PDA

View Full Version : Int'l Issues November 29: The UN will vote to recognize Palestine as a "state."


Pages : 1 2 [3]

mlyonsd
11-29-2012, 07:01 PM
I don't think that's the order this goes in.

If Israel adopts a smarter approach to Palestine, then we are in a much better position for a two-state solution to be adopted. Part of the two-state solution, I believe, is mutual recognition of existence.

I don't believe any country could/should ever give concessions when the other side can't publicly acknowledge their right to exist.

It's a non-starter.

BigRedChief
11-29-2012, 07:01 PM
I don't believe Americans should support Hamas. You should support Palestinian independence, however.

It will allow an entire people to be free on land they have a historical and cultural right to, interact with their neighbors, become part of the international community, potentially thrive economically, and minimize violence with Israel. Armed with self-determination and economic freedom, Palestine will moderate, and the Hamas' of the population will lose their foothold.Sorry, I'm not buying the cumbaya. The extremist will never, ever allow a peace to take hold.

As long as any Arab group/state/religion/kingdom refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, they don't deserve our support.

I get that we should support people that are seeking freedom. But, until they quit swearing death to our friends, they don't deserve our support.

HonestChieffan
11-29-2012, 07:11 PM
The result is as expected. The administration can say we voted no but they can now give mondy to the Palastinians at will. They saw the opportunity to sucker the tax payer and they were right. Pay up. Plus they will continue to do the UN's bidding while the money just flows

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 07:12 PM
ohhh I fully admit the Israeli's are oppressing the Palestinians. They make life for all Arabs that live in the West Bank and Gaza extremely difficult.. A lot of pain is inflicted.

However, when you are asleep in your room with your 9 year old brother and a rocket comes into your house and you wake up with your brothers blood and brains all over you....... it makes you more inclined to say **** those heathrens.

And every time that Israeli's kill innocent Arabs, the same things are said on the Arab side of the fence.

Yep. It's an incredibly difficult situation.

Emotional rage rarely fuels effective policy, however.

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 07:13 PM
I don't believe any country could/should ever give concessions when the other side can't publicly acknowledge their right to exist.

It's a non-starter.

Why do you think that is?

Let's isolate that issue, because it comes up a lot with you.

HonestChieffan
11-29-2012, 07:15 PM
How do the Palestinians who live in Israel compare on economic measurements to those outside of Israel?

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 07:17 PM
But restraint and patience only on the Israeli side, right?

Nope.

Just to be clear, I think your approach is completely unworkable. There's no way Israel can just absorb whatever damage Hamas wants to inflict knowing that there is no peace-loving authority in Gaza to reign them in. Ever.

I'm not saying Israel shouldn't protect itself. I'm saying exercise proportional responses instead of disproportional responses, stop exacting punitive punishment, and stop stealing land.

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 07:18 PM
Sorry, I'm not buying the cumbaya. The extremist will never, ever allow a peace to take hold.

As long as any Arab group/state/religion/kingdom refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, they don't deserve our support.

I get that we should support people that are seeking freedom. But, until they quit swearing death to our friends, they don't deserve our support.

The point is to understand why, and then work to resolve that.

We call that pragmatism.

BigRedChief
11-29-2012, 07:29 PM
The point is to understand why, and then work to resolve that.

We call that pragmatism.Lest we forget. In 1948 Israel was willing to forever accept an Israeli state and the West Bank and Gaza as permanent Palestinian states. The arabs said lets kill all those Jews. No mercy. Declared a holy war.

The Arabs could have helped the Palestinians at any point since 1948. Built some houses, provide drinkable water etc. They chose not to because of politics. They decided to let their fellow Arabs live in squalor to make their political point and use those images for political purposes in their own country.

patteeu
11-29-2012, 07:31 PM
Nope.



I'm not saying Israel shouldn't protect itself. I'm saying exercise proportional responses instead of disproportional responses, stop exacting punitive punishment, and stop stealing land.

What would your idea of a proportional response be to Hamas raining scores (and sometimes hundreds) of rockets per day into Israel from Gaza?

mnchiefsguy
11-29-2012, 07:33 PM
Lest we forget. In 1948 Israel was willing to forever accept an Israeli state and the West Bank and Gaza as permanent Palestinian states. The arabs said lets kill all those Jews. No mercy. Declared a holy war.

The Arabs could have helped the Palestinians at any point since 1948. Built some houses, provide drinkable water etc. They chose not to because of politics. They decided to let their fellow Arabs live in squalor to make their political point and use those images for political purposes in their own country.

In addition, how many hundreds of millions of dollars in aid did Yasar Arafat help himself too, instead of using it for the benefit of his people. His widow was living the high life in the south of France with 400 million dollars from what I have read, although that was 5-6 years ago.

Edit: I guess it was more than that. Here is a CBS article talking about the billions that Arafat took and did not use to help his people:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-582487.html

ForeverChiefs58
11-29-2012, 07:44 PM
How do the Palestinians who live in Israel compare on economic measurements to those outside of Israel?

Well, Israel even allows for thousands and thousands of Palestinians—to hold Israeli residency permits, which allows them to live in Judea and Samaria. Many also hold a "Jerusalem Residency Card," which entitles them to state benefits from Israel. Yet they have remained in Jordan.

HonestChieffan
11-29-2012, 08:54 PM
Well, Israel even allows for thousands and thousands of Palestinians—to hold Israeli residency permits, which allows them to live in Judea and Samaria. Many also hold a "Jerusalem Residency Card," which entitles them to state benefits from Israel. Yet they have remained in Jordan.

And to my question?

Taco John
11-29-2012, 09:13 PM
Hahaha! Did the UN just vote to make Palestine a club that gets to watch! HAHAHAHAHA!

The UN is such a joke!

ForeverChiefs58
11-29-2012, 10:28 PM
And to my question?

Oh they have it much, much better.


In July 2006, the Israeli Government categorized all Arab communities in the country as 'class A' development areas, thus making them eligible for tax benefits. This decision aims to encourage investments in the Arab sector.

Raanan Dinur, director-general of Prime Minister office, said in December 2006 that Israel had finalized plans to set up a NIS 160 million private equity fund to help develop the businesses of the country's Arab community over the next decade. According to Dinur, companies owned by Arab citizens of Israel will be eligible to apply to the fund for as much as NIS 4 million (USD 952,000), enabling as many as 80 enterprises to receive money over the next 10 years. The Israeli government will, according to Dinur, solicit bids to operate the fund from various financial institutes and private firms, which must pledge to raise at least NIS 80 million (about USD 19 million) from private investors.

In March 2010, the government approved a $216 million, five-year development plan for the Israeli Arab sector with the goal of increasing job accessibility, particularly for women and academics. Under this program, some 15,000 new employees will be added to the work roster by 2014.

