Israel bans use of word "Nakba" in textbooks

Thunder · 24th July 2009, 02:13 PM

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102099.html

I have to say...I agree with this decision.

Israel must protect the right of citizens to dissent...even angrily dissent against state policies..and even past policies.

But Israel is under no obligation to use tax funded textbooks to insult and defame the actual creation of the State of Israel.

If Arabs want to discuss the racism suffered by their people in Israel..thats all fine.

If Arabs want to discuss the ethnic cleansing that took place during the 1948 war....that is also fine.

But if they want to identify the creation of the State of Israel as a tragedy..do it on your own dime and don't demand that Israeli tax payers flip the bill for your dissent.

Non-violent dissent is a fundamental right in any democracy....but that does not mean it has to be financially supported by the people.

Kookwatcher · 24th July 2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:

"The Arabs call the war the nakba - a war of catastrophe, loss and humiliation - and the Jews call it the Independence War."

This is the language they want to remove from textbooks? I suppose it's their prerogative, but I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it.

Darth Rotor · 24th July 2009, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Kookwatcher

This is the language they want to remove from textbooks? I suppose it's their prerogative, but I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it.

I sort of agree with you. This seems petty.

DR

Marc39 · 24th July 2009, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Kookwatcher

...I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it.

A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business.

a_unique_person · 24th July 2009, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by Marc39

A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business.

Rewriting history.

BenBurch · 24th July 2009, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Rewriting history.

Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad.

Marc39 · 24th July 2009, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad.

Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened.

a_unique_person · 24th July 2009, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened.

A diversion. So you accept it is rewriting history.

Marc39 · 24th July 2009, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

A diversion. So you accept it is rewriting history.

No, not really. You see, given that the entire ethnic and cultural identity of the "Palestinian People" have been completely fabricated, then, any other aspects of their history are inherently not credible.

athene · 24th July 2009, 06:10 PM

Personally, I think in the context of the book it makes sense to just leave it. It's improtant to understand where all sides are coming from, especially in the study of history, and disallowing an account that shows where the Arabs are coming from just increases the prejudice that already exists between culture. The first step to peace is either understanding or mass genocide. Most people prefer the former.

Safe-Keeper · 24th July 2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened.

You mean the way Europeans, Africans, Asians and Latinos that just happen to live in the USA and Canada are called "Americans" and "Canadians"? Or am I missing something here?

Marc39 · 24th July 2009, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by athene

Personally, I think in the context of the book it makes sense to just leave it. It's improtant to understand where all sides are coming from, especially in the study of history, and disallowing an account that shows where the Arabs are coming from just increases the prejudice that already exists between culture. The first step to peace is either understanding or mass genocide. Most people prefer the former.

The study of history? The Palestinians never existed in history, unless you consider 1964 history, when the PLO was created. So, spare me the faux history lesson.

The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live, the country that accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in the Arab and Muslim worlds, the country whose soldiers give their lives in protecting them, which breeds resentment toward Israel and Jews and incites violence and terrorism. If the Israeli Arabs want to mourn the creation of Israel, let them relocate and take it outside of Israel. If they dared mourn the creation of Jordan or Saudi Arabia, they'd be shot.

Marc39 · 24th July 2009, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

You mean the way Europeans, Africans, Asians and Latinos that just happen to live in the USA and Canada are called "Americans" and "Canadians"? Or am I missing something here?

Is Palestine a country?

Kookwatcher · 24th July 2009, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by Marc39

A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business.

I don't see how the excerpt I quoted feeds or promotes the Arab perspective. It's merely a descriptive statement.

And let's say for the sake of argument - I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing here - that the Arabs are suffering from a "psychosis of victimization and revenge". Even a criminal profiler strives to understand a psycho from the psycho's perspective. I think censorship here will only harm Israelis by making them less aware of what's going on around them, and why. It's a head-in-the-sand move. Arab anger and the perceived reasons for it won't go away because Israelis refuse to recognize them.

