Senior NDPer denies Israel's right to exist

[ToadBrother]

So why not just claim all Palestinian land as Israel and be done with it?

That's a good question. The answer, in short, is that Israel doesn't necessarily want to throw every Palestinian off their land, but it wants recognition of the fact that the Arab states tried to wipe Israel off the map, failed miserably, and that most of the Palestinian's ills come from picking bad allies. Clearly Israel has been willing to make piece with its Arab neighbors where they have been willing to reject its overthrow.

The only people late to the party now are the Palestinians, who continue to seek aid from delightful regimes in Damascus and Tehran.

Edited June 16, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

It is the official stance of every single nation--including Canada, including the United States, and even, off and on, including Israel, that the settlements should not be there.

I don't know why you'd wish to align yourself with the most fanatical, reactionary minority on this issue.

In fact, in all the debates I've witnessed with Israelis on this issue, only settlers themselves defend this...and these are the types of people who refer to the Palestinians as "Philistines" (No joke!), and think all the land is theirs because a tribal God says so.

Even our fellow poster Bob, who has effectively asserted that criticism of Israel itself constitutes antisemitism, and that the entire world simply "hates the Jews"...even HE is oppsoed to the settlements.

So your stance is a little puzzling.

My stance is this. Israel won that territory, in effect, due to botched and inept attempts by invaders to wipe it out. In such cases, historically, the victor picks the spoils. Now we can dance around the issue of the settlements, but none of this would even be talked about if the Arab world had accepted Israel's existence from the beginning, but seeing as it did not, and then, much worse, showed an extraordinary ineptness in its military operations, I'd say that Israel has the right to decide what it will and will not take. The Palestinians could probably go some distance to amending this if they picked leadership that wasn't basically an army of Tehran and Damascus, or a bunch of corrupt thugs like Fatah. Until then, there will be no ceasing of the settlements, just as Jerusalem is now forever Israel's. There's a lesson, don't fight wars you can't win, because in losing, you truly do give up the power to decide what you get to keep.

[bloodyminded]

My stance is this. Israel won that territory, in effect, due to botched and inept attempts by invaders to wipe it out. In such cases, historically, the victor picks the spoils. Now we can dance around the issue of the settlements, but none of this would even be talked about if the Arab world had accepted Israel's existence from the beginning, but seeing as it did not, and then, much worse, showed an extraordinary ineptness in its military operations, I'd say that Israel has the right to decide what it will and will not take. The Palestinians could probably go some distance to amending this if they picked leadership that wasn't basically an army of Tehran and Damascus, or a bunch of corrupt thugs like Fatah. Until then, there will be no ceasing of the settlements, just as Jerusalem is now forever Israel's. There's a lesson, don't fight wars you can't win, because in losing, you truly do give up the power to decide what you get to keep.

The settlements are directly part of the issue. Even the violently hostile Palestinians (who are certainly not the majority) are working from different grievances, with different emphases; that is, they're not all a bunch of Jew-haters who want to "push Israel into the sea," as the plagiarists keep repeating with monotonous regularity. Simplifying one's enemy is awesome for debate purposes, and is excellent for those who wish to be servile to State Power, but it's incorrect and unwise.

So dismantling the settlements once and for all--no easy task, since we're talking about radicals and fanatics here (though no doubt with some exceptions)--would not end Palestinian violence. I quite agree. However, there's every probability that it will decrease the violence, since one of the thorns is removed from the Palestinians' side; further, the more reasonable and peaceable Palestinians would see this, correctly, as a genuine move towards peace, a true movement towards some sort of rapproachment. Less violence isn't as good as none; but it's an improvement by definition.

Further, since there can be no doubt that Israeli officials recognize this basic truism, they have a responsibility to dismantle settlements which are technically illegal anyway, since it would lead to a lessening of violence.

Israel has in fact made minor moves in this direction, but they appear to be mostly cosmetic.

Hell, even the more hawkish American presidents--including Dubya and Reagan--were quite frustrated at Israeli intransigence on this issue.

Edited June 16, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Jack Weber]

I'm not going to smear everyone on the Left (because there are some pretty damned intelligent people there) by Davies' outrageous comments, but it certainly doesn't help the NDP that Layton isn't turfing her from the front lines. She always was a self-important annoying loudmouth. She needs to go, and go now. If Layton won't fire her, then she needs to quit.

I don't have a problem with supporting the Palestinian cause (as long as it comes with the admission that the Palestinians all too frequently have done themselves no favors), but this clear denial of Israel's right to exist is a show-stopper. I've never taken the NDP all that seriously, but this is the sort of nonsense I expect from some Green Party member.

I agree...

I should have clarified that because I suspect there are some people in that party who are about to blow their stacks over the comments of this clueless,misinformed,rigid,leftist ideologue...

I suspect the likes of Peter Julian,Charlie Angus,Thomas Mulcair,Dave Christopherson etc...are livid at her comments.But those are people who are not part of the wacko left...

Ms.Davies is...

[GostHacked]

There are no settlements in Gaza.

Let me adjust.

Along with the previous settlements in Gaza, along with the other points I mentioned, as such has created the desperate situation in Gaza.

[Bob]

For one thing, Helen Thomas family came from Lebannon and probably knows more about Israel than you or I. Right now, Obama and Israel aren't as close as the US has been in the past and didn't need anyone to rock the boat further.

I'm not certain she doesn't know much more about the conflict than the bullshit she learned growing up. Most Jews in Europe aren't from Poland or Germany, either.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Bob

[Bob]

It's hardly genocide when you are occupying and building settlements to (well to me anyways) purposefully dispose the other ethnic group. These settlements are fiercely defended by the IDF and Israeli police forces. It is not Israeli land. Israel can help it's own situation by building settlements in it's own territories and getting out of the occupied territories. Most don't think this is a big deal, but I will say it will help tremendously and improve the situation and relations between Israel and the future state(s) of Palestine.

Nothing creates desperation in Gaza more than these settlements, razing of Gazan buildings, and the prevention of needed supplies for the general population. These are 3 key factors in why people support the Palestinians. Just because some of us support Palestinians, does NOT mean we support a terror group. Although some here have tried their best to make that connection stick.

First of all, ethnic cleansing isn't the same thing as genocide.

More importantly, though, it's simply a falsehood to suggest that Israeli expansionism in disputed territories is the cause of Arab and Muslim hostility towards Jews in Israel (to say nothing of Arab and Muslim hostility towards most Jews of the Middle East and Africa, which effectively cleansed the lands of Jewish presence and prompted these Jews to be liberated by coming to Israel). If your assertion was correct (and it most certainly is not correct), then how do you explain the thousands of Jews murdered by Arabs and Muslims in Israel pre-1967? What about the war of '48? What about the war of '56? What about the terrorism on Israeli borders during these decades? Terrorism didn't start with the military occupation, and it certainly won't end if Israel withdraws from disputed territories. We need to keep Palestinians as far away from mainland Israel as possible, Israeli expansionism through the building of Israeli presence in the West Bank plays a role in achieving that security need.

Remember, if you support the Palestinians, you're supporting a group of people that is openly anti-semitic, anti-Israel, anti-West and anti-liberal. They do not believe in the values and freedoms that we take from granted. Political opponents are kidnapped, tortured, and murdered. Suspected Israeli "collaborators" are kidnapped, tortured, and murdered; not-to-mention what happens to their families (go read Son of Hamas, I have the e-book if you're interested). Religious apostates are mistreated or murdered. Honour killings take place. Suicide bombings are celebrated. Mass murderers are celebrated. 9/11 was celebrated. Israel's founding is commemorated as the ultimate tragedy. Yet you support these people - how honourable of you.

[dre]

So you support ethnically cleansing a future Palestinian state of Jews through dismantling of "settlements"? Deal, let's first start with deporting all Arabs and Muslims from Israel to some other country in the form of a population exchange.

