Gaza Agreement ; Hamas prepares for unity government.

Interesting but Israeli scholars agree with me. Cant really get better authority than that.

And I didnt twist his words.

And the A A brigades were created as a response to the Israeli betrayal of Oslo times, the intervention of Sharon and the consequent crackdown on Palestine and assassination policy that continued even after Arafat called for and got a three week cease fire by Fatah (Al-Aqsa), Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

You just dont know enough of the history. Because you dont read much.

 

Um no, youre first link has more evidence to the contrary in it.

In fact Arafat was betrayed by Israel, and had to look strong in the face of the post 2nd intifada crackdown.

Its a matter of public record that Arafat felt and was humiliated by negotiations with Israel and chose to fight back in the face of continued bad faith.

 

Yes this seems to be the double standard that undermines your entire thesis, do you view Palestinian armed struggle as illegitimate, Israeli armed struggle as legitimate?

 

Most acclaimed...
But apparently many on this Forum are looking forward in promoting PUG (Palestine Unity Gov.) The question of Hamas not participating in PUG is a political strategy that is equivalent to Hizballa in Lebanon, I am not with them but I am surely the one that pulls the strings of the PUG puppet. This is well described by the most influential reporter in Israel Arlene Kushner... Here we go...

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:11 pm Post subject: June 5, 2014 “That Unity Government”
June 5, 2014

“That Unity Government”

Shavuot has come and gone and before we go into Shabbat tomorrow night, I want to return to the issue of the PA-Hamas government in order to provide my readers with additional information. This is particularly for readers in the US, who, I must hope and trust, will be inclined to raise their voices in a variety of venues.

Let us begin with the defense of the decision to support the new government issued by the State Department:

“Deputy State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said...that the new government does not include any members of the Hamas terrorist group.
"’It is not a government backed by Hamas. There are no members of Hamas in the government,’ Harf told reporters.”

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/181370#.U5CQn5tZrIW

Excuse me? The fact that Hamas has, very cleverly, withdrawn from participation in this temporary government in no way means it is not a government backed by Hamas. This is precisely what was anticipated: a benign technocrat “front” government, with Hamas lurking behind the scenes. Clearly, Hamas has signed on – not to what the government ostensibly represents with regard to recognizing Israel, etc. But to allowing it to function in the interim because it is expected to serve its own purposes down the road.

~~~~~~~~~~

I would remind officials at State that Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh and his cabinet resigned to make way for this new government. The argument that is it not “backed by Hamas” holds no water. This is no more than that “fancy footwork” to which I have alluded, in this instance with the US doing the dance.

Hamas’s short term goal: PA elections, in which it hopes to achieve considerable success. Remember, the last time Hamas was permitted to run in PA legislative elections, in January 2006, it emerged with a decisive majority in the parliament.

Why, then, give a nod to an arrangement that again permits Hamas to participate in elections? There is a folk saying that applies here: Once burnt, twice shy. Going down this road once was not enough? It is what led to Hamas control in Gaza.

To give Hamas electoral legitimacy now is to give it the opportunity to seize control of the Palestinian Authority areas of Judea and Samaria (aka the West Bank). Hamas leaders have been itching to do this, and the way they are playing it, they anticipate that no forcible takeover would be required: it would just come into their hands “legitimately.”

~~~~~~~~~~

Professor Ephraim Inbar, writing for BESA, concurs that in the present circumstances “Hamas is gaining better access to the West Bank.” He explains (emphasis added):
“...it is hard to believe that Hamas will give up control over the Gaza Strip. The de facto statehood which Hamas enjoys is good business, as it allows for the extraction of taxes and fees. In addition, it serves the extremist Hamas ideology that demands building Islamist political structures and keeping alive the military and theological struggle against the unacceptable Jewish state. Hamas has made it clear that it has not mellowed one bit on this issue. It also hopes to get a better foothold in the West Bank to fortify its role in Palestinian society. Hamas seeks to emulate the road taken by Hezbollah in gaining political hegemony in Lebanon while maintaining a military force independent of the central government.”

http://besacenter.org/perspectives-...tm_campaign=dangerous-false-palestinian-unity

As long as there is a radical military force that exists outside of the control of the government – as Hezbollah does in Lebanon – then, declares Inbar, the chances for peace in the region and a stable Palestinian Arab society are diminished. That’s pretty much a “no-brainer.” But, as you will see below, there are multiple legal implications as well.

~~~~~~~~~~

Are American analysts missing this? Is the US simply naïve, hoping against all logic for good results? There are some who might say so. But I would most assuredly not be one of them. And I suspect that the number of those who are able to believe this any longer has dwindled considerably.

Anne Bayefsky, Director of the Touro Institute, has it exactly right (emphasis added):
“It is about time that pundits stop describing President Obama’s foreign policy as weak. There is a straight line between emboldening Syria’s Assad by calling him a reformer, Egypt’s Morsi a democrat, Turkey’s Erdogan a friend, Iran’s Rouhani a moderate, and now a Palestinian government that includes Hamas, a peace partner.

“Monday's speedy announcement that the United States will work with and pay for a PLO-Hamas coalition government is a strong and predictable step in an alarming pattern...

”...Asked about Hamas’ continued commitment to militarism, [State Department spokesperson] Psaki responded ‘we’ll continue to evaluate the specifics here.’

“The specifics are simple. One more Jew-hating, Israel-bashing, American foe has been welcomed into Obama’s Islamist inner circle.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014...-hamas-common-thread-in-obama-foreign-policy/

~~~~~~~~~~

As to the illegalities of what is transpiring, they are happening at multiple levels:

There are the Oslo commitments the PA/PLO made and which Abbas will not honor now.

According to the Oslo 2 Accords (Article XIV (3)), "Except for the Palestinian Police and the Israeli military forces, no other armed forces shall be established or operate in the West Bank and Gaza Strip." See above with reference to a separate, extra-governmental Hamas military force in Gaza.

Interim Agreement of 1995, Chapter 2, Article XIV 4 outlines what weapons are permitted for the PA police, etc. and rockets are not included.

The 1998 Oslo follow-up in the Wye Memorandum requires the PA to "establish and vigorously and continuously implement a systematic program for the collection and appropriate handling of" illegal weapons.

In the Note for the Record attached to the Hebron accord, the Palestinian Authority reaffirmed its commitment to "combat systematically and effectively terrorist organizations and infrastructure."

That the PA/PLO ignores all of these commitments is hardly surprising. We’d be foolish indeed to expect them to be honored. What is troubling in the extreme is that the international community is content to turn a blind eye here. PA officials never, but never, have their feet held to the fire; the international community simply cuts them whatever slack is necessary. For this willful lapse, international leaders have enormous culpability.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then there is US law, which restricts aid from going “to Hamas or any entity effectively controlled by Hamas, any power-sharing government of which Hamas is a member, or that results from an agreement with Hamas and over which Hamas exercises undue influence.”

This is from the 2006 Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, and the 2012 approps bill.

