Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 Of course I am biased in this Steve... I am a freakin Muslim. The occupied terrorites are just that- occupied by Isrealis! The key thing here is that our Army unlike the Isreali army is just, does the right thing and does not attempt to kill civilians at all. Here is a nation that we are giving billions of dollars of aid to and they are shooting our own! And as I have said many times on this board I am no Arafat fan I dont like his methods at all and it would make my life easier if he was either gone or actually reined in the terrorists. But to say the Isreali army is benevolent or to say that many of the atrocities commited by Isreal are reported in the American media is completely false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 SHF, What country is Israel occupying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by Blade And, now that the media is extremely anti-israeli, you are getting some vidication for your long-repressed anti-semitism. "Anti-Semitism" ... always the outburst when anyone expresses displeasure with the actions of anyone or anything Israeli. But, then again, people like to use buzzwords they've heard without actually looking them up: Main Entry: Sem·itePronunciation: 'se-"mIt, esp British 'sE-"mIt Function: noun Etymology: French sémite, from Semitic Shem, from Late Latin, from Greek SEm, from Hebrew ShEm Date: 1848 1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b : a descendant of these peoples 2 : a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language Palestinians are of Arabic descent, and they speak a Semitic language. Therefore, when people side with the Palestinians, it's really quite silly to call them "Anti-Semitic". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by RiggoDrill "Anti-Semitism" ... always the outburst when anyone expresses displeasure with the actions of anyone or anything Israeli. But, then again, people like to use buzzwords they've heard without actually looking them up: Palestinians are of Arabic descent, and they speak a Semitic language. Therefore, when people side with the Palestinians, it's really quite silly to call them "Anti-Semitic". RD, Since you are smart enough to use a dictionary, I am sure that you are smart enough to understand the intent of my words. There is the literal definition of things, and then the definition to which a word evolves. Often, these two are not the same thing. For example, does anyone really call a native American a 'Redskin' anymore? The word "ant-semitic" has long been used to refer to a prejudice against Jews. However, that it can include Arabs within the definition is not lost on me. Nor is my use of the term wrong within the context of my post! Perhaps you should read more than just one line taken out of context before you go off half-asssed on a linguistic superiority trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by Omer Hey, I am living in Israel and I fill that I have to respond to this thread. Believe it or not, I am on the left side of the political map in Israel and my opinions are closer to Mike's more than the rest of the posters. One of the problems of the American people is that they see everything in black and white. There is no bad and good in this conflict and there isn't right and wrong (but I am always right ). Dealing with civilians is a large problem in the fight in terrorism. I belive the israeli goverment is not willing to negotiate with the palestinians on the subject of peace agreement and the fault of the situation falls on both sides. P.S I'm sorry about my bad English and I'm pretty sure I was misunderstood by some of you. Omer, Welcome to Extremeskins.com! I gotta admit that I am curious how an Israeli ended up becoming a Redskins fan... Also, thanks for joining in this discussion. The fact that you are doing so (and that Israelis are openly debating this subject) is justification enough to continue to USA support. My understanding of the peace negotiations was that Arafat has consistently refused to hold to the terms of the Oslo agreement, and that negotiations have been contingent on him getting control of Hezbollah and the more extreme factions of the PLO (which are all committed to nothing less than the destruction of Israel). Perhaps you can help us non-Israelis understand how the government is not doing enough compromising with the PLO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsHokie Fan Of course I am biased in this Steve... I am a freakin Muslim. The occupied terrorites are just that- occupied by Isrealis! The key thing here is that our Army unlike the Isreali army is just, does the right thing and does not attempt to kill civilians at all. Here is a nation that we are giving billions of dollars of aid to and they are shooting our own! SHF, To echo Art, exactly what country is Israel occupying? And how long have they been occupying it? And what reason are they occupying it? If you know the answers to those questions, then you should wonder why the hell are these "palestinians" not called Jordanians, or why arent the Jordanians called Palestinians? We do NOT know the facts surrounding the shooting of this American, although even if it WERE a legitimate murder as implied by the article above, then do we blame the Israeli government or the individual soldier? You dont really expect anyone to believe that the Israeli government instructs its soldiers to shoot Americans on sight do you? And as I have said many times on this board I am no Arafat fan I dont like his methods at all and it would make my life easier if he was either gone or actually reined in the