PDA

View Full Version : Second Annual Israel Apartheid Week



Slaughtermaster
28-02-2010, 09:55 PM
Over twenty years, we saw the end of the apartheid regime in South Africa, a regime where an ethnic minority set legal and social barriers to separate the "races" in that country. People such as Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu had worked towards bringing an end to that regime and played an integral role in reconciliation between the factions.

Presently, we are seeing a similar phenomenon in Israel - but much like in the fight against apartheid in South Africa, the important thing to keep in mind is that this event is not to demonize or to make Israel "the enemy", rather to acknowledge that both side has a stake in bringing peace to the region and that there are people from both sides who can see the problems in the way the Israeli government is segregating people according to their ethnic/religious background. This event is to send a message to the Israeli government that apartheid practices is not an instrument for peace.

Here is a link to the events calendar:

http://edmonton.apartheidweek.org/

moahunter
01-03-2010, 09:14 AM
^I have some sympathy for the Palestinian cause (an injustice to one people, doesn't justify an injustice to another), but the comparison to apartheid is silly. There are many Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who vote, there are not restrictions on them doing so. Israel is the most democratic country in the middle east.

At issue, is what constitutes Israel, and what doesn't. I dislike the settlements, and the other fighting over land, be it by the Israeli or Palestinian side. But, this is what religion does, religious people fight over land considered significant to them, throughout history. At the end of the day, it isn't my job to care if they kill each other over stupidity (i.e. religion), and it surprises me that a student body in Edmonton really thinks I should.

Slaughtermaster
01-03-2010, 12:07 PM
^I have some sympathy for the Palestinian cause (an injustice to one people, doesn't justify an injustice to another), but the comparison to apartheid is silly. There are many Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who vote, there are not restrictions on them doing so. Israel is the most democratic country in the middle east.

At issue, is what constitutes Israel, and what doesn't. I dislike the settlements, and the other fighting over land, be it by the Israeli or Palestinian side. But, this is what religion does, religious people fight over land considered significant to them, throughout history. At the end of the day, it isn't my job to care if they kill each other over stupidity (i.e. religion), and it surprises me that a student body in Edmonton really thinks I should.

It's more than religion - it's strictly about land and who gets control of the land. Many non-Jewish residents within Israel, despite having equal rights on paper, are victims of legal and institutionalized discrimination. That's what these seminars are about - to get the experiences first hand from both the Palestinians and Jews who lives in the region who can see the injustices brought on to the non-Jewish populations by the Israeli government.

sundance
01-03-2010, 04:15 PM
Some differences to South Africa are; that the colored people in South Africa weren't lobbing hundreds of rockets into the white areas, they weren't for the most part doing suicide attacks against white people.

Ask yourself this question, what would USA do if Canada was sending rockets into USA? The answer is pretty obvious, they would attack us pretty much overnight. So why do you expect Israel to do differently?

After reading through the site, I think I might decide to start shopping at Mountain Equipment Co-op (even though they are higher priced).

grish
01-03-2010, 04:33 PM
It's more than religion - it's strictly about land and who gets control of the land. Many non-Jewish residents within Israel, despite having equal rights on paper, are victims of legal and institutionalized discrimination. That's what these seminars are about - to get the experiences first hand from both the Palestinians and Jews who lives in the region who can see the injustices brought on to the non-Jewish populations by the Israeli government.

This is simply not true. There are many non-Jewish members of the israeli parliament. there are no restrictions on work, residence, or any other civil rights. There are no limitations on the right to travel unless one wished to travel to a foreign state, in which case standard restrictions apply.

This whole "Israel Apartheid" week is a veiled hate fest. The only way to bring about peace in the region is not by singling out one of two sides who are doing the fighting. They need to negotiate and they both need to stop fighting. As such, pressure needs to be placed on BOTH sides simultaneously to ensure a long-lasting peace. From what I understand, Israel needs to withdraw military from the palestinian territory and allow self-governance. On the other side, Palestinians need to recognize Israel and to stop threatening to kill everyone living there (this mostly applies to Hamas).

This particular event is designed to put pressure on ONLY ONE side out of two to gain concessions for the other. The choice of focus is very ironic and extremely unfortunate, unfair, and biased considering that under attack is the only true democracy in the region. Talking about apartheid, there used to me very large jewish populations in Egypt, Jordan, Sirya, Lebanon, and what is now Palestinian territory. Most of those communities have all but vanished.

grish
01-03-2010, 04:51 PM
From the opening paragraph in the website:

In 2010, there are approximately 11 million people who live in Palestine/Israel. Half are Israeli Jews and half are Palestinians, but the trend is that Palestinians are becoming the clear majority. The reality today is that the Israeli government effectively rules over all these people, but they do not all have equal rights. Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip are deprived of the most fundamental civil, political, economic, educational and cultural rights as their land is under relentless assault from settlers and they are relegated to a separate road network. Within Israel, Palestinian citizens have some rights, but face institutionalized and legal discrimination.
1. The reality today is that the Israeli government effectively rules over all these people...
The governing body is the Israeli parliament with members elected through regular elections. There are people of every religion and race represented in the parliament. Like the Canadian government rules over the English-speaking and the French-speaking canadians, the Israeli government rules over the Hebrew and Arabic-speaking Israelis. Btw, both of those languages are the official languages of Israel.
2. Israel has not been occupying Gaza for many years now. The unilateral withdrawal was largely seen as a test whether self-governance in gaza will lead to reduced hostilities and eventual peace. The ensuing rocket fire from there helped to convince many israelis to not make any more unilateral moves.

... and that is why apartheid week is a completely useless event designed to promote the interests of one side and not the promotion of peace between the two people.

kcantor
01-03-2010, 06:28 PM
From the opening paragraph in the website:

In 2010, there are approximately 11 million people who live in Palestine/Israel. Half are Israeli Jews and half are Palestinians, but the trend is that Palestinians are becoming the clear majority. The reality today is that the Israeli government effectively rules over all these people, but they do not all have equal rights. Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip are deprived of the most fundamental civil, political, economic, educational and cultural rights as their land is under relentless assault from settlers and they are relegated to a separate road network. Within Israel, Palestinian citizens have some rights, but face institutionalized and legal discrimination.
1. The reality today is that the Israeli government effectively rules over all these people...
The governing body is the Israeli parliament with members elected through regular elections. There are people of every religion and race represented in the parliament. Like the Canadian government rules over the English-speaking and the French-speaking canadians, the Israeli government rules over the Hebrew and Arabic-speaking Israelis. Btw, both of those languages are the official languages of Israel.
2. Israel has not been occupying Gaza for many years now. The unilateral withdrawal was largely seen as a test whether self-governance in gaza will lead to reduced hostilities and eventual peace. The ensuing rocket fire from there helped to convince many israelis to not make any more unilateral moves.

... and that is why apartheid week is a completely useless event designed to promote the interests of one side and not the promotion of peace between the two people.
agreed completely - once again. :) the very name seems designed to promote - or at the least to rationalize - more conflict than to promote mutual respect and resolution. as for the proposed boycotting of mec for selling goods from israel in favour of purchasing alternative goods from who knows what sweatshops with child labour, that's an agenda speaking and little more.

AAAAE
01-03-2010, 08:13 PM
I hope the organizers are planning apartheid weeks for other countries too. China for example (tibet).

Otherwise this reeks of anti-semitism.

armin
02-03-2010, 12:19 AM
It's more than religion - it's strictly about land and who gets control of the land. Many non-Jewish residents within Israel, despite having equal rights on paper, are victims of legal and institutionalized discrimination. That's what these seminars are about - to get the experiences first hand from both the Palestinians and Jews who lives in the region who can see the injustices brought on to the non-Jewish populations by the Israeli government.

This is simply not true. There are many non-Jewish members of the israeli parliament. there are no restrictions on work, residence, or any other civil rights. There are no limitations on the right to travel unless one wished to travel to a foreign state, in which case standard restrictions apply.

This whole "Israel Apartheid" week is a veiled hate fest. The only way to bring about peace in the region is not by singling out one of two sides who are doing the fighting. They need to negotiate and they both need to stop fighting. As such, pressure needs to be placed on BOTH sides simultaneously to ensure a long-lasting peace. From what I understand, Israel needs to withdraw military from the palestinian territory and allow self-governance. On the other side, Palestinians need to recognize Israel and to stop threatening to kill everyone living there (this mostly applies to Hamas).

This particular event is designed to put pressure on ONLY ONE side out of two to gain concessions for the other. The choice of focus is very ironic and extremely unfortunate, unfair, and biased considering that under attack is the only true democracy in the region. Talking about apartheid, there used to me very large jewish populations in Egypt, Jordan, Sirya, Lebanon, and what is now Palestinian territory. Most of those communities have all but vanished.


Grish, that is completely not true.
You say it's a hate fest but since when has Israel ever agreed to any of the sanctions from the UN, the Goldstone report, and most recently the Dubai assassination. Explain how Israel sending out hit squads is any different that Hamas' rockets?

http://www.mujahideenryder.net/2009/09/15/ultimate-jihad-and-sabr-in-palestine-picture-of-israeli-throwing-wine-on-palestinian-woman/

That is disrespectful.

grish
02-03-2010, 01:21 AM
Grish, that is completely not true.
You say it's a hate fest but since when has Israel ever agreed to any of the sanctions from the UN, the Goldstone report, and most recently the Dubai assassination. Explain how Israel sending out hit squads is any different that Hamas' rockets?

http://www.mujahideenryder.net/2009/09/15/ultimate-jihad-and-sabr-in-palestine-picture-of-israeli-throwing-wine-on-palestinian-woman/

That is disrespectful.

As I was saying, singling out one side while completely ignoring the actions of the other is not helpful and will never bring about long lasting peace. While Israel has to make concessions, the Palestinians need to agree to peace and make concessions as well. The biggest concession from the Palestinians (Hamas specifically) is to abandon their calls for the destruction (read: mass murder of the Jewish ihabitants) of Israel.

I am not sure what that little link is supposed to prove or illustrate. There are idiots on both sides and this guy should be charged with assault. His actions, however, cannot not be equated with the policies of the government. If we confuse the actions of one with the policies of the government, we would be concluding that Canada is against public bus drivers following few recent assaults on bus drivers in Edmonton.

JasonR
02-03-2010, 08:57 AM
Many of us who can see both sides of this issue lost just a little bit of sympathy when Arafat turned down the deal that Clinton brokered. They were offered everything they said they wanted and then said no. There are no angels in this at all. But the Palestinians are going to have to accept the existence of Israel just as much as Israel will have to accept a Palestinian state.

sundance
02-03-2010, 09:13 AM
Explain how Israel sending out hit squads is any different that Hamas' rockets?Interesting Armin that you chose that phrase, the individual who was killed in Dubai Mahmoud Rauf al-Mabhouh was a founding member of the military arm of Hamas. He was directly involved in the death of two Israeli soldiers.

Associated Press article http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jSdL4oiz5cg_6JzNK8g-zrAiYk7wD9DUG6B80

JasonR
02-03-2010, 09:18 AM
I just have to shake my head at those who point to one side or the other as being the victims or villains in all of this.

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 09:18 AM
It's more than religion - it's strictly about land and who gets control of the land. Many non-Jewish residents within Israel, despite having equal rights on paper, are victims of legal and institutionalized discrimination. That's what these seminars are about - to get the experiences first hand from both the Palestinians and Jews who lives in the region who can see the injustices brought on to the non-Jewish populations by the Israeli government.

This is simply not true. There are many non-Jewish members of the israeli parliament. there are no restrictions on work, residence, or any other civil rights. There are no limitations on the right to travel unless one wished to travel to a foreign state, in which case standard restrictions apply.

This whole "Israel Apartheid" week is a veiled hate fest. The only way to bring about peace in the region is not by singling out one of two sides who are doing the fighting. They need to negotiate and they both need to stop fighting. As such, pressure needs to be placed on BOTH sides simultaneously to ensure a long-lasting peace. From what I understand, Israel needs to withdraw military from the palestinian territory and allow self-governance. On the other side, Palestinians need to recognize Israel and to stop threatening to kill everyone living there (this mostly applies to Hamas).

This particular event is designed to put pressure on ONLY ONE side out of two to gain concessions for the other. The choice of focus is very ironic and extremely unfortunate, unfair, and biased considering that under attack is the only true democracy in the region. Talking about apartheid, there used to me very large jewish populations in Egypt, Jordan, Sirya, Lebanon, and what is now Palestinian territory. Most of those communities have all but vanished.


Grish, that is completely not true.
You say it's a hate fest but since when has Israel ever agreed to any of the sanctions from the UN, the Goldstone report, and most recently the Dubai assassination. Explain how Israel sending out hit squads is any different that Hamas' rockets?

http://www.mujahideenryder.net/2009/09/15/ultimate-jihad-and-sabr-in-palestine-picture-of-israeli-throwing-wine-on-palestinian-woman/

That is disrespectful.


Oh my...how ignorance is bliss...
Israel doesn't have to "agree" to any "sanctions" by the UN b/c the bulk of UN is dominated by arab/muslim/leaftleaning countries who hate anythig that is Jewish... in a word: the UN is rigged.
Please get real and read a little.
The "Dubai hit", first and foremost, was not done by Israel, there is no proof yet it was (even the Hamas is saying today it was either Egypt or Jordan)..but even if it was Israel, since when killing a terrorist mastermind a crime? it should be praised not condemned.
This "Apartheid week" is indeed a hatefest promoted by terrorist supporters who advocate the elimination of Israel.
The moment they start discussing the Arab discrimination against jews, christians, women and gays in arab countries I will start having some sympathy for the cause.... in the meantime it's just a propaganda drive that preys on the ignorant and the gullible like you....

grish
02-03-2010, 09:59 AM
I just have to shake my head at those who point to one side or the other as being the victims or villains in all of this.

exactly. I hope this message came through in my posts, so I will agree with this to make sure it does. "Israel Apartheid" thing is the complete opposite of what is needed to bring peace. I absolutely refuse to take part in this hate propaganda exercise.

Marcel Petrin
02-03-2010, 10:54 AM
I just have to shake my head at those who point to one side or the other as being the victims or villains in all of this.

exactly. I hope this message came through in my posts, so I will agree with this to make sure it does. "Israel Apartheid" thing is the complete opposite of what is needed to bring peace. I absolutely refuse to take part in this hate propaganda exercise.

Ummm, if you think that this movement is a "hate propaganda exercise", then you're the kind of person JasonR should be shaking his head at. There are real issues in Israel relating to institutionalized racism and discrimination against Palestinians and Arabs. Israel is very much a "Jewish" state, the very UN resolution that called for it's creation stated as such and so do it's basic laws (interestingly enough, they don't appear to have a formal constitution).

Is it comparable to South Africa under apartheid? Of course not. They're clearly reaching by drawing that comparison, and they might well not have a well reasoned point to stand on.

But they're entitled to their opinion without it being labeled "hate propaganda." Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere on their website to they argue for the destruction of Israel, expulsion of Jews, or anything else even remotely resembling hate speech. They have a different political viewpoint on the situation than you. Quite possibly it's egregiously and provably wrong. That doesn't make it hate speech.

JasonR
02-03-2010, 11:10 AM
This is one of those issues that just gets people so riled up. But in the end both sides have been total villains to each other. The Palestinians seem to want the destruction of Israel rather than a shared state or a two state model. The Israelis always answer an attack with an attack ten times stronger. It never ends. I don't understand how a nation-state that is a democracy can be based on race and religion, but that's what both sides have ended up doing. It's terrible.

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 11:17 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere on their website to they argue for the destruction of Israel, expulsion of Jews, or anything else even remotely resembling hate speech. They have a different political viewpoint on the situation than you. Quite possibly it's egregiously and provably wrong. That doesn't make it hate speech.

I will correct you. You're wrong.
Their website

http://edmonton.apartheidweek.org/

shows the map if Israel labeled as "Palestinian" with the "Palestinian" colours and 2 arabs.. if that is not advocating hate I do not know what is... Until Arabs come to terms with the fact that they need to stop hating Israel and realise the world will come to ashes before Israel dissapears, until then, there will not be peace in the region and Arabs will have a hard time getting support from those not aligned with terrorists or the extreme left.

faraz
02-03-2010, 11:20 AM
This is one of those issues that just gets people so riled up. But in the end both sides have been total villains to each other. The Palestinians seem to want the destruction of Israel rather than a shared state or a two state model. The Israelis always answer an attack with an attack ten times stronger. It never ends. I don't understand how a nation-state that is a democracy can be based on race and religion, but that's what both sides have ended up doing. It's terrible.

Palestinians have for a long time been willing to settle on a two state model but that doesn't mean at all costs. They have asked for the pre-1967 borders to be drawn and the dismantling of hundreds (yes hundreds) of settlements housing hundreds of thousands of settlers on Palestinian land. But Israel has never agreed to do so because it serves as a strategic location to grab land and control any future Palestinian state.

Look at the map of Palestine in 1930 and then 1948 and then 1967 and 2010. As they say, picture is worth a thousand words.

debos
02-03-2010, 11:24 AM
Grish, that is completely not true.
You say it's a hate fest but since when has Israel ever agreed to any of the sanctions from the UN, the Goldstone report, and most recently the Dubai assassination. Explain how Israel sending out hit squads is any different that Hamas' rockets?

http://www.mujahideenryder.net/2009/09/15/ultimate-jihad-and-sabr-in-palestine-picture-of-israeli-throwing-wine-on-palestinian-woman/

That is disrespectful.

How is the targetted assination of a Hamas leader by an (until now) unknown group different than the indiscrimante bombing of civilians? Oh that's a tough one...

faraz
02-03-2010, 11:26 AM
Many of us who can see both sides of this issue lost just a little bit of sympathy when Arafat turned down the deal that Clinton brokered. They were offered everything they said they wanted and then said no. There are no angels in this at all. But the Palestinians are going to have to accept the existence of Israel just as much as Israel will have to accept a Palestinian state.

Israel has existed for last 60 odd years and with one of the largest armies in the world backed by the sole superpower in the world, both of whom possess nuclear weapons, it's not going anywhere.

A better question is whether Israel and its supporters are willing to accept a Palestinian state not controlled and at the mercy of Israel?

faraz
02-03-2010, 11:31 AM
Before this degrades into a full fledged heated argument on Middle East politics, I'd like to say that both sides have made mistakes. Palestinians are not completely innocent and neither is Israel.

grish
02-03-2010, 11:35 AM
This does not compute. Consider the actions. The state of Israel gave up land for peace with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Gaza. With the last two, instead of peace they got artilery attacks closer to the populated areas. I would excuse them being reluctant in pulling back more until peace is agreed upon. The last two pull backs were done unilaterally without a reciprocal gesture. This is why I do not believe that you can single out only one side of this conflict and label them villians. There should have beena gesture in kind towards peace from the other side of the conflict.

Marcel,
Jason shook his head (correct me Jason if this is not the case) at people who single out one side. This event singles out one side. I point to the fact that both sides need concessions such as Israel pulling out and Palestinians opting for a long lasting peace accord. Any event singling out only one of two sides with made up causes is a hatefest.

JasonR
02-03-2010, 11:39 AM
This is one of those issues that just gets people so riled up. But in the end both sides have been total villains to each other. The Palestinians seem to want the destruction of Israel rather than a shared state or a two state model. The Israelis always answer an attack with an attack ten times stronger. It never ends. I don't understand how a nation-state that is a democracy can be based on race and religion, but that's what both sides have ended up doing. It's terrible.

Palestinians have for a long time been willing to settle on a two state model but that doesn't mean at all costs. They have asked for the pre-1967 borders to be drawn and the dismantling of hundreds (yes hundreds) of settlements housing hundreds of thousands of settlers on Palestinian land. But Israel has never agreed to do so because it serves as a strategic location to grab land and control any future Palestinian state.

Look at the map of Palestine in 1930 and then 1948 and then 1967 and 2010. As they say, picture is worth a thousand words.

They got everything they asked for in the deal Clinton negotiated and Arafat said no. To be fair to Israel, they have dismantled settlements, they have agreed on a Palestinian state.

debos
02-03-2010, 11:47 AM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

faraz
02-03-2010, 12:02 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

faraz
02-03-2010, 12:07 PM
This is one of those issues that just gets people so riled up. But in the end both sides have been total villains to each other. The Palestinians seem to want the destruction of Israel rather than a shared state or a two state model. The Israelis always answer an attack with an attack ten times stronger. It never ends. I don't understand how a nation-state that is a democracy can be based on race and religion, but that's what both sides have ended up doing. It's terrible.

Palestinians have for a long time been willing to settle on a two state model but that doesn't mean at all costs. They have asked for the pre-1967 borders to be drawn and the dismantling of hundreds (yes hundreds) of settlements housing hundreds of thousands of settlers on Palestinian land. But Israel has never agreed to do so because it serves as a strategic location to grab land and control any future Palestinian state.

Look at the map of Palestine in 1930 and then 1948 and then 1967 and 2010. As they say, picture is worth a thousand words.

They got everything they asked for in the deal Clinton negotiated and Arafat said no. To be fair to Israel, they have dismantled settlements, they have agreed on a Palestinian state.

Dismantling a few settlements when hundreds exist doesn't mean much. But I also understand that there are interest groups in Israel who are completely against such actions so when the government tries to do anything, there is great opposition.

Bush was the first US President to explicity demand the existence of a Palestinian state. The fact that it took 40 odd years for someone to do it shows how concept of a Palestinian state is treated.

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 12:09 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

with the 'slight' differences that the prawns in the movie didn't fire rockets at civilians on the other side nor did they blow themselves in buses to kill hundreds of innnocent ppl.... oh...and the prawns didn't want the population on the other side to be thrown to the sea... these are just slight differences ...other than that, yeah, poor pals.

debos
02-03-2010, 12:17 PM
In or outside of Gaza and the West Bank - it's still not a comperable situation to South Africa during 'apartheid'.

The plight of Palestinians in Isreal and in the occupied territories is often overlooked and I applaud the organizers of the event for attempting to bring that our attention. Still, the use of the word 'apartheid' and the comparison that the organizers are trying to play off is unnaceptable and out of context. They'll get nowhere with an approach that tries to vilify the other party from the start rather than engaging them.

faraz
02-03-2010, 12:23 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

with the 'slight' differences that the prawns in the movie didn't fire rockets at civilians on the other side nor did they blow themselves in buses to kill hundreds of innnocent ppl.... oh...and the prawns didn't want the population on the other side to be thrown to the sea... these are just slight differences ...other than that, yeah, poor pals.

To say oppression shouldn't be fought is a very unrealistic stand. Yes, the methods should be appropriate but to lay the entire blame based on the wrong methods is incorrect.

Yes, the Palestinians should be smarter about how they resist but does that absolve Israel of the oppression and injustice that caused this reaction?

armin
02-03-2010, 12:23 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

with the 'slight' differences that the prawns in the movie didn't fire rockets at civilians on the other side nor did they blow themselves in buses to kill hundreds of innnocent ppl.... oh...and the prawns didn't want the population on the other side to be thrown to the sea... these are just slight differences ...other than that, yeah, poor pals.

It's comments like yours that make these debates really annoying.
Israel killed hundreds of people last year and they'll never be held accountable for that, and that kind of one sided bias is a problem.

You're blaming Palestinians as a group because some rebels launch crappy rockets that have killed less than 20 people in 10 years. Israel used white phosporous on civilians.

And since when is assassination recognized as a substitute for international law?

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 12:31 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

with the 'slight' differences that the prawns in the movie didn't fire rockets at civilians on the other side nor did they blow themselves in buses to kill hundreds of innnocent ppl.... oh...and the prawns didn't want the population on the other side to be thrown to the sea... these are just slight differences ...other than that, yeah, poor pals.

It's comments like yours that make these debates really annoying.
Israel killed hundreds of people last year and they'll never be held accountable for that, and that kind of one sided bias is a problem.

You're blaming Palestinians as a group because some rebels launch crappy rockets that have killed less than 20 people in 10 years. Israel used white phosporous on civilians.

And since when is assassination recognized as a substitute for international law?

I'm not blaming anyone... I just don't resort to lies and the propaganda machine used by the arabs and their 'rebel' brothers (aka as terrorists)

I am just stating facts: more than 2000 rockets fell on Israel from Gaza from 2008 until the war was launched:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2008

What would the U.S do if Canada fired more than 2000 rockets into their territory? Canada would simply cease to exist...Of course Canada and the US are civilised nations so this would never happen, but i just use the example to illustrate the fact that Israel is 100% justified in launching a war to defend its citizens...

If you want to defend your cause use facts not made-up propagandistic lies..

faraz
02-03-2010, 12:34 PM
You are correct Faraz. Though, the name of this event would indicate otherwise. Perhaps the meaning of the Dutch word 'apartheid' could be applicable but the conotations it carries do not make for a suitable comparison.

My understanding when I read the title was that it's referring to the treatment of the Palestinians within the territories. I think many people mistook it to mean inside Israel.

Watching the movie District 9, the conditions of the aliens reminded me of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

with the 'slight' differences that the prawns in the movie didn't fire rockets at civilians on the other side nor did they blow themselves in buses to kill hundreds of innnocent ppl.... oh...and the prawns didn't want the population on the other side to be thrown to the sea... these are just slight differences ...other than that, yeah, poor pals.

It's comments like yours that make these debates really annoying.
Israel killed hundreds of people last year and they'll never be held accountable for that, and that kind of one sided bias is a problem.

You're blaming Palestinians as a group because some rebels launch crappy rockets that have killed less than 20 people in 10 years. Israel used white phosporous on civilians.

And since when is assassination recognized as a substitute for international law?

I'm not blaming anyone... I just don't resort to lies and the propaganda machine used by the arabs and their 'rebel' brothers (aka as terrorists)

I am just stating facts: more than 2000 rockets fell on Israel from Gaza from 2008 until the war was launched:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2008

What would the U.S do if Canada fired more than 2000 rockets into their territory? Canada would simply cease to exist...Of course Canada and the US are civilised nations so this would never happen, but i just use the example to illustrate the fact that Israel is 100% justified in launching a war to defend its citizens...

If you want to defend your cause use facts not made-up propagandistic lies..

I think you forgot to mention one statistic....how many Palestianians were killed, how many children died, how many houses destroyed because of the Israeli occuption since 1967?

And since you bought it up, how many Israelis died from those rocket attacks?

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 12:49 PM
I think you forgot to mention one statistic....how many Palestianians were killed, how many children died, how many houses destroyed because of the Israeli occuption since 1967?

No I didn't forget...Lots of arabs have been killed by Israel and lots of Isrealis have been killed by arabs as well...
About 50,000 between them... since 1948... but don't forget that muslims have killed more arabs than anyone else...more than 10,000,000 (yes, 10 million) since 1950...Funny how the arab propaganda machine forgets these statistics and concentrates on the (yes, terrible) 25,000+ deaths inflicted by Israelis on arabs...

And since you bought it up, how many Israelis died from those rocket attacks?

I dunno, about 5?... what i'm saying is that having 2000 rockets fall on your head day and night is not nice and I would want my government to crush whoever is firing those rockets and doesn't let me sleep...Again, what country would tolerate that? Israel is to blame in that they let 2000 rockets fall on their citizens and didnt act with full force

And remember, if those attacks did not take place not a single arab would have died in Gaza.. The arabs only have themselves to blame...Informed people will not fall prey to propaganda..so the propagandistic attacks on Israel are really laughable to those with access to the internet

JasonR
02-03-2010, 12:54 PM
This is one of those issues that just gets people so riled up. But in the end both sides have been total villains to each other. The Palestinians seem to want the destruction of Israel rather than a shared state or a two state model. The Israelis always answer an attack with an attack ten times stronger. It never ends. I don't understand how a nation-state that is a democracy can be based on race and religion, but that's what both sides have ended up doing. It's terrible.

Palestinians have for a long time been willing to settle on a two state model but that doesn't mean at all costs. They have asked for the pre-1967 borders to be drawn and the dismantling of hundreds (yes hundreds) of settlements housing hundreds of thousands of settlers on Palestinian land. But Israel has never agreed to do so because it serves as a strategic location to grab land and control any future Palestinian state.

Look at the map of Palestine in 1930 and then 1948 and then 1967 and 2010. As they say, picture is worth a thousand words.

They got everything they asked for in the deal Clinton negotiated and Arafat said no. To be fair to Israel, they have dismantled settlements, they have agreed on a Palestinian state.

Dismantling a few settlements when hundreds exist doesn't mean much. But I also understand that there are interest groups in Israel who are completely against such actions so when the government tries to do anything, there is great opposition.

