A Star is Born

I would not be so overjoyed they usually comment about people with OCD from which you appear to suffer
"I will continue to draw peoples attention to what is happening in the valley ..."

I don't bother with these kind of one-man-and-the-voices-in-his-head sites, but I'm told that I get a mention too. I wear it as a badge of honour.

Joking aside it is interesting that you focus on the Jordan valley because that it precisely where Israel's security needs are one of the keenest. Most Israelis consider that it would be inimical to Israel's security to cede the Jordan valley and unfortunately no amount of promised guarantees would change that view given what has happened in south Lebanon since the end of hostilities in 2006. No one is suggesting that the rights of the indiginous population should be compromised but unless there is a paradigm shift in the Palestinians' aspirations which if they establish a state would mean that they then and for all time renounce their espousal of a state "from the Jordan to the sea" Israel will have no option but to maintain a presence there.

Most Israelis, Advis3r? You sure? I doubt that. Most Israelis, knowing they live in the most technologically and economically advanced country in the region and who do not buy into the "nebbische state" syndrome, realise that the country has more than adequate security arrangements at its disposal.
As for from the River to the Sea, are you coming around to thinking that the one-state solution is a disaster?

Joe I don't post unless I am able to back up what I say with evidence please see
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/142817
and before you rush to say that is a "right wing" site it is reporting on the findings of the Dahaf Institute which is independent.
If you believe Israel has more than adequate security arrangements at its disposal you obviously do not share the IDF's appraisal - I would tend to prefer their informed view over your, it must be said, uninformed view of Israel's security capabilities.
"As for from the River to the Sea" as I said the Palestinians would have to give that up if there ever was a settlement based on two states in which Israel ceded the Jordan Valley but since they never will give up that aspiration one has to come to the obvious conclusion. I never said I was in/not in favour of a two state solution.

Who asked for the poll to be conducted? They usually determine the way questions are framed.
If you live in a settlement, as you claim, then you can only be opposed to a two-state solution, since by your very presence in the occupied territories, you are preventing the Palestinian state's creation.
That being the case, you must favour a single state between the River and the Sea, a binational state with a disenfranchised non-Jewish majority ruled by the Jewish minority. Or perhaps you envisage some Bantustans? Sliding towards apartheid, did we say?

There I was trying to address Mr Bloom's genuine concerns about the Arabs living in the Jordan valley which have to be weighed against Israel's also genuine security concerns and as he invariably does Mr Millis reduces it to a personal attack on the person making points with which he does not agree and for good measure adds the old anti-Israel canard " apartheid state".
I trust we will not be hearing from Mr Millis quoting any public opinion polls which support anything he says since as he says: " They usually determine the way questions are framed." (Actually not if they are carried out by an accredited pollster which like Gallup the Dahaf Institute is).

What personal attack? If Israel holds on to the occupied territories, where you claim to live, then it will slide towards apartheid, with "Bantustans" for the disenfranchised majority. That is what will happen if the Israeli far right continues to believe in the Greater Land of Israel. A single, binational state between the River and the Sea, with a non-Jewish majority, largely disenfranchised, being ruled over by a Jewish minority. That's a personal attack only if you think that that is a desirable situation for Israel.

Once again I never said I was in/not in favour of a two state solution so please do not personalise the argument or try to ascribe to me " A single, binational state between the River and the Sea, with a non-Jewish majority, largely disenfranchised, being ruled over by a Jewish minority." In any event why should Judea and Samaria be judenrein? why should Jews not be allowed to live in peace in the Jordan Valley even if that was eventually part of a Palestinian State?

Fine, if the settlers want to live outside Israel, under a different country's rules. But you've made it clear you are opposed to the two-state solution. Who's making it personal? You just don't like what the consequences of your actions will bring, which I consider progress. Well done.

"I had no idea that there were such psychos in the world except inside the walls of the most secure institutions".

Obviously, you never encountered any woolly hats on Monmouth Street.

There you go projecting again. Sigh!I never said I was in/not in favour of a two state solution. Hopefully it will sink in sooner or later.

You can twist and turn as much as you like, Advis3r, but you've made it abundantly clear that you oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories. But you can prove me wrong by stating that actually you, too, are in favour of such a state.

Watchful, I'd just ignore the fools and their "watch" sites. They'll just get an aneurysm if they don't get a mention.

There you go projecting once again. This is not about me and whether or not I am in/not in favour of a two state solution and I choose not tell you what I think. You can go on ranting all day if you like but I will not "march to your drum"! ;)

Rofl, advis3r. I love the coward's cop out tactic. I think it's pretty safe to say you favour the one-state solution with all the problems that this will cause to Israel's existence as a Jewish democratic state.

I think it's pretty safe to say you have not got a clue what I favour.

You made it very clear. Otherwise you wouldn't have been arguing against the notion that holding on to the occupied territories would lead to a demographic disaster for Israel or that the settlement enterprise has been nothing but futile and toxic.

Advis3r, I'm beginning to think that you aren't actually who you claim you are. I have a sneaking suspicion that your multiple posting behaviour is giving your game away.

Pssst....check out his "Good news Israel" blog. Ring any bells?

About a thousand years ago Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Ben Yitzchak who lived in Medieval France) commented on the first sentence in the Torah (bible). Why did the Torah commence with the creation? As a codification of Law surely it should have commenced with the first commandment given to Israel i.e. the laws concerning the months of the year. It starts where it does because if or perhaps when the nations of the world will say to Israel you are bandits for you stole the land on which you are sitting Israel will answer the whole earth belongs to the Creator, He created it and and He gave it to Israel. This is not only an admonishment to those who would deny the Jewish people's moral historical and legal right to the land but also to prove to the Jews themselves that they should not have a guilty conscience wrongly believing the land belongs to others when it belongs to Israel. Mark you this was written one thousand years ago but remains a prescient comment on what the Jewish people have to face today. Shabbat Shalom!

I see what you mean, Watchful. Best ignore him from now on

This comment line was supposedly to discuss the position in the Jordan valley. Unfortunately instead of dealing with the topic just as I have seen on other topic lines you (Username: Joe Millis, username:Watchful Iris) descend to unwarranted personal attacks on bloggers (in this case me) who do not share your view and have the temerity to express a view contrary to your own - in some cases vilifying and embarrassing them and in some cases hounding them off the web-site.
At present there is no legislation in the UK governing this but a recent ruling in the UK determined that it is possible for an Internet Service Provider (ISP) to be liable for the content of sites which it hosts, setting a precedent that any ISP should treat a notice of complaint seriously and investigate it immediately. I would assume that the JC Blog Moderator would have noted the contents of this comment line – I have kept a copy of it, and I trust will take the appropriate action. Bullying in any form is reprehensible it is even more so when the bully hides behind the anonymity of a username.

ROFLMAO. The more he posts, the more we know who he is.

Comments for this page are now closed.