Dude, Israel has gone in and systematically leveled houses. Do they check to see which ones were actually terrorists houses? Hmm?

Here: "In April 2002, during Operation Defensive Shield, the Israeli army surrounded Palestinian towns and
refugee camps in the West Bank, and entered them in force, systematically demolishing homes in
many areas."

So you destroy innocent people's homes, people who had nothing to do with the terrorism. If that's your opinion on it, then I truly feel sorry for you.

You didn't answer my question Leauki.

>_<

Take the higher road, and stop the fighting. If they're so wonderful and noble and what not  - then take the friggin high road. Stop the battle and be proactive in providing places for the innocent palestinians to live. Then deal with the terrorists.

Because, Israel is the one that has the true capability to do such things. The palestinian gov't most likely won't do it.

I never said they did it for no reason, I said the fact that they did it is wrong when it comes to destroying some persons home who had nothing to do with it.

I'm taking a break from this article as my stress is through the roof because either: A) I am just not getting my point across, which is likely. One of my instructors did tell me that I often argue like a shotgun to the side of a barn. -OR- I will never get my point across and will just be lambasted as an apparent Jew hater, which is ridiculous.

That was in a battle during a war, you joker.

It was the humane alternative to bombing the area.

Other armies just bomb the area in these situations. Israel uses bulldozers because it allowed for the destruction of installations without hurting or, G-d forbid, killing too many innocent civilians.

Incidentally, "refugee camp" is newspeak for "Arab village". The word is supposed to trigger sympathy for the Arabs. Jewish villages made up of people who fled 60 years ago are not called "refugee camps" because that would trigger similar sympathy for Jews. (Jewish refugees also don't get any money from the UN, not even if they are half Arab.)

I'll show you how this works:

Village or town founded after 1948 and populated by refugees from then:

Arab: "refugee camp"

Jewish: "town"

Jewish village or town in the West-Bank or Arab village or town in Israel:

Arab settlement in Israel: "town" or "village"

Jewish settlement in the West-Bank: "outpost" or "settlement"

It didn't occur to the UN (or the media) to treat Jews and Arabs the same. Arabs live in towns and refugee camps, Jews live in settlements and towns.

There is a 3000-year old Jewish "settlement" in Hevron, surrounded by an Arab town settled 1000 years ago.

That's one of the "settlements" Obama wants destroyed, I think.

Anyway, I find it interesting that "Israel uses bulldozers in a battle even though bombing the area would be easier" transformed into "Israel bulldozes innocent families' homes for no reason".

And you don't think this is anti-Semitism???

Let me rephrase your quote, without changing its truth value:

In April 2002, during Operation Defensive Shield, the Israeli army surrounded Arab towns in the West Bank, and entered them in force, systematically demolishing buildings manually instead of bombing the area."

The changes I made to remove the propaganda:

1. "Palestinian" became "Arab". (I refuse to acknowledge that only Arabs are "Palestinians". If the land is called "Palestine", then certainly both Jewish and Arab inhabitants would be "Palestinians".)

2. "towns and refugee camps" became "towns". (The UN and the media do not differentiate between Jewish towns settled by Jewish refugees and others, I don't see why this has to be done with Arab towns.)

3. "systematically demolishing homes in many areas" became "systematically demolishing buildings manually instead of bombing the area". (I added the logical explanation for why one side decides to use bulldozers to destroy buildings in a battle. I also figure that "buildings" is more correct, since Israel destroyed mainly police stations and other non-civilian buildings and "homes" really is a word used for "house" when one wants to draw attention to the idea that families live there. It is more honest to say "buildings" when the target were buildings in general rather than homes specifically.)

You can change any news story to add your propaganda.

Take this example:

"Traffic police were attacked by drunk car driver. The armed drunk wounded a police officer and then walked into incoming traffic where he was hit by a car and died before the ambulance arrived."

(I made this up.)

This can be rephrased, without changing the truth value:

"Armed government units were involved in a fight with a civilian attending a social event. The civilian died on the spot. One officer was wounded."

It's the same story, but the focus is on different aspects of it. Both versions are true.

It becomes a lie when I retell the same story as:

"Armed governments units generally kill innocent civilians coming home from parties."

And that's what became of this story about the destruction of buildings during a battle.

The truth: Israel had once decided to use bulldozers to destroy buildings instead of bombs.

The other true version: Israel bulldozed "homes" during a battle with terrorists.

the lie: Israel bulldozes the homes of innocent people for no reason.

(Note that Israel doesn't do this any more. It proved too good a propaganda fodder for the terrorists. I still think it was an excellent idea. Note that I think that WHAT REALLY HAPPENED was the excellent idea. I do NOT think that the lie about destroying the homes of innocent people is true and that that was the right thing to do.)

