Let's talk about Israel

  • Thread starter Thread starter Orangeduck
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 55
  • Views Views 8K
[MOUSE][/MOUSE]Salaam

The problem isn't a theological one it's pretty much one sided affair. According to international law Palestine is east Jerusalem, west bank and gaza. Isreal has zero rights on that land and is violating international law building on west bank when isn't part of isreal.

East Jerusalem isn't isreal so i don't know why even claim it's there land. The real question is why isn't isreal letting Palestine exist?
 
Last edited:
Salaam

The problem isn't a theological one it's pretty much one sided affair. According to international law Palestine is east Jerusalem, west bank and gaza.

Actually, by international law, Palestine is more than that - the entire territory allotted to it in the Partition Plan. Which, apart from the West Bank and Gaza include about the same amount of land inside Israel's pre-1967 borders. East Jerusalem isn't, though, it was decreed to be an international city whose final status was to be determined later by referendum.
 
Salaam,

I personally do not care about international law. It does not make sense to tell other countries what to do...for example:

UN speaker: Iran, you can't build nuclear weapons, in accordance with section bla bla bal of the bla bla bla.

Iran: ahhh shut up.

UN speaker: Israel, stop killing Palestinians.

Israel: we will never listen to anti-semitic, racist holocaust deniers!

See what I mean?
 
International law is a body of law that exists because of international agreements that have established common codes of conduct. It has little to do with the UN.
 
International law is a body of law that exists because of international agreements that have established common codes of conduct. It has little to do with the UN.

Just an example of how pointless they are. It's not practicable. Of course, I'm not aiming here to be factually accurate.
 
Greetings and peace be with you Orangeduck;
Nope, my example works from a legeal standpoint. Nothing I said has been my opinion.

God gave Israel many laws, so how does their scripture say they should treat foreigners living in their land. Although I say the land belongs to the Jews at the moment, their scriptures say that the land belongs to God, their scriptures are also our Old Testament.

Ezekiel 47
21 “You are to distribute this land among yourselves according to the tribes of Israel. 22 You are to allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the foreigners residing among you and who have children. You are to consider them as native-born Israelites; along with you they are to be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. 23 In whatever tribe a foreigner resides, there you are to give them their inheritance,” declares the Sovereign LORD.

Leviticus 24
You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.

Leviticus 19
33 " 'When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. 34 The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

Exodus 12:49
The same law applies to the native-born and to the alien living among you."

Exodus 22:21
"Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt.

Leviticus 19:10
Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.

Now we look at Israel and wonder how they live by their scriptures towards the aliens living in their land.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people.

Eric
 
Greetings and peace be with you truthseeker63; it seems to have been a long journey; but I see you now have Islam as your Religion, I pray your journey in faith will lead you to salvation.

Israel has no right to exist.

Israel has the right to live in peace with its neighbours, but they must also do this with justice and fairness.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people, every blessing.

Eric
 
is it true that palestinians willingly sold land to isrealis before there was ever an isreal? for a lot of money.

..if so you cant entirely blame the west and the jews for the state of the place today..

First, it is true that the Arabs willignly sold land to the immigrant Jews. However, one cannot disregard the fact that the Jews only owned 6-7 percent of Palestine by the time of the partition plan. Also, one must take into account the many Jews who had illegaly immigrated to Palestine.
 
Whats there to talk about? Israel, alongside its masters USA are the worlds number one terrorists, a bunch of land grabbing, mass murderering thugs. The illegal zionist immigrants who live in PALESTINE toay should pack their bags and swan off to whatever gutter they crawled out from, Its as simple as that.
 
From my point of view so called Israel has no moral right to exist. I think the World would be better off if Israel did'nt exist. I do not blame Jews for everything bad that goes on in the world but Jews did start Communism.
 

Myths and Realities about Israel



Myth No. 1: About UN Partition Resolution

The UN voted in 1947 to create the State of Israel in the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. Israel accepted the compromise while the Arabs rejected it.