Bush was the first US President to explicity demand the existence of a Palestinian state. The fact that it took 40 odd years for someone to do it shows how concept of a Palestinian state is treated.


Don't get me wrong, my friend. I don't entirely disagree with you, although I think that you aren't giving enough credit to Israel. If it were up to the hardliners in Israel all of the occupied territories would be amalgamated with Israel as spoils of war. To dismantle any settlements was massively controversial in Israel. And considering the attempts to make peace and the results, you'll have to understand why there are many who just don't believe that the Palestinians want peace with Israel at all.

For my part, I believe that many on both sides are fed up with old hatreds and want to move forward, while too many others still hold on to old hatreds.

armin
02-03-2010, 12:59 PM
I think you forgot to mention one statistic....how many Palestianians were killed, how many children died, how many houses destroyed because of the Israeli occuption since 1967?

No I didn't forget...Lots of arabs have been killed by Israel and lots of Isrealis have been killed by arabs as well...
About 50,000 between them... since 1948... but don't forget that muslims have killed more arabs than anyone else...more than 10,000,000 (yes, 10 million) since 1950...Funny how the arab propaganda machine forgets these statistics and concentrates on the (yes, terrible) 25,000+ deaths inflicted by Israelis on arabs...

And since you bought it up, how many Israelis died from those rocket attacks?

I dunno, about 5?... what i'm saying is that having 2000 rockets fall on your head day and night is not nice and I would want my government to crush whoever is firing those rockets and doesn't let me sleep...Again, what country would tolerate that? Israel is to blame in that they let 2000 rockets fall on their citizens and didnt act with full force

And remember, if those attacks did not take place not a single arab would have died in Gaza.. The arabs only have themselves to blame...Informed people will not fall prey to propaganda..so the propagandistic attacks on Israel are really laughable to those with access to the internet

Day and night? Ten years is 3650 days. 2000 rockets. I think your statement is a little hyperbolic, especially since in the last few years, rocket attacks have decreased exponentially and the majority of those rockets were back 5-10 years ago.

There was another article in the Journal today on Israeli settlement expansion. They don't have enough land so they keep building giant walls and pushing back the Palestinians.

http://www.wake-up-america.net/apartheid_wall_files/image004.jpg

http://www.sott.net/image/image/9591/israel-palestine_map.jpg

grish
02-03-2010, 04:01 PM
something to think about before taking in on the hate-fest:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/dark%20side%20Israeli%20Apartheid%20Week/2612768/story.html

armin
02-03-2010, 04:08 PM
^
That article is the exact reason why non Israeli Jewish people should distance themselves from what the government of Israel does. How Israel treats the Palestinians and acts internationally just enflames anti semetic groups like the KKK.

grish
02-03-2010, 04:14 PM
you got THAT out of the article? wow

faraz
02-03-2010, 04:26 PM
something to think about before taking in on the hate-fest:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/dark%20side%20Israeli%20Apartheid%20Week/2612768/story.html

It's an article which tries to defend Israel by saying others are worse. It doesn't address the issue of the apartheid like treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis.

Points fingers and stereotypes other groups while ironically complaining about the same treatment.

armin
02-03-2010, 05:09 PM
From your article Grish:


One of those organizations, the Ottawa Public Interest Research Group, refused in 2008 to promote a lecture on African development because Jewish students at the University of Ottawa happened to be organizing it. The event had zero connection to Israel but OPIRG said it wouldn’t partner with the Jewish students’ union due to the latter’s “relationship to apartheid Israel.”

I found this article to counter your article.

http://jewschool.com/2010/03/02/21314/israel-apartheid-week/

CigarHippo
02-03-2010, 05:23 PM
something to think about before taking in on the hate-fest:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/dark%20side%20Israeli%20Apartheid%20Week/2612768/story.html

It's an article which tries to defend Israel by saying others are worse. It doesn't address the issue of the apartheid like treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis.

Points fingers and stereotypes other groups while ironically complaining about the same treatment.

its a superb article .... "pal" supporters are a joke, they are resorting to the same tactics of the 1930s nazis... too bad for them the world is not as ignorant as they'd like it to be..... more than a hatefest i'd call it a terrorfest because the organisers have the exact same tactics as the muslim terrorists such as hamas , hezbollah...which have graciously been called in here "rebels"...lol...what a hoot...

armin
02-03-2010, 05:40 PM
That article is one sided. Read the one I posted for some more perspective.

Israel is just as bad as Hamas as far as i'm concerned.

Marcel Petrin
02-03-2010, 05:48 PM
As a general comment on the situation as a whole, I bet 90% of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews would be fine living side by side in the same unified, representative democracy where they all have equal rights and there's no need to worry about security checkpoints, security walls and all that other wonderful stuff. They do it throughout the world in other democracies. It's the 1% or 5% or 10% that are hardcore ideologues on either side that wreck it for everyone else and prevent any meaningful solution to the problems.


I will correct you. You're wrong.
Their website

http://edmonton.apartheidweek.org/

shows the map if Israel labeled as "Palestinian" with the "Palestinian" colours and 2 arabs.. if that is not advocating hate I do not know what is... Until Arabs come to terms with the fact that they need to stop hating Israel and realise the world will come to ashes before Israel dissapears, until then, there will not be peace in the region and Arabs will have a hard time getting support from those not aligned with terrorists or the extreme left.

Can you point me to it specifically? Nearest I could find was this: http://apartheidweek.org/sites/apartheidweek.org/files/iaw%202010%20bookmark%20back%20FINAL.jpg

And that's just flat out factual. The maps anyway. Again, near as I can tell they don't call for the destruction of Israel and there's nothing outright "hateful" about their agenda.


Marcel,
Jason shook his head (correct me Jason if this is not the case) at people who single out one side. This event singles out one side. I point to the fact that both sides need concessions such as Israel pulling out and Palestinians opting for a long lasting peace accord. Any event singling out only one of two sides with made up causes is a hatefest.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

Hate is hate. being one-sided in an argument is not hate.

Where have they advocated anything hateful about Israelis or Jews?

faraz
02-03-2010, 06:03 PM
Going through the event, it includes Anna Baltzer, Fulbright scholar and grand daughter of Holocaust survivors and b.h. Yael, an Israeli-Canadian director whose documentary about Palestine will be shown.

I'm sure they'll be labeled as hate filled too now.

ralph60
02-03-2010, 08:12 PM
A little interesting reading to put things in perspective:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/terrisrael.html
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/terrisraelsum.html

sundance
02-03-2010, 08:53 PM
Thanks Ralph... here is a graph from the above site, of FATALITIES (not injured) people in Israel from terrorism.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/terrisrael-1.gif

armin
02-03-2010, 09:52 PM
Nice chart. Now why don't you show the one that shows the Palestinian deaths?
The reason why is that you can't since no one can keep count.
They did manage to record them after Israel's last attack.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2009/jan/03/israelandthepalestinians

Israel has killed about 4 times as many Palestinians and displaced about 4.5 million people. In fact, out of the 1600 killed last year, more of them were children than the highest point of your chart.

sundance
02-03-2010, 10:51 PM
Armin the funny thing I note that you skirt around is the issue of rocket and mortar attacks prior to Israel invading Gaza. If Hamas and others weren't attacking Israel in violation of the treaties then Israel wouldn't have invaded and nobody in Gaza would have died.

You say you want peace, but you want it unilaterally and on your terms only.

grish
02-03-2010, 10:58 PM
Marcel,
Jason shook his head (correct me Jason if this is not the case) at people who single out one side. This event singles out one side. I point to the fact that both sides need concessions such as Israel pulling out and Palestinians opting for a long lasting peace accord. Any event singling out only one of two sides with made up causes is a hatefest.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

Hate is hate. being one-sided in an argument is not hate.

Where have they advocated anything hateful about Israelis or Jews?

It is in what is not being said... what exactly is being proposed? equal citizenship and human rights for all? Are you sure Israel already does not have that ideal? No country is perfect and as canadians we know that. But israel in my mind has come a very long way to becoming a tolerant society. that includes having full members of their parliament who oppose the very state they serve...

equal rights to palestinians living in gaza and the west bank? being part of one country? then why push for the withdrawal? why demand settlers to leave? why not demand equal rights instead? rather than kicking out the settlers, invite them in. make the whole country a welcome place for jewish, muslem, christian and other people. that is never talked about, suggested, or even whispered. why is the onus on the israel to create a tolerant society and not on israel, palestinian authority in the west bank, and hamas in gaza? israel already has two official languages, people of eveery race and religion with full citizenship, etc.. Cross the border to Gaza–are the rights of jewish people respected there? If we talk apartheid, I am not so sure it is israel who is the guilty party, or at least not the only guilty one...

Hate? it is in the misleading label, in hypocricy, in hiding behind slogans and big, emotionally charged words like "apartheid, human rights, opression, etc.." The constant singling out of only one nation out of a whole line up of gross offenders including some nations who are the first to sling mud at israel.

No, we may not necessarily see it written. But hate is the underlying message in this sad event. Hate is what blinds one side to only see faults in the other and the inability to have any sort of intraspection and honesty to realize it takes two sides to agree to a peaceful coexistence.

This event has nothing to do with improving the treatment of the palestinians by israel. if that were the case, there would be offers of reciprocity in well-treating the jewish israelis, in calls to stop indescriminate attacks, and in other good will gestures like releasing the kidnapped soldiers. this event is to score public relation points and to put pressure on israel. it is a struggle against israel rather than a struggle for peace.

faraz
03-03-2010, 08:22 AM
Marcel,
Jason shook his head (correct me Jason if this is not the case) at people who single out one side. This event singles out one side. I point to the fact that both sides need concessions such as Israel pulling out and Palestinians opting for a long lasting peace accord. Any event singling out only one of two sides with made up causes is a hatefest.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

Hate is hate. being one-sided in an argument is not hate.

Where have they advocated anything hateful about Israelis or Jews?

It is in what is not being said... what exactly is being proposed? equal citizenship and human rights for all? Are you sure Israel already does not have that ideal? No country is perfect and as canadians we know that. But israel in my mind has come a very long way to becoming a tolerant society. that includes having full members of their parliament who oppose the very state they serve...

equal rights to palestinians living in gaza and the west bank? being part of one country? then why push for the withdrawal? why demand settlers to leave? why not demand equal rights instead? rather than kicking out the settlers, invite them in. make the whole country a welcome place for jewish, muslem, christian and other people. that is never talked about, suggested, or even whispered. why is the onus on the israel to create a tolerant society and not on israel, palestinian authority in the west bank, and hamas in gaza? israel already has two official languages, people of eveery race and religion with full citizenship, etc.. Cross the border to Gaza–are the rights of jewish people respected there? If we talk apartheid, I am not so sure it is israel who is the guilty party, or at least not the only guilty one...

Hate? it is in the misleading label, in hypocricy, in hiding behind slogans and big, emotionally charged words like "apartheid, human rights, opression, etc.." The constant singling out of only one nation out of a whole line up of gross offenders including some nations who are the first to sling mud at israel.

No, we may not necessarily see it written. But hate is the underlying message in this sad event. Hate is what blinds one side to only see faults in the other and the inability to have any sort of intraspection and honesty to realize it takes two sides to agree to a peaceful coexistence.

This event has nothing to do with improving the treatment of the palestinians by israel. if that were the case, there would be offers of reciprocity in well-treating the jewish israelis, in calls to stop indescriminate attacks, and in other good will gestures like releasing the kidnapped soldiers. this event is to score public relation points and to put pressure on israel. it is a struggle against israel rather than a struggle for peace.

I always hear this argument of how Israel is so democratic and treats everyone equally. Does that give her the right to subjugate and oppress an entire people?

As for the one state solution, Israel will never ever accept it because it knows that the Arabs (muslims/christians) will be in the majority and she will lose her Jewish nature. No Israeli PM will ever advocate that and it is one of the reasons that Israel refuses the right of return for refugees.

Labeling this event hate is just a way to distract everyone from the real message. Yes, this event gets the Palestinian point of view across which is often missed in the media. Do we know about the frequent incursions in the refugee camps that Israel makes? The hundreds of Arab houses that get destroyed in Jerusalem because they don't have the 'right permit?'

The Palestinian uprising began in 1987 but the occupation by Israel had started 20 years ago in 1967 and continues on to this day.

faraz
03-03-2010, 08:23 AM
If the event is so biased and hate filled, why are two speakers/presenters of Israeli/Jewish origin invited?

grish
03-03-2010, 08:26 AM
If the event is so biased and hate filled, why are two speakers/presenters of Israeli/Jewish origin invited?

everyone is entitled to their opinion and everyone is entitled to be wrong. it just happens that their opinion coincides with the agenda of the event. I think they are wrong to participate in it. But that is my opinion.

faraz
03-03-2010, 08:37 AM
Grish, we all got off the main topic here which is pretty normal in anything related to Middle Eastern politics.

The main issue was the Israel Apartheid Week event and it seems like many posters jumped to conclusions without even looking at the program and based on articles written by the Canadian Jewish Congress (who of course will defend Israel at any cost).

All I'm saying is for Edmontonions to look at the speakers and the program to make up their own mind about attending.

grish
03-03-2010, 08:45 AM
I always hear this argument of how Israel is so democratic and treats everyone equally. Does that give her the right to subjugate and oppress an entire people?

they don't. as far as I know, all israeli citizens are treated with the same fairness. What is it in the laws of Israel that specifically prohibits a muslem arab from moving around, owning property, having access to education, health, representation in government, etc?

Haifa is one (of many) great example where Jewish and Arab residents live side by side without an issue.

The people living in hostile to Israel areas are treated with suspision, subjected to checkstops and other security measures that are warranted based on the history of violence, not the policy of the government. In these same areas, jewish israelis are subject to hostility and murder. This came to be during the state of war and has continued. In these areas, both sides are not able to be free.

And that is the crux of the problem. At some point the war needs to end. That is when people will stop being affraid that one will stab you or blow you up and the other will search and hassle you. It is that tension along the fighting zone that continues to opress both sides. Until both sides come to a negotiation table and negotiate, rather than posture to their electorate, no event will help the situation. Particularly not one that unfairly singles out one of two sides. IAW is a propaganda excercise at best and a hate fest at worst. It is not something positive as it does not seek a positive resolution for peaceful coexistence. It is only designed to assign blame and act against one of two sides in the conflict.

grish
03-03-2010, 08:55 AM
Grish, we all got off the main topic here which is pretty normal in anything related to Middle Eastern politics.

