The Creation of Israel Violated the Palestinian Right to Self-Determination

ahhell said:
Dude, calm down, the splitters thing is a reference to Monty Python's the Life of Brian and the fact that the Samaritans and Jews split over where the proper place for the temple is and who could be a priest. Thing is, the Samaritans never left the levant, the Jews on the other hand, at least their leadership were removed to babylon. How would those Yawhehists know where the original and proper location of the temple is any more than the folks that never left.

From the Wiki you claim says there was no temple at Mount Gerizim.


There has been a temple there for millennia.

As to the highlighted bit, that is literally the biggest difference between the Jews and the Samaritans.

en.wikipedia.org

Samaritans - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
www.britannica.com

Samaritan | Definition, Religion, & Bible | Britannica

Samaritan, member of a community, now nearly extinct, that claims to be related by blood to those Israelites of ancient Samaria who were not deported by the Assyrian conquerors of the kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE. The community numbers about 800 individuals.
www.britannica.com www.britannica.com

The Rabbis claim the Samaritans came from Mesopotamia during the Assyrian exile, the Samaritans claim they were natives that weren't conquered and exiled by the Assyrians. If the Samaritans are correct then they are more likely the legitimate form of Yahweh worship.
Click to expand...
 
The temple was obviously in Jerusalem, why else is the Temple Mount and the Dome of the Rock there? For ◊◊◊◊◊ n giggles? Even the Samaritans dont believe the 1st Temple was at Mt Gerizim.

To deny the holyness of Jerusalem to the Jews is disgusting. Historical revisionism. And downright ignorant.
 
Sure the Samaritans don't claim the Temple was located at Mount Gerizim, they just claim its the holy mountain of the Torah and there isn't any need for a Temple. I think the evidence supports the claim that the Samaritans Torah, form of worship, and Mt Gerizim being the original holy site of the Torah are probably correct. Unlike the Jews they never had an exile in Babylon, so are more likely to have maintained the religious and cultural traditions that existed prior to the exile.

All that being said, who cares, it's not like 2500 religious traditions should have any bearing on who gets to live in or govern any area. Well, I care, because its an interesting bit of historical trivia that I doubt most folks are aware of. Sure, Christians all know the parable of the good Samaritan but how many actually know what a Samaritan is or that they still exist.
 
ahhell said:
Sure the Samaritans don't claim the Temple was located at Mount Gerizim, they just claim its the holy mountain of the Torah and there isn't any need for a Temple. I think the evidence supports the claim that the Samaritans Torah, form of worship, and Mt Gerizim being the original holy site of the Torah are probably correct. Unlike the Jews they never had an exile in Babylon, so are more likely to have maintained the religious and cultural traditions that existed prior to the exile.

All that being said, who cares, it's not like 2500 religious traditions should have any bearing on who gets to live in or govern any area. Well, I care, because its an interesting bit of historical trivia that I doubt most folks are aware of. Sure, Christians all know the parable of the good Samaritan but how many actually know what a Samaritan is or that they still exist.
Click to expand...
The Jews AND Muslims believe the holy site of Abraham's sacrifice is under the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Maybe 500 people believe otherwise. So yeah, 1 billion vs 500.
 
Hercules56 said:
The Jews AND Muslims believe the holy site of Abraham's sacrifice is under the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Maybe 500 people believe otherwise. So yeah, 1 billion vs 500.
Click to expand...
I am not sure historical facts are determined by popular vote.
Jerusalem is never explicitly mentioned in the Pentateuch and thus the Jewish identification of Jerusalem as the chosen place is created only through texts outside the Pentateuch, most prominently 1 Kings 8:16 // 2 Chronicles 6:5: ... Therefore, the Jewish identification of Jerusalem as the holy center of Israel is achieved only through paratexts to the Torah, even if later Jewish exegesis and theology further strengthened and elaborated this link. ...The Samaritan identification of Mount Garizim as the chosen place, on the other hand, is present in the Pentateuch, most prominently in its Samaritan version. Thus, within the Samaritan Pentateuch, the election of Mount Garizim as the holy center of Israel is part and parcel of the Torah itself, as opposed to the Jewish text. And on the basis of the narrative of the Pentateuch, as contained in the Samaritan version, the divine order to establish the center of Israel’s worship on Mount Garizim is part of the laws revealed on Mount Sinai...From a Samaritan perspective, Abraham’s altar was neither in Jerusalem nor in Mekka, as the Islamic tradition has it (cf. Sura 3:96–97), but on Mount Garizim. Therefore, Abraham’s words as recorded in the Qur’an can only relate to Mount Garizim...The central claim of Samaritan identity, as opposed to Judaism and Islam, can be corroborated from Qur’anic sources
Click to expand...