Various polls show that Arabs in Israel do not wish to move to the West Bank or Gaza if a Palestinian state is created there. In a survey conducted by Kul Al-Arab among 1,000 residents of Um Al-Fahm, 83 percent of respondents opposed the idea of transferring their city to Palestinian jurisdiction, while 11 percent supported the proposal and 6 percent did not express their position.

Of those opposed to the idea, 54% said that they were against becoming part of a Palestinian state because they wanted to continue living under a democratic regime and enjoying a good standard of living. Of these opponents, 18% said that they were satisfied with their present situation, that they were born in Israel and that they were not interested in moving to any other state. Another 14% of this same group said that they were not prepared to make sacrifices for the sake of the creation of a Palestinian state. Another 11 percent cited no reason for their opposition.


According to Ishmael Khaldi, an Arab citizen of Israel and the nation's first high-ranking Muslim in the Israeli foreign service, while Israeli society is far from perfect, minorities in Israel fare far better than any other country in the Middle East. He wrote:

"I am a proud Israeli – along with many other non-Jewish Israelis such as Druze, Bahai, Bedouin, Christians and Muslims, who live in one of the most culturally diversified societies and the only true democracy in the Middle East. Like America, Israeli society is far from perfect, but let us deal honestly. By any yardstick you choose – educational opportunity, economic development, women and gay's rights, freedom of speech and assembly, legislative representation – Israel's minorities fare far better than any other country in the Middle East."

In 2009, the Israeli Arab Journalist Khaled Abu Toameh declared to a Muslim audience during the Durban Review Conference, that while there are serious problems facing the Arab secter in Israel, "Israel is a wonderful place to live and we are happy to be there. Israel is a free and open country. If I were given the choice, I would rather live in Israel as a second class citizen than as a first class citizen in Cairo, Gaza, Amman or Ramallah."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Economic_status

WoodDraw
11-29-2012, 10:42 PM
I'm so bored of this conflict. Neither side wants peace. They'll pretend they do, but show no actions. Both sides have decent points. Any outsider could sit down and hammer out a compromise. But it won't happen...

ForeverChiefs58
11-29-2012, 11:06 PM
I found this very interesting as it seems ignorance of history and widespread inaccurate acceptance of Palestinian historiography to be the main problem.


The Catastrophe Called Nakba

"All of the world knows what happened here in 1948,' Daoud Abu Lebdeh says, while leaning against a table in a coffee shop on the Hebrew University's Mount Scopus campus.

"The Israeli soldiers or the Israeli militias like the Hagana, Kahane, the Irgun and Lehi came here and they [kicked] the people outside from their homes."

Daoud is a nondescript man of 24 from the Jerusalem neighborhood of Wadi Joz. A correspondent and blogger with the Palestinian website the Middle East Post, Daoud has come highly recommended as an expert on the Nakba, the "catastrophe" of the birth of the State of Israel, and concurrently, the start of the Palestinian refugee problem, by Fatah Youth activist and Jerusalemite Mousa Abassi.

Despite the historical inaccuracy, Daoud's statement echoes the standard Palestinian narrative of the Nakba, a topic which comes up every year as Arabs within Israel, the Palestinian Authority and around the world commemorate the what they see as the tragedy of Israel's establishment on May 14, 1948.

Elaborating on the Palestinian narrative regarding what they have termed "ethnic cleansing," Daoud explains that "the English books, the American history books, it's all the same. There is nothing to change. The whole world knows what happened here."

"[The Jews] came here and established their own state [and] until today they have prevented us [from] establishing our state near to their state."

The Palestinian narrative is very clear. According to Daoud and the Arab version of events, the Zionist movement began bringing in Jews to Palestine, then a peaceful backwater of the Ottoman Empire in which a distinct Palestinian culture had developed over centuries.

Having convinced the British to back their nationalist goals at the expense of the local Palestinians, the Jews began to bring in illegal immigrants and eventually drove the Palestinians out of their homes in an orgy of violence and massacre.

The Jews, explains Daoud, have no claim to any part of Palestine.

Asked why his predecessors did not accept the 1947 United Nations partition plan, unlike the Zionist movement which endorsed it wholeheartedly, and instead chose to go to war, the Palestinian journalist grabs my iPhone off of the table.

"I have taken your phone," he says. "What do you do?" The partition resolution, he claims, was like someone stealing a smartphone and then asking to split it. He asserts that the Zionist movement had no claim to any part of the land and that asking the Arabs to accept that they did was a trampling of their rights.

According to Daoud, the ancient Jewish presence in Israel, preceding the arrival of Arabs and Islam to the country by thousands of years, does not have any bearing on the current political reality.

Asked why, he counters that the Jewish presence in this land is similar to that of the Muslim Moors who conquered Spain.

"Just as I can't, in the name of Islam, go to Spain to occupy it and [expel] the Spanish because [in the past we were there]," he says, "it's the same thing that you [Israel] are doing now. It's not my problem that [King] David was here and Muhammad was there."

The Palestinian focus on the Nakba, and on the return to homes lost in the fighting and subsequent Arab mass flight from Israel in 1948, has intensified over the past few years, he asserts. Despite an emphasis on the Nakba, and Israel's illegitimacy, in the PA's educational curriculum since the early 1990s, Daoud is sure that his people have grown more attached to the Nakba narrative because they are disillusioned by the failure to achieve a two-state solution.

However, despite the popularity and wide currency enjoyed by the Palestinian version of events, history tells a different story, and not everybody subscribes to the Nakba narrative.

Efraim Karsh, an expatriate Israeli, historian and Arabist, is the editor of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Quarterly, published by Dr. Daniel Pipes's think tank the Middle East Forum, and, speaking with the Post by Skype from his home in the city of brotherly love, affirms his contention that the popular version of events is based on erroneous sources.

Karsh, who recently published Palestine Betrayed, a history of the Nakba, explains that it is precisely the widespread acceptance of Palestinian historiography that has stood in the way of implementing a two-state solution and accounts for, in his view, Palestinian intransigence.

An accurate history of the conflict, he opens, should be independent of political ideology. He believes history has no relation to political ideology. He himself, he continues, is an advocate of the two-state paradigm, despite his absolute rejection of the Palestinian narrative.

One of Karsh's main contentions in his book is the responsibility of the Palestinian and outside Arab leadership for the events of 1948.

"In 1947, prior to the first UN General Assembly vote, Palestinian leaders rejected any form of Jewish self-determination in Palestine. Hajj Amin Husseini, their most prominent leader from the early 1920s to the late 1940s, upheld that 'there is no place in Palestine for two races.' All areas conquered by the Arabs during the 1948 war were cleansed of Jews," he wrote in this newspaper last year.

Delving through Arab, Israeli and British archives, Karsh in Palestine Betrayed paints a portrait of a divided and not at all cohesive Palestinian-Arab society that, as he put it "all but disintegrated, with 300,000-340,000 of its members fleeing their homes to other parts of Palestine and to the neighboring Arab states."

Writing that "nowhere at the time was the collapse and dispersion of Palestinian Arab society al-Nakba, 'the catastrophe,' as it would come to be known in Palestinian and Arab discourse – described as a systematic dispossession of Arabs by Jews," Karsh went on to quote contemporary Palestinian Arab leader Musa Alami, who stated that "If ultimately the Palestinians evacuated their country, it was not out of cowardice, but because they had lost all confidence in the existing system of defense."

Even more damning, in Karsh's eyes, is a statement by Sir John Troutbeck, the head of the British Middle East Office in Cairo, regarding a 1949 fact-finding mission to the Gaza Strip.

"'We know who our enemies are,' they [the Arab refugees] will say, and they are referring to their Arab brothers who, they declare, persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their homes."

Referring to these and similar statements, Karsh tells the Post that "the beginning of my book basically tells it all. In 1948-1949 no one among the Palestinians spoke about the Jews as responsible for their plight. It came only later, ex post facto, that they started explaining why they ran away. If you look, there are quotes of refugees in Gaza in 1949 telling the British 'look, our leaders, the Arabs, they pushed us out but not the Jews' so I cannot think that you need much more than this [to understand the situation]."

In the Fifties, Karsh says, the narrative began to change, with the plight of the Palestinian refugees being used as a tool in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

"In the Fifties you see the discredited Arab leaders like the Mufti and others begin an attempt to basically absolve themselves or rehabilitate themselves in their constituents," he says.

This alternative narrative, combined with statements by Daoud regarding repeated Israeli rejections of Palestinian peace offers which Karsh rejects as untrue, paint a picture, he says, of a people unwilling to face reality.

The current Palestinian historiography is "a combination of ignorance and reluctance to reconcile themselves to reality [and] the result is very dispiriting for the future for peace," he continues.

Certainly, the PA's continuing demand for the "right of return" would be looked upon differently by a world that believed the Palestinian exodus to be the fault of the Arab states and local communal leaders.

In fact, Karsh continues, while there has been, even after the Roman exile, a Jewish presence in the Land of Israel for millennia, the very concept of Palestinian nationalism is a 20th-century creation.

Among his sources, Karsh quotes former Arab nationalist, Knesset member and alleged Hezbollah spy Azmi Bishara, who once made an appearance on Israeli television to announce that he doesn't "think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation.

"I always thought so and I did not change my mind. I do not think there is a Palestinian nation, I think its a colonialist invention – Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from? I think there is an Arab nation. I never turned to be a Palestinian nationalist, despite my decisive struggle against the occupation. I think that until the end of the 19th century, Palestine was the south of Greater Syria."

Of course, Daoud is having none of this. He says that while he is ready to accept a two-state solution, there really is no legitimate Jewish sovereignty in Palestine and that the entire conflict is the fault of Zionist territorial hunger and ethnic cleansing. "The Jews suffered at the hands of the Nazis. What we don't know is why we the Palestinians must pay the price for that."

Karsh's opinion, he believes, is the historical revision, not the current Nakba narrative.

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 11:11 PM
Lest we forget. In 1948 Israel was willing to forever accept an Israeli state and the West Bank and Gaza as permanent Palestinian states. The arabs said lets kill all those Jews. No mercy. Declared a holy war.

The Arabs could have helped the Palestinians at any point since 1948. Built some houses, provide drinkable water etc. They chose not to because of politics. They decided to let their fellow Arabs live in squalor to make their political point and use those images for political purposes in their own country.

You're preaching to the choir. I'm not arguing that Palestine is blameless.

I also don't have a time machine handy, and am trying to cook up solutions in 2012.

Direckshun
11-29-2012, 11:16 PM
What would your idea of a proportional response be to Hamas raining scores (and sometimes hundreds) of rockets per day into Israel from Gaza?

I'm not a military expert, but I favor proportional responses.

Israel's military response in this most recent escapade walked a bit too deadly of an edge for me, but I don't have too big of a problem with how Israel responded militarily. (And we both know that Hamas was responding to an Israeli misdeed, which was responding to a Hamas misdeed, which was a response to an Israeli misdeed, ad nauseum... This region is chicken vs. egg shit.)

I do think Israel embraces policy that makes episodes like this more frequent and more deadly. That's where the bulk of my criticism lies.

ForeverChiefs58
11-30-2012, 12:33 AM
Hamas's Web School for Suicide Bombers


All states use education as a medium to encourage responsible behavior in their children, at least in part to develop a law-abiding, civic-minded citizenry. Authoritarian regimes have a history of distorting this trust, often turning schools into places of indoctrination for a state or religious ideology. The Palestinians have, for some time now, created an educational system exemplifying this indoctrinational approach: Their textbooks deny Jewish and Israeli legitimacy within historic Palestine, demonize Jews and Israelis, discourage compromise or negotiated peace, and glorify violent struggle to achieve what are often termed "Palestinian aspirations." Since coming to power through elections in early 2006 and following its military coup in Gaza in June 2007, Hamas has continued this path of indoctrination, utilizing its popular children's website, Al-Fateh.

Formal Education in Gaza

After a series of clashes, predating Hamas's parliamentary win in 2006 but intensifying thereafter, Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip in a swift but brutal campaign, which lasted little more than a week (June 7-15, 2007). Hamas now controls the Gaza Strip, and the Palestinian Authority (PA) retains almost no standing, except perhaps in the field of education: All the schools in the strip—the very small number of private schools, the public schools, and those run by the United Nations Works and Refugee Agency (UNRWA)—follow the official PA school curriculum and use the corresponding textbooks.

This may be surprising in view of the cardinal importance Hamas attributes to the education of children and youth as a means of achieving its ideological and political goals. Article 15 of the Hamas charter states:


It is necessary that scientists, educators, and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening. It is important that basic changes be made in school curriculum to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the Orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah al Din (Saladin).

Despite this, Hamas has yet to introduce its own school curriculum. Perhaps this is due in part to a concern for Palestinian unity; perhaps it is merely a desire to avoid the heavy expense such revisions would necessitate. Most likely this results from Hamas's recognition that continued implementation of the official PA curriculum is the only way currently that allows internationally recognized matriculation examinations to proceed and for diplomas to be awarded. In 2009 for example, practical steps were taken by Hamas to ensure that the examinations would take place at exactly the same time in both Gaza and the West Bank.

But if Hamas is apparently content at this time to rely on PA-sanctioned curricula, it nonetheless resorts to other methods in order to leave its imprint on Gazan education. Firstly, it sees to it that the teachers employed throughout the strip impart its ideological and political views alongside the official pedagogical and educational approaches. One way to get a good idea of the substance of those views is by turning to Al-Fateh, Hamas's web-based magazine for children and youth.