[dre]

First of all, ethnic cleansing isn't the same thing as genocide.

More importantly, though, it's simply a falsehood to suggest that Israeli expansionism in disputed territories is the cause of Arab and Muslim hostility towards Jews in Israel (to say nothing of Arab and Muslim hostility towards most Jews of the Middle East and Africa, which effectively cleansed the lands of Jewish presence and prompted these Jews to be liberated by coming to Israel). If your assertion was correct (and it most certainly is not correct), then how do you explain the thousands of Jews murdered by Arabs and Muslims in Israel pre-1967? What about the war of '48? What about the war of '56? What about the terrorism on Israeli borders during these decades? Terrorism didn't start with the military occupation, and it certainly won't end if Israel withdraws from disputed territories. We need to keep Palestinians as far away from mainland Israel as possible, Israeli expansionism through the building of Israeli presence in the West Bank plays a role in achieving that security need.

Remember, if you support the Palestinians, you're supporting a group of people that is openly anti-semitic, anti-Israel, anti-West and anti-liberal. They do not believe in the values and freedoms that we take from granted. Political opponents are kidnapped, tortured, and murdered. Suspected Israeli "collaborators" are kidnapped, tortured, and murdered; not-to-mention what happens to their families (go read Son of Hamas, I have the e-book if you're interested). Religious apostates are mistreated or murdered. Honour killings take place. Suicide bombings are celebrated. Mass murderers are celebrated. 9/11 was celebrated. Israel's founding is commemorated as the ultimate tragedy. Yet you support these people - how honourable of you.

Your insane and racist attempts to paint millions of people with the same brush have no bearing on this conversation or any other. Youre a hardliner and a religious zealot, with zero credibility.

[Bob]

Your insane and racist attempts to paint millions of people with the same brush have no bearing on this conversation or any other. Youre a hardliner and a religious zealot, with zero credibility.

Well, you don't know anything about Palestinians. It may make you feel better to argue that I am overgeneralizing, but the words and deeds of Palestinians from the bottom to the top paint a very clear picture of what their beliefs are. Of course not all of them are the same, I never said such a thing or suggested such a thing - but the horrible social trends and values are widespread enough. You're living in a fantasy world if you think all socieities out there think like Canadians.

[dre]

Well, you don't know anything about Palestinians. It may make you feel better to argue that I am overgeneralizing, but the words and deeds of Palestinians from the bottom to the top paint a very clear picture of what their beliefs are. Of course not all of them are the same, I never said such a thing or suggested such a thing - but the horrible social trends and values are widespread enough. You're living in a fantasy world if you think all socieities out there think like Canadians.

Those sort of blanket generalizations are by definition exactly what racism is. And the ironic thing, is that youre doing exactly the same thing that hardliners on the other side do to jews. Either you dont notice that youre the spitting image of hardliners on the other side, or you just dont care. I guess it doesnt really matter.

[Topaz]

Most Canadians and the world don't like what Israel is going to Palestine people nor would they like it if it was reversed. Sooner or later, countries have to come together and find a solution for both countries before Israel decided to start a nuke war over it. The hatred for each other is great and perhaps we in the west don't understand this.

[dre]

Most Canadians and the world don't like what Israel is going to Palestine people nor would they like it if it was reversed. Sooner or later, countries have to come together and find a solution for both countries before Israel decided to start a nuke war over it. The hatred for each other is great and perhaps we in the west don't understand this.

Sooner or later, countries have to come together and find a solution

Not gonna happen. When you have two belligerent retarded children fighting for turf and dinky cars in the same sandbox, things will generally escalate until an adult intervenes, and in this case theres no adults around to intervene. The world community and various multinational institutions have been utterly disfunctional when it comes to this situation, and if anything they have made things worse. Like pushing for elections in Palestine when the only other party that could possibly get elected was Hamas. OOPS!

