ALL THE MORE REASON TO EMBRACE THE LEVY REPORT
Jerusalem rejects ‘biased’ Human Rights Council finding that West Bank Jewish communities are illegal
TIMES OF ISRAEL January 31, 2013, 2:36 pm 4
JTA — A United Nations investigation into the impact of Jewish West Bank settlements on the Palestinian population said that Israel should immediately begin to withdraw all settlers from the territory.
The report issued Thursday by the UN Human Rights Council based in Geneva said that settlement violate the 1949 Geneva Conventions and that failure to withdraw could lead to a finding of war crimes at the International Criminal Court.
The Palestinians have threatened to take Israel to the ICC since the Palestinian Authority was recognized as having non-member state status in the General Assembly in November.
The Human Rights Council’s investigation began last March. Israel did not cooperate with the investigation, including barring investigators from entering the territory, saying that the council is biased against the Jewish state. The council has issued more resolutions regarding Israeli human rights violations than any country.
The report said that Israel “must, in compliance with article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, cease all settlement activities without preconditions. It must immediately initiate a process of withdrawal of all settlers from the OPT,” or Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Investigators interviewed about 50 Palestinians in Jordan in order to prepare the report. The report said that the Palestinians were prevented by the settlements from reaching their farming lands and water resources.
The report estimated that 520,000 settlers live in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem in some 250 settlements.
This, according to the report, “prevents the establishment of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state and undermines the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.”
Israel’s Foreign Ministry rejected the report, calling it “counterproductive.” The report “will only hamper efforts to find a sustainable solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict,” the ministry said in a statement.
“The only way to resolve all pending issues between Israel and the Palestinians, including the settlements issue, is through direct negotiations without pre-conditions,” the ministry said. .
“The Human Rights Council has sadly distinguished itself by its systematical, one-sided and biased approach towards Israel. This latest report is yet another unfortunate reminder of such approach,” the ministry concluded.
Bernard Ross Said:
Sorry, Bernard, i asked with a negative, so i don’t understand the “yes”. You mean yes it makes sense to you as a joke?
Bernard Ross Said:
That’s what we will find out.
@ Marjorie Stamm Rosenfeld: Thank you for your excellent links.
@ Honey Bee:
Honey Bee Said:
It’s because of the mix of testosterone with boys-don’t-cry- upbringing.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
but will the explanation be accurate?
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Yes, to me. But I am not a mind reader. Also I don’t think it is very important.
Bernard Ross Said:
There are alternative interpretations as to why we are having this discussion. Actually, it is very clear that it was a joke, so the question becomes why dweller reinterpreted it as “lamenting” after the fact.
I am sure he will explain when he shows up.
my reply #38 to Dionissis is in moderation (and #23 also still remains in moderation)am i making too many posts or is the content being censored(certainly much worse has already passed thorough the censor today)
@ yamit82:
yamit82 Said:
No
Bernard Ross Said:
Freud often alluded to subconscious sexuality in conversation: the “freudian slip”.dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Not you: Dweller! One who is always analyzing may be making Freudian slips,as well as jokes or just being direct in an oblique way.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Don’t understand, what truth? I have no idea as to what is the truth in this situation and don’t believe it has anything to do with the issues in the forum.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
I thought you liked to spice things up?
BTW how do you insert the emoticons, I dont see that menu like on the old format?
Bernard Ross Said:
So you are saying that the reply of dweller in the dialogue i posted above(Comment #15)does not make sense to you as a wholly humorous response?
Bernard Ross Said:
There are things i will know even if we take for granted your insinuation that he might lie.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
We would not be now having this discussion, there would be no confusion and the “joke” would have been clear. Why would one associate demanding women with demanding acolytes, there was no precedent for this insertion? Frankly I do not see an association between demanding women and demanding acolytes.
Bernard Ross Said:
I don’t get the joke.
Interpretation is also what we do when we try to understand the meaning of a piece of writing.
And when was it that i have made psychoanalytic remarks? I never have, i actually have expressed my negative opinion on psychoanalysts.
But, Bernard, don’t let the truth stand in your way if you can bring forth some irony
Bernard Ross Said:
How could it make more sense? Half the population of the English-speakers might not even know the word “acolyte”. And there is no widely held stereotype of demanding acolytes, whereas there is (a sexist) one about demanding women.
Honey Bee Said:
“It wasn’t me!”
yamit82 Said:
I can attest to this, having been severely disciplined by a jealous woman with a frying pan over the head.
Now of yawl no a durn thing about women or what to do them or with them, and every time I write my opinion on the male species I get censored. Such delicate egos yawl have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
It is not always what a person says that is the real McCoy. The mouth was made to say anything. sometimes we hear what we want to hear.
dweller Said:
Sorry, we totally disagree: there is no need to enter the stream of ongoing world discussion on the terms of the disingenuous as this perpetuates jewish masochism; AND: The Jewish discussion is not the same as the worldwide discussion because most Jews do not have the prior prejudice and disposition to delegitimize Jews.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Of course they do, because they are marketing fluff, BS, no content, etc. Hence the need for intricate packaging. Let me use dwellers own posts today as an example: His response on my packaging comment was long winded, dramatic and containing little content of interest and yet he had posts of quotes, with his comments, on jewish settlement rights and mandate expiration which were excellent, bundled together and chock full of interesting facts which needed no drama, flourish,self aggrandizement, etc because they had great content.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Actually, I think it would have made more sense, why bring in women?
my reply #23 to dionnissis is in moderation
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Freud anyone??????
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
It was not my intention to open a can of worms, although I know you like to spice up the conversation with excitement. I was taken by the oddness of the comment coming from someone well aware of Freud. My first thought was that I had missed the woman in the conversation, my second thought was that he had mistaken your name for a female name. The first scenario was non existent and the second unlikely due to his education level. I knew you were joking which is why his comment was so strange. What I think is not important: the question is his perception of you and now yours of him. Perhaps it is not I who needs a translator. The comment was addressed to you; whether a joke or not your comment was compared to that of a demanding woman and he was “blushing”(for all that it might mean); this was followed up by:
dweller Said:
This statement is clear and not made by me. As to the intentions of the writer: I am not a mind reader, but do the conscious intentions matter? He states that he is dealing with your “female identity”. Please do not shoot the unwitting messenger.
It does not matter to me what sort of relationship the 2 of you have but such discussions are the natural outgrowth of psychobabble, which tends to obscure the issues. Although I will admit that, as you say, it does spice up the conversation with some amusing results. I am starting to think that Yamit might be correct in his assessment as the comments discussed do appear to have the air of flirtation, which is commonly wrapped in witty repartee.
@ dweller:
How nice Dweller you read Dickens!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
yamit82 Said:
1) You politely said that he finds me very naive?
2)”We three” as in you, Bernard and…
dweller Said:
All 3 doors are a form of insult and an expression of pompous pontification. Odd behavior for a holier than thou “moralizer”; on second thought it is common for hypocritical preachers, sitting on high and full of themselves.
@ yamit82:
As I have said,”Conservitive women are aggressive carnivorious creatures.” Tiene cuedado amigo mio!!!!!!!!!
@ dweller:
DEMANDING WOMAN OR WOMEN SAY WHAT DWELLER AND ROSS YOU DON’T WANT TO KICK THE HIVE!!!!!!!!!!! EVER
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
dweller was hitting on you and he sees in you a potentially worthy score. You have refused to acknowledge that we three have a keener and more sensitive insight into his persona and MO and so he finds in you something he has searched for for many years, question remains whether he thinks you are a (he )gay or a (she) is in IMHO still open to speculation. He felt secure enough with you to take a public plunge and commit himself to discussing gender, hasn’t happened before to the best of my memory.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Watch some more it’s not the size it’s their aggressiveness and females can be and often are more aggressive than males.
Couple of images come to mind The story of Joseph and his brothers. If I were one of the brothers, Joseph would not have survived!!! He was deserving of death. The other is and I think we all experienced it when we were kids, those who betrayed their classmates and best friends by snitching on them to the teacher or parents for attention approval and spite. Now jump ahead many years and we have our dwellers general framework. Keep those images in your mind when discussing your boy.
Get back to you later, having a coughing fit and I can’t focus.
@ yamit82:
Yamit i need your expert opinion.
Bernard called dweller a pontificating wannabe professor and called me his acolyte.
Obviously, i immediately adopted the terms in mocking fashion and started calling my self “acolyte” and dweller “professor”. Here is a dialogue between me and dweller:
Isn’t it clear that dweller’s response was a joke? Or, better, isn’t it clear that the only interpretation of dweller’s response is that he was joking? A humorous response to my own joke?
dweller Said:
Watch out for trick questions, either way you answer gets dweller off the hook, reply not to his framed question but your own….. This is fun!!!
Could dionissis be the spirit of a women trapped in a mans body or the spirit of a man (gay) trapped in the body of a women. Who knows what’s in the evil hearts of man only the dweller knows just ask him if you are not sure.
@ Yamit
I am waiting for dweller to come back because i want to clear my mind concerning his comment #1 in this page. I will reply to you after that. Meanwhile, there is one of your comments that is more theoretical, so let’s talk about that:
That’s not cowardice. Being afraid of the males that are more testosterone-laden than you is natural and intelligent. I don’t know how many stray dogs you have in Israel, but in Greece we have a billion, or so. I have been watching them for long, the smaller ones immediately submit to the big ones. Those who don’t submit don’t live long to talk about it.
The fear of human males towards the more-testosterone males is more of the physical variety, not of the cerebral. It’s fear of being beaten up, not of being outsmarted.
This can be avoided, depending on the upbringing. If no competitive male ego is set up in the first place, then there’s nothing to be fractured.
Don’t ask me what is the implication of this for the Israelis, because you are a special case, it is only you that face a real threat of annihilation. And i don’t mean just Iran, i mean that there are too many people out there who want you annihilated, even if temporarily they have not the means to effect it. Given that being brought up in the competitive-testosterone way seems to be the only option to survive, there’s no choice.
But the rest of the world has no such problems of being severely threatened. So what’s the point for the less-testosterone males of the rest of the world to internalize value systems that favor the more-testosterone ones? Why should they play by rules that are bound to tilt the field against them? The smart small dogs just refuse to fight. That’s what i suggest the smaller men should do – Israel excluded.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Get Smart
Which one would dweller pick? Which one would you Pick?
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Let’s return to the subject of your female identity that interests dweller so much he can’t sleep nights.
Try Aphrodite 😀
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
Are you gay? dweller is you know. Got himself a vasectomy in the 60’s because he didn’t want children to have to suffer what we have made of this world. He loved prison being locked up with all those horny fellas though and would have stayed longer but they threw the freak out on his well used bare ass.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
dweller likes to think of himself as a soul connector and he connects best with the feminine soul. Not sexually but because it is less threatening to his fractured male ego and and because he is a coward who fears testosterone males who can not only beat the crap out of him but beat him in every cerebral way as well.
dweller Said:
You can’t speak of Jews in a generic sense. If you mean American Jews that’s one type and even there there are enough nuances where you can’t and shouldn’t generalize.
@ Shy Guy:
Ok, you were not really interested to find out if the posts were something like the Dr Phil Show. If you were interested, you would have said what your idea of the show is, so that you could get an answer to your question quickly.
So your initial question was not really a question, but was meant as a smart remark.
I am sad to inform you that it was not that smart 😛
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
I don’t think so. Get real! 🙂 See?!?! Google can be your friend.
@ Shy Guy:
But i did not ask for Google info, i could have checked this myself. I asked for your idea of the Dr Phil show, so that i could tell you if it matches the posts above. Your idea of the show might be something different from what Google might be saying about the show.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Google is your friend
@ Shy Guy:
I have never watched it either. But you seem to have a vague idea about what this Dr Phil show is, so if you tell me this vague idea, maybe i will be in a position to tell you if it is like the posts above which i have co-authored.
I’ve never watched the Doctor Phil Show. Is it something like these posts above?
@ dweller
dweller Said:
dweller we will talk about my female identity as much as you want, but first i need to understand something. When you replied to my joke you started by making a joke of your own, something about blushing right through the wire to the internet connection. That was clearly a joke, right? And then you italicized your punchline which was this:
“Demanding women, the same everywhere”
Dweller, how on earth can someone understand that you are not joking, but you are lamenting female identities? There is no reasonable interpretation of this sentence being meant seriously when your previous sentence was humorous and your next sentence ties up very well with your previous joke as a punchline.
I mean, if you wanted to talk seriously, why make the first joke about blushing, and not start immediately talking about what you wanted to talk, like you did just now where you explicitly said what you are interested in discussing?
Can you explain this to me?
@ dweller:
dweller Said:
Yes, but Bernard was making a completely different point. He didn’t have female identities in his mind. He had gays in mind. And now he says that he didn’t mean that.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
When I ‘lamented’ demanding women, Dionissis, I did so because I’ve long sensed that I was dealing with a female identity in you.
Whom it might BELONG to is another question altogether.
@ Bernard Ross:
The Jews ARE the problem.
But there is no real difference — except that what the WORLD thinks is immaterial.
But everything else is the same — that is, you still have to get the Jews’ attention
— and for the most part, the Jews have bought into the world’s narrative.
So you have to enter the stream of the ongoing discussion — notwithstanding that the ongoing discussion is unadulterated BS.
— Once you’re IN, what you DO with it (and where you GO with it) is up to you.
@ Bernard
Bernard Ross Said:
In your dreams, maybe.
In the real world they spend billions for marketing and PR.
Bernard Ross Said:
I mentioned gay because that’s what you meant when you alluded twice to the fact that dweller was referring to me (as Dionissis)when he talked about demanding women.
You made as clear an innuendo as can be that dweller was conveying the message that i am gay, and now you are denying that you made that innuendo?
You wanted to stress the fact that dweller was referring to me when he spoke about demanding women – that’s why you made your point twice.
Why did you stress the fact that he was referring to me as a woman, if you were not alluding to something about me being gay, or being thought of by dweller as gay? What would be the point of your insistence, if not that?
When you say to someone male ” you are woman” do you mean that he miraculously changed sex on the spur of the moment, or that he is gay? you mean that he is gay.
That’s why i mentioned gay, because that’s what you had in mind.