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.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
I find it neither extravagant nor irrelevant. It wasn’t major, so I let it be parenthetical.
If my style repulses or bores you, sue me.
Emotions are ALWAYS ‘stupid,’ Dionissis.
— That’s why it’s always a mistake to let them control you; a word to the wise.
@ the phoenix:
Bacchus is a drunken slob with NO sence of style, ripi ripi
dweller Said:
So what?
So that the one who is “howling”(as you described me a few comments above) will not get the feeling that you are occupying your brain with self-indulgent trifles.
You don’t have a clue how to talk to someone you have harmed, don’t you?
It’s maybe because you get off on your offering moral-character advise, no time left for you to consider how to approach the other one, you just need to teach life-lessons, even if no one asks for them.
Professor! 😛
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Lucky you:
dweller Said:
A free unsolicited, comprehensive, psychoanalysi;, all in one sentence and compliments of the house (no gift certificate necessary)
All this from our resident therapist. AND:
dweller Said:
an impeccable reference brimming with modesty!
What more could you want? 🙂
@ yamit82:
I liked him very much,I have heard the name,I shall research him,how old is he. I will look u[ a poem by John Donne that especially enjoy and send it along.
“I like your videos ” and their youn men shall see vision and their old men shall dream dreams” if that wrong please correct me.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
I’ve never had any problem with being sorry — over things I genuinely believe I’m wrong about.
OTOH, I’ve always been leary of offering ersatz apologies strictly for the sake of relieving pressure, even when I don’t believe I’m wrong — or don’t even know IF I am.
As Ive said, I maintain the discipline of an open mind — even as to myself.
Judgment is always an error.
Since YOUR English is actually better than that of some of our online associates here (that’s not patronising, it had a reason): I know you — at least —will understand what I mean when I say that your comment is begging the question.
dweller Said:
After all my protests at your presenting me as gay, you still need corroboration that i am male?
You can’t be that stioupid, you are disingenuous.
You just pretend that you didn’t know.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
My comments are always under modification. Really Zeues hasn’t looked that good in the last several 1000 yrs. Of couse male, I though that was a given.
dweller Said:
It seems that, after all, it matters to you if you are perceived as gay.
That’s why you keep on bringing it up.
Should i say, as you did, “i would have thought you more hardy”? 😛
@ dweller
Smart tactic, dweller, you avoid everything that i wrote yesterday, and engage in real-time comments, hoping that your better English will give you an advantage in saving face.
You can’t save face, you are a 100% on the wrong on this, you just ridicule yourself with your cheap tactics.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
If that were so, you wouldn’t have bothered to say so
— especially in reply to somebody else’s post (howsoever malicious that post might’ve been).
So I gave you an answer.
It’s the way I write. So what?
dweller Said:
Surely, though, it wasn’t given to you so that you could play your power games with an eye to beating your selected Israpundit competitors.
@ dweller
If you didn’t know if i am a woman, why did you say that the female identity that you could sense in me, did not belong to me?
If you thought i am a woman, then the female identity was perfectly proper.
Answer this, you fraud 😛
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Quite so, I agree.
That’s why I didn’t call you that.
I repeat, you’re overreacting.
Can’t help that. It wasn’t given to me for the purpose of pleasing you — or for that matter, YoursTruly.
It was given to me to please the Giver of consciences.
dweller Said:
You are a dirty liar.
I have never left ambiguous anything about the fact that i am male.
Nobody ever asked, nobody ever implied that i might be a woman, and all along i was speaking in a way that made it perfectly clear that i am a male, and not a female.
Is this your exit strategy?
“Oh, but i didn’t know”!!!
dweller, you are a joke 😛
dweller Said:
This tempest in a teapot has already been explained to you.
Calling me gay (that’s how the female identity was understood) and especially making it look like i am some sort of sick person was more than enough to trigger it.
Your psychological BS is an attempt to obscure something that is perfectly clear.
You are such a fraud! – not Freud, fraud 😛
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Seems then, that the definition HAS changed.
When I first heard it, it meant somebody who placed into common commercial circulation something that didn’t belong there.
But it does tell me that you probably ARE a guy after all.
A woman wouldn’t accuse somebody (of either gender) of being a whore — she might THINK it of another woman, but wouldn’t likely STATE it that way.
No, at most, it shows that I haven’t finished slogging thru the previous pages (as I suggested above).
