Arab countries treat Palestinians far worse than Israel

[Edan]

Originally posted by GePap
I looke dat your site edan, and again, same quote, BUT NO SOURCE given. Where did that number come from?

You may have looked at dat site, but did you actually read it?

1Carl Voss, The Palestine Problem Today, Israel and Its Neighbors, (MA: Beacon Press, 1953), p. 13.

[GePap]

I did read it edan which is why i can see that the site makes several claims 9for example, saying that most pals were decendents of individual who had immigrate within the lkast 70 years). There is no quote next to the number. The quote is elsewhere, not next to the number, or at the end of the sentence. Does that page number refer to the 250,00 number, or the 70% quote, or what?

Come on.

[Panag]

Originally posted by GePap
Edan:

did you look up from the bibliography in the idiots guide to make sure that they were correct?

Let me guess...the envelope please? NO!

And yes, edan, I do prefer sources that tell me outright what their sources are, where they got what they are telling me. It is far more difficult to make sh1t up when you put out there were you claim you got it from (as the Twain misquote form the innitial article proves).

Tell me, did you look up those books?

Just as much as you did. I guess I am just a thourought with my research as you......

Can you get me any better sources than the idiots guide? I will be much better than any of you 'doubters". give me a source from any site, even one called ZIONISTARERIGHTFOREVER.com. , as long as they site their sources.

why on earth would any of the Israeli or Jewish posters or supporters post a link , ....

cause for the simple fact if they are posted you ignore them or say they are a bunch of crap , ...

if you can post here you can find the facts yourself , just use a searchengine , .... it cant be that hard , ...

if you are "thourought" with your research you can find the fatcs , .......

[Edan]

Come on.

No, you come on. I gave you exactly what you requested, despite the fact that didn't support that website or verify anything on it - for all I know, it could be completely made up. Just as easily as your site could be. I admit that, but you're a hypocrite, because any site you agree with, the sources are valid, any site you don't agree with aren't. At least I have physical books, and don't resort to looking things on biased websites (except when asked to, but only under protest. )

[GePap]

Imran:

Why was the "democratic" tie to the French greater than lets say, the tie to the semi-democratic Germans, if there was an even bigger , more important differentiantion, European, or none European?

You are trying to claim that the distinction "democrat" is so important to people in dmeocraces they won;t fight other people in dmeocracies (which is why a dmeocratic leader may lose thier job, and thus be timid to act). OK, why is it more imnportant than the distinction: "European"? "worker"?, "capitalist"?, "Christian"?

You can show me that when deciding not to go to war in 1895, what the british and french leaders were thinking was : If i go to war against a fellow democracy, I will lose my job! But you can;t. Without being able to give me some quote to prove this, then you have to give me sound theoretical arguemnts, and as of yet, you havent made one, as to why the shared indentity of "democracy" is stronger than a whole other set of shared identities.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Edan



No, you come on. I gave you exactly what you requested, despite the fact that didn't support that website or verify anything on it - for all I know, it could be completely made up. Just as easily as your site could be. I admit that, but you're a hypocrite, because any site you agree with, the sources are valid, any site you don't agree with aren't. At least I have physical books, and don't resort to looking things on the web (except when asked to, despite my doing so under protest. )

My protest lies with how they made their citation. If I was as careless in my univeristy, i would not have done well.

Lets move on. can you give me a o****er nuber to the one saying that as of 1924, the population was only 8% Jewish, out of over 500,000 people there?

[Panag]

Originally posted by GePap


My protest lies with how they made their citation. If I was as careless in my univeristy, i would not have done well.

Lets move on. can you give me a o****er nuber to the one saying that as of 1924, the population was only 8% Jewish, out of over 500,000 people there?

source

just plain simple PA , fatah , hamas and g-d knows what other crap pr , .....

[Edan]

Originally posted by GePap


My protest lies with how they made their citation. If I was as careless in my univeristy, i would not have done well.

Rrrrriiight. It's got nothing to do with it being in conflict with your viewpoints?

Face it, you cant have it both ways.

[Ned]

I read the beginning and the end of this thread. It began as an Arab-bashing thread and ended as an Israel-bashing thread. One would almost think that there are people on this forum that deliberately try to divert attention away from difficult issues involving the Arabs by blaming all their problems on Israel.

But getting back to the original topic of this thread, if one looks at how Palestinians were treated by individual Arab countries, such as how they were treated by the Kuwaitis and Jordanians, I can see justifications for what those two countries did. It is my understanding that the Palestinians (not just Arafat) openly sided with Saddam Hussein against the liberation of Kuwait. I think there is total justification by the Kuwait government in expelling the Palestinians.

In the case of Jordan, I believe that the Palestinians, led by Arafat and the PLO, revolted and were trying to take over the government of Jordan.

Now as to the situation in Lebanon, I do not have enough information about the situation there to make a judgment. The Lebanese government may have a good reason to not allow the Palestinians to become Lebanese citizens. They apparently allowed 25,000 become citizens; but somehow this has boomeranged on the Lebanese in some fashion. Before we can make a judgment here as to the rightness or wrongness the Lebanese government's action, I believe we need more information as to why they are thinking about revoking the citizenship of the 25,000.

However, that said, I simply do not understand how these Palestinian refugee camps can continue to exist nearly 60 years after they were first created. This is not a simple matter of discrimination by non-Palestinian Arabs against the Palestinians. The camps continue to exist even in the West Bank and Gaza. All involved in keeping these camps in existence for such a long time deserve to be condemned in harsh terms.

I think the UN is partly to blame because they do not put a time limit on how long they will continue to fund the camps nor do they place any requirement on the governments that host the camps that they must make permanent disposition of the refugees. Keeping the camps in existence for such a long time only makes the ultimate settlement between Israel and the Palestinians more difficult, just as the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza make peace more difficult. If the UN truly was for peace, it would do everything in its power to make a permanent disposition of the Palestinian refugees in Arab lands particularly since it has no power to end the conflict between the Arabs and the Israelis.

This is not to say that a permanent disposition of the Palestinian refugees would amount to an abandonment of the refugees inherent right to compensation or to and abandonment of their right to return to the portion of Palestine that is now Israel. It is intended to alleviate their suffering while the war between Israel and the Arabs continues. But as we know, the number of Palestinians who would actually return to Palestine (Israel) will be far fewer if they were permanently settled in their host countries. Keeping them in the camps, not only extends their suffering, but it makes it far more likely that they will want to return to Palestine when there is peace. Obviously, this enormously complicates the issues involved in any peace settlement. Thus the UN position on the refugee camps perversely not only extends the suffering of the refugees, it helps prevent peace.

BTW, does anyone know how many refugees live in the camps outside of Palestine?

[Spiffor]

Wow, Ned, that was a great post

I whoelheartedly agree with you.

[Sirotnikov]

*sits back by the fire and watches GePap being slowly grilled*

[GeneralTacticus]

Originally posted by Ned

Now as to the situation in Lebanon, I do not have enough information about the situation there to make a judgment. The Lebanese government may have a good reason to not allow the Palestinians to become Lebanese citizens. They apparently allowed 25,000 become citizens; but somehow this has boomeranged on the Lebanese in some fashion. Before we can make a judgment here as to the rightness or wrongness the Lebanese government's action, I believe we need more information as to why they are thinking about revoking the citizenship of the 25,000.

I don't know anything about the case of these specific 25000, but my understanding is that the influx of Palestinian refugees was a big factor in upsetting the balance between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon, which ultimately resulted in beginning of the civil war, so I can imagine that the Lebanese government wouldn't be too enamoured of them.

[Odin]

This crap wouldn't have happened if Israel wouldn't of kicked out most of the Palestinians in order to creat a "Jewish" state. But nobody raised a finger and called them racist because of "Holocaust Sympathy Syndrome". It is sickening, Jews were the victims of the worst racism in history and then turn around and treat Palestinians like crap, you Israelis are a buch of hypocrites. Unfortunately the US can't do anything about it because the US jewish population would start screaming anti-semitism. And you Israelis wonder why the Palistinians hate you! Open your f*cking eyes.

[Spiffor]

Odin :
From experience, I can tell you that these discussions about who has started the mess can lead you nowhere. No side is innocent, and this mess has been created and maintained by the determination of both sides to be stupid.

I'm not whitewashing the Israelis, and I am not whitwashing the Palestinians either. When both sides decide to take steps to improve things together, then the wound would begin to heal.
It was the point of Oslo, and it has raised huge hopes. Sadly the greed and shortsightedness of Arafat and Netanyahuh ruined it all

[GePap]

I am not having it both ways: One thing i am always clear with is sources. Honestly look at the two sites given, the one I posted to, the one Edan posted too. LOOK at THEM. Read what they say, and how they say it. No one can be unbiased when it comes to this conflict, but as we all know from this forum, you can make an arguemnt well or you can make it badly.

All the peole bashing the site as biased: how many of you actually read it? I read Edans site, and besides the poor use of sitation, well, it gives you 2, and most of it is simple argument, without facts. The one I posted, well, it almost all sites, quotes, and may I point out, almost none from a Palestinian source.

For example, in the pro-zionist site quoted, you get the argument that since most palestinians were from newly arrived families, they had no tie to the land, and thus could not become refugees. Well, how mnay Israelis can trace thier families back more than 70 years themselves in that land? So the site is telling me that if there was a war tommorrow, and Eli, Siro, and Azazel were forced to flee from Israel due to a war, because none of them were actually born in the land, that they have no tie to it? That they would NOT be refugees? I am sorry, but not only is that argument totaly undocumented (the law defining refugees says nothing about a time span one must have lived there to become a refugee), but it is CRAP ON ITS FACE!

So no, i have no problem questioning the site Edan gave me, because unlike most people here, I actually read both, and the differences in style, in usefullness are vast, and the "bias" (you actualy mean, its politcal leaning) does nothing to detract from its value, or its effectiveness.
I am finding more and more that poeple here don;t seem to know how to honestly handle sources. If they don;t say what you like, well, ignore them: that is the surest way to a crap arguemnt, and to those waiting to say I want it both ways, well address my comment about the method of quotation: I assume you al go, or have gone, to some sort of higher education, one which calls for you to create research papers: tell me that site does a good job: look at them both as if you were a professor, and tell me which of them makes a stronger case, a case with evidence. Are they equal?

BTW, does anyone know how many refugees live in the camps outside of Palestine?

The UN would telly ou, as they handle the camps and must eep the data. it is certainly more than one million.