And with you as well.
I'm afraid that man will always be killing one another though.
Palestinians are all about piece right?
- Thread starter trader
- Start date
And with you as well.
I'm afraid that man will always be killing one another though.
Taken from the Congressional Research Service: -
Since the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993 and the establishment of limited Palestinian self rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1994, the U.S. government has committed over $3.5 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians. Since the death of Yasser Arafat in November 2004, U.S. assistance to the Palestinians has been averaging about $400 million a year. During the 1990s, U.S. foreign aid to the Palestinians averaged approximately $75 million per year. Despite more robust levels of assistance this decade, Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Hamas’s heightened role in Palestinian politics have made it more difficult to implement effective and lasting aid projects that serve U.S. interests.
Counter this with the 113 Billion given in aid to Israel over the years and it's not hard to see why they can't turn a desert into an oasis.
The interesting bit for me is the last five words... "Projects that serve U.S. interests".
There's nothing like giving for giving's sake eh boys :thumbsup:
Counter this with the 113 Billion given in aid to Israel over the years and it's not hard to see why they can't turn a desert into an oasis.
The interesting bit for me is the last five words... "Projects that serve U.S. interests".
There's nothing like giving for giving's sake eh boys :thumbsup:
Couple of points here:
- the Milliband's mother is involved with the Jewish Floatilla to break the Gaza blockade
- the Isrealis left Gaza with the largest greenhouse in the world which the palestinians quickly destroyed
The Jews are prosperous, and the Palestinians are still caught up in their own thing.
- the Milliband's mother is involved with the Jewish Floatilla to break the Gaza blockade
- the Isrealis left Gaza with the largest greenhouse in the world which the palestinians quickly destroyed
The Jews are prosperous, and the Palestinians are still caught up in their own thing.
Would they do anything constuctive if they had the money? Probably buy more rockets, mortar rounds and piss and moan about how shitty things are. Things are pretty bad when the only person in that group you can find to give the Nobel Peace Prize to is a terrorist. But then BO got that meaningless award too!
Danny,
Spot on mate. If we put women in charge, then that might happen. I sometimes wonder if us blokes let our ego's affect our decisions a tad too much...
(P.S. I'll NEVER admit that to the wife
).But seriously I agree with your sentiment. Shame that both sides in this conflict have become SO entrenched in their side of the story that they can't see the wood for the trees...
Graham.
Graham,
Part of the problem is that the Arab countries, while promising aid and previously sending it, have ceased to do so. In 2002, the Palestinians were promised $660 million/year by 22 Arab nations (how much money do you think Israel gets from those countries?) in addition to US providing about $400 million/year since Arafat's death. Then, there's the EU, which provided an average of over $340 million/annually since 2000.
Interesting write up here - apparently, much of it has to do with the concern over how the Palestinians will use the money ...
Arab Aid to Palestinians Often Doesn't Fulfill Pledges - washingtonpost.com
Ian
Danny,
Spot on mate. If we put women in charge, then that might happen. I sometimes wonder if us blokes let our ego's affect our decisions a tad too much...
(P.S. I'll NEVER admit that to the wife
But seriously I agree with your sentiment. Shame that both sides in this conflict have become SO entrenched in their side of the story that they can't see the wood for the trees...
Graham.
It sure would be nice if they could start with a clean slate. Unfortunately, the hatred on both sides (and their allies) is so deep, I don't think it will ever be possible.
The bright spot - their are moderate Israelis and Palestinians that probably could enjoy a nice peaceful coexistence. The hope is that they will some day help break the cycle.
Ian
Personally I don't understand why Isreal just does not unilaterally declare the Palestine Territories to be a State.
That way they do not have to supply them with food, water and power, they can keep the walls up and any attack from Gaza or the West Bank can be treated as an Act of War and the Isreali's will not have to fight with one arm tied behind their back and blind folded.
Palestinian Statehood is not wanted in the Middle East by anybody that matters and apparently it is not possible for Isreal to ever offer up what the losers of this perpetual struggle continue to demand.
Palestine is full of educated, industrious people who allow their destiny to be controlled by a small group of stone age fanatics, if peace is ever achieved then this bunch will have no purpose in Life and be forced to blame their miserable existence on themselves.
Even in perpetual warfare Isreal is the only state in the area that comes close to living up to it's potential.
IMHO
That way they do not have to supply them with food, water and power, they can keep the walls up and any attack from Gaza or the West Bank can be treated as an Act of War and the Isreali's will not have to fight with one arm tied behind their back and blind folded.
Palestinian Statehood is not wanted in the Middle East by anybody that matters and apparently it is not possible for Isreal to ever offer up what the losers of this perpetual struggle continue to demand.
Palestine is full of educated, industrious people who allow their destiny to be controlled by a small group of stone age fanatics, if peace is ever achieved then this bunch will have no purpose in Life and be forced to blame their miserable existence on themselves.