terrorists. But to say the Isreali army is benevolent or to say that many of the atrocities commited by Isreal are reported in the American media is completely false. No one here has said that the Israeli army is benevolent. No army is benevolent... an army by definition kills people and breaks things. Stevea said it best, Israel and its army work VERY hard to minimize civilian casualties in an IMPOSSIBLE situation. The fact that an Israeli can come to Extremeskins and voice his opposition to his governments actions without fear of repression or repurcussion puts the Israeli government on the high ground compared to most of its Arab neighbors. Furthermore, 'atrocities' NEVER COMMITTED BY THE ISRAELI ARMY are consistently reported in the American media. Go back and do a search on the "Jenin massacre" and see EXACTLY what was reported initially versus what the REAL death count of civilians versus armed soldiers of Arafat confirmed by the UN and the Red Cross. I distinctly remember NPR reporting about Israelis digging mass graves and burying women and children in them in Jenin, yet they never said shiznit when it was determined to be a complete lie. At least you are honest about your prejudice in this discussion, but do not come here and post such blatant garbage as the "American media underreports Israeli atrocities". That borders on propaganda, which you can see from the rules posted above, is NOT tolerated here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruzious Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsHokie Fan Damnit Isreal cannot be allowed to shoot AMERICAN CITIZENS. If this was ANY OTHER country we would be outraged at this. That government is so stupid and brutal I'm guessing it wasn't convenient at the time to ask the HUMAN SHIELD to provide evidence that he was an American citizen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 I know it's wrong of me to say, but I just can't get myself to care. Sorry... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 I keep hearing about how Israel is a valued ally, So how does it work? We give them 8 Billion a year in aid and what do we get in return? Hatred by association of a billion Muslims for our seeming condonement of their brutality. We need to tell them that this kind of sh!t must stop or they don't get a dime. Maybe then the PLO and the arab world will trust us enough to give peace a chance. Since we already have about 100 threads on the persecution of the Palestinians under Israeli rule. Let's start maybe ONE thread about Jews under Egyptian rule. We give Egypt $2 billion a year in aid and what do we get in return? Hatred of a billion Muslims ... And I wonder, how well are Egyptian Jews treated? Oh, that's right. There ARE NONE. All 75,000 that lived there 50 years ago have been kicked out or killed. But let's not look at just one Arab or Muslim nation. That's not really fair, is it? What about the 30,000 Jews that used to live in Syria? Gone. The 38,000 in Lybia? Gone. The 63,000 in Yemen, an ally? Gone. The 20,000 in Lebanon? Gone. The 140,000 in Algeria? Three guesses. The 150,000 in Iraq? One guess. I guess if the Israelis simply killed or drove off ALL the Palestinians 35 years ago noone would be bringing this up now, and it would all be forgotten by the international community, just like the 400,000 or so Jews that dissappeared from Egypt, Syria, Lybia, Yemen, Algeria and Iraq ... yeah right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 I'm more shocked at the lousy aim than the idiot getting shot. As far as I'm concerned when you as a civillian leave the US to take on policies of another Country then whatever danger comes your way is your fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratoman Posted April 7, 2003 Author Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by NavyDave As far as I'm concerned when you as a civillian leave the US to take on policies of another Country then whatever danger comes your way is your fault. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 To respond to you Blade the Isreali army has been occupying Palestenian territory (which has not been granted statehood although UN resolution 181 called for it to be a state way back in 1947) as well as territory captured in the 1967 that according to UN Resolution 242 calls for Isreal to leave those territories. That is the occupation. If we rightly so expect Saddam Huessien to comply Isreal should be forced to comply as well. UN resolutions 181 and 194 call for the recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestenian people. 194 also calls for the right of return of Palestenian refugees (which was a key sticking point in the 2000 Clinton sponsored negotiations) And a two state solution the Isreal-Palestenian conflict was endorsed by the Arab summit in Beiruit in 2002. And it has been asked where did the Jews in various Muslim/Arab countries go? TO ISREAL! That is the whole point of Isreal to set up a Jewish homeland for all Jewish people around the world to come to. That is the ultimate goal of Isreal. Why would they set up a Jewish homeland if Jewish people didn't go to it? And although Isreal is a democracy it is yet to have any Bill of Rights and it has over twenty laws that discriminate against the Palestenian national minority (Christians included) on such things as education, land ownership and access to public resources. And I never would use blatant or psuedo propaganda on this board. Propaganda would be saying that Jewish people control the media therefore there is an underreporting of Jewish atrocities. However you never seem to here about incidents of Jewish settlers firing on Palestenians do you? As I have stated many many times on this board before I do not like any of the Arab/Muslim governments in the Middle East. Not one. And my views tend to be much more to the right except on the issue of Isreal. If we are gonna fight for the rights of the Iraqi people and if we are gonna stand up for our own citizens in other countries we damn well should be outraged when one of ours is killed by an Isreali soldier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratoman Posted April 7, 2003 Author Share Posted April 7, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsHokie Fan we damn well should be outraged when one of ours is killed by an Isreali soldier. the dumb$hit put himself in harms way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsHokie Fan To respond to you Blade the Isreali army has been occupying Palestenian territory (which has not been granted statehood although UN resolution 181 called for it to be a state way back in 1947) as well as territory captured in the 1967 that according to UN Resolution 242 calls for Isreal to leave those territories. That is the occupation. If we rightly so expect Saddam Huessien to comply Isreal should be forced to comply as well. Ok, I can only stomach so much of this crap... I am rather sick and tired of the Tailgate being used as a place to post partial truths and blatant lies. UN 181 called for both the formation of a Jewish state in the area west of the Jordan and an arab nation in the same area... Despite ALL of Jordan being designated an Arab state for the "Palestinian" Arabs AND the majority of what is now considered the State of Israel, the Jews *accepted* the grossly unfair and indefensible borders of UN 181 and declared thier independence on May 15, 1948. (See the attached map for the borders proposed by 181) Did the "palestinians" accept UN Resolution 181 and peacefully take control of thier "homeland"? NO! They did not want any Jewish state at all! They promptly waged war on the newly formed Jewish state AND LOST. And the Arab states continued to wage war on Israel (and LOSE) for the next 30 years, until Sadat signed his peace agreement.... but that is only ONE Arab state out of many that is still in a state of war with Israel, even today. There has been a common theme throughout all of these UN resolutions against Israel: 1. Israel is attacked. 2. Israel defends itself. 3. The UN or other international group steps in to end the violence, calling for both sides to take certain actions to resolve the situation. 4. Israel attempts to comply but the intransigence and non-compliance of Israel's enemies delays implementation. 5. Israel is blamed for failing to comply while the failures of Israel's enemies are ignored. Its no wonder that Israel has not complied with these resolutions... Furthermore, it's an insidious form of propaganda to compare Israel's "non-compliance" with that of Iraq. When Israel has been subject to a "UN Resolution" you first have to ask what type of resolution it was. Resolutions of the General Assembly are merely recommendations and many Security Council actions are too. There is no force of law to any UN resolution, and Israel cannot be accused of anything more than deciding that the resolution is not in Israel's national interest. Resolutions of the Security Council are of two types, falling under either: Chapter VII, dealing with "Threats to Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Aggression", resolutions that require compliance by the subject nation and carry the threat of force that may be used to compel compliance, or Chapter VI, dealing with "Pacific Resolution of Disputes", resolutions that are meant to be implemented through negotiation or other voluntary means. Unlike Iraq, Israel has bever been a subject of any Chapter VII resolution. UN resolutions 181 and 194 call for the recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestenian people. 194 also calls for the right of return of Palestenian refugees (which was a key sticking point in the 2000 Clinton sponsored negotiations) And a two state solution the Isreal-Palestenian conflict was endorsed by the Arab summit in Beiruit in 2002. It is a blatant lie to state that UN 194 calls for the "right of return" for the Palestinian "refugees". Most of Resolution 194 dealt with seeking a diplomatic solution to war the Arabs were inflicting upon Israel in 1948. This included setting up an international Conciliation Commission to mediate between the parties. The refugees are mentioned only in Article 11, which resolved: ... that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible. Article 11 also instructed the Conciliation Commission: ... to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation. Considering that this is only can only apply to "those willing to LIVE AT PEACE with thier neighbors," this does NOT apply to any Arab people other than Egypt. Also note, that the language in this resolution did not state PALESTINIAN or ARAB refugees. It applies to any refugee of any country in conflict with Israel.If one must make a case for a "right of return, then one must also demand for the "right of return" of the Jews who were forced out of all of the Arab countries over last century as well. We all know THAT will never happen! And it has been asked where did the Jews in various Muslim/Arab countries go? TO ISREAL! That is the whole point of Isreal to set up a Jewish homeland for all Jewish people around the world to come to. That is the ultimate goal of Isreal. Why would they set up a Jewish homeland if Jewish people didn't go to it? That is correct, Jews FLED to Israel because, after