Conversation about Israel/Arab relations

[renata]

I would like to invite anyone interested in this topic to participate in this thread. The idea came as we have recently started seeing posts from 3 relatively new posters: AN@S, Wasim and hisham. See threads below for references.

http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18213
http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17711&perpage=40&pagenumber=3
http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6087

Given a rare opportunity to discuss this issue with residents of the Arab world (Syria, for all I believe) I wanted to start this thread with some ground rules for behavior and evidence. I have already been warned that it is unlikely to suceed- I go into this with a full understanding of the issues on both sides. However, I would like to give it a try.

Here are some preliminary proposed guidelines. I will add or delete from the list on request from other posters.

I want to reemphasize suggested guidelines below. Please, no personal attacks of any kind in this thread.

No flaming or baiting or name calling
No posting if inflammatory images ( israeli flag image, pictures of victims)
Try to keep appeals to emotion to a minimum.
Answering questions, not avoidance of them.
Willingness to examine other party's sources.
As to evidence- can we agree that writings on a website without references are not strong evidence? Furthermore, writings by a splinter group should not be shown as evidence of a major point. So, for example, since majority of religious Jews would disagree with the statements by the group referenced in the first post of the Jews don't deserve a homeland thread, all that website proves is that a minority of Jews disagree on a subject, not that Jews don't have a right to Israel




There are already multitudes of questions for these posters stemming from the the previous threads. I will list a few of mine I already asked
1. Does one have to believe that Israel is a God given land in order to accept it?
2. Why does hisham believe talmud is a "most racist book in the history"
3. Do our Syrian posters believe believe that Protocols of the Elders of Zion are real or a forgery?
4. Do you think that Jews use blood in their rituals, particularly during Passover?
5. If you disagree with Syrian policies on ( for example) economy, education and foreign policy then why are you all united when it comes to Israel? Do you think your government may misinform you when it comes to some topics tells 100% truth when it comes to another topic?
6. What is acceptable historic evidence? What are the standards you use? if I linked to many website showing Jewish groups that disagree with this one's interpretation of the Tora, would you change your mind?
7. Do you have any independent proof showing Zionist control of the US media?


You do not have to answer them all at once, as they each deserve a deep discussion. I am sure you will have questions for me and other Israel supporters as well. I would also like to include as many JREF posters in this thread as possible, both pro and anti-Israel policy. Thanks all, and I anticipate an interesting and civilized discussion.

[headscratcher4]

Renata: An good topic starter.

Hopefully, there will be some response.

If the inspiration for this attempt are indeed Syrians, and they can speak freely, I'd like their views on a couple something as well -- at least to the extent that they can speak freely (and would we in the US know the difference?)

First, an observation. The Syrian Foreign Minister was interviewed on the TV Show 60 Minutes. When asked about Bashar Assad and his elevation to the Presidency. He responded, essentially, that Assad was elected by "all" of the people to lead the nation after the death of his father. When asked if there were any other candidates, the Foreign Minister demurred.

The failure of Arab ambition and aspirations, it seems to me, lies in a failure to admit that democracy -- other than that of the mob -- has and is failing across the Arab world. One party states perpetually electing by vast "majorities" corrupt leaders who do nothing to truely change the average life of the people and who continually focus anger away from their failures to "the West", To Israel, to "Colonialism", etc. Will remain failures.


I understand, to a degree, Arab rage and anger about Israel. However, to me, Israel and Arab anger over it seems to be, in part, as much a substitute for people unable to control their societies or to exercise numerous and basic political and economic freedoms as a serious issue.

Syria is a prime example. It is a failing one party state. The economy is in the basement. Unemployment is high. The state controls not only essential functions but also many small aspects of the economy. There is little transparency, and the state seemingly and brutally crushes any form of dissent or political discussion.

And, the people seem truly unified only about one issue: Israel. As if all the injustice and corruption in the Arab world would somehow disappear if Israel didn't exist.

My question/point is that Israel could disappear tomorrow, and Syria would still be a floundering, corrupt and repressive state. Everything that Assad could do to change that, to make the nation more just, democratic, open, free, economically viable could be done today -- in spite of Israel -- save that he can not and is using Israel as an excuse.

This is not to suggest that there is no problem/conflict and very real issues regarding Israel. Rather, that it has become an excuse for inaction and continued repression...

While granting that every Syrian and Arab nationalist, patriot and Islamic adherent wants to see the demise of Israel...what than? What is the just society that you envision? How will it be achieved under the leadership of either the Baathists or the mullahs? What is the core, cultural value of the Arab society that is, today, repressed by the West...as opposed to repressed by Arabs themselves?


Finally, are you at all familiar with Bernard Lewis and his thesis regarding the failures of Arab modernization in "What Went Wrong"? How do you respond to his contentions? (P.S. I am only half way through the book, but finding it very interesting).

[Cleopatra]

An interesting but daring experiment would be if we tried the following.

What if an alien that landed on earth decided to "hire" those who defend Palestinians to defend Israel and the vice-verca; those who usually defend Israel would be "hired" to defend Palestinians...

Anyway, I will participate in the discussion as Renata put it, later on but during the day...

[hisham]

Originally posted by renata

Here are some preliminary proposed guidelines. I will add or delete from the list on request from other posters.

No flaming or baiting or name calling
No posting if inflammatory images ( israeli flag image, pictures of victims)
Try to keep appeals to emotion to a minimum.
Answering questions, not avoidance of them.
Willingness to examine other party's sources.
As to evidence- can we agree that writings on a website without references are not strong evidence? Furthermore, writings by a splinter group should not be shown as evidence of a major point. So, for example, since majority of religious Jews would disagree with the statements by the group referenced in the first post of the Jews don't deserve a homeland thread, all that website proves is that a minority of Jews disagree on a subject, not that Jews don't have a right to Israel.

I will participate in this discussion even the English is not my second language, I say that because me and you decided to start this new discussion with specific roles and this maybe need more concentration on my part. I read your roles, I will submit my notes and we will try to reach the civilized discussion. Regarding to those guidelines you suggested, I will analyze the post of headscratcher4, because I feel the first post in this discussion has violations of these guidelines, so we need to build fast technique to decide if any post has a violation, because we must discuss our ideas and prevent wasting time in this kind of analyses. Is it ok?

[renata]

Originally posted by hisham


I will participate in this discussion even the English is not my second language, I say that because me and you decided to start this new discussion with specific roles and this maybe need more concentration on my part. I read your roles, I will submit my notes and we will try to reach the civilized discussion. Regarding to those guidelines you suggested, I will analyze the post of headscratcher4, because I feel the first post in this discussion has violations of these guidelines, so we need to build fast technique to decide if any post has a violation, because we must discuss our ideas and prevent wasting time in this kind of analyses. Is it ok?

There is no moderation on this thread, we will have to rely on individual posters to keep the discussion civilized. I will be unable to make anyone conform to the rules, so we can expect some deviation. However, I hope majority of people can stick to the guidelines, as there are nothing more than courtesy.

Do not worry about the language issue- many posters do not have English as a first language. I have lived in the US now for many years, and writing in English is hard for me. Cleopatra also does nto have English as a first language. I appreciate the effort you will make to talk. However, if you think anyone here misunderstood what you said, just correct us.

I do not see headscratcher4's post as in violation of the informal guidelines. However, if you do, please let him know via PM or by posting here. He is a very good and respected poster here, and if you have any concerns, I am sure he will be happy to discuss them with you.

I look forward to reading your suggestions on this thread.

By the way, can you confirm that you are from Syria, as I assumed? How do you access the internet- is it through school, or work, or a library?

[Wasim]

First I want to say that there is no party or official organization behind our group. We are just a three young men..

We are a small group that looking for (The Open Minds Communication) .. And it's the reason why came we here .. JREF Forums is a great place to exchange ideas and comments ..

Although we represent no one but ourselves.. We know the fact of Israel .. I believe that all the Arabs know the reality of Israel, but what about the Americans ??

The American people have a wrong idea about this case .. So we tried to correct the American point of view about the Arabic Israeli struggle by subscribing at JREF Forums ..

We are syrians .. AN@S and Hisham are from Syria .. And I'm in Stockholm .. I really don't know who AN@S or Hisham are !! But the most important thing that we have the same message to the Americans .. And we encourage all JREF Forums members to take an active role in keeping this discussions lively and more interesting ..

And I want to thank all who share us this discussion..

[headscratcher4]

Please know, I have no intent or desire to violate any guidlines. My hope is to engage in a reasonable and honest discussion. I will ask questions, of course, but they can be as much from ignorance as from a firm conviction. There is much I don't know, and much I am interested in learning...especially regarding Arab perceptions and positions on the conflict in the middle east.

Please know ahead of time that I have not been a supporter of the US government's position regarding Iraq, or how it has handled Sharon and the crisis in the middle east. I am sympathetic to Palistinian and Arab asperations. However, I am also skeptical as to conspiracy theories and allegations of international plots -- you need a lot of proof to convince me.

Further, I don't believe that there is any monopoly on the truth...in other words, I don't believe that Americans fully understand or have a monopoly on truth or facts about the middle east, Arabs or Israel. Just as I don't believe that there is some "universal" truth about Arabs and what they "know". I think all of these are pieces of a puzzle and that solutions to problems comes by understanding as much as one can of all perspectives.

So, if you claim a universal truth, especially here at the Randi forum -- a Truth that Arabs understand but Americans do not --you'd better be prepared to have it "challenged" and to explain it and prove it, just as I believe and hope that you would challenge me and my beliefs and pronouncements.

Anyway, I look forward to an interesting discussion. I look forward to learning a few "truths" and changing my perceptions, just as I hope that you, also, might change your mind in light of new or alternative ways of considering the issues.

If I have offended in anyway, please let me understand how, and I will, of course, apologize.

[davefoc]

First I would like to commend Renata for starting this thread, both for the creativity of the notion and for the openness of it. Renata, clearly has some different views than these folks but she has gone out of her way to listen to them and to give them a chance to voice their views. Well done.

I would like to see at some point in the thread, perhaps not right away, each of the three guys answer this question:

If a majority of Palestinians come to accept a peace agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis will they also come to accept this peace agreement?

[renata]

Wasim:
First of all, let me thank you for taking the other thread out of your sig line and putting this one in. As you know, I and some other posters felt the subject of that thread was inflammatory, and I wanted to avoid that here. Your show of good faith is noted and appreciated.

I assumed the three of you knew each other, because hisham and Wasim started posting shortly after An@S latest thread. Welcome to this forum- it is a good place with a large variety of topics, posters and opinions.

I must say I agree with headscratcher's second post. I do not believe in conspiracy theories or universal truths. For example, in another thread hisham brought up Talmud, as a "racist" book. I studied it a while ago, and do not think it is anything other than a codex of laws and memorialization of oral tradition. I would like to know the reason for hisham's belief, so we can talk about it openly.

Whereas I do indeed disagree with you on undoubtedly most Middle East subjects, I welcome the opportunity to learn about your opinions. I feel I have much to learn, and I hope we can achieve some common ground. I am Jewish, an immigrant from USSR. I have close family in Israel, and I am a Zionist. The current situation in the Middle East pains me, and I hope eventually a Palestinian state and Israel can exist in peace with each other and their neighbors.

Davefoc: thank you for the complement, and thanks for participation in this thread. I must say I can not take credit for this idea- there was a lengthy thread in Religion section " Hitler was an atheist"a while ago that set out some rules and was heavily moderated. In that thread, people were able to talk to each other, and not past each other. This thread, although not moderated, was inspired by that one. I hope to see many more posts from you and other posters on this thread. I like your question, and I look forward to the response.

[AN@S]

Good idea renata, I like your idea to have discussions about Israel/Arab relations, and I approve your guidelines...
I'll try to answer your questions as I can :

1. Does one have to believe that Israel is a God given land in order to accept it?
I don't think so, I believe that people who accept Israel are of two kinds:
1- The extremeist Zionists :They believe that Israel is a god given land and they are fighting for their believes to death (I hate them).
2- There are some people who accept Israel and they are living in Israel but they don't believe that Israel is a god eiven land, they immigrated to Israel because they have very bad situations in their original countries :CCCP,Poland,Greek,...etc.
They came to Israel not because they believe in Israel but hoping to have a better life...But I don't think that they have better life now (I advice them to back to the countries they came from because living in thier original countries are better than living in Israel because of the war and because Arabs don't like them.. they can find great jobs in their countries because the economy in their countries may be best than it in Israel)

7. Do you have any independent proof showing Zionist control of the US media?
http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindne...gs/mediagov.htm
I think you'll accept such a proof because it's not by a splinter group ... here you can find good proofs and a lists of people names, TV stations, and news papers.

I'll be back to answer the rest of your questions ...

I like to talk about the language, Sorry for my mistakes in my English, I am trying to make it better...
This year I am taking English courses in order to take the TOEFL exam after few monthes.

[hisham]

Originally posted by renata
Wasim:

I assumed the three of you knew each other, because hisham and Wasim started posting shortly after An@S latest thread. Welcome to this forum- it is a good place with a large variety of topics, posters and opinions.
Is this means you will never trust wasim? he said that he didn't know me or Anas, he said the truth, I was reading about this forum in a Syrian discussing board, then I decided to participate here.
Yes am from Syria and living in Syria, and haven't any relation with government organizations, and have my own opinion in this subject.
Now I think if we are trying to reach the civilized discussion, we must not say or indicate to any poster like a liar.

[renata]

Originally posted by hisham

Is this means you will never trust wasim? he said that he didn't know me or Anas, he said the truth, I was reading about this forum in a Syrian discussing board, then I decided to participate here.
Yes am from Syria and living in Syria, and haven't any relation with government organizations, and have my own opinion in this subject.
Now I think if we are trying to reach the civilized discussion, we must not say or indicate to any poster like a liar.

It was not my intention to call him a liar, or not to trust him. If my post came out that way, I apologize. I was talking about my initial assumption that the three of you are from Syria, and why I thought so. If he says he does not know you on AN@S, that is good enough for me. I would not want to derail this discussion with a miscommunication.

As to government influencing your opinion. Here in the US we hear the Syria has a tight control on information- newspapers and other sources. I do not know how much freedon Syria gives its citizens to engage in internet debates. Some countries (China, for example) curtails certain discussions. Due to your post, I assume Syria does not monitor its citizen internet communications and opinions. That is good to know.

[renata]

Originally posted by AN@S


I don't think so, I believe that people who accept Israel are of two kinds:
1- The extremeist Zionists :They believe that Israel is a god given land and they are fighting for their believes to death (I hate them).
2- There are some people who accept Israel and they are living in Israel but they don't believe that Israel is a god eiven land, they immigrated to Israel because they have very bad situations in their original countries :CCCP,Poland,Greek,...etc.
They came to Israel not because they believe in Israel but hoping to have a better life...But I don't think that they have better life now (I advice them to back to the countries they came from because living in thier original countries are better than living in Israel because of the war and because Arabs don't like them.. they can find great jobs in their countries because the economy in their countries may be best than it in Israel)


Do you think it is possible for people to have escaped various countries- post Holocaust Europe, anti-Semitic USSR ( I am from USSR) and fall in love with their new country? Do you think it is possible for Jews, who have faced persecutions from many different countries through their history to want a country of their own? Not exclusively their own, mind you- but a country in which they will not be the minority, like they have been throughout a long time.

Many Jews do not believe in a God given land, but they do believe their ancestors built Jerusalem, and lived in that country, so there is a historical connection to the land. So it is possible to believe in Israel and not believe that it is preordained by God. For example- you are from Syria. Syria, as it exists today is a relatively new country. But you are still proud of what it achieved, and you are still a patriot. So just because Israel as it exists today is a relatively new country, does not mean that people who live in it are not proud of it, its achievements, and do not love it.

Interestingly, the height of Jewish philosophy- Rambam, and I think Rashi occured in Muslim territories. There was a time when Jews thrived with their Muslim neighbors much more so than with Christians. I know that history, and I know a little bit about the Golden Age of Islam. It came through tolerance and trade and education, and it can come again through the same way.



http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindne...gs/mediagov.htm
I think you'll accept such a proof because it's not by a splinter group ... here you can find good proofs and a lists of people names, TV stations, and news papers.

This link does not work for me- it says it can't find the page


I'll be back to answer the rest of your questions ...

I like to talk about the language, Sorry for my mistakes in my English, I am trying to make it better...
This year I am taking English courses in order to take the TOEFL exam after few monthes.

I look forward to reading more of your posts. Other posters have questions as well, which I hope you will consider. And of course, you are free to ask questions of me and others here.

Do not worry about your English. Like I mentioned before I sometimes still struggle with it, especially when I have to write clearly. Many posters are from other countries, if I do not understand, I will ask.

I took TOEFL a few years ago also. Seeing how you are representing yourself here, I think you will not have any problems. :)

[Baker]

Originally posted by davefoc
First I would like to commend Renata for starting this thread, both for the creativity of the notion and for the openness of it. Renata, clearly has some different views than these folks but she has gone out of her way to listen to them and to give them a chance to voice their views. Well done.

I would like to see at some point in the thread, perhaps not right away, each of the three guys answer this question:

If a majority of Palestinians come to accept a peace agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis will they also come to accept this peace agreement?

Excellent post Dave I agree with all your comments I would also like to hear their answer on your question.

[davefoc]

Renata, touched on something that concerned me. To what degree is it safe for each of you to express your opinion openly? Is there any government monitoring of your internet activity? Are there things that you couldn't say if you wanted to for fear of reprisals?

Perhaps it was foolish of me but I actully had some concerns along those lines for AN@S. I sure wouldn't want to be part of something that resulted in violence against anybody here.

Most of us on this forum, have never lived in a place where there are restrictions on political speech, so we really don't know what it would be like at all.

[EvilYeti]

I have a question for the gentlemen from Syria.

Would, in your opinion, the world be a better place if there were no Jew's in it?

A simple yes or no answer from each of the participants will suffice.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by AN@S
http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindner/Writings/mediagov.htm
I think you'll accept such a proof because it's not by a splinter group ... here you can find good proofs and a lists of people names, TV stations, and news papers.
Interesting link, AN@S.

To be sure that Jews are over-represented in positions of authority in the media, we'd have to know what the denominator is. That is, we'd need a broad idea of how many top level media jobs are out there. And we'd need to know what the turn-over is for those jobs.

But even without that information, I'm willing to grant that Jews are over-represented in the media. It's also my impression that Jews are over-represented in medicine, law, and the sciences.

Asians are another group over-represented in certain areas of society. It's my impression that US Ph.D. programs in the physical sciences, computer sciences, and engineering, have a disproportionate number of Asian candidates. I suppose we could test this idea in a crude way by going to, say, the web site for the M.I.T. engineering department and looking at the list of graduate students in the program.

In medicine, there are a disproportionate number of men in orthopedic surgery, and a disproportionate number of women in pediatrics, dermatology, and psychiatry.

Blacks are over-represented in professional basketball. Whites are over-represented among professional golfers. Jews are under-represented in professional boxing, which has a high percentage of Hispanics.

What causes these statistical anomalies? Some grand conspiratorial cabal? Perhaps a more pedestrian explanation is possible. Can you think of one?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Interesting link, AN@S.

To be sure that Jews are over-represented in positions of authority in the media, we'd have to know what the denominator is. That is, we'd need a broad idea of how many top level media jobs are out there. And we'd need to know what the turn-over is for those jobs.

But even without that information, I'm willing to grant that Jews are over-represented in the media. It's also my impression that Jews are over-represented in medicine, law, and the sciences.

Asians are another group over-represented in certain areas of society. It's my impression that US Ph.D. programs in the physical sciences, computer sciences, and engineering, have a disproportionate number of Asian candidates. I suppose we could test this idea in a crude way by going to, say, the web site for the M.I.T. engineering department and looking at the list of graduate students in the program.

In medicine, there are a disproportionate number of men in orthopedic surgery, and a disproportionate number of women in pediatrics, dermatology, and psychiatry.

Blacks are over-represented in professional basketball. Whites are over-represented among professional golfers. Jews are under-represented in professional boxing, which has a high percentage of Hispanics.

What causes these statistical anomalies? Some grand conspiratorial cabal? Perhaps a more pedestrian explanation is possible. Can you think of one?

The problem is that the media is the means by which we receive our information, which is what we use to base our view of the world on.

While there are no laws governing membership of basketball teams or medical professions, except the ability to provide academic qualifications where required, media ownership is entirely another matter.

No one would want the media to be owned by one company, even if that company agreed entirely with their world view. I do not know what the US laws are in regard to media ownership, but in Australia there are quite specific rules to ensure that one company cannot dominate the dissemination of news.

Now, the fact that many Jews are involved in the ownership of the media does not necessarily mean that they are out to manipulate the programming to suit their political views. However, there is a strong possibility that they will have natural sympathies to the Zionist cause, and skew the presentation of news that way.

I do know, for example, that Rupert Murdoch, although not Jewish himself, is very pro-Israeli, and his news organisations support this position. This in itself is not so bad, if there are other sources of news to balance his point of view.

The problem is if the 'balance' is so small and inconsequential that a balanced view, for a reasonable person, is hard to acquire.

The solution is to not pass laws to prevent the number of Jews from owning media, but to ensure that there is a broad diversity of views available.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by AN@S

I like to talk about the language, Sorry for my mistakes in my English, I am trying to make it better...
This year I am taking English courses in order to take the TOEFL exam after few monthes.

Hi AN@S, Marhaba! Welcome to the forum. As an ex-TOEFL teacher let me say your English is already quite good, and you've chosen an excellent way to practice as well.

Just one point when talking to Brits and Americans, especially in an anonymous forum such as this. People speak very frankly here, and what may seem to be a personal insult will usually not be meant as such. You will know when the insult is intended!

From personal experience I know how misunderstandings between Arab people and westerners can happen, so if you think you have been insulted, wait a bit, and PM me if you like for clarification.

[renata]

Unfortunately, the media link does not work for me, so I am not sure what is there. I assume it lists various Jewish participants in the media.
However,
Do you know that Ted Turner, founder of CNN called Israelis terrorists?
Did you know that New York Times, a Jewish owned newspaper is one of the most liberal in this country, and one of the most supportive of the Israeli cause?

Being a Jew does not mean being a Zionist. Most Jews in America are Democrats, and liberals- the people who tend to support a Palestinian state.

I am sorry I am unable to address your link directly. Can you check it and post it again?

I also wanted to welcome EvilYeti, AUP and DrBenway, the other frequent particants in the threads on Israel to this thread. Hypocolius, thanks for the offer to help the new guys. If you can confirm that I meant no insult to Wasim in my earlier post, I would appreciate that.

You can tell that on this forum the opinions on Israel vary quite widely. I hope to get input from all participants, and I appreciate that we got so far in this thread, and its tone is kept as requested. Usually, the fur is flying by now! :) Thanks, all.

[davefoc]

I have been more pro-Palestinian than the average American for years. As such, I have wondered how it is that the average American has a somewhat different view than myself.

One possibility, is of course, that I'm just flat out wrong on the issue. The average American, free of some of the vestigial European anti-semitism and free of some of the self serving motivation of his European counterparts is free to take a righteous view without these encumbrances. Since part of this notion includes the idea that I am wrong, I am therefore forced to consider other possibilities :) :

1. The average American is not as pro-Israel as it seems. Democracies are driven by motivated minorities not disinterested majorities, so American policy is not as reflective of the majority as one might expect, it is, in fact, driven by a strongly pro-Israel minority more than by a disinterested majority.
2. Fundamentalist Christians in this country often have a deep belief that the bible says the land belongs to the Jews so Jews in Israel is a kind of affirmation of their beliefs.
3. Jews in this country, vote almost monolithically for pro-Israeli candidates. This gives them power far in excess of their numbers to select candidates and drive public debate on this issue than their numbers would suggest.
4. American policy has been pro-Israel for more than fifty years. Nobody likes to think they've been doing the wrong thing for fifty years so some of the reason we support Israel is because we support Israel.
5. Jews do hold decision maker positions in media companies at a rate higher than their rate in the general population. This undoubtedly has some effect on story selection by the major media outlets, although working in isolation my sense is that this is not as important as it might seem.
6. Jews have been some of the most successful story tellers in this society and some of those stories have enjoyed wide spread popularity. There are certain ideas that the average person takes for granted like that the pyramids were built by Jewish slaves, that are almost completely false but they are instilled in our collective conciousness because of the great skill of Jewish story tellers.
7. There is a kind of synergy that works to make reasons one through six above more powerful than the sum of these reasons working independently.

[davefoc]

Renata,
I am posting the link on Jewish control of the media again for you. I hope it works. I realize that some of what is said here may be exaggeration or even racist, but to an uninformed reader like myself it seemed like there was something to what they were saying and I would like your thoughts. I did notice they listed William Paley who has been dead since 1990 but perhaps that's a minor objection since most of the folks listed seemed to be alive.
http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindner/Writings/mediagov.htm

Incidentally, how do you figure out if a public person is Jewish? I had no idea a lot of the people listed were Jewish.

To people who have expressed concerns about their English.
It seems pretty good to me. I have not had trouble understanding anybody. I would consider it a major accomplishment if I could converse remotely that well in a second language. Congratulations.

[renata]

Originally posted by davefoc
Renata,
I am posting the link on Jewish control of the media again for you. I hope it works. I realize that some of what is said here may be exaggeration or even racist, but to an uninformed reader like myself it seemed like there was something to what they were saying and I would like your thoughts. I did notice they listed William Paley who has been dead since 1990 but perhaps that's a minor objection since most of the folks listed seemed to be alive.
http://home.earthlink.net/~hhlindner/Writings/mediagov.htm


This time the link seems to work, thank you. it is quite lenghty, and it is difficult for me to address all its claims. I will work on it and try to address it as soon as I can.
However, here are some things I noticed
- The list of Jews in the media is quite out of date: Tartikoff has been dead for a few years
- I do not know how they know who is Jewish and who is not. There are some common Jewish sounding names- Rabin, Levin, etc but outside of that I do not know how they decide
- The list of Jews in the media reminds me of the Clinton body count ( here is what I mean http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm ) Sometimes connections appear to be tenuous.
- Bush's cabinet is the first one in at least 12 years, and I think more that does not have a Jewish cabinet member
- Even if Jews own a particular newspaper ( New York Times) that is not a guarantee that that newspaper will have a pro-Israel slant. NYT was heavily criticized as more liberal and anti-Israel than the mainstream.


I do not mind addressing these points, as long as people realize it takes a long time to do so, and I may not be able to refute every point in the link.

Any assistance from other posters will be appreciated.

[DrBenway]

Israel's government works, for the most part, and is basically secular. Israelis can believe in any religion they like, or no religion at all.

On the Palestinian side, what choices do folks have?

Well, there's Arafat and his entrenched kleptocracy with its impressive Swiss bank accounts. If you're unhappy with that choice, there is an alternative: Hamas. Hamas stands ready to lead the Palestinian people upward, onward, and into the Middle Ages --you know, the good old days of tossing homosexuals off rooftops, cutting hands off thieves, and throwing stones at adulterers.

If it were up to me, I'd vote for reforming Israel from within rather than bothering to try to make the PA work. If the PA ever starts looking like a viable enterprise, we can count on Hamas blowing up a few more busses and nightclubs, thereby putting the PA out of its misery.

From a distance, I can see the Intifada going off all around the Palestinian people, like a slow-motion suicide bomber's coat ripping apart in all directions. I think this event, this Intifada, may be something new in the history of humankind: the self-genocide of a people.

I view the resistance movement as hopeless and pointless, because I know that Israel will never capitulate to threats of violence. More importantly, the West will never allow such capitulation to happen, for obvious reasons.

Most Americans feel a visceral equivalence between the suicide bombers and the perpetrators of 9/11. Consequently, Americans will recoil from any policy which might be interpreted as an attempt to appease the "martyrs" or their sympathizers.

But is there any alternative to the Intifada?

For there to be peace, the Palestinians must be given a realistic vision of a better life, something they can reach within a reasonable period of time. They need markers pointing the way out of those awful, crowded refugee camps and into safer, better homes and communities. They need new settlements of their own. They need a means to invest of themselves in the building of these new structures.

But will the world outside of Palestine allow peace? Year after year, so many have tuned in to watch the conflict. Like a good boxing match between two greats, the drama is gripping. Vicariously, the world suffers the pain with the faces on the screen, and enjoys the promise of a miracle which will make things right.

I wonder, can the world let the drama end without a happy miracle? If it ends without a Palestinian victory, will men sitting in pubs in Syria and Jordan curse their TV screens, just as they did when the Iraqis "failed to fight" and so "dishonored" the Arab world?

The Arab-Israeli movie doesn't run on ticket sales. It runs on donations sent to Islamic and Palestinian charities, which in turn are traded for crates of AK-47s, RPGs, and vests filled with C4. It's these things that keep the action going on the TV screen.

