Israel/Palestine Shenanigans

Amp34 · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:00

It's quite apt really. The most vocal pro Israeli posters are generally the ones most vocally against immigration and Muslims, just see Scorza's threads as a prime example...

Destination · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:10

ghutchison14078 said:
The sooner huge swathes of the worlds population stop having 2000 year old propaganda drummed into them via their "religious oppressors" (gotta keep the collection plates full ) then we may actually have a chance as a civilization.

Morning rant over....

I think you will find most tribes fought prior to religion, on tribal basis, then brought religion into it, and continued to fight on that basis, then superseded that and fought on country basis, or ethnic basis.
If there was no religion, people would continue to oppress and kill the Jews. They've done it from the dawn of Judaism.

In Africa tribal fights occurred and continue to occur, just some countries have turned that into a Muslim purge of those who are different. Call it as it is, religion is the excuse not the cause. If either side actually followed their faith to the letter, they would not take up arms at all.

Craterloads · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:20

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...hat-helps-israelis-to-hide-facts-9630765.html

Something about this just makes me feel uncomfortable, can you even be human?

Israeli spokesmen have their work cut out explaining how they have killed more than 1,000 Palestinians in Gaza, most of them civilians, compared with just three civilians killed in Israel by Hamas rocket and mortar fire. But on television and radio and in newspapers, Israeli government spokesmen such as Mark Regev appear slicker and less aggressive than their predecessors, who were often visibly indifferent to how many Palestinians were killed.
There is a reason for this enhancement of the PR skills of Israeli spokesmen. Going by what they say, the playbook they are using is a professional, well-researched and confidential study on how to influence the media and public opinion in America and Europe. Written by the expert Republican pollster and political strategist Dr Frank Luntz, the study was commissioned five years ago by a group called The Israel Project, with offices in the US and Israel, for use by those "who are on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel".
Every one of the 112 pages in the booklet is marked "not for distribution or publication" and it is easy to see why. The Luntz report, officially entitled "The Israel project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary, was leaked almost immediately to Newsweek Online, but its true importance has seldom been appreciated. It should be required reading for everybody, especially journalists, interested in any aspect of Israeli policy because of its "dos and don'ts" for Israeli spokesmen.
These are highly illuminating about the gap between what Israeli officials and politicians really believe, and what they say, the latter shaped in minute detail by polling to determine what Americans want to hear. Certainly, no journalist interviewing an Israeli spokesman should do so without reading this preview of many of the themes and phrases employed by Mr Regev and his colleagues.
Mark Regev
The booklet is full of meaty advice about how they should shape their answers for different audiences. For example, the study says that "Americans agree that Israel 'has a right to defensible borders'. But it does you no good to define exactly what those borders should be. Avoid talking about borders in terms of pre- or post-1967, because it only serves to remind Americans of Israel's military history. Particularly on the left this does you harm. For instance, support for Israel's right to defensible borders drops from a heady 89 per cent to under 60 per cent when you talk about it in terms of 1967."
How about the right of return for Palestinian refugees who were expelled or fled in 1948 and in the following years, and who are not allowed to go back to their homes? Here Dr Luntz has subtle advice for spokesmen, saying that "the right of return is a tough issue for Israelis to communicate effectively because much of Israeli language sounds like the 'separate but equal' words of the 1950s segregationists and the 1980s advocates of Apartheid. The fact is, Americans don't like, don't believe and don't accept the concept of 'separate but equal'."
So how should spokesmen deal with what the booklet admits is a tough question? They should call it a "demand", on the grounds that Americans don't like people who make demands. "Then say 'Palestinians aren't content with their own state. Now they're demanding territory inside Israel'." Other suggestions for an effective Israeli response include saying that the right of return might become part of a final settlement "at some point in the future".
Dr Luntz notes that Americans as a whole are fearful of mass immigration into the US, so mention of "mass Palestinian immigration" into Israel will not go down well with them. If nothing else works, say that the return of Palestinians would "derail the effort to achieve peace".
The Luntz report was written in the aftermath of Operation Cast Lead in December 2008 and January 2009, when 1,387 Palestinians and nine Israelis were killed.
There is a whole chapter on "isolating Iran-backed Hamas as an obstacle to peace". Unfortunately, come the current Operation Protective Edge, which began on 6 July, there was a problem for Israeli propagandists because Hamas had quarrelled with Iran over the war in Syria and had no contact with Tehran. Friendly relations have been resumed only in the past few days – thanks to the Israeli invasion.
Frank Luntz
Much of Dr Luntz's advice is about the tone and presentation of the Israeli case. He says it is absolutely crucial to exude empathy for Palestinians: "Persuadables [sic] won't care how much you know until they know how much you care. Show Empathy for BOTH sides!" This may explain why a number of Israeli spokesman are almost lachrymose about the plight of Palestinians being pounded by Israeli bombs and shells.
In a sentence in bold type, underlined and with capitalisation, Dr Luntz says that Israeli spokesmen or political leaders must never, ever justify "the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children" and they must aggressively challenge those who accuse Israel of such a crime. Israeli spokesmen struggled to be true to this prescription when 16 Palestinians were killed in a UN shelter in Gaza last Thursday.
There is a list of words and phrases to be used and a list of those to be avoided. Schmaltz is at a premium: "The best way, the only way, to achieve lasting peace is to achieve mutual respect." Above all, Israel's desire for peace with the Palestinians should be emphasised at all times because this what Americans overwhelmingly want to happen. But any pressure on Israel to actually make peace can be reduced by saying "one step at a time, one day at a time", which will be accepted as "a commonsense approach to the land-for-peace equation".
Dr Luntz cites as an example of an "effective Israeli sound bite" one which reads: "I particularly want to reach out to Palestinian mothers who have lost their children. No parent should have to bury their child."
The study admits that the Israeli government does not really want a two-state solution, but says this should be masked because 78 per cent of Americans do. Hopes for the economic betterment of Palestinians should be emphasised.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is quoted with approval for saying that it is "time for someone to ask Hamas: what exactly are YOU doing to bring prosperity to your people". The hypocrisy of this beggars belief: it is the seven-year-old Israeli economic siege that has reduced the Gaza to poverty and misery.
On every occasion, the presentation of events by Israeli spokesmen is geared to giving Americans and Europeans the impression that Israel wants peace with the Palestinians and is prepared to compromise to achieve this, when all the evidence is that it does not. Though it was not intended as such, few more revealing studies have been written about modern Israel in times of war and peace.

