One for One Thousand...

1. 59

   megs78posted 12 years ago

   One for One thousand... I just don't get it.  I don't know if I will ever get it.  What IS it about our world and the complete injustice of it all?
   
   Can anyone explain to me how this is ok?  what am i missing in all of this?

   replyreport
   1. 79

      ReuVeraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It's mass media blurring the line. There's no comparison.
      
      http://www.aish.com/jw/me/Gilad_Shalit_ … Lines.html

      replyreport
2. 72

   Cagsilposted 12 years ago

   Clarify?

   replyreport
   1. 67

      2uesdayposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think the reference is to the release of one young man in exchange for 1000 prisoners - the Israel/Palestine news.
      
      
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15339604

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Oh okay.

         replyreport
      2. 59

         megs78posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you 2uesday!

         replyreport
3. 82

   lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

   "Mr Netanyahu wrote a letter, released by his office, to bereaved Israeli families telling them: "I understand the difficulty in accepting that the vile people who committed the heinous crimes against your loved ones will not pay the full price they deserve."
   
   The same letter should be sent to Palestinian families who have lost loved ones to Israel's bombs, to Rachel Corrie's family, and to Fulkan Dorgan's.
   
   Vile people who commit heinous crimes runs the gambit--Bibi being chief offender among them.
   
   Loss is the same the world over...no one has any moral high-ground here. Least of all BibiGuns. IMO

   replyreport
   1. 59

      megs78posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, but they got 1000 of their own back and the Israeli's only got 1.  That is what I am referring to, not to any moral high ground.  It seems unfair...

      replyreport
4. 59

   megs78posted 12 years ago

   Yes I am referring to the prisoners released...I was just wondering if any one here had any insight into this subject?

   replyreport
5. 76

   psycheskinnerposted 12 years ago

   It isn't about logic, it is about what was necessary to make the deal.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      megs78posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly my point!  Why was that so necessary?  why not 10 for 1?  why in the world did it have to be 1000?  actually there are even more than a thousand...

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Hollie Thomasposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, there are even more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. But  there are also thousands more that live in poverty, have had every single human right denied, live as refugees in other countries, with no citizenship and no hope. What should be done about them? Where is the equity?

         replyreport
         1. 79

            ReuVeraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            First of all- let's make it clear- you must be taking about those Arabs (call them Palestinians if you wish) living in Arabs countries, because Arabs who live in Israel have ALL the rights. Israel – the only free Democracy in the Middle East and the only country whose Arab citizens are truly free.
            
            http://unitedwithisrael.org/where-are-arabs-free/

            replyreport
      2. 82

         lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         "According to newly released figures, Palestinian Central Bureau Statistics said over 750,000 Palestinians were arrested and detained since June 1967, including those affected several times. They include about 12,000 women and “tens of thousands of children.”
         
         Throughout Occupied Palestine and Israel, prisons, detention camps and interrogation centers were established to incarcerate, torture, abuse and humiliate them.
         
         Currently, Israel holds about 6,000 detainees, including 35 women and 285 children. Others as young as 10 (and occasionally younger) remain until adulthood, losing out entirely on their formative childhood years.
         
         As a result of torture, medical neglect, or assassination, over 200 died martyrs in captivity. Another 302 are called “veteran detainees,” serving 17 years or longer.
         
         Another 136 serving 20 years or more are called “Deans of Detainees.” “Generals of Patience” is a term applied to prisoners incarcerated over 25 years. As of October, they number 41."
         
         --Stephen Lendman
         http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/10/16 … ner-swaps/

         replyreport