gibber71

Given the tensions in the Middle East ,this made the front page of the National Post.



Federal lawyer cites Israeli 'war crimes'
Refugee board rejects claim by Lebanese spy for Mossad

Stewart Bell
National Post


Thursday, May 15, 2003



TORONTO - A man who spied on the terrorist group Hezbollah for the Israeli secret intelligence agency Mossad has been branded a war criminal by Canadian authorities, who said his actions helped Israel commit "heinous" atrocities.

In a ruling likely to raise diplomatic tensions between Canada and Israel, a lawyer representing the Minister of Immigration intervened in the Lebanese man's refugee case to argue his claim should be rejected for his role in Israeli "war crimes."

The Immigration and Refugee Board agreed and, citing reports by an American human rights group, ruled that the Israeli government was responsible for crimes against humanity in South Lebanon, including torture and murder.

The Israeli embassy in Ottawa called the Canadian assertions false. "Israel did not and has not been involved in any war crimes or crimes against humanity in southern Lebanon or any other place," said Ronen Gil-Or, the deputy head of mission.

Under Canadian law, Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization because of its involvement in car bombings, hijackings and kidnappings. Despite that, Canadian officials condemned the man, identified only as Mr. X, for his work against the group.

"It certainly is curious," said Eric Vernon, director of government relations at the Canadian Jewish Congress, which is drafting a response to the IRB, complaining that its ruling relied on the "distorted" assertions of human rights activists.

Mr. X gave Mossad agents the names of 40 Hezbollah members. He also told Mossad about the centres used by Hezbollah, the places where they prayed and met, the cars they used and the print shops that produced their materials.

He was paid US$800 a month for his services between 1998 and 1999 but fled Lebanon in May, 2000, after the Israelis withdrew from South Lebanon. He filed a refugee claim in December, 2000, because his former superior had turned himself in to the Lebanese security services and identified the informants under his direction.

The IRB said the names Mr. X gave to Mossad were probably handed to the South Lebanon Army (SLA), the pro-Israeli militia that controlled South Lebanon, and that Hezbollah members would have been mistreated as a result.

"According to the documentary evidence, the SLA and Israeli government were responsible for a number of crimes, including civilian displacements, house demolitions, murders, torture as well as heinous crimes committed at Khiam Prison [an SLA jail in Lebanon]," the IRB said.

"The claimant alleged not to be aware of the purpose of the information he was providing, but knew that it was for the Israeli intelligence service.... The panel found it implausible that the claimant, who had worked as an informer for the Mossad for a year, would not be aware of the abuses inflicted by Israel and the SLA on people suspected of being members of the Hezbollah.

"The panel was of the opinion that there were serious reasons for considering that the claimant had been an accomplice, because of his personal and conscious participation in crimes against humanity committed by Israel and the SLA," the IRB said.

The adjudicator went further, suggesting Israeli counter-terrorism measures were on par with the tactics of terrorists. "Those who attempt to eradicate terrorism and fight terrorists must in no way conduct themselves as they do."

Mr. X was excluded from refugee protection on the grounds he had committed crimes against peace, war crimes or crimes against humanity. The adjudicator also said he was not credible.

Israel has been battling allegations it committed war crimes in Lebanon since 1982, when it invaded its northern neighbour to chase out Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization, which was based in Beirut.

Palestinians tried to bring war crimes charges against Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister, in Belgium, but an appeals court ruled last year that Mr. Sharon could not be put on trial because he was not on Belgian territory.

Human Rights Watch has documented what it calls "grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions by SLA forces, including torture and expulsion of civilians." It said Israel was ultimately responsible for the SLA's abuses because it was an "occupying power."

Mr. Gil-Or said contrary to the Canadian government claims, Israel "is continuing to give humane treatment even under the most difficult conditions as a result of violence directed against it by terrorist organizations."

By contrast, Lebanon and Syria continue to back Hezbollah, even as it regularly fires rockets at villages in northern Israel.

"Hezbollah is a destabilizing force in the region and committed terrorist attacks throughout the world," he said.

sbell@nationalpost.com

These are some serious allegations. Do you think the outcome will have any impact on how people view the Isreali's methods of how they combat terrorism? If so,will this story have the legs to influence the outcome of the 'roadmap'. Or is this just fodder for the anti-Isreali forces at large?

Dragonlich

If Israel needs to maltreat members of a terrorist organization, so be it. They cannot afford to follow all legal rules, because they'd have their hands tied behind their backs, while the terrorists can do whatever they want. That will cost Israeli lives. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, it's a matter of "them or us", unfortunately.

The only thing this report will do is highlight the differences of opinion. Pro-Israeli people will dismiss the Canadian claims as insane, while anti-Israeli people will agree that Israel is evil.

crumbbum

So Israel gave the names of Hezbollah terrorists to the Lebanese resistance? Why is Israel being blamed for the crimes of others? It seems racist to me, like "no one expects the arabs to maintain standards of decency, lets blame Israel". That said, the Canadian and the French governments, among others, have definitely showed warm feelings towards Hezbollah. Chirac denied there was anything wrong with this, by citing the fact that Hezbollah does humanitarian work. So does Hamas, for that matter- on the one hand, social welfare, on the other, murder. Hezbollah, BTW is an Iranian proxy group.
It says Israel needs to end its occupation of southern Lebanon- but they pulled out the IDF in 2000. what occupation are they talking about? Maybe they meant the Syrian occupation, that has lasted more than 20 years? You don't hear much protest about that, about the raping and killing of lebanese civilians. No one seems to care about the real human rights abuses in the region, this stuff is all so politicized, it makes me sick. These people have an agenda and it is completely transparent.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

The_Dude

i never believed that isreal had it's hands clean.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

MSD

"The Israeli embassy in Ottawa called the Canadian assertions false. 'Israel did not and has not been involved in any war crimes or crimes against humanity in southern Lebanon or any other place,' "

I suppose that's why their Prime Minister will be tried for war crimes as soon as he is out of office.