millenia of perscution, they finally had a very tiny sliver of land to call home. Here is the point of the comment that provoked your misguided response: Considering the VAST number of muslim/Arab countries surrounding Israel, why did the Arabs who left thier land in the new Jewish state (at the urging of the other Arab countries I must add) NOT be welcomed as brothers in Jordan? Or Syria? Or Lebannon? One could easily make the case of the Arab nations using the "Palestinians" as political pawns in the overt and covert war against Israel. If you want to aim your anger against someone, aim at your Islamic 'brothers' who have allowed the Palestinians to live in refugee camps for decades with no assistance for anything other than guns and explosives. And I never would use blatant or psuedo propaganda on this board. Propaganda would be saying that Jewish people control the media therefore there is an underreporting of Jewish atrocities. However you never seem to here about incidents of Jewish settlers firing on Palestenians do you?As I have stated many many times on this board before I do not like any of the Arab/Muslim governments in the Middle East. Not one. And my views tend to be much more to the right except on the issue of Isreal. If we are gonna fight for the rights of the Iraqi people and if we are gonna stand up for our own citizens in other countries we damn well should be outraged when one of ours is killed by an Isreali soldier. Hokie, as a fellow Skins fan, Virginian, and American, we share a common bond. But I gotta tell you that your post regarding the UN resolutions against Israel is nothing BUT propaganda. Please do NOT go here again unless better equipped with the FACTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 These are the borders designated by UN 181 to which Israel agreed to comply upon declaring independence in 1948 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 That's what is known as a good ole fashiones *** whoopin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Outstanding Blade. Last year on the 700 club and on the WETA channel they showed the old map and this proposed one and went on a lengthy discussion of the ethnic groups and how if they followed scriptures Jordan lands would belong to the palestinians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 Blade, I'm no expert on the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (although based on some of the idiotic arguments I've seen, I'm apparently a lot more well versed than some), but you've inspired me to learn more. Any reading recommendations would be appreciated, particularly if you know of a quality history of Israel? I admire you for calling out those that parrot what they've heard on TV and forcing them to defend outlandish claims with facts. Moral relativism is rampant everywhere you look. Just a few days ago, someone posted here that 'there is no black and white, no right or wrong'....WHAT?!!! Now that is one of the scarier statements I've ever heard made in a public forum. Props to you for drawing a line. :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 This will be my last post on the subject because anything I write is called a lie or propaganda and insults are hurled at my arguments. So this will be it and I am done Blade posted: "UN 181 called for both the formation of a Jewish state in the area west of the Jordan and an arab nation in the same area... Despite ALL of Jordan being designated an Arab state for the "Palestinian" Arabs AND the majority of what is now considered the State of Israel, the Jews *accepted* the grossly unfair and indefensible borders of UN 181 and declared thier independence on May 15, 1948" Actually the majority of the modern state of Isreal is NOT from conquest of the West Bank or Gaza from Egypt and Jordan as I will show you. In 1917 the stage for conflict was set by the British who while drawing up the borders for the Palestine mandate declared "with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." In 1914 92 percent of Palestine was Arab, after 32 years of immigration from Europe in 1946 68 percent was Arab and 32 percent was Jewish. In the 1948 resolution Isreal was given 56 percent of the territory, the Palestenians 43 percent and Jerusalam was supposed to be an "international zone" with open borders. This was despite the fact the Arabs owned 93 PERCENT of the Palestenian territories and were 2/3's of the population. This was a VERY fair deal for Isreal in the first place and Arabs rejected this as unjust for that reason. In 1948 Jewish forces after being attacked conquered additional territory and established Isreal on 78 percent of the Palestinian mandate. 750,000 Palestenians fled or were driven from their homes in this war. After this Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan controlled the West Bank (someone had to govern these areas since Palestine was never established.) In 1967 Isreal conquered the rest of the Palestine including the West Bank and Gaza and have set up a military occupation of these territories including East Jerusalam since then. On top of this it is against International Law for an occupying power to transfer its own population into occupied territories. Yet in the past 35 years successive Isreali governments have established over 200 settlements with a population of 380,000 on confiscated Palestinian land. In the West Bank for example Isreal has siezed 59 percent of the land from Palestinans and use 90 percent of the water. In the Gaza despite only 1 percent of the population being settlers they control 20 percent of the land. And responding to Blades comment on the return of