Eighth plague hits Egypt


By Jennifer Lipman
March 5, 2013
Share

Here’s a mad pre-Pesach coincidence for you.

Reports are emerging of a plague of locusts descending on modern Egypt – a catastrophe that, as you most likely know, marked the eighth stage in the ten biblical plagues visited upon Egypt ahead of the Exodus.

Time magazine has the story:

"Folks in Giza, Egypt — home of the famous pyramids — are presently grappling with just such a plague, having to fend off upwards of 30 million locusts according to official estimates."

With less than three weeks to go until seder, it’s certainly ironic timing. As yet, however, there have been no reports of rivers of blood, frog invasions or bizarre spells of daytime darkness. If anyone hears of a bloke called Moses wandering about Egypt, though...

COMMENTS

Rich Armbach

Thu, 07/25/2013 - 15:18

Rate this:

0 points

It's those shared values again.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.537819


Ben F

Thu, 08/01/2013 - 09:29

Rate this:

0 points

The Methodists again

http://wp.me/P3pxXH-cn


Ben F

Thu, 08/01/2013 - 09:30

Rate this:

0 points

The Methodists again

http://wp.me/P3pxXH-cn


Rich Armbach

Thu, 08/01/2013 - 16:31

Rate this:

0 points

G


Ben F

Wed, 08/14/2013 - 17:26

Rate this:

0 points

A new and much improved version...

http://wp.me/P3pxXH-8E


joemillis1959

Wed, 08/14/2013 - 18:18

Rate this:

0 points

Is that a settler only road, i wonder. Don't let anyone suggest that there is discrimination against Arabs in the Israeli justice system, despite what Jose the israel supremacist says.

Typical racist


happygoldfish

Wed, 08/14/2013 - 18:35

Rate this:

1 point

Ben F: Seems there's been another face lift. http://wp.me/P3pxXH-8E

Ben F: A new and much improved version... http://wp.me/P3pxXH-8E

Rich Armbach: http://eappiblog.wordpress.com/

(this is from maureen jack's blog, http://maureenjackea.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/access-to-education/)

zaheerayin: Oh great! The traumatised kids just love it!

zaheerayin, there's nothing in rich's link about the children being traumatised … on the contrary, it says "The children were full of fun, and a couple of the boys grinned as I was hauled out and up from inspecting the tunnel." oh, and here's her picture of abdullah saying he likes school, but he doesn't like the tunnel … traumatised?

zaheerayin, you just like making things up

this official eappi article shows exactly why it is so wrong for the church of england to associate itself with eappi

this eappi activist accuses israel of a breach of international humanitarian law

‘Everyone has the right to education.’ Article 26 (1), Universal Declaration of Human Rights,1948 (has been ratified by Israel.)
‘Education is a fundamental human right and essential for the exercise of all other human rights. It promotes individual freedom and empowerment and yields important development benefits.’ UNESCO http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-...
International humanitarian law and international human rights law are central to the work of EAPPI. One of our tasks is to monitor children’s access to education.

… based on totally misleading reporting

eappi claim that israel is in breach because smaller children of ka'abne crawl through a 60 cm high 12-metre culvert to get to school because a dangerous main road is in the way

israel has not built a special road between the village and the school, the road was always there!

the better the palestinian economy gets, the more traffic will be on that road

the bigger children (and the teachers) do manage to cross the road

the smaller children find it more fun to walk crouched along the culvert … i think they're right!

no doubt, eaapi activists will soon be visiting churches around england showing photos of these children to show how terrible israel is to palestinian children!

joemillis1959: Is that a settler only road, i wonder.

joe, you know perfectly well it isn't

the eappi report (which you've read) (and which is still there!) says quite specifically that it's a "a busy main road, which cars speed along" …

nothing about it being a settler-only road, which eappi would have been sure to mention

why does the elected deputy for bromley reform think there's nothing wrong with making things up so long as one's criticising israel?