The creation of a taboo on use of the word nakba will also give the impression that Israel has something to hide, somethng to cover up and suppress. Not smart.

The Fool · 24th July 2009, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by Marc39

The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live

Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning. They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history.

Pardalis · 24th July 2009, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad.

Are you calling the Israelis invaders?

Pardalis · 24th July 2009, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by Marc39

A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business.

I agree completely.

Arabs should come up with a new word, a word for "live with it", or "move on".

Originally Posted by The Fool

Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning. They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history.

You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

Oliver · 25th July 2009, 01:58 AM

Originally Posted by parky76

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102099.html

I have to say...I agree with this decision.

Israel must protect the right of citizens to dissent...even angrily dissent against state policies..and even past policies.

But Israel is under no obligation to use tax funded textbooks to insult and defame the actual creation of the State of Israel.

If Arabs want to discuss the racism suffered by their people in Israel..thats all fine.

If Arabs want to discuss the ethnic cleansing that took place during the 1948 war....that is also fine.

But if they want to identify the creation of the State of Israel as a tragedy..do it on your own dime and don't demand that Israeli tax payers flip the bill for your dissent.

Non-violent dissent is a fundamental right in any democracy....but that does not mean it has to be financially supported by the people.

Let's assume the creation of Israel was a "Catastrophy" for a lot of people, wouldn't it be fair to point out that those people call it that way? And if not, maybe they also should ban the terms Shoah and Holocaust, because Arab-Israeli taxpayers shouldn't "flip the bill for your dissent"?

Strange thread, me thinks.

linusrichard · 25th July 2009, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Is Palestine a country?

There used to be a country called Palestine, yes, in the last century. If the US (I guess you are an American?) were taken over, and a different state founded in its place, would you wish your children and grandchildren to not call themselves "Americans"? Would you think if they did call themselves "Americans," that "other aspects of their history" would be "inherently not credible"? To make the question fair, assume that the new state "accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in" the US.

Personally, I would want my daughter and grandchildren to continue to consider themselves Americans, to fight for the US if there was a chance it would work, and if (like the Palestinians) there wasn't any gain to be had by fighting, I would hope they would find a way to accept what had happened and work for peace, but without forgetting where they came from.

But, like everything else in this debate, it seems to be all or nothing.

linusrichard · 25th July 2009, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

maybe they also should ban the terms Shoah and Holocaust

Originally Posted by Pardalis

I agree completely.

They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

What fun.

The Fool · 25th July 2009, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

I would normally only expect to see this sort of stuff from Racists and Holocaust deniers but I congratulate you in your attempts to make it a more mainstream view.

They are mourning. Mourning the deaths and displacement of close family members. They don't have the luxury of distance that you have to enable them to process it through a filter of Ignorance and offensive bigotry....

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by The Fool

Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning.

There's nothing "hilarious" about the disgrace of citizens of a country that has gone to war to protect them mourning its creation. If they pulled that Nakba jazz in Turkey, they would be looking at the inside of a jail and the last place you want to be is in a Turkish jail.

Quote:

They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history.

Except, nothing "happened" to "them" with respect to the reestablislhment of Israel. Thus, their bitterness over Israel is manufactured and a complete farce, and, merely serves to keep them entrenched in the past, instead of looking ahead, which is a reason for their failure in establishing a viable so-called Palestinian society.

Furthermore, violence is often attendant to the Nakba parades and they incite future violence by furthering the fallacy of an injustice having been perpetrated against them. Meanwhile, I don't see those crybabies lining up to emigrate from Israel.

The Fool · 25th July 2009, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

Congratulations, I think you win the offensive post of the week.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by The Fool

They are mourning. Mourning the deaths and displacement of close family members. They don't have the luxury of distance that you have to enable them to process it through a filter of Ignorance and offensive bigotry....