EDIT: I realized as soon as I hit "Submit" that that makes me sound anti-Israel. I'm not. I just don't approve of some of their government's actions. I think that both sides have a lot of work to do.

crumbbum

Belgium, the nation responsible for the murder and enslavement of thousands in Congo, now has appointed itself moral conscience of the world. Beyond the ridiculousness of that, do you see anything wrong with them accusing Sharon of war crimes? Do you know what it's about? Sabra and Chatila- while the IDF was operating against the PLO in Lebanon in the 80s, they were allied with the Lebanese christian Phalangists. The Phalangists went into a refugee camp that was a terror center and massacred hundreds of Palestinians. Sharon was the Israeli defense minister at the time- it was ruled in an internal inquiry that he was "indirectly responsible", in that he should have known a massacre could happen, and not let the Phalangists into the camp. Of course, no one else foresaw a massacre either, no media wrote about it, or anyone said anything. So he stepped down. That said, why are they going after Sharon? What about the people who actually carried out the massacre? The phalangists? Why doesn't Europe and the UN expect the same humanity from the arabs as the Israelis? Is that not racist? it's like they assume the arabs are animals, and don't even bother. Its ridiculous. Do you see anyone accusing the US for war crimes? In Afghanistan, do you remember when the Northern Alliance soldiers were executing Taliban prisoners in revenge? No one said anything then. The US certainly wasn't blamed for it, they weren't responsible. That's the same situation as Sharon at Sabra and Chatila. No Israeli soldier or officer either played any part or had foreknowledge of what would happen. This has become the most hypocritical, politicized piece of cr** for people who always look to accuse Israel of anything possible. Again, why the hell does no one care about the 20 year old Syrian occupation of Lebanon, which brutalizes their citizens and denies the Lebanese their freedom? So Israel gave info about Hezbollah to the Lebanese resistance? Good! Hezbollah is an Islamofascist terror group sponsored by Iran, and are responsible for the death of many Americans, as well as Israelis. The US, and every other country for that matter, support resistance against sick regimes and terror groups. The US supported the Kurds in Iraq, the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, we're trying to support the reformers in Iran, etc. And sorry to MrSelfdestruct, but to focus on "israeli war crimes" that are BS to begin with, and to turn a blind eye to the real abuses in the region(these terror groups and arab governments do so many sick thing), does very much make you anti-Israel, and seeing reality through a skewed lens.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

SLM3

Crumbbum, how much does being Sharon's publicist pay?

Sharon should be tried for war crimes for good reason. Sharon is being held responsible for the massacres at Sabra and Chatila because he was DIRECTLY involved. Stop painting this murderer as an innocent bystandard. A minister of defence who had no clue what was going on, right? The phalangist death squads were able to carry out their work because the camps were encircled by the IDF. C'mon, the UN immediately passed Resolution 521 condemning the massacres. Of course Sharon was quick to ignore it. Instead he moved forward with his "landscam" deal with the Phalange leaders.

But of course he's totally innocent. Had NO clue what was going on.

You seem to have a very different view of Israel than the rest of the world, save the US and Britain. Yes, the same world that condemned Israel as a racist state at the last UN World Conference on Racism. How you can spin all the attrocities committed by the Israeli's every day amazes me. Trying to make it look like Israel, a huge military power, is on the defensive from a starving and dying population amazes me.

crumbbum

The UN has passed all kinds of nutty resolutions about Israel- part of this has to do with the fact that there are at least 40 Arab/Muslim countries in the general assembly- part of this has to do with the fact that the other countries are all playing to suit their own interests, which usually lie more with oil than truth. Don't use the UN to learn about the reality of the region, the general consencus of the world governments is a not any sort of moral authority, if you look at history, and is dominated by petty squabbling and selfish motive, not the pursuit of real justice and truth. Israel is not only under attack from the Palestinians- it is a proxy war, backed by Syria, Iran, the Saudis, Iraq until recently, and of course the PLO and Palestinians themselves, who have been brainwashed for 55 years first by the Egyptians and Jordanians who ran their camps and coordinated terrorist raids, and then by the PLO. Sharon was NOT directly responsible- Time magazine, as well as another Israeli magazine both had articles that suggested that- he sued them for libel, and won both cases, because it ISN'T TRUE. I am not Sharon's publicist, but at the same time it makes me sick to see the truth distorted to such an extent. And by the way, the Phalangists weren't "death squads", they happened to be the special forces of the LEBANESE PRESIDENT, and therefore the sovereign military power in the region. It was the elite of the Lebanese army, who had been battling the PLO before Israel arrived, which had been brutalizing, killing, stealing, torturing and raping the lebanese civilians and violating their rights, while it set up a terrorist mini-state. I know though, that people like you don't actually, deep down, really give a shit about anyone's human rights, you just hate Israel. Otherwise there wouldn't be this selective attention. The camps were not encircled by the IDF, the area was under IDF control, but the IDF did not sit there watching this happen. There was a war going on, and since the Lebanese and the Israelis were both trying to expel the PLO. The Phalangists were directly responsible, not Sharon. Israel is on the defensive from a starving, dying population- because they are deliberately kept in such squallid conditions, instead of being absorbed into the arab countries 95% of them originally came from, like in every single other conflict in history where land changed hands. Examples- when India and Pakistan split, Germany/Czechoslovakia after WW2, etc. And yes, Israel is on the defensive- in case you didn't notice 1000 jews have been killed since Oslo. And then you're of course going to say- "oh, but more palestinians have been killed!" First of all, when do numbers of casualties reveal anything about the cause of or source of aggression in a conflict? Second, more Israeli CIVILIANS have been killed. After all, the palestinians specifically target civilians, as they are trying to break Israel by demoralization. Israel does not target civilians. Some are killed regardless, when terrorists hide in and operate out of civlian areas, or intentionally use human shields. The world saw these tactics in Iraq. Israel wouldn't be on the defensive, except that the whole world puts huge political pressure on them NOT to kill Arafat, the head of the snake, not to have a permanent military presence in Palestinian areas, not to expel anyone and basically, not to defend themselves to the best of their ability, because it hurts the "peace process", as though there can ever be peace before the renunciation of terrorism as a political bargaining chip. If you are being intellectually honest, which it doesn't seem that you are, go read the thread about the evacuation of settlements, I had an extended dialogue with some people where I gave a lot of history with sources. If you aren't willing to look past the bullshit and consider the facts, then there is no point in debating with you.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

SLM3

Your zionist rhetoric boggles the mind. Next thing your gonna tell me is there's no such thing as a Palestinian people.

Sharon is known as the Butcher of Beirut for good reason. He didn't heroically step down, he was forced to quit the defence ministry in disgrace. He doesn't want peace, he never has. Right wing Israeli journalist Uri Dan put it best when he said, "There is no new Sharon". But according to you the whole world is wrong. They're all corrupt and somehow have more to gain condemning Israel and its US support.

How many Security Council resolutions have been passed condemning Israel? Remember, a majority of Arab countries don't have a say here. How many resolutions have had the full support of all the members of the SC only to be vetoed by the US? You tell me to look through all the bullshit, but the reasoning you give me is that there is some sort of world-wide conspiracy against the Israeli's. Please.

Lebanese Special Forces? More like Lebanese Christian Militiamen. And we all know how much THEY represent the general population. And yes, they WERE sorrounded by Israeli troops, just ask Jeffrey Heller of Reuters.

Israel doesn't target civilians? You've got to be kidding me. Have you ever even been to the region? Go to a demonstration and try and count how many snipers sorround the teenagers throwing rocks at tanks. If they're not killed by a bullet, it'll be when a bulldozer knocks down their house, or when they're under a 22hr curfew so they can't go out and work. Not that they have the infrustructure to provide themselves with any sort of industry, that was destroyed long ago. Instead they can sit home and look across the street to an Israeli settlement where they water their lawns as Palestinian children go thirsty a hundred yards away.

You need to stop putting the two sides on the same playing field. That's rediculous. It's two completely different worlds right next to each other that are fighting. One first and one third. I don't think you realize that.

If you wouldn't mind seperating your thoughts into paragraphs, I'd really appreciate it.

crumbbum

You are merely spewing propaganda. You haven't stated any facts. I am aware of the UN record on Israel. That proves nothing. When it comes down to helping jews or getting oil contracts, there is usually no hesitation to ignore the truth. Why, to you, has Israel been singled out to the extent that is has been, while its neighbors engage in the most horrific human rights abuses anywhere in the world? And by the way, you say that Reuters said the camps were surrounded. That can mean a lot of things. As I said before, the IDF controlled the area. However, there was not a circle of Israeli soldiers standing in a circle around the village cheering as the massacre was taking place. That is ridiculous. They "surrounded" the village- meaning they controlled the area around it. No IDF soldier or officer participated in, or had foreknowledge of the event. You have conveniently dodged my points, facts that disprove what you are saying, like Sharon's case against Time magazine, which he won. I suppose the American justice system is overrun by a zionist conspiracy, right?
The lebanese forces happened to be the personal forces of the Lebanese president. They were not some rag-tag militia, they were the soverign military force in the region. They were fighting the PLO, which had established a terrorist mini-state within Lebanon, and like I said before, committed horrific crimes against the Lebanese. When the IDF went into Lebanon, the lebanese threw flowers at them and greeted them as liberators. They felt abandoned after the war when Israel pulled out, and Syria moved in.
You say Sharon doesn't want peace? Then what does he want? War? Why? Look at a map- Israel is surrounded by enemies, and takes up less than 1% of the land the arabs have. Since when do they have any choice but peace? Do you consider the palestinians as peace-loving, flexible and open minded liberals? Do you consider someone who straps a bomb to their body, packed with nails, screws, and rat poison, and gets on a bus filled with children and senior citizens, and blows themselves up, killing dozens of innocent people, in the belief that this will take him straight to paradise, where 70 virgins will be waiting for him, desperate? Do you feel sympathy for the bomber? Do you think that it's the settlements that gave him to choice but to do this?
The Israelis do not target civilians. There are curfews, and other forms of military control of palestinians areas when repeated terror attacks come out of those areas. Palestinian gunmen often deliberately fire form inside building with children and other civilians in them, so that when the Israeli troops return fire, innocent people are killed. This, of course, creates more sympathy for the Palestinians.
Oh, and you blame the Israelis for destroying palestinian infrastructure. Well, in case you didn't realize, the palestinians have never had much of an economy to begin with, they mostly rely on employment in Israel. Then you mention the contrast of the settlements, and the poverty in Palestinian areas. But whose fault is this? Are you aware of the billions of dollars that have been poured into those camps? Do you realize the full extent of corruption in the PLO and the PA? That Arafat is stinking rich, and that all their leaders take the money for themselves, while deliberately letting the people suffer as an international eyesore? Why are these people still living in camps? Why haven't better condition been made, why haven't more permanent and sanitary housing projects been undertaken? It is a choice. The arab countries refused to absorb the refugees in 1948, because they weren't willing to recognize the existence of Israel, and the refugees have been used as a human political weapon ever since (a national suicide bomb, if you will). They do indeed suffer- but if you actually cared, you'd place the blame where it is due. These people have been brainwashed and bred on hatred and jealousy, for 55 years. If you need a primer in what is going on now, I suggest you read the thread about the settlements, I was having a very interesting discussion with some people.
I do realize the economic gap, which you claim I overlook. I am saying that it exists, but that you have not dug deep enough into the history and reality of the events over there to understand what these problems really stem from. If you were intellectually honest, and actually knew some history, we could discuss this. But I will not waste my breath indefinitely shooting down ignorant statements, generalizations, false assumptions and lies.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

Oh, and you're right, there is no such thing as a Palestinian people (in terms of them being a separate and distinct nation from other arabs). A palestinian, by the UN definition, is any arab that is descended from someone who lived west of the Jordan before 1948 for 2 years or more. That's it. While a very small minority of the palestinians are actually descended from arabs who had been in the land a long time, the vast majority are descended from arab migrant workers and laborers who went to the land seeking employment, after Jewish immigration, and their development of the land, started creating economic opportunity. These people were not native to the land. The palestinians are made up of egyptian, syrian, jordanian, and lebanese arabs. They do not have a unique history, and they never identified themselves as a distinct people until after 1967. They never demanded statehood while Egypt occupied Gaza, or Jordan the West bank. Arafat himself is an egyptian. I will refer to "the palestinians", even though the term originally was used for the jews. They are indeed, however, not a distinct people. Sorry if my "zionist rhetoric" is too much for you, or deflates any beloved fantasies about history.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Nad Adam

I belive this is kind of far fetched but since you seem to have a lot of faith in Ariel Sharon: "every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."

__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9

crumbbum

that doesn't justify a response, Sharon never said that. Do you have a source on this?

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

And anyway, I'm not saying I love Sharon, or agree with everything he's ever done, but he isn't a war criminal. That's a pretty fucked up thing to post, anyway.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Dragonlich

FYI... the same Belgian law is being used to bring your US general Tommy Franks to court.

Some leftist group, accompanied by an extreme-right Arab-rights group, on behalf of a bunch of Iraqi citizens, has filed a complaint in Belgium. They say Franks is responsible for war crimes because he used cluster bombs on civilians, amongst other things.

Still think these laws (and the int'l war crimes tribunal) won't be used in international political smear campaigns?

As for Sharon... he's not a nice guy, and he has done some pretty bad things. However, the crimes-against-humanity thing is obviously politically motivated. Nobody seems to care about the other butchers; nobody is charging the founder of Hamas with crimes against humanity; nobody is trying to bring Arafat to justice; nobody is trying to bring the Jordan government to justice after their war against the PLO in 1970, which was equally brutal...

Nobody has clean hands in this war, so either everyone should be put in jail, or nobody should. Just focusing on the acts of one side isn't fair, because the other side is just as guilty.

SLM3

SLM3

If I cite UN resolutions you say they're "nutty", if I cite the words of a Reuters correspondant, you twist his thoughts. Then you tell me I have given no facts. Ok, I'll try and be a bit more deliberate.

It is agreed upon by most academics that Sharon authorised the "Lebanese forces" to "mop up" the Palestinian camps during a meeting with Bashir Gemayel on September 12 (Benny Morris, The Righteous Victims, New York, A. Knopf, 1999, p. 540.). Mr. Sharon had already announced, on 9 July 1982, his intention to send the Phalangist forces into West Beirut (Schiff and Ya'ari, Israel’s Lebanon War, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1984, p. 251.). Furthermore, Sharon's autobigraphy confirms that he negotiated the operation during his meeting with Gemayel in Bikfaya (Ariel Sharon, Warrior: An Autobiography, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1989, p. 498.). More? Ok. On September 22, 1982, Sharon said in the Knesset that the decision that the Phalangists should enter the camps was made on Wednesday, September 15 at 3:30pm (Sharon at the Knesset, Annex to the Kahan Commission report, The Beirut Massacre, The Complete Kahan Commission Report, Princeton, Karz Cohl, 1983, p. 124).

So far does this look like the Sharon didn't play a part in these massacres? How many different sources do you need?

When the Phalangists entered the camps, General Drori called Sharon to tell him, "Our friends are advancing into the camps. We have co-ordinated their entry." What did Sharon reply? "Congratulations! Our friends’ operation is approved." (According to Kapeliouk, Sabra et Shatila: Enquête sur un massacre, Paris, Seuil 1982, p. 37).

The nerve of those people to think poor Sharon had anything to do with these slaughterings. It's a good thing we know better.

"Tsahal controls all strategic points in Beirut. The refugee camps, inside which there is a concentration of terrorists, are surrounded and sealed" (Israeli press release as quoted in the Kahan Commission Report, p. 14.). But of course the Israeli army had no clue what was going on.

I can keep going if you'd like.

Nad Adam

Take five minutes and learn how to use google and you can pick a source yourself.

__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9

Dragonlich

Question to some of the guys here (you know who you are): When Sharon says Jews control US politics, do you believe him?

Could this have been a simplification of reality: that the US supports Israel because they need a friendly state in a middle-east full of US-hating Arabs. As a result of this mutual need for support, the Israelis can make some demands of the US, in exchange for all kinds of Israeli support, both visible and secret. Thus, when Sharon says Jews control US policies, he's saying they have influence; perhaps there was a context where this comment was perfectly logical, or perhaps the audience made the comment seem reasonable.

Quotes taken out of context can be very misleading, and perhaps this quote isn't quite as controversial as it seems to be.

(Oh, and my comment still stands: either everyone is put on trial, or nobody. Sharon is a saint compared to some other people in the middle-east, or even on the Palestinian side alone...)

Nad Adam

If you are refering to me then read my post. I think I put something about "far fetched" in there.


Fair enough, but we gotta start somewhere don't we? Why not with Sharon?



Edit: Tags

__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9

archer2371

Sharon is not the nicest guy on the planet, but we're talking about the same group that wants to try Tommy Franks. The only thing Franks is guilty of is being an inept commander. I agree with what crumbbum and Dragonlich have stated, cuz they've pretty much said all of what I think. Sure, the Mossad does get it's hands dirty a lot of the time, but they aren't intentionally killing citizens to prove a point, that is the job of organizations like Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Do I think that Sharon is a saint? No, but he's certainly a hell of a lot cleaner than the monsters that surround him. And the fact of the matter is that the Israelis are the only completely free people in that region, that's why the United States backs them. You point out the fact that hey, Israeli snipers have shot kids who were throwing rocks (as well as crude fire bombs) at tanks, hi, rules of engagement here, that's an attack if I ever saw one, and are you gonna stand idly by while you or your friend gets set on fire or maybe a lucky throw strikes his temple and he dies? I don't think so. But I agree with Dragonlich, if ur gonna try Sharon you have to try Arafat, you have to try the leaders of the other terrorist organizations, because if we let them go, then what message are we sending to the world, that it's ok to be a so called "freedom fighter" and blow up a school bus full of kids who don't understand what the hell is going on? That you can committ acts of mass destruction like 9/11 and be exempt from the standards of society? And lastly, the United Nations has about as much real power as the Model United Nations debate club that I participate in does. Hey, the Security Council passed a resolution, well whoopity doo, without enforcement, are they going to get anything done, no. Even with their UN Peacekeeping Forces, they still managed to leave Mohammed Aidid in control of Somalia. Hussein has been violating UN Resolutions for years now, but it took the foresight of the US to actually do something about it. It's like trying to stop a slap shot from the blue line simply by standing near the guy and saying, "Wait, stop, don't, please?" But the real point that we are trying to show you is that Sharon doesn't deserve a War Crimes Trial, it's the guys around him that have been doing this crap for years already and have killed the most civilians in the modern era since Josef Stalin. Show a little common sense here guys.

__________________
"This ain't no Ice Cream Social!"

"Hey Grif, Chupathingy...how bout that? I like it...got a ring to it."

"I have no earthly idea what it is I just saw, or what this place is, or where in the hell O'Malley is! My only choice is to blame Grif for coming up with such a flawed plan. Stupid, stupid Grif."

crumbbum

"The Independent Palestinian Information Network"

This is not a source, this is disinformation. Sharon never said it. Nice try.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

You also made abundantly clear that Sharon approved the Phalangists going into the camps at Sabra and Chatila, to "mop them up", of the terrorists imbedded there. So? What does this prove? This has nothing to do with knowledge of or approval of a massacre! Their mission was to clear out the terrorists, and they went nuts and shot everyone! I can't believe you guys can post stuff like this. Are you thinking? Do you have a brain? Oh, and Dragonlich, actually, the Jordanian massacre of Palestinians ("Black September"), killed thousands and thousands. The PLO had tried to topple the Jordanian monarchy, and had set up a state within a state. Jordan was pissed. This was far worse than anything Sharon was ever involved in, it is questionable to even mention them in the same sentence. Sharon was involved in many battles, he was a general, and many military campaigns, and I'm sure some civilians were killed in those campaigns, as the targets(PLO) used the same tactics you saw the Iraqis using. Human shields, armories in hospitals, young kids on the front lines. It is a propaganda war, and they try to use our morality against us. And about that shit that Sharon never said, that is the kind of crap that the nazis spread about Jewish leaders leading up to the Holocaust, and Czarist Russia spread (Protocols of the Elders of Zion) to work up jew-hatred for political purposes. Hope you're proud.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

SLM3

You've totally missed it...again!

The ceasefire, brokered by the US, allowed all the PLO forces to get out BEFORE the massacres occured. The whole point is that those camps were filled with civilian men, women, and children. Sharon's covenient choice of language (labelling civilians "terrorists") had its exact intended effect on you. The whole point is they WERE NOT terrorists, they were civilians. All the fighters had left on the 10th. Sharon and those death squads knew exactly what they were doing going into those camps.

crumbbum

The cease-fire came later when the PLO was holed up in Beirut. The US and UN were TRYING to negotiate a cease-fire all along, but it wasn't working. There wasn't a real cease-fire until later, when the PLO was allowed to evacuate Beirut. The camps were NOT only filled with civilians by any means, they were terrorist centers. There would have been absolutely no reason for anyone to enter them in the first place if that was the case. I will state again, that Sharon has been involved in 2 different lawsuits, one against an Israeli magazine, and one againt Time magazine, in a US court, when they suggested that he had any form of direct responsibility or foreknowledge. He won both cases, because he was able to prove it. You want so badly to believe the worst about Sharon that you are obfuscating and ignoring reality.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

I'd like to hear what Nad Adam has to say for himself, by the way.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Nad Adam

Que?

__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9

Nad Adam

I'm going to sleep, if crumbbum means that I'm a nazi then please explain a bit further in what way and I'll get back to that tomorrow.


PS I have no idea what obfuscating means so it's possible I'm doing that.

__________________
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. - Psalms 137:9

SLM3

I don't understand what you mean by later. The PLO forces were out on September 1, 1982. The multinational forces overseeing it all were gone on the 10th. The massacres occured later in the week. That's reality. You're talking like these acts of genocide occured before the PLO forces left. Where are you coming up with this?

SLM3

Just for clarifications sake, when Sharon sued Time magazine a jury found that specific Time article defamatory and false, but NOT libelous. Sharon was not "cleared" by any means.

