Iran Attacks Israeli Racism

[La_Dolce_Vita]

From my understanding of history, when Israel was created the Israelis began to evict Palestinians from the land they lived and farmed on. All for the sake of providing land for Israelis to live on in their new nation. This was one of the first unjustifiable acts.

 

The Jews had no justifiable claim to forcefully take ownership of any land in the Levant, nor even to establish their authority over the region. But they got their nation state.

[Rog]

From my understanding of history, when Israel was created the Israelis began to evict Palestinians from the land they lived and farmed on. All for the sake of providing land for Israelis to live on in their new nation. This was one of the first unjustifiable acts.

 

The Jews had no justifiable claim to forcefully take ownership of any land in the Levant, nor even to establish their authority over the region. But they got their nation state.

 

 

Then your understanding is wrong.

 

Pure and simple.

 

There were odd exceptions of 'land grab' but these were very few and very far between, and whenever found reversed by Israeli courts.

 

Moreover the ‘authority’ to establish the nation state of Israel in a part of what had been historic ‘Eretz Israel’ was established by the League of Nations and underwritten by the UN.

[Chinahand]

The first state, that for the Arab population who didn’t want to live in what was to become modern day Eretz Israel, was created when Britain declared the region known as Trans Jordan to be the independent nation of Jordan.

 

The second state, modern day Israel, should have comprised of the remainder of the land.

 

So there already IS a state for the Arab population of the region of The British Mandated region of Palestine.

 

It is to the credit of the Israeli people that rather than simply take all of the region ... Instead in an attempt to gain peace they accepted a much reduced area of the remaining region even after the illegal act by Britain in ‘creating’ Jordan.

 

But even that was unacceptable to the Arabs who wanted NO Jewish population in what they claimed to be an Islamic ‘waaf’.

 

... the ‘authority’ to establish the nation state of Israel in a part of what had been historic ‘Eretz Israel’ was established by the League of Nations and underwritten by the UN.

 

Rog - 1) do you acknowledge that the UN is the final authority where the various soverignties in this region must be agreed? And 2) do you agree that the Arabs have no more right to demand an Islamic 'waaf' than the Jews to demand a greater Israel?

 

For all your statements that Israels SHOULD have comprised the remainder of the land west of the Jordan river - it doesn't. The international agreements create two states - with their final borders agreed between the two parties and ratified by the UN.

 

If you are going to disagree with those two questions then you are condeming your people to generations of conflict - or is that what your God wants, or some other Messianic nonsense?

[jimbms]

I note that no comeback was forthcoming when faced with the facts of El Shatila

[Chinahand]

There were odd exceptions of 'land grab' but these were very few and very far between, and whenever found reversed by Israeli courts.

I love the way you imply that this is a historical issue created in the fog of war in 1948 or whenever and then rectified by the courts: in fact land grabs have occurred systematically throughout the period of settlement.

 

CLICKY

 

Secret Israeli database reveals full extent of illegal settlement 01/02/2009

 

Just four years ago, the defense establishment decided to carry out a seemingly elementary task: establish a comprehensive database on the settlements. Brigadier General (res.) Baruch Spiegel, aide to then defense minister Shaul Mofaz, was put in charge of the project. For over two years, Spiegel and his staff, who all signed a special confidentiality agreement, went about systematically collecting data, primarily from the Civil Administration. ...

 

...An analysis of the data reveals that, in the vast majority of the settlements - about 75 percent - construction, sometimes on a large scale, has been carried out without the appropriate permits or contrary to the permits that were issued. The database also shows that, in more than 30 settlements, extensive construction of buildings and infrastructure (roads, schools, synagogues, yeshivas and even police stations) has been carried out on private lands belonging to Palestinian West Bank residents.

 

The data, it should be stressed, do not refer only to the illegal outposts (information about which was included in the well-known report authored by attorney Talia Sasson and published in March 2005), but to the very heart of the settlement enterprise.

[Rog]

I note that no comeback was forthcoming when faced with the facts of El Shatila

 

There will be, but my life consists of far more than atempting to educate the ignorant and prejudiced.

[Rog]

Rog - 1) do you acknowledge that the UN is the final authority where the various soverignties in this region must be agreed?

