Originally Posted by L'Chaim

@ edg - Now you're going into 'Mystic Meg' territory. You can't show ethnic cleansing by Israel in the past or the present (because the facts show there wasn't any) so you try the future. But look at what happened over the last 60 years. the palestinian population of Israeli citizens and of those in the West bank quadrupled. Yet you are claiming the next 100 years will see them wiped out. Have you not thought that if israel wanted them wiped out they would have done it already? They didn't do that because they never had the intention of doing that. And it was the original Zionists who advocated peaceful coexistence and it was the Arab leaders that violently refused. And it was also the Arab leaders who advocated annihilating all the Jews in Israel. These are facts. Where you are trying to go is not fact or based in fact, it's fortune telling - Mystic Meg or the tent at the end of the pier type thing.

Originally Posted by yanshuf

Israel doesn't have to condemn stuff, it's not a member of the Higher Moral Standardisation Committee, like the Irish Left.

The double standard is not from the side of Israel. It's from your side who's very fast to condemn Israel for its defensive steps, and gives support to terrorists.

If you try to show a higher moral stance, it's not helpful to be a hypocrite, especially when you focus only in one state in the world.

Originally Posted by yanshuf

Not only did I already back up my posts, but I've showed you more than once that what you post is tantamount to hatred of jews, majority of jews, but you can roll your eyes whatever direction you find fit to try and ignore them facts:

1. you state you hate zionsist. a fact. meaning you hate majority of jews.

2. you support boycotts of Israel, while you try to diminish the importance of such acts against say- Russia, China, Zimbabwe et al. when you know that the boycotts are a display of a political persecution against Israel and no other in the world.

3. You try to equate between Israel and Hamas terrorists, denying Israel's right to defend itself.

I think it's more than enough for now.



Do I weaken it more than when you and your likes equate between Israeli defensive actions and Hamas civilian shellings, or do I weaken it less?



I see some here celebrate on the opportunity to ram Israel over the "ethnic cleansing" it allegedly carried out against the Arabs.

So I'd have to ask, again (as in the last thread this dealt with I didn't get answers), why is this more important than - say - the Beneš decrees that confiscated the land of 2.5 million ethnic Germans and transfered this population to Germany?

Or the same thing that happened to the Germans in Poland when Silesia Germans were transfered to Germany and Polish settlers took their land?

But I get it, if it's the Jews, then it's ok to attack.

And there goes another antisemitic posting.

Originally Posted by yanshuf

Israel doesn't have to condemn stuff, it's not a member of the Higher Moral Standardisation Committee, like the Irish Left.

The double standard is not from the side of Israel. It's from your side who's very fast to condemn Israel for its defensive steps, and gives support to terrorists.

If you try to show a higher moral stance, it's not helpful to be a hypocrite, especially when you focus only on one state in the world.