Time for the world to declare a Palestinian state

[E.J.Armstrong]

Given Israel's contempt for the latest peace process the time has come for the world to declare a State of Palestine within the entirety of the 1967 borders that Israel currently occupies.

The apartheid state of Israel can no longer be allowed to flout the law with such impunity. It can no longer be allowed to operate an increasingly apartheid state. It can no longer be allowed to continue the disgusting 60 year pogrom against the Palestinians.

I urge all decent people to please call your politicians and tell them you are no longer prepared to accept the appallingly illegal behaviour of this pariah state and tell them to support the international project to declare an independent Palestinian State or you will vote to eject them from office at the next election.

The time has come for the rule of law to be enforced by the international community. No more turning a blind eye to the contempt that the extreme right wing apartheid government of Israel continually shows for decency and the law.

[quixotecoyote]

Power to the People! Man the barricades! Down with the oppressor!

[paximperium]

Hava nagila
Hava nagila
Hava nagila
ve nis'mecha
(repeat once)

Hava neranenah
Hava neranenah
Hava neranenah
ve nis'mecha
(repeat once)

Uru, uru achim!
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim, uru achim!
B'lev sameach

[cornsail]

Originally Posted by E.J.Armstrong

Given Israel's contempt for the latest peace process the time has come for the world to declare a State of Palestine within the entirety of the 1967 borders that Israel currently occupies.

The apartheid state of Israel can no longer be allowed to flout the law with such impunity. It can no longer be allowed to operate an increasingly apartheid state. It can no longer be allowed to continue the disgusting 60 year pogrom against the Palestinians.

I urge all decent people to please call your politicians and tell them you are no longer prepared to accept the appallingly illegal behaviour of this pariah state and tell them to support the international project to declare an independent Palestinian State or you will vote to eject them from office at the next election.

The time has come for the rule of law to be enforced by the international community. No more turning a blind eye to the contempt that the extreme right wing apartheid government of Israel continually shows for decency and the law.

Pretty much every single country has been pushing for a UN two-state settlement for a long time. The US has always voted against it. It's up to us really.. Thus far our government has been sufficiently content with "stalemate" (a strategy that was actually discussed in the past and made it into the documentary record).

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by cornsail

Pretty much every single country has been pushing for a UN two-state settlement for a long time. The US has always voted against it. It's up to us really.. Thus far our government has been sufficiently content with "stalemate" (a strategy that was actually discussed in the past and made it into the documentary record).

Yeah, EJ's up to his usual with "pariah states" and pogroms and apartheid, but I'd like to see a two-state solution implemented.

I think Israel would too, for all the worries about how to handle the Temple Mount.

I don't think either Palestine faction has any intention of ever accepting that.

Quote:

By December of 2000, Israel had accepted President Bill Clinton’s “parameters,” offering the Palestinians all of the Gaza Strip, 94 percent to 96 percent of the West Bank and sovereignty over Arab areas of East Jerusalem. Arafat again rejected the deal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/bo..._r=2&ref=books

I'm planning on reading the book in the link the next chance I get, because it seems like the author has a pretty strong background on both sides of the issue.

[casebro]

I guess the way to establish a Palestinian state is the way all the other states established themselves. Fight for it. The way the USA did it, the way Israel did it. It's been 43 years since the Paleys lost the 1967 war, and the militarily worthless Palestinians haven't accomplished a thing. They don't deserve their own country.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by casebro

I guess the way to establish a Palestinian state is the way all the other states established themselves. Fight for it.

Or just say, "yes."


Either way.

[Doctor Evil]

Already done in 1988.

How come you have not heard that? How do you get your news? Carried by turtles?

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

Already done in 1988.

How come you have not heard that? How do you get your news? Carried by turtles?

From your link, that declaration was made unilaterally at a time when the organization making it had no control over the territories it was declaring ownership of.

My turtles seem to be quite a bit more reliable than whatever you're using.

They also suggest that the bilateral negotiation at Camp David in 2000 is where we could have expected to see a more realistic resolution of the issue.

But what do they know, they're just turtles.

eta: The turtles just mentioned that they consider using the PLO DoI rather than the Charter almost as silly as using the American DoI instead of the Constitution.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by E.J.Armstrong

The apartheid state of Israel can no longer be allowed to flout the law with such impunity. It can no longer be allowed to operate an increasingly apartheid state. It can no longer be allowed to continue the disgusting 60 year pogrom against the Palestinians.

As long as Jewish right-wingers and Christian fundamentalists hold strong influence over politicians in the USA, Palestine will not exist and Israel will be allowed to discriminate against its non-Jewish minority with impunity.

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

From your link, that declaration was made unilaterally at a time when the organization making it had no control over the territories it was declaring ownership of.

And which area's they control now? Gaza? Hmm, not really, as Hamas and the PA are not the best of friends. At most the ones designated as area A and B in the Olso accords. The OP clearly refers to areas which they do not control at the moment.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

And which area's they control now? Gaza? Hmm, not really, as Hamas and the PA are not the best of friends. At most the ones designated as area A and B in the Olso accords. The OP clearly refers to areas which they do not control at the moment.

The OP refers to a lot of things.

In 2000, Hamas hadn't managed to capture the Gaza Strip yet, so the PLO was in control back then.

Your objection is kinda funny now, as if the division makes them somehow more likely to agree to a solution, as they seem to be using recognizing Israel as a smear to bash the other side with.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=136281

[dirtywick]

I don't know that Hamas wants the accountability that comes with a recognized international government anyway. In the end they'd probably lose more than they gained not long after.

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

The OP refers to a lot of things.

In 2000, Hamas hadn't managed to capture the Gaza Strip yet, so the PLO was in control back then.

Your objection is kinda funny now, as if the division makes them somehow more likely to agree to a solution, as they seem to be using recognizing Israel as a smear to bash the other side with.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=136281

I was not objecting. Just pointing out that this was done before.

I can actually make an objection, based on the assumption that if such a declaration would occur, the Palestinians will include all of the WB, including the Western Wall. Lets be honest, Israel would never return that.

There are more reasons to object, but I am so tired from the discussion in this board - or the lack of it - that I am not going to bother. (Not your fault, by the way - so do not take it personally.)

[cornsail]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

Yeah, EJ's up to his usual with "pariah states" and pogroms and apartheid, but I'd like to see a two-state solution implemented.

I think Israel would too, for all the worries about how to handle the Temple Mount.

I don't think either Palestine faction has any intention of ever accepting that.

Screw getting both sides to agree on it. To use a crude analogy: In a divorce settlement, the Judge doesn't wait endlessly until the parties come up with a ruling they both accept. The UN should be able to enforce a two-state settlement with US support if the US were to actually get on board.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by cornsail

Screw getting both sides to agree on it. To use a crude analogy: In a divorce settlement, the Judge doesn't wait endlessly until the parties come up with a ruling they both accept. The UN should be able to enforce a two-state settlement with US support if the US were to actually get on board.

I don't think the UN wants any piece of that hatchet fight.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

I can actually make an objection, based on the assumption that if such a declaration would occur, the Palestinians will include all of the WB, including the Western Wall. Lets be honest, Israel would never return that.

They were willing to give 90%, give or take.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Da...mmit#Territory

Quote:

There are more reasons to object, but I am so tired from the discussion in this board - or the lack of it - that I am not going to bother. (Not your fault, by the way - so do not take it personally.)

Fair enough. No offense taken.

[Safe-Keeper]

What's all this fuss about the Jews and Palestinians? What about the Chechens, Kurds, Gypsies and all the other ethnic groups without a homeland? What do the Israelis and Palestinians and their itty-bitty desert patch have that all these other people do not?

Maybe if they all converted to Buddhism and flew around in private jets talking about peace and harmony. Seems to work for the Tibetans.

[Thunder]

I would not shed a tear if Jordan regained control of the West Bank, and Egypt regained control of Gaza. I trust these two long established nations a great deal more than I trust Fatah and Hamas.

This could also lead to a compromise with the settlements, allowing many of them to stay under Jordanian soveriegnity.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by parky76

I would not shed a tear if Jordan regained control of the West Bank, and Egypt regained control of Gaza. I trust these two long established nations a great deal more than I trust Fatah and Hamas.

This could also lead to a compromise with the settlements, allowing many of them to stay under Jordanian soveriegnity.

This idea, I like. But it's pretty clear Jordan and Egypt do not want the problems absorbing the PLO and Hamas would bring.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Maybe if they all converted to Buddhism and flew around in private jets talking about peace and harmony. Seems to work for the Tibetans.

Depends, would they have horns?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

They were willing to give 90%, give or take.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Da...mmit#Territory

Actually, Olmert offered 94% of the west bank with 5% from Isreali territory in exchange. But this was not my point. If such a declaration is made, but is not recognised by most of the world, then it would be as useless as the 1988 one. If it is recognised, then the Palestinian would see this as a way to try to get the whole territory including places which the Israelis will not give back under any condition. This would not lead to peace.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

Actually, Olmert offered 94% of the west bank with 5% from Isreali territory in exchange. But this was not my point. If such a declaration is made, but is not recognised by most of the world, then it would be as useless as the 1988 one. If it is recognised, then the Palestinian would see this as a way to try to get the whole territory including places which the Israelis will not give back under any condition. This would not lead to peace.

I read that three times, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're trying to say.

[cornsail]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

I don't think the UN wants any piece of that hatchet fight.

"Security Council resolutions dating back to June 1976 supporting the two state solution based on the pre-1967 lines were vetoed by the United States.[8] The idea has had overwhelming support in the UN General Assembly since the mid 1970's".[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

[Giz]

Originally Posted by parky76

I would not shed a tear if Jordan regained control of the West Bank, and Egypt regained control of Gaza. I trust these two long established nations a great deal more than I trust Fatah and Hamas.

This could also lead to a compromise with the settlements, allowing many of them to stay under Jordanian soveriegnity.

I'm curious parky, why would it be OK (in your eyes) for Palestinians to be under the rule of Egypt and Jordan (especially given the way those countries have treated Palestinians in the past) but not Israel?

It seems philosophically inconsistent?

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

I read that three times, but I'm still not sure I understand what you're trying to say.