So I would go with the view of YHWH! Unfortunately both Jews and Muslims have been misled.
www.ias.edu

Is a qibla a qibla? Samaritan Traditions About Mount Garizim in Contact and Contention

The emergence of Judaism is closely intertwined with the emergence of Samaritanism. Both are heirs of ancient Israelite traditions, and the predecessors of both shared the same religious and literary culture.
www.ias.edu www.ias.edu
 
Planigale said:
I am not sure historical facts are determined by popular vote.


So I would go with the view of YHWH! Unfortunately both Jews and Muslims have been misled.
www.ias.edu

Is a qibla a qibla? Samaritan Traditions About Mount Garizim in Contact and Contention

The emergence of Judaism is closely intertwined with the emergence of Samaritanism. Both are heirs of ancient Israelite traditions, and the predecessors of both shared the same religious and literary culture.
www.ias.edu www.ias.edu
Click to expand...
All the historical and archaeological evidence points to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem being the site of both Jewish temples. Please stop playing games with your stupid and offensive "Temple Denial".
 
Hercules56 said:
All the historical and archaeological evidence points to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem being the site of both Jewish temples. Please stop playing games with your stupid and offensive "Temple Denial".
Click to expand...
If that's what I said to begin with, I was wrong. The Samaritans don't claim that Mt Gerizim is the site of the Temple of David, just the original holy site of Yahweh. History, archeology, and genetics show that to be a strong possibility. This isn't temple denial at all. Almost nobody who isn't a Palestinian Muslim denies the Jewish presence in the levant for the last 2500+ years.

I think it is silly to deny possibility that the Samaritans may be right, I think likely so, but I admit that is debatabe, being about events from 2500+ years ago with only highly biased sources. The fact that the Samaritans were never exiled suggests that the Samaritan version of Yahwism is likely closer to the form that existed prior to the schism between Samaritans and Jews though.

Even if the Temple of David was built on the Temple Mount, that says nothing about where the original holy site of Yahweh and Abrahams altar was.
 
ahhell said:
If that's what I said to begin with, I was wrong. The Samaritans don't claim that Mt Gerizim is the site of the Temple of David, just the original holy site of Yahweh. History, archeology, and genetics show that to be a strong possibility. This isn't temple denial at all. Almost nobody who isn't a Palestinian Muslim denies the Jewish presence in the levant for the last 2500+ years.

I think it is silly to deny possibility that the Samaritans may be right, I think likely so, but I admit that is debatabe, being about events from 2500+ years ago with only highly biased sources. The fact that the Samaritans were never exiled suggests that the Samaritan version of Yahwism is likely closer to the form that existed prior to the schism between Samaritans and Jews though.

Even if the Temple of David was built on the Temple Mount, that says nothing about where the original holy site of Yahweh and Abrahams altar was.
Click to expand...
No logical reason to think the Samaritans are right and the Jews, Muslims and Christians are wrong.

Both temples were in Jerusalem, this is not disputed except by Muslim bigots who know nothing of history.
 
Hercules56 said:
No logical reason to think the Samaritans are right and the Jews, Muslims and Christians are wrong.

Both temples were in Jerusalem, this is not disputed except by Muslim bigots who know nothing of history.
Click to expand...
Sure there is, First, we can rule out the Christian and Muslim opinion on this all together as they just inherited their ideas on the matter from Judaism.

So that leaves the competing stories by the Samaritans and the Jews.

The historical consensus is:
The Israelites practiced the ancient Canaanite polytheistic religion, the same religion as just about everyone else in the Levant. Lots of those Canaanite city states had patron dieties that they worshiped a bit more than the other. Eventually Israel and Judah, who's patron was Yahweh, took that to the extreme of monolatry and finally monotheism. At some point between 3000 and about 2500 years ago the Samaritans and Jews disagreed over where the center of worship of Yahweh should be.

With that story alone there would be no reason to think that either was more likely to be correct. The thing is, most of the Jewish leadership was exiled to Babylon around 600BC but the Samaritan leadership was not. The Samaritans did not have same discontinuity in their relgious practice that the Jews had. Which would make it more likely that they retained more aspects of the original Yahwist monotheistic traditions intact.

Also:
en.wikipedia.org

Samaritan Pentateuch - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
In 1946, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, which include the oldest known versions of the Torah. In Deuteronomy 27:4–7, the Dead Sea scroll fragments bring "Gerizim" instead of "Ebal", indicating that the Samaritan version was likely the original reading.
Click to expand...

Also, there is no direct evidence that the first temple actually existed. Scholarly consensus is that it did but there's less evidence outside the bible for the first temple than there is for Jesus. But for the record, I'm not arguing that the Jews didn't build a Temple on the Temple mount more than 2500 years ago, I'm arguing they built it in the wrong place.
 
ahhell said:
...Also, there is no direct evidence that the first temple actually existed. Scholarly consensus is that it did but there's less evidence outside the bible for the first temple than there is for Jesus. But for the record, I'm not arguing that the Jews didn't build a Temple on the Temple mount more than 2500 years ago, I'm arguing they built it in the wrong place.
Click to expand...
The only basis for your claim that the Jews built the 1st and 2nd temple in the "wrong" place, is that the Samaritans never went into exile. So they should know better.

Got anything else?
 
Hercules56 said:
The only basis for your claim that the Jews built the 1st and 2nd temple in the "wrong" place, is that the Samaritans never went into exile. So they should know better.

Got anything else?
Click to expand...
That's enough to give it at least 51% to the Samaritans but:
ahhell said:
Also:
en.wikipedia.org

Samaritan Pentateuch - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
The oldest known version of the Torah found with the Dead Sea Scrolls matches the Samaritan story which is that they were commanded to build an altar on Mount Gerizim not the Jewish version.

ETA: Now, slightly different Holy site than the Temple Mount. According to the Samaritans, God commanded the Israelites to build an alter on Mount Gerizim and later Commanded Isaac to be sacrificed at mount Gerizim. The Jews say, God commanded the Israelites to build an alter on Mount Ebal and later commanded Isaac to be sacrifice at the temple mount. Regardless, the Samarian Torah seems to be closer to the oldest known written versions of the Torah than the Jewish Torah.
 
Last edited:
ahhell said:
That's enough to give it at least 51% to the Samaritans but:

The oldest known version of the Torah found with the Dead Sea Scrolls matches the Samaritan story which is that they were commanded to build an altar on Mount Gerizim not the Jewish version.
Click to expand...
Cool.

en.wikipedia.org

Moriah - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Regardless, the two temples of Israel and Judea were built in Jerusalem, not Mt Gerizim. Only idiots and bigots like Arafat and other Islamists think that the first Solomon Temple was at Mount Gerizim.

I can think of no honest reason why the Jews would build the second temple miles and miles away from where the first temple stood.

en.wikipedia.org

Temple denial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
Because they didn't actually know were the first was when they came back from exile, or they built it in the wrong place to begin with, or the Jews built a temple on the Temple mount and the Samaritans built one on Mount Gerizim at roughly the same time then began fighting about which was the authentic one.

To be clear, the current Samaritan take is that there shouldn't be a Temple at all, so the mistake the Jews made 3000 years ago was building the Temple in the first place. Well, after the Jews started worshiping Yahweh on the wrong mountain that is. So, the second mistake they made was building a temple.
 
ahhell said:
Because they didn't actually know were the first was when they came back from exile, or they built it in the wrong place to begin with, or the Jews built a temple on the Temple mount and the Samaritans built one on Mount Gerizim at roughly the same time then began fighting about which was the authentic one.

