Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About maymoon

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Coast to Coast - Canada
  • Interests
    Politics, Sports, Technology, Justice, Libertarian
  1. I'm surprised you are asking for me to back up this information. US Aid to Israel, which is used towards its military is well documented. Key U.S. lawmakers want to boost Israel's $38 billion defense aid package WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. senators who just returned from a trip to Israel called on Tuesday for an increase in the $38 billion in military aid the United States is currently providing Israel, signaling support for more funds for Israeli missile systems. Reuters
  2. $50 million goes to Hamas from Canada? Where did you get that? Any concerns about the $4,000,000,000 that U.S. gives to Israel each year that Israel uses to bomb Palestinians? Or do you not like talking about that?
  3. What if the "fake Palestinians" become Israelis? Oh wait. They won't be able to, because Israel will not allow the "fake Palestinians" to go back to their homes they were kicked out of and there is the law that only gives citizenship to those who consider themselves Jewish.
  4. There needs to be some kind of a revolution. The system is unsustainable. My hopeless side thinks the revolution can only happen if there is some sort of world devastation, either man-made or a large natural disaster. My hopeful side thinks it will be some kind of a technological revolution, where the unsustainable system, being held up by the old and crusty few, who are milking it to the last drop, are pushed aside.
  5. As a libertarian, a small part of me had hopes that Trump would be different and not get involved in military adventures around the world. Of course, that hope quickly evaporated.
  6. You are one if you speak out against what Israel has done. I agree that you cannot try to excuse the actions of one group by using another person's actions. That said, I see that the false context of 50/50 blame is being used here in many of the discussions. To me, the dynamics and the relationship between the Palestinians and Israelis is much different. I see one as the occupier and the other as the occupied. One as the aggressor and the other as the victim. One as the human rights abuser and the other as the abused. Some try to change the facts on the ground, like "Palestinian homes have not been stolen and taken over", when it's clear that this is happening on many fronts. Like the State sponsored seizure of land, by declaring Palestinian areas as "military zones" and then eventually a post is created and then another Jew-only settlement is born. You also have the take-over of Palestinian houses in Palestinian East Jerusalem and Hebron by extremist Jewish settlers, which are being backed up shady municipal governments and the Israeli police.
  7. I don't think there would be any issue with the wall if it was within the internationally recognized Israeli territory. The problem with the legality of the wall is that it cuts well into Palestinian land. In some cases, the wall isolates and separates Palestinian land from other Palestinian areas, including schools and hospitals. Many, including myself, see the wall not just as a defensive measure, but also as a way to continue to annex Palestinian land. I would disagree with your assessment that the Palestinians are their own worst enemy. I would argue their worst enemy are the right wing Israelis who continue to want to take as much as land as possible and the neighbouring Arab governments who have chosen to respond to the financial and diplomatic incentives given to them by the U.S. government. In some ways I understand why these Arab governments do this. These governments (Jordan, Gulf States, Egypt and Saudi) know that without the diplomatic and financial incentives, they would very quickly lose power. I don't agree that the Palestinians don't deserve a Palestinian State or that Israel should be given a pass for their numerous illegal actions because Hamas came to power. Before Hamas came to power, the PLO, who eventually and officially accepted a Palestinian State were in power. Israel continued to annex land and violate the rights of the Palestinians. I find it wrong to try to deflect and shift the blame on the Palestinians for what Israel is doing. The PA is definitely not innocent. At the same time, the PA's corruption is not an excuse to not criticize Israel's actions. I believe Israel is the major culprit. They have never shown real intentions to allow a Palestinian State to be formed. Your bottom line is that. I disagree that it's up to Israel to decide on Jerusalem. If we continued to allow the status quo to continue, Israel would continue to do what it has been doing in the past several decades. Which is to continue to annex Palestinian land. Unfortunately, one Israeli government after another, to different degree, have continued the same status quo. I don't think Israel has any appetite to change the course. There needs to be some accountability. I am still not convinced the BDS is the right approach, to push Israel to do the right thing. I feel that it will only push Israel to isolate itself and the people in Israel, just like most other people around the world, will end up backing their government, when they feel that they're being attacked. The question is, how can the rest of the world empower the people in Israel to stop supporting their government's illegal actions? How do we get these people to find empathy and sympathy for each other? Is this even possible?
  8. If you like facts, then: The General Assembly cannot pass legally binding resolutions over international issues, the United Nations Security Council, which has the authority to do so, has passed a total of six Security Council resolutions on Israel on the matter, including UNSC resolution 478 which affirmed that the enactment of the 1980 Basic Jerusalem Law declaring unified Jerusalem as Israel's "eternal and indivisible" capital, was a violation of international law. The resolution advised member states to withdraw their diplomatic representation from the city. The Security Council, as well as the UN in general, has consistently affirmed the position that East Jerusalem is occupied territory subject to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The International Court of Justice in its 2004 Advisory opinion on the "Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" described East Jerusalem as "occupied Palestinian territory".