drunkenmaster · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:39

ghutchison14078 said:
Why the hell are they fighting over this piece of scrub-land anyways, is the ground and the concrete buildings on it actually worth more than the lives (on both sides) and the lifelong stress and threat of conflict to those living in the region??

Bloody religion...the sooner it disappears the better; I can think of no other differentiating factor (nationality, skin color, age, sex) that divides the worlds population and precipitates conflict so much as f'ing religion!

It's a prehistoric practice that belongs to an age when humanity couldn't understand and explain the natural world around them...."it must be the magic man in the sky that does it all"

The sooner huge swathes of the worlds population stop having 2000 year old propaganda drummed into them via their "religious oppressors" (gotta keep the collection plates full ) then we may actually have a chance as a civilization.

Morning rant over....

You couldn't misunderstand the situation more completely if you tried, any of it, at all.

Religion is used as an excuse, rich people use religion to control the uneducated, to give them a reason to fight and die to make the rich people richer. If there was no religion, they'd merely promise them something else they wouldn't get anyway.

People fought over caves, food and women before anyone made up religion. After religion is long gone, people will fight over land, money, food and power.

Humans fight over greed, have always done and likely will always do. Religion is an excuse, when it's not religion it's skin colour, or the team you support, or the country you're from, or whatever. Humans pick ANYTHING that is different between them and someone else and fight over it.

Lots of wars have been fought over religion, but if religion didn't exist the wars would have been fought for some other reason.

The Isreal Palestine conflict is primarily about greed, and the majority of religious wars are actually about greed.