To be clear, the current Samaritan take is that there shouldn't be a Temple at all, so the mistake the Jews made 3000 years ago was building the Temple in the first place. Well, after the Jews started worshiping Yahweh on the wrong mountain that is. So, the second mistake they made was building a temple.
Click to expand...

You must think the Jews are pretty stupid to have built the second temple in literally the wrong City.

Why do you think they chose Jerusalem rather than the correct City?
 
You must think the Samaritans are pretty stupid then, why do you think they think they shouldn't build a temple on Mount Gerezim instead of Jerusalem?

I gave a list of possibilities for why either the first or second temple might have been built in the wrong spot. But I'll go with the first was correct and the second was wrong. The Temple was destroyed and the Israelite literati were held in exile for 50ish years. How can you guarantee that a generation or two later the returnees knew where the original holy site was?

Could also be that before the exile there were dozens of similarly equivalent holy sites and when they came back they insisted on the one and only the Samaritans resisted the change. Could be a million reasons, it was a society with 1% literacy 2500 years ago.

ETA: Could have just been a spelling error. The difference between the Torahs appears to be two very similar words. Grandpa tells you he's from Vicksville in middle of nowhweresvania. You get there and find Vikesville and Fickville, who knows.
 
Last edited:
Most historians agree that the first and second temples were in Jerusalem. That is good enough for me.

There is definitely more evidence that the second temple was in Jerusalem, than Muhammad taking his night journey from Jerusalem and going to heaven and hanging out with Moses.
 
We KNOW for 100% fact, that the 2nd Jewish Temple was at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Even the Muslims acknowledged this until the conflict with Israel began.

The 1st temple? Probably around the same place. But we KNOW for a fact the 2nd was there.

Did Muhammed's miraculous Night Journey to heaven take place there with the magic donkey? Its doubtful.
 
Hercules56 said:
Disagree. Judaism developed in Judea/Israel. They built their holy temple in Jerusalem where they believe Abraham made his sacrifice to God. Muslims accept this claim and the Dome of the Rock is centered over the Holy of Holies where Abraham did his thing. The Jewish prophets are buried all over the land, especially in Hebron where the last remaining Herodian structure remains basically intact.
Click to expand...
That is completely irrelevant. It has no relation to the legal status of peoples inhabiting the land in a continuous manner extending to contemporary history. That is what is required to be legally indigenous to a given geography. And that is the beginning, middle and end of that story. Israelis are not indigenous to Palestine, Palestinians are.

Here's a legal scholar clarifying the issue.

The fact remains, as in my original claim: The Israeli claim to Palestinian land violates the Palestinian's fully grounded legal right to self-determination under international law.

There is no Israeli claim to the land of Palestine that is not based on religious canon (and thereby invalid), as you yourself are now forced to recur to it, lacking any other foundation. Epic fail, it's a non-starter. Or do you support ISIS claims to all of the lands under the last Caliphate? Chinese claims to Tibet? Celtic claims to Ankara, Turkey, the city they founded? Let's not be silly.
 
Hercules56 said:
We KNOW for 100% fact, that the 2nd Jewish Temple was at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Even the Muslims acknowledged this until the conflict with Israel began.

The 1st temple? Probably around the same place. But we KNOW for a fact the 2nd was there.

Did Muhammed's miraculous Night Journey to heaven take place there with the magic donkey? Its doubtful.
Click to expand...
I basically agree but none of that has any impact what I've been saying, or really on whether or not Israel has a right to exist.

The Israelite religion was indigenous to the area we now call Israel and Palestine. It is pretty clear that the people who would become jews were never in Egypt as slaves so the whole story of genesis is just myth. If the first temple existed, probably did, it was likely a temple of the polytheistic Canaanite religion for whom Yahweh was merely the chief of god of the Proto-Israelites. So, basically as different a religion from Judaism as Judaism is from Christianity.

Any rate, using the existence of the first and second temples as justification for the modern state of Israel is nonsensical, about as nonsensical as the denial that the Jews didn't originally come form the region around Jerusalem in the first place.
 
ahhell said:
I basically agree but none of that has any impact what I've been saying, or really on whether or not Israel has a right to exist.

