the major Jewish settlement blocs on the Palestinian West Bank. If applied, his plan would strip roughly one-third of Israel’s Palestinian citizens of their citizenship. A “loyalty test” would be applied to those who desired to remain in Israel. This plan to trade territory with the Palestinian Authority is a revision of Lieberman’s earlier calls for the forcible transfer of Palestinian citizens of Israel from their land. Lieberman stated in April 2002 that there was “nothing undemocratic about transfer.”

Also in May 2004, he said that 90 percent of Israel’s 1.2 million Palestinian citizens would “have to find a new Arab entity” in which to live beyond Israel’s borders. “They have no place here. They can take their bundles and get lost,” he said.

In May 2006, Lieberman called for the killing of Arab members of Knesset who meet with members of the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority.’ ”

But don't say Israel is proto-fascist and behaving obscenely, or you are antisemitic.---Mona- (talk) 00:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Let's end the existence of the USA because of George W Bush and John Boehner! Let's end the existence of Germany because of these guys. Let's blame all ills that have ever befallen Europe on the existence of Hungary because of this guy Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Let's end the occupation and apartheid, and make some reparations.---Mona- (talk) 00:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should end the occupation of Gaza by the Hamas (if you ask Abu Mazen's gang, but he should be back in your good graces soon, trying to whip up a 3rd Intifada like Yasser his predecessor did). And the territory of what state does Israel occupy? That of Egypt, Jordan or that of the Osman Empire?
 * And FYI, there is no apartheid in Israel, the Israeli Arabs have much more rights than their brethren anywhere else.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 00:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Shush. Don't let your facts get in the way of Mona's preaching! You are practicing whataboutism. Even if you aren't. A leading civil libertarian has written so on Jihad daily. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Racism is dead in the U.S. because we elected a black president and there is no apartheid in Israel. Anyway, the non-existent apartheid and occupation must end.---Mona- (talk) 01:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Nice that you linked to your own personal hatchet piece instead of Wikipedia, which even acknowledges that the whole claim might just be a tad hyperbolic. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger, and to a slightly lesser extent Arisboch, I fail to see how you can condone the actions of Israel against the occupants of Gaza - call them what you will, Palestinians, Hamas etc. By associating yourselves with these actions you are displaying the most hateful traits possible in a human being. I find you despicable. Scream!! (talk) 01:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I like it, when you talk dirty *purrr* Siriusly, though, now you are apparently calling all residents of Gaza Hamas. I didn't do that, you did. If you think, that returning fire against terrorists, who hurl rockets, mortars and bombs at Israeli (and Arab-Israeli) citizens, is hateful, then fuck you and the horse you ride on.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 16:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There should be a button to thank someone for their contribution. (As is the case in newer versions of the software this page runs on). This. So much this. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This site has much better content than the Conservapedia, but it's tech sucks (and I'm not talking about like buttons and such stuff, I'm talking more about bugfixes, mobile view and SSL. People've been asking for it for ages, but the techs are doing NOTHING (David Gerard, where the fuck is your fabled RationalBeta (test plattform for running a new version of the Wikimedia software)???)).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 16:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wrote only about 25% of that section. Chris knows a lot more about apartheid in Israel than I do. And yes, facts are very difficult things for Zionists to deal with. In my extensive experience they find them most unpalatable.---Mona- (talk) 01:49, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well thanks for the compliment, kind sir or madam. I know it wasn't intended as one, but I have found people who hate Israel calling me names to be a very good indicator that I am on the right track. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Whoa, my confirmation bias meter just went off the charts! 141.134.75.236 (talk) 02:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger (and Aris, but especially Avenger) is definitely making it easy for Mona. That he (they) can't see that is rather sad. Dendlai (talk) 01:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)Do kindly explain on my talk page how you think this to be the case... And please mull about one question while you are at it (Mona claims to have already answered it but of course she hasn't) Why this focus on Israel? Why make up human rights abuses perpetrated by one of the nicest places in the Middle East (in terms of government) when there are plenty of real abuses (including, ironically against Palestinians) just a few hundred kilometers away? In the answer to this - I think - lies the crux of this problem. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * He didn't call you names; he pronounced you despicable for the quite specific behavior of "condon[ing] the actions of Israel against the occupants of Gaza." Which you do and which is, indeed, despicable. You behave as did those Western Stalinists who accepted that Stalin did some unpleasant things but insisted it was for noble reasons and was necessary. They were despicable, too---Mona- (talk) 01:58, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, he didn't condone Hamas at all. You seem to confuse something.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 16:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait, Hamas = Israel now? >.> 142.124.55.236 (talk) 00:29, 15 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * It's simply an issue of practicality. Fatah has made great gains in trying to grow international support for their statehood by trying to prove that they can be a functioning state that can coexist peacefully with their neighbors. Germany and Japan largely did not try to keep the fight up when it was clear they lost and their enemies had superior technology (most the atom bomb but other stuff too), and they quicker they accepted that, the quicker they were able to become a functioning state again after the war. It didn't matter that American GIs were raping Japanese women or any other injustice or indignity they suffered, fighting after a certain point is simply hopeless, and if you truly care about the lives of the innocent, you will play the long game instead of the short one. I have no great love of Israel or Netanyahu, but when you are defeated, you have to decide what is more important: life or principle. If you choose principle it better be a damn good one, and Hamas does not have one. Hentropy (talk) 01:57, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I think you are misrepresenting Germany during World War II here. I'd like to discuss this with you in some place where Mona won't bark in and accuse me of derailing this discussion. Your talk page okay? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "and Hamas does not have one. " Yes they do. Gazan civil society shares their demands and states that until they are met life for them is "a living death." They will not submissively subsist like that any more than the ANC and blacks would in apartheid South Africa---Mona- (talk) 02:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Why this focus on Israel?" The answer to that question is on my user page.---Mona- (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The same Gazan civil society that is shot at when it protests against Hamas? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 02:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Possibly. But they do not cite Hamas as imposing on them a "living death." That these professionals say of the Zionists.---Mona- (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hamas' demands are not simply that Israel be nicer, Hamas has repeatedly stated, proudly, that they want the Israeli state to end. The SCLC and ANC's demands did not have to do with ending other states, nor were they based on a hatred of others in their country, they just wanted a more just society. You can keep pretending that Hamas is some kind of freedom fighters, but their stated goal is not simply liberation (like Fatah), their goal is to destroy Israel and get revenge on Israelis. Long-lasting peace will never achieved this way. Hentropy (talk) 02:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Depending on what one means by ending (not, e.g., people dying or being wholesale uprooted), Israel should end. It must cease the occupation and its apartheid policies, both vis-a-vis Arab Israeli citizens and in the occupied territories. Moreover, Hamas is, contrary to your assertions and implications, engaged in resistance. (But I have actually said very little about Hamas per se, and certainly have not called them "freedom fighters.") Finally, you are out of date on the current positions and actions of Hamas. Please see the RW entry on Hamas (much of it by the very knowledgeable ChrisAmiss)---Mona- (talk) 03:06, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The Hamas Charter on what "ending" means is not vague. They want an undivided Palestine, one that is controlled by an Islamist government. The political wing of the organization has tried to appease internationalists by claiming that they no longer believe in their own charter, even though they will not revoke it. They can't revoke it or change the language, because the military wing won't let them, because that's what they believe at the end of the day. They have offered no other clear and consistent alternative to a material destruction of Israel as a state, they only pay lip service to western cameras so they can drum up sympathy. Indiscriminately targeting Israelis and carrying out terrorist attacks against them is not the behavior of a party that totally wants "two states with 1967 borders". Your actions have to match your words. It's also largely the same criticism I have of Israel, I have no great love for them or Likud, but their shortcomings does not justify or make up for Hamas' serious problems. Hentropy (talk) 03:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Again, please see the RW article on Hamas. It includes this: "However, the Hamas charter is considered irrelevant by its political leaders today, along with a US government study which mentions, 'Hamas has, in practice, moved well beyond its charter. Indeed, Hamas has been carefully and consciously adjusting its political program for years and has sent repeated signals that it may be ready to begin a process of coexisting with Israel'" You are attempting false equivalency. Hamas is one manifestation of Palestinian resistance to a grossly oppressive, ethno-religious supremacist, colonizing state. The African National Congress had its extremists as well (actual Stalinists). The ANC committed gross barbarisms. But that had nothing to do with its cause being just or the fact that the organization came to exist because of an oppressor.---Mona- (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I'm allowed to disagree with the government or any other entity on the issue. To me, Hamas does not act like an organization that wants to peacefully coexist with Israel. Are the rocks thrown at Israeli military or the rockets launched into Israel going to liberate the Palestinians? Really think about that question. What's the point of it? To provoke, to start a new war which will inevitably kill more and more civilians. That's the only function they serve, to make sure that Israelis will react to their provocations. If they were interested in peaceful coexistence, then their actions would reflect that. They would stop the pointless rocket attacks, stop the violent protests, stop teaching their kids to throw rocks and be martyrs for the cause, stop trying to build tunnels into Israel so they can carry out targeted attacks against civilians, and generally stop being what they have been since they came to power. I'm no great fan of the ANC's early days of resistance, "barbarisms" targeted at civilians is never justified, and using civilians as human shields is not, either. Mandela forswore the use of violence and practiced it, just as previous resistance activists have done in the past. From a purely strategic perspective, if Israel is truly the monstrous country Hamas makes them out to be, then they would slaughter civilians no matter what the Gazans do. But most everything Israel has done has been a reaction to Gazan provocation. "Innocent civilians" would not get shot if they were not throwing rocks and slurs at Israelis, and Gaza would not get bombed if they weren't firing rockets and building tunnels. Hamas knows this, they knew if they just stopped that the peace process would move forward, which is why they do not let that happen. They have decided that war and indefinite conflict with Israel is their long-term strategy. Hentropy (talk) 17:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "But most everything Israel has done has been a reaction to Gazan provocation....not throwing rocks and slurs at Israelis" FFS, that's as disgusting as it is false. And I mean, really? Slurs? It's just fine to shoot 13-year-olds if they say mean things about the occupation forces oppressing them? Moreover, if you think all those Palestinians throwing stones are Hamas, you are beyond reasoning with. Hamas is not the problem; the occupation and apartheid are. As for human shields, Israel uses them all the fucking time ADDING: innocent ARAB civilians, is who the IDF uses as human shields. Their own supreme court has said so and demanded that it end, but it has not---Mona- (talk) 17:40, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Again, stomping your feet and pointing at Israel does not justify anything. Two wrongs don't make a right. Forget about the slurs and Hamas specifically, how does firing rockets into Israel and teaching kids to throw bricks at soldiers help liberate the Palestinian people? How is that constructive resistance that might lead to peace and coexistence? Answer that question without making a tu quoque fallacy. Hentropy (talk) 18:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Just to point this out here: Mona inserted the BS into the Hamas article she herself quotes above... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Answer that question without making a tu quoque fallacy." Not a fallacy because not offered for the purpose of saying what you claimed about Hamas is untrue. (Tho it is.) You indict Hamas for something that Israel actually does in huge proportions, but now won't indict Israel. Moreover, what you call "stomping my feet" is moral outrage; that you would mention "slurs" as justification for Israel's depraved indifference to Arab life is beyond sickening. Finally, Avenger is wrong (this is usual). Chris made the edits which I have repeatedly directed you to in the RW Hamas article. (And even if I had made those edits, to discredit them on the basis of editor is, you know, fallacious.) You are both behaving in a morally reprehensible manner.---Mona- (talk) 19:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hentropy has the facts wrong on who initiatives the provocations, that tunnels were directed to civilians (they weren't, UN report says they only went for soldiers and this is ignoring the raids/buffer zones Israel conducts in Gaza) and the subject of human shields (a myth). Do you think you could link to the sources I provided Mona? ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:12, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I have frequently said I am no huge fan of Israel, but you're not defending Israel (otherwise I would take you to task on what Israel has done). You're defending Hamas, and defending other Palestinian extremism under the guise that they are "oppressed" and thus anything they do is justified. You cannot address my question because it hits at the core problem. You claim that the Palestinian extremists (resistors), no matter what they call themselves, are fighting oppression. I personally fail to see how anything they have done is effective at creating freedom for the Palestinian people, or even creating a long term peace with Israel. So again, without mentioning Israel or whatever they may or may not have done, how does throwing rocks at soldiers and firing rockets indiscriminately into Israel create a stable Palestinian state? How does that send the message that Gazans and Palestinians in general are ready to coexist peacefully? This is the root of the argument. We can argue all day about sources and facts, I can link many articles citing the usage of human shields and terrorist attacks and you'll just denounce it as Zionist propaganda that is 100% lies, and that we should believe 100% of what all Palestinians say on Twitter because they're entirely trustworthy and have no reason to lie. Fine. No one disputes the use of rockets. No one denies the use of intentionally attacking Israeli soldiers. No one denies the use of anitsemitic children's programming to incite children against Israel. Defend that, and tell me specifically how that will help liberate the Palestinian people. Hentropy (talk) 20:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I would agree that a non-violence movement would probably be the best option going forward. The historical context should be considered too. The first intifada was largely non-violent according to non-violence expert Gene Sharp, about 85%. And unfortunately, the first intifada led to the Oslo Accords which produced a Palestinian collaborator in the PA and more settlements to boot. So nonviolence can be tried, but when it was done historically, it failed, and that's one reason why the second intifada became more violent. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hentropy, there's no evidence of human shields. The human rights organizations have criticized Hamas for indiscriminate rockets, but they haven't found evidence of human shields. Refer to the Hamas page and its section on human shields. Don't fall for certain propaganda talking points. Human shields mean deliberately forcing someone to shield yourself from attack. And in all the cases documented by human rights organizations, they've always found that Israel has used them and not Hamas. That is not apologetics. Those are just the findings of the independent fact-finding teams who again, have criticized Hamas for war crimes.ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That is a misunderstanding then, because when I talk about human shields I mean intentionally building military installation in or near hospitals and schools, meaning that if Israelis want to attack those sites they will kill civilians as a result. That is much more costly and egregious, in my mind, than using a single person as a shield during a firefight. Military installations should be built away from civilian shelters, but Hamas uses them as shields intentionally because they know it will kill more civilians and get more people sympathetic to their cause. Hentropy (talk) 21:12, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The evidence isn't strong in this regard either. If you go through reports like 22 Days of Death and Destruction, Amnesty documented that people were attacked without fighters in the vicinity. The same goes for HRW. Israel has weapons at its disposal that can target within a meter, and at most, the closest a Hamas militant was to civilians was 50-300 meters. I cited this in another talk page before, but that's still a 49-299 meter difference that allows Israel to target discriminately. Most of the Hamas military positions were driven by the stationing of Israeli ground troops in civilian areas instead of the other way around. For example, during OCL, Amnesty noted: "In Gaza, Palestinian fighters, like Israeli soldiers, engaged in armed confrontations around residential homes where civilians were present, endangering them. The locations of these confrontations were mostly determined by Israeli forces, who entered Gaza with tanks and armored personnel carriers and took positions deep inside residential neighborhoods. A resident of a neighborhood in the center of Gaza City told Amnesty International that, as Israeli forces entered Gaza and as rumors spread that they were going to advance into the center of town, Hamas fighters located a 50mm mounted machine-gun in the street by the corner of his building." And that's not mentioning that Gaza is very densely populated, so fighters essentially have to line up like ducks. ChrisAmiss (talk) 21:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Obviously this is another deliberate attack. There is an ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, but Zionists always try to justify the atrocities. --Gh1900 (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If Israel wanted to do this, there'd be a Gaza Crater instead of a Gaza Strip.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 21:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well that's a bit over the top. Israel doesn't commit genocide. It does target civilians to terrorize them and instill fear. And it shows reckless disregard for civilians through indiscriminate weapons. But Israel's intention isn't to completely destroy a group. ChrisAmiss (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There can't be much doubt that Israel could kill every living thing in Gaza if it wanted to. They don't. Draw your own conclusions as to why. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hentropy now moves the goalposts by providing her very own definition of "human shields." Now, she's decided, that in the tiny area of Gaza stashing rockets and other military items too near civilian areas constitutes employing human shields. Which, she informs us, is "worse" than Israel committing the war crime of using innocent Arab civilians -- including Palestinian children -- over 1200 times. She is depraved, as are so many Zionists; Zionism turns people into moral monsters. LOOK AT THEM: "Nuh-uh, Israel doesn't do genocide, so it's all good" Foul.---Mona- (talk) 21:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Shove your namecalling where the sun doesn't shine, Jihad Mona.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 11:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Hentropy kind of did that. Fighting in urban areas is not an example of human shields. If that were the case, every country would be guilty of war crimes for that. I think using the term genocide goes too far. I think the term massacre is more appropriate. I would reserve he term genocide for deaths in the hundreds of thousands with a specific intent, like Armenian Holocaust, Nazi Holocaust, Rwanda, Cambodia, East Timor, Guatemala, etc. ChrisAmiss (talk) 22:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * We were operating under different definitions of "human shields" from the beginning, that's not the same as moving the goalposts. Intentionally building military installations next to schools when there plenty of other places to build them (or you could evacuate the innocents from the area). No one has been able to address the questions I asked twice, so maybe three times will be the charm: explain to me exactly how children throwing rocks at soldiers and firing rockets into Israeli territory liberates the Palestinians from their oppression. For the record, since I keep getting called a Zionist for criticizing Palestinians (sort of like calling everyone who disagrees with Israel an anti-semite, hmm...), I do not think the state of Israel should have been created and I think it was one of the great geopolitical mistakes of the 20th Century. I also don't think that slavery should have happened or that Europeans should have colonized the entire world, but there's nothing we can do about those things today. This is a very long conflict that has unfortunately been all too predictable, and Palestinians are not ultimately fighting for their own long-term liberation, they are fighting for vengeance. No different from extremist elements in Northern Ireland, South Africa, and countless other examples across the world and history. I just happen to hold both sides to the same standards, that killing innocents and indiscriminate violence is not acceptable, and that Israel should be punished for its own crimes against civilians, but that does not give Palestinians license or excuse to do the same. If they wish to fight a war for their own liberation, that is at least understandable, but they will lose, and they have to be ready for the consequences of their loss. Hentropy (talk) 22:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The only real claims for military installations next to schools comes from the IDF, which has a self-serving stake in the matter and is not reliable in that regard. Human rights organizations have gone through this and determined there's no intent nor strong evidence by militants to build installations near schools. And again, read the quote I cited above by Amnesty on how Palestinian militants were positioned in residential areas thanks to confrontrations being mostly determined by Israeli forces. The other stuff I agree with. ChrisAmiss (talk) 23:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