I'm sure crumbbum simply forgot to mention that fact.

crumbbum

Ok, I mixed up the dates a little before- my mistake. Here is the correct information- the massacres took place on the 16th and 17th. The war was basically over, and Israel was trying to transfer military authority back to the Lebanese. The Phalangists were part of the Lebanese Army.
"By June 1982, Israel viewed the Syrian and PLO presence in southern Lebanon as a threat and attacked. Yasser Arafat and PLO followers were forced to evacuate Beirut strongholds and later reestablished their headquarters in Tunisia. With the help of U.S. envoy Philip Habib, the international community in August negotiated the PLO withdrawal agreement and deployed U.S., French, and Italian forces to Beirut to facilitate the move.

Civil war and violence continued to rage in Lebanon and key political figure, president-elect Bachir Gemayel was assassinated before he could even take office. The turmoil and the continued presence of PLO fighters prompted a second Israeli invasion in September 1982. This time Israeli forces moved all the way up to the capital of Beirut, occupying the western half of the city."
That is from PBS- http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middl...eace_sec2.html
There was still PLO in the country, and the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps were PLO strongholds. Among the 7-800 killed were many PLO terrorists, as well as many innocent civilians. At this stage in the war, Israel was trying to transfer military authority back to the Lebanese Army, as they were trying to pull out. The Phalangists were part of the country of Lebanon's military.
The Israeli commision into this, the Kahan commission, found Sharon, as Defense Minister, indirectly responsible, and he was forced to step down. It was ruled that he should have foreseen that a massacre was a possibility, although no one else in the military, media, or anyone else had suggested that this could happen either. He was forced to step down. He bears no direct responsibility.
And Nad Adam, I am not calling you a nazi, but the fabricated quote you posted, from "The Independent Palestinian Information Network", is not legitimate. This is the type of propaganda that was pushed by the nazis to stir up Jew-hatred, which gave Hitler the public support for his "Final solution". I hope you don't really believe what you have posted. If you do, and fail to acknowledge how sick it is, I would consider you an anti-semite. That "quote" is not from a legitimate source, and jewish conspiracy theories have no place in any intellectually honest discourse. I didn't mean to say you were a nazi- you should just be aware of the significance of believing or posting something like that. I did do a google search, and besides the site you mentioned I also found it on another jew-hating sight, the "American defense league", I believed it was called, filled with anti-semitic hate literature.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

"Just for clarifications sake, when Sharon sued Time magazine a jury found that specific Time article defamatory and false, but NOT libelous. Sharon was not "cleared" by any means.

I'm sure crumbbum simply forgot to mention that fact."

The jury found the article suggesting he had foreknowledge/direct responsibilitiy for the massacre defamatory and false. FALSE. What does this mean to you? How would you define libel, if not smearing someone with responsibility for something when it isn't true? That is what libel is- get a dictionary.
And obfuscate means to distort, change, or hide some fact or truth.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

I'm unclear about something so any feedback on this is greatly appreciated: Nothing can be taken away from the people that actually do the physical fighting to make things happen throughout human history. Alongside that element of cultural expansion is the vital areas diplomacy with regards to international politics. The UN certainly seems to have fallen apart; if one could consider it to have ever been together in the first place. The rotation of countries into positions of global political authority when the leadership’s actions reflect a contradiction of the areas of their responsibility makes this case all to clear.

This dysfunctional state could have evolved from multiple factors. One that stands out to me is the double standard and situational respect that all countries seem to give it. This dooms it from the start. In regards to this discussion; a ProIsrael perspective disagree will the 90 resolutions Israel is in violation of including transgressed Geneva Convention laws. It’s understandable how the Israeli government would scoff at UN demands of retribution and justice; especially as noted when the community has Arabs in it. The world has Arabs in it who believes they're as right as the Israelis.

Is Israel discounting the very entity that recognized its statehood? With no discredit taken to those that fight; the Jewish diplomats scored an equal great victory by gaining the recognition of the UN. It appeared at that point Israel didn’t have any issues with the UN at all until resolutions were passed that it did not benefit from. It truly is a joke that counties such as Iraq and Cuba held positions dealing with disarmament and human rights; but no more than the 90 resolutions Israel continues to break. If someone disagrees with this they are accused of being anti-Semitic; which is ridiculous and side tracking the issue. When things are desired both ways is it unreasonable to expect the reaction is going to be negative. I think the UN should be disbanded; what could have been a good thing has become a joke.

I think America should go to war with any nation that doesn’t agree to lift the sanctions on Iraq, nuke Mecca, nuke Iran, nuke Syria, give more money and weapons to Israel than already given and let them finish off the Palestinians, Lebanese, and Jordians, hire the remaining Saudis work in the oil fields for cheap labor, laugh at France, tell Russia and China to deal with it, turn North Korea into a giant casino and we will finally have truth, liberty, and justice for all.

Pardon the sarcasm these issues are frustrating to me; as is the rest of the world. It seems like humans could be capable of so much more.

Technological progression with social regression; IMO looking back at our passionate history we haven’t learned a dam thing. That is of course MO.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Sun Tzu

Has he said that? Could you please provide a link with reasonable credability you saw that.

I found this excerpt interesting from the debka site:

I wonder how far he would like them stretched.
I also agree everyone should be put on trial; but should any that are recieve the same pass as the rest?