refugees. Who is to say that those refugees do not simply want to live in peace when they return to the Palestinian territories? It can be argued that it is blatant propaganda to say that no Arab wants peace. It is not a blatant lie to say it calls for the right of return because it is interpreted that way as you have interpreted as a "why not allow Jewish people to return to Arab nations." And of course we all know this will never happen because why on earth would any Jewish person want to return to an Arab nation when they have their homeland that they have spilled hundreds of years of blood for. The Arab mission of eliminating Isreal is a dead game and will not happen ever. And I do point much of my anger at the Arab governments that have allowed for this to happen and have used Palestine as a pawn in their game while conviently ignoring the Kashmiri's , the Chechnyans and did nothing when Milosivec was mudering Muslims in Kosovo. To say that I have not pointed anger at these governments before is just ignorant. These are the facts. No propaganda, no insults, just a little history of what happened and why Isreal is an occupying force. I am done with this topic now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omer Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 tarhog wrote: "Just a few days ago, someone posted here that 'there is no black and white, no right or wrong'....WHAT?!!! Now that is one of the scarier statements I've ever heard made in a public forum. " I made this statement and I'm standing behind it. Over this thread I saw people taking judt one point of view, the Arabic or the Israeli, and that scaries me. About the "right of return": both sides know that the right of return will not be acknowledged by Israel and will not be forefited by the Palestinian authorities. The result in the final agreement will be return of 50,000-100,00 people that will be called "Family Reunion". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Originally posted by Omer tarhog wrote: "Just a few days ago, someone posted here that 'there is no black and white, no right or wrong'....WHAT?!!! Now that is one of the scarier statements I've ever heard made in a public forum. " I made this statement and I'm standing behind it. Over this thread I saw people taking judt one point of view, the Arabic or the Israeli, and that scaries me. About the "right of return": both sides know that the right of return will not be acknowledged by Israel and will not be forefited by the Palestinian authorities. The result in the final agreement will be return of 50,000-100,00 people that will be called "Family Reunion". Omer....I personally am glad to hear other viewpoints...and its obvious that someone living daily in Israel has much more insight into the reality there than I could impart. So my comment was not intended to stifle you or anyone else from putting forward your perspective. You are welcome here! What I intended to convey is that Americans are not simplistic blind 'black and white' thinkers as they are caricatured. What might separate us from the politically correct elsewhere in the world is that we ALWAYS choose sides. I agree with your sentiment, that there are always shades of grey, good and evil done in the name of both sides. But that truth does not change the final equation, that in every conflict, there is a better and a worse, and actions have to be taken into context. NO political or legal argument justifies intentionally targeting and blowing up non-combatant civilians. That is not a grey area in my mind. How we got to the point of atrocities being committed is also important in my opinion. Atrocities or brutal behavior committed in the heat of conflict(however inexcusable) by individuals in military units is not the same as intentional, planned, leadership-sanctioned terrorist bombing on non-combatants. I believe all individuals should feel compelled to view as much information as they can on any issue, and then take a stand. We hear in the US that ALL politicians are the same, ALL governments are corrupt, Republicans and Democrats are the same so theres no sense taking sides. I totally reject that. There is always right and wrong, better and worse, it just takes work to find that out for yourself. Anyway, hope you stick around. My argument is not with you, its with those that promote moral relativism, that America is no better than any other country because we are imperfect, that no conflict is just because suffering will occur, that we should never take sides in any dispute because everyone is at fault. Those are dubious assertions that I reject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 There is never anything other than a black or a white. There is only grey where people are too paralyzed to make up their minds. When instead of seeing one side or another, people allow themselves to see a picket fence with each picket being a valid view that must be respected, pondered and considered. It's hogwash and always has been. There is right and there is wrong. In every small thing in the world there is. Every choice a person makes is either right or wrong. Every position is right or wrong. There is no such thing as, "There really is no right or wrong answer." That's the escape of a person who thinks himself intellectual but is really unable to support his thoughts in any manner whatsoever. I'll never really understand the shades of grey people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Its funny, I just saw a program on PBS about moral relativism. Personally Art, I think you are wrong, of course thats just me, I'm sure others would agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsHokie Fan This will be my last post on the subject because anything I write is called a lie or propaganda and insults are hurled at my arguments. So this will be it and I am done Anything I've 'hurled at your arguments' you have earned! A fella named Kefka was banned for posting malicious propaganda and lies here. Remember, this is NOT a forum without its rules. The rules state that you back up your opinions and statements. You have NOT done so, and there will be little tolerance for it. The fact that I have not banned you means that I truly do not believe that you are trying to post malicious propaganda. But, I do truly believe that you have been fed so much of it by your Islamic 'brothers' that you truly just do not know the facts of the history of the region. If you think you were angry with your Islamic Arab brothers before reading the FACTS that I have posted, you are not going to like what I have to say in reply to your last post. If you truly believe any of what you wrote, then they have duped you and turned you into another one of their pawns. I hope you are smarter than that, have an open mind, and will revise the way you perceive Middle East issues regarding Israel (spelled I-S-R-A-E-L, btw.) SkinsHokie Fan wrote:Actually the majority of the modern state of Isreal is NOT from conquest of the West Bank or Gaza from Egypt and Jordan as I will show you. In 1917 the stage for conflict was set by the British who while drawing up the borders for the Palestine mandate declared "with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." In 1914 92 percent of Palestine was Arab, after 32 years of immigration from Europe in 1946 68 percent was Arab and 32 percent was Jewish. In the 1948 resolution Isreal was given 56 percent of the territory, the Palestenians 43 percent and Jerusalam was supposed to be an "international zone" with open borders. This was despite the fact the Arabs owned 93 PERCENT of the Palestenian territories and were 2/3's of the population. This was a VERY fair deal for Isreal in the first place and Arabs rejected this as unjust for that reason. In 1948 Jewish forces after being attacked conquered additional territory and established Isreal on 78 percent of the Palestinian mandate. 750,000 Palestenians fled or were driven from their homes in this war. After this Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan controlled the West Bank (someone had to govern these areas since Palestine was never established.) Please give me the source of your stats regarding the populations in the early 1900's. Those that I have seen are nowhere near those that you have posted here. In fact, they are quite the opposite. Regarding the Arabs being "driven" from their lands, I answer this with a Joseph Farah (A Lebanese Arab American) article from WorldNetDaily.com, who did some excellent research on this topic, and backs it up with direct quotes from various media, and is more eloquent on the issue that I could be: The world's collective amnesia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: September 19, 2002 Yasser Arafat may have lost some of his personal political clout of late, but the political movement he began – demanding justice for Palestinian Arabs expelled from their homes in 1948 – remains as strong as ever. There's just one problem. There's not the slightest historical evidence to suggest Arabs were expelled in significant numbers – certainly not by Jews. I know this statement is going to be met with gasps, guffaws and gnashing of teeth. Nevertheless, let me defend it, not with my own words, not with the words of Jews and Israelis, but with the words of Arabs closer to the time of the events. "The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish state. The Arab states agree upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem." – Emile Ghoury, secretary of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, in an interview with the Beirut Telegraph Sept. 6, 1948. "The Arab state which had encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees." – The Jordanian daily newspaper Falastin, Feb. 19, 1949. "Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders, who have neither honor nor conscience? Who brought them over in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their honor? The Arab states, and Lebanon amongst them, did it." – The Beirut Muslim weekly Kul-Shay, Aug. 19, 1951. "The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead." – The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963. "For the flight and fall of the other villages it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs ... By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy." – The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953. I could go on and on and on with this forgotten – or deliberately obscured – history. But you get the point. There was no Jewish conspiracy to chase Arabs out of their homes in 1948. It never happened. There are, instead, plenty of historical records showing the Jews pleading with their Arab neighbors to stay and live in peace and harmony. Yet, despite the clear, unambiguous words of the Arab observers at the time, history has been successfully rewritten to turn the Jews into the bad guys. The truth is that 68 percent of the Arab Palestinians who left in 1948 – perhaps 300,000 to 400,000 of them – never saw an Israeli soldier. Even more importantly, the revised history has given the guilty a free ride. The Arab states that initiated the hostilities have never accepted responsibility – despite their enormous wealth and their ability to assimilate tens of millions of refugees