Israel Tries to Persuade France to Give Up Human Rights for Security
37 replies, posted
[QUOTE]In light of the terror attacks in Paris, the Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon said that like his country and the United States, France and European nations must now favor security measures, wiretapping civilians and “eavesdropping on potential terrorists” over human rights.
"In the United States until the events of September 11, [2001], the balance between security and human rights favored human rights on the issue, for example of eavesdropping on potential terrorists," he said Sunday night on the local Israeli Army Radio.
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Israel-to-France-Do-It-Our-Way-Security-over-Human-Rights-20151116-0011.html[/url]
Suddenly everyone becomes a "potential terrorist"
They're called human rights, not human privileges, you idiot, and a surveillance state still won't be able to completely prevent all instances of guerilla attacks.
So prove to ISIS that what they are doing is working? Yeah, fuck off.
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;49140329]They're called human rights, not human privileges, you idiot, and a surveillance state still won't be able to completely prevent all instances of guerilla attacks.[/QUOTE]
I suspect the Founding Fathers and those like minded were wise men. I mean look at Syria. As soon Assad tried to crack down and revoked rights, things only got worse. In the US? You can rant all you want and you'll be ignored and drown in the sea of voices ranting along with you.
Hahaha, like Israel is in any position to give advice to others about security at home. Get your own affairs in order and stop running the concentration camp you call the remaining Palestinian settlements inside Gaza before you start telling respected nations what to do.
There's a real irony to a Jewish defense minister essentially telling a nation that was once directly victimized by the Nazis that they should give up their essential liberties because they're afraid of the unwanted tribe of people emigrating. Shall Muslim immigrants be made to wear something on their clothing to tell them apart, a star perhaps?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49140439]Hahaha, like Israel is in any position to give advice to others about security at home. Get your own affairs in order and stop running the concentration camp you call the remaining Palestinian settlements inside Gaza before you start telling respected nations what to do.
There's a real irony to a Jewish defense minister essentially telling a nation that was once directly victimized by the Nazis that they should give up their essential liberties because they're afraid of the unwanted tribe of people emigrating. Shall Muslim immigrants be made to wear something on their clothing to tell them apart, a star perhaps?[/QUOTE]
A [i]crescent moon[/i] AND star, you ig'nant motherfucker. :vs:
how about no
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49140439]Hahaha, like Israel is in any position to give advice to others about security at home. Get your own affairs in order and stop running the concentration camp you call the remaining Palestinian settlements inside Gaza before you start telling respected nations what to do.
There's a real irony to a Jewish defense minister essentially telling a nation that was once directly victimized by the Nazis that they should give up their essential liberties because they're afraid of the unwanted tribe of people emigrating. Shall Muslim immigrants be made to wear something on their clothing to tell them apart, a star perhaps?[/QUOTE]
Not a star but a towel, on their head
[QUOTE=MisterSjeiks;49140327]Suddenly everyone becomes a "potential terrorist"[/QUOTE]
That's how it starts.
[video=youtube;52wis_sLT1I]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52wis_sLT1I[/video]
Right because France would never spy on its own people.
[URL="http://www.france24.com/en/20111017-squaccini-le-monde-dcri-espionage-bettencourt"]http://www.france24.com/en/20111017-squaccini-le-monde-dcri-espionage-bettencourt[/URL]
Here's what Yaalon actually said, in context:
[URL="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4725647,00.html"]http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4725647,00.html[/URL]
[QUOTE]"The Europeans understand that there is a threat, but they have not taken the measures they could have – for example changing the legislation to allow [B]listening in [U]on potential terrorists[/U][/B]," Ya'alon told Army Radio.
"The balance between security and human rights in Europe has so far tipped in favor of human rights, but there is no longer a choice," he continued.
"From now on [B][U]the balance[/U] must be weighted on the side of security[/B] in order to defend democracy."
Among the other measures suggested by the defense minister were increased passport control throughout Europe and checks at the entrances to public places.[/QUOTE]
Fact is, there's always a balance between individual human rights and the greater good. That's what allows some countries to put security cameras in public places, search people in airports and even take away people's property, freedom and very lives when they pose a threat to society.
