Free Gaza Movement

[bud]

You can spin all you want that Jews are invaders to Israel but they are no more invaders then the huge influx of Arabs who came in thanks to British immigration policies that deliberately flooded the area today known as Israel, the West Bank and Jordan while severely preventing Jewish immigration to try prevent a Jewish state.

according to ottoman census records and justine mccarthy:

In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews (including many European Jews from the first and second Aliyah).

it's important to get your facts straight.

That historic fact can't be revised and the practical reality is most people in Israel and the West Bank today are what? In Israel they come from Russia, Ethiopia, North America, South America, India and Africa. For Palestinians most are Arabs who came looking for work

it's true, majority of jews who migrated to palestine were from russia. however, i'd like to see something to back up your comment about how arabs migrated to palestine for work like it was some uninhabited land.

and still come looking for work.

[

really now? how about some citation to prove you're not talking out of your ass.

You can revise history all you want the practical reality is in this region you have 2 people who have no choice as to where they live. The arm chair geniuses on this forum will not resolve the conflict nor will the revisionism change the predicament.

besides palestine, kenya and argentina were also looked at by the theodor herzl as a place for the jews to create a nation. at the end, they chose palestine. it's too bad the local palestinians didn't get to have a say in this.

The solution requires a recognition of both peoples rights simultaneously. Problem right now is Abbas has said he will never recognize Israel as a JEWISH state and Hamas has a charter calling for its complete elimination with force.

okay... and... and... what about israel, mr. balanced? what is likud's platform when it comes to a palestinian state? what has the israeli government vowed when it comes to a palestinian state? i'll refresh your memory:

Self-Rule

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state.

What has arafat/PLO/fatah have to say about israel's right to exist?

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of

Israel

to exist in peace and security.

The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

You can talk all you want but until Abbas and Hamas come to their senses nothing changes.

there goes mr. balanced, blaming it all on abbas and hamas and despite only one of the two governments has accepted israel's right to exist and despite likud's platform which vows to never allow a palestinian state, you blame it all on the palestinians. oh and lets not forget the increasing government funded illegal settlements on the palestinian land, which have accelerated in speed (because, you know, everyone is concentrating on iran).

how come you never talk about the settlements and the israeli government's stance on a palestinian state?

The average Palestinian wants a job, water and access through Israel to travel to see relatives or access on the West Bank free of check points. That is elementary but seems so far away as long as terrorism continues and no one listens to the average Palestinian who wants to be left alone to work.

ooh. justifying the brutal occupation. thank you mr. fair and balanced. when was the last time a suicide bomber came from the west bank? when is the last time a rocket was fired from the west bank? why are there checkpoints in the west bank?

oh and, what about the illegal settlements? why don't you ever talk about that? what about the control of the palestinian water which mostly go to the settlements and to israel? instead of pretending to being honest, why don't you actually be honest?

As for Israelis, their existence will always depend on themselves. They can rely on no one but themselves. That history has rudely taught them.

this is no longer about israel's existence. this is about prolonging land theft and justifying the brutal occupation that has been going on for over 60 years.

Edited October 12, 2012 by bud

[jbg]

People living there for many years under their own rule now have to all of a sudden live under someone eles's rule because of the creation of Israel.

During what period of time prior to 1948 was any part of that region under its own rule, since the end of the Hasmonean rule?

[Bonam]

It kind of goes both ways. Lots of people who criticise Palestinians seem to have pretty bigotted views of Muslims as well.

I think if you blame Israel's bad doings on their Jewishness, you're an anti-semite. Likewise, if you blame the Palestinians' bad bhaviour on their Muslimness, then you're anti-Muslim.

It has nothing to do with their "Muslimness". It's about their lack of willingness to engage in doing something constructive, like working to build their own state and its institutions, rather than mindlessly shooting rockets at Israel. This has nothing to do with them being Muslim (there are multiple examples of Muslim nations that are prosperous and succesful), it has to do with them being uneducated, ruled by corrupt inept terrorists, and growing up in a culture of hatred. I wonder, how would Gaza look if, instead of using those Egyptian tunnerls to smuggle rocket parts, mortars, guns, etc, they instead smuggled in building materials, water desalination equipment, science textbooks, farm and irrigation equipment, etc. You know, if they spent their energy on the peaceful pursuit of their own prosperity, rather than an ineffectual agenda of hate.

[Bonam]

I had no idea to what extent Jews felt the need to leave - or were forced to leave. It makes support for Israel even more crucial, imo.

While I appreciate what you say here, I find it surprising that someone who has been partaking in debate on topics like this for years, as you have, would not have previously known some of these facts.

In any case, if you haven't considered this before, you may also find this interesting:

1) In the 1st century AD, Jews comprised approximately 3% of the world's population (9 million out of 300 million)

2) There is no reason to believe Jewish birth rates have deviated significantly from the world average, to the best of historical knowledge, over the last 2000 years, and conversion to and from Judaism after the 1st century remained minimal.

3) Today, Jews comprise 13.4 million out of 7.05 billion people, or 0.19%.

Given (2), (3) is explainable primarily through events like the Holocaust and other atrocities, which have periodically killed large portions of the world's Jewish population. In fact, the numbers imply that over the last 2000 years, 94% of the Jewish population has been eradicated (0.19% is 6% of 3%). That is, if not for the killing over the centuries, the world's Jewish-descended population today would likely have been about 210 million (the same 3% of the world total that it was in Roman times).

This might seem a fantastical number, but remember that it would only take 4 Holocaust-like events over the last 2000 years to have had that effect. And starting in Roman times, continuing through to the middle ages and through the industrial revolution all the way into the 20th century, most European nations killed substantial portions of their Jews every few generations. Most of this killing wasn't on the scale of the Holocaust though, it was merely pogroms, massacres, irritated peasants killing their Jewish neighbors for a bit of coin, etc, But if in any given generation on average 3% of Jews are killed where others were not, over the 100 generations that have passed since the 1st century, that amounts to having killed 95% of the population. And that's pretty much exactly what has happened.

And yes, all this just makes Israel's continued existence all the more vital. 2000 years of history has proven that living in the nations of others is a death sentence for the Jewish people.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Bonam

[dre]

Only in the denying eyes of a terrorist supporter.

In case you're not getting it, I can do this just as long, and just as often, as you can. You want to play this game, you won't be playing it alone any more .... I'll be right there, calling you on your support of terrorism.

In case you're not getting it, I can do this just as long, and just as often, as you can.

Dont worry AW, I can assure you everyone here gets that....

[GostHacked]

In which world. Prior to the creation of the state of Israel in 1949 Palestinians had no government where they ruled themselves. How many times do you want to repeat this-it doesn't make it a fact just evidence of your attempts to revise history.

And prior to that 1949 Jews did not have a government to rule themselves either. What is your point?

[DogOnPorch]

And prior to that 1949 Jews did not have a government to rule themselves either. What is your point?

The Jews of Palestine had the Jewish National Council/Jewish Agency as their de facto government before Israel's formation. The Arabs under the Mufti had the Supreme Muslim Council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Council

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Agency_for_Palestine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Muslim_Council

[GostHacked]

The Jews of Palestine had the Jewish National Council/Jewish Agency as their de facto government before Israel's formation. The Arabs under the Mufti had the Supreme Muslim Council.

http://en.wikipedia....ational_Council

http://en.wikipedia....y_for_Palestine

http://en.wikipedia...._Muslim_Council

So did both have governments then prior to the creation of Israel. Good to know.

[jbg]

So did both have governments then prior to the creation of Israel. Good to know.

Partially the same way Canada had limited self-rule during the years leading up to 1867. The problem was that the (ir)responsible Arab "government" rejected any territorial adjustments, any Jewish territory at all.

