Palestine: Peace or Apartheid

[scribblet]

"The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation's supposed ancient name, though they couldn't even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin a fictional entity." ---- Golda Meir quoted by Sarah Honig, Jerusalem Post, 25 November 1995

Yeah, right. There's an impartial source -- Not.

I truly doubt Golda Meir was ignorant of the ancient Roman history of the region, and if so her pretense that the name dates only from the British mandate must be a deliberate deception.

Could you show a map or something from that era showing a Palestine, who ruled it etc. etc.

http://www.levitt.com/essays/palestine.html

The term Palestine is rarely used in the Old Testament, and when it is, it refers specifically to the southwestern coastal area of Israel occupied by the Philistines. It is a translation of the Hebrew word “Pelesheth.” The term is never used to refer to the whole land occupied by Israel. Before Israel occupied the land, it would be generally accurate to say that the southwestern coastal area was called Philistia (the Way of the Philistines, or Palestine), while the central highlands were called Canaan. Both the Canaanites and the Philistines had disappeared as distinct peoples at least by the time of the Babylonian Captivity of Judea (586 B.C.), and they no longer exist.

In the New Testament, the term Palestine is never used. The term Israel is primarily used to refer to the people of Israel, rather than the Land. However, in at least two passages, Israel is used to refer to the Land:

[Figleaf]

... I suspect many of the folks who criticize Israel criticize it because it's better at war than anyone else, ...

Speaking for myself, when I criticise Israel I do so because I disagree with some policy or action it has taken. In fact, that's pretty much the same reason I criticise anyone.

That's why the outcry about the "unfairness" of the "disproportionate" Israeli attack on Hezbollah.

I think that sentence represents a profound misunderstanding of the situation. The problem with the disproportionateness of Israel's last cross-border military action was not that it was attacking Hezbollah, but that it was attacking Lebannon's infrastructure and the innocent civilians of that country.

They see it not as a gang of savages firing rockets indiscriminantly into civilian populations and getting their asses justly kicked, but rather as a game in which both sides must be evenly matched, conducting a gentleman's game of tit for tat.

Well that's certainly a pipe-dream, given the vast disproportion in force available to the two respective sides.

[M.Dancer]

The problem with the disproportionateness of Israel's last cross-border military action was not that it was attacking Hezbollah, but that it was attacking Lebannon's infrastructure and the innocent civilians of that country.

That is pure propagandic nonsense. You suggest that they were deliberately attacking civilians?

There was only one group deliberately attacking civilians and to compound their crime they used civilian areas to launch those attacks.

To avoid your naive criticism, Israel would have to not defend herself, which is exactly the result intended by using civilians and the civilian infrastructure to attack from.

[Rue]

More anti-Israel opionions from Figleaf. Israel of course was not fighting Hezbollah. It was destroying Lebanon. Selective, simplistic and as usual indication of how Figleaf reverts to the same Israel bad bad bad for any and every response.

Of course Figleaf will write back and tell us he is not bias and thinks Hezbollah was wrong for shooting missiles from apartments, hospitals, schools, mosques. He will tell us how Iran and Syria were wrong for equipping them with missiles. He will tell us how Hezbollah's charter to wipe Israel off the map is wrong. He will tell us Hezbollah's decision to place civilians directly in harm's way and use them as acover to launch missiles was wrong.

He will tell us that Hezbollah started the last war in Lebanon by going into Israel proper and kidnapping an Israeli soldier so they could then use that soldier to obtain the release of Samir Kuntar. Figleaf will then tell you Samir Kuntar came into Israel proper with 6 others, and kidnapped an Israeli civilian and his 4 year old boy. He will tell you that civilian only had hiding spaces for his wife and daughter and had to sacrifice his son and himself knowing they would die. He will tell you Mr. Kunar took this man and his boy to a beach, slowly torturde them, sodomized them defecated and urinated on their chopped up bodies and that this was wrong.

He will tell you this had nothing to do with self-determination and everything to do with an act of hatred and terror against Israelis for living in Israel proper. He will tell you Hezbollah which stated it came into existence to free Lebanon and not invade Israel, is the same Hezbollah that in fact invaded Israel and has a charter calling for the extermination of Jews world wide until Israel is extinguished.

He will tell you that the wife of the man who was killed by Mr. Kuntar suffocated her daughter to death preventing her from crying and giving out their hiding place.

Figleaf will point that all out because he as he states is not anti-Israel and does not support terrorism.

Figleaf would never selectively ignore the above and simply state Israel for no reason started blowing up Lebanon's roads to prevent military arms from being sent by Iran and Syria down to the Hezbollah through these roads to all the hospitals, schools, mosques, and government buildings let alone apartments they hid inside and launched their weapons from.

Figleaf won't forget to tell you the United Nations Peacekeeping Force (UNIFIL) stated it would disarm Hezbollah now that Israel as no longer in Lebanon and agreed to leave Lebanon if Hezbollah nolongre attacked it and was disarmed.

Figleaf won't forget to tell you how UNIFIL in fact ignored its mandate and the French army which was the largest army in UNIFIL was forced to watch as the Hezbollah were armed with the full approval of Le Deuxieme Bureau and the French government which openly backed Hezbollah even after it killed French soldiers.

He won't forget to tell you how Chinese army troops as part of UNIFIL and along with North Korea armed Hezbollah and built its terrorist camps while still part of UNIFIL.

Hed won't forget to tell you that the brave Canadian soldier who died when Israel killed him while he was in UNIFIL because Hezbollah hid behind him to shoot off missiles-stated prior to his death Hezbollah was hiding behind UNIFIL to launch its missiles and UNIFIL knew this and was doing nothing about it.

Figleaf will also tell you that Hezbollah and the Syrian army occupied Lebanon, were foes of the Lebanese government and were planning to stage a coups to implement a Shiite theocracy in Lebanon as part of the over-all war they would engage with Israel.

He won't forget to tell you how Hezbollah has murdered thousands of Lebanese civilians opposed to their ideology. He won't forget to tell you how the Syrians who support Hezbollah assassinated Lebanon's elected leader-why because he would never want you to think he skipped over any of that and would suggest

all these things make the situation a little bit more complicated then ISrael bad bad bad.

Why because Figleaf is thorough and makes it a point each and every time to see both sides of a conflict and not be selective.

[Figleaf]

"Then it is neglecting its obligations as an occupying power to supply order and security within the area."

You are the same person who says Israel has no business in the Gaza and West Bank and now states the exact opposite.

I am so tired of your horrific lying that I may have to start bringint it to the attention of the Admin.

I am NOT saying that Israel SHOULD Occupy the territories. I said that that since they ARE occupying the territories they have certain obligations.

More to the point when Israel does try supply order and security within the area you call it terrorism.

Is that another lie? When did I call it 'terrorism?

Anyway, there is a BIG difference between supplying security and prosecuting a creeping annexation. I criticise the latter, not the former.

Does Israel help prevent normal crimes in the West Bank? Do they investigate thefts of commercial goods, common frauds, domestic violence?

"There is no doubt that Israel exercises military control over the region to the extent it sees fit from time to time. It continues to control ingress and egress at the borders, and controls the airspace and use of the ports."

Absolutely true and your point?

That the Occupation has not ended.

The above does not constitute legal occupation under international law.

How many times must you be asked to support your assertions before you will actually deign to do so?

For the convention to apply the occupying power must sign on as occupiers,...

!!! Where does it say that?

Uh Figleaf, in the space at the bottom of the treaty or declaration that states who the signatories to the treating or declaration are-try read one before you ask such questions...you are embarassing yourself with such questions...

Did that make sense to anyone? Again, Rue, please tell us ... where does it say that occupiers must sign on as occupiers? (Be specific, please... what treaty, what clause, where can we read it?)

"Nonsense. The Palestinian's claims are not based on sovereignty; they are based on the right to self-determination."

Good grief. Try read and find out what the Palestinians have actually said and while you are at tell us the difference between sovereignty and self-determination.

If you can prove me wrong, I invite you to provide the supporting documents, otherwise your objection there appears baseless.

Under the international doctrine of self-defence Israel was and is allowed to defend itself from terrorist actions or external military attacks from foreign nations.

Yes, and under international law Israel is not permitted to occupy and deny self-determination to a people and carry out a creeping annexation on the premise of protecting itself.

Figleaf you said yes and then completely contradicted yourself in the next sentence.

Do you have trouble seeing the screen? I ask because there is simply no contradiction at there and it's really inexplicable how you could imagine one.

... If no terrorist attacks were being launched from the West Bank ... settlers who then came in from Israel and who most certainly exasperate the over-all situation could be removed. They were originally put in as early warning sites to observe for terrorist attacks and it proved a disaster

They could (and should) be removed anyway. But in fact adding more settlements on the Occupied territories is government policy. It's impossible to see how that policy relates to securing Israels real borders, or how it coheres with a concept of admitting self-determination for Palestinians in the Occupied territory once peace is concluded. There is a word for the policy of settling on land one is supposedly to be giving back -- 'disingenuous'.

Strategically they are of no help.

Exactly, so their presense has nothing to do with security and must be about something else.

The question unfortunately has come to fruition. Israel has given up waiting for terrorist attacks to stop from the West Bank and is building a cement wall. That will be the tragic solution to an inability to stop terrorism.

Personally, I think it's perfectly okay if that's what Israel wants, except it should be built only on Israel's side of the Green Line.

[Figleaf]

Continued...

What Figleaf would try present as a military ooccupation wide spread on the ground ...

Can't you PLEASE stop inventing shit that I haven't said?

is not true at all-first off the IDF does not have the manpower to commit to such an operation, secondly they use sattelites to monitor movement, and then only move their units in based on specific intelligence reports ...

The number of men, the type of technology, and the way choices are made by the Occupier don't change the fact of occupation.

It does not contrary to the machinations of Figleafs brain, have to sit and wait to be attacked, then do nothing as its people are killed.

I've never said any such thing. It would really go a long way toward bringing your posts up to a decent level of integrity if you avoided uttering scurrilous claptrap about other posters."

Really Figleaf. Then put up right now of shut up. State right now ...

YOU put up right now or shut up.

Where did I say Israel must "do nothing while it's people are killed"? Where? Where did I say that?

I didn't. It's simply another lie, like all the other dirty lies you've fired at me for months on this forum.

Can you not stop for one moment and admit that the words "by all necessary means at their disposal" has been used to justify terror not self-defence.

It would not surprise me at all to learn that Palestinian terrorists have used that term that way.

[Figleaf]

"The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation's supposed ancient name, though they couldn't even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin a fictional entity." ---- Golda Meir quoted by Sarah Honig, Jerusalem Post, 25 November 1995

Yeah, right. There's an impartial source -- Not.

I truly doubt Golda Meir was ignorant of the ancient Roman history of the region, and if so her pretense that the name dates only from the British mandate must be a deliberate deception.

Could you show a map or something from that era showing a Palestine, who ruled it etc. etc.

You could look at these, for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/image:Israel_Byzantine_5c.jpg

http://www.culturalresources.com/images/ma...omEmp117Big.jpg

[M.Dancer]

There's also this map fromthe 19th century

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Califate_750.jpg

[M.Dancer]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e_1481-1683.jpg

[DogOnPorch]

If one goes back to the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea at about 1000BC there's no Palestine. There is however Philistia which is possibly where the root for Palestine comes from. However, the Philistines were not native to the area being part of the "Peoples of the Sea"...Minoan in origin. They were also wiped out around 730BC by the expanding Assyrian Empire. They were constantly at war with Israel...if that's a worthwhile connection...lol.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands.

---Ezra 5:8 Old Testament

[Guthrie]

they don't even know what they are looking at

[Figleaf]

There's also this map fromthe 19th century

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Califate_750.jpg

What for?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If one goes back to the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea at about 1000BC there's no Palestine.

If one goes back to the time of the Caananites (at about 1600BC) there's no Israel or Judea.

