jimmy carter to meet with hamas
- Thread starter negator
- Start date
I agree, while meridith is slightly extremist, you seem even more so, and are infact the one insighting violence-even more so than Meridith. Like it or not, it was originally the Palestinian's land, but who got their first is the most primitive form of political arguements. The fact that Israel is killing ore civilians of the Palestinian's side is the biggest thing that discredit's it. Sayng they were targeting the terrorists not the civilians is like the 9/11 cunts saying they were only targeting the floor they think is responsible for weapons trading.
Extremists are on both sides, and are equally evil and extreme. But since Israel is the one killing ore civilians, I believe Palestine is the one we should be protecting. Simple as that as to me all human life is equally precious, and cheap talk about whose being targetted doesn't relief the suffering.
dick van cock
Closed Account
I was just trolling, ofcourse i don't support hamas or call for the killing of ANYONE.
Just checking reactions that I will get as there are some people like Georges calling for the killing of others.
ok. this is a two part stumper.
firstly about my being a violent extremist, do you mean in this thread or just in general?
secondly, I was defending meredith, but then you call both him and me extreme, and then you go even further in voicing support for Palestine, which was essentially his point. That makes zero sense to me. are you saying that you are an extremist too?
to make it perfectly clear I am against Palestinian terrorism. I am against Isreali terrorism. I'm agaisnt Middle-eastern terrorism. I'm agaisnt US terrorism.
I only defend Palestine because some people think that they are the ONLY bad guys. also some people think that Israel are the ONLY bad guys, and I disagree with them too. I disagree with antisemitism and people who believe in the so-called "Zionist plot." But I also think that Israel isn't perfect and that they should be held to the same standard as everyone else.
I was just trolling, ofcourse i don't support hamas or call for the killing of ANYONE.
Just checking reactions that I will get as there are some people like Georges calling for the killing of others.
oh really? Do you think that members here are enough naive to believe you? You got it all wrong. Members know each other pretty well. You threw words in this thread and in another thread deliberately without weighting the meaning of them. Anyone backing up the hamas and saying what you said against israel tells a lot about him. The only killings I advocate are the killings of terrorists, dictators and their sympathizers. :thefinger
:ban:Actually on that post I was trolling, although I have no proble saying the same thing now. Although I side more with the palestinians than the Israeli.
I couldn't give a shit if hamas kill the israeli as I classify them as terrorists. Doesn't mean I support them. Just don't care about zionists.
And frankly I couldn't give a shit what zionist scum like you think.:ban: Go and beg the governments of the world for charity for your pathetic parasitic state, that wouldn't last a day without the guilt support of E.U or the U.S.
I hope thamas kill as many zionists as they can. So what if the israeli kill 1 or 2, the Palestinians should NEVER give up for their right to freedom.
I couldn't give a shit if hamas kill the israeli as I classify them as terrorists. Doesn't mean I support them. Just don't care about zionists.
And frankly I couldn't give a shit what zionist scum like you think.:ban: Go and beg the governments of the world for charity for your pathetic parasitic state, that wouldn't last a day without the guilt support of E.U or the U.S.
I hope thamas kill as many zionists as they can. So what if the israeli kill 1 or 2, the Palestinians should NEVER give up for their right to freedom.
Give me a f;ing break. A country that gets $5billion dollars free (they don't have to do 1 SINGLE thing to get it) to spend on U.S equipment is of course going to have a reasonably equipped military.
what happens when Israel runs out of bomb as in the Lebanon war, oh they get another 100 flown in free of charge by the U.S. Oh wait, they have already used the $5billion for this year, no problem, the U.S will take it out of NEXT year's fund. What a joke. This is what is prolonging the war. If Israel knew that they will have to buy everything like the rest of the world, they wouldn't be so quick to start wars.
On top of that, the zionist scum got their slaves in the U.S house of repulicans (the Senate seems to be less in control) to borrow them $10billion dollars last year, as Israel's conomy wasn't doing to good. What a bloody joke, in a time the U.S was firing teachers, they had enough money for the zionists though.
But you are right, I don't think there is any real chance of war in the middle east, as neither side wants it.
However, I really think Israel should push for peace, as in 50 years the world will be a different place. The U.S, E.U will not have the same power. Other countries are growing at a rate of 10% per year and soon they will catch up....only a matter of time.
Whatever zionist's like Georges think, I do admire hezbollah Hamas, as even though they know that they have NO CHANCE of doing any real harm to Israel, they will fight for freedom and not just walk to their graves like the Jews did in WWII. That was truly tragic that the Jews just allowed themselves to be killed by the nazi's, they should have fought.
You have to really admire them, they will fight even though they know that their is a good chance that they will be killed. That is what bravery is. Not sitting in a jet plane and bombing a helpess people (palestinians), knowing full well that your plane is safe as they do not have ny anti-aircraft missiles.
You show your true colors here. I am not a zionist but I have respect for Israelis and Jews in general. You call me scum? Look at your posts and look at how "clever" they are. You are not very clever, neither can you post something than make sense. Israel is perhaps the sole country in the middle east having respect for its citizens as well as the UAE, Jordan and Egypt. The E.U. gave a shitload of money to Arafat but it was misused. You call israel "pathetic parasitic" state? I wonder from you where come from but you are a true anti semite. :ban:
You are such a brainless fool.You show your true colors here. I am not a zionist but I have respect for Israelis and Jews in general. You call me scum? Look at your posts and look at how "clever" they are. You are not very clever, neither can you post something than make sense. Israel is perhaps the sole country in the middle east having respect for its citizens as well as the UAE, Jordan and Egypt. The E.U. gave a shitload of money to Arafat but it was misused. You call israel "pathetic parasitic" state? I wonder from you where come from but you are a true anti semite. :ban:
Well I must have you confused, cause everyone can have respect for jews and what they have gone through, UP TO A POINT. It has been 50 years and what Israel has done to the Palestinians is just disgusting. I don't pretend to be clever, but jus have a view like your view.
Don't mention arafat, for all I care, the Israeli's should have bombed him ages ago. I care for all people of the world that are oppressed.
"They said that they would accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders if approved by Palestinians and that they would accept the right of Israel to live as a neighbour, next door, in peace," Carter told the Israeli Council on Foreign Relations think-tank.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gdtRDtnHXowtCzCgJF-5zQE_CMRA
carter: FAIL
he's being painted alternately as incompetent, irrelevent, and pure evil.
personally, i have to give him credit for trying, but i think it's time to back away from this one.
don't negotiate with terrorists.
don't bleed for poorly-drawn borders from yesteryear's wars.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gdtRDtnHXowtCzCgJF-5zQE_CMRA
carter: FAIL
he's being painted alternately as incompetent, irrelevent, and pure evil.
personally, i have to give him credit for trying, but i think it's time to back away from this one.
don't negotiate with terrorists.
don't bleed for poorly-drawn borders from yesteryear's wars.
Here is Jimmy Carter's one on one interview with Charlie Rose on Monday April 28, 2008. If you posted a comment on this forum or are interested (since this IS what this thread is about) watch the interview and draw your own conclusions. I think its defenitely worth the view.
He reveals some pretty extraordinary stuff that we never hear about in our media....because we dont talk to anyone. I think what he learned and negotiated are a great starting point to go forward with.
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2008/04/28/1/a-conversation-with-former-president-jimmy-carter
Cheers,
He reveals some pretty extraordinary stuff that we never hear about in our media....because we dont talk to anyone. I think what he learned and negotiated are a great starting point to go forward with.
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2008/04/28/1/a-conversation-with-former-president-jimmy-carter
Cheers,
this is utter flatulence.
No, that'd be the fast track to annihilation.
You seem to forget that Israel and her adversaries have very different goals.
Some key points in Jimmy Carter's meetings as he conveyed in an op-ed in the NY Times.
On the issue of recognition -Carter asked whether Hamas would recognize Israel's right to exist - Answer: Hamas would recognize Israel's right to exist in its pre-1967 border - just as all other 22 arab countries have agreed to do. How? They would support any peace deal negotiated by Abbas and the Israelis IF it were then supported by the Palestenian people in a referendum. Further, on the issue of recognition, Hamas would not exchange diplomats with Israel however. They have said so publicly and are on the record.
Second, on the issue of Corporal Shalit. Carter negotiated that Hamas would free Shalit if Israel would free a list of prisoners that Hamas wants released. Carter suggested that they free Shalit if the 71 (already approved by Israel) prisoners were released as well as the additional names they wanted released. Carter suggested that they accept the 71 plus the 500 women and children Israel holds in its jails (the youngest apparently is 12 years of age). Hamas said they could not because in Palestenian society they had already promised families that they would negotiate for certain individuals first (those at the top of the list would not be bumped in favour of others - people's words are their bonds and changing that would be unfair and a disgrace). Hamas further said they would send Shalit to Egypt where the Egyptians would then send him to Israel (so their is no concern about Hamas renegging on any agreement).
On the issue of rockets, Carter tried to negotiate for Hamas to unilaterally implement a ceasefire - Hamas rejected this having already done so twice in the past only to have Israel continue its incursions in the West Bank and Gaza, however they did say they would (For the first time) have a cease fire between Gaza and Israel and once confidence was built, to have it extended to the West Bank. Hamas made this public - Israel rejected this. Isnt bringing calm and ending the violence the goal??
On not meeting with any Israelis other than Perez - Carter points out that he was scheduled to meet with Ehud Barak who backed out at the last minute. Carter believes it was due to pressure from the US government. In a CNN poll Carter pointed out that 64% of Israelis support talking to Hamas. As I said before, Jews in Israel are more pragmatic in their thinking because they live in the neighbourhood.
On the issue of terrorism - Carter stated that the attack on areas of population by both sides were tantamount to terrorism. He pointed out that any time there is a good chance that civilians will be killed by weapons (from either side) that continuing to fire those weapons anyways, are terrorism.
Finally on the issue of the government, Carter points out that when Hamas won they wanted to form a unity government to represent all the palestenian people, and offered top posts to Fatah members. It was the US who outright rejected a national unity government and put things on the track that they are today rather than embracing it and trying to bring Hamas into the process much like the IRA in Northern Ireland.
The issue of the use of violence and rockets is a terrible method to make a point. But I will repeat what I have said before, in the West Bank there has not been one single rocket fired at Israel and the policy of Israel with the support of the US is to build settlements on Palestenian land, daily incursions killing palestenians, confiscation or resources such as water and the uprooting of olive trees (the only means of livelihood for those who grow them), the bulldozing of homes, the eviction of Palestenians from their own homes etc etc. From a policy objective if you preach peaceful negotiations, then maybe you would want to set an example where peaceful negotiations take place, progress can be made with goodwill on both sides - however, as I summarized above - even with no violence from the West Bank, the actions of the Israeli government are destructive in nature. Seems to me that whether Palestenians negotiate in good faith or not, Israel's policies will continue and will be supported completely by the US government - so why would they stop firing the rockets at illegal settlements?? To make the occupation easy for Israel??? I guess we should have practiced what we preached after Saddam invaded Kuwait. Tell the Kuwaities just to accept the occupation and negotiate.
Cheers
On the issue of recognition -Carter asked whether Hamas would recognize Israel's right to exist - Answer: Hamas would recognize Israel's right to exist in its pre-1967 border - just as all other 22 arab countries have agreed to do. How? They would support any peace deal negotiated by Abbas and the Israelis IF it were then supported by the Palestenian people in a referendum. Further, on the issue of recognition, Hamas would not exchange diplomats with Israel however. They have said so publicly and are on the record.
Second, on the issue of Corporal Shalit. Carter negotiated that Hamas would free Shalit if Israel would free a list of prisoners that Hamas wants released. Carter suggested that they free Shalit if the 71 (already approved by Israel) prisoners were released as well as the additional names they wanted released. Carter suggested that they accept the 71 plus the 500 women and children Israel holds in its jails (the youngest apparently is 12 years of age). Hamas said they could not because in Palestenian society they had already promised families that they would negotiate for certain individuals first (those at the top of the list would not be bumped in favour of others - people's words are their bonds and changing that would be unfair and a disgrace). Hamas further said they would send Shalit to Egypt where the Egyptians would then send him to Israel (so their is no concern about Hamas renegging on any agreement).
On the issue of rockets, Carter tried to negotiate for Hamas to unilaterally implement a ceasefire - Hamas rejected this having already done so twice in the past only to have Israel continue its incursions in the West Bank and Gaza, however they did say they would (For the first time) have a cease fire between Gaza and Israel and once confidence was built, to have it extended to the West Bank. Hamas made this public - Israel rejected this. Isnt bringing calm and ending the violence the goal??
On not meeting with any Israelis other than Perez - Carter points out that he was scheduled to meet with Ehud Barak who backed out at the last minute. Carter believes it was due to pressure from the US government. In a CNN poll Carter pointed out that 64% of Israelis support talking to Hamas. As I said before, Jews in Israel are more pragmatic in their thinking because they live in the neighbourhood.
On the issue of terrorism - Carter stated that the attack on areas of population by both sides were tantamount to terrorism. He pointed out that any time there is a good chance that civilians will be killed by weapons (from either side) that continuing to fire those weapons anyways, are terrorism.
Finally on the issue of the government, Carter points out that when Hamas won they wanted to form a unity government to represent all the palestenian people, and offered top posts to Fatah members. It was the US who outright rejected a national unity government and put things on the track that they are today rather than embracing it and trying to bring Hamas into the process much like the IRA in Northern Ireland.
The issue of the use of violence and rockets is a terrible method to make a point. But I will repeat what I have said before, in the West Bank there has not been one single rocket fired at Israel and the policy of Israel with the support of the US is to build settlements on Palestenian land, daily incursions killing palestenians, confiscation or resources such as water and the uprooting of olive trees (the only means of livelihood for those who grow them), the bulldozing of homes, the eviction of Palestenians from their own homes etc etc. From a policy objective if you preach peaceful negotiations, then maybe you would want to set an example where peaceful negotiations take place, progress can be made with goodwill on both sides - however, as I summarized above - even with no violence from the West Bank, the actions of the Israeli government are destructive in nature. Seems to me that whether Palestenians negotiate in good faith or not, Israel's policies will continue and will be supported completely by the US government - so why would they stop firing the rockets at illegal settlements?? To make the occupation easy for Israel??? I guess we should have practiced what we preached after Saddam invaded Kuwait. Tell the Kuwaities just to accept the occupation and negotiate.
Cheers
Similar threads
- Locked