in their largely under-populated nations. And other states have failed to hold them accountable. It's bad enough the Arab states created a small nation of refugees by their actions. It's worse that they have successfully blamed that international crime on the Jews. Today, of course, this cruel charade continues. The suffering of millions of Arabs is perpetuated only for political purposes by the Arab states. They are merely pawns in the war to destroy Israel. There were some 100 million refugees around the world following World War II. The Palestinian Arab group is the only one in the world not absorbed or integrated into their own people's lands. Since then, millions of Jewish refugees from around the world have been absorbed in the tiny nation of Israel. It makes no sense to expect that same tiny Jewish state to solve a refugee crisis it did not create. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As I have said before, and can not emphasize enough, the Arabs are using these 'refugees' as a political pawn in its continuous war against Israel. If you doubt my words, how about listening to those of a couple of men in the higher echelons of the PLO/Palestinian Authority: "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity.... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel." -----Zuheir Muhsin, late Military Department head of the PLO and member of its Executive Council (Dutch daily Trouw, March 1977) "The Oslo accords were a Trojan Horse; the strategic goal is the liberation of Palestine from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea" ---Faysal Al-Husseini, Palestinian Authority Minister for Jerusalem Affairs, in his last interview, 'Al-Arabi' daily newspaper (Egypt), June 24, 2001 SkinsHokie Fan wrote:In 1967 Isreal conquered the rest of the Palestine including the West Bank and Gaza and have set up a military occupation of these territories including East Jerusalam since then. Didnt Israel also take the entire Sinai peninsula in 1967 in a war to prevent an impending attack upon them by Egyptian forces massing in the Sinai? Didn't Israel completely vacate this in its peace agreement with Egypt? Didnt Israel also agree to a Palestinian Authority government in Gaza and the West Bank in its attempt to secure peace for Israel once again by trading land? The refusal of this 'Authority' to squash the terrorist actions of its consitituents forces the Israeli army to "occupy" the land which is harboring those committing acts of terrorism against it. If this was occuring just across the border of the USA, you know damn well there would be no one complaining about our "occupation". SkinsHokie Fan wrote:On top of this it is against International Law for an occupying power to transfer its own population into occupied territories. Yet in the past 35 years successive Isreali governments have established over 200 settlements with a population of 380,000 on confiscated Palestinian land. In the West Bank for example Isreal has siezed 59 percent of the land from Palestinans and use 90 percent of the water. In the Gaza despite only 1 percent of the population being settlers they control 20 percent of the land. How many new Arab settlements have been established in these same regions over this time period? (The answer is about 5x the number of Jewish settlements) More importantly, how many Arabs have LEFT other Arab countries and immigrated to Israel? To quote Joesph Farah again from an article two days ago: In 1949, the Arab population of Israel was about 160,000. Today, it is over 1.2 million. This is hardly attributable to higher birth rates. Most of the growth in Arab population is due to migration. In other words, Arabs are picking up stakes in Arab lands and choosing to live in Israel. This trend, of course, doesn't include Arab Jewish migration to Israel. No one talks about the staggering number of Arab Jewish refugees – as many as 1 million – who fled the Muslim world with little more than the clothes on their backs to reach the safety and security of the Jewish state in the last 50 years. We're led to believe Arabs hate Israel – and, indeed, it's true there is an irrational, inexplicable form of virulent anti-Semitism growing in the Arab and Muslim world. But when they vote with their feet, Arabs seem to love Israel. They continue to choose it as a place to live over life in their native countries as they have for the last half-century. Arabs & Muslims have 21 countries in the Middle East, 800x the land of Israel, 50x the population and ALL of the oil! Surely, they have the resources to provide a better quality of life compared to the limited land and resources of tiny Israel? But why dont they? How easy would it be to say, "Here, my Jewish brothers, is this tiny partition of land... live and prosper here and share in our pursuit of happiness along side of us!" What is sad is that they wont even do that for thier own Arab brothers, so expecting them to do so for the Jews would be rather blind. SkinsHokie Fan wrote: And responding to Blades comment on the return of refugees. Who is to say that those refugees do not simply want to live in peace when they return to the Palestinian territories? It can be argued that it is blatant propaganda to say that no Arab wants peace. It is not a blatant lie to say it calls for the right of return because it is interpreted that way as you have interpreted as a "why not allow Jewish people to return to Arab nations." And of course we all know this will never happen because why on earth would any Jewish person want to return to an Arab nation when they have their homeland that they have spilled hundreds of years of blood