Jump to content

Israel


jdobbin

Recommended Posts

I do not have the time or the patience to respond to your entire post here. But I have three questions:
  1. Why can Arab Muslims live safely and productively in Israel, even vote there, and the reverse is not true;
  2. Why was Israel willing to peacefully accept partition of the Palestine Mandate in 1948, but the Arabs weren't; and
  3. Why were the Israelis willing to resettle their refugees, i.e. poor Jews from Baghdad and other Arab cities expelled after 1948, but the Arabs kept theirs in fetid camps?

I expect silence rather than intelligent answers.

Judging by a lot of your previous posts, you also do not have the education.

Arab Muslims do not live in peace in Israel. An article in the Globe and Mail - Jan 27, 2007 - points out that the number of Israeli Arabs seeking refugee status (and being granted it) in Canada has increased substantially over the past 5 years. These people are living in a state that is run by and for the benefit of a group to which they do not belong - Jews. It is widely acknowledged that successive Israeli governments have publicly fretted over the threat that the Arabs would out-breed the Jews and "democratic" Israel would cease to be a Jewish state. Consider what would happen if the government of Canada started to publicly worry that one demographic group might outbreed the other.

The Arabs were willing to accept a previous proposal for partition and the Jews rejected it. So what?

I will answer your third question with these questions: why is it that you hold the Arab nations around Israel responsible to solve a problem that Israel created? Why is it that you feel you have the right to expect them to behave in the way that Israel has with respect to refugees? Israel's behavious towards incoming Jewish refugees is unique to its own intentions. What makes you think that the Palestinian Arab refugees would accept citizenship in other Arab countries when their homeland is Palestine and by doing so they would likely forfeit their claims?

And finally... "I expect?" Who exactly do you think you are? The quizz master?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 552
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am creating this special post to point out by highlighting in red all those points where Rue tries to turn debate into thought crime by stretching, exaggerating, and distorting the words of the other party. I am then reporting the post for the review of the administrator.

In response to Higgly;

'Illegal? (the unilateral creation of TransJordan by Britain) Under whose law and why?'.

International law and because Britain like any country in the world at the time, had no legal right to unilaterally seize land and declare a nation. It was also declared illegal by the league of Nations.

"Where does it say that the Jewish homeland will be all of Palestine? You make this mistake over and over ad nauseum - you assume that the Balfour Declaration and everything that came after promised the entire Palestinian mandate to the Jews. It did not."

No Higgly you make the mistake over and over again as you just did trying to pretend historic fact does not exist when it does not suit you. The League of Nations mandate stated clearly that Palestine where the Jewish homeland was to be created was what is today Jordan (East Paletsine) and Israel (West Palestine). The Belfour Declaration is an entirely different document. The mandate can be found on the inter-net. Your choosing to pretend it does not exist is absurd.

"(Britain) Liied to whom? "

The documents released by the British government, in particular the papers of Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, and the High Commissioner to Palestine, all evidence the British deliberately chose to mislead and lie to the Leage of Nations.

"Weitzmann was less than candid with Feisal and hid from him the true nature of his plans - to take all of Palestine for a Zionist state. "

The above comment is a n tter fabrication on your part. It is an historiuc fact that the agreement between Weitzman and Feisal was written out in full and signed by both sides.

"In any case, the Jordanians, including Feisal's successor, Abdullah, kept their word. "

Again you are absolutely wrong. Abdullah had nothing to do with the agreement between Feisal and Weitzman. Later on, he did enter into an agreement with Britain not any Jewish people, that he would give up any rights to West Palestine.

"Of course people like you will tell us time and again that the Arabs just hate the Jews, in spite of this generous accommodation from Feisal."

I have never at any time suggested or stated that Arabs just hate Jews. Your coded words slurring me as a Jew "People like you" is cowardly. If you want

to call me a Jew say it to me. Unlike Figleaf I won't report you.

"The British were promising the Arabs a pan-Arab nation at the same time as they were making promises to Weitzmann and the Zionists. "

At no time did Britain ever promise Weitzman anything as the released documents from Churchill, Eden, the British High Commissioner to Palestine, all evidence. The British were clear fromt he get go that they were completely against giving any credence to a Jewish state under any circumstance. This is precisely why they came into conflict with the League of Nations.

"Palestine has always been the territory between the Jordan River and the sea. You keep trying to expand it - a good Zionist, true to form. "

No, Palestine was always and has always been where Jordan and Israel and for that matter portions of Syria and Lebanon are today. That has nothing to do with me or Zionists it has to do with historic fact and geography and is precisely why the Leage of Nations mandate described it as such.

