Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

TEHRAN, Iran- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday said the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported. Full Story
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#39932 Sep 18, 2013

-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

The Criminal N.S.A.

By JENNIFER STISA GRANICK and CHRISTOPHER JON SPRIGMAN


The government knows that it regularly obtains Americans’ protected communications. The Washington Post reported that Prism is designed to produce at least 51 percent confidence in a target’s “foreignness”— as John Oliver of “The Daily Show” put it,“a coin flip plus 1 percent.” By turning a blind eye to the fact that 49-plus percent of the communications might be purely among Americans, the N.S.A. has intentionally acquired information it is not allowed to have, even under the terrifyingly broad auspices of the FISA Amendments Act.

How could vacuuming up Americans’ communications conform with this legal limitation? Well, as James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, told Andrea Mitchell of NBC, the N.S.A. uses the word “acquire” only when it pulls information out of its gigantic database of communications and not when it first intercepts and stores the information.

If there’s a law against torturing the English language, James Clapper is in real trouble.

The administration hides the extent of its “incidental” surveillance of Americans behind fuzzy language. When Congress reauthorized the law at the end of 2012, legislators said Americans had nothing to worry about because the surveillance could not “target” American citizens or permanent residents. Mr. Clapper offered the same assurances. Based on these statements, an ordinary citizen might think the N.S.A. cannot read Americans’ e-mails or online chats under the F.A.A. But that is a government ¬fed misunderstanding.

A “target” under the act is a person or entity the government wants information on — not the people the government is trying to listen to. It’s actually O.K. under the act to grab Americans’ messages so long as they are communicating with the target, or anyone who is not in the United States.

Leave aside the Patriot Act and FISA Amendments Act for a moment, and turn to the Constitution.

The Fourth Amendment obliges the government to demonstrate probable cause before conducting invasive surveillance. There is simply no precedent under the Constitution for the government’s seizing such vast amounts of revealing data on innocent Americans’ communications.

The government has made a mockery of that protection by relying on select Supreme Court cases, decided before the era of the public Internet and cellphones, to argue that citizens have no expectation of privacy in either phone metadata or in e-mails or other private electronic messages that it stores with third parties.



This hairsplitting is inimical to privacy and contrary to what at least five justices ruled just last year in a case called United States v. Jones. One of the most conservative justices on the Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr., wrote that where even public information about individuals is monitored over the long term, at some point, government crosses a line and must comply with the protections of the Fourth Amendment. That principle is, if anything, even more true for Americans’ sensitive nonpublic information like phone metadata and social networking activity.

We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protecting Americans’ privacy. It’s time to call the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs what they are: criminal.

Jennifer Stisa Granick is the director of civil liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Christopher Jon Sprigman is a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#39933 Sep 18, 2013
w wman uk wrote:
<quoted text>
That true l ask him why the moohamidan would want to pour boiling water down the throats of the non blliever for simply not wanting to believe the koran . l have asked him to post the wife beating instructions as detailed in the unholy koran and all the coward can do is sqwark hatred.
From what he has posted he is a coward,lier , a biggot, a raciest and a hater of all Jews for surviving.
If that was true, we would see in Saudi Arabia, pots of boiling water, thrown down the throats of millions of Non Muslims working here!!

How idiotic remarks some people post , I cannot believe it?

Their aim is only to spread hate and hatred, by any means.

This is why they live and that is why they shall die and even in their graves, they will find a way to spew hate!!

Since: Nov 12

Sydney, Australia

#39934 Sep 19, 2013
That awful woman should be ashamed of herself .
And every time she has a cup of tea , she should know if I had my way there would be no leaves to purify the air that we breathe it would be just boiling water.
danetoo

London, UK

#39935 Sep 19, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
If that was true, we would see in Saudi Arabia, pots of boiling water, thrown down the throats of millions of Non Muslims working here!!
How idiotic remarks some people post , I cannot believe it?
Their aim is only to spread hate and hatred, by any means.
This is why they live and that is why they shall die and even in their graves, they will find a way to spew hate!!
from their GRAVES???

