Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Equating criticism of Israeli government policy with anti-Semitism is lazy, utterly illegitimate and serves to undermine your position far more than support it.
when one posts a "story" from a site like sabbath.biz, a story that can't be backed up by any legitimate news agency, I see it for exactly what it is. thanks.
When one makes claims of anti-Semitism that can't be backed up by any legitimate understanding of that term, I see that for exactly what it is.
Groundless, slanderous sensationalism and nothing more.
Unless you can show that the criticisms of the actions and policies of the Israeli government are somehow motivated by a bias against the religion of the people of Israel - & I can see no basis here for you to do so - then your accusation is totally without foundation. It's just blind adherence to transparent propaganda.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
that's such a terrible thing for him to say. we all know that Jews shouldn't be safe anywhere on earth.
They should be safe, but they should be held to the same standards as everyone else. Nuclear weapons, war crimes...etc. This immediate attempt to brand anything as anti semi is a disgrace. Israel is spitting on those people who died during the holocust by using their pain to try advance their own cause. Pathetic.
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me.
Then you truely don't have a good grasp on the definition of anti-Semitism.
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
Once again, you've completely missed, failed to mention or just conveniently ignored the fact that anti-Semitism is a bigotry against Jews for being Jews, and that is not the issue when it comes to (the majority of) criticism of Israel's actions in Palestine. It has to do with human rights abuses, plain and simple, which deserve to be criticised no matter who the perpetrator is, or what their religion is.
When you start from the blinkered perspective that Israel is above criticism just because it its Israel, your argument and your position have no basis in reality, and have no legitimacy.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
let me guess.... high school history book? Is that your source?
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done.
for you, yes.
typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument.
and, of course, accusing someone of being an anti-semite is not an insult you've just resorted to using.
great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it.
do you even know what you're saying? that's like saying "you're a piece of shit. that's not an insult, it's just the fact as I see it."
when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me.
HAHA! NOW, this argument is DONE.
now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
you write a paragraph without giving any "legitimate" source--or ANY source for that matter--as your backup, call someone an anti-semite, insult all of us, then you say "but the facts are there. I'm out."
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
And typical of rightists, you've got blind allegiance to Israel in spite of their international law violations and blatant disregard for human rights. See? Generalisations are fun!
With all due respect, posting "What illegal settlements? You're an anti-Semite! Post some real news sources!" without once posting anything from a legitimate source doesn't equate to winning an argument, in my opinion.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
omg
The argument is done all right, and thus confirms my observation of your inability to understand it. That's not a forever situation btw...
Are you part of that CUFI cult? because I think you've been brainwashed by a religious organization, and I'm serious when I say that.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I reserve the right to clarify any slanderous remarks made towards me.
And why may I ask are you singling me out in this situation?
gmab...read the thread and see for yourself. I'd say it again given the same circumstances.
(I think perhaps someone is still a little sore over differing opinions on Obama...)
i wasn't trying to single you out, i just noticed your remark is all. you mean there were lots of other pissy remarks here? gee, lemme go back and enjoy them, too!
and regarding obama debates, i really don't mind what anyone says about him. in all seriousness, i like him as a presidential candidate, and i'm planning to vote for him if he gets the nomination. nothing anyone says here is gonna sway me, not even YOU, in your infinite wisdom.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
i wasn't trying to single you out, i just noticed your remark is all. you mean there were lots of other pissy remarks here? gee, lemme go back and enjoy them, too!
and regarding obama debates, i really don't mind what anyone says about him. in all seriousness, i like him as a presidential candidate, and i'm planning to vote for him if he gets the nomination. nothing anyone says here is gonna sway me, not even YOU, in your infinite wisdom.
Just some people calling other people conspiring racists incorrectly out of context...that's all.
Infinite wisdom?...naw mine's just average. I think the majority to the south of me are below average due to the lacking (read: borderline pathetic) media coverage on the key issues like the constitution, human rights violations, and economics.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, Britain was given the mandate for the partitioning of Palestine. this, and other reasons, led to a mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. when the mandate expired in 1948, Israel declared independance and were immediately recognized by most nations of the world. but the Arab League declared war on Israel, were defeated, and Israel's size grew. Israel's size has also grown over the years through other armed conflicts and threats of armed conflicts. Israel has since made peace with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. but attempts for peace with the Palestinians have always stalled. sometimes at the fault of both sides, sometimes at the fault of the Palestinians, very rarely at the fault of Israel only. in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
Firstly, there is a reason that the Palestinians and the Arab league rejected the British Mandate of Palestine: http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/snakebite/Wars.html
'In late 1947 the United Nations proposed that Palestine be divided into a Palestinian Arab state and a Jewish state. The UN Partition Plan recommended that 55 percent of Palestine, and the most fertile region, be given to the Jewish settlers who compromised 30 percent of the population. The remaining 45 percent of Palestine was to comprise a home for the other 70 percent of the population who were Palestinians. The Palestinians rejected the plan because it was unfair. Israel and its supporters claim that the Arabs first attacked in Janurary 1948 and then invaded Israel in May 1948.
The truth is that by May 1948 Zionist forces had already invaded and occupied large parts of the land which had been allocated to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan. In January 1948 Israel did not yet exist.
