"Disappearing Palestine" bus ads anger Jewish groups

[Black Dog]

]A controversial ad campaign on Vancouver's transit system showing the territory of Palestine shrinking into the state of Israel will run in other Canadian cities this fall, says the coalition behind the images.

...

We're disappointed that TransLink decided to run them," Anita Bromberg, national director of legal affairs for B'nai Brith, said in an interview from Toronto.

"It is contrary to their own rules and regulations," she said, as advertisements "shouldn't be derogatory of any one group, and the innuendo, the common understanding, would be to be very derogatory of Israel and it's supporters."

"In this day and age, where such supporters could be the target of hate, of violence or other acts of mischief, we feel that that regulation of TransLink should be interpreted quite broadly, understanding what the circumstances are around a campaign like this."

...

But Stephen Schachter, the co-chair for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, argued that if advertisements targeted non-Jewish groups, the situation would be taken more seriously.

"I can think of all sorts of other kinds of advertising by other communities, whether it's sexist, homophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-other-ethnic or religious groups that would be" prohibited, he said.

"We have members of the Jewish community who say they are not going to use transit and are very concerned about safety issues as a result of this kind of advertising."

Link

My main question is: are the maps accurate or not? If they are, I don't know how one could argue they are "targeting a group".

IMO there's nothing stopping B'nai Brith, or other groups from running their own ads, perhaps a map showing Israel's position in the region and the number of times its been attacked by its neighbours.

[DogOnPorch]

Those particular maps have never been accurate...getting old, too. The maps do not hint at the repeated Arab invasions. Now they're outraged?

[GostHacked]

Look at the map when Israel was created, and look at it now. No matter the reasons, it has been happening.

[DogOnPorch]

Look at the map when Israel was created, and look at it now. No matter the reasons, it has been happening.

lol...not like those silly maps claim. Pure Pallywood.

[GostHacked]

lol...not like those silly maps claim. Pure Pallywood.

Someone needs a dose of reality.

[DogOnPorch]

Someone needs a dose of reality.

Oh by all means, GH. Let's match skillz on the Middle East.

[GostHacked]

Oh by all means, GH. Let's match skillz on the Middle East.

Go ahead and start without me, I'll join you later.

[DogOnPorch]

Go ahead and start without me, I'll join you later.

Didn't think you were up for it.

[Charles Anthony]

Folks,

Stop trolling yourselves. My threshold for what is and what is not trolling is falling. Anybody who continues to troll will run the risk of taking a vacation from the forum.

If you can not ignore other trolls, then you will be treated as a troll.

Ch. A.

[Moonlight Graham]

Showing a map of a shrinking Palestinian territory (or whatever you want to call the area) being taken over by Zionists and, since 1948, the state of Israel, has indeed been happening over the last century or so and is still happening. That's not anti-Semitism or anything else, it's plain geography.

If this angers Jewish groups, then maybe these Jewish groups can pressure Israel to stop expanding the building of illegal settlements.

[DogOnPorch]

Let's look at some real maps, then, rather than made-up BS courtesy of the folks of the ilk that run blockades on occasion.

[Bryan]

Link

My main question is: are the maps accurate or not? If they are, I don't know how one could argue they are "targeting a group".

IMO there's nothing stopping B'nai Brith, or other groups from running their own ads, perhaps a map showing Israel's position in the region and the number of times its been attacked by its neighbours.

The maps are fairly accurate, through the context might be somewhat misleading.

The "pre" 1946 map is of the unincorporated Palestinian territory prior to the UN giving much of it to Israel. Zionists will argue there was no Palestine prior to 1946. That has the dubious distinction of being both technically true and deliberately misleading. There was no country of Palestine internationally recognized as an independent state, but that's because it was a British controlled territory. The boundaries are still accurate. The green areas really are where all the Palestinians lived (most of the region), and the white areas really are the few places where Jewish settlements were at the time.

The 1947 map really is how the UN cut up the territory. They absolutely screwed the Palestinian people over.

The difference from 1947 to now is pretty close too, but for different reasons. A chunk was taken all at once in 1967 when Egypt, Syria and Jordan got involved in a few border disputes. Israel was backed by the US, and had much more formidable armed forces. Instead of just declaring victory against those other countries, they used it as a cover for taking even more land and screwing the Palestinians over even more.

The 2010 map is also accurate yet misleading at the same time. Since 1967, the loss of land has been incremental, and less obvious. The grey areas are not all within Israeli borders, but they did take control of those areas largely at the point of a gun and the force of a bulldozer. Instead of moving the borders, they left them fairly close to 1967 levels, but just started marching troops into Palestinian land, forcing Palestinians off, and building Jewish settlements inside the Palestinian territories. So the green spots on the last map are the parts left of their own country that they still live in and control -- mostly isolated enclaves that they've been confined to rather than one contiguous area.