Its Master's Voice

Al-Fateh (Al-Fatih) website went online in September 2002. Its name is indicative of its ideological ambition. Al-Fateh (the conqueror) is not related to the Fatah party, Hamas's Palestinian rival; the apparent link is purely fortuitous and only linguistic. Fatah is an invented word. It starts with an acronym from the initial letters in Harakat Tahrir Filastin, the Movement for the Liberation of Palestine, HTF or Hataf. It seemed ill-omened that Hataf can be read as hatf or death in Arabic letters where only the consonants are shown. Fatah's founders decided to write the initial letters backwards, as FTH or Fatah, which can also be read as fath or "conquest, victory" when the vowels are changed.

Although Hamas has denied any connection to Al-Fateh, there is evidence to the contrary. Al-Fateh's Internet server (located in Russia) also hosts the Palestine Gallery, the photo portal website for Hamas's online Palestinian Information Center (PIC). The Arabic portal of the PIC contains a number of links to Hamas-affiliated websites, including that of Hamas's military wing, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades and Al-Fateh, showing Hamas's intent to refer readers to sites whose content supports its ideology. Hamas's public rejection of ownership may be useful in preventing host countries from shutting down the servers as was done to the site of the Qassam Brigades in 2008.

In spite of the denial, the web magazine's ideological affiliation with Hamas is evident when one considers the content and messages conveyed on the site. It identifies itself exclusively with both the ideology and activities of Hamas, including military actions that deliberately target civilians.

The website expresses the same religio-political positions that Hamas takes in its charter, including the doctrine that the entire land of historic Palestine is waqf (an Islamic endowment) and that its liberation by violent jihad is a religious duty. Pride of place is given to Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, the founder of Hamas. The site repeatedly quotes the words of the movement's leaders and extols the members of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Except for a few references to Palestinian Islamic Jihad, no other Palestinian movements or leaders are mentioned. It jubilantly reported Hamas's victory in the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections and repeatedly commemorates Hamas martyrs (shahids/shuhada'), publishing their last wills and testaments.

In an analysis of 159 issues published between September 2002 and October 2009, four major themes recur: hatred and contempt for the West, annihilation of Israel and its Jewish inhabitants, demonization of the Jews, and a cynical form of indoctrination that aims to turn children into future suicide bombers.

Hatred and Scorn for the West

Al-Fateh depicts the West as decadent and inferior to the Islamic world, both from a scientific and a moral perspective. Many scientific discoveries achieved by the West are claimed to be of Islamic origin. Thus, Christopher Columbus was not the first to discover America, which "he reached hundreds of years after the Arabs and Muslims." The "legend" that Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity is but a ruse to hide the fact that the idea was of Arabic provenance. Other scientific "firsts" appropriated without acknowledgment by the West include the knowledge that the world is not flat and the discovery of electricity.

Ideas of human equality and social justice, whose roots extend from the Bible through the Magna Carta through the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, emerged according to Al-Fateh in reality in Mecca in the seventh century. While Western nations have time after time violated their own proclamations concerning human rights, Al-Fateh states that the emergence of Islam in Mecca brought


equality between the slave and his master, between the rich and the poor, the young and the old, the man and the woman, the Arab and the non-Arab … And from these roots grew a strong Islamic society which has no oppressor or oppressed, and in which no man can steal the rights of the other.

The West is regarded as a source of decadence, corruption, and cheap values that should be avoided—from "Western imperialist clothing" to television programs. The site also warns against celebrating Western holidays, which are alleged to provide an opportunity for Westerners to scorn Muslims:


the West looks at us … disdainfully and derisively, with a glance full of arrogance … They have the right to do so, because we have celebrated their [holidays] while they have not even thought to celebrate ours … because we have distanced ourselves from our ideal values and clung to their decadent values.

In this somewhat difficult passage, Al-Fateh uses the status of women to illustrate the inferiority of Western values:


Many Orientalists accuse Islam of failing to grant the woman what it grants the man. We do not see this phenomenon in reality, but from reading history books we find something interesting: Century after century, we see that the nations of the West exploit and deny their basic human rights more than any other nation. The meaning of freedom has changed for the European woman and become entwined with the concepts of loss, escape, and disintegration … [so that] suicide has become the only option for those despairing and falling in perdition.

The West is further the enemy of Islam both because of its "severe attacks in beloved Palestine, in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, in Chechnya and in the Balkans, in India and in Kashmir" and its "subjugation" of Muslim peoples:


We are currently subjugated by the Jews, the Americans, and the British who occupy our holy land of Palestine, in Iraq, and in many Arab and Muslim states … It is [incumbent] upon us, the lion cubs of Arabism and Islam, to be prepared to fight those abject people and to liberate our country from occupation.

The website provides the obligatory references to Western imperialism and the crimes of the Crusaders:


The savage and backward feudal kings of Europe came at the head of huge armies as invaders and occupiers and seized many Arab cities on the Syrian coast.

See the crime that Britain has brought upon us: Britain conquered Palestine in a Crusader spirit, as articulated by their commander, General Allenby, who, after the conquest of Jerusalem in 1917, said: "Today the Crusades have ended."

This last, unsubstantiated quotation is taken directly from article 15 of the Hamas charter although it is a matter of controversy whether Viscount Allenby ever uttered such a comment.

Annihilation of Israel and the Jews

For Al-Fateh, Israel is an illegitimate state since "greater Palestine" is an Arab, Islamic land. Thus, the Jews have no rights whatsoever in "Palestine"


where the Arab Canaanites have dwelt since ancient times, a long time before the arrival of the Jews in Palestine, and even when the Jews immigrated into Palestine, the Arab tribes were there until the arrival of Islam, which made Palestine an Arab Islamic land … and since that time to our day the Muslim Arabs have never left … and everything in it testifies to Palestine being Arab and Muslim, despite the arrogance of the Jews and the imperialism that helps the Jews occupy it.

According to a number of modern Arab historians, the ancient Babylonians, Aramaeans, and Phoenicians were all Arabs who emigrated from the Arabian Peninsula. This "Arabization" of the Canaanites is meant to portray the Israelites (and by extension, the Jews) as interlopers in the land and to transform the Arab Palestinians, the alleged Canaanite descendants, as the only legitimate and indigenous inhabitants. But as even partisan supporters of the Palestinian cause such as Rashid Khalidi have noted, Palestinian nationalism developed a historiography that "anachronistically read back into the history of Palestine over the past few centuries, and even millennia, a nationalist consciousness and identity that are in fact relatively modern," creating a "predilection for seeing in peoples such as the Canaanites, Jebusites, Amorites, and Philistines the lineal ancestors of the modern Palestinians."

This denial of a Jewish connection to the land extends to the Kotel or Western Wall, a remnant of one of the supporting walls of Herod's Temple and the holiest, accessible site for Jewish prayer:


The Western Wall, a noble and honored Arab and Islamic remnant, [is] one of the walls of the Al-Aqsa Mosque … the most ancient Islamic site in Jerusalem. The occupying Jews claim that this wall is all that remains of their ancient temple, called Solomon's Temple. In actual fact, the Jews' claim is false, fake, and incorrect, and history and archeological research prove our statements. The ancient Jewish temple was completely destroyed by the Romans approximately 2000 years ago. All archeological researchers prove that this wall was built in the Umayyad period … the Western Wall of the Al-Aqsa Mosque is thus an Arab Islamic remnant and consequently has no connection at all to Solomon's Temple.

Like other Palestinian educational literature, Al-Fateh website frequently depicts the map of the Middle East without Israel and instead shows only "Palestine." It avoids the phrase "the State of Israel," instead employing terms of derogation and condemnation, including the "Zionist entity," "the cursed state," the "state of the monstrous entity," the "criminal state," the "alleged entity," and the "thieving usurping entity."

Not content with expunging any past connection to the land, Al-Fateh's hostility and contempt for Israel are intertwined with an expressed longing to annihilate it: "All Muslim children are the hope for the future, and by their hands, with God's help, the accursed Jewish state will be totally destroyed." This uncompromising hatred is tied to a condemnation of the Jews reputedly uttered by Muhammad, echoed in turn in the Hamas charter:


Palestine is an Islamic [religious] endowment [waqf]. It is the Muslims' primary problem, and its liberation is a personal religious duty for every Muslim. I recall the saying [hadith] uttered by God's Messenger [Muhammad]: "The Hour of Judgment will not arrive until you fight the Jews and kill them … and until the trees and the rocks will say: 'O Muslim, O servant of God, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him," except the salt bush [gharqad], for it is [one] of the Jews' trees.

That this exhortation is not confined to the past or some theoretical clause in an organizational charter is made explicit in numerous Al-Fateh issues: "You will be in the ranks in the near future, the future in which we cleanse our holy land of the impurity of the Jews." Israel's destruction and the violent liberation of Palestine are described as one and the same thing: "The way to the complete liberation of the land is through the muzzle of the gun." Leaving nothing to chance, God Himself is called upon to accomplish the goal: "O God, you should deal with the aggressive Zionists, O God … kill them … and do not leave [even] one of them." This destruction is aimed not only against Israel but against Jews generally: "Oh, our Aqsa [Mosque], we shall return; we are the soldiers of God's religion. We will rejoice at the victory and kill the Jews by the sword."

It is not surprising then that Al-Fateh rejects any peace settlement, any negotiations that might lead to a settlement, and all past agreements concluded with Israel, echoing article 13 of the Hamas charter. In a column dedicated to Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the most prominent Palestinian leader in the 1930s and 1940s and a Nazi collaborator, Al-Fateh republishes his admonition for its student readers: "If you don't succeed in liberating Palestine, I am warning you not to conclude a peace agreement with the Jews, whatever the situation will be." Turning to more contemporary leadership, the website quotes Abd al-Aziz Rantisi (1947-2004), Hamas's cofounder, one of its principal leaders in Gaza, and a staunch opponent of the Oslo accords, who referred to Palestinian anti-negotiation demonstrators as those who "left their homes in order to tell the negotiators: 'No to this ridiculous negotiation! Yes to continuing resistance. Yes to the gun!'"

Demonization of Jews

Al-Fateh takes every opportunity to promote demonization of the Jews, described as "the lowest of the human race." Jews are regularly accused of being enemies of Islam, inherent tricksters, and treaty violators, for whom there is no place in Palestine:


Tell them about your forefathers and about the Jews' forefathers and explain the difference between them. For they [the Jews' forefathers] violated [their] treaties, killed the innocent ones, and transformed falsity into truth and truth into falsity through their trickery … Talk to them about the Jews' trickery against our Messenger al-Mustafa [Muhammad] and [tell them] that this trickery will continue until the hour of judgment.

Stories and articles on the website portray Israel and the Jews as thirsty for Palestinian blood and lusting to commit murder and acts of cruelty for the sake of their own pleasure. A prime example of such demonization can be found in the following excerpt from a story told by a grandmother about Muhammad al-Dura. Dura, a Palestinian child allegedly killed in a gun battle by Israeli troops in September 2000, became the poster boy for the second intifada and has been idealized as a shahid (martyr):


He and his father arrived at the roadblock guarded by the criminal Jewish soldiers, the car was not allowed to pass, and Muhammad went by foot with his father … [T]he soldiers descended on them as the wolves descend on their prey, and began to fire around them first without hitting them. Muhammad stood by his father and said: "Do not worry, their bullets will not hurt us, we have done nothing to them, why should they kill us?" His father responded: "They are Jews, Muhammad." … Muhammad was hit by shrapnel … Muhammad's father began to shout in the direction of the ambulance (which could not move forward due to the fire): "The boy is dead! The boy is dead! Help us!" One of the sniper soldiers laughed in scorn at this father … [and] said in his criminal mind: The solution is to rid him of his son, then aimed the sniper rifle at Muhammad's chest, smiled and began to shoot. The bullets pierced Muhammad's heart … The soldiers' teeth … stuck out like the fangs of wolves … their hearts were like the hearts of wolves that have no human emotion in them.

The wolf imagery also appears in other editions: Jews are "wolves whose eyes blaze with evil, evil fills their hearts … They are indeed the murderers of the prophets." The latter accusation harks back to a common interpretation of the Qur'an giving these efforts at demonization a religious dimension. Similarly, Jews are slurred many times on the website as descendents of apes and pigs, a terrible insult in Islam, with its origins in the Qur'an.

Educating Future Suicide Bombers

At times it seems as if Al-Fateh's educational mission is the single-minded creation of the next generation of suicide bombers. Demonizing and dehumanizing the Jews prepares young readers for future action. However, Al-Fateh does not merely exhort children to take up arms to kill Israelis and become jihad fighters, it indoctrinates them to seek shahada or martyrdom. Suicide bombings are idealized as an expression of devotion to Islam and as a sought-after pleasure, enabling the shahid to ascend immediately to paradise. Terrorist attacks and suicide bombings are highly praised and their perpetrators glorified.

To overcome the youngsters' natural reservations about committing suicide, the site also systematically and cynically exposes the readers to graphic images of torn limbs and dead bodies in order to desensitize them to violence and death. Similarly, the last wills and testaments of suicide bombers are used to sway youngsters and prepare them psychologically to "follow in the footsteps of the fighters in order to liberate this land from the impurity of the contemptible Jews … know[ing] clearly that my blood will be shed and my organs scattered."

Al-Fateh publishes scores of jihadist testimonies such as this from the will of suicide bomber Isma'il al-Ma'aswabi, who detonated a car bomb killing two Israeli soldiers:


love of jihad and martyrdom rules my life, my soul, my feelings and my heart … It is difficult for the soul that has tasted the sweet taste of jihad, the suffering in which is delicious … to rest anywhere else than Paradise …Whereas I am living in Paradise … do not be sad my brothers as I am a shahid in Paradise …and I will see you there with God's help.

