Apartheid in Israel

[CyberGnu]

Ned, OK, so if we force Arafat to peacefully resign, can we get the UN to remove the Knesset and replace them with peaceful people? Preferable non-jews who don't want a a Grosse Israel?

I'm afraid my friend that you have fallen for the latest round of Israeli propaganda. Sharons though process is pretty transparent. 'Hmm, how can we indefinetely stall the peace process now that even the US is calling for us to give up the 'no negotiation until a complete ceasefire? Oh, I know, let's blame all the problems on Arafat, and refuse to negotiate until he is out of power. If it ever succeeds, it is going to take at least a year, and at that time we can come up with another reason to maintain the status quo and even expand our settlements some. Oh, and as a nice side effect, this gives Bush a conventiant line to blurb when we give him more money. Excellent'.

The problem isn't Arafat. The problem is the occupation.


I consistently fail to see why not giving back 100% of the 67 land would be feasible. It is only 22% of palestine, to a people that compose 75% of the total population. As far as I can see is the only reason not to Israeli greed...

Viability is not to have the territory crisscrossed by Israeli-only roads and chekpoints. Its to have a continuous territory that you can develop without fear of Israeli army units wantonly wrecking anything that provides economic sustenance. Its to have control of your own water, your imports/exports, your airspace.

You know, what any nation on earth requires....

[Panag]

Originally posted by S. Kroeze
Ned:


Here is proof of the 'boundless love' of Americans and Zionists for Jewish refugees; even the survivors of Auschwitz were not allowed to live in a peaceful environment:

"The Anglo-American Committee issued its report on 1 May 1946. With regard to the future government of Palestine, the report was vague, but it urged that 100,000 Jewish immigrants be immediately allowed into the country. It is ironic that the United States government strongly urged the British to allow large-scale immigration into Palestine, but only 4,767 Jewish refugees were permitted to enter the United States in the first eight months of 1946. There were many reasons why the United States permitted so few DPs into the country, not least of which was the apathetic attitue of the American Jewish community leadership to a liberalization of US immigration law.

By 1946 most American Jewish organizations had been converted to Zionism. As such they viewed the immigration of the Jewish DPs to the United States or anywhere else besides Palestine as a diversion from their goal to establish a Jewish state in the Holy Land. The Jewish DPs in their detention camps in Europe were subjected to intense propoganda by Zionist agents. But according to General Frederick Morgan who ran the camps for the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (UNRRA), if the Jewish displaced persons had been allowed to make their own decision, few 'would have gone elsewhere that to the USA.'(51) But the Zionists used the Jewish refugees as propaganda for their cause and as cannonfodder in the struggle to create a Zionist state in Palestine. After the horrors of the Holocaust, these unfortunate survivors deserved a better fate.

During this period, Palestine was suffering as a result of Jewish terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun and Stern Gang, which directed their attacks against British installations. The terrorists hoped to persuade the British, who had 100,000 troops in Palestine, that continued occupation would be too costly. Both the Irgun and the Stern Gang came out of the right wing of the Zionist movement.

The Stern Gang had originally been formed early in the Second World War by Abraham stern, who like Jabotinsky, greatly admired Mussolini. Stern had studied classics at the University of Florence and had been influenced by the extreme Anglophobia of Italian Fascism. Stern believed that no effort should be spared to drive the British out of Palestine. Indeed in 1941, the Stern Gang even contacted Otto von Hentig, the German emiisary in Syria, in the hope of making a Nazi-Zionist alliance against the British. In their proposal the Stern Gang (which included as one of its leaders the current Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir) offered to co-operate with the Nazis on the formation of a Jewish state, 'on a national and totalitarian basis which will establish relations with the German Reich'(51) and protect Nazi interests in the Middle East. The Jewish terrorists also proposed to recognize the Nazi 'New Order in Europe' which was then planning the murder of millions of Jews. These overtures were ignored by the Nazis but do no credit to the Stern Gang."

(source: M.Palumbo: 'The Palestinian catastrophe',1987)

(51) Frederick Morgan, Peace and War, p. 245.
(52) Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, p. 267.

Sirotnikov:


No offence meant, but since your are studying History -I suppose at some university- it surprises me highly you cannot mention the books you studied and read about Palestine/Israeli history. I suppose and hope they are not all in Hebrew.
When I was studying myself, it was most common to read for just one examination -mediaeval history for example- a list of eight or more prescribed books and several articles besides.

Ned:


I might be too modest, but I do not harbour illusions about my influence on the use of terrorism by Arabs or Zionists.
To me it seems you approve of terrorism practised by the Irgun, the Stern Gang and the Israeli state.

hi ,

tiid om wakker te worden , en controleer je ciifers opnieuw , kom dan eens langs in ons land , dan mag je praten .
je bent altijd welkom , voor een bezoekje !

have a nice day

[Sirotnikov]

During this period, Palestine was suffering as a result of Jewish terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun and Stern Gang, which directed their attacks against British installations. The terrorists hoped to persuade the British, who had 100,000 troops in Palestine, that continued occupation would be too costly. Both the Irgun and the Stern Gang came out of the right wing of the Zionist movement

LOL

How nice of the writer to omit the Arab resistance, and the Arab massacares and attacks against Jews.

As always - Jews don't matter.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
1) The local population was forced from their land and had it stolen!

The local population fled war, declared by the Arab states.

As a result of the same war, Israel conquered their lands, and kept them.

2) Enough of the local population was exiled so as to ensure a Jewish majority in nation in which they only represented about 11% of the population before the Balfour Declaration handed the Zionists the pretext they needed for their wholesale invasion/colonisation of Palestine.

You twist the facts to make it seem as if the entire Palestinian population was exiled.

After the balfour declaration- time has passed and the Jewish percentage grew.

Infact, you have no proof of any large scale exile actions by Israel.

I have though, facts, in the NYT for instance, proving a large scale fleeing by Arabs in 1947, on their own.

3) Those that remain inside Israel are treated as 2nd class citizens

You'd know.

4) Those in the occupied territories are treated no better than animals in large open plan cages…

again you're speaking nonsense.

If they are treated badly by anyone- it's Yassir Arafat.

Israel built homes and infrastrucutre.
Arafat only built Palaces for himself, and government offices.

Even during this war, Israel voluntarily helped Palestinian bussinessmen suffering from the curfew to export their products abroad.

5) That anyone with the merest hint of Jewish ancestry is automatically allowed in no questions asked and people who were chased out of their homeland and had their land stolen – people WHO LIVED THERE! Are not allowed back!!!

People who fled, or were exiled for helping enemy forces, have no reason to comeback.

6) The local population will never have tangible power in Israel’s govt.

?

The arab population has some 12 seats in the knesset.
There are arab MKs even in Avoda and Likud parties. So screw you.

7) Israel and Apartheid SA had a close relationship of co-operation.

So did England and Nazi Germany.
So does France and Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan ...

Question: Are there any beaches, buses, buildings etc where Palestinians are not allowed?

You're a blithering idiot, you know that, don't you?

Palestinians are Palestinians. Israel closed it's borders to the Palestinians, to prevent infiltration of terrorists among civilians, so currently Palestinians are generally not allowed in Israel.

No, there aren't any places where Palestinians or Israeli Arabs are not allowed.

You have to be blind not to acknowledge that Israel is a grossly discriminatory country and therefore by definition, an ‘Apartheid’ State…

This is again nonsense.

Israel is not a discriminatory country, and not every discirminatory country is an appartheid.

If anything comes close today to an appartheid, it's the way Native Americans live in the USA.

Who knows? That’s the point – he saw a connection between the struggle of the Israelis and the struggle of the Blacks in America. Maybe he thought an attack on the Israeli movement (Zionism), was also by connection an attack on him…

He knew it. Because he knew that the same biggots who hated successfull blacks hate successfull jews.

I don’t know and frankly it’s irrelevant. Sure he’s held up as a paragon of human virtue/civil rights etc… What I know of him I admire. But that is not to say that he did not make mistakes – he was only human.

Unlike you - obviously - you're a god. You're always right.

Basically you’re just acting like a two bit politician who knows he’s losing his arguments and has resorted to an unfounded smear campaign…

Aha, unlike stating unsupported facts or twisted truths, by a two bit politician who's an idiot if he thinks that'll win his debate.

Just because I don’t agree with what the state of Israel is about – means I have to be an anti-jew/semite whatever. It’s reactionary name calling like that that never gets anything solved!

Just because Israel does not share your view of democracy as inherently being a political national state, and of pacifism as being the only way, does not mean it's "fascist" or "apartheid".

But, congratulations on yet again avoiding the question of just why Israel is an Apartheid state… Keep squirming, and continue your personal assault or turn round and justify how the Jewish population of more than quintupled in less than 20 years!?
Just to remind you of YOUR figures…

How about the Israeli Arab population that grew 10 times in 50 years?

In 1952 there were ~130,000 Arabs in Israel.
In 2002 there are ~1,300,000 Arabs in Israel.

The answer as you well know is illegal immigration – that is why Jewish terrorists (apparently it’s OK for Jewish terrorists to kill civilians, but not Palestinian ones!) were fighting the British…

Give me one example of Jewish militants targetting civilians.

Also, when are you going to address your blatantly hypocritical stance as a New Zealander about the Maori issue in New Zealand???

When are you ever going to address England's bloody past?

You accuse Caligastia of evading the topic, but then you go and do it yourself.

How surprising!

And assuming we go with your 1,000+ year ‘We were there first’ argument – what about the Canaanites? They were there before the Israelites!

Hmm... I was under the impression that Abraham and Sarah were canaanites before they became Jews.

I was also under the impression that during their life here, Jews mixed with practically all the people here, including somaritons, philistines, hitties, moavites, edomines and so on.

But wait, what's that? Are those the trumpets of ignorance blowing from inside of your head? I believe so!

Unfortunately it doesn’t because Israel doesn’t care about the opinions of anyone other than themselves.

If Jews ever, in the thousands of years of their existance, relied on any one else, any such "do good"er such as yourself, it only brought to their decay.

What it does do is bring this crime against humanity to the attention of people like you and I, who can then find out whether it’s really true or not…

Wait... now I'm confused.

First you declare it a crime against humanity... and only then you find out the truth?

I feel someone has had his morning cereals with piss.

I just get sick of the Anti-Palestinian posts…

HOW CAN ANYONE BLAME THE PALESTINIANS!!!!

THEY ARE SIMPLY TARGETTING INNOCENT PEOPLE!!!

IT IS THE ISRAELIS WHO TRY TO STOP THEM FROM DOING SO THAT ARE BAD!!!

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Ned, if there was an election today Arafat would still win. Hey, I doubt anyone would dare run against him...

Again you have no idea what you are talking about.

Arafat has less than 20% support according to recent polls.

And at least one Palestinian scholar has promised to run against him. I wonder what will happen to him meanwhile though.

You know he sat 1 year in Palestinian jail for criticising Arafat publically?

Claiming that 'Arafat won't negotiate' is quite false, since there hasn't been a serious offer since the Oslo accords. He did negotiate during the Oslo process, and accepted several painful choices (such as acknowledging Israels 'right' to the 1967 territory).

If that's painfull, then the Israeli choises are also painful.

In any case - he hasn't really negociated since Camp David. He didn't even negociate in Camp David.

He refused to anything but full control of Jerusalem.
He refused to anything but full acceptance of refugees.

Arafat is also on record saying that he would accept less than 100% of the 1967 territory, but it has to be VIABLE.

Arafat is also on record saying that Israelis are stealing Palestinian body parts.

I actually saw that myself on Al-Jazira.

The result of the Camp David negotioations was one of the greatest victories for the Israeli propaganda machine... The oft-repeated lie that 'Arafat got 95% of what he wanted', when he in reality was offered a bantustan...

Read:

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=subjects&Area=conflict&ID=IA6901

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=subjects&Area=conflict&ID=IA7001

Give him a serious offer of a viable palestinian state, and then come back and claim that you can't negotiate with him.

If you read more on memri.org , you'll find out that this was a very viable state.

The "viable" parts were invented for the west, who was disapponted in the Palestinians trashing the talks because of Jerusalem and the Refugees.

And to their own people they talked only of Jerusalem and the Refugees.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Ned, OK, so if we force Arafat to peacefully resign, can we get the UN to remove the Knesset and replace them with peaceful people? Preferable non-jews who don't want a a Grosse Israel?

This is not at all comparable.

Removing the mullah omar isn't comparable to removing Bush.

There's one side to blaim for the failure of peace talks - Clinton can put his finger on it. So can bush.

I'm afraid my friend that you have fallen for the latest round of Israeli propaganda. Sharons though process is pretty transparent. 'Hmm, how can we indefinetely stall the peace process now that even the US is calling for us to give up the 'no negotiation until a complete ceasefire? Oh, I know, let's blame all the problems on Arafat, and refuse to negotiate until he is out of power. If it ever succeeds, it is going to take at least a year, and at that time we can come up with another reason to maintain the status quo and even expand our settlements some. Oh, and as a nice side effect, this gives Bush a conventiant line to blurb when we give him more money. Excellent'.

Have you ever thought anything about Arafat's thought process?

The problem isn't Arafat. The problem is the occupation.

Hmm...

the PLO predates the 67 occupation. so does the Fatah.

The terracts against Jews, predate the 67 occupation.

They predate the 1948 declaration of Israel.

They predate WWII.

I would seriously rethink my way if I were you.

Dozens of Israeli PMs.
Many American Presidents.
Always Palestinians Terror.
Always Arafat.
..
Always CocaCola. No?

I consistently fail to see why not giving back 100% of the 67 land would be feasible. It is only 22% of palestine, to a people that compose 75% of the total population. As far as I can see is the only reason not to Israeli greed...

Actually, Historical Palestine includes Jordan, 80% of whose citizens are Palestinians.

Viability is not to have the territory crisscrossed by Israeli-only roads and chekpoints. Its to have a continuous territory that you can develop without fear of Israeli army units wantonly wrecking anything that provides economic sustenance.

Security is not to have an englufment in Israel, in which arab missiles are placed. It is not to have Iraqi and Irani commandos stationed in the West Bank. It is not to have PA cooperate with Iran and Iraq. It is not to have Imad Murnie's people in Palestine. It is not to have Al-Qaeda agents in Palestine.

Meanwhile, none of this is kept.

Its to have control of your own water, your imports/exports, your airspace.

Control over their water?

They know as well as we do, that the only way we can share the water is work together.

Germany offered 130 M DM for a united Israeli-Palestinian project for water purification. It only demanded transparency in where the funds go to. Arafat heard it and said "No".

The PA is sending it's sewage to the underground equifers. They don't care that they'll be drinking from there later on.

[CyberGnu]

Siro, of course I have no idea what I'm talking about. Nor does the vast majority of reporters or independent analysts of the ME conflict. Only Siro knows, because he reads magical documents where information not available to the reast of the world exists. Well, come to think of it, I guess the term should be 'made up', not 'magical'...

Do you have any real sources? Memri.org hardly qualifies.

[CyberGnu]

You are right about removing Knesset and Arafat aren't comparable. Removing Arafat would be removing the most moderate choice there is right now, while removing the Knesset would be removing a selection of warmongering politicians. The first would most likely lead to a more radical PA, while the second might lead to peace.

Arafats thought process? something on the line of 'I must stay in power. If I work to hard stopping terrorists, my own people will depose me [because of Israeli occupation]. If I don't work hard, Sharon gets more fuel for his lies. I'm screwed either way. I'll try my best to do both.'.

His political future lies in getting peace. He has nothing to win on continued conflict.

Sharon, on the other hand, does.

[CyberGnu]

the PLO predates the 67 occupation. so does the Fatah.

The terracts against Jews, predate the 67 occupation.

They predate the 1948 declaration of Israel.

And so on, and so on. Ah Siro, always so willing to switch from reailyt to ancient history and back again in a single heartbeat... And all to avoid thinking about how it is the contiuned occupation that causes people to become suicide bombers.... What will he do the day the excuses run out?

[CyberGnu]

Security is not to have an englufment in Israel, in which arab missiles are placed. It is not to have Iraqi and Irani commandos stationed in the West Bank. It is not to have PA cooperate with Iran and Iraq. It is not to have Imad Murnie's people in Palestine. It is not to have Al-Qaeda agents in Palestine.

Meanwhile, none of this is kept.

*looking at clock* I see it is time for the traditional 'but the palestinains are bad toooooooooo' whine. Not that it has any significance, but it alwasy wastes a few more lines, and I'm sure it does keep poor Siro from actually considering the real issues.

[CyberGnu]

Talk about the water situation with Ramo, he is much better at it. e has repeatedly shown how Israeli is stealing the vast majority of palestinan water... And the only response he gets is 'but if we don't steal it, they would just waste it'...

[Sirotnikov]

Siro, of course I have no idea what I'm talking about. Nor does the vast majority of reporters or independent analysts of the ME conflict. Only Siro knows, because he reads magical documents where information not available to the reast of the world exists. Well, come to think of it, I guess the term should be 'made up', not 'magical'...

Do you have any real sources? Memri.org hardly qualifies.

What's wrong with Memri.org?

Furthermore, i have proof that it's correct, since I have examples of articles covered there to actually appear on internet websites of arab newspapers.

They also have full sources and etc.

It seems to be your problem to accept anything which you do not wish to believe.

Journalists from around the world are guilty of 'flock journalism'. They behave like a flock of birds, going to the most popular items. Most of them are activist instead of objective - they believe in taking sides.

And 90% of the photographers and camera men working in the west bank are palestinians who are hired by international news agencies. They obviously do not record things they don't want to show.

Removing Arafat would be removing the most moderate choice there is right now, while removing the Knesset would be removing a selection of warmongering politicians.

You're again talking nonsense based on your own silly ideas.

Just because you equate Arafat to be as reasonable as you are - does not mean he is such.

It's is funny how you can bad mouth Sharon and call him the mother of all evil, and then call Arafat, the father of ME terrorism, together with Imad Mornie, and call him a chance of peace.

And so on, and so on. Ah Siro, always so willing to switch from reailyt to ancient history and back again in a single heartbeat... And all to avoid thinking about how it is the contiuned occupation that causes people to become suicide bombers.... What will he do the day the excuses run out?

you're again ignoring historical facts.

Terror exited before suicide bombings.

Terror includes the massacare of jews in 1920 and 1921, and 1929 and during 1933-1936.

No occupation by Jews there, is there?

And then, like now, it was pre-meditated and organized and incited. The mufti of Jerusalem, spreaded flyers against Jews during prayers, called for their murder.

He also was a friend to Hitler, and visited him several times. He tried to help form an Arab legion that fought against the brittish. He expressed his happiness at Hitler's final solution with regard to the Jews.

*looking at clock* I see it is time for the traditional 'but the palestinains are bad toooooooooo' whine. Not that it has any significance, but it alwasy wastes a few more lines, and I'm sure it does keep poor Siro from actually considering the real issues.

Again, it is you who are evading the reality here.

You want Israel to solve the problems that Arabs created themselves, while the Palestinians keep slaughtering them.

Nope - own't go.

Ramo is much better generally because unlike you he knows what he is talking about.

You on the other hand, are talking out of your arse.

You decided yourself, devoid of any evidence about what an angel Arafat is.

You decide yourself what is truth and what is not, according to what you can be bothered to find in international press, which obviously can't be as exact as local press.

I'm pretty sure that if I search international press about events which happen in some place in Sweden, I would most likely not find them.

[Sirotnikov]

The fact is - you're just as smart as Mobius.

Sadly.

[CyberGnu]

Well, I'm assuming that is a compliment.

[CyberGnu]

What is wrong with Memri.org? Apart from that it is a pro-israeli spin-machine, that is? Oh, I don't know...

My friend, the only person here who won't accept news he doesn't like is you. Even Eli accepts that if you want to debate with facts you have to stick with respected and impartial sources.

At no point have I said that Arafat is an angel, or even as reasonable as me. I have said, however, that he is a pracmatic and selfish man, whose only chance of stauning in power is to get peace and a state for his people. He committed himself to that when he ended the first intifada.

Sharon, on the other hand, does not want peace as it would mean he would HAVE to give up the settlements and solve the ROR. We both know that he only wants to maintain status quo to more firmly fix the 'facts on the ground'.