  9. It's not up to Israel to annex land that doesn't belong to them. Israel is made up of West and East Jerusalem. East Jerusalem does not belong to Israel. Majority of the world agrees with that, including the Canadian government.
  10. Canada will not move embassy to Jerusalem, federal government says A government official told The Globe and Mail on Tuesday that Canada will keep its embassy in Tel Aviv. The official also said Canada still does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital city
  11. I never said anyone should be given a pass. I'm not sure why you have a difficult time understanding what I am saying. In every single post, you have gone out of your way to make false accusations. Your argument is that the Mufti had a very large role in the holocaust and he was the leader of the Palestinians - Even though you claim Palestinians didn't really exist until well after World War II. My argument, which coincides with the majority, including many in Israel, is that the Mufti had a very minimal role. That he wasn't even accepted as the leader of the Palestinians by many Palestinians groups and Arab leaders. As Eyeball has said, you are minimizing and disrespecting holocaust victims and survivors by trying to glorify who the Mufti is, just so you can somehow create a false link between Palestinians/Arabs and the Nazis. There were many people and groups who worked with the Nazis or wanted to work with the Nazis for their own gain. Their decision does not reflect all of the people who have the same ethnic or nationality of the person/group. One example of this is Yhitzak Shamir, the future prime minister of Israel, who wanted to make an alliance with the Nazis, with the "Final Solution" already under way, by fighting against the British, in exchange for support for a Jewish State. Paper Breaks Taboo on Shamir, Nazi Link : Jerusalem Post Cites Stern Gang Past http://articles.latimes.com/1989-03-07/news/mn-330_1_stern-gang
  12. Netanyahu was correct when? When he said Hitler wasn't planning to kill the Jews until the Mufti pushed him towards "the final solution"? Or when he retracted the comment? Which Netanyahu do you agree with?
  13. You're not an easy person to have a conversation with because you continuously make false accusations. Once again you are insinuating that I am apologizing for the Mufti or the Nazis, when I'm not. When Netanyahu made his comment about the Mufti's role in the holocaust, he was scorched in Israel by many people. Even Germany came out refuting Netanyahu's comment. Even Netanyahu ended up retracting his own statement. "Contrary to the impression that was created, I did not mean to claim that in his conversation with Hitler in November 1941 the Mufti convinced him to adopt the Final Solution. The Nazis decided on that by themselves," I'm not sure if there is a point in continuing this with you.
  14. Yes. Minimal. If you take the largest figure, the Mufti recruited 20,000 soldiers. During WWII there were 13 million soldiers who served the German army. Don't you think that's minimal? Plus, as much as he wanted to be, the Mufti was never really fully accepted as the representative of the Palestinians. He sort of just appointed himself and was the de facto leader of the Palestinians for just a few years. He was never liked by most other groups and had a difficult time staying in Palestine. Who defended the Nazis? I don't get your comment. All I am saying is that the Mufti had a very minor role in WWII and as Robert Fisk says: Dumping the Holocaust on this wretched figure is ultimately an insult to history as well as to the six million victims of an evil regime. It also provides another means of denigrating the entire Palestinian people – whose lands are still being gobbled up by the Israeli government – when the real criminals were neither Muslim nor Arab but Europeans, that cultured, largely Christian race who have inflicted more suffering on the people of this world than any other in recent history.
  15. al-Husseini was certainly involved, but his role was minimal and he was not part of the decision to "exterminate the Jews." He was an outcast who wanted to escape going to prison and ended up in Germany. Besides a few photos of him meeting Hitler, there is no real evidence that he was 'responsible for the holocaust'. That's just not true. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini#Post-War_Palestinian_Political_Leadership Peter Novick has argued that the post-war historiographical depiction of al-Husseini reflected complex geopolitical interests that distorted the record. I love this piece by Robert Fisk: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/dumping-blame-for-the-holocaust-on-the-grand-mufti-is-an-insult-to-its-six-million-victims-9587755.html The Grand Mufti, let’s face it, was a pretty horrible man, immoral and racist, but he was a puny figure in the history of Nazism’s epic evil. Dumping the Holocaust on this wretched figure is ultimately an insult to history as well as to the six million victims of an evil regime. It also provides another means of denigrating the entire Palestinian people – whose lands are still being gobbled up by the Israeli government – when the real criminals were neither Muslim nor Arab but Europeans, that cultured, largely Christian race who have inflicted more suffering on the people of this world than any other in recent history.
  • Create New...