"youtube" transmissions on gravestones ..

that would be rather an interesting business idea actually .. rather than engravings .. have live transmissions from the afterworld

investors .. anyone??

Website, marketing .. SEO ...

I will make the cakes
w wman uk

Northampton, UK

#39936 Sep 19, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
If that was true, we would see in Saudi Arabia, pots of boiling water, thrown down the throats of millions of Non Muslims working here!!
How idiotic remarks some people post , I cannot believe it?
Their aim is only to spread hate and hatred, by any means.
This is why they live and that is why they shall die and even in their graves, they will find a way to spew hate!!
So the koran is a like you a lie it doesnt contain these words?
l cant believe the koran contains such nonsence as wife beating instructions .
TheReligionofPeace.com
Guide to Understanding Islam
What does the
Religion of Peace
Teach About...
Wife-Beating
Question:
Does Islam permit a man to hit his wife?
Summary Answer:
Yes, but only if she doesn't do as he asks. The beating must cease if the woman complies with her husband's demands. Beating is also intended to be the last resort of coercing submission, behind verbal abuse and abandonment.
According her testimony in the Hadith, Muhammad, physically struck his favorite wife for leaving the house without his permission. It is not known how he treated his less-favored wives.
w wman uk

Northampton, UK

#39937 Sep 19, 2013
The Qur'an:
Qur'an (4:34)- "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
Qur'an (38:44)- "And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with it, and do not break your oath..." Allah telling Job to beat his wife.
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (72:715)- A woman came to Muhammad and begged her to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that she it is described as being "greener" than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to him and submit to his sexual desires.
Bukhari (72:715)- "Aisha said,'I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women'" This is Muhammad's own wife complaining of the abuse that the women of her religions suffer relative to other women.
Muslim (4:2127)- Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."
Muslim (9:3506)- Muhammad's father-in-laws (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.
Abu Dawud (2141)- "Iyas bin ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Dhubab reported the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens, but when ‘Umar came to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them." At first, Muhammad forbade men from beating their wives, but he rescinded this once it was reported that women were becoming emboldened toward their husbands.
w wman uk

Northampton, UK

#39938 Sep 19, 2013
Beatings are sometimes necessary to keep women in their place.
Abu Dawud (2142)- "The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife."
Abu Dawud (2126)- "A man from the Ansar called Basrah said:'I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found her pregnant.(I mentioned this to the Prophet).' The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said:'She will get the dower, for you made her vagina lawful for you. The child will be your slave. When she has begotten (a child), flog her'" A Muslim man thinks his is getting a virgin, then finds out she is pregnant. Muhammad tells him to treat the woman as a sex slave and then flog her after she has delivered the child.
w wman uk

Northampton, UK

#39939 Sep 19, 2013
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 969 - Requires that a married woman be "put in a separate room and beaten lightly" if she "act in a sexual manner toward others." According to the Hadith, this can be for an offense as petty as merely being alone with a man to whom she is not related.
Kash-shaf (the revealer) of al-Zamkhshari (Vol. 1, p. 525)-[Muhammad said] "Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it"
Additional Notes:
Some contemporary Muslim apologists often squirm over this relatively straightforward verse from the Qur'an (4:34)- which actually give men the right to beat their wives if they even have a "fear" of disloyalty or disobedience. Their rhetorical aerobics inspired us to write a separate article:
Wife Beating- Good Enough for Muhammad, Good Enough for You
Others are not nearly as squeamish. Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradhawi, one of the most respected Muslim clerics in the world, once made the famous (and somewhat ridiculous statement) that "It is forbidden to beat the woman, unless it is necessary." He also went on to say that "one may beat only to safeguard Islamic behavior," leaving no doubt that wife-beating is a matter of religious sanction.(source)
Dr. Muzammil Saddiqi, the former president of ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America), a mainstream Muslim organization, says it is important that a wife "recognizes the authority of her husband in the house" and that he may use physical force if he is "sure it would improve the situation." (source)
Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Muhammad Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, the head of Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam's most prestigious institution says that "light beatings" and "punching" are part of a program to "reform the wife" (source).
Dr. Jamal Badawi endorses corporal punishment as "another measure that may save the marriage" (source). He isn't clear on how striking a woman will make her more inclined toward staying with her assailant, unless the implication is fear of a more serious beating if she leaves.
w wman uk

Northampton, UK

#39940 Sep 19, 2013
Egyptian cleric, Abd al-Rahman Mansour, said in a 2012 televised broadcast that in addition to discouraging the wife from filing divorce, beatings would inspire the wife to "treat him with kindness and respect, and know that her husband has a higher status than her." (source)
During Ramadan of 2010, another cleric named Sa'd Arafat actually said the woman is "honored" by the beating (source). No one else seemed terribly surprised by this.
An undercover report from progressive Sweden in 2012 found that 60% of mosques there actually advised beaten women not to report the abuse to the police. These women were also told that they must submit to non-consensual 'sex' with their husbands.(source)
In the birthplace of Islam, about half of Saudi women are beaten at home. "Hands and sticks were found to be used mostly in beating women, following by men’s head cover and to a lesser extent, sharp objects." (source)
According to Islamic law, a husband may strike his wife for any one of the following four reasons:
- She does not attempt to make herself beautiful for him (ie. "let's herself go")
- She refuses to meet his sexual demands
- She leaves the house without his permission or for a "legitimate reason"
- She neglects her religious duties
Any of these are also sufficient grounds for divorce.
Respected Quran scholars from the past interpreted verse 4:34 with impressive candor. Tabari said that it means to "admonish them, but if they refused to repent, then tie them up in their homes and beat them until they obey Allah’s commands toward you." Qurtubi told wife-beaters to try to avoid breaking bones, but added that "it is not a crime if it leads to death." (source)
Muslim apologists sometimes say that Muhammad ordered that women not be harmed, but they are actually basing this on what he said before or during battle, such as in Bukhari (59:447), when Muhammad issued a command for all the men of Quraiza be killed and the women and children taken as slaves.(Having your husband murdered and being forced into sexual slavery apparently doesn't qualify as "harm" under the Islamic model).
But, in fact, there are a number of cases in which Muhammad did have women killed in the most brutal fashion. One was Asma bint Marwan, a mother or five, who wrote a poem criticizing the Medinans for accepting Muhammad after he had ordered the murder of an elderly man. In this case, the prophet's assassins literally pulled a sleeping infant from her breast and stabbed her to death.
After taking Mecca in 630, Muhammad also ordered the murder of a slave girl who had merely made up songs mocking him. The Hadith are rife as well with accounts of women planted in the ground on Muhammad's command and pelted to death with stones for sexual immorality - yet the prophet of Islam actually encouraged his own men to rape women captured in battle (Abu Dawood 2150, Muslim 3433) and did not punish them for killing non-Muslim women (as Khalid ibn Walid did on several occasions - see Ibn Ishaq 838 and 856).
In summary, according to the Qur'an, Hadith and Islamic law, a woman may indeed have physical harm done to her if the circumstances warrant, with one such allowance being in the case of disobedience. This certainly does not mean that all Muslim men beat their wives, only that Islam permits them to do so.
TheReligionofPeace.com Home Page
© 2006-2012 TheReligionofPeace.com . All rights reserved.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#39942 Sep 19, 2013
Look at the goyim which goes by the name wwman....there is nothing but hate and hatred in her messages.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#39943 Sep 19, 2013
-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

The Duty of Lawyers

By Ralph Nader

June 29, 2013 "Information Clearing House - What happens when the rule of law increasingly bows to the whims and violations of unaccountable public officials?

In the United States, we are seeing the rule of law eroded by those at the top levels of our government. We are witnessing the dismantling of the guiding principles of justice and the rule of law. Our legal system has been gamed to preferentially serve the needs of the few rather than those of the many.

The rule of law should be a persistent guard against -- rather than an instrument of -- unfair advantage or injustice for those with power, money and influence.

Our elected officials have failed in their duty to uphold the rule of law. This malfeasance has led to secret law, secret courts, secret evidence, secret budgets and secret prisons under the guise of "national security." There is surveillance of attorney-client communications, unauditable secret expenditures for foreign military exploits, dragnet snooping of electronic and telephone data and even redacted published judicial decisions.