1. The Israelis made a better offer then the one you mentioned in 2008. Just pointing that out.

2. That a Palestinian declaration of independence would not help to bring peace to the region. I gave one reason, but there are several more.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by cornsail

"Security Council resolutions dating back to June 1976 supporting the two state solution based on the pre-1967 lines were vetoed by the United States.[8] The idea has had overwhelming support in the UN General Assembly since the mid 1970's".[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

There's a difference between supporting resolutions and what you were talking about: enforcing a division of land between two parties, regardless of whether either of them agree.

Although, the prospect of Israel, Hamas, and the PLO in a joint fight against UN Peacekeepers does tickle my alternate history fannishness.

[quixotecoyote]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

1. The Israelis made a better offer then the one you mentioned in 2008. Just pointing that out.

2. That a Palestinian declaration of independence would not help to bring peace to the region. I gave one reason, but there are several more.

Ok, but if the Palestinians accepted the offer, wouldn't it be likely to be internationally recognized? Or am I still not getting it?

[cornsail]

Despite the hopelessness of these deal negotiations between leaders, most Israelis and Palestinians seem to want a negotiated settlement. All the more reason for the US to get behind the international consensus.

[Thunder]

A new unilateral declaration of statehood in the West Bank would lead Israel to annex large sections of the West Bank. This has been stated by Israel many times.

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

Ok, but if the Palestinians accepted the offer, wouldn't it be likely to be internationally recognized? Or am I still not getting it?

Of course it would have been. The world would recognise any deal agreed by both sides.

[NWO Sentryman]

well, in E J's political worldview, Israel is worse than the Draka

Most of the OP is basically hyperbole which uses very emotive language such as "apartheid" and the like to convert the reader.

[cornsail]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

There's a difference between supporting resolutions and what you were talking about: enforcing a division of land between two parties, regardless of whether either of them agree.

Yeah, the resolutions don't go that far, but they can't even get past the resolutions, because the US always vetoes them (and therefore obviously doesn't support enforcing them). There's no way to bring about peace if we can't hold people accountable for their actions.

Quote:

Although, the prospect of Israel, Hamas, and the PLO in a joint fight against UN Peacekeepers does tickle my alternate history fannishness.

But most of the people support a negotiated settlement. If it's fair enough to satisfy a sizable proportion of each group I can't see that happening. Many will be discontent, but probably not to the point of being motivated to fight almost the entire rest of the world.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by paximperium

Hava nagila

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by cornsail

There's no way to bring about peace if we can't hold people accountable for their actions.

Who's holding Hamas and Hezbollah and Fatah accountable besides Israel?

[cornsail]

"People" includes Hamas, Hezbollah and Fatah...

[E.J.Armstrong]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

Yeah, EJ's up to his usual with "pariah states" and pogroms and apartheid, but I'd like to see a two-state solution implemented.

care to explain why Israel is not a pariah state for a change given its demonstrable contempt for the EU, the UN, the USA and international law? Its behaviour towards the EU is clearly that of an enemy.

Quote:

I think Israel would too, for all the worries about how to handle the Temple Mount.

Unfortunately that is completely contradicted by the apartheid state's behaviour. Israel has demonstrated to the world without doubt that it is utterly contemptuous of the world, the EU and the USA and the law. Israel has forfeited any right to respect on the international stage. Mouthing platitudes does not change the reality of the apartheid government of Israel's own behaviour.

Quote:

I don't think either Palestine faction has any intention of ever accepting that.

All one has to ask is who is building on stolen land at an ever increasing pace. Hint - its not Palestine.

It is simply too late to take any notice of these patently false claims. Israel's apartheid government is clearly an enemy of peace and the law and shown by its utter contempt for the EU and its murder squads hiding behind EU passports show that it is an implacable enemy of the decent aspirations of the people of the EU.

The Zionists are the enemy of the EU and although they will try to delay the inevitable but it is now too late for them to be taken seriously.

[E.J.Armstrong]

Originally Posted by quixotecoyote

Power to the People! Man the barricades! Down with the oppressor!

Thanks for putting the zionist side of the argument so completely.

That's moved things on tremendously.

Much appreciated.

[E.J.Armstrong]

Originally Posted by paximperium

Hava nagila
Hava nagila
Hava nagila
ve nis'mecha
(repeat once)

Hava neranenah
Hava neranenah
Hava neranenah
ve nis'mecha
(repeat once)

Uru, uru achim!
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim b'lev sameach
Uru achim, uru achim!
B'lev sameach

Ah.

The rest of the Zionist argument in full.

Thanks for displaying so clearly the utter paucity of your contribution.

Yak shamash.

Perhaps you actually have something to say about the apartheid government of Israel's demonstrated and patent enmity to the EU and all its citizens? Why do I doubt it?

Luckily the world is going to support the declaration of a Palestinian State. Happy days.
Pip pip.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by E.J.Armstrong

The Zionists are the enemy of the EU.

Israel and the EU do billions of Euros in trade annually.

they have full diplomatic relations with all EU states.

some Israelis have even suggested Israel become a member of the European Union.

Israel is an enemy of the EU? I don't think so.