Rich Armbach

Thu, 08/15/2013 - 16:41

Rate this:

0 points

,You are lying that isn't an EAPPI report official or otherwise

http://hurryupharriet.wordpress.com/modus-example-eappi/


happygoldfish

Thu, 08/15/2013 - 17:25

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: You are lying that isn't an EAPPI report official or otherwise

yes it is … it's the 7th article down on the lead page of eappi's own website (also at http://blog.eappi.org/ and http://blog.eappi.org/2013/02/06/ea-blog-access-to-education-through-a-t...)

rich armbach seems to have forgotten that i got it from his own link

Rich Armbach: http://eappiblog.wordpress.com/

that's rich!

happygoldfish

Fri, 08/16/2013 - 09:12

Rate this:

1 point

joemillis1959: Is that a settler only road, i wonder.

joe, you know perfectly well it isn't

the eappi report (which you've read) (and which is still there!) says quite specifically that it's a "a busy main road, which cars speed along" …

nothing about it being a settler-only road, which eappi would have been sure to mention

joemillis1959: Jose has a reading comprehension failure. He obviously doesnt know what "I wonder" means.

joe, what i said was (only) "joe, you know perfectly well it isn't "

you haven't answered that … all you've done is defend yourself against the imagined allegation of lying (that your own "reading comprehension failure" saddled you with )

i didn't accuse you of lying, i only accused you of baseless hatred, ie speculation totally unsupported by any evidence and clearly contradictory to the evidence that you rely on

joe millis is an established historical author (of an illustrated history of jerusalem)

he has read the eappi report (by maureen jack) … a eye-witness report by someone who has seen the road herself …

he knows it is intended to be critical of israel (nothing in itself wrong with that, of course) …

so as a historian he can be confident that if there was such an allegation to be made (that the road only benefits israelis), then the writer would have made it

he knows perfectly well that his own evidence is entirely against him

some historians are motivated by a desire to present events in a manner consistent with their own beliefs even if that involves distortion and manipulation of evidence

if joe millis's approach to evidence as a historian is as reliable as this particular allegation (and as his 50-times repeated accusation against me of being a previously-banned blogger, also without any grounds), then his book may be an excellent buy as a work of fiction, or as a children's picture book, but cannot seriously be considered as a reliable research resource

for the record: joe, i do know what "i wonder" means … it's a phrase which people add to an untrue speculation in order to get away with it

do all members of bromley reform consider it acceptable for their elected deputy to make allegations without evidence and/or contrary to the evidence?

i wonder!


Rich Armbach

Thu, 08/22/2013 - 17:34

Rate this:

-1 points

Hilarious letter in this week's JC from the execrable oaf David Gifford about Greenbelt. An absolute must read.

Open letter to David Gifford:

Dear Revd. Gifford,

Since Greenbelt won't let you play, could you recommend someone that could speak to our local Ferret Fancier's Club on "Is it cruel to transport your ferret down the front of your trousers?" For the ferret, I mean. Your alternate viewpoint would be most welcome here.

Sincerely,

Compo


zaheerayin

Thu, 08/22/2013 - 17:36

Rate this:

0 points

What makes him think his "alternate viewpoint" is even desired? I don't geddit.


zaheerayin

Thu, 08/22/2013 - 17:38

Rate this:

0 points

If Gifford is standing around waiting for Greenbelt to ask his advice, I hope he's not holding his breath.


happygoldfish

Thu, 08/22/2013 - 18:32

Rate this:

1 point
officially, eappi's eas ("Ecumenical Accompaniers") go to the west bank as witnesses, and on return to the uk report on what they have witnessed

in practice, many of them return to tour the uk with preconceived speeches that have little or nothing to do with what they have witnessed

here's another, more recent, example of eappi reporting (higher up the same page, and also here) …

an eappi ea called c naess witnessed the friday ramadan checkpoints and reports they were "very good" and everyone was "very happy"

however, she couldn't resist adding – and the eappi website couldn't resist posting in bold – a completely one-sided judgment on the need for checkpoints …

Each Friday during Ramadan, tens of thousands of Palestinians make the arduous journey from the West Bank to Jerusalem through checkpoints to pray at al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. Our summer team of Ecumenical Accompaniers (EAs) monitors the checkpoints every Friday to ensure that all who desire are able to go to Jerusalem to pray and report on any human rights abuses that occur during crossing. Although the first few Fridays at the Bethlehem Checkpoint 300 were well organized, EA C. Naess notes the underlying humanitarian injustice in needing to cross a checkpoint at all.

