falxori

and on that note, they should also stop asking Israel to take of it for the rest of the world. This is not just an Israeli problem "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

so, if you need "just over 3oz", why don't you just carry it in two bottles of 3 oz or even better, 2 different people? you can always combine it later... effective screening should be of the passenger and the way they behave, not only of what they carry (which is fighting yesterday's battle). "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

What if the country it was "occupied" from (Jordan) never claimed it back? Based on your "international law", the only entity that has a claim on this land beside Israel is Jordan, not the Palestinians. It doesn't mean I don't support a Palestinian state in the west bank (it's the right solution), but they don't have a "right" for it based on your logic. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

so how long of a freeze would indicate Israel Is a willing partner ? 10 months is not long enough? What indicates to u that the Palestinians are a willing partner? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

to be fair, thats a completely different group of palestinians, which makes it even more difficult "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

israel did just that and for 10 months the palestinians did nothing. why dont you suggest they just come back to the table ? 10 months is enough to show its not the real reason. now they are just trying to set a new status quo "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Because I'm afraid its just another excuse. If/when there is a freeze, something else will come up... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

You say building is the reason why there are no peace talks. so tell me something... Israel had a settlement freeze that lasted for 10 months. why did the Palestinians wait until the last month to resume negotiations? I think building there is a waste of time and money but saying that is a reason not to talk is naive and stupid. when there was a freeze, they made up other reasons. there will always be reasons if one is looking for any... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

why? because the evidence shows the opposite of what the original post claims? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

I followed your advice and picked a random line... Because its a known fact that finance ministers usually take the underground when they attend conferenes... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

I don't. if I thought you were a mindless idiot I wouldn't be talking to you. I don't respond well to people who just say things to provoke and there a couple of them here. this is not binary. there is a lot between absolute truth and absolute false and that's were bias plays. and yes, the agenda of CNN, BBC and the others. the agenda of their field crews who are often local palestinians, the agenda of the editor who want to show an apealing story (and blood and sensation sell better) and the agenda of showing things in a simple, easy to grasp way that may fit in a 30 second segment but lacks any context and ignores the complexity of the situation before the operation started there were often dozens a day. now this may look like minor damage to you but would you be willing to live in a place were rockets randomly fall? would you agree to send your kids to a school in such an area? would you agree for your government not to respond to such attacks? its really easy to dismiss small rockets when you are not there but what would you do when there are hundreds of rockets launched continuously? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

don't play naive. false? no. biased towards an existing agenda, very much so. Did you ask yourself why you didn't hear about the hundreds of rockets fired out of Gaza prior to this operation? This is why Israel attacked Hamas in Gaza, not because it felt like killing people. you keep forgeting the Israel has pulled out of Gaza years ago. Israel don't want to be in Gaza and trust me when I tell you that no Israeli is happy when Israeli troops are drawn back into Gaza. but when rockets fly out of there and they keep stockpiling more and more weapons, what would you do? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

have you also watched the assault FROM Gaza on southern Israel that included daily missiles and rockets? Have you heard of editing? you know, the thing editors do to make sure you see what they want you to see. it's funny but you say the videos supporting Israel's versions are not the whole truth but you blindly follow media outlets who's main interest is not simply to show you the truth. Media has an agenda and you should know that when you follow the news. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Wrong. A naval blockade can be enforced in international waters and even before the ship has entered the blockade area if the ship has declared its intentions to run the blockade and it was warned not to do so. Since these guys said they'll run the blockade repeatedly and since Israel gave them more than enough warnings, there is nothing illegal about it. you may not care but if you come with lolly pops its a good indication that you didn't intend to hurt anyone (not to mention murder anyone) now you're just being racist. I don't know how many Israelis and Palestinians you've actually met but skin color is rarely a good differentiator. I can and I am. Israel has not broken any law here as the blockade is legal and running it is cause for a takeover. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

ok, I'll comment. Just shows you that Israel will stop any ship trying to run the blockade. It will do so regardless of who is on board and it will not use any force when none is needed. here, much like on the other ships (beside the big Turkish one when the soldiers where attacks) no force was needed and no one got hurt. The fact that no one commented on a peaceful ending only shows you why the people on the original ship would never have gone without violence. they wanted and needed violence to get media attention and the only way to do that was to attack the Israeli soldiers. so don't give me crap about being "peaceful activists". they were there for one reason and one reason only and it wasn't to deliver any aid beside media aid. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

No, but enough who did. and even the some of the organizers said they lost control of it. No, they wanted a media circus. if they wanted to deliver aid they could have delivered through Israel as suggested (and Israel did deliver everything that was on the ships to Gaza). Listen to yourself. VIDEO conflicts with reports. yes, editing can change the POV but the video is of the actual takeover and it shows exactly what took place. Do you know that the soldiers first boarded the ship with paint guns? they only used live ammo after they were attacked with knives and clubs, some were thrown overboard and some were taken below deck. at that stage and force in the world would have used live ammo. it can force an agreement, mostly on Israel, yes. but unless both sides see the value in an agreement, it will not happen. But this is not relevant to this incident. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

What? you said there were no attacks before "these territories were stolen". even if one agrees with your definition of "stolen", there were attacks on Jews before Israel was founded and many attacks by terrorists crossing the border with Gaza and Jordan prior to 67 when "these territories were stolen" (you can google fedayeen). That is, of course, only valid if you don't consider Israel's existence as "stealing land". in that case, my don't really have anything to talk about... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

This is factually wrong. read on the riots during the 20's and 30's and the terrorist attacks in the 50's. if you don't know what you're talking about, you might want to stay quiet. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

A claim by the PLO that Israel should not be recognized by the UN is not as convincing as the factual number of resolutions and discussions dedicated to Israel. again a 100% of their resolution were against Israel in 2006 (when they were formed). was there no other human right issue to discuss at the time? and you don't see a problem with having 52 Arab and Muslim countries in the UN and only one Israel? they can pass a resolution that the world is flat. it doesn't make it right. without the US veto the UN would have been an even bigger joke. This is off topic, but why should it collapse? Israel froze it for almost a year and nothing happened until now. Why is it expected to give away everything in advance when the PA wouldn't even openly recognize Israel's right the exist? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Here are a few... s of June 2010, the UNHRC has criticized Israel in 33 resolutions. During its first year of existence (2006), the UNHRC passed seven resolutions, all (100%) critical of Israel. In its second year (2007), Israel was the subject of 4/11 resolutions (36%) The Council voted on June 30, 2006 to make its review of human rights abuses by Israel a permanent feature of every council session. This decision was renewed in June 2007. Israel is the only country subject to a permanent review. The Economist wrote: "In its fourth regular session, which ended in Geneva on March 30, the 47-member council again failed to address many egregious human-rights abuses around the world. (...) Indeed, in its nine months of life, the council has criticised only one country for human-rights violations, passing in its latest session its ninth resolution against Israel. This obsession with bashing Israel and turning a blind eye to so much else has disappointed those who hoped that the new council might perform better than its predecessor." Peggy Hicks, Global Advocacy Director for Human Rights Watch said in a July 26, 2007 testimony to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee: "In its first year, the Human Rights Council has failed to take action regarding countries facing human rights crises such as Burma, Colombia, Somalia, Turkmenistan, and Zimbabwe, ended the mandates of human rights experts on Belarus and Cuba, and rolled back its consideration of the deteriorating situations in Iran and Uzbekistan. At the same time, it focused disproportionately on Israel’s human rights record and worse still, did so in a manner doomed to be ineffective because it failed to look comprehensively at the situation, including the responsibilities and roles of Palestinian authorities and armed groups".[90] Similar accusations were voiced by Freedom House,[91][92] the Washington Post,[93] Kofi Annan,[94] Ban Ki-moon,[95] US President George W. Bush,[96] and members of the European Parliament --------------------------------- all from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel,_Palestine,_and_the_United_Nations#Claims_that_the_UN_is_anti-Israel Sorry, I have to rely on wiki right now as I don't have time to put together a more comprehensive list but the bottom line is clear, this organization (much like the UN General assembly) is a joke. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

I agree with everything you (and the king) said. This is not relevant for this discussion though. This human rights committee is nothing but a joke and pretty much all of its resolutions are targeting Israel regardless of the facts. even if you think Israel is 100% guilty of what's going on in the middle east, shouldn't the UN devote some attention to a few regions with more critical human rights issues? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

This report is yet another sad joke by the UN "human rights committee" A simple look at the statistics shows that pretty much all of their actions/resolutions/meetings are against Israel, as if there are no other problems in the world... This report was written long before anyone even looked at the evidence. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

So who are the "few evil Jews" in this comparison? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

It may be a contributing factor but it can't be that simple. The Arab society is not the only one with strict sexual restrictions. Orthodox Jews can be almost as bad with interaction between the sexes but you don't see a lot of them going to Afghanistan. Not saying your point is invalid, just that its not as simplistic and straight forward. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

I don't disagree with that. As I said, the holocaust showed what can happen and how important it is to have a home land for the Jewish people. If you want a simple proof, just google the Balfour deceleration from 1917. Again, huge difference between the holocaust showing the need for Israel and having Israel as a compensation for the holocaust. big difference. but again, if you want, I'll be happy to start another thread where we can discuss the two views in a civilized way. I'm not going to have this discussion here. Good, I'm happy to hear that. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."