I am sorry, I might not have made myself clear enough.

I do NOT BELIEVE that Israel was destroying innocent people's homes. If I at any point implied that I think it was OK for Israel to do something instead of telling people repeatedly that it was a lie that Israel did this, I apologise. I meant to make it perfectly clear that I considered it a lie.

(And I thought I had totally exaggerated it with my many replies explaining the same thing over and over again. And yet here we are and some people still think that I believe the lie and support Israel perpetrating what the lie says Israel did.)

That's what the Jews did when the Germans screamed "death to the Jews". Since then we know that the world will simply watch.

It will NEVER happen again. The high road is, for non-Jews, something the Jews can take on their way to death.

I found the article I wrote about this some time ago:

http://citizenleauki.joeuser.com/article/313428/Lies_about_Israel_and_why_People_tell_them

Wow, 52 responses and only a couple have anything whatsover to do with Adventure-dudes point!

It's a legitimate question... why does Obama respect the right of every nation no earth to use nuclear power... except the US?

Nuclear power is the only "alternative" source that can possibly keep up with what oil does for us.. yet to Obama, it's off the table.

Palistinians are welcome to move and live freely in Israel.  The reverse is NOT true.

How AJ, do you propose they 'stop the battle' when they aren't the one's throwing the first grenade, rocket, killing, etc?  That's like me telling you to stop your feud with your neighbor when your neighbor keeps throwing rocks at you, your family, and your house.  Not to mention that your neighbor calls for the destruction of you and your house. 

So you decide to give them a bit of your back yard in the name of peace. Now they are closer to you, your family, and your house to take better aim. 

Please AJ, tell me what the 'high road' is here?

I guess their nuclear waste is ok because it isn't here?

Which brings us back to my theory that western liberals simply don't see Iranians (and middle-easterners in general) as human beings completely like Americans or Europeans.

"Without going into specifics, what I do believe is that Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations. On the other hand, the international community has a very real interest in preventing a nuclear arms race in the region," Obama said.

A nuclear arms race IN THE REGION... aka, a nuclear arms race between... israel and iran?

So he is saying he SUPPORTS irans ASPIRATIONS to nuclear might, but is against any races of nuclear tech, which sound to me like he is saying he wishes to see israel disarmed and iran armed.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/06/02/obama_iran_has_legitimate_aspirations_for_nuclear_power.html

It doesn't matter who did what first, it's the peace that could be that matters.As for the high road, at least they didn't broadly fire into the yard, possibly killing said neighbor's family/children who likely had nothing to do with the specific neighbor.

Here's an idea:

1. Offer to move any and all Palestinians to camps outside of, say, the WB and Gaza. Tell them that if they won't leave, then they are considered fair game. (Offer incentives; food, water, etc.) As they are transitioning, establish security measures (i.e. my thought is an ID system)

2. Blow the hell out of those who are left.

It isn't fool proof, but it could be a start. I'm not saying that Israel is entirely to blame - I'm not dense; however, they do share a part of the blame.

P.S. Anyone know a good mexican dish to prepare for a date? I'm gonna ask this girl out here at school and thought about fixing something.

You confuse first with "all the time"

There are countless cease fire agreements, terrorist organizations keep on breaking them, israel does not.

First, I'm not sure where this whole bulldozing houses thing started.  If Alderic, you want to talk about Bull Dozing well, Gaza and West Bank FORCED all Jews out hence if you owned a house and you were Jewish it got demolished doing the evac.

Second, the attitude that a Nation should be allowed to do whatever as along as it doesn't effect me is IMBECILIC! Yes, they should be allowed to do whatever they want.  As people, we can do whatever we want for example some one could come burn your house down, kill you, and your family.  Yes, they're allowed to do that BUT there will be consequences to this happening (laws).

I'm not saying that Iran shouldn't be allowed to have Nuclear Power, but I think it would be better if they didn't have it FOR the consequences of them getting it will be high.

It would be naive and jive if we would allow them to get nuclear power. Notice how China and Russia aren't really concerned with Iran getting it. The problem is most people from the States have the attitude that why not let them get it.

Yeah and I'm sure that the world would be a much safier, more peaceful place if Iran was allowed to have Nuclear Power. Especially with Mahmoud and that he's a radical muslim as well(oh yeah maybe you don't believe in G-D or their god.  Why don't we just tell him that we don't believe in his god or their god and lets see how far that gets us).

Kofi Annan, he was the UN Secretary General, admitted that Israel is often unfairly judged at the United Nations. "On one side, supporters of Israel feel that it is harshly judged by standards that are not applied to its enemies and too often this is true, particularly in the some U.N. bodies."

ISRAEL DOES NOT GET A PASS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

Out of 225 resolutions towards Israel:

136 were against Israel

84 were neutral

5 were against the perceived interests of Arabs.

WOW! WHAT A PASS!  I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW THEY GET AWAY WITH EVERYTHING!  WHAT A FREE PASS!

I will give you this and that the U.N is a joke, a joke with most employees getting paid decently. The employees are the ones who are laughing at the foolish people who supports them.

Just so you know that Palestine has had 2 opportunities (U.N. Resolution 181/465, can't find third one late and tired) to accept a land agreement.  Each time they've rejected it out right.  What the PA is doing now is just being a little kid and throwing a fit until they get their way.  The PA doesn't want Israel to be there.

Your response is the usually 'American' response.  We should let them duke it out or we should bomb them all.

You may say that G-D (may not don't believe in G-D) didn't intervene during 1948 war and 1967 war BOTH wars the U.S were not yet supporting Israel heavily.  Actually during the '67 war Israel and U.S relations were pretty intense due to a situation that happened with an American ship.

One final thing, Hamas (Chamas in biblical Hebrew actually means violence.  I won't bore anyone with the verses.  The verse are pretty interesting in what they say about Chamas, Leauki am I right?) hates Israel and actually in its charter wants to set up an Islamic Palestinian state with no Jews in it.  With Jerusalem just like Mecca and Medina they want to set it up so ONLY MUSLIMS are allowed in those cities. Saudi Arabia, actually does not allow Israelies in FOR ANY REASON.

Giving land for peace will NEVER work, for PA/Hamas does not just want a piece they want the whole thing.

I will say this on both sides there is hatred and a lot of false stereotypes.

It'll takes both sides though you are right because the PA doesn't want peace.  I will concede this fact a fair amount of Religious Jews don't want to give up any land, but you see that being disregarded.

Suha Arafat, she's the widow of Yasser, she is in the top 15 most wealthiest women in the World.  I don't think you become one of the wealthiest by being the wife of a PA president.  A lot of that money is OUR tax money hard at work.  Greed, was one of the main reasons why Hamas won elections.

In conclusion, your analysis of the PA gov't was very accurate and they plan on not doing anything that will help the peace process.

Israel does this. Every time Israel bombs an enemy, Israeli aircraft drop leaflets first, telling people to leave the area.

But they don't leave.

Sounds a bit inhumane to me.

So your criticism of Israel here is that you think that Israel should bomb the hell of of the enemies rather then use bulldozers?

Specifically, they share the part of the blame for things people make up.

Do you still need a mexican recipe? I have won and gone to a lot of cooking competitions in many different styles.  What type of food do you like? Are you vegan or do you like meat? What type of food does she like? Spicy? Tangy? Are you looking for something easy? What food do you have to work with? What is your budget?

Oh but in this case they do.  When you have friends over they are open firing on them, including women and children.  AJ, just look up all the horrors of S'derot.  The terrorists constantly bomb them. 

Leauki, as you and I know they are part of the blame for trying to live.

Yes.

Sorry about that.

It's really the world vs Israel on the question of whether the Jews should be thrown into the sea. Now the world offers a compromise, of course. And the evil Israelis won't accept it. Six million dead, they think, six million dead is the demand. What would the compromise be? (And what legitimises the demand anyway?)

Leauki,

Isn't it interesting how Israel has to always give up something? Israel needs to be the one to stop fighting first (ie start the cease fire).  Israel needs to give up some land.  Israel needs to give up some money.  Why hasn't there been a solution that says.  Hey Palistine you want to exist then leave Israel alone else, withdraw most of the restrictions on what Israel can do as part of warefare!  There that's my two state solution.

Obama is now calling for a 2-state solution.  Suddenly he says, "Now is the time to act." Obama went to a concentration camp, gave a speach in Cairo, and suddenly he is the expert.    

I wonder if Obama realizes that Netanyahu has told him, NO to dividing of Jerusalem.  The lines are already drawn why doesn't the POTUS just push for them to accept their current territory?  I'm of the opinion that Chamas/Palistine will continue to push and break peace treaties when they know that the next peace treaty will involve Israel giving them something (usually land).  What incentive is Palistine given to quit fighting when they know that they'll keep getting more?

My policy is simple.

1. Bring up the concept of "land for peace" and I will want to know how much land Israel is going to receive in exchange for peace.

2. Bring up the concept of "illegal settlements" and I will want to know whether those rules should also affect Arab settlements in Israel or whether they are rules against Jews only. I will reject any anti-Semitic rules.