I went to a site that truly has me bothered; I need help discrediting the material here and substance that shows it to be inaccurate.

www.indybay.org/news/2003/02/1572736.php

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

Sun Tzu I read through that, a lot of the quotes are from nutcases, like Ginsburg- people no one, Israelis included, takes seriously. many of the other quotes, when put next to the rest, are taken out of context. It is good to be suspicious when selective quotes are gathered for the specific purpose of saying that the Zionists are racist and evil.
About the supposed Sharon quote, the source he gave, it's above, was the "Independent Palestinian Information Network". When I did a google search I found the quote on that site, which is devoted to attacking US Israel ties, and also on the "American defense league" website, which was basically an anti-Jewish hate site. The quote is fabricated, I couldn't find it anywhere else, and no legitimate source was given to counter what I said above.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

SLM3

The Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs seemed to find the source credible enough. It seems like you're not going to accept any source that is criticle of Israel and/or its policies. Yet you provide Israeli sources as gospel. This double standard is maknig it impossible to have any sort of discussion.

crumbbum

First, what Israeli sources did I provide as gospel? Second, The "Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs" is, from looking at the website, an arab lobby group that's only goal, apparently, is to break US support of the State of Israel. I saw their site, I read what it said. the unreliability of that site as a source is irrelevant however, as it is not the source of the "quote". I have never even heard of the "Independent Palestinian Information Network", and it sounds extremely fishy. You have in no way established it as legitimate.
You have however, succeeded in dodging every fact-based argument I have presented in response to your points. I would appreciate it if you would, if you are able, respond to the legitimate points I have raised.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

SLM3

I have a hard time finding your legitimate points.

You've been saying the same thing over and over again. That an Israeli commision founded Sharon indirectly responsible therefore you believe that implies he as well as everyone else had no clue what was going on. How much faith should I put in a finding put forth by the Israeli government concerning an attoricty alledgedly commited by its own people? It may seem totally impartial to you, but it's far from it to me.

What about my post with all the different sources linking Sharon directly to the two massacres? They indicate that he was an integral part of what occured. You did not address any of those points.

Excuse me if I don't take all of your claims as "facts". You provide no sources but you accuse me of dodging your fact-based arguments? What'd I ignore?

Sun Tzu

crumbbum thanks for taking the time to look. Im looking through all the Ben Gurion records that I find both on and off the web.

The quote "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
It is the first time I've seen anything of such by him. I found in the past he was careful what he said because of the pressure the British were putting on the Zionists to limit immigration and turning ships back. If its found to accurate I dont see how such could be taken out of context, and also shows terrorism goes back further than what is widely thought from directions most dont look in.

I wish the forum had an automatic spell check

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

Oh man, this will take forever, but I feel like it's too important to leave outstanding. I'm going to go through the quotes, Sun-Tzu.
Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25,1982:

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
What is unclear is whether or not he was talking about Palestinian terrorists- I personally would indeed consider anyone who commited many of the horrific atrocities by Palestinian terrorists a beast. To give your own life for the sake of murdering as many innocent people as possible is beastly- be it on 9/11, in Israel, in Morocco, in Moscow, anywhere. It is sick, disgusting and inhuman.

David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff.
From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978:

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
This is out of context- why did the Galilee need to be rid of its arab population? What is unsaid is the reality, which is that the Galilee was a center of the Fedayeen, that were conducting raids on the nearby kibbutzes and killing people. There were indeed retaliatory strikes and the like before 1948- it was self-defense. Quotes like this must be taken in historical context, and understand what was really going on. At this time the Jews in Palestine were not a military power, but were struggling to defend their fledgling farm communities from raids, and the roads from bandits and murderers.

Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department.

From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5:

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them."

It is no secret that after the 67 war, there was a drive to build settlements on the hilltops in the territories. The hilltops were chosen for defensive purposes. No Arab land was stolen, the land claimed was ownerless (though some legal scholars would say the Israelis had the most right to it, as they had captured it in a self-defensive war). Once the land came under Israeli control, there was a rush to build settlements in strategically important places, before the high ground was claimed by the arabs (there were and are many arab settlements as well. There are more illegal arab settlements than Jewish ones today, particularly in the Negev- as of yet, Israel has not dismantled any of them).

Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine, "Complete Diaries," June 12, 1895 entry.:

"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
First of all, herzl only lived to see the first wave of Jewish immigration, he died soon after. Obviously, the early settlers hoped to gain land in the area. As it turned out, they purchased it legally from the arabs, often at ridiculous prices. Herzl's idea here of driving the arabs out by denying them employment- first of all, why was it the Jews' responsibility to employ the arabs? The vast majority of the Palestinians today are descended from arabs who came from surrounding countries seeking employment. Only a small minority of the Palestinians are descended from arabs who actually had lived in the land for any significant length of time. As far as Herzl's statement, I assume he was aware of the population figures, and Arab and Jewish immigration statistics. I assume he was aware of the reality of the situation- that the majority of the arab population in Palestine was arabs who had come seeking employment opportunity, which the jewish settlement had created. Since this was the only thing bringing arabs to the land, he suggested that by denying them employment they would leave. This is perfectly legitimate. The jewish immigrants did not drive anyone out, or steal land, or any other such behavior, in the interest of procuring property. They bought the land fair and square. There is nothing wrong with Herzl's statement- his intent was not to drive out the authentic arab population, but to encourage the arabs who had only come for employment to look elsewhere, freeing up available land.

Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, head of the Kever Yossev Yeshiva (school of Talmud) in Nablus stated:

"The blood of the Jewish people is loved by the Lord; it is therefore redder and their life is preferable."
Ginsburg is infamously crazy. No one takes him seriously, and he does not speak for the Jewish religion. His statements are deemed irrelevant by other rabbis.

Yitzhak Ginsburg, "Five General Religious Duties Which Lie Behind the Act of the Saintly, Late Rabbi Baruch Goldstein, May his Blood be Avenged":

"The killing by a Jew of a non-Jew, i.e. a Palestinian, is considered essentially a good deed, and Jews should therefore have no compunction about it."
Same as above- this is btw a false statement about the Jewish religion.