The Israelite religion was indigenous to the area we now call Israel and Palestine. It is pretty clear that the people who would become jews were never in Egypt as slaves so the whole story of genesis is just myth. If the first temple existed, probably did, it was likely a temple of the polytheistic Canaanite religion for whom Yahweh was merely the chief of god of the Proto-Israelites. So, basically as different a religion from Judaism as Judaism is from Christianity.

Any rate, using the existence of the first and second temples as justification for the modern state of Israel is nonsensical, about as nonsensical as the denial that the Jews didn't originally come form the region around Jerusalem in the first place.
Click to expand...

The Jews and Jewish culture and religion does originate from the land of Israel, which is somewhat of a justification for building a Jewish State there. But of course it conflicts with the rights of people who had moved into the land and existed in 1948 who were not Jews.

However as I mentioned earlier if the Jews only wanted to build a state in parts of Palestine where it basically nobody existed I don't think anybody would have had an issue with it. Such as if the Jews decided to only build a state for themselves in the Negev desert.

Nobody then and nobody now would really complain about the Jews having a state in the Negev.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
The Jews and Jewish culture and religion does originate from the land of Israel, which is somewhat of a justification for building a Jewish State there. But of course it conflicts with the rights of people who had moved into the land and existed in 1948 who were not Jews.

However as I mentioned earlier if the Jews only wanted to build a state in parts of Palestine where it basically nobody existed I don't think anybody would have had an issue with it. Such as if the Jews decided to only build a state for themselves in the Negev desert.

Nobody then and nobody now would really complain about the Jews having a state in the Negev.
Click to expand...
As stated above, agreed. I would now further add that the definition I gave for indigenous people now extends to later generation Israelis who now have no homeland to return to. Any displacement thereof would be as improper as what is happening to the Palestinians. That said, this does not establish that the land that should pertain to Israelis should be independent or the same size as now.

If a single state solution, then a secular state with majority rule which specifically bars political parties based on religious criteria would be best. Given recent history, however, I doubt that is possible. I would therefore advocate for the original 1948 partition, the right to return of all Palestinians, and full compensation for the lands comprising Israel to Palestine. Too many property deeds have been purposefully destroyed, so those claims that can be shown should be returned, and the entire rest of the land paid for as general compensation to Palestine. This brings property rights up to speed and to coincide with the sovereignty of Israel.

Because Israel would remain a uniquely undemocratic theocracy, strict adherence to the 1948 lines of partition should receive maximum support in terms of peacekeeping forces and limitations on the types of armament anyone in the region may stockpile or deploy. Otherwise, it would be rinse and repeat of the Nakba as soon as anyone relaxes their guard.
 
With respect to the observation that the creation of Israel violated Palestinian rights, and my claim that its justification is solely a religious one, let us hear from those writing about that justification. Of note is the close relation between maternal blood lines and the faith (tribalism).

I Just Discovered I’m Jewish! What do I do now?
Dear Jew,
Funny thing, nobody is ever shocked by the discovery that their mother is Korean. Funny thing, nobody is ever shocked by the discovery that their mother is Inuit.Or Slovakian. Or even Inuit—although that would be pretty interesting. On the other hand, suddenly discovering that you’re Muslim, Bahai or Buddhist is not even a possibility. Those are religions, and if you don’t believe, in what way are you a member? But it happens quite often that someone wakes up one day to discover, hey, I’m Jewish.

So there’s something unique in that. And I suppose that’s really what you’re asking: What’s unique about being a Jew that you can discover you are Jewish, not out of belief or affiliation, choice or inclination, upbringing or community? It's so strange: You can discover you are Jewish just because your mother one day says, “Guess what? I’m Jewish, so you are too.” (Of course, you’ll need some credible evidence that this is for real.) The answer is that we Jews are one big family, all brothers and sisters, all children of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Rachel and Leah. If your mother is Jewish, you’re part of that family. (If it’s your dad, but not your mother, or if it’s your mother’s father, but not her mother, see To the Child of a Jewish Father.)