"Your last name must be Jabotinsky or Sharon."

Ooh some more Jew baiting. Figgy should I report himn?

"Every country has immigration quotas."

Britain was not legally mandated to create or impose quotas. It had no legal authority to set up immigration quotas. Neither did Transjordan. Neither Britain or Transjordan had the legal right through sovereignty to create and impose immigration quotas against Jews. The British did so illegally and unilaterally and in express contradiction of international law and the League of Nations mandate.

"It is a fact of life."

Another coded reference to Jews should know their place in life and not question it right Higgly? Yassuh Massuh Higgly.

"Just because they were applied to Jews is not important."

Right, Jews are not important. I mean what next, someone might think they have the right to exist..

" It is frankly bizarre that you would expect everybody living in Palestine just to move out of the way so that the Zionists could do whatever they pleased. "

Right. Its bizarre for Jews to want self-determination. They should know their place in life right Higgly. Besides Jews aren't important. Why would 2000 years of discrimination make Jews want to live in their own countr....no that would be bizarre. So would wanting a country because in the Muslim world, Jews were not allowed to be citizens or own land...no bizarre. Wanting to leave Europe or to escape pogroms or leave after the holocaust....bixarre The expulsion of 900,000 Jews from Arab countries and having 700,000 head to Israel because no one else would take them....bizarre All those countries refusing to take in Jews forcing them to head to Israe... bizarre. I mean there you have it. Jews are bizarre for fleeing persecution and wanting peace and security and self-determination. Those unimportant Jews should just shut up and accept their lot in life.

"You think like a two year old. Unfortunately so did the Zionists."

Right. Jews are bizarre for wanting to be free of persecution and anyone who thinks people who suffer and want to be free is a two year old and Zionists are all 2 year olds. Of course you Higgly for stating thi show incredible maturity.

"Samuel was a Jew."

Yes The High Commissioner to Palestine was a Jew. So what is your point? Churchill was Christian? Anthony Eden was Christian. Feisal and Abdullah were Muslims. So? Let's call you out on this Higgly. How does Samuel being a Jew in any way have anything to do with the British policy of preventing an Israeli state from coming about? Samuel carried out exactly what he was required to do as a British civil servant. He carried out their mandate to prevent Israel from coming about. So what does his being a Jew have to do with it? You are so typical of anti-semites. You throw in someone's Jewish religion as a racist slur. It has no relevance at all to the historic developments that led to all of the above.

"Lebanon and Syria were French territory."

Lebanon and Syriawere colonies imposed by the French as part of an agreement with Britain who sliced up Iraq and Jordan for themselves. It is precisely these unilateral colonial divisions by both the British and French which led to the present day conflict.

"OK. So anything Feisal agreed to became moot. What's your point?"

The point is you choose to ignore the historic origins of the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

"Again, you are proceeding uder the misguided assumption that all of Palestine was somehow owing to the Jews. It was not and it never promised to them in its entirety. "

No it is in fact you continue to pretend the League of Nations mandate which states the above does not exist.

"So what? Palestine was under British rule. In any case, Passfield was re-affirmed by the United Nations when it too partitioned Palestine."

The UN never partitioned Palestine. In fact when it proposed a second Palestinian state and a Jewish state, the Arab League disagreed. Its mandate then expired. The border that then came about with Israel was not partitioned by the UN - it came about by de facto possession because of a war. The war was initiated byt he Arab League. The pre-1967 borders of Israel came about from war not a UN partition.

"Everything you say is based on the incorrect notion that all of Palestine was somehow the property of the Jews."

I have never stated at any time that it is my opinion that all of Palestine is the property of Jews. What I have done is to show that historically, Palestine consisted of Jordan and Israel and in fact today, what we are talking about is the creation of a second Palestinian state. I also call Higgly out on it, because time and time as in the next quote below, he pretends Jordan is not part of Palestine and should not be considered when discussing the Palestinian conflict as constituting a Palestinian state.

"The British created Jordan as a Palestinian State? What sheer nonsense! Has anybody told them? Jordan was created as a Hashemite kingdom, Rue. "

Jordan was carved out of East Palestine that is an hostoric fact. Its population was created by flooding it with migrant Arabs from all over the Middle East while at the same time restricting any immigration of Jews. The fact that the British set up a puppet monarchy and chose to call it a Hashemite Kingdom (Beduins) doesn't change the geographicl location, who lives there and where they came from. The vast majority of Jordans were Palestinian or were encouraged to migrate into Jordan by the British from other Arab locations. Few if any were Hashemite or Beduin. To pretend Jordan is not a Palestinian nation is absurd. Tell that to the Palestinians who live there was well as the PLO and Hamas. It will be new to them. It will also be news to the current King who has stated in numerous speeches that he acknowledges the Palestinian nature of his country as did his father. It will also be news to his Palestinian wife.

"The Jordanians made a treaty with Golda Meir not to attack Israel's borders during the 1948 war and it kept that promise."

Absolutely wrong. It deliberately and openly violated that agreement History shows the attacks were initiated from and led from and by Jordan not Israel.

"In fact it was Israel that attacked Jordanian territory."

The facts show the Arab League initiated attacks from Jordan and Israel then and only then responded. It never initiated any attacks or the war of independence.

"There was never any promise nor intention to turn all of Palestine over to the Zionists. "

The League of Nations mandate which exists and can be found on the inter-net can be read in its full text and is clear on what it promised.

"The Balfour Declaration talks about a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. It does not say all of Palestine will be turned over to the Jews."

So? Why do you pretending history should only commence from the Balfour declaration onwards? Why the selectivity?

"Read it as many times as you like, Rue. That's just what it says. "

No one is debating what the Balfour declaration said. What I am stating is you are deliebrately choosing to ignore the League of Nations mandate on Palestine and how the British violated it and illegally created Transjordan out of 80% of Palestine, and then and only then came up with the Balfour declaration.

"The Balfour declaration was the result of talks between the British government and Weitzmann. "

The Balfour declaration was the result of unilateral British action to take 80% of Palestine, create Tran-Jordan, then suggest two enclaves one for Jews and one for Muslims to be governed by the British. This was not proposed by the Leage uf Nations nor was it the result of anything Weitzman suggested or agreed to and for you to suggest Weitzman created it is a deliberate misrepresentation. It was a unilateral initiative of the British in response to the League of Nations calling on Britain to dismantle TransJordan and cease and desist in its anti-Jewish immigration quotas and attempts to prevent a Jewish homeland. That of course is the part of history Higgly skips over.

"The Arabs never had any say in the matter"

Absolute and utter bull-shit. Not only did the Arab League have a say, but Abdullah, Feisal and many other Arab Leaders constantly had in-put and pressured Eden and Churchill as evidenced by their documents.

"Your constant attempts to depict the British as some sort of treacherous, anti-Israel power is extraordinary. "

The actions of the British have been proven by the very words and documents of Eden, Churchill, and their government papers now released and public record. As much as Higgly would like to suggestI am attempting to suggest this I am not. The decision of the British to prevent a Jewish homeland is an historic fact evidenced by their own documents and words....anyone can find them on the inter-net and read them. Suggesting I am creating them is absurd.

For that matter at no time did I call the British treacherous. If you notice, such name calling is Higgly's m.o. not mine. What I stated is that the British were against the creation of a Jewish state and did everything in their power to stop one from happening including lying to the League of Nations and then unilaterally and illegally seizing 80% of Palestine, creating TransJordan and then flooding it with Arab migrants from outside the area. I have stated this is now been proven iby their own documents and words. It is not something I made up or need to create.

"Were it not for the British just where would Israel be today?"

If it were not for the British, and for that matter the FRench and Germans,Israel would have created a state in Palestine with the assistane of King Feisal and the conflict as we know it would not exist.

"Incredible though it may seem, Israel and its founders were the original terrorists in the Middle East."

Right here was never any terror or violence in the Middle East until those darned Jews came back. Talk about revising history to suit one's anti-semitic agenda.

By the way my historic references for anything I stated come from the League of Nations, United Nations, and the papers and documents from the British government. You can find them yourselves on the web-site. They are public record.

This debate will continue once a ruling on Rue's behaviour has been issued. Because Rue resorts to these accusations on a routine basis, I am also asking the administrator to suspend Rue until a decision has been reached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o.k. so as I understand it Higgly made the following comments to me;

1-Oh Rue. You're so cute when you're angry

2-Your last name must be Jabotinsky or Sharon.

3-Just because they were applied to Jews is not important.

4-You think like a two year old. Unfortunately so did the Zionists

5-You will embue just about anybody with ultimate authority as long as they agree with you.

6-Everything you say is based on the incorrect notion that all of Palestine was somehow the property of the Jews. Although you cling to this illusion desperately, you cannot make it true

7-It's bad enough that you can't think straight

and the following comment to JBG;

8-Judging by a lot of your previous posts, you also do not have the education.

and then states about me again;

9-.....the above (abridged) post contains irrational allegations of criminal behaviour and/or intent

and

10. Rue tries to turn debate into thought crime by stretching, exaggerating, and distorting the words of the other party.

Then as I understand it he "reported" me using the following remark;

11.This debate will continue once a ruling on Rue's behaviour has been issued. Because Rue resorts to these accusations on a routine basis, I am also asking the administrator to suspend Rue until a decision has been reached.

So as I understand it, Higgly feels I should be suspended/censored but for my responses to his comments in debate, but his remarks should be simply ignored. It appears this is the same selective process Higgly has used to ignore any references to history that do not back up his opinions in the above debate.

I now note Higgly has ignored responding to any of the historic points raised and is trying to avoid having to debate me.

Oh well. By the way if anyone cares, I have reported all of the above comments Higgly made about me to my cats who are Zionists but act older then 2 year old children. They are very mature cats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is my personal opinion that the following 3 comments from Higgly can be construed as anti-semetic in that they make references to Jews but had nothing to do with the debate being discussed;

1-Of course people like you

2-Your last name must be Jabotinsky or Sharon

3-Samuel was a Jew.

I also wish to state that Higgly made the following 3 comments clearly using emotion to suggest Israel is treacherous;

1-“Instead it (Israel) attacked Jordanian troops and tried to take Jerusalem. Treachery!

2-“That outpost was there (placed by Israel) to keep Palestinian Arabs in their refugee camps so they would not go back into Israel. Treachery!”

3-“How did Sharon reward them (Lebanon) in the 1980s? Treachery!”

then stated to me;

4-“Your constant attempts to depict the British as some sort of treacherous’

I would like to state that the above comments by Higgly indicate he does one thing then criticizes others for doing what he does.

The contradictions and inconsistencies are self-explanatory.

I should also point out for the record, that Higgly has projected his exercise of calling

countries such as Israel treacherous onto me. I do not engage in such a device when I debate or respond. That is a method of expression specific to Higgly and I think it is unfair for him to suggest I have engaged in what he does. My remarks as to Britain speak for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Arab Muslims do not live in peace in Israel. An article in the Globe and Mail - Jan 27, 2007 - points out that the number of Israeli Arabs seeking refugee status (and being granted it) in Canada has increased substantially over the past 5 years. These people are living in a state that is run by and for the benefit of a group to which they do not belong - Jews. It is widely acknowledged that successive Israeli governments have publicly fretted over the threat that the Arabs would out-breed the Jews and "democratic" Israel would cease to be a Jewish state. Consider what would happen if the government of Canada started to publicly worry that one demographic group might outbreed the other."

I would like to address the above subjective personal opinion stated by Higgly and expose its inaccuracy and point out that his decision to infer that Arab Muslims do not libve in peace because Israeli Arabs choose to leave Israel is subjectively fabricated.

Let us talk facts. Unlike Jews in any Muslim country that exists today, Arab Israelis are citizens of the Israel with equal legal rights. This is precisely why the Israeli constitution guarantees the government serve Arab Israelis in Arabic, allow them to elect Arab members of the Knesset (parliament) and why the Israeli courts have enforced Arab Israeli legal rights time and time again in decisions.

The political and legal involvement of the Arab Israeli populationevidenced through national and municipal elections is public fact. It is also public fact that Arab Israelis in fact do live in peace and are not subject to crimes or attacks by Jewish Israelis. Higgly has invented that. The crime rates, charges and sentences for Arab Israelis compared ti Jewish Israelis is public knowledge and I now challenge Higgly to produce evidence that indicates Arab Israelis are being attacked by Jewish Israelis and not living peacefully.

In fact Arab citizens of Israel run the political and administrative affairs of their own municipalities and advance their political nd interests through their elected representatives in the Knesset,

It is a fact Arab Israelis have also held various government positions, including that of deputy minister.

Israel's constitution unlike any constitution in any Muslim country states that the Israeli state will "ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex" and guarantees "freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture". That is precisely what has been upheld in Israeli courts and this is precisely why Israel has very clear anti-discrimination laws which Arab Israelis have invoked.

What Higgly also will ignore in his Israel bad bad bad subjective personal remarks is that since the creation of the State of Israel, the legal and social status of Arab Israeli by law has enabled them to be guaranteed equal rights for women and prohibition of polygamy and child marriage which is NOT the case in the Muslim world.

It is again a legal and social fact that Israel unlike the Muslim countries of the Middle East and elsewhere politically and legally guarantees Arab/Muslim and all women equality in rights and personal freedoms, including the right to vote and be elected to local and national office.

Now let us talk why Arab Israelis leave Israel and address Higgly's unsubstantiated fabrication that they are leaving because they can't live in peace.

There is a very real distinction that has resulted between Arab and Jewish citizens as a direct result of the Palestinian conflict and terrorism. It has to do with civic duty. Since 1949, because Israel has been under contionual attack from Muslim/Arab terrorists and/or hostile Arab nations it requires all its citizens to join the armed forces from 18 to 65 and be on reserve after serving a compulsory period of service. Therefore the entire country is enlisted and when one goes for a job interview if one does not have military security clearance they can not get a job.

Since Arab citizens have been exempted from compulsory service in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) many for obvious reasons will not join the IDF. As a result without the military security clearance, when they go to get jobs, they will be rejected not because they are Arab, but because they have no military security clearance.

This is precisely why so many Arab Israelis leave. For them trying to find work as engineers, doctors, professionals is limited.

So for Higgly to suggest they are fleeing violence is b.s.

Now why do Arab Israelis apply for "refuge" status? Because they make the legal arguement they are being discriminated against when trying to get jobs. In fact those Arab Israelis who join the armed forces, get jobs and do not encounter the problem of lacking security clearance. For that matter non Arab Israelis including Jewish Israelis who choose NOT to serve in the IDF face the exact same kind of problem when looking for work and trying to be hired.

Someone should explain to Higgly that the no. 1 country these days for refugee applicants in Canada is Mexico and the top ten countries where refugee applicants apply from when coming to Canada do NOT correspond to the top 10 refugee producing countries of the world.

Someone should explain to Higgly that the method in which our refugee determination system is being used by applicants to come to Canada can not automatically assume the applicants are in fact refugees or for that matter the findings of the Refugee Board of Canada are stating Arab Israelis are being subject to violence.

In fact the Refugee Board decisions have been inconsistent for Arab Israelis and many are rejected as not having been discriminated against because of their ethnicity or political views but having been treated the same way as any Israeli Jew or Muslim or Christian or anyone else who has no military security clearance.

That said no it would not be easy being an Arab in Israel during times of conflict the same reason it was

so difficult for the Japanese in Canada and the U.S. during world war two. However unlike the US and Canada, Israel has never rounded up and arrested its Arab Israelis during its wars andthen placed them in camps like the US and Canada did.

Now let us explain why Arab Israelis are exempted from military service. This exemption is allowed precisely out of consideration for their family, religious and cultural affiliations with the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world, given the on-going conflict.

This does not mean they are not encouraged to volunteer for military service and the fact is Arab Israelis, Druze and Circassian and Christian Israelis have and continue to join the IDF.

Let us also address Higgly's fabrication that Arab Israelis are being abused by "Jews" in Israel which is anti-semitic in that it singles out only the "Jews" in Israel and suggests they discriminate against Arab Israelis because they are "Jews".

Israeli society is made up of different population groups coexisting in the framework of a single democratic state. It is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multi-religious and multi-lingual society, with vey high levels of informal segregation patterns. Contrary to Higgly's attempts to define Israeli society as Jew v.s. Arab, this is bul-shit. Within the Jewish community there are complicated divisions between Ashkanazi (Eurpean Jews) and Tsfardic (Arab Jews). There is a division between Jews who came from Latin America, Russia, the US, Britain, etc. Jews speak many different languages and have a wide variety of religious believes ranging from extreme ultra-orthodox Jews who do not believe in the State of Israel (because they believe the Messiah must return first) to absolute atheists on the other side.

When Ethiopian Jews came to Israel, they were discriminated against not because of their skin colour but because they were not considered "Jews" by the Rabbinical council. This same Rabbinical council may not consider myself, a Reform Jew with very little traditional Jewish religious practice and who ressembles more of a Unitarian-Bhuddist-Taoist-agnostic like modern non religious Jew, to be Jewish either.

Religious contravery over who is a Jew still exists as do the cultural differences between Jews depending on their countries of origin. Jews face conflicts between other Jews within Israeli society.

For that matter within Arab Israel society there are divisions also depending on how Arab Israelis practice their religions whether they be Christian or Muslim.

So while groups are not separated by official policy, as is the case here in Canada or in any other democractic multi-cultural society different sectors within the society have chosen to lead a segregated life-style, maintaining their strong cultural, religious, ideological and/or ethnic identity, while others do not.

It is a fact that the vast majority of Arab Israelis have chosen to maintain their distinct identity and not assimilate. Their community's separate existence is constitutionally, legally and politically guaranteed through the use of Arabic, Israel's second official language; a separate Arab/Druze school system; Arabic literature, theater and mass media; and maintenance of independent Muslim, Druze and Christian denominational courts which adjudicate matters of personal status.

Of course relations between Israel's Arab and Jewish citizens are directly affected by terrorism and the Palestinian conflict. For that matter this Palestinian conflict hinders relations between Arab Muslim Israelis and Arab Christian Israelis and Israeli Druze.

In Israel there is a Citizen Accord Forum, which tries to address relations between Jews and Arabs in Israel. It includes well over 500 active volunteers.

Is Israel a perfect society? No. Are there problems between Israelis? Yes. However I wish to make this perfectly clear. Arabs in Israel enjoy a way of life no non Muslim enjoys in Muslim countries that is a fact.

I also wish to make it crystal clear that for Higgly to fabricate that Israeli Jews are preventing Arab Israelis from living in peace as he did, is a complete lie and I challenge him to prove his statement or issue an apology and admit he fabricated his statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Arab / Israeli conflict is about ethnic hatred and genocide....If you refuse to read history and are unaware, please do not burden us with trivia.

OK. How's this for trivia? Jordan and Egypt have had peace treaties with Israel for decades now. Are they not Arabs? Have they attacked Israel since signing those treaties? Why do you keep demonizing and scapegoating all Arabs? Here are a few other Arab countries that have not attacked Israel for decades: Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Tunisia, Dubai, Algeria...

You're being more than slightly disingenuous here. The primary reason other Arab states don't attack Israel directly is hardly benevolence: it's self interest. They would lose - badly - as they always have.

That has not prevented them from attacking Israel indirectly, in the media, at the UN, and in many instances by funding terrorist groups which attack Israel and primarily murder Israeli civilians. Some Arab states openly pay a reward to the families of suicide bombers who kill Israelis. The media of the Arab world is filled with the most vile anti-semitic stories this side of Nazi Germany, and we're talking government controlled media here. Schools in the Arab world are no better in how they depict the Jews and Israelis as evil caricatures who pollute the earth.

Without the IDF the surrounding Arab states would swarm Israel and there would not be a Jew left alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have the time or the patience to respond to your entire post here. But I have three questions:
  1. Why can Arab Muslims live safely and productively in Israel, even vote there, and the reverse is not true;
  2. Why was Israel willing to peacefully accept partition of the Palestine Mandate in 1948, but the Arabs weren't; and
  3. Why were the Israelis willing to resettle their refugees, i.e. poor Jews from Baghdad and other Arab cities expelled after 1948, but the Arabs kept theirs in fetid camps?

I expect silence rather than intelligent answers.

Judging by a lot of your previous posts, you also do not have the education.

What exactly is YOUR education? And if you have one why is it not more evident in your posts?

Arab Muslims do not live in peace in Israel. An article in the Globe and Mail - Jan 27, 2007 - points out that the number of Israeli Arabs seeking refugee status (and being granted it) in Canada has increased substantially over the past 5 years.

They are still a piddling number compared to the number of Arabs from nations RUN BY ARABS who seek refugee status here. Living as an Arab in Israel still gives you a far better life, and far more human rights and privileges than living as an Arab in Syria or Egypt. But of course, you don't care about Arabs being mistreated by Arabs. You don't care about the lack of civil rights of Arabs in Arab nations. You also ignored the rest of the first question - about why Jews can't live safely in the surrounding Arab lands. People who are the most critical of Israel often seem uncomfortable discussing the hundreds of thousands of Jews driven out of the Arab world for some reason. It's as if they fear they might have to somehow criticize someone for mistreating a bunch of Jews in order to make themselves look even handed.

I will answer your third question with these questions: why is it that you hold the Arab nations around Israel responsible to solve a problem that Israel created? Why is it that you feel you have the right to expect them to behave in the way that Israel has with respect to refugees?

You mean with basic humanity? How would you feel about Canada keeping refugees in squalid camps for generations?

Why does no one criticize the Arab nations who do this to their own people? Generations born and raised in their countries and not considered citizens, not even given the lowest, minimal level of rights the citizens of other Arab nations get?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rue and Argus: I'm enjoying your posts immensley, keep up the good work !!!

you're one of those sick people who stop at an accident scene to see if they can see any blood, ya? If you have nothing constructive to add (and I'll take my own advice after posting this) keep your cheerleading to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chilipeppers

Rue and Argus: I'm enjoying your posts immensley, keep up the good work !!!

you're one of those sick people who stop at an accident scene to see if they can see any blood, ya? If you have nothing constructive to add (and I'll take my own advice after posting this) keep your cheerleading to yourself.