[Rue]

The maps are fairly accurate, through the context might be somewhat misleading.

The "pre" 1946 map is of the unincorporated Palestinian territory prior to the UN giving much of it to Israel. Zionists will argue there was no Palestine prior to 1946. That has the dubious distinction of being both technically true and deliberately misleading. There was no country of Palestine internationally recognized as an independent state, but that's because it was a British controlled territory. The boundaries are still accurate. The green areas really are where all the Palestinians lived (most of the region), and the white areas really are the few places where Jewish settlements were at the time.

The 1947 map really is how the UN cut up the territory. They absolutely screwed the Palestinian people over.

The difference from 1947 to now is pretty close too, but for different reasons. A chunk was taken all at once in 1967 when Egypt, Syria and Jordan got involved in a few border disputes. Israel was backed by the US, and had much more formidable armed forces. Instead of just declaring victory against those other countries, they used it as a cover for taking even more land and screwing the Palestinians over even more.

The 2010 map is also accurate yet misleading at the same time. Since 1967, the loss of land has been incremental, and less obvious. The grey areas are not all within Israeli borders, but they did take control of those areas largely at the point of a gun and the force of a bulldozer. Instead of moving the borders, they left them fairly close to 1967 levels, but just started marching troops into Palestinian land, forcing Palestinians off, and building Jewish settlements inside the Palestinian territories. So the green spots on the last map are the parts left of their own country that they still live in and control -- mostly isolated enclaves that they've been confined to rather than one contiguous area.

You need to go back and find out the actual history of the Middle East.

First off what makes you think the 1946 map you show is accurate? What presumption leads you to believe there was Palestinian territory let alone the one shown in the 1946 map.

See that is your problem. You start off with a false myth and then you assume from there,

The reference name Palestine did not make it a territory. It was never a territory. Can you please at least make the effort to find

out what a territory is.

The use of the name Palestine was for geographic purposes only and it has always been an ambiguous term. It is a false assumption to believe as you do it was the 1946 map.

In fact Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah and Mr. Abbas of the Palestinian Authority all believe as do the majority of Arab League nations particularly Saudi Arabia, that Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, the West Bank and Gaza all are Palestine.

They did not see it as a territory or nation just a geographic region.

It was the British and French who introduced the notion of nations and borders in the area and how they did it is something you clearly do not understand because I doubt the generation you come from knows what a book is and thinks it will get buy in life reading

selective web sites which you absorb as absolute truth with no attempt to do any other research.

The League of Nations, a collective of European nations mandated after World War One that a Jewish state be created.

Britain to manouver into the position of being appointed governor for that mandate in fact lied, out and out lied as Winston Churchill

would admit years later in his memoirs so it could become the administrator of the Middle East and create this nation.

In fact Britain and France had a mandate in direct opposition to the League of Nations mandate. There agenda was to set up some

states they could control to assure access to the emerging oil fields.

In the original plan agreed to by Prince Faisal who lived in Damascus and representatives for the Jews at that time and its leader Chaim Wietzman, there were to be two nations side by side. In fact Israel would have been a Switzerland. It would have been a nation with special legal rights for Jews but Arab peoples who were nomadic would continue to move in and out of it.

There was to be an alliance between the two nations with the proposed Israel providing scientific and technology advise to Faisal.

That proposal was then circumvented. The French went to Faisal the day before this agreement would be put in effect and out and out lied to him saying the Jews were planning a different agenda. Faisal panicked and ripped up the agreement. The day after that the French imprisoned him and deported him and he realized he had been screwed by the French. The British then unilaterally and in direct contradiction to their mandate created Transjordan which took over 90% of the land earmarked for a Jewish state and turned it into a puppet monarchy with one of Faisal's sons to placate him. That kingdom to this day forbids Jews from being citizens of Jordan. It was and remains Jew free. It was also declared a Palestinian state and anyone calling themselves Palestinian was granted automatic citizenship and had the right to return anywhere from any country to Jordan for automatic citizenship.

Iraq was created next door for another one of Faisal's sons, and Saudi Arabia was then created for the family of Faisal and in so doing the British were able to pay back the Arab peoples it owed a favour to for helping them defeat the Ottoman Empire during World War One and you all remember Lawrence of Arabia.

As Churchill then indicates in his memoirs it was his job to deliberately prevent a Jewish state and in fact disobey the League of Nations Mandate. France carved up the two imposed nations of Syria and Lebanon and tried to turn them into French colonies and France had a base of Phalangiste Christians in Lebanon to run that country but there were also Sunnis and Shiites who never

trusted them in that country resulting in many civil wars and today Hezbollah controls the country through brute force and along with the Syrian government and Iran has assassinated 3 Lebanese elected leaders over the years.

Syria with a majority Sunni population also has Assyrian Christians, all kinds of other orthodox Christians, Druze, Berbers,Shiites,

and a small minority group called the Alawites who are an offshoot of Islam but incorporate many Pagan principles. The Alawites

wrestled control of the country via Colonel Assad head of the Syrian Air Force whose son who was supposed to replace him was murdered to be replaced by the current Assad who had intentions of being an eye doctor which he is trained for in London when he was recalled to Damascus.

To this day Hamas, Syria,, Iran Hezbollah do not recognize Lebanon, Israel and Jordan as legitimate nations and believe they all should be one Sharia law nation. Now the question is should that be a Sharia law nation of Shiites or Sunnis and that is what the current war has turned into with the Muslim Brotherhood which is Sunni split in two factions one pro Syria and propped by Iran the other propped by Al Quaeda and Turkey.

The pre 1967 Israel border was never agreed to. Try understand that. Its called a de facto border. It came about because when Israel agreed to a tiny nation of less than 5% of what it was originally offered and less than 4% of the entire region, The Arab League said no never will a Jew have their own nation and declared a war to kill all Jews in the area now referred to as Palestine which no longer included Syria, Lebanon and Jordan but is what Israel and the West Bank are today.

The borders that came about in 1949 arose as the line where Arab soldiers from the Arab League of Nations ran away and gave up the war. To this day the Arab League has never recognized them and Syria and Lebanon and many other Arab League nations remain in a declared state of war against Israel which they never removed.

Even Egypt and Jordan do not recognize Israel as a nation. They have low level relations but no ambassador nor will they ever openly admit there is a Jewish nation although they have agreed at this point in time not to attack it.

So your borders you show above are a crock. They are a myth that was manufactured by the Ministry of Communications of Syria after 1949 and then updated and expanded upon by the KGB. Syria after World War Two became the host of 80% of the former Gestapo and SS who engage in the holocaust. They were welcomed to Damascus and based on their political ideology the Bath Party ran Iraq and Syria. Nasser of Egypt glorified Hitler, and all three nations incorporated his policies right down to the Getaspo police they

renamed Mukbharat, the goose stepping soldiers and World War Two helmets and to this day Hitler salute also used by Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.

Nasser wore a Hitler mustache and so did Anwar Sadat his whole life.

Mr. Assad the current leader of the Palestinian Authority wrote his ph.d thesis in Egypt explaining how the holocaust never happened and Hitler was misunderstood.

Now you want to think you can summarize Middle East history with the b.s.maps you have? Really.Go find out where they came from.

In Jewish maps Judea and Somaria cover most of the area you do not show which religious Jews to this day argue was illegally taken from them. That of course you have no clue about.

Nor would you understand that the majority of people today claiming to be Palestinian refugees are not however the UN changed the definition of refugee to apply differently to Palestinians and that today's Palestinians are most probably descendants from Arab peoples who flooded the region of Palestine displacing the actual Palestinians thanks to the British who flooded the area with Arabs to try prevent a Jewish state.

In fact most land disputes remain between so called Palestinians not between Israelis and Palestinians and that is why Arafat blew up the Land Titles office on the West Bank. He didn't want a Palestinian v. Palestinian land war over whose title to land was more valid.

Let me summarize. This thread was started by someone who thinks there is nothing wrong putting one sided political propaganda on a bus designed to inflame hatred of Israel because that conforms to his political opinions.

If I put an ad on that same bus making inflammatory political comments about gays, this poster would be the first to spitter and spatter how unfair it is and how public displays should not be turned into political forums for bias views.

This is someone who believes the gay pride parade should be used to spew out anti Israeli comments.

So before you trot out your borders, do some more homework.

[DogOnPorch]

Not to mention the maps don't show evil Zionists BUYING the land off the Ottoman Turks. Let alone the wars the Arabs launched on the evil Zionists...which they LOST. Had the Arabs WON, I seriously doubt the folks that put that ad on a bus would be trying to bring back the Jewish homeland.

[DogOnPorch]

Nor do these maps show events like this...the 1936 Arab Revolt and Pogrom. Gangs of the Mufti's men cruise the Mandate looking for Jews. I'm sure they just want to talk...

[Rue]

Wait I want to put up a map showing how the Muslim population is moving across Europe and taking over.