And you’ll say, “Yes, but all of humanity is one big family.” So I’ll answer that Jews are a family held together with super glue. Divine super glue that lasts forever. We are eternally bonded by an eternal covenant and a common mission that our ancestors accepted at Mount Sinai.
Click to expand...
Divine super glue? Really? Sounds exactly like a self-serving tribal religion. Let us read on:

Almost 4,000 years have passed since Abraham, the first Jew, began to teach the world that G‑d cares for His world and its creatures. Over 3,300 years have passed since Abraham’s children entered into a covenant at Mount Sinai. Since then, the Jewish people have made an immeasurable impact on the way people think about themselves and about our world, igniting the human spark with ideas that were once radical and revolutionary but now are almost universally embraced. For example:
  • the notion of liberty (think Exodus), 1
  • a vision of world peace (think of the U.N. wall with the quotation from Isaiah, “. . . and they will beat their swords into plowshares”),
  • the sanctity of all human life without discrimination, 2
  • the right of the common man to his own property, 3
  • the need to educate every child, 4
  • equal rights for all before the law, 5
  • the supremacy of the law over the monarchy, 6
  • government-mandated social welfare, 7
  • tolerance of the foreigner who does not share your religion, 8
  • . . . and the concept of progress over time—one that leads to a world filled with an awareness of the divine “as water fills the ocean bed”—may that time arrive much sooner than we can imagine. 9
We brought these ideas to the world not by the sword and not by threat of force, but by example and by perseverance through the greatest hardships, so that they seeped through many streams and wellsprings into the beliefs of other peoples, until those peoples came to adopt them as their own.
Click to expand...

To that load of crock, we may now respond, with respect to facts on the ground in Israel/Palestine:
  1. Exodus is fully mythical; it never happened. FALSE.
  2. Discrimination is built in to the idea of a Jewish state. Sanctity claim is FALSE.
  3. The 1950 Absentee Property Law is land theft on a massive scale. Related claim is FALSE.
  4. The need to educate every child is falsified by the chest and head shots on Palestinian children. FALSE.
  5. Equal rights before the law.... Please stop. In the state of Israel, this is FALSE.
  6. Supremacy of [Jewish] law over monarchy [civil rule]. This is TRUE, and is therefore a threat to democratic governance
  7. Government mandated social welfare. FALSE. Gaza is being starved to death.
  8. Tolerance of the foreigner who does not share your religion. OMG, STFU! Not even tourists are safe in your apartheid regime.
  9. Progress over time... Bla, bla. Judaism, as practiced by Israelis, ignores all in favor of the 5 books of Moses. TOTAL BS!
Either Judaism is a sad joke, or Israel is fully apostate. To the latter, many devout Jews say "Indeed!" In either case, it seems clear that a tribal religion is doomed to being a bigoted affair from day one, unless the final claim, that of progress over time, is fundamental to scriptural interpretation, such that later prophets supersede and serve to amend earlier ones; e.g., Isaiah: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

Not even the Jesus myth, one of blood sacrifice, complies with Isaiah. WTF is going on here? My answer: Religious canon is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊; the foundational claims underpinning the entire Zionist enterprise are all made of sand.
 
Pursuant to the above, we have the claims and statements being publicly made by Zionist Israelis. Though some readers may object to YT links, sometimes, as in this instance, it is the easiest way to access something published in Hebrew and then translated. No need to view more than a minute or less to get the gist, no need to agree with the YT author; the statements made by Moshe Feiglin, leader of libertarian Zionist party Zehut, are damning in and of themselves.

Every child is an enemy.*

*Judaism is therefore, and is openly admitted to be, a load of crock by this Zionist whack job.
 
