• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Jimmy Carter: Palestine Peace Not Apartheid

You want rational thought based on irrational beliefs? You might be waiting for a while...

Unfortunately, the more entrenched and single minded people come to be about something, the more they seem to be ready to believe that god is actually on their side.

Meanwhile, an article from Haaretz on the occuption.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/866548.html

The need to exert authority over the large and alien population of the territories forced the government to recreate the military rule it had just abolished, and to employ it in the territories - tactics and methods included.

Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz did not need 40 years to realize that this would transform Israel to a secret-police state, and the Israel Defense Forces into an "occupation army." As early as spring 1968, he warned against the occupation's effects on education, freedom of speech and thought, and on the democratic nature of the government.

Leibowitz predicted that the corruption that is characteristic of any colonialist regime would not spare Israel. He also warned against the collapse of social structures and the corruption of man - Arab and Jew alike.

But even the Jerusalemite prophet of apocalypse did not predict the scale of corruption and the corruption of values that the settlement enterprise generated, and the extent of the apartheid regulations that would allow and encourage the theft of lands.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
There will never....ever...be peace..as long as Jews are unwilling to admit to their own mistakes and extremism when it comes to the Middle East. There will also never...ever..be peace...as long as Arabs are unwilling to compromise, admit to terrrorist acts, and continue to lie about Jewish historical and religous connections to the land. Both sides are going to have to take some heavy doses of humility pills.
Click to expand...

With respect, parky76, I think your rhetoric here is quite similar to the rhetoric around here on the other side in that it attempts to characterize one side of this debate as monolithic.

Essentially the "Jews" have been willing to admit their mistakes if by that you mean great numbers of Israeli and American Jews.

If American Jews were anywhere near as militaristic or one sided about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict as the Bush administration I don't think the vast majority of American Jews would vote Democratic. Public opinion polls that I have seen on Israeli views with regard to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict show a significant percentage of the population more conciliatory toward Palestinians than their government.

I also think your statement overlooked other more important interest groups in the US with respect to maintaining the massive US aid to Israel in the face of whatever actions Israel decides to take.

The US military industrial complex gains enormously from the continued violence surrounding Israel. First the US government buys weapons and just gives them to Israel. It is hard to beat a deal like that if you are a military equipment supplier, but better yet for the military suppliers surrounding countries negotiate the right to buy the same kind of weapons that are given to the Israelis. And there are still more benefits of the continuing conflict for the US military equipment suppliers. Israel will, at times, deal with countries that the US doesn't openly trade weapons to thereby expanding still further the market for American weapons.

Another interest group which is more important in the US with respect to a continuation of US Mideast policies are the evangelical denominations. Almost every day on my television I skip past one holy roller or another extolling the righteousness of the Israelis in their fights against the evil Arabs.

My own cut at this is the most important step toward Palestinian/Israeli peace is for the Israelis to begin to disengage themselves from the American influence over them. The American political interests that control the American influence IMHO, are driven more by corruption and religious zeal than any interest in the benefit of Israelis. But it will not be easy for the Israelis to step away from their American benefactors. On an Israeli per capita basis, I think it is likely that never in the history of the world has one country transferred such massive aid to another. This kind of aid buys enormous influence and right now that influence serves to maintain the status quo with respect to this conflict.
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
There will never....ever...be peace..as long as Jews are unwilling to admit to their own mistakes and extremism when it comes to the Middle East. There will also never...ever..be peace...as long as Arabs are unwilling to compromise, admit to terrrorist acts, and continue to lie about Jewish historical and religous connections to the land. Both sides are going to have to take some heavy doses of humility pills.
Click to expand...

What part of the fighting between the Lebanese Army and militants in Lebanon should the Jews admit too?
 
davefoc said:
But it will not be easy for the Israelis to step away from their American benefactors. On an Israeli per capita basis, I think it is likely that never in the history of the world has one country transferred such massive aid to another. This kind of aid buys enormous influence and right now that influence serves to maintain the status quo with respect to this conflict.
Click to expand...
Ya think? When it's to the tune of 3-10 bilion dollars per year in aid and forgiven loans (pick your source and which axe is being ground, the numbers vary) it is freaking hard to break that dollar addiction, which is as insidious as any drug or petroleum addiction in America.