 

There are different sorts of UN declarations. Some are binding, others not. The declarations relating to the establishment of the state of Israel are binding.

 

And 2) do you agree that the Arabs have no more right to demand an Islamic 'waaf' than the Jews to demand a greater Israel?

 

I do not agree. The Islamic ‘waaf’ is purely a religious concept whereas the establishment of Israel is a secular thing underwritten by the LON and the UN.

 

For all your statements that Israels SHOULD have comprised the remainder of the land west of the Jordan river - it doesn't. The international agreements create two states - with their final borders agreed between the two parties and ratified by the UN.

 

Not so. The establishment of the 1947 borders was never agreed to by the Arabs. In fact the day after modern day Eretz Israel was established the most Arab nations declared war.

 

If you are going to disagree with those two questions then you are condeming your people to generations of conflict - or is that what your God wants, or some other Messianic nonsense?

 

It’s not a ‘God’ thing, certainly not from the Israeli side (though there’s more than a few gabardine-clad pious-dripping Frummer Yiddles who would disagree, still they are very much in the minority) instead its’ about not having a party who wants to agree peace with Israel.

 

To get some insight into Hamas for example, (let alone Hezbollah) just read the Hamas charter. A very good and authentic translation is to be found at amongst many other places http://tinyurl.com/a5tkss (The Jerusalem Fund).

 

Personally I would recommend another site since it provides an annotated translation bringing out nuances and aspects about the charter that are not obvious to someone who is not very au fait with the Arab mindset, a thing VERY different from that which you might meet even on a Saturday night in Foxdale. (Is The Baltic still there btw?)

 

Try http://christianactionforisrael.org/isreport/hamas.html since that illustrates points that the casual reader or a reader who is not ‘into’ the mindset of those who wrote the thing might well miss.

 

Another factor to bring in is the involvement of Muslim Brotherhood, al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin Jama'at al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun Hizb Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimoon al-Ikhwana, a radical organisation that resulted from the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and that was vehemently opposed to the Allies during WW2. Their ‘motto’ – Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

 

Nice.

 

Not.

 

It’s a dirty road that you tread when you look into the antics of that lot, Hamas is a spin off from it as was the son of a slum gutter bitch, the late and MUCH unlamented Arafat and the evil that

[Rog]

There were odd exceptions of 'land grab' but these were very few and very far between, and whenever found reversed by Israeli courts.

I love the way you imply that this is a historical issue created in the fog of war in 1948 or whenever and then rectified by the courts: in fact land grabs have occurred systematically throughout the period of settlement.

 

CLICKY

 

Secret Israeli database reveals full extent of illegal settlement 01/02/2009

 

Just four years ago, the defense establishment decided to carry out a seemingly elementary task: establish a comprehensive database on the settlements. Brigadier General (res.) Baruch Spiegel, aide to then defense minister Shaul Mofaz, was put in charge of the project. For over two years, Spiegel and his staff, who all signed a special confidentiality agreement, went about systematically collecting data, primarily from the Civil Administration. ...

 

...An analysis of the data reveals that, in the vast majority of the settlements - about 75 percent - construction, sometimes on a large scale, has been carried out without the appropriate permits or contrary to the permits that were issued. The database also shows that, in more than 30 settlements, extensive construction of buildings and infrastructure (roads, schools, synagogues, yeshivas and even police stations) has been carried out on private lands belonging to Palestinian West Bank residents.

 

The data, it should be stressed, do not refer only to the illegal outposts (information about which was included in the well-known report authored by attorney Talia Sasson and published in March 2005), but to the very heart of the settlement enterprise.

 

 

Since the West Bank and other disputed lands were captured by Israel in defensive wars there is strong argument and considerable historical precedence to propose that any Israeli settlement on those territories are in fact being made on Israeli land.

 

Look at the way that Europe was carved up, especially after WW1 when for example parts of Germany were ‘won’ by the Allies and were used to create Poland.

 

But Israel has never pushed that argument, in fact it returned The Sinai to Egypt though held on to Gaza for the pure and simple reason that Egypt refused to take it back as it was populated by so many so called ‘Palestine’, a population they didn’t want added to their own.