“We want to make sure it opens when it is supposed to open, and that everyone with permits are allowed through,” she described. “This first Friday was very good on that. Very well organized, no big problems at the checkpoint. I was monitoring for eight hours, and everyone seemed happy to be able to reach Al Aqsa mosque in time for the prayer. But as my colleague said, it doesn’t really make sense to be impressed by the organizing of a checkpoint. It would be more impressive if the whole wall was removed and the need for a checkpoint would disappear.

(ramadan is now over, and there have been no further reports or complaints, about the three subsequent fridays)

this one-sided judgment of the "humanitarian injustice" of checkpoints makes no mention of the humanitarian injustice of palestinian suicide bombers, and other armed palestinian murderers, or of the need to strike a balance between the inconvenience of being delayed at checkpoints, and the inconvenience of being dead

is it because the eappi ea had not spent any time in israel, and had not been briefed on the israeli side (contrary to assurances given to the church of england)?

or is it because the eappi website – and eappi lectures – are intended for eappi eas who use their visit as authority to vent their preconceived judgments?


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 09:05

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: Hilarious letter in this week's JC from the execrable oaf David Gifford about Greenbelt. An absolute must read.
Open letter to David Gifford:
Dear Revd. Gifford,
Since Greenbelt won't let you play …

no, greenbelt won't let anyone "play" on the israeli side

this 20,000-strong christian conference promotes an unrelieved anti-israel agenda

from thejc of 9th august

A pro-Palestinian platform is to be launched later this month at a Christian festival, whose invitation to an American Jewish critic of Israel to speak has already troubled the Council of Christians and Jews and Board of Deputies.
CCJ chief executive, the Reverend David Gifford, said it was “concerned” by the programme at the forthcoming Greenbelt conference in Cheltenham, which is expected to be attended by 20,000 people and is seen as a Christian equivalent to Limmud.
Pro-Palestinian campaigners plan to use the event to publicise a formal response to the Kairos document, which was issued by Palestinian Church leaders in 2009 and has since proved influential in mobilising Christians worldwide.
The Kairos document calls Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land “a sin against God and humanity” and supports boycotting “everything produced by the occupation”.
Guest speakers at the festival include Mark Braverman, author of Fatal Embrace, who describes himself in the book as “a Jew who is overwhelmed by the reality of Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine”.
Earlier this year, Greenbelt rejected requests from the Board and CCJ to invite other speakers who could present a different opinion
.

christian activist mark braverman is program director for kairos usa (see his complete profile at http://www.greenbelt.org.uk/contributors/mark-braverman/)

visiting last year's greenbelt, the bod's interfaith consultant rabbi natan levy found

The sessions on Israel are overwhelmingly critical and geared toward direct action (read boycotts) towards this "pariah" state.  They include such talks as "If I Am Only For Myself, Who Am I? The passage of a Jewish boat to Gaza",  "Israel's invisible occupation-The Matrix of Control",  how to "Lobby parliament on Israel/Palestine against suffering and injustice being inflicted on the Palestinian people", and my personal favourite,  a children's program entitled, "Messy Warriors-Help us to transform the people of Israel from wild warriors to wise worshippers. With time for crafts and celebration!

These sessions are influential in creating a particularly circular logic of anti-Israel sentiment amongst the Greenbelt Christians.  Because the festival organizers are transfixed with justice for Palestine (as fully realized in the official Greenbelt call  for a boycott of  West Bank settlement goods at the culmination of this year's event), they invite speakers who favour that particular narrative such as Ilan Pappe and returnees from the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme to Palestine and Israel (EAPPI).  Because the festival goers only hear from these blinkered  viewpoints, the blogs and tweets that emerge from Greenbelt are filled with 'helpful' ways to treat Israel as the "new South Africa",  urging the Church of England to "follow Greenbelt's wise decision on boycotts".  And thus, because the 'problem of Israel' trends so highly on Greenbelt related social media, the organizers see this as a public demand  to  invite the same type of speakers back for the next year, and on and on.

rev david gifford is merely expressing dismay that the uk's leading christian conference consistently refuses to allow any voice defending israel

Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 09:30

Rate this:

0 points

Gifford is supposed to be the head of an organisation that began as a laudable effort to increase understanding between Christians and Jews. Why is he wasting donors money fretting about defending Israel ? And defending Israel from what ?