The religious justification for this act of self-destruction is made explicit for young readers in the following passage:


Muslims who have been slain are in Paradise, and [the Jews] who have been slain are in Hell. They [the Muslims who were killed] have been granted martyrdom, which is the Muslims' hope and goal in this world. They died because their time had come, and had the Jews not killed them, they would have died [anyway]. But God wanted Paradise for them, so He granted them martyrdom … Be reassured my beloved one, that at the moment of their martyrdom they do not feel pain at all. They feel as if they are only pricked by a needle.

Al-Fateh and Hamas's radical, hard-line, rejectionist stance are not compatible with a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. More typical of Al-Fateh's viewpoint is the republished last will and testament of suicide bomber Ahmad Marmash, who murdered five and wounded more than 100 civilians at a shopping mall in Netanya in 2001:


many of the sons of this nation are killed, and they [the leaders] are waiting and standing idly by, claiming that the solution of the problem is the solution of peace. Do you think that the Zionist enemy understands the message of peace and the peaceful solution?

In another posting, a young girl recounts her response to an official from the Israeli Ministry of Education, who visited her school to speak of peace:


Do you expect peace between the wolf and the lamb? … The wolf wants to devour the poor, weak lamb because it drank from a brook … peace, honorable sir, with the wolf of occupation which took everything from us … imprisons our youths? Our warriors will pursue them and kill them. The pupils applauded me and whispered … "the occupation will fall … no peace with the enemies."

Al-Fateh's doctrinal and educational approach is in clear violation of international educational standards based on various U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization resolutions. By instructing its young audience in hatred and demonization and inciting them to shed blood and commit suicide, Al-Fateh and Hamas trample upon the fundamental rights of children as formulated in the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically article 6, which recognizes that every child has the "inherent right to life." Regardless of the U.N.'s tarnished reputation regarding human rights overall, the protection of children from indoctrination into a life of hatred and violence should be supported by all those who claim to advocate for human and children's rights.

http://www.meforum.org/pics/large/87.jpg
This cartoon from an Al-Fateh web page shows a young girl with a slingshot and, at the top, a boy with a sword. Al-Fateh promotes violence towards Jews, who are regularly accused of being enemies of Islam, thirsty for Palestinian blood, and lusting to commit murder and acts of cruelty. Comments on the website assure its readers that "with God's help, the accursed Jewish state will be totally destroyed."

http://www.meforum.org/2478/suicide-bombing-as-worship

Comrade Crapski
11-30-2012, 03:17 AM
so unplug the jukebox
and do us all a favor
that music lost it's taste
so try another flavor
ant music huh uh uh uh uh ant music huh uh uh uh uh

mlyonsd
11-30-2012, 02:59 PM
Why do you think that is?

Let's isolate that issue, because it comes up a lot with you.

What possible reason would Palestine not acknowledge Israel's right to exist? What would be the motive?

ForeverChiefs58
11-30-2012, 04:23 PM
What possible reason would Palestine not acknowledge Israel's right to exist? What would be the motive?

He prob. won't answer because it forces him to either be blind, or acknowledge the truth.

Well, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the most prominent Palestinian leader in the 1930s and 1940s was a Nazi collaborator.


Their own hate filled words tell their motives.


And how does someone argue that Israel needs to do more to achieve peace when things like this are on the palestinian govt website:

"All Muslim children are the hope for the future, and by their hands, with God's help, the accursed Jewish state will be totally destroyed." This uncompromising hatred is tied to a condemnation of the Jews reputedly uttered by Muhammad, and echoed in turn in the Hamas charter:

Palestine is an Islamic [religious] endowment [waqf]. It is the Muslims' primary problem, and its liberation is a personal religious duty for every Muslim. I recall the saying [hadith] uttered by God's Messenger [Muhammad]: "The Hour of Judgment will not arrive until you fight the Jews and kill them … and until the trees and the rocks will say: 'O Muslim, O servant of God, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him," except the salt bush [gharqad], for it is [one] of the Jews' trees.

"You will be in the ranks in the near future, the future in which we cleanse our holy land of the impurity of the Jews." Israel's destruction and the violent liberation of Palestine are described as one and the same thing: "The way to the complete liberation of the land is through the muzzle of the gun." Leaving nothing to chance, God Himself is called upon to accomplish the goal: "O God, you should deal with the aggressive Zionists, O God … kill them … and do not leave [even] one of them." This destruction is aimed not only against Israel but against Jews generally: "Oh, our Aqsa [Mosque], we shall return; we are the soldiers of God's religion. We will rejoice at the victory and kill the Jews by the sword.

http://www.meforum.org/2675/hamas-web-school-suicide-bombers

patteeu
11-30-2012, 04:28 PM
What possible reason would Palestine not acknowledge Israel's right to exist? What would be the motive?

Direckshun's angle seems to be that they'd be giving up a bargaining chip. In Direckshun's world, it would seem, the people he disfavors are the ones who owe concessions to the negotiating process first, whether it's the Israeli-palestinian conflict or the fiscal cliff negotiations.

Anticipated response --> Swing and miss (for no particular reason)

ForeverChiefs58
12-02-2012, 10:04 PM
I just saw this today and it just adds to the point at what is at the core of this dispute in previous posts:

Israel insists that the Palestinians are responsible for the deadlock, accusing them of refusing to recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland, glorifying violence and promoting anti-Semitic caricatures.

Netanyahu said Abbas' speech at the U.N., in which he accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing" and omitted any reference of the Jewish connection to the holy land, was filled with incitement and hate.

"This is additional proof that this is not a dispute over land but a denial of the existence of the State of Israel," he said. "As long as the Palestinian Authority educates the younger generation to hate, how is it at all possible to talk about peace?"

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 10:31 AM
What possible reason would Palestine not acknowledge Israel's right to exist? What would be the motive?

Direckshun's angle seems to be that they'd be giving up a bargaining chip.

That is absolutely true.

The biggest issue for the Palestinian people, in 2012, is their survival and existence in what is culturally and historically known as Palestine. Whether Israel actually exists is secondary; getting their own land and self-determination is primary.

So if it bothers Israel so much that a symbolic act that will do nothing to affect what's happening on the ground is not being granted by the Palestinians, they'll just keep it in their pocket and use it as a bargaining chip in negotiations.

Why is it so important to you, mlyonsd? I assume for symbolic purposes, because nothing on the ground is going to change.

In Direckshun's world, it would seem, the people he disfavors are the ones who owe concessions to the negotiating process first, whether it's the Israeli-palestinian conflict or the fiscal cliff negotiations.

Anticipated response --> Swing and miss

Swing and a miss.

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 10:32 AM
For the record, in response to Palestine being upgraded at the UN, Israel has just started expanding settlements to a part of Jerusalem long-thought to be the deathknell of the two-state solution.

Go ahead and tell me Israel shouldn't be doing anything different than what they're doing now.

Just go ahead and tell me. A generation's worth of ignorance is waiting for your arrival.

patteeu
12-03-2012, 11:22 AM
For the record, in response to Palestine being upgraded at the UN, Israel has just started expanding settlements to a part of Jerusalem long-thought to be the deathknell of the two-state solution.