See: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/06/obama-administration-we-support-new-hamas-government/

This is where the Hamas deniability is significant, and where the State Department pretends to buy into the notion that Hamas has no influence over/role in establishing the new government.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then we have international law, which anti-Israel elements are so quick to invoke improperly – making it up as they go along. This, however, is real and legit:

Article 2 of UN Security Council Resolution 1373 of September 2001, passed under Chapter VII, which means it is binding on all member states, says, inter alia:

“all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts...

(thanks to Salomon B.)

~~~~~~~~~~

Stay tuned...

~~~~~~~~~~

© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.

If it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be noted.

 

Your attempt to turn the sources into the exact opposite of that they say is fun.

 

Creation I know you will never accept a thing I have to say. I appreciate that but to suggest I do not read because you disagree with me over history is silly.

See the fact is I do read-you just do not want to read what I do.

For example, in 1973, Khaled al-’Azm, who served as Prime Minister of Syria in 1948 and 1949, published his memoirs in Beirut. Go find them. He stated the following:

"We have brought destruction upon a million Arab refugees, by calling upon them and pleading with them to leave their lands, their homes, their work and their business, and we have caused them to be barren and unemployed though each one of them had been working and qualified in a trade from which he could make a living. In addition, we accustomed them to begging for hand-outs and to suffice with what little the UN organisation would allocate them."

Why do you think he said that?

See you can deny what he said, but his words live on. There are many more just like them from the Arab world leaders of that time.

You can deny them and pretend they do not exist or you can read them. The choice is yours.

By the way anytime you want to provide an "Israeli scholar" that denies the above statement please provide it right here on this forum. I would love to read it.

 

There is an irony in the current alleged unity agreement.

After the War of Independence in 1948, when Israel was invaded by the armies of five of its Arab neighboring countries, and they could not kill off the Jews and simply fled, the pre 1967 borders in fact came about because of where they ran away from.

Those are called de facto borders. They came about not because of agreement but because that is where the Arab armies fled from.

Now there is reference to Israel returning to those borders as if that is a solution for peace but each and every time Abbas ohas said return to those 1967 borders he never then states, then we will recognize that country in the 1967 borders as a Jewish state.

He then says, he can't do that because he can only agree to recognize those borders and that state if and only if Palestinians are returned to it.

Now let's back up because today no one wants to actually go back to 1948 to understand the origins of how these borders came about and why.

After that war, and the Arab armies fled they decided since they could not kill off the Jews in Palestine they would do two things. First they would refuse Palestinians displaced from that war citizenship in their countries and instead they would place them in refugee camps and as they stated in speech after speech hold them there until Israel was dismanlted as hostages to remind the world that Israel should not exist.

They then expelled 900,000 Jewish refugees of whom it is believed at least 700,000 had no choice but to flee thoseArab countries to Israel. Its estuimated the other 200,000 were absorbed by families in France, the US and Argentina who had the largest Jewish populations at that time outside Israel.

The so called Palestinian refugees who anti Israeli persons claim today amounted to 70% of the Arab population of Mandatory Palestine it is claimed fled to Arab states from the portion of Palestine that is now Israel.

The story goes they left because they were attacked. As you can see if you attempt to tell an anti Israeli that the Arab exodus was in fact initiated by the actions of Arab leaders and not because of anything the Israeli Jews did they will deny it.

So much for that but what history now shows us is that the actual estimates of the total number of Palestinians who left was somewhere around 540,000 to 720,000. That is less than the Jews thrown out of the Arab world. Ironically its the same amount as the Jewish refugees who had to flee to Israel and yet in the narrative against Israel you will never hear any anti Israeli discuss the fact there were as many Israeli refugees as there were Palestinian ones. Anti Israeli history just pretends they do not and have never existed and only Palestinians were refugees.

Here is what is even more strange. Of those Palestinians who were said to fle their homes their own Arab league nations have claimed that 45% of them simply crossed into the the West Bank and another 5% right into Jordan. About 30%, are said to have headed Gaza area, 15% to Lebanon, 5% to Syria, with smaller groups traveling on to Iraq and Egypt — and later to the Persian Gulf sheikhdoms.

That is then said to be the basis of Palestinians who were displaced. Abbas argues any of the descendants of these people and not just descendants of these people, any Arab who identifies as being Palestinian as long as he isn't Jewish should have the right of return to Israel before he will recognize Israel.

Now let's go back again one last time.

It is fact that in 1949, Israel actually offered to admit 100,000 Arab refugees, at that time if the Arab League would recognize Israel as a jewish state. The Arab League said never. They would never under any circumstance recognize Israel and all 700,000 Palestinians must be able to return to Israel.

In fact there response was to expel the 900,000 jews forcing 700,000 of them to Israel.

Now I ask you if the Arab League really was concerned with 700,000 Palestinians being returned to Israel, why create the same amount in Jewish refugees and force them to flee to Israel knowing how small Israel was?

That act of spite then made it impossible even if Israel had wanted to, to find the space to accommodate any Palestinians.

Interestingly when Israel was created they took in 35,000 Palestinian refugees on top of those who stayed and did not leave and those persons today are Israeli citizens with the highest standard of living of any Arab in the Middle East and have stated over and over again they do not wish to be considered Palestinian but consider themselves Israelis.

So I now ask, why do anti Israelis cut out large chunks of history and deny it?

How is it the population exchange of refugees following the end of World War II, between many different kinds of Euuropeans far exceeded the number of Palestinians today and featured refugees taken in by countries, but not one Arab country has offered citizenship to Palestinians.

How is it when Pakistan partitioned from India, millions of Hindus and Muslims in India and Pakistan, could be resettled but allegedly 700,000 could not be settled into the arab League nations.

How is it Israel was forced and had no choice to to take in 700,000 forced Jewish refugees from the Arab world but the Arab world consisting of over 94% of all the land mass in the Middle East could not take in
Palestinians as citizens?

Was it not the Arab League that declared the war and told them to go and they would soon be back? Who put them in the refugee camps and called them hostages after the 1949 war?

How is it today, som any years later we are engaged in a fantasy script that Palestinians should still be given back Israel because that is all Abbas is now saying. All he is saying is we recogize the state if it takes back all the Palestinians. Well? How is that different than stating we want it all back and to hell with the Jews.

What has changed?

Why would anyone suggest Hamas who Abbas now openly embraces with an avowed agenda to wipe a Jewish state off the map is an entity Israel should accept let alone negotiate with?

Who sits at a table with a man that says-I will not stop until you are dead?

Who sits with a man like Abbas who chears his own members as they yell death to Israel?

Who would even think you can negotiate with such people. All you need to do is look at the denials from Creation to see what Israel is up against.

It is up against a supposed peace partner who under no circumstance will ever accept Israel as a jewish state and will not stop until Israel is taken down as a Jewish state.

Who then is there to talk peace with? Arafat openly admitted time and time again his agenda had never changed and his sole agenda was to destroy Israel and take it back. Abbas has said the same. He has stated for all to hear, he will never abandon returning Palestinians to Israel and never acknowledge a Jewish state. He embraces as a partner violent terrorists.

So you can spin all you want its all Israel's fault but Israel has done nothing more than try to exist.

Has Israel made mistakes, yes. Is Israel perfect? No. But I ask you, does Israel have a charter that calls for the destruction of all of the Arab world and Muslims world wide as in reverse Hamas does with Israel and not just Israel, Jews world over who are referred to as the enemy by Hamas?

Does Israel place rubber tires around people suspected of being friends of Palestinians as Hamas does to Palestinians?

Does Israel harbour terrorist groups such as Fatah Hawks, Hamas, Al Asqa Martyr Brigades and refer to them as freedom fighters? Does Israel use its hospitals as army sites? Does it use its ambulances to transport weapons to kill civilians who are Palestinian?

No it does not. So who does it reach out to? Who is at this time capable of seeing Israel through the eyes of anything but the view it must be destroyed and terror is an acceptable means to achieve this?

Who in Hamas or the PA is a moderate? Who?

 

creation; et al,

Is there a "double standard?" OR, is it a consequential penalty arising from pervious incurred hostile connected action?

(THUMBNAIL VIEW)

View One:

In the case of the West Bank (WB), the Occupation was a result of the Jordanian complicity with Egypt in the instigation of the 1967 War. Whether of not the adjudication of the aggressor action is favorable to Israel, and the Jordanian intervention is a matter of mutual defense with Egypt, is relatively unimportant; as for whatever reason - this was a continuation or resumption of the Israeli War of Independence of 1948/49 under Armistice between Israel and the Aggressor Forces of the Arab League.

During the course of the 1967 Conflict, element of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) engaged elements of the Jordanian Army to suppress hostile fires and push back and pursue the overall Jordanian opposing force (OPFOR). As the forward edge of the battle area (FEBA) moved eastward, in favor of the IDF advance and hot pursuit of the OPFOR, the WB (sovereign Jordanian territory) came under the established and firm control of the IDF; having secured all the foreign territory west of the FEBA (Jordan River and Dead Sea). At that time, all the WB had become Israeli Occupied Jordanian Territory. From that time forward ---- the IDF, as the Occupation Force, incurred the obligation to restore and maintain public order in the occupied territory; to include the detection, exploitation and neutralization of emerging organized armed groups (Jihadist and Fedayeen) and affiliated resistance movements. From that point forward, the IDF was obligated to protect the anyone that find themselves, in the aftermath of the conflict and then in occupation, in the hands of the Occupying Power; the IDF. Additionally, under International Humanitarian Law, and as a matter of routine of maintaining public order, the IDF was committed to protect against - and to pursue - any threat intended to harm the Occupying Power, and all persons suspected of espionage, or serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power; including intentional offenses which have caused the death of one or more persons.

There is no limit, under law, as to the duration of an Occupation. Since the initialization of the Occupation in the WB, Jordan has legally disengaged from the territory and abdicated its responsibility over the WB. The Palestinian have exercised their right of self-determination by declaring independence and sovereignty. These rights were not denied by the Occupation Force. From 1988 forward, the Israeli Occupied Jordanian Territory transitioned to the Israeli Occupied Palestinian Territory. The scope, nature and intensity of the belligerent population gradually increased over time to the present state. While WB remained under belligerent, hostile and nonconsensual occupation, there is a similarity to the limited control the UK exerted over Jordan during the period 1928 and 1946; a series of Anglo-Transjordanian treaties led to almost full independence for Transjordan. However, the Palestinians continue the 1948/49 struggle, and have not been established as a positive influence for regional peace and security. Whereas, Egypt and Jordan have negotiated peace settlements; and international borders.​

View Two:

ILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS ON OCCUPIED LAND:

• Geneva Conventions IV, Article 49(6) (1949). It is illegal to colonize occupied land or transfer non-indigenous population to that land.
• Rome Statutes ICC Article 8(2b)(viii). The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;

SECURITY BARRIER OVER THE ARMISTICE LINE

• 2004 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion - 2004 9 July General List No. 131

Now additionally, there are several ad hoc categories of complaints that are repeticious, the same complaint compounded by multiple listings in UN Security Council Resolutions

• ISRAELI OCCUPATION IS ILLEGAL:
  • Laws Violated: U.N. Charter, Article 2(4) & 51 (1945); Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations…, Principle 1 (1970).
• ILLEGAL TO TAKE LAND BY FORCE & CLAIM SOVEREIGNTY:
  • Laws Violated: U.N. Charter, Article 2(4) (1945); Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations…, Principle 1 (1970).
• ILLEGAL ISRAELI PRACTICE OF ETHNIC CLEANSING:
  • Laws Violated: Forbidding civilian populations the right to return to their homes following the end of armed conflict is in direct violation of international law and UN resolutions. Geneva Convention IV, Articles 45, 46 & 49 (1949), UN resolutions 194 (III) (General Assembly; 1948 ) & 237 (Security Council; 1967).
  • ISRAELI APARTHEID SYSTEM IS ILLEGAL:
  • Laws Violated: International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1976).
• MASSIVE VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS (HR):
  • Laws Violated: U.N. Charter, Article 1 (1945); Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations…, Principle 5 (1970).
• ILLEGAL MASSIVE TRANSFORMATION OF LOCAL LAWS:
  • Laws Violated: Hague Regulations IV, Article 43 (1907).
• VIOLATIONS OF U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS:
  • Laws Violated: Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (which are legally binding on member-nations U.N.
  • Charter, Article 25 (1945); a few sample resolutions - 54, 111, 233, 234, 236, 248, 250, 252, 256, 262, 267, 270, 280, 285, 298, 313, 316, 468, 476,etc.

​

(COMMENT)

The system the Israelis have in place is not perfect. Clearly! However, there is a cost associated with them versus the threat they counter. In some cases, like the settlement issue, they were to be covered under the Oslo Agreement under the Permanent Status of Negotiations (Article V). In other cases, they balance of the reparations, war damages, civil claims, and restitution owed each party could have been negotiated in Permanent Peace Talks. It is essentially clear, that the hostile party is still the Arab Palestinian (rocket fire, suicide bombings, etc). The Belligerence of the Occupation is solely based on the reaction of the Palestinian.

The double standard has to be evaluated, not in the context of the difference in treatment, but in terms of the difference in the threat potential and the effective neutralization of that threat potential. The greater the threat potential, the greater the investment in separation, quarantine, containment and enforcement is warranted. It is a cost benefit analysis. Similarly, the greater the benefit of peace settlement, the greater an investment in pressure is warranted on the party obstructive to a settlement.

I don't think there should be, if all things were equal, a difference between the right Israel grants its citizens and the rights granted the Arab Government for the State of Palestine affords its citizens. But we all know that will not be an equality we will see in the near term. The argument today is --- given the threat posed by the Arab Palestinian to the citizens and the State of Israel, should the Occupation Force grant those same rights and treatment it gives it citizen to a State and a citizenry that openly supports terrorist organizations and activity? The answer is no. It is not reasonable to assume, at this time and given the threat, that if all general restrictions were lifted, that the people of Palestine would conduct themselves in a peaceful manner. There is no evidence to support that contention at all.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

Interesting except in fact it is essentially clear that the hostile party is the Israel government - mass punishment, settlements, indiscriminate bombing, punitive raids, annexations, invasions.

The belligerence of the occupation is based solely on the Israeli need / desire for land, proven simply by their actions such as moving civilians on to occupied lands, the annexation of territory, breaking of ceasefires.

Indeed as you say threat potential etc, but also palestinians have their own moral right to respond to Israeli aggression also.

The support of a population for violent activity is irrelevant as for starters, the concept is vague, they do not vote in the knesset, they do not enjoy any rights under Israeli law as citizens and so one cannot tell what palestinians actually think.

It is reasonable for an occupation force to protect itself and its borders. Thats about it, not to change the borders, not to move more people into territory and not to annex territory. As long as that goes on, the Palestinians moral right to armed resistance is as legit as the Israeli.

 

No youre simply pasting from a propaganda site that provides no context and delivers snippets couched in its own terms.

Not my problem that you perhaps have trouble with english or arabic but examining the actual grammar of what is said its clear youre wrong.

Moreover your article link, provides as much evidence to the contrary, in fact its filled with quotes from people who deny your claims.

 

I dont need an Israeli scholar to deny any such thing when you wont even provide an independent source for the quote or provide any context to his words.

On the other hand I can provide a sourced quote of an Israeli scholar who provides detailed evidence of hos the arab powers actually threated refugees to return and how the Hagannah and other forces kicked the palestinians out.

But I know that you, as a pro israeli hard liner wont believe a thing I or anyone else say.

 

It appears youre hiding from a response by posting a long diatribe and hoping no one will respond.

Please prove your worth and simply ask a few pointed questions you would like answered;

I hereby promise to answer any question you put forward.

 

Arabs should discuss and deal with the Jewish Nakba !
850000 to 1000000 Jews were expelled from their houses and villages in Arab countries.
This is the topic that Arabs here try to hide.

 

1/ Israel was not invaded, Palestine was invaded, by both Israel and the Arab powers.
2/ Why aren’t those borders a solution for peace?
3/ No one is going to recognise Israel as a Jewish state, that’s fundamentally wrong.
4/ The return of refugees to Israel has never been a sticking point, that’s a lie. This issue has already been agreed as one which can be compromised over by compensation ala the Saudi Peace Plan.
5/ I’m happy to go back to 1948, to understand the origins – in fact its right wing and pro Israelis who don’t want to go back. So that’s just a deception and you know it.

1/ The idea that the surrounding arab states would take in nearly a million refugees is racist, bigoted and preposterous, no power in Europe did such a thing willingly and especially today they would not consider such an option.

2/ Jewish refugees were not expelled en masse, but were forced out in waves as a reaction to each successive Israeli invasion.
The story goes they left because they were attacked. As you can see if you attempt to tell an anti Israeli that the Arab exodus was in fact initiated by the actions of Arab leaders and not because of anything the Israeli Jews did they will deny it.
So much for that but what history now shows us is that the actual estimates of the total number of Palestinians who left was somewhere around 540,000 to 720,000. That is less than the Jews thrown out of the Arab world. Ironically its the same amount as the Jewish refugees who had to flee to Israel and yet in the narrative against Israel you will never hear any anti Israeli discuss the fact there were as many Israeli refugees as there were Palestinian ones. Anti Israeli history just pretends they do not and have never existed and only Palestinians were refugees.
1/ Not only do anti-zionists deny it, but Israeli scholars also deny it. In fact all independent analysts deny it. Avi Schlaim is a noted example.
2/ The actual estimate is around 700,000 plus. They were all thrown out en masse at the one time, not in waves and with nothing but the clothes on their back. That is unlike the middle eastern Jewish refugee situation.
3/ Israeli actively encouraged refugees from the middle east to settle in Israel as they had a long standing need to fill the land they had taken.

1/ The return of refugees issue was agreed to be compromised over using compensation going right back to 1988 and Oslo.
2/ Recognition of Israel is not a big issue, both sides will recognise each other. At the moment Israel doesn’t recognise Palestine nor accept that Palestine should be a member of the UN.

1/ 100, 000 is a seventh of those displaced by war. A seventh. What were Israelis planning to do with all those other houses farms and villages they had taken over?
2/ Their response was not to expel 900,000. The flight of Jewish refugees came in waves as described above.

3/ The Israeli government was in fact keen to absorb more people. For obvious reasons.

1/ Irrelevant BS.
2/ Im not cutting out anything, you are.

1/ What are you talking about? What population exchange in WW2? Jewish refugees from Germany were compensated for.
2/ And refugee returns have never been a blockade in negotiation.
3/ And what obligation do Arab powers have to accept nearly a million refugees anyway?

1/ No. It was Israel that attacked first, moving on to arab partition territory.
2/ Israel put them in refugee camps. They took over the villages and farms and called them their own – this was long before all the jewish refugees arrived in Israel by the way.

1/ BS, that is not all Abbas is saying and refugee return has never been a blockade on negotiation.
2/ Recognition of the state of Israel is not a blockade on negotiation either, and without the same recognition by Israel of Palestinians is preposterous.
3/ Fatah & Hamas had to re-unite in one government just as Likud and Labour currently unite in the Knesset.
4/ Israel has already negotiated with the PA despite all the terrible things Israelis have said and done. And the why should the PA negotiate with Israel which has taken, still takes and claims most of its lands?
5/ All one need look at is the deceptive delusion Israeli propagandists like those on this forum to see what the Palestinians are up against. Israelis have as government policy churned out organised propaganda for decades – this is the result.
6/ There is no reason to accept Israel as a jewish state, this was never the demand in the original negotiation and is fundamentally immoral as 25 % of its population are not Jewish.

1/ Arafat already talked peace and was betrayed. Abbas is a moderate who has cooperated with Israel in West Bank development for over a decade.
2/ There is no evidence that Israel has done little more than exist. At every turn it has taken and settled on land. All Palestinians have done is try to exist.
3/ Have Palestinians made mistakes? Yes. Are they perfect? No. But I ask you, do Palestinians have a nuclear bomb, have they come from elsewhere to take over and settle on more and more land, have they annexed Jerusalem and the Golan heights?

1/ Did Palestinians try to take a large swathe of Egyptian territory and settle it on it? Do their right wing parties repeatedly talk of transferring millions of innocent people to Jordan?
2/ Have they killed large swathes of innocent men women and children and take over their houses and farms?
3/ Did they permanently jail the one man who leaked their nuclear bomb secret? Do they run a vast propaganda network of Hasbara?
4/ Were Israelis guilty of terrorism before 1948 and state terrorism after 1948?
5/ Does Israel have a large modern arsenal of weaponry, trains with it in the Negev desert and keeps most of it population as reserve soldiers which it uses to protect settlement activity?
6/ Has Israel repeatedly attacked its neighbours over and over again even when those neighbours were cooperating in peace?
7/ So who do the Palestinians reach out when Israel’s own prime minister has repeatedly stated Israel’s annexation of Jerusalem
8/ Who in Israel is a moderate when its PM was against Oslo as were much of it government?
9/ Who is Israel is a moderate when its PM can be quoted as being against peace and able to twist its main backer the US to its own agenda?

Im asking you...who in Israel is a moderate?

- - - Updated - - -

Youre lying, Im not hiding anything. But if you want to lay out the details then please lay them all out, what when where from both sides...

You wont, because youre not capable.

 

Ethnic cleansing in the Middle East is a tactic older than Nebuchadnezzar. Niggling over the misdeeds of various players is fun but a waste of time. The Israel vs. Palestine struggle is occurring in the context of a much larger political upheaval across the Arab world. The trajectory of those 370 million Arabs will determine the status of Israel's 8 million Jews in the long run. The armed stand-off maintained by American subvention cannot last forever. Indeed, the turning point is likely to be reached long before this century is out. A century isn't much time in the Middle East. Israel has the potential to be to the Arab world what Hong Kong has been to China. How much blood will be shed in the transition is the only real puzzle.

 

Creation you stated;
" Israel was not invaded, Palestine was invaded, by both Israel and the Arab powers."

Of course it was. the Arab League of Nations refused to recognize the right of Jews in Palestine to have a state next to a Palestinian state
as per the Balfour Agreement.

Therefore Israel unilaterally declared independence and then the Arab League defended the land declared as Israel. You want to pretend its all Palestine go ahead the fact is the Jews who were their defending themselves didn't invade anyone. Palestine was not a nation. You can't invade land that isn't a nation. This is the kind of revisionism you have been raised on but its simply not true. The Jews who came to Palestine were no more invaders than the Arabs who came to Palestine and were not Palestinian but flooded in during te 1920's to 1940's because of British policies that rewarded them for moving in.

You asked " Why aren’t those borders (pre 1967 Israel borders) a solution for peace?"

They could be. They can't right now because Hamas, Fatah Hawks,Al Asqa Martyrs and 300 other splinter cells as well as Hezbollah, Syria and Iran have said they will never ever recognize any Israeli border. Those borders could very well be PART of a solution if we could disarm terrorists.Until that disarming of terrorists happens agreeing to those borders would make it easier for them to kill Israelis.

You stated: " No one is going to recognise Israel as a Jewish state, that’s fundamentally wrong."

Well the above means there will never be peace. How do you expect the Muslim world to believe it has the right to Muslim sharia law states and Arab states to say no Jews can't have a state? Why do you think it is ok for Muslims to have Sharia law states but Jews can not have a Jewish one?

That is just fundamentally wrong. So is dhimmitude and the belief in Islam that Jews are not entitled to the same legal rights as Muslims, i.e., statehood and ownership of property. Until you move on past that discriminatory belief nothing changes.

You stated: "The return of refugees to Israel has never been a sticking point, that’s a lie. This issue has already been agreed as one which can be compromised over by compensation ala the Saudi Peace Plan. "

First off when you disagree with what I say don't call it a lie. You then call me a liar. The fact I disagree with you does not make me a liar anymore than it makes you a liar. We just disagree. Now with due respect of course its a sticking point. Think about it. If Israel allowed every Arab who calls himselfa Palestinian the right of return to Israel, Israel would become a majority Muslim state and cease to exist. So of course is a sticking point. Israel can not agree to turn itself into a Muslim state and disappear and that is why the refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state when coupled with this demand for law of return just means you are saying Israel must vanish voluntarily. Its not going to happen.

Israel can not absorb Palestinians anymore than the Arab world would take back all the Jews it threw out.

You stated:

"The idea that the surrounding arab states would take in nearly a million refugees is racist, bigoted and preposterous, no power in Europe did such a thing willingly..."

The above makes no sense. Palestinians are not a race. They are a people who now choose to self identify that way as an identifiable nationality not race. It also makes no sense because in fact after WW2 millions of refugees were taken in by many countries. Why don't you go find out since you don't believe me. Go find out where the refugees of WW2 went and where they were repatriated. Go find out why Elenor Roosevelt then stepped in as the only person in the world at the time to defend Jewish refugees who were displaced and had nowhere to go.

By the way your attempt to inflate the number of Palestinians to 1 million is silly. It was somewhere between 350,000 and 750,000.

You stated: "Jewish refugees were not expelled en masse, but were forced out in waves as a reaction to each successive Israeli invasion.|"

The time line for when the Jews were expelled speaks for itself. The fact that the Jews were expelled in a series of expulsions and not one sudden expulsion does not change the fact they were expelled in spite because the Arab League could not get rid of Israel.

You keep referring to Israel scholars as backing up your opinions. I have to see a name for such scholars but you did mention Avi Schlaim. Should I counter with Karsh who repudiated everything he said and is also an Israeli "scholar".

You do realize their are people that are Jewish and Israeli as well as Muslims, Aras andChristianswho revise history to match your opinion but that does not make them any more valid than me trotting out "scholars" who are Muslim and Arab as well as Jewish and Israeli or Christian who agree with me?

We both can take our alleged "scholars" and quote them. So? When does what you quote contain simply subjective opinions you agree with and when does it contain actual objective proof? Do you know the difference?

I try read both sides of the opinions. Do you?

Now you stated: "The return of refugees issue was agreed to be compromised over using compensation going right back to 1988 and Oslo."

Wow you do need to go read what Arafat said then. He said the exact opposite, not once but over and over again and so has Abbasnow. Both stated they would never compromise over the right of Palestinians to return to Israel under any circumstance. That is public record. Why you would deny that I do not know.

You stated: "Recognition of Israel is not a big issue, both sides will recognise each other." That's interesting because you earlier said Israel will never be recognized as a Jewish state that is fundamentally wrong. So which one is it?

You stated, "At the moment Israel doesn’t recognise Palestine nor accept that Palestine should be a member of the UN."

True. It doesn't because Palestine won't recognize it. Its tit for tat. Fro what its worth they should both recognize each other.

You went on to ask me "What population exchange in WW2? " I said after WW2 refugees were repatriated in many countries. Go find out for yourself where and why. Stop asking me things you are intelligent enough and should know for yourself. Besides if I tell you, you will not believe me.

You asked: "what obligation do Arab powers have to accept nearly a million refugees anyway? "

First of all Arab League nations have the same moral obligation to take in Palestinians who want to become citizens of their nations as Israel has done for the displaced Jews of Europe, the Arab world, Ethiopia and all over the world. It is a moral obligation based on the fact they started a war they never finished and deliberately imprisoned Palestinians in camps as hostages and pawns and to this day treat Palestinians as second class inferiors.

I would never order a Palestinian to go live in their countries. I am saying for those who want to, they should be offered citizenship.

See here is the ridiculous pith and substance of the anti Israel myth. You don't expect Palestinians to be taken in by Arab League nations but you just want Jews to disappear poof and do what? How many anti Israelis say oh just go back to Europe. Really? How is it you find it impossible a Palestinian could live in an Arab League but Jews just suddenly leave and go back to Europe, assuming terrorists haven't wiped them out?

You stated Israel attacked first in 1948- :No. It was Israel that attacked first, moving on to arab partition territory."

With due respect, you can deny history but that is public record. The declaration of war and attack by the Arab League of Nations led by the Royal Jordanian Army is not denied by the Arab League of Nations.

You also stated: " Israel put them in refugee camps."

Interesting you call me a liar and claim I am lying but you now have made two statements, Israel started commenced the 1948 war and now Israel placed Palestinians in refugee camps. Of course they did not. How would the Jewish settlers fighting to defend Israel have found the time let alone the manpower to transport Palestinians to Syria, Lebanon, the Gaza and the West Bank then march them into camps?

What an absurd thing to try say. The Arab League of Nations is now on public record as saying they imprisoned Palestinians and their speeches say why and not even the Palestinians deny the Arab League of Nations not Israel put them in the camps.

You stated: "They took over the villages and farms and called them their own – this was long before all the jewish refugees arrived in Israel by the way."

I guess if that is what you believe it won't change. The truth may be something else. Jews came to Palestine and took over swampland infested with malaria, drained it and turned it into farms yes. However Arabs were not farmers. They were goat herders. Some then chose to move close by and wor directly with Jews on the farms or sell things to them. What you don't seem to understand was there was no forced grab of land or invasion. The actual Palestinian Arabs were drifting back and forth. They owned no land. It was owned by citizens of the Ottoman Empire back in Instanbul loyal to the Ottoman Empire's leader. These itinerants might have tended land for absent land owners but never owned it. Some tended land illegally as squatters.

Then Churchill created Trans-Jordan and flooded the area with non Palestinian Arabs.Why do you ignore that and the fact that it was in fact a huge influx of Arabs not Jews who displaced the Palestinians. Why is it in your take of history the Arabs that moved to Palestine and displaced Palestinians are called by you Palestinian but if a Jew came to Palestine they can't be Israeli? Who is the bigot?

Palestinians were displaced by fellow Arabs and in your revisionist myth anyone who is not a Jew in Palestine is Palestinian. Why?

More to the point why do you ignore the fact that Palestinian Arabs did not war with Jews when they came. There was no invasion and war there were poor Jews who came in from Israel and in fact Palestinian Arabs who donated them land as well as sell it to them. If they were invaders why did they buy it? If they were invaders why did Palestinians donate land to them?

You stated:

"Fatah & Hamas had to re-unite in one government just as Likud and Labour currently unite in the Knesset."

That is an interesting argument and I actually like it.On one level I get that argument. On another I say this,Likud and Labour are not terrorist groups Hamas is. The problem is Fatah is not just its political wing, it is also its Al Asqa Martyrs and Fatah Hawks.Hamas is not just its political wing, its a terrorist organization that has killed its own people not just Israelis.

Yithak Shamir and Menachem Begin were terrorists yes. They had to disavow their terrorist beliefs to join Likud. What about Hamas and Al Asqa MArtyrs and Fatah Hawks. How is it Abbas and Hamas have not disavowed them?

You can't have your cake and eat it too Creation. Either they renounce terror and agree to follow international law and gain political legitimacy or they remain terrorist because they will not follow international law and continue to believe the destruction of Israel and killing of civilians is acceptable.

You are not a little but murderer and a little bit civilized negotiator. Which one is it Creation? When Arafat stood up in the UN carrying a gun and said I carry a olive branch and a gun and I won't hesitate to use the gun if he didn't get his way what message did that send Creation? He walked into the UN with a gun in a military uniform. How much more absurd can you get Creation? Why did he not say I am a little bit pregnant a little bit not pregnant?

You said:

"...why should the PA negotiate with Israel which has taken, still takes and claims most of its lands?"

Because Israel won't disappear and terrorism has not worked and has only resulted in poverty and death of Palestinians.

Why? Because when Palestinians did negotiate, Israel directly funded charities that build roads.homes schools,mosques, hospitals, greenhouses to grow food, community centres for Palestinians in the Gaza and provided jobs in Israel.

Why because when Hamas was elected then then blew that all up and went onto the streets shooting dead Palestinians that worked in Israel or worked with Israel on those projects placing rubber tires around their necks and burning them slowly for all to say.

Why because Hamas has done nothing for its people but keep them imprisoned in a hell and use them as hostages and shields. Why? Because people like me used to work with Palestinians as volunteers and because we proved Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Muslims were not enemies, we were people who could live together and help each other and terrorism is against that.

Why? Because if I succeed you will not hate me. You will see I respect your right to disagree. You would see I hate Palestinians being caught in despair just as much as I hate to see Israelis trapped in a war that won't end for them.

Why? Because people like me to not kill your children. Because people like me follow laws and are willing to compromise. Why because I do not expect you to agree with me or like me, just treat me the way you want to be treated and vice versa.

You said: "All one need look at is the deceptive delusion Israeli propagandists like those on this forum to see what the Palestinians are up against. Israelis have as government policy churned out organised propaganda for decades – this is the result."

I could say the same in reverse about forum members who come on this forum and have nothing but hatred to say about Israel. Who you and I are does not matter in the grand scheme of things. This is a political forum. This theory you now spin there is an elaborate Israeli propaganda machine or whatever, come now. You don't think Hamas and the PA use propaganda and manipulate the press?

You said ....:There is no reason to accept Israel as a jewish state, this was never the demand in the original negotiation.."

OOOps you changed your mind again. Now we are back to refusing to ever accept a Jewish state but expecting Israel to recognize a Palestinian state.

Right, There is that double standard again. I must recognize you, but you can deny I exist. Got it.

You say since 25% of Israel is not Jewish it can't be a Jewish state. Well using your reasoning then, if Israel gets ride of all the non Jews then and only then it could be Jewish? How absurd. Using your analogy since England which defines itself as an Anglican state I s no longer 75% Anglican it must tell Queen Liz to stop referring to herself as the head of the Anglican Church known as the Church of England?

Where did you come up with this magic formula?


Lol.


You said, " Abbas is a moderate who has cooperated with Israel.."

O.k. then. So what did it mean when he stood up and clapped as members of his PA chanted death to Israel? Was that moderate behaviour. Is his doctorate thesis written in Moscow that the holocaust was a lie created by Jews and Nazis working together, moderate?

Does a moderate man say as he has that he will never accept Israel as a Jewish state and will only accept it as a state if any Arab who calls himself a Palestinian is allowed to become an Israeli? That to you is moderate? Why because he shaves and doesn't wear khaki? Lol.

You stated:. :All Palestinians have done is try to exist."

I think the same holds true for Israelis as well. I think they both are just trying to exist.

You stated: "Have Palestinians made mistakes? Yes. Are they perfect? No"

Well they say imitation is the highest form of flattery but I will say this I do appreciate you are taking the time to challenge me and debate. It sure as hell is better than you ignoring me. Thank you.

