Comments on: REPORT ON THE VICE-CHANCELLOR’S PUBLIC DEBATE re HAMAS, MONASH UNIVERSITY 13Oct09 http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234 Providing a Voice Mon, 22 Aug 2011 05:31:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: lester http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-337 lester Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:11:34 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-337 "States, said Mr Shaik, are not ends in themselves but agencies whose right to exist is derived from their willingness to protect and promote the human rights over those they govern."--if there is anything one can take away from this debate, this should be it. “States, said Mr Shaik, are not ends in themselves but agencies whose right to exist is derived from their willingness to protect and promote the human rights over those they govern.”–if there is anything one can take away from this debate, this should be it.

]]> By: el amir http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-333 el amir Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:03:25 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-333 danny stevens, using danny 'the dentist' lamm's own argument to defend your point about his argument shows just hollow your argument is. you have no clue whatsoever. do yourself and the rest of us a favour and take a trip to occupied palestine and you will see for yourself. the systematic destruction of every single level of society by zionism is there for all and sundry to witness first-hand. the gaza pull-out was only a means to an end - which was the annexation of the entire west bank. unlike your good self, ı have a very sound understanding of the conflict and have seen the oppressed become the oppressor. danny stevens, using danny ‘the dentist’ lamm’s own argument to defend your point about his argument shows just hollow your argument is. you have no clue whatsoever. do yourself and the rest of us a favour and take a trip to occupied palestine and you will see for yourself. the systematic destruction of every single level of society by zionism is there for all and sundry to witness first-hand. the gaza pull-out was only a means to an end – which was the annexation of the entire west bank. unlike your good self, ı have a very sound understanding of the conflict and have seen the oppressed become the oppressor.

]]> By: Gerry Georgatos http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-331 Gerry Georgatos Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:17:57 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-331 Michael Shaik's questions need to be answered and were core to the debate - however Mark Dreyfus' assumption that Michael strayed from the debate topic in terms of the issue of rightful engagement is unsound. Michael's questions underpin the issue of engagement and its legitimacy. Funnily, if Michael strayed as Mark alleged then Mark likewise moved away from the issue of what he perceived and alleged counter claims to Michael's questions. Michael's questions, still unanswered, are: 1. On what basis legally or morally should the Palestinians be required to unconditionally recognise Israel’s right to exist when it is systematically violating their human rights? 2. On what basis legally or morally should a population that has been violently oppressed and dispossessed be called upon to renounce violence? 3. What possible Western influence is served when the West rightfully upholds democracy and human rights in other parts of the world, but refuses to do so in the case of the Palestinians? Let us remember that 93% has been dispossessed from the Palestinian people who now live like squatters in 23 large camp like regions. Let us remember the inhumanity they endure without denying anyone else their rights. All people have a right to live in peace. It is the Palestinian people that at this time live without a sustainable future and prospects and the trauma of living without security and liberty and the ability to care and appropriately develop their families, let alone defend them. Gerry Georgatos Michael Shaik’s questions need to be answered and were core to the debate – however Mark Dreyfus’ assumption that Michael strayed from the debate topic in terms of the issue of rightful engagement is unsound. Michael’s questions underpin the issue of engagement and its legitimacy. Funnily, if Michael strayed as Mark alleged then Mark likewise moved away from the issue of what he perceived and alleged counter claims to Michael’s questions.

Michael’s questions, still unanswered, are:

1. On what basis legally or morally should the Palestinians be required to unconditionally recognise Israel’s right to exist when it is systematically violating their human rights?
2. On what basis legally or morally should a population that has been violently oppressed and dispossessed be called upon to renounce violence?
3. What possible Western influence is served when the West rightfully upholds democracy and human rights in other parts of the world, but refuses to do so in the case of the Palestinians?

Let us remember that 93% has been dispossessed from the Palestinian people who now live like squatters in 23 large camp like regions. Let us remember the inhumanity they endure without denying anyone else their rights. All people have a right to live in peace. It is the Palestinian people that at this time live without a sustainable future and prospects and the trauma of living without security and liberty and the ability to care and appropriately develop their families, let alone defend them.

Gerry Georgatos

]]> By: Daniel Stevens http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-330 Daniel Stevens Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:15:14 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-330 "hamas has not enacted their charter?" El-Amir were you away with the fairies when anything Danny Lamm spoke? Hamas repeated calls for Israel to be wiped off the map are completely consistent with their charter and it's calls for Islam to obliterate Israel and to kill all the Jews. Likud was the one in government when both the Sinai and Gaza withdrawals happend. Hamas controls that area where there are no settlements so your settlement construction argument has no relevance. Research the conflict properly. “hamas has not enacted their charter?” El-Amir were you away with the fairies when anything Danny Lamm spoke? Hamas repeated calls for Israel to be wiped off the map are completely consistent with their charter and it’s calls for Islam to obliterate Israel and to kill all the Jews. Likud was the one in government when both the Sinai and Gaza withdrawals happend. Hamas controls that area where there are no settlements so your settlement construction argument has no relevance. Research the conflict properly.