for. Of course no Jew would wish to return to a land where they were oppressed; that was why Israel was formed so that they would not have to. I am merely using the standards that you set forth in your post, that of UN 194, which calls for the "repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation." The Arab Jews forced to flee to Israel are just as much entitled to this "payment of compensation" as the Arabs are who left their homes in 1948. To use this Resolution only for the benefit of Arabs would be yet another injustice in the long line of injustices inflicted upon Israeli Jews. SkinsHokie Fan wrote: The Arab mission of eliminating Isreal is a dead game and will not happen ever. And I do point much of my anger at the Arab governments that have allowed for this to happen and have used Palestine as a pawn in their game while conviently ignoring the Kashmiri's , the Chechnyans and did nothing when Milosivec was mudering Muslims in Kosovo. To say that I have not pointed anger at these governments before is just ignorant. If the Arab mission of eliminating Israel was truly dead, then we would not be discussing this issue. I applaud your desire to see a unity of Moslems world-wide; but sadly, that has not been the case. I never stated that you DIDNT point your anger at these Muslim governments... I DID state that your anger at Israel over issues about which you truly dont know the facts *is* ignorant. SkinsHokie Fan wrote:These are the facts. No propaganda, no insults, just a little history of what happened and why Isreal is an occupying force. If what you wrote were truly the facts, then I would not have to take so much time setting you straight There is alot of propaganda on both sides of this issue, and figuring out exactly what the "facts" are can be difficult. People are imperfect, as are governments. One thing that *can* be said is that Israel is still the only country in the Middle East that is a democracy, allows *all* (even the Arabs) of its citizens to vote AND be represented in the Keneset (the governing body of representatives), and allows freedom of the press to such an extent that you can get such critical, slanted, and overtly propagandist articles posted above by likitornot on the newsstands in Israel. It is for this reason that the moral thing to do, as Americans, is to support our brothers in democracy to whatever extend we can, continue to do what we can to help them live in peace, and to continue to do what we can to help free oppressed people of this world and give them the opportunity for a free democracy just as we enjoy here, and in Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Originally posted by Tarhog Blade, I'm no expert on the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (although based on some of the idiotic arguments I've seen, I'm apparently a lot more well versed than some), but you've inspired me to learn more. Any reading recommendations would be appreciated, particularly if you know of a quality history of Israel? I admire you for calling out those that parrot what they've heard on TV and forcing them to defend outlandish claims with facts. Moral relativism is rampant everywhere you look. Just a few days ago, someone posted here that 'there is no black and white, no right or wrong'....WHAT?!!! Now that is one of the scarier statements I've ever heard made in a public forum. Props to you for drawing a line. :notworthy Tarhog, I do not claim to be an expert on this either, but there is an enourmous amount of facts, propaganda, and politics surrounding this issue. My moral stand is with the imperfect American political system. Despite ****ing about my taxes, the legal system, and many other injustices that occur in this country, I still thank the divine power for my life and citizenship in the country, and all the opportunities it has given me. I truly believe it to be the form of government which allows the maximum opportunity for a human to pursue life, libery, and happiness. Israel is one of the few beacons of democracy in that part of the world, and it also has the difficult task of being in a constant state of war with 20+ nations AND has a political refugee problem that these neighboring states foster and use against it. As I said before, this is a rather impossible predicament for the Israeli government. I wont pretend to know the answers. But I WILL try to pan out the facts from the information out there, and try to learn the history as best as I can. Off the top of my head, here is a list of websites that I have read (and plagarized) in some of my debates on this issue: These are the "pro-israeli" slanted: http://worldnetdaily.com Click here for worldnetdaily.com's recommended reading list on the conflict and the history. An excellent collection articles by Hank Roth: http://pnews.org And excellent pro-israeli recounting of the history of the Israel, one which I draw upon alot since it honestly addresses many of the attacks and criticisms of the opponents of Israel: http://palestinehistory.org ---------------- Here are the anti-Israeli/anti-Jew slanted sites that I visit to get the opposing view, and to see what the latest propaganda/spin is: http://electronicintifada.net and its sister website http://electronicIraq.net A distinctly anti-Jewish site about the history of Israel: http://cactus48.com There are several others, but my insomnia is wearing out now, so I will leave it at that... If I can think of any others, I will pass them along. I'll pick things up sometime tomorrow with likeitornot's spew of articles that I split off of this thread since they are way off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.