The evidence that Israel started the 1948 war comes from Zionist sources. The History of the Palmach which was released in portions in the 1950s (and in full in 1972) details the efforts made to attack the Palestinian Arabs and secure more territory than alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan (Kibbutz Menchad Archive, Palmach Archive, Efal, Israel).
'...it is not true that the Arabs "invaded Israel" in 1948. First, Israel did not exist at the time of the alleged invasion as an established state with recognised bounderies. When the Zionist leaders established Israel on 15 May 1948 they purposely declined to declare the bounderies of the new state in order to allow for future expansion.
Secondly, the only territory to which the new state of Israel had even a remote claim was that alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan. But the Zionists had already attacked areas that were alloted to the Palestinian Arab state.
Thirdly, those areas which the Arab states purportedly "invaded" were, in fact, exclusively areas alloted to the Palestinian Arab state proposed by the UN Partition Plan. The so-called Arab invasion was a defensive attempt to hold on to the areas alloted by the Partition Plan for the Palestinian state.
By the end of the 1948 war the Jewish state — having now declared itself "Israel" — had conquered 78 percent of Palestine — far more than that proposed even by the very generous UN partition plan. And three-quarters of a million Palestinians had been made refugees. Over 400 towns and villages had been destroyed, and a new map was being drawn up, in which every city, river and hillock would receive a new, Hebrew name. All vestiges of the Palestinian culture were to be erased. In fact, for many decades Israel — and the US, following its lead — denied the very existence of this population. Golda Meir once said, in fact: "There is no such thing as a Palestinian."
Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the State of Israel retained nearly all the territory that would have been assigned to it in the 1947 UN Partition Plan, as well as conquered half of the land intended to become the Arab state of Palestine and a portion of the territory intended for international administration around Jerusalem. The remaining half of the land that had been intended to become Palestine along the West Bank of the Jordan River was annexed by Jordan, as was most of the Jerusalem enclave; the Gaza Strip along the Mediterranean coast, also included in the Arab state territory, was captured by Egypt.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...in 2006, the Palestinians gave majority rule of parliament to Hamas. Hamas' stated mission is the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Hamas- the Palestinians' OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT- refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by 6 of the most powerful nations in the world and is labeled by the EU as a group "involved in terrorist attacks". Hamas is famous for suicide-murders, particularly inside Israel.
Israels stated mission is the destruction of Palestine and replacing it with a Jews only state. Israel refuses to recognise Palestine. Israel is currently in breach of over 60 U.N resolutions.
"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No Zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."
Actually this article is very interesting on it's own. If you look at the votes you can see a common pattern re: the U.S.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1309/is_v24/ai_4776467/pg_1
The General Assembly on 3 December declared that Israel's "grave breaches" of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War were "war crimes and an affront to humanity".
The Assembly also condemned "the continued and persistent violation" by Israel of the 1949 Geneva Convention and other applicable international instruments, and it strongly condemned 19 specific examples of Israeli policies and practices in the occupied territories, including what it termed Israel's "iron-fist policy" against the inhabitants of the occupied territories since 4 August 1985, ill-treatment and torture of children and minors under detention and/or imprisonment, and interference with the freedom of the press.
The Assembly demanded that Israel desist forthwith from those policies and practices.
Six other resolutions were adopted under the agenda item entitled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the population of the occupied territories". The texts were recommended for adoption by the Special Political Committee. Resolution 41/63 D on the 1949 Convention was adopted by 114 votes to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 36 abstentions.
In other provisions of the resolution, the Assembly:
* Strongly condemned the arming of Israeli settlers in the occupied territories to commit acts of violence against Arab civilians and the perpetration of acts of violence by those armed settlers against individuals, causing injury and death and widescale damage to Arab property;
* Called upon Israel, the occupying Power, to take immediate steps for the return of all displaced Arab and Palestinian inhabitants to their homes or former places of residence in the occupied territories;
* Requested the Security Council to ensure Israel's respect for and compliance with all the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Convention in the occupied territories, and to initiate measures to halt Israeli policies an practices in those territories; and
* Called upon Israel, the occupying Power, to allow the reopening of the Roman Catholic Medical Facility Hospice in Jerusalem to provide needed health and medical services to the city's Arab population.
By other resolutions approved, the Assembly:
* Called upon Israel to release all Arabs arbitrarily detained and imprisoned as a result of their struggle for self-determination and for the liberation of their territories, and demanded that Israel rescind its action against the detainees and imprisoned Palestinians and release them immediately (The vote on resolution 41/36 A was 108-2 (Israel, United States) -34.);
* Condemned the systematic Israeli campaign of repression against and closing of universities and other educational institutions in the occupied territories, and restricting and impeding the academic activities of Palestinian universities in contravention of the 1949 Geneva Convention; and condemned Israeli policies and practices against Palestinian students and faculties in educational institutions in the occupied territories, especially the policy of "opening fire on defenceless students, causing man ties" (The vote on resolution 41/63 G was 119-2 (Israel, United States) -32.);
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's interesting that he was quoted as saying "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people" but was then forced to change his statement
after pressure from AIPAC to: "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognise Israel."
A Moral Judgment is Called For
On Israel's "Right to Exist"
By JOHN V. WHITBECK
Now that the Palestinian civil war long sought by Israel, the U.S. and the EU appears on the verge of breaking out, it may be timely to examine the justification put forward by Israel, the U.S. and the EU for their collective punishment of the Palestinian people in retaliation for their having made the "wrong" choice in last January's democratic election -- the refusal of Hamas to "recognize Israel" or to "recognize Israel's existence" or to "recognize Israel's right to exist".
