peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by jingu » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:42:53


apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
racist, zionist regime in israel.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Raja » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:45:54


Quote:
> apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
> enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
> whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
> racist, zionist regime in israel.

> http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

They shld not mix politics with tennis. Not cool. What did she do?

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Fan » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:00:16


Quote:
> apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
> enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
> whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
> racist, zionist regime in israel.

> http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

The international community banned South African athletes from
sporting events and even from the Olympics because of their apartheid.
The Israeli apartheid is far worse than the South African apartheid
was. What is surprising is that more countries do not ban Israeli
athletes especially after Israels brutal slaughter of Palestinians in
Gaza.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by wkhed » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:10:42


Quote:

> > apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
> > enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
> > whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
> > racist, zionist regime in israel.

> >http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

> The international community banned South African athletes from
> sporting events and even from the Olympics because of their apartheid.
> The Israeli apartheid is far worse than the South African apartheid
> was. What is surprising is that more countries do not ban Israeli
> athletes especially after Israels brutal slaughter of Palestinians in
> Gaza.

Banning Palestinians from life is one thing and Dubai banning Israels
tennis players from playing tennis is something else. Dubai has to be
punished, right?
 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by jingu » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:20:33

Quote:

> The international community banned South African athletes from
> sporting events and even from the Olympics because of their apartheid.
> The Israeli apartheid is far worse than the South African apartheid
> was. What is surprising is that more countries do not ban Israeli
> athletes especially after Israels brutal slaughter of Palestinians in
> Gaza.

 >

with the unabashed slaughter of palestinians in gaza, the racist,
zionist israeli apartheid regime stepped up it's practice of genocidal
collective punishment of the palestinian people to a new level that
should draw the disgust of all right-minded people.

of course, israel was one of the few allies of the apartheid south
african regime, so it should come as no surprise that the racist israeli
apartheid regime is so similar to that of the south african apartheid
regime.  the difference is that the racist israeli regime uses the
jewish holocaust committed by the nazis are a justification and to play
to a sense of guilt to inhibit criticism.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by mimu » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:43:29

Quote:



>>> apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
>>> enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
>>> whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
>>> racist, zionist regime in israel.

>>> http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

>> The international community banned South African athletes from sporting
>> events and even from the Olympics because of their apartheid. The
>> Israeli apartheid is far worse than the South African apartheid was.
>> What is surprising is that more countries do not ban Israeli athletes
>> especially after Israels brutal slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.

> Banning Palestinians from life is one thing and Dubai banning Israels
> tennis players from playing tennis is something else. Dubai has to be
> punished, right?

No, they have money.

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by number_si » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:06:56


Quote:
> snip <
> Even allowing Hamas to run in the elections held under the Oslo Accords
> violated and ended those accords:

Cogent post.  I guess I thought the Oslo Accords were dead a long time
ago, along with the "road map", but perhaps the Accords lingered in
some vestigial form, though dead in spirit.  If the PA elections were
held under those auspices, I agree Hamas was not a legitimate
participant.  But their level of support in Gaza showed the deep
schism within the PA, and that civil war was the reality, whether
behind the scenes, or in the open.

There have been so many deals, so many efforts.  There have been so
many envoys and diplomats -- General Zinni, for example -- who have
been seduced by the idea of the "peace process" and have lost sight of
the fact that it is all for naught unless they can get off square one
(as detailed in your post).  Hamas cannot and will not take the first
step.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Wayn » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:32:20


Quote:
> Even allowing Hamas to run in the elections held under the Oslo Accords
> violated and ended those accords:

> CHAPTER 4 - COOPERATION

> ARTICLE XXII

> Relations between Israel and the Council

> ? ?1. Israel and the Council shall seek to foster mutual understanding and
> ? ?tolerance and shall accordingly abstain from incitement, including
> ? ?hostile propaganda, against each other and, without derogating from the
> ? ?principle of freedom of expression, shall take legal measures to
> ? ?prevent such incitement by any organizations, groups or individuals
> ? ?within their jurisdiction.