3. Bring up the refugee question and I will want to know how much each Jewish and Arab refugee is supposed to receive as compensation. There have been more Jewish than Arab refugees in this conflict. I support equal compensation for each individual.

4. And finally, bring up the question of annexation of land and occupation of Islamic holy cities and I will enthusiastically support any measure designed to convince the Saudis to withdraw from the Kingdom of Hejaz and the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina. I will want to address the holy cities in order of Islamic holiness.

Leauki and Adventure Guy, you fail to realize that most people, especially in the States, don't know about that  or care to know.  Hence, why they say let them duke it out or we should blow them up.

Israel was totally trouncing Lebanon but was force to stop.  If the United States and the U.K (both countries are becoming anti-sematic and are just plain ignorant) stop supporting Israel, Israel will still survive.  Now, for the United States and the U.K, both countries and the West in general is another question if they survive.

Most people think its all about the land.  If only the PA had the land this whole thing would be over.  In the two U.N resolutions that I posted (181 and 465) they got a lot of land.  Obviously now, the land is better because Israel had irigated it, but the PA has made that all null and void with what they've done to the land. The land now is back to how it was prior to '47 and just a waste land.  Its not about the land but its about the people who are on the land and who is allowed on the land.

One final thing, is most people don't realize that the PA use to get most of their electricity, food, medical needs to such a point where was like a tumor or a leech.

It would be like if the United States supported Mexico as in they supplied them with what ever they need.  Wait a minute, the U.S. already does!

And that despite the fact that both the PLO and Hamas do their best to make it clear that it is about killing Jews.

It's weird.

Yeah, but that doesn't really matter.

Using my four principles, I can deflect almost anything.

And then there is the ideal answer to "Are you a Zionist?".

I support freedom and independence for all minorities in the Middle East including the Imazighen, the Fur and the other African tribes in Sudan, the Kurds, the Assyrians, and the Jews. I am a Phoenicianist and a Pharaonist.

I suport equal rights for Arabs and Jews and Assyrians and everybody else, women, homosexuals, Christians, and Yezidis.

I support gay pride parades in holy cities, I support democracy and freedom of speech and religion.

I support a Jewish state in Israel, an Aramaic state in Syria, Berber states in northern Africa and Arab states in Arabia.

I oppose the death penalty and the mistreatment of foreign workers.

I believe that whites and blacks have the same value, that black Africans are not merely potential slaves and that white Arabs are not automatic masters.

So, yes, in other words, I am a Zionist.

I am everything white supremacists, Arab nationalists, slave holders, and Islamic fundamentalists hate. And I am proud of it.

Bottom line is folks, I want to see peace. For the sake of my friends, and my grandfather; the stuff happening over there breaks my heart, and I do not see the PA willing to do much, so, it really falls on Israel to get things done. I'm not saying Israel is some hideous monster, but I do believe it can do better. I'm suddenly reminded of a comment that is worth chewing on:

"Governments have never lied to anyone; they are the bastion of honesty, I should believe my government."

Think about it; other than that, I'm done with the Israel part of the conversation.

Yes, and I'm vegetarian, she is not. She's not picky and I don't mind spicy food's so long as it isn't "kick your arse" spicy. You know what I mean? I'd like something easy to make since I really am no Emeril Lagasse. My budget is 45-50$.

They turn a deafening ear and close their eyes.  Obama and many Americans come across as arrogant as a result.  They have a solution but only reveal their ignorance.

I forgot about this.  Thank you for reminding me.

as for peace, the Jewish scriptures speak of a man who will broker peace for a seven year period.  He's the one the Christians are waiting for.  He will not be a good guy but millions will think he's god because he will finally be the one who brings peace  (false) to the Jews and to the nations.  So as I watched Obama yesterday I was thinking....is he the one Daniel spoke about so many many years ago?  If so, there's not one thing we're going to do to stop this.  There will be some sort of seven year pact made.  Time will tell if that's what Obama is supposed to be part of or not.  If so, it should be imminent.  Because he has most likely 7 1/2 years left.

I have a nice rice,bean, mexican cheese and salsa dish that wins raves everytime I make it.....but it does have hamburg in it.  Everyone else who has made it also said it went over big at their homes.   It's very easy but very good.    It's very inexpensive to make and with some cornbread and salad would make you a wonderful meal. 

AJ, this is a ludicrous perspective! 

Please tell me how the additional responsibility falls on Israel for the lack of responsibility?  You talk about giving Israel the pass when you clearly just gave the PA a pass for their lack.  Additionally you place PA's lack on Israel.  When you do this what is the PA's incentive for peace?  This is a total socialist/Marxist mindset on an international scale!