"Death and displacement" caused by "close family members" who chose to try to destroy Israel and annihilate Jews by going to war with Israel. Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. Furthermore, their "close family members" were offered statehood, which they flatly rejected. There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing.

linusrichard · 25th July 2009, 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by The Fool

Congratulations, I think you win the offensive post of the week.

Not so fast!

Originally Posted by Marc39

Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. ... There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by linusrichard

There used to be a country called Palestine, yes, in the last century.

Incorrect. Palestine was always viewed by Arabs as part of the vilayets of Syria and Lebanon, governed by Beirut and Damascus for centuries during Ottoman rule.

Quote:

If the US (I guess you are an American?) were taken over, and a different state founded in its place, would you wish your children and grandchildren to not call themselves "Americans"? Would you think if they did call themselves "Americans," that "other aspects of their history" would be "inherently not credible"? To make the question fair, assume that the new state "accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in" the US.

Did I mention Palestine was not and is not a country?

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 04:48 AM

Originally Posted by Kookwatcher

I don't see how the excerpt I quoted feeds or promotes the Arab perspective. It's merely a descriptive statement.

Correction: It's merely a propagandistic descriptive statement.

Quote:

And let's say for the sake of argument - I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing here - that the Arabs are suffering from a "psychosis of victimization and revenge". Even a criminal profiler strives to understand a psycho from the psycho's perspective. I think censorship here will only harm Israelis by making them less aware of what's going on around them, and why. It's a head-in-the-sand move. Arab anger and the perceived reasons for it won't go away because Israelis refuse to recognize them.

Arab anger is only exacerbated by the Nakba nonsense. They are acting like infants and Israel needs to intervene and parent them to behave like adults.

Quote:

The creation of a taboo on use of the word nakba will also give the impression that Israel has something to hide, somethng to cover up and suppress. Not smart.

Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda.

linusrichard · 25th July 2009, 04:53 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Incorrect. Palestine was always viewed by Arabs as part of the vilayets of Syria and Lebanon, governed by Beirut and Damascus for centuries during Ottoman rule.

Did I mention Palestine was not and is not a country?

I guess it just depends on what you mean by "country." There was never (to my knowledge) a self-governing modern nation-state that went by the name of "Palestine." So if that's what you mean, fine. It's kind of beside the point, though. What the name is, or was, doesn't change what happened. But it's obviously useless to discuss that, since you have your mind made up about your version of it.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 05:04 AM

Originally Posted by linusrichard

I guess it just depends on what you mean by "country." There was never (to my knowledge) a self-governing modern nation-state that went by the name of "Palestine." So if that's what you mean, fine. It's kind of beside the point, though. What the name is, or was, doesn't change what happened. But it's obviously useless to discuss that, since you have your mind made up about your version of it.

I'll be more specific: For most of history, Arabs living in Palestine did not view themselves as Palestinians, nor, was there a Palestinian nation. Arabs in the territory for centuries were parochial in their identities. They identified themselves based on affiliations with tribes and clans, they identified themselves as Syrians or Ottoman nationals or they identified themselves by religious affiliations. In fact, Jews were known as Palestinians until the rebirth of Israel, when Jews then became Israelis.

The Fool · 25th July 2009, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda.

sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"...

hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it.

The Fool · 25th July 2009, 06:17 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda.

sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"...

hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it.

The Fool · 25th July 2009, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

I'll be more specific: For most of history, Arabs living in Palestine did not view themselves as Palestinians, nor, was there a Palestinian nation. Arabs in the territory for centuries were parochial in their identities. They identified themselves based on affiliations with tribes and clans, they identified themselves as Syrians or Ottoman nationals or they identified themselves by religious affiliations. In fact, Jews were known as Palestinians until the rebirth of Israel, when Jews then became Israelis.

so at the moment of the creation Palestinians who were Jews became Israelis but all the other palestinians didn't....they turned into "so-called Palestinians"....that about sum it up?