DR
 
A-U-P ----- those palestinian-arabs were born in Lebanon, they didn't "come from" anywhere else. The actual number of refugees from 60 years ago was relatively miniscule, and those original tens of thousands were denied being absorbed naturally into Lebanese society (a society which was not foreign in any way to them, with the same food, same language, same dress, same religion, same landscape as palestine ---- wait, uh, actually, it all WAS part of historical palestine, up until the Sykes-Picot Lines and the San Remo Accords).

Why, exactly, would the Lebanese-Palestinians (Lebanon was a historical part of Palestine, c'mon be honest, a_u_p) be happy to see their brethren/cousins be deported to the West Bank and Gaza??
 
webfusion said:
A-U-P ----- those palestinian-arabs were born in Lebanon, they didn't "come from" anywhere else. The actual number of refugees from 60 years ago was relatively miniscule, and those original tens of thousands were denied being absorbed naturally into Lebanese society (a society which was not foreign in any way to them, with the same food, same language, same dress, same religion, same landscape as palestine ---- wait, uh, actually, it all WAS part of historical palestine, up until the Sykes-Picot Lines and the San Remo Accords).

Why, exactly, would the Lebanese-Palestinians (Lebanon was a historical part of Palestine, c'mon be honest, a_u_p) be happy to see their brethren/cousins be deported to the West Bank and Gaza??
Click to expand...
what are these people thinking? That they have some sort of case to return to thier land of origin....even the ones not born there? I can fully understand how Israelis like yourself can't comprehend people feeling that way.
 
The Fool, here's a question ---- how many of these so-called palestinian people fleeing those 'camps' (housing projects) have come forward into the media spotlight and said:

"OK, I want to go to Israel right now. I want to become an Israeli-palestinian citizen, by Right of Return" ???

Have you heard such a thing being proposed?
 
Occupation by Israel of territories that don't belong to Israel -per U.N.- when was that solved?
Click to expand...

Per UN? Where? When? I must have missed that binding and lawful declaration that defines these areas you're referring to. Please provide the cite...



Once this is solved by a retreat, talk.
Click to expand...


It will be solved only by peaceful and normal means at a negotiating table, with maps and satellite photos. Israel has retreated unilaterally far enough for now, and in the opinion of nearly 1/2 of the public, the time may not be too far off where we send in the IDF to restore law and order to Gaza.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/867304.html
 
At least 25 percent of the structures built by Israelis in the West Bank's Area C (full Israeli control) were constructed on private Arab-owned land, an internal report by the Civil Administration found.

According to the report, only 0.5 percent of the illegal structures were constructed on land registered to Jewish owners.

0.gif
0.gif
Advertisement
The data also indicate that Israel is practicing a discriminatory policy: It is more lenient on illegal construction by Jews than by Palestinians.

Although the Jewish population in the area is four times bigger than the Arab population, the authorities have demolished triple the number of Palestinian structures compared to Jewish structures.
Click to expand...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/867033.html

Pretty well clears up that point.
 
webfusion said:
The Fool, here's a question ---- how many of these so-called palestinian people fleeing those 'camps' (housing projects) have come forward into the media spotlight and said:

"OK, I want to go to Israel right now. I want to become an Israeli-palestinian citizen, by Right of Return" ???

Have you heard such a thing being proposed?
Click to expand...
How about so-called Israelis (just thought I'd join you in the "so called" game) list all the things the so-called palestinians would be required to do or say or pledge or whatever and make them an offer? Until then its pure speculation what any rate of takeup would be.

Discrimination on the basis of religion is not a good thing, even when it is done by good people.
 
DR appears to be on-target as usual: My using "cite" as a noun is odd. But I meant cite, as in provide the source/origin/citation of the claim that Israel is failing to honor the UN ----

Occupation by Israel of territories that don't belong to Israel -per U.N.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to see which "occupation" is being referred to here.
Normally, this overall discussion revolves around the 1967 UNSCR 242.

Now, Ion clarified that he meant to go all the way back to UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (passed in November 1947, actually)
You ignore the borders that U.N. gave to Israel in 1948. says Ion.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm

There's the citation. Spelled out in full -----
Part II, Paragraphs A and B
Part III, Paragraphs A, B C, D

OK, my understanding has now advanced considerably since my last participation in the thread several days ago.