]]> By: Erik Hoffmoen http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-328 Erik Hoffmoen Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:55:27 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-328 On this subject, I cannot but recall an interview with Richard Holbrooke regarding on the initial phase of the Kosovo campaign. Richard Holbrook received a representative from the Kosovo guerrila prganisation while attending the the annual Davos World Economic conference. His information regarding this organisation and of indeed the leader he was about to meet. But he did, and by doing so, he probably broke all principles we today hash and re-hash regarding Hamas as a "terrorist organisation", a description that probably aptly could be used to characterise the Kosovar "liberation organisation" or whatever it was called. So there precedenses! On this subject, I cannot but recall an interview with Richard Holbrooke regarding on the initial phase of the Kosovo campaign. Richard Holbrook received a representative from the Kosovo guerrila prganisation while attending the the annual Davos World Economic conference. His information regarding this organisation and of indeed the leader he was about to meet. But he did, and by doing so, he probably broke all principles we today hash and re-hash regarding Hamas as a “terrorist organisation”, a description that probably aptly could be used to characterise the Kosovar “liberation organisation” or whatever it was called. So there precedenses!

]]> By: el amir http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-327 el amir Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:49:55 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-327 sensational job by the affirmative team by the looks of things. having the truth on their side makes all the difference. stating the facts on the ground in place of fictional realities no doubt left the audience clear that the zionist team failed miserably. daniel stevens, you clearly have no clue. when israel funded and armed hamas in the late 80's to bring down president arafat, you and your co-horts were nowhere to be seen. now that they are a legitimate player on the political scene, every man and his dog has no problem quoting the obsolete references in their charter. lıkud's platform of no freeze on colony (settlements)construction, no palestinian state, no right of return and no sharing of jerusalem are just as relevant. the only difference is that hamas has no enacted their charter, whereas likud has rolled out its policies chapter and verse. get your facts clear before you shoot from the hip my friend, but then again, that would mean having to tell the truth - something that is utterly foreign to you zionist loonies! sensational job by the affirmative team by the looks of things. having the truth on their side makes all the difference. stating the facts on the ground in place of fictional realities no doubt left the audience clear that the zionist team failed miserably.

daniel stevens, you clearly have no clue. when israel funded and armed hamas in the late 80′s to bring down president arafat, you and your co-horts were nowhere to be seen. now that they are a legitimate player on the political scene, every man and his dog has no problem quoting the obsolete references in their charter. lıkud’s platform of no freeze on colony (settlements)construction, no palestinian state, no right of return and no sharing of jerusalem are just as relevant. the only difference is that hamas has no enacted their charter, whereas likud has rolled out its policies chapter and verse.

get your facts clear before you shoot from the hip my friend, but then again, that would mean having to tell the truth – something that is utterly foreign to you zionist loonies!

]]> By: Roy Davenport http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-325 Roy Davenport Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:41:16 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-325 I look forward to the recording of the debate. Mr Dreyfus referred to the capture of Corp Gilad Shalit but failed to mention that the Israeli army kidnapped two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from their home in Gaza on June 24, the day prior to Corporal Shalit's capture on June 25. Dr Lamm failed to mention the statement by Ehud Olmert, then Israeli Prime Minister, to the US House of Representatives, June 2006: "I believed and to this day still believe, in our people's eternal and historic right to this entire land." I look forward to the recording of the debate.

Mr Dreyfus referred to the capture of Corp Gilad Shalit but failed to mention that the Israeli army kidnapped two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from their home in Gaza on June 24, the day prior to Corporal Shalit’s capture on June 25.

Dr Lamm failed to mention the statement by Ehud Olmert, then Israeli Prime Minister, to the US House of Representatives, June 2006: “I believed and to this day still believe, in our people’s eternal and historic right to this entire land.”

]]> By: Josh http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-323 Josh Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:42:06 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-323 Why would Michael Shaik condemn Israel for "human rights abuses" against Palestinians when Hamas does to Palestinians exactly that which he claims he stands against? Why would Michael Shaik condemn Israel for “human rights abuses” against Palestinians when Hamas does to Palestinians exactly that which he claims he stands against?

]]> By: Daniel Stevens http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-322 Daniel Stevens Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:32:28 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-322 The negative team were awesome! Michael Shaik when he took a dig at the Likud charter, contradicted what Debra Smith on his own team said about charters being merely guides which don't have to be taken literally. It may sound from this report that the affirmative team did well but they were actually terrible and their arguments had little substance. The negative team were awesome! Michael Shaik when he took a dig at the Likud charter, contradicted what Debra Smith on his own team said about charters being merely guides which don’t have to be taken literally. It may sound from this report that the affirmative team did well but they were actually terrible and their arguments had little substance.

]]> By: Stewart Mills http://australiansforpalestine.com/10234/comment-page-1#comment-320 Stewart Mills Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:37:11 +0000 http://australiansforpalestine.com/?p=10234#comment-320 Great turn out. Great report to be a record for those who could not make it. Thanks to the organisers. Great turn out. Great report to be a record for those who could not make it. Thanks to the organisers.

]]>