[GostHacked]

Partially the same way Canada had limited self-rule during the years leading up to 1867. The problem was that the (ir)responsible Arab "government" rejected any territorial adjustments, any Jewish territory at all.

Andy why should they accept any adjustments? And who were the adjustments for?

Edited October 12, 2012 by GostHacked

[DogOnPorch]

Andy why should they accept any adjustments? And who were the adjustments for?

The area was former Ottoman territory won at a high cost in blood by Allied soldiers. It was not the property of some Arab nationalist movement "just because".

[GostHacked]

The area was former Ottoman territory won at a high cost in blood by Allied soldiers. It was not the property of some Arab nationalist movement "just because".

That does not answer my question.

[DogOnPorch]

That does not answer my question.

Because dozens of nationalist movements...including the Mufti and the Zionists...were busy trying to grab a chunk of the Ottoman Empire. Where do you think Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia etc came from? Should the Mufti been allowed to call his own shots? Especially since he was a wanted Nazi with a date with the noose. Either way, the Brits, rather tired of all this crap by 1947 were only too happy to get out. They thought they could hang onto Egypt for the canal...but even that proved to be unaffordable.

Edited October 12, 2012 by DogOnPorch

[GostHacked]

Because dozens of nationalist movements...including the Mufti and the Zionists...were busy trying to grab a chunk of the Ottoman Empire. Where do you think Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia etc came from? Should the Mufti been allowed to call his own shots? Especially since he was a wanted Nazi with a date with the noose. Either way, the Brits, rather tired of all this crap by 1947 were only too happy to get out. They thought they could hang onto Egypt for the canal...but even that proved to be unaffordable.

Might be getting closer, but still does not really answer the question.

[DogOnPorch]

Might be getting closer, but still does not really answer the question.

Then you need to ask your 'question' better.

[Guest Peeves]

Andy why should they accept any adjustments? And who were the adjustments for?

Why should Israel? Who should Israel make any adjustments for, those that attacked them? Why should they be expected to make any adjustments?

The territory they hold is a legitimate state and territory occupy resulting from winning a war.

Israel has every right that any country has to defend and occupy land unless there are guarantees attached to its return, as the Sinai to Egypt.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Peeves

[Guest American Woman]

While I appreciate what you say here, I find it surprising that someone who has been partaking in debate on topics like this for years, as you have, would not have previously known some of these facts.

I should have clarified by saying that I had no idea so many Jews felt the need to leave permanently, as of course I realized that they felt the need to leave at the time. Also, given the small percentage of Americans that are Jews, I didn't realize the percentage of Jew worldwide residing in the U.S. was so high. I'm not so sure how pertinent it was to know that, as it doesn't change my position, just makes it stronger; but as a side note, I can't say that I've been partaking in debates on the Israel-Palestine issue for years, but I'm not sure if that's really of any relevance, either. I do believe in Palestine's right to exist, and being an American, I have been strongly subjected to the 'evil empire' line of thought - which is also applied to Israel - from many, and it took me a while to sort it all out in my own head.

In any case, if you haven't considered this before, you may also find this interesting: [...]

I did find it interesting.

And yes, all this just makes Israel's continued existence all the more vital. 2000 years of history has proven that living in the nations of others is a death sentence for the Jewish people.

That much I knew, just not to what extent.

[BC_chick]

It has nothing to do with their "Muslimness". It's about their lack of willingness to engage in doing something constructive, like working to build their own state and its institutions, rather than mindlessly shooting rockets at Israel. This has nothing to do with them being Muslim (there are multiple examples of Muslim nations that are prosperous and succesful), it has to do with them being uneducated, ruled by corrupt inept terrorists, and growing up in a culture of hatred. I wonder, how would Gaza look if, instead of using those Egyptian tunnerls to smuggle rocket parts, mortars, guns, etc, they instead smuggled in building materials, water desalination equipment, science textbooks, farm and irrigation equipment, etc. You know, if they spent their energy on the peaceful pursuit of their own prosperity, rather than an ineffectual agenda of hate.