Hmmm, more adhominems must be something in the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uhh, no, just that these people have a conversation going on and you and I offer nothing to advance the debate. Both offer points that I was unaware of before.
I see nothing wrong with a headcount, especially when the Jews are 1.9% of Canada's and the US's population and about 0.2% of the world's population.

Expressions of support are nice, particularly given the one-sided focus on rare and relatively mild Israeli violence compared to the animalistic practices in the "umma".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uhh, no, just that these people have a conversation going on and you and I offer nothing to advance the debate. Both offer points that I was unaware of before.

I appreciated his comment.I also very much appreciate when others express opinions.

If you read what I have written I am way more to the left then Argus or JBG but I am trying to simply prevent these debates on Israel to revert to one sided name calling.

Argus' perspective is a lot dryer and blunt then mine and I would say JBG and I are very typical of what kind of dialogue you would see within Israel bewteen the left and right with JBG being if he doesn't midn me saying classic Likud in position while I am probably Labour.

Argus is consistently conservative in his views but I defy anyone to say he is pro anyone. He has blasted everyone equally which I kind of like in that it is consistent and I like someone who hates everyone equally.

Now as for this road kill stuff, yegards man, JBG is not that mean to people. You are referring to him yes? Hah. I was joking. Have a nice day you Zionist supporter-hater-or whatever you ares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argus' perspective is a lot dryer and blunt then mine and I would say JBG and I are very typical of what kind of dialogue you would see within Israel bewteen the left and right with JBG being if he doesn't midn me saying classic Likud in position while I am probably Labour.
Not sure where I'd be on the Israeli political spectrum. In Canada I'd be NDP, typical of what you find on Babble (link)..
Now as for this road kill stuff, yegards man, JBG is not that mean to people. You are referring to him yes? Hah. I was joking. Have a nice day you Zionist supporter-hater-or whatever you ares.
Thanks, but I missed reference to road kill.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...People who are the most critical of Israel often seem uncomfortable discussing the hundreds of thousands of Jews driven out of the Arab world for some reason. It's ...

on that note -- I found this website...

If Americans Knew

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the world’s major sources of instability. Americans are directly connected to this conflict, and increasingly imperiled by its devastation.

It is the goal of If Americans Knew to provide full and accurate information on this critical issue, and on our power – and duty – to bring a resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...People who are the most critical of Israel often seem uncomfortable discussing the hundreds of thousands of Jews driven out of the Arab world for some reason. It's ...

on that note -- I found this website...

If Americans Knew

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the world’s major sources of instability. Americans are directly connected to this conflict, and increasingly imperiled by its devastation.

It is the goal of If Americans Knew to provide full and accurate information on this critical issue, and on our power – and duty – to bring a resolution.

It's a good site Drea.

Have you read this:

The Jews of Iraq by Naeim Giladi

"I write this article for the same reason I wrote my book: to tell the American people, and especially American Jews, that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave, Jews killed Jews; and that, to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands, Jews on numerous occasions rejected genuine peace initiatives from their Arab neighbors. I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called "cruel Zionism." I write about it because I was part of it. "

It is a very interesting read and gives insights to a part of the history of Israel that many Jews seem to want to either forget or dismiss outright.

WRT:

"People who are the most critical of Israel often seem uncomfortable discussing the hundreds of thousands of Jews driven out of the Arab world for some reason. "

I don't think anyone is uncomfortable discussing this. Certainly it did happen as there was much resentment of so many European Jews being settled in British Mandate Palestine and then in the UN created state of Israel - they saw the native populations being driven off their ancestral lands, villages litterly wiped off the map to make way for these 'foreigners'. So, yes it did happen - but not all of it was simple Arab against Jew 'hatred' which is so often declared the reason - much of it was encouraged to bolster the Jewish populations of the newly founded Israel. It is quite clear that Zionism dearly needs to encourage anti-semitic actions in order to justify its own existance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have waited long enough for a response from the admin; none has been forthcoming. Apparently, if I refer to Rue as an asshole, an idiot, a retard, a jackass, a bitch, liar or moron, I can be censured. But if I allege criminal intent or action on Rue's part, no harm can come. From now on, Rue, since you insist on referring to me as an anti-semite, I will refer to you as a thieving, murderous, baby-killer. Let the debate continue...

Let's see. Where were we? Oh yes. The thieving, murderous, baby-killer was referring to the League of Nations and the 1919 Conference of Versailles which spawned the Second World War and the massacre of 6 million Jews. I believe that the thieving, murderous, baby-killer was using the outcomes of the Versailles conference to justify the theft of Palestinian lands, the ethnic cleansing of the people who lived on those lands, their continued subjugation and impoverishment (including a severely reduced life span), and their banishment to the margins of human existence where they have no human rights. Is that right, thieving murderous baby-killer?