Go ahead and tell me Israel shouldn't be doing anything different than what they're doing now.

Just go ahead and tell me. A generation's worth of ignorance is waiting for your arrival.

The palestinian action at the UN was a step backward (from the Oslo agreement). Why should Israel step forward in response?

patteeu
12-03-2012, 11:25 AM
BTW, Direckshun, acknowledging Israel's right to exist can't just be symbolic or it's worthless. The palestinians have to convince the Israelis that they're sincere if they want their own state.

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 01:40 PM
The palestinian action at the UN was a step backward (from the Oslo agreement).

In what way?

Why should Israel step forward in response?

Israel is taking a radical step backwards with the E1 settlements.

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 01:40 PM
BTW, Direckshun, acknowledging Israel's right to exist can't just be symbolic or it's worthless.

Nope, symbolism is very important.

But that's all recognition is. Symbolic. It doesn't change anything on the ground by itself.

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 01:55 PM
Makes all the sense in the world (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/02/israel-palestinian-tax-revenue-un-vote):

Israel has seized more than $120m (£75m)in tax revenues it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority in response to last week's overwhelming vote at the UN general assembly to recognise the state of Palestine. The move came as the PA president, Mahmoud Abbas, returned to cheering crowds in Ramallah in the West Bank following Thursday's vote, in which 138 countries backed enhanced "non-member state" status for Palestine. Only nine countries opposed the move and 41 abstained.

ForeverChiefs58
12-03-2012, 03:11 PM
Makes all the sense in the world (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/02/israel-palestinian-tax-revenue-un-vote):

Yes, since they don't have to do it at all.

And they shouldn't. Why would you ever give money to people sworn to your death?

Do you understand how much money and aid is provided to these people that are sworn to violence and death?

ForeverChiefs58
12-03-2012, 03:13 PM
In what way?



Israel is taking a radical step backwards with the E1 settlements.

The palestinians broke another agreement when they went to the UN

They had previously agreed to unilateral talks with Israel

Pawnmower
12-03-2012, 03:17 PM
Go ahead and tell me Israel shouldn't be doing anything different than what they're doing now.


Theyre both acting like spoiled brats....

Neither wants to say 'sorry' first.....Neither wants to be the one to 'look weak' to the public by admitting any wrong doing.

They are both at fault.....to degrees.


I'm not saying it is the biggest problem, but one of the biggest problems that may not be able to be overcome is the FACT that most Palestinians truly do not believe Israel has a right to exist. (So asking them to 'say' they do is asking a lot...)

We can blame Hamas all we want, but Hamas is elected by the people...and every poll I know of shows something on the order of 80% of the Palestinian PEOPLE do not think Israel has a right to exist. Period.

From what I understand, the majority of Israeli's believe that Palestinians, if they simply acknowledged this right and denounced suicide bombings and martyrdom operations SHOULD have their own country, and have a right to it.

12,000 rockets fired over 10 years.....I mean what if they were their own country? What would happen to a country who fired 12,000 missiles at a neigboring country ?

Personally I think they are lucky they aren't a country yet. Right now they have sympathy as an occupied / subjugated people. If and when they get their own actual country where the buck stops with them....If and when that happens, if they fire missiles they will get the shit kicked out of them even harder IMO.

patteeu
12-03-2012, 05:44 PM
In what way?

At Oslo, the parties agreed that changes of status would be negotiated between the parties, not imposed by outside organizations.

Israel is taking a radical step backwards with the E1 settlements.

I'm not sure Israel considers Oslo operative anymore. Israeli officials have made statements in the past indicating that if the palestinians were to go through with their recognition gambit at the UN, it would be the end of Oslo. I don't know if these statements were official policy or just talk.

patteeu
12-03-2012, 05:45 PM
Nope, symbolism is very important.

But that's all recognition is. Symbolic. It doesn't change anything on the ground by itself.

The only thing that's important in this regard is whether or not Israel believes that the palestinians want a two-state peace. If they aren't convinced, then no peace can be had.

Direckshun
12-03-2012, 06:57 PM
Theyre both acting like spoiled brats....

Neither wants to say 'sorry' first.....Neither wants to be the one to 'look weak' to the public by admitting any wrong doing.

They are both at fault.....to degrees.

I'm not saying it is the biggest problem, but one of the biggest problems that may not be able to be overcome is the FACT that most Palestinians truly do not believe Israel has a right to exist. (So asking them to 'say' they do is asking a lot...)

We can blame Hamas all we want, but Hamas is elected by the people...and every poll I know of shows something on the order of 80% of the Palestinian PEOPLE do not think Israel has a right to exist. Period.

From what I understand, the majority of Israeli's believe that Palestinians, if they simply acknowledged this right and denounced suicide bombings and martyrdom operations SHOULD have their own country, and have a right to it.

12,000 rockets fired over 10 years.....I mean what if they were their own country? What would happen to a country who fired 12,000 missiles at a neigboring country ?

Personally I think they are lucky they aren't a country yet. Right now they have sympathy as an occupied / subjugated people. If and when they get their own actual country where the buck stops with them....If and when that happens, if they fire missiles they will get the shit kicked out of them even harder IMO.

Solid post, in most places.

mlyonsd
12-03-2012, 07:02 PM
BTW, Direckshun, acknowledging Israel's right to exist can't just be symbolic or it's worthless. The palestinians have to convince the Israelis that they're sincere if they want their own state.
They won't recognize Israel because they don't really believe in it. Their end game is to eventually own all of Israel. It's not like a secret or anything.

patteeu
12-03-2012, 07:31 PM
They won't recognize Israel because they don't really believe in it. Their end game is to eventually own all of Israel. It's not like a secret or anything.

I agree, but I'm not sure if anyone has told Direckshun.

stevieray
12-03-2012, 10:34 PM
They won't recognize Israel because they don't really believe in it. Their end game is to eventually own all of Israel. It's not like a secret or anything.
"someday, a young Palestinian will raise a flag over Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Palestine"

Abbas

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 07:44 PM
I'm not sure Israel considers Oslo operative anymore. Israeli officials have made statements in the past indicating that if the palestinians were to go through with their recognition gambit at the UN, it would be the end of Oslo. I don't know if these statements were official policy or just talk.

Oslo or no Oslo, building in E1 largely kills the two-state solution.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 07:44 PM
The only thing that's important in this regard is whether or not Israel believes that the palestinians want a two-state peace. If they aren't convinced, then no peace can be had.

The Likud doesn't want a two-state solution. So.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 07:45 PM
The Likud won't recognize Palestine because they don't really believe in it. Their end game is to eventually own all of Israel. It's not like a secret or anything.

Works both ways, does it not.

mnchiefsguy
12-04-2012, 07:54 PM
The Likud doesn't want a two-state solution. So.

Just because The Likud don't conduct themselves the way you want them too, does not mean they do no want a two-state solution.