REALITY:
The 1947 UN resolution is a General Assembly resolution, not a Security Council resolution. The UN General Assembly can only make recommendations. Recommendations have no obligatory character. Member states are free to accept or reject them.
Israel’s apologists are quick to say that Israel accepted this compromise. The Partition Plan granted 52% of Palestine to the Jews who were 30% of the population and owned no more than 6% of the land. This is a net gain on the part of Israel, not a compromise.
Israel’s apologists are quick to claim that the Arabs started the 1948 war. Ben-Gurion himself in Rebirth and Destiny of Israel wrote: “Until the British left, no Jewish settlement, however remote, was entered or seized by the Arabs, while the Haganah, under severe and frequent attack, captured many Arab positions and liberated Tiberias and Haifa, Jaffa and Safad” (p. 530). Israel’s military activity started well before any attack by the Arab armies.
Israel’s apologists are quick to accuse Jordan of occupying and annexing what is now called the West Bank. While not a single Arab soldier entered the area allotted to Israel in the UN resolution, Israel occupied and annexed areas in excess of what was allotted to it in the UN Partition Plan. These areas include, among other areas, the Arab cities of Nazareth, Jaffa, Acre, Lydda and Ramleh. Thus Israel expanded from 52% to 78%.
Moreover, according to the UN Partition Plan, 49% of the population of the Jewish state was supposed to be Arabs. Through a war of ethnic cleansing this percentage was reduced to 12%. The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was the result of a deliberate master plan, code named Plan Dalet.
In light of all the above, it is ludicrous to pretend that Israel accepted UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947.



Myth No. 2: About Annexation
The military occupation of Palestinian territories has never been converted by Israel into an annexation.

REALITY:
Immediately after the 1967 war, the Israeli government issued an order declaring that an area comprising the Old City of Jerusalem and some adjacent territory should be subject to the law, jurisdiction and administration of Israel. Thus Israel expanded municipal East Jerusalem from 6 km2 to 73 km2 of the West Bank. Furthermore, Jewish colonization of East Jerusalem went beyond the extended municipal boundaries to include what Israel calls Greater and Metropolitan Jerusalem comprising 330 km2 and 665 km2, respectively.
The Annexation of the Old City of Jerusalem was carried out under the Law and Administration Ordinance (Amendment No. 11 of June 27, 1967). Not only did Israel annex East Jerusalem but it also feverishly worked toward the judaization of its population by expropriating Arab land to build Jewish settlements.
As for the rest of the occupied territories, the real reason for not annexing them is the racist nature of the Zionist state. The only way for Israel to annex the occupied territories is by cleansing them of their indigenous inhabitants, following the pattern of 1948 (see Myth No. 1 above).
Furthermore, on December 14, 1981, Israel officialy annexed the Golan Heights. The legislation, extending Israeli law to the area of the Golan Heights was adopted by the Knesset by a majority of 63 against 21.



Myth No. 3: Jordan attacked first
Israel in 1967 notified Jordan that it wished to maintain non-belligerent policy between the two states and that Jordan nevertheless attacked Israel.


REALITY: “The pretence that Israel would not attack Jordan is belied by the secret decision adopted by the Israeli cabinet on June 4, 1967 (which was made public on June 4, 1972) to attack Egypt, Syria and Jordan on the following day” (Henry Cattan, Jerusalem, p.69).
Also, Israel was well aware that Jordan signed on May 30, 1967 a defense pact with Egypt, allowing Egyptians to take command of the Jordanian army.



Myth No. 4: Recognizing and making peace with Israel
When Egypt recognized and made peace with Israel in 1979 the entire Sinai was returned to Egypt.