Maybe my comments sound too one-sided. Shouldn't I fault America for its part in keeping the drama going? Shouldn't I fault American aid to Israel, a country all ready far stronger than the Palestinians?

No. And here's why, by way of an analogy:

In hindsight, it's clear that Iraq never had a chance in Gulf War II. Iraq was defeated long before any US soldier ever crossed its border.

If Iraq had been smarter, it would have done everything in its power to avoid a direct armed conflict with the US. If a benevolent government had ruled over the Iraqi people, it would have surrendered immediately after the first shots were fired.

Similarly, from a military standpoint, the Palestinians have already been defeated. No matter how many boatloads of arms the PA or Hamas bring into the region, the Palestinians have no hope of victory against the sophisticated Israeli armed forces.

For those who enjoy seeing dead Palestinians on TV, I recommend making a donation to Hamas. I recommend writing essays of solidarity with "the struggle" in the Arabic press.

For those who hope for a better future for the Palestinians, I recommend speaking out against guns, against bombs, and against all form of armed struggle. Do not support delusional ideas of a military victory over Israel. Do not play the part of al-Sahaf, who lied to his own people so they might waste their lives in service to false dreams.

There are ways to fight that don't involve things that go boom.

Ask a woman for advice about how to negotiate from a position of weakness. Women are familiar with the ways in which apparent weakness can be used as a strength.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DrBenway
Israel's government works, for the most part, and is basically secular. Israelis can believe in any religion they like, or no religion at all.

On the Palestinian side, what choices do folks have?

Well, there's Arafat and his entrenched kleptocracy with its impressive Swiss bank accounts. If you're unhappy with that choice, there is an alternative: Hamas. Hamas stands ready to lead the Palestinian people upward, onward, and into the Middle Ages --you know, the good old days of tossing homosexuals off rooftops, cutting hands off thieves, and throwing stones at adulterers.

If it were up to me, I'd vote for reforming Israel from within rather than bothering to try to make the PA work. If the PA ever starts looking like a viable enterprise, we can count on Hamas blowing up a few more busses and nightclubs, thereby putting the PA out of its misery.



The big flaw with Israel's democracy is that the extreme right has too much influence. Due to the quircks of proportional representation, part of the reason the settlement movement is so strong is that they get to help make government, and hence get their pound of flesh in return.

In case you haven't noticed, the Palestinians already have a new PM, who has just had a new cabinet sworn in.

Here is a good trivia question for you, which Isreali PM helped get Hamas started?



How the Likud Bloc Mid-wifed the Birth of Hamas
By RAY HANANIA

Hamas is considered one of Israel's greatest threats, but the Islamic terrorist organization found its beginnings in the misguided Israeli effort to encourage the rise of a religious alternative that would undermine the popularity of the Palestine Liberation Organization and Yasir Arafat.

The strategy resulted in the birth of Hamas which rose from these Islamic roots. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was a member of the government when the policy was developed in the late 1970s.

Although Sharon and his Likud (formerly Herut Party) government colleagues could not anticipate that the Islamic leaders they backed would eventually evolve into Hamas and suicde bombings, the two have benefited from each other's extremism over the years.



http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania01182003.html



From a distance, I can see the Intifada going off all around the Palestinian people, like a slow-motion suicide bomber's coat ripping apart in all directions. I think this event, this Intifada, may be something new in the history of humankind: the self-genocide of a people.



To accuse the Palestinians of 'self-genocide', is not, I believe, a statement that is morally acceptable. I think you should consider removing it.

That they are being subjected to a slow and agonising spiral down is not in dispute, to describe it as self inflicted is to turn 'blaming' the victim into an art form.



I view the resistance movement as hopeless and pointless, because I know that Israel will never capitulate to threats of violence. More importantly, the West will never allow such capitulation to happen, for obvious reasons.



Palestinians were being harrassed and subject to genocide long before suicide bombing ever started.



Most Americans feel a visceral equivalence between the suicide bombers and the perpetrators of 9/11. Consequently, Americans will recoil from any policy which might be interpreted as an attempt to appease the "martyrs" or their sympathizers.

But is there any alternative to the Intifada?

For there to be peace, the Palestinians must be given a realistic vision of a better life, something they can reach within a reasonable period of time. They need markers pointing the way out of those awful, crowded refugee camps and into safer, better homes and communities. They need new settlements of their own. They need a means to invest of themselves in the building of these new structures.

But will the world outside of Palestine allow peace? Year after year, so many have tuned in to watch the conflict. Like a good boxing match between two greats, the drama is gripping. Vicariously, the world suffers the pain with the faces on the screen, and enjoys the promise of a miracle which will make things right.

I wonder, can the world let the drama end without a happy miracle? If it ends without a Palestinian victory, will men sitting in pubs in Syria and Jordan curse their TV screens, just as they did when the Iraqis "failed to fight" and so "dishonored" the Arab world?

The Arab-Israeli movie doesn't run on ticket sales. It runs on donations sent to Islamic and Palestinian charities, which in turn are traded for crates of AK-47s, RPGs, and vests filled with C4. It's these things that keep the action going on the TV screen.



You haven't noticed all the arms supplied to Israel labelled "Made in the USA", including such horrors as the flechette cannon shells.



Maybe my comments sound too one-sided. Shouldn't I fault America for its part in keeping the drama going? Shouldn't I fault American aid to Israel, a country all ready far stronger than the Palestinians?

No. And here's why, by way of an analogy:

In hindsight, it's clear that Iraq never had a chance in Gulf War II. Iraq was defeated long before any US soldier ever crossed its border.

If Iraq had been smarter, it would have done everything in its power to avoid a direct armed conflict with the US. If a benevolent government had ruled over the Iraqi people, it would have surrendered immediately after the first shots were fired.

Similarly, from a military standpoint, the Palestinians have already been defeated. No matter how many boatloads of arms the PA or Hamas bring into the region, the Palestinians have no hope of victory against the sophisticated Israeli armed forces.

For those who enjoy seeing dead Palestinians on TV, I recommend making a donation to Hamas. I recommend writing essays of solidarity with "the struggle" in the Arabic press.

For those who hope for a better future for the Palestinians, I recommend speaking out against guns, against bombs, and against all form of armed struggle. Do not support delusional ideas of a military victory over Israel. Do not play the part of al-Sahaf, who lied to his own people so they might waste their lives in service to false dreams.

There are ways to fight that don't involve things that go boom.

Ask a woman for advice about how to negotiate from a position of weakness. Women are familiar with the ways in which apparent weakness can be used as a strength.

The strawmen you have raised and rebutted have nothing to do with the reality of the situation.

[hisham]

Originally posted by EvilYeti
I have a question for the gentlemen from Syria.

Would, in your opinion, the world be a better place if there were no Jew's in it?

A simple yes or no answer from each of the participants will suffice.

of course NO, we are not racists. Personally I live in Damascus and tow Jews families were my good neighbors, I missed them. Who in Damascus don't know Avraham Hamra chief rabbi of the Jewish community of Syria until 1994? Now in Damascus the Jews still enjoy their relations with other religions people .

[renata]

AUP,
As I mentioned before, this thread is an experiment in a quiet, low key civilized discussion. I would really appreciate it if you would refrain from comments such as the ones I quote below. There are dozens of confrontational threads on Israel- I do not want this one to become one as well. I want to learn from the various posters, and talk to them, not scream at them.
I hope you will continue posting within the spirit of this thread.

As to Dr. Benway- he/she posts several challenging and thought provoking topics. They are perhaps controversial, but are not in attack style. I will leave that to our Syrian posters to say whether they are offended.

I request from all again- please refrain from attacking posters. Let's talk about ideas and history, not each other.

Thanks
-r


Edited to delete personal attacks, as AUP took them out of his post. -Thank you

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by renata
AUP,
As I mentioned before, this thread is an experiment in a quiet, low key civilized discussion. I would really appreciate it if you would refrain from comments such as the ones I quote below. There are dozens of confrontational threads on Israel- I do not want this one to become one as well. I want to learn from the various posters, and talk to them, not scream at them.
I hope you will continue posting within the spirit of this thread.

As to Dr. Benway- he/she posts several challenging and thought provoking topics. They are perhaps controversial, but are not in attack style. I will leave that to our Syrian posters to say whether they are offended.

I request from all again- please refrain from attacking posters. Let's talk about ideas and history, not each other.

Thanks
-r



I try to refain from this, but some posts are just so stupid that something has to be said. To accuse them of 'self-genocide' is something that is akin to the often quoted UCE cheering as the WTC.

I have not attacked anyone else in this thread, and have tried to stay out of it, to let some Zionist/Arab debate take place.

If she wants to take away that point, I'll delete mine.

[renata]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I try to refain from this, but some posts are just so stupid that something has to be said. To accuse them of 'self-genocide' is something that is akin to the often quoted UCE cheering as the WTC.

I have not attacked anyone else in this thread, and have tried to stay out of it, to let some Zionist/Arab debate take place.

If she wants to take away that point, I'll delete mine.

If DrBenway wants to delete that point, he/she can. However that notwithstanding, please either delete your personal comments (the ones I quoted, and I will delete them as well) or refrain from such comments in the future. If you believe that DrBenway overstepped some bounds, that does not give justification to respond in kind or, in my opinion escalate. Let's not divert this thread on this matter any further. I hope I can trust in your judgement on this, and will not see any more personal attacks from anyone in this thread.

[NoZed Avenger]

I used to have a more pro-Palestinian outlook. In 1998 when Arafat walked away from negotiations after Barach's offer, my opinions changed. Barach put a number of items on the table that prior Prime Ministers said Israel would not even consider; it appeared to be a huge move forward in the process that Arafat walked away from without any thought of a compromise.

At that point, I came to the tenative conclusion that there would not be a peace as long as Arafat effectively controlled the process, as he had no interest in destroying his power base by accepting peace. I have seen nothing since then that has changed my opinion.


NA

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by renata
Hypocolius, thanks for the offer to help the new guys. If you can confirm that I meant no insult to Wasim in my earlier post, I would appreciate that.


That's pretty much why I posted in the first place. Hisham appeared to take offense at a seemingly inocuous comment, and it can only have been through an imperfect understanding of what you meant.

Hisham, Wasim and AN@S. You have no reason to trust me to interpret other people's posts, and your English seems good enough to understand what is said, but perhaps some of the hidden meanings might be difficult for you. If you like, you can consult me as to what I think people mean it it is unclear to you. English is a very complex language (as I'm sure you know), and many words have more than one meaning.

[headscratcher4]

AUP:

I always read with interest your posts...though I pretty much know the position you will take with respect to Israel and US Middle East Policy. Indeed, I am often in agreement, though not as agitated as you. Having said this, I note specifically, that you very effectively criticize US and Israelie policy -- as do, I add, many Americans. However, and I may have missed this, what are your concerns/criticisms of Arab and Palestinian positions.

You seem quite inteligent, and the failures of US policy in this respect are often manifest, but the story has always more than one side. I am interested in your stepping back for a moment and describing your thoughts about where the Arab governments have been wrong, failed opportunities, failed acts of courage, failed policies, and what you think is the most effective and realistic position for Arabs in general and Palistinians in particular for going FORWARD...in short, not a re-hash of the past, but going forward.

In other words, you support the establishment of a Palestinian state...what in your mind does that state look like? Does it look like other current Arab states? Does it look like a fundumentalist Islamic State -- a'la the Taliban or Iran?

I suspect your answer is that that state should look like whatever its citizens want it to look like...my question is different than that reality (for, clearly, it will be as democratic, fundumentalist, corrupt, transparent, tolerant, non-sexist, sexist as the people allow). No, my question is to you, as an outside observer, as one who abhores the injustice in Palestine today, who must (though not accepting the US interpretation of what is "terrorism", etc.) abhore torture, murder, corruption, etc. of any kind...what do you want to see happen?

I say this as an outsider, who has not had to live the life or fight the fight, but it is difficult to see that anyone would want a government like the current (soon to be different?) Palistinian authority -- where theft, troture, corruption and restraint of all sorts of critical civil freedoms are the rule of the day -- as the ideal governemnt for establishing justice in that part of the world. That is, in fact, what we and the Palestinian people have, it may even be what they want (as opposed to what is best or perfect)...my question is: what -- from your perspective -- do they deserve?

[AN@S]

Originally posted by renata
Many Jews do not believe in a God given land, but they do believe their ancestors built Jerusalem, and lived in that country, so there is a historical connection to the land. So it is possible to believe in Israel and not believe that it is preordained by God. For example- you are from Syria. Syria, as it exists today is a relatively new country. But you are still proud of what it achieved, and you are still a patriot. So just because Israel as it exists today is a relatively new country, does not mean that people who live in it are not proud of it, its achievements, and do not love it.

What???
How can u compare Israel with Syria?
Syria is relatively new i agree with you ,,, but it's relatively new only by its political borders that had been drawn not from a long time ..But who cares about political borders when talking about civilisations?
There is something called civilisation which is much more important than political borders that drawn by people...
Syria has a great civilisation, Damascus is the oldest capital in the history from thousands of years??Who cares about political borders?
You can't compare Israel with syria because Israel is not like Syria..
Israel is a TOTALLY new country , it's a country without a civilisation,without a history...Maybe there is something called (Jews history) but there's nothing called (Israel history) or (Israel civilisation)...
Give me one example proofes that your ancestors built Jerusalem!!
Or let's say one example proofes that your ancestors were in Jerusalem...
I need one -only one- name of an Israeli ruin in Jerusalem (Don't say Solomon's Temple because it's nonsense, Israeli government did not find it).
I know that there were some Jews in Jerusalem long time ago but they were Arabs..
Let me give u an example : You're from USSR but you said that your ancestors were in Jerusalem, Do u believe that your ancestors immigrated from Jerusalem after building it to USSR then they Immigrated again from USSR to Palestine 55 years ago??
Be logical my friend ... your ancestors are from USSR...
You have to know that religion have nothing to do with nationality ...
Let's suppose that Jews were in Jerusalem long time ago..
You are from USSR and your religion is Jewish, but that doesn't mean that the Jews who were in Jerusalem are your ancestors!!!
I am from Syria and I am a moslem but that doesn't mean that my ancestors are from Indonesia because they are moslems!!!
My ancestors are Arabs from Syria, and your ancestors are from USSR and other Jew from Poland his ancestors are from Poland...

I assumed the three of you knew each other, because hisham and Wasim started posting shortly after An@S latest thread. Welcome to this forum- it is a good place with a large variety of topics, posters and opinions.
I'll tell you what..
I talked about this forum In a Syrian Discussion forum and I invited Syrians and Arabs to join this forum in order to give the Arabs point of view to the Americans ...
Hisham and Wasim read my invitation and they liked the idea...
That's all and we really don't know each others...

Originally posted by davefoc
To what degree is it safe for each of you to express your opinion openly? Is there any government monitoring of your internet activity? Are there things that you couldn't say if you wanted to for fear of reprisals?

I can assure u that we can talk about everything we want, there isn't any monitoring of our internet activities in syria...
There are some banned websites in Syria but there is no monitoring of internet activities ...
Especially from few years ago the democracy in syria has improved and we still waiting for more
Originally posted by Hypocolius
Hi AN@S, Marhaba! Welcome to the forum. As an ex-TOEFL teacher let me say your English is already quite good, and you've chosen an excellent way to practice as well.

Just one point when talking to Brits and Americans, especially in an anonymous forum such as this. People speak very frankly here, and what may seem to be a personal insult will usually not be meant as such. You will know when the insult is intended!

From personal experience I know how misunderstandings between Arab people and westerners can happen, so if you think you have been insulted, wait a bit, and PM me if you like for clarification

Thank u very very much my friend, When I was new to this forum I thought that somepeople are insulting me but I discovered that Americans speak very frankly ...
Actually, Arabs are more diplomatic in their discussions and that is not very good thing ..

Originally posted by renata
The list of Jews in the media is quite out of date: Tartikoff has been dead for a few years

You can see this : http://www.duke.org/awakening/chapter19_01.html

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
In case you haven't noticed, the Palestinians already have a new PM, who has just had a new cabinet sworn in.
Abu Mazen's position is similar to mine. He has spoken out against the Intifada. He has tried to convince people that there are other ways to fight.

True to form, Hamas marked the day of his swearing in with an explosion in a Tel Aviv night club.

What happens to a person who throws rocks at another person armed with automatic weapons? Is the result "homicide" or "suicide"? I'd call it suicide.

What will happen the the Palestinians if they continue the Intifada in the current, post-9/11, post-Iraq political climate?

[Cleopatra]

I don't know where to start. What I really know though, is that I don't intend to apologize for anything.

I was born in Jerusalem, my grandparents have fought in the wars to make my country exist and I have served the Israeli Army, the great Israeli Air Force to be exact. :)

Israel is my beloved country the way Greece is and maybe more because I was born there and I feel that this country still bleeds and needs me more.

So, I don't owe anybody. Maybe, I owe to the American Governments that have been more than friendly to us but in our turn we have paid them off very well so far.

Having said that, let me proceed.

Yes, we have an issue with the Palestinians. The Palestinians, who suddenly appeared after the 6 days War, when their brothers, the Arabs, decided that it was time to aknowledge their existence.

Let me remind you, that their brothers, the Arabs of Jordan, who were possessing the territories of the West Bank, didn't let them establish a country of their own before 1967 and let me remind you that the arabic part had rejected the plan of UN according to which a Palestinian State was recognized.

But since our friends are "young men" as they said, maybe they don't remember those things , so let me skip History, I don't need it to built my case anyway.

This short introduction will save me from having to answer to this :
I don't think so, I believe that people who accept Israel are of two kinds: bla bla bla
.

I belong to the third kind. I am a native. I am the true stuff :)

I must confess that I was impressed , very much impressed, by this statement of Wassim :

Although we represent no one but ourselves.. We know the fact of Israel .. I believe that all the Arabs know the reality of Israel, but what about the Americans ??

The American people have a wrong idea about this case .. So we tried to correct the American point of view about the Arabic Israeli struggle by subscribing at JREF Forums ..


Well Wassim, you are wrong. The truth is that some Media support Israel but there are other independant organizations who exercise a severe criticism against Israel.

Personally, although I have a satellite TV I never see Fox News ( unless I want to amuse myself) or CNN. I watch BBCNews. When I want to read something interesting and unbiased, I read either "The Nation" on line or the articles I find in "Open Democracy".

Dear Wassim. I think that what distinguishes this strange country that is called USA, is that you can go there and say whatever you wish...There are people who believe in the existence of extra terrestrials fro example and the have a church. None bothers them as long as they don't bother anybody ...

Otherwise, I can't understand why there are people who learn English and try to pass some TOEFL exams so as to be able to come to the "bad bad USA"... ;)

Frankly Wassim, I can't understand how someone who studies in Stockholm admires the young Palestinians who kill civilians by commiting suicide.

I expected somebody like you, who has some education, to want a better life for those poor people. On the contrary, you want them to continue die for the sake fo Allah. I wonder why? Don't you think that they deserve a better future?

Also, and I will stop here for the moment.Althought I can add some more things about the situation with Abu Mazen, I know that your country has some serious problems with the consititution. To be more exact, you don't have a democracy...

Allow me please to remark that you problem, comparing to the Palestinian Issue, is much worse.

At least , they have something to expect and we, the bad Israelis are pressuring for a Democracy what do you, Syrians, have to expect?

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by AN@S
Syria is relatively new i agree with you ,,, but it's relatively new only by its political borders that had been drawn not from a long time ..But who cares about political borders when talking about civilisations?
There is something called civilisation which is much more important than political borders that drawn by people...
Syria has a great civilisation, Damascus is the oldest capital in the history from thousands of years??Who cares about political borders?
You can't compare Israel with syria because Israel is not like Syria..
Israel is a TOTALLY new country , it's a country without a civilisation,without a history...Maybe there is something called (Jews history) but there's nothing called (Israel history) or (Israel civilisation)...Aren't some of things you're saying about Israel even more true of the Palestinians? There's no distinct Palestinian culture or language. There's never been a Palestinian nation ruled by Palestinians - nor, until it was recently invented, any such thing as a sense of Palestinian national identity.

Syria itself, for that matter, is quick to proclaim itself the heir to the ancient civilizations that preceded it. But is that really justified? As Canadian journalist Mark Steyn recently observed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn27.html) about Iraq:Mankind's first experiments in agriculture and village life took place on the soil of what is now Iraq. Inhabitants of this land invented writing, and the first legal code, and possibly the wheel. But in the millennia between Gilgamesh, King of Nippur, and Saddam Hussein, President of Saddamland, any connection, ethnic, linguistic, religious or cultural, between the subjects of the former and those of the latter has withered to nothing. An Iraqi is no more likely than a Texan to be a descendant of Sumer, and the Lone Star State can stake a more plausible claim to Sumer's civilizational inheritance.

Present-day Iraq was home to the ancient cultures of Babylonia and Sumeria in much the same way that my property in New Hampshire was once home to NBC celebrity doctor Bob ''Doctor Bob'' Arnot. It would be foolish to come to me asking for advice on the side-effects of Rogaine: Doctor Bob's legacy is not to be found at my pad. Likewise, whatever the innovations in writing, law, agriculture and village life once pioneered by previous owners of the lot, modern Iraq has squandered them.Syria isn’t quite the dysfunctional horror state that Iraq is (or was, rather), of course, but I think a forceful argument can be made that modern Syria has to a great extent disinherited itself from the cultural legacy of the “previous owners”. Consider this before you reproach Israel for not having one.
Originally posted by AN@S
Actually, Arabs are more diplomatic in their discussions and that is not very good thing ..When Westerners hear the inflammatory rhetoric that passes for political discourse and serious journalism in the Arab world (Great Satan, anyone?), they come away with a different impression. Who could forget these recent examples of diplomatic Arab discussion:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,908386,00.html
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/11/1049567870880.html

(And this is only the lighter side, of course.)

[AN@S]

Originally posted by Cleopatra

This short introduction will save me from having to answer to this :

I belong to the third kind. I am a native. I am the true stuff :)

There's nothing called (native Israeli), if you can proof it to me go on... I challenge you ...
There are native americans, native Arabs, native Russians ...etc and every one of those are broud of their civilisations , but there's nothing called native Israeli (see my last post)

Frankly Wassim, I can't understand how someone who studies in Stockholm admires the young Palestinians who kill civilians by commiting suicide.
I expected somebody like you, who has some education, to want a better life for those poor people. On the contrary, you want them to continue die for the sake fo Allah. I wonder why? Don't you think that they deserve a better future?
You are wrong my friend...
Education doesn't mean to let the enemies steal your land!!
Me too, I can't understand how someone has a good education like Cleopatra accepts the idea of Israel and she is also broud to be an Israeli!!!!
I'll tell you something ... Next year I'll study the Web Development in a British or Canadian university (Virtual studying -online)....
studying in a foreign universities and having a high quality of education doesn't mean to kick my principles off !!!

[AN@S]

Originally posted by ceo_esq
Aren't some of things you're saying about Israel even more true of the Palestinians? There's no distinct Palestinian culture or language. There's never been a Palestinian nation ruled by Palestinians - nor, until it was recently invented, any such thing as a sense of Palestinian national identity.
You're wrong my friend ... There was a Palestinian and Arabic cultures in Palestine ....

When Westerners hear the inflammatory rhetoric that passes for political discourse and serious journalism in the Arab world (Great Satan, anyone?), they come away with a different impression. Who could forget these recent examples of diplomatic Arab discussion:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,908386,00.html
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/11/1049567870880.html

(And this is only the lighter side, of course.)

When I said that Arabs are more diplomatic than Americans in their discussions I meant the ordinary Arabic man , not the politicals..
Most Arabic politicals are IDIOTS...
Why do Americans believes that Arabs are agree with thier leaders?
Most Arabic leaders understand nothing about politics ...
You have to know my friends that I am not here to reflect my government point of view , or the point of view of any other government ...
If Arabs leaders are good leaders they have to unite ...
Imagine that ... 300 millions Arabs against three millions Israelis...
WOOOW....
This is the Arabic people's dream ... The United States Of Arabia
:cool:
We can force Israelis to back to their home lands in three hours...
If the Arabic leaders were really elected by thier people you'll not see idiots leaders like the gulf leaders or Iraqi leaders..
When we have democracy in the middle east we can defeat Israel , The new Arab generation are trying to have more democracy and more education in order to reach the Arabic dream...

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by AN@S
There's nothing called (native Israeli), if you can proof it to me go on... I challenge you ...
Question: if an Arab and a Jew marry and have children in Israel, are their children native Israelis?

[renata]

Originally posted by AN@S

You're wrong my friend ... There was a Palestinian and Arabic cultures in Palestine ....

When I said that Arabs are more diplomatic than Americans in their discussions I meant the ordinary Arabic man , not the politicals..
Most Arabic politicals are IDIOTS...
Why do Americans believes that Arabs are agree with thier leaders?
Most Arabic leaders understand nothing about politics ...
You have to know my friends that I am not here to reflect my government point of view , or the point of view of any other government ...
If Arabs leaders are good leaders they have to unite ...
Imagine that ... 300 millions Arabs against three millions Israelis...
WOOOW....
This is the Arabic people's dream ... The United States Of Arabia
:cool:
We can force Israelis to back to their home lands in three hours...
If the Arabic leaders were really elected by thier people you'll not see idiots leaders like the gulf leaders or Iraqi leaders..
When we have democracy in the middle east we can defeat Israel , The new Arab generation are trying to have more democracy and more education in order to reach the Arabic dream...

This post really bothers me for the following reasons
1. Is it really true that the one unifying goal of all 300 million Arabs is to force Israelis back to their homelands ( what are you going to do- put them on planes?) in three hours? If that is true, then Israel is quite justified in not giving territory ( such as Golan) to enemy countries. Why should Israel assist in own self destruction?
2. Even if it was true, I am afraid 300 millions Arabs would never, ever succeed in wiping out Israel. Recall it has been tried before. Israel will not go down quietly. That is a fact- it has superiour weapons and powerful friends.
3. Let's assume Arabs succeed. Zionists are dead, millions of Jews are deported to Russia, Germany, Iran, Ethopia, etc. Then what? What is your plan for victorious Arabs? Is lack of Israel going to make Arabs more educated? More equal? More rich? More kind? What will happen next?

It seems that the hatred of Israel, a tiny country with a small population and a small percentage of land is clouding the judgement of many people. You destroy it- how is that going to make you feel better? Is it really true as some people believe that the presence of a tiny democratic Jewish state plays into some sort of inferiority complex?

Do you understand that you can achieve education and democracy now, that Israel does not stand in the way of that?


I have to say that if what you say is true, then you are not changing my mind to be more pro-peace. Why should Israel make peace with people who dream of nothing but destroying it. I sincerely hope your attitude is in the minority.

[renata]

Originally posted by AN@S

There's nothing called (native Israeli), if you can proof it to me go on... I challenge you ...
There are native americans, native Arabs, native Russians ...etc and every one of those are broud of their civilisations , but there's nothing called native Israeli (see my last post)




Well, I assume Cleopatra is a living, breathing native Israeli. She was born there, her family built the country. She is as true article as you are going to get, along with millions of others like her.

As to Jewish history in Israel. In another post, someone quoted Bashar Assad saying Jews
"tried to kill the principles of all religions with the same mentality in which they betrayed Jesus Christ and the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Muhammad."
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/06/27/france.assad/index.html

If Jews are an invention of Persians in 5th century, who then betrayed Jesus? You referenced Tora before- when was it written? Was it written before 5th century CE? Who wrote it? Are you familiar with Masada? What people lived there? Are you familiar with the wailing wall? Who built it and when? Are you familiar with the dead sea scrolls, which have been dated from the third century B.C.E. to 68 C.E. Do you know that they represented almost all works of the Hebrew Bible? Who wrote them?

I do not argue that Jews deserve a homeland because their ancestors were there many years ago. However, denying the obvious connection between Jews and the land of Israel is disingenous at best.

Native to the land is a strange thing. I am a Jew, currently living in USA, before that in USSR. My grandparents came to USSR from Poland, and about 400 years before hand my ancestors fled Spain. I am afraid the thread stops there- I do not know how my family ended up in Spain, but I assume they did along with the large Jewish community there followed the usual path.

I am not Russian- there were plenty of Russians who called me a "kike" and told me Hitler did not finish his job. I am now a US citizen, but since I was not born here, you would not call me native to this land. My grandparents were driven from Poland, so Poland did not want them. Spain really was not kind to my ancestors either. Can you please tell me, what am I a native of?

[DrBenway]

More questions:

1. What are the geographic boundaries of the ancient Palestinian people? Are Jordanians also Palestinians? Are Syrians or Egyptians?