Oh no. That's different. Can't have that. It would be hateful. Save it for Jews in Israel.

[DogOnPorch]

Wait I want to put up a map showing how the Muslim population is moving across Europe and taking over.

Oh no. That's different. Can't have that. It would be hateful. Save it for Jews in Israel.

You're right...much like Geller found out. Her bus ads were 'controversial and bigoted'. But, not her opponent's ads...

[bud]

You're right...much like Geller found out. Her bus ads were 'controversial and bigoted'. But, not her opponent's ads...

great comparison.

enjoy these heartwarming photos of geller's vandalized racist posters. here is one:

[GostHacked]

Wait I want to put up a map showing how the Muslim population is moving across Europe and taking over.

Oh no. That's different. Can't have that. It would be hateful. Save it for Jews in Israel.

Immigration instead of invasion. A very clear and distinct difference. Plus the Muslim immigrants are not creating new nation states within those countries they emigrate to. Another difference.

[bud]

lols.

obviously you didn't watch the video, because it doesn't respond to what you're trying to say.

[The_Squid]

Immigration instead of invasion. A very clear and distinct difference. Plus the Muslim immigrants are not creating new nation states within those countries they emigrate to. Another difference.

Never mind the fact that the host country has let them immigrate!

[Shady]

Immigration instead of invasion. A very clear and distinct difference. Plus the Muslim immigrants are not creating new nation states within those countries they emigrate to. Another difference.

Not really true. In many countries like France for instance, there are Muslim enclaves that they've carved out for themselves. They also seek to change certain laws, to make them more like the countries they emigrated from, such as making Sharia law more acceptable. The violence, riots, and city fires in France last year or so is fallout from the whole situation. They also don't respect true freedom of speech. Ask the Danes about that regarding the cartoons certain publications published a while back. There is definitely a creeping influence that seeks to erode traditional western values. Which is why many of these same countries are reforming their immigration system.

It's the same strategy behind the Palestinian's insistance of the right of return. Overrun Israel with non-Israelis so that Israel ceases to exist anymore.

[DogOnPorch]

lols.

obviously you didn't watch the video, because it doesn't respond to what you're trying to say.

Sure it does. Stacey Dooley is just a BBC travel corespondent whose hometown is Luton. Perhaps you can make her out to be a Zionist.

[kimmy]

But Stephen Schachter, the co-chair for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, argued that if advertisements targeted non-Jewish groups, the situation would be taken more seriously.

"I can think of all sorts of other kinds of advertising by other communities, whether it's sexist, homophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-other-ethnic or religious groups that would be" prohibited, he said.

"We have members of the Jewish community who say they are not going to use transit and are very concerned about safety issues as a result of this kind of advertising."

Link

To me, that's the funny part of the whole thing.

Jewish groups, more than any other group I can think of except arguably gay rights activists, can demand to be taken seriously regardless of how trivial their concerns are.

-k

[Rue]

Immigration instead of invasion. A very clear and distinct difference. Plus the Muslim immigrants are not creating new nation states within those countries they emigrate to. Another difference.

Ooopsy right over your head right Gost. How the hell do you think Transjordan was started? Where do you think the so called Palestinians of today are descended from?

You really show your ignorance. Now you again trot out the canard that Jews who went to Israel invaded. They did not. There was no country to invade. Invade refers to illegally committing an act of war against a nation that exists and taking it over.So save your bs

revisionist crap for someone else.

The area of Palestine was never a nation. 80 percent of it was illegally confiscated by Britain in direct contradiction and contravention of international law and its mandate by the League of Nations to create Transjordan a Palestinian state that to this day does not allow Jews to be citizens or own land in that country so give it a rest.

The Muslims who go to Europe and experience discrimination are absolutely no different than the Jews who went to Israel or lived in Europe or in Arab countries. Your selectivity is past amazing. It shows the bs double standard you use.

If a Muslim creates a sharia law state that is not invasion. If a Jew does it, its invasion. If a Muslim wants self determination-its called Sharia law and we must accommodate in Europe. If a Jew says, you know what, I want self determination but only in my own country no where else, you say its different.

The Muslim religion not that you seem to remember does not distinguish from state and religion. The two are to be the same. The minority of Muslims who do not believe that are just that- a minority. The majority believe they have the religious obligation to populate in the state they are in to become majority population to achieve sharia law as the state government and religion.

So yes the map would be very appropriate because Jews do not go to France, Germany, Holland seeking to become the majority population, segregate themselves from the mainstream, demand their own religious rights to exempt them from laws.

Zip over your head. Of course.