Well John bull1, let me see if I can address what you have mentioned:
You said Arab nations not Palestine.
Palestine,as you are aware, is not a recognised nation.
I'm aware of this, but let's continue....
The UN has regularly condemned all terrorism including Palestinian terrorism.
I'm aware of few to some general terrorism condemnations, in general there John, but in regards to your comment regarding the inclusion of
Palestinian terrorism, I would say that your assertion is not factually correct? Care to provide such "a" United Nation's condemnation of
This then goes back to your before mention that Palestine is not a recognized 'state'. Though Palestine is not a 'state', they have not only
observer status, but it has been upgraded so that they, Palestine, can now co-sponsor resolutions. In other words, it virtually makes Palestine an
You see, the issue here is not that Palestine is not a 'state'. The issue is that the United Nations has not once issued a "United Nation's"
condemnation against Palestine, nor has it ever recognized the use of terrorism by that 'associate member', Palestine. Your playing word games based
on the technical use of words. Nice. Are you expressly advocating that since Palestine is not a recognized 'state' that they are exempt from UN
condemnation for using terrorism and commiting acts of terrorism? Whether Palestine is an "Arab state", it will soon be, won't it? Filled with the
majority of "Arab" peoples, who are ruled by Muslim Law and the tenants of Islam, correct?
You may think that members don't pick up the misleading statements you so often put forward on this site for the right wing agenda but you are
Quite disappointed in your "unbiased" view here John, but you are entitled to see 'things' as you so deem, correct? With your respected words of
wisdom and 'lack' of any type 'agenda' in your wording, I'll offer this open challenge to you:
There is going to be an upcoming research project on the issue of the Palestinian and Israeli Conflict. Being such, I challenge you to to openly
commit to joining this research project. Allow your own 'agenda' to be brought forth, since you likewise, feel that I am not aware of yours? No
matter really. I am not here to attack you, I am here to attack the issue, and that issue was that the UN is openly biased against Israel and does not
condemn terrorism nor the terrorist acts continually perpetuated by Palestine and Palestinians. Let us see how "misleading" your words are in such a
As for Muslims not allowing Suicide bombings.What is this? Religion day!
Yes John bull 1, I expected as much from you. Its apparent that you have no understanding how much their religions, Islam, does
influence their Arab nations, the Arab people in and around that area, and includes Palestine? To ignore and spout What is this? Religion
, is showing how little you give merit to the above mentioned facts
. Yes John, as unadmitted and unrecognized by you, religion
is the guiding force within each and every life of those Arab-Muslim people. Each and every condemnation issued by those groups and organizations in
that area stipulate one thing: by Allah/God.
You then blindly comment:
Many crimes that are committed on many sides are not sanctioned by any relion.Neither Judaism,Christianity,or Islam.Your new pet project is
irrelevant to this topic.
Again John bull 1, I would beg to seriously differ with you on this. Indeed, many "crimes" and acts of terrorism committed on many sides is
religious or religion related. Your inclusion of the word "sanctioned" is noted. As I expressly mentioned before, I will agree with the use of the
word, but to use it in the correlation with "not irrelevant," is misleading on your part and poorly used sir! Such a comment or attack that I would
have never expected from you John.
America's failure to condemn this act creates the precedent of legalising political assination.But you will expect everyone to condemn if Bush
is assinated.And they will because unlike the USA the rest of the world condemns all such acts.That is what principles are for.
This is twice that you have brought forth 'an' attack on the US: once by mentioning more terrorism against the US in the cards
above by mentioning the hypothetical assassination of Bush. Did you fail to see the prophetic merit of those words you uttered John? Did you also
likewise fail to note that since the UK is involved in this 'war on terror' that your lovely nation will undoubtedly, inevitably, not escape such
actions and are equally under those same prophetic words you so vehemently speak against the US? But back to the issue, you present only one eternal
"message" that is being presented by this UN veto. Your 'agenda' is also apparent and indicitive of one not seeing the other eternal "message"
being sent: That the UN's sole condemnation of Israel is sending an open message of support and the "legalizing of" to those who seek to continue
such acts of terrorism against Israel. How, sir, can you openly deny such? The United States has made clear, for quite sometime "why" they continue
to veto such UN condemnations and resolutions. Here:
The United Nations
In July 2002, the United States shifted its policy and announced that it would veto any Security Council resolution on the Middle East that
did not condemn Palestinian terror and name, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade as the groups responsible for the attacks. The
U.S. also said that resolutions must note that any Israeli withdrawal is linked to the security situation, and that both parties must be called upon
to pursue a negotiated settlement (Washington Post, July 26, 2002). The Arabs can still get around the United States by taking issues to the General
Assembly, where nonbinding resolutions pass by majority vote, and support for almost any anti-Israel resolution is assured.
Are you saying that the above is a wrong reason and not justified?
The trouble is the Bush propaganda against the international community and the UN in particular has stuck.
Your view is noted, as is your stance, as is your 'agenda'.
The USA is an apologist for Israeli expansion.
Again, you present your one-sided 'agenda'. Touche'. Allow me? The United Nations is an apologist for Palestinian acts of terrorism. Has been and
will continue to be!
The challenge has been made to you John bull 1 to join the research project on this. You can deny joining and continue to think your knowledge of this
situation is superior and infallible, and that any subsequent information brought forth, contrary to your interpretations and beliefs, is
, but then that would show or indicate that you have no real interest in seeking the truth in regards to this conflict? Allow
your acceptance to join this research project speak louder than your own words, views, and opinions of the "otherwise".
[Edited on 26-3-2004 by Seekerof]