2. If a Jordanian or Syrian moves to the West Bank, does he then become a Palestinian?

3. Arafat was born in Cairo. Doesn't that make him a native Egyptian? Can he also claim to be a Palestinian?

4. Are the distinctions used today, based upon post-WWII boundaries (e.g., Jordanian, Palestinian, Syrian, Egyptian, Iraqi), more or less culturally meaningful to people living in the region, than the term "Arab"?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by headscratcher4
AUP:

I always read with interest your posts...though I pretty much know the position you will take with respect to Israel and US Middle East Policy. Indeed, I am often in agreement, though not as agitated as you. Having said this, I note specifically, that you very effectively criticize US and Israelie policy -- as do, I add, many Americans. However, and I may have missed this, what are your concerns/criticisms of Arab and Palestinian positions.



Thanks HS, I read yours with interest too, although they seem to be appearing less frequently lately.

The biggest criticism I have, I suppose, is that they do not appear to have the political sophistication of those they are dealing with, but this is just as much a cultural thing. They Jewish immigrants were often better educated and aware of the world, (though by no means all), compared to the Arabs.

Arafat, having achieved a start in the right direction with Oslo, did appear to not know what to do next. I can still remember hearing an opinion piece on radio, several years ago, on a program run by a comitted lefty, on how the PA was not actually creating an econom, but just running on handouts. According this person, they PA was going to run out of steam some time in the future, which is exactly what happened.

Fortunately, the natural economic interdependence of the two states was growing, with work being provided for Palestinians from the growing Isreali economy.



You seem quite inteligent, and the failures of US policy in this respect are often manifest, but the story has always more than one side. I am interested in your stepping back for a moment and describing your thoughts about where the Arab governments have been wrong, failed opportunities, failed acts of courage, failed policies, and what you think is the most effective and realistic position for Arabs in general and Palistinians in particular for going FORWARD...in short, not a re-hash of the past, but going forward.



I cannot say what should be done. For one thing, anything I say is only my opinion, which isn't going to count for much. Also, it is not my place to say what should be done. I am just an interested spectator.

The obvious thing is for some form of restitution to be made to those disposessed, which is not likely to happen when the Isreali economy is in such dire straights as it is at the moment, and for a total withdrawal of the IDF from the West Bank.

As to how the two countries can then get on, economic interdependence will hopefully grow over time, and the two countries will have a natural unity develop over time.

However, the amount of ill will and mistrust present on both sides does mean that violence will continue for many years to come. Nothing can be done to stop this.

The amount of violence inflicted on both sides means that there are many scores to settle. And both sides have their share of people who like to settle scores.



In other words, you support the establishment of a Palestinian state...what in your mind does that state look like? Does it look like other current Arab states? Does it look like a fundumentalist Islamic State -- a'la the Taliban or Iran?

I suspect your answer is that that state should look like whatever its citizens want it to look like...my question is different than that reality (for, clearly, it will be as democratic, fundumentalist, corrupt, transparent, tolerant, non-sexist, sexist as the people allow). No, my question is to you, as an outside observer, as one who abhores the injustice in Palestine today, who must (though not accepting the US interpretation of what is "terrorism", etc.) abhore torture, murder, corruption, etc. of any kind...what do you want to see happen?

I say this as an outsider, who has not had to live the life or fight the fight, but it is difficult to see that anyone would want a government like the current (soon to be different?) Palistinian authority -- where theft, troture, corruption and restraint of all sorts of critical civil freedoms are the rule of the day -- as the ideal governemnt for establishing justice in that part of the world. That is, in fact, what we and the Palestinian people have, it may even be what they want (as opposed to what is best or perfect)...my question is: what -- from your perspective -- do they deserve?

They are just going to have to have time to work out for themselves how they are going to live. This is exactly what is happening in every other country around the world.

If we look at history, the advanced, peace loving, educated and enlightened west has been involved in the most stupid and bloody wars for much of it's history, even very recently. I don't think that we can say that we are much better than them.

Wall St. Investment Advisors have just been find billions of dollars for corruption. Fortunately, they were caught and fined, but I believe this is just a case that was acted on because it had to be. There is usually more than just one cockroach in the kitchen.

Education, I believe, will improve the lot of the Palestinians, just as it has for every other country in the world. This will just have to happen over time. They are no more or less intelligent than any other race in the world, and there are always people of good will out there who just need a chance.

As to why I have taken such an Anti-American Pro-Palestinians stance. As I have noted before, the US runs the modern world, it is therefore the country that is going to be open to the most criticism of it's actions. When I joined the forum, the Anti-Palestinian side was much in the fore, I just tried to bring some balance to what appeared to me to be one sided.

[DrBenway]

6. If I could demostrate that forum member Cleopatra is a descendant of the prophet Mohammed (pbuh), would the Arabs here support her right to live in Israel/Palestine?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by renata


I am not Russian- there were plenty of Russians who called me a "kike" and told me Hitler did not finish his job. I am now a US citizen, but since I was not born here, you would not call me native to this land. My grandparents were driven from Poland, so Poland did not want them. Spain really was not kind to my ancestors either. Can you please tell me, what am I a native of?

Which was the problem Zionism tried to address, creating a state for, what I believe is termed, the Diaspora.

However, I note in your case, you chose to live in the US. That is, there were alternatives to the creation of Israel.

[Baker]

Originally posted by davefoc
I have been more pro-Palestinin than the average American for years. As such, I have wondered how it is that the average American has a somewhat different view than myself.


Where do you get the majority of your information on the Israel Palestinian conflict?
That would help explain the view you seem to have on the issue.

I also want your opinion on a comment Cleopatra touched on.

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Yes, we have an issue with the Palestinians. The Palestinians, who suddenly appeared after the 6 days War, when their brothers, the Arabs, decided that it was time to aknowledge their existence.

Let me remind you, that their brothers, the Arabs of Jordan, who were possessing the territories of the West Bank, didn't let them establish a country of their own before 1967 and let me remind you that the arabic part had rejected the plan of UN according to which a Palestinian State was recognized.

Despite the evidence most pro-Palestinian's, ignore this fact the POL was created for the sole purpose of destroying Israel.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


Where do you get the majority of your information on the Israel Palestinian conflict?
That would help explain the view you seem to have on the issue.

I also want your opinion on a comment Cleopatra touched on.



Despite the evidence most pro-Palestinian's, ignore this fact the POL was created for the sole purpose of destroying Israel.

And as I have commented to Cleopatra, what has what the rest of the Arabs view on the rights of the Palestinians got to do with it? The Palestinians certainly wanted what they wanted, completely independently of what Israel and other Arabs may have had in mind for them.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


And as I have commented to Cleopatra, what has what the rest of the Arabs view on the rights of the Palestinians got to do with it? The Palestinians certainly wanted what they wanted, completely independently of what Israel and other Arabs may have had in mind for them.

From PLO to Palestinian Authority : The Palestine Liberation Organisation was set up by the Arab League in 1964 to represent the Palestinians.

And of course the Arabs invaded Israel twice since then to wipe them out.
To claim the Palestine or any thing other then an Arab pawn to destroy Israel is absurd.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


From PLO to Palestinian Authority : The Palestine Liberation Organisation was set up by the Arab League in 1964 to represent the Palestinians.

And of course the Arabs invaded Israel twice since then to wipe them out.
To claim the Palestine or any thing other then an Arab pawn to destroy Israel is absurd.

The Palestinians are, ultimately, people. Flesh and blood people, with their own aspirations. To deny their existence is to commit an act of mental genocide.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


The Palestinians are, ultimately, people. Flesh and blood people, with their own aspirations. To deny their existence is to commit an act of mental genocide.


Unfortunately their aspirations are to destroy Israel.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by Cleopatra

Otherwise, I can't understand why there are people who learn English and try to pass some TOEFL exams so as to be able to come to the "bad bad USA"... ;)



There are many reasons to learn English other than emigration. TOEFL exams are a prerequisite to studying at any of the American Universities in the Middle East, and the English equivalents (PET, IELTS etc) are a condition of advancement in the police here in the UAE.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker



Unfortunately their aspirations are to destroy Israel.

I would say there is a lot of debate as to whether or not most Palestinians want thatn, and I can safely say that all palestinians don't want that.

Israel's current aspirations are to formally incorporate Palestine and Gaza into Israel.

[Skeptic]

I think my post from another thread in reply to AN@S s relevant here as well. His claims are in "bold".

--- Begin Quote ---

1. Did you know that non-Jewish Israelis cannot buy or lease land in Israel?

Not true. Israeli arabs (and foreigners, for that matter) can buy and lease land in israel just like anybody else.

2.Did you know that instead of sewing an insignia on clothing to distinguish race (like the Germans did to the Jews before WW2), Palestinian license plates in Israel are color coded to distinguish Jews from non-Jews?

Not true. They distinguish ISRAELI cars from PALESTINIAN cars, in much the same way that a car from Italy is distinguished from a car from France by a different license plate. But the difference is by citizenship, NOT race: an arab israeli citizen has the same license plate for his car as a jewish israeli citizen, of course.

Ah well. Two blatant, obvious lies about israel right off the bat--with the rest of the "awful truths" about israel being on about about the same level of "accuracy". What a surprise, coming from a Syrian...

What is truly ironic is just WHAT this guy, from "Syria, the Arab world" accuses israel of doing:

1).Of failing to be a democracy and not "respecting human rights"... when Syria is one of the worst thuggish dictatorships in the world, without any trace of either human rights or democracy whatsoever. (You disobey Assad, you die.)

2). Of being a "nazi" and "racist" state... when Syria not only harbored nazi war criminals with great respect, but engages in unending nazi-like propaganda which continously demonizes the jews.

For example: Mustafa Tlas, the ex-Syrian ministry of defense, authored a "historical" textbook about the jews that claimed they use the blood of Muslims for passover matzos. The "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a popular text in Syria. Haj Amin-al Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem who raised two SS divisions for Hitler, spent the rest of his days after 1945 in Syria to avoid a trial as a war criminal.

3). Of being "agressive"... when Syria continously calls for a "war of liberation" to destroy israel and kill the jews; for example, in the recent visit of the Pope to Syria, Assad tried to convince him to join him in a joint Christian-Muslim holy war against the jews, "who deny Jesus" (so much for the "they're just anti-zionists" nonsense.)

4). Of wishing a "genocide" on the palestinians... when, as said above, Syria repeatedly and openly calls for just such a genocide through Jihad of the jews.

What can I say? Typical of the hypocritical and hate-filled Arab world. I could go on, criticizing the rest of AN@S's so-called "truths" about israel. But it should be obvious that criticism from Syria (of all places!) about being a nazi that doesn't respect human rights is a bit like criticism from a 500-pound man about not eating right.

It is astonishing that AN@S has the hutzpah (to use a Hebrew word) to even start a discussion about human rights, frankly. Refresh my memory, AN@S: just HOW many of his own citizens did Assad kill in ONE DAY in Hama when they dared to oppose him? 20,000 or 25,000? It was something around that figure. Oh, and when are the next elections in Syria? Just asking...

If you are really a Syrian, AN@S, then perhaps--just perhaps--you should try to rid your country of the evil thugs who rule it, instead of trying to destroy israel. Even if you succeed in destroying israel, you'll find that you're STILL ruled by the same evil thugs.

--- End Quote ---

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Israel's current aspirations are to formally incorporate Palestine and Gaza into Israel.

So, the Oslo agreements must have been just a rental agreement?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


So, the Oslo agreements must have been just a rental agreement?

Many felt they were exactly that. People have said the one constant through all this has been Arafat. There have been more, including the building of settlements. These don't just pop up anywhere, they are all placed according to a plan drawn up by Sharon years ago.

http://www.peacenow.org/nia/pr/04182002.html



"With Secretary Powell planning to travel to Israel on a regular basis in the months ahead to promote President Bush's peace initiative, the U.S. government needs to be on guard against the establishment of new 'Powell Settlements,' which echo the 'Baker Settlements' that Ariel Sharon initiated on the eve of then-Secretary of State James Baker's numerous visits to the region," said APN President and CEO Debra DeLee. "President Bush and Secretary Powell were correct in noting the negative impact that settlements have on the peace process, an assessment also shared by the Israeli public. With the announcement of new permanent housing at the Tel Rumeida settlement just as the Bush initiative was getting underway, the Sharon government was thumbing its nose at Israel's best friend and ally. Unless the Bush Administration makes the fight against Israeli settlement expansion a top priority on its Middle East agenda, Sharon will continue to work against U.S. and Israeli interests by deepening Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza."

Knesset Member Mossi Raz said, "It is chilling to think that at a time when 31,000 soldiers in reserves are being recruited, Civil Authority clerks are busy planning a settlement in the heart of Hebron—an act that undermines the chances for separation, constitutes a rejectionist response to the Saudi initiative, and harms the State of Israel's security."



http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/uavnery2.htm



In the seven years of the Oslo process the settler population doubled to 380,000 (180,000 in occupied East Jerusalem alone), representing a 7.9% growth rate



So, the settlements are another thing that has been constant throughout all the peace talks.



When Ehud Barak presented a ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ plan for a final
status solution at Camp David in July 2000 he did so by way of a
map which demanded that the Palestinians accept, and in fact
legitimise, Israel’s permanent annexation of 10% of the
Palestinian territory occupied in 1967. Defined as it was by over
thirty years of strategic military planning, the 10% in question
stood to carve the proposed Palestinian state into a fractured
series of Palestinian ‘zones’ cut off from each other and especially from an isolated Jerusalem, by way of the web of settlements and roads.

The offer was not negotiable and was resoundingly rejected by the Palestinians, who had entered negotiations expecting Israel to keep its commitment to the framework of land-for-peace and the implementation of UNSC Res. 242, rather than seek such annexations.

Since the ascendance to power of Ariel Sharon, himself a settler and an advocate of a 60% annexation plan, 15 new settlement ‘outposts’ have been identified by the Israeli
group Peace Now and Prime Minister Sharon has told the Israeli
press that he sees the Mitchell Commission’s demand for a settlement freeze as "total madness."

Palestinian leaders from all political groupings have reiterated their demand that the Palestinian people be allowed to realise their inalienable national rights in accordance with UN Resolutions and international law.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
I think my post from another thread in reply to AN@S s relevant here as well. His claims are in "bold".

[B]--- Begin Quote ---

1. Did you know that non-Jewish Israelis cannot buy or lease land in Israel?

Not true. Israeli arabs (and foreigners, for that matter) can buy and lease land in israel just like anybody else.



http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0198/9801088.html



Israeli Discrimination Against Non-Jews Is Carefully Codified in State of Israel's Laws

By Dr. Israel Shahak

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1998, pages 88-89

The legal system of the State of Israel can be described as a weird mixture of advanced democracy and retrogressive discrimination, combined with clumsy attempts to hide the discriminatory reality. For example, in all Israeli laws except one, the Law of Return, the word "Jew" does not appear. The term employed when the law gives discriminatory privileges to Jews is that those privileges are granted to "persons who would have benefited from the Law of Return had they been outside the borders of Israel." The Law of Return specifies that its benefits can be given only to Jews. However, Israeli propagandists calculate, correctly in my view, that a great majority of the opponents of discrimination would not dare to criticize this law.

The second trick, especially beloved by the Meretz Party and other "leftist" hypocrites, is to campaign for and then pass a high-sounding law in favor of equality or human rights. Such laws, however, always contain one little paragraph stating that their provisions will not affect any laws or regulations enacted in the past. The high-sounding preambles of the new laws then can be solemnly quoted without mentioning that since discriminatory laws and rules were passed in the 1950s and early 1960s (by Labor, of course), the new laws cannot change the existing discrimination. When one understands those two tricks, one comprehends that Israeli laws, and even more so government regulations on all possible subjects, are full of discriminatory measures which, if employed against Jews anywhere else in the world, would be regarded as anti-Semitic.

The greatest discrimination, regarded as an ideological duty, is practiced with regard to land. Before explaining the legal niceties, let me summarize the ideology involved. It still is inculcated in Jewish schools in Israel, as well as in the diaspora, although increasingly resented because of the increasing competition of Western ideologies and fashions. The key concept of this ideology, established in Zionism from its beginning and much stronger on its "left" than its right wing, is "redeeming the land."

....

Naturally, when Israel was ruled by the true believers in the Zionist faith, its laws and regulations were shaped accordingly, but also with due regard to the needs of Israeli propaganda. The key law is "Israeli Land Law," which set up a government-appointed body called the "Israel Land Authority" (ILA), controlled by a board partly appointed by the government and partly by the World Zionist Organization through its subsidiary branch, the "Jewish National Fund" (JNF), to control all the land owned by the state. A key paragraph in the law states that ILA will administer its land according to the regulations of JNF. The regulations of the latter strictly prohibit all non-Jews from benefiting in any way from JNF land and by this simple trick the Israeli state lands (92 percent of the area of Israel) were removed from the use of non-Jews.

[hisham]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by renata
Here are some preliminary proposed guidelines. I will add or delete from the list on request from other posters.

I want to reemphasize suggested guidelines below. [b]Please, no personal attacks of any kind in this thread....etc.
[QUOTE]

Am really sorry renata, but it seems very difficult to let this discussion goes as we think, some of the posts was greats, but the others was miserable, full of hate and ignorance, I participated in many forum "in Spanish, that I speak very well" and it was very good experience for all participants, I would like to tell Anas, I visited USA one time and I don't think American people "not administration" think such what he see here, in this forum you can find the majority talk to you with the power logics and in fact you can't debate with people don't respect another logic because the wisdom tell you this is waste of time.
Thank you renata for your initiative, but..

[Dancing David]

This is a very valiant attempt at discussion and I applaud it!

I welcome our Syrian posters , and I have to say that your English is quite good. A word of caution: so far the conversation is civilized, there are posters called 'trolls' who will say outrageous things just to provoke an angry response.

A word about the american media: Americans have the right to vote and very few do, but we are a nation that loves to talk. In American politics saying something that sounds good means more than saying something that is meaningfull. Politics are usually based upon emotions in the US and our media reflects that. Recent TV shows go more for the emotional side of the story than the intellectual side of the story.

So do Arab/Israeli issues get a fair play in our media , no. Do issues of 'social justice' get fair play in our media, no. Does the truth win out, sometimes. I suggest that NPR is a good source for middle of the road reporting on issues. You will find there that sometimes fair play occurs.

I too find it odd that some believe that there is some historical reason for Israel to exist. My ancestors partly came from Germany, but that does not give me the right to go to Germany and occupy it.

Israel does exist however, and it will not just go away. Whatever bizzare colonial politics led to it's formation is a moot point, it does exist. It is not right or fair that my ancestors dispossed the native americans, I regret it but cannot change it.

Recently many of us have tried to discuss a single point, how can the situation go forward from here?

I have stated before that there are innocent children on both sides who are going to suffer. What would lead to an end to the suffering?

My idea:
1. Israel make all people born within it's borders full citizens of Israel.

Peace
dancing david

[DrBenway]

There is a mathematically high likelihood that everyone on this forum shares many of the same ancestors.

http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/GenealComp1.html

People who have traced their genealogy extensively often reach three conclusions that the rest of us find improbable. First, they conclude that they are descended from some famous person of the distant past. For persons of European descent, a very common example is Charlemagne, founder of the Holy Roman Empire in 800 AD. Secondly, they conclude that they are related to some famous modern people (for example, a recent American president or two). Thirdly, they conclude that they are their own cousins, which is to say that some pair of their ancestors (Grandma and Grandpa Jones, for example) were cousins. This sounds improbable to most of us, but a look at the math of ancestry says that such relationships aren't improbable, and that in fact they're almost inevitable.

Let's suppose you're asked to fill out a chart showing your ancestry. Your first task is to list your ancestors one generation back: your parents, of which their are two. Then you list your ancestors two generations back: your grandparents, of which there are four. Then, perhaps with some help from a knowledgeable family member, you list your ancestors three generations back: your great-grandparents, of which there are eight. If you're exceptionally aware of your ancestry, you can list your ancestors four generations back: your great-great-grandparents, of which there are sixteen.

If you're following the numbers here, you'll have noticed that the number of ancestors doubles each generation back: two one generation back, four two generations back, eight three generations back, and so on. If we let "n" be the number of generations back, the number of ancestors in that generation is 2n, or 2 raised to the nth power.

[snip]

So what does all this mean, other than that your braggart neighbor may really be descended from Charlemagne, or Confucius, or Asoka? It means that you may be, too. More importantly, it means that we're all considerably more inter-related than we might think. The staggering number of ancestors each of us has (for example, perhaps 200 million of them in 1300 AD) also means that your ancestry is probably more diverse than you think. Somewhere among those 200 million people who were your ancestors in 1300, there are probably some folks who came from places you wouldn't think likely, or who were members of ethnic groups that would surprise you. You'll never know who all those 200 million people were, but they can be abundant fuel for your imagination.

Finally, the most important point to appreciate is that we're all more closely related than commonly supposed. Despite our apparent differences across nationalities, cultures, and religions, we have more in common than we usually think. If ties of kinship matter to us, we're all closer kin than our attitudes and policies would often suggest.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by hisham
[
Thank you renata for your initiative, but..
I ask your forgiveness if I've said anything to offend you myself.

[davefoc]

Baker said:Where do you get the majority of your information on the Israel Palestinian conflict?
That would help explain the view you seem to have on the issue.


I took this question to mean, how is it that you came to your current views on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. I thought about this for quite awhile. I don't think I know the answer exactly and it is a bit off the topic of the thread if I were to answer to even the degree that I know the answer.

A small part of the answer is that I am not a religious person, so that I have always seen the rise of Israel as a large immigration of Europeans to a small piece of land that was occupied by others. This is not to say I am not sympathetic to those immigrating Europeans, obviously many of them had suffered enormously, there was an effort to treat the indigenous population fairly and an effort to reimburse people for their lands.

Between then and now there there are many stories and biases that have shaped my views. A small sampling of stories would include the massacre in Lebanon, the razing of Palestinian orchards and the massive US foreign aid for Israel (larger than all other US foreign aid combined). Of late, I have come to believe that Sharon has intentionally incited Palestinian violence in an effort to thwart American efforts to establish a Palestinian state and American efforts to stop the settlements. Of course this is speculation and many of you might think my biases are a more likely explanation for this view than the actual facts.

I do not want to go on here. Like many of you, I am most interested in hearing from the Syrians and Israel's staunch supporters. I would like to add that two of things that have been said by the Syrians have resonated with me:
1- The extremeist Zionists :They believe that Israel is a god given land and they are fighting for their believes to death (I hate them). I do not hate the Zionists that might believe such a thing, but I can sympathize with those who do. I can imagine fighting to the death against somebody who I believed took my land and then stood before me and told me he did it because God gave him this land. Can the pro-Israeli folks here see how inflaming such a sentiment can be?

of course NO, we are not racists. Personally I live in Damascus and two Jews families were my good neighbors, I missed them. Who in Damascus don't know Avraham Hamra chief rabbi of the Jewish community of Syria until 1994? Now in Damascus the Jews still enjoy their relations with other religions people .
I was a bit moved by this response. I had seen the question that precipitated it as antagonistic and considered responding to it myself since I thought it was not in the spirit of this thread. I was very heartened to see a polite response that affirmed the possibility of good relations between Jews and Muslims. This stands in contrast to some of the extremist Islamic literature that seems to blame all problems on Jews and homosexuals. Perhaps some of our Syrian friends would like to talk about their feelings towards this kind of Islamic literature and how wide spread the distribution and acceptance of that kind of literature is.

[Cleopatra]

This last well written post of davefoc shows in the most clear way how biases work :)

There is a tendancy to be more sympathetic and relaxed towards the Arabs just because some Europeans decided to migrate and "steal" the land of some natives.

Personally, I don't know a single country ( maybe Great Britain is an exception) that wasn't created that way, by taking some land by other people, but still the only "theft" we keep remember is the one that was committed in Middle East...

Also, when it comes to personal and sentimental responses people are more receptive to arabic nice stories... the personal stories of the Israelis are not tender enough to touch hearts...

Two sides provoke each other. But the Israeli side is always to blame. Look what was written above about Sharon. I think that I have demonstrated my feelings towards Sharon, maybe I deslike him more than the Arabs do, but still, it's unfair to say that he is the responsible for the second Intifanda.

I wonder why people are more soft to Arabs? Don't they consider them equal to them?

Of course I will be back because I have some more comments, I just need to calm down :)

edited to add: Also I have to find a way to proove that I am a native Israeli... Where is my birth certificate?

[Dancing David]

Cleo, you are very brave!

I think that being born in a geographic location does make you native.

Who is soft on Arabs? I think that most of us here in the USA are constanly bombarded by the 'evil arab' propaganda. That is when they are not calling them 'sand n*****s'. So perhaps our posts do seem to sympathetic to the Palestinians.

Sigh, I remember the sadness, I was alive during the Munich Olympics, it made me sick, just like it does when someone kills a bunch of innocent civilians. Or when they call a killer a holy martyr.

It also bothers me to hear about people who are born in Israel but aren't it's citizens.

I hope for peace and an end to the madness.

Peace
dancing David

[renata]

Well, it looks like this thread did not quite accomplish what I hoped and intended. I hope this is just an intermission, and Washim, Hisham and An@S will come back to answer the questions and discuss their opinions.


I want to thank the posters who posted in the spirit of the thread. I also want to say that the point of the thread was for a conversation ( hence the topic) and not the distribution of the "awful truth" and rehashing of the same tired arguments we had seen on the forum again and again. For those who took the effort to ask questions and come up with the answers- thank you.

Just a few comments on the recent contents. I learned some things from the Syrian posters. I was pleased to learn the government does not monitor its citizens activities, although some websites are banned. I wonder what kind of websites are banned?

I was pleased to see hisham post in which he says he does not call for destruction of all Jews, and quite frightened to read AN@S's post about Arab aspirations to defeat Israel and send Jews back where they came from. That post, more than any other, confirmed some very pessimistic viewpoints about the readiness for peace in the Arab world. An excellent questions about whether Syria will accept Israel if Palestinians do went unanswered, as did many other good questions.


I am a little puzzled why some of the basic, yes/no questions (talmud, protocols of elders of Zion, etc) went unanswered. I think before a good conversation, we need to know what parties believe of each other and why. I am also a little disappointed that some posters posted commentary that is wildly inconsistant with the basic history of the world- for example, the whole Persians invented Jews in the 5th century. It is this kind of inconsistant thinking that feeds into conspiracy theories.

Most people on this board have access to multiple news sources- left and right wing, so there is no need to publish some conspiracy theory. I do not think many in the US think as AN@S does. I wonder exactly how representative his view is of Arabs overall. I hope Wasim and hisham will be able to comment on that.

I do hope a discussion in the good vein will continue. I frequently rely on the credo that reasonable people can disagree. I hope that if we keep down the attacks and the same tired arguments, and listen to why people believe certain things, this discussion may give more food for thought to all participants.

[renata]

Originally posted by Dancing David


I think that being born in a geographic location does make you native.

Who is soft on Arabs? I think that most of us here in the USA are constanly bombarded by the 'evil arab' propaganda. That is when they are not calling them 'sand n*****s'. So perhaps our posts do seem to sympathetic to the Palestinians.

I have never ever heard ANYONE in the media refer to Arabs as "sand n-s". I do not know where this is coming from. Media can have bias in many directions, but I have never heard overt racism.



It also bothers me to hear about people who are born in Israel but aren't it's citizens.

I am not sure what you mean. I do not know Israeli requirements for citizenship, but I know there are a lot of Israeli Arab citizens.


I hope for peace and an end to the madness.

And I share that with you. One way to end the madness is education and knowledge about each other's opinions and intentions. I am still stunned by AN@S' post- and if anything, this one more than any other moved me to the right on my position in Israel. This is why I would like to hear from Wasim and hisham, so they can let me know whether An@S expressed an extreme opinion ( as I hope) or is in the mainstream ( as I fear).

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Dancing David
It also bothers me to hear about people who are born in Israel but aren't it's citizens.
That may be a choice.

[Dancing David]

I may be mistaken , as I often am, are non jewish Israelis granted the same privileges as jewish Israelis?

I mean to offend no one, there is more to America than the media and even on the media there is the evil arab thing. As for the SN thing it is a commonly used term here in the midwest. Sigh.

Peace
dancing David

[Baker]

Originally posted by davefoc

I took this question to mean, how is it that you came to your current views on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. I thought about this for quite awhile. I don't think I know the answer exactly and it is a bit off the topic of the thread if I were to answer to even the degree that I know the answer.

A small part of the answer is that I am not a religious person, so that I have always seen the rise of Israel as a large immigration of Europeans to a small piece of land that was occupied by others. This is not to say I am not sympathetic to those immigrating Europeans, obviously many of them had suffered enormously, there was an effort to treat the indigenous population fairly and an effort to reimburse people for their lands.



I'm sorry for my part in contributing to taking the thread off of its topic however AUP had took it of the theme of thread long before me.
I agree with this part of your message.