[GostHacked]

Oh the ironing.

[kimmy]

That's assuming she knows the difference between '48 and '67. It seems to me she doesn't. I don't think she knows what she's saying.

I think she knows very well what happened in 1948 and in 1967.

-k

[ToadBrother]

I think she knows very well what happened in 1948 and in 1967.

-k

It's Libby Davies. I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't know the day of the week. She looks sufficiently idiotic to probably not know a damned thing about Israel beyond that far Left notion that big bad Israel beats up the poor defenseless Palestinians.

[naomiglover]

She denies Israel's right to exist because she said they've been occupying Palestinians since 48, instead of 67? Did I miss something?

[Bob]

I think she knows very well what happened in 1948 and in 1967.

-k

I don't get that impression, at all. Look, Israel bashers and anti-semites hate me, and I hate them ten times back - I'm not trying to make excuses for this silly lady. It seems quite clear that she doesn't know the first thing about Israel outside of briefing she's had with anti-Israel extremist groups (i.e. the organizers of the DBS rally she's taking part is). We can't know for certain, but my instincts tell me you're wrong and that this lady is wholly ignorant about Israeli history.

[segnosaur]

She denies Israel's right to exist because she said they've been occupying Palestinians since 48, instead of 67? Did I miss something?

Yeah, you're missing a lot of things... like the ability to apply critical, unbiased thinking over the situation.

The state of Israel was founded in 1948. At the time, the West Bank/Gaza was not 'occupied territory'. If her goal was to suggest that Israel should end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, they should return to the 1967 borders. By stating that the occupation began in 1948 (the year Israel was founded, and in far less territory than they have now), she's suggesting that all of the land of Israel is "occupied", and ending that occupation would end the state of Israel.

[naomiglover]

Yeah, you're missing a lot of things... like the ability to apply critical, unbiased thinking over the situation.

The state of Israel was founded in 1948. At the time, the West Bank/Gaza was not 'occupied territory'. If her goal was to suggest that Israel should end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, they should return to the 1967 borders. By stating that the occupation began in 1948 (the year Israel was founded, and in far less territory than they have now), she's suggesting that all of the land of Israel is "occupied", and ending that occupation would end the state of Israel.

What's all the outrage though? She should lose her job and her career because she made a mistake between 48 and 67?

Did anything happen to Minister Kenney when he participated at a terrorist organization's rally? Isn't that a far worse act than making a mistake between two numbers?

[M.Dancer]

Did anything happen to Minister Kenney when he participated at a terrorist organization's rally? Isn't that a far worse act than making a mistake between two numbers?

1) Other than your psychic abilities, how do you know her mistake was one of dates or one of foot in mouth?

2) Kenney should have been disciplined strongly, especially in light of his anti communist, anti terrorist views.

[bloodyminded]

What's all the outrage though? She should lose her job and her career because she made a mistake between 48 and 67?

Did anything happen to Minister Kenney when he participated at a terrorist organization's rally? Isn't that a far worse act than making a mistake between two numbers?

I would think that Dick Armey, Chuck Schumer and Mike Huckabee openly calling for forced transference of the Palestinians would be equally offensive. Schumer's remark, especially, cannot be seen as off the cuff the way Thomas' was.

Especially since none of these new recruits into the "political correctness" that they pretend to hate have any problem at all with such statements.

Ethnic cleansing is a-ok with them.

Usually.

That's why I maintain that none of these tantrum-throwers are really serious.

[Keepitsimple]

What's all the outrage though? She should lose her job and her career because she made a mistake between 48 and 67?

Nobody can be that stupid. It was not a mistake.

[ToadBrother]

What's all the outrage though? She should lose her job and her career because she made a mistake between 48 and 67?

Well of course YOU don't think it's a big deal. You despise Israel.

[naomiglover]

Well of course YOU don't think it's a big deal. You despise Israel.

I don't despise Israel. I despise their policies and treatment of the Palestinians. I'm also not a fan of violations of international law.