You think ISIS went on a rampage over religion... just a coincidence that he's in charge of a lot of land, people, money, oil, resources? He's increased his power dramatically, that's why he/they are doing what they are doing.

Cosimo · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:48

scorza said:
How well do you think the development agenda being implemented in Palestine right now? What exactly has Tony achieved in his seven years as Middle-East peace envoy?

You can guess the answer to the first question. As to the second, the Office of the Quartet Representative has:

Facilitating Large Economic Projects - Secured Israeli release of electromagnetic frequencies in November 2009 for the commercial launch of a second Palestinian mobile telephone operator Wataniya [investment worth USD 350 million]

Improving Movement and Access - Facilitated the opening of the Jalameh Crossing between the northern part of the West Bank and Israel enabling vast numbers of Arab Israelis to visit the PA [supported the economic revitalization of the northern West Bank]

Reconstructing and Opening Up the Gaza Strip - Supported the accelerated implementation of the large Northern Gaza Emergency Sewage Treatment Project (NGEST) and Sheikh Ajleen Project from 2008-2011 [multi-million dollar infrastructure projects]; negotiated a change in the Israeli closure regime on imports into Gaza in June 2010 significantly expanding the volume and range of imported products into Gaza; and secured approval for the export of Gazan products from the furniture, textile and agricultural sectors to all third markets in February 2011.

Supporting Area C Development - Facilitated Israeli approval to fast-track the issuance of permits for the construction and rehabilitation of 21 new schools and health clinics in Area C in the West Bank in February 2011 [coordinated with the Office of the US Special Envoy].

And Blair:

http://www.quartetrep.org/quartet/news/

I'll leave to answer your own questions.

Destination · 27 Jul 2014 at 11:51

scorza said:
I know it's the 'Fail, but it's good to see the Middle-East Peace Envoy trying his best to sort this mess out:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ion-mansion-Gaza-death-toll-passes-1-000.html

I thought he had quit that job.
Not that it matters.
I am rather surprised his wife didn't know it was going to be her birthday. Most people are not surprised, as it is pretty much on the date each year for most of us.

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 12:10

Craterloads said:
Demanding cheese from the moon would be unreasonable, demanding the very basic of human rights is reasonable.

Demanding prisoners to be released is a basic human right?

ghutchison14078 · 27 Jul 2014 at 12:34

drunkenmaster said:
You couldn't misunderstand the situation more completely if you tried, any of it, at all.

^^ In your opinion

Lets say this then...if differing religions aren't the direct cause then they are certainly used as the rallying call to different demographics to precipitate conflict.
There is barely a morning goes by where I don't switch on the TV when having my breakfast before work to see some religious faction / region chucking bullets and bombs at another religious faction / region just because they have differing ideas about their particular magic man in the sky and how they think we all should be leading our lives based on their silly little book of rules.

Religion needs to go away, sadly it probably never will.

Simply my opinions based on my observations of historic and current conflicts; I'm not saying people would never fight but if you took religion out of the equation it would perhaps be simpler to identify the matter/land/items they were fighting over - something tangible that can be negotiated over.

LockyOK · 27 Jul 2014 at 12:42

McBain said:
Demanding prisoners to be released is a basic human right?

Yes.

Wikipedia said:
A writ of habeas corpus is a writ (court order) that requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court. The principle of habeas corpus ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention - that is, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence.

Of course that wouldn't apply in Israel because like the Americans the Israelis don't believe that the law applies to them.

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:04

LockyOK said:
Yes.
.

How so?

Perhaps we should follow suit, and close our prisons down. Human rights and all that.

dirtychinchilla · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:05

Bloody hell. From that Independent article:

In a sentence in bold type, underlined and with capitalisation, Dr Luntz says that Israeli spokesmen or political leaders must never, ever justify "the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children" and they must aggressively challenge those who accuse Israel of such a crime. Israeli spokesmen struggled to be true to this prescription when 16 Palestinians were killed in a UN shelter in Gaza last Thursday.

shine · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:08

McBain said:
How so?