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 06:21 AM

Originally Posted by The Fool

sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"...

hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it.

Harry Truman instituted a Loyalty Program during his administration and certain states today, such as California, continue to require loyalty oaths for employees. Turkey, considered one of the more enlightened countries in the region, prohibits the denigration of Turkey, Turkish customs and Turkish institutions, punishable by up to three years in prison. Last time I checked, a couple dozen individuals, including prominent writers merely exercising free speech, were detained or imprisoned by the Turkish gov't for violating this law. Anyone daring to protest the actual existence of Turkey would be met with dire consequences. Israel has no less right to preserve order and security.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by The Fool

so at the moment of the creation Palestinians who were Jews became Israelis but all the other palestinians didn't....they turned into "so-called Palestinians"....that about sum it up?

No, it doesn't even come close to summing it up. Arafat and his cohorts concocted the fiction of the "Palestinian People" as a propoganda tool against Israel, recognizing that Arabs were incapable of destroying Israel militarily, after repeated failed attempts, and that the only way in which Israel could be weakened would be in delegitimization. Israel would have to be transformed from being the David persecuted by the Arab Goliaths, which was the international community's view of the conflict at the time, to Israel being the Goliath persecuting a hapless adversary---Hellooo, "Palestinian People"! And, it has proven a brilliant strategy. This about sums it up.

Safe-Keeper · 25th July 2009, 06:36 AM

Quote:

The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live

Stupid me thought it was the war that drove them into a life of refugee camps and terrorism.

Quote:

"Death and displacement" caused by "close family members" who chose to try to destroy Israel and annihilate Jews by going to war with Israel. Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. Furthermore, their "close family members" were offered statehood, which they flatly rejected. There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing.

You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

Wow.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 06:41 AM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Stupid me thought it was the war that drove them into a life of refugee camps and terrorism.

A war initiated by the Arabs. Refugee camps cynically maintained by the oil-rich Arab League for propaganda purposes by denying the "refugees" (Today, there are few real refugees) citizenship and providing just enough financial aid to keep them alive. The terrorism is based on a combination of anti-Semitic Qur'anic verses and Arab--Muslim cultural indoctrination.

Monketey Ghost · 25th July 2009, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

I agree completely.

Arabs should come up with a new word, a word for "live with it", or "move on".

You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?

If people from some other continent start moving into your area and taking over homes, you'd bomb the **** out of them, not give up sixty years later and call it a loss. Especially if the area is small.

Marc39 · 25th July 2009, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by Magnifico2.0

If people from some other continent start moving into your area and taking over homes, you'd bomb the **** out of them, not give up sixty years later and call it a loss. Especially if the area is small.

Excuse me, what state in the world advocates bombing people for merely immigrating to their country? What a ghastly moral compass.

Monketey Ghost · 25th July 2009, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

Excuse me, what state in the world advocates bombing people for merely immigrating to their country? What a ghastly moral compass.

"Merely immigrating" to you might be "taking our country over" and "stealing our land and resources" to others. To many people, allowing outsiders to take your land exhibits a ghastly moral compass.

Kookwatcher · 25th July 2009, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by Marc39

They are acting like infants and Israel needs to intervene and parent them to behave like adults.

Hahahaha, OK, gotcha.

Happy trolling, little buddy.

24th July 2009, 02:13 PM	#1
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	Israel bans use of word "Nakba" in textbooks http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102099.html I have to say...I agree with this decision. Israel must protect the right of citizens to dissent...even angrily dissent against state policies..and even past policies. But Israel is under no obligation to use tax funded textbooks to insult and defame the actual creation of the State of Israel. If Arabs want to discuss the racism suffered by their people in Israel..thats all fine. If Arabs want to discuss the ethnic cleansing that took place during the 1948 war....that is also fine. But if they want to identify the creation of the State of Israel as a tragedy..do it on your own dime and don't demand that Israeli tax payers flip the bill for your dissent. Non-violent dissent is a fundamental right in any democracy....but that does not mean it has to be financially supported by the people.