Between then and now there there are many stories and biases that have shaped my views. A small sampling of stories would include the massacre in Lebanon, the razing of Palestinian orchards and the massive US foreign aid for Israel (larger than all other US foreign aid combined). Of late, I have come to believe that Sharon has intentionally incited Palestinian violence in an effort to thwart American efforts to establish a Palestinian state and American efforts to stop the settlements. Of course this is speculation and many of you might think my biases are a more likely explanation for this view than the actual facts.

I was referring to the source of your Information there are many Myths about this conflict.
Which might need its own thread for but what I was getting at is how do you get the correct information many on both sides of the debate often just run with there emotions with out checking all of the facts and evidence.




I do not want to go on here. Like many of you, I am most interested in hearing from the Syrians and Israel's staunch supporters. I would like to add that two of things that have been said by the Syrians have resonated with me:
I do not hate the Zionists that might believe such a thing, but I can sympathize with those who do. I can imagine fighting to the death against somebody who I believed took my land and then stood before me and told me he did it because God gave him this land. Can the pro-Israeli folks here see how inflaming such a sentiment can be?

If they took someone's land and who's land is another debate.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Many felt they were exactly that. People have said the one constant through all this has been Arafat. There have been more, including the building of settlements. These don't just pop up anywhere, they are all placed according to a plan drawn up by Sharon years ago.

http://www.peacenow.org/nia/pr/04182002.html



http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/uavnery2.htm



So, the settlements are another thing that has been constant throughout all the peace talks.




I don't see how your links prove that incorporate Palestine and Gaza into Israel.

In fact the sites them self’s can be questioned.
Plus the fact that the land they have now was given to them by Israel.


Originally posted by a_unique_person


http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0198/9801088.html



Law of Return 5710-1950
Right of aliyah** 1. Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh**.

Oleh's visa 2. (a) Aliyah shall be by oleh's visa.
(b) An oleh's visa shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the applicant


(1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or
(2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State.


Oleh's certificate 3. (a) A Jew who has come to Israel and subsequent to his arrival has expressed his desire to settle in Israel may, while still in Israel, receive an oleh's certificate.
(b) The restrictions specified in section 2(b) shall apply also to the grant of an oleh's certificate, but a person shall not be regarded as endangering public health on account of an illness contracted after his arrival in Israel.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00kp0


It doesn’t say anything about only Jews can buy land in Israel its a Immigration law.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker



I'm sorry for my part in contributing to taking the thread off of its topic however AUP had took it of the theme of thread long before me.
I agree with this part of your message.



I was staying out of it till DrBenway came up with her insulting platitudes.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
This last well written post of davefoc shows in the most clear way how biases work :)

There is a tendancy to be more sympathetic and relaxed towards the Arabs just because some Europeans decided to migrate and "steal" the land of some natives.

Personally, I don't know a single country ( maybe Great Britain is an exception) that wasn't created that way, by taking some land by other people, but still the only "theft" we keep remember is the one that was committed in Middle East...



Great Britain was subject to several invasions. That is the reason, for example, you will see nobility with French names. However, the general feeling by the time Israel was founded was that taking land from other people was a relic of a bygone age.



Also, when it comes to personal and sentimental responses people are more receptive to arabic nice stories... the personal stories of the Israelis are not tender enough to touch hearts...



Not at all true. The 'Diary of Ann Frank', for example, is a classic. We had to read it for school.



Two sides provoke each other. But the Israeli side is always to blame. Look what was written above about Sharon. I think that I have demonstrated my feelings towards Sharon, maybe I deslike him more than the Arabs do, but still, it's unfair to say that he is the responsible for the second Intifanda.



He certainly knew what buttons to push to get it going. And it does server his purposes. Look at the roadmap. Step one, no terrorism. End of roadmap.



I wonder why people are more soft to Arabs? Don't they consider them equal to them?

Of course I will be back because I have some more comments, I just need to calm down :)

edited to add: Also I have to find a way to proove that I am a native Israeli... Where is my birth certificate?

If you see our media, the majority of stories are sympathetic to the Israeli cause. Those stories sympathetic to the Palestinian cause are definitely in a minority.

I actually grew up being pro-israeli, which just reflected the news I was receiving. I saw Israel as many others on this forum do, a small country fighting valiantly to defend itself against the barbarians. As I grew older, and was presented with better quality information (And I am talking about mainstream newspapers and current affairs shows, not internet hate sites), I realised the story was not that presented, which made me resent being misled.

It was interesting to read about David Ben-Gurion. He was the source of much the modern myth of Israel, as he always wanted it to be something of a new United States, that is, with a modern, liberal government, with democratic institutions and a model for democracy in the region. That was the intention, that is what is presented, but it is not the truth. For example, the rule of law is not happening. Israels own supreme court is ignored when it suits. Illegal settlements, for example, have been ordered closed by it. These orders have just been totally ignored.

It was a revelation to see that the information I was being fed was not a true representation of the situation over there.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I was staying out of it till DrBenway came up with her insulting platitudes.
You missed the forest for the trees.

If I were a Palestinian mother, I would keep my boys away from apologists for the Intifada, such as yourself.

[hisham]

Originally posted by davefoc
I was very heartened to see a polite response that affirmed the possibility of good relations between Jews and Muslims. This stands in contrast to some of the extremist Islamic literature that seems to blame all problems on Jews and homosexuals. Perhaps some of our Syrian friends would like to talk about their feelings towards this kind of Islamic literature and how wide spread the distribution and acceptance of that kind of literature is.
Davefoc, thank you for your response,
if you review the history of the Islamic civilization you can note the relation between Muslims and Jews was active along the history of this civilization, am not sure if you mean and want to say "the possibility of good relations between Israelis and Arabs", for me as an individual belong to this civilization like all Muslims, Christians, Jews "not the Israelis because they consider themselves as part of the western civilization" and other religion groups lives in this region, I think we have no problem with Jews as religion group.
Now, like every region in our world you can find extremist groups, in our case they don't reflect the real Islamic literature as thinking method, in Syria there are a grand variety of those methods like religious, seculars and others. BUT I think as many others here, the extremists in the "other part specially in Israel" are playing a new role to alert the west and the power centers and decisions making institutions that there is new power hold a grand container of history and civilization and if this power reach the political and economical stability, will be the real danger for the west and its universal culture.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Great Britain was subject to several invasions. That is the reason, for example, you will see nobility with French names. However, the general feeling by the time Israel was founded was that taking land from other people was a relic of a bygone age.

Really? :) How many countries were established in the late 40ies and how many lands were taken?

Not at all true. The 'Diary of Ann Frank', for example, is a classic. We had to read it for school.

You reffer to History, I was reffering to "nice stories" something like the Arabian Nights...

He certainly knew what buttons to push to get it going. And it does server his purposes. Look at the roadmap. Step one, no terrorism. End of roadmap.

Let's try to be practical and reasonable. Did he have the right to visit the place? He did. The rest is cucumbers.

If you see our media, the majority of stories are sympathetic to the Israeli cause. Those stories sympathetic to the Palestinian cause are definitely in a minority.

In Europe it's just the opposite. Israelis are always the monsters and Palestinians the victims.


It was interesting to read about David Ben-Gurion. He was the source of much the modern myth of Israel, as he always wanted it to be something of a new United States, that is, with a modern, liberal government, with democratic institutions and a model for democracy in the region. That was the intention, that is what is presented, but it is not the truth. For example, the rule of law is not happening. Israels own supreme court is ignored when it suits. Illegal settlements, for example, have been ordered closed by it. These orders have just been totally ignored.

The fact that the dream of Ben Gurion wasn't fulfilled ( I agree) doesn't make him and his ideas a myth. This is true, I have mentioned it many times in this forum. Israel didn't turn out to be a good idea...at least the way it's now.

[

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by hisham

Davefoc, thank you for your response,
if you review the history of the Islamic civilization you can note the relation between Muslims and Jews was active along the history of this civilization, am not sure if you mean and want to say "the possibility of good relations between Israelis and Arabs", for me as an individual belong to this civilization like all Muslims, Christians, Jews "not the Israelis because they consider themselves as part of the western civilization" and other religion groups lives in this region, I think we have no problem with Jews as religion group.
Now, like every region in our world you can find extremist groups, in our case they don't reflect the real Islamic literature as thinking method, in Syria there are a grand variety of those methods like religious, seculars and others. BUT I think as many others here, the extremists in the "other part specially in Israel" are playing a new role to alert the west and the power centers and decisions making institutions that there is new power hold a grand container of history and civilization and if this power reach the political and economical stability, will be the real danger for the west and its universal culture.

Hisham,

I was worried you were all gone, I will make one more reply then bow out again. I really didn't want to impinge on the intention of this thread.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Really? :) How many countries were established in the late 40ies and how many lands were taken?



If we ignore the empire the USSR was creating, I think the general intent at that time was to give back the countries to their original owners, that is, the people who actually lived there. For the rest, the nationalist indepdendence movements were on the rise.



Let's try to be practical and reasonable. Did he have the right to visit the place? He did. The rest is cucumbers.



I haven't seen to many Muslims at the 'Wailing Wall' lately.




The fact that the dream of Ben Gurion wasn't fulfilled ( I agree) doesn't make him and his ideas a myth. This is true, I have mentioned it many times in this forum. Israel didn't turn out to be a good idea...at least the way it's now.



And I am glad you acknowledge that. Isreal is just as prone to errors, self interest and hypocrisy as any other nation. Others are worse, but Israel is far from perfect. That is all I want to hear. Because once that is acknowledged, then the demands that Palestine is to be as true to perfection as Israel disappear, and a more meaningful level of negotiation can proceed.

It was also interesting to note that DBG thought the West Bank and Gaza should be handed back to the Palestinians. Despite the fact that he was prepared to go to war to get his aims, he knew they should always have somewhere to call their own.

[AN@S]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Question: if an Arab and a Jew marry and have children in Israel, are their children native Israelis?

Of course no...
they are native to their father's original country if the father is jew, and they are Arabs is the father is an Arab

[AN@S]

Originally posted by renata


This post really bothers me for the following reasons
1. Is it really true that the one unifying goal of all 300 million Arabs is to force Israelis back to their homelands ( what are you going to do- put them on planes?) in three hours? If that is true, then Israel is quite justified in not giving territory ( such as Golan) to enemy countries. Why should Israel assist in own self destruction?
2. Even if it was true, I am afraid 300 millions Arabs would never, ever succeed in wiping out Israel. Recall it has been tried before. Israel will not go down quietly. That is a fact- it has superiour weapons and powerful friends.
3. Let's assume Arabs succeed. Zionists are dead, millions of Jews are deported to Russia, Germany, Iran, Ethopia, etc. Then what? What is your plan for victorious Arabs? Is lack of Israel going to make Arabs more educated? More equal? More rich? More kind? What will happen next?

It seems that the hatred of Israel, a tiny country with a small population and a small percentage of land is clouding the judgement of many people. You destroy it- how is that going to make you feel better? Is it really true as some people believe that the presence of a tiny democratic Jewish state plays into some sort of inferiority complex?

Do you understand that you can achieve education and democracy now, that Israel does not stand in the way of that?


I have to say that if what you say is true, then you are not changing my mind to be more pro-peace. Why should Israel make peace with people who dream of nothing but destroying it. I sincerely hope your attitude is in the minority.

Take it easy renata don't be angry...
I don't think that lack of Israel will make Arabs more educated but to defeat Israel we have to be more educated...
Arabs have much more weabons than Israel (not talking about WMD) and we can defeat them very easily in any Arabic-Israeli war .But Arabs can't make wars without having more democracy and more education , and that is what the new Arabs aiming for ..
For me , I may accept a peace agreement between Arabs and Israel if Israel accepted Arabs conditions...

[hisham]

Originally posted by Skeptic

1).Of failing to be a democracy and not "respecting human rights"... when Syria is one of the worst thuggish dictatorships in the world, without any trace of either human rights or democracy whatsoever. (You disobey Assad, you die.)


What is the difference between countries governed by totalitary regims and countries governed by false and military democracy? the famous Argentine poet Juan Gelman said: how Can be a democratic state that puts a millions of Palestinians behind the wall by arms force? he said this when he was captured because of his political ideas in Ben Gurion airport. Everybody knows the Sephardic Ashkenazi conflicts and falashas whom undergoes the racism applied by "beni-Israel". Azmi Bishara member of the Knesset, deprived his parliamentary immunity cause of his political ideas and of not being Jewish, is that the equality and democracy?
I think jews MUST work hard because as name of Germany is now totally tie, not only to Beethoven and Brecht, but to Hitler and Himmler, in the same way the name of the Jews now will tie, not only with Marx and Menuhin, but to Sharon and Shamir.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by AN@S


Of course no...
they are native to their father's original country if the father is jew, and they are Arabs is the father is an Arab

Interesting:
In the US citizenship is viewed as a right of being born someplace, this would define citizen ship as inherited through the male line.
Very similar to Nippon where there are people who are what americans would call ethnic Koreans but the Nippons call Korean.

Did anyone answer my question? Do non jewish citizens of Israel have the same rights as Jewish citizens.

Also the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a total sham!


Peace
dancing David

[renata]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Interesting:
In the US citizenship is viewed as a right of being born someplace, this would define citizen ship as inherited through the male line.
Very similar to Nippon where there are people who are what americans would call ethnic Koreans but the Nippons call Korean.

Did anyone answer my question? Do non jewish citizens of Israel have the same rights as Jewish citizens.

Also the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a total sham!


Peace
dancing David

Judaism goes through the mother. So if the mother is Jewish, and father not, the child is Jewish. If the father is Jewish, and mother is not, the child is non Jewish and technically has to convert.

That does not quite answer your question on the citizenship. As far as I know, Jewish citizens of Israel and non Jewish citizens of Israel ( who are mostly Arabs) have the same rights with one exception- Arabs are not required to serve in the military, though they can volunteer. Service in the military does provide certain benefits in getting jobs. However, it would not surprise me that even though there is no legal or government sanctioned discrimination, there are inequalities in reality. The reasons for that are many: education differences, poverty, etc. I think it is a lot like the US: blacks and whites are equal legally, but in reality, black communities have higher levels of poverty and crime.


I agree that the protocols are a sham, and I do not understand why our Syrian posters can not say the same.

[davefoc]

It was very much appreciated to see some new posts from the Syrians.

I had a question, that I hope is not too much of a digression for this thread. I was wondering if our Syrian friends have any thoughts on the Sudanese civil war. The Israeli/Palestinian dispute is just a minor conflict compared to this in terms of human misery. Millions of people have been killed via massacre and starvation.

I thought Sudan might be relevant to this discussion because it involves Arabs attempting to control land that is occupied by a non-Arab population, something that you believe the Jews are doing to the native Palestinian populations in and around Israel.

[Cleopatra]

I have a "problem".

One the one hand, I don't find it appropriate to join an " All against three" "War" , especially when our Syrian friends are doing such a lousy job in defending Palestinians...

On the other hand, I don't know how to react when I read such things :

1. author :AN@S

For me , I may accept a peace agreement between Arabs and Israel if Israel accepted Arabs conditions...

2. author: Hisham

think jews MUST work hard because as name of Germany is now totally tie, not only to Beethoven and Brecht, but to Hitler and Himmler, in the same way the name of the Jews now will tie, not only with Marx and Menuhin, but to Sharon and Shamir.

3. The invitation to proove that I am a native Israeli.

Well, in all seriousness, during all these days, I tried to find a way to answer to these ... ( shut your mouth Cleopatra) without sounding rude.

I don't know how to say, in a polite way, that I refuse to accept such invitations from people that never in their life, have they participated in this procedure that is called elections...

I didn't find the appropriate words that describe the dissapointment I have for this, so-called ,Second Indifanda.

I have endless questions about the terrorist actions that made all of us, who propagandized peace, look stupid. The Arabs have ridiculed us. They made us look stupid in the eyes of our compatriots.

I want an answer from the Arab world. What have THEY done to help Palestinians apart from encouraging them to commit suicides and kill civilians?

Have they called-off the production of oil JUST FOR ONE HOUR, in order to put pressure upon West on the Palestinian issue?
Why they haven't done anything like that so far?
Are american dollars more sweet than the poor Palestianians?

And last but not least. You said that you can invade us with your sophisticated but not WMD weapons...

What are you waiting for?

PS. The Protocols?? Come on these are old comedies... Do you want something really amusing? Let's talk about this script
of John Malalas ( the byzantine Historian-don't ask me for a link:rolleyes: ) according to which Mohammed , before his death was secretely baptised a Christian...

Do you want "archaeological" or "historical" discussions?

There you go...

[max]

I am curious to know as to why the three Syrians are bothering themselves with Israel when they could make a better Syria and work in good jobs for a good life with their own worries/problems. Life is far too short to spend it interfering with other countries when ones own is a mess. Just puzzled

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0198/9801088.html



AUP, this information is not the whole truth. You use it as evidence that non-Jews are discriminated from buying land, but you leave out the fact that this land isn't for sale to anyone, Jew or non-Jew. To use this as evidence that non-Jews are barred from buying land in Israel that Jews are allowed to buy is pretty hard to swallow.

From the entry on this topic in the Myths section of us-israel.org:

MYTH

"Israel discriminates against Israeli Arabs by barring them from buying land."

FACT

In the early part of the century, the Jewish National Fund was established by the World Zionist Congress to purchase land in Palestine for Jewish settlement. This land, and that acquired after Israel's War of Independence, was taken over by the government. Of the total area of Israel, 92 percent belongs to the State and is managed by the Land Management Authority. It is not for sale to anyone, Jew or Arab. The remaining 8 percent of the territory is privately owned. The Arab Waqf (the Muslim charitable endowment), for example, owns land that is for the express use and benefit of Muslim Arabs. Government land can be leased by anyone, regardless of race, religion or sex. All Arab citizens of Israel are eligible to lease government land.

-Elektrix

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by renata


Judaism goes through the mother. So if the mother is Jewish, and father not, the child is Jewish. If the father is Jewish, and mother is not, the child is non Jewish and technically has to convert.

That does not quite answer your question on the citizenship. As far as I know, Jewish citizens of Israel and non Jewish citizens of Israel ( who are mostly Arabs) have the same rights with one exception- Arabs are not required to serve in the military, though they can volunteer. Service in the military does provide certain benefits in getting jobs. However, it would not surprise me that even though there is no legal or government sanctioned discrimination, there are inequalities in reality. The reasons for that are many: education differences, poverty, etc. I think it is a lot like the US: blacks and whites are equal legally, but in reality, black communities have higher levels of poverty and crime.


I agree that the protocols are a sham, and I do not understand why our Syrian posters can not say the same.

That sounds about right.... here is the entry describing the rights of Arab and non-Jewish citizens in Israel:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf18.html#a

-Elektrix

[Elektrix]

Just out of curiosity, how do our Syrian friends feel about the 40,000 Syrian troops currently occupying Lebanon, and how the Assad dynasty treats Lebanon as if it was just part of Syria, practically. Also, how do you feel about Syria's support for Hezbollah? Or groups like Islamic Jihad headquartered in Damascus? Do you support them, or do you speak out against the Syrian government on these issues?

-Elektrix

[AN@S]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
I have a "problem".

especially when our Syrian friends are doing such a lousy job in defending Palestinians...

Please don't use words like (a lousy job) ... I hope to keep it a civilized conversation.


I don't know how to say, in a polite way, that I refuse to accept such invitations from people that never in their life, have they participated in this procedure that is called elections...
Ok ... we never participated elections, I agree , but this has nothing to do with our conversation ...This doesn't mean that we are idiots and we can't talk about our believes !!!:confused:
Israelis elected Sharon!!!!
That's mean that you only elects criminals, and when Issac Rabin was about to reach a peace agreement with Arafat, Israelis killed him!!


I have endless questions about the terrorist actions that made all of us, who propagandized peace, look stupid. The Arabs have ridiculed us. They made us look stupid in the eyes of our compatriots.

Ok ...
If u don't want to look stupid in the eyes of other Israelis you have to try to make conversations with your government to reduce the Israeli violence...What Palestinians do is a normal reaction

I want an answer from the Arab world. What have THEY done to help Palestinians apart from encouraging them to commit suicides and kill civilians?

Have they called-off the production of oil JUST FOR ONE HOUR, in order to put pressure upon West on the Palestinian issue?
Why they haven't done anything like that so far?
Are american dollars more sweet than the poor Palestianians?

And last but not least. You said that you can invade us with your sophisticated but not WMD weapons...

What are you waiting for?

Ok ... you're right , I talked about this issue and I'll repeat ...
Our governmets do nothing to Palestinians and the Arabic people are sorry for this ...
As you say , the American dollars are so sweet for some Arabic leaders ...
You asked a good question:"What are you waiting for?"
We're waiting for the new Arab generation to have more education and more democracy. The new Arab generation is aware of the great power that Arabs have if they know how to use it , they are different from their leaders ... Believe me we're working for that ...
We are a nation in the third world but we have a great apility to change that, and the change is coming
What are we waiting for??
It takes sometime ,,, wait for 10 years and watch, I live in the Arab world and I know what's happening here ....

I think it's my turn to ask a question :
How can the violence be stopped in the middle east ??
Do you think that the Israelis have to stop the violence from the Israeli side ? Or do you think that the Palestinians have to stop resisting the occupation?Or both of them have to work for that ?

[Elektrix]

For the purpose of this debate, can we stop with holding the entire people responsible for everything? Just speaking a large context about the "Palestinians" and "Israelis" ignores that there are so many different issues here. "Israelis" did not kill Rabin, for example.... a single Israeli did. By the same token, it's just as ridiculous to say that all Palestinians support terrorism, as that certainly isn't the case.

I think this is an issue that can be debated and discussed without resorting to claiming that all Israelis and Palestinians are responsible or supportive of everything that is associated with these positions, etc.

-Elektrix

[Elektrix]

AN@S, why is it that you feel the Arab world has to "defeat" Israel? You've said in a number of your posts how you seem to hope the Arab world will come together and become better educated, etc. so it will be able to defeat Israel. But why is this a goal? Is there no circumstance where the Arab world won't try to defeat Israel? If all of Israel's neighbors want to defeat Israel, wouldn't that be a pretty logical explanation for why Israel is reluctant to just give back the land it has claimed it needs as a security buffer?

-Elektrix

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by Elektrix
AN@S, why is it that you feel the Arab world has to "defeat" Israel? You've said in a number of your posts how you seem to hope the Arab world will come together and become better educated, etc. so it will be able to defeat Israel. But why is this a goal? Is there no circumstance where the Arab world won't try to defeat Israel? If all of Israel's neighbors want to defeat Israel, wouldn't that be a pretty logical explanation for why Israel is reluctant to just give back the land it has claimed it needs as a security buffer?

-Elektrix

BINGO...

This is what I am getting from this exchange. If your a Jew in Tel Aviv and want to vote Labor can you if this is the attitude of many of your neighbors?

The gentleman from Syria says his goal is not to become educated to make a better society, it is to become educated to destroy Israel.

No wonder Labor got trounced at the polls last election. Any Likud Party person would just have to post AN@S's comments when one talks about peace, and by the way one can go to many Arab sites to hear the same thing!!!

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mike B.


BINGO...

This is what I am getting from this exchange. If your a Jew in Tel Aviv and want to vote Labor can you if this is the attitude of many of your neighbors?

The gentleman from Syria says his goal is not to become educated to make a better society, it is to become educated to destroy Israel.

No wonder Labor got trounced at the polls last election. Any Likud Party person would just have to post AN@S's comments when one talks about peace, and by the way one can go to many Arab sites to hear the same thing!!!

I think this was supposed to be a conversation between Zionists and Arabs, not a triumphalist parade of Americans.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I think this was supposed to be a conversation between Zionists and Arabs, not a triumphalist parade of Americans.

AUP, are you going to reply to the issue about you stating that there is land that non-Jews can't buy, which you distorted by not mentioning that that is land that no-one can buy, including Jews. Or are you just planning on ignoring it?

It seems like you should stand up for your statements. You implied that Israel discriminates against non-Jews this way, but you selectively forgot to mention the full truth, which shows this not to be any sort of discrimination at all.

-Elektrix

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I think this was supposed to be a conversation between Zionists and Arabs, not a triumphalist parade of Americans.

I love it when you play dirty you Unique... I just love it...

Personally, I don't accept the use of term Zionism. As I have said before, I accept Hertzl's definion of the term Zionism: " The right of Jews to have their own country".

I thought that only Greek leftists used the term Zionism the way you do... it seems that it's an international thing.

[davefoc]

Cleopatra said:Personally, I don't accept the use of term Zionism. As I have said before, I accept Hertzl's definion of the term Zionism: " The right of Jews to have their own country".

I can not know what it is like to be in your situation, and I want to be careful here with what I say, but that statement makes me feel like you want to group the people who opposed the founding of the state of Israel into a big anti-Jewish group. Perhaps many were, but I think it also reasonable that many were just like the people everywhere whose traditional land is being taken over and whose culture is being threatened by a large immigartion and who aren't happy about it. This is true even when an effort is made by the immigrating population to treat the indigenous population fairly as I believe the Jews have often done with the native non-Jewish Palestinians.

I don't think the Fijians are opposed to the right of Indians having a state of their own, they just don't want it to be in Fiji. Similar things could be said about the Chinese in Tibet, the Mexicans in California, the Russians in Lithuania and the English in Ireland. The fact is that immigrating populations cause resentment and disruption. If the Jews after world war II had chosen another place to go besides Israel as was under consideration the indigenous population in those areas would have resented it also, not because the immigrating population was Jewish but because they were immigrating.

I have seen that you are proud of the state of Israel from your posts. I think that is a good thing and I believe that the Israelis have much to be proud of. I know that many of my posts have been critical of Israel and I understand that at a time when Israel is suffering greatly from the suicide attacks it must be hard to listen to people like me. I appreciate your patience and understanding.

[Broud]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cleopatra


I accept Hertzl's definion of the term Zionism: " The right of Jews to have their own country".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By this way you call all chrestian to look for the land which they live all on it , and guss whitch land it will to be it is Palastine or as u like to call it Israel.

so i'm sorry for jews cause they will be out again

i'm sorry for that begin :
but i dont like any one to be thinking in that way caus we are as Muslims don't think by this way but all of us as Arab think that all of the arab world is our home and we work hardly to make that true.

so
we don't hate jews as our friends Wasim , Anas and Hisham says
but we hate and fight our enemys whom ocupide our lands Goolan, ALQuds or as u like to say juraselem, and some still lands in south of lebanon and i think that it's our rights to do that untill our lands will back

for that :
yes we suport hezbollah if u want to ask why please ask kana's children whom killed with F16 wepons

yes we support aljehad in palastine for that u can ask jenen children and women whom killed with the nativ american wepons

do u support Israelian people? yes u do

also we hate to kill any body didn't fight us but we can't stay standing there while our brothers and sesters also our kides are killing there

that's our viewpoint

thanx for reading and got respect to ur minds

The Broud

[Cleopatra]

Let me put somebody in bed first and then I will come here....

Golan?? Who is occuping Golan??Am I dizzy?? Who is occuping Golan and Lebanon???

[Broud]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cleopatra


Golan?? Who is occuping Golan??Am I dizzy?? Who is occuping Golan and Lebanon???
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sorry Cleopatra

i didn't mean you or any one here
i mean Israel

please dont miss understand me
and thanx again

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Broud
quote:
so we don't hate jews as our friends Wasim , Anas and Hisham says but we hate and fight our enemys whom ocupide our lands Goolan, ALQuds or as u like to say juraselem, and some still lands in south of lebanon and i think that it's our rights to do that untill our lands will back ...

The Broud


First , I wanna say that you're welcome to JREF Forums and here you can share with your ideas and comments ..

And I hope that you'll join us to correct the American point of view about the Arabic Israeli struggle ..

Thanks a lot Mr.Broud ..
Nice to meet you ...

[Cleopatra]

Shallam Broud! Welcome on board! I am Cleopatra an Israeli -Greek Queen :)

First of all, I am not THAT sensitive and as long as I don't feel that anybody is underestimates my intelligence I can take a lot...

Yes Gollan! When I read it, my mind was elsewhere, I thought that you were talking about Sinai...

So...As long as the Syrian Government encourages Hizballah we can't leave Gollan. You know this. You also know that as long as President Assad was alive, Israel was having endless talks to end the Gollan occupation. After his death, his son Bashar, didn't proceed to any further talks...

Maybe he has forgotten the issue... There is none to question his policy anyway, since there is not an elected Parliament in Syria...

As for Lebanon, I must inform you that Israelis have left Lebanon since May 2000

Time for Syrians to leave Lebanon alone...

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Shallam Broud! Welcome on board! I am Cleopatra an Israeli -Greek Queen :)

First of all, I am not THAT sensitive and as long as I don't feel that anybody is underestimates my intelligence I can take a lot...