You said: ." But I ask you, do Palestinians have a nuclear bomb, have they come from elsewhere to take over and settle on more and more land, have they annexed Jerusalem and the Golan heights? "

No. All points I acknowledge. If you have read what I have written my criticism is not directed at Palestinians ..It is directed at Abbas and Hamas not the Palestinian people themselves. I have been in Gaza and on the West Bank. I don't look down on Palestinians or Israelis. I consider them equals. I hate extremists on both sides. That is just me. In the grand scheme of things I mean sweet f...ck all.All I care about is the average Palestinian and Israeli find peace side by side for the exact same reasons.

You stated: "Did Palestinians try to take a large swathe of Egyptian territory and settle it on it?"

No. Their leader Arafat that tried to kill King Hussein and seize all of Jordan. As well you seem to forget something. When Israel pulled out of Gaza what happened....did you forget. They sent settlers in to act as an early warning post and buffer against terrorism. Palestinians said leave that is the only reason we are terrorist. The Israelis left and within hours the terrorist attacks recommenced into Israel. Same thing happened when Israel left Lebanon.

You asked:

"Do their right wing parties repeatedly talk of transferring millions of innocent people to Jordan?"

Yes. They can say some very extremist, hateful things. Absolutely. I can't stand the Kache party, and Lieberman and certain right wing parties. Then again we also have Muslim politicians calling for all Jews be sent from Israel back to Europe so your point?

You asked me whether Palestinians, " Have they killed large swathes of innocent men women and children and take over their houses and farms,,"

Yes they have. You might want to look closely at what Arabs have done to their fellow Arabs in the Middle East and the amount of illegal land dealings between Palestinians ripping off other Palestinians. That does not make Palestinians bad people though.

You asked: "Did they permanently jail the one man who leaked their nuclear bomb secret?" No but in Palestine political opponents arenot put in jail they are killed. So what is your point?

You asked," Do they run a vast propaganda network of Hasbara?" No the run their own networks of propaganda. Your point?

You asked: "Were Israelis guilty of terrorism before 1948 and state terrorism after 1948? "

Israel didn't exist prior to 1948. There were members of the Levi and Stern gangs and Irgun that engaged in terror. They never amounted to no more than 125 people two of whom went on to be Prime Ministers of Israel but had to renounce their terrorist beliefs. The vast majority joined Palmach and openly denounced what these people did and to this day denounce it. can you name me one elected Arab official who denounces what the PLO and Hamas did? Name one.

You asked: "Does Israel have a large modern arsenal of weaponry, trains with it in the Negev desert and keeps most of it population as reserve soldiers which it uses to protect settlement activity?"

Everyone in Israel until the age of 65 is on call. Of course. You do realize Israel is in a state of war. What would should they do-stay undefended while they are being attacked? Do you have a point?

You stated: "Has Israel repeatedly attacked its neighbours over and over again even when those neighbours were cooperating in peace?"

Are you suggesting Hamas was cooperating in peace? What when they attacked Nasser he was cooperating in peace? Lol. Come on.

You asked: "Im asking you...who in Israel is a moderate?"

Type in Israeli peace movements on google. Better still go find out what Tzipi Levni's policies are.

Better still ask me. You think I hate Palestinians? You think I do not believe in a two state solution?

Lol. You think most Israelis don't.

See you and I need to understand that we may not trust each other, or the leaders of either side but that does not mean the people on either side can not be listened to.





Youre lying, Im not hiding anything. But if you want to lay out the details then please lay them all out, what when where from both sides...

You wont, because youre not capable.[/QUOTE]

 

PERSECUTION AND EXPULSION OF JEWS FROM ARAB LANDS
HBendor

On September 22, 1967 the World Islamic Congress convened in Amman [Jordan].
One of the Resolutions adopted by this gathering speaks, among other things, of "the Moslems' good treatment and protection (of Jews) over the centuries."

Looking back at these centuries admittedly one will find that, in some Moslem countries, some of the time, there were tolerably good relations between the Jews and the Moslem authorities.

But this was not the general picture. For hundreds of years, the Jews living in Arab countries have been treated as second-class citizens, subject to various forms of discrimination Their lives and property were assured to them only on the payment of a poll-tax (jizya), and in the less advanced Arab countries such as Yemen their status was one of marked inferiority. A Jew was not permitted to walk on the pavement or ride a horse. In court, his evidence was not accepted against that of a Moslem. Jewish orphans were compulsorily converted to Islam; anyone who helped such children to escape did so at the risk of his life.

The emergence of Arab nationalism in the present century, side by side with the regeneration of Jewish nationalism and, subsequently, the reconstitution of the State of Israel, produced new forms of intolerance and oppression. Through the denial of licenses and Government financing, and restrictions on travel, the Jews were gradually driven out of their trades and professions and were unable to find employment in other walks of life.

In Iraq, for example, Government posts were closed to Jews; State-controlled enterprises, too, employed only Moslems. The Jews were issued no passports. In the secondary schools and universities, an unofficial numerous clauses operated against them. Again, Government schools and universities admitted no Jews at all. There, as in other Moslem lands, Jews became an ever-present target of administrative and social discrimination and, in times of political tension, of physical attack.

Arab leaders have frequently emphasized, in recent decades, that their opposition was directed only against Zionism and not against Jews generally; but the anti-Jewish riots which erupted during periods of internal political unrest in these countries and the economic and social disabilities imposed on the Jews-as Jews-by the Arab Governments make a mockery of these pleas.

The reconstitution of the State of Israel in its ancestral Jewish homeland in 1948 led to two developments…

(1) In its wake came a worsening of the situation of the Jews in the Arab countries.
(2) It galvanized hundreds of thousands of these Jews into action to alleviate their lot.

With their human dignity, suddenly restored and a new hope for a better life rekindled, less than a million Jews who had been living in Arab lands some ever since the original expulsion of Jews from ancient Israel-left, with little more than the shirts on their backs, and came to start life all over again in Israel. Together with their children, these Jewish refugees (actually, they have long since ceased to be refugees, in name and in fact) today number more than a million souls.

In the years that followed, the situation of the thousands of Jews who remained in the Arab countries continued to be precarious, as they were virtually held hostage by the Arab Governments in their war against the State of Israel. Once again, these Jews were made to suffer for the failure of the Arab States' attempt to destroy Israel in May and June 1967: a new wave of murders, arbitrary arrests, torture and imprisonment, discriminatory legislation and sundry restrictions and acts of debasement swept the
Moslem countries of the Middle East.

I will take the liberty to post Jewish testimony, letters, official statements and other documentation's of incarcerated, imprisoned, beaten, demeaned, debased, hanged and summarily PERSECUTED AND EXPULSED Jews to illustrate the latest chapter of a long and shameful story of supposedly Arab good record vis a vis the Jews of the Arab Lands.

 

HBendor; et al,

So what is the point here? How does it relate to "Gaza Agreement ; Hamas prepares for unity government."???

Most Respectfully,
R

 

Everything is related Rocco et al... it started in the Seventh Century with Mohammad and his false premise that the Jewish Tribes in Arabia Felix were conspiring against him then expendable and to be put to death. In addition, to illustrate and substantiate his <murder> he trumpeted that Jews have no right to live in his propinquity or anywhere... Thus the hate generated by Mohammad has been transmitted on and on to any indecent behavior of many peoples against the Jews.