Yes and Israel clearly took "legal measures to prevent such
incitement" as the continued expropriation of Palestinian land in the
W Bank and E Jerusalem, the continued monopolization of the W Bank
water supply, the *** (and often unpunished) behaviour of Israeli
settlers in the W Bank towards Palestinians, the unlawful killings of
Palestinian civillians (see reports by Amnesty Intl and HRW), the
demolition of Palestinian houses, the denial of housebuilding permits
to Palestinians etc, all of which occured right throughout the Oslo
period and was a far greater barrier to a settlement than the
meaningless piece of paper that is the Hamas charter. And that's
notwithstanding the fact that Hamas was not even in control of any of
the Palestinian territories during the Oslo period and what
effectively killed the accords was Israel's continued illegal
colonization of the land, essentially making any Palestinian state
unviable in the process. This is now even more the case then it was
then.
 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Wayn » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:37:53


Quote:
> There have been so many deals, so many efforts. ?There have been so
> many envoys and diplomats -- General Zinni, for example -- who have
> been seduced by the idea of the "peace process" and have lost sight of
> the fact that it is all for naught unless they can get off square one
> (as detailed in your post). ?Hamas cannot and will not take the first
> step.

Yet even when Hamas was not in power in any of the Palestinian
territories, the situation did not change: Israel did not dismantle
any of its settlements in the W Bank and E Jerusalem. Why doesn't
Israel take the "first step" and dismantle some of the settlements? In
fact, the settlements keep being expanded which automatically makes a
Palestinian state less and less viable. And all the while this occurs
people claim that Israel "wants peace" - that isn't what it looks like
when you demolish people's homes to make way for further Jewish
settlements; that isn't what it looks like when a Jewish settler
family has a swimming pool whilst the Palestinians next door have no
more than two hours of running water a day. How can any of this
possibly be justified? Why isn't this racist and immoral? And then we
are told that Israel "wants peace"? Well they do want peace, but only
on terms that mean the Palestinians acquiese in the dispossession of
much of their W Bank land.
 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Wayn » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:51:34


Quote:
> with the unabashed slaughter of palestinians in gaza, the racist,
> zionist israeli apartheid regime stepped up it's practice of genocidal
> collective punishment of the palestinian people to a new level that
> should draw the disgust of all right-minded people.

> of course, israel was one of the few allies of the apartheid south
> african regime, so it should come as no surprise that the racist israeli
> apartheid regime is so similar to that of the south african apartheid
> regime. ?the difference is that the racist israeli regime uses the
> jewish holocaust committed by the nazis are a justification and to play
> to a sense of guilt to inhibit criticism.

Israel's entire treatment of both the Israeli Arabs and the
Palestinians in the OPT is just disgusting and the West would call it
for what it really is if it was any other country in the world
carrying out the same actions: racism. Just look out how concepts of
virulent nationalism and racism have become accepted and almost
unquestioned concepts in mainstream Israeli politics: politicians like
both Avigdor Lieberman and the supposedly "moderate" Tzipi Livini now
openly talk about dealing with the demographic threat, i.e. the
Israeli Arabs, by means of transfer if this means that the Jewish
majority can be maintained:

Lieberman advocates land and population exchanges, seeking to reduce
the number of Arabs who are Israeli citizens and dividing Jews and
Arabs into two homogeneous states. The suggested plan is to award the
Palestinian Authority governoship over Arab-Israeli towns near the
West Bank in exchange for Israeli control over Jewish cities which
reside on disputed territory. Lieberman also advocates that all
Israeli citizens, including anti-Zionist Haredim and Israeli Arabs,
take loyalty tests and recognize Israel as a Jewish State. Those who
refuse would be stripped of their citizenship, but could remain in
Israel as permanent residents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has sparked controversy by saying
a Palestinian state would provide "a national solution" for Israel's
Arabs.

Politicians from the minority Arab community have demanded she clarify
if it means that Arabs citizens will face loss of rights in Israel or
expulsion.

Israeli politicians have long grappled with the issue of a growing
proportion of ethnic Arabs in the Jewish state.