If one goes back to 4000BC there's no Egypt.

There is however Philistia which is possibly where the root for Palestine comes from.

Yes, that is the generally thought history of the term.

However, the Philistines were not native to the area being part of the "Peoples of the Sea"...Minoan in origin.

Not, of course that this is relevant in any way to the rights or wrongs of the modern conflict, but the picture is not nearly as clear on that point as your forumation suggests.

[Guthrie]

That map seems to show Israel really belongs to the Iraqi's. (Persians?)

[DogOnPorch]

That map seems to show Israel really belongs to the Iraqi's. (Persians?)

Exactly. Assyrians I believe. The area has changed hands many, many times over the years. In 1948...it changed hands again. If some get their way...it'll change again in the future.

Yes, that is the generally thought history of the term.

Yes...and it refers to the 5 ancient towns near and including Gaza...Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Do not confine your children to your own learning, for they were born in another time.

---Hebrew Proverb

[Guthrie]

I don't care about who's bureacratic stamps were used in Palestine. I do care about the thousands of families who were thrown off their farms. Beyond that it really is just prattle.

[DogOnPorch]

I don't care about who's bureacratic stamps were used in Palestine. I do care about the thousands of families who were thrown off their farms. Beyond that it really is just prattle.

That's commendable. If certain countries eventually destroy Israel via one method or another, would you show the same compassion towards Israelis?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe however that peace is attainable regardless of the Arabs' mentality, society or government.

---Yitzhak Rabin

[jbg]

I don't care about who's bureacratic stamps were used in Palestine. I do care about the thousands of families who were thrown off their farms. Beyond that it really is just prattle.

That's commendable. If certain countries eventually destroy Israel via one method or another, would you show the same compassion towards Israelis?

Also, how much "farming" were the Arabs really doing on the desert and swamps that preceded the Zionist's investments?

[DogOnPorch]

One only has to take a peek at Google Map's Israel to see what wonderful things they've done to that former desert. It's as green as the Nile Delta in areas.

-----------------------------------------------

Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd, smiling

Merciless the magistrate turns round, frowning

And who's the fool?...who wears the crown?

---Pink Floyd: Fearless

[jbg]

One only has to take a peek at Google Map's Israel to see what wonderful things they've done to that former desert. It's as green as the Nile Delta in areas.

I thought that the Arabs accomplished all that and the Zionist entity stole it.

Even on the satellite map, one can pick out, from coloration, where Israel starts.

[DogOnPorch]

Yes...click on the satellite button on the map...forgot to "link to this page."

Or click here

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Israel...248909&t=h&om=1

-----------------------------------------

Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum...

---Treasure Island: Robert Louis Stevenson

[jbg]

Yes...click on the satellite button on the map...forgot to "link to this page."

Or click here

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Israel...248909&t=h&om=1

The Zionists obviously have regularly pulverized everything to the left of a striking green area.

[Figleaf]

Rue wrote:

More anti-Israel opionions from Figleaf. Israel of course was not

fighting Hezbollah. It was destroying Lebanon.

Its a simple fact, that in their purported fight against Hezbollah, Israel

deliberately targeted several elements of civilian infrastructure. The Beirut

airport is a well known example.

Of course Figleaf will write back and tell us he is not bias

Since Im such a nice guy, Im going to point out that in that sentence the

proper usage is biasED, with an ED on the end. And, Im not.

He will tell us how Iran and Syria were wrong for equipping them with

missiles.

That I dont know.

He will tell us how Hezbollah's charter to wipe Israel off the map is

wrong.

Actually, I know why and how they have come to hold that viewpoint, but I think

its a not a very viable objective, nor one I endorse.

He will tell us Hezbollah's decision to place civilians directly in

harm's way and use them as acover to launch missiles was wrong.

Sure I do, dont you?

He will tell us that Hezbollah started the last war in Lebanon by going

into Israel proper and kidnapping an Israeli soldier so they could then use that

soldier to obtain the release of Samir Kuntar.

No, you wont hear me say that. Hezbollahs capture of the Israeli soldier did

not start the war as that condition pre-existed the capture of the soldier.

Figleaf will then tell you Samir Kuntar came into Israel proper with 6

others,

No, since I dont know who Samir Kuntar is.

took this man and his boy to a beach, slowly torturde them, sodomized

them defecated and urinated on their chopped up bodies and that this was

wrong.

That sure does sound really bad.

He will tell you this had nothing to do with self-determination and

everything to do with an act of hatred and terror against Israelis for living in

Israel proper.

Actually, Ill tell you I had never heard of that before now.

{At this point, I really wonder if there some point to this peculiar recitation

of thing Rue is imagining I might say?}

Figleaf will point that all out because he as he states is not

anti-Israel and does not support terrorism.

I dont see what pointing all that out would have to do with whether I am

anti-Israel or not. Of course, whether I am anti-Isreal or not depends

totally on what definition you apply to that concept.

Figleaf would never selectively ignore the above and simply state Israel

for no reason started blowing up Lebanon's roads to prevent military arms from

being sent by Iran and Syria

Well, I dont see what relevance any of the above had to do with the legal or

strategic merits of Israels conduct in the last round of belligerence in

Lebannon.

Figleaf won't forget to tell you how UNIFIL in fact ignored its mandate

and the French army which was the largest army in UNIFIL was forced to watch as

the Hezbollah were armed

Id like to learn more about that can you tell me where I can look into

UNIFILs mandate?

He won't forget to tell you how Chinese army troops as part of UNIFIL and

along with North Korea armed Hezbollah and built its terrorist camps while still

part of UNIFIL.

Even if I knew that, I likely might have felt it to be quite tangential and

unimportant to the points I have been making.

Hed won't forget to tell you that the brave Canadian soldier who died

when Israel killed him while he was in UNIFIL because Hezbollah hid behind him

to shoot off missiles-stated prior to his death Hezbollah was hiding behind

UNIFIL to launch its missiles and UNIFIL knew this and was doing nothing about

it.

I wouldnt tell you that because thats not how those events unfolded as I

understood it. But again, I probably would not have mentioned this matter

anyway.

he would never want you to think he skipped over any of that and would

suggest

all these things make the situation a little bit more complicated then ISrael

bad bad bad.

This has gotten boring.

Rue, why dont YOU just tell what YOU want to tell.

I have no obligation to spread your irrelevancies and propaganda for you. Buzz

off.

[buffycat]

Truly sad how this thread has devolved.

Also sad that to some here any kind of criticism of Israeli policies (well discussed in Israel herself) leads to accusations of anti-semetism! Mind-boggling really.

It's too bad too because without REAL discussion - with both sides listening - progress and solutions can never be achieved.

It's sad for all involved, the blaming of one side or the other - when there is so much blame it covers half the bloody planet. Perhaps if the Western world had not propped up the pfledgling Israeli State and the Arab world had not fuelled the fires of desperation on the part of Muslim and Christian Palestinans a lesson would have been learned by both peoples - that is: how to get along and build together, how to accept one another.

I know I sound idealistic, but I really feel that Israel lost a wonderful opportunity in declaring herself a Jewish state. She could have chosen to create herself as not only a haven and safe place for the Jews, but also of all peoples. She could truly have been a light among nations, emboding the best of what all monothesitic religions share - the golden rule itself. Though I am not a 'religious' person it seems to me that this one thing is universal - but the other stuff is BS and only leads to divide us all. Sad really, all of it.

Anyways, rant done - I feel for the innocents who don't realize how their leaders are taking them to the slaughter.

[scribblet]

Its also sad to see that any kind of criticism of radical Islam leads to accusations of bigotry. Mind-boggling really.

It's too bad too because without REAL discussion on what is happening within that religion from both sides - progress and solutions can never be achieved.

[cybercoma]

Its also sad to see that any kind of criticism of radical Islam leads to accusations of bigotry. Mind-boggling really.

It's too bad too because without REAL discussion on what is happening within that religion from both sides - progress and solutions can never be achieved.

Let's have a logical, reasoned discussion on ghosts, the tooth fairy and sasquatch too.