Last edited:

Gaza doctor receives charred bodies of her nine children while on duty​

Paediatrician Alaa al-Najjar was treating victims of Israeli attacks when her children were killed in a strike on their home
www.middleeasteye.net

Gaza doctor grieves her nine children killed in Israeli strike

Paediatrician Alaa al-Najjar was treating victims of Israeli attacks when her children were killed by an Israeli strike on their home
www.middleeasteye.net www.middleeasteye.net
 
Planigale said:

Gaza doctor receives charred bodies of her nine children while on duty​

Paediatrician Alaa al-Najjar was treating victims of Israeli attacks when her children were killed in a strike on their home
www.middleeasteye.net

Gaza doctor grieves her nine children killed in Israeli strike

Paediatrician Alaa al-Najjar was treating victims of Israeli attacks when her children were killed by an Israeli strike on their home
www.middleeasteye.net www.middleeasteye.net
Click to expand...
I posted another story from BBC about this in the other Gaza thread, then noticed this.

I can't even begin to imagine what this is like for her. But I'm sure her life will get back to normal, maybe even better*, webfusion assures her that it will!

* After all, even if there's no one left to treat as a doctor, she can always get a job at Trump Casino Gaza.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to amend my prior support for a return to the original 1948 partition plan, as it was criminally lopsided. For the time, a 70-80% Palestinian portion and 20-30% Israeli portion would have been more appropriate. Given that the land is all Palestine, that would have been, and is, a wonderfully generous offer.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
I'd like to amend my prior support for a return to the original 1948 partition plan, as it was criminally lopsided. For the time, a 70-80% Palestinian portion and 20-30% Israeli portion would have been more appropriate. Given that the land is all Palestine, that would have been, and is, a wonderfully generous offer.
Click to expand...
Who are you negotiating with??
 
There are a number of reports, and the rhetoric of Netanjahu, Gantz and Smotrich seem to support the idea that the Israeli leadership expected the US to force Israel to stop after the month of bombing, and every month after that - Israel never had a plan to stop fighting, now or in the past, expecting and depending on Big Daddy to step in and sort things out. That way the warmongers have an offramp that doesn't hurt their credibility with their base.
Biden just letting them do whatever surprised them more than anyone else, probably.

They are reeling to figure out what to do with all the extra weapons and support and territory that they never expected to get.
 
We have to stop sugarcoating what Israel is doing, and has been doing for decades, in Palestine. It is holocaust plain and simple, the adherents of a German nationalist, far-right and ethno-supremacist ideology entering another gtoup's land and forcibly disposessing and genociding them because they are, to use a phrase, untermenschen. The quicker we acknowledge that what is happening now almost exactly mirrors what happened between 1933 and 1945 and stop it, the better.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
We have to stop sugarcoating what Israel is doing, and has been doing for decades, in Palestine. It is holocaust plain and simple, the adherents of a German nationalist, far-right and ethno-supremacist ideology entering another gtoup's land and forcibly disposessing and genociding them because they are, to use a phrase, untermenschen. The quicker we acknowledge that what is happening now almost exactly mirrors what happened between 1933 and 1945 and stop it, the better.
Click to expand...
I dont know if you can call it a Holocaust.

Yes, Israel kicked out most Arabs and stole lots of their land.

But Israel's Arab population also grew from 200,000 to more than 1.5 million. This is not something that the Nazis would have ever allowed.

Analogy is better to Apartheid and Jim Crow. And the Soviet expulsions.

But in Gaza? Right now? That is a genocide.
 
Israel admits to smuggling weapons into Gaza.
www.israelnationalnews.com

Security official reveals how Israel assisted anti-Hamas clans in Gaza

A security official who took part in the operation revealed that Israel supplied arms, equipment, and money to Gazan elements as part of a secret operation aimed at weakening Hamas.
www.israelnationalnews.com www.israelnationalnews.com
So Israel has been smuggling arms into Gaza, I suspect that many will be diverted to fighting the occupation forces. Palestinians may not support Hamas, but that is very different from supporting a fascist government intent on your extermination.
 
Palestinians will just sell their weapons to Hamas for food.
If Israel wanted to undermine Hamas, it should send supplies to Palestinians it deems friendly.
Instead, they want excuses to continue fighting and blocking aid.
 
Last edited:
The armed groups that were attacking and looting UN and NGO aid convoys and depots. Stealing aid and selling it on the black market, were not Hamas but groups armed and supported by Israel. In part to discredit and intimidate NGOs and their staff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom