At 12:08 PM 6/10/02, you wrote: >Michael Dinowitz wrote: >> >>>But the Gaza strip was occupied on June 5, 1967 by Israel, even before >>>Jordan entered the conflict between Egypt and Israel. Right? >> >> Gaza is right on the border with Egypt. The same border as the Sinai which was >given over to Egypt for peace. (the weapons smuggling from Egypt is a violation of >that oeace). > >So because Egypt doesn't honor a peace treaty the people that live in >the Gaza strip, which has never been part of Egypt, are now under >control from Israel? No, Gaza is under the control of Israel because when Egypt negotiated with Israel a peace deal, it only asked for land to enrich itself (the sinai). It cared nothing for it's arab brothers and didn't ask for gaza back (as it wasn't theirs in the first place) and didn't ask for it to become a palestinian state. Why is gaza controled by Israel, because egypt lost it in a war they started.
>>>But with exercising that right come certain responsibilities. >> >> Yes. Protecting your citizins. Remember Jenin and the 'world' report on a massacre. >It turns out that Israel did not cause one and those killed were almost all >combatants. The responsability is to not target civilians. Israel is doing great with >that. > >If a country takes away the possibilities of people to organize certain >things for themselves in response to a war started by a third party, it >assume the responsibility of organizing these things for them. >If Israel wishes to stop Palestinian ambulances from coming close to a >firefight and help people that is fine with me. But then it assumes the >responsibility to make sure that enough ambulances are available for >themselves. (Overly simple example, but I believe this principle extends >to infrastructure, education, healthcare, government etc.) You mean the ambulances that have been documented as being used to transport fighters and bombs? Those ambulances? And what of the education you speak of? The education that teaches that Israel does not exist, the Jews should be killed and America is a 'great satan'? Israel doesn't control that infrastructure and perhaps they should. >>>You are assuming that the people that sign the agreements are the same >>>people that do the attacks, or at the very least are in a position to >>>stop those attacks. I doubt that, considering that not even Israel is in >>>a position to stop those attacks. >> >> Arafat signed the agreement, Arafat is paying for the attacks and not having his >people stop them. When 17 people were murdered on a bus going to work, the chief of >palestinian security said in english publically that they would not do anything to >stop the attacks. They're supposed to by signed agreement. If the people who sign an >agreement can't be trusted to fulfil it then it's not worth being signed. > >I will say only one thing about Arafat and then I would very much want >to let that particular subject rest. > >Arafat would best serve peace in the Middle East by moving on from this >temporary existence to the eternal one. Preferably in such a way that it >is impossible for even the most zealous anti-Zionist to blame Israel for >it. Certain scenario's, including him being found dead in bed naked, >handcuffed etc. with an intern, a bodyguard or a family member not being >his wife, come to mind. > > >My point is, just as in my very first message in this thread, is it fair >to hold an entire population responsible if somebody with an air of >command, like Arafat or Yassin, says A but does B? He controls the government, he controls some of the terrorists directly and others indirectly. He has command of a massive police force. Can you hold a population responsable for the actions of a few? Yes, if the population supports the few in attacks. Yes, If the population is controled by a government that is corrupt. >>>BTW, transscripts of the talks that took place in Camp David when >>>Clinton tried his last shot at being famous for something else as he is >>>now suggest otherwise. There are additional issues, such as the faith of >>>East Jerusalem, especially certain places of religious interest, and "no >>>mans land". >> >> Lets see. The holiest place in Judaism, third holiness in Islam and the arabs don't >want us to have any access to it. Screw that. We've already seen what they do to our >holy sites when they destroyed Josephs tomb. > >So you agree there are additional issues as just the security of Israels >citizens. Yes. The issue of freedom of worship. SOmething that exists under Israel but not under Islam. >>>That just depends on who you are asking. >> >> I'm quoting those who wrote the resolution. > >Did they ask the average Palestinian? Nope and they didn't have to. When America defeated Japan, did they ask the average Japanese what they thought? No. Japan attacked us and we defeated them. Same here. >>>>And if they did that and the attacks still went on, what then? >>> >>>Handle it the same way as the US handled the Oklahoma bombing. >> >> Right. Find those who are responsable and kill them. > >Exactly. And assume responsibility for whatever else you break in the >process of doing so. Yes, which is what Israel does in many cases. >Jochem > > ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