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 11:06

Rate this:

0 points

I see. So the CCJ disagrees with the Board of Deputies about the desirability of a two state solution. How interesting is that o:))


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 11:21

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: … defending Israel from what ?

from racists who demonise the only jewish state in the world, and who want to destroy it

(the ccj of course also defends the two-state solution against such racists)

Rich Armbach: Gifford is supposed to be the head of an organisation that began as a laudable effort to increase understanding between Christians and Jews. Why is he wasting donors money fretting about defending Israel ?

also fretting about defending the peace process and the two-state solution!

the ccj's "Position Statement: Israel" includes …

CCJ acknowledges the intense centuries-old relationship of the Jewish people with the land of Israel, just as we recognise the tragedy of the Palestinian people who left their historic homes.
To bring about a just and sustainable solution in the region CCJ promotes a strategy of positive engagement, investment and dialogue. CCJ opposes and deplores boycotts: these hinder the opportunity for dialogue. We welcome links with institutions and organisations which encourage cooperation and co-existence between all faiths. We support initiatives designed to increase understanding and respect for the individual.

and the ccj's "Position Statement: Zionism & Anti-Zionism" includes …

CCJ regards anti-Zionism as antisemitism when its proponents:
• Fail to promote equally self-determination of Palestinians and Israelis …
• Consider only discrimination against, or injustice to, Palestinians to the exclusion of that of Israeli Jews
• Judge Israel by standards which are not applied equally and impartially to all other countries

by promoting a completely one-sided program against israel, greenbelt has been increasing racial hatred among christians

(and particularly among children encouraged to "Help us to transform the people of Israel from wild warriors to wise worshippers." )


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 11:55

Rate this:

0 points

"greenbelt has been increasing racial hatred among christians"

Inciting racial hatred is a crime.

have you informed the police about this ?


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 12:35

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: Inciting racial hatred is a crime.
have you informed the police about this ?

rich, you know perfectly well that only "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour" (or written material or recordings or broadcasts) can be the subject of the crime of stirring up racial hatred (under uk law)

so long as greenbelt speakers aren't "threatening, abusive or insulting", they can gently stir as much racial hatred into what they feed the multitude as they like

see part III of the public order act 1986 (as amended)


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 14:50

Rate this:

-1 points

The issue is the independence of the Greenbelt festival. It isn't the freaking Oxford Union or any other kind of debating chamber. It is their festival and they can set any tone they wish within the law.

Their inviting speakers whose presence is consistent with the stated aims of the organisation is perfectly legitimate. The demand for balance is ludicrous.

Do the ZF invite anti Zionists to their gatherings for balance ?

When there was the 65 th birthday party for Israel and speakers were invited did they include anti occupation speakers ? Or did they undertake to invite such to speak at the next God bless Israel party ? I don't recall them doing so.

Greenbelt should simply tell the Council of Christian Zionists For The Occupation to go do one.

Luckily knowing some of the people involved as I do you can be sure that they will.


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 16:41

Rate this:

0 points
first you misinform us about uk criminal law

now you misinform us about greenbelt's stated aims

that's rich!

Rich Armbach: Their inviting speakers whose presence is consistent with the stated aims of the organisation is perfectly legitimate. The demand for balance is ludicrous.
Do the ZF invite anti Zionists to their gatherings for balance ? …

greenbelt's stated aims (ok, "vision, mission and values") are at http://www.greenbelt.org.uk/about/organisation/vision/ (and /mission and /values)

they do not include supporting the palestinians, criticising israel, rejecting dialogue, or anything else that dogmatically inviting anti-israel speakers is "consistent with"!

they do include …

Greenbelt is a collision of the arts, faith and justice.
encourage dialogue and understanding between people of faith and no faith
Our mission is to create spaces, like festivals, where art, faith and justice collide.
… our underlying values of tolerance, dialogue and hope.
Ours is a belief that embraces instead of excludes.
Working for justice, challenging oppression, listening to those with no voice and standing with people on the margins.
Celebrating the power of people to change history, inspiring and resourcing each other to live lives marked by art, faith and justice.
Questioning intolerance, greed, prejudice and injustice.

rich, i see plenty of references to "justice", and even one to "dialogue and understanding between people of faith" …

i see nothing that remotely justifies presenting to 20,000 adults and children a completely one-sided view of israel/palestine in the name of "justice"!