Even in perpetual warfare Isreal is the only state in the area that comes close to living up to it's potential.
IMHO
Re: Palestinians are all about peace right?
A very good speech to a useless organization. The last part has to do with this thread.
Netanyahu´s Speech at the UN General Assembly
September 2010
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.
The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.
Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942 , after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?
A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler's deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?
This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute
to a lie?
And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the
Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish
family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and three
brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?
Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to
come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you
brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?
A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six
million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state.
What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this
man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong.
History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing
many others. This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously
slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of
different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.
Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or
anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does
not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.
The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure
of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day.
Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties
of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially.
It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to
the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.
What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes
that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives.
We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.
I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances - by leading innovations in science
and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These
innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.
But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be
reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will
prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the
greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass
destruction.
The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear
weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international
community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?
Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian
protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart
the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?
Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic
weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?
The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world
stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations
stand by their side?
Ladies and Gentlemen, The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.
For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby
Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN
resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing - absolutely nothing - from
the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one. In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza . It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent. Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities,
causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy
committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians - Israel sought to
conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.
That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using
mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel , by contrast, tried to minimize
casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas.
We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of
cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove
the enemy's civilian population from harm's way.
Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide
to condemn? Israel . A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged,
drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.
By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill
to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.
Delegates of the United Nations, Will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding
democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that
the earth is flat.
If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you
launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel ,
this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace.
Here's why.
When Israel left Gaza , many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very
least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy?
What self-defense?
The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now
accuses us -my people, my country - of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense.
What a travesty! Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?
We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take
more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the
confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.
Ladies and Gentlemen, All of Israel wants peace. Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with
us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel , will
make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this
body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted
that resolution. The Arabs rejected it.
We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state.
Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked
to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land
of Israel . This is the land of our forefathers. Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the
great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more."
These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in
my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem .
We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland.
As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and
want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity
and dignity.
But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those
handful of powers that could endanger Israel .
That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza , another
Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.
We want peace.
I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran , that seek to
destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international
community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.
Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of
mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.
Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be
simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until
self-preservation strikes its jarring gong."
I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for
once proven wrong.
I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time.
In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good
courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for
generations to come.
A very good speech to a useless organization. The last part has to do with this thread.
Netanyahu´s Speech at the UN General Assembly
September 2010
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.
The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.
Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942 , after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?
A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler's deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?
This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute
to a lie?
And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the
Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish
family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and three
brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?
Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to
come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you
brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?
A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six
million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state.
What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this
man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong.
History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing
many others. This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously
slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of
different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.
Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or
anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does
not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.
The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure
of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day.
Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties
of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially.
It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to
the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.
What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes
that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives.
We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.
I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances - by leading innovations in science
and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These
innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.
But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be
reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will
prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the
greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass
destruction.
The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear
weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international
community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?
Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian
protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart
the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?
Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic
weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?
The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world
stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations
stand by their side?
Ladies and Gentlemen, The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.
For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby
Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN
resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing - absolutely nothing - from
the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one. In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza . It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent. Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities,
causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy
committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians - Israel sought to
conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.
That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using
mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel , by contrast, tried to minimize
casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas.
We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of
cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove
the enemy's civilian population from harm's way.
Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide
to condemn? Israel . A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged,
drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.
By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill
to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.
Delegates of the United Nations, Will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding
democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that
the earth is flat.
If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you
launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel ,
this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace.
Here's why.
When Israel left Gaza , many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very
least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy?
What self-defense?
The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now
accuses us -my people, my country - of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense.
What a travesty! Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?
We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take
more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the
confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.
Ladies and Gentlemen, All of Israel wants peace. Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with
us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel , will
make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this
body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted
that resolution. The Arabs rejected it.
We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state.
Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked
to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land
of Israel . This is the land of our forefathers. Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the
great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more."
These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in
my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem .
We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland.
As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and
want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity
and dignity.
But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those
handful of powers that could endanger Israel .
That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza , another
Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.
We want peace.
I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran , that seek to
destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international
community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.
Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of
mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.
Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be
simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until
self-preservation strikes its jarring gong."
I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for
once proven wrong.
I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time.
In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good
courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for
generations to come.
Re: Palestinians are all about peace right?
Al, you should probably start a new thread on this, as no one on this thread has EVER said that the holocaust didn't happen. On the contrary, I am sickened by the events of WW2 as I am sure most people on here are too.
I appreciate that you mention that the piece relevant to this thread is later on in the text, so if you need to take a piece from this speech, then just take that piece. The rest is just scenery that actually works against you as it shows a heavy bias (which we are all capable of). It wouldn't have been hard for you to cut and paste the piece you needed.
It just seems as though you are quite happy to lump the whole thing in there, and that action is not balanced to any of the points that have been made in this thread.
Graham.