[Chinahand]

And 2) do you agree that the Arabs have no more right to demand an Islamic 'waaf' than the Jews to demand a greater Israel?

 

I do not agree. The Islamic waaf is purely a religious concept whereas the establishment of Israel is a secular thing underwritten by the LON and the UN.

Rog - I am talking about Greater Israel - any part of Israel which does NOT correspond to the already existing binding UN resolutions - I basically agree the General Assembly is a dictator's talking shop - but the security council is a different matter and they have made binding statements on Israel and Palestine - there is a difference between Israel and Greater Israel, I know it, you know it, the UN knows it.

 

My entire point is that the Arab annexations should not be recognized - as far as I'm aware (other than the Golan and Jerusalem - which is a huge complication) Israel has never annexed the occupied territories.

 

This land is recognized as soverign Palestinian territory by the UN and the issue is how to allow that soverignty to be taken up peacefully.

 

I don't need educating about Hamas etc. You'll say Israel has no partner to negotiate with and Hamas and its ilk are all there is - well I think you are wrong. I believe there is a moderate Palestinian caucus that also desires normalization and peace - and I think with Obama in the Whitehouse you should be aware that Israel can't block forever.

 

Israel has to make hard decisions - up until recently I always regarded Sharon as a war monger - but he got it - he realized Israel had to present a pragmatic

approach to justify peace. It is very sad that his health failed him before he could consolidate his position, but his stroke and then Israel's botched wars in Lebanon and Gaza (wars they choose to fight) have compromised the pragmatists position.

 

I've no idea if Bibi will be able to lead Israel to peace - but I think you are very wrong in claiming that those who want to seize Palestinian lands (ie occupied territory) and create a Greater Israel are just the religious fringe. Basically if you have that mentality then you are a member of the War party.

 

Rog - you always sound like you are a Greater Israel throw-them-into-the-sea extremist.

 

But the fact is you've never tried to use persuasion or explanation to allow people to understand your point of view - rather you go in with both feet in the most bellicose manner. That attitude often totally swamps any sense you are speaking and just encourages those who disagree in their belligerancy.

 

It makes for a typical internet session, but is of very little use to actually improve understanding.

 

Rog, for better or worse, you represent on this forum a pro-Israel point of view. I totally support Israel's right to exist. The trouble is I also see no reason why I shouldn't support Palestine's - there needs to be some compromises - that famous phrase land for peace, but I believe those compromises can be made.

 

At the moment you aren't doing anything to persuade me that Palestine shouldn't get basically the entire occuppied territories - most of the settlements Israel has built are illegal etc.

 

Are you going to accept land for peace or not?

[Pragmatopian]

It really saddens me that Israel has so often in its short modern history taken untenable positions. Like it or not, it needs to find a way to peacefully co-exist with its Arab neighbours, and yet it persists in taking unreasonable and disproportionate measures against them and electing leaders who do nothing but antagonise them.

 

I expect that Ahmadinejad (another unspeakable c**t - I'm detecting a theme today) sees this as his final insult to the international community before he is ousted in the forthcoming elections. I hope and expect that his successor will take a less antagonistic attitude towards the wider world.

[manshimajin]

It is a shame that people spend their time in blame games rather than in resolving problems. In the meantime whilst they bicker the problem remains and it's the ordinary folk who suffer.

[Rog]

Rog - I am talking about Greater Israel - any part of Israel which does NOT correspond to the already existing binding UN resolutions - I basically agree the General Assembly is a dictator's talking shop - but the security council is a different matter and they have made binding statements on Israel and Palestine - there is a difference between Israel and Greater Israel, I know it, you know it, the UN knows it.

 

I do not know it, and in any case am unaware of ANY UN chapter seven resolutions made on Israel that Israel have not complied with. .

 

Israel, in MY opinion, is the whole area that was left of the land of the British Mandate of Palestine after the Arab state was created, i.e. Jordan.

 

Having said that I am in the minority. That being said the idea that Israel would EVER relinquish any portion of Jerusalem is ridiculous, as is the thoughts of pulling out of The Golan.

