I never asked... I just said I was going to Amsterdam too... I was trying to be nice *shes refering to a post i put in another forum btw (i think)* Won't try that again sorry.... but I think that your comment is a bit unessessary
Actually Zonk, what they said was actually fact. Do some research and find out. Oh and Claire... I'm referring to what Brian (monosphere) said... I'm hanging with him in Amsterdam for a few days...
Er, I have a degree in political history. It's the terminology and semantics used I have issue with. Alright?
ahhhhhhhh.... I thought you were having a go!... It's been a bit fiesty on here lately with certain nasty trolls etc... so my bad:&
Perfect qualifications for selling the Big Issue eh? Now I know what I have to look forward to when I graduate....
Rick's Rants are particularily good.... I wonder who the dashing man with the rock hard abs is though
Many sources say that he is already dead. I'm bloody glad. Today is a great day for the world, with that piece of shit terrorist being dead.
Whilst i am not the biggest fan of Yasa Arrafat, i think your being a little harsh. Firstly Mr Arrafat has actually eased a lot of tension between israel and palistine, he has been willing in the past to negotiate with sharon and other israeli prime ministers. Although i don't know much before this decade (he has been the leader of the palistinians since the 60's). Recently due to his ill health and ageing into an old man he has not been so proactive in the peace process. Coupled with the constant bombings and gunship attacks on palistinan homes the palistinian people obviously are getting pissed off to the extent that not even Arrafat himself can calm things down. The situation between the two sides, is a complicated issue, they both feel they have rights to the Gaza strip and the west bank. If either of them backed down it would be a humiliation for the country and so until some mutally agreed plan or foreign intervention is initiated then they will be at loggerheads with each other for decades more to come. I'm not saying that Arrafat wasn't or isn't a "terrorist" but think of sharon ordering the bombings of towns and villages that may kill 2 or 3 "militants" with one bomb but hundreds of innocents are caught in the blasts... Whose the worse terrorist? Arrafat in local suicide bombings or Sharon in bombing whole streets and villages in search for a few militants?
Let me start off with this: I have lived in Israel for 7 years and have first-handedly witnessed what Arafat has done. Eased tension? Never. He supported the PLO is terrorist attacks, and has never agreed to any preposition offered by any Israeli PM. The attacks are only on terrorist homes. If people wouldn't want to die, they wouldn't live with terrorists, who hide with civilians, on purpose. Sharon is backing down from both Gaza and the West Bank. A fact is a fact. Sharon has only killed those that were with the militant, they should not house the militant in the first place. Arafat has murdered thousands of innocent civilians. You judge.
You fucking muppet...and what exactly do you think is going to happen now? There is a powder keg of militant activism in the Middle East or haven't you noticed?! Arafat has to a large level managed to quell the suicide bombings. Sorry to tell you but it's likely to get worse with him dead. And as for your ranting rubarb about Israel and terrorism let me remind you of a basic historical fact. Israel was born out of terrorism. They were blowing the shit out of the European occupiers until they got there own state! Amazing that fact is conveniantly forgotten. Excuse my use of profanities everyone but some people really get my goat! Peace! (some hope!)
Now? Sharon will follow up on his plan and evacuate Gaza and Israel will finish building the wall. Arafat? Arafat has been set aside from political activity for weeks, and exactly in those weeks... the terrorist activity seemed to have come to a short halt. Born out of terrorism? Last I checked, it was internationaly agreed to establish Israel as a state. Came into existence by terrorism? How so? By jewish collonization and social protest? Do not one modern day nation that did not come into its current Democratic existance through some form of "terrorism".
aww I have never, ever seen you apologise for your profanities before ... are you feeling ok? *hands zonk a hot water bottle and some soup* (it's for your own good ) Love Clairexxx
The Israeli state was born from the massacre of thousands of Palestinians who were forced from their land. And I don't see how building a wall is going to help matters in any way at all....
Thousands? Massacre? What? Where? Yes, there were deaths... please do tell me of a war over land with no death in it. (Other than the Cold War, obviously) The wall benefits both sides, and both sides aknowledge it. It separates the countries, giving the Palestinians their own state. It also stops suicide bomber access to Israel.
Maybe you should check out the entire sorry history of that region: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/israel_at_50/history/78601.stm or http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm or http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/ I don't think anyone is dismissing the right of the Jews to a homeland, just condemning the acts of barbarity that were carried out in the process of its formation.
Both sides acknowledge it? By acknowledge, do you mean subjected to it? I'm pretty sure most of the Palestinians are very unhappy about it, especially since it encroaches further into their territory, and cuts many towns off from their main supplies of water, also seperating people from their work. Moreover the UN General Assembley has ruled it illegal. For a source on the massacres in setting up the Israeli state: http://www.palestinehistory.com/massacre.htm You seem to justify it by saying that all struggles for land are characterised by blood shed. That's a little heartless, not only because the colonialists were essentially invaders, occupying the Palestinian land that they had lived on for centuries....