It's up to every society to decide exactly how to balance these two needs, in a way that mostly protects people's own rights but also allows the country to protect them from harm. It's a delicate balancing act, and it can and does shift constantly as the needs of society change.
All Yaalon is saying (in his blunt, stupid sounding, ex military way) is that right now France need to put more weight on the greater good side of the scale. He's not saying "throw away all human rights". He's saying "put more weight on security". And yes, that implies less wight on human rights. But just as catching a potential criminal means allowing the police to search suspicious looking individuals, maybe preventing the next terror attack means being able to wiretap terror suspects and their associates in a way that is harder to do under existing laws. That doesn't mean "spy on everyone because fuck freedom". Spying on everyone doesn't help catch terrorists, it just helps them hide in the noise.
all aboard the "i hate israel!" train
"To win the game, you must stoop to my level."
And we have many times in the past, and arguably now.
Government surveillance isn't an inherently wrong thing. Information technology has drastically changed in the last few decades with the advent of the PC, smartphones, the internet, the 'deep web', encryption technogy and yada yada. Governments need to adapt to meet the challenges of the new information warfare battlefield; especially in this day when their adversaries would use that technology to their advantage. I'm all for reasonable levels of surveillance in the light of recent terrorist attacks.
Fuck off Israel noone asked for your opinion.
Israel is a nation of individuals and it's bigoted to make blanket statements about the people who live there or make negative remarks about the faith of the different peoples there. However, Israel's political leaders are not quite as innocent as the Israeli civilians that they hide behind (as a sort of religious shield for themselves)... so you have to watch them and the things they openly call for.
Netanyahu should lose his human right to live
[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;49142848]Israel is a nation of individuals and it's bigoted to make blanket statements about the people who live there or make negative remarks about the faith of the different peoples there. However, Israel's political leaders are not quite as innocent as the Israeli civilians that they hide behind (as a sort of religious shield for themselves)... so you have to watch them and the things they openly call for.[/QUOTE]
Israel is a democracy. Its political leaders represent the people. Using the politicians that people voted in to judge the people makes sense.
Netanyahu especially since hes a popular leader.
[quote]"In the United States until the events of September 11, [2001], the balance between security and human rights favored human rights on the issue, for example of eavesdropping on potential terrorists," he said Sunday night on the local Israeli Army Radio.[/quote]Thing about that is it's A: illegal and B: unwanted, oh and C: there isn't any concrete proof that it's stopped an attack.
To quote a wise warrior-poet, those who give up essential liberties for a little security deserve neither.
Don't do it France!
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49143820]To quote a wise warrior-poet, those who give up essential liberties for a little security deserve neither.[/QUOTE]
Why the fuck would they not "deserve" either?
Honestly, it seems like Benjamin was a bit insecure about the possibility of someone simply having a preference for security over freedom. That's not my preference at all, but it still seems a bit overreaction-y and childish to say that they don't deserve safety or freedom at all over a meer opinion.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49143641]Israel is a democracy. Its political leaders represent the people. Using the politicians that people voted in to judge the people makes sense.
Netanyahu especially since hes a popular leader.[/QUOTE]
Netanyahu won around %25 of the votes in the last elections. He's only in power because he managed to just barely put together a majority coalition with the far right, ultra orthodox and one supposedly apolitical party that got a lot of votes for promising to lower the cost of living.
Fuck that I would rather go fight terrorists then be wiretapped
"See? It's happening! And you all called me crazy!"
[I]old man jenkins we called you crazy because you exposed yourself at the school yard[/I]
"give up human rights"
good 1 is-off-the-raels
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49143641]Israel is a democracy. Its political leaders represent the people. Using the politicians that people voted in to judge the people makes sense.
Netanyahu especially since hes a popular leader.[/QUOTE]
Not exactly. Israel's political system is a bit weird.
Essentially, the percentage of votes a party gets is the percentage of seats the party receives. There are 120 seats in the Israeli Government. It takes 3.25% of a total population vote for a party for it to receive a seat. Because of this there are many parties within the government and as such there is never a majority parliament. However, a majority is required for a vote to pass. Because of this, the major parties usually form a coalition.
The guy in this article, Moshe Ya'alon, is part of the Likud party. Because it got the largest amount of votes, it gets to decide who the ministers are. Hence he is the Defense Minster of the current government.
However, the Likud party only got 25% of the votes in the elections. You can't say that Netanyahu is popular if 75% of the population don't vote for his party.
It's also worth noting that the major deciding factor of the last few elections has been what each party will do about the economy. Israel's cost of living has increased, but it's standard wage has not. Hence there is a growing divide between the rich and the poor and as such it has taken precedence over Palestinian relations.
[QUOTE=Blue Meanie;49144441]Fuck that I would rather go fight terrorists then be wiretapped[/QUOTE]
Well you are wiretapped. Are you fighting terrorism?
[QUOTE=Skerion;49143915]Why the fuck would they not "deserve" either?
Honestly, it seems like Benjamin was a bit insecure about the possibility of someone simply having a preference for security over freedom. That's not my preference at all, but it still seems a bit overreaction-y and childish to say that they don't deserve safety or freedom at all over a meer opinion.[/QUOTE]So really you're asserting that the statist bootlickers need to have their opinion guarded from crazy libertarian types like Ben Franklin? Who was also expressing an opinion by the way, if you're going to give up "essential liberties" (i.e. motherfucking basic human rights) you really don't deserve either the small amount of security gained nor the liberties so freely traded like they were worthless to begin with.
That doesn't seem like an overreaction or a childish statement at all, on the contrary it sounds more like "calling it like it is" than anything else.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49154864]So really you're asserting that the statist bootlickers need to have their opinion guarded from crazy libertarian types like Ben Franklin? Who was also expressing an opinion by the way, if you're going to give up "essential liberties" (i.e. motherfucking basic human rights) you really don't deserve either the small amount of security gained nor the liberties so freely traded like they were worthless to begin with.
That doesn't seem like an overreaction or a childish statement at all, on the contrary it sounds more like "calling it like it is" than anything else.[/QUOTE]
That "you don't deserve x" shit is pretty subjective; not really "calling it like it is".
Don't you guys talk about how anyone has the right to criticize other people's opinion whenever they say "it's my opinion" as a defense? Couldn't that also apply to Benjamin?
[QUOTE=Skerion;49155546]That "you don't deserve x" shit is entirely subjective and you know it.[/QUOTE]"No, you don't deserve to walk the streets freely because you murdered four people, you're going to have to go to prison."
"You really don't deserve to fly a plane without a license. Sorry."
"Well, you placed third in the race so you don't deserve the gold medal."
No, it really isn't.
[editline]20th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Skerion;49155546]Don't you guys talk about how anyone has the right to criticize other people's opinion whenever they say "it's my opinion" as a defense? Couldn't that also apply to Benjamin?[/QUOTE]Yeah, and now I'm criticizing you for criticizing his opinion.
That's how the world works.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49155579]"No, you don't deserve to walk the streets freely because you murdered four people, you're going to have to go to prison."
"You really don't deserve to fly a plane without a license. Sorry."
"Well, you placed third in the race so you don't deserve the gold medal."
No, it really isn't.[/QUOTE]
I can see that people have these rules set up and enforced and they can be at least reasonable, but that doesn't mean the whole "deservity" thing or whatever you call it automatically applies to the universe as some magically objective fact.
"This man deserves to be castrated because he's gay"
"This man deserves to be burned at the stake because he's a heretic"
"Women don't deserve voting rights"
There were also previously rules based off of these statements, but I sure as hell wouldn't consider these as objective facts.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49155579]Yeah, and now I'm criticizing you for criticizing his opinion.
That's how the world works.[/QUOTE]
That's cool. That's not going to change my mind about what he said, if that's what you were hoping for.
Kind of an odd suggestion considering the situations that Israel and France are in. Israel is pretty much completely surrounded by countries that don't even recognize it's legitimacy, several of which that hate Israel's guts all together. Israel's heightened security seems to be a result of their paranoia when it comes to the rest of the middle east and the huge amount of wars they've fought since their formation which is somewhat (emphasis on somewhat) understandable.
France on the other hand is one of the bigger countries in the EU and NATO and as far as I know has no real enemies. I think the statement is silly simply on the count of Israel and France's foreign relations not even being relatively comparable.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.