Israel wants to keep ALL of the West Bank

[Thunder]

Numerous individuals in this forum have suggested that the current Zionist movement and the Israeli government seeks to keep ALL of the West Bank. They argue this, even though Israel has spent billions of dollars on a Seperation Wall that cuts off a good 85% of the West Bank from Israel, and even though former and the current Israeli govt. has offered the Palestinians 93% of the West Bank, and a land exchange for the other 7%, for the State of Palestine.

I now call on the various accusers to show us their proof that the mainstream Zionist movement and the current Israeli government seeks to keep control of ALL of the West Bank.

.....Time to show your cards.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

The ghetto walls and separation walls are all part of a strategy to harass and persecute the Palestinians in order to eventually drive them out. This may take another 60 years. The Zionist Movement is no stranger to a long term agenda. Theodore Herzl recognized it would take 50 years before Israeel was created. And he was right.


has offered the Palestinians 93% of the West Bank

How can Israel offer something that isn't theirs to offer?


Everytime I ask the question: "Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?" there's an eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Why? because the Israel offer of a 2 state solution is complete lies. They only offer it because they know the Palestinians won't accept it.

So I ask again. Is it the sincere intention of Israel to fix it's borders forever, even in theire current position, with half of Jerusalem stuck on the end of a triangular peninsular of land protruding into the West Bank and live side by side with a Palestinian state that comprises of the West Bank and the little 'island' of Gaza?

Awaits eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Israel not only want all of the west bank it wants rid of Gaza. The evidence of the last 60 years history, including quotes from leading Zionists show that it wants the lot.

[Thunder]

The ghetto walls and separation walls are all part of a strategy to harass and persecute the Palestinians in order to eventually drive them out.

And your evidence of this complex master plan is???

I suspect you have none. But I will give you the opportunity to prove that the current Israeli govt. seeks to eventually push out all 3 million Palestinians and 1.3 million Israeli Arabs.

BTW, 65 year old quotes from Ben-Gurion, Begin, and Jabotinsky are meaningless.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

BTW, 65 year old quotes from Ben-Gurion, Begin, and Jabotinsky are meaningless.


Are they? Are you suggesting that Israel is now a traitor to the Zionist dream. You are getting as ludicrous as the Apologists now


And if Israel wants a two state solution then why is i implementing apartheid in the west bank and ghettoizing the Gazans. If it cares about the Palestinians, why has it just slaughtered a thousand of them. Why did it slaughter a similar amount in a Lebanese refugee camp in 2006.

Zionist apologist claim that Israel only targets 'military' - BS!!!

[WildCat]

Why? because the Israel offer of a 2 state solution is complete lies. They only offer it because they know the Palestinians won't accept it.
The challenge in the OP was for you to provide evidence for this assertion instead of repeating it. Will you be doing so?

[Thunder]

A


And if Israel wants a two state solution then why is i implementing apartheid in the west bank and ghettoizing the Gazans. !

Still waiting for you to provide actual evidence that Israel seeks to kick out all 3 million Palestinians and all 1.3 million Israeli-Arabs. I would also LOVE to see your evidence that the Seperation Wall is a pre-planned fruitless endeavor by Israel.

...This should be good.

[a_unique_person]

Numerous individuals in this forum have suggested that the current Zionist movement and the Israeli government seeks to keep ALL of the West Bank. They argue this, even though Israel has spent billions of dollars on a Seperation Wall that cuts off a good 85% of the West Bank from Israel, and even though former and the current Israeli govt. has offered the Palestinians 93% of the West Bank, and a land exchange for the other 7%, for the State of Palestine.

I now call on the various accusers to show us their proof that the mainstream Zionist movement and the current Israeli government seeks to keep control of ALL of the West Bank.

.....Time to show your cards.

What "Israel" thinks, in the sense of what actually happens as a result of it's actions, is not something static, and can be internally self contradictory.

The wall was built, for billions, by Kadima to set the borders for the new bantustan state. I don't see Likud regarding it as anything more than a white elephant. Who will get the call on policy now? I have no idea, but Likud seems to have the numbers, even if half of it's partners in Government despise each other and don't even want the same outcome.

[gtc]

It is silly to think that there was ever a single unified goal of the Zionist Movement (other than to found the state of Israel) and it is silly to assume that those same goals have been carried through unaltered to the modern state of Israel when so few of the current citizens of Israeli were alive during its foundation.

No one would argue that the US government shares the same agenda as the Pilgrims or that the English have the same goals as the Normans.


The writings of someone from the 19th Century shouldn't be used as evidence of Israel's 'secret agenda' to control the entire shebang.

[Puppycow]

I have a lot of sympathy for the Jews because of the Holocaust.

I have little for the Palestinians because of Munich and dancing in the streets after 9/11.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

It is silly to think that there was ever a single unified goal of the Zionist Movement (other than to found the state of Israel) and it is silly to assume that those same goals have been carried through unaltered to the modern state of Israel when so few of the current citizens of Israeli were alive during its foundation.

No one would argue that the US government shares the same agenda as the Pilgrims or that the English have the same goals as the Normans.


The writings of someone from the 19th Century shouldn't be used as evidence of Israel's 'secret agenda' to control the entire shebang.

So are you saying that Israel has turned it's back on the dream of it's founders?

[gdnp]

Numerous individuals in this forum have suggested that the current Zionist movement and the Israeli government seeks to keep ALL of the West Bank. They argue this, even though Israel has spent billions of dollars on a Seperation Wall that cuts off a good 85% of the West Bank from Israel, and even though former and the current Israeli govt. has offered the Palestinians 93% of the West Bank, and a land exchange for the other 7%, for the State of Palestine.

I now call on the various accusers to show us their proof that the mainstream Zionist movement and the current Israeli government seeks to keep control of ALL of the West Bank.

.....Time to show your cards.
I think it is incorrect that Israel wants all of the west bank and Gaza. Although this may be true in the broadest sense, as in "I want all the Saudi oil", it does not imply that the current political consensus is that they will keep it. Given the results of the recent election, where the most successful party only won 27 of 120 seats, I think it absurd to even make a statement that includes "the Israeli government seeks..." in it. I would have to agree with my friend, who says "if you want 3 opinions, ask 2 Jews".

Not living there, it is hard to know even what the range of opinions is. The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz seem to have decidedly different editorial slants. I suspect that the average Jew realizes that they cannot have all of the West Bank and peace, and that it would be impossible long term without extending citizenship rights to the current Muslim residents, which would eventually lead to the end of Israel as a Jewish state, or expelling them, which would put them in conflict with their neighbors with whom they are currently at peace. Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria do not wish several million Palestinian refugees.

I suspect that different Knesset members want different things, and if there is any consensus at all it is that they do not want a Palestinian state that has any military power and who they cannot control. Some may wish the current status quo, some may wish an apartheid-like division. I think they want to dump Gaza and its 1.5 million destitute, disgruntled souls on Egypt: that they would like nothing better than a de facto or de jure annexation of Gaza to Egypt. At least this is what they would want if they were smart, which they show all evidence of being. Egypt, however, is not interested.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I think it is incorrect that Israel wants all of the west bank and Gaza. Although this may be true in the broadest sense, as in "I want all the Saudi oil", it does not imply that the current political consensus is that they will keep it. Given the results of the recent election, where the most successful party only won 27 of 120 seats, I think it absurd to even make a statement that includes "the Israeli government seeks..." in it. I would have to agree with my friend, who says "if you want 3 opinions, ask 2 Jews".

Not living there, it is hard to know even what the range of opinions is. The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz seem to have decidedly different editorial slants. I suspect that the average Jew realizes that they cannot have all of the West Bank and peace, and that it would be impossible long term without extending citizenship rights to the current Muslim residents, which would eventually lead to the end of Israel as a Jewish state, or expelling them, which would put them in conflict with their neighbors with whom they are currently at peace. Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria do not wish several million Palestinian refugees.

I suspect that different Knesset members want different things, and if there is any consensus at all it is that they do not want a Palestinian state that has any military power and who they cannot control. Some may wish the current status quo, some may wish an apartheid-like division. I think they want to dump Gaza and its 1.5 million destitute, disgruntled souls on Egypt: that they would like nothing better than a de facto or de jure annexation of Gaza to Egypt. At least this is what they would want if they were smart, which they show all evidence of being. Egypt, however, is not interested.

Of course there's a range of opinions and agendas. Like there is in any country. I've been heart warmed by watching interviews with some ordinary Israelis who are disgusted at Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. And at the same time I've been disgusted at the views of some vile settlers who see Palestinians as nothing but Subhuman scum who should be exterminated.

But overall the Zionist agenda is the Zionist agenda. The agenda was NOT to establish a 2 state situation in the land formally known as Palestine. The behavior of Israel over the last 60 years only reinforces this. And until someone can put up a rational argument otherwise that's the way it is.

I ask again ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

Is anyone going to find the courage to answer?

gndp, you seem like a rational fella. You should ask yourself why these Zionist Apologists are not answering the questions above.

[gumboot]

Complete and utter nonsense. Again.

Anyone with the most basic english language skills can confirm for themselves that the thread unfolded precisely as a I described.


Is there some kind of mail alert for the Zionist Apologists. Like Megpahone™ for instance. Here you go. Don't say I don't help the Zionists spread their propaganda... http://giyus.org/ You can now sign up and get alerted when you are needed to help the Zionist cause.

Are you calling me a Zionist Apologist?


Anyway ... The most blatant case of question avoidance I've ever seen.

If you want people to answer your questions, create your own threads. This is a thread for people to answer parky76's question. Hijacking someone else's thread for your own agenda is considered very rude, and is in fact a violation of forum rules.


Considering the Zionist Apologetic views of the poster Gumboot above it's no surprise that he/she deliberately both avoids my pertinent questions and makes silly claims of thread derailing.

The Zionist apologetic views? What Zionist apologetic views would these be? My post made no mention of Jews, Zionists, or anything else of the sort at all. You're talking complete drivel.

You quite clearly derailed the thread.


The hypocrisy is of a majestic nature considering the thread derailing conducted by the Zionist Apologists in this forum.

You have a very unhealthy obsession with "Zionist Apologists". Frankly it scares me.


So let's get this straight. Parky is asking for evidence of Israel wanting the whole of the West bank.

Yes.


I offer evidence in the tangible form of Israel's actual behavior over the last 60 years and the behavior of the Zionist Movement over the last 100 years, including the leaked quotes of prominent Zionists themselves.

That's not evidence. That's a hollow statement. Do you think in court a prosecutor could simply say to the judge "In evidence I offer that the murder weapon was a pistol that had finger prints on it". That would not cut it at all. The prosecutor would be required to actually present the gun, explain how it was determined it was the murder weapon, explain how finger prints were recovered from it, and explain how they were matched to the suspect.

Your statement above is worthless and meaningless. What behaviour? Be specific. Cite examples. What leaked quotes? Provide them.


The actual behavior of Israel is far more compelling than the empty words of the Zionist propaganda that laughably claims to want a 2 state solution.

Perhaps it is. But until you actually present that behaviour it's worth nothing.


Apparently the views of prominent Zionists like Ben Gurion don't count in 2009.

Obviously not. The OP is about the current Zionist movement and the Israeli government, not some dead guy. This is a pretty basic and easily grasped concept. The opinions of Ben Gurion in determining the attitudes of the Israeli government are about as relevant as using the opinions of early 19th Century Mississippi senators to determine the current US government's attitude to slavery.

Social attitudes change over time. Opinion that were held by some members of a society 50 years ago may not be held by different members of the same society today.


But if that's the case then surely Israel has clearly drifted away from the Zionist dream. A traitor to it's own agenda.

How does this have any bearing on the matter? So what if they are a "traitor to their own agenda"? The IRA became "traitors to their agenda" when they put down their arms. Are you seriously suggesting that a group driven by a particular goal cannot revise or abandon that goal?


So instead of being honest and admitting that Israel wants the lot they get all angry and start spewing personal attacks, some of them even putting the police uniform on and being forum cop.

Every member of the forum has a right to point out breaches of the membership agreement. It's considered the more polite and less extreme end of measures, with the other actions for regulars being to put posters on ignore or report their posts.

As for the spewing of personal attacks, the only poster in this thread doing that is you. The remainder of posts have either been attempts to ignore your derail and address the OP, or decidedly restrained posts asking to to remain on topic.


The clear sign of a weak and cowardly group backed into a corner without any other argument

You're right about that, but you're wrong about who is displaying that behaviour.


than creating a fantasy claim of thread derailment. One of them even made some laughable threat to call the mods. Go ahead and call the mods and amke yourself look foolish.

Make that two. If you don't stop derailing the thread I'll report you myself. Grow up.


Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Obviously parky76 does, hence the thread.


Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

Obviously parky76 thinks they have, hence the thread.


I know damn well the Zionist Apologists are too cowardly to answer this question.

The very creation of this thread answers that question. If you want a more detailed body of answers from the various posters here, I suggest you create your own thread on that very topic.


You all know that Zionist dream is to take the promised land, which if I'm not mistaken includes the West Bank. The evidence is in the Zionist Dream in the first instance. It's reinforced by the behavior of Israel, it's further reinforced the quotes from the Prominent Zionists who created Israel.

This all might be completely true. But you'll need to prove it. The OP asks for evidence, not empty rhetoric.


See by starting a thread like this you open yourselves up to having to admit what the Zionist dream really is.

I am sure parky76 is man or woman enough to handle such a profoundly disturbing revelation.


Not one of you has the courage to admit that Israel wants to take the lot.

Perhaps not one of us agrees with that claim. You obviously do. Prove it.


It's pathetic and it's checkmate.

Yes. It is.

[a_unique_person]

There is this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/23/60minutes/main4749723.shtml


Daniella Weiss moved from Israel to the West Bank 33 years ago. She has been the mayor of a large settlement.

"I think that settlements prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in the land of Israel. This is the goal. And this is the reality," Weiss told 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon.

[gdnp]

I ask again ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

Is anyone going to find the courage to answer?

gndp, you seem like a rational fella. You should ask yourself why these Zionist Apologists are not answering the questions above.

I think the answer is what I stated above: That there is no answer because there is no person who can speak for Israel. The best anyone can do, based on the last election, is speak for 22% of Israel.

There are Israelis who want it all. How many? I'd guess less than a quarter. Some fraction of these would be willing to expel the Palestinians from the territories, and from within Israel proper. Probably 10% of the total population.

There are Israelis that want what was in the 1967 borders and then some. These also probably make up somewhere between a quarter and a half. They do not want to absorb the Palestinians, however, and thus want to either give them a weak state or maintain the status quo.

There are Israelis who would still be willing to return to something close to the 1967 borders in exchange for peace. Their numbers have been dropping as their proponents have found it more and more difficult to convince the population that the Palestinians really want peace.

So there you have it. 5,000,000 jews, 5,000,001 opinions.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Not one of you has the courage to admit that Israel wants to take the lot.
Perhaps not one of us agrees with that claim. You obviously do. Prove it.

I have given my argument for that proposition. Now it's YOUR turn.

If you don't agree with the premise that Israel wants the lot then explain why.

Are you saying that the Zionist Dream was not to take the lot? Did Theodore Herzl say that his dream was to share Palestine with the Arabs by creating two separate states.

Why don't you have the courage to answer the questions ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

You can't answer can you?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I think the answer is what I stated above: That there is no answer because there is no person who can speak for Israel. The best anyone can do, based on the last election, is speak for 22% of Israel.

There are Israelis who want it all. How many? I'd guess less than a quarter. Some fraction of these would be willing to expel the Palestinians from the territories, and from within Israel proper. Probably 10% of the total population.

There are Israelis that want what was in the 1967 borders and then some. These also probably make up somewhere between a quarter and a half. They do not want to absorb the Palestinians, however, and thus want to either give them a weak state or maintain the status quo.

There are Israelis who would still be willing to return to something close to the 1967 borders in exchange for peace. Their numbers have been dropping as their proponents have found it more and more difficult to convince the population that the Palestinians really want peace.

So there you have it. 5,000,000 jews, 5,000,001 opinions.

Thankyou for answering gdnp :) - At least you attempted what the Zionist apologists are too cowardly to attempt.

But, with all respect, describing the obvious diversity of opinions of the ordinary Israeli is avoid the real question. We all know that the ordinary Israeli is like the ordinary person from any country. They of course do not reflect the agenda of the ruling force. Not all Americans backed the invasion of Iraq.

I've already stated that some Israeli's are disgusted by the actions of sirael against the Palestinians. I always believe that ordinary people from any country have peace as their priority and are not interested in racial agendas to attack other groups.

But again thanks for at least answering. :)

[gdnp]

I have given my argument for that proposition. Now it's YOUR turn.

If you don't agree with the premise that Israel wants the lot then explain why.

Are you saying that the Zionist Dream was not to take the lot? Did Theodore Herzl say that his dream was to share Palestine with the Arabs by creating two separate states.

Why don't you have the courage to answer the questions ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

You can't answer can you?
Who is this Israel person you keep referring to?

ETA: stated another way, do you think that the leaders of Likud, Kadima, Shas, Labor, Yisrael Beiteinu, and the other smaller parties that won seats in the recent elections all have the same agenda regarding territory?

[gumboot]

I have given my argument for that proposition. Now it's YOUR turn.

No one is interested in your argument. Believe me, we have all heard quite enough of your "argument". The OP asked for your evidence.


If you don't agree with the premise that Israel wants the lot then explain why.

Are you saying that the Zionist Dream was not to take the lot? Did Theodore Herzl say that his dream was to share Palestine with the Arabs by creating two separate states.

Why don't you have the courage to answer the questions ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

You can't answer can you?


Israel never wanted "the lot" and doesn't have "the lot". You're ignoring Jordan, which is an Arab homeland created from the majority of Palestine. What Israel doesn't want is a neighbour that incessantly attacks them and calls for their annihilation.

Some of their tactics for doing so are woefully misguided (for example the illegal settlement of the West Bank) but I cannot fault their intent, just their methods.

I've reported your post for derailing, by the way. You've had ample warning, and this isn't the first time.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Israel never wanted "the lot"

This is a classic!!!

I'm going to scribe it on the finest parchment and mount it on my wall behind toughened glass and sealed in a controlled atmosphere so it doesn't decay. Even after a billion years!!!!!

There's one thing such absurdity shows, and that's the clear difference between Zionist leaders and the pawns that follow.

Even though I find the agenda of Zionist leaders abhorrent I actually respect them. At least the Zionist Leaders have balls. The Zionist leaders knew that their agenda was doing a disservice to the people they were displacing. They recognized that they wanted 'the lot' and recognized the Palestinians had a legitimate cause.

For that I actually respect David Ben Gurion. His viewpoint is vile, but I respect his honesty.

Contrast that with the completely ridiculous claim that, wait for it ....<drum roll> ......

Israel never wanted "the lot"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Hey gumboot!! I've just thought of something.

Can you tell us what the boundaries of the Jewish Homeland is? You claim that Israle 'never wanted the lot'. Are you saying that the Jewish homeland was never the whole of Palestine.?

I wonder as according to Theodore Herzl, who with respect I trust a lot more than you to eb a knowledgable abou the Zionist Agenda, says (In his Complete Diaries, Vol.II, Page 711) that the area of the Jewish state stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates”.

http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/eretz.gif

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that it includes the West Bank.

You are claiming, seemingly with a straight face, that Israel never wanted the lot. So did the Zionists spend 50 years of toil to plan a take over of the promised land but in reality never wanted Eretz Israel?

Presumably the following was just an April fools joke then gumboot?

http://utenti.lycos.it/Delenda_Carthago/eretz_israel.jpg

[a_unique_person]

There is this

http://www.yesha-israel.com/about/article/id/407/Regions.htm

No site of any Palestinian space there.

And this


Who is represented by The Yesha Council?

Yesha is an acronym for the Hebrew names of three geographic regions in Israel: Yehuda, Shomron and Aza (Judea, Samaria and Gaza). These regions are divided into 24 municipalities representing three different governmental structures – city, regional and small town. The Yesha Council represents all 24 municipalities and operates to insure the interests of all their residents – present and future.
Some Yesha Council History

Although many of the communities in Yesha have been around since Avraham walked Israel's desert paths, The Yesha Council was only established with the renewal of Jewish settlement after The Six Day War as a natural outgrowth of Gush Emunim, the philosophical, spiritual beginning of resettlement in Yesha. Yesha's founder and first chairman was Yisrael Harel, Ofra resident and respected journalist, who was a partner to the establishment of many communities in Yesha.
Why is there a need for a Yesha Council?

Renewal of Jewish settlement in Yesha is a central part of realizing the Zionist dream and is of critical strategic importance to the existence of a strong Israel. The Yesha Council is the only unified organization which is based solely on Yesha interests, working to further those interests in every area. Unfortunately, this includes the struggle to insure the very existence of Jewish civilian life in Yesha.
Yesha municipalities have unique needs not found in other parts of Israel including a higher level of security, the paving of highways circumventing dangerous areas, recognition of state lands, school transportation subsidies including bulletproof buses and long distances). The Yesha Council lobbies for these special needs to insure the continuation of everyday life for Yesha residents.
What are The Yesha Council's Goals?



Annexation of Yesha to the State of Israel
Further development of Jewish communities surrounding Jerusalem
Preventing agreements which damage the integrity and security of the State of Israel
Defending the rights of the Jewish people to the land of Israel

[The Fool]

Excerpt of Likud Party Platform.

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

well it sure looks like Likud wants to control it all. But hey, maybe they are only a minor extremist element.

[chillzero]

Off topic posts and bickering removed to AAH. There would have been less to do had people not indulged themselves in joining in the derail by complaining about the derail. Report such posts, and ignore them so the mods can deal with them.

Get this thread back on topic, and keep it civil.

[lupus_in_fabula]

Maybe Eretz Nehedert has the answer (Israeli hasbarah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9SMwVgCSzk))? :p

Some of the lyrics:
If you ask why we fight

we say – THEY started!

If you ask why we bomb

we say – THEY started!

If you ask what we want

we say ...erm?...Certain policies are in effect, they carry a certain momentum, hard-liners often find ways to use them for their own advantage, thus keeping the momentum alive, which also seems to make a viable independent Palestinian state ever more implausible as time goes by.

But in the end, I think most Israelis know they can't have it that way, they don't seem to even want it, except for the hard-liners. The various governments don't really know what to do, hence they do nothing, which also favors the hard-liners, and consequently fuels the idea that there's some ancient Zionist master-agenda at play. I however don't think there is, not anymore. What there is, is impotence and lack of a new vision. A mess there is, and tiredness.

Maybe that's the problem: the general public is tired of the mess, the zealots aren't, which makes them more influential than what they ought to be (both inside Israel and in the U.S.). Combine with that, it also seems to me that as long as Israeli policy makers can rely on almost unequivocal support from the U.S., it's easier to just ride along the train wreck.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Hey gumboot!! I've just thought of something.

Can you tell us what the boundaries of the Jewish Homeland is? You claim that Israle 'never wanted the lot'. Are you saying that the Jewish homeland was never the whole of Palestine.?

I wonder as according to Theodore Herzl, who with respect I trust a lot more than you to eb a knowledgable abou the Zionist Agenda, says (In his Complete Diaries, Vol.II, Page 711) that the area of the Jewish state stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates”.

http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/eretz.gif

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that it includes the West Bank.

You are claiming, seemingly with a straight face, that Israel never wanted the lot. So did the Zionists spend 50 years of toil to plan a take over of the promised land but in reality never wanted Eretz Israel?

Presumably the following was just an April fools joke then gumboot?

http://utenti.lycos.it/Delenda_Carthago/eretz_israel.jpg

I can debunk your entire post in one sentence:

Are you ready?

Here it comes...


Theodor Herzl is dead.

Has been for nearly 105 years in fact. Only a silly person would suggest that someone who sluffed off the mortal coil more than a century ago is actively guiding the foreign policy of a modern state.

[yairhol]

http://utenti.lycos.it/Delenda_Carthago/eretz_israel.jpg

This is a map that was drawn according to the bible book: "Bamidbar" (translation: In the dessert). I don't know how it's called in English. It is hardly a map that is relevant today or even 60 years ago.

[a_unique_person]

I can debunk your entire post in one sentence:

Are you ready?

Here it comes...


Theodor Herzl is dead.

Has been for nearly 105 years in fact. Only a silly person would suggest that someone who sluffed off the mortal coil more than a century ago is actively guiding the foreign policy of a modern state.

A quote about economists, but I think it is still relevant.



the ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually slaves of some defunct economist.

[gdnp]

I can debunk your entire post in one sentence:

Are you ready?

Here it comes...


Theodor Herzl is dead.

Has been for nearly 105 years in fact. Only a silly person would suggest that someone who sluffed off the mortal coil more than a century ago is actively guiding the foreign policy of a modern state.I do not think TFT believes that Herzl is actively guiding Israeli foreign policy, it seems much more likely that he believes that Herzl's dream did not die with him, and that there are others in positions of influence who still share that dream.

This is a map that was drawn according to the bible book: "Bamidbar" (translation: In the dessert). I don't know how it's called in English. It is hardly a map that is relevant today or even 60 years ago.It is only relevant if there are significant portions of the Israeli population that believe that this map should be the boundaries of Israel. I will point out that "significant" in this sense does not mean "majority" or even "large minority" of the population. If a small portion of the population acts on these beliefs and thus creates settlements within these territories, usurping other's land if necessary, and the government turns a blind eye, then these groups are influencing the debate.

[gdnp]

Excerpt of Likud Party Platform.

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

well it sure looks like Likud wants to control it all. But hey, maybe they are only a minor extremist element.
Wow. if you are going to actually post the position of the political party most likely to lead the next Israeli government, we may actually need to debate substance here. :eek:

So what is Lilkud saying here? It would seem that they will allow Palestinians to run their daily lives, but plan to maintain control over any potential interaction with Israelis or foreign countries. That makes the west bank...what? A colony? A client state? A Bantu?

Based on the above, it would appear that Likud wants to keep control of

Setting the borders
the transfer of goods in and out
immigration: the transfer of people in and out
ecology: water resources
security: formation and control of any military
security: formation and control of any police force
security: travel both within the west bank and between the west bank and Israel


What goes unsaid is that by giving the Palestinians limited self-rule within the west bank, they are maintaining veto power over the west bank thus denying the palestinians any real political rights. And, obviously, any voting rights in Israel.

Based on Likud's own words, it sounds like they want to indefinitely keep all of the west bank, stopping short of only the most extreme position of expelling the Palestinian residents.

[doobiedoright]

All it would take for a 2 state solution,would be for the pal/s to lay down their weapons and renounce all violence.
The real question appears to be do the Pals really want a peace.
I am afraid it is like in the movie Independence Day
.......No peace.....What do you want us to do?...........DIE!

[gdnp]

All it would take for a 2 state solution,would be for the pal/s to lay down their weapons and renounce all violence.

And this would lead to the Israelis conceding to all of the Palestinian demands? Return to 1967 borders, right of return, return and/or compensation for confiscated Palestinian lands, full control of their borders and trade, water rights, release of Palestinian political prisoners, etc?

Or are you really stating that this would allow the Palestinians and the Israelis to begin negotiating a 2 state solution. To back up their position the Israelis would have control of the territories, an army, a police force, and an intelligence service, and the Palestinians would have...what?

I suppose this might work if the Palestinians were willing to accept a state on Israel's terms. I know of no group in the world that would agree to these termsl, though. Would you?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I do not think TFT believes that Herzl is actively guiding Israeli foreign policy, it seems much more likely that he believes that Herzl's dream did not die with him, and that there are others in positions of influence who still share that dream.

gdnp, you find it easy to comprehend something the Zionist Apologists seemingly cannot compute. Sword of Truth(?) swaggers majestically upto the table confident that he is going to demolish my argument with the debate equivalent of a tsunami. Observers cower in awe awaiting his forthcoming triumph.

And then as he says "Theodore Herzl is dead" there follows a stunned silence. People look at each other and soon the whole room is drenched in bouts of hilarity!!

The most significant and notable anti-climax in the history of JREF forum!!!


It is only relevant if there are significant portions of the Israeli population that believe that this map should be the boundaries of Israel. I will point out that "significant" in this sense does not mean "majority" or even "large minority" of the population. If a small portion of the population acts on these beliefs and thus creates settlements within these territories, usurping other's land if necessary, and the government turns a blind eye, then these groups are influencing the debate.

Indeed.

And the problem for the Zionist Apologists is that they are stuck in this dilemma. You see theri very own Dream, their Agenda is to take all of Palestine, yet to admit this means they also have to admit they are the instigators in the Israel/palestinian conflict

They have backed themselves into a corner.

Sword of Truth by saying Theodore Herzl is dead and no longer relevant is basically throwing away all that Israel stands for and is created upon.

So are Zionist Apologists in their stubbornness to never admit Israel is the instigator in the 60 year old conflict even turning their back on their own ideology and agenda?it seems so. I never thought I'd hear anyone dismiss the valiant dream of Theodore Herzl on this forum. It seems to be in stark contradiction to the ferocity of complaints thrown out when anyone challenges the right of a Jewish homeland in Palestine

Why can they not admit that Israel is out to take the lot?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Wow. if you are going to actually post the position of the political party most likely to lead the next Israeli government, we may actually need to debate substance here. :eek:

So what is Lilkud saying here? It would seem that they will allow Palestinians to run their daily lives, but plan to maintain control over any potential interaction with Israelis or foreign countries. That makes the west bank...what? A colony? A client state? A Bantu?

Based on the above, it would appear that Likud wants to keep control of

Setting the borders
the transfer of goods in and out
immigration: the transfer of people in and out
ecology: water resources
security: formation and control of any military
security: formation and control of any police force
security: travel both within the west bank and between the west bank and Israel


What goes unsaid is that by giving the Palestinians limited self-rule within the west bank, they are maintaining veto power over the west bank thus denying the palestinians any real political rights. And, obviously, any voting rights in Israel.

Based on Likud's own words, it sounds like they want to indefinitely keep all of the west bank, stopping short of only the most extreme position of expelling the Palestinian residents.