These three verbal formulations have been used by media, politicians and even diplomats interchangeably, as though they mean the same thing. They do not.
"Recognizing Israel" or any other state is a formal legal/diplomatic act by a state with respect to another state. It is inappropriate -- indeed, nonsensical -- to talk about a political party or movement, even one in a sovereign state, extending diplomatic recognition to a state. To talk of Hamas "recognizing Israel" is simply sloppy, confusing and deceptive shorthand for the real demand being made.
"Recognizing Israel's existence" is not a logical nonsense and appears on first impression to involve a relatively straightforward acknowledgement of a fact of life -- like death and taxes. Yet there are serious practical problems with this formulation. What Israel, within what borders, is involved? The 55% of historical Palestine recommended for a Jewish state by the UN General Assembly in 1947? The 78% of historical Palestine occupied by Israel in 1948 and now viewed by most of the world as "Israel" or "Israel proper"?
The 100% of historical Palestine occupied by Israel since June 1967 and shown as "Israel" on maps in Israeli schoolbooks? Israel has never defined its own borders, since doing so would, necessarily, place limits on them. Still, if this were all that were being demanded of Hamas, it might be possible for it to acknowledge, as a fact of life, that a State of Israel exists today within some specified borders.
"Recognizing Israel's right to exist", the actual demand, is in an entirely different league. This formulation does not address diplomatic formalities or simple acceptance of present realities. It calls for a moral judgment.
There is an enormous difference between "recognizing Israel's existence" and "recognizing Israel's right to exist". From a Palestinian perspective, the difference is in the same league as the difference between asking a Jew to acknowledge that the Holocaust happened and asking him to acknowledge that it was "right" that the Holocaust happened -- that the Holocaust (or, in the Palestinian case, the Nakba) was morally justified.
To demand that Palestinians recognize "Israel's right to exist" is to demand that a people who have for almost 60 years been treated, and continue to be treated, as sub-humans publicly proclaim that they ARE sub-humans -- and, at least implicitly, that they deserve what has been done, and continues to be done, to them. Even 19th century U.S. governments did not require the surviving Native Americans to publicly proclaim the "rightness" of their ethnic cleansing by the Pale Faces as a condition precedent to even discussing what reservation might be set aside for them -- under economic blockade and threat of starvation until they shed whatever pride they had left and conceded the point.
Some believe that Yasser Arafat did concede the point in order to buy his ticket out of the wilderness of demonization and earn the right to be lectured directly by the Americans. In fact, in his famous statement in Stockholm in late 1988, he accepted "Israel's right to exist in peace and security". This formulation, significantly, addresses the /conditions/ of existence of a state which, as a matter of fact, exists. It does not address the existential question of the "rightness" of the dispossession and dispersal of the Palestinian people from their homeland to make way for another people coming from abroad.
The original conception of the formulation "Israel's right to exist" and of its utility as an excuse for not talking to any Palestinian leadership which still stood up for the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people are attributed to Henry Kissinger, the grand master of diplomatic cynicism. There can be little doubt that those states which still employ this formulation do so in full consciousness of what it entails, morally and psychologically, for the Palestinian people and for the same cynical purpose -- as a roadblock against any progress toward peace and justice in Israel/Palestine and as a way of helping to buy more time for Israel to create more "facts on the ground" while blaming the Palestinians for their own suffering.
However, many private citizens of good will and decent values may well be taken in by the surface simplicity of the words "Israel's right to exist" (and even more easily by the other two shorthand formulations) into believing that they constitute a self-evidently reasonable demand and that refusing such a reasonable demand must represent perversity (or a "terrorist ideology") rather than a need to cling to their self-respect and dignity as full-fledged human beings which is deeply felt and thoroughly understandable in the hearts and minds of a long-abused people who have been stripped of almost everything else that makes life worth living. That this is so is evidenced by polls showing that the percentage of the Palestinian population which approves of Hamas' steadfastness in refusing to bow to this humiliating demand by their enemies, notwithstanding the intensity of the economic pain and suffering inflicted on them by the Israeli and Western siege, substantially exceeds the percentage of the population which voted for Hamas in January.
It may not be too late to focus decent minds around the world on the unreasonableness -- indeed, the immorality -- of this demand and of the verbal formulation on which it is based, whose use and abuse have already caused so much misery and threaten to cause more.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
but what interests me most in this whole palestine/israel saga is how the oppressed has become the oppressor. youd think that if any people on the face of the earth could find compassion for the palestinians it'd be the jews. dispossession does not a good neighbour or fellow countryman make.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
but what interests me most in this whole palestine/israel saga is how the oppressed has become the oppressor. youd think that if any people on the face of the earth could find compassion for the palestinians it'd be the jews. dispossession does not a good neighbour or fellow countryman make.
The irony is stupefying. One could say they (Israeli govt) caught the Nazi flu, and don't care to be cured anytime soon.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
It's interesting that he was quoted as saying "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people" but was then forced to change his statement
after pressure from AIPAC to: "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognise Israel."
Nice find.
I think Obama fans need to think really hard about this reality.
The majority of Arab hatred towards the US is from their blind support of Israel.
"A 2002 Zogby poll, conducted in eight Arab countries showed that "the negative perception of the United States is based on American policies, not a dislike of the West." The same poll showed that "the Palestinian issue was listed by many Arabs among the political issues that affect them most personally." Resolution of the Palestinian refugee issue would undoubtedly improve America's international image, by proving that the U.S. government supports the consistent application of international law."
-
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
hmm what do yuo suggest a people do when they are dispossessed of their land, not allowed the right of return when they flee during wartime? should they hold hands sit around a campfire and sing kumbaya? or should they do what you and i would do in the same circumstance, and oppose with everything they have and any way they can?
the palestinians didnt decide one day to target israeli jews just for the heck of it. the way you go on id swear you thought the palestinians had no grievances that need to be addressed.
fascinating how the oppressed has become the oppressor dont you think?
To be honest I find it amazing and very very big of the Palestinians to even CONSIDER negotiating a peace deal. That must have took a serious amount of willingness to put aside the attrocities committed on them in in order that peace may be achieved.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
To be honest I find it amazing and very very big of the Palestinians to even CONSIDER negotiating a peace deal. That must have took a serious amount of willingness to put aside the attrocities committed on them in in order that peace may be achieved.
well while israel continues to flout international law there is no real negotiation. tis all just a bit of a show really dont you think?, so israel(and her close personal mates) can parade in front of the world and say look at us arent we the better men to even talk with these barbarians, all the while grinding the palestinians into the dust.
if negotiations were serious, the occupied territores wouldnt even exist. and while they continue to, i will never believe the palestinians have any hope in hell of being recognised as legitimate citizens of their own fucking country.
the united states of america are doing themselves such a disservice in this whole debacle. they continually(as we know) speak of peace and democracy whilst aiding and abetting what is possibly the most visible display of human rights abuses on the planet.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I don't see how a supposedly peace loving candidate gets the notion to polarize a nation to one side on an issue.
Since when is it about picking sides that lead to biblically prophesied Armageddon type confrontation?
I though peace was about trying to live together...
Very, very astute Roland. That's the essential contradiction right there, and why polarized good/bad views continue to perpetuate the mayhem on the world stage.
Peace is not about choosing sides and making one right and another wrong. That's how we perpetuate separation, illusion. We let someone be the scapegoat for our inability to solve our problems. This is the hallmark of the co-dependent mind-set that has a whopping 95% of North Americans imbalanced.
People hear the surface words of peace - the "shine" - and they go for that. They are mesmerized away from what is really going on. Then when the fallout comes back to them, it's "why me?" "What did I do to deserve this?" They are blind.
As you've alluded to in this thread, only those with the ears to hear will hear.
Anyone who sees that the emperor has no clothes is then villified.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
'By MARK LAVIE, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 34 minutes ago
JERUSALEM - A rocket fired from the Gaza Strip exploded in a shopping center in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon on Wednesday, wounding at least 14 people, rescue officials said.'
Very, very astute Roland. That's the essential contradiction right there, and why polarized good/bad views continue to perpetuate the mayhem on the world stage.
Peace is not about choosing sides and making one right and another wrong. That's how we perpetuate separation, illusion. We let someone be the scapegoat for our inability to solve our problems. This is the hallmark of the co-dependent mind-set that has a whopping 95% of North Americans imbalanced.
People hear the surface words of peace - the "shine" - and they go for that. They are mesmerized away from what is really going on. Then when the fallout comes back to them, it's "why me?" "What did I do to deserve this?" They are blind.
As you've alluded to in this thread, only those with the ears to hear will hear.
Anyone who sees that the emperor has no clothes is then villified.
Thanks.
I let people actions describe who they truly are. Words are for the most part are meaningless, and in certain cases no indication at all of how/what people are thinking.
Some are charmed by the words and place merit on them despite the actions observed. People lie all the time... some do it perpetually. Some are flawless at it....like politicians for example I've worked with enough of people like this and befriended them enough to know how masterful this skill can be developed.
With some practice it's not too hard to pick out intentions through the smoke screen.
Hard to describe. I've always been able to "read" people very quickly in real life.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I let people actions describe who they truly are. Words are for the most part are meaningless, and in certain cases no indication at all of how/what people are thinking.
Some are charmed by the words and place merit on them despite the actions observed. People lie all the time... some do it perpetually. Some are flawless at it....like politicians for example I've worked with enough of people like this and befriended them enough to know how masterful this skill can be developed.
With some practice it's not too hard to pick out intentions through the smoke screen.
Hard to describe. I've always been able to "read" people very quickly in real life.
Yes, actions are real. The words state the rhetoric - what the ego tells ourselves and others, but the actions do show what we really think/feel and where we're really coming from.
That's why the "shine" is different than the substance.
People so much want to be inspired out of reality that they really want to buy the glamour and the fairy magic. They are mesmerised by the surface shine. Also, that helps them feel better that someone so seemingly charismatic and "great" is really "just like them" when that person actually acts out their deepest fears and flaws. It's understandable...he's only human...hence, mediocrity is what's aspired to.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Yes, actions are real. The words state the rhetoric - what the ego tells ourselves and others, but the actions do show what we really think/feel and where we're really coming from.
That's why the "shine" is different than the substance.
People so much want to be inspired out of reality that they really want to buy the glamour and the fairy magic. They are mesmerised by the surface shine. Also, that helps them feel better that someone so seemingly charismatic and "great" is really "just like them" when that person actually acts out their deepest fears and flaws. It's understandable...he's only human...hence, mediocrity is what's aspired to.
After Bush it's easy pickings for the right speaker.
The sad part is Bush was talking similarly, like no nation building, let's be friends etc.., then a couple week after getting elected he was dropping bombs in Iraq....prior to 9/11.
Would it be wise by to exact a higher level of scrutiny this time around?
...one could say perhaps to put it lightly.
apparently a feel good rally speech is still good enough for a lot of people despite a shaky voting record on civil liberties, and a hard line stance towards fighting "terrorism" when it comes to using lethal force. I guess a lot of people still want to stick it to the terrorists and win the fight against terrorism if push comes to shove.
Why engage masses of people towards using violence as a means if you;re pro peace??? Is it a toughness thing... macho ego? I'm not sure.
In any event, I'm wondering who has learned what, and from which lessons in the past...
It's not an overly compelling picture.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I think Obama fans need to think really hard about this reality.
The majority of Arab hatred towards the US is from their blind support of Israel.
"A 2002 Zogby poll, conducted in eight Arab countries showed that "the negative perception of the United States is based on American policies, not a dislike of the West." The same poll showed that "the Palestinian issue was listed by many Arabs among the political issues that affect them most personally." Resolution of the Palestinian refugee issue would undoubtedly improve America's international image, by proving that the U.S. government supports the consistent application of international law."
-
roland, in all seriousness, WHO DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE ELECTED PRESIDENT? do you actually believe that, given the chance, nader or paul or some other fringe candidate with no future political aspirations and therefore the luxury of saying whatever the fuck they want, you think they could actually run this country?? do you think they could get anything accomplished? you fail to recognize that while barack obama may have to compromise on some things he is still a good candidate and probably our best shot at regaining some of the respect throughout the world that the past 7 1/2 years have completely fucked and squandered. when you lay your head down on a pillow at night, do you REALLY think nader, in all his uncompromising greatness, could get the job done??
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Remind me again how Obama is a good candidate and probably our best shot at regaining some of the respect throughout the world; when in fact he has voted for and supported just about all the actions which have led to us to this point of disrespect and loathing, by the International community?
As well as pandering to all of the same Corporate and financial interests that have ruined this country.
Remind me again how Obama is a good candidate and probably our best shot at regaining some of the respect throughout the world; when in fact he has voted for and supported just about all the actions which have led to us to this point of disrespect and loathing, by the International community?
As well as pandering to all of the same Corporate and financial interests that have ruined this country.
Our standing in the world was largely and negatively impacted by our invasion of Iraq. Obama publically opposed that invasion, and the rest of the world tends to notice that sort of thing.
Comments
http://uruknet.info/?p=m43896&hd=&size=1&l=e
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
When one makes claims of anti-Semitism that can't be backed up by any legitimate understanding of that term, I see that for exactly what it is.
Groundless, slanderous sensationalism and nothing more.
Unless you can show that the criticisms of the actions and policies of the Israeli government are somehow motivated by a bias against the religion of the people of Israel - & I can see no basis here for you to do so - then your accusation is totally without foundation. It's just blind adherence to transparent propaganda.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
They should be safe, but they should be held to the same standards as everyone else. Nuclear weapons, war crimes...etc. This immediate attempt to brand anything as anti semi is a disgrace. Israel is spitting on those people who died during the holocust by using their pain to try advance their own cause. Pathetic.
She's playing Dr.Phil and you've been singled out for her unique brand of therapy:.
Although she certainly has no problem slinging insults of her own, lol.
Which of course makes her preaching all the more hilarious.:D
now, this argument, as far as I'm concerned, is done. typical of leftists, many of you resort to insults when you've lost an argument. great. continue to get your news from Roland. I've insinuated, and fully believe, that he is an anti-semite. that's not an insult, that's the fact as I see it. when you post links to websites full of anti-Israel "news stories" giving stories of atrocities that can't be substantiated by any legitimate or well known news source, it reeks of anti-semitism to me. now, you can go back to jacking each other off or whatever, but the facts are there. I'm out.
Then you truely don't have a good grasp on the definition of anti-Semitism.
Plain and simple.
Once again, you've completely missed, failed to mention or just conveniently ignored the fact that anti-Semitism is a bigotry against Jews for being Jews, and that is not the issue when it comes to (the majority of) criticism of Israel's actions in Palestine. It has to do with human rights abuses, plain and simple, which deserve to be criticised no matter who the perpetrator is, or what their religion is.
When you start from the blinkered perspective that Israel is above criticism just because it its Israel, your argument and your position have no basis in reality, and have no legitimacy.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
for you, yes.
and, of course, accusing someone of being an anti-semite is not an insult you've just resorted to using.
do you even know what you're saying? that's like saying "you're a piece of shit. that's not an insult, it's just the fact as I see it."
HAHA! NOW, this argument is DONE.
you write a paragraph without giving any "legitimate" source--or ANY source for that matter--as your backup, call someone an anti-semite, insult all of us, then you say "but the facts are there. I'm out."
classic!
And typical of rightists, you've got blind allegiance to Israel in spite of their international law violations and blatant disregard for human rights. See? Generalisations are fun!
With all due respect, posting "What illegal settlements? You're an anti-Semite! Post some real news sources!" without once posting anything from a legitimate source doesn't equate to winning an argument, in my opinion.
omg
The argument is done all right, and thus confirms my observation of your inability to understand it. That's not a forever situation btw...
Are you part of that CUFI cult? because I think you've been brainwashed by a religious organization, and I'm serious when I say that.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
i wasn't trying to single you out, i just noticed your remark is all. you mean there were lots of other pissy remarks here?
and regarding obama debates, i really don't mind what anyone says about him. in all seriousness, i like him as a presidential candidate, and i'm planning to vote for him if he gets the nomination. nothing anyone says here is gonna sway me, not even YOU, in your infinite wisdom.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
i agree with you on that, absolutely. and i've said as much.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Just some people calling other people conspiring racists incorrectly out of context...that's all.
Infinite wisdom?...naw mine's just average. I think the majority to the south of me are below average due to the lacking (read: borderline pathetic) media coverage on the key issues like the constitution, human rights violations, and economics.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Firstly, there is a reason that the Palestinians and the Arab league rejected the British Mandate of Palestine:
http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/snakebite/Wars.html
'In late 1947 the United Nations proposed that Palestine be divided into a Palestinian Arab state and a Jewish state. The UN Partition Plan recommended that 55 percent of Palestine, and the most fertile region, be given to the Jewish settlers who compromised 30 percent of the population. The remaining 45 percent of Palestine was to comprise a home for the other 70 percent of the population who were Palestinians. The Palestinians rejected the plan because it was unfair. Israel and its supporters claim that the Arabs first attacked in Janurary 1948 and then invaded Israel in May 1948.
The truth is that by May 1948 Zionist forces had already invaded and occupied large parts of the land which had been allocated to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan. In January 1948 Israel did not yet exist.
The evidence that Israel started the 1948 war comes from Zionist sources. The History of the Palmach which was released in portions in the 1950s (and in full in 1972) details the efforts made to attack the Palestinian Arabs and secure more territory than alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan (Kibbutz Menchad Archive, Palmach Archive, Efal, Israel).
'...it is not true that the Arabs "invaded Israel" in 1948. First, Israel did not exist at the time of the alleged invasion as an established state with recognised bounderies. When the Zionist leaders established Israel on 15 May 1948 they purposely declined to declare the bounderies of the new state in order to allow for future expansion.
Secondly, the only territory to which the new state of Israel had even a remote claim was that alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan. But the Zionists had already attacked areas that were alloted to the Palestinian Arab state.
Thirdly, those areas which the Arab states purportedly "invaded" were, in fact, exclusively areas alloted to the Palestinian Arab state proposed by the UN Partition Plan. The so-called Arab invasion was a defensive attempt to hold on to the areas alloted by the Partition Plan for the Palestinian state.
By the end of the 1948 war the Jewish state — having now declared itself "Israel" — had conquered 78 percent of Palestine — far more than that proposed even by the very generous UN partition plan. And three-quarters of a million Palestinians had been made refugees. Over 400 towns and villages had been destroyed, and a new map was being drawn up, in which every city, river and hillock would receive a new, Hebrew name. All vestiges of the Palestinian culture were to be erased. In fact, for many decades Israel — and the US, following its lead — denied the very existence of this population. Golda Meir once said, in fact: "There is no such thing as a Palestinian."
Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the State of Israel retained nearly all the territory that would have been assigned to it in the 1947 UN Partition Plan, as well as conquered half of the land intended to become the Arab state of Palestine and a portion of the territory intended for international administration around Jerusalem. The remaining half of the land that had been intended to become Palestine along the West Bank of the Jordan River was annexed by Jordan, as was most of the Jerusalem enclave; the Gaza Strip along the Mediterranean coast, also included in the Arab state territory, was captured by Egypt.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Israels stated mission is the destruction of Palestine and replacing it with a Jews only state. Israel refuses to recognise Palestine. Israel is currently in breach of over 60 U.N resolutions.
"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No Zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."
The United Nations General Assembly says Israeli breaches of Geneva Convention constitute 'war crimes.'
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1309/is_v24/ai_4776467
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1309/is_v24/ai_4776467/pg_1
The General Assembly on 3 December declared that Israel's "grave breaches" of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War were "war crimes and an affront to humanity".
The Assembly also condemned "the continued and persistent violation" by Israel of the 1949 Geneva Convention and other applicable international instruments, and it strongly condemned 19 specific examples of Israeli policies and practices in the occupied territories, including what it termed Israel's "iron-fist policy" against the inhabitants of the occupied territories since 4 August 1985, ill-treatment and torture of children and minors under detention and/or imprisonment, and interference with the freedom of the press.
The Assembly demanded that Israel desist forthwith from those policies and practices.
Six other resolutions were adopted under the agenda item entitled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the population of the occupied territories". The texts were recommended for adoption by the Special Political Committee.
Resolution 41/63 D on the 1949 Convention was adopted by 114 votes to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 36 abstentions.
In other provisions of the resolution, the Assembly:
* Strongly condemned the arming of Israeli settlers in the occupied territories to commit acts of violence against Arab civilians and the perpetration of acts of violence by those armed settlers against individuals, causing injury and death and widescale damage to Arab property;
* Called upon Israel, the occupying Power, to take immediate steps for the return of all displaced Arab and Palestinian inhabitants to their homes or former places of residence in the occupied territories;
* Requested the Security Council to ensure Israel's respect for and compliance with all the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Convention in the occupied territories, and to initiate measures to halt Israeli policies an practices in those territories; and
* Called upon Israel, the occupying Power, to allow the reopening of the Roman Catholic Medical Facility Hospice in Jerusalem to provide needed health and medical services to the city's Arab population.
By other resolutions approved, the Assembly:
* Called upon Israel to release all Arabs arbitrarily detained and imprisoned as a result of their struggle for self-determination and for the liberation of their territories, and demanded that Israel rescind its action against the detainees and imprisoned Palestinians and release them immediately (The vote on resolution 41/36 A was 108-2 (Israel, United States) -34.);
* Condemned the systematic Israeli campaign of repression against and closing of universities and other educational institutions in the occupied territories, and restricting and impeding the academic activities of Palestinian universities in contravention of the 1949 Geneva Convention; and condemned Israeli policies and practices against Palestinian students and faculties in educational institutions in the occupied territories, especially the policy of "opening fire on defenceless students, causing man ties" (The vote on resolution 41/63 G was 119-2 (Israel, United States) -32.);
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/14/barackobama.usforeignpolicy
It's interesting that he was quoted as saying "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people" but was then forced to change his statement
after pressure from AIPAC to: "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognise Israel."
Re: the question of Palestinians 'recognizing Israel'...
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitbeck12212006.html
December 21, 2006
A Moral Judgment is Called For
On Israel's "Right to Exist"
By JOHN V. WHITBECK
Now that the Palestinian civil war long sought by Israel, the U.S. and the EU appears on the verge of breaking out, it may be timely to examine the justification put forward by Israel, the U.S. and the EU for their collective punishment of the Palestinian people in retaliation for their having made the "wrong" choice in last January's democratic election -- the refusal of Hamas to "recognize Israel" or to "recognize Israel's existence" or to "recognize Israel's right to exist".
These three verbal formulations have been used by media, politicians and even diplomats interchangeably, as though they mean the same thing. They do not.
"Recognizing Israel" or any other state is a formal legal/diplomatic act by a state with respect to another state. It is inappropriate -- indeed, nonsensical -- to talk about a political party or movement, even one in a sovereign state, extending diplomatic recognition to a state. To talk of Hamas "recognizing Israel" is simply sloppy, confusing and deceptive shorthand for the real demand being made.
"Recognizing Israel's existence" is not a logical nonsense and appears on first impression to involve a relatively straightforward acknowledgement of a fact of life -- like death and taxes. Yet there are serious practical problems with this formulation. What Israel, within what borders, is involved? The 55% of historical Palestine recommended for a Jewish state by the UN General Assembly in 1947? The 78% of historical Palestine occupied by Israel in 1948 and now viewed by most of the world as "Israel" or "Israel proper"?
The 100% of historical Palestine occupied by Israel since June 1967 and shown as "Israel" on maps in Israeli schoolbooks? Israel has never defined its own borders, since doing so would, necessarily, place limits on them. Still, if this were all that were being demanded of Hamas, it might be possible for it to acknowledge, as a fact of life, that a State of Israel exists today within some specified borders.
"Recognizing Israel's right to exist", the actual demand, is in an entirely different league. This formulation does not address diplomatic formalities or simple acceptance of present realities. It calls for a moral judgment.
There is an enormous difference between "recognizing Israel's existence" and "recognizing Israel's right to exist". From a Palestinian perspective, the difference is in the same league as the difference between asking a Jew to acknowledge that the Holocaust happened and asking him to acknowledge that it was "right" that the Holocaust happened -- that the Holocaust (or, in the Palestinian case, the Nakba) was morally justified.
To demand that Palestinians recognize "Israel's right to exist" is to demand that a people who have for almost 60 years been treated, and continue to be treated, as sub-humans publicly proclaim that they ARE sub-humans -- and, at least implicitly, that they deserve what has been done, and continues to be done, to them. Even 19th century U.S. governments did not require the surviving Native Americans to publicly proclaim the "rightness" of their ethnic cleansing by the Pale Faces as a condition precedent to even discussing what reservation might be set aside for them -- under economic blockade and threat of starvation until they shed whatever pride they had left and conceded the point.
Some believe that Yasser Arafat did concede the point in order to buy his ticket out of the wilderness of demonization and earn the right to be lectured directly by the Americans. In fact, in his famous statement in Stockholm in late 1988, he accepted "Israel's right to exist in peace and security". This formulation, significantly, addresses the /conditions/ of existence of a state which, as a matter of fact, exists. It does not address the existential question of the "rightness" of the dispossession and dispersal of the Palestinian people from their homeland to make way for another people coming from abroad.
The original conception of the formulation "Israel's right to exist" and of its utility as an excuse for not talking to any Palestinian leadership which still stood up for the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people are attributed to Henry Kissinger, the grand master of diplomatic cynicism. There can be little doubt that those states which still employ this formulation do so in full consciousness of what it entails, morally and psychologically, for the Palestinian people and for the same cynical purpose -- as a roadblock against any progress toward peace and justice in Israel/Palestine and as a way of helping to buy more time for Israel to create more "facts on the ground" while blaming the Palestinians for their own suffering.
However, many private citizens of good will and decent values may well be taken in by the surface simplicity of the words "Israel's right to exist" (and even more easily by the other two shorthand formulations) into believing that they constitute a self-evidently reasonable demand and that refusing such a reasonable demand must represent perversity (or a "terrorist ideology") rather than a need to cling to their self-respect and dignity as full-fledged human beings which is deeply felt and thoroughly understandable in the hearts and minds of a long-abused people who have been stripped of almost everything else that makes life worth living. That this is so is evidenced by polls showing that the percentage of the Palestinian population which approves of Hamas' steadfastness in refusing to bow to this humiliating demand by their enemies, notwithstanding the intensity of the economic pain and suffering inflicted on them by the Israeli and Western siege, substantially exceeds the percentage of the population which voted for Hamas in January.
It may not be too late to focus decent minds around the world on the unreasonableness -- indeed, the immorality -- of this demand and of the verbal formulation on which it is based, whose use and abuse have already caused so much misery and threaten to cause more.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The irony is stupefying. One could say they (Israeli govt) caught the Nazi flu, and don't care to be cured anytime soon.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Nice find.
I think Obama fans need to think really hard about this reality.
The majority of Arab hatred towards the US is from their blind support of Israel.
"A 2002 Zogby poll, conducted in eight Arab countries showed that "the negative perception of the United States is based on American policies, not a dislike of the West." The same poll showed that "the Palestinian issue was listed by many Arabs among the political issues that affect them most personally." Resolution of the Palestinian refugee issue would undoubtedly improve America's international image, by proving that the U.S. government supports the consistent application of international law."
-
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
well while israel continues to flout international law there is no real negotiation. tis all just a bit of a show really dont you think?, so israel(and her close personal mates) can parade in front of the world and say look at us arent we the better men to even talk with these barbarians, all the while grinding the palestinians into the dust.
if negotiations were serious, the occupied territores wouldnt even exist. and while they continue to, i will never believe the palestinians have any hope in hell of being recognised as legitimate citizens of their own fucking country.
the united states of america are doing themselves such a disservice in this whole debacle. they continually(as we know) speak of peace and democracy whilst aiding and abetting what is possibly the most visible display of human rights abuses on the planet.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Peace is not about choosing sides and making one right and another wrong. That's how we perpetuate separation, illusion. We let someone be the scapegoat for our inability to solve our problems. This is the hallmark of the co-dependent mind-set that has a whopping 95% of North Americans imbalanced.
People hear the surface words of peace - the "shine" - and they go for that. They are mesmerized away from what is really going on. Then when the fallout comes back to them, it's "why me?" "What did I do to deserve this?" They are blind.
As you've alluded to in this thread, only those with the ears to hear will hear.
Anyone who sees that the emperor has no clothes is then villified.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
1 hour, 34 minutes ago
JERUSALEM - A rocket fired from the Gaza Strip exploded in a shopping center in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon on Wednesday, wounding at least 14 people, rescue officials said.'
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=112726
Four children among six dead in Israeli strikes on Gaza
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Thanks.
I let people actions describe who they truly are. Words are for the most part are meaningless, and in certain cases no indication at all of how/what people are thinking.
Some are charmed by the words and place merit on them despite the actions observed. People lie all the time... some do it perpetually. Some are flawless at it....like politicians for example
With some practice it's not too hard to pick out intentions through the smoke screen.
Hard to describe. I've always been able to "read" people very quickly in real life.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Yes, actions are real. The words state the rhetoric - what the ego tells ourselves and others, but the actions do show what we really think/feel and where we're really coming from.
That's why the "shine" is different than the substance.
People so much want to be inspired out of reality that they really want to buy the glamour and the fairy magic. They are mesmerised by the surface shine. Also, that helps them feel better that someone so seemingly charismatic and "great" is really "just like them" when that person actually acts out their deepest fears and flaws. It's understandable...he's only human...hence, mediocrity is what's aspired to.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
After Bush it's easy pickings for the right speaker.
The sad part is Bush was talking similarly, like no nation building, let's be friends etc.., then a couple week after getting elected he was dropping bombs in Iraq....prior to 9/11.
Would it be wise by to exact a higher level of scrutiny this time around?
...one could say perhaps to put it lightly.
apparently a feel good rally speech is still good enough for a lot of people despite a shaky voting record on civil liberties, and a hard line stance towards fighting "terrorism" when it comes to using lethal force. I guess a lot of people still want to stick it to the terrorists and win the fight against terrorism if push comes to shove.
Why engage masses of people towards using violence as a means if you;re pro peace??? Is it a toughness thing... macho ego? I'm not sure.
In any event, I'm wondering who has learned what, and from which lessons in the past...
It's not an overly compelling picture.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
roland, in all seriousness, WHO DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE ELECTED PRESIDENT? do you actually believe that, given the chance, nader or paul or some other fringe candidate with no future political aspirations and therefore the luxury of saying whatever the fuck they want, you think they could actually run this country?? do you think they could get anything accomplished? you fail to recognize that while barack obama may have to compromise on some things he is still a good candidate and probably our best shot at regaining some of the respect throughout the world that the past 7 1/2 years have completely fucked and squandered. when you lay your head down on a pillow at night, do you REALLY think nader, in all his uncompromising greatness, could get the job done??
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
As well as pandering to all of the same Corporate and financial interests that have ruined this country.