"Transfer" has been mooted explicitly only by far right-wingers in
Israel.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7779087.stm

By the year 2030 30% of Israel's population will be Arab, that's why
it's called the demographic threat. Essentially the Jewish majority
can only be maintained by increasingly facist means. As long as Israel
continues to rule over people who are non-Jews then there will never
be peace because discrimination will always occur. A state can only be
Jewish and a democracy if all its citizens are Jewish; discrimination
against those citizens who are not Jewish is inherent in the entire
concept of the state.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Calimer » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:59:18


Quote:
> apparently israeli players with dual passports have been allowed to
> enter the country under their non-israel passports but it is not clear
> whether peer attempted to enter dubai under a passport issued by the
> racist, zionist regime in israel.

> http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=A2KIPFLkUphJKuwAdgQ4v7YF?slug=a...

"The anti-Semite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice.? The
times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred
of the Jews.? This being the case, the anti-Semite must constantly
seek new forms and forums for his poison.? How he must revel in the
new masquerrade!? He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-
Zionist'! ...
When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews -- make no mistake about
it."
(Martin Luther King)

Max

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by number_si » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:10:54


Quote:

> > There have been so many deals, so many efforts. ?There have been so
> > many envoys and diplomats -- General Zinni, for example -- who have
> > been seduced by the idea of the "peace process" and have lost sight of
> > the fact that it is all for naught unless they can get off square one
> > (as detailed in your post). ?Hamas cannot and will not take the first
> > step.

> Yet even when Hamas was not in power in any of the Palestinian
> territories, the situation did not change: Israel did not dismantle
> any of its settlements in the W Bank and E Jerusalem. Why doesn't
> Israel take the "first step" and dismantle some of the settlements? In
> fact, the settlements keep being expanded which automatically makes a
> Palestinian state less and less viable. And all the while this occurs
> people claim that Israel "wants peace" - that isn't what it looks like
> when you demolish people's homes to make way for further Jewish
> settlements; that isn't what it looks like when a Jewish settler
> family has a swimming pool whilst the Palestinians next door have no
> more than two hours of running water a day. How can any of this
> possibly be justified? Why isn't this racist and immoral? And then we
> are told that Israel "wants peace"? Well they do want peace, but only
> on terms that mean the Palestinians acquiese in the dispossession of
> much of their W Bank land.

We simply do not concur as to the what constitutes "the first step".
I'd say the first step is to have a cease-fire that is actually
adhered to by both sides, and to have a mutual acknowledgement of the
parties' right to exist.

I don't want to mischaracterize your position, but it looks like your
idea of the "first step" is to have Israel make land concessions, with
a continuing Intifada to extract more concessions.  This thread is a
simulacrum of the talks themselves, and shows why the talks fail.

I have to question whether Britain and France, whose colonial and post-
colonial policies played such a prominent role in defining the modern
Middle East, can constructively contribute to the peaceful resolution
of the status of Gaza and the West Bank.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by Wayn » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:46:07


Quote:
> We simply do not concur as to the what constitutes "the first step".
> I'd say the first step is to have a cease-fire that is actually
> adhered to by both sides, and to have a mutual acknowledgement of the
> parties' right to exist.

Sensible point but what I am arguing is that even if such a scenario
occured, Israel would still not withdraw from the W Bank and E
Jerusalem. If Israel really wanted peace, then why did its settlement
construction continue right throughout the Oslo period and *before*
the second Intifada?

Quote:
> I don't want to mischaracterize your position, but it looks like your
> idea of the "first step" is to have Israel make land concessions, with
> a continuing Intifada to extract more concessions. ?

You characterize the concessions as if Israel would be being nice if
they gave back some of the land. Yet this land does not legally belong
to them and they are legally entitled to give it back so that the
Palestinians can have their own state on this land. It's hardly a
concession if they have to give back what is not theirs anyway.

If I stole your house and then gave it back to you, would you consider
this a "concession"?

It's only a concession from the perspective of what Israel wants i.e.
to keep as much of the territory as possible. Just as it's a
concession from my perspective if I give you back your house i.e. I
desire to keep your house.

You talk about an "Intifada to extract more concessions" yet no
Intifada is currently occuring in the W Bank and E Jerusalem and
Israel continues to expand its settlements. You can't invoke
Palestinian terrorism or an uprising as a reason not to cede land if
Israel refuses to cede land even when no terrorism or uprising is
happening. IOW, Israel wants the land regardless of Palestinian
terrorism.