Well done The Fool for finding a modern admission that they want the lot. Still I suppose Likud are only a minority extremist party and hardly representative of anyone of any significance they? ;)

[jovial sarcasm]
Everyone else is no doubt tearing down any statues of Theodore Herzl and references to Ben Gurion as these people's dreams and ideology are obviously a thing of the past.
[/jovial sarcasm]

[gdnp]

Why can they not admit that Israel is out to take the lot?

Perhaps because, as I have said repeatedly, "Israel" is not a person--it is a country, and in fact one that currently speaks with a rather fractured voice.

Do you believe that Labor and Meretz want to take the whole lot? What about Kadima? When Rabin was prime minister, do you believe that his peace initiatives were simply a cover for future expansion? I don't. I think he was sincere, and had he been able to negotiate a peace deal the majority of Israelis would have supported it.

Even if the parties currently in power lean towards this goal as you state does not mean that the population would not be willing to give it up in exchange for lasting peace and security. Just as one hopes that the Palestinians would pull away from Hamas and a claim on all of Palestine if provided with an alternative that provided them with the hope of their own state, peace and prosperity.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

All it would take for a 2 state solution,would be for the pal/s to lay down their weapons and renounce all violence.
The real question appears to be do the Pals really want a peace.
I am afraid it is like in the movie Independence Day
.......No peace.....What do you want us to do?...........DIE!

Of course the Palestinians want peace.

Surely you don't think they like being ghettoized, persecuted, the subject of a racist occupation and every now again bombed and slaughtered?

The problem is that of whether Israel wants a 2 state solution. Everyone knows, but some can't bring themselves to admit it, that the whole foundation of the Zionist Dream was not to share the land with an Arab State with the Arabs in this state having a control over their own lives independent of Israel


I'm afraid doobiedoright that by laying all the blame on the Palestinians you are way way away from reality

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Perhaps because, as I have said repeatedly, "Israel" is not a person--it is a country, and in fact one that currently speaks with a rather fractured voice.

Do you believe that Labor and Meretz want to take the whole lot? What about Kadima? When Rabin was prime minister, do you believe that his peace initiatives were simply a cover for future expansion? I don't. I think he was sincere, and had he been able to negotiate a peace deal the majority of Israelis would have supported it.

Even if the parties currently in power lean towards this goal as you state does not mean that the population would not be willing to give it up in exchange for lasting peace and security. Just as one hopes that the Palestinians would pull away from Hamas and a claim on all of Palestine if provided with an alternative that provided them with the hope of their own state, peace and prosperity.

I'm not unaware of the diverse voices within Israel. Every country has those.

But come on! The foundations that Israel was built upon is pretty strong is it not? I do not believe that Israel as an entity has lost that foundation and it seems (even though Sword Of Truth above has seemingly turned his back on Herzl's dream ) that no one else is willing to say they have moved on from the Zionist Dream.

I ask again ....

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

The only argument against these extremely pertinent questions yesterday was an absurd and totally fallacious claim of thread derailment. I think that speaks volumes. Not one Zionist Apologist can answer them as to do so would show an admission that Israel is the instigator in the 'conflict'.

[a_unique_person]

All it would take for a 2 state solution,would be for the pal/s to lay down their weapons and renounce all violence.
The real question appears to be do the Pals really want a peace.
I am afraid it is like in the movie Independence Day
.......No peace.....What do you want us to do?...........DIE!

If you read the statements by the settlers, if you look at the expansion of the settlements, that's nothing like what would be needed. The mayor of that settlement I quoted stated quite clearly, the settlements are designed to ensure they can never be a two state solution, the Yesha map makes it quite clear, there is no room for any Palestinians there. What do you want them to do? DIE!

If they lay down their weapons and renounce all violence, the best they can hope for is a bantustan, that is, apartheid. That was the plan that Kadima came up with. The worst case is hard to tell, because the settlements will just keep expanding, with no statement about what is to happen to them as their farms and water are taken in ever greater amounts.

[gdnp]

Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?

Has Israel dropped the original Zionist dream?

I see the majority in Israel willing to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian state in exchange for peace and security. Is that dropping the original Zionist dream, or modifying it to conform with reality?

On what do I base this belief? The statements and actions of Israeli politicians and discussions with a good friend who grew up in Israel before emigrating to the US.

ETA: if you really believe that Israel's dream is to make that map you posted a reality, why did they give the Sinai back to Egypt?

[Kevin_Lowe]

And the problem for the Zionist Apologists is that they are stuck in this dilemma. You see theri very own Dream, their Agenda is to take all of Palestine, yet to admit this means they also have to admit they are the instigators in the Israel/palestinian conflict

I don't think it's productive to fall into the trap of referring to Israel as a monolithic entity, even just rhetorically. Nor to fall into to the trap of black and white thinking and assume that either the Israelis or the Palestinians must be the sole instigators of the current problems.

Say rather that some Israelis, some of the time, have been instigators in the Israel/Palestine conflict, and that some Israelis do not seem likely to ever be satisfied by any solution other than ethnic cleansing or apartheid.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I don't think it's productive to fall into the trap of referring to Israel as a monolithic entity, even just rhetorically. Nor to fall into to the trap of black and white thinking and assume that either the Israelis or the Palestinians must be the sole instigators of the current problems.

Say rather that some Israelis, some of the time, have been instigators in the Israel/Palestine conflict, and that some Israelis do not seem likely to ever be satisfied by any solution other than ethnic cleansing or apartheid.

Saying that a country moves as an entity doesn't mean that everyone within the country shares the same view.

Taking into account that the most influence in the country is held by just a few, the sum of all the views resolves to a single direction.

Just like a ship is subjected to the forces of wind, tides and if it has them, it's engines. All thes forces combine to pruduce the final trajectory.


Like it or not, the Zionist Movement/Dream has set up a country on land where other people, not deemed to be part of that plan of a homeland, were living and thus were displaced, often with violent force.

Now you could argue that the current problems are down to the Palestinians not bowing down to the bully and simply leaving the whole of Palestine for Israel.

But do we want a world where if anyone bullies it way around everyone should should bow down and let them do it? What if we'd taken that approach with Hitler?

[gtc]

Saying that a country moves as an entity doesn't mean that everyone within the country shares the same view.

Taking into account that the most influence in the country is held by just a few, the sum of all the views resolves to a single direction.

In my experience, the dead do not tend to be among those few people.

Aside from North Korea and Transylvania.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I see the majority in Israel willing to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian state in exchange for peace and security. Is that dropping the original Zionist dream, or modifying it to conform with reality?


I fully believe the majority simply want peace. But we all know that there is never an equal influence of opinion.


On what do I base this belief? The statements and actions of Israeli politicians and discussions with a good friend who grew up in Israel before emigrating to the US.

ETA: if you really believe that Israel's dream is to make that map you posted a reality, why did they give the Sinai back to Egypt?

The old fallacious Israel gave the Sinai back argument?

The graph of expansionism isn't a straight line. Compare the area in 1948 to the area now.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

In my experience, the dead do not tend to be among those few people.

Aside from North Korea and Transylvania.

So are you saying that Israel has turned it's back on the dream of it's founders?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

gdnp, you find it easy to comprehend something the Zionist Apologists seemingly cannot compute. Sword of Truth(?) swaggers majestically upto the table confident that he is going to demolish my argument with the debate equivalent of a tsunami. Observers cower in awe awaiting his forthcoming triumph.

And then as he says "Theodore Herzl is dead" there follows a stunned silence. People look at each other and soon the whole room is drenched in bouts of hilarity!!

The most significant and notable anti-climax in the history of JREF forum!!!



Indeed.

And the problem for the Zionist Apologists is that they are stuck in this dilemma. You see theri very own Dream, their Agenda is to take all of Palestine, yet to admit this means they also have to admit they are the instigators in the Israel/palestinian conflict

They have backed themselves into a corner.

Sword of Truth by saying Theodore Herzl is dead and no longer relevant is basically throwing away all that Israel stands for and is created upon.

Yet he is dead. Your efforts to revive him and put his face on a nation he never lived in not withstanding.

Here's another observation you have missed that to others will be obvious:

Things change.

Your apperant claim, that 60 years of Israeli history, most of it in a state of perpetual siege punctuated by wars initiated not by Israel but by her numerically superior neighbors has produced no change in the thinking of Israels leaders from what Herzl first imagined more than a century before, is patently absurd and invalid on its face.

Why can they not admit that Israel is out to take the lot?

If this is what you want from us, here's another hint:

Evidence > Ethno-religious bigotry and paranoia.

BTW, yes I know my screen name is pretentious and self-important. I first came to JREF with the wave of anti-9/11 "truth" advocates who were drawn here by interest in what Gravy was doing with Loose Change. "Sword of Truth" was a name I was already using to yank the chains of the tinfoilers who hate that they didn't think of it first. I've been considering having the mods change it for me, but haven't gotten around to thinking of a better one yet.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Compare the area in 1948 to the area now.

Compare the area in 1974 to the area now.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Things change.



So are you saying that Israel has turned it's back on the dream of it's founders?

[gtc]

So are you saying that Israel has turned it's back on the dream of it's founders?

I am saying, as I have said repeatedly, that the early supporters of Israel where never as monolithic in their aims as you believe and that modern Israelis do not feel bound to follow any particular aim of those long dead people.

I didn't hear of anyone casting their vote in the US election based on what John Hancock would have wanted and I don't see Obama bringing back slavery because the founding fathers owned slaves. I don't see Sarkozy asking himself what De Gaulle would have done before proposing a new policy. Of course some arch conservatives will argue that this pragmatism means that Israel or the US or France or the Church of England or McDonalds or the Boy Scouts have turned their backs on the wishes of their founders.

If you want to argue that the early supporters of Israel were monolithic in their views and that, unlike every other organisation or country in the world, the modern Israelis are wholly bound to follow these monolithic views then you have to provide some evidence.

This is the same claim that was made by the author the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and we are still waiting for evidence for the claims in that book so I suspect you will have your work cut out for you.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Compare the area in 1974 to the area now.

So by that argument if Israel took over the whole of the middle east next year and then 5 years later reduced in size so it only comprised of what was once Syria Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine you would argue that Israel wasn't' expanding on the basis of comparing it from 2010 to 2015?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I am saying, as I have said repeatedly, that the early supporters of Israel where never as monolithic in their aims as you believe and that modern Israelis do not feel bound to follow any particular aim of those long dead people.

I didn't hear of anyone casting their vote in the US election based on what John Hancock would have wanted and I don't see Obama bringing back slavery because the founding fathers owned slaves. I don't see Sarkozy asking himself what De Gaulle would have done before proposing a new policy. Of course some arch conservatives will argue that this pragmatism means that Israel or the US or France or the Church of England or McDonalds or the Boy Scouts have turned their backs on the wishes of their founders.

If you want to argue that the early supporters of Israel were monolithic in their views and that, unlike every other organisation or country in the world, the modern Israelis are wholly bound to follow these monolithic views then you have to provide some evidence.

This is the same claim that was made by the author the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and we are still waiting for evidence for the claims in that book so I suspect you will have your work cut out for you.

I've never read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion ( I must get around to it ), but from what I've heard it's about a Jewish take over of the world, not the Zionist Movement's agenda of setting up a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

[gtc]

I've never read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion ( I must get around to it ), but from what I've heard it's about a Jewish take over of the world, not the Zionist Movement's agenda of setting up a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

The argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Jews who direct the actions of all other Jews. Your argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Zionists who direct the actions of the Israelis so its the same argument.

I would recommend the 1996 edition of Warrant for Genocide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_for_Genocide)by Prof. Norman Cohn it is very readable and covers the orgins and history of the Protocols plus the actual text.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

The argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Jews who direct the actions of all other Jews. Your argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Zionists who direct the actions of the Israelis so its the same argument.

That's not my argument at all. My argument is that original agenda of Theodore Herzl, who died in 1904 was carried through by the Zionist Movement to 1948 where we have have quotes from leading Zionists at that time spouting the view that All of Palestine was the agenda and the UN Partition plan and declaration of independence was just a stepping stone. And even recognizing that most ordinary Israelis just want peace ( as do most ordinary Palestinians ) the general direction of Israel is still, slowly but surely adhering to the original Zionist Dream.

Are any of you Zionist Apologists ever going to explicitly state that Israel does not want the lot.

I certainly do not believe that the Zionist dream directs the actions or views of ALL Israelis



I would recommend the 1996 edition of Warrant for Genocide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_for_Genocide)by Prof. Norman Cohn it is very readable and covers the orgins and history of the Protocols plus the actual text.

Thanks, I'll get around to reading it at some point. It seems to be a highly attacked work. It's content must scrape some raw nerves

[gtc]

Are any of you Zionist Apologists ever going to explicitly state that Israel does not want the lot.

I think some do but I don't think the majority does.

Thanks, I'll get around to reading it at some point. It seems to be a highly attacked work. It's content must scrape some raw nerves

It does scrape some raw nerves, mainly because it has no basis in fact. Most of it was plagarized from an earlier pamphlet that was written by a liberal attacking the policies of one of the Napoleons (the original had nothing to do with Jews).

[tomwaits]

It was a forgery plagiarizing a satire which itself was plagiarizing an earlier work.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

So are you saying that Israel has turned it's back on the dream of it's founders?

Theodor Herzl wasn't a founder of Israel. He died nearly half a century before Israel was founded.

[webfusion]

*snip* "If a small portion of the population acts on these beliefs and thus creates settlements within these territories, usurping other's land if necessary, and the government turns a blind eye, then these groups are influencing the debate."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1064503.html
1700 dunams approriated for expansion of Efrat.


The lands were deemed to be "State Lands" in Court.

[gdnp]

The old fallacious Israel gave the Sinai back argument?
What is fallacious about it? Israel did give the Sinai back, did they not? They are currently at peace with Egypt, are they not? If you have evidence that they plan to retake the Sinai, feel free to present it.

The graph of expansionism isn't a straight line. Compare the area in 1948 to the area now.All this demonstrates is that you cannot predict the future based on extrapolating from the past, not that Israel plans to expand further.

You seem to be making the same argument against Israel that the Israelis make against the Palestinians: that they can't be trusted in any agreement that they sign because it is just an intermediate step that they will eventually violate in order to fulfill their ultimate hegemonic plan. If that's the case we might as well let the two sides fight it out. It won't end until one side or the other has been exterminated. Maybe both.

Wouldn't that be ironic: the dome of the rock blown up with a dirty bomb, the temple mount left a radioactive wasteland that neither side could inhabit for 10,000 years.

What a fine monument that would make to religion.

[a_unique_person]

The argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Jews who direct the actions of all other Jews. Your argument is that there is an ancient cabal of Zionists who direct the actions of the Israelis so its the same argument.

I think there is a difference. The writings of earlier influential leaders, and religious zealots, are still taken quite seriously by many, read the "Yesha" links, they want nothing less then all the West Bank, and "Israel Gaza". It says so in the old testament (my bad, I forget what their name for it is). They take seriously the notion that ancient mythical references to purchases of a plot of land have legal validity today.

Whether they get it or not is impossible to know, but they are quite determined to achieve it. "Yesha" doesn't seem too interested in the Sinai desert, however.

[gumboot]

For what it's worth, a 2002 poll found that 72% of Israelis would accept a peace deal based on the 1967 borders; indicating that the majority of Israelis do not want all of the region. The figure of about 70% has stayed pretty consistent in numerous related polls on matters like "do you want peace with the Palestinian territories?".

Palestinian attitudes tend to jump around a bit more, based on what is currently happening.

[a_unique_person]

For what it's worth, a 2002 poll found that 72% of Israelis would accept a peace deal based on the 1967 borders; indicating that the majority of Israelis do not want all of the region. The figure of about 70% has stayed pretty consistent in numerous related polls on matters like "do you want peace with the Palestinian territories?".

Palestinian attitudes tend to jump around a bit more, based on what is currently happening.

It's true, and many of those people voted for Likud and other right wing parties, who don't agree with a peace for land concept. They won with an appeal to 'tough on terror' and patriotism. An election choice that is internally inconsistent.

[Darth Rotor]

What Israel gained by the sword will most likely need to be taken by the sword by whomever wants to take it.

So, Israel may lose some of the West Bank to the method of the sword as seen in the Intafada: not your grandfather's method of using force for a political end, but seeming effective to a certain extent.

In that context, I understand the Wall, as a strategic move that in time coincides with a general withdrawal of politically difficult to occupy terrain.

I still think its a poor idea, but I grasp what is at its root, politically: Sentiment is "We took that land, it is ours, or as much of it as we can keep."

DR

[doobiedoright]

Of course the Palestinians want peace.

Surely you don't think they like being ghettoized, persecuted, the subject of a racist occupation and every now again bombed and slaughtered?

The problem is that of whether Israel wants a 2 state solution. Everyone knows, but some can't bring themselves to admit it, that the whole foundation of the Zionist Dream was not to share the land with an Arab State with the Arabs in this state having a control over their own lives independent of Israel


I'm afraid doobiedoright that by laying all the blame on the Palestinians you are way way away from reality




The Pals have had several chances at peace and refused them all!
Are you implying it is not their fault that they have refused peace?
They could have peace tomorrow if only they actually wanted it!
Plenty of blame to go around and the blame game should stop.
If the Pals would prove they really want peace it could be achieved very quickly.Alas they dont want peace as they could no longer play victim!
And who would all the Arab nations blame their troubles on if all of a sudden there was peace?
They will not give up on playing the victim card even when in truth most if not all the arab nations could really care less about the Pals.
They would have to look in the mirror and realize the ways of the past dont work in the here and now!
It is time for the arab nations to join the rest of us in the 21st century!
There better do it soon as when a replacement for oil is found they will cease to be relevant!

[gdnp]

The Pals have had several chances at peace and refused them all!
Are you implying it is not their fault that they have refused peace?
They could have peace tomorrow if only they actually wanted it!
Plenty of blame to go around and the blame game should stop.

So...the Palestinians are at fault for the lack of peace...but the blame game should stop...

:i:

[Thunder]

The fact remains that the Palestinians intentional targeting and murder of Israeli civilians has NOT brought them any closer to a Palestinian state. Since the suicide bombings began in the 1990s, the number of Israeli settlers has increased by 100,000 and settlements have expanded to surround Jerusalem. The Palestinians have pushed their dream farther and farther away.

If the Palestinians had adopted non-violent resistance, they would have their own state today.

[Kevin_Lowe]

The fact remains that the Palestinians intentional targeting and murder of Israeli civilians has NOT brought them any closer to a Palestinian state. Since the suicide bombings began in the 1990s, the number of Israeli settlers has increased by 100,000 and settlements have expanded to surround Jerusalem. The Palestinians have pushed their dream farther and farther away.

If the Palestinians had adopted non-violent resistance, they would have their own state today.

I've heard this claim often enough, where's the evidence?

We've seen evidence that some Israelis want the Palestinians gone or in bantustans, where's the evidence they would have changed their minds or been unable to act on their desires had the Palestinians rolled over?

Non-violent resistance worked, eventually, on the British in India during a period when they were withdrawing from their colonial role anyway. Has non-violent resistance ever worked against Israel when it is expanding?

[The Fool]

If the Palestinians had adopted non-violent resistance, they would have their own state today.
This is absolute rubbish. Palestinians have never been offered statehood. What you have to do to be in the game is yell at them "choose peace" when what it is in reality is "choose some wierd modern form of vassalage" They have only ever been offered what Israel herself would never ever agree to if it was offered to them.....being someone vassal.

[webfusion]

T-F: *snip* ... what it is in reality is "choose some wierd modern form of vassalage"

I have seen you repeat this at every opportunity here.
Yet, no evidence exists for it.

By the way, in the news ---- Top Palestinian Negotiator is Fired (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/02/17/Abbas_fires_top_Palestinian_negotiator/UPI-33731234896894/)

Abu Ala has been removed from his seat at the negotiating table after he was accused of "stubbornness" (apparently, he has not been acting according to the interests of PA President Abbas).

[The Fool]

I have seen you repeat this at every opportunity here.
Yet, no evidence exists for it.

By the way, in the news ---- Top Palestinian Negotiator is Fired (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/02/17/Abbas_fires_top_Palestinian_negotiator/UPI-33731234896894/)

Abu Ala has been removed from his seat at the negotiating table after he was accused of "stubbornness" (apparently, he has not been acting according to the interests of PA President Abbas).
evidence? whats next, I need evidence that the sun rose today? Look at what they have been offered, Its self evident.

Israel will always insist on control over things that it would not tolerate itself.

[Thunder]

I read a few days ago that Israel has confiscated MORE privately owned Palestinian land, designated it "state-land", and has now said it will become part of a Jew-only settlement.

So basically, Israel has stolen privately owned land and is now giving it over to folks who will turn it into a segregated settlement, where only Jewish Israelis can live.

This is theft..and this is Apartheid.

(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090216/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians_7)

[gdnp]

I have seen you repeat this at every opportunity here.
Yet, no evidence exists for it.

Well, there are these lines from the Likud party platform (http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm):

Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

[moon1969]

The ghetto walls and separation walls are all part of a strategy to harass and persecute the Palestinians in order to eventually drive them out. This may take another 60 years. The Zionist Movement is no stranger to a long term agenda. Theodore Herzl recognized it would take 50 years before Israeel was created. And he was right.




How can Israel offer something that isn't theirs to offer?


Everytime I ask the question: "Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?" there's an eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Why? because the Israel offer of a 2 state solution is complete lies. They only offer it because they know the Palestinians won't accept it.

So I ask again. Is it the sincere intention of Israel to fix it's borders forever, even in theire current position, with half of Jerusalem stuck on the end of a triangular peninsular of land protruding into the West Bank and live side by side with a Palestinian state that comprises of the West Bank and the little 'island' of Gaza?

Awaits eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Israel not only want all of the west bank it wants rid of Gaza. The evidence of the last 60 years history, including quotes from leading Zionists show that it wants the lot.



Why should jews give any land to the palestinians since Russia took Karelia and drove out over 400 000 karelians. :mad: So no land to the palestinians until Russia also give back what it has stolen from others.

[webfusion]

I read a few days ago that Israel has confiscated MORE privately owned Palestinian land, designated it "state-land", and has now said it will become part of a Jew-only settlement.

Yes, you probably read about it right here in this thread --- back at Post #56.
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4438662&postcount=56


So basically, Israel has stolen privately owned land and is now giving it over to folks who will turn it into a segregated settlement, where only Jewish Israelis can live.

