Feiglin confirmed his plans on CNN, which Blitzer described to him as 'concentration camps'.I see you have totally run away from the hate lies you were exposed telling. Now you want to move on to a new topic to incite hatred.
Not so fast. Retract your lie about Feiglin and acknowledge that CNN fact checked the Hamdan quote.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4557951,00.htmlHannibal Directive is the beginning of fascism in Israel
Op-ed: Protocol promoting idea that a soldier's life is expendable for good of state is one manifestation of growing fascism, fed by Benjamin Netanyahu.
Bullfeathers. He said no such thing.Hamdan confirmed that they weren't his words...
Exactly.What he claimed was that the tape had been edited.
Funny thing about MEMRI's history, they had one translation that was found inaccurate out of thousands. Meanwhile you are inaccurate in pretty much every post you make.Exactly.
Given MEMRI's history, why do you still doubt Hamdan's denial?
Are you such a colonial racist that you believe propagandists MEMRI over the man who spoke?
Not quite. You cut my sentence to remove the part about what Hamdan said had been edited out.Exactly.
Oh, are you saying that edited conversations aren't accurate or don't respect the speakers words?Not quite. You cut my sentence to remove the part about what Hamdan said had been edited out.
You're a little too precious your for your own good.Oh, are you saying that edited conversations aren't accurate or don't respect the speakers words?
Is that what you are saying?
What he claimed was that the tape had been edited
You're a little too precious your for your own good.
In case you have forgotten, Hamdan's clip -- which has not been doctored
You and Gryfin practice very similar forms of evasion. One of your tactics is responding with nothing but questions.So lets see, you get upset with me if I edit your replies but don't care if Hamdan gets upset if his are edited?
And you believe know fakers MEMRI over the man who said the words?
You and Gryfin practice very similar forms of evasion. One of your tactics is responding with nothing but questions.
If you're going to make the assertion, back it up.
You say there was something else that Hamdan said that would justify his statement about Jews slaughtering Christians in order to use their blood for Passover. Tell us what it was.
Right here is proof that you are a completely dishonest and blatant liar. Blitzed asked him if that is what he said and he explained his plan for a safe haven. Per YOUR DEFINITION his proposal is nothing even remotely like a concentration camp. In fact the only similarity is that they are camps, a summer camp is more similar than a concentration camp.Feiglin confirmed his plans on CNN, which Blitzer described to him as 'concentration camps'.
Right, and where have we heard that line before?Right here is proof that you are a completely dishonest and blatant liar. Blitzed asked him if that is what he said and he explained his plan for a safe haven.
Straw man argument.Groggy insists that if we had more information from Hamdan's interview, we would see a context that would somehow explain Hamdan's assertion that Jews slaughter Christians to use their blood for Passover, that such actions are something his TV audience would "all remember," that it is "a fact" that Jews slaughter Christians to use their blood for Passover, and that this has been confirmed in the Jews' books and by history.
.
Really?Straw man argument.
That is not 'what I insist'.
You are being as dishonest as MEMRI.
I detect a pattern.
What Feiglin proposed isn't a one time wacko plan. Its been talked about, including by you in a form, and by others in government for at least a decade. Even the label 'concentration camp' has been applied before, though not only for camps in the Sinai but as a label for all of Gaza. In 2004 the director of NSC, Eiland told the US ambassador that Gaza was a giant concentration camp and that the plan was to work with Egypt to create more camps in the desert for Palestinians.Feiglin proposed a refugeee camp. You are just a blatant liar and everyone here can see it -- you are a fool, and you do great damage to the Palestinian cause by associating it with your fundamental dishonesty.
https://wikileaks.org/cable/2004/03/04TELAVIV1952.htmlRepeating a personal view that he had previously
expressed to other USG visitors, NSC Director Eiland laid out
for Ambassador Djerejian a different end-game solution than
that which is commonly envisioned as the two-state solution.
Eiland's view, he said, was prefaced on the assumption that
demographic and other considerations make the prospect for a
two-state solution between the Jordan and the Mediterranean
unviable. Currently, he said, there are 11 million people in
Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip, and that number will
increase to 36 million in 50 years. The area between Beer
Sheva and the northern tip of Israel (including the West Bank
and Gaza) has the highest population density in the world.
Gaza alone, he said, is already "a huge concentration camp"
with 1.3 million Palestinians. Moreover, the land is
surrounded on three sides by deserts. Palestinians need more
land and Israel can ill-afford to cede it. The solution, he
argued, lies in the Sinai desert.
¶13. (C) Specifically, Eiland proposed that Egypt be persuaded
to contribute a 600 square kilometer parcel of land that
would be annexed to a future Palestinian state as
compensation for the 11 percent of the West Bank that Israel
would seek to annex in a final status agreement. This Sinai
block, 20 kms of which would be along the Mediterranean
coast, would be adjacent to the Gaza Strip. A land corridor
would be constructed connecting Egypt and this block to
Jordan. (Note: Presumably under Egyptian sovereignty. End
Note.) In addition, Israel would provide Egypt a 200 square
km block of land from further south in the Negev. Eiland
laid out the following advantages to his proposed solution:
-- For the Palestinians: The additional land would make Gaza
viable. It would be big enough to support a new port and
airport, and to allow for the construction of a new city, all
of which would help make Gaza economically viable. It would
provide sufficient space to support the return of Palestinian
refugees. In addition, the 20 km along the sea would
increase fishing rights and would allow for the exploration
of natural gas reserves. Eiland argued that the benefits
offered by this parcel of land are far more favorable to the
Palestinians than would be parcels Israel could offer from
the land-locked Negev.
-- For Egypt: Israel would compensate Egypt with a parcel of
land on a 1:3 ratio, which is the ratio of the size of Israel
to the Sinai. Egypt would enjoy the land corridor to Jordan,
thereby controlling the shortest distance between Jordan and
Saudi Arabia to Europe.
-- For Jordan: The greater the capacity of the Gaza Strip to
absorb Palestinian refugees, the fewer the number of refugees
who would "return" to settle in the West Bank, thereby
resulting in less pressure on Jordan. Jordan would also
benefit economically from the land bridge.
¶14. (C) Eiland, having previously debated the merits of this
proposal with Ambassador Kurtzer, conceded the point that
Egyptian President Mubarak "would never agree" to it, and he
also took the point that in negotiating the Israel-Egypt
peace treaty Israel had foregone the entire Sinai and
accepted the Palestinian issue as an "Israeli" problem. He
nonetheless refused to be dissuaded from exploring the idea,
noting that he had reason to believe that Prime Minister
Sharon would support such a proposal, if it were tabled by a
third party.
Ah, why am I not surprised that you support this wikileaks document?Now you are citing a plan to give the a Palestinians MORE LAND so that they can have a viable state?
Log off, shut off your computer, and never use the internet again. You are too pathetic to even exist, you must be a troll.
Nobody could be as stupid as you are.