Rich Armbach: The issue is the independence of the Greenbelt festival.
… The demand for balance is ludicrous.

no, the issue is the injustice and dishonesty of the greenbelt festival

they mislead their 20,000 good christians that they will experience a weekend of (arts, faith and) justice (and dialogue with other faiths), and they present them with a completely one-sided view that is likely to encourage racial hatred!

(btw, thankyou for drawing my attention to their stated aims! )

unfortunately, they take the same view that you do of the criminal law against racial hatred …

Rich Armbach: It is their festival and they can set any tone they wish within the law.

… they do what they can get away with

greenbelt is a collision of faith and justice in which justice comes off worst


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 16:58

Rate this:

0 points

Fortunately neither they nor I care what you think. It is THEIR festival and they can set whatever tone they wish within the law if you want a festival jam full of pro occupation speakers go organise one. Maybe get the Council of Christian. Zionists For The Occupation to help.

If that tone is anti brutal occupation GOOD


Ben F

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 17:08

Rate this:

0 points

The relevant Greenbelt aim in this context is providing a voice for those working for peace and justice in Palestine. Obviously, speakers advocating continuing illegal occupation don't fit the bill. Maybe at the festival Rich suggested that you organise...


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 17:15

Rate this:

0 points

Yeah I don't think it is cool for festival organisers to expose kids to advocates of lawlessness


Ben F

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 17:38

Rate this:

0 points

"...they mislead their 20,000 good christians..."

What could Zionists possibly say to 20,0000 good Christians that would change their position on an illegal occupation?


Rich Armbach

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 17:43

Rate this:

0 points

Good Christians ?

Good Christians Bad Christians ?

Good Jews. Bad Jews ?


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/23/2013 - 18:37

Rate this:

0 points
Rich Armbach: Good Christians Bad Christians ?

since i'm calling all christians good, i don't get your point

Ben F: The relevant Greenbelt aim in this context is providing a voice for those working for peace and justice in Palestine.

most jews and israelis (including the israeli government) are working for peace and justice in israel/palestine

but greenbelt won't provide a voice to anyone working for peace and justice on the israeli side

greenbelt's idea is of a peace and justice in which only one side is to be listened to

Ben F: Obviously, speakers advocating continuing illegal occupation don't fit the bill.

Rich Armbach: Yeah I don't think it is cool for festival organisers to expose kids to advocates of lawlessness

Ben F: What could Zionists possibly say to 20,0000 good Christians that would change their position on an illegal occupation?

no serious international lawyer regards the occupation as illegal!!

the occupation occurred perfectly legally as a result of the 1967 war, and nothing has since happened to alter that

(un security council resolution 242 itself acknowledges the legality)

so the zionists (as you call them) would easily be able to convince the 20,000 good christians that their bad organisers are lying to them

if they could be heard!

(as for the possible illegality … but not criminality …of the settlements, that pales into insignificance compared with the war crimes and crimes against humanity of the rockets from gaza, the suicide bombers, and other palestinians who try to kill as many innocent civilians as they can)


zaheerayin

Mon, 08/26/2013 - 17:18

Rate this:

0 points

"no serious international lawyer regards the occupation as illegal!!"

Really? Jenni, how old are you? 25 or so? Do you have any idea how immature you appear? I expected better from someone with your academic credentials.


happygoldfish

Mon, 08/26/2013 - 18:13

Rate this:

1 point
zaheerayin: "no serious international lawyer regards the occupation as illegal!!"
Really?

yes, zaheerayin …

it simply isn't an issue …

even the comprehesive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Palestine#Legal_status does not mention any views questioning the legality of the occupation

you (and greenbelt) can't just decide what they want the law to be, and then say that it is so …

that's lying!


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 09:56

Rate this:

0 points

There is little point in arguing the legality or otherwise of the occupation as a whole here it would only provoke Lippy into behaving like a giggly school girl.

However since they can be said briefly we can say two things.

1) The Israeli presence in East Jerusalem and the Golan is clearly illegal as a breach of UNSC res 242

2) The colonising of the West bank including East Jerusalem is equally clearly illegal and a war crime.