Perhaps we should follow suit, and close our prisons down. Human rights and all that.

How many prisoners in our prisons are there without trial or medical care?

http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/...palestinians-detained-without-trial-by-israel

In case you cannot be bothered to read the full article, you should at least digest this paragraph before speaking on the subject:

Administrative detention is a form of detention without charge or trial. Its use may result in arbitrary detention and if prolonged or repeated can amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. Other violations to which administrative detainees – as well as other Palestinian prisoners held by Israel – are routinely subjected include the use of torture and other ill-treatment during arrest and interrogation; poor prison conditions, including inadequate medical care; detention in prisons inside Israel rather than in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT); and prohibitions on family visits. Since 1967, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the OPT have been arrested – some of them repeatedly – by the Israeli security forces. At the time of writing, well over 4,000 – considered by the Israeli authorities to be “security prisoners” and thus held under harsher conditions than “criminal prisoners” – are detained or serving sentences in Israeli prisons. Over 300 of these “security prisoners” are held under administrative detention orders, with no intention to try them for any criminal offence, a violation of their right to a fair trial.

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:13

shine said:
How many prisoners in our prisons are there without trial or medical care?

http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/...palestinians-detained-without-trial-by-israel

In case you cannot be bothered to read the full article, you should at least digest this paragraph before speaking on the subject:

How many prisoners, around the world, are there without trial or medical care? I don't know, but i'd hazard a guess to say quite a few. Perhaps we should be advocating their release also.

I did read the link however, I wonder if Gilad Shalit received a trial and medical care during his detention.

shine · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:17

McBain said:
How many prisoners, around the world, are there without trial or medical care? I don't know, but i'd hazard a guess to say quite a few. Perhaps we should be advocating their release also.

You do not have to look far to see that people are:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/...uman-rights/demand-accountability-for-torture

However, this thread it specifically about Israel and Palestine. What are your thoughts on demand that Israel release political prisoners now that you know they are holding them without trial?

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:19

shine said:
You do not have to look far to see that people are:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/...uman-rights/demand-accountability-for-torture

However, this thread it specifically about Israel and Palestine. What are your thoughts on demand that Israel release political prisoners now that you know they are holding them without trial?

I think the demands are a means to prevent a genuine cease fire. Hamas will surely know that Israel won't release them, so why put it into the demands?

As such, I think the demand is a joke. There are more pressing matters to deal with.

dirtychinchilla · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:22

McBain said:
I think the demands are a means to prevent a genuine cease fire. Hamas will surely know that Israel won't release them, so why put it into the demands?

As such, I think the demand is a joke. There are more pressing matters to deal with.

That's only one of their demands, though. If they are being held illegally under international law then, yes, the prisoners should be released. But the blockade on Gaza is unacceptable. Israel are unwilling to fulfil a single one of these terms, so the fact that they're asking for their prisoners back makes little difference.

More pressing matters?

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:24

dirtychinchilla said:
That's only one of their demands, though. If they are being held illegally under international law then, yes, the prisoners should be released. But the blockade on Gaza is unacceptable. Israel are unwilling to fulfil a single one of these terms, so the fact that they're asking for their prisoners back makes little difference.

More pressing matters?

Yes, pretty much everything else they have demanded, the blockade being lifted, the re-opening of border crossings etc.

dirtychinchilla · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:25

McBain said:
Yes, pretty much everything else they have demanded, the blockade being lifted etc.

OK, well I agree with you there, but I can't see them fulfilling any of the terms.

arknor · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:28

Amp34 said:
It's quite apt really. The most vocal pro Israeli posters are generally the ones most vocally against immigration and Muslims, just see Scorza's threads as a prime example...

what BS.
I'm against immigration but would like hamas to get the peace and rule their own land.

it will take someone with nukes to stop another country with nukes from throwing it's weight around

McBain · 27 Jul 2014 at 13:29

dirtychinchilla said:
OK, well I agree with you there, but I can't see them fulfilling any of the terms.

Indeed and ultimately, sadly, it's the people that suffer.