 

My entire point is that the Arab annexations should not be recognized - as far as I'm aware (other than the Golan and Jerusalem - which is a huge complication) Israel has never annexed the occupied territories.

 

This land is recognized as soverign Palestinian territory by the UN and the issue is how to allow that soverignty to be taken up peacefully.

 

If a territory is to become a designated Palestinian homeland then that should be negotiated in just the same way that modern Eretz Israel was negotiated out of what should have been ALL Israel in 1947.

 

It’s actually all a horrible problem, one that actually was the creation of the son of a slum gutter bitch, Arafat.

 

For one thing he invented the ‘Palestinian’ nationality. On the surface not too bad a thing to aggregate the dispirit Arab tribes and camps of various forms but as with most things in that part of the world where Arabs are concerned, (and it comes down to the principles and practices of Islam) what you see isn’t what you get.

 

Also consider this scenario.

 

A Palestinian state was recognised in the Arafat days. But what would its borders be? How many people realised that the scarf so casually worn at all times by the ultra pig Arafat was deliberately arranged in the shape of the whole land map of the Palestinian Mandate lands?

 

Because it was, and for good purpose. It sent a visual message that when Arafat spoke of ‘occupied territories’ he didn’t mean The West Bank and Gaza, he meant ALL the land.

 

But moving on, even if a Palestinian state HAD been ‘recognised’, then what? How long before that state signed mutual defense treaties with the ultra hostile states in the region? Hours? Minutes? Believe me, the treaties would have already been written and just waiting to be signed.

 

Next a place in the UN. Again, so what? The UN is way past its fit for purpose state anyway and needs to be reformulated as soon as possible since now far from being part of solutions it’s part of problems but again, that’s another fish to fry. However that place in the UN would be exploited big time and the UN once again used for nefarious purposes.

 

So we have a Palestinian state, it’s got defense treaties in place with the likes of Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia (it would have to have that one if for no other reason than to wrong foot potential trouble makers in Saudi) and it’s got its seat at the UN.

 

Now --- trouble breaks out with attacks against Israel from the ‘Palestinian state’. Rockets, kidnapping, attacks made by Palestinians within Israel from the ‘Palestinian’ nationals and all the time Israel knows absolutely that any form of defensive action ranging from closing of borders to attacking rocket launch sites will at least cause a huge brouhaha in the UN GA, and more likely will trigger the ‘defense treaties’ that the Palests. have signed up to with the other states. Only this time the UN SC will have to come down against Israel as they will have been seen as the instigator of conflict.

 

The reason? Simple. Any Street Arab with a rocket can launch an attack against Israel safe in the (established) knowledge that even if picked up by any ‘Palestinian’ security force he will find their police stations have revolving doors. That is a proven fact.

 

Yet if an Israeli individual were to do the same all hell would break out, the perp would have to be found, and Israeli jails do NOT have revolving doors. As a result retaliation would have to be formal and that is where the wheels would come off.

 

 

I don't need educating about Hamas etc. You'll say Israel has no partner to negotiate with and Hamas and its ilk are all there is - well I think you are wrong. I believe there is a moderate Palestinian caucus that also desires normalization and peace - and I think with Obama in the Whitehouse you should be aware that Israel can't block forever.

 

The dependence that Israel has on the US is hugely overblown. Today if anything the shoe is on the other foot. But I do agree that there are many Palests who do NOT support Hammas and their like and this can be seen in action by the progress that has been made between the PA and Israel and is also the cause for much of the trouble between the two groups.

 

 

Israel has to make hard decisions - up until recently I always regarded Sharon as a war monger - but he got it - he realized Israel had to present a pragmatic approach to justify peace. It is very sad that his health failed him before he could consolidate his position, but his stroke and then Israel's botched wars in Lebanon and Gaza (wars they choose to fight) have compromised the pragmatists position.

 

Sharon was indeed a great man and his reputation as a war monger was the creation of spin and propaganda, similarly Bibi Netanyahu is also far from the evil man that he is presented as being by those who have an axe to grind as time will tell. It’s not these people who have changed, it’s the unavoidable facts of their actions that confound the lies that have been about them.

 

I've no idea if Bibi will be able to lead Israel to peace - but I think you are very wrong in claiming that those who want to seize Palestinian lands (ie occupied territory) and create a Greater Israel are just the religious fringe. Basically if you have that mentality then you are a member of the War party.

 

Rog - you always sound like you are a Greater Israel throw-them-into-the-sea extremist.

 

Because that is PRECISELY what is behind the majority ‘Palestinian’ agenda. Also I am a solid supporter of Likud.

 

But the fact is you've never tried to use persuasion or explanation to allow people to understand your point of view - rather you go in with both feet in the most bellicose manner. That attitude often totally swamps any sense you are speaking and just encourages those who disagree in their belligerancy.

 

That’s me. I don’t suffer fools or the deliberately ignorant gladly.

 

It makes for a typical internet session, but is of very little use to actually improve understanding.

 

Most people have rock solid opinions about this subject. For a shed load of reasons they will NEVER change. It’s become a ‘meme’, all Jews are ‘Jeeews’. There are very few minds there to be changed.

 

I can recall as a teenager listening to a guy who used to live in Onchan (and incidentally who had lost an arm in a bus accident as a child) singing a highly anti-semetic song in my presence. He will never change, nor will his kind. He didn’t even realise how offensive he was being, that’s the amazing thing quite apart from how utterly far from the truth the song was.

 

 

Rog, for better or worse, you represent on this forum a pro-Israel point of view. I totally support Israel's right to exist. The trouble is I also see no reason why I shouldn't support Palestine's - there needs to be some compromises - that famous phrase land for peace, but I believe those compromises can be made.

 

In fact if weep for so many of the so called ‘Palestinian’ people, their worst enemies aren’t Jews, Israeli or ex pat, their worst enemies are their leaders and teachers who promulgate the lies as truths. Right now most of them don’t want peace if that involves the Israel remaining in existence and that is another fact.

 

Interestingly up until the creation of Fatah (’54 I think) there was little trouble between Israel and the Arab population most of whom were comparatively recent immigrants (fact). Up until the end of the 19th. Century the land was mostly a malarial swamp or desert. It was the influx of European Jews to the region and building the farms and prosperity that drew Arabs from surrounding areas. Not entirely, but mostly.

 

It was Arafat et al who saw an opportunity to push the Muslim Brotherhood agenda by creating a cause celebre, and promoting it that saw real Israeli / local Arab conflict emerge where before there had been very little indeed.

 

At the moment you aren't doing anything to persuade me that Palestine shouldn't get basically the entire occuppied territories - most of the settlements Israel has built are illegal etc.

 

Not illegal if the conventions relating to lands taken in war apply.

 

Are you going to accept land for peace or not?

 

Absolutely not.

 

It has been tried and the results turn out to be simply the pushing forward of the front line. Take Gaza. A classic example of how land exchanged for peace resulted in even less peace.

 

The ONLY solution, in my opinion, is the urgent completion of The Security Fence and the total isolation of the ‘Palestinians’ from Israel and Israel from the Palestinians. After all, strong fences make for good neighbours.

 

And I will address the reality of Sabra and Shatila shortly but I considered investing time in replying to your very sensible comments much more important in the short term.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It has been tried and the results turn out to be simply the pushing forward of the front line. Take Gaza. A classic example of how land exchanged for peace resulted in even less peace.

 

The ONLY solution, in my opinion, is the urgent completion of The Security Fence and the total isolation of the ‘Palestinians’ from Israel and Israel from the Palestinians. After all, strong fences make for good neighbours.

 

The only people who will end up isolated from this will be the Palestinians, and they would be left isolated from more than just the Israeli state. Where would you expect the boundaries to be drawn?

[jimbms]

Come back LDV all is forgiven, I may not agree with some of your wacky ideas and beliefs but at least you will accept facts when given them and do not possess such a blinkered and bigoted view. BTW nice facts Chinahand but wasted on the person directed at, they are too indoctronated into thier ways.

[cheeky boy]

If nothing else, listening to Rog makes it easier for me to understand why someone would strap on a semtex & ballbearing waistcoat .

 

If you cannot negotiate and compromise then then violence is the only remaining option