The main issue was the Israel Apartheid Week event and it seems like many posters jumped to conclusions without even looking at the program and based on articles written by the Canadian Jewish Congress (who of course will defend Israel at any cost).

All I'm saying is for Edmontonions to look at the speakers and the program to make up their own mind about attending.

It starts with the title of the event. Once you place it in the heading–a false claim about one of the two sides–the whole event becomes the propaganda/ hate filled IAW's we have seen in the past.

Call it: "Issues of Human Rights in Israel-Palestine Conflict" and there is room for a conversation, the equal presentation of both sides of the conflict, and a discussion towards (for not against) a peaceful resolution.

JasonR
03-03-2010, 08:56 AM
Call it: "Issues of Human Rights in Israel-Palestine Conflict" and there is room for a conversation, the equal presentation of both sides of the conflict, and a discussion towards (for not against) a peaceful resolution.

Agreed entirely.

faraz
03-03-2010, 09:16 AM
Grish, we all got off the main topic here which is pretty normal in anything related to Middle Eastern politics.

The main issue was the Israel Apartheid Week event and it seems like many posters jumped to conclusions without even looking at the program and based on articles written by the Canadian Jewish Congress (who of course will defend Israel at any cost).

All I'm saying is for Edmontonions to look at the speakers and the program to make up their own mind about attending.

It starts with the title of the event. Once you place it in the heading–a false claim about one of the two sides–the whole event becomes the propaganda/ hate filled IAW's we have seen in the past.

Call it: "Issues of Human Rights in Israel-Palestine Conflict" and there is room for a conversation, the equal presentation of both sides of the conflict, and a discussion towards (for not against) a peaceful resolution.

Many people believe that ghetto like occupation of the territories surrounded by walls and dotted with illegal, lush, and suburban Israeli settlements is reminiscent of the apartheid era. Hence the title.

You can disagree and that's your right.

faraz
03-03-2010, 09:50 AM
I always hear this argument of how Israel is so democratic and treats everyone equally. Does that give her the right to subjugate and oppress an entire people?

they don't. as far as I know, all israeli citizens are treated with the same fairness. What is it in the laws of Israel that specifically prohibits a muslem arab from moving around, owning property, having access to education, health, representation in government, etc?

Haifa is one (of many) great example where Jewish and Arab residents live side by side without an issue.

The people living in hostile to Israel areas are treated with suspision, subjected to checkstops and other security measures that are warranted based on the history of violence, not the policy of the government. In these same areas, jewish israelis are subject to hostility and murder. This came to be during the state of war and has continued. In these areas, both sides are not able to be free.

And that is the crux of the problem. At some point the war needs to end. That is when people will stop being affraid that one will stab you or blow you up and the other will search and hassle you. It is that tension along the fighting zone that continues to opress both sides. Until both sides come to a negotiation table and negotiate, rather than posture to their electorate, no event will help the situation. Particularly not one that unfairly singles out one of two sides. IAW is a propaganda excercise at best and a hate fest at worst. It is not something positive as it does not seek a positive resolution for peaceful coexistence. It is only designed to assign blame and act against one of two sides in the conflict.

The issue at discussion is not about Israeli citizens but Palestinians in the occupied territories because they are treated worse than prisoners.

Tanks, jets, and heavy artilellery is used to keep a cloud of fear and of course any one who gets killed in the Israeli incursions is automatically labeled a militant. For every Israeli, there are 5 Palestinians murdered through 'precision weapons.'

Read the Amnesty and UN reports and you'll find the daily abuses that Israel inflicts and the thousands of deaths that you won't hear about in the media.

But I guess Amnesty and UN are biased too right?

grish
03-03-2010, 09:50 AM
and many would argue that it is the fault of the leadership of the palestinian populations. for example, when all israeli settlers from Gaza were forced to evacuate, they left in tact large agricultural infrastructures. Instead of Hamas taking ownership of these and providing people with employment and, at the same time, food, they were looted.

For the most part, Gaza and the west bank have been self-governing for years with only a small percentage of the territory in the west bank in direct contact with the state of israel and affected by the separation barrier, yet there are no improvements on the ground. The living conditions are poor, and unemployment is high.

There is definitely the armed conflict with israel that shares in blame, but considering the millions of dollars in international aid, a large portion of responsibility for the conditions should be placed on failed leadership in the territories. The leadership that continues to seek military conflict rather than provide for their citizens.

Two sides to the argument. Both need to be heard in order to work for peace rather than against israel.

faraz
03-03-2010, 09:53 AM
and many would argue that it is the fault of the leadership of the palestinian populations. for example, when all israeli settlers from Gaza were forced to evacuate, they left in tact large agricultural infrastructures. Instead of Hamas taking ownership of these and providing people with employment and, at the same time, food, they were looted.

For the most part, Gaza and the west bank have been self-governing for years with only a small percentage of the territory in the west bank in direct contact with the state of israel and affected by the separation barrier, yet there are no improvement on the ground. The living conditions are poor, and unemployment is high.

There is definitely the armed conflict with israel that shares in blame, but considering the millions of dollars in international aid, a large portion of responsibility for the cnditions should be placed on failed leadership in the territories. The leadership that continues to seek military conflict rather than provide for their citizens.

Two sides to the argument. Both need to be heard in order to work for peace rather than against israel.

Israel evacuated but still controlled the air, land, and sea entrances to Gaza. So while it trumpeted to the world about the pull out, it kept the economic blockade to starve and punish the people of Gaza.

It allowed bare minimum food requirements and nothing else that would help spur development of any kind.

This is the other side of the story.

grish
03-03-2010, 09:57 AM
you missed the part when Gazans were given the means to produce their own. At one point, you grow your own food so you do not starve.

faraz
03-03-2010, 10:06 AM
So 2 million Gazans are expected to cultivate land and feed themselves because Israel is not willing to lift the blockade as it should?

grish
03-03-2010, 10:08 AM
So 2 million Gazans are expected to cultivate land and feed themselves because Israel is not willing to lift the blockade as it should?

I am not sure if you are reading what I am saying.

There is a part to blame the military events for the living conditions. The firing of rockets and the constant attempts by israel to stop the smuggling in response is one aspect subject to blame. The other is not taking ownership for your own future such as taking the opportunity to cultivate your own food.

faraz
03-03-2010, 10:21 AM
So 2 million Gazans are expected to cultivate land and feed themselves because Israel is not willing to lift the blockade as it should?

I am not sure if you are reading what I am saying.

There is a part to blame the military events for the living conditions. The firing of rockets and the constant attempts by israel to stop the smuggling in response is one aspect subject to blame. The other is not taking ownership for your own future such as taking the opportunity to cultivate your own food.

How can any development for the future takes place when Israel refues to lift the econimic blocked of the occupied territories?

I would say the hundreds of lush illegal settlements (land grab) combined with the humiliating occupation causing THOUSANDS of deaths is the reason for the resistance. Once again, the occuption began in 1967 and the uprising in 1987.

grish
03-03-2010, 10:28 AM
and just so there is no misunderstanding on the blockade from air and see etc that faraz claims.

Here is a news story from the Teheran Times stating that israel is doing as promised in lifting of the blockade. If an Iranian news agency reporting Israel is doing as promised, then it must be so. This is days before rockets started raining on israel yet again leading to yet another armed conflict.

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=171519

faraz
03-03-2010, 10:31 AM
Grish, I don't defend every method that Palestinians use for self defence but it is a response to the occupation and oppression by Israel since 1967.

Generations have grown up seeing Israeli tanks and soldiers destroying homes, grabbing land, and building settlements while the occupied territories becomes one of the most crowdest regions in the world.

faraz
03-03-2010, 10:41 AM
and just so there is no misunderstanding on the blockade from air and see etc that faraz claims.

Here is a news story from the Teheran Times stating that israel is doing as promised in lifting of the blockade. If an Iranian news agency reporting Israel is doing as promised, then it must be so. This is days before rockets started raining on israel yet again leading to yet another armed conflict.

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=171519

BBC article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7818022.stm

So Tehran Times is reliable when it lines up with your views? Otherwise, it is biased and propaganda?

Read the BBC article. It is actually pretty neutral and discusses both sides of the issue debunking the myth of lifting the economic blockade.

grish
03-03-2010, 10:45 AM
How can any development for the future takes place when Israel refues to lift the econimic blocked of the occupied territories?

there is still an armed conflict to resolve. there will be blockades as long as one side has evidence or is convinced the other side is smuggling arms. I am surprized people are surprized by it. In the mean time, the Hamas is responsible for their people. They have to find ways to produce food, educate, provide health care, safety and security. The constant blaming of Israel does not obsolve them of their responsibility to their people. Use the donated funds to build up your nation, not to purchase weapons.

grish
03-03-2010, 10:46 AM
and just so there is no misunderstanding on the blockade from air and see etc that faraz claims.

Here is a news story from the Teheran Times stating that israel is doing as promised in lifting of the blockade. If an Iranian news agency reporting Israel is doing as promised, then it must be so. This is days before rockets started raining on israel yet again leading to yet another armed conflict.

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=171519

BBC article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7818022.stm

So Tehran Times is reliable when it lines up with your views? Otherwise, it is biased and propaganda?

Read the BBC article. It is actually pretty neutral and discusses both sides of the issue debunking the myth of lifting the economic blockade.
I did not claim Teheran Times to be biased or unbiased. I claim that when a news paper from Iran–a sworn enemy of Israel– says that Israel has done something half decent, it must be so.

The BBC article does not contradict Teheran Times. It admits that both sides broke the truce. Hamas continued to fire rockets, and Israel in response did not fully re-open the borders. What is the issue?

The six-month ceasefire, brokered by the Egyptians, was often broken in practice. Its terms were never written, but were widely understood to include Hamas ending all rocket fire from Gaza and weapons smuggling from Egypt, while Israel stopped military activity against militants in the strip and carried out a phased lifting of its blockade of Gaza. Negotiations on the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit were also supposed to begin.
Rocket fire was greatly reduced, though not completely stopped, for the first few months of the truce. The volume of goods allowed into Gaza also increased for some of the time, but remained well below pre-embargo levels.

faraz
03-03-2010, 10:59 AM
Don't just quote parts that suit you:

"Hamas said Israel had broken the truce by failing to lift the blockade; Israel said Hamas had used the period to smuggle more rockets into Gaza, was planting explosive devices on the border fence and had not stopped the rocket fire completely.

Hamas demanded that the blockade be ended or it would not renew the ceasefire.

What have been the effects of the Israeli blockade?

They have been severe. Little but humanitarian basics have been allowed into Gaza since Hamas seized power in 2007. Before the Israeli operation began, health, water, sewage and power infrastructure were seriously ailing because of a lack of spare parts. The blockade includes limits on fuel, which have on several occasions forced the power plant that supplies Gaza City to shut down.

A total ban on exports has left the already fragile economy devastated. Unemployment has soared. The United Nations Relief and Works agency (Unrwa) provides basic food aid to about 750,000 people in Gaza, but in the weeks preceding the Israeli operation these were suspended because the UN ran out of food because Israel closed the crossings into Gaza citing security reasons.
Goods ranging from food to missiles have, however, been brought in through smuggling tunnels from Egypt."

faraz
03-03-2010, 11:09 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051211.html

Guardian and UN officials clearly blame Israel for violating the truce. The reason?

Well it is not the missiles as so widely claimed but an 'imminent' threat to kidnap soliders according to Israel. Imminent or fabricated, either way, Israel broke the truce.

ike9126
03-03-2010, 11:26 AM
Armin the funny thing I note that you skirt around is the issue of rocket and mortar attacks prior to Israel invading Gaza. If Hamas and others weren't attacking Israel in violation of the treaties then Israel wouldn't have invaded and nobody in Gaza would have died.

Sundance the funny thing I note that you skirt around is the issue of Israel expanding greatly beyond what was mandated to them under the UN Partition Plan (1947) into what was designated Arab territory. If Israel had respected the terms of the agreement and not forced countless Palestinians out of their homes and into refugee camps, Hamas wouldn't have fired rockets and nobody in Israel would have died.

Note: I am in no way advocating rocket attacks... treaties are treaties, but this debate is not one sided.

sundance
03-03-2010, 11:46 AM
Ah yes how far back shall we go back, getting back to the UN Partition plan what happened afterwards? Seems if my memory is right in January 1948 Egypt's Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni invaded Israel, as well as Fawzi al-Qawuqji from Syria invaded Israel as well with around 3,500 to 6,000 fighters. Jerusalem was blockaded. Of course the partition plan should be applied to Jews not Arabs?

Ask yourself a question why are there refugee camps in Arab countries? Why are they not welcomed into their countries societies? Many Arabian people are citizens of the state of Israel, however Palestian refugees are barred from Lebanese citizenship.

grish
03-03-2010, 11:57 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051211.html

Guardian and UN officials clearly blame Israel for violating the truce. The reason?

Well it is not the missiles as so widely claimed but an 'imminent' threat to kidnap soliders according to Israel. Imminent or fabricated, either way, Israel broke the truce.

the rockets never stopped. there was never "cease fire". but that is a never-ending, circular debate. the point is that a one-sided event with a title attacking Israel is not conducive to working towards peace as it takes two hands to "shake".

IAW is a publicity stunt, a propaganda event, and a hate fest that has got nothing to do with the promotion of peace in the region.

ike9126
03-03-2010, 12:25 PM
Hypothetical situation:

The Amish(or any other religious/ cultural group) are discriminated against around the world, and as a result, desire a new homeland. Now, the United States and England desire to help them create this homeland, and state that the Amish should receive all the land north of highway 16 (including half of Edmonton) in Alberta. The government of Alberta has no say in the matter.
The plan proceeds, and Amish immigration begins to that territory, gradually displacing Albertans. Eventually, Alberta's fellow provinces decide to help out Albertans by invading, in an attempt to stop this. They are dealt a crushing defeat by the new powerful Amish army, and the Amish expand to take over most of the province in the course of the war, with the majority of the Albertan population being displaced into Saskatchewan.

In time, Albertans are allowed self rule, but only to the area inside the boundaries of Banff and Jasper national parks. Some are even granted citizenship of the new Amishonia, but face discrimination, and their elected reps are seldom allowed to take part in government coalitions.

Ask yourself the question: You are forced out of your home outside of Edmonton, where your family has lived for generations. Would you even want to consider becoming a "citizen" of Saskatchewan, and establish a new life there after that?

I'll admit that this situation is a bit simplistic compared to reality but many argue that if displaced Palestinians accept citizenship in other countries, it would mean them accepting the situation, and giving up any say.

faraz
03-03-2010, 12:32 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051211.html

Guardian and UN officials clearly blame Israel for violating the truce. The reason?

Well it is not the missiles as so widely claimed but an 'imminent' threat to kidnap soliders according to Israel. Imminent or fabricated, either way, Israel broke the truce.

the rockets never stopped. there was never "cease fire". but that is a never-ending, circular debate. the point is that a one-sided event with a title attacking Israel is not conducive to working towards peace as it takes two hands to "shake".

IAW is a publicity stunt, a propaganda event, and a hate fest that has got nothing to do with the promotion of peace in the region.

With two Jewish/Israeli presenters at the event, I'm sorry but your argument makes no sense.

faraz
03-03-2010, 12:37 PM
Hypothetical situation:

The Amish(or any other religious/ cultural group) are discriminated against around the world, and as a result, desire a new homeland. Now, the United States and England desire to help them create this homeland, and state that the Amish should receive all the land north of highway 16 (including half of Edmonton) in Alberta. The government of Alberta has no say in the matter.
The plan proceeds, and Amish immigration begins to that territory, gradually displacing Albertans. Eventually, Alberta's fellow provinces decide to help out Albertans by invading, in an attempt to stop this. They are dealt a crushing defeat by the new powerful Amish army, and the Amish expand to take over most of the province in the course of the war, with the majority of the Albertan population being displaced into Saskatchewan.

In time, Albertans are allowed self rule, but only to the area inside the boundaries of Banff and Jasper national parks. Some are even granted citizenship of the new Amishonia, but face discrimination, and their elected reps are seldom allowed to take part in government coalitions.

Ask yourself the question: You are forced out of your home outside of Edmonton, where your family has lived for generations. Would you even want to consider becoming a "citizen" of Saskatchewan, and establish a new life there after that?

I'll admit that this situation is a bit simplistic compared to reality but many argue that if displaced Palestinians accept citizenship in other countries, it would mean them accepting the situation, and giving up any say.

Just to counter the first argument that will come up: lets say that the ancestors of these Amish people lived in Northern Alberta thousands of years ago and were promised the land by God.

armin
03-03-2010, 12:56 PM
Armin the funny thing I note that you skirt around is the issue of rocket and mortar attacks prior to Israel invading Gaza. If Hamas and others weren't attacking Israel in violation of the treaties then Israel wouldn't have invaded and nobody in Gaza would have died.

You say you want peace, but you want it unilaterally and on your terms only.

Since when did I skirt a thing?
I wasn't the one shouting 'thousands of rockets daily' but then only a smattering of injuries or fatalities. And while it's tragic that anyone dies or gets hurt, I do know that as soon as a siren warns, Israelis head down to their bomb shelters.

Gaza residents have no bomb shelters and Israel destroyed crucial infrastructure that will cost billions to repair.

You want a balanced debate but nothing Israel does or says comes close to fair. Banned weapons like DU, WP, cluster bombs are all being used so when you say I'm skirting around the rockets, I say you're skirting around Israeli war crimes.

CigarHippo
03-03-2010, 02:34 PM
Many TERRORIST SUPPORTERS believe that ghetto like occupation of the territories surrounded by walls and dotted with illegal, lush, and suburban Israeli settlements is reminiscent of the apartheid era. Hence the title.

You can disagree and that's your right.

Fixed it for ya...

kcantor
03-03-2010, 02:45 PM
Hypothetical situation:

The Amish(or any other religious/ cultural group) are discriminated against around the world, and as a result, desire a new homeland. Now, the United States and England desire to help them create this homeland, and state that the Amish should receive all the land north of highway 16 (including half of Edmonton) in Alberta. The government of Alberta has no say in the matter.
The plan proceeds, and Amish immigration begins to that territory, gradually displacing Albertans. Eventually, Alberta's fellow provinces decide to help out Albertans by invading, in an attempt to stop this. They are dealt a crushing defeat by the new powerful Amish army, and the Amish expand to take over most of the province in the course of the war, with the majority of the Albertan population being displaced into Saskatchewan.

In time, Albertans are allowed self rule, but only to the area inside the boundaries of Banff and Jasper national parks. Some are even granted citizenship of the new Amishonia, but face discrimination, and their elected reps are seldom allowed to take part in government coalitions.

Ask yourself the question: You are forced out of your home outside of Edmonton, where your family has lived for generations. Would you even want to consider becoming a "citizen" of Saskatchewan, and establish a new life there after that?

I'll admit that this situation is a bit simplistic compared to reality but many argue that if displaced Palestinians accept citizenship in other countries, it would mean them accepting the situation, and giving up any say.
not only is it "a bit simplistic', it might be more appropriate if you presented it as a first nations scenario and not an amish one... although i have to wonder "which side" of your simplistic scenario you would then choose to support.

moahunter
03-03-2010, 02:58 PM
Just to counter the first argument that will come up: lets say that the ancestors of these Amish people lived in Northern Alberta thousands of years ago and were promised the land by God.
Being promised something by god justifies anything, including killing women and children in his name, while he claps and cheers like the christian god did (e.g. the story of Jericho). Which is why the world would be better off without hateful Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other gods, for they are the justification to do anything. It is no coincidence that many of the worst war spots in the world, are those locations where religions meet to do evil in their god's name.

ike9126
03-03-2010, 03:02 PM
It is a different situation. The First Nations were here before Europeans, that is not debatable.
The Palestinians have just as much of a claim to that land as the Jewish community.
The primary issue in my mind is the unilateral decision of the Israeli government to expand beyond the boundaries of the original partition plan.

faraz
03-03-2010, 03:06 PM
Many TERRORIST SUPPORTERS believe that ghetto like occupation of the territories surrounded by walls and dotted with illegal, lush, and suburban Israeli settlements is reminiscent of the apartheid era. Hence the title.

You can disagree and that's your right.

Fixed it for ya...

CigarHippo, you are free to state your opinion under your name but please don't change my comment under my name.

JasonR
03-03-2010, 03:19 PM
It is a different situation. The First Nations were here before Europeans, that is not debatable.
The Palestinians have just as much of a claim to that land as the Jewish community.
The primary issue in my mind is the unilateral decision of the Israeli government to expand beyond the boundaries of the original partition plan.

Do the 1948 or the six day war or the yom kippur war not factor in here at all? It wasn't Israel that did not hold to the original partition. Israel is not blameless, but let's keep our facts straight.

kcantor
03-03-2010, 04:21 PM
It is a different situation. The First Nations were here before Europeans, that is not debatable.
The Palestinians have just as much of a claim to that land as the Jewish community.
The primary issue in my mind is the unilateral decision of the Israeli government to expand beyond the boundaries of the original partition plan.

Do the 1948 or the six day war or the yom kippur war not factor in here at all? It wasn't Israel that did not hold to the original partition. Israel is not blameless, but let's keep our facts straight.
and it wasn't israel who forced anyone to leave. and it isn't israel who to this day refuses to grant citizenship to those who chose to believe in the false promises made to them by others...

grish
03-03-2010, 04:52 PM
Hypothetical situation:

The Amish(or any other religious/ cultural group) are discriminated against around the world, and as a result, desire a new homeland. Now, the United States and England desire to help them create this homeland, and state that the Amish should receive all the land north of highway 16 (including half of Edmonton) in Alberta. The government of Alberta has no say in the matter.
The plan proceeds, and Amish immigration begins to that territory, gradually displacing Albertans. Eventually, Alberta's fellow provinces decide to help out Albertans by invading, in an attempt to stop this. They are dealt a crushing defeat by the new powerful Amish army, and the Amish expand to take over most of the province in the course of the war, with the majority of the Albertan population being displaced into Saskatchewan.

In time, Albertans are allowed self rule, but only to the area inside the boundaries of Banff and Jasper national parks. Some are even granted citizenship of the new Amishonia, but face discrimination, and their elected reps are seldom allowed to take part in government coalitions.

Ask yourself the question: You are forced out of your home outside of Edmonton, where your family has lived for generations. Would you even want to consider becoming a "citizen" of Saskatchewan, and establish a new life there after that?

I'll admit that this situation is a bit simplistic compared to reality but many argue that if displaced Palestinians accept citizenship in other countries, it would mean them accepting the situation, and giving up any say.

Just to counter the first argument that will come up: lets say that the ancestors of these Amish people lived in Northern Alberta thousands of years ago and were promised the land by God.
actually, lets not go to thousands of years ago and hypothetical promises by god... according to the ottoman empire records, there has always been Amish population on the territory you describe and some of the Albertans moved to the location as recently as some of the Amish. Alberta as an independent country did not exist until the US and the British helped to create the Amish state. Until then, there were various "mandates" and before that, the Ottoman Empire ruled over Alberta, the Albertans and the Amish living there.

grish
03-03-2010, 04:58 PM
and all this back and forth with facts, history etc underscores the need for a balanced presentation of facts, an open discussion and a mutual negotiation. An event such as IAW does absolutely nothing towards the promotion of peace. It is a propaganda event and a hate fest.

The fact that there are two token jewish people participating only underscores that people are free to have opinions, not that their opinions are correct.

kcantor
03-03-2010, 05:01 PM
Nice chart. Now why don't you show the one that shows the Palestinian deaths?
The reason why is that you can't since no one can keep count.
They did manage to record them after Israel's last attack.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2009/jan/03/israelandthepalestinians

Israel has killed about 4 times as many Palestinians and displaced about 4.5 million people. In fact, out of the 1600 killed last year, more of them were children than the highest point of your chart.
i wouldn't put an awful lot faith in the guardian's numbers. it's no secret that reported numbers of deaths are regularly inflated for the media:

"The IDF released its official numbers of the Palestinian fatalities in Gaza and updated them on 26 March: "According to the data gathered by the Research Department of the Israel Defense Intelligence, there were 1166 names of Palestinians killed during Operation Cast Lead. 709 of them are identified as Hamas terror operatives, amongst them several from various other terror organizations. Furthermore, it has been found that 295 uninvolved Palestinians were killed during the operation, 89 of them under the age of 16, and 49 of them women. In addition, there are 162 names of men that have not yet been attributed to any organization."

"A few out of these women and teenage victims were actually also proven as combatants or failed suicide bombers, but their number were left among the civilians. The further 162 identified fatalities were unclassified males, the majority of whom believed to be military men. Assuming their composition of military vs. civilians being similar to the other males;


"one can conclude with high probability that more than 71 % of the Palestinian fatalities in Gaza were parts of the Hamas/Palestinian terror/military and less than 29% could have been civilian victims. Though every civilian death is tragic, this is a very low civilian casualty rate in any international comparison - particularly if one considers Hamas' consistent use of its population as human shields.

"These figures are very different from those provided by diverse Palestinian sources and Palestinian-leaning NGO-s, who talked of about two-third of the casualties being civilians. Ample evidence supports the IDF figures and practically none the Palestinian hearsay.

"To those however, who have doubts as to which side they can believe, let's remind the figures of the famous "Jenin massacre" rumors in April 2002. Saeb Erekat - the Palestinian Authority's Minister of Truth then - talked of 3000 and days later of 500 Palestinian civilian victims in Jenin. Israel - the IDF - reported within two weeks a total 52 Palestinian dead, mostly combatants. It took the UN investigating team until August to publish its report declaring that "no massacre whatsoever was committed by Israel in Jenin", and reporting about 53 Palestinian dead - mostly combatants - thus justifying the IDF figures to the letter."

and it's also no secret that hamas and other palestinian "militia" groups consistently dress as civilians and use civilian populations - particularly those in hospitals and religious buildings and schools - as human shields.

any fatality - civilian or not - is tragic but trying to find a workable solution that will be not only verbally acceptable to both sides but implemented by both sides (because acceptance without implementation is worthless for both sides) will not come about by using arithmetic as a shield as well.

armin
03-03-2010, 06:10 PM
kcantor let me point out the flaw in your last post.

You belittle the Guardian for a report that is created by the same guys who did the killing, it's like allowing Charles Manson to be his own prosecution.

There's videos of IDF soldiers using Palestinian civilians as human shields so you might want to watch your claims. Israel's soldiers weren't exacly saints either.

http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2009/03/anti-israelidf-propagandaisraeli-soldiers-t-shirts-depict-shooting-arabs/

kcantor
03-03-2010, 07:04 PM
kcantor let me point out the flaw in your last post.

You belittle the Guardian for a report that is created by the same guys who did the killing, it's like allowing Charles Manson to be his own prosecution.

There's videos of IDF soldiers using Palestinian civilians as human shields so you might want to watch your claims. Israel's soldiers weren't exacly saints either.

http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2009/03/anti-israelidf-propagandaisraeli-soldiers-t-shirts-depict-shooting-arabs/
by belittling, do you mean rebutting an newspaper article with a report that was verified as accurate by a united nations investigating team?

i didn't represent any group on either side as being comprised solely of "saints" (an interesting word choice in this discussion :) ). on the other hand, i would certainly differentiate between the actions of specific individuals on either side and the actual official policies and tactics and procedures developed and implemented and condoned by either side.

what i did say was that any fatality - civilian or not - is tragic. i also said both sides have to work together instead of throwing stones at each other either literally or figuratively using your "your side is worse than our side so that justifies our actions" as a rationale. that's the rationale behind why things are not much different for the current war in gaza than they were for:

· 1948 Arab-Israeli War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War)
· 1956 Suez War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1956_Suez_War)
· 1967 Six Day War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1967_Six_Day_War)
· 1970 War of Attrition (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1970_War_of_Attrition)
· 1973 Yom Kippur War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1973_Yom_Kippur_War)
· 1978 South Lebanon conflict (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1978_South_Lebanon_conflict)
· 1982 Lebanon War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War)
· 1987-1993 First Intifada (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/First_Intifada)
· 1982-2000 South Lebanon conflict (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/1982-2000_South_Lebanon_conflict)
· 2000-2007 al-Aqsa Intifada (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Intifada)
· 2006 Lebanon War (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War)


and lest anyone think this is entirely an israeli phenomonen, they may want to look a little further at the relationships between jordan and syria, black september in jordan, the north yemen and lebanese civil wars, the conflicts between libya and egypt (who has "made peace" with israel and been more than somewhat ostracized for it), the wars between iraq and kuwait...


they might also want to look a little further at the deaths of more than 400 palestinians in the ain al hilweh refugee camp or those in nahr al-bared to try and identify the real common denominator.


and while you might want to question the full equality of an arab israeli's citizenship, that citizenship certainly offers more than virtually all palestinians are granted in virtually all of her neighboring states.