24th July 2009, 03:08 PM	#2
Kookwatcher New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 21	Quote: "The Arabs call the war the nakba - a war of catastrophe, loss and humiliation - and the Jews call it the Independence War." This is the language they want to remove from textbooks? I suppose it's their prerogative, but I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it.
Kookwatcher New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 21

24th July 2009, 03:54 PM	#3
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,279	Originally Posted by Kookwatcher This is the language they want to remove from textbooks? I suppose it's their prerogative, but I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it. I sort of agree with you. This seems petty. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

24th July 2009, 04:47 PM	#4
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by Kookwatcher ...I question the wisdom of suppressing an awareness of the Arab perspective, no matter how strongly you may disagree with it. A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

24th July 2009, 05:22 PM	#5
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,331	Originally Posted by Marc39 A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business. Rewriting history.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

24th July 2009, 05:25 PM	#6
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,200	Originally Posted by a_unique_person Rewriting history. Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

24th July 2009, 05:29 PM	#7
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by BenBurch Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad. Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

24th July 2009, 05:45 PM	#8
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,331	Originally Posted by Marc39 Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened. A diversion. So you accept it is rewriting history.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

24th July 2009, 05:55 PM	#9
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by a_unique_person A diversion. So you accept it is rewriting history. No, not really. You see, given that the entire ethnic and cultural identity of the "Palestinian People" have been completely fabricated, then, any other aspects of their history are inherently not credible.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

24th July 2009, 06:10 PM	#10
athene New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 9	Personally, I think in the context of the book it makes sense to just leave it. It's improtant to understand where all sides are coming from, especially in the study of history, and disallowing an account that shows where the Arabs are coming from just increases the prejudice that already exists between culture. The first step to peace is either understanding or mass genocide. Most people prefer the former.
athene New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 9

24th July 2009, 06:10 PM	#11
Safe-Keeper Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sogndal, Norway Posts: 7,117	Quote: Soon it will be that Arabs will falsely be called Palestinians. Oops, already has happened. You mean the way Europeans, Africans, Asians and Latinos that just happen to live in the USA and Canada are called "Americans" and "Canadians"? Or am I missing something here?

24th July 2009, 06:23 PM	#12
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by athene Personally, I think in the context of the book it makes sense to just leave it. It's improtant to understand where all sides are coming from, especially in the study of history, and disallowing an account that shows where the Arabs are coming from just increases the prejudice that already exists between culture. The first step to peace is either understanding or mass genocide. Most people prefer the former. The study of history? The Palestinians never existed in history, unless you consider 1964 history, when the PLO was created. So, spare me the faux history lesson. The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live, the country that accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in the Arab and Muslim worlds, the country whose soldiers give their lives in protecting them, which breeds resentment toward Israel and Jews and incites violence and terrorism. If the Israeli Arabs want to mourn the creation of Israel, let them relocate and take it outside of Israel. If they dared mourn the creation of Jordan or Saudi Arabia, they'd be shot.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Last edited by Marc39; 24th July 2009 at 06:24 PM.

24th July 2009, 06:26 PM	#13
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper You mean the way Europeans, Africans, Asians and Latinos that just happen to live in the USA and Canada are called "Americans" and "Canadians"? Or am I missing something here? Is Palestine a country?
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

24th July 2009, 09:44 PM	#14
Kookwatcher New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 21	Originally Posted by Marc39 A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business. I don't see how the excerpt I quoted feeds or promotes the Arab perspective. It's merely a descriptive statement. And let's say for the sake of argument - I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing here - that the Arabs are suffering from a "psychosis of victimization and revenge". Even a criminal profiler strives to understand a psycho from the psycho's perspective. I think censorship here will only harm Israelis by making them less aware of what's going on around them, and why. It's a head-in-the-sand move. Arab anger and the perceived reasons for it won't go away because Israelis refuse to recognize them. The creation of a taboo on use of the word nakba will also give the impression that Israel has something to hide, somethng to cover up and suppress. Not smart.
Kookwatcher New Blood Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 21

24th July 2009, 09:46 PM	#15
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Originally Posted by Marc39 The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning. They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history.
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

24th July 2009, 09:47 PM	#16
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by BenBurch Soon it will be that Israel was ALWAYS there, and the Palestinians are invaders from abroad. Are you calling the Israelis invaders?

