General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[bigjelmapro]

I take it that is what you meant? The Ottoman Empire, of course.

So now Pan-Arabism/Arab nationalism is interchangeable with Palestinian self-determination?

Nice attempt at moving the goal posts there.

Vagueness won't help you here. The cherry-picking on the rest continues...

 

[WildCat]

One man's immigrant is another man's invader. "Australia Day" is often referred to as "Invasion Day" by Australian Aboriginals.

Did the Aboriginals sell their land to the British?

 

[Mycroft]

One man's immigrant is another man's invader. "Australia Day" is often referred to as "Invasion Day" by Australian Aboriginals.

So if I start shooting Mexicans moving into my state you will understand and support my efforts?

Wow, that would be disgusting.

 

[Mycroft]

On why many liberals continue to ignore explicit anti-Semitism in the Palestinian media

I once asked a highly respected academic, and colleague, why so many (but, to be clear, not all) progressive Western anti-racists, who are committed to a two-state solution, often ignore evidence of Palestinian hate and incitement which is routinely propagated in Mosques, by government officials, in state-controlled media, and popular culture.

My colleague’s answer was quite interesting.

He thought that many liberals would view the dissemination of such information (news about Palestinian anti-Semitic incitement) as an impediment to peace, insofar as such news would damage the trust Israelis need to make strategically risky concessions necessary to achieve a final status agreement.

full article:

http://cifwatch.com/2011/06/19/on-w...licit-anti-semitism-in-the-palestinian-media/

I've run across similar attitudes in these forums before, the belief that acknowledging Palestinian intransigence is assumed to be pushing for continued conflict, where I would say recognizing a problem is the first step to dealing with it.

Other opinions?

 

[a_unique_person]

Did the Aboriginals sell their land to the British?

Another gish gallop. Australia Day is Invasion Day. The concept is not too hard to understand. There were some supposed sales of land, such as the founding of Melbourne. The aboriginals had no concept of ownership of land. You could not sell it, you could not buy it, although the British did.

Are you saying that if I move to the USA, buy some land, then I am entitled to set up a new sovereign state not just on the land I bought, but on the land around that area too?

 

[WildCat]

Another gish gallop. Australia Day is Invasion Day.

What day did the Jews invade Israel?

Are you saying that if I move to the USA, buy some land, then I am entitled to set up a new sovereign state not just on the land I bought,

If the USA says you can, sure.

but on the land around that area too?

Is that how it happened? Israel just decided one day to have a war with Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, et al in order to steal land?

And another question: Would you support Americans shooting Mexican immigrants to prevent an "invasion", as you define it?

 

[Virus]

"One man's immigrant is another man's invader."

Classic.

 

[The Fool]

Rabinical court order dog stoned to death.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...death-by-stoning/story-e6frev00-1226077492084


"the large dog made its way into the Monetary Affairs Court in the ultra-Orthodox Jewish neighbourhood of Mea Shearim in Jerusalem, frightening judges and plaintiffs.

Despite attempts to drive the dog out of the court, the hound refused to leave the premises.

One of the sitting judges then recalled a curse the court had passed down upon a secular lawyer who had insulted the judges two decades previously.

Their preferred divine retribution was for the lawyer's spirit to move into the body of a dog, an animal considered impure by traditional Judaism.

Clearly still offended, one of the judges sentenced the animal to death by stoning by local children.

The canine target, however, managed to escape.


please tell me this judge doesn't believe that the spirit of a secular lawyer the court "cursed" 20 years ago is running around wild and free in the Body of this dog.

 

[Koltopi]

Thank you. I hope we see more of your participation in these discussions.

thanks

full article:

I've run across similar attitudes in these forums before, the belief that acknowledging Palestinian intransigence is assumed to be pushing for continued conflict, where I would say recognizing a problem is the first step to dealing with it.

Other opinions?

So basically they'd (prog. liberals) have to recognize that israel is right for not making any further concessions. Making concessions relying on blind hope when all facts suggest otherwise is utter idiocy.
Recognizing this problem is indeed essecial, but it adds up to a list of facts that completely shreds the rationality of thier view of things.
For example, the Gaza disengagement and following events,
the camp david / taba negociations,
that nobody talked about a palestinian state pre 1967,
the prosperity of the palestinians from 67 till the first intifada,
any comparison to similar events in the world to avoid double standards,
and so on..

Acknowledging this would force them to agree with the israeli mainstream agenda, this creates a cognitive desonance, they simply have to identify with who they conceive of as weak.
They tend to identify more with the criminal rather than the cop,
when smaller sized kid bullies a fat kid and the fat retaliates - they identify more with the bully.
In this case the palestinians are deemed to be opressed, thus they identify with them to the point that even terrorism is justified.
I apply some Inclusion here, obviously many don't go this far in thier thinking, but In my opinion its definitely a gravitational force behind the left's views.

One can also see the same things in the clash of civilizations today in the west, feminists turn a blind eye to honor killings, gays ignore the sharia law implications, free of speech granted to one side only, no-go zones in the UK. All is valid so they can side with the oppressed.

 

[Mycroft]

thanks



So basically they'd (prog. liberals) have to recognize that israel is right for not making any further concessions. Making concessions relying on blind hope when all facts suggest otherwise is utter idiocy.
Recognizing this problem is indeed essecial, but it adds up to a list of facts that completely shreds the rationality of thier view of things.
For example, the Gaza disengagement and following events,
the camp david / taba negociations,
that nobody talked about a palestinian state pre 1967,
the prosperity of the palestinians from 67 till the first intifada,
any comparison to similar events in the world to avoid double standards,
and so on..

Acknowledging this would force them to agree with the israeli mainstream agenda, this creates a cognitive desonance, they simply have to identify with who they conceive of as weak.
They tend to identify more with the criminal rather than the cop,
when smaller sized kid bullies a fat kid and the fat retaliates - they identify more with the bully.
In this case the palestinians are deemed to be opressed, thus they identify with them to the point that even terrorism is justified.
I apply some Inclusion here, obviously many don't go this far in thier thinking, but In my opinion its definitely a gravitational force behind the left's views.

One can also see the same things in the clash of civilizations today in the west, feminists turn a blind eye to honor killings, gays ignore the sharia law implications, free of speech granted to one side only, no-go zones in the UK. All is valid so they can side with the oppressed.

Wow, you don't pull punches, do you?

 

[Mycroft]

Another gish gallop. Australia Day is Invasion Day. The concept is not too hard to understand. There were some supposed sales of land, such as the founding of Melbourne. The aboriginals had no concept of ownership of land. You could not sell it, you could not buy it, although the British did.

Arabs, on the other hand, understood the concept of land ownership perfectly well because it is just as much a part of their culture as it was Europeans. So trying to portray Arab culture to be like that of the aboriginal Australians is at very best dishonest.

 

[Mycroft]

please tell me this judge doesn't believe that the spirit of a secular lawyer the court "cursed" 20 years ago is running around wild and free in the Body of this dog.

According to this, the story is not true.

http://lifeinisrael.blogspot.com/2011/06/maariv-apologizes-about-misleading.html

Maariv Apologizes About Misleading Headline Regarding Stoning Of Dog Story
Remember the story of the dog that appeared at the gates of the beis din in mea Shearim? They could not chase it away, and supposedly had decided it was a gilgul of someone who had shamed the dayanim many years earlier. they supposedly had kids stone it and chase it away.

The story raised a ruckus at the time, and the organization against cruelty to animals even filed a complaint against the beis din, all the while the head of the beis din denied the allegations.

Today, the Maariv newspaper ran a "clarification" and apology about that story, saying the rav had said there is no basis for abusing the dog, not halachically and not logically. The rav had also said that city hall had sent their dog catcher to collect the dog from the premises of the beis din. The newspaper apologizes for the misleading headlines from when it was reported.

The newspaper rarely gets the details of stories accurately, and it might generate interesting discussion, it is not worth condemning or attacking anybody just based on an inaccurate newspaper article.