Yes Gollan! When I read it, my mind was elsewhere, I thought that you were talking about Sinai...

So...As long as the Syrian Government encourages Hizballah we can't leave Gollan. You know this. You also know that as long as President Assad was alive, Israel was having endless talks to end the Gollan occupation. After his death, his son Bashar, didn't proceed to any further talks...

Maybe he has forgotten the issue... There is none to question his policy anyway, since there is not an elected Parliament in Syria...

As for Lebanon, I must inform you that Israelis have left Lebanon since May 2000

Time for Syrians to leave Lebanon alone...

Ok .. Syrians will leave Lebanon alone soon .. And the Syrian government will not support Hizbullah any more .. BUT does it mean that Israel will give Syria Golan that were occupied by Israel during the Six Days War in June 1967 ??

Do you know we the Syrian government will do this ?? because Syria want peace .. and I'm not sure if you know what is the meaning of "PEACE" !!!

...

[Cleopatra]

Davefoc:

Introduction:

The softness in the tone of your message although appreciated, is not needed. Save it for the blessed day you will have the privilege to escort me to a nice walk by Nile...:cool:




I can not know what it is like to be in your situation, and I want to be careful here with what I say, but that statement makes me feel like you want to group the people who opposed the founding of the state of Israel into a big anti-Jewish group.

What's in my situation? Where do we differ? You are a citizen of one country I am the citizen of another... If you are a USA citizen, then you understand me pretty well for you are in War too...of course you don't have human bombs exploding every other minute but you don't have the privilege to enjoy the view from the hills of Jerusalem too :) Believe me it worths the price...

You are wrong. If you check my posts you will find out many interesting things regarding Jews and the establishment of the State of Israel and Zionism.

If the Jews after world war II had chosen another place to go besides Israel as was under consideration the indigenous population in those areas would have resented it also, not because the immigrating population was Jewish but because they were immigrating.

Now. I will take it for granted that you haven't read what I have written so far...

I have seen that you are proud of the state of Israel from your posts. I think that is a good thing and I believe that the Israelis have much to be proud of. I know that many of my posts have been critical of Israel and I understand that at a time when Israel is suffering greatly from the suicide attacks it must be hard to listen to people like me. I appreciate your patience and understanding.

You are wrong again. First of all Yes!! I am as proud as you are for your country. BUT I find criticism very usefull. I hope that people won't stop to criticize things in general and Israelis in particular.

If the suicide attacks prevent us from being able to accept criticism, then the terrorists will have won! This is what they want! To terrorize us so much as we stop thinking.

But they chose the wrong people to apply such methods...

[Broud]

Bsm Allah AlRahman AlRaheem
In The Name Of God
Dear Wasim :

Thanx alot for ur welcome and i hope to gain a new friend to correct our American Friends Mind ,Thanx again.
dear Cleopetra:

First :
of all when we talk about any CM of our land that mean no one untill president Bashar can let it at any way and if u know that is the reason which make him stay in his place ,if u ask any arabian not just syrian people will tell u that , so may u as israel can't leave Goolan it's ur problem not our ,for us Golan is very important as like Damascus not for any thing else that it is our land .

Second :
for lebanon Israel didn't finish her Occupide there still Mazare Shabaa under the Israelian Occupide so our war didn't finish yet

and accept our respect to ur minds

The Broud

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Wasim
[B]

Ok .. Syrians will leave Lebanon alone soon .. And the Syrian government will not support Hizbullah any more ..

What makes you so sure? Do you know this or you just wish it?

BUT does it mean that Israel will give Syria Golan that were occupied by Israel during the Six Days War in June 1967 ??

I am not a member of the Israeli government but personally, I am pro the withdrawal behind , to the lines of 1967

and I'm not sure if you know what is the meaning of "PEACE" !!!

Of course I don't know. According to the Protocols, I enjoy drinking blood of young people...So...be carefull...

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I think this was supposed to be a conversation between Zionists and Arabs, not a triumphalist parade of Americans.

:confused:

[DrBenway]

What I believe would help the Arab peoples and would help the peace process: a reformation movement within Islam.

I think it is a problem, that Islam is both a religion and a system of law and government. The form of government I see in Islamic law is despotic. Power is concentrated in the hands of a caliph or caliphate. The notion that the ummah must decide by consensus effectively suppresses open dissent.

Now, despotism is a very good form of government in certain circumstances. Where there are warring tribes separated by old blood feuds, despotism may be the only effective means of achieving domestic peace. But when it comes to economic prosperity, despotism can't hold a candle to democracy. Democracy rewards and encourages individuals who work hard to raise their own social position. Because despotism limits upward mobility, the drive for individual achievement is dampened.

Although Islam and the sharia proved very useful to the Arab peoples in the Middle Ages, I believe some Islamic practices are now holding the Arab peoples back. Unfortunately, the prohibition against bid'ah or innovation, makes it difficult to speak out in favor of change.

I can't believe Allah wishes for the Arabs to live now, in this modern era, without the benefits of a free and democratic society.

Some smart Muslims will have to think through the legal justifications for a reformation of Islam. Keep the core Islamic beliefs --the monotheism, the notion that no human power stands between Allah and the individual Muslim, the notion that worship must arise from a willing heart and not by political compulsion, the notion that Allah provides guidance, through the words and deeds of righteous people, but that no human guidance is equal to Allah himself.

Ditch the more peripheral parts of Islam, those cultural practices that now prove awkward and impractical today. I'd include here the system of inheritance, the political inequality of the sexes, the theocratic despotism, and the strong prejudice against the kuffaar. Unequal treatment of non-believers before the law contradicts the principle of "no compulsion in religion."

I believe Israel is evolving toward a more fully secular society. It seems very possible and very likely that Arab Israelis will one day enjoy fully equal status before the law in Israel with Jewish Israelis.

If other Arab states in the region, including the nascent Palestinian Authority, also move toward societies where all peoples are equal before the law, regardless of race, cultural background, or religion, then the need for warfare will vanish.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Wasim
And I hope that you'll join us to correct the American point of view about the Arabic Israeli struggle ..


Wasim, I wonder... have you ever thought that maybe it's your point of view that will be corrected after a while?

[hisham]

Originally posted by DrBenway
I believe Israel is evolving toward a more fully secular society.
I think you know that all Arab countries around Israel have secular regimes, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and the PA. No one of those countries is trying to apply shari'a as social or political or economical system. If you review the fundamental low of those countries you can see the shari'a is just one helpful source, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt had the same civil code since 1946.
when you said " Israel is evolving toward a more fully secular society " I think you had a mistake for tow reasons: First, Israel is the only state in the world based in religion identity, the term "Jewish people" explain that, Jewish people member: who is not consider him to belong to another religion or "mamleches kohanim vegoy kodos". There is no Jewish people because the word people refers to human communities live together and have the same cultural background,, language, geographic zone and other factors, but Jews have different nationalities, languages and cultural backgrounds.
Second, The people in Israel, specially in the last 3 years is "evolving toward" a more religious extremism, trying to reach the solution for the miserable political, economical and moral situations they are living generated by their actual government .

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by hisham

Second, The people in Israel, specially in the last 3 years is "evolving toward" a more religious extremism, trying to reach the solution for the miserable political, economical and moral situations they are living generated by their actual government .


You are wrong. You confuse the role that the Army plays with Religion...

I'd accept a comment about the role of the Army in Israel but of Religion, no.

You know, I wanted to tell you before but now I think it's the best opportunity. The suicide bombers, the murderers that you admire so much, don't die for their country but they die for the sake of Allah...

People that support death in the name of a religion I think that they belong to theocratic regimes.

Not to mention that I find funny to talk about secularism without having a democratically elected government.

I'd suggest that you wait until you participate just for once in free elections and then you come to lecture us on " the miserable political, economical and moral situations they( people of Israel) are living generated by their actual government "

[hisham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
I'd suggest that you wait until you participate just for once in free elections and then you come to lecture us on " the miserable political, economical and moral situations they( people of Israel) are living generated by their actual government "

DONE, until that prepare your self for more lectures ;)

[Cleopatra]

:)

Hisham when I read your posts, I become terribly homesick :)

DONE?? Since it's DONE you must stop lecturing!!! LOL

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Cleopatra

Ok .. Syrians will leave Lebanon alone soon .. And the Syrian government will not support Hizbullah any more ..

What makes you so sure? Do you know this or you just wish it?

BUT does it mean that Israel will give Syria Golan that were occupied by Israel during the Six Days War in June 1967 ??

I am not a member of the Israeli government but personally, I am pro the withdrawal behind , to the lines of 1967

and I'm not sure if you know what is the meaning of "PEACE" !!!

Of course I don't know. According to the Protocols, I enjoy drinking blood of young people...So...be carefull...

And I hope that you'll join us to correct the American point of view about the Arabic Israeli struggle ..

Wasim, I wonder... have you ever thought that maybe it's your point of view that will be corrected after a while?


I'm sure that Syrians will leave Lebanon in few months .. But I'm not sure if the Syrian government will support Hizbullah or not .. And I'm not surprised that you don't no what is the meaning of peace .. It's maybe defficult for an Israeli -Greek Queen like you to understand what does it mean :rolleyes:
My point can't be corrected because it's correct ... And how can you correct something that was correct .. Oh ... :confused:

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Wasim


It's maybe defficult for an Israeli -Greek Queen like you to understand what does it mean :rolleyes:
My point can't be corrected because it's correct ... And how can you correct something that was correct .. Oh ... :confused:

Are you God too?

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Are you God too?

No .. I'm the GODFATHER :D
silly question !!!

[Cleopatra]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! THAT was a very good one!!

Accept my Royal and Divine compliments Sir...

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! THAT was a very good one!!

Accept my Royal and Divine compliments Sir...

Ok Cleopatra ..
Let'us go back to our conversation .. :)

[Cleopatra]

Ok . Could you be so kind to explain to me how can you support people that die in the name of Allah and in the same time talking about secular arabic governments?

[Dancing David]

Wow, this is great! I am glad to see a dialouge occuring and I hope that you won't mind my intrusion.

Things look deadlocked again, so I would like to ask:

What could the state of Israel do to show a desire for peace?
What could the refugees and non jewish citizens of Israel do to show a desire for peace?
What could all the other players do to show a desire for peace?

Call me crazy, but somewhere someone is going to have to stop killing and harming people, and that aggregate set of people is going to have to stop even though the other side provokes them. Hope is the only emotion (that and love) strong enough, so how can we bystanders build hope/love for peace strong enough so some wacko does not bring it all down.

Y'all is way cool!

Peace
dancing David

[hisham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
:)

Hisham when I read your posts, I become terribly homesick :)

DONE?? Since it's DONE you must stop lecturing!!! LOL
FINE, Greece is waiting for you

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Dancing David
What could the refugees and non jewish citizens of Israel do to show a desire for peace?
Just checking in.. you realize that many Israelis are not Jewish, right? There are Israeli atheists, agnostics, Christians, Bah'ais, Buddhists, etc. There are Israeli Arabs, and Israelis of other ethnic backgrounds as well.

Israel has two national languages: Hebrew and Arabic.

People living in the occupied territories include Palestinians, who are not Israeli citizens, and some Israeli citizens. Some Palestinians are refugees living in refugee camps. Some are not.

At times when I've read your posts, I've had the impression that you equated "Palestinians" with "non jewish citizens of Israel."

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by hisham

I think you know that all Arab countries around Israel have secular regimes, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and the PA.
I think we're not defining the term "secular" in quite the same way. True, none of these countries is a strict theocracy. However, Islamic courts are recognized and allowed to hear and decide cases in these countries.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by hisham

FINE, Greece is waiting for you
Just as a bystander, I think both sides in this conflict are a little crazy. You can buy property, cheap, in Puerto Rico, and about a thousand other wonderful places. Why waste your lives fighting over a crap piece of desert real estate?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Just as a bystander, I think both sides in this conflict are a little crazy. You can buy property, cheap, in Puerto Rico, and about a thousand other wonderful places. Why waste your lives fighting over a crap piece of desert real estate?

So who asked for you and your inane platitudes in this conversation?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by hisham

FINE, Greece is waiting for you

Hisham. Crossing the dark boarders of trolling is very tempting, I know, but it's not suggested when you are having dialogues with me. You see, I take such behaviours as a provocation , as if someone is trying to underestimate my intelligence...

And the problem is that I don't know how to react in " a measured and mannered" ( TM Dr.X) way...

Having said this...

Tell me now. Is there a way that we help our beloved Syrian friends to achive a democratic Strate? What can I do for you, so as you have the opportunity, just for once, to chose your government?

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
So who asked for you and your inane platitudes in this conversation?
AUP, you can be helped. (http://www.packagemuseum.com/packagemuseum/exhibits/exlax01/exlax01.htm)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DrBenway

AUP, you can be helped. (http://www.packagemuseum.com/packagemuseum/exhibits/exlax01/exlax01.htm)

You are acting like this is the 'Gratuitous advice for Arabs' thread.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


You are acting like this is the 'Gratuitous advice for Arabs' thread.

This, was mean Unique. Renata didn't mean it that way.

[Cleopatra]

No... this comment wasn't for Renata...

Unique, this is the best we can do for people that they came here to illuminate us. Althought "there is not such a thing as a free lunch", I can do my best for people that work hard to illuminate me...

[hisham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Tell me now. Is there a way that we help our beloved Syrian friends to achive a democratic Strate? What can I do for you, so as you have the opportunity, just for once, to chose your government?
Thank you for your offer, it is GREAT :) , but in fact we are looking for a real democracy not a false and military one likes what exist in Israel, Israel state is: "social and political equality of all citizens without distinction of religion, race or sex." This what you can see in Israel "Proclamation of Establishment" this statement corresponds with the basic rules of a democracy, but in reality Israel has never attempted to comply with those rules. This was not a law, so there was no legal obligation that would force the government to apply this statement. Look for those lows: the law of return, the law of Citizenship, and the status law, they only applied to Jews, not for second-class citizens. And note that Israel does not recognize the democratic principle of separation of the church and state, also its economy is dominated by the Histadrut.

[Cleopatra]

" Charmion! Have you observed, too, the sudden improvement of the English of our friends...do you believe in miracles now?... Does this writting style seems familiar to you too?...anyway..."

Hisham, although I find ridiculous to apologize to a Syrian about the quality of Democracy in my country, I will reply in the name of good faith.

I am sure that you have heard, since it's impossible for you to know, that every democratic country has its problems. Israel has some serious problems too. BUT what distinguishes a democracy from other... ( let me be polite...) systems is exactly this : a democracy, can be improved.

Since you show so much interest in Israel, let me tell you a secret. As long as your brothers, terrorize innocent civilians, there is no way for me and others to follow your friendly advices and do something to change things.

If you want to help us , then, PLEASE, do something to stop Terrorism!

[renata]

I just wanted to say how pleased I am that Syrian posters came back to the thread, and an interesting conversation is continuing. This having been said, I would like to remind all the participants that this is a special thread, with no flaming, baiting or personal attacks of any kind. Please keep your posts within the spirit of this thread. As I mentioned before, there are dozens of threads which devolved into sniping, and I want this one to be different. Thank you all for participating!

[Wasim]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
If you want to help us , then, PLEASE, do something to stop Terrorism!


Hisham ...
You Should be Supporting those who are in iraq to stop terrorism so that you will not get killed!! ~THINK~ :cool:

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Wasim
Hisham ...
You Should be Supporting those who are in iraq to stop terrorism so that you will not get killed!! ~THINK~ :cool:
Syria ought to forget about sinking its limited resources into military adventures. Syria is a culturally diverse, unique place, with potential as a crossroads of trade, tourism, and art.

[Wasim]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Syria is a culturally diverse, unique place, with potential as a crossroads of trade, tourism, and art.

I knew this ... And that's why did they call Syria "The cradle of civilizations" ...


Andre Parrot Former director of Louvers Museum, said ...

Every person has two homelands: His own and Syria

[Dancing David]

Apologies to Renata!

(Dr. Bren thanks sooo much for adding to the thread, I really wanted to read what you write.Usually your posts are insightful. I use the term non jewish citizens of Israel becasue there are people who are citizens of Israel who aren't recognised the same way as thos eof Jewish descent.
Could you not lecture me on the obvious.
Too bad you didn't talk about what us bystanders could so.)

Peace

[Cleopatra]

Hmmmmm ... Renata have you imposed any rule on who is participating in the talk?

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Dancing David
I use the term non jewish citizens of Israel becasue there are people who are citizens of Israel who aren't recognised the same way as those of Jewish descent.
Sorry if I explained the obvious. In a few conversations here, folks sometimes seem to blur the distinction between "Arab citizen" and "Palestinian."

Can you clarify for me how non-Jewish Israelis are legally recognized in a different way, in comparison to Jewish Israelis?

[Dancing David]

It is a commonly held belief( Notice belief, I haven't facts) that the Israeli state discriminates against it's non jewish citizens, the source of these reports for me is generaly NPR, they talk about how they get no electricity or water, they talk about bulldozing of houses without due process, not to mention land deeds that the Israeli sate doesn't recognise.

That is why I asked if non jewish citizens have the same rights? Can they vote for the Keneset? Can they sue when the army cuts down thier olive trees? Can sosmeone who was born in exile return to Israel ( A right that jewsih people have)?

I realise that these commonly held beliefs that there is an apartheid in Israel could be beliefs and not facts.
That why i ask.

Peace

PS I am appalled by all the children around the world who live in no win wars.

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Dancing David
... they talk about how they get no electricity or water, they talk about bulldozing of houses without due process, not to mention land deeds that the Israeli sate doesn't recognise.
Those reports are concerned with the Palestinians, not Israeli Arabs.

Added: The Palestinians reject the legitimacy of the Israeli government, and so reject the notion of becoming Israeli citizens.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Those reports are concerned with the Palestinians, not Israeli Arabs.

Added: The Palestinians reject the legitimacy of the Israeli government, and so reject the notion of becoming Israeli citizens.

More of those reports also talked about 'palestinians' who did want to be citizen?
So is there aparthied?

Peace

[AN@S]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


According to the Protocols, I enjoy drinking blood of young people...So...be carefull...

Cleopatra , How does the human blood taste?:D

Just kidding ;)

I am happy to back to this discussion and I apologize if I bothered anyone in my last posts...

Cleopatra what do you mean by:
" Charmion! Have you observed, too, the sudden improvement of the English of our friends...do you believe in miracles now?... Does this writting style seems familiar to you too?...anyway..."

I didn't understand ...
What do you want to say??

[RandFan]

Fascinating thread. I had the wind taken out of my sails on the other Israel/Palestinian threads and have not felt the passion to join in. I remain a supporter of Israel but have changed my views somewhat. I'm going to lurk some more but will probably join in at some point.

Thanks everyone.

RandFan

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by RandFan
Fascinating thread. I had the wind taken out of my sails on the other Israel/Palestinian threads and have not felt the passion to join in. I remain a supporter of Israel but have changed my views somewhat. I'm going to lurk some more but will probably join in at some point.

Thanks everyone.

RandFan

How did you have the "wind taken out of your sails"? I remember the thread you started about Israel using terrorism, but I assume that can't be everything. What changed in your views?

-Elektrix

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by Dancing David
More of those reports also talked about 'palestinians' who did want to be citizen?
Without knowing more specifics regarding these reports, I dunno. The Palestinians are at war with Israel right now. There may be legitimate reasons why some who apply for citizenship are denied.

But the leadership in Palestine, and in many Arab states, is against the idea of Palestinians becoming Israeli citizens, as that gives legitimacy to the Israeli government.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Elektrix
How did you have the "wind taken out of your sails"? What changed in your views? I guess that is fair question. I regret having phrased my statement that way. Though to be sure it was extemporaneous and sincere. I would prefer to dodge it altogether but such would be dishonest. Let me just say this. I have had a singular view of Israel that I have moderated somewhat in recent weeks. I think that I am a somewhat more willing to empathize with the plight of the Palistinians than before. I think I have a more accurate picture of the history of the region and I believe that Israel bears more responsibilty than I previously thought.

Having said that I cannot justify the terrorism on the part of the Palestinians and saying that I understand it would be misleading. The issue has left me conflicted and I think that it is going to take some time for me to completely coalesce my thoughts and feelings.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by RandFan
I guess that is fair question. I regret having phrased my statement that way. Though to be sure it was extemporaneous and sincere. I would prefer to dodge it altogether but such would be dishonest. Let me just say this. I have had a singular view of Israel that I have moderated somewhat in recent weeks. I think that I am a somewhat more willing to empathize with the plight of the Palistinians than before. I think I have a more accurate picture of the history of the region and I believe that Israel bears more responsibilty than I previously thought.

Having said that I cannot justify the terrorism on the part of the Palestinians and saying that I understand it would be misleading. The issue has left me conflicted and I think that it is going to take some time for me to completely coalesce my thoughts and feelings.

That's perfectly understandable, and quite fair. Clearly Israel has its own issues it has to take responsibility for (although it's of course thinking about not only the issues that have caused the plight of the Palestinians, but what issues have caused Israel to take some of the actions and policies it has).

Anyway, I certainly wouldn't feel about about feeling conflicted...... if this was a simple issue, there wouldn't be so much difficulty in it being resolved. There's a lot of different factors at play, clearly, and the way they all affect one another is pretty difficult to unravel at times.

-Elektrix

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by RandFan
I guess that is fair question. I regret having phrased my statement that way. Though to be sure it was extemporaneous and sincere. I would prefer to dodge it altogether but such would be dishonest. Let me just say this. I have had a singular view of Israel that I have moderated somewhat in recent weeks. I think that I am a somewhat more willing to empathize with the plight of the Palistinians than before. I think I have a more accurate picture of the history of the region and I believe that Israel bears more responsibilty than I previously thought.

Having said that I cannot justify the terrorism on the part of the Palestinians and saying that I understand it would be misleading. The issue has left me conflicted and I think that it is going to take some time for me to completely coalesce my thoughts and feelings.

That was what happened to me. Was fully behind Israel, then found things didn't quite add up when I read more than just the headlines.

I think we have been fortunate to have Cleopatra grace us with her Regal presence, as a skeptical Israeli, who wants peace but can see faults on both sides, has much to offer with their insights.

I don't enjoy seeing people suffering due to terrorism, on either side.

[Baker]

Originally posted by RandFan
Let me just say this. I have had a singular view of Israel that I have moderated somewhat in recent weeks. I think that I am a somewhat more willing to empathize with the plight of the Palistinians than before. I think I have a more accurate picture of the history of the region and I believe that Israel bears more responsibilty than I previously thought.



The plight of the Palestinians you mean to destroy Israel?
You really need to look up the history of the PLO.
I try to look at both sides but all I have found was that their only purpose was to destroy Israel and where Created by the Arab league who of course tried to invade Israel 3 times to destroy them.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


That was what happened to me. Was fully behind Israel, then found things didn't quite add up when I read more than just the headlines.

I think we have been fortunate to have Cleopatra grace us with her Regal presence, as a skeptical Israeli, who wants peace but can see faults on both sides, has much to offer with their insights.

I don't enjoy seeing people suffering due to terrorism, on either side.

AUP, I noticed you STILL haven't responded to my correction of your assertion that there is land that is only not sold to non-Jews. You posted that as some sort of evidence of Israeli discrimination against non-Jews, and have yet to respond to the full fact of it, that that land is not for sale to anyone, Jew or non-Jew.

I'm really puzzled as to why you refuse to respond to that point, as you do claim to be someone who is interested in the truth, yet you continue to claim that this is a prime example of Israeli discrimination against non-Jews, and the facts don't back that up.

I asked you to respond to it twice and both times you ignored it. Is it because you are unwilling to admit when something that you think shows how bad Israel is isn't the full truth? Or do you only like to look at things that support your belief that Israel is a discriminatory entity that favors Jewish people and discriminates against non-Jews?

-Elektrix

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by AN@S

Cleopatra what do you mean by:


I didn't understand ...
What do you want to say?? [/B]

I was talking to my servant AN@S not you! She understood perferctly what I wanted to say...

[69dodge]

Originally posted by hisham
Davefoc, thank you for your response,
if you review the history of the Islamic civilization you can note the relation between Muslims and Jews was active along the history of this civilization, am not sure if you mean and want to say "the possibility of good relations between Israelis and Arabs", for me as an individual belong to this civilization like all Muslims, Christians, Jews "not the Israelis because they consider themselves as part of the western civilization" and other religion groups lives in this region, I think we have no problem with Jews as religion group.
Now, like every region in our world you can find extremist groups, in our case they don't reflect the real Islamic literature as thinking method, in Syria there are a grand variety of those methods like religious, seculars and others. BUT I think as many others here, the extremists in the "other part specially in Israel" are playing a new role to alert the west and the power centers and decisions making institutions that there is new power hold a grand container of history and civilization and if this power reach the political and economical stability, will be the real danger for the west and its universal culture. What do you consider to be the important differences between your civilization and western civilization? What do you like about your civilization? What do you dislike about western civilization?

You say "universal culture" when talking about the west. What do you mean by that?

Thanks.

[Cleopatra]

RandFan

In the Introduction of his book " From Beirut to Jerusalem",Thomas Friedman , the author, notes:

" I have observed that when people start talking about Middle East, after a while, they become insane".

Never before have I come -up by such an accurate a comment...so, I find your post quite fair...

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
RandFan

In the Introduction of his book " From Beirut to Jerusalem",Thomas Friedman , the author, notes:

" I have observed that when people start talking about Middle East, after a while, they become insane".

Never before have I come -up by such an accurate a comment...so, I find your post quite fair...

We get Friedman syndicated in our local newspaper from time to time. I have found him to be someone who wants Israel to do the right thing, and the terrorism to stop, but he cannot find it within himself to fully appreciate Israel's part in the problem.

[69dodge]

Originally posted by AN@S
2- There are some people who accept Israel and they are living in Israel but they don't believe that Israel is a god eiven land, they immigrated to Israel because they have very bad situations in their original countries :CCCP,Poland,Greek,...etc.
They came to Israel not because they believe in Israel but hoping to have a better life...But I don't think that they have better life now (I advice them to back to the countries they came from because living in thier original countries are better than living in Israel because of the war and because Arabs don't like them.. they can find great jobs in their countries because the economy in their countries may be best than it in Israel)
Why don't Arabs like them?

hisham said he didn't mind having Jewish neighbors. If Arabs and Jews can be friendly neighbors in Damascus, why not in Jerusalem?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by 69dodge
Why don't Arabs like them?

hisham said he didn't mind having Jewish neighbors. If Arabs and Jews can be friendly neighbors in Damascus, why not in Jerusalem?

Which is an interesting point that I have pondered before. The Jews and Arabs in Palestine, prior to Zionism, lived in relative harmony, if I have read it right. Zionism was the fly in the ointment. Now Zionism only arose because of persecution Jews experienced in Europe and Russia.

[69dodge]

Originally posted by AN@S
For me , I may accept a peace agreement between Arabs and Israel if Israel accepted Arabs conditions... What do you think those conditions should be?

[AN@S]

Originally posted by 69dodge
Why don't Arabs like them?

hisham said he didn't mind having Jewish neighbors. If Arabs and Jews can be friendly neighbors in Damascus, why not in Jerusalem?

No my friend, don't misunderstand me, Arabs don't hate Jews..
As hisham said, there are Jews in Syria and no one hate them, they are friendly neighbors, Moslems and Christians in Syria don't hate them...
It's not the same in Palestine ...
In Palestine there are alot of Arab-Jewish families no one hate them because they are living in THEIR lands, But we hate the Zionists who came from another countries to occupy Arabic lands, we hate them not because they're Jews, we're not racists,
Imagine that someone kicked you out of your home, Do u love him or do u hate him??
You'll hate him regardless of his religion..

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by DrBenway

Without knowing more specifics regarding these reports, I dunno. The Palestinians are at war with Israel right now. There may be legitimate reasons why some who apply for citizenship are denied.

But the leadership in Palestine, and in many Arab states, is against the idea of Palestinians becoming Israeli citizens, as that gives legitimacy to the Israeli government.

So once again I ask, do non-jewish citizens of Israel (babies born in Israel) have the same rights as jewish citizens? Can you really say that this is a reactive policy? Why would an old lady who never supported the PLO have her civil rights abbrogated. Why if people pay taxes wouldn't they be granted the same benefits of those taes.

I suppose that the South African governement was justified in it's violence because people objected to aparthied?

The only reason I bring this up is because I feel that if non-jewish citizens of israel were granted the same rights as jewish citizens it woulf be a major motivator towards peace.

I am just a bystander and it is just an opinion.

Peace

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by Dancing David
So once again I ask, do non-jewish citizens of Israel (babies born in Israel) have the same rights as jewish citizens?

For everyone's consideration (bearing in mind that these sources may not fully reflect the current situation today):
Palestinians in Israel are now full citizens, with the right to vote, to run for office, and to receive state services. As a group, however, they remain in a disadvantaged position. The differences, measured by such indicators as average income, educational achievement, and professional status, are partly differences in outcome; in part, however, they are differences in opportunity. As has already been indicated, in view of the official status of Zionist institutions like the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund, there are certain rights and benefits available by law only to the Jewish citizens of the state. Furthermore, the per capita expenditure of state funds for education, road building, housing, social services, and municipal services in the Arab sector has tended to be consistently lower than in the Jewish sector. (Source: Herbert C. Kelman, “Israel in Transition from Zionism to Post-Zionism”, 555 Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Science 46 (Jan. 1998))


Under the dual system of governance applied to Palestinians and Israelis, Palestinians are treated less favorably than Israeli settlers on a broad range of issues, including applicability of the right to due process; residency rights; freedom of movement; sale of crops and goods; water use; land tenure, ownership, and seizure issues; and access to health and social services. Offenses against Israelis are investigated and prosecuted more vigorously than offenses against Palestinians.(Source: Christine Biancheria, “Restoring the Right to Have Rights: Statelessness and Alienage Jurisdiction in Light of Abu-Zeineh v. Federal Laboratories, Inc., 11 American University Journal of International Law & Policy 195 (1996))


While the social and political position of the Palestinian minority in Israel has changed in the forty-five years since Israel's establishment, its status in the Israeli nation has continued to be marginal. While enjoying nearly full formal equality as citizens, Israeli Arabs continue to face private and institutional forms of discrimination in many spheres of social and political life, including employment, education, housing, financial support for local government, government services, military service, access to land and water resources, and the criminal justice system.(Source: George E. Bisharat, “Land, Law and Legitimacy in Israel and the Occupied Territories”, 43 American University Law Review 467 (1994))


The reality would seem to be that non-Jewish Israelis have, on paper, the same rights as their Jewish compatriots (or close to it); in practice, however, they do not always derive the full benefit of their formal legal status. In the United States, of course, we're familiar with the difference between theoretical and actual equality under the law, as applied to different groups of citizens.

[Dancing David]

Thank You!

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


We get Friedman syndicated in our local newspaper from time to time. I have found him to be someone who wants Israel to do the right thing, and the terrorism to stop, but he cannot find it within himself to fully appreciate Israel's part in the problem.

I would suggest you read more of Friedman then (more of his columns, or some of his books, like the one just mentioned above, "From Beirut to Jerusalem"). I see no justification for your statement that he cannot find it within himself to "fully appreciate Israel's part in the problem", as he has written on Israel's part in the problem extensively for a very long time.

-Elektrix

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Thank You!

Dancing David, maybe next you can ask about the real and effective discrimination that Jews have faced in other Middle Eastern countries. Might also look more into Palestinian attitudes towards Jews, how they educate their children to hate the Jews, etc..... and perhaps it might explain in part why they end up facing some types of practical discrimination.

You seem so concerned with any discrimination of non-Jews in Israel, but I haven't seen you concerned about the discrimination of Jews in the Palestinian territories or Israel's Arab neighbors..... even on such matters like religious sites, where when they were under Arab control, Jews were not allowed to visit holy sites, whereas while under Israeli control they have made sure that all people can visit holy sites in peace.

I have no doubt that Palestinians end up facing some practical discrimination, but I don't see what good it does to look at it in a vacuum and focus so much on that without looking at the context of why individuals and businesses in Israel might be inclined to discriminate, and compare that to the discrimination Jews face by their neighbors.

-Elektrix

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


We get Friedman syndicated in our local newspaper from time to time. I have found him to be someone who wants Israel to do the right thing, and the terrorism to stop, but he cannot find it within himself to fully appreciate Israel's part in the problem.

Partly I agree with Elektrix , partly with you for different reasons of course.

An interesting topic of discussion would be about the role of Press and which are the criteria according to which an analyst is considered trustworthy for each one of us....

I might ask Renata to start a thread, since she is talented in opening a discussion and keep it going :)

I think that for journalists like Fisk and Friedmann one should know what to keep from their articles and what to throw away...

In the mean time, the plot thickens, as a member with the nickname Palestine4ever has joined the forum...Finally Cleopatra your dream will come true... One and female against the hordes of fierce Arabs... :p

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Elektrix


Dancing David, maybe next you can ask about the real and effective discrimination that Jews have faced in other Middle Eastern countries. Might also look more into Palestinian attitudes towards Jews, how they educate their children to hate the Jews, etc..... and perhaps it might explain in part why they end up facing some types of practical discrimination.

You seem so concerned with any discrimination of non-Jews in Israel, but I haven't seen you concerned about the discrimination of Jews in the Palestinian territories or Israel's Arab neighbors..... even on such matters like religious sites, where when they were under Arab control, Jews were not allowed to visit holy sites, whereas while under Israeli control they have made sure that all people can visit holy sites in peace.

I have no doubt that Palestinians end up facing some practical discrimination, but I don't see what good it does to look at it in a vacuum and focus so much on that without looking at the context of why individuals and businesses in Israel might be inclined to discriminate, and compare that to the discrimination Jews face by their neighbors.

-Elektrix

Uh, on other threads I have talked about the fact that The USA is partly responsible for the whole situation, had jewish people been allowed to emigrate to the US then there would have not been this problem in the first place.

I believe very strongly that there is anti-semitism rampant around the world, it is one of many forms of bigotry and still suprisingly prevalent in the US.

Many people have held up Israel as a paragon of democracy in the middle east, which I am not certain it is. Why would the state of Israel deny it's citizens due process?

On the scary-boo scale I don't know why our nation picked a fight with Iraq, to my parochial mind Syria is much more of a threat.(Sorry I am not trying to offend our Syrian posters, I just aknowledge that in the 1980 Syria used to have the largest standing army in the Middle East)

In the Tao Te Ching it is recommended that a larger power concede to the lesser power, so I suggest that Israel offer citizenship to all it's citizens.

A quick glance at the Amnesty web site will show that there is an awful lot of torture and political detention in the middle east (wierd british term that).

As for my biasis towards the 'palestinians', really I don't have one, I think that the PLO should be tried as international war criminals.

Peace

[renata]

Originally posted by Cleopatra




An interesting topic of discussion would be about the role of Press and which are the criteria according to which an analyst is considered trustworthy for each one of us....

I might ask Renata to start a thread, since she is talented in opening a discussion and keep it going :)



I started one on a very similar topic a while ago, but it did not generate interest. You are welcome to revive it, if you wish. :)
http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15828

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Uh, on other threads I have talked about the fact that The USA is partly responsible for the whole situation, had jewish people been allowed to emigrate to the US then there would have not been this problem in the first place.


Well the US has bankrolled Israel for 40 years or so. Before that the British encouraged Zionist colonisation, before that the Ottoman Empire permitted unwelcome immigration and of course if the Jews themselves had been more adaptable the Romans wouldn't have booted them out of the country in the first place. So this particular stew has many ingredients although the US is, for the time being, quite an important part of the recipe.


A quick glance at the Amnesty web site will show that there is an awful lot of torture and political detention in the middle east (wierd british term that).


I often wonder what happened to the near east. This used to be the term applied to Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt etc. I think the middle east started in Iraq and the far east started in India.


As for my biasis towards the 'palestinians', really I don't have one, I think that the PLO should be tried as international war criminals.


Well, perhaps the PLO learned a lesson from the Irgun(sp?), the Zionist terrorist movement, i.e. that only the losers get taken to court. Needless to say, from the PLO's point of view, the war has not gone entirely as they would have hoped.

Peace

[Elektrix]

If the Jews had been "more adaptable" the Romans wouldn't have kicked them out? So now it's the Jews fault they were kicked out of Israel? Is that what you're really saying?

Regarding Irgun, where do you get that the Irgun terrorists weren't held accountable for their crimes? The Irgun errorists were condemned and were seen as extremists by most Jews, and were often arrested (although some famously escaped Acco prison). When they wanted to carry out reprisals and revenge they were condemned by most other Jews, and when they murdered 7 Arabs in and around Jerusalem in 1937 most Jews expressed outrage and called it Black Sunday.

People seem to equate the actions of Irgun, the Stern Gang, etc. with those of the terrorist groups supported by the PLO, but I don't see how they can be equated. They were both terrible terrorist groups and extremists, but Irgun was not supported or praised as martyrs by their government or most of the people they claimed to represent. They were seen as criminals and treated as criminals, tried in court, put in jail, etc.

Members of the terrorist groups were even hung at Acco (http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/noar/sites/acco.htm#lechi).

-Elektrix

[Baker]

Originally posted by renata


I started one on a very similar topic a while ago, but it did not generate interest. You are welcome to revive it, if you wish. :)
http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15828

Speaking of sources these are some interesting links from MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute)
They simply to translate Arab news articles and stories but many people don’t like it.

At the H Street home of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), five linguists can create a media stir simply by translating, accurately, Arabic-language news stories on their black Dell computers.

From its nine-room office, which looks more like the corporate headquarters of a small Saudi oil company, MEMRI distributes, via e-mail and fax, translations of comments about America in mainstream Arabic-language newspapers and in speeches by Muslim leaders.

U.S. officials say the translated texts sometimes are unnerving.
http://memri.org/bin/media.cgi?ID=24202


Leave it to a Saudi professor to reveal why the Iraq war began when it did.
"The American war on Iraq started in March to concur with [the] Purim feast," Prof. Umayma Jalahma explained last week, according to a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

Why is Purim a good time for war?

Because, Jalahma wrote last year, on Purim, "the Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare the holiday pastries . . . That affords the Jewish vampires great delight."
http://memri.org/bin/media.cgi?ID=47703





Following a lesson on the monotheistic faiths, Saudi Arabian schoolchildren are asked to discuss "With what types of weapons should Muslims arm themselves against the Jews?" That question is part of an official textbook for 8th grade students which also emphasizes that "Jews and Christians were cursed by Allah and turned into apes and pigs," and that "The hour [the Day of Judgment] will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them."
http://memri.org/bin/media.cgi?ID=39202

[hisham]

Originally posted by Baker


Speaking of sources these are some interesting links from MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute)
They simply to translate Arab news articles and stories but many people don’t like it.

Just for clarification, MEMRI is a secretive body managed by colonel Yigal Carmon of Israeli military intelligence. And the majority of MEMRI stuff is working for Israeli Intelligence, and some of them served in the Israeli army northern command, that ran the al-Khayam torture prison in south Lebanon. As the British newspaper, .the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html)

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by hisham


Just for clarification, MEMRI is a secretive body managed by colonel Yigal Carmon of Israeli military intelligence. And the majority of MEMRI stuff is working for Israeli Intelligence, and some of them served in the Israeli army northern command, that ran the al-Khayam torture prison in south Lebanon. As the British newspaper, .the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html)

Reminds me of CAMERA. If these were all you read, you would be a one eyed Israel supporter. But they only tell one side of the story. It would be handy if MEMRI could give us some of the inside dirt on Israel.

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Reminds me of CAMERA. If these were all you read, you would be a one eyed Israel supporter. But they only tell one side of the story. It would be handy if MEMRI could give us some of the inside dirt on Israel.

What?! A source that goes through articles and news services and picks out only slanted ones to present so that one side is presented in bad light?!

I can see why you're shocked, shocked at this sort of behavior.

NA

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by hisham


Just for clarification, MEMRI is a secretive body managed by colonel Yigal Carmon of Israeli military intelligence. And the majority of MEMRI stuff is working for Israeli Intelligence, and some of them served in the Israeli army northern command, that ran the al-Khayam torture prison in south Lebanon. As the British newspaper, .the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html)

Why does it matter who is behind it?

As that article says, no-one disputes the accuracy of their translations. Surely they do focus on translating the kinds of things that the Arabs who say them probably would prefer were only heard by other Arabs, but they are still being said.

It seems like trying to deflect from the real issue.... regardless of who is behind MEMRI, it doesn't change the truth of what they translate and what is being said, and it doesn't absolve people of taking responsibility for what is being said.

-Elektrix

[dmarker]

Originally posted by AN@S


Of course no...
they are native to their father's original country if the father is jew, and they are Arabs is the father is an Arab

But in Judaism, the religion of the child is determined solely by the mother. Wouldn't the child of an Arab father and a Jewish mother be Jewish in the eyes of the Israelis?

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Reminds me of CAMERA. If these were all you read, you would be a one eyed Israel supporter. But they only tell one side of the story. It would be handy if MEMRI could give us some of the inside dirt on Israel.

Even if they are only translating selective articles, its still shows the Arabs for who they are.
These are news stories from the main Arab news outlets.
This is an interview that will help show what kind of information they get and this is from the birthplace of Islam.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/interviews/ahmed.html

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


Even if they are only translating selective articles, its still shows the Arabs for who they are.
These are news stories from the main Arab news outlets.
This is an interview that will help show what kind of information they get and this is from the birthplace of Islam.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/interviews/ahmed.html

The unofficial dirt on Israel is every bit as extreme, only we don't get a first class intelligence service to pass it on.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


The unofficial dirt on Israel is every bit as extreme, only we don't get a first class intelligence service to pass it on.

Care to cite some examples? I.e. some things comparable in the Hebrew press or from Israeli officials that are comparable to what is translated and published by MEMRI?

You say its every bit as extreme, so I assume you're speaking from first-hand knowledge, so what examples of this do you find as extreme as the Arab leaders who talk about how the Jews need Arab blood for their food for passover, or calling for the destruction of Israel and the extermination of the Jews, etc.?

Even just one or two examples that are "every bit as extreme" would suit me fine, since I assume you wouldn't make a statement like that without being able to back it up.

Then again, you still haven't responded to my last question to you (where you implied that the land that wasn't for sale to non-Jews was an example of discrimination even though that land is in fact not for sale to anyone, regardless of whether they are Jewish or not.... but you clearly meant to show it as an example of something that was only affecting non-Jews, which wasn't the case), so I really hope you'll respond this time.

-Freakzilla

[Baker]

Originally posted by Elektrix

Then again, you still haven't responded to my last question to you (where you implied that the land that wasn't for sale to non-Jews was an example of discrimination even though that land is in fact not for sale to anyone, regardless of whether they are Jewish or not.... but you clearly meant to show it as an example of something that was only affecting non-Jews, which wasn't the case), so I really hope you'll respond this time.


He isn’t going to respond when AUP is caught in one of his Israel is evil lies he just ignores it and waits a few months then uses the same lie again in another Israel Palestine thread hopping that we forgot about it.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by hisham


Just for clarification, MEMRI is a secretive body managed by colonel Yigal Carmon of Israeli military intelligence. And the majority of MEMRI stuff is working for Israeli Intelligence, and some of them served in the Israeli army northern command, that ran the al-Khayam torture prison in south Lebanon. As the British newspaper, .the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html)

The Arab world can sponsor an organization of this kind too.

Why don't you do it instead of criticizing the people who work hard for their country?

You should congradulate them!

You see, countries don't need money. They need sacrificies....

[hisham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


The Arab world can sponsor an organization of this kind too.

Why don't you do it instead of criticizing the people who work hard for their country?

You should congradulate them!

You see, countries don't need money. They need sacrificies....
of this kind ??:confused:

[Cleopatra]

You need to sacrifice part of your free time, for example, to translate articles... We have sacrificed many things to keep this country alive... some of those sacrificies are very very painful but this is how it must be done, hisham.

The easy way is to wear a jacket with explosives and to go meet Allah... the tough way is to give part of your everyday life for your country...

Most Israelis, don't get paid to do things like that and they don't expect any reward on a personal level.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


The unofficial dirt on Israel is every bit as extreme...

Prove it.

For the reasonable people in this thread, I recommend a visit to this page (http://www.memri.org/reform.html), where Evil Extremists at MEMRI selectively display both sides of the internal struggle in the Arab world for reform.

For instance, this call (http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=subjects&Area=reform&ID=SP44802) by a Saudi columnist to end the violence:

"This is the most apt diagnosis of the problem of our society. To regain its peace and innocence and reconciliation with the world, our youths must be reeducated and violence - a concept alien to our society - must be discarded."

"This can be achieved by educating the youth. Perhaps, a new subject of modern culture may be added to the education system."

"We have to remove the wrong interpretations from our literature, and return to the pure Da'wa of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) employing good counsel and sound religious education. A Muslim's duty is to call people to goodness rather than gaining control over them."

MattJ

[hisham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Most Israelis, don't get paid to do things like that and they don't expect any reward on a personal level.
If you are saying that for propaganda then OK because this is your main business, but if you saying that for me then you know perfectly what is going on there.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by hisham

If you are saying that for propaganda then OK because this is your main business, but if you saying that for me then you know perfectly what is going on there.

Why is it propaganda to simply present the words of people in the Arab world? I'm baffled by this, truly. It's not like MEMRI is making stuff up.... they are simply presenting what is REALLY being said.... which is especially important since it seems like what many in the Arab world choose to say in English to the English-speaking world is quite different from what they say only in Arabic.

Now, if you have some examples of MEMRI actually making up stuff, then that is something else. But otherwise, why is it so evil for MEMRI to show people what is really being said? If the people in the Arab world who say it believe in it, why should they care or call it propaganda when it is presented to others?

EDIT: I actually might have misread what you said, as from Cleopatra's reply it seems like you were claiming she was spreading propaganda, which is also pretty ridiculous to claim.

-Elektrix

[Cleopatra]

To Hisham

What???? WHAT???????????

Listen. You'd better correct your post, take back the stupidity you have just written and STOP addressing to me in a such an insulting way .

I am not 18 years old to accept stupidities like this :"If you are saying that for propaganda then OK because this is your main business"

Edited to add: It's late here. I am going to bed. Tomorrow, when I will switch my pc-on, I expect to find a correction Hisham.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


Prove it.

For the reasonable people in this thread, I recommend a visit to this page (http://www.memri.org/reform.html), where Evil Extremists at MEMRI selectively display both sides of the internal struggle in the Arab world for reform.

For instance, this call (http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=subjects&Area=reform&ID=SP44802) by a Saudi columnist to end the violence:

MattJ

I have said all along that there are reasonable people in the Arab world, it could not be otherwise.

Where is the MEMRI dirt on Israel, though? It is there, and they would be in a good position to provide it. The settlement planning, racism against arabs, the lead up to the six day war, rules of engagement against palestinians, disciplinary action against military who break those rules, use of the armed forces to aid in the creation of settlements.

[Cleopatra]

I was expecting the "Boys Choir of the Arabian Nights" to do something about Hisham's post.

They ignored me.

My sense of self-respect doesn't let me continue discussing this matter with those gentelmen, therefore I am off the discussion.

Thank you very much!

*bows*

Cleopatra

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I have said all along that there are reasonable people in the Arab world, it could not be otherwise.

Where is the MEMRI dirt on Israel, though? It is there, and they would be in a good position to provide it. The settlement planning, racism against arabs, the lead up to the six day war, rules of engagement against palestinians, disciplinary action against military who break those rules, use of the armed forces to aid in the creation of settlements.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translates the regions media. Can this dirt of which you speak be found in the popular media of Israel? I suspect not, but feel free to prove me wrong. They do translate media from Hebrew to English as well.

MattJ

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I have said all along that there are reasonable people in the Arab world, it could not be otherwise.

Where is the MEMRI dirt on Israel, though? It is there, and they would be in a good position to provide it. The settlement planning, racism against arabs, the lead up to the six day war, rules of engagement against palestinians, disciplinary action against military who break those rules, use of the armed forces to aid in the creation of settlements.

Since when do you have a problem finding dirt on Israel your only problem is that your main source the Arab media is being questioned!

[CapelDodger]

Elektrix: The Irgun was absorbed into the Hagganah/IDF in 1949; those that opposed this were the ones prosecuted, just like the post-partition IRA in Ireland. If one were to postulate that the Irgun was there to do the dirty work and keep ben-Gurion's hands clean, the evidence certainly doesn't exclude it. And there wouldn't be a paper-trail. The political wing of the Irgun is now known as Likud.

from Cleopatra:
We have sacrificed many things to keep this country alive...
I don't see sacrifice as a positive thing. If that's the cost of creating a "country" I'd question the value of having the country.

And by the way, Cleopatra, I say "damn their impudence".

(Who the hell are the "Boys Choir of the Arabian Nights"? Presumably not a rap-band ...)

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Elektrix: The Irgun was absorbed into the Hagganah/IDF in 1949; those that opposed this were the ones prosecuted, just like the post-partition IRA in Ireland. If one were to postulate that the Irgun was there to do the dirty work and keep ben-Gurion's hands clean, the evidence certainly doesn't exclude it. And there wouldn't be a paper-trail. The political wing of the Irgun is now known as Likud.

from Cleopatra:

I don't see sacrifice as a positive thing. If that's the cost of creating a "country" I'd question the value of having the country.

And by the way, Cleopatra, I say "damn their impudence".

(Who the hell are the "Boys Choir of the Arabian Nights"? Presumably not a rap-band ...)

Isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that the "political wing of Irgun is now known as Likud"? That seems like a gross oversimplification. Irgun and other paramilitary organizations were dissolved in 1948. Some remnants of the dissolved Irgun created Herut. Years later Gahal formed Likud and Herut was a prominent part of that. But it seems like a real stretch to just simply say that the political arm of Irgun is now known as Likud.

Regarding Irgun being absorbed into the IDF, this was after an agreement was signed that had a number of clauses in it including that Irgun had to cease independent arms acquisition.

So, I don't see the big deal.

Also, what in the world do you mean that if sacrifice is necessary it means the country itself isn't worth having? Does that mean every country that has had to sacrifice in one way or the other is not worth having?

Why exactly do you feel that Israel and a Palestinian nation are somehow of no value just because sacrifice is necessary to have them?

-Elektrix

[Broud]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cleopatra

I was expecting the "Boys Choir of the Arabian Nights" to do something about Hisham's post.

They ignored me
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thanx for respect.
also i want to say that we can't wait your posts to replay it soon that because me and our friends from Syria as i think don't have alot of time to spend it in the forum , so please if we late to post a replay then don't be angry.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cleopatra

The easy way is to wear a jacket with explosives and to go meet Allah... the tough way is to give part of your everyday life for your country...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes we like to meet allah, and may that will be one of the ways
but for sure it isn't the best way for us, do u know why:
because as every body in this world we don't like to die that's for us and for our brothers and familys so we don't like to cry when they die.

Also we don't like killing other people but we have no other thing to do pushing our miserable life for our brothers in Plastine(( Israel )) in this time

will

got respect to ur Minds

The Broud

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


Since when do you have a problem finding dirt on Israel your only problem is that your main source the Arab media is being questioned!

I don't have an issue with the 'evils' of the arab world, I can find them presented to me from many sources. The issue I have is Israel presenting itself as 'holier than thou', when it's actions present quite a different image. Israel could teach the Arabs a thing or two about PR, but that is not what I am interested in.

I find it interesting that one area I think Muslims could improve is in women's rights. However, conservative westerners love to put down the women's rights movement, (including all those conservative women who would have stayed at home in the olden days).

[CapelDodger]

From Elektrix:
Also, what in the world do you mean that if sacrifice is necessary it means the country itself isn't worth having?
I mean what I write, which isn't what you report. I wrote that I would question the value of having a country if it requires sacrifice. As it happens I'm not a nationalist and I doubt the value of any country, but that's a different issue. (The damage done to the Jewish people of the world by Zionism should also be added to the sacrifice of Israelis when coming to an estimate of the cost of this "country". And that would still leave out the sufferings of the Palestinians.)
If I get a moment I'll hit the books the check out the overlap between Irgun and Likud; I'll probably cheat and include the Stern Gang.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Broud
Also we don't like killing other people but we have no other thing to do pushing our miserable life for our brothers in Plastine(( Israel )) in this time I don't like killing people but I don't have anything else to do? So, killing is a way to stop boredom?

A clear case can be made that the killing perpetuates the violence. Perhaps it is time to try something else for awhile and give the killing a rest.

All I'm saying is give peace a chance --John Lennon

[hisham]

Originally posted by RandFan
Perhaps it is time to try something else for awhile and give the killing a rest.

I agree with you that it is time to try something else, but Sharon don't agree with you:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/292807.html

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
from Cleopatra:

I don't see sacrifice as a positive thing. If that's the cost of creating a "country" I'd question the value of having the country.

And by the way, Cleopatra, I say "damn their impudence".

(Who the hell are the "Boys Choir of the Arabian Nights"? Presumably not a rap-band ...)

The pleasure to see you back CapelDodger, enables me to make an exception and come back to the thread to reply to you, just to you.

It's easy to say this CD, when you live on an island and nothing yours has ever been questioned... things for us who were born to other places that they were questioned are a bit different.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
From Elektrix:

I mean what I write, which isn't what you report. I wrote that I would question the value of having a country if it requires sacrifice. As it happens I'm not a nationalist and I doubt the value of any country, but that's a different issue. (The damage done to the Jewish people of the world by Zionism should also be added to the sacrifice of Israelis when coming to an estimate of the cost of this "country". And that would still leave out the sufferings of the Palestinians.)
If I get a moment I'll hit the books the check out the overlap between Irgun and Likud; I'll probably cheat and include the Stern Gang.

I'm sorry for misinterpreting you, but it does sound like when you said you would question the value of having a country if it requires having sacrifice. What about what I reported was incorrect in that case? It would seem that by questioning whether the country is worth having you think it doesn't have any value (otherwise the value it had would be the answer to the question of whether its worth having, including whatever sacrifice is necessary).

What damage has been done to the Jewish people of the world exactly specifically because of Zionism?

As I said above, there is no overlap between Irgun and Likud. Some members of the dissolved Irgun formed another group and later that group was part of a larger political body which was formed as Likud.

-Elektrix

[CapelDodger]

A hasty response, as I've just been called in to make up the numbers in a pub-quiz team, and I doubt I'll be up to typing when I get back.

Elektrix: Menachem Begin became leader of the Irgun in 1944, subsequently leader of Herut and later a well-known leader of Likud and elected Prime Minister. That counts as an overlap in my book. The "old comrades" culture at Likud, and the general cult of Irgun, is hardly a secret. If you would accept that Herut was "dominant", not "prominent", in the formation of Likud we could reasonably leave it there.
Questioning the value of something doesn't automatically mean you reach the answer "no". My point is that sacrifices shouldn't be expected in life, and the need for them in a situation, especially one that persists, is a strong indication that something is fundamentally wrong.
(Also sacrifice doesn't of itself add any justification to a cause.)

Cleopatra:
It's easy to say this CD, when you live on an island and nothing yours has ever been questioned... things for us who were born to other places that they were questioned are a bit different.

There's a lot to be said for living in the west of an island off the western coast of the western continent of Eurasia. You're not on anyone's route to anywhere. It's the reverse of being Polish. That said ...
I was born in the '50s and lived my first years in central Cardiff, which, as an important port, took a beating in the war. Bomb-sites were a normal part of life, and one of the earliest images I remember is of a tenement end-wall with doors and fireplaces high up on the walls, which still had wallpaper on them. It was a common sight; the walls were usually propped up with timbers. There were far too few houses to demolish the whole block. As a kid, of course, such things are just accepted until that point when you realise that it's very, very strange. And of course I knew it was all about the war; the war was only ten years past, if was all around, not dominating but just there. So I've never been unaware of what war is and how it can happen to ordinary old you, right out of the blue.
A little inarticulate, but sadly I'm rushed.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
A hasty response, as I've just been called in to make up the numbers in a pub-quiz team, and I doubt I'll be up to typing when I get back.

Elektrix: Menachem Begin became leader of the Irgun in 1944, subsequently leader of Herut and later a well-known leader of Likud and elected Prime Minister. That counts as an overlap in my book. The "old comrades" culture at Likud, and the general cult of Irgun, is hardly a secret. If you would accept that Herut was "dominant", not "prominent", in the formation of Likud we could reasonably leave it there.
Questioning the value of something doesn't automatically mean you reach the answer "no". My point is that sacrifices shouldn't be expected in life, and the need for them in a situation, especially one that persists, is a strong indication that something is fundamentally wrong.
(Also sacrifice doesn't of itself add any justification to a cause.)


I guess I can accept "overlap" in that sense.... my main objection honestly was to you saying that Likud was simply the political wing of Irgun.... so yes, there's clearly some overlap from some members of Irgun, but I think it simplifies things too much to just say Likud is the political wing of Irgun, or what once was the political wing of Irgun.

Anyway, at least I think it's cleared up.

Regarding whether sacrifices should ever be necessary, and if the need for sacrifice means something is fundamentally wrong... I don't know about that.