24th July 2009, 10:00 PM	#17
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by Marc39 A "perspective" that serves to feed the Arab psychosis of victimization and revenge, but, far more importantly, a perspective that is the root cause of Arab terrorism against Jews. Both Jews and Arabs, and the world, would do well to not have any of this Nakba business. I agree completely. Arabs should come up with a new word, a word for "live with it", or "move on". Originally Posted by The Fool Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning. They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history. You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore?
	Last edited by Pardalis; 24th July 2009 at 10:03 PM.

25th July 2009, 01:58 AM	#18
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by parky76 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102099.html I have to say...I agree with this decision. Israel must protect the right of citizens to dissent...even angrily dissent against state policies..and even past policies. But Israel is under no obligation to use tax funded textbooks to insult and defame the actual creation of the State of Israel. If Arabs want to discuss the racism suffered by their people in Israel..thats all fine. If Arabs want to discuss the ethnic cleansing that took place during the 1948 war....that is also fine. But if they want to identify the creation of the State of Israel as a tragedy..do it on your own dime and don't demand that Israeli tax payers flip the bill for your dissent. Non-violent dissent is a fundamental right in any democracy....but that does not mean it has to be financially supported by the people. Let's assume the creation of Israel was a "Catastrophy" for a lot of people, wouldn't it be fair to point out that those people call it that way? And if not, maybe they also should ban the terms Shoah and Holocaust, because Arab-Israeli taxpayers shouldn't "flip the bill for your dissent"? Strange thread, me thinks.
	__________________

25th July 2009, 04:18 AM	#19
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,665	Originally Posted by Marc39 Is Palestine a country? There used to be a country called Palestine, yes, in the last century. If the US (I guess you are an American?) were taken over, and a different state founded in its place, would you wish your children and grandchildren to not call themselves "Americans"? Would you think if they did call themselves "Americans," that "other aspects of their history" would be "inherently not credible"? To make the question fair, assume that the new state "accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in" the US. Personally, I would want my daughter and grandchildren to continue to consider themselves Americans, to fight for the US if there was a chance it would work, and if (like the Palestinians) there wasn't any gain to be had by fighting, I would hope they would find a way to accept what had happened and work for peace, but without forgetting where they came from. But, like everything else in this debate, it seems to be all or nothing.
	Last edited by linusrichard; 25th July 2009 at 04:22 AM.

25th July 2009, 04:21 AM	#20
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,665	Originally Posted by Oliver maybe they also should ban the terms Shoah and Holocaust Originally Posted by Pardalis I agree completely. They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore? What fun.

25th July 2009, 04:21 AM	#21
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Originally Posted by Pardalis You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore? I would normally only expect to see this sort of stuff from Racists and Holocaust deniers but I congratulate you in your attempts to make it a more mainstream view. They are mourning. Mourning the deaths and displacement of close family members. They don't have the luxury of distance that you have to enable them to process it through a filter of Ignorance and offensive bigotry....
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