Habeas corpus has been tarnished by the inhumane and unjust treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay including many already cleared by the government but still jailed. Infinite detention has tarnished our legal system. Some dictocrats even argue that American citizens should be subjected to indefinite imprisonment.

Drone attacks in foreign nations are justified by secret legal memos. The president, without any Congressional authorization, can target any "suspected terrorist," including American citizens.

Who has the power to stop this descent into a nation of reckless leadership and lawlessness?

The million lawyers of America do. Lawyers know how to apply law to power. They know how to use the courts and how to lobby. They can cut through the jungle of legalese. They know when the laws are being violated and the remedies for the victims. They know how to draft legislation. They have contacts and resources. It's only a matter of more of them utilizing these powerful tools.

Being a lawyer is about much more than billable hours. Consider the differentiation of the terms lawyer and attorney. An attorney represents their clients; they represent the more vocational side of the law. It is this side of the legal profession that is driven by the big-client imperative, those profitable corporate industries that dominate the time and talent of many in the legal field.

On the other hand, a lawyer represents the professional side. A lawyer's duties extend beyond the needs of their clients to the vital needs of the public interest and the justice system. Lawyers are deemed "officers of the court." They can and should be sentinels and guardians for the just rule of law.

Although law school curriculums have improved greatly since the 1950s -- when they were largely shaped by the job market and business interests -- there is still an immense need for law professors to instill idealism in their students.

Since: Nov 12

Sydney, Australia

#39944 Sep 19, 2013
w wman uk wrote:
<quoted text>
So the koran is a like you a lie it doesnt contain these words?
l cant believe the koran contains such nonsence as wife beating instructions .
TheReligionofPeace.com
Guide to Understanding Islam
What does the
Religion of Peace
Teach About...
Wife-Beating
Question:
Does Islam permit a man to hit his wife?
Summary Answer:
Yes, but only if she doesn't do as he asks. The beating must cease if the woman complies with her husband's demands. Beating is also intended to be the last resort of coercing submission, behind verbal abuse and abandonment.
But w wman uk if you abandon the birch how the hell can you beat her up any more.
And what if she's bigger or learns how to do wrestling and specialises in the Crab Lock Nut Star Nebular.
Your not making any sense,
Or , maybe do you mean ,abandon the bitch and get someone else to best her , I mean beat her.
But even so if you abandoned her, and beat her, in that order according to your informant .
Yes OK good , but , tell me then, what is the point to it , if she is not annoying you any more.
I can't understand it.
What exactly DO you mean,???????¿.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#39945 Sep 19, 2013
Contd.

Three points every current law student should take to heart.

1. You can act as a positive force in society as a lawyer. A lawyer's role can be to advance systems of justice, to enlarge the peoples' access to justice and to improve the administration of justice.

2. You can make a difference to society today as a law student. Find a public cause and devote some time to advancing justice.

3. Do not allow law school to break your idealism. The legal profession will tempt you with money and the illusion of prestige. Our country needs more lawyers working to preserve the rule of law, rather than serving clients who subvert it.

Being a lawyer should include public service. Our nation is in dire need of more lawyers speaking out to uphold their oath of office and working to restore constitutional authorities and legal facilities and boundaries.

The million-plus practicing lawyers and their many bar organizations should be on the ramparts defending against the insidious rejection of due process, probable cause, habeas corpus and privacy that come out of our Constitution.

(Autographed copies of my latest book Told You So: The Big Book of Weekly Columns are available at Told-You-So.com )
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