I posted a previous VIDEO of many propagandists that were ebbed by no official government but by the <clerics> of many of these Arab Governments that took it upon themselves to propagate such hate. This is what the <Jewish People> experience today!!!

 

Please use the quote button, so I can see when you have responded.
No in fact Zionist forces were invading and ethnically cleansing the areas they already agreed to stay out of in 1947, meanwhile the most powerful arab force in the area, the legion, after invading Palestine to protect the people in may 1948 could have invaded the jewish area but did not.
So to think this was just about a multitude of arabs bearing down on little proto Israel is not accurate. In fact its mere propaganda.
Moreover you can indeed land that isn’t a nation.
There was no flooding of Palestine by arabs in the 20s and 30s. Justin McCarty’s study of the population increase bears this out.

Um no, the wall built in the west bank already follows this border. Syria has already offered peace in return for the Golan. Some other border that’s more suitable you think?

No people would ever recognise the subjugation of a percentage of a populace. Jews can and do have a state, and they may indeed call it a jewish state – just don’t expect any agreement to hang on that, or expect anyone to accept that. Moreover the Israeli demand that its state be accepted as jewish before there can be peace is nonsense, Egypt signed a treaty long ago without such recognition. Jordan has been peaceful and cooperative with Israel for a long time without such.

Ok, lets forget the lie thing. I think you know it not to be a sticking point.
The law of return was abrogated in previous negotiations already precisely because the arabs recognise that just as they could not cope with the refugees thrown at them from 1947, Israel could not either.

You’ve included all arabs as the same, that’s at least bigoted if not worse. The idea that the arab world, a vast under populated and poorly equipped region should have to accept refugees the same way Europe did, where Europe suffered a wide scale international conflict directly involving an entire continental population is ridiculous. Moreover refugees were both permanently displaced and re-patriated across Europe – perhaps you youslf should examine both the differences between Europe and the middle east and the scale of the European conflict.
Post ww2 the UN committee for refugees was set up, did this body demand that the arab powers accept and assimilate all refugees? No.
I didn’t say a million, I said nearly a million, as some ¾ ‘s of a million is. That’s dis-ingenuous of you.

Yes indeed Karsh’s repudiation is nonsense. He doesn’t in fact address anything of note.
Its useful to quote scholars because their job is to spend time examining these issues in detail. In fact they do this so that we the readers of their work may discuss their findings. It’s the purpose of scholarship. To reject them outright is to reject reason. Indeed there are various scholars of varying background this we seek to take a broad range of credible opinion.

Of course, do you really? I think you really do not. I below I think I can demonstrate this.

http://www.newleftproject.org/index...stine_an_interview_with_norman_g._finkelstein

Israel will be recognised. The jewish state question does not determine an agreement.

Exactly. You seek to make comparison, I simply ask you to draw out the similarities and ask if they are equal.

The fact that they started a war is not a fact, it’s a myth.

Interesting, all countries except Israel?

No I don’t expect jews to disappear. I just want Israel out of the occupied territories and Golan.

I don’t need to deny history, history agrees with me. Isreal gained territory even before the arab intervention.

Easily, they simply drive into arab villages threaten the population, or bomb some houses and watch the residents leave. You really think the settlers just stayed in their camps and defended their walls?

Arabs were indeed farmers, Palestine was a cash crop exporter. Actual Palestinian arabs were not drifting back and forth. They had numerous farms and villages, some 400. They owned most of the land, as the British survey shows. Youre simply being deceptive.

I ignore it because its not a fact, it’s a myth. There was no flooding of Palestine by outside arabs.

 

That’s a silly argument for a people still under occupation and encirclement. Israel got rid of its terrorists only after a time of border security.

The same way an Israeli PM commands both the forces of peace and those of war while wearing a suit.

All of which means nothing if Israel cannot even manage to leave the lands it has taken and settled on. Which it can easily afford to do if it values life over land.

Of course, but their resources are much lesser among the English speaking world of which we are part.

No, there’s a difference between recognition of states as religiously orientated and recognition as simply nation states, this would be silly as so many arabs are Christian. So I haven’t changed my mind. Its time you stopped trying to put up barriers.

LOL, you really think England, the epicentre of reasoned enlightenment and individualism could not conclude a treaty with its neighbour because it would demand it be recognised as an Anglican state?
Go on…tell us more of this.

There is a pragmatic difference between rhetoric and reality that you cowardly refuse to acknowledge.

No, settling on occupied territory is not just trying to exist. Your point is refuted by that fact, please respond.

Indeed, you say Isrealis are not perfect then implicitly expect Palestinians to be so. Is this you being dis-ingenuous?

That’s clearly nonsense, nowhere in your statements do you criticise Israeli leadership, only Palestinian. So clearly youre being deceptive.

I didn’t forget what happened in gaza, you did – settlers were not their as an early warning post, they were there as a land grab. When they left Israel continued to bomb and imprison gazans even when a ceasefire was underway. Then followed the invasion of 2008 when Israelis got butt hurt that their imprisonment wasn’t working.

So what was your point if you admit that extremism exists on all sides? Clearly you’ve been dumb founded and have nothing further to offer.

Nonsense, while arabs across the middle east continue to war and fight as humans would across any region the Palestinians have not. Youre again being dishonest.

You’ve tried to paint Israelis as somehow better than Palestinians and have been proven incorrect, that’s not even mentioning the thousands of Palestinians imprisoned in Israel.

You’ve tried to paint Israelis as subject of propaganda and have now admitted they run their own, again your diatribe is a deception.

Israelis existed as Zionists before and Israelis after 48, the difference is negligible, your attempt to make a distinction is proof of your dishonesty.

Then you try to pretend that Palestine is the same as Israel when its been occupied territory since 1947. More proof.

Yes, the point is that all who are in a state of war should make defence when attacked, you imply this necessity is for Israelis only – you know the need is on all sides. Again proof of your dishonesty.

- - - Updated - - -

 

This is the heart of bigoted Israeli opinion found in both Israel and the US, going off on stupid unfounded tangents is par for the course. Hbendor has been refusted again and again here, only to resort to insult again and again. This is the voice of extremism here. Its about time you looked harder at these matters you claim to be interested in.

 

creation, et al,

Hummm... So in what way are HBendor's views and opinions, on politics, religion, or ethnicity of the Middle East, any less rejective than your perspective which refuses to accept different views?

(COMMENT)

Specifically, who is the extremist? Who is holding extreme political, religious views or promoting extreme actions on the basis of those views?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

That would Hbendor, since he believes, like many Israelis, in population transfer and is not for a two state solution. Further I accept different views, I accept them as wrong and ignorant - what problem could you have with that?

 

Well... it is not the job of Israel to create another MUSLIM irredentist, fifth columnist, in the heart of the Jewish Patrimony...
There are 57 Muslim countries to chose since the Jews are anathema and cannot be in propinquity with Muslims...
Either you emigrate to one of your Muslim Paradise and leave us alone or face the daily grind where Jews from all around the world come home and surprisingly you are faced to live with them as a good citizen... the choice is yours.