One side in this argument wants genocide...can you guess which one? Here's a hint...they have nothing to do with Likud.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:12 PM
Just because The Likud don't conduct themselves the way you want them too, does not mean they do no want a two-state solution.

No, but when they build settlements in E1, that definitively means they do not want a two-state solution.

mlyonsd
12-04-2012, 08:24 PM
Works both ways, does it not.
Not really. One owns the high ground given to them by the UN in 1948.

Swing and a miss.

patteeu
12-04-2012, 08:38 PM
Oslo or no Oslo, building in E1 largely kills the two-state solution.

It doesn't kill a two-state solution, but it might be the beginning of killing a two-state solution that ends up with shared control of Jerusalem. Abbas should have thought of that before he pushed forward with his UN gambit.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:43 PM
Not really. One owns the high ground given to them by the UN in 1948.

How is that a response to what I said?

patteeu
12-04-2012, 08:44 PM
The Likud doesn't want a two-state solution. So.

Even if that were true, Likud is one of several political parties in Israel and it's clear that a large portion of Israelis are willing to support a two-state solution if they can be confident about Israeli security. If a reasonable negotiating party for a two-state solution emerges among palestinians and if Likud refuses to negotiate, Israelis will not be shy about electing a government that will.

Unfortunately, the same is not true for the palestinians. They have no interest in peace with Israel and no political leadership attempting to lead them down that path. Not Hamas and not Fatah. No one. That's where the problem lies, not with Likud.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:44 PM
It doesn't kill a two-state solution, but it might be the beginning of killing a two-state solution that ends up with shared control of Jerusalem. Abbas should have thought of that before he pushed forward with his UN gambit.

If you give up shared control of Jerusalem, you're giving up on the two-state solution.

There is no two-state solution without shared control of Jerusalem.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:45 PM
Even if that were true, Likud is one of several political parties in Israel and it's clear that a large portion of Israelis are willing to support a two-state solution if they can be confident about Israeli security. If a reasonable negotiating party for a two-state solution emerges among palestinians and if Likud refuses to negotiate, Israelis will not be shy about electing a government that will.

One hopes.

patteeu
12-04-2012, 08:45 PM
If you give up shared control of Jerusalem, you're giving up on the two-state solution.

There is no two-state solution without shared control of Jerusalem.

That's nonsense. There's no reason why a palestinian state can't be established without Jerusalem. No reason other than the fact that palestinians prefer war and violence over a state of their own, that is.

mlyonsd
12-04-2012, 08:51 PM
How is that a response to what I said?Lukid is protecting what they already have. Hamas wants to take it for no reason other than to kill every Jew still alive. Big difference.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:51 PM
That's nonsense. There's no reason why a palestinian state can't be established without Jerusalem.

How about the fact that it's as likely as Jews agreeing to a two-state solution without Jerusalem.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 08:52 PM
Lukid is protecting what they already have.

The Likud do not want to recognize Palestine. They also want all of Israel for themselves.

mlyonsd
12-04-2012, 08:54 PM
The Likud do not want to recognize Palestine. They also want all of Israel for themselves.And you can thank the ongoing Palestinian onslaught for that.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 09:00 PM
And you can thank the ongoing Palestinian onslaught for that.

There's lots of things we can thank for that.

To pretend this is simple is naive.

patteeu
12-04-2012, 09:30 PM
How about the fact that it's as likely as Jews agreeing to a two-state solution without Jerusalem.

The Israelis won't agree to a demilitarized state either, but that's what the palestinians will need to agree to if they ever want a two state solution. It would be good for palestinians to remember the maxim that beggars can't be choosers. It would also be good for them to recognize that the longer they hold out and continue to kill Israelis, the less likely they are to maximize their final status.

Direckshun
12-04-2012, 09:42 PM
The Israelis won't agree to a demilitarized state either, but that's what the palestinians will need to agree to if they ever want a two state solution. It would be good for palestinians to remember the maxim that beggars can't be choosers. It would also be good for them to recognize that the longer they hold out and continue to kill Israelis, the less likely they are to maximize their final status.

There are deal breakers, and there are deal breakers.

A Jerusalem in sole possession of Israel is a dealbreaker to both the two-state solution and peace.

stevieray
12-04-2012, 10:06 PM
A Jerusalem in sole possession of Israel is a dealbreaker to both the two-state solution and peace.

Thank God.

Your intellectual dishonesty is appalling.

ForeverChiefs58
12-05-2012, 01:52 PM
Oslo or no Oslo, building in E1 largely kills the two-state solution.

No, you are 100% wrong. Weird, you don't bring up the fact the palestinians killed it so many times first.

"Intensification of Palestinian terror in the years immediately following the signing of the accord led to disenchantment on the Israeli side."

"The Israeli's trust in the accords was undermined by the fact that immediately after the signing, the attacks against Israel intensified, which some explained as an attempt by certain Palestinian organizations to thwart the peace process. Others believed that the Palestinian Authority had no interest in stopping these attacks and was instead endorsing them. As evidence, they showed that when violence flared up in September 1996, Palestinian police turned their guns on the Israelis in clashes which left 61 Palestinians and 15 Israeli soldiers dead."

Broken.

The two side had an agreement the palestinians once again broke. In this case the Palestinians agreed to work directly with the people they want to destroy and NOT go to the UN.

"The 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement which created the PA, established a fundamental principle:

“Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the Permanent Status negotiations."

Broken.

"The Palestinian police force established under the Gaza-Jericho Agreement will be fully integrated into the Palestinian Police and will be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. Except for the Palestinian Police and the Israeli military forces, no other armed forces shall be established or operate in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

Broken.

Consisting of Articles XXII-XXVIII: Relations between Israel and the Council:

...shall accordingly abstain from incitement, including hostile propaganda, against each other...that their respective educational systems contribute to the peace between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples and to peace in the entire region, and will refrain from the introduction of any motifs that could adversely affect the process of reconciliation...cooperate in combating criminal activity which may affect both sides, including offenses related to trafficking in illegal drugs and psychotropic substances, smuggling, and offenses against property...

Broken.


"The fact that the Gaza Strip is fully controlled by Hamas who do not want peace with a Jewish state. According to the Israeli view, this limits the ability of the Palestinians to make peace with Israel and enforce it over the long term. Furthermore, in the Israeli view, a violent overtake of the West Bank by the Hamas as a result of the creation of an unstable new state is likely. Lastly, rhetoric from high-ranking Fatah officials promising a full, literal Palestinian right of return into Israel (a position no Israeli government can accept without destroying the Jewish character of Israel) makes peace negotiations more difficult for both sides."

You said, "To pretend this is simple is naive."

Yet it is way more simple than you make it. But I could see how you would think it was so complex since it is only the palestinians have always had an "all or nothing" approach to Israel with never a real commitment to peace.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interim_Agreement_on_the_West_Bank_and_the_Gaza_Strip