I wasn't talking about you. Your post I was responding to mentioned that some of Israel's critics are anti-semites and some of them aren't. I said the same thing goes for the critics of Palestinians.

My point was that it's ok to point out the bad the other side does, but when you take out the human-nature factor and blame the bad actions entirely on them being Jewish (or Muslim), then it's anti-semitic or anti-Muslim.

[bud]

It has nothing to do with their "Muslimness". It's about their lack of willingness to engage in doing something constructive, like working to build their own state and its institutions, rather than mindlessly shooting rockets at Israel. This has nothing to do with them being Muslim (there are multiple examples of Muslim nations that are prosperous and succesful), it has to do with them being uneducated, ruled by corrupt inept terrorists, and growing up in a culture of hatred.

you seem to always miss the biggest variables in the equation when you talk about the palestinians and that is israel's brutal occupation of them and the fast growing and illegal jewish settlements that are stealing palestinian lands.

the slumping economy and the rockets don't happen for no reason.

you need to grow up and start being honest about the situation.

[Guest Peeves]

you seem to always miss the biggest variables in the equation when you talk about the palestinians and that is israel's brutal occupation of them and the fast growing and illegal jewish settlements that are stealing palestinian lands.

the slumping economy and the rockets don't happen for no reason.

you need to grow up and start being honest about the situation.

The Israelis occupy land as a result of war.It's not Arab land, it's land in dispute. Israeli' occupation is far less brutal than regimes like Assads or Egypts (see Chritians Egypt) or Sadaams (see Kurds) or Darfur, (see genocide) or .. why do I bother

[dre]

The Israelis occupy land as a result of war.It's not Arab land, it's land in dispute. Israeli' occupation is far less brutal than regimes like Assads or Egypts (see Chritians Egypt) or Sadaams (see Kurds) or Darfur, (see genocide) or .. why do I bother

The Israelis occupy land as a result of war.It's not Arab land, it's land in dispute.

No thats not true... Israel does not assert sovereignty over most of the west bank and it does not assert sovereignty over gaza. So theres no real dispute over ownership. Israel does claim as its own SOME parts of the occupied terrorists... parts of jerusalem and some of the land to the east of lake tiberius, so you could say some of THAT is disputed territory but never the less your claim is false.

Israel doesnt claim to own most of the west bank. They just want the area to remain stateless so that its easy for them to keep plundering it for resources.

Edited October 13, 2012 by dre

[DogOnPorch]

Jordan only gave-up claim to the so-called West Bank in 1988. Land they, themselves, captured during war. If there's a place that is disputed on this planet, it's this chunk of land. It should have been annexed by Israel decades ago and residents given a choice of staying or going. Staying = becoming Israeli. But, alas...

[dre]

Jordan only gave-up claim to the so-called West Bank in 1988. Land they, themselves, captured during war. If there's a place that is disputed on this planet, it's this chunk of land. It should have been annexed by Israel decades ago and residents given a choice of staying or going. Staying = becoming Israeli. But, alas...

Shouldnt there need to be two sides claiming something for its ownership to be disputed? Israel asserts no claim... Jordan asserts no claim... So who does? Your uncle pete?

And Israel cant annex millions of arabs. It would threaten their aspirations to maintain a jewish majority.

[dre]

-

Edited October 13, 2012 by dre

[DogOnPorch]

Shouldnt there need to be two sides claiming something for its ownership to be disputed? Israel asserts no claim... Jordan asserts no claim... So who does? Your uncle pete?

And Israel cant annex millions of arabs. It would threaten their aspirations to maintain a jewish majority.

Alas, I said...note also, I said decades ago...as in June 1967...a done deal like South Viet-Nam. The citizens would have...could have...been Israeli with all the trappings that go with that. Instead, the planet insisted upon dealing with terrorists, rewarding them for blowing-up airliners, etc.