We have a right...

[GuruJane]

Is this about Ohlmert's plan to impose a frontier on the palestinians unilaterarily?

Only in that this is what its going to end up as.
As far as I can gather, Olmert's convergance proposal which basically means keeping the settlements that abutt Israel's borders and dismantling all the others, is similiar to the Camp David and Clinton proposals, except that under them there was going to be a land swap with Israel's land as compensation.

 

[Mr Q]

OK, so now I know why my question wasn't taken seriously, perhaps you're not all a bunch of anti-semites. I now see how you see the situation: You think that the Palestinians have a right to the land of Israel, and we stole the land from them. We are now saying 'look, we're giving back the land we stole and they keep bombing us and asking us for more!'. But that's not true. We never stole the land. We have a right to the land

Why? What's the right?

OK, the Jews were there 2000 years ago. But I wouldn't try to use that to ask for bits of continental Europe as a homeland because that's where my Celtic ancestors were back then.

In 1900, only 1% of the population (which seems to have been somewhere between half a million and a bit over a million - so clearly not empty) was Jewish. Compared to the presence of the antecendents of the Palestinians of today, the Jews were close to non-present.

Net migration in the Mandate period still saw the Jews with less than 35% of the population (and only 6% of the land ownership), so of the people resident in the area, they were a vast minority.

So, no, you didn't have any particular right to the land. Yes, it was effectively stolen off the Palestinian people (the treatment of the Jews in Europe is actually irrelevant in respect to Palestine). The partition of Palestine was, in my eyes, no different to the creation of the Bantustan's as black homelands in apartheid South Africa.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Yep, zing ....there goes the USA and most of South America.
Oh and Canada just flashed past as well

And the great southern land.......

 

[medusala]

In 1900, only 1% of the population (which seems to have been somewhere between half a million and a bit over a million - so clearly not empty) was Jewish. Compared to the presence of the antecendents of the Palestinians of today, the Jews were close to non-present.

Which was less than the Christian population. This begs the obvious question of why the Jews feel that they have a better claim than Christians given the land was ruled by Christians for quite a period of time.

They have no logical argument whatsoever.

They have run a consistently poor PR campaign over 2000 years, its no wonder they have lost virtually all of the market share for their god.

Getting people to argue the case for a population capable of the most apalling terrorist acts is quite an achievement.

 

[^Eagle^]

Ok, I've swung from one side to the other, but you've done it twice now - wasn't it a few months ago that you were acknowledging Israel's culpability in the conflict? What's changed?

Incidentally - British imperialists drawing lines on maps can't give you a right to land that didn't belong to them, either.

misinformed....anyway, my main point there was still valid. There is a problem with the fact that all Israelis become soldiers at age 18 for 2 years, so that any soldier with an aggression problem will obviously go further than their obligations, yet the IDF is very stringent on this, giving fines, sending them to jail, etc.

 

[GuruJane]

its no wonder they have lost virtually all of the market share for their god..

And those hook noses, too.

 

[just maybe]

misinformed....anyway, my main point there was still valid. There is a problem with the fact that all Israelis become soldiers at age 18 for 2 years, so that any soldier with an aggression problem will obviously go further than their obligations, yet the IDF is very stringent on this, giving fines, sending them to jail, etc.

Looks like you've been misinformed too far the other way now.

You are making a habit of it.

 

[^Eagle^]

Looks like you've been misinformed too far the other way now.

You are making a habit of it.

Maybe you need to read what I wrote instead of being one-minded, I'd give you the same courtesy.

Before 1960 a Palestinian was a Jew. Look at all the literature before this time-a good example is Exodus, in which Jews are referred to as Palestinians. The PLO was established in 1960, at the suggestion of the British so that Yasser Arafat's cause to 'drive the people of the book into the sea' could be supported by the entire world in the form of a nation whose land was stolen. They will not comprimise. What was our reply from the May 2000 offer of 97% of Israel(everything Yasser Arafat requested, except for the 'rite of return', a euphemism for the destruction of the Israeli state), an heart-breaking offer for the Jewish people showing our desperation for peace? The Intifida in September 2000. Not even another offer. What do they want? I think it's clear. It's the message Arafat was pushing before 1960, before the Palestinian people existed-when he was still an Egyptian-'to drive the people of the book in the sea'. Only thing is that, now, the world is on Goliath's side. The 20 Arab states surrounding the tiny strip of Israel(a third of the size of Tasmania) are ready to destroy us. Al-Queda, Iran give money to Hammas. Iranian PM denies the holocaust, doesn't recognise Israel's right to exist...oh and by the way that Nuclear facility is just for power purposes. Open your eyes to what's really going on. There's no such thing as a 'cyle of violence'. There is a victim. There is an opressor. The victim:The Jewish people. The opressor: The Arab world

 

[^Eagle^]

How many Jews were there in Palestine compared to Christians at the start of the 20th century?

What makes you think you have more RIGHTS than they do?

...The Christians have never had a problem with the existence of a Jewish state. They are allowed to visit holy sites, etc do whatever they want as we wished the Arabs to do but their leaders want control of our tiny land. If this were the case, both Christians and Jews would be kicked out, as they are non-believers. Can you clarify your point please?

 

[^Eagle^]

Didnt the Israelis destroy large tracts of Palestinian homes during and just after the creation of the state of Israel?

A little bit rushed for time, but i'll try adress everything...

I don't quite know where you are getting this from...("during and just after the creation of the state of Israel"), and won't defend something I don't know about...try find a source or something..

If you are referring to the more recent destruction of homes then the reason is this: The Palestinian government uses tunnels to smuggle weapons into Israel and used to pay Palestinians in the settlements ~$1000 to have a tunnel lead into their house. They would then use these houses to transport weapons to which they would then use to destroy civillian lives.

The IDF would find out which houses were being used for this purpose and would then go and bulldoze their house. Before doing this, they would warn the civillians and tell them to pack up and leave. Then the house would be bulldozed, as a warning to other Palestinians. It worked.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

There is no cycle of violence. There is no such thing. There is an opressor. There is an underdog. There are 20+ Arab countries surrounding a tiny strip called Israel. Israel fits 3 times into Tasmania. When looking on a map, a fly once flew onto it and covered the entire state of Israel.

Always the victim.

Israel are the only country in the region with nuclear weapons, and has one of the world's largest armies.

They also have full military support from the world's only superpower.

But of course, they're so incredibly vulnerable.

 

[just maybe]

Maybe you need to read what I wrote instead of being one-minded, I'd give you the same courtesy.

Before 1960 a Palestinian was a Jew. Look at all the literature before this time-a good example is Exodus, in which Jews are referred to as Palestinians. The PLO was established in 1960, at the suggestion of the British so that Yasser Arafat's cause to 'drive the people of the book into the sea' could be supported by the entire world in the form of a nation whose land was stolen. They will not comprimise. What was our reply from the May 2000 offer of 97% of Israel(everything Yasser Arafat requested, except for the 'rite of return', a euphemism for the destruction of the Israeli state), an heart-breaking offer for the Jewish people showing our desperation for peace? The Intifida in September 2000. Not even another offer. What do they want? I think it's clear. It's the message Arafat was pushing before 1960, before the Palestinian people existed-when he was still an Egyptian-'to drive the people of the book in the sea'. Only thing is that, now, the world is on Goliath's side. The 20 Arab states surrounding the tiny strip of Israel(a third of the size of Tasmania) are ready to destroy us. Al-Queda, Iran give money to Hammas. Iranian PM denies the holocaust, doesn't recognise Israel's right to exist...oh and by the way that Nuclear facility is just for power purposes. Open your eyes to what's really going on. There's no such thing as a 'cyle of violence'. There is a victim. There is an opressor. The victim:The Jewish people. The opressor: The Arab world

Pity you don't mention that the '97%' you mentioned (which was actually 95%) involved cutting a big swathe of land out of what Palestine wanted that effectively crippled the Palestinian state if it existed and would have made Arafat a pariah to his people if he agreed to it.

But hey, 'heartbreaking'? You just need to see how the Palestinians live. Now THAT is heartbreaking.

Open my eyes? Mine are already open. Yours are wired shut.

 

[Bombers 2003]

Before 1960 a Palestinian was a Jew. Look at all the literature before this time-a good example is Exodus, in which Jews are referred to as Palestinians.

WTF?
Are you on Qat?

 

[Chief]

a 50 per cent majority

Just FYI 50% isn't a majority.

 

[Mr Q]

Maybe you need to read what I wrote instead of being one-minded, I'd give you the same courtesy.

Before 1960 a Palestinian was a Jew. Look at all the literature before this time-a good example is Exodus, in which Jews are referred to as Palestinians.

Wrong. Well maybe in Exodus, but that's going back quite a long time before 1960. UN and British documentation from the 40s refers to the Arabs as Palestinians. Probably because they'd been native to Palestine for centuries leading up to that time, unlike the Jews.

The PLO was established in 1960, at the suggestion of the British so that Yasser Arafat's cause to 'drive the people of the book into the sea' could be supported by the entire world in the form of a nation whose land was stolen.

It was stolen. Quite blatantly as well. Jews made up less than 1% of the population in 1900 - and by 1947 the Western world had shipped them in (probably to get rid of them), and then gave them 55% of the land - that's theft, plain and simple.

They will not comprimise. What was our reply from the May 2000 offer of 97% of Israel(everything Yasser Arafat requested, except for the 'rite of return', a euphemism for the destruction of the Israeli state)

Actually, its a request that people driven off their land by the creation of Israel have the right to return to that country. Something that would be valid in every single civilised nation in the world.

, an heart-breaking offer for the Jewish people showing our desperation for peace? The Intifida in September 2000. Not even another offer. What do they want? I think it's clear. It's the message Arafat was pushing before 1960, before the Palestinian people existed-when he was still an Egyptian-'to drive the people of the book in the sea'. Only thing is that, now, the world is on Goliath's side.

??? The fact the world's only superpower is so distrusted by the Arab world because of its history of support for Israel sort of makes that statement look downright stupid.

The 20 Arab states surrounding the tiny strip of Israel(a third of the size of Tasmania) are ready to destroy us.

Of course, if Israel hadn't been carved out of land where the Arabs had lived for centuries - and the Jews hadn't - then Israel wouldn't be surrounded by Arab states. The creation of Israel at the expense of the Arabs of Palestine is the root cause of the problem... creating a homeland for the Jews at the expense of someone else was always going to create a disenfranchised group that weren't going to like it.

Al-Queda, Iran give money to Hammas. Iranian PM denies the holocaust, doesn't recognise Israel's right to exist...oh and by the way that Nuclear facility is just for power purposes. Open your eyes to what's really going on. There's no such thing as a 'cyle of violence'. There is a victim. There is an opressor. The victim:The Jewish people. The opressor: The Arab world

Bull****. 1900: the area known as Palestine is occupied in a vast majority by Arabs that we now know as the Palestinians.

Post WWII, (when the Pals are still a huge majority), the rest of the world decides the Jews need a homeland, so they start resettling them in the British Mandate territories, thus displacing the native Palestinians. Still there's plenty of room.

1930/40s: Jews want a homeland where they're the only masters, so they start a terror campaign against the British. You know, blowing up civilians and the like - interesting to see who actually started that sort of thing in the area, isn't it?

1947: the rest of the world decides to partition the land, despite the Palestinians objecting (and still being the majority people). The Jews get 55% of the land, despite only being 32% of the population and owning 6% of the country, and not being a majority in any single area of the region (these figures are from the UN).

Palestinans refuse to accept this - fairly understandably. Over the years they're forced off their land, have it reduced in size, and never gain any sovereignty. That's being oppressed. And by experts.

The oppressed: the Palestinans.
The oppressors: the rest of the non-Arab world.

Israel should never have been created in that location - its a place with a long history of violence and pain over land. Once created, there was no way an Arab could trust the West, and thus a lot of the problems of the Middle East today were created.

 

[just maybe]

Very well said Mr Q.

 

[^Eagle^]

Always the victim.

Israel are the only country in the region with nuclear weapons, and has one of the world's largest armies.

Iran. Iraq(in the 90's). We need to at least be a threat to these countries by making them think we have nuclear weapons. Now as to whether or not we have them, no-one can make a definite conclusion.

They also have full military support from the world's only superpower.

But of course, they're so incredibly vulnerable.

Really? USA encouraged giving away our land to an Arab terrorist government. USA deterred us from going into Gaza to force the same Arab terrorist government to give back the hostage through force from the land that USA encouraged to give away for peace(although the Arab view of peace is the destruction of the Jewish state and 'driving the Jews into the sea' and the Jewish view of peace is a Jewish-controlled state in which people can freely practice their religion(as it is) where they don't try and bomb us)....Is USA really on our side?

 

[^Eagle^]

Pity you don't mention that the '97%' you mentioned (which was actually 95%) involved cutting a big swathe of land out of what Palestine wanted that effectively crippled the Palestinian state if it existed and would have made Arafat a pariah to his people if he agreed to it.

But hey, 'heartbreaking'? You just need to see how the Palestinians live. Now THAT is heartbreaking.

Open my eyes? Mine are already open. Yours are wired shut.

Please state the source for this...however why didn't Arafat respond with another proposal. Why did he respond with the intifada? He wanted to anhileate the Jewish state. And how do you respond to the creation of the PLO in 1960??

 

[^Eagle^]

WTF?
Are you on Qat?

No. Look at literature from before 1960. Before such, a Jew was most commonly reffered to as a 'Palestinian', one of the most obvious examples is 'Exodus'. Arafat did this to make it look like he had a campaign that had nothing to do with the destruction of the Jewish state-he has made it look like there is a people called the 'Palestinians' who were uprooted out of their homes by the Nazi-Israelis(although it was the Jews who had had the final straw with the Nazis and decided that Israel was the only place where they could live in freedom after WW2)

When Golda Meir stood up in the UN and said 'there is no such thing as the Palestinian people', people did not label her a 'racist'. The world agreed. It was a fact. There was no Palestinian people as we know them before the formation of the PLO, and they weren't recognised until after the six-day war.

 

[^Eagle^]

Wrong. Well maybe in Exodus, but that's going back quite a long time before 1960. UN and British documentation from the 40s refers to the Arabs as Palestinians. Probably because they'd been native to Palestine for centuries leading up to that time, unlike the Jews.

You'll have to give me some of this documentation.
Again, rushed for time. I'll have to continue whenever I have some spare time..

 

[Mr Q]

You'll have to give me some of this documentation.
Again, rushed for time. I'll have to continue whenever I have some spare time..

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/ee...07175de9fa2de563852568d3006e10f3!OpenDocument

There you go. More specifically, it refers to them as "Palestinan Arabs", but it certainly does not refer to Jews as Palestinians.

In fact, I've never heard of Jews being referred to as Palestinians, unless in a generic sense as residents of Palestine, when the term did not refer to Jews specifically.

 

[Lestat]

Mods....Why was my post removed????

 

[GuruJane]

Mods....Why was my post removed????

They're probably worried your eyes might be popping.

 

[Bombers 2003]

In fact, I've never heard of Jews being referred to as Palestinians, unless in a generic sense as residents of Palestine, when the term did not refer to Jews specifically.

I think that's where ^ Eagle^'s confusion comes from

 

[just maybe]

Please state the source for this...however why didn't Arafat respond with another proposal. Why did he respond with the intifada? He wanted to anhileate the Jewish state. And how do you respond to the creation of the PLO in 1960??

Arafat's reasoning was rejected.

The intifada was not as a result of that breakdown in negotiations. It was started by Sharon deliberately inciting Palestinians with his Temple Mount visit.

As for nuclear weapons - Iran and Iraq don't have nuclear weapons. You will find no evidence suggesting they do. Why post lies?

However, Israeli scientists who have defected have detailed Israel's nuclear arsenal, and it was wheeled out as a threat, I think in the 70s, and captured on satellite. The IAEA openly lists them as a non-NPT nuclear state.