Would you like to go back to debating historical fact, thieving murderous baby-killer, or would you prefer to dwell on hate? For surely it is you and you alone, who has steered a course into the realm of hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have waited long enough for a response from the admin; none has been forthcoming. Apparently, if I refer to Rue as an asshole, an idiot, a retard, a jackass, a bitch, liar or moron, I can be censured. But if I allege criminal intent or action on Rue's part, no harm can come. From now on, Rue, since you insist on referring to me as an anti-semite, I will refer to you as a thieving, murderous, baby-killer. Let the debate continue...

Let's see. Where were we? Oh yes. The thieving, murderous, baby-killer was referring to the League of Nations and the 1919 Conference of Versailles which spawned the Second World War and the massacre of 6 million Jews. I believe that the thieving, murderous, baby-killer was using the outcomes of the Versailles conference to justify the theft of Palestinian lands, the ethnic cleansing of the people who lived on those lands, their continued subjugation and impoverishment (including a severely reduced life span), and their banishment to the margins of human existence where they have no human rights. Is that right, thieving murderous baby-killer?

Would you like to go back to debating historical fact, thieving murderous baby-killer, or would you prefer to dwell on hate? For surely it is you and you alone, who has steered a course into the realm of hate.

deleted pretty low

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On second thought, I think I'll just give up on Maple Leaf Web. Much of what is posted here is about hate - either people hating the Arabs and Moslems or accusing others who disagree with them of acting out of hate. Desperation is so sad. Anybody who takes any time to delve into history can spot the tired old distortions, exaggerations and misrepresentations that Rue and the other Israelites have made their stock in trade. Those who can't are not sufficiently armed to be particularly dangerous anyways.

With proper moderation, this place could be an interesting debating society. With little or no moderation, it's just a bad joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On second thought, I think I'll just give up on Maple Leaf Web. Much of what is posted here is about hate - either people hating the Arabs and Moslems or accusing others who disagree with them of acting out of hate. Desperation is so sad. Anybody who takes any time to delve into history can spot the tired old distortions, exaggerations and misrepresentations that Rue and the other Israelites have made their stock in trade. Those who can't are not sufficiently armed to be particularly dangerous anyways.

I think anyone can spot the distortions by those who hate Israel too, not to mention their exaggerations and misrepresentations. This is a case of pot - black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On second thought, I think I'll just give up on Maple Leaf Web. Much of what is posted here is about hate - either people hating the Arabs and Moslems or accusing others who disagree with them of acting out of hate. Desperation is so sad. Anybody who takes any time to delve into history can spot the tired old distortions, exaggerations and misrepresentations that Rue and the other Israelites have made their stock in trade. Those who can't are not sufficiently armed to be particularly dangerous anyways.

With proper moderation, this place could be an interesting debating society. With little or no moderation, it's just a bad joke.

I guess you wanted the joke that passed for "moderation" at www.cbc.ca/forums, where anti-French or Chinese slurs were rampant but Jews couldn't spell out the words "Jew" or "Israel" without word being filtered.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have waited long enough for a response from the admin; none has been forthcoming. Apparently, if I refer to Rue as an asshole, an idiot, a retard, a jackass, a bitch, liar or moron, I can be censured. But if I allege criminal intent or action on Rue's part, no harm can come. From now on, Rue, since you insist on referring to me as an anti-semite, I will refer to you as a thieving, murderous, baby-killer. Let the debate continue...

Let's see. Where were we? Oh yes. The thieving, murderous, baby-killer was referring to the League of Nations and the 1919 Conference of Versailles which spawned the Second World War and the massacre of 6 million Jews. I believe that the thieving, murderous, baby-killer was using the outcomes of the Versailles conference to justify the theft of Palestinian lands, the ethnic cleansing of the people who lived on those lands, their continued subjugation and impoverishment (including a severely reduced life span), and their banishment to the margins of human existence where they have no human rights. Is that right, thieving murderous baby-killer?

Would you like to go back to debating historical fact, thieving murderous baby-killer, or would you prefer to dwell on hate? For surely it is you and you alone, who has steered a course into the realm of hate.

The Ottoman Empire lost ownership and control over the lands of the Middle East in 1919 to Britain and France as the spoils of war. The Middle East was partitioned into French and British protectorates from 1919 to 1949. Following WW-II, the British turned over their protectorate to the United Nations for a resolution of valid land claims by both the Arabs and Jews. It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...