See 4th Geneva Convention and UNSC Res 465

Greenbelt was fantastic, had a great time. The kairos response document is brilliant.People, Christians, Jews and Muslims alike, lined up for hours to make sure they could get into the venue. The presentation was totally compelling and the authors got a prolonged and rapturous standing ovation at the end.

TIME FOR ACTION !!!!

Also had fun with a tweet exchange with the execrable Council of Christians and Jews, I mean Council of Christian Zionists For The Occupation, who were on 24 hour Greenbelt watch all weekend.Someone at that sad and sorry organsation later panicked and deleted their more laughable tweets but of course we have preserved them for posterity. Will be publishing it you know where.

http://www.kairosbritain.org.uk/resources/documents/Time-for-Action/Time...


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 11:12

Rate this:

0 points

This sums it up really. Like how they share our values I mean

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/tale-of-two-citizens/


happygoldfish

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 11:51

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: 2) The colonising of the West bank including East Jerusalem is equally clearly illegal and a war crime.

yes, the settlements (except in the already jewish-owned properties in hebron and a few other places) are probably illegal, as being contrary to the last sentence of article 49 of the 4th geneva convention, as affirmed by unsc resolution 465 (1980)
however, no, they are clearly not a war crime (or crime of any sort), since the 4th geneva convention sets out the list of crimes (strictly, "grave breaches" requiring "penal sanctions", see article 146) in article 147

Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

("protected persons" in this case means palestinians)
… and the last sentence of article 49 (transfer of the occupier's own people) clearly isn't on the list!

once again, rich, you've decided what you want to be true (that the settlements are a war crime), and then said it anyway, even though it's clearly untrue, and even though it appears to be entirely your own invention (you certainly didn't get it from greenbelt's website)

that's rich!

Rich Armbach: 1) The Israeli presence in East Jerusalem and the Golan is clearly illegal as a breach of UNSC res 242

(the golan isn't part of "palestianian territories")

no, the israeli presence is clearly legal

the annexation of east jerusalem is illegal, in that it has no validity under international law (and is of course not recognised by any other country) …

so, under international law, east jerusalem is not annexed, but is still occupied

and that occupation – and the israeli presence – is clearly legal


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 11:55

Rate this:

0 points

and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

That will do for starters


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 11:57

Rate this:

0 points

raise you for three


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 12:03

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 13:32

Rate this:

0 points

you know perfectly well that the israeli supreme court will not permit settlements built on land owned by palestinians …

I do ?


happygoldfish

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 13:38

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: and extensive destruction and appropriation of property …

don't be ridiculous

the settlements are built on land that is not anybody's property …

you know perfectly well that the israeli supreme court will not permit settlements built on land owned by palestinians

no destruction or appropriation of property is involved in the creation of settlements …

no war crime (or any crime) is committed

Rich Armbach: oh lookee we have wilful killing too
http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/testimonies/videos/84876

clearly that's a war crime (killing a 12-year old 40 minutes after he threw a molotov cocktail near el-fawar refugee camp), and should be prosecuted

but that war crime has nothing to do with the creation of settlements


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 14:23

Rate this:

0 points

Prosecuted by whom ? Don't say the IOF they will just take his iPod off him for a week. And it can't be at The Hague the Israelis wouldn't hand him over Ipso IOF impunity which is why they behave so badly.


Ben F

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 14:24

Rate this:

-1 points

The Israeli Supreme Court is as bent as a 9 pound note.


zaheerayin

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:14

Rate this:

0 points

Jenni, you need to stick to baking ridiculous cakes. Logic isn't your strong point.


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:17

Rate this:

0 points

I can understand your reluctance to take those particular " side tracks "

Oh yeah it's the unowned land thingy again. Tell us more about this " unowned land " the illegal colonies are built on.


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:29

Rate this:

0 points

Ok,Lippy. Given that Israelis have a natural aversion to building on other peoples' land, and nicking other peoples' stuff, explain this to me.

In 1948, 711,000 Arabs fled the war zone that is now the State of Israel. They weren't allowed back. Of that 711,000, a large proportion would have owned land and/or property. That's an awful lot of land and property.

What became of the land and property?


zaheerayin

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:36

Rate this:

0 points

There wasn't an Israeli Supreme Court to protect the Arabs then, silly.


happygoldfish

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:48

Rate this:

1 point

Rich Armbach: In 1948, 711,000 Arabs fled … a large proportion would have owned land and/or property …
What became of the land and property?