REALITY: The purpose of such a statement is to give the impression that Israel is willing to withdraw from the land it occupied in exchange for peace. The return of the entire Sinai would be a proof of that. In this context, the name of Anwar Sadat is mentioned.
Jimmy Carter’s memoirs: Keeping the Faith: Memoirs of a President shatters this impression. Menachem Begin did not want to withdraw from the entire Sinai. For Israel to come to it senses, it necessitated the pressures that only an American President could have applied.
For Israel’s apologists to say that when the Palestinian Authority agreed to recognize and negotiate with Israel, Israel began to “transfer control of West Bank lands” is further evidence that Israel’s goal is not to achieve with the Palestinians a peace resembling the peace with Egypt, (the withdrawal from the entire occupied territories, similar to its withdrawal from the entire Sinai), but to establish another form of occupation.
Israel's defenders claim that by mid-2000 more than 90% of the Arab population of the West Bank and more than 25% of its land were under complete Palestinian control. This only demonstrates what Israel is really after: an indigenous authority controlling its indigenous population, while Israel continues to build Jewish settlements in the remaining 75% of Palestinian land. The result of such policy is the establishment of numerous disconnected Palestinian enclaves (bantustans) in a sea of settlements rendering the free movement of the Palestinians difficult, if not impossible.



Myth No. 5: Barak’s “unprecedented offer”
Israel made an “unprecedented offer” consisting of giving back 95% of the West Bank and all of Gaza. Jerusalem itself would be partitioned into Israeli and Palestinians sectors.

REALITY: The Jerusalem that is being referred to here is just the Old City of Jerusalem, not the entire East and West Jerusalems. Not only will Israel keep West Jerusalem but it also wants to partition East Jerusalem. The Palestinians, by the way, accepted to give Israel sovereignty over the Jewish holy places, something that the Israelis refused to give to the Palestinians. They rather talked about “religious sovereignty” over Haram al-Sahrif, and “autonomy” over the Christians and Muslims quarters.
The 95% of the West Bank referred to is in fact 95% minus the expanded municipal boundaries of Jerusalem, that Israel has already annexed (see Myth No. 2 above), which makes Barak’s offer more like 85% of all the West Bank.
Furthermore, the so-called Palestinian state that would have been created according to the “unprecedented offer” would have control neither over its natural resources nor over it air space (For more details see: Camp David mythology)



Myth No. 6: Israel never target civilians
Israel does not deliberately target civilians.

REALITY:
How else can we qualify dropping a 2,000 pound bomb on an apartment building in a civilian neighborhood supposedly to kill one “terrorist leader”?
Also, a Jan. 3, 2003 editorial in The Washington Post had this to say: “Israeli paramilitary forces have reportedly been operating something they call ‘the lottery,’ in which they detain Palestinians and order them to choose from pieces of paper labeled with punishments such as ‘broken leg’ and ‘smashed head.’ The practice was reported by an Israeli newspaper on Dec. 22, more than a week before Amran Abu Hamediye was beaten to death.” This is what a self-censorship press revealed. What is not being reported must be even worse.



Myth No. 7: The “only democracy”
Israel is the “only democracy” in the Middle East.

REALITY: How many times have Israel’s apologists repeated this slogan? In fact, Israel is not a democracy by Western standards. Not a single Western democracy occupies another people’s land, rules another people and subjects them to all kinds of humiliations, torture and mistreatment. Israel indeed is a democracy, but a democracy by Zionist standards, just as South Africa, under the White minority rule, was a democracy by apartheid standards. It is true that Palestinians with Israeli citizenship have the right to vote in Israel. So are all the citizens of the Arab countries. This however doesn’t make them democracies. In Israel, there is no equality between Jews and non-Jews. In a Jewish state, Jews are more equal than non-Jews. It has always been that way and unless Israel becomes the country of all its citizens, it will lack the characteristics of a Western democracy.

http://www.mideastwatch.com/

Medhat Creedi is a friend and a christian Arab .. I post it of course to showcase that there's solidarity between middle easterners on exactly what Israel is, that if this resident troll is not what he appears!

 
Chronological Table of Middle East History with emphasis on Iraq from 1908 to the present
Impressions from Iraq
Letter from Baghdad - Thoughts on the Palestine Question
The Palestine Question, the Oslo Agreement put in context
The Khazars
Letters to the Editor
Exchanges
Correspondence with White Plains Public Library
Correspondence with Greenburgh Public Library
Criticize Israel at your own peril
Physical threat came my way
Camp David Mithology
Crash Course in the Real Facts about the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Myths and Realities about Israel