"We were operating under different definitions of "human shields" from the beginning," No, we were not. I don't believe you. You are lying. "explain to me exactly how children throwing rocks at soldiers and firing rockets into Israeli territory liberates the Palestinians from their oppression." I never said it did, but the stone-throwing is not, as you so absurdly suggested, done at the direction of Hamas. It is precisely the kind of protest behavior that naturally arises among oppressed peoples. You likely know this. Your preposterous claim to be holding both sides to the same standards is revolting. The Zionists are the oppressor and victimizers; the Palestinians are the oppressed and the victims. Let me conclude this with a quote from Moshe Dayan from his 1956 eulogy for an Israeli soldier who'd been killed by a Gazan: Let us not today fling accusation at the murderers. What cause have we to complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived.

We should demand his blood not from the Arabs of Gaza but from ourselves. . . . Let us make our reckoning today. We are a generation of settlers, '''and without the steel helmet and gun barrel, we shall not be able to plant a tree or build a house. . . . Let us not be afraid to see the hatred that accompanies and consumes the lives of hundreds of thousands of Arabs who sit all around us and wait for the moment when their hands will be able to reach our blood.'''

The clear-eyed monster Dayan got it. You, Hentropy, do as well.---Mona- (talk) 23:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * You know that Mona is down to her last attempts when she starts pulling out that Dayan quote... If he ever indeed said this... You do know that Mona has on occasion had trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality in the websites she frequents... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * In the unlikely event that anyone reading is not familiar with Avenger's intellectual deficits, it is not true that I have ever been observed to be confusing fantasy from reality in any context, including the one he cites. He deeply dislikes that particular quote from Dayan; Zionists usually do. One preposterously told me it meant Moshe fucking Dayan was a "self-hating Jew."---Mona- (talk) 00:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you really think it bothers me how many ways you'll find to call me dumb? I have it on good authority that my intellectual and rhetoric capacities are above average, so getting called dumb by someone who struggles with her own native tongue more thaen I do with my first and second foreign language does not really bother me. As for your mysterious mythical Zionists you like to quote... Well I'd like to meet some of them some time. They are probably somewhere in South Detroit or George W Bush' Texan birthplace... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger, your authorities are also very dumb if they are telling you you are smart. For you truly are dumber than a bag of rocks. Especially at a site like this, the deficits in your logical and analytical reasoning are extensive. Idiot savants can pick up foreign languages and still be unable to reason out of a box -- that's possibly you. It must be difficult for a man of high intellect like Arisboch to have you as his sidekick.---Mona- (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hentropy, a Palestinian answers your question
As it happens, I was reading my Twitter timeline and just saw this story linked. The reporter is a Palestinian writer based in Jerusalem:

“If you grow up in the camp, fear doesn’t exist for you,” said Qassam Dweik, a resident of Jalazone refugee camp, north of Ramallah in the occupied West Bank.

Qassam’s best friend, 14-year-old Ahmad Sharaka, was killed by Israeli soldiers on Sunday. He had been taking part in the ongoing confrontations between Israeli forces and Palestinian youth near the Beit El settlement colony.

“We know that rocks will not end the occupation, but it’s all that we have to resist,” Qassam explained.

... Ahmad quit school two years ago and his main focus became attending protests and confrontations in defiance of his family’s appeals.

“He was committed to the struggle from a very young age,” his mother told The Electronic Intifada.

Recalling the moment of his best friend’s killing, Qassam said, “We were together when the soldiers’ shooting intensified. I fled, but Ahmad insisted on staying and throwing rocks at the military jeep.”

“A soldier then chased Ahmad with his M-16 and shot him in his left ear,” he added.

