The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
Helen Thomas and Isreal https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3136 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Uncle Fester [ Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | Helen Thomas and Isreal |
http://bigjournalism.com/jdunetz/2010/0 ... nd-poland/ Get the hell back to Germany and Poland. I am sure her reporting is completely unbiased. |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
On open letter to her from a Shimon Peres advisor: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContr ... ?id=177668 Spoiler: |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:07 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Dash's op ed doesn't reconcile itself with any of the arguments against Zionism. |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:28 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Should it have? I think the purpose was to rebut the absurd suggestion by Thomas that the Jews should get out of Palestine and go back to Germany and Poland. |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:44 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Yes. It should have, and the notion isn't all that absurd. At a minimum it is less absurd then having given them a country that belonged to someone else without their consent. |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:20 am ] |
Post subject: | |
By that token I suppose everyone in North America that was not originally here (whatever that means) should go back from whence they came too. Same with many people and places all over the world. Thomas is very ignorant of the history of the region apparently and seems to think all the jews just showed up one day when Israel was created. She realizes how stupid her comment was, now that she was exposed. |
Author: | Taskiss [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
She apparently has resigned |
Author: | Vindicarre [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Helen Thomas Retires About time. |
Author: | Taskiss [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Resigned, retired... she's not going to take it anymore! |
Author: | Elmarnieh [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Damn I don't care for how she expressed her view but she does a very fine job in her role. She was the only one and I mean literally the ONLY ONE in the press corp that never balked at asking any President the hard questions. Two weeks ago she asked Obama "Why are we still over there and don't give me any **** about weapons of mass destruction or terrorists." He stumbled and then went on for three minutes about 9/11. I really don't think that these two events are not related. |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 1:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Dash wrote: By that token I suppose everyone in North America that was not originally here (whatever that means) should go back from whence they came too. Same with many people and places all over the world. Not at all, Dash. It is very different when many people who were displaced, and had their homes stolen from them, for circumstances that had nothing to do with them and were largely geo-political, are still alive and are still very affected by those decisions. The Jews should have had their homeland carved out of Germany. |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 1:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Rynar wrote: Not at all, Dash. It is very different when many people who were displaced, and had their homes stolen from them, for circumstances that had nothing to do with them and were largely geo-political, are still alive and are still very affected by those decisions. Are we talking Israel or the US? In any case the creation of Israel is not what she said. She wanted the jews to "get the hell out of Palestine". Wherever that is, and whoever that means. Again, the inference is that the Jews havent been there for thousands of years. |
Author: | DFK! [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 3:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Rynar wrote: Dash wrote: By that token I suppose everyone in North America that was not originally here (whatever that means) should go back from whence they came too. Same with many people and places all over the world. Not at all, Dash. It is very different when many people who were displaced, and had their homes stolen from them, for circumstances that had nothing to do with them and were largely geo-political, are still alive and are still very affected by those decisions. The Jews should have had their homeland carved out of Germany. The British empire didn't include Germany, so how would they cede lands there, exactly? |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
They lost WW2. |
Author: | Xequecal [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
I still don't get how the Holocaust is relevant to the Israel situation in any way. Ok, Britain probably wouldn't have given them the land if it hadn't happened, but the Palestinians don't care why the country was divided. |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:33 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Rynar wrote: They lost WW2. The Ottoman empire lost WWI |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Oh waaah. She said something offensive. Let's ruin the long, distinguished career of a woman who said something we don't like. |
Author: | DFK! [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Rynar wrote: They lost WW2. And? You're essentially demanding return of lands to original ownership. As such: get off my property. |
Author: | Rynar [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
DFK! wrote: Rynar wrote: They lost WW2. And? You're essentially demanding return of lands to original ownership. As such: get off my property. If you can't make the distinction between tacit support for a return to all knowable ownership "rights", and a rejection of Zionism, then I have no time for you. |
Author: | Dash [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:20 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Oh waaah. She said something offensive. Let's ruin the long, distinguished career of a woman who said something we don't like. She was a nut. I think this was just an excuse they needed to get her out. All the Bush press secretaries must be jealous. |
Author: | Taskiss [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Dash wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: Oh waaah. She said something offensive. Let's ruin the long, distinguished career of a woman who said something we don't like. She was a nut. I think this was just an excuse they needed to get her out. All the Bush press secretaries must be jealous. She has learned the joy of having been hoist with one's own petard. Seriously, she's a hard nosed reporter, if she had someone on record saying something similarly inflammatory about another demographic she would have been all over them. Payback's a *****. Hamlet - Act 3, Scene 4 wrote: "For tis the sport to have the enginer Hoist with his owne petar".
|
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:23 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Carving a new Jewish state out of Germany wasn't going to happen. That would have put it right dead center in the middle of the Cold War's main event, which any idiot could see coming a mile a way. Not only that, Europe was already getting carved up left and right because Stalin picked the winning side and wanted to keep his spoils of invading Finland and Poland. That meant land already had to be carved out of Germany to make up for the land Poland wasn't getting back. In any case there was nothing wrong with putting Israel where it was, especially under the plan that created 2 states. There were already plenty of Jews in the area, although, granted, the maps for what land would go to which state look like they were drawn by a drunk, In any case, however, it wasn't the Palestinian's exclusive land to begin with. They got pissed off because under the UN plan they wouldn't get ALL the land, and they wouldn't be a majority anymoe in the Jewish state. |
Author: | DFK! [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:15 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Rynar wrote: DFK! wrote: Rynar wrote: They lost WW2. And? You're essentially demanding return of lands to original ownership. As such: get off my property. If you can't make the distinction between tacit support for a return to all knowable ownership "rights", and a rejection of Zionism, then I have no time for you. Perhaps you should be more clear with your point then. As it stands, my interpretation of your stance is this: 1) A sovereign nation ceded their owned territory to create a new nation. 2) You have a beef with this because Britain ceded land that "shouldn't" have been theirs. 3) Israel's existence ("Zionism") is therefore bad. By arguing point (2), you're arguing that the right of conquerors to do with land as they see fit is "improper." At it's root, that's the same core argument as a return to "original" ownership of land. |
Author: | Aizle [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Diamondeye wrote: In any case there was nothing wrong with putting Israel where it was, especially under the plan that created 2 states. Yeah, nothing wrong except the vigorous objection of every one of the new countries immediate neighbors... |
Author: | DFK! [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Helen Thomas and Isreal |
Aizle wrote: Diamondeye wrote: In any case there was nothing wrong with putting Israel where it was, especially under the plan that created 2 states. Yeah, nothing wrong except the vigorous objection of every one of the new countries immediate neighbors... And this argument is the inverse of Rynar's, yet still spurious. The British Empire controlled that territory. If the neighboring states had a beef with "outsiders" or "non-Muslims" or "non-Arabs" having control, they'd have attacked Britain's territory there. As long as it was Britain's though, it's Britain's to do with as it sees fit. Britain created a new "outsider/non-Muslim/non-Arab" country and ceded the land. This doesn't change the dynamic except that the territory is no longer controlled by Britain (and thus backed by the entire empire's military strength). They attacked the new state of Israel because they thought it was weak (unlike the British) and could reclaim the territory, not because they had particular objection to the country itself. That developed later. The key point here, though, is that you seem to think Britain, which controlled the territory, should have checked with the neighboring countries first; i.e. that their rights to the land should have been secondary to other concerns, such as original ownership or the opinion of other countries. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |