• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Likud Minister Uses IDF Murderer To Bolster Campaign

AFAIK they have no jurisdiction to jail Palestinians that have committed attacks against Israelis and these matters are handled by the Israelis themselves



Yep some do celebrate/congratulate , as do some Israelis do when in the same position , as per the content of the OP



In token gestures aimed at PR I agree. They also fail to investigate others on many occasions too. Maybe the video of Azaria actually committing the crime was pretty hard to refute eh ? Hence the ban on those hoping to film the IDF in action no doubt




Didn't happen. Occupying soldiers are not " innocents " and the Palestinians have the right to resist and attack the IDF in their bid to free themselves from occupation and attain self determination




Can't help yourself , can you ? :roll:

You're wrong of course. They are innocent. The occupation isn't 'evil' in its nature, it is there to protect lives from terrorists and as long as it's necessary it must be upheld by every moral standard. Calling for the murder of innocents is however completely evil.
 
Has any Palestinian been jailed by the Palestinians for the death of an Israeli?

Last time I checked they were congratulated.

But clearly the Israeli Army is willing to jail one of their own in this case.

BTW - Calling the murder of innocents "legitimate" is disgusting.

Now cry more.

You are correct. In his attempt to promote further propaganda in the name of evil and barbarism onewolrd2 does a service to show the differences between the moral and civilized side and its dark and backwards opposition.
 
You're wrong of course.

No I'm not wrong. People have the right to resist , up to and including armed resistance , the forces of an occupying army. It's such an obvious state of affairs that your unwillingness to accept it only shows how much of an extremist you are

They are innocent.

No they are not. They are violently suppressing , brutally occupying and assisting the illegal settling going on there. They are violating the human rights of the Palestinians on a grand scale including their right to self determination.

To deny it is futile seeing as it is already well documented

The occupation isn't 'evil' in its nature, it is there to protect lives from terrorists and as long as it's necessary it must be upheld by every moral standard. Calling for the murder of innocents is however completely evil.

Soldiers are not innocents and nobody has " called for the murder " of anybody. They have commented on the conflict in a way you don't like , tough

Your constant lies and misrepresentations aimed at stirring up trouble ruin this subforum in so many threads it's untrue. Get a grip of yourself and try to debate honestly for a change
 
You are correct. In his attempt to promote further propaganda in the name of evil and barbarism onewolrd2 does a service to show the differences between the moral and civilized side and its dark and backwards opposition.

Pathetic

You might not like it , you might not want others to see it , but there are evil , disgusting , extremists on both sides

Your constant references to terrorist Palestinians and innocent Israelis is as pathetic as it is patently untrue

Stay on topic and quit your inaccurate , deliberately antagonistic , posts that are only aimed at trying to shut the thread down
 
No I'm not wrong. People have the right to resist , up to and including armed resistance , the forces of an occupying army. It's such an obvious state of affairs that your unwillingness to accept it only shows how much of an extremist you are



No they are not. They are violently suppressing , brutally occupying and assisting the illegal settling going on there. They are violating the human rights of the Palestinians on a grand scale including their right to self determination.

To deny it is futile seeing as it is already well documented



Soldiers are not innocents and nobody has " called for the murder " of anybody. They have commented on the conflict in a way you don't like , tough

Your constant lies and misrepresentations aimed at stirring up trouble ruin this subforum in so many threads it's untrue. Get a grip of yourself and try to debate honestly for a change

We've already been through this.
There is no right to murder soldiers who enforce an occupation.
A military occupation isn't something that's automatically not legitimate and it can be justified, and the act of killing can only be legitimate when done in self-defense.

Your belief that soldiers aren't innocent because they are enforcing a military occupation, in this case to defend from terrorism, and thus there is a "right" to murder them, is obviously based on wishful thinking of one who bases his entire agenda and world view on the support for the murdering of innocents.

You have no right to murder a 18 year old kid because he's defending civilians from possible terror attacks.
The moral people who want to end the situation of an occupation should call for its ending through nonviolent means. Supporting murder isn't moral in any possible way.
Those who nevertheless wish to see the removal of the occupation without first reaching an agreement that can lift it, should be calling for alternative solutions to the occupation that will ensure the safety of humans from those willing to take their lives in the name of their God.
Those who call for the lifting of the occupation while at the same time not providing any reasonable alternative are just extremists who should be opposed.
Your position of course is more than just extreme, it's completely evil and promotes the murder of innocents under a non-existent "right" you claim the murderers have to engage in the act of murder.
 
Pathetic

You might not like it , you might not want others to see it , but there are evil , disgusting , extremists on both sides

Your constant references to terrorist Palestinians and innocent Israelis is as pathetic as it is patently untrue

Stay on topic and quit your inaccurate , deliberately antagonistic , posts that are only aimed at trying to shut the thread down

Your thread shows the clear moral disparities between one side and the other.

You came here to attack the fact that a soldier who was jailed after he executed a jihadist who attacked his best friend and nearly murdered him, while he was neutralized on the ground and no longer a threat, gets support from some in the public.

So we have a side that jails its soldiers after they execute actual jihadists who attack their soldiers, and the other side that grants payments to the terrorists that murder completely innocent people like the terrorist who invaded into a Jewish house and murdered a 15 year old girl with multiple knife stabs as she was sleeping in her bed. Such terrorist receives money from the Palestinian leadership - the one that is considered the moderate out of the two.

These disparities are exactly what you're showing here.
 
We've already been through this.
There is no right to murder soldiers who enforce an occupation.
A military occupation isn't something that's automatically not legitimate and it can be justified, and the act of killing can only be legitimate when done in self-defense.

Your belief that soldiers aren't innocent because they are enforcing a military occupation, in this case to defend from terrorism, and thus there is a "right" to murder them, is obviously based on wishful thinking of one who bases his entire agenda and world view on the support for the murdering of innocents.

You have no right to murder a 18 year old kid because he's defending civilians from possible terror attacks.
The moral people who want to end the situation of an occupation should call for its ending through nonviolent means. Supporting murder isn't moral in any possible way.
Those who nevertheless wish to see the removal of the occupation without first reaching an agreement that can lift it, should be calling for alternative solutions to the occupation that will ensure the safety of humans from those willing to take their lives in the name of their God.
Those who call for the lifting of the occupation while at the same time not providing any reasonable alternative are just extremists who should be opposed.
Your position of course is more than just extreme, it's completely evil and promotes the murder of innocents under a non-existent "right" you claim the murderers have to engage in the act of murder.

It's an armed conflict and you are claiming that only one side has the right to kill. It's typical of your one eyed approach to everything about this subject and shows a ridiculous bias and detachment from reality.

Most people here are already aware of your ridiculous and extremist views along with your wish to derail every thread you don't like so ................. rant on
 
Last edited:
It's an armed conflict and you are claiming that only one side has the right to kill. It's typical of your one eyed approach to everything about this subject and shows a ridiculous bias and detachment from reality.

Most people here are already aware of your ridiculous and extremist views along with your wish to derail every thread you don't like views so ................. rant on

Spare me the "most people think like I do" nonsense. It's the worst way one could choose to admit to his extremism, to be looking for outside approval, and it has become somehow attached to nearly every one of your comments here.

Your words are in approval of some imaginary right that people have in your view to commit acts of murder.
Such right doesn't exist, and you basically support murder.
There is no "warfare" between civilians and soldiers. Just like a soldier cannot walk up and murder a civilian, a civilian cannot pick up arms and try to murder a soldier. That's just murder. The soldier is innocent, no matter how much it disappoints you. There is no automatic "evil" in military occupations. And above all, the act of killing can only be justified by self-defense. There is a double standard when you claim that it's not legitimate to execute a person who stabbed and tried to murder, while you support the act of murdering a soldier who has not attacked anyone.
 
It's an armed conflict and you are claiming that only one side has the right to kill. It's typical of your one eyed approach to everything about this subject and shows a ridiculous bias and detachment from reality.

Most people here are already aware of your ridiculous and extremist views along with your wish to derail every thread you don't like so ................. rant on

If this is indeed an armed conflict where are the uniforms and markings of the Palestinian attackers?

What war was declared?

What command do they serve?

It appears they would be declared unlawful combatants.
 
I know you think every action taken by Palestinian against Israelis are " terrorist " attacks but that is down to your ignorance of the subject and not any kind of reflection of the reality

The intent makes the terrorist....

What was the intent behind the attacks?
 
If this is indeed an armed conflict where are the uniforms and markings of the Palestinian attackers?

What war was declared?

What command do they serve?

It appears they would be declared unlawful combatants.

Fledermaus:

The attackers are in IDF uniforms now and were in irregular Haganah, Irgun and Lehi markings before the creation of the IDF. Just like the Israeli militias before the formation of the Israeli state, the Palestinians do not have uniforms and fight as an irregular guerrilla force rather than a standing army. This is because they are not agents of a state, as Israel has prevented the formation of a Palestinian state for over seventy years. This is not state on state Westphalian warfare but is protracted and irregular tribal warfare fought by an occupied people in a militarily occupied land against the army of an aggressor state. That aggressor state is still taking territory through a dual-track programme of militarily protected displacement of Palestinians and the illegal settlements of the occupying power's own population going on in the occupied territories, in blatant contradiction to the laws of war and international law. Thus IDF soldiers in the occupied territories are legitimate targets for an armed Palestinian resistance.

There is no declaration of war because the Jewish Agency and later the Israeli state did not make one when it seized lands from the Palestinians between 1947 and the 1949 armistice. Again in 1967 there was no declaration of war because the Six Day War began with a surprise attack on the Egyptian Air Force and such a declaration was deemed unnecessary given past hostilities.

They follow no unified command because they are not agents of a state but are rather irregular guerrilas fighting an active and illegal military occupation. This is not a state on State conflict and western definitions of how wars should be prosecuted do not apply here. This is a nation on nation struggle, and is really just an amplified and old-style tribal conflict with modern weapons in the hands of the combatants.

The US definition of Unlawful Combatants is far more recent than the 1967 Arab Israeli War and so does not apply to this legacy resistance and this 72/52 year old occupation. Don't try to apply Western military practices to non-Western people's who are resisting a de facto Western army in occupation of their traditional lands.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
My guess is that had this been a Palestinian Arab/Israeli political party minister using a Palestinian murderer of an Israeli to try to gain support for their political chances the term " idiot " would NOT be used to describe them

If a palestinian politician would show support to a palestinian who executed illegaly a jewish terrorist I would think nothing of it, actually ehat Mazuz did would bother me even more





The facts were straight. Maybe that's why you declined to make the allegation that they were not without actually citing anything false ?

no they are not, for starters Yaron Mazuz isnt a minister and never was, he was anonymous until recently.


I set out as to what was the point of this thread in the OP. The degrading effect on both sets of people. It was clear enough. That you appear to bemoan the " point of this thread " and your general disjointedness about it makes me think it ruffled your feathers a little. Maybe you are happier when people are just focusing on some of the uglier parts displayed by some Palestinians.

That there are others like him ( Mazuz ) or even worse I have no doubt but the thread was about him in particular regardless of where he is on any looney Israeli politician scale

As i said, there are much more outrageous cannadits than Yaron Mazuz in Israel who are much more dangerous than Yaron Mazuz.
This shows nothing about Israeli society as every nation has its set of idiots and dangerous politicians, Americans even choose one to lead them, thankfully we are not there yet, and here they are mostly representing the outlines of our society.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk
 
As for the PA ( PLO ) policy of paying those people or their family members that are killed , injured or imprisoned due to the conflict/actions related to it ,people should perhaps remind themselves that this is pretty standard practice elsewhere too

Here in the UK the government compensates soldiers/widows/ the families/ of those killed or maimed due to armed conflicts they have taken part in
the UK will pay a family of a soldier who sliced the throut of a sleeping baby ?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk
 
Beyond simply disgusting. It's completely inhuman in its monstrosity and pure evil. But you should have come to expect that by now.

Of course it is monstrously evil to point out that both sides have ugly extremists doing and supporting sickening actions/views. I should perhaps seek to placate people like you and just talk of them when they are Palestinians ? Not likely , the place requires a bit more balance than that imo
 
If a palestinian politician would show support to a palestinian who executed illegaly a jewish terrorist I would think nothing of it, actually ehat Mazuz did would bother me even more

What don't you understand about the fact that a Palestinian attacking an occupying IDF soldier is not a terrorist attack ? so your analogy falls short






no they are not, for starters Yaron Mazuz isnt a minister and never was, he was anonymous until recently.

He is a deputy minister AFAIK. I thought you might have had a much bigger claim than that about my alleged inaccurate OP. Seems a bit trivial in the broader context but at least it's something to cling to eh ?


As i said, there are much more outrageous cannadits than Yaron Mazuz in Israel who are much more dangerous than Yaron Mazuz.

The whole Likud coalition is much more dangerous imho but who is and who is not the most extreme politician in Israel at this present time was mever even a consideration wrt the OP. TBH I don't even see why you are harping on about it. Maybe once again , it's just more white noise

This shows nothing about Israeli society as every nation has its set of idiots and dangerous politicians, Americans even choose one to lead them, thankfully we are not there yet, and here they are mostly representing the outlines of our society.

Well if we are to believe much of the commentary here by the usual suspects it would be easy to conclude , falsely , that all Israelis have wings on their shoulders smooth as ravens claws and halos above their noggins. So kudos for at least stating the obvious that they are , after all , only human like the rest of mankind
 
the UK will pay a family of a soldier who sliced the throut of a sleeping baby ?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

Well that's the picture many people seem to only want to see. You know , Palestinians being something akin to a human sub species dogged by a natural inclination to violence/barbarism , unable to offer anything else. Colours many posts here from many posters too.

You pick one act possibly to usher people to think that this is the typical example of payments made to Palestinians killed, injured , imprisoned as a result of actions related to the conflict by the PA. Don't get me wrong I think a payment to a person that does such a heinous thing is totally abhorrent and I would not support it but acts like that must account for a pretty miniscule percentage of the whole. Those paid out include everything from those injured/killed whilst stone throwing through to those in administrative detention for political activism . And for these types of " crimes " I see little difference to the payments given to Westerners for those injured or killed in conflicts
 
The intent makes the terrorist....

What was the intent behind the attacks?

I disagree , the target makes the difference. If you are targeting the military of an occupying power then it is not terrorism but an act of legitimate armed resistance

You should be more honest and admit it is the fact that a Palestinian has committed the act that makes it , in your opinion , a terrorist attack. It's been so obvious for so long
 
If this is indeed an armed conflict where are the uniforms and markings of the Palestinian attackers?

What war was declared?

What command do they serve?

It appears they would be declared unlawful combatants.

see Evilroddy's post for an accurate depiction of the situation

Of course , if the boot were on the other foot and it was you and your compadres living under a foreign military occupation each act of violence directed at the occupying military forces would be lauded as heroic national defence
 
Spare me the "most people think like I do" nonsense. It's the worst way one could choose to admit to his extremism, to be looking for outside approval, and it has become somehow attached to nearly every one of your comments here.

Your words are in approval of some imaginary right that people have in your view to commit acts of murder.
Such right doesn't exist, and you basically support murder.
There is no "warfare" between civilians and soldiers. Just like a soldier cannot walk up and murder a civilian, a civilian cannot pick up arms and try to murder a soldier. That's just murder. The soldier is innocent, no matter how much it disappoints you. There is no automatic "evil" in military occupations. And above all, the act of killing can only be justified by self-defense. There is a double standard when you claim that it's not legitimate to execute a person who stabbed and tried to murder, while you support the act of murdering a soldier who has not attacked anyone.

Having listened to Finkelsteins analysis on this very subject I am inclined to take his word over yours all day long

The right to resist a foreign military occupation of your territory is so fundamentally an inalienable right , a moral right , that to try to class it as , somehow , illegal/illegitimate is hilarious and only confirms you as the extremist most of your other views also underscore
 
Having listened to Finkelsteins analysis on this very subject I am inclined to take his word over yours all day long

The right to resist a foreign military occupation of your territory is so fundamentally an inalienable right , a moral right , that to try to class it as , somehow , illegal/illegitimate is hilarious and only confirms you as the extremist most of your other views also underscore

If there was such right you would refer to it by now.
It's a made up right by those who wish to feel good with their desire to have innocents murdered.
 
Of course it is monstrously evil to point out that both sides have ugly extremists doing and supporting sickening actions/views. I should perhaps seek to placate people like you and just talk of them when they are Palestinians ? Not likely , the place requires a bit more balance than that imo

That's not what you said, you compared British troops to terrorists.
 
I disagree , the target makes the difference. If you are targeting the military of an occupying power then it is not terrorism but an act of legitimate armed resistance

You should be more honest and admit it is the fact that a Palestinian has committed the act that makes it , in your opinion , a terrorist attack. It's been so obvious for so long

What is the definition of Terrorism?

Here is one: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

Is it unlawful? Yes. Is it violence? Yes. Is it in pursuit of political aims? Yes.

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives"

The UN: Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

UN Security Council: criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism, are under no circumstances justifiable by considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other similar nature.
 
If there was such right you would refer to it by now.
It's a made up right by those who wish to feel good with their desire to have innocents murdered.

I am saying it is a moral inalienable right that there is no international law that bars armed resistance to foreign military occupation. That you wish to contest this view will put you in a absolute miniscule minority.

There are easy barometers to measure just how universal the support is or not

Let's have everyone here state whether or not their country folk should have the right to resist a foreign military invasion and subsequent military occupation of their territory

In fact you have repeatedly cited Israelis right to defend themselves and their territory from those seeking to invade or curtail Israeli self determination so you have already supported this position yourself countless times already but now seek to deny it to the Palestinians in as obvious a show of extreme bias as is possible to achieve . Once again it is yourself and your comments that serve to show you up for the hypocrite and extremist you evidently are
 
Well that's the picture many people seem to only want to see. You know , Palestinians being something akin to a human sub species dogged by a natural inclination to violence/barbarism , unable to offer anything else. Colours many posts here from many posters too.

You pick one act possibly to usher people to think that this is the typical example of payments made to Palestinians killed, injured , imprisoned as a result of actions related to the conflict by the PA. Don't get me wrong I think a payment to a person that does such a heinous thing is totally abhorrent and I would not support it but acts like that must account for a pretty miniscule percentage of the whole. Those paid out include everything from those injured/killed whilst stone throwing through to those in administrative detention for political activism . And for these types of " crimes " I see little difference to the payments given to Westerners for those injured or killed in conflicts

It is a picture of the Palestinian's making.

Itamar: Baby's Throat Slashed

Report: Initial Probe of Friday night massacre in Itamar shows terrorists stabbed 3-year old in the heart and slashed 3-month old baby's throat.
Itamar: Baby's Throat Slashed - Israel National News

Between 22:20 and 22:30 the terrorists entered the house through the living room picture window, did not notice the 6-year-old boy sleeping on the couch and continued on to the bedroom where they slashed the throats of the father and newborn baby who were sleeping there. The mother came out of the bathroom and was stabbed on its threshold. The evidence shows that she tried to fight the terrorists.

They then slashed the throat of the 11-year old-son who was reading in bed. They did not notice the 2-year old asleep in his bed, but murdered the 3-year old with two stabs to his heart. After that, they locked the door, exited through the window and escaped.

Exactly two hours after the infiltration, there was another warning signal from the same spot on the fence, as the terrorists left the way they had come. Once again, the patrol did not identify the source of the signal as infiltration.


These are your "freedom fighters"
 
That's not what you said, you compared British troops to terrorists.

Hilarious and desperate , again.

I compared UK government payments to those UK citizens and/or relatives injured or killed in conflict to those on the Palestinian side who you routinely and inaccurately tar as all being " terrorists ".

Your compulsion to misrepresent in order to smear being your only talent imo
 
Back
Top Bottom