Exactly how many terrorist attacks from the W Bank have occured in the
last couple of years? Not very many. Has Israel rewarded the
Palestinians for that by dismantling some of the settlements? No. In
fact they continue to expand them.

 
 
 

peer denied visa to play in dubai tennis championships

Post by jingu » Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:00:14

Quote:

> Yes and Israel clearly took "legal measures to prevent such
> incitement" as the continued expropriation of Palestinian land in the
> W Bank and E Jerusalem, the continued monopolization of the W Bank
> water supply, the *** (and often unpunished) behaviour of Israeli
> settlers in the W Bank towards Palestinians, the unlawful killings of
> Palestinian civillians (see reports by Amnesty Intl and HRW), the
> demolition of Palestinian houses, the denial of housebuilding permits
> to Palestinians etc, all of which occured right throughout the Oslo
> period and was a far greater barrier to a settlement than the
> meaningless piece of paper that is the Hamas charter. And that's
> notwithstanding the fact that Hamas was not even in control of any of
> the Palestinian territories during the Oslo period and what
> effectively killed the accords was Israel's continued illegal
> colonization of the land, essentially making any Palestinian state
> unviable in the process. This is now even more the case then it was
> then.

it's a funny thing, the bush administration justified starting a war
against iraq on the premise that iraq had been in violation of
international law.  yet, you have the racist, zionist israeli apartheid
regime that has been in violation of u.n. resolution 242 (which was
passed in 1967) for over 40 years.

the depiction of the palestinians reminds me of the way that native
americans used to be depicted in old western movies.  in the old western
movies you would have a scenario in which a white family was sitting in
their connestoga wagon when all of a sudden a flaming arrow would piece
the wagon and the family would be shown under attack by the "savage"
indians - seemingly without provocation.  but what the old western
movies *didn't* show you was the native americans, including women,
children and the elderly, who were slaughted by the supposedly
"peaceful" white people; and how the native americans were fighting back
against having their land and their homes taken from them.

isn't that so much like what the racist israeli zionists have done to
the palestinians?  using as a justification, the wrongs done to jews by
the nazis, the racist zionists committed acts of ethnic cleansing to
take the land and the homes of palestinians, rendering these victims and
their decendants to lives as refugees to this day.  then you had the
degradation suffered by palestinians under occupation by the SS troops
dispatched by the zionist regime to enforce the occupation.  the
palestinian people have had to live with seeing their families beaten,
killed, their homes taken and/or demolished and subjected to an economic
blockade that keeps them in abject poverty - all of these done by the
racist zionist israeli apartheid regime.  then these very same racist
zionists act surprised and can't understand why palestinians might want
to become suicide bombers.

then there is the fate of palestinians who live as second class citizens
within the racist, apartheid state of israel.  you can have wingnut
zionists making all manner of crazy proclamation about how arabs are
less than rodents (true to the tradition of hermann goering), yet they
are able to run for political office and enjoy full rights within the
racist zionist regime.  yet, palestinians can have their rights
curtailed for showing "sympathy" to palestinian causes.  when the racist
zionist israeli regime undertook a war against the lebanese people
(under a claim that they were trying to eliminate hezbollah) the western
media gave considerable coverage to show the "terror" under which
israelis had to live - you know, having to retreat to bunkers and all.
what the media didn't show you was that most of the israeli citizens
who got killed were palestinians - because the racist israeli regime
didn't make any allowance for them to have bunkers.

as a general rule, the racist israeli regime makes sure that the media
show israeli jews while preventing the western media from having access
to palestinian areas so that people in the west don't get to see
palestinians as human beings, but rather as faceless "terrorists".  a
few years ago there was footage showing a palestinian girl crying after
bombs launched by the racist zionist regime killed her family.  this was
a very rare case in footage showing palestinians as human beings leaked
out to the west.  but not to worry, the racist zionist regime promptly
claimed that they weren't the fault for the bombing and then proceeded
to prevent any international bodies from investigating the incident.

my thinking is that if those of us in the west were able to actually see
what the racist zionists were doing agaisnt he palestinian people, that
sympathy for the racist zionist israeli apartheid regime would decline
precipitously.  thus, the racist zionist regime and their supporters,
such as AIPAC and the AJC, see to it that the racist anti-arab
propaganda machine is cranked up in high gear.