Former CIA political analysts Bill and Kathleen Christison are initiating a much needed discussion in the American MSM on ground realities in Palestine through their new book "Palestine in Pieces" Video link to discussion
Just call it the new slavery of our century . Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghans are living hell under the Jewish-Christinians occupations . Every Muslim country was at one point and occupation of the Christinians . History shows us the pure bullying and tyranny of the Jews and Christinians . Is James R going to close this thread soon too ??!!. Hahaha.
SAM is trying to cling to any chink in Walid's story as if finding it would discredit him entirely. It would be pretty awesome if you could do that, wouldn't it? To discredit completely his entire transformation, his views, his legitimacy, his prominence, his faith, his conversion, his lineage, decades of his life, his identity, the danger that he faces if he shows his face anywhere in "Palestinian" territories without protection, and all that, because of minor indiscrepancies here and there? Here's another site, full of people like him. Have fun. http://www.apostatesofislam.com/
And this is news? Michael Schuerer has been barking about US policy to Israel for years, and his sentiments are shared by many at Langley.
SAM's attempt to discredit Mr Shoebat's status was pretty much completely successful. Being an American, I have had a lot experience with the fundie Christian presentation of the saved and converted, the public confessions of the formerly lost to the evil du jour (drugs, homosexuality, alcohol, rock music, women wearing pants, etc), now brought to the light by Jesus Christ Our Savior. Generally, the scene is sad hooey depressing to contemplate, more symptom than salvation, and not a reliable foundation for geopolitical analysis. Mr Shoebat was your choice of the lot in this case, former confused teenager brought out to balance former professional agents of the CIA, and I leave it to you to ferret out a more persuasive one. Apparently to some. The amnesiac faction of the US political scene needs a lot of repetition.
Israel was formed in 1948, and established by force - including acts of terrorism, as well as UN imposition - in the region. Let's get an accurate description of what those actions have been since, and then decide if we care about whether they are a result, a cause, or a constituent, of "the conflict". o
The formation of Israel could be a result of the conflict which preceeded it, which did include Arab terrorism. The situation could just as easily have been the reverse, with Jews the oppressed minority.
Let's go along with your crap for just a mintute - which country has NOT been established by "force, including terrorism, as well as a UN imposition"? Country borders are drawn in blood, my friend. If anything, having a body like the UN to bestow its recognition of a territory would only add to a newly formed country's legitimacy. But it isn't necessary, and in most cases was not part of their creation. (Where was the UN for Canada's or USA's creation?) Israel gets its legitimacy from a long list of things. At the bottom of that list, yes, you will find "force" and "international recognition" (i.e. by the UN). But it's at the bottom, and only 2. See, you have never even heard of the other ones. Or you reject them. Well, thank gd your approval has never been a determinant of a country's legitimacy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
So? So did the Boer's South Africa, Stalin's Russia, and Cecil Rhode's country so elegantly named for him - neatly finessing Godwin's Law. "Legitimacy" is something that can be lost, as well as gained, no? But it isn't. So let's describe the situation we have, accurately, how about.
Its remarkable that these everyday factual details of human rights abuses, hardly ever makes it into mainstream news and opinion. The defensive responses on this board are exactly a microcosm of the broader reaction, that attempts to negate ANY negative publicity of immoral Israeli behavior.
and lets not forget the radical elements whose idea of "greater Israel" that reaches from the nile to the euphrates.
or maybe you could do some research and know what the fuck your talking about. That is a simplistic, bigoted, ignorant, and quite frankly in my opinion a stupid point of view.
Or the radical Islamists who feel that the entire area is the sole concern of Muslim Arabs, and all Jews are immigrants who should have no say whatsoever.
or maybe your to much of a bigot to understand what the problem is. They were perfectly willing to allow jews a say just not give up THEIR land so the jews could get a state not in accoradance with the priciplies of self determination.