No. Just trying to use limited time in the most efficient way.
dionissis mitropoulos Said:
I’ ll try once again, just in case you get it:
When you have harmed someone, you don’t go around blaming him for not being hard enough to withstand your blow.
It only serves to anger him even more.
And it makes you look like a true whore, who will say anything just so that she won’t have to own up to a mistake.
If you find it so difficult to acknowledge your mistake, you may at least STFU.
No point in aggravating the issue.
yamit82 Said:
thanks for the links, which were very good as usual, and the lesson. I am interested in your thoughts on the lebanese war regarding the complaints of the soldiers in the video. Especially the view point expressed of disenchantment with the mission and the idea that the war should nave been avoided. It was expressed that the mission was not worth risking the lives for and that everything must be done to avoid the war, or whatever you think their complaint is. The lebanese war video interviews appeared at odds with the sentiments expressed in the prior links.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Told you before: I didn’t characterize you as homosexual. Didn’t suspect it; didn’t suggest it.
For one thing, I have no way of knowing what you do with your body (regardless of how its plumbing is configured).
I simply thought you were probably a woman (no, not a “demanding” one; that was a snort) — and it was THAT that I hung back about discussing (since you seemed content to leave it ambiguous). I reposted a previous comment [re “Dove”] in which I (and most of the rest of the crowd hereabouts) had mistaken a woman for a man). So what?
In fact the few times I ever contemplated the possibility of your being homosexual, it was to speculate on whether you might be a female homosexual. But that was the total extent of it. No lie.
But if I’m to understand that you are a GUY, then we can — at last — move on to what you’re actually howling about. However, not unless — or it wouldn’t make any sense.
But let’s be clear about something before I go any further:
This tempest-in-a-teapot over homosexuality suggests that I may have unwittingly tweaked a nerve (yes, unwittingly) that was left raw by previous experiences you never met properly at the time — so they left residues that trigger the old anguish at moments when you least expect it.
Are you serious?— I’m constantly feeling inadquate in grasping “people’s psychology.”
— I’m just a little better at it than those who take the occasion to get rich off of the pastime.
Short answer: No — no more than I usually have.
I’m not afraid to be SEEN a ‘fool,’ Dionissis, if that’s what it takes to find out what I need to know.
dweller Said:
What gives you away is this extravagance included in the parenthesis.
Is this the time for such irrelevant observations?
dweller, i am sure now that you cannot associate with people properly. You are emotionally too stioupid.
dweller Said:
Look who’s talking!
The man who can’t say “ok, i am sorry, i shouldn’t have said it”.
Since your English is great, tell me, does the definition of “hardy” allows for cowards like you to be considered hardy?
dweller Said:
dweller, i don’t care if you are gay.
So why did you write all this (verbose :P) prose?
dweller Said:
Yeah, irony on my command of English.
That’s the important issue here, whether i speak English well, not whether you have a committed a psychological blunder of epic proportions, and yet refuse to even acknowledge it because your ego is incapable of admitting that you erred.
dweller Said:
Oh, no.
When you intend to call someone gay in public, you make sure you do it when there is enough time to take up the issue.
If there is not enough time, you don’t do it.
Your conscience stinks.
dweller Said:
By “whore” we refer to a very cheap person.
The very fact that you pretend that i have not given explicit reasons why you are a whore, whereas i have done so extensively in the previous pages, shows what a whore you are, indeed.
You are just trying to save face without addressing my points.
It’s all in the posting record, Present Company 😛
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Cheap, yes (well, in the literal sense of the term) — don’t have a computer, so I use those at the library.
But I don’t control the library’s hours.
So I have little control, if any, over when I can be online.
If that’s ‘cowardice,’ fine.
My conscience is clear.
dweller Said:
No, this all did not arise, you made it arise, by calling me gay.
And you just feel your pride hurt for having proved yourself to be so inadequate in grasping people’s psychology.
Since you use this verb all the time, “sense”, please tell me:
Can you sense how much you have made a fool of yourself? 😛
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Lots of elucidation; so far, however, no examples of how I’m a ‘whore.’
Perhaps the definition’s changed since I first heard it — but it may be that I just haven’t read enough of your posts; I’ll continue slogging thru the mire.
@ dweller
As i predicted in the previous page yesterday, you waited for the last moment to come with your prepared comments, so that i won’t have enough time to answer them all before the thread expires.
You are not just a true coward.
You are cheap.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Alas dionissis, Aphrodite ain’t bitin’ on the offer to go for the gods….:(
Try Bacchus, you might fool her. (= caller I’d block….. 😉 )
@ Bernard Ross:
Actually it’s the kozachky.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
Well, I certainly do since this all arose — but not until then.
I’d have thought you more hardy.
Nothing to be ‘noncommittal’ about.
As a matter of personal history, I have it on good authority that my soldier-friend has never saluted another boy.
He seems to be quite settled as to who constitutes a superior officer (and who doesn’t)
— and THEY all shlep around the other toolbox.
Hope that helps.
But if it doesn’t — well then, it doesn’t.
@ Aprhodite:
your comments must have been in moderation and just showed up. You say you like them young, but i think there were Greek Gods that were young. I remember depictions of them, some looked young.
I think I’ll order another case of popcorn …..
3…2….1
🙂
@ yamit82:
Dream on.
@ yamit82:
Pure projection.
It is PresentCompany who knows not the one from the other. That’s why such things are known as wishful thinking.
@ yamit82:
yamit82 Said:
Is Aphrodite lois lane? I thought you didn’t like him.
@ Aphodite:
What is your opinion of Roethke? Your the poetry expert. 😛
Aphodite Said:
Should read: “I like them young and male”
FIFY
@ yamit82:
yamit82 Said:
I admit i didn’t even know of him!
@ Marjorie Stamm Rosenfeld:
I did and it was an oversight as I had meant to include it.
Must admit this was my first exposure to Roethke. Read some of the literary criticism of hm and his work.
yamit82 Said:
Bernard Ross:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVINFyrUaZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95LcFRfEzFk Must watch
@ Bernard Ross:
Hard Truths:
These are the only non-Israeli born voices that count.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7b0n9Qs-OM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2S0vF3Qqm4
@ yamit82:
You left off the best line of Roethke’s, the last one: *I measure time by how a body sways.” And by the way, this is a poem Roethke wrote for his wife.
@ dionissis mitropoulos:
I like them young
@ Bernard Ross:
Keep wandering, a wandering target is harder to hit.
@ the phoenix: Perhaps the jewish people need a new representative who will represent their only remaining interest in YS: settlement west of the jordan river. I have been saying that the role of Israel as a sovereign state, who happens to be in control of YS and exhibits no self interest in YS, should be separated from the role of Israel as the representative of Global Jewry. A separate jewish representative would remove the conflict of interest as the current Israel does not wish to inherit YS. Israel can remain as the occupier of YS and still fulfill its legal obligation to settle jews in YS without having to annex YS or absorb the west bank arabs at this time. Both scenarios can proceed separately and legally at this time. Israel can operate YS sinmilarly to the UK mandate until the unexpired mandated jewish rights are fulfilled. At that time the options are many: YS can become a separate jewish state of Judea, YS can be annexed into Israel, etc. This scenario would allow Israel to continue to pursue its own national interests while not dishonoring their trust to global jewry. The important thing is fulfilling Jewish settlement of YS which is absolutely legal and mandated in law. If UK was still there jewish settlement rights would be demanded by Jews.
Bernard Ross Said:
that is putting it very mildly, mr ross
the phoenix Said:
I would love to see this, but here is the conundrum. there is a govt of the Jewish nation called Israel. this govt has been popularly invested with the honor to be the representative of Global Jewry at its birth. The one remaining beneficial interest of global jewry is the internationally guaranteed recognition of the right to close settlement west of the Jordan River. The state of Israel came into control of YS and is now in a dual role of haivng the ability to fulfill the legal mandate to settle Jews AND being the representative of the Jewish people. NOt only has the state of Israel obstructed this internationally recognized and guaranteed right of Jewry but it appears to have intentionally hidden and obscured that right from its children.
I HAVE NEVER HEARD OR READ OF THE GOI MENTIONING OR CLAIMING THE RIGHT OF JEWISH SETTLEMENT FOR ITSELF, OR FOR GLOBAL JEWRY IN TRUST, IN YS;
I HAVE NEVER HEARD OR READ OF THE GOI REMINDING OF, OR CLAIMING THE OBLIGATIONS OF, THE NATIONS WHO PARTICIPATED IN SAN REMO, LON, UN TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE.
If the settlement rights of the Jews, and the obligations of the reneging nations to jewish settlement, are not even mentioned in passing by the global representative of world jewry and the conqueror and current ruler of YS then who will?????
A person can be owed an unpaid debt and it may remain outstanding and unpaid but until the debt is formally canceled most will deign to mention it once in a while.
A shame and scandal.