There was a legal process, referred to as "Eminent Domain" -- perhaps you are familiar with that? I have yet to see a shred of evidence that it was "privately owned land" -- you actually started another thread about this same issue, and to this moment, have not shown any proof of it being "privately owned" ---- AFAIK, the courts saw actual evidence and made a determination that it didn't stand up to legal scrutiny. (Although it must be said, that in a single instance in the same case, the courts did find supporting a claim that some land should not be confiscated, although I am not positive the ruling was based on the defense of "privately owned" land --- you may wish to look into that and provide some case history on this to show a legal basis why the court ruling was made the way it was.)


Anyway, as regards to communities in Israel (including specific neighborhoods, or entire towns) being Jew-only ------- that's the way things are. It's a social phenomenon. It works both ways. Many Arab towns and communties exclude Jews. Um-El-Fahem. Taibe. Tulkarem. Ramallah. Jenin. Gaza.



This is theft..and this is Apartheid.

It is neither.

[gdnp]

Anyway, as regards to communities in Israel (including specific neighborhoods, or entire towns) being Jew-only ------- that's the way things are. It's a social phenomenon. It works both ways. Many Arab towns and communties exclude Jews. Um-El-Fahem. Taibe. Tulkarem. Ramallah. Jenin. Gaza.


It is Israel's peculiar institution. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peculiar_institution)

[Thunder]

Yes, you probably read about it right here in this thread --- back at Post #56.
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4438662&postcount=56


There was a legal process, referred to as "Eminent Domain" -- perhaps you are familiar with that? I have yet to see a shred of evidence that it was "privately owned land" -- .

the land is privately owned. it says so in the article i posted.

a nation cannot use eminent domain in land that is not part of their state. if israel wants to use eminent domain in the west bank, then they must also give the palestinians the right to vote.

[a_unique_person]

the land is privately owned. it says so in the article i posted.

a nation cannot use eminent domain in land that is not part of their state. if israel wants to use eminent domain in the west bank, then they must also give the palestinians the right to vote.

Yep.

[Thunder]

No response from Webfusion. I guess he just can't believe that Israel would actually steal privately owned Arab land, and use it to build a Jews-only settlement.

Yes, Webfusion, it is indeed stunning.

[Thunder]

Anyway, as regards to communities in Israel (including specific neighborhoods, or entire towns) being Jew-only ------- that's the way things are. It's a social phenomenon. It works both ways. Many Arab towns and communties exclude Jews. Um-El-Fahem. Taibe. Tulkarem. Ramallah. Jenin. Gaza.


Arab towns in Israel FORBID Jews from living there? Id like to see some evidence of this.

And Palestinian towns would forbid a Jew who became a Palestinian citizen, who wanted to live in peace with his Arab neighbors, from living there? I call BS once more.

Though the fact remains that when Jews move into Arab towns in Jerusalem or the West Bank, they do not act as neighbors. They constantly steal privately owned Palestinian homes, squat in abandoned ones, and harrass the local Arabs. Jewish extremists don't want to live in Arab towns as neighbors, they move into these towns to TAKE the town and make life a living hell for the Arabs, in hopes that they will leave.

[Marc39]

The ghetto walls and separation walls are all part of a strategy to harass and persecute the Palestinians in order to eventually drive them out.

The walls, however unfortunate, are intended as a barrier to help prevent terrorists from gaining entry into Israel, as they are want to do. Thus far, this tactic has proven to be highly effective as suicide bombings have been reduced dramatically if not eliminated.

Everytime I ask the question: "Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?" there's an eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Why? because the Israel offer of a 2 state solution is complete lies. They only offer it because they know the Palestinians won't accept it.

Perhaps because your posts are not taken seriously. Israel agreed to the UN Partition Plan in 1947 that would have allowed your very scenario to have unfolded, however, the Arabs rejected the plan and proceeded to go to war with Israel. 10 years earlier, the Arabs rejected a similar partition plan offered them by the Peel Commission. So, who really has a rejectionist position? In 1967, after crushing the Arabs, once again, in the Six-Day War provoked by the Arabs, Israel put the return of the Gaza and West Bank territories captured during the war on the table, simply in exchange for peace with the Arabs. However, after the Arabs met in Khartoum, they returned with the Khartoum Resolution that represented a thorough rejection, once again, of Israel's offer to live at peace with its neighbors. The resolution contained what is known as the 3 No's: No peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel and no right of Israel to exist.

So I ask again. Is it the sincere intention of Israel to fix it's borders forever, even in theire current position, with half of Jerusalem stuck on the end of a triangular peninsular of land protruding into the West Bank and live side by side with a Palestinian state that comprises of the West Bank and the little 'island' of Gaza?

Unless amnesia has set in, you should recall that in 2000, Israel, in the presence of President Bill Clinton, offered Yasir Arafat what was widely considered a tremendously generous offer that entailed, in part, all of Gaza and most of the West Bank, including a foreign aid package totaling $30 BILLION to assist the refugees. Arafat, in yet another rejectionist gesture, turned the offer down and proceeded to inflict a reign of terror on his former negotiators for peaceful co-existence with an intifada-stream of suicide bombers.

Saudi Prince Bandar, who was acting as an intermediary, urged Arafat to "take this deal". He told Arafat he would never get as good a deal. Prince Bandar then said to Arafat, "I hope you remember, sir, what I told you. If we lose this opportunity, it is going to be a crime." Prince Bandar later described Arafat's rejection of Israel's peace offer as "a crime against the Palestinians, and, a crime against the entire region".

[Darth Rotor]

Why should jews give any land to the palestinians since Russia took Karelia and drove out over 400 000 karelians. :mad: So no land to the palestinians until Russia also give back what it has stolen from others.
Moon, that is the most sense you've made in a while, but I am a little concerned on your fidelity to topic here.

How are these two concerns linked?

Should I now insert my own pet peeve, the lack of an official and recognized Pashtunistan in the UN?

DR

[Marc39]

How can Israel offer something that isn't theirs to offer?

There was a little war in '67 that might have escaped your Middle Eastern scholarship in which Israel captured the West Bank. UNSCR 242 allows Israel to maintain control of the West Bank until a final land-for-peace resolution is achieved. To preempt further possible confusion of the matter, Res. 242 does not stipulate that Israel cede control of the entire territory.

Everytime I ask the question: "Does anyone seriously see Israel wanting to share the land of Palestine with a Palestinian State forever?" there's an eerie silence from the Zionist Apologists.

Why? because the Israel offer of a 2 state solution is complete lies. They only offer it because they know the Palestinians won't accept it.

One confused person is bad enough, but, when that confused person has a dialogue with himself, it only further exacerbates the confusion.

[Thunder]

How can Israel offer something that isn't theirs to offer?
.

Very easily. Israel conquered the West Bank. They rule it. Under international law, they are the legal occupiers of this land. They are NOT required to give it to the Jordanians or the Palestinians, until a final peace accord is achieved.

A nation is under no obligation to return land to a people that refuses to sign a peace deal with them. I know...it sucks..but this is the law.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

There was a little war in '67 that might have escaped your Middle Eastern scholarship in which Israel captured the West Bank. UNSCR 242 allows Israel to maintain control of the West Bank until a final land-for-peace resolution is achieved. To preempt further possible confusion of the matter, Res. 242 does not stipulate that Israel cede control of the entire territory.



One confused person is bad enough, but, when that confused person has a dialogue with himself, it only further exacerbates the confusion.

Old thread dragged up. Looks like we've got another TFT Stalker. Interesting

[Marc39]

Old thread dragged up. Looks like we've got another TFT Stalker. Interesting

Your posts are entertainingly confused, however, I'm nevertheless trying to educate the seemingly uneducable. No need to thank me, I'm a giver.

[Thunder]

Your posts are entertainingly confused, however, I'm nevertheless trying to educate the seemingly uneducable. No need to thank me, I'm a giver.

Lay off the personal attacks. I'm compulsive about reporting serial insulters.