25th July 2009, 04:29 AM	#22
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by The Fool Its hilarious the way you want to tell people what they are mourning. There's nothing "hilarious" about the disgrace of citizens of a country that has gone to war to protect them mourning its creation. If they pulled that Nakba jazz in Turkey, they would be looking at the inside of a jail and the last place you want to be is in a Turkish jail. Quote: They are mourning the things that happened to them, the things you want to erase from history. Except, nothing "happened" to "them" with respect to the reestablislhment of Israel. Thus, their bitterness over Israel is manufactured and a complete farce, and, merely serves to keep them entrenched in the past, instead of looking ahead, which is a reason for their failure in establishing a viable so-called Palestinian society. Furthermore, violence is often attendant to the Nakba parades and they incite future violence by furthering the fallacy of an injustice having been perpetrated against them. Meanwhile, I don't see those crybabies lining up to emigrate from Israel.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Last edited by Marc39; 25th July 2009 at 04:33 AM.

25th July 2009, 04:37 AM	#24
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by The Fool They are mourning. Mourning the deaths and displacement of close family members. They don't have the luxury of distance that you have to enable them to process it through a filter of Ignorance and offensive bigotry.... "Death and displacement" caused by "close family members" who chose to try to destroy Israel and annihilate Jews by going to war with Israel. Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. Furthermore, their "close family members" were offered statehood, which they flatly rejected. There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 04:41 AM	#25
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,665	Originally Posted by The Fool Congratulations, I think you win the offensive post of the week. Not so fast! Originally Posted by Marc39 Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. ... There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing.

25th July 2009, 04:41 AM	#26
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by linusrichard There used to be a country called Palestine, yes, in the last century. Incorrect. Palestine was always viewed by Arabs as part of the vilayets of Syria and Lebanon, governed by Beirut and Damascus for centuries during Ottoman rule. Quote: If the US (I guess you are an American?) were taken over, and a different state founded in its place, would you wish your children and grandchildren to not call themselves "Americans"? Would you think if they did call themselves "Americans," that "other aspects of their history" would be "inherently not credible"? To make the question fair, assume that the new state "accords them rights and freedoms only dreamed about in" the US. Did I mention Palestine was not and is not a country?
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 04:48 AM	#27
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by Kookwatcher I don't see how the excerpt I quoted feeds or promotes the Arab perspective. It's merely a descriptive statement. Correction: It's merely a propagandistic descriptive statement. Quote: And let's say for the sake of argument - I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing here - that the Arabs are suffering from a "psychosis of victimization and revenge". Even a criminal profiler strives to understand a psycho from the psycho's perspective. I think censorship here will only harm Israelis by making them less aware of what's going on around them, and why. It's a head-in-the-sand move. Arab anger and the perceived reasons for it won't go away because Israelis refuse to recognize them. Arab anger is only exacerbated by the Nakba nonsense. They are acting like infants and Israel needs to intervene and parent them to behave like adults. Quote: The creation of a taboo on use of the word nakba will also give the impression that Israel has something to hide, somethng to cover up and suppress. Not smart. Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 04:53 AM	#28
linusrichard Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Lansing, Mich. Posts: 2,665	Originally Posted by Marc39 Incorrect. Palestine was always viewed by Arabs as part of the vilayets of Syria and Lebanon, governed by Beirut and Damascus for centuries during Ottoman rule. Did I mention Palestine was not and is not a country? I guess it just depends on what you mean by "country." There was never (to my knowledge) a self-governing modern nation-state that went by the name of "Palestine." So if that's what you mean, fine. It's kind of beside the point, though. What the name is, or was, doesn't change what happened. But it's obviously useless to discuss that, since you have your mind made up about your version of it.