#39946 Sep 20, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
4. I did not say that Goyim is a bad word or good word. It is a racial word , that is all.
5. What are "genuine atrocities" that happened in Palestine, please provide a list of them. I think your figure will be Zero or close to Zero!!
6. How come a land which is occupied and where people are living for past 1300 years became "disputed" under International Law?
So the Basic question is itself wrong. People who are living in any land for centuries get "permanent title" to that land.
Those who abandoned it "for whatever reasons" loose their title after 2000 years, this is "More like International Law"!!
7. According to Islamic teachings every prophet of God was a Muslim, which means "willful submission to your Creator"
So every prophet was a Muslim.
8. So you "Think" that the figure of 1000 is a "manufactured one"? Do you? What is the basis of your suspicion.
Let me tell you, it would have been less than 600, had it not been for that Back stabbing, treacherous tribe of BANI QURAIDAH, of Madina!!
9. I do not want Isreal to disappear along with the Jews, I wish that it can be established on "any other part of the world" except on Islamic lands.
Why only Muslims should sacrifice to take care of their "Younger cousins" , why not other nations?
(Jews who were living in Palestine prior to 1917, will be living there and it would be just like "old days")
4. The articles you posted portray the word goyim as bigoted and it has nothing to do with Race. Jews are not a race.
5. This is the problem you have no idea of history or reality it seems when you speak of this conflict.
http://www.camera.org/index.asp...
The link above gives dozens of examples. The only reason the Jews had Irgun Lechi and others is because of the Arab massacres against Jews in places such as Hebron, Jerusalem, Tzfat, Jaffo and so on. YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT LOOKED UP PALLYWOOD THAT IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE OF THE PALESTINIAN PROPAGANDA INDUSTRY.
6. The majority of todays Palestinians were not on the land for 1300 years. 300,000 arrived in the 20th century and many more the century preceding. I never said it was fair but 52 nations at San Remo 1920 got together and gave 99.9% of the region to the Arabs while keeping a tiny sliver for the Jews who had lived on the land REALLY continuously since Roman times. The land was never occupied by Israel as they have a legal claim to it. You may not like international law I am just quoting it. The only reason Saudi Arabia exists is because the Wahabbis took it forcefully in the 1920's. This is also the reason why Jordan was created and why 80% of Palestine was given to the Abdullahs. To make up for loosing Mecca and Medina.
7. I am speaking reality not religion. As i said before Islam stole its beliefs from other religions just as Judaism probably came from Paganism.
8. You have given no evidence to the contrary and there were many more than 1000 Jews living in that region at the time.
9. According to Islam any land conquered by Islam in history is now Islamic. and you complain about Israel? According to your logic the land should be Jewish as it was conquered by Jews beforehand. The only reason Islam wants Jerusalem is because it is like a child wanting something which isn't his. Mecca and Medina should be enough but I have learned from the Palestinians that whatever they get they want more.
SO YOU WANT ISRAEL TO DISAPPEAR AS THERE IS NO WAY UNLESS IT IS DESTROYED THAT 7-8million JEWS WILL GET UP AND LEAVE WHEN THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE HERE.

Why is 1917 the cut off date? Does this include Arabs who arrived afterwards?

Since: Nov 12

Sydney, Australia

#39947 Sep 20, 2013
Unbelievable bullshit is all that comes from Jew.
Judges 1. 27-35.
The Palestinians were there then , had the state of the arty technology , were heralded by Greeks and Romans as the principal people of the region and the land was named after them.
Palestine, there are some things even the dictatorial power of criminally insane Jews can not change.
Palestine is one of them.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#39949 Sep 20, 2013
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
4. The articles you posted portray the word goyim as bigoted and it has nothing to do with Race. Jews are not a race.
5. This is the problem you have no idea of history or reality it seems when you speak of this conflict.
http://www.camera.org/index.asp...
The link above gives dozens of examples. The only reason the Jews had Irgun Lechi and others is because of the Arab massacres against Jews in places such as Hebron, Jerusalem, Tzfat, Jaffo and so on. YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT LOOKED UP PALLYWOOD THAT IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE OF THE PALESTINIAN PROPAGANDA INDUSTRY.
6. The majority of todays Palestinians were not on the land for 1300 years. 300,000 arrived in the 20th century and many more the century preceding. I never said it was fair but 52 nations at San Remo 1920 got together and gave 99.9% of the region to the Arabs while keeping a tiny sliver for the Jews who had lived on the land REALLY continuously since Roman times. The land was never occupied by Israel as they have a legal claim to it. You may not like international law I am just quoting it. The only reason Saudi Arabia exists is because the Wahabbis took it forcefully in the 1920's. This is also the reason why Jordan was created and why 80% of Palestine was given to the Abdullahs. To make up for loosing Mecca and Medina.
7. I am speaking reality not religion. As i said before Islam stole its beliefs from other religions just as Judaism probably came from Paganism.
8. You have given no evidence to the contrary and there were many more than 1000 Jews living in that region at the time.
9. According to Islam any land conquered by Islam in history is now Islamic. and you complain about Israel? According to your logic the land should be Jewish as it was conquered by Jews beforehand. The only reason Islam wants Jerusalem is because it is like a child wanting something which isn't his. Mecca and Medina should be enough but I have learned from the Palestinians that whatever they get they want more.
SO YOU WANT ISRAEL TO DISAPPEAR AS THERE IS NO WAY UNLESS IT IS DESTROYED THAT 7-8million JEWS WILL GET UP AND LEAVE WHEN THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE HERE.
Why is 1917 the cut off date? Does this include Arabs who arrived afterwards?
Are you trying to "Play down" the land given to Jews in the Palestine?

Have you any idea how that "tiny" piece of land given in 1920 has "over grown" by 2013?

Whom you are trying to befool?

Is there any country in the world, which has "grown" in land by occupying lands from its neighbours, except Isreal?

No one has any grudge for Jews living in Palestine, prior to 1917, to demand seperate land for themselves.

The problem in with millions who came from Europe. Which nation would allow so many high numbers of immigrants to come to their land.

You are trying to paint, Jews as a "persecuted lot" running away from their enemies to save their lives, but in reality, they acted as "bullies" from the day they landed there and that is how they are behaving right now.

The land has not seen a day of peace since their feet touched this land and it shall never see as long as they are here.

You will find them in the forefront of "any", Anti Islamic or Anti Muslim movement, and you are trying to picture them as "wooly lambs" while they are like Wolves in sheep clothing.

Since: Nov 12

Marrickville, Australia

#39950 Sep 20, 2013
Crying crocodile tears.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

#39951 Sep 21, 2013
Roland of Gilead wrote:
I really think Israels occupation of Palestine is illegal and guess what the UN agrees with me. They have passed 2 dozen resolutions declaring Israels actions against the Palestinians illegal.
Not to mention the IDS is bombing Syria all the time and Iran all the time and Lebenon all the time and who knows what else they do clandestine.
Seriously respect the Oslow accord and the borders that Israel agreed to when they signed the accord. Hmmm maybe then there can be a chance for peace.
Give any document giving the Palestinians as a nation the legal right to the land than. If Israel is occupying someone elses land than they have to have a legal right to it in the first place. The UN is a corrupt org with a majority Arab/Muslim on most votes especially when it comes to Israel. Only a small % of UN Resolutions have any legal basis. UN General Assembly resolutions for example are only legally binding if both sides agree to it.

When is Israel bombing Lebanon and Iran all the time? Are you trying to create another false reality??
As for Syria there missiles/rockets have landed in Israel more than the other way around.

The Oslo Accord makes no mention of a Palestinian state nor of borders. It was supposed to give the Palestinians Autonomy which they had until the started the 2nd intifada when Arafat continued his evil ways.
It was the Palestinians who didn't follow even one part of any accord they have ever had. They still incite violence and hatred in EVERY part of their society. The leaders, tv, songs, schoolbooks, summer camps and so on.
They were not allowed a military but a restricted police which is 10,000's larger than agreed upon. They don't secure Jewish areas in the West Bank under their control like Josephs tomb. They constantly try to force Israel to do things by going to international institutions even though this is against the Oslo Accord. I could go on for hours.

MAYBE IF THE PALESTINIANS FINALLY GIVE UP THEIR OPENLY GENOCIDAL INTENTIONS THERE CAN BE PEACE.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

#39952 Sep 21, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you trying to "Play down" the land given to Jews in the Palestine?
Have you any idea how that "tiny" piece of land given in 1920 has "over grown" by 2013?
Whom you are trying to befool?
Is there any country in the world, which has "grown" in land by occupying lands from its neighbours, except Isreal?
No one has any grudge for Jews living in Palestine, prior to 1917, to demand seperate land for themselves.
The problem in with millions who came from Europe. Which nation would allow so many high numbers of immigrants to come to their land.
You are trying to paint, Jews as a "persecuted lot" running away from their enemies to save their lives, but in reality, they acted as "bullies" from the day they landed there and that is how they are behaving right now.
The land has not seen a day of peace since their feet touched this land and it shall never see as long as they are here.
You will find them in the forefront of "any", Anti Islamic or Anti Muslim movement, and you are trying to picture them as "wooly lambs" while they are like Wolves in sheep clothing.
Overgrown???
80% was taken straight away in the 1920's to create trans-Jordan.
You keep implying or just saying that Israel occupied it from neighbors but no neighbor legally occupied it in the first place. Egypt illegally occupied Gaza from 1948-67, and Jordan illegally occupied West Bank and Jerusalem from 1948-67.
You really need to learn some history.
Most countries in the world were created by war and conquest. Israel has given land away rather than taken it.
If Israel had control of all the Mandate for Palestine this would include the Golan Heights, West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, S.Lebanon and Israel.

YOU STILL SEEM TO REFUSE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IT SEEMS. Why choose 1917 as the cut off date?? Does this also include the Arabs who came to the land after 1917?
Millions only came from Europe after Israel was created. Most Israeli Jews come from the region.

Europe is allowing millions of African and Middle Easterners to move to their countries. So is the US.

The fact is Jews were always here and have continuously been massacred over the centuries. You asked for evidence of massacres against Jews and the link I posted gave a number of examples. It was the Arabs on the land who started the war with the Jews by massacring them even the indigenous Jews.

YOu find ex-Muslims also at the forefront of anything anti-Islamic. You do however find Jews at the forefront of nearly all humanitarian situations in the world for decades. Whats your point?? It is Jews being massacred for being born Jews. It is Muslims carrying out the massacres. You live in an apartheid which incites hatred against Jews so should understand this. Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi, and so on. ALL THESE SOCIETIES INCITE HATRED AND CALL FOR VIOLENCE AGAINST JEWS. You don't care because you are one of them.

“Liberty & Justice For All”

Since: Aug 11

United States of America

#39953 Sep 21, 2013
Topix posters like "w wman uk", "nutjobs here",“Thinking”, "Calypso 17, "Jim Justice" , Waleed Sadat" ,“Shamma” etc are Israel’s “internet soldiers”, i.e. Israeli agents who have been trained and are paid to personally attack, stalk, and harass other Topix posters who do not agree with Israel’s propagada in general or its vicious, slanderous anti-Muslim campaign in particular.

The Hebrew word “hasbara” refers to Israel’s propaganda efforts to improve its image abroad, to justify its actions, and defend itself in world opinion. It is a public diplomacy effort undertaken by Israeli government officers, or individuals in target countries (public or private efforts; group or individual efforts).

Israel portrays itself as fighting on two fronts: against the Palestinians/Arabs and world opinion. The latter is dealt with hasbara. The premise of hasbara is that Israel's problems are a matter of better propaganda, and not one of an underlying unjust situation.

Israel’s Hasbara Handbook instructs its “internet soldiers” on attacking the messenger and avoiding the message at all costs ‘in ways that engage the emotions, and downplay rationality, in an attempt to promote’ their cause.

In a section entitled ‘Name Calling,’ Israel's Jewish Agency writes,‘Creating negative connotations by name calling is done to try and get the audience to reject a person or idea on the basis of negative associations, without allowing a real examination of that person or idea."

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 min John Fladgat 738,578
dried poppy pods (Mar '13) 9 min CRAFTERS ASSOCIATION 22
3 Word Game (Feb '12) 31 min andet1987 4,214
sri lankan & indian gay/ bi Bbm pin swap - livi... 48 min sexy123 2
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Thinking 227,366
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr andet1987 4,460
4 word game (use same Letter) (Mar '13) 1 hr andet1987 1,085
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr RoSesz 542,024
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 hr AussieBobby 259,121
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Seentheotherside 600,981
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 4 hr RiccardoFire 95,412
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••