Norman Finkelstein vs Martin Indyk over Gaza and the "Peace Process" 1/8/09 Democracy Now 3 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDS7Oc4LZSA for part 4

The Israeli assault on Gaza is entering its thirteenth day. Some 700 Palestinians have been killed, with many thousands more wounded, and a humanitarian crisis is mounting. Ten Israelis have died, four by friendly fire. A ceasefire has not been reached, and the offensive continues. We host a debate between Martin Indyk, the former US ambassador to Israel and Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs during the Clinton administration, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution and author of, Innocent Abroad: An Intimate Account of American Peace Diplomacy in the Middle East, and Norman Finkelstein, author of several books, including The Holocaust Industry, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict and Beyond Chutzpah.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/8/former_amb_martin_indyk_vs_author

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Norman
• Finkelstein
• vs
• Martin
• Indyk
• over
• Gaza
• and
• the
• Peace Process
• 1/8/09
• Democracy
• Now
• of

[kevinherbert]

@unabomberman : nice one.....succintly put.

I think the Savon Institute should be looking for a new head.

[kenzo4000]

*Israeli government

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 The Israeli organization is a much bigger terrorist. Just read some international law and take a good look at how many human rights abuses, and breaches of international law they have committed.

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 So i answered your question pretty well. Like every typical zionist your responses never deal with cold hard facts. "Israel did plenty on their end" Yep they certainly did, they continued their activities as if nothing was signed at all.

As for the number of original refugees, yes i am quite aware that it is a significant numbers. But Israel was not moving into the direction of even trying to solve the problem.

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 Typical pro-Israeli propogandist. It was Israel that provoked Palestinians and essentially continued their practices of building settlements, not withdrawing, ignoring the refugee question. Arafat's main purpose would have been to stop the terrorism. The problem is Israel did not cease their terrorist activities, so naturally the Palestinians did not as well. Finkelstein says it pretty well in that video. When Israel keeps getting aggresive, they will respond.

[Greywind30]

@kenzo4000

I ask the question "Name me what PLO/Arafat did on their end?" Where is the answer?

I ask do you have any idea how many ORIGINAL refugies from this conflict? Where is the answer?

You are as dishonest as your idol NF.

YOu dont understand Ben Ami reference? I'm not surprise

Yes all PLO/hamas does is a terrorism. Note. I'm not calling Egyptian, Jordanian or even Syrian that. They fought open in open war as millitary arm of Arab world but PLO etc are not soldiers but terrorist.

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 Also i have no idea what you were trying to say with your comment about Ben Ami.

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 Israel expanded their settlements, did not withdraw from agreed upon areas, nothing was done about the refugee status etc... I really don't need to go into a full length history lesson. Anybody who has internet access can google this stuff.

Also the fact that there were casualties on both sides, does not equal terrorism. According to you any fighting from the Palestinians must be terrorism, and Israel is defending itself LMAO

[Greywind30]

@kenzo4000 "The fact that he even mentions the Oslo accords and doesn't admit that it was Israel that did not hold up their end of the bargain"

Name me what PLO/Arafat did on their end? I can put a list what Israeli did.

You still dont get it. He also said there were 20 to 1 casualties and that lead to terrorism. But it means there were casualties from Israeli side. Get it?

How do you account for a Goebbels like half true about Ben Ami?

You are obviously bias and deny in your face facts. Bye

[kenzo4000]

@Greywind30 The fact he didn't even say these things at separate parts of the debate should be clear enough. Throughout the debate even with such a clear mistake in phrasing Finkelstein still has a much more coherent viewpoint. Gil Troy goes all over the place and says anything that could place the Palestinians in a negative light, even if it has nothing to do with the specific topic they are talking about.