(and of course, about 650,000 jews fled in the opposite direction – though of course that was from persecution not from war)

same as in any other case of exchange of populations during war (india/pakistan, greece/turkey, etc) …

the land of both the arab refugees and the jewish refugees were deemed abandoned by whatever state they fled, and were re-allocated by that state to its own citizens

(rich, since none of the arab land was on the west bank where the settlements are … what is the relevance?)


Rich Armbach

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:52

Rate this:

0 points

Deemed abandoned huh. A polite euphemism for stolen. Thanks for that I have always wondered.


zaheerayin

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 17:53

Rate this:

0 points

Remind me to never forget my purse on a bus seat sitting next to you.


happygoldfish

Tue, 08/27/2013 - 18:16

Rate this:

1 point
stop changing the subject

greenbelt's excuse for its completely one-sided program against israel depends largely on its lie:

"– The continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories as illegal"

rich and ben repeated greenbelt's lie about the occupation …

Ben F: Obviously, speakers advocating continuing illegal occupation don't fit the bill.

Rich Armbach: Yeah I don't think it is cool for festival organisers to expose kids to advocates of lawlessness

Ben F: What could Zionists possibly say to 20,0000 good Christians that would change their position on an illegal occupation?

… then tried to draw attention away from greenbelt's lie about the occupation by inventing a new lie (not even supported by greenbelt), that the settlements are a war crime

and now, unable to come up with any justification for the new lie either, ben and rich try to draw attention away from that by making racist remarks about the idf and the israeli supreme court …

Rich Armbach: Prosecuted by whom ? Don't say the IOF they will just take his iPod off him for a week.

Ben F: The Israeli Supreme Court is as bent as a 9 pound note.

zaheerayin: Remind me to never forget my purse on a bus seat sitting next to you.

(i'm not going to be side-tracked:)

no serious international lawyer regards the occupation as illegal!!

the occupation occurred perfectly legally as a result of the 1967 war, and nothing has since happened to alter that

(un security council resolution 242 itself acknowledges the legality)

and the creation of settlements (unlike rockets from gaza, suicide bombers, etc) isn't an act of wilful killing or of extensive destruction or appropriation of property, and so isn't a war crime under article 147 of the 4th geneva convention (or any other crime)


Rich Armbach

Wed, 08/28/2013 - 09:43

Rate this:

0 points

"rich, i hope you're not racistly criticising israel for acts for which you don't equally criticise the arab countries (or india pakistan greece turkey etc)"

If you think that you can intimidate me with that " new anti-semitism", EUMC/Ottawa protocol bullchit I can only suggest to you that you leave thinking to those of us with an aptitude for it.


happygoldfish

Wed, 08/28/2013 - 10:23

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: Deemed abandoned huh. A polite euphemism for stolen.

like it or not, it happens all over the world (eg india/pakistan and greece/turkey) …

the "theft" (as you put it) was on both sides, against both arabs and jews

(and was theft of considerably higher value against the jews – most of whom were expelled in peace-time,not in war)

rich, i hope you're not racistly criticising israel for acts for which you don't equally criticise the arab countries (or india pakistan greece turkey etc)

Rich Armbach: "rich, i hope you're not racistly criticising israel for acts for which you don't equally criticise the arab countries (or india pakistan greece turkey etc)"
If you think that you can intimidate me with that " new anti-semitism", EUMC/Ottawa protocol bullchit …

singling out one country for criticism when you don't criticise other countries for doing the same thing is obviously racism!

no "new" definition is needed for that

(the only relevance of the ottawa protocol, of the interparliamentary committee against anti-semitism, is on the issue of whether anti-israeli racism is also anti-semitism)

unfortunately, there are people on this website – and also at greenbelt – who believe that lying doesn't matter so long as one's criticising israel, and that anyone singling out israel for criticism is immune from a charge of racism

rich, now answer the question … are you criticising israel for acts of "theft" (of property abandoned in an exchange of refugee populations) for which you don't equally criticise the arab countries (or india pakistan greece turkey etc)?

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JENNIFER LIPMAN ON TWITTER

    LATEST COMMENTS