In 1923, radical Zionist Ze'ev Jabotinsky-- spiritual father of not only of Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin but of Brooklyn Rabbi Meir Kahane-- wrote:

the "sole way" for Jews to deal with Arabs in Palestine was through "total avoidance of all attempts to arrive at a settlement"-which Jabotinsky euphemistically termed the "iron wall" approach. Not coincidentally, a picture of Jabotinsky graces Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's desk. Source: The Village Voice, "Death Wish in the Holy Land," Dec. 12, 2001.
I don't know about the picture on Sharon's desk. I know that the Village Voice has been virulently pro-palestinian. As far as Jabotinsky- so what? Yasser Arafat, as well as the PM of Pakistan, Musharref, have both referred in speeches to the "Treaty of Hubadiah"- Arafat in reference to agreements with Israelis, and Musharref with the US. It refers to a peace treaty Muhammed made with an enemy city. After ten years, he aquired enough strength to take the city, thus breaking the peace agreement. False agreements, like Oslo (where the PLO was politically resurrected, given an autonomous government west of the Jordan, and armed, in return for nothing but false promises), are a typical strategy used in Arab warfare. The people the Jews in Palestine were dealing with in Jabotinsky's time, were mostly 2 groups- arabs in Palestine who welcomed Jewish immigration and benefited from it, and arabs, led by the Mufti of Jerusalem, who collaborated with the nazis, and had control of many vicious gangs, who harassed the Jews and stirred up Pogroms, like the one in Hebron in 1929, where 133 Jews were killed by an Arab mob, primarily with axes and knives, and nearly 400 wounded. It was wise not to indulge in negotiation with such people at the time, who only seeked the destruction of the Jews in the area. He was right at the time he said it. He realized that the only way there could only be a peaceful settlement once th arab rejectionists had accepted that the Jewish presence in palestine was permanent. This is true today as well.

The influential Israeli Rabbi Ovadia Yosef exclaimed during a sermon preceding the 2001 Passover holiday, :

"May the Holy Name visit retribution on the
Arab heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them." He added: "It is forbidden to have pity on them. We must give them missiles with relish, annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones." -- Source: Ha'aretz April 12, 2001.
He was undountedly referring to the terrorists, probably, based on his statement about the missiles, leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and other terrorist groups, that the IDF has made a policy of targeting and killing, often with missiles.

Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969:

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, ‘What is to be done with the Palestinian population?’ Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'"
A hand gesture that said "drive them out"? That's not really legit. The context is unclear, and this is Dayan's interpretation of a hand gesture- a fairly ambiguous thing. Maybe he meant that, maybe not- the situation and context is unclear from the statement, and there isn't enough to go on here.

David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
1978, p. 99:

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

I don't know much about this guy, but again it is presented out of context. It is true, that there are few places in Israel today where arabs once lived (though the area was only lightly populated). What is not said is that the land was sold completely legitimately to the Jews. There is nothing controversial about saying that before Jewish immigration, the land was inhabited primarily by arabs. It was. There was a Jewish presence there at all times, as well, but it was a small minority in most places, with the exception of Jerusalem. The statement is a bit of an exaggeration- the land was only lightly populated, and mostly barren and empty. There were many places where no one lived. The land itself, however was mostly owned by arabs, if not inhabited.

Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, 'Begin and the "Beasts"', New Statesman, 25 June 1982:

"We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return."

Duh. This would result in the destruction of the State of Israel. This has always been the official Israeli position.

Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979. Rabin's description of the conquest of Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet:

"We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters."

" I don't know about this, what does it mean "leaked censored version of Rabin's memoirs"? I don't know whether he said it or not. That said, it should be noted that the Arab population in Palestine before Jewish immigration was almost exclusively poor farmers and peasants, living in squallid condition. They lived in mud huts, and malaria and other diseases were widespread. Most were illiterate. So I don't know exactly what this quote suggests they will be reduced from. Once Jewish immigration was underway, they mostly worked for the Jews. That said, this quote is also out of context- it says it was after a battle? For all I know, maybe he was just pissed after winning the battle. He was a general after all. I don't know what a big deal this quote is, it depends on the context. I wouldn't want to hear what things other soldiers and officers and generals have said after winning battles, about "krauts" or "sand niggers" or "japs" or whatever. Who cares?

David Goldman wrote:

"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours."

Who is David Goldman?

Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir's infamous quote:

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian."
I have explained this before- what she meant is that the term "Palestinian", in referring to Palestinian arabs, is a misnomer. Before 1948 the Jews were referred to as the Palestinians- the Jerusalem Post was once called the "palestine post". The Palestinians today are the descendants from arabs of various surrounding countries. The Palestinians never identified themselves as a distinct nation until after 1967. Arafat himself, along with Edward Said, the famous Palestinian propagandist, who teaches at Columbia, are Egyptians.

Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998:

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."

Duh, again. See above comment on Ben-Gurion's supposed quote.


Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum":

"If I was an Arab leader I would never make [peace] with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country."

Don't know much about Israel Koenig, but he's wrong- there was never any country in the land that made up Palestine, in 800 years of arab rule. Never. The only country or sovereign entity that ever existed on that land was the Kingdom of Judah, that was destroyed by the Romans, and Israel today. It was never more than a backwater province of the Ottoman empire. Perhaps he was referring to the Palestinians today, who do indeed believe that Israel stole their country. They have been brought up to believe this, by the PA school system and media, among other things. It is a reality to them, even if it isn't based in truth. Perhaps this is what he meant.

And finally:

Michael Ben-Yair, Attorney General of Israel, 1993-1996 (in Ha'aretz):

"The Intifada is the Palestinian's people's war of national liberation. We [Israel] enthusiastically chose to become a colonialist society, ignoring international treaties, expropriating lands, transferring settlers from Israel to the Occupied Territories, engaging in theft and funding justification for all these activities.. we [Israel] established an apartheid regime."

The Israeli left controls the Justice system in Israel. I don't know who this guy was, but he's wrong- no land w

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.