I can think of a lot of situations in history where sacrifice was absolutely necessary for something to happen.... I don't think it means that the sacrifice or what was trying to be accomplished always had anything fundamentally wrong about it. I just don't follow the logic that says that anything that requires sacrifice means it isn't worth it. Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but you did just say that the need for sacrifices in a situation is a sign that something is fundamentally wrong..... but I think you could look at a lot of historical examples and see the sacrifices made by people to bring about change or to establish something was worthwhile.

No doubt, the sacrifice itself can be painful for everyone involved, especially for something that stretches through slavery. But it can still be worth it to fulfill a goal or a dream.

I don't think the fact that a lot of sacrifice has been necessary ever since Israel was founded is a direct indication that something is fundamentally wrong with the dream itself of Israel, just as I don't think the dream of a Palestinian state is fundamentally wrong either, when you look at all the sacrifice happening there too.

-Elektrix

[Broud]

Besm Allah Alrahman Alrahem
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by RandFan
Perhaps it is time to try something else for awhile and give the killing a rest.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you don't know we gave it a chance befor, That was in Madred Spain if you remember, Also Mr Yaser Arafat Went to Oslo twise But we didn't anything else more KILING More Misrable More Respectless.

If anyone of you Have other thing to do Please tell us and be sure that we will do it strongly as we can because believe us we hate to see more kiling, more bloode.

Got Respect For Your Minds

[CapelDodger]

Elektrix:
I don't think the fact that a lot of sacrifice has been necessary ever since Israel was founded is a direct indication that something is fundamentally wrong with the dream itself of Israel ...
There, obviously, we disagree. It's led to 80 years of turmoil, with no end in sight. "Dream" is a value-laden word; I'd suggest "fantasy" as an alternative. Comparisons with, say, Greek independance don't work; the Greek nation was formed in Greece, where the Greeks were. Israel was to be carved out as a state by people who weren't even there yet. And it was devised by Europeans and Americans, not the Jews of the long-standing communities there, who in the main were against it.

What damage has been done to the Jewish people of the world exactly specifically because of Zionism?
I was sloppy in my use of "Zionism". In the past I've used the more precise "nationalist Zionism", as distinct from the pre-existing Zionism that didn't call for sovereignty but simply advocated a return to the Holy Land. Nationalist Zionism has become the absolutely dominant form by being the most raucous, organised, ruthless and single-minded movement in the 20th century Middle East.
Obviously the damage includes the sacrifices previously mentioned. Generations of Israelis have given over a large part of their lives (if not life or limb) to fighting for the "dream". Without the nationalist-Zionist project that would not have been necessary. Even now people are leaving perfectly ordinary lives in the US and Europe to move into a war-zone - sometimes with young children - to "help defend the Zionist Homeland". Which they wouldn't be prompted to do if there was no such cause.

Another clear effect has been the damage done to ancient Jewish communities from Morocco to Tehran. Without themselves contributing very much in motivation or action to nationalist Zionism they were caught up in the effects, and often persuaded by a very hard-sell to move to Israel. Here they found that a) the streets weren't paved with gold, b) they eren't paved at all and c) they were expected to pave them. Many of them would have been better of at home.

Those are obvious examples, but there is also an argument to be made that nationalist Zionism contributed to the bizarre outbreak of anti-semitism in mid-20th century Germany. Certainly a strong part of the anti-semitic argument was that there was a trans-national Jewish organisation that all (or almost all) Jews owed allegiance to before the nations of their birth. The Zionist movement, and its achievement of the Balfour declaration of (in effect) a Jewish nation in particular, could be brought up as "evidence" of this. And Zionists promoted the idea themselves, since it gave them greater leverage in the corridors of power in Europe and the US. Even today it's not unusual to hear people speak of a US "Jewish vote" which can be delivered en bloc, and that that vote is delivered according to policies on Israel - in effect, that US Jews put the interests of Israel before the interests of the US. How dangerous is that? Yet you seldom hear this block-vote myth described as anti-semitic, when in fact it is.

And, of course, there's the insane Islamic anti-semitism that has grown up over the last 50 years or so, when Islam and Judaism co-existed for so long. That's undoubtedly going to lead to more damage in the future, to Moslems as well as Jews.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Elektrix:
Another clear effect has been the damage done to ancient Jewish communities from Morocco to Tehran. Without themselves contributing very much in motivation or action to nationalist Zionism they were caught up in the effects, and often persuaded by a very hard-sell to move to Israel. Here they found that a) the streets weren't paved with gold, b) they eren't paved at all and c) they were expected to pave them. Many of them would have been better of at home.


Hrmm, from what I've read, there were plenty of Jews that were forced to leave Morocco against their will. I can't see how all of that can be blamed on the existence of Israel. From reading about the treatment of Jews in Morocco up until fairly recently (where it seems like things are much better), I don't see why it would have been much better off if they had stayed in Morocco.

And about the ancient Jewish communities in Tehran.... you think the Jewish communities there were better off, despite all the persecution they faced (well before the founding of Israel)?

I think I understand what you're getting at, but I don't see how you can say that Israel's existence has done damage to the ancient Jewish societies there, or that they would have been better off there when you look at what Jewish people have faced in Iran and Morocco.

Perhaps you could clarify exactly why you think that they would be better off if Israel didn't exist and were subjected to what the remaining Jews in those countries faced.

-Elektrix

[Baker]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Elektrix:

There, obviously, we disagree. It's led to 80 years of turmoil, with no end in sight. "Dream" is a value-laden word; I'd suggest "fantasy" as an alternative. Comparisons with, say, Greek independance don't work; the Greek nation was formed in Greece, where the Greeks were. Israel was to be carved out as a state by people who weren't even there yet. And it was devised by Europeans and Americans, not the Jews of the long-standing communities there, who in the main were against it.


I was sloppy in my use of "Zionism". In the past I've used the more precise "nationalist Zionism", as distinct from the pre-existing Zionism that didn't call for sovereignty but simply advocated a return to the Holy Land. Nationalist Zionism has become the absolutely dominant form by being the most raucous, organised, ruthless and single-minded movement in the 20th century Middle East.
Obviously the damage includes the sacrifices previously mentioned. Generations of Israelis have given over a large part of their lives (if not life or limb) to fighting for the "dream". Without the nationalist-Zionist project that would not have been necessary. Even now people are leaving perfectly ordinary lives in the US and Europe to move into a war-zone - sometimes with young children - to "help defend the Zionist Homeland". Which they wouldn't be prompted to do if there was no such cause.

Another clear effect has been the damage done to ancient Jewish communities from Morocco to Tehran. Without themselves contributing very much in motivation or action to nationalist Zionism they were caught up in the effects, and often persuaded by a very hard-sell to move to Israel. Here they found that a) the streets weren't paved with gold, b) they eren't paved at all and c) they were expected to pave them. Many of them would have been better of at home.

Those are obvious examples, but there is also an argument to be made that nationalist Zionism contributed to the bizarre outbreak of anti-semitism in mid-20th century Germany. Certainly a strong part of the anti-semitic argument was that there was a trans-national Jewish organisation that all (or almost all) Jews owed allegiance to before the nations of their birth. The Zionist movement, and its achievement of the Balfour declaration of (in effect) a Jewish nation in particular, could be brought up as "evidence" of this. And Zionists promoted the idea themselves, since it gave them greater leverage in the corridors of power in Europe and the US. Even today it's not unusual to hear people speak of a US "Jewish vote" which can be delivered en bloc, and that that vote is delivered according to policies on Israel - in effect, that US Jews put the interests of Israel before the interests of the US. How dangerous is that? Yet you seldom hear this block-vote myth described as anti-semitic, when in fact it is.

And, of course, there's the insane Islamic anti-semitism that has grown up over the last 50 years or so, when Islam and Judaism co-existed for so long. That's undoubtedly going to lead to more damage in the future, to Moslems as well as Jews.


I see you also; take the Arab Islam view of history let me introduce a good source on the subject.



The Jews took no one's land
By Joseph Farrah
WoridNet Daily
November 19, 2(102


As the most visible Arab-American critic of Yasser Arafat and the phony "Palestinian" agenda, I get. a lot of hate mail .-I've even received more than my share of death threats. Most of those who attack me at least those who bother to get beyond the four-letter words and insults say I just don't understand or have sympathy for these poor Arabs who were displaced, chased out of their homes and. turned into refugees by the Israelis.

Let me state this plainly and clearly: The Jews in Israel took no- one's land.

When. Mark Twain visited. the Holy Land in the 19th century, he. was greatly disappointed. He didn't see any people. He referred to it as a vast wasteland. The land we now know as Israel was practically deserted. By the beginning of the 20th century, that began to change. Jews from all over the world began to return to. their ancestral homeland - the Promised Land Moses and Joshua had conquered millennia earlier, Christians and Jews believe, on the direct orders of God. That's not to say there wasn't always a strong Jewish presence in the land -particularly in and. around Jerusalem.. In 1854, according. to a report in the New York Tribune, Jews constituted two-thirds of the population of that holy city. The source for that statistic? A journalist on assignment in the Middle East that year for the Tribune. His name was Karl Marx. Yes, that Karl Marx.

A travel guide to Palestine and Syria, published in 1906 by Karl Baedeker, illustrates the fact that, even when the Islamic Ottoman Empire ruled the region, the Muslim population in Jerusalem was minimal. The. book. estimates the total popu1ation of the. city at 60, 00(1,. of whom. 7,0(10 were Muslims, 13,000 were Christians and 40,000 were Jews. "The number of Jews has greatly risen in the last few decades, in spite of the fact that they are forbidden to immigrate or to possess landed property,." the book. states. Even though the Jews were persecuted, still they came to Jerusalem and represented the overwhelming majority of the population as early as 1906. And even though Muslims today claim Jerusalem as the third holiest site in Islam, when the city was under Islamic rule, they bad little interest in it.


As the Jews came, drained the swamps and made the deserts bloom, something interesting began to happen. Arabs followed. I don't blame theta. They had. good reason to come. They came for jobs. They came for prosperity. They came for freedom. And they came in large numbers.

Winston Churchill observed in 1939: "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population." Then came 1948 and the great partition. The United Nations proposed the creation of two states in the region - one Jewish, one Arab. The Jews accepted it gratefully. The Arabs rejected it with a vengeance and declared war.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27338

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Baker
I see you also; take the Arab Islam view of history let me introduce a good source on the subject. Baker,

Thanks for the info and link. I'm going to buy the book.

This is the modern real history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. At no time did the Jews uproot Arab families from their homes. When there were title deeds to be purchased, they bought them at inflated prices. When there were not, they worked the land so they could have a place to live without the persecution they faced throughout the world.

It's a great big lie that the Israelis displaced anyone – one of a series of lies and myths that have the world on the verge of committing yet another great injustice to the Jews. Author Mitchell G. Bard, a foreign policy analysts and expert on U.S.-Middle East policy, dispels scores of myths covering several different historical eras, including:

Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict (book) (http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=299)


"Palestine was always an Arab country."
"The Zionists could have chosen another country besides Palestine."
"Israel usurped all of Palestine in 1948."
"The Jews started the first war with the Arabs."
"Israel has been an expansionist state since its creation."
"Israel illegally annexed the Golan Heights in 1981."
"The Palestinians have been denied a voice at the U.N."
"1 million Palestinians were expelled by Israel from 1947-49."

[RandFan]

Originally posted by RandFan
Perhaps it is time to try something else for awhile and give the killing a rest.

Originally posted by Broud
If you don't know we gave it a chance befor, That was in Madred Spain if you remember, Also Mr Yaser Arafat Went to Oslo twise But we didn't anything else more KILING More Misrable More Respectless. RandFan the peacenik. You know, I'm going to have to reconsider buying the 50cal BMG :D.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger


There, obviously, we disagree. It's led to 80 years of turmoil, with no end in sight. "Dream" is a value-laden word; I'd suggest "fantasy" as an alternative. Comparisons with, say, Greek independance don't work; the Greek nation was formed in Greece, where the Greeks were. Israel was to be carved out as a state by people who weren't even there yet. And it was devised by Europeans and Americans, not the Jews of the long-standing communities there, who in the main were against it.

Capel Dodger, as we have previously discussed ( I don't remember if it was in this thread or to another one-I have lost track with all these replies!) National States, are the artificial creation, the product of a some specific needs in a certain historical moment.

So, believe me, when the modern Greek state was created ,it was as homogenous as Israel. What kept together the Greeks of the 19th ce. was the religion. Nothing else. Of course the great advantage , was the continuous presence of greek speaking population ( hmmm although here, some people might argue this) for thousands of years.

I insist on this because I find it very unfair to criticize Israel about THE WAY it was created. It was created the same way most Balkan and European countries did. With population transfers, ethnic clearings etc etc etc. Once the decision was made, the used the "good" old European method of creating countries out of nowhere...


Obviously the damage includes the sacrifices previously mentioned. Generations of Israelis have given over a large part of their lives (if not life or limb) to fighting for the "dream". Without the nationalist-Zionist project that would not have been necessary. Even now people are leaving perfectly ordinary lives in the US and Europe to move into a war-zone - sometimes with young children - to "help defend the Zionist Homeland". Which they wouldn't be prompted to do if there was no such cause.

It was not a matter of choice. The WWII, left Jews in a situation that I don't wish to anyone to experience. As you know, Sefardic Jews weren't in good terms with the Askenazim and they never really embraced the idea of National Zionism.

In 19th ce. when this nationalistic fever was high and they FELT OBLIGED to answer to the question " what country they wanted", the numerous Jews of Greeks tried to persuade the Ottomans to let them establish independant cities where they lived.They were interested in Salonika and they didn't even want to discuss to go to the Middle East.

After the WWII , the 97% of the community was exctinct, those who returned to Greece found their properties occupied by the christians. Not only that, they were asked to " apologize" why they were alive, it was clear to them that they were unwelcomed. So, they left for Israel.

I have mentioned it before. Quiting Europe was the most painfull thing those people experienced during their History. Those people, Capel Dodger , they were not Moroccans or Americans... they were europeans who have contributed to the formation of our european background. I am sure you understand the BIG difference.


those are obvious examples, but there is also an argument to be made that nationalist Zionism contributed to the bizarre outbreak of anti-semitism in mid-20th century Germany.

I am sorry but I find this argument outrageous!!

If you have a look at the History of Antisemitism you will realize that when societies were facing serious financial problems they used the easy targets to distract interest, the Jews. What Jews were expected to do. Live quietly their lives and barely breath? No, I am sorry. People have the right to get together into groups and discuss ideas about their future. This is not an enough reason to cremate people alive.

[Baker]

Originally posted by RandFan
Baker,

Thanks for the info and link. I'm going to buy the book.

Author Mitchell G. Bard, a foreign policy analysts and expert on U.S.-Middle East policy, dispels scores of myths covering several different historical eras, including:

Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict (book) (http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=299)


"Palestine was always an Arab country."
"The Zionists could have chosen another country besides Palestine."
"Israel usurped all of Palestine in 1948."
"The Jews started the first war with the Arabs."
"Israel has been an expansionist state since its creation."
"Israel illegally annexed the Golan Heights in 1981."
"The Palestinians have been denied a voice at the U.N."
"1 million Palestinians were expelled by Israel from 1947-49."



Thanks RandFan I wish more people would look into the real history of the area instead of just going by the myth’s created by the Arabs.
All have to purchase Mitchell G. Bard’s book also.

[Cleopatra]

In my opinion, my dear Baker, is that we don't really need to resort to this kind of info.

After all... we are not Arabs...

[Baker]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
In my opinion, my dear Baker, is that we don't really need to resort to this kind of info.

After all... we are not Arabs...

Sorry I don’t understand what you are trying to say here.

[CapelDodger]

Cleopatra:
So, believe me, when the modern Greek state was created ,it was as homogenous as Israel. What kept together the Greeks of the 19th ce. was the religion. Nothing else. Of course the great advantage , was the continuous presence of greek speaking population ( hmmm although here, some people might argue this) for thousands of years.

I can't accept that the independence of Greece or the other Balkan nations can be compared to the creation of Israel. All these nations were formed under the 19th CE philosophy of nationalism, perfected mostly in Germany, which defined the nation by three criteria: a definable ethnic group, a shared culture and a definable geographical location. The nationalist Zionist project tried to create that third element from scratch. If nothing else, Greeks were the overwhelming majority in Greece, and Greeks were defined by much more than religion - language, a long history, costume, personal names and so on. There may have been some questions about Slavs and Albanians on the fringes, but there was no large population in place that needed to be thrown out so that the "Greek nature" of the State was ensured.

I insist on this because I find it very unfair to criticize Israel about THE WAY it was created. It was created the same way most Balkan and European countries did. With population transfers, ethnic clearings etc etc etc. Once the decision was made, the used the "good" old European method of creating countries out of nowhere...

Since all those things were wrong, why was not the creation of Israel just as wrong? "He did it too" is no way to approach these things. And as to criticising Israel, you've never heard my tirades against the Serbs or the Pashtun (amongst others; I'm no great fan of the human race). Remember, I see no good in any nationalism. I'm a World Government man.

It was not a matter of choice. The WWII, left Jews in a situation that I don't wish to anyone to experience. As you know, Sefardic Jews weren't in good terms with the Askenazim and they never really embraced the idea of National Zionism.

It is a matter of choice. They don't have to go. They are not under threat. Israel is one of the most dangerous places in the world to be. It hasn't made the world safer for Jews, any more than the creation of Pakistan made the world safer for Indian Muslims. I fail to see how it ever could have. Quite the opposite seems to have been the result - as a lot of people predicted a century ago. The Sephardic Jews, as you mention, didn't see the need - but they were caught up in the reaction.

they were not Moroccans or Americans... they were europeans who have contributed to the formation of our european background. I am sure you understand the BIG difference.

No, I don't understand. People are people. What your relatives suffered was terrible, as were the fates of millions of displaced people during that conflagration. People took their houses and didn't want to give them back, which is how people are, especially at a time of such disruption. "I'm looking after me and mine." Sudetan Germans experienced much the same, more recently Bosnians, Serbs and Croats, and, of course, Palestinians.

I am sorry but I find this argument outrageous!!

I'm not surprised. It's a common reaction, but what happened in the '30s and 40's can't make previous history taboo territory. The story that Hitler sold - and believed - was that the Jews of Germany, acting under orders from a trans-national Jewish cabal, betrayed their country to the allies in exchange for the Balfour Declaration and a Jewish State, from which their evil machinations would ... and so on. It didn't actually sell that well - Hitler never got a majority vote, and not all his support was anti-semitic - but it was popular with the old army that had still been in the field, undefeated, at the surrender. Germany collapsed on the Home Front, where the blockade and army demands on manpower had left the people starving, fields unfarmed and factories idle. But Russia had just been defeated; why wasn't there food from the Ukraine? Of course, Russia was in chaos, Poland was devastated and there was no money or transport. But another story was more popular.
During the war, Chaim Weizman had the ear of Balfour in London. Weizman persuaded Balfour that "The Jews" controlled the grain trade of Russia, and that he could have them deny grain to Germany. Otherwise, at least by implication, the Germans would get the Russian grain and a new lease of life. He claimed that this could be done in exchange for a Jewish Homeland in (Turkish-occupied) Palestine - the Declaration. Balfour accepted this, as did most of his cabinet, including Lloyd George. Lloyd George met Hitler in the 1930's; we can all be sure of one subject of conversation. This would have been hard proof to the Nazis - the word of someone right there at the time, who'd been told the word by Weizman. Who's to say what the effect was?

If you have a look at the History of Antisemitism you will realize that when societies were facing serious financial problems they used the easy targets to distract interest, the Jews. What Jews were expected to do. Live quietly their lives and barely breath? No, I am sorry. People have the right to get together into groups and discuss ideas about their future. This is not an enough reason to cremate people alive.

Unkind. You know I don't try to excuse such things, but I do try to understand them. It's not always the Jews who are turned on - over here it's asylum-seekers at the moment. Scapegoating is a common way that people behave. Nationalist Zionism didn't save the Jews of Salonika. It hasn't contributed to the safety of American, British or Greek Jews. All it has done is lead to decades of warfare with no end in sight. And your point is rather euro-centric - it's usually been the Christians who've been the problem.

[CapelDodger]

Just to wipe some crap off the windshield:

From Baker:
I see you also; take the Arab Islam view of history let me introduce a good source on the subject.

I take an infomed view. Let's consider what impresses you. Mark Twain, writer of light fiction, visits the Holy Land to check out the Biblical sites of his Old Testament down-home religion. He finds the Jordan Valley very different from the Mississipi. He fails to take any interest in the local Arabs since his Holy Guidebook concentrates on Jewish matters. Why he would be expected to recognise an arid, pastoral landscape as anything other than wasteland is an open question. Are you sure he could tell an olive tree from scrub? Do you have any reason for thinking so?

Then the blank statement that Palestine was practically empty, when the reports and memoirs of the military campaigns of 1917 tell a completely different story - is that the wrong kind of history? Not written to a purpose? Then we get the travel-guide; suddenly we've jumped from the population of Palestine to the population of Jerusalem - did you notice that? Very clumsy, I thought. A majority of the Jews of Palestine lived in Jerusalem, where they were regularly described by travellers and administrators as 50% of the population. If there were barely any Moslems in Jerusalem there were barely any Jews. Of course, there were plenty of both.

Then we get "the incomers". You see this quite often. Serbs will tell you that the Kosovars only arrived after the 1920's. The Boers will tell you there were no blacks in South Africa when they got there. Winston Churchill as your source? A portly Anglo-American in London where he's getting schmoozed by Weizman - what do you think his source was? And what do you think it's worth as evidence?
Had this influx (from where?) actually occurred, the clever trick they managed was bringing those well-established olive-trees with them. And knocking up a city the size of Jaffa between, what, 1914 and 1917? Why give this kind of stuff any credulity? And if this isn't the best they've got, why do they use it?

A word to the wise: when someone starts off his piece pointing out how brave he is to go against the entrenched interests that confront him, handle it with gloves on.

[davefoc]

This thread contains the most well written and informative arguments on the Palestinian/Israel disputes that I have read. Thank you to both groups for the information and ideas.

Unfortunately, I suspect, most of the interested parties to these issues in the world have never seen the arguments of the other side put forth so well. Perhaps if they had, the extreme polarization that exists on these issues between different groups could be reduced and the chances for a peaceful settlement would be increased.

Right now, it seems doubtful that the two groups will ever achieve agreement on the background issues involving the conflict. But, even given that, on a go forward basis can the two groups come to a consensus that will allow for the peaceful existence and perhaps cooperation of the Palestinians and the Israelis in the future?

Is there even a consensus in this forum between the two sides about the conditions that would allow for this?

Even as I write this it seems that both Sharon and the suicide bombers are conspiring to prevent the possibility of a peaceful solution. It appears that, at least from the viewpoint of somebody more or less in the middle on these issues, that the extremists on both sides are working together to ensure the continuation of the conflict.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Just to wipe some crap off the windshield:

From Baker:


I take an infomed view. Let's consider what impresses you.
Had this influx (from where?) actually occurred, the clever trick they managed was bringing those well-established olive-trees with them. And knocking up a city the size of Jaffa between, what, 1914 and 1917? Why give this kind of stuff any credulity? And if this isn't the best they've got, why do they use it?

A word to the wise: when someone starts off his piece pointing out how brave he is to go against the entrenched interests that confront him, handle it with gloves on.

Damn you Capel Dodger, I just had to scrap a perfectly good post, bristling with insight and irony because you have done a better hatchet job.:(

I would just like to add that this entry in!the Jewish Encyclopedia (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp) ( look for agricultural colonies in Palestine) makes no claim that significant numbers of Jews were living in Palestine until colonisation began towards the end of the 19th century.

It states......

"
Since the dispersion of the Jews from their native land, many efforts have been made to induce them to return to Palestine and engage in agriculture. Probably the first of these to lead to any practical result occurred in the nineteenth century; though in the travels of Benjamin of Tudela, and of Peta?yah of Ratisbon, there are records of small settlements of Jews in the Holy Land dating as far back as 1170.

About 1860, several orthodox rabbis, among whom were Hirsch Kalischer and Elijah Gutmacher, developed a plan for the colonization of Palestine with Russian and Rumanian Jews; and this plan was soon after supported by the Maskilim (Progressists). The latter induced the Alliance Israélite Universelle, of Paris, to interest themselves in the matter, notwithstanding the circumstance that many members of the Alliance doubted the adaptability of the Jews to agricultural work.
...........
The year 1882 witnessed the foundation of the first of the Russian-Jewish Agricultural
Colonies in Palestine. This community, which was called Rishon le-Zion......."

By the way that reference to Mark Twain often turns up. There doesn't seem much else for them to grasp at. Apparently he was a member of a group of wealthy tourists on a package tour organised by Thomas Cook's company. I can just imagine them doing a conga on the walls of Jerusalem singing "Viva Espania" !the Jewish Encyclopedia (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp)

[Baker]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
Just to wipe some crap off the windshield:

Until fairly recently (the 2oth Century) Muslims were at least as tolerant if not more so than much of Western culture. Remember, it was the Ottoman sultans who invited the Jews chased out of Europe to Constantinople where they lived in relative I take an infomed view. Let's consider what impresses you. Mark Twain, writer of light fiction, visits the Holy Land to check out the Biblical sites of his Old Testament down-home religion. He finds the Jordan Valley very different from the Mississipi. He fails to take any interest in the local Arabs since his Holy Guidebook concentrates on Jewish matters. Why he would be expected to recognise an arid, pastoral landscape as anything other than wasteland is an open question. Are you sure he could tell an olive tree from scrub? Do you have any reason for thinking so?

I don't see how any of this contradicts the information I gave besides your own opinion of what you want us to think Mark Twain saw.


Then the blank statement that Palestine was practically empty, when the reports and memoirs of the military campaigns of 1917 tell a completely different story - is that the wrong kind of history? Not written to a purpose? Then we get the travel-guide; suddenly we've jumped from the population of Palestine to the population of Jerusalem - did you notice that? Very clumsy, I thought. A majority of the Jews of Palestine lived in Jerusalem, where they were regularly described by travellers and administrators as 50% of the population. If there were barely any Moslems in Jerusalem there were barely any Jews. Of course, there were plenty of both.


Well again we are given your own personal view do can you provide any source to your claims.
From the article:
As the Jews came, drained the swamps and made the deserts bloom, something interesting began to happen. Arabs followed. I don't blame them. They had good reason to come. They came for jobs. They came for prosperity. They came for freedom. And they came in large numbers.

Winston Churchill observed in 1939: "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population."
Can you provide any evidence that the above quote is wrong?



Then we get "the incomers". You see this quite often. Serbs will tell you that the Kosovars only arrived after the 1920's. The Boers will tell you there were no blacks in South Africa when they got there. Winston Churchill as your source? A portly Anglo-American in London where he's getting schmoozed by Weizman - what do you think his source was? And what do you think it's worth as evidence?
Had this influx (from where?) actually occurred, the clever trick they managed was bringing those well-established olive-trees with them. And knocking up a city the size of Jaffa between, what, 1914 and 1917? Why give this kind of stuff any credulity? And if this isn't the best they've got, why do they use it?

A word to the wise: when someone starts off his piece pointing out how brave he is to go against the entrenched interests that confront him, handle it with gloves on.


But you are willing to take the Arab side of the argument and their dictatorship governments don't forget they tried to invade Israel three times to wipe them out then created the POL to do the job they couldn't do with military might.

[CapelDodger]

I don't see how any of this contradicts the information I gave besides your own opinion of what you want us to think Mark Twain saw.

Your point being? (Apart from inarticulate.) Anybody can form their opinion of the relevance of Mark Twain's comments; you clearly think his opinion is important, I don't. I indicate why. (You also quote me as saying things I don't, but I can see that's an editing problem.) I don't have "... an opinion of ..." etc, I don't give a toss what you think. Nor do I give a toss about what Mark Twain thought of the Jordan Valley, and I don't see why anybody would - except those that see it as useful in spreading their lies.

But you are willing to take the Arab side of the argument and their dictatorship governments don't forget they tried to invade Israel three times to wipe them out then created the POL to do the job they couldn't do with military might.

Just what are you talking about? On second thoughts, don't answer that, I really don't care.

Can you provide any evidence that the above quote is wrong?

Can you provide any evidence that it is correct? Do you even care, given that it backs up the fantasy that you wish to believe in? Why is Winston Churchill regarded as an authority? I gave one very good reason why his opnion should be dismissed - the fact that he was exposed to a mendacious shyster by the name of Chaim Weitzman, who didn't care what lies he told to further his beloved nationalist Zionist cause.
Consider the problem Weitzman had when Empire forces entered Palestine. He'd been describing Palestine as a "Land without a people", but now the troops have arrived there and found it full of Johnny Arab. How to respond when this is put to him? "They all turned up recently." What transparent bollocks. But believe it if you want, who cares. What I care about is people being misled by propagandists like Joseph Farrah because they lack real information and fail to see what's relevant.

[CapelDodger]

Nikk:
Thanks for the comments, and for the link to the Jewish Encyclopedia - the whole thing online! One hell of a resource.

[Cleopatra]

Another impressive post coming from you Capel Dodger ...

Before replying to you, allow me, please, to notice something I have pointed to you before but remained unanswered...

The way you keep reminding us that you, personally, are against Nationalism in general , although you take part in a the details of a discussion that is about the creation of a national state, reminds me of those discussions in this very forum, where the one, tries to persuade the other on the existence of God...

Or worse, it is as if we are playing chess and you expect us to let you use dices... My chess trainer would tell you that this is might seem convenient but it's dangerous on the long run for the reasons explained in this very thread...

So, Let's play chess and if you insist, you can keep your dices...:)

All these nations were formed under the 19th CE philosophy of nationalism, perfected mostly in Germany, which defined the nation by three criteria: a definable ethnic group, a shared culture and a definable geographical location. If nothing else, Greeks were the overwhelming majority in Greece, but there was no large population in place that needed to be thrown out so that the "Greek nature" of the State was ensured.

Obviously you are refering to the tiny geographical part of Greece, some thousands of Sq.kil. long, where the first Greek State was established and it occupied the 1/4 of todays country... Because... if you are talking about the geographical area of modern Greece then you are wrong.

The large areas of Macedonia, Epirus, Thraca. Crete and the Islands... had to be persuaded to become Greek by the typical european methods. Ethnic cleanings, exhanges of populations, forced hellenization... And if Greece isn't the most striking example, I remind you that Bulgaria didn't exist even as a name at the beginning of the 20th centrury.

The fact that Israel was created the same way doesn't excuse certain things, you are right about this, I agree, what I find amusing though, especially when it comes to old Europeans, is to show astonishment to the way Israel was created because there was no other way Capel Dodger.

On a different tone... Nationalism as an idea might have been created in Germany but it had its deep roots in the French Intelligentia, I am terribly sorry... those French! Everywhere! And Nationalism was the vehicle that major financial factors used in order to achieve their goal: the maximun of profit from the new economical conditions that were dawning.

I have said it before, I repeat it now. Nationalism along with Religions are the most brilliant invention of Western Culture!

Let me proceed to the most interesting part of your post and the famous Balfour Declaration...

Was it for the Russian wheat or for thanking Weitzmann for inventing acetone for the allies... was it that Loyd George and Balfour were avid readers of the Bible or it was just a reflex reaction to the October Revolution ( according to another popular conspiracy theory the Jews were hiding behind this one too ...)

I am not very smart CD, that's why I make simple thoughts, so regarding the Balfour Declaration ,I will ignore the dirt listed above and I will take as an option that the Brits thought that a Jewish Palestine would keep the road to India open...

The example of Salonika in Greece is striking and I am sorry ( too) to admit that justified completely the theory of National Zionism.

Long before the War, the economical scenary of the World was changing rapidly. Jews were merchants mostly and it was clear to them that if they wanted to be part of the game, they should be organised in a national state. These were the rules and Jews weren't those who made them...So, they didn't have much of a choice.

Jews of Salonika, REFUSED to leave the city because they were living in a country where- since the day of their arrival -none ever harmed them. Unfortunately ,even this tolerant country failed to protect them and the tragic events justified the zionists. There was a saying in Salonika before the War : " Palestine is for the desperate" ... I think that this says it all.

After the War and with a country on the edge of a civil war and the economy destroyed the took they only choice they really had:To embark for Palestine... justifying the old sefardic saying:

Palestine was for the desperate,indeed...

edited to make my English-grammatically speaking-less insulting...

[max]

Bravo Cleopatra, my thoughts exactly but since my stroke I am unable to vocalise my feelings so articulately
Long live Israel and I hope peace for it and for the two planned states

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Baker


I don't see how any of this contradicts the information I gave besides your own opinion of what you want us to think Mark Twain saw.

[B]


Well again we are given your own personal view do can you provide any source to your claims.
From the article:
As the Jews came, drained the swamps and made the deserts bloom, something interesting began to happen. Arabs followed. I don't blame them. They had good reason to come. They came for jobs. They came for prosperity. They came for freedom. And they came in large numbers.

Winston Churchill observed in 1939: "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population."
Can you provide any evidence that the above quote is wrong?


[B]


But you are willing to take the Arab side of the argument and their dictatorship governments don't forget they tried to invade Israel three times to wipe them out then created the POL to do the job they couldn't do with military might.

I will provide some stats and reports tomorrow on the subject of population, agricultural production etc. If Capel Dodger does not get there first!

Note that I have already established in my post that there was only a small Jewish presence in Palestine prior to the beginnings of colonisation.

I'll let you have a few more quotes from Mark Twain's book as well.

[Cleopatra]

Of course we are dying to read your statistics because you see, we can't search google by ourselves, but don't you have a historical thought of your own ,the way Capel Dodger has?

It will be interesting to know what do you think based on your readings or studies.

[DanishDynamite]

I have a perhaps naive question for those who take an interest in the Palestine-Israel problem:

What exactly is the fundamental problem which hinders a resolution?

Is it the question of who gets to have Jerusalem?

[Cleopatra]

Danish Dynamite.

Your question is not naive. I guess that when you live thousands of kilometres away from Middle East, you find all this bloodshed absurd.

Bloodshed is always absurd, I agree but you can't expect people ( of both sides) that they have invested their lives in a specific place, to be able to answer a simple question in a simple manner.

Sometimes simplicity might lead to over-simplification.

Since you said you don't want much History ( although I will be delighted to talk about the Historical perspective of the issue) I will give you an account on what each side wants, in brief.

*The Palestinian side, wants above all a country.They want Israel to withdrawl to the -before the 1967 border line. In simple words they want to establish their country in todays occupied territories.

Before the 1967 War those territories belonged to Jordan and Egypt. Palestinians think that it's time for them to have those territories to establish their state.

*They think that Jerusalem must be the capital of their future country.

*They want the return of the before 1948 refugees.

Israelis from their part discuss everything but the real burning issues are Jerusalem ( for it's their Holly City) and the issue of the refugees.
Surpising though might sound, the settlements is not Israel's real issue with Palestinians.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:Your question is not naive. I guess that when you live thousands of kilometres away from Middle East, you find all this bloodshed absurd. Thanks for responding seriously.
Bloodshed is always absurd, I agree but you can't expect people ( of both sides) that they have invested their lives in a specific place, to be able to answer a simple question in a simple manner.Why not? I just asked what seperates the parties in regard to their requirements for a resolution. As you demonstrate in your post, you are able to answer this question. :)
*The Palestinian side, wants above all a country.They want Israel to withdrawl to the -before the 1967 border line. In simple words they want to establish their country in todays occupied territories.

Before the 1967 War those territories belonged to Jordan and Egypt. Palestinians think that it's time for them to have those territories to establish their state. OK. Is this a problem for the Israelies?
*They think that Jerusalem must be the capital of their future country.AHAAAH!
*They want the return of the before 1948 refugees. A return of refugees to where? Israel? Palestine? Why is this return a problem?
Israelis from their part discuss everything but the real burning issues are Jerusalem ( for it's their Holly City) and the issue of the refugees.Thank you. This is what I thought (except for the refugee part).

[DanishDynamite]

So, given that the core problem in resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict is the determination of who controls Jerusalem, which compromises have been aired?

How about a solution a la Washington DC? That is, an area outside any one state's control. Perhaps a joint guardianship? Perhaps half the city is under "religious" control of one part, and the other half is under "religious" control of the other.

[renata]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Cleopatra: Thanks for responding seriously.
Why not? I just asked what seperates the parties in regard to their requirements for a resolution. As you demonstrate in your post, you are able to answer this question. :)
OK. Is this a problem for the Israelies?
AHAAAH!
A return of refugees to where? Israel? Palestine? Why is this return a problem?
Thank you. This is what I thought (except for the refugee part).

First of all, DD, welcome to this thread. I am glad to see the discussion continue here. I am sure I do not have to point that out, but we have had some lapses. Please read my first post in this thread- this thread should contain no personal attacks whatsoever, and attempt to educate all parties.

Now that is out of the way, the refugee question. There are many Arabs who fled land that is now Israel during the 1948 war. There are many reasons- some villages were brutally attacked by Israelis and they fled out of fear, some fled because Arab neighbord promised a quick end to the war, and they wanted to be out of the way. Estimates vary from 300,000-1,000,000. At the same time, of course, Jews had to flee Arab countries in large lands.

I believe there are camps to this day in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and West Bank. When Egypt had control of Gaza, they refused refugee's entry into Egypt, I believe Jordan also placed restrictions on refugees living in teh West Bank, which they controlled until 1967. Current estimates are that there are about 4 million refugees. The demand was that all those refugees be resettled within Israel proper. Unfortunately, as population of Israel is 6 million, that would invite a demographic catastrophe. Arab countries kept these poor people in squalid conditions for half century partially to keep the open sore. Israel resettled hundreds of thousands of reguees from Arabs countries, as well as Ethiopia and Eastern Europe, but it was done gradually.

Does that answer some of your questions?

[renata]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
So, given that the core problem in resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict is the determination of who controls Jerusalem, which compromises have been aired?

How about a solution a la Washington DC? That is, an area outside any one state's control. Perhaps a joint guardianship? Perhaps half the city is under "religious" control of one part, and the other half is under "religious" control of the other.

A compromise was suggested. Barak proposal in 2000, while not giving Palestinians all they wanted offered to split Jerusalem- an unprecedented offer. Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the new Palestinian state. The Palestinians would maintain control over their holy places and have "religious sovereignty" over the Temple Mount.

The offer was not eprfect, as it did not deal with a lot of issues. However, Arafat did not make a counter offer, to the great frustration of US negotiators.

For me, one of the greatest causes of the conflict is the inability of the participants to take major steps and risk wrath of their people. Because the plan did not fulfill all Palestinian demands, Arafat did not negotiate further. I believe he was afraid to take unpopular concesssions and make hard decisions,- and that is why Israelis refuse to negotiate with him. One hopes the new PM will be able to take the risks.

[DanishDynamite]

renata:First of all, DD, welcome to this thread. I am glad to see the discussion continue here. I am sure I do not have to point that out, but we have had some lapses. Please read my first post in this thread- this thread should contain no personal attacks whatsoever, and attempt to educate all parties. Thanks for the welcome. :)
Now that is out of the way, the refugee question. There are many Arabs who fled land that is now Israel during the 1948 war. There are many reasons- some villages were brutally attacked by Israelis and they fled out of fear, some fled because Arab neighbord promised a quick end to the war, and they wanted to be out of the way. Estimates vary from 300,000-1,000,000. At the same time, of course, Jews had to flee Arab countries in large lands.

I believe there are camps to this day in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and West Bank. When Egypt had control of Gaza, they refused refugee's entry into Egypt, I believe Jordan also placed restrictions on refugees living in teh West Bank, which they controlled until 1967. Current estimates are that there are about 4 million refugees. The demand was that all those refugees be resettled within Israel proper. Unfortunately, as population of Israel is 6 million, that would invite a demographic catastrophe. Arab countries kept these poor people in squalid conditions for half century partially to keep the open sore. Israel resettled hundreds of thousands of reguees from Arabs countries, as well as Ethiopia and Eastern Europe, but it was done gradually.Thanks for enlightening me.

Given that the Palestinian leadership has acknowledged the right of the state of Israel to exist, it seems to me that they have thereby acknowledged that Israel is a sovereign state and as such, has every right to accept or not accept immigrants as they see fit. Furthermore, I don't see why they would insist that these Palestinian refugees should resettle in Israel when they have their own Palestinian country.
Does that answer some of your questions? It certainly does. Thanks very much.

[DanishDynamite]

renata:A compromise was suggested. Barak proposal in 2000, while not giving Palestinians all they wanted offered to split Jerusalem- an unprecedented offer. Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the new Palestinian state. The Palestinians would maintain control over their holy places and have "religious sovereignty" over the Temple Mount.

The offer was not eprfect, as it did not deal with a lot of issues. However, Arafat did not make a counter offer, to the great frustration of US negotiators.I'm curious. What issues weren't dealt with?
For me, one of the greatest causes of the conflict is the inability of the participants to take major steps and risk wrath of their people. Because the plan did not fulfill all Palestinian demands, Arafat did not negotiate further. I believe he was afraid to take unpopular concesssions and make hard decisions,- and that is why Israelis refuse to negotiate with him. One hopes the new PM will be able to take the risks. I agree that the Israel-Palestine situation has not revealed a lot of statesmen (or stateswomen, if you prefer). I'm curious about a few things:

1. What reasons did SArafat give for not accepting the offer? What part of the compromise couldn't he accept?

2. What do you mean by "the new PM"? Who is that, what is he PM of and what is the power sharing relation in regard to good ol´Arafat?

[Cleopatra]

No, the Palestinians haven't officialy recognized Israel yet. They have just stopped to claim that PLO's ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel.

The issue of the refugees is big and it needs a detailed post, since we haven't discussed about the refugees so far, it's a good opportunity to discuss about this.

Do you see DD? I was right for insisting your coming here. You added something new to the discussion.

[DanishDynamite]

Sorry for the late response. I had Real Life issues to deal with.

Cleopatra:No, the Palestinians haven't officialy recognized Israel yet. They have just stopped to claim that PLO's ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel.Reading the link I provided in the "wrong" thread, I would tend to agree with you. However, are you sure that no such proclamation has occured during the multiple peace talks? Camp David, Oslo Accords or otherwise?
The issue of the refugees is big and it needs a detailed post, since we haven't discussed about the refugees so far, it's a good opportunity to discuss about this.Enlighten me. Also, were these demands central to the Palestinian leaderships approval of a peace accord?
Do you see DD? I was right for insisting your coming here. You added something new to the discussion. Thanks. You could have been cordial about it though. ;)

[CapelDodger]

It is late, and I am in a philosophical state. I have coffee, but I also have a glass of philosophy-juice, so I'm not committing myself to anything here. That said ...

Cleopatra:
I would contend - and I'm not committing myself to this, since I haven't covered my ass completely - that I bring up the subject of nationalism when a comment is made that I interpret as implicitly assuming the desirability of the nation-state. (Have I spent too much time around lawyers or what?) I'm seriously tempted to start up a thread, perhaps under Banter, entitled "Nationalism sucks". On the other hand, I'm also tempted to start up a thread entitled "Patriotism is for losers". I've been misusing this thread, since I've hardly made any reference to Arab-Israeli relations at all, but then I'm not alone. All of the threads around this subject seem to degenerate into the same kind of thing. I think your thread on the "Road Map" shows so little action because the question "Will it lead to peace?" receives the same answer from every direction. At which point conversation grinds to a halt. I'll make a considered response to your post soonest.

Supplementary - I've just logged on to post this and find hells-a-popping all over. It's as if there's only one fashionable playground for this subject at a time. It's all seems sterile. I'm going to respond to Cleopatra, and possibly bully Baker a bit more, then I'm off to do the "Nationalism sucks" thing.
Except I know I'll be itching to respond to some of the new stuff ...

[Cleopatra]

I love it when you are in philosophical state Capel Dodger!

That brings us to another "word that should exist" but I will leave that for the appropriate forum...

You must be very brave for even considering starting a thread about Nationalism. Are you ready to absorb the "Google knowledge" ?

I think that it was in my very first post in this board regarding the Israeli/Arab relationships that I used the quote:

" When people start talking about Middle East, they become insane after a while..." I strongly believe that.

I will post something on the refugees too. Maybe you can explain some things that for the moment appear mysterious to me. Like how the 1.000.000 Palestinians refugees of 1948 have climbed to 6.000.000 in our days... etc etc etc

I mean, I believe to Jesus and His Miracles ( was it the one with the 2 fishes and 5 breads? ) but this exceeds the limits even of a lawyer!

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
I will post something on the refugees too. Maybe you can explain some things that for the moment appear mysterious to me. Like how the 1.000.000 Palestinians refugees of 1948 have climbed to 6.000.000 in our days... etc etc etc

I mean, I believe to Jesus and His Miracles ( was it the one with the 2 fishes and 5 breads? ) but this exceeds the limits even of a lawyer!

I believe a similar effect has been noticed in the number of holocaust survivors. However, in the case of refugees, I suppose they continued breeding, so perhaps the figure must have grown by a certain amount, as the child of a refugee is still a refugee, and the 'refugee deniers' still insist the amount of humans requiring recognition of their suffering is about 0.

[Cleopatra]

Aha!

Well, if you think that Palestinians have such a "logical" explanation( that even your explanation happens to contradict every legal approach that exists on this planet) you will be suprized when you read my post...

In the mean time find out who Sari Nusseibeh is. We will need him in the conversation.

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/05/20/1053196581769.html

Excellent article, posted in a separate thread, but no comments. maybe here instead.



The Israeli Prime Minister has some choices to make. Will he act responsibly? History will be the judge, writes David Grossman.


Secretary of State Colin Powell arrived in the Middle East, met the leaders of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and left without any diplomatic achievement. True, Israel made a few small gestures, but it did not commit itself to the "road map", the American plan for restarting the peace process.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon rebuffed the American request that he freeze construction in Israel's settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, explaining that this construction was essential to provide for the "natural increase" of the settlements' population. Appealing to his guest's Republican heart, Sharon asked: "Do you want the settlers to have abortions?"

So in the aftermath of Powell's visit, large numbers of questions continue to waft through the Middle East. But they are all, when it comes down to it, progeny of one central question: what does Ariel Sharon really intend to do?



He intends to do what he always intended to do, annexe the West Bank and Gaza.

[Cleopatra]

If you say so....

[Broud]

Besm Allah Alrahman Alrahem

For Sharon I think that he can't make peace cause Men who used to make war can't never make peace and befor the "Road Map"
which presented by US Prince Abdullah present a suggest to make a full peace for a full relation with Israel for All Arab but Mr. Sharon never take it befor so no way to make peace when any one like sharon still in the roll

and got respect for your mind

The Broud

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
If you say so....

This is an Israeli author writing this article.



Will he do it?

Look where we are now. Iraq has ceased to be a threat to Israel. Syria is frightened and promising to rein in the terrorist organisations that operate with its support. Arafat has, for all intents and purposes, been relieved of his powers and influence. The Palestinian Prime Minister sharply condemns terror against Israel. The only major military power in Israel's proximity today is the United States. Had an angel come from heaven a year ago and given Israelis a glimpse of their current position, they would have thought that the Messiah was on his way.

Yet this really is our position, and our leaders must read the map properly to prepare for the future. If Sharon refuses to take advantage of this rare opportunity to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all (on terms very good for Israel), if he continues to play tough and arrogant, it will be an act of historical irresponsibility. It will increase hostility to Israel in the region and in the world. It will entrench the conflict and will prevent any chance of normality.

Which way will he choose?



Has he ever changed his mind before or shirked the violent option if he thought it would get him his way? I do not believe so. In fact, he has everything set just the way he wants, the continuing stream of violence will be the perfect justification for every step he takes.

[hisham]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


This is an Israeli author writing this article.



Has he ever changed his mind before or shirked the violent option if he thought it would get him his way? I do not believe so. In fact, he has everything set just the way he wants, the continuing stream of violence will be the perfect justification for every step he takes.

another one here (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=292968&contrassID=2&subContrassID=3&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y)

[davefoc]

Would the posters who have referenced the articles about Sharon and have written so critically about him agree that right now one of the strongest allies that Sharon has in his drive to prevent conscessions is the suicide bombers?

It is disheartening for me to see how these attacks are used to martial public support for Sharon in the US. From my perspective, these attacks coming on the eve of peace discussions as they did, have successfully derailed whatever limited proPalestinian discussion there might have been here.

Perhaps, up to now, it might have been argued that suicide bombers may at least have had a purpose of convincing the Israeli people that there was a price to be paid for Sharon's in-your-face, don't give an inch policies with respect to the Palestinians.

At this juncture, there seems to be no justification except to further the goal of endless violence. The fact is the suicide bombers are making the ultimate sacrifice only to ensure the continued misery of Palestinians.

[CapelDodger]

From davefoc:
Would the posters who have referenced the articles about Sharon and have written so critically about him agree that right now one of the strongest allies that Sharon has in his drive to prevent conscessions is the suicide bombers?

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. It's a fact of the situation that there is an alliance of interests between those of both camps who seek total victory, so the moderates and compromisers are outgunned. It makes the problem depressingly intractable.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by davefoc
Would the posters who have referenced the articles about Sharon and have written so critically about him agree that right now one of the strongest allies that Sharon has in his drive to prevent conscessions is the suicide bombers?



It reminds me very much of northern ireland, the terrorists, on both sides, are enjoying their games and are virtually teamed up against the civilian non-combatants on both sides.



It is disheartening for me to see how these attacks are used to martial public support for Sharon in the US. From my perspective, these attacks coming on the eve of peace discussions as they did, have successfully derailed whatever limited proPalestinian discussion there might have been here.

Perhaps, up to now, it might have been argued that suicide bombers may at least have had a purpose of convincing the Israeli people that there was a price to be paid for Sharon's in-your-face, don't give an inch policies with respect to the Palestinians.

At this juncture, there seems to be no justification except to further the goal of endless violence. The fact is the suicide bombers are making the ultimate sacrifice only to ensure the continued misery of Palestinians.

As I have said before, the suicide bomber is the only weapon they have left in this current phase of the ongoing war. The Palesitinians have no smart bombs, jets or tanks. Maybe the US could supply them with some.

[CapelDodger]

From a_unique_person:

As I have said before, the suicide bomber is the only weapon they have left in this current phase of the ongoing war. The Palesitinians have no smart bombs, jets or tanks. Maybe the US could supply them with some.

The argument assumes that any form of attack is better than no form, and even given that I don't think it works. If Hamas can smuggle a body-belt into Tel Aviv they can do the same with any bomb. The IRA didn't blow themselves up deliberately and they exploded a good many. In my opinion the principle reason for losing a volunteer for each bomb is the disproportionate response of Americans since 9-11. I thought the change was remarkable; prior to the Twin Towers the suicide nature of attacks didn't evoke outrage, afterward the reaction was practically hysterical. I also noticed Sharon cranking this up. He was practically chanting "Suicide-bomb, Suicide-bomb ..." (with regular breaks for "Iraq-al Qaeda"). Hamas, being none too bright, thought this meant that the suicide-attacks were what actually frightened the Israeli government, whereas they form no threat to their position at all. What they didn't want was dozens of kids getting shot every day by soldiers who would get sickened by it again as they had before. That would have been a better strategy - and throwing stones is still a form of attack.

[CapelDodger]

"As the Jews came, drained the swamps and made the deserts bloom ..."

Another poke at the Joseph Farrago may not be required, but here it is. I was struck by the above quote, as you would expect, since the concepts of "Palestine" and "big swamp problem" don't come along tripping over each other. It's also an almost direct lift from standard US politicians' rhetoric of the last two centuries - not surprising sine the whole thing is directed at Americans. So I went In Search of the Swamps of Palestine. A modern atlas is no use, of course, since the alleged swamps have been drained, so I went to an encyclopaedia of the 1880's And ... still no swamps. But interesting. (As was the stuff about the Panama Canal.)

The aricle defined Palestine as the Ottoman vilayet (administrative area) recently detached from the province of Syria, bounded on the north by the Litani valley and Lebanon range, east by the Jordan valley and south by Sinai, about 160 miles by 70 - very much the current problem area. (All quotes from the article.) "The current population is estimated at about 650,000, or according to Turkish returns, at about 300,000, of which a very small proportion are Jews". The Turkish returns, of course, were the basis of taxation and conscription. The estimate is, I would expect, a consensus figure, probably with some input from the Foreign Office, and the article is clearly written by an eye-witness..

In Topography:

"In the valley of the Jordan the balsam tree, date, indigo, oleanders, willows and tamarisks flourish; but at a little distance from the river all this rich and beautiful vegetation disappears ..." The author clearly liked the place.

On the coastal plain:

"Here the pleasant towns of Gaza and Adhdod (Esdud) are surrounded by gardens of apricots, mulberries and other fruits, by groves of sycamores, olives, and palms. Wheat is cultivated over the whole region, and with great success, abundant harvests regularly repaying the labour of the husbandman." Sounds nice, doesn't it? Also reveals where Rupert Giles got his style. "The plain of Sharon(!) lies to the northward ... " and stuff about Mt Carmel.

In Botany:

"It is easy to understand, even now, how in truth Canaan seemed to the Israelites, approaching from the wilderness, a land flowing with milk and honey, with wine and oil." As noted, this chap clearly liked the place.

This is not the picture that those like Joseph Farrah paint, nor is it difficult to find out the truth. So why are these lying bastards lying to us? And why are people so easily fooled?

[Cleopatra]

Instead of replying to the last post of yours Capel Dodger, I will refer you to the English Travellers of the 19th century who came to Greece and described the country as the place of Olympean serenity and the birthplace of God Pan.

They even described scenes of God Pan chasing the Nymphs in the woods...

When you read those things you can't help but wondering: Was it the 19th ce or the 5 ce BC that they were talking about?

Thank God the Europeans of that time didn't read about a country of Olympean serenity but of the accounts of Ottoman brutality...

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

As I have said before, the suicide bomber is the only weapon they have left in this current phase of the ongoing war. The Palesitinians have no smart bombs, jets or tanks. Maybe the US could supply them with some.

I think that these four lines, Unique, show clearly where our prime difference lie. This is not what I consider "legitimate" or better, fair criticism and I will explain why.

First of all, you ignore the impact those suicide bombings have on the Palestinians. I expected you and everybody who take the time to make such criticism, to write a word on the pcychology that such actions create to those poor people: The message is clear: Their future is their death.

I wonder how they accept it.

Anyway, this is how I, an Israeli, criticize Israel about the suicide bombers:

PLO was the only organization in Middle East that wasn't either Islamic or fundamentalistic. PLO wasn't a gang like the one Saddam was "breeding".

It was to the interest of Israel to deal with PLO or to persuade them to deal with us. Instead of encouraging them to abolish the extremistic approach to the matter, we threw them to the arms of Allah...

Because however hard you, Capel Dodger and others try to oversee it, there is only one fact: That suicide bombers die for the sake of Allah and NOT of Palestine and I think that this is very serious.

[davefoc]

AUP said:

As I have said before, the suicide bomber is the only weapon they have left in this current phase of the ongoing war. The Palesitinians have no smart bombs, jets or tanks. Maybe the US could supply them with some.

You either missed the point of my question or chose to ignore it. What are the suicide bombers trying to accomplish? If it is to get the Israeli's to modify their behaviors with regard to the occupied territories and the Palestinians then the strategy must include a cessation of violence when significant peace proposals and discussions are underway.

If the suicide bombings continue in the face of peace negotiations then it seems reasonable to assume that the only purpose of the suicide bombings is to annihilate Israelis and continue violence endlessly. This is exactly how Sharon wants to characterize the Palestinians. Based on this he is able to continue his policy of settlements and occupation.

[CapelDodger]

Cleopatra:
Instead of replying to the last post of yours Capel Dodger, I will refer you to the English Travellers of the 19th century who came to Greece and described the country as the place of Olympean serenity and the birthplace of God Pan.

I'm aware of the problem, but be assured I read the piece with that in mind. Critical to the point of absurdity, that's me. The encyclopaedia is the National Encyclopaedia : a Dictionary of Universal Knowledge in 14 volumes, sold by subscription for the education of the common man, and is top-notch stuff. You really can't compare it in any way to classical-hack day-trippers churning out vanity publications of their uneventful travels.

Anyway, Pan was born in Greece, in Arcadia, unless I've been sorely misled.

I included the reference to the Israelis because clearly I shouldn't ignore that aspect, but it's not representative. Even the history ignores god-stuff. I'd honestly say this is the best source we've had to date. (Sadly I have but 12 of 14 volumes, and I'm missing the Greek one.)

Of course, the important point remains "Why are these lying bastards lying to us?"[

[Cleopatra]

If I may add something to Davefoc's post.

The connection that Capel Dodger makes between suicide bombings and 9/11 doesn't seem right to me.

The climax of violence against Israeli citizens was the main reason that Ehud Barak lost the elections long before 9/11.

[DanishDynamite]

Hmmm...

It seems I've been snubbed by Cleopatra. My questions have gone unanswered.

If it true that most Palestinians and most Israelies do not want to live in a perpetual state of conflict, then who cares about all thge historical reasons for this or that. The bottom line is: What are the outstanding points of contention? I understand that it is Jerusalem and the right of return for refugees. Fine, then set up a working group composed of leaders from both sides to look at the problems.

The suicide bombings and the settling of occupied territories are done by extremists who will be around as long as a solution isn't found. Its been going on for decades now, for Ch**t sake! Refering to these things as a reason for not reaching a settlement is crap. Look at what it is that really seperates the parties and solve it. How hard can it be?