(links from wiki - certainly not the only source but reasonably quick and reasonably accurate as well)

JasonR
03-03-2010, 07:18 PM
Ken, as usual, spot on.

andy8244
03-03-2010, 07:44 PM
If there's one thing there's just not enough of in this world, it's internet forum discussions about the Arab/Israeli conflict. Good to see folks here addressing this issue! :smt023

kcantor
03-03-2010, 07:55 PM
If there's one thing there's just not enough of in this world, it's internet forum discussions about the Arab/Israeli conflict. Good to see folks here addressing this issue! :smt023
good to see you managing to find something positive to post. :smt023

ralph60
04-03-2010, 08:14 AM
Regarding the chart that Sundance copied from my links a point should be made. If a person was to put the yearly Jewish deaths from the Holocaust onto a chart of this scale the lines for 1942-1945 would be over 1000 feet high.
Israel was created to provide a homeland for the survivors of history's worst crime. Although the Palestinians have absolutely no blame in the holocaust, with an event like this well within living memory how can anybody expect the Israelis to be understanding about just a few rockets?
The people of Gaza allowed 2000 rockets to be launched from their territory against Israel. This means Gaza is either a failed state or a hostile state. I think the Israelis were totally justified in their actions to stop the rockets. The Gazan's obviously couldn't or wouldn't.

ralph60
04-03-2010, 08:24 AM
In a sad coincidence the first day of Israeli Anti-Apartheid Week was marked with a hatchet attack against a prominent Jewish shopkeeper in Edmonton.

ralph60
04-03-2010, 08:45 AM
Here is a link to an essay that says virtually everything that needs to be said on this issue. IMHO
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2010/03/by_alan_m_dershowitz_every.html

JasonR
04-03-2010, 10:36 AM
Here is a link to an essay that says virtually everything that needs to be said on this issue. IMHO
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2010/03/by_alan_m_dershowitz_every.html

Good article.

Marcel Petrin
04-03-2010, 10:42 AM
In a sad coincidence the first day of Israeli Anti-Apartheid Week was marked with a hatchet attack against a prominent Jewish shopkeeper in Edmonton.

Link? Was it racially motivated?

kcantor
04-03-2010, 11:27 AM
In a sad coincidence the first day of Israeli Anti-Apartheid Week was marked with a hatchet attack against a prominent Jewish shopkeeper in Edmonton.

Link? Was it racially motivated?
i doubt - hope? - there was no racial (?) or religious motivation to that attack. although your asking the question then begs the question of whether you think there is a racial or religious motivation behind the current situation in the middle east. and if so to which side would you attribute the motivation? because if it is racial or religious, then neither military or economic solutions will be effective without first addressing and overcoming that. :(

Marcel Petrin
04-03-2010, 11:35 AM
I wasn't implying anything about the situation in the middle east, I was genuinely curious if it was just sad coincidence or not.

And of course race and religion play a huge part in the conflict in the middle east. I haven't been keeping score on which side is more of a bigot unfortunately.

CigarHippo
04-03-2010, 12:04 PM
and while you might want to question the full equality of an arab israeli's citizenship, that citizenship certainly offers more than virtually all palestinians are granted in virtually all of her neighboring states.

Actually, it offers more than to ANY arab citizen in ANY country in the middle east... I would love to know what arab country in the middle east allows the level of freedoms and rights that Israeli arab citizens in Israel enjoy... If you ask ANY Israeli arab whether they'd like to live in any arab country or in Israel i am willing to bet that more than 90% would rather stay in Israel (and that includes the non-existent but potentially achievable state of "palestine")

Top_Dawg
04-03-2010, 01:01 PM
Link? Was it racially motivated?


' Course !

Everybody knows that Al Queda's newest sleeper cells are the desparate crackheads of Emonchuk's inner city.

armin
04-03-2010, 01:13 PM
Ralph, where does it claim anywhere that assault was racially motivated, or are you just assuming because he's jewish, that it was an act of anti-semetism?

kcantor, all of those links you posted are 1 sided. i've at least been trying to keep unbiased about this but it's obvious that none of you have any interest in doing so.

Hamas may be listed as a terror group, but I think that should be extended to include Israel as well who continues to break more laws than any other country in the world.

Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.

ralph60
04-03-2010, 03:55 PM
Armin, What part of "In a sad coincidence" was so hard to understand?

kcantor
04-03-2010, 04:01 PM
Ralph, where does it claim anywhere that assault was racially motivated, or are you just assuming because he's jewish, that it was an act of anti-semetism?

kcantor, all of those links you posted are 1 sided. i've at least been trying to keep unbiased about this but it's obvious that none of you have any interest in doing so.

Hamas may be listed as a terror group, but I think that should be extended to include Israel as well who continues to break more laws than any other country in the world.

Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.
all of those links??? there were only two source targets. the first was a link to a report verfied by the united nations. the others were all taken from a single wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_the_Middle_East

and while wiki - as noted in the original post - isn't the be all/end all source reference, i would certainly put them right up there with the self admitedly biased guardian...

armin
04-03-2010, 04:24 PM
Armin, What part of "In a sad coincidence" was so hard to understand?

I don't know what that means.
What I do know is that you claimed that shopkeeper was attacked because he was jewish. I asked you to cite your information and you came back with an obscure deflection.
Not cool.

armin
04-03-2010, 04:31 PM
Ralph, where does it claim anywhere that assault was racially motivated, or are you just assuming because he's jewish, that it was an act of anti-semetism?

kcantor, all of those links you posted are 1 sided. i've at least been trying to keep unbiased about this but it's obvious that none of you have any interest in doing so.

Hamas may be listed as a terror group, but I think that should be extended to include Israel as well who continues to break more laws than any other country in the world.

Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.
all of those links??? there were only two source targets. the first was a link to a report verfied by the united nations. the others were all taken from a single wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_the_Middle_East

and while wiki - as noted in the original post - isn't the be all/end source reference, i would certainly put them right up there with the self admitedly biased guardian...

Wikipedia shut down the jewish group CAMERA from writing articles specifically because they were altering them to a pro jewish slant.

The biggest issue is who decides what is the truth?
I can counter every link you choose to pass with an alternate recounting of events. The point is to figure out who is actually telling the truth in a manner that doesn't have us resorting to baseless accusations or hyperbolic disconnects and actually provides a civil debate without the inflamatory jingoism.

This back and forth thing solves nothing until each other side concedes and admits to making mistakes.

grish
04-03-2010, 04:38 PM
This back and forth thing solves nothing until each other side concedes and admits to making mistakes.
and let this be the finale word as you have finally agreed that an event that takes a one-sided approach at the issue is not going to solve anything "until each other side concedes and admits to making mistakes." Any event that promotes the "mistakes" of only one side is at best a simple propaganda and at the worst a hate fest.

armin
04-03-2010, 04:53 PM
This back and forth thing solves nothing until each other side concedes and admits to making mistakes.
and let this be the finale word as you have finally agreed that an event that takes a one-sided approach at the issue is not going to solve anything "until each other side concedes and admits to making mistakes." Any event that promotes the "mistakes" of only one side is at best a simple propaganda and at the worst a hate fest.

I almost want to agree with you. In fact I do take offense to them calling it an apartheid week by just singling out Israel, but I wouldn't even think of stopping them. Call it payback for the George Galloway thing when he was banned from Canada as a terror supporter by Jason Kenney (the homophobe who just removed sections from the immigration guide relating to gay marriage), who was acting under the wishes of the Canadian Jewish Congress and the JDF which is recognized as a terror group in the United States.

As a supporter of free speech, that event was offensive since Galloway's only crime was giving some money and riding a boat filled with diapers and wet naps. I fail to see how a speech can be taken as a terror threat anyways.

If Israel wants to throw an apartheid week, they can, I won't try to stop them either.

CigarHippo
04-03-2010, 05:54 PM
Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.

You're wrong.you like to reject arguments based on personal opinion and not out of reliable information/facts

So, let's do this:

I challenge you to a bet... come up with a poll where it shows that more than more than 10% (ten percent) of Israeli arabs would rather live in another ARAB country than Israel and you've won yourself CDN $1,000 (One thousand Canadian dollars)
You have until noon MST of March 5th to accept this challenge...don't want to give you time to create something bogus. It has to be an independent, legitimate source, not Israeli or Jewish or Arab or muslim related.. (like the UN, HRW, etc)

Accept the challenge and all you have to do is prove that more than 10% of Israel arabs would rather live in an arab country...

On the other hand...if you accept the challenge by noon tomorrow, I would win the bet if i can come up with the same proof i am asking above...That is, an independent, reliable source stating more than 90% (ninety percent) would not leave Israel for another ARAB country...

This C2E forum will serve as a sort of collective witness for the bet...

If you think the amount of the bet is too high for you, name another number higher than $100...you know, to make things interesting...

So, either put your money where your mouth is or stop spreading lies and try to spread your twisted ideology across...

As i said before, propaganda pays off until confronted with facts..

You're on?

ralph60
04-03-2010, 09:00 PM
Armin, the word "coincidence" means two things happening at the same time by pure chance.
I didn't say anywhere that the man was attacked because he was Jewish, and the opening line of my post made that very clear. I suggest that you take a deep breath and actually read what people are posting and if you don't know the meaning of a word just google it.
If you want a source for the story, I think you should read a newspaper or go to the Journal or Sun's website, it was cited by both papers quite prominently, or are the local papers too big of an obscure deflection?

grish
05-03-2010, 06:58 AM
Call it payback for the George Galloway thing when he was banned from Canada as a terror supporter by Jason Kenney (the homophobe who just removed sections from the immigration guide relating to gay marriage), who was acting under the wishes of the Canadian Jewish Congress and the JDF which is recognized as a terror group in the United States.

As a supporter of free speech, that event was offensive since Galloway's only crime was giving some money and riding a boat filled with diapers and wet naps. I fail to see how a speech can be taken as a terror threat anyways.

If Israel wants to throw an apartheid week, they can, I won't try to stop them either.

huh?

:confused::confused::confused:

what does this have to do with anything? i guess the discussion has reached its logical end (or the end of any logic).

kcantor
05-03-2010, 07:08 AM
Call it payback for the George Galloway thing when he was banned from Canada as a terror supporter by Jason Kenney (the homophobe who just removed sections from the immigration guide relating to gay marriage), who was acting under the wishes of the Canadian Jewish Congress and the JDF which is recognized as a terror group in the United States.

As a supporter of free speech, that event was offensive since Galloway's only crime was giving some money and riding a boat filled with diapers and wet naps. I fail to see how a speech can be taken as a terror threat anyways.

If Israel wants to throw an apartheid week, they can, I won't try to stop them either.

huh?

:confused::confused::confused:

what does this have to do with anything? i guess the discussion has reached its logical end (or the end of any logic).

Agreed - although I'm not sure that a thread about Israel Apartheid Week started by someone opting to use Slaughtermaster as an alias wasn't always slated to be ironical rather than logical in it's conclusion anyway.

armin
05-03-2010, 01:12 PM
Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.

You're wrong.you like to reject arguments based on personal opinion and not out of reliable information/facts

So, let's do this:

I challenge you to a bet... come up with a poll where it shows that more than more than 10% (ten percent) of Israeli arabs would rather live in another ARAB country than Israel and you've won yourself CDN $1,000 (One thousand Canadian dollars)
You have until noon MST of March 5th to accept this challenge...don't want to give you time to create something bogus. It has to be an independent, legitimate source, not Israeli or Jewish or Arab or muslim related.. (like the UN, HRW, etc)

Accept the challenge and all you have to do is prove that more than 10% of Israel arabs would rather live in an arab country...

On the other hand...if you accept the challenge by noon tomorrow, I would win the bet if i can come up with the same proof i am asking above...That is, an independent, reliable source stating more than 90% (ninety percent) would not leave Israel for another ARAB country...

This C2E forum will serve as a sort of collective witness for the bet...

If you think the amount of the bet is too high for you, name another number higher than $100...you know, to make things interesting...

So, either put your money where your mouth is or stop spreading lies and try to spread your twisted ideology across...

As i said before, propaganda pays off until confronted with facts..

You're on?

What a ridiculous proposition that has nothing to do with the topic.
You're deflecting the debate by trying to put me up against an irrelevant statistic. Argue that with Kcantor since you were using his quote.

CigarHippo
05-03-2010, 01:16 PM
Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.

You're wrong.you like to reject arguments based on personal opinion and not out of reliable information/facts

So, let's do this:

I challenge you to a bet... come up with a poll where it shows that more than more than 10% (ten percent) of Israeli arabs would rather live in another ARAB country than Israel and you've won yourself CDN $1,000 (One thousand Canadian dollars)
You have until noon MST of March 5th to accept this challenge...don't want to give you time to create something bogus. It has to be an independent, legitimate source, not Israeli or Jewish or Arab or muslim related.. (like the UN, HRW, etc)

Accept the challenge and all you have to do is prove that more than 10% of Israel arabs would rather live in an arab country...

On the other hand...if you accept the challenge by noon tomorrow, I would win the bet if i can come up with the same proof i am asking above...That is, an independent, reliable source stating more than 90% (ninety percent) would not leave Israel for another ARAB country...

This C2E forum will serve as a sort of collective witness for the bet...

If you think the amount of the bet is too high for you, name another number higher than $100...you know, to make things interesting...

So, either put your money where your mouth is or stop spreading lies and try to spread your twisted ideology across...

As i said before, propaganda pays off until confronted with facts..

You're on?

What a ridiculous proposition that has nothing to do with the topic.
You're deflecting the debate by trying to put me up against an irrelevant statistic. Argue that with Kcantor since you were using his quote.

lmao!!
Translation: "i'm a tool of arab and Jihad propaganda and stop asking for facts...facts are for informed ppl, we arab supporters rely on propaganda Jihad only"....
Alahu Fubar!!

armin
05-03-2010, 01:21 PM
Armin, the word "coincidence" means two things happening at the same time by pure chance.
I didn't say anywhere that the man was attacked because he was Jewish, and the opening line of my post made that very clear. I suggest that you take a deep breath and actually read what people are posting and if you don't know the meaning of a word just google it.
If you want a source for the story, I think you should read a newspaper or go to the Journal or Sun's website, it was cited by both papers quite prominently, or are the local papers too big of an obscure deflection?

I asked you twice now to back up the claim that this man was attacked because he was jewish and now you're backpeddaling. You make the claims, you scite the sources. I've read a few stories on that and have yet to see any claim to support your allegations.

There is a new article that says this: "The Jewish immigrant originally from South Africa is a member of the Beth Israel Synagogue in west Edmonton."

That's the only thing I could find noting his background. Why they pointed that out seems a little suspect to me. Could it be that you're the one looking for racial divisions? I'd say that's a little anti-semetic for pointing out this man is jewish.

armin
05-03-2010, 01:26 PM
Cigarhippo, you're dreaming. I've read many accounts where arabic Israelis are treated like crap.

You're wrong.you like to reject arguments based on personal opinion and not out of reliable information/facts

So, let's do this:

I challenge you to a bet... come up with a poll where it shows that more than more than 10% (ten percent) of Israeli arabs would rather live in another ARAB country than Israel and you've won yourself CDN $1,000 (One thousand Canadian dollars)
You have until noon MST of March 5th to accept this challenge...don't want to give you time to create something bogus. It has to be an independent, legitimate source, not Israeli or Jewish or Arab or muslim related.. (like the UN, HRW, etc)

Accept the challenge and all you have to do is prove that more than 10% of Israel arabs would rather live in an arab country...

On the other hand...if you accept the challenge by noon tomorrow, I would win the bet if i can come up with the same proof i am asking above...That is, an independent, reliable source stating more than 90% (ninety percent) would not leave Israel for another ARAB country...

This C2E forum will serve as a sort of collective witness for the bet...

If you think the amount of the bet is too high for you, name another number higher than $100...you know, to make things interesting...

So, either put your money where your mouth is or stop spreading lies and try to spread your twisted ideology across...

As i said before, propaganda pays off until confronted with facts..

You're on?

What a ridiculous proposition that has nothing to do with the topic.
You're deflecting the debate by trying to put me up against an irrelevant statistic. Argue that with Kcantor since you were using his quote.

lmao!!
Translation: "i'm a tool of arab and Jihad propaganda and stop asking for facts...facts are for informed ppl, we arab supporters rely on propaganda Jihad only"....
Alahu Fubar!!

Look, you're asking me to look for something irrelevant that probably doesn't even exist. You throw up a straw man argument and tell me to prove it. When I say it's useless, you resort to namecalling and slanderous interjections without ever backing anything up.

I never made any such claims and you're purposely avoiding the real debate which is about Israel and Palestine.

armin
05-03-2010, 01:33 PM
I'm including 2 links to show 2 different perspectives

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3857671,00.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100305/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

These are 2 different situations and don't overlap. I'm including both just to show that I'm not biased, unlike some of these other posters.

armin
05-03-2010, 01:48 PM
"I was similarly struck by what I heard from a business group at the Karni industrial park. This group of predominantly young businessmen and women graphically described the devastation that has been wrought on the private sector in Gaza, an economy that is now only operating at some 10-15 percent of capacity. Over a thousand companies have gone out of business since the Israeli Army’s Operation Cast Lead in early 2009. Unemployment now runs at over 50 percent."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/opinion/05iht-edmartin.html?scp=2&sq=gaza&st=cse

I suppose the New York Times is just a tabloid too.

moahunter
05-03-2010, 01:56 PM
^God told the chosen people that it is ok to do this. She also told the not-chosen people that it is ok to hold the Israeli soldier in captivity.

armin
05-03-2010, 01:59 PM
^
I hope Shalit makes it home safe. No one should be used as a political pawn.
Hamas or should release him but Israel should have taken the offer when it was given to exchange his release.

CigarHippo
05-03-2010, 03:53 PM
Look, you're asking me to look for something irrelevant that probably doesn't even exist. You throw up a straw man argument and tell me to prove it. When I say it's useless, you resort to namecalling and slanderous interjections without ever backing anything up.

I never made any such claims and you're purposely avoiding the real debate which is about Israel and Palestine.


It's not irrelevant b/c u said arab israelis are treated like crap and i rebuffed you by saying you are wrong, that more than 90% of arab israelis would rather live in Israel than in any arab country...and the poll exists and i can prove it...agree to the bet and i will post it...

as i said, you made a bogus claim that arabs are treated like crap and i, as you said, interjected with offering proof as a challenge to you... you rejected, meaning you know you're lying...

why can't you accept that most arabs (yes, many are treated like crap, but there'll always be ppl treated like crap in any country, usually a small minority in democracies like Israel and Canada) in Israel have it way better than any arab country

If you don't accept it, if that is blasphemy to an arab, then offer some proof affirming that most israeli arabs would rather live in an arab country. otherwise you're full of it..

armin
05-03-2010, 05:24 PM
^
You asked a loaded question. Why would they want to leave their country of birth?
That would be like the city of Edmonton taking over Enoch reserve and saying they should either accept it or move to some reserve in northern Saskatewan. Not exactly a Mecca location.

Post your poll, by all means. Israel is a nice country full of pools, big houses, a great history, lots of technology and western conveniences. I'd want to live there if it wasn't full of guns but I was born in a different culture. Who wouldn't want to live like that opposed to the rubble and poverty in Gaza? As far as other countries go, well I do know that there are Iranian, Turkish, and even Iraqi jews who live peacefully without persecution. Iraq is dangerous in general, so no one is truly very safe, but they are there.

As far as muslims moving to other countries, there's lots of refugee camps that no one ever talks about. There was a Leonardo dicaprio movie I saw lately with a scene at one of these camps. It looks like a set from District 9. Sunny pools of blue water or tainted stillwater. Only a fool would choose the latter.

grish
06-03-2010, 01:35 PM
As far as other countries go, well I do know that there are Iranian, Turkish, and even Iraqi jews who live peacefully without persecution. Iraq is dangerous in general, so no one is truly very safe, but they are there.

I would be asking for a source backing such a statement, but it would be difficult to establish the bias for the source as even in most oppressed conditions, people claim to love thei leader and their country.

One thing you did touch on is the state of jewish people in the entire region. Those communities and the jewish communities in Jerusalem and many other cities in Israel date back thousands of years.

However, the jewish communities of the entire middle east have been decimated in all countries except for Israel. The majority of Persian Jews (Iranian Jews) living in the middle east live in israel. There was a combination of reasons for that including iranian revolution amongst all others. Still, Israel took on hundreds of thousands of refugees from communities that include Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan etc.. While some simply fled, others were kicked out. This is true for the Palestinian refugees, many of whom have fled on their own and others were kicked out.

The difference in the reception of the refugees is that they were settled in Israel with full rights (that of course ties with the chief nature of the state of israel). Palestinian refugees are to this day confined to cramped refugee camps particularly in Lebanon. They have been restricted from becoming full citizens even though many "refugee camps" are real cities now and most of the "refugees" are second or third generation. I believe there are no refugee camps in Jordan as all refugees were kicked out of the country and many were killed by the Jordan army due to the politics there.

While the status as a refugee in the country is one of those matters that needs to be negotiated by all nations together with Israel and Palestinian leadership, the conditions of those camps, the status of those people in their host countries, and other issues of human rights are in fact a lot more severe than those in Gaza and the West Bank. That includes safety as there are routine military clashes between the Lebanese army, for example, and the militia in the camps with civilians falling to "collateral damage".

JasonR
08-03-2010, 08:00 AM
Wow. Two sides that won't budge and ignore each other's good points and play up their own. Remind anyone of anything?

kcantor
08-03-2010, 10:28 AM
^
You asked a loaded question. Why would they want to leave their country of birth?
...
isn't that a loaded question as well?

the total number of palestinian "refugees" that left the newly formed state of israel in 1948 is estimated to have been somewhere between 700 and 750,000 with a further 300 to 400,000 leaving during the 6 day war in 1967. the number of palestinians "classified" as refugees today whether they live in refugee camps or not has been estimated at anywhere between 4 and 6 million.

the issue is further complicated in that the un has never actually provided a workable definition of a palestinian refugee although it should be noted that the unrwa does include those displaced in 1948 and their descendants regardless of where they have lived since. palestinians are the only group to have ever been defined as refugees based on descent alone and this definition has exacerbated their circumstances for more than 6 decades...

armin
08-03-2010, 01:19 PM
kcantor, you just gave a bunch of statistical numbers then defined part of the semantical technicalities surrounding the conflict. Is there an answer to my somehow loaded question in there?

Grish, there's plenty of sources available to tell you whether or not there is jewish communities in those locations. It's fairly common knowledge and you can go pull up any source you deem credible. I'd do it for you but you'll just call all my links biased.

You ever hear of genome mapping? It's wonderful, they can tell where anyone is from just by using this thing called DNA. With it they figure out which Israelis are actually descendents of the region, and which ones are just using their religion to lay claim to the land. Arabic Israelis share the same DNA with the Arabic Palestinians. The only difference is the religious aspect. European Israelis are european in origin. They're eastern german jewish migrants who use the law of return to take away land from Arabs.

JasonR, this stupid argument could go on for days and I am being intentionally stubborn until they concede a few facts or at least stop making such ridiculous claims.

JasonR
08-03-2010, 01:26 PM
armin, no offense, but you are just as guilty. You cannot argue the fact that Arabs have it much better in Israel than Jews have it in Arab countries. You place the blame all on Israel, and that's just not fair or accurate.

grish
08-03-2010, 01:53 PM
Grish, there's plenty of sources available to tell you whether or not there is jewish communities in those locations. It's fairly common knowledge and you can go pull up any source you deem credible. I'd do it for you but you'll just call all my links biased.

:confused:

what are you replying to? the conditions under which the jewish communities live or whether or not they exist?



You ever hear of genome mapping? It's wonderful, they can tell where anyone is from just by using this thing called DNA. With it they figure out which Israelis are actually descendents of the region, and which ones are just using their religion to lay claim to the land. Arabic Israelis share the same DNA with the Arabic Palestinians. The only difference is the religious aspect. European Israelis are european in origin. They're eastern german jewish migrants who use the law of return to take away land from Arabs.


You have no clue what genome mapping is. You are probably thinking of some sort of genetic geneaology thing, not the genome mapping project that simply tries to identify all human gene codes.

Since you have quite obviously taken gene samples from all jews of the world, you have convinced yourself that there were no jewish people living in Jerusalem, in Tzfat (or Safed), Haifa, Ramle, Cescaria, Hebron, and many, many other cities and villages.

You have also remembered–a reasonable thing to do using the magic of Gene Geneaology–to take samples of the DNA from every Arab living in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia etc and have identified all those arabs having different DNA from the DNA of the Palestinian Arabs. Obviously, when in lat 1800's and early 1900's the Zionist movement of the European Jews was taking place, not a single arab moved into what is now the state of Israel. I am sure the economic activity and trade would not have attracted anyone else just like no Arab has made a move to Canada or the US in search of a more prosperous life.

This "scientification" of land claim has striking similarities to what the Nazis did to convince the enlightened Germans at the time that Arian is the pure race, others like Italians and the Spanish are a bit lower, and Jews and Gypsies are practically not human. But if you are going to go down that path, why not sample everyone and designate the areas in the world where they can establish a country for themselves.

armin
08-03-2010, 04:08 PM
armin, no offense, but you are just as guilty. You cannot argue the fact that Arabs have it much better in Israel than Jews have it in Arab countries. You place the blame all on Israel, and that's just not fair or accurate.

And you guys keep putting all the blame on the Palistinians. I've already answered that question earlier in this thread. I've even condemned Hamas earlier, but no, I'm just being racist.

:smt096

armin
08-03-2010, 04:17 PM
Grish, where do you get your information from?

You're talking about Eugenics, which wasn't a Nazi born idea. It was actually incredibly popular in the United States long before Hitler started buying into that junk. Also, Hitler was an *****.

They can use the genome project to trace dna back to villages that are thousands of years old. Israel funded alot of the recent research trying to find genetic connections to religious writings.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7686

I didn't write this stuff, and your accusations are close to Godwin rules. If you want to play the nazi card, you already lose because it's a stupid insinuation.

JasonR
08-03-2010, 04:19 PM
armin, no offense, but you are just as guilty. You cannot argue the fact that Arabs have it much better in Israel than Jews have it in Arab countries. You place the blame all on Israel, and that's just not fair or accurate.

And you guys keep putting all the blame on the Palistinians. I've already answered that question earlier in this thread. I've even condemned Hamas earlier, but no, I'm just being racist.

:smt096

First of all, I have never called you racist. Second, I haven't ever put all of the blame on the Palestinians.

kcantor
08-03-2010, 05:07 PM
armin, no offense, but you are just as guilty. You cannot argue the fact that Arabs have it much better in Israel than Jews have it in Arab countries. You place the blame all on Israel, and that's just not fair or accurate.

And you guys keep putting all the blame on the Palistinians. I've already answered that question earlier in this thread. I've even condemned Hamas earlier, but no, I'm just being racist.

:smt096
i don't believe i've ever called you a racist or even inferred it. but you have been guilty of deflecting criticism of some of your statements and positions.

you asked "why would anyone want to leave their country of birth?"

i pointed out that most palestinian refugees were not born in israel and acknowledged that as being an issue that has to be dealt with by both sides. you cannot at the same time question why people would want to leave their country of birth while you are supporting exactly that.

and you came back stating that trying to address real numbers - who are all at the end of the day real people and not just numbers - is no more than "a bunch of statistical numbers" and "part of the semantical technicalities surrounding the conflict". how do expect the two sides to be able to resolve the conflict if even you can't even get past the semantical technicalities when semantical technicalities are one of the major reasons this conflict has gone on for more than six decades.

and then you started to ramble on to grish about genome mapping and DNA and JasonR about how you are "being intentionally stubborn until they concede a few facts or at least stop making such ridiculous claims".

as near as i can tell, most of the positions put to you have been more verifiable than many of your statement like that "As far as other countries go, well I do know that there are Iranian, Turkish, and even Iraqi jews who live peacefully without persecution".

in the last 60 years, the jewish population of arab countries declined from estimates of between 750,000 and 900,000 to less than 9,000 in total. this would include your example of iraq with a decline from 140-150,000 to fewer than 100 today.

the decline in non-arab muslim countries in total would be similar to or greater than your other two examples of turkey - which went from 140,000 to 17,000 - and iran - which went from estimates as high as 150,000 to 10,800 today.

hardly true reflections of living peacefully without persecution.

armin
08-03-2010, 05:34 PM
kcantor, define the Israel Palestine border and we'll probably get to the crux of the problem.

You're accusing me of deflection, but I can say the same thing.

The racist comment was to Grish and her stupid accusational tone.

And all your stats mean very little without citations. I'll get back with a better response when I've got more time.

kcantor
08-03-2010, 06:48 PM
kcantor, define the Israel Palestine border and we'll probably get to the crux of the problem.

You're accusing me of deflection, but I can say the same thing.

The racist comment was to Grish and her stupid accusational tone.

And all your stats mean very little without citations. I'll get back with a better response when I've got more time.
as for my defining the border, israel's original borders weren't acceptable to her neighbors - it wasn't israel that went to war to change them. nor has any proposed border since been acceptable to her neighbors whether pre or post any of the wars since. my "definition" isn't likely to be any better received.

you can certainly say the same thing about deflection if you want. although - much like many of your other assertions - that won't make it true.

as for a better response with more time, you probably don't have to bother. as long as facts don't mean as much as your own personal opinions, our "stalemate" isn't likely to be resolved regardless of how much time goes in to crafting it. if the source of facts provided (regardless of how easy they are to verify) isn't cited, you discount them completely. although earlier when a source was provided you simply discounted the source just as readily and just as completely. if you have more accurate facts, please table them. until then, i will stay quite comfortable with mine.

grish
08-03-2010, 09:55 PM
Grish, where do you get your information from?

You're talking about Eugenics, which wasn't a Nazi born idea. It was actually incredibly popular in the United States long before Hitler started buying into that junk. Also, Hitler was an *****.

They can use the genome project to trace dna back to villages that are thousands of years old. Israel funded alot of the recent research trying to find genetic connections to religious writings.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7686

I didn't write this stuff, and your accusations are close to Godwin rules. If you want to play the nazi card, you already lose because it's a stupid insinuation.

well, you didn't read it either.

this article has nothing to do with providing a link between lineage to land claim. nor does it make an unequivocal claim to being trust-worthy.

trying to "scientisize" something like that to determine belonging is not that far from claims of supremacy. i did not start down that path. I am just giving you a heads up that once you try to test the DNA of one people, every people will be subject to the same DNA analysis. Racism can be dressed up in many different ways. Saying that a whole people does not belong due to the absence of a particular DNA is not that far from the scientification of stature, head shape, etc perfected by Nazi "scientists". You are going to start building historical arguments, you should expect others to bring up history to counter them.

armin
08-03-2010, 11:47 PM
kcantor, prior to 1948 there was no Israel. Palestine was under Britain at the time, and they just decided to give away land that never belonged to them. If the situation was different and the US gave away a part of Alberta to any reserve, I'd call you a coward if they were allowed to push us out and you just sat back. That's no different than any Israeli, or Palestinian. Both of them feel deserving of the land. The big problem is for the last 60 years, Israel has been taking all the land without sharing or treating arabs equally.

Grish, just stop before you embarrass yourself further.
You accused me of racism. After that, all gloves are off because I've fought racism for at least the last 20 years and for you to make such accusations is insulting.
When you take a pair of Doc Martins across the head, then you can come back and try accusing me, until then you don't have any right to say spit.

The link I posted is relevant because you accused me of preaching eugenics. I just showed you a link that confirms studies relating to genetic testing by Israel. Double standard much? Where's their allegations of racism?

grish
09-03-2010, 07:15 AM
kcantor, prior to 1948 there was no Israel. Palestine was under Britain at the time, and they just decided to give away land that never belonged to them. If the situation was different and the US gave away a part of Alberta to any reserve, I'd call you a coward if they were allowed to push us out and you just sat back. That's no different than any Israeli, or Palestinian. Both of them feel deserving of the land. The big problem is for the last 60 years, Israel has been taking all the land without sharing or treating arabs equally.

Grish, just stop before you embarrass yourself further.
You accused me of racism. After that, all gloves are off because I've fought racism for at least the last 20 years and for you to make such accusations is insulting.
When you take a pair of Doc Martins across the head, then you can come back and try accusing me, until then you don't have any right to say spit.

The link I posted is relevant because you accused me of preaching eugenics. I just showed you a link that confirms studies relating to genetic testing by Israel. Double standard much? Where's their allegations of racism?

First of all, you need to tone down your threats of physical violence and name calling.

prior to 1948 there was no palestine either. There was no country for either people. There were jews and arabs and armenians and several other groups living on this land. European jews have orchestrated a large scale move into the land to join the jews already living there. That much is true and is very well documented. There were rich philantropists who have helped purchase land. That was done legally under the Ottoman Empire laws. Jewish settlers who did move back, moved into land they legally owned. Your comparisons to US giving parts of Alberta away are made out of complete ignorance of the history of the region.

for some reason, you quite freely deny histry of one people over another. more over, you have written down as a fact that genetics has proved jewish people have no right to any claim on the land. as a proof, you offered an article on the religious comparison between judaism and the opinions of a scientist who has worked on the human genome project. The goal of the project was to map the DNA of humans. The opinion of the scientists has to do more with divine creation versus evolution. Yet, to you this article is written about the rights of jewish people to the land claim.

You don't want to be called racist, but you are perfectly ok with using genetics to differentiate between people and their rights. The last time someone tried to use science to differentiate between people and their rights were the Nazis.

I will not call you a racist. You pick a word that suits you better. Next time you threaten me to throw a shoe, make sure the shoe is not a boumerang.

ps I did not accuse you of eugenics. Yet another term you quite obviously do not understand. I did not ever say that you wish some sort of purposeful, selective breeding:
from the dictionary...
eugenics is the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics. Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, it fell into disfavor only after the perversion of its doctrines by the Nazis.

but I did accuse you of trying to pervert human genome project into something that it isn't and to differentiate between different groups of people and their rights.

CigarHippo
09-03-2010, 07:58 AM
prior to 1948 there was no palestine either.

or ever. there has never been a "palestine", ever... it has never been a country, it was a territory whose name was given by the romans when they conquered it and it remained like that until the brits took over from the turks... "palestina" is a name of a town in Italy, that's where the name dates back to, to ancient Rome.
the name "palestine" has zero conection to arabic.. it has no arabic backround. it's a latin name.

Neither "palestine" or "AlQuds" are named even ONCE on the Holy Quran, not once.
Israel otoh, is named 52 times in the Quran. The Quran. The one document that arabs most believe in has no connection to "palestine" whatsoever.

Armin, why isn't "palestine" mentioned once in the Quran? Where is the muslim connection to "palestine"? it seems to me the name "palestine" is just an made up name for a made up ppl, kind of like "Mordor" or "KPax"

moahunter
04-03-2017, 01:04 PM
Zombie thread but the topic fits. Brave stuff by Israeli commedian to call it like it is, apartheid.

://youtu.be/QyyUvxHLYr4

https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2017/03/03/in-last-monologue-israeli-comedy-show-host-implores-israelis-to-wake-up-and-smell-the-apartheid/

I don't believe the answer is two state anymore. I think the only way for peace is for the Palestinans to be granted the same rights as Israelis (including the right to live anywhere and to vote) and the constitution to be rewritten not as a Jewish state but as a Secular state. With mutual rights and respect Arab and Jew can live together in peace in the Middle East, just like in Canada.

kcantor
04-03-2017, 03:56 PM
Zombie thread but the topic fits. Brave stuff by Israeli commedian to call it like it is, apartheid.

://youtu.be/QyyUvxHLYr4

https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2017/03/03/in-last-monologue-israeli-comedy-show-host-implores-israelis-to-wake-up-and-smell-the-apartheid/

I don't believe the answer is two state anymore. I think the only way for peace is for the Palestinans to be granted the same rights as Israelis (including the right to live anywhere and to vote) and the constitution to be rewritten not as a Jewish state but as a Secular state. With mutual rights and respect Arab and Jew can live together in peace in the Middle East, just like in Canada.
"With mutual rights and respect Arab and Jew can live together in peace in the Middle East, just like in Canada."

lovely sentiment moa... if only it were either accurate or true. unfortunately it is neither and reflects at best a lack of understanding on many levels.

firstly, there is no "equivalency" between "arab" and "jew". one describes a member of a semitic people originally from the arabian peninsula. the other describes people whose traditional religion was judaism. your descriptives aren't even exclusive of each other.

secondly, i'm not sure that canada does treat either of these overlapping groups equally (or, more accurately, canada probably does treat both groups equally but not with equality in much the same way that canada still not treat first nations canadians with equality).

thirdly, i find it interesting that you now want to insist that israel would be a better place if it became a secular place where religion no longer impacted on life within the state or on the state's behavior towards other states. interesting insofar as there seems to be no similar sentiment calling for the establishment of secular states in jordan or lebanon or syria or saudi arabia or yemen or iran or iraq or turkey or egypt or yemen or libya or qatar or the united arab emirates or kuwait or oman or bahrain or even palestine to rewrite their constitutions and enshrine similar rights and freedoms and security throughout the middle east.

moahunter
06-03-2017, 09:26 AM
^did you watch the video? I'm guessing you didn't like watching an Israeli pointing out how inhumane it was that within a few kilometers, while he lives a good life, others struggle to get even basic government services / health care.



thirdly, i find it interesting that you now want to insist that israel would be a better place if it became a secular place where religion no longer impacted on life within the state or on the state's behavior towards other states. interesting insofar as there seems to be no similar sentiment calling for the establishment of secular states in jordan or lebanon or syria or saudi arabia or yemen or iran or iraq or turkey or egypt or yemen or libya or qatar or the united arab emirates or kuwait or oman or bahrain or even palestine to rewrite their constitutions and enshrine similar rights and freedoms and security throughout the middle east.
So because Israel is better than the rest of the middle east (for some of its residents, per you), its perfectly acceptable that some of its people live a very good, "white equivalent" apartheid live, whiles others live a "black equivalent" apartheid life with few rights and basic services. I would have though Israel can be better than that, maybe with a Swiss style government of quasi states (which could at a regional level choose a state religion), but I guess its good enough for you the way it is. I don't think its good enough, when you repress people into poverty / enclaves, a people whose population is growing at a faster rate than yours, the end result is not going to be pretty the longer it takes to face up to the inequality.

kcantor
06-03-2017, 09:45 AM
^did you watch the video? I'm guessing you didn't like watching an Israeli pointing out how inhumane it was that within a few kilometers, while he lives a good life, others struggle to get even basic government services / health care.



thirdly, i find it interesting that you now want to insist that israel would be a better place if it became a secular place where religion no longer impacted on life within the state or on the state's behavior towards other states. interesting insofar as there seems to be no similar sentiment calling for the establishment of secular states in jordan or lebanon or syria or saudi arabia or yemen or iran or iraq or turkey or egypt or yemen or libya or qatar or the united arab emirates or kuwait or oman or bahrain or even palestine to rewrite their constitutions and enshrine similar rights and freedoms and security throughout the middle east.
So because Israel is better than the rest of the middle east (for some of its residents, per you), its perfectly acceptable that some of its people live a very good, "white equivalent" apartheid live, whiles others live a "black equivalent" apartheid life with few rights and basic services. I would have though Israel can be better than that, maybe with a Swiss style government of quasi states (which could at a regional level choose a state religion), but I guess its good enough for you the way it is. I don't think its good enough, when you repress people into poverty / enclaves, a people whose population is growing at a faster rate than yours, the end result is not going to be pretty the longer it takes to face up to the inequality.
yes, i watched it...

and i thought how different the acceptance of a different point of view in israel than if that video had come from jordan or lebanon or syria or saudi arabia or yemen or iran or iraq or turkey or egypt or yemen or libya or qatar or the united arab emirates or kuwait or oman or bahrain or even Palestine in terms of its remaining available for discussion. or even its author still being available for discussions.

i also found it interesting to see which thread you chose to resurrect to make your point...

kkozoriz
06-03-2017, 07:08 PM
The PLO was the secular group fighting for Palestinians. In order to split the Palestinian vote, Israel supported Hamas, a religious group.


How Israel helped create Hamas
Hamas launched in 1988 in Gaza at the time of the first intifada, or uprising, with a charter now infamous for its anti-Semitism and its refusal to accept the existence of the Israeli state. But for more than a decade prior, Israeli authorities actively enabled its rise.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/?utm_term=.c1c5608ef9c6



Israel, particularly the current Netanyahu government, isn't interested in a secular state. And there's no way that Israel will aloow the Palestininans in the occupied territories to become citizens. In a generation or two, Jews would be a minority

You can't even get married in Israel unless you're approved by the approved religious authorities. If you want to marry in a secular, mixed faith, same sex or otherwise unapproved marriage, you have to do it outside of Israel.


Israel’s religious authorities — the only entities authorized to perform weddings in Israel — are prohibited from marrying couples unless both partners share the same religion. Therefore, interfaith couples can be legally married in Israel only if one of the partners converts to the religion of the other. However, civil, interfaith and same-sex marriages entered into abroad are recognised by the state
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_Israel

Immigration to Israel is based on your ethnic and/or religious background. You don't meet those standards, it's almost impossible to move there.


Immigration to Israel and Israeli Citizenship
Israel, despite being a liberal democratic country, is not an immigration country. Therefore, Israel does not have laws and regulations enabling foreigners who wish to come and settle Israel the opportunity to do so.
http://www.visa-law.co.il/immigration-to-israel/

It's really not that different in result than many of the countries you mention Ken. Only in execution. And isn't Israel supposed to be the example?

Different laws for arrest and imprisonment based on citizenship, which, as we see above, is heavily titled towards Jewish citizens. A Christin or Muslim or Atheist person, even if they are a citizen, face a much harder time that a Jew would in the same circumstances.

It's a rarity for a Jewish person to have their home taken from them by the government. Usually only in the cases of illegal settlements and usually not even then. However, Palestinians are often, you could even say routinely, evicted from their homes, often with little to no notice.

But, according to Ken, that's their fault. If people who these people don't even know or support, who were put in power by the Israeli government, would simply stop doing what they were created to do, everything would be wonderful. Remember, if something bad happens to a Palestinian, it's their own fault, regardless of the circumstances.

KC
19-07-2018, 09:03 AM
Jewish nation state: Israel approves controversial bill - BBC News

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-44881554