I guess it was picked up uncritically because it conforms to many peoples preconceptions.

 

[The Fool]

According to this, the story is not true.

http://lifeinisrael.blogspot.com/2011/06/maariv-apologizes-about-misleading.html





I guess it was picked up uncritically because it conforms to many peoples preconceptions.

according to a blog its not true......wouldn't be surprised because its one bizzare story. But your blog only seems to say that some newspaper apologized for a headline. The Maariv newspaper...was it the source? Its not sited by Ynet as far as I can see and they also reported that Yediot Aharonot got confirmation...



does the story confirm the preconceptions of Ynet who reported it. Or does it confirm the preconceptions of Yediot Aharonot.....or....does the blog you cite confirm yours?

 

[Mycroft]

according to a blog its not true......wouldn't be surprised because its one bizzare story. But your blog only seems to say that some newspaper apologized for a headline. The Maariv newspaper...was it the source? Its not sited by Ynet as far as I can see and they also reported that Yediot Aharonot got confirmation...

So you've looked for and found reasons to continue believing the story.


http://hurryupharry.org/2011/06/19/the-dog-that-didnt-die/

 

[a_unique_person]

So now Pan-Arabism/Arab nationalism is interchangeable with Palestinian self-determination?

Nice attempt at moving the goal posts there.

Vagueness won't help you here. The cherry-picking on the rest continues...

Are you saying that Palestinians never had aims for self determination during the time of the Ottoman Empire or British rule?

 

[Skeptic]

So if I start shooting Mexicans moving into my state you will understand and support my efforts?

Wow, that would be disgusting.

I don't see why not. That's what the Australian Whites did to the natives, didn't they?

 

[bigjelmapro]

Are you saying that Palestinians never had aims for self determination during the time of the Ottoman Empire or British rule?

Where were the calls by Palestinian Arabs for self-determination under the Ottoman period?

I do quite enjoy you trying to shift the burden of proof my way by these questions, but you made the claim.

Also answer the rest: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7289584&postcount=4593

And answer Mycroft's rebuttal to your claim that there wasn't rampant anti-semitism prior to Israel's (re-)establishment. And rebut your claim that a demographic war would cease to exist even with a two-state solution even with PA/PLO/etc. practices and polls pointing to the contrary.

Over to you...

 

[The Fool]

So you've looked for and found reasons to continue believing the story.


http://hurryupharry.org/2011/06/19/the-dog-that-didnt-die/

and you appear to have found another blog repeating the story of your first blog. No links in there to anything they claim.

Trying to find ma'arev and apparently it no longer has an english language website. I looked at the Hebrew site and can't see anything that looks like the apology your blogs talk about. Maybe a Hebrew speaker can find a link to the courts statement and the retraction.

I concede that it a crazy story....but Ynet doesn't even seem to mention this newspaper as the source.

You seem to find blogs with no links repeating each others stories quite persuasive.

 

[The Fool]

Where were the calls by Palestinian Arabs for self-determination under the Ottoman period?

I do quite enjoy you trying to shift the burden of proof my way by these questions, but you made the claim.

Also answer the rest: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7289584&postcount=4593

And answer Mycroft's rebuttal to your claim that there wasn't rampant anti-semitism prior to Israel's (re-)establishment. And rebut your claim that a demographic war would cease to exist even with a two-state solution even with PA/PLO/etc. practices and polls pointing to the contrary.

Over to you...

so you have chopped the question in half? and then said "over to you"? well, how about over to you to address the question....rather than a trimmed version of it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian-Palestinian_Congress

this would be during the British period??

 

[WildCat]

Are you saying that Palestinians never had aims for self determination during the time of the Ottoman Empire or British rule?

Hey a_u_p, on what day did the Jews invade Israel?

Can Americans shoot Mexicans to prevent an "invasion"?

Can the French shoot North African Muslim immigrants to likewise resist the "invasion"?

Can members of the English Defense League shoot Muslims to "resist the invasion"?

Or are Palestinians the only group who can shoot immigrants, and then only if they're Jews?