Al, you should probably start a new thread on this, as no one on this thread has EVER said that the holocaust didn't happen. On the contrary, I am sickened by the events of WW2 as I am sure most people on here are too.
I appreciate that you mention that the piece relevant to this thread is later on in the text, so if you need to take a piece from this speech, then just take that piece. The rest is just scenery that actually works against you as it shows a heavy bias (which we are all capable of). It wouldn't have been hard for you to cut and paste the piece you needed.
It just seems as though you are quite happy to lump the whole thing in there, and that action is not balanced to any of the points that have been made in this thread.
Graham.
Re: Palestinians are all about peace right?
What I said, was that it was a good speech and the last part of the speech pertained to this thread, as he spoke at length about the Palestinians. The speech was interesting and I saw no reason to cut it up.
What I said, was that it was a good speech and the last part of the speech pertained to this thread, as he spoke at length about the Palestinians. The speech was interesting and I saw no reason to cut it up.
Danny,
Spot on mate. If we put women in charge, then that might happen. I sometimes wonder if us blokes let our ego's affect our decisions a tad too much...
(P.S. I'll NEVER admit that to the wife
But seriously I agree with your sentiment. Shame that both sides in this conflict have become SO entrenched in their side of the story that they can't see the wood for the trees...
Graham.
Women leaders (business and politics) are just as ruthless as men, sometimes more so. It's not a gender thing, it's a power thing. Golda Meir, an example relevant to this discussion, may be an exception however as she held back against a pre-emptive strike against the Syrians in the Yom Kippur War in '73, which turned out to be a very smart move.
Take a look at female leaders like Carly Fiorini or Meg Whitman - they are absolutely ruthless and cunning in their tactics, same as most male CEO's.
Charlie Farley
Supporter
Al, well said.
You know, your President sent your 8th Army Airforce to the UK in 1943, to carry out daylight bombing raids on Germany. The RAF Bomber Command carried on with its night time offensive. Of all the Army, Naval and Airforce commands, both regular and volunteer, RAF Bomber Command was the only branch to never receive a campaign medal. It was a slight never corrected, due in part to Churchill's about face, late in the war, whereby, with an election looming, he tried to distance himself from the growing ' horror ' that we could actually be killing civilians. If i recall correctly, after the blitz on british cities, he was all in favour of hitting back.
To put things into perspective, Bomber Command , by percentage, suffered by far the greatest fatalities of ANY british unit. Not the Royal Marines, not the Parachute Regiment, not Bomb Disposal, not even the forerunners to the SAS, no, Bomber Command. The official figure for aircrew is 32%.
I asked my Father , who served with Bomber Command about this. After the war was over, the bad press slowly grew, until he never mentioned his service.
It was only in the late 1940's that he felt vindicated. While attending a cinema, he watched a newsreel film. In it, it told of the allied entry into Dachau by a British Army unit. The camera focused for a moment on the row of ovens. Then the penny dropped.
Cast into the front panel of every oven, was the manufacturer's name and the town of manufacture. It took him back years, to one cold winter's night, flying high over Bavaria,
probably on their own. When they were tasked with bombing what to them at the time, seemed a small light industrial town. Those ovens were made in that town.
You know, your President sent your 8th Army Airforce to the UK in 1943, to carry out daylight bombing raids on Germany. The RAF Bomber Command carried on with its night time offensive. Of all the Army, Naval and Airforce commands, both regular and volunteer, RAF Bomber Command was the only branch to never receive a campaign medal. It was a slight never corrected, due in part to Churchill's about face, late in the war, whereby, with an election looming, he tried to distance himself from the growing ' horror ' that we could actually be killing civilians. If i recall correctly, after the blitz on british cities, he was all in favour of hitting back.
To put things into perspective, Bomber Command , by percentage, suffered by far the greatest fatalities of ANY british unit. Not the Royal Marines, not the Parachute Regiment, not Bomb Disposal, not even the forerunners to the SAS, no, Bomber Command. The official figure for aircrew is 32%.
I asked my Father , who served with Bomber Command about this. After the war was over, the bad press slowly grew, until he never mentioned his service.
It was only in the late 1940's that he felt vindicated. While attending a cinema, he watched a newsreel film. In it, it told of the allied entry into Dachau by a British Army unit. The camera focused for a moment on the row of ovens. Then the penny dropped.
Cast into the front panel of every oven, was the manufacturer's name and the town of manufacture. It took him back years, to one cold winter's night, flying high over Bavaria,
probably on their own. When they were tasked with bombing what to them at the time, seemed a small light industrial town. Those ovens were made in that town.
Charlie Farley
Supporter
Cliff.
It was meant to be slightly tongue in cheek, but that's the trouble with the written word, sometimes it can't be interpreted in the same way as a conversation.
My bad, I should have put a sarcy face next to it.
For what it's worth, you are right. Take a look at Margaret Thatcher... she had bigger bollocks than most men
Cheers,
Graham.
Similar threads