“The army left him to bleed and only allowed the ambulances to take him after about 15 minutes,” It's generally best to let the victims speak for themselves. So, Hentropy, there you have it.---Mona- (talk) 23:44, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It seems more like an admission of what I was saying, two children who are likely uneducated, taught only to hate Israelis from the day they were born, throwing rocks not because it accomplishes anything, but because they're angry. He should not have been shot. Civilians were killed recently in Jerusalem, Israeli and Palestinian. Two Israelis were stabbed on a bus, something that Hamas then applauded by saying it was heroic to indiscriminately stab people. Are those Israeli's lives worth as much as a Palestinian's? Or do they deserve it, being oppressors who brought it upon themselves? Or are they just people, who are not responsible for things outside of their control? I cannot forgive indiscriminate and civilian-targeted violence, no matter who the perpetrators are or what they are fighting for. The Palestinian strategy seems to be built around the idea that if we wrong the Israelis enough, eventually those wrongs will add up to a right. But you seem to think that my criticism of the Palestinians means that I support Israel unconditionally, in fact my position can best be described as supporting no one. No one has proven themselves to be the better actor in the conflict, neither side is fully justified in what it does, and neither side has any kind of moral authority. No single event in the last few years has frustrated me more than the reelection of Netanyahu, and if I were President I would immediately reform our relationship with Israel and make it clear they will not get more support for the US if they are not willing to reform their own relationship with the Palestinians. I critisize the Palestinians so because I sympathize with them, and I want to see them being able to build up their own country and flourish, rather than launching into more suicidal conflicts that only ensures more war and death. Hentropy (talk) 23:57, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What bullshit. The idea that young Palestinians living in the West bank should have to be "taught" to hate Zionist Jews is preposterous. They live with fanatical Zionist settlers constantly staking more claims to their land, razing their homes, and burning their olive trees. These settlers, and other Israelis, can terrorize and even kill them with almost complete impunity, and they do. But you think these young people have to be "taught" to hate the people who do this to them and get away with it. I see.---Mona- (talk) 00:15, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd be curious to know how many settlers there are in Gaza... oh right, none. I'm sure no one taught them about Jews using leftover Nazi propaganda in school, either. Hentropy (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Right. The Gazans are simply penned up in an open air prison with insufficient electricity, little potable water and an economy destroyed by the occupation and its blockade. They, too, have to be "taught" to hate the people who stole their grandparents' land and locked them up in there. pffft---Mona- (talk) 00:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course they do, or else they gonna start to question the Hamas leadership and why's still in charge of the place since about 9 years.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 11:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * About Gaza there is just this small "irrelevant" issue that it has a land border with Egypt. If it were a prison (which to reiterate it blatantly isn't), it would have two people with the key. Yet for some strange reason only one is ever blamed for all the ills that have befallen Gazans. Including those that Hamas is blatantly responsible for... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Arisboch, the people of Gaza are not especially supportive of Hamas; opinions vary. But when their oppressor begins another round of murderous bombs and devastation, they do rally round Hamas. But it's grotesquely comical to think the people who stole their land and have penned them up in this small strip of land are a people the victims must be "taught" to hate.---Mona- (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * cough*Egypt*cough* Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 14:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger Please, the adults are talking. Also, not exactly a great and free crossing. Wanna know why it's usually Israel that gets slammed for this though? Because they are the ones who keep invading and attacking Gaza, not egypt, --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

If you care about Gaza (which you claim to do), why don't I ever hear any sound about this? Or the fact that Egypt could open its border crossing at Rafah tomorrow (and there would not be a thin Israel could do about it) yet for some reason they chose not to... Strange that, innit? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe you don't realize it Avenger, but Egypt is not a Zionist nation. No, Egyptians had nothing to do with stealing Arab land in Palestine and locking up the refugees in the open air prison of Gaza. The siege, occupation, blockade -- the military control of Gaza -- that is all a Zionist thing.---Mona- (talk) 15:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed, they did that and more, when they controlled the area, but since no-one here either gives a flying fuck about Arab infighting, no-one cares.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 16:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually do barely give a fuck about Arab infighting as long as I (as an American citizen) have nothing to do with it.---Mona- (talk) 00:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Arisboch, whether or not we care about Arab infighting doesn't matter. What matters is the actions and policies of Israel towards Palestinians, which can be influenced, if not controlled, by the United States. I don't think anyone here is saying what Egypt did when it occupied Gaza was a good thing. Yeah, so Egypt is demolishing neighborhoods in Rafah. I think the Egyptian government is bad and should be overthrown and replaced by a different government with the Muslim Brotherhood as a coalition partner in the parliament. Like it or not, 50% of people in Egypt voted for them, and they aren't going away. But Egypt is out of Gaza now. Their blocking of the crossing is terrible and is needs to stop, but isn't the same as saturation bombing an ENTIRE CITY for WEEKS. That's why we don't give it as much attention: because the magnitude and severity of Israeli government crimes is far, far worse. Until those crimes stop, we should continue to put the majority of our attention and focus on Israel rather than Egypt. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * One of the oldest Islamist organizations are a good choice for the Egyptian government?! Are you out of your motherfucking mind?!?! And about what kinda saturation bombing you are talking about, when you got less casualties in a battle in urban environment going on for months than in battles on a singe day?! You fuckin outdo Mona and Chris in your amount of bullshit per post.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 18:58, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer a democratically elected Islamist party over a secular fascist (Assad, Saddam, Sisi) dictator. And the casualties are documented by human rights organizations and the UN. They come to the conclusions that Israel does not exercise with caution, but rather recklessness and disregard of international humanitarian law. And Israel has a history of doing this as part of its strategic doctrine of reacting completely disproportionately, as can be seen in their conduct in the 50's, the 1982 Lebanon War, the military operations they undertook in Lebanon in the mid-90s and 2006, the intifadas, and Gaza. ChrisAmiss (talk) 00:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well if the people who have to live under a "democratically elected" Sharia-state are d'accord with it, who am I to doubt your superior wisdom (Mona having pointed out my stupidity repeatedly to me now)? But as an aside... Many many dictators (including religious ones, Arab ones and religious Arab ones) have wrecked up a higher skull count in days or weeks thaen the WHOLE Israel-Palestine mess (including the slaughters committed by Hamas) in all its seventy years (Not counting the Arab slaughters of Jews pre foundation of Israel) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't like it for sure, but a people's democratic choice should be respected. I treat democracy like free speech. You either support it or you don't. I don't think we should overthrow countries who chooses leaders we disagree with on political issues, no matter how conservative or far-left they may be (that is not a license of course for those leaders to commit atrocities against their people which may require a liberal intervention). I'm not disputing the casualties dictators have rattled up, but why are you diverting the subject? Should we discount the 9/11 attacks because only 3,000 people were killed? Should we discount the Srebrenica massacre because only 8,000 people were killed? ChrisAmiss (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Countries like Turkey, Azerbaijan, Tunisia, Albania, Kosovo, Bosnia, and Kyrgyzstan are all Muslim and have democratically-elected governments. None of them have Sharia law. Your argument doesn't hold up, Avengerofthe BoN. I agree with your point about dictators wrecking up a higher skull count, but that doesn't excuse Israel's behavior. If you are referring to Assad, Saddam, and Gadhafi, then I agree completely. They should not be committing those acts. Additionally, from a purely semantic point of view, if they people freely elect to restrict their freedom, who are we to stop it? What I just said was a rhetorical argument with the purpose of showing you that how people decide how they should live should be none of your business, and conquering the West Bank to stop Sharia Law (as just one example goal) is unjustifiable.
 * With regards to Arisboch, what is wrong with an Islamist organization being part of a coalition government with secularists, which is what I meant when I said "a different government with the Muslim Brotherhood as a coalition partner in the parliament". In fact, I specifically stated this to avoid the perception that I wished that the Muslim Brotherhood should be the sole governor of Egypt, which I do not personally agree with. Next, when I say 'saturation bombing', this is what I am talking about. More examples. It is true that Israel doesn't drop all of the bombs at once, unlike Vietnam, but the bombing still isn't consistent with targeted strikes against known soldiers like this. Even the Syrian Air Force is more accurate! Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It's bad enough to have Islamists any kind of say in any government whatsoever and I these pictures are fucking worthless without the background, circumstances and backstory.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 01:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

The recent growth in the number of Israel/Palestine WIGOs
A question to the old guard here: What do you think about the fact that the Israel/palestine thing seems to have come to dominate WIGO? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:22, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) If you dont like a WIGO, downvote it. 2) You added to "the problem", so fuck off. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I like it. I, however, have no intention of spamming it with gratuitous WIGOs. Just saw the first and then yours Avenger, and realized I really would have added that one about the Jew mistakenly stabbing another Jew anyway, had I thought about the WIGO page. The topic is timely and important.---Mona- (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I would complain about Avenger slyly re-using a poll number (with votes already applied) for his goat WIGO, but then I accidentally the anti-wifi knickers. Thanks to Paravant for fixing that. CamelCasePragmatist (talk) 15:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, I did not know it would do that. And yes I just used one of my two posts every hour just to say sorry. Paravant kindly binned me because apparently having a debate about RT's bias should not be done in the saloon bar... For whatever reason... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Not when framed around "Mona said some shit people should see it!". Edit Warring didn't help. Besides, you're a better user when you can only post every half an hour, it actually makes you consider what you say. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:04, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

As a representative of the "old guard.": We apparently have moved from Gender Wiki to Social Justice Wiki to Gamergate Wiki to Israel-Palestine Wiki. I, for one, welcome our new single-issue overlords. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:21, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't the first three all just be social justice wiki?--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:22, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't over-analyze my jokes, son. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I have three papers all about analysis due in the next 3 weeks, Over-analysis is all I am now.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 16:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I got your three words right here, pal: lumpers, splitters, and intersectionalists. From a distance they look a lot alike, but they hate each other's guts. Alec Sanderson (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should launch Rationalwiki: Project Israel-Palestine. I mean, the last "Project" attracted so many editors who stuck it out for the long term.Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Aging Hippie, you are mistaking the kinds of concerns that have rather recently percolated to the top in progressive circles for a single-issue focus. None of us who edit Zionism-related articles only edit those. You just don't yet grok that this issue has jumped into prominence with progressives. Gay rights in the U.S. are largely won; that topic doesn't need me any more. Drug policy is rapidly moving toward rational and just. So, I spend a lot of time now on an issue that is finally getting the attention it merits but is still in the needs-to-be-won phase. But, it's not, by any means, my sole concern.---Mona- (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * " You just don't yet grok that this issue has jumped into prominence with progressives." shut the fuck up when you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about -- ie, things I "grok," such as issues I have been following closely/active on since the 1980s. Just shut up and let the grown-ups talk, okay? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I hate to nitpick (actually, that's a lie), but "Just shut up and let the grown-ups talk, okay?" doesn't sound particularly 'grown-up' to me. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 16:54, 14 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Not my best moment, I'll admit. But for Christ's sake, Mona's assumption that they are part of some cutting edge progressive tendency that is finally militating for a cause that progressives have actually been militating for for decades, and their assumption that they know anything about what I "grok" based on a lame joke on a marginal lame website is laughable Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * AH, yes, this is not the first time you've assured me you know lotsa shit about the I/P issue; why, you've said you know more than I do. Great. But what you don't seem to get is that the grown-ups are now pushing the issue front and center. Take, e.g., the Nation magazine. Was a time there were almost no Palestinian voices there; Jewish Zionists and others were published, but there was little representation of the Palestinian side of things. That has changed in the last several years. Black Lives Matter and various black activists are joining with Palestinians in a unified movement. BDS is sweeping American university campuses. That is all to say: The issue has arrived. Leastwise, that's how the grown-ups see it.---Mona- (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ALSO Aging Hippie: I'm a grandmother. Not some young "whipper-snapper" who thinks her elders couldn't find Israel on a map.---Mona- (talk) 17:10, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * From where I sit, the issue arrived decades ago, and Palestinian voices were a big part of that process. Maybe we were just tuned it to different writers/tendencies/etc. Unless by "the last several years" you mean 30+ of them, your argument that it's only now that people are pushing the issue front and center holds no water for any campus scene (to name just one dimension...) I'm familiar with. Yes, the "Ferguson to Palestine" moment is an important and welcome development -- but it is part of a much longer trajectory. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually
There's actually been a lot of news popping up about Israel/Palestine lately in the general media. Insisting that it's all because of a few individual RW editors (in particular when we're specifically talking about WIGOs) seems kinda navelgazy. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 16:50, 14 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Did you just start reading the news? 'Cause most of the news sources I rely on pretty much address that issue on a more-than-weekly and often daily basis, and have been for decades. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Anecdote from about 25 years ago:Noam Chomsky, who, back in the day, was sometimes booked years in advance for speaking engagements, was asked about the topic of a talk he would give in the distant future: "The Current Crisis in the MidEast." (ie, because he knew that whenever he spoke, there would be one...) But only now, Mona argues, are "progressives" latching on to the issue. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * All sentences are to be taken relatively; context is everything, ya know? As for "have I been reading the news": yes, but 1) I don't live in the US so Israel isn't a regular hot topic here 2) what I'm saying is that it's increased in prominence and amount lately 3) I did say "in the general media". 142.124.55.236 (talk) 17:12, 14 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * I don't live in the US either, and much of the media I consume is from non-US sources. The issue is pervasive, and has been for decades. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 17:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That's just not true. It just isn't. I literally know of no one writing on the issue who takes that position. A sea change has occurred in the last 5-10 years. I know lotsa folks who see it that way. And, it comports with my lived experience.---Mona- (talk) 17:45, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This is not an argument you're going to win, Mona. There's been a slight uptick in Israel-Palestine specific news in the past week, but in general, it's been long-running, and oft-debated.  ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 18:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I've already "won." Reality is.---Mona- (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

You folks are smokin funny cigs if you haven't observed any of this: Ten years after Palestinian civil society issued the call for Boycott, Divestment from, and Sanction of Israel (BDS), people around the world have taken heed, building an international campaign for human rights that is acknowledged by supporters and foes alike as an increasingly powerful force.

"Effective grassroots BDS campaigning has forced some of the world’s largest corporations, including Orange, G4S and Veolia, to gradually withdraw from Israeli projects that violate international law," reads a statement released this week by the Palestinian BDS National Committee..."From major U.S. churches to private European banks, divestment from Israel is becoming acceptable and understood as necessary to bring about freedom, justice and equality," the statement continues. "In Latin America, major state contracts with Israel companies have collapsed after grassroots pressure."

What's more, the academic boycott of Israeli institutions is gaining steam, bolstered by the formal support of prominent associations, including the American Studies Association. Also, increasing numbers of student and campus communities are joining the movement, as exemplified by the British national student union's alignment last month.

All over: Europe, and now the U.S. -- especially on campus -- the issue is exploding. And no one is more aware of this than Netanyahu and Israel. They've just begun pouring millions into PR efforts, in partnership with billionaire Zionists in the U.S., to meet the tsunami of pro-Palestinian support. Fuck, they held an "emergency meeting" in Las Vegas to get this going. This is new.---Mona- (talk) 18:57, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * " A sea change has occurred in the last 5-10 years." If your argument is that "a decade = recently," then sure. Okay. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, in the U.S. it's about the last two years that the issue has exploded on campus. The Nation publishes Palestinians with some regularity in the last few years. This is new. In any event, Noam Chomsky is now an elder statesman but not the main event of the pro-Palestinian movement in the U.S. Max Blumenthal, Ali Abunimah, and others, are the names now and they are greatly weakening the grip the Zionist narrative has had on even the left in America.---Mona- (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 20:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Vile racist who is Israeli Justice Minister does whataboutery
Really, this is the favorite thing ever for Zionists; not just here at RW. Whataboutery is their talking point 1, 2 and 3. "Justice" Minister Ayelet Shaked -- who posted awful crap on FB calling Arabs "snakes" born to breeding Arab mothers -- says in this video interview that there is no 2-state solution and that the West Bank is not "occupied." It is "Judea and Samaria" and is "disputed." Interviewer Mehdi Hasan tries hard to keep the "Justice" Minister on point, but the whataboutery and other fallacies are strong in this one, as they are in so many Zionists.---Mona- (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And what about talking point 4? Siriusly tough, she did indeed write rather while things, but the reason you mention her writing this shit is to tar anyone holding the other views she's holding besides the horseshit she wrote about Palestinians as equally vile as her comments about Palestinians (nutpicking, that is), I suspect.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Arisboch, maybe you skimmed over this part but... she's the Israeli Justice Minister! Doesn't it trouble you that such a blatant racist is the head of the Ministry of Justice? Doesn't it say a lot about Israel's goverment when an extremist like this is allowed to run the Ministry of Justice? Hello? 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:36, 14 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * And she's not the only vile racist in a powerful position in Israel. All kinds of state-funded rabbis advocate genocide and that Arab lives are not worth a Jew's fingernail and other heinous shit like that. I don't toss around the "fascist" label promiscuously. Fascism is rising in Israel.---Mona- (talk) 20:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Pray do tell is there any Palestinian in a position of power who is not a vile antisemitic Jew hating maniac? Look for example what Mahmoud Abbas said just a few days ago... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:04, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And how would the alleged racism of Palestinians make the racism of Shaked any better? Tielec01 (talk) 23:16, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Real - or imagined - racism of an Israeli is big news. Antisemitism and racism by Palestinians is a dog bites man story. Ever wondered why? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:53, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Israeli racism -- which is acute, pervasive and virulent -- is only now beginning to percolate into establishment media. And that's just barely. Between the obscenity Israel committed in Gaza for 51 days in the summer of 2014, followed by burning a teenage Palestinian to death and then an Israeli cop beating the living shit out of his cousin who happened to be an American, it's beginning to dawn on people. But this is quite new. Moreover, Israel is the oppressor; Palestinians are the victims. It is far more understandable when the oppressed hate their oppressor.---Mona- (talk) 20:16, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

What do you call somebody who gets up in the morning and says "Today I'ma kill me some (blank)" gets themself a knife (or hatchet, or saw) and goes down the street to do exactly that? I don't know your term, but "victim" is not the first that springs to my mind Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Whether or not it's the "first" thing that springs to your mind, the Palestinians are victims of ethno-religious supremacist oppression by Zionists.---Mona- (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Exists only in your goddamn fucking excuse for a mind and go fuck yourself with a rolled-up toenail (Michael Rosen Youtube Poop overdose detected and I'm not even from Pennsylvania) cactus for justifying the knifing of Israeli civilians by terrorist.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Arisboch, do you agree that Israel maintains it's "Jewish character?"---Mona- (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Depends on whom you ask. If you ask the Ultra-Orthodox, they'd (probably) answer, that even Saudi-Arabia is more Jewish than Israel. Or how you define "Jewish character".--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm asking you. You. So: Do you agree that Israel maintains it's "Jewish character?"---Mona- (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Government officials like the Justice Minister can go around being openly antifilastinic, but anti-Palestinian oppression is all imaginary? Who's being delusional here, Arisboch? 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:11, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * You, of course. If she'd be an Palestinian Arab and saying the same about Jews, she'd be the hero of the day in both Gaza and the West Bank. You know what, scratch that, no way a women could become a minister in Gaza or West Bank (and even if she did, she'd have to wear a hijab or similar shit and kiss the ass of clerics all day, who call her inferior for not having the same set of genitals as them). Although, scratch that too, she'd be most likely shot to death for being an "Zionist collaborator" for being soft on the Jews "Zionist enemy".--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:23, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ... 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:27, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Arisboch takes the view that because I post such facts about the Israeli Justice Minister I am a Hamas mouthpiece.---Mona- (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't, you gaslighting fuckface. I agreed with you for thinking, that Shaked is a fuckhead for posting such horseshit on her Facebook page.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You agree that the horseshit she posted was horshit but then you call Mona various names for daring to imply that Palestinians are being oppressed by Israel? So which is your honest opinion? Or is your head just a mess of contradicting opinions? 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:38, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)


 * Oh no you don't. You objected to my posting that, and today told me the facts I produce are somehow the result of Hamas. Arisboch: Do you agree that Israel maintains it's "Jewish character?" ---Mona- (talk) 19:54, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And now he thinks the same about me apparently. *shrugs* 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:29, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)

I sometimes understand the Palestinians. Making yourself out to be the victim always and foremost is a comfortable way to go at live. Though it is certainly one that deprives you of all agency and makes live miserable once you see the first crack in the victim narrative. Not that any of the people present here exhibit such a narrative... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I suppose the point you're missing is that Palestinians are more so victims than Israelis. It is true that Palestinians say 'we're the victim' to get support; to some extent, it has worked in garnering international intention. You talk about a 'crack in the victim narrative'. Do you realize that Palestinians have had most of their arable land taken away from them by people who were not living there a few generations ago? Do you realize that cities are being saturation-bombed by Israelis to uninhabitability? You might also say we support Hamas. This is a blatant strawman of our positions and views. I am sure if you ask Mona that she will denounce any action of Hamas that involves killing or hurting civilians. The fact is we support resistance against Israelis killing mostly innocent people in Gaza and the West Bank. If a soldier of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades shoots and kills an Israeli soldier who invades Gaza, I cannot say with any honest that I condemn that act, as it is a defensive measure. Likewise, if a Hamas member tunnels into Israel and the IDF kill him, I don't mind that either. The point is that the Palestinians are overwhelmingly the victims by shear casualty count, and if you don't believe that, you probably haven't spent some time living in Gaza or Ramallah. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 00:32, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

"You still haven't answered my question"
Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No one's actually under the obligation to go along in or pay any attention to your blatantly anti-Palestinian narrative, Avenger. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 19:50, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * To beat the big drum for the Hamas like Mona or Chris do is in effect anti-Palestinian, not what Avenger writes.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Because there can only be one oppressor per population group? Wut? Are you even trying to make sense these days, Arisboch? 142.124.55.236 (talk) 20:00, 17 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * If I were a Palestinian who does not swallow the Hamas propaganda hook line and sinker, I'd go to the next Hamas guy and put a bullet through his useless head. It would be a Palestinian live lost for a good cause for a change. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:08, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Arisboch cannot makes sense on this topic. I've seen this time and again all over the Internet. Otherwise intelligent people who are Zionists find facts -- past and present -- about Zionists and Zionism exceedingly unpleasant and react as the proverbial vampire does to the crucifix. Name-calling and overwrought shrieking, such as we see here, is very common.---Mona- (talk) 20:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait. I don't understand why I'm being attached by Arisboch for allegedly putting out propaganda. I cite non-partisan sources and human rights reports. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Zionists do not credit the UN or NGOs. Not unless the latter are totally Zionist NGOs, at least not for any issue touching on Israel. It's almost quaint how you think you have a safe harbor in human rights orgs. You don't.---Mona- (talk) 20:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * In response to Avengerofthe BoN's original question: I call them a criminal. That is what they are. But do you honestly believe that these young Palestinian man think they will achieve political change by stabbing civilians? Of course not! That's not why they're doing it. They're doing it because they hate Israeli Jews. Random acts of violence against civilians like this is usually the result of systemic oppression of some kind, usually ethnic or religious. In this case, it is caused by the oppression of Muslim Palestinians by mostly Jewish Israelis. I oppose deliberate attacks against civilians in all cases. The best way to make these attacks stop is to remove the political and socioeconomic conditions that are causing them, namely the Jewish towns being built in the West Bank and the violent crackdowns on Gaza. Maybe the violence will decrease if Israel changes its behavior. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 00:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You know there have historically been several people several times who got up in the morning to kill Jews who were not by any stretch of the imagination oppressed by any single Jew or in any real way harmed by any Jew ever. But thaen again, those people had other reasons....Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 00:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And you think I don't condemn that? I absolutely do! I think randomly stabbing a Jew is not the way to achieve lasting peace and happiness there. But are you willing to condemn people who burn Palestinian homes and kill children in the West Bank? I just need to make sure we are on the same page here before we continue with the conversation. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 00:36, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am. The guys, who e.g. perpetrated the arson in Duma deserve a fucking bullet between the eyes or, at least, a very long prison sentence.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 00:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well agreeing with Arisboch has recently become my thing, or so it would appear, so I would agree. Though I have to slightly disagree on the issue of bullets to the forehead, as I am rather opposed to the death penalty as it does not give criminals time to think about what they did. Which imho is the worst punishment for any mentally normal person. And mentally ill people need treatment rather thaen punishment... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 01:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Which won't happen. It's rare for an Israeli Jew to be seriously punished for violence against an Arab. Jews in Israel have very close to total impunity for harming Arabs.---Mona- (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * --Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 01:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Arisboch, see below.---Mona- (talk) 01:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Jews have impunity to terrorize Arabs in Israel
Don't take my word for it, that's the determination of Yuval Diskin, the former director of Shin Bet, Israel's security service (Israel's FBI).

The two-state solution is becoming true for the Jews: The State of Judea is being built de facto side by side with the State of Israel. These are two nations whose differences are eclipsing their commonalities, a condition that is growing irreversible.

The State of Judea has different standards, different approaches to democracy, and it has two justice systems, one for Jews (Israeli law) and the other for Palestinians (martial law). Whether we want it or not, these two justice systems have divergent measures to adjudicate identical offenses.

Do nations have borders? Most of the time. These two states are separated by a clear border, the buffer zone/separation fence designed to distance us from Islamic/Palestinian terrorism but that, in fact, created a border between two Jewish states.

In the State of Judea, '''the laws are hardly ever enforced against Jews. In the State of Judea, there’s a gradual flourishing of anarchic, anti-authoritarian ideologies that are violent and racist and that are tolerated, from a legal point of view, by the Israeli justice system.''' In the State of Judea the (no longer tiny) minority of radical “Hilltop Youth” and their various supporters set the tone for the mainstream of religious Zionism.

Arisboch asked for me to support claim that Jews have near complete impunity to commit terror against Palestinians. Diskin is my Exhibit A and his whole article repays reading.---Mona- (talk) 01:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks more like Yuval having a row with Bibi than anything else.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 01:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * By State of Judea does he mean Israel's control of the West Bank and its discriminatory laws applied between the settlers and Palestinians under occupation? Just want to clarify because if it's the West Bank, human rights organizations concur on this point. But if it's within Israel, it may differ. ChrisAmiss (talk) 01:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes he means that. And to Mona, I don't mean to disagree with you in any way, but the repetitive posts about Israel get annoying. Eventually the argument is going to have to die down here, and be reignited later. I would be happy to debate nonetheless. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * is what they call the West Bank in Israel. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 01:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but Arisboch asked me for a citation, and I felt the topic is worth it's own section. Moreover, matters in Israel are currently very violent and tense, and approaching a third intifada. But yes, I know the Israel stuff is getting a bit overdone. As to what Diskin means, it isn't clear to me he means only the settlements. In fact, he doesn't seem to mean only those. He's talking about "Judea" as a separate state from Israel in having two justice system not demarcated by a physical border. But by different applications of the law depending on who the perpetrators and victims are.---Mona- (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So it basically seems like he is saying that "Judea" is going to become a mixed Jewish-Arab state, with Israel proper being a different, almost all Jewish state. Interesting experiment. I don't think it will work, for obvious reasons that go without saying. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Arisboch ignores reality: "Looks more like Yuval having a row with Bibi than anything else." Uh-huh.---Mona- (talk) 01:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

There's roughly 20% Arab citizens in Israel. 77% of which don't want to live in any other state but Israel. So bearing a major change in borders, Israel in the pre 1967 lines (which the Arabs affirmed where never meant to be borders of any kind) is and will for the foreseeable future be a multiethnic state of all of its citizens. Something that does not apply to any of its neighbors bar - maybe - Lebanon. And ironically enough Israeli Arabs have more rights thaen Arab Arabs... Or how many free Arab parties are there in the elections of Egypt who call al-Sisi names in public? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:27, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

A question to all who care about civilian deaths
The way I understand the different intergovernmental treaties on the treatment of civilians, they all acknowledge that avoiding all civilian deaths is impossible. They do however define criteria for "excessive" or "unnecessary" civilian deaths. One of the questions they ask is whether there was a clear military objective to the attack. Another question they ask is whether said objective could have been achieved with lower numbers of casualties. And a third question is whether efforts were undertaken to reduce the number of civilian casualties.

Now with that in mind, here come my questions:

Which military objective (if any) do the rocket attacks by Hamas serve?

Could said objective have been achieved with less civilian casualties or endangerment of civilians?

Which measures - if any - were undertaken by Hamas to limit or reduce civilian casualties?

In short, according to the definition outlined above (and if someone disagrees with said definition, I invite you to study the relevant international treaties and see where they contradict me) do the rocket attacks by Hamas the way they are conducted constitute the war crime of unnecessarily endangering harming or killing civilians? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The rockets are indiscriminate by nature so they are considered to be war crimes, but they are also largely symbolic First, Sisi closed the tunnels and Israel maintains the blockade, so logically speaking, it's unlikely that Hamas would gain more sophisticated rockets. So, the rockets were likely home made and something you'd see in a science experiment (an Israeli official called them pipes, Mark Perry of Foreign Police has an article on this). Second, because the rockets cause very little deaths (about 2 per year) and lack the necessary explosives, I would say they serve a symbolic objective rather than a military one; a reminder to the outside world that the status quo is unsustainable and that we're not dying without a fight. Third, the UN report did mention some examples of Hamas telling civilians to go to another location. Fourth the Hamas militants mentioned on their web page that they were attempting to fire at military targets, though this can be dismissed as self-serving like the Israel MFA. That's not mentioning the fact that Hamas statistically killed more soldiers than civilians last year, compared to Israel's combatant to casualty ratio. For all we hear about the most moral army in the world, it would seem the facts would say otherwise and that Hamas exercised more restraint last year than Israel did. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So in essence even you agree that Hamas is committing war crimes? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * According to human rights orgs, yes. However, their level of war crimes pales in comparison to Israel's level of war crimes within the conduct. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So, war crimes are ok if you are bad at doing them? Starting fights again and again and again and again ist ok, if you too dumb to understand that you are always the one losing? Interesting. --Irian (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't suggest that. I stated explicitly they were war crimes. My point was there's a tendency to seek false balance in a conflict, like say with Syria by focusing on the war crimes of the Syrian rebels or the war crimes of Iraqi Kurdistan in the conflict with ISIS. ChrisAmiss (talk) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

A procedural question
Why is there no "add topic" button here in this forum? It would help decrease edit conflicts and enable one to think clearly about the way in which a new topic is to be started... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Add section fa.jpg
 * There ya go, now there is. (It's in Persian, but I'm sure you won't mind that little detail.) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 18:49, 18 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * It doesn't appear at the top of the page for me. There is "read", "edit" and "fossil record" Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:54, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Add section MediaWiki screenshot.ru.png Нет проблем :)--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 18:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I know where it should be. Only it isn't. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I added a quick and dirty solution at the top of the page.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch. You do seem to have your way with PCs Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd consider myself something of an advanced beginner (e.g. I can't program, but I write a few primitive BASH scripts to take care of simple stuff).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 19:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

A topic we should discuss
Is Ma'an news reliable? Please have the discussion here in order to not shit all over the WIGO talk page. The rest of the community who does not care about this whole issue will thanks us for it Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

So how could peace be achieved?
Given the Hamas won't stop until all the territory between Jordan and Med is free of Jews (to wit: Their Charta). Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hamas is willing to accept a Palestinian state on the 67 borders as per their electoral platform. Hamas abides by the ceasefires and refains from attack as Israel acknowledges (I've cited this repeatedly to you, but your stubbornness is a huge detriment). Their charter has no legal standing and is a historical document. Plus, it was written by only one person without consultation of other Hamas members at the time, so it was basically one isolated member of the Muslim Brotherhood who wrote it.
 * Here's my suggestions
 * * Arms embargo, possibly disarming both Palestinian militants and the IDF
 * * Dismantle the settlements, or have the settlers achieve citizenship under a Palestinian government
 * * End the occupation and blockade, institute peace-keeping forces in the border areas and areas of general tumult
 * * War crimes tribunals for both sides. A truth and reconciliation commission. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If the charter wouldn't have no meaning, then they would've chucked it into the garbage long time ago. You can't simply bullshit it away.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 20:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well, that should go without saying... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * They actually have said the charter is irrelevant. Hamas will not likely change its charter if Israel continues to build settlements and hold claims over the West Bank. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So it still has a great importance, if they try to keep it as a bargaining chip!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 20:48, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Peace=/=Ceasefire. If Hamas were to ever line out any conditions that could even possibly result in them recognizing Israel and signing a peace treaty with it, there would be immediate peace-negotiations and some sort of resolution (and be it only a "temporary intermediate framework") within a couple of moths... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh and an aside: Disarming the IDF won't happen unless Israel ceases to be surrounded by entities like Syria, Hezbollah and (a bit further away) the Islamic Republic, the Islamic State and the Saudi thingy Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * They have. One of the conditions was a long-term truce lasting over 50 years and recognizing Israel provided Palestinians as a majority approve it. Well, same goes for Palestinians. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * All these entities have repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel. Not any Palestinian group, organization or state. And given the history of the Jewish people "better save thaen sorry" could just as well be inscribed on the gates of Tel Aviv... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, they haven't. They want the occupation and settlements to end. They're willing to accept Israel if these terms are fulfilled. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There's not all that much ambiguity to "mak bar Israel" which is chanted by Iranian leaders at least once a year. Neither is there to the statements by Hezbollah. Or those by ISIL... And against those Israel needs to have a credible threat of military defense. And if push comes to shove enough planes and tanks to make a war too costly even for lunatic eliminatory anti-Zionists... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What do those have to do with the Palestinians? ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You argued for the disarming of the IDF. I tried to explain why that is a very bad idea indeed. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Disarm the IDF?! What the flying fuck of drugs are you on?!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 10:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The wrong ones, apparently... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, not the cheery ones like khat, alcohol or ganja, since the IDF laying down their weapons or even relaxing their guard would, without fail, cause any (Islamist) regime and organization in the region to pounce Israel at once (as I'd suspect, even the ones currently having a peace agreement with Israel).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * As Bill Maher (I can hear the boos and hisses by Mona even now) once said: You kinda have to go eight and oh. (Sports metaphor, meaning, you can't lose a single time). Sadly that is true. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Read again, I said "possibly". I didn't say with certainty whether they should be disarmed. I only raised it as a possibility since Nutty-Yahoo keeps raising the issue of disarming the Palestinians, which might as well leave them dead if ISIS were to expand its territory. So, in the interest of fairness, disarming both would serve the cause of equality and genuine peace from both sides, no strings attached. ChrisAmiss (talk) 01:41, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * We should disarm Hamas as long as they don't recognize Israel. But nobody ever talks about that. Even Liebermann (who is probably as much to the right as right goes in Israel) is tacitly endorsing a two state solution through his idiotic "plan" of giving up territory in Northern Israel which is inhabited mostly by Israeli Arabs. I have never heard Hamas acknowledge the right of any Jewish state - even one limited to the beach of Tel Aviv - to exist... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 14:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Jews have impunity to terrorize Arabs in Israel
Don't take my word for it, that's the determination of Yuval Diskin, the former director of Shin Bet, Israel's security service (Israel's FBI).

The two-state solution is becoming true for the Jews: The State of Judea is being built de facto side by side with the State of Israel. These are two nations whose differences are eclipsing their commonalities, a condition that is growing irreversible.

The State of Judea has different standards, different approaches to democracy, and it has two justice systems, one for Jews (Israeli law) and the other for Palestinians (martial law). Whether we want it or not, these two justice systems have divergent measures to adjudicate identical offenses.

Do nations have borders? Most of the time. These two states are separated by a clear border, the buffer zone/separation fence designed to distance us from Islamic/Palestinian terrorism but that, in fact, created a border between two Jewish states.

In the State of Judea, '''the laws are hardly ever enforced against Jews. In the State of Judea, there’s a gradual flourishing of anarchic, anti-authoritarian ideologies that are violent and racist and that are tolerated, from a legal point of view, by the Israeli justice system.''' In the State of Judea the (no longer tiny) minority of radical “Hilltop Youth” and their various supporters set the tone for the mainstream of religious Zionism.

Arisboch asked for me to support claim that Jews have near complete impunity to commit terror against Palestinians. Diskin is my Exhibit A and his whole article repays reading.---Mona- (talk) 01:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks more like Yuval having a row with Bibi than anything else.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 01:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * By State of Judea does he mean Israel's control of the West Bank and its discriminatory laws applied between the settlers and Palestinians under occupation? Just want to clarify because if it's the West Bank, human rights organizations concur on this point. But if it's within Israel, it may differ. ChrisAmiss (talk) 01:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes he means that. And to Mona, I don't mean to disagree with you in any way, but the repetitive posts about Israel get annoying. Eventually the argument is going to have to die down here, and be reignited later. I would be happy to debate nonetheless. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * is what they call the West Bank in Israel. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 01:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but Arisboch asked me for a citation, and I felt the topic is worth it's own section. Moreover, matters in Israel are currently very violent and tense, and approaching a third intifada. But yes, I know the Israel stuff is getting a bit overdone. As to what Diskin means, it isn't clear to me he means only the settlements. In fact, he doesn't seem to mean only those. He's talking about "Judea" as a separate state from Israel in having two justice system not demarcated by a physical border. But by different applications of the law depending on who the perpetrators and victims are.---Mona- (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So it basically seems like he is saying that "Judea" is going to become a mixed Jewish-Arab state, with Israel proper being a different, almost all Jewish state. Interesting experiment. I don't think it will work, for obvious reasons that go without saying. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Arisboch ignores reality: "Looks more like Yuval having a row with Bibi than anything else." Uh-huh.---Mona- (talk) 01:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

There's roughly 20% Arab citizens in Israel. 77% of which don't want to live in any other state but Israel. So bearing a major change in borders, Israel in the pre 1967 lines (which the Arabs affirmed where never meant to be borders of any kind) is and will for the foreseeable future be a multiethnic state of all of its citizens. Something that does not apply to any of its neighbors bar - maybe - Lebanon. And ironically enough Israeli Arabs have more rights thaen Arab Arabs... Or how many free Arab parties are there in the elections of Egypt who call al-Sisi names in public? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:27, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 200 Israeli settlers attack Palestinian village with firebombs. Israeli police do not care and will do nothing.---Mona- (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Get another source then Ma'an News.
 * --Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 18:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Tut tut tut... You and your demand for facts and credible sources... That is a well known Zionist tactic... It probably has to do with your wild/wide eyes... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Cut the propaganda Avenger. Israel isn't the only multiethnic state for all its citizens. The Arab countries don't have great HR records, but they're diverse in their demographics (except maybe Saudi Arabia). ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a reply to Avengerofthe BoN's second to last post. Of course Arabs would like to live in Israel, it has had the benefit of having massive amounts of foreign aid and assistance, and has a military that assures that stability will continue long into the future. The economic success of Israel is going to drive people to stay there rather than move to Syria or Lebanon. With regards to your claim "Israel is a multiethnic state... that does not apply to any of its neighbors bar - maybe - Lebanon." Yes, Lebanon is multiethnic. Iraq's constitution guarantees that it is a multiethnic state (for Turkmens, Christians, Jews, Kurds, and Persians). Kurdistan in Syria is multiethnic (Assyrians, Turkmens, Arabs), and Turkey is multiethnic (Arabs, Kurds butnotverymuchnow, Greeks, Circassians). Egypt treats Copts very well. You're basically saying "Israel is more multiethnic and liberal than its neighbors". So what? Does that justify its behavior towards Arabs that aren't on its side of the 1967 borders? No! Pbfreespace3 (talk) 22:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

"Get another source then Ma'an News." No. I'll continue to use it unless and until someone persuades me it is generally unreliable. As far as I know, it is reliable; you haven't shown that it is not.---Mona- (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That is a start.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 18:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This should be moved to the forum . Where it belongs. Just sayin'.... But Mona will probably edit war about that and throw nasty words at me for even suggesting such a thing... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't need a sub-section on this administrative topic which is discussed above in its own section. PsyGremlin reinstated this substantive section and I'm fine with just one per page being on I-P. Indeed, if and when another starts, I'll move this one myself.---Mona- (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That an Israeli NGO doesn't like Ma'an is no shock. And the NYT merely says reports were conflicting. Ma'an has no reputation for general unreliability.---Mona- (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * BDS echo chamber sealed. Mazal tov.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 16:20, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Terrorists post videos teaching Palestinians ‘how to stab a Jew’
Nice, peaceful protests, huh?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 16:23, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There were peaceful protests in Syria too, before things got out of control. Were those also just a ploy to commit violence and murder towards Assad's nice, peaceful soldiers? 142.124.55.236 (talk) 16:36, 20 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * You won't hear Assad-apology from me, but maybe you could try it with his Holeyness Greenwald, he has a heart for both Assad and Putin (If Israel would be anything like Assad, Gaza City would've been renovated into Gaza Parking Lot).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 16:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I firmly denounce the murder of Palestinians by Assad and ISIS forces as it is currently committed in Syria. Do you? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Severely oppressed people virtually never are peaceful; some -- as the ANC did -- engage in barbarism. But their causes nevertheless remain just and the ultimate cause of the violence is the unjust oppression. Oppression like collective punishment (only for non-Jews) and stealing yet more West Bank land using IDF storm-troopers whose gas canister killed an old Arab lady. They threw firebombs at Palestinian homes, setting some on fire, local residents and medics said. Meanwhile, Israeli soldiers assisted the settlers by firing tear gas and live ammunition at Palestinians trying to aid families under attack.

One Palestinian was injured with live ammunition during the settler rampage.

Israel continued its campaign of raids and arrests in the West Bank, detaining more than 30 Palestinians over the weekend.

On Saturday, Israeli forces shot dead five Palestinians in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, alleging they had tried to stab members of its forces.

What people, anywhere, would passively accept that (and so much worse) and fail to hate the oppressor?---Mona- (talk) 16:45, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Cause stabbing random people is the way, right (what stupid motherfucker brings a knife to a gunfight, anyway)?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 16:53, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Stupid motherfuckers" being oppressed by one of the world's premier militaries and who are not permitted by their oppressor to acquire anything like a top grade of weapon. That's who.---Mona- (talk) 17:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ...by stabbing random people. Yay.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 17:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand that the violence is a reation to the oppression in their country, but viewing it as acceptable is only going to create a harsher reaction. The Palestinians can't win any kind of revolution. This may be a cherry picked example, but violence will always be used to justify more violence.--Owlman (talk) 17:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see how this would help anything but incite more violence. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 17:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "but viewing it as acceptable is only going to create a harsher reaction" It is NOT acceptable, any more than the ANC's necklacing was. It is merely the understandable result of a deeply frustrated and long-oppressed people. The cliche "no justice, no peace" is a cliche because it is true. And justice for Palestinians has been grossly lacking for many, many decades.---Mona- (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Arisboch, way to be dishonest. The image of the human body never said "how to stab a Jew", look again at the source the NY Post cites (the Times of Israel). It shows the body, not the words "how to stab a Jew" superimposed. The person who imposed those words was Danny Danon, an unreliable source given that he is Israel's UN ambassador.Source: http://www.timesofisrael.com/videos-teach-would-be-palestinian-attackers-how-to-stab/. Most of the people being stabbed now are soldiers, who are legitimate targets in a war. Targeting soldiers is not terrorism. Would you rather they be indiscriminate and target more civilians than soldiers like Israel did last year during OPE or during the suicide bombings? ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "War"? With what state is Israel at war with? And you're also lying, if you claim, that they make the fine distinction between soldiers, cops and civilians, when stabbing.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 18:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Palestinians. Well, they did go after 5 soldiers Sunday. And there have been images circulated in social media showing how to stab an IDF soldier. Not sure where I lied. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Show me the state "Palestinians" on a map, please. And the declaration of war, when you're at it.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 18:49, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * How about including a video of Jewish settlers in Hebron attacking Palestinian houses near the settlement of Kiryat Arba? Source: https://t.co/CotrGl2nvu. While we're at it, let's title this video HOW TO KILL AN ARAB, to provoke a reaction and sensationalize the violence.
 * They don't have a state at the moment because someone conveniently keeps building settlements that blocks the establishment of such a state. Hmm, who could that be? Militarily occupying someone for 50 years and colonizing their land, and then saying after that when they react that you're at war with the terrorists, yeah I'd call that a war and a conflict in itself. Let's not play semantics. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Not forgetting that the ICJ said people have a right to use force to achieve self-determination, so Palestinians do have a legal right to resist occupation and settlements of their lands. Attacking civilians is a no-no, but attacking soldiers is not. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Wait, just to be clear: First you argue that Palestinian deaths are justified because Israel is waging a defensive war, but then no one's in any war because that'd justify the targetting of Israeli soldiers? Which one is it? Pick one. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 18:58, 20 October 42015 AQD (UTC)

Arisboch asks where is Palestine on a map. Where was Israel before 1948? What are it's borders? Ands actually, Palestine was on the map. It had been for millennia. Much like Italy was an area well before it became a nation-state.---Mona- (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Elderly Palestinian women called ‘whores’ on Yad Vashem tour, while racism explodes across Israel

This week, a group of elderly Palestinian women were escorted to the Yad Vashem Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance musuem [in Israel] to learn about the Jewish genocide in Europe. At the entrance of the museum, they were surrounded by a group of Jewish Israeli youth who recognized them as Arabs. “Sharmouta!” the young Israelis shouted at them again and again, using the Arabic slang term for whores, or sluts. ...

Daniel Bar-Tal, a renowned Israeli political psychologist ... found that the racist, authoritarian trends that are increasingly pronounced in Israeli society are products of a “psycho-social infrastructure” dedicated to promoting “a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the Palestinians and insensitivity to their suffering.”

In April 2009, Yad Vashem fired a docent, Itamar Shapira, because he had discussed the massacre of Palestinians in Deir Yassin with a group of students from the settlement of Efrat. “All I was trying to say is that there were people who lived here before the Holocaust survivors arrived, that they suffered a terrible trauma too, and that we shouldn’t hide the facts,” Shapira told me a month after his firing. “Yad Vashem carefully selected what facts it wanted to present, but deliberately avoided things like Deir Yassin, even though its ruins were just a thousand meters from the museum.” What Arisboch and Avenger do is no different than the Zionist of Israel. Facts that upset the Zionist narrative -- and support the reality that they have grossly victimized the Palestinian people and are deeply racist -- are simply not to be credited, where they must be allowed.---Mona- (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Arisboch, here is that state, "Palestinians", on a map that Israel has attacked and encroached upon. By building settlements inside or in any way sending any kind of armed personnel into these areas without consent of the people living there, the government of Israel is de facto declaring war.
 * Arisboch et al, you know very well Israel is at war with some Arabs living inside the green line west of the Jordan River. Sometimes it is a cold war, other times it is a hot war. But to deny that there is a war there, however casualty-light, is denying what is happening right in front of your own eyes. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * There never was a Palestinian state. There is a de facto state in Gaza and another de facto entity in the West bank. There were however, several times before 1948 when a Jewish state was in existence. In fact, credible historical documents even establish reason to believe that at some time two Jewish states existed between Jordan and Red Sea. However, even though the Palestinian claim on the land is shaky at best if one takes the older claim to be the more valid one (which is a convention in law that I don't opine upon), Palestinians and Arabs had several chances to establish a Palestinian state. As a matter of fact, Jordan even claims they did. That state being Jordan. But even the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank could have their own state at peace with Israel. The just chose to say no to peaceful coexistence. They started wars of aggression and they lost them. They chose to follow al Husseini and Sadat, when they should have taken the hand Israel has always stretched out for peace. But I can fully understand that many Jews have learned one lesson from history: Public relations are irrelevant once you're dead. You first have to avoid being killed before you can ask what some guy in a cheap suit in Twiddenham is going to say. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The level of bullshit you spew is amazing. Israel has not stretched its hand out for peace. It has gone against the international consensus for resolving the conflict by being one of the 7 countries voting against the 165-country endorse resolution of two states on the 67 borders (Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine question). It's gone against the consensus of the whole world along with the US and some south Pacific islands Palestinians have called for a state on the 1967 borders which Israel has vowed not to follow. You're inverting the reality of the conflict and turning the perpetrators into the victims. ChrisAmiss (talk) 20:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


 * .... Really? Well thaen what is this? Do remember that at the same time the Arab states passed a resolution often called the "triple no": No peace, No recognition, No negotiations... Who was rejecting the outstretched hand right there? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you shitting me Avenger? Your source links to what an Israeli foreign minister and ambassador said. I mean come on Avenger, if you're going to cite sources, at least be impartial about it and don't cite the press release. You are not hiding the fact you are verbatim repeating what the Israeli government is saying by citing them, which leads me to declare that you're not interested in history as much as you are interested in being a propagandist. And you omit what actually led to the three no's. I have testimony by Odd Bull clarifying the events leading up to this, but I don't have the time now, so I'll cite it later. ChrisAmiss (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Stretching out your hand for peace is something you either physically do with your actual hand or you do it (mostly) through rhetoric. So yes, I would quote high ranking Israeli politicians on that (in their statements at the time, to be clear). Whom would you quote? And of course this forms a quite striking (and telling) contrast to the Arab statements of the same time. While rhetoric is not the only thing that matters, it does indeed matter a lot in international politics... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Then you concede you're not interested in independent analysis or skepticism, but rather parroting what a government says. Thank you for finally concluding my point why your edits to Israel-Palestine should not be included. Every leader says they want peace in public, even Hitler. Iran says they want peace and don't want a nuclear weapon. By your logic of rhetoric, why don't you trust them? Why are you changing the standards of peace all of a sudden? Peace isn't always restricted to those optiins. A genuine historian determines a contrast between a self-serving statement and self-critical one. Rhetoric may not necessarily match actions, as is the case with Israel when they say they want peace but provoke a war as in 67 and 82. You of all people should not rely on what a government's PR says. I would quote what a historian says or whatnan independent observer would say, not a self-serving statement by a government. If that were the case, we might as well cite the Hamas PR website when they say they only target militants. And I don't think you'd want that. ChrisAmiss (talk) 02:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you really as dense as you seem? My statement was that Israel has stretched out is hand for peace. In fact it may have even been part of the declaration of independence by Ben Gurion, but don't quote me on that one. Hence I made a point primarily about rhetoric, and even you won't be able to deny that the rhetoric of Israel in the first two and a half or three decades of its existence has markedly differed from the rhetoric of Nasser, Arafat, al Husseini or the Arab League. Some (not all) Arab players have now learned to embrace a similar rhetoric in their English language statements, but that was not the point here. The point was about words. And in some cases words themselves are actions. Iran for example (since you brought up that example) continues to publicly say things like "mak bar Israel". That is markedly different from the rhetoric of Israel and it is also markedly different from the rhetoric of - say - Mahmud Abbas. So I hope we can agree that - in rhetoric at the very least - Israel has extended a hand for peace while her Arab neighbors have said no no no to everything. In my humble opinion there is meaning and importance in that, but you seem to discount words as worth nothing... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

And my point was citing the Israeli ambassador is as reliable as citing the Hamas foreign affairs page. I think you're exerting too little of an uncritical stance towards the statements of Israeli leaders and accepting what they say at face value. If you actually look at the historical round, Israel usually ended up trying to change facts on the ground to its advantage, such as when it sent tractors into DMZ's in Syria to provoke a Syrian attack before the 6 Day War (as Moshe Dayan admitted) and as UN officials took notice. I don't have the books or documents to cite at the moment, but Israeli leaders in private usually have a much different tone than the one they portray in public. And the facts also belie what they seem (they're lying in other words). The Arab neighbors did actually accept the existence of Israel reluctantly in the late 1940s and 1950s, and they've endorsed two-states on the 67 borders for the past 3-4 decades, not also including the Arab peace initiative. I think you're confusing discounting words with dismissing press releases given out by a government aka propaganda, which is not a rational position in that it defers to uncritical analysis of what a government says with regard to its foreign policy. ChrisAmiss (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * [ Bullshit ]--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:24, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, Bull took the bull the Arab leaders used as a pretext for the Khartoum Resolution Idiocy at face value, but why should we??--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 21:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Chris:Why, oh why, do you waste so much time arguing with an ignoramus like Avenger? Any person with two IQ points to rub together sees the (profound) deficiencies in his "logic" and that he pulls "facts" out of his ass? It is most certainly not my place to tell you what to do, but I feel moved to register my opinion that you possess pearls but are casting them before the proverbial swine.---Mona- (talk) 23:45, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Netanyahu says Palestinians caused the Holocaust
No, really.

Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly asserted that Adolf Hitler had no intention of exterminating Europe’s Jews until a Palestinian persuaded him to do it.

The Israeli prime minister’s attempt to whitewash Hitler and lay the blame for the Holocaust at the door of Palestinians signals a major escalation of his incitement against and demonization of the people living under his country’s military and settler-colonial rule.

...

In the video above, Netanyahu claims that al-Husseini “had a central role in fomenting the final solution. He flew to Berlin. Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here.’ ‘So what should I do with them?’ he asked. ‘Burn them!’”

There is no record of such a conversation whatsoever, and Netanyahu provides no evidence that it ever took place. Israel, the West Bank and Gaza are currently exploding with violence, much of it Zionist attacks and murders of Arabs -- by the military and civilians. (Yes, some Palestinians are also stabbing innocent civilian Jews.) As Ali Abunimah puts it: "Netanyahu’s attempt to blame Palestinians for the Holocaust is itself a form of genocidal incitement." Netanyahu is a very smart man, and he knows that this outrageous pitch can only fuel the murderous rage on the Zionist street.---Mona- (talk) 02:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

ADDING: Netanyahu’s claim that in 1941 Hitler only wanted to expel Jews was made by Holocaust denier David Irving and debunked in historian Deborah Lipstadt's UK defamation trial that Irving lost.---Mona- (talk) 02:49, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There's a lot to be said about al-Husseini, but a lot of nonsense has been written that delves into pseudo-history, like that he orchestrated the Holocaust or was a chief architect of it, as if the Nazis had no full agency behind their actions. Raul Hilberg in his magisterial study of the Holocaust only devotes a sentence to Husseini out of 900 page book. According two biographers of Husseini, one of which I think is Philip Mattar, Husseini did not do many of things suggested by pseudo-historical people, like that Husseini constructed a gas chamber in Palestine, personally visited a concentration camp himself, etc. ChrisAmiss (talk) 03:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Curiously enough, Netanyahu omits that a telegram from the Stern gang was sent to Nazi Germany on the basis of strategic interests. One of the members of the Stern gang became a Prime Minister of Israel. A prime minister of Israel was a would-be Nazi collaborator. Does this make certain elements of Zionism responsible for the Holocaust? No. ChrisAmiss (talk) 03:29, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * In 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a memorandum to the Nazis agreeing that Jewish assimilationists were wrongheaded and that Zionism was the proper avenue for Jews to take. The documents said the "rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group." Some antisemites take the facts you adduce, Chris, as well as the GZF's accommodationist position vis-a-vis Nazis, as meaning they agreed with the Nazi movement and brought the Holocaust on themselves. This is obscene, and overlooks that they were trying to appease a vile government that was severely oppressing them. You know, if ANYONE but Netanyahu had made those remarks, the ADL, Simon Weisenthal Center & etc, would be outraged.---Mona- (talk) 03:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Steven Salaita makes this important point: "Netanyahu thinks worse of the Palestinian people than he does of Hitler. Remember that as the IDF undertakes its latest killing spree." The man stirring up the Zionist street that's already murdering Arabs (or Jews it mistakes as Arabs) is in charge of "defending" Israel from the same oppressed, occupied people.---Mona- (talk) 18:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * It's rather egregious bullshit, of course, and most Israelis are even offended by it. The idea that Mr. Master Race himself would give two shits about what some Arab Muslim in the middle east would have to say, let alone actually taking his advice, is absurd. This after universal calls to tone down the rhetoric, someone certainly needs to rein in Netanyahu's lunacy. Hentropy (talk) 03:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've seen discussion about whether Netanyahu is actually losing it in some clinical sense. Having someone that wild and lacking judgment in charge of a world-class military that is constantly employed, including currently, is scary.---Mona- (talk) 03:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What I am getting out of all of this is that I need to become a Mufti. Not a Grand Mufti, not yet, you have to work up to that.  I still get that cool hat, right? - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 04:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There are easier ways to get cool hats. Learning Arabic is rather difficult. They're not far from those old fuzzy Soviet hats, you could always just go with that. Hentropy (talk) 05:04, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That hat is preposterous. And to be the Mufti you had to be appointed by the Brits. So go to the queen and suck up.---Mona- (talk) 05:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Lulz. A wag on Twitter offers the next Netanyahu statement: "You have to understand who we are dealing with, these are the same Muslims that killed Jesus."---Mona- (talk) 16:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Palestinian groups outdid it already: They claim, that Jesus was a Palestinian and that "da juice" killed him (another case of Western-style antisemitism imported into Arabia).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 17:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Just saying that this should be moved to the Israel/Palestine forum... that's what it was made for. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, but there is likely to often be one active I/P-related entry on the main page. I'll keep it there until it is stale. That way the topic -- which is quite timely -- is addressed with other world events, but does not overrun the page. I've moved old I/P sections myself and will no doubt do so in the future.---Mona- (talk) 18:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Mona, community consensus has decided otherwise and you should not go against it with your own Mona-consensus. I don't know how many juries this type of pigheadedness has won you when you were still a lawyer, but I as an exceedingly stupid layperson assume somewhere between zero and the tolerance of the measurement... I think that the only thing that could even possibly teach you would be a delete on sight policy, but I fear there is not a sysop with the requisite huevos in sight to do so Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, Avenger, I do realize that you don't want I/P topics posted on the main page where they receive wider readership. And, I understand exactly why.---Mona- (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Look who's breaking her vows not to post in the "topic ghetto" (her words, not mine, I only quote them reluctantly) and not to answer to anything I say... What is the penalty for that in the BDS church? One pound of incense to be burned in front of the Arafat portrait? Splitting stones to throwable size for two weeks? I'm curious... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Jesus on a crutch you are such a moron, or a liar -- or both. I've made neither "vow."---Mona- (talk) 23:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

You know what I hate most about the whole Palestinian mess?
It gets people like Netanyahu reelected. While the guy is somewhat likable and has a way with media, his domestic policies are - for the part that I know off - disastrous and bound to worsen the economic woes Israel does have to deal with (contrary to popular opinion, Israel would be more in line with the countries that joined the EU in 2004 or later in terms of economic performance and income per capita thaen with the pre 2004 EU). And given that Labor has married itself to the Oslo process (which after years on live support was finally declared dead for good by Abbas) and no other credible left wing force that merits that name exists, Israel will continue to have right wing economic policies as long as Hamas rockets keep flying. But this is of course not the first time Arab murderers have succeeded in disrupting Israeli domestic live. Despite being densely populated, small and rather well suited for trains in other respects (no domestic oil to speak of, abundant wind and solar potential etc.) for decades roads were prioritized over rails due to military concerns. Which led to Israel having a rail system not really worth its salt. True, even the current government is building news routes such as a "high-speed" Tel Aviv - Jerusalem line and even urban rail is getting a boost with a light rail line in Jerusalem built and one planned for Tel Aviv... But even that is made difficult by fucking BDS types... Veolia (a company I don't usually care for) got a ton of shit for daring to take rail contracts in Israel... And that's just one example... Do you know what the Palestinians who worked for Soda Stream say to the BDS types? They say fuck you and your boycott, now I don't have a job! And unless Antisemitism magically ends (most unlikely), the Hamas leaders do the world a favor and end their worldly existence (also unlikely) or peace somehow falls down as a gift from god to its creation (even more unlikely), there is no conceivable way the Israeli left can gain ground again. Why did they have to chain themselves to that sinking ship with Oslo? Hamas won't allow the peace process to succeed... So that's my evul Zionist rant on Israel and stuff, take it or leave it.... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, that's all very interesting, but what I read in between the lines here is that economics and infrastructure are more of a concern to you than humanitarian issues. >.> 142.124.55.236 (talk) 20:07, 24 October 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * Palestinians in the West Bank are getting by. I don't say they are living in paradise, but most of them have sufficient meals and running water and all that stuff. The very real suffering of people in Gaza (though it is often exaggerated by Hamas and their fans) is mostly the result of Hamas embezzling aid money and goods and using almost everything they can get their hands on for either propaganda or the building of weapons. If all the Israeli supplied fertilizer is in the rockets, nothing will grow on the fields. That's just math... But actually for once, I did not want to discuss this but economic and transportation policies within Israel itself and how they are affected by the (lack of) peace process Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:28, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hamas will allow the peace process to succeed. The issue is their stance of a Palestinian state on the 67 borders is in accordance with international law, which Israel has rejected year in and year out at the UNGA resolution. As I've cited before, Hamas has restrained itself and arrested rockets being fired from rogue groups. That's not mentioning that Israel has usually fired first, which provokes the rocket attacks in response (which speaks more to the blood it's willing to spill for the sake of military aggrandizement). As for the West Bank, you may want to check out the World Bank report released last year on how Israeli restrictions impact the economy. And the suffering of people of the Gaza falls on Israel's behalf because as they've stated to US officials, they want to put the Gaza economy on a cliff with no real prospects for growth or development. Gaza according to the UN will be uninhabitable in 5 years and human rights orgs/the UN have said to lift the blockade "unconditionally".. I think you're confusing embezzlement with Fatah. It is correct that Hamas has engaged in the black market through high taxes, but that is not the same thing as embezzling. And the Shin Bet estimates that only 10% or so of Hamas' funding goes to military purposes. The PA is useless and basically a bunch of corrupt Uncle Toms doing Israel's dirty work of suppressing resistance to the occupation, so I didn't have any illusions on what Oslo truly was, which was an annexation process in Israel's favor. Israel can claim it's withdrawing from the West Bank, but in actuality, it will be able to annex the settlement blocs with 80% of the settlers and keep the crucial arable land and water resources. ChrisAmiss (talk) 22:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "The PA is useless and basically a bunch of corrupt Uncle Toms doing Israel's dirty work of suppressing resistance to the occupation," that's the view of every Palestinian activist I know and/or have read. It's certainly Ali Abunimah's position and he copiously documents why it's true in his last book.---Mona- (talk) 23:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Apparently Abu Mazen fanning the flames in the last few weeks is not enough for Electronic Jihad, huh?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 09:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't be ridiculous, he once between clenched teeth and in English said that he could imagine some kind of Jewish state in maybe some neighborhoods of Tel Aviv... Of course that means he is a traitor to the Palestinian "cause".... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * @Mona: Here we have „copiously documents“ again, and you reinvent logic by saying that copiously documenting equals truth. No wonder you're an ex-lawyer. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I missed the word „why“, but that doesn't really matter. Those are your thoughts anyway. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sadly the discussion on policies domestic to Israel and unconnected to the Palestinian mess has been successfully derailed... It would have been a talk I would have liked to have had, but that's that, apparently... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Where is the notion coming from that Israel/Palestine is the root cause of all problems in the Middle East?
Given that Iranian, Saudi (or in the past Saddam's) policies do much more harm in the region and that both Assad and ISIS have racked up a higher skull count thaen both Hamas and her enemies in the last coupla decades... So why the notion (that I've seen expressed e.g. by Mona) that once Israel/Palestine is "resolved" there'll be no problems in the Middle East... Which completely disregards the sheer number of religious nuttery, corruption and downright incompetence exhibited by practically all governments in the region (except of course for one)... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 19:19, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Why are you a moron? Were you perhaps dropped on your head as an infant? Or did you flood your brain in alcohol? Those with Korsakoff Syndrome do frequently confabulate.---Mona- (talk) 19:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Mona, all of these things seemingly apply to you. You may not have killed your grey matter with alcohol, but then you didn't need to in the first place. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * So Mona dropping the ad hominem you are throwing at me for now, do you honestly wish to tell me the corruption and incompetence various Arab regimes have exhibited for decades now is of no consequence? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * She'll never drop the ad hominems, and she'll never think of other things. It's just her nature. The combination megalomania + singlemindedness sees to that. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorte and Arisboch need to grasp that the Zionist narrative cannot prevail here. Too many editors are clued in to the facts. (Avenger is beyond help, of course, and has evinced idiocy on myriad issues and driven multiple editors batshit with his stupidity.) Things will calm down and people might listen to any of your reasonable arguments if you decide to be reasonable and fact-based. Until then, I don't care what names you call me. Knock youselves out. In fact, let it occupy all your time here. That will allow the sturm und drang to be reserved for cartoons about ponies and their fans.---Mona- (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Speak for yourself. There's no Zionist narrative, just a reaction to an anti-Zionist one. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Mona just to clarify, which particular name have I called you? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I haven't bothered to check Mona's activities during the past two days, but until tonight, my last entry was dated Friday evening - local time of course and a few days ago I did estimate her time here and came up with around 12 hours a day. So the question about who's spending all the time here is answered. And there is a market for ex-lawyers and always has been, but for ex-lawyers with ex-brains, not so much. That's why Mona is confined here, where she actually does little damage all things counted. Have fun. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 22:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I like it here and am enjoying myself a great deal. That I annoy you so much, Sorte, you'd purport to calculate the time I spend here is flattering, but I don't require that much attention!---Mona- (talk) 22:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I just started wondering, my dear, and found out that my estimate had been correct. I was just testing a hypothesis. I won't bother again, why should I? You annoy me precisely as much as others of your ilk - no more, no less. It was obvious that you enjoy being here. You wouldn't be able to find an outlet elsewhere. There's a reason you don't contribute to Wikipedia, to name an example. But it's always sad to see the sanctimonious and hypocritical play you put on, regardless of who does it. As for your sheep, well least said. Sorte Slyngel (talk) 23:06, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok.---Mona- (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Susan Rice did basically the same as Ran Baratz
He accused Kerry of antisemitism an being retarded, Rice accused Netanyahu of being a racist.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:05, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Has John Kerry made openly antisemitic, xenophobic remarks about saying Jews are coming in droves to the polls? ChrisAmiss (talk) 19:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not what Susan Rice was talking about. Dennis Ross said, that Susan Rice said, that Netanyahu's critique of Obama's policy was somehow motivated by racism against him cause of ... reasons.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:26, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Is Netanyahu racist?
well, Haaretz seems to think so. Bicycle  wheel  19:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * A paywalled opinion piece and then claiming in what smacks of appeal to authority, that "the Haaretz" thinks so? Without any of the arguments why being written in the free part? Whom you're trying to fool??--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Am I allowed to ask why an article by Odeh Bisharat is actually by Dennis Ross? Bicycle wheel  19:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Where the devil did I claim THAT?? Clear strawmanning (he cites a book from Dennis Ross, where he claims, that Rice said that. Clear rumour-mongering).--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I cited Jerusalem Post. I could cite Times of Israel reporting the same.---Mona- (talk) 19:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's them citing Newsweek citing, what "Democratic congressional aide" said and Dennis Ross claimed in a book, that Susan Rice claimed, that Bibi was being racist against Obama (that's why the claim, that Netanyahu has done everything except "use ‘the N-word’ in describing the president"). And blackagendareport.com having lotsa stuff about the Israeli/Palestine issue is also not a proof of Netanyahu being racist.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * And, FrontPageMagazine accepts Rice said that, but think she's horrible.---Mona- (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)---Mona- (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ...so?--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 19:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ...so this is an issue. The issue is not whether Netanyahu is a racist, but that so many blacks think he is. And the report about Susan Rice has currency. That's not beieng discussed at Infowars. (Or, if it is, at sane sites as well.)---Mona- (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hell, even if Rice actually said that, it's still a baseless accusation.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 20:16, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't have to determine whether it is baseless or not. Simply that blacks and others are saying that it is so. Even the Israeli mainstream press is reporting the problems caused by this "perception." That's not a small thing.---Mona- (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We're not wikipedia we don't quote "A says X" just because A or X are "notable" Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Netanyahu wouldn't dare try to snub George Bush by barging in on the US Congress and trying to undermine a negotiated deal. That he did it to Obama and the Black Congressional Congress was disgusted by his actions to boycott it I think does not speak well of Netanyahu. ChrisAmiss (talk) 18:59, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Which is still no proof in the slightest of his supposedly racist motives behind the critique of Obama. --Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 20:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a meta thought...
Netanyahu criticizing Obama makes him a racist... However, if someone dare point out that certain types of criticism of Israel sound like Antisemitism one is tared and feathered and made to ride the rail out of town... Where's the consistency and logic in that? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No.-- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * False analogy. Netanyahu wasn't just criticizing Obama. He breached diplomatic protocol and went under Obama's head in order to humiliate him in public view, bad enough that the Black Congressional Congress found it appalling. And cut the garbage. Israel is a country, not an ethno-religious group. Criticizing a country's actions and conduct is not racist nor a criticism directed at a religious group of people. Unless you're one of those regressive leftists who believe criticism of a country or a religion (i.e. Islam) is racist.ChrisAmiss (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Which still doesn't make him racist. Nice try.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:06, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Isn't it interesting how nobody talk of "criticism of France"? Or "Criticism of Japan"? It's only ever one country which is criticized. In other places people put it "I don't like leader X or policy Y" and I think if there is animosity between Obama and Bibi, it's based on politics, neither antisemitism (which is common among African-Americans, let's not kid ourselves) nor racism... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:49, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I banned you for an hour for doing this bullshit before, stop it. Stop it with your "but wah antisemites!" bullshit. It's tiring, and it's stupid. -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:51, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * So in essence we can say "this sounds racist" (even if we acknowledge the speaker probably did not mean it this way) But saying "This sounds like something an antisemite would say" or "this sounds antisemitic" is not something I can say? Just curious... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 21:53, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Just curious, eh? ;) 142.124.55.236 (talk) 21:54, 8 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * I though "just curious" had other connotations Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:00, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger hasn't seem to grasped that it wasn't just what Netanyahu said, but it was his actions as well. That's the point I'm making here, which is a bit different from criticizing a country on an online wiki. ChrisAmiss (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What of his actions towards Obama make Bibi racist???--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Anybody but you can do it because you have a known history of bandying the term about for any and all criticism of Israel, alongside pulling out the "hey remember all these nazi terms bout jews? lets drop those here". -- "Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:56, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * And in the latest Funny Things Avenger Said: "Isn't it interesting how nobody talk of "criticism of France"? Or "Criticism of Japan"? It's only ever one country which is criticized." [insert roaring laughter here] 142.124.55.236 (talk) 22:41, 8 November 42015 AQD (UTC)
 * That's looks more like the examination of German political term in English.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ ∈)☼(∋ 22:44, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Ayup the term "Israelkritik" there is no "Frankreichkritik" That's what I wanted to say. Btw Giants win against Tampa Bay today... 00:23, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Avenger, I may be revealing something groundbreaking to you here, but: not everything that applies in the context of German politics also applies in a general context. 142.124.55.236 (talk) 00:29, 9 November 42015 AQD (UTC)

Meh, calling someone a racist is like, the worst available insult. If you're going to insult Israel's PM, there are far better things to criticize him for, for example, bombing UN hospitals knowingly and ordering civilian electrical power plants to be destroyed. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Looking for that amazing Israel/Palestine debate that was here?
Want to debate Israel/Palestine? This is the place to be. All the cool kids are there. Really.
 * Hooray, now I have one centralised place to avoid to lessen my exposure to aimless bickering. ArcticVixen (talk) 08:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Amazing" isn't the word I'd call it. Rather "mona derailing our mission-tastic".... but good catch in giving it its own space away from WIGO talk, dear user who forgot to sign... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You and that kettle, i swear avenger. --"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 14:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Archiving is fine. But I'm not going to restrict my Israel-Palestine postings to that ghetto. I reinstated the last, still-active I/P thread.---Mona- (talk) 15:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC) (AVENGER DELETED THIS. STOP IT.]
 * Yeah, this backwards NIMBY sentiment of uninvolved people in regards to Israel/Palestine issues is getting seriously asinine. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 15:48, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * moving large discussions to forums is a thing we do. See the mod debate from the bar--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 15:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ghettoing annoying topics off to their own forum page is also something we do, e.g. Forum:Mr 74 said something (justifiably in that instance). I'm not all too sure which of the two is the prime motivation in this case, but either way I've seen this NIMBY sentiment pop up among many editors. Just see ArticVixen above for example. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Well I'm not doing it. Any topical issue I want to share that touches on I-P will be in this space, and I will not tolerate it being "relocated." At all. But Avenger, who wants that topic hidden, will revert me -- so all Paravant has achieved is endless edit warring. ---Mona- (talk) 16:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * For the record, it was not my humble self who moved the topic in the first place. My rollback of your shenanigans (which I did exactly once) was only to ensure that mob consensus is not ignored by fiat of one single person. And as for the merits of having the issue dealt with in its own forum... Quite frankly I am not hugely in favor of any one side, but I mildly prefer it to be given its own space, as a good number of contributors have shown visible annoyance at the topic clogging up valuable omnibus discussion space Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

PsyGremlin reinstated the last I-P related section and I'm entirely good with that. As long as the active section remains I don't care if the rest is ejected to archive purgatory.---Mona- (talk) 16:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)