25th July 2009, 05:04 AM	#29
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by linusrichard I guess it just depends on what you mean by "country." There was never (to my knowledge) a self-governing modern nation-state that went by the name of "Palestine." So if that's what you mean, fine. It's kind of beside the point, though. What the name is, or was, doesn't change what happened. But it's obviously useless to discuss that, since you have your mind made up about your version of it. I'll be more specific: For most of history, Arabs living in Palestine did not view themselves as Palestinians, nor, was there a Palestinian nation. Arabs in the territory for centuries were parochial in their identities. They identified themselves based on affiliations with tribes and clans, they identified themselves as Syrians or Ottoman nationals or they identified themselves by religious affiliations. In fact, Jews were known as Palestinians until the rebirth of Israel, when Jews then became Israelis.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 06:11 AM	#30
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Originally Posted by Marc39 Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda. sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"... hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it.
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

25th July 2009, 06:17 AM	#31
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Originally Posted by Marc39 Such Nakba parades are subversive and treasonous. Israel has a right to protect its internal security by banning inciteful propaganda. sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"... hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it.
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

25th July 2009, 06:19 AM	#32
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Originally Posted by Marc39 I'll be more specific: For most of history, Arabs living in Palestine did not view themselves as Palestinians, nor, was there a Palestinian nation. Arabs in the territory for centuries were parochial in their identities. They identified themselves based on affiliations with tribes and clans, they identified themselves as Syrians or Ottoman nationals or they identified themselves by religious affiliations. In fact, Jews were known as Palestinians until the rebirth of Israel, when Jews then became Israelis. so at the moment of the creation Palestinians who were Jews became Israelis but all the other palestinians didn't....they turned into "so-called Palestinians"....that about sum it up?
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

25th July 2009, 06:21 AM	#33
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by The Fool sorry...I thought you were quoting Deng Xiaoping until I spotted the word "nakba"... hey...here is an Idea. What about removing the word subversion from books too....then they wouldn't be able to do it. Harry Truman instituted a Loyalty Program during his administration and certain states today, such as California, continue to require loyalty oaths for employees. Turkey, considered one of the more enlightened countries in the region, prohibits the denigration of Turkey, Turkish customs and Turkish institutions, punishable by up to three years in prison. Last time I checked, a couple dozen individuals, including prominent writers merely exercising free speech, were detained or imprisoned by the Turkish gov't for violating this law. Anyone daring to protest the actual existence of Turkey would be met with dire consequences. Israel has no less right to preserve order and security.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 06:36 AM	#34
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by The Fool so at the moment of the creation Palestinians who were Jews became Israelis but all the other palestinians didn't....they turned into "so-called Palestinians"....that about sum it up? No, it doesn't even come close to summing it up. Arafat and his cohorts concocted the fiction of the "Palestinian People" as a propoganda tool against Israel, recognizing that Arabs were incapable of destroying Israel militarily, after repeated failed attempts, and that the only way in which Israel could be weakened would be in delegitimization. Israel would have to be transformed from being the David persecuted by the Arab Goliaths, which was the international community's view of the conflict at the time, to Israel being the Goliath persecuting a hapless adversary---Hellooo, "Palestinian People"! And, it has proven a brilliant strategy. This about sums it up.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720

25th July 2009, 06:36 AM	#35
Safe-Keeper Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sogndal, Norway Posts: 7,117	Quote: The Israeli Arabs are mourning the creation of the country in which they live Stupid me thought it was the war that drove them into a life of refugee camps and terrorism. Quote: "Death and displacement" caused by "close family members" who chose to try to destroy Israel and annihilate Jews by going to war with Israel. Death and displacement is a natural consequence of war. Furthermore, their "close family members" were offered statehood, which they flatly rejected. There's no room for boo hoo hoo'ing. You're confusing "mourning" with "whining". They are whining about something that happened 60 years ago. What's the use of commemorating something nobody can do anything about anymore? Wow.
	Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 25th July 2009 at 06:40 AM.

25th July 2009, 06:41 AM	#36
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper Stupid me thought it was the war that drove them into a life of refugee camps and terrorism. A war initiated by the Arabs. Refugee camps cynically maintained by the oil-rich Arab League for propaganda purposes by denying the "refugees" (Today, there are few real refugees) citizenship and providing just enough financial aid to keep them alive. The terrorism is based on a combination of anti-Semitic Qur'anic verses and Arab--Muslim cultural indoctrination.
Marc39 Banned Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,720