Ion is indicating that Israel occupies lands (as an aggressor), which are not part of the 1947 Partition Plan for an Arab and Jewish Shared State.
He's not talking about the 1967 "occupation" at all, and isn't concerned with Gaza and the West Bank. No, indeed.
Ion wants us to focus first and foremost on Paragraph B of this toilet-paper 1947 document:
  • The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier (as defined by Sykes-Picot in 1916 - webfusion) and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Trans-jordan. It includes the whole of the Huleh Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beit She'an Sub-District, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State (see Paragraph A). The Jewish section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat El-Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza Sub-District and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

    The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba Sub-District, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza Sub-District, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron Sub-District boundary line to 'Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.


A tremendous plan. Bravo.
Let's all work for the immediate reversal of Israeli-occupied lands to those boundaries and spare no amount of effort to get Israel to dismantle their Armed Forces, stop those illegal aggressions originating from 1947, and make things "right" in that part of the world.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

BTW, Azure is correct, I'm living in the USA, not Israel, currently (although I hold Israeli citizenship and am still registered in the IDF reserves).
 
Ion said:
Any supporter of a country's expansion is an aggressor.
Click to expand...

So anyone who supported the admission of New Foundland into Canada is an aggressor? Or anyone who supported the unification of Glarus and Switzerland? Or Scotland and England? Or the Alaskan Purchase? Were all the supporters of the United Arab Republic aggressors?

Are the Dutch aggressors for building new polders?
 
Last edited:
gtc said:
Are the Dutch aggressors for building new polders?
Click to expand...
Dutch bastages, trying to take over the world with their insane expansionist ideas... I knew they were trouble when they said they had no more territorial claims on the European continent. They're going to try to fill up the Atlantic Ocean and claim it's all Dutch soil. The time to stop them is now.
 
Ion said:
Any supporter of a country's expansion is an aggressor.
Click to expand...

What does one get called for supporting the reduction of the territory of a country?

(which would actually include the majority of citizens of Israel, who routinely answer opinion polls in favor of relinquishing territory for the establishment of a demilitarized, non-threatening, normalized-relations peaceful Palestinian State in 100% of Gaza and 90% of the West Bank).

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/palaestina_1849.jpg
MAP of Historical Palestine --- Includes Lebanon, Southern Syria, Hejaz (western Jordan)

MAP of the entire 'San Remo' definition of Palestine --- (Based on the Sykes-Picot lines)
http://www.mideastweb.org/sanremo_palestine_1.gif

MAP of territory of Israel -- 1956 (includes Gaza, Sinai)
http://www.ahavat-israel.com/eretz/eimages/1956map.jpg
A United Nations decision to station a UN Emergency Force (UNEF) along the Egypt-Israel border and Egyptian assurances of free navigation in the Gulf of Eilat led Israel to agree to withdraw in stages (November 1956 - March 1957) from the areas taken a few weeks earlier.

MAP of territory of Israel -- 1967 (includes Gaza, Sinai, Golan, Judaea & Samaria)
http://www.ahavat-israel.com/eretz/eimages/1967map.jpg

Proposed (Barak) MAP of territory of Israel (excludes Gaza, Sinai and large portions of Judaea and Samaria, leaving 97% of this section of disputed land under autonomous control of the Palestinian Authority).
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f301/shergald/sharon-map.jpg


Pick a map, any map.
I can say that the claim of "expansionist" Israel would not be provable with critical thinkers' logic. Maybe in this Alternate Universe of ION, Israel is continually expanding and taking more and more land, but here on Earth, either using sophisticated satellite imaging, or just lines drawn on bits of paper to show boundaries, it appears that Israel is in flux, (even reducing its territory in various directions) while trying to satisfy the demands of a world which, quite honestly, has proven to embrace the concept throughout history that it would be OK if the jews just disappear altogether (in other words, 'expanding' in the direction of the Null Set).
 
gtc said:
So anyone who supported the admission of New Foundland into Canada is an aggressor? Or anyone who supported the unification of Glarus and Switzerland? Or Scotland and England? Or the Alaskan Purchase? Were all the supporters of the United Arab Republic aggressors?
...
Click to expand...
Yes.
gtc said:
...
Are the Dutch aggressors for building new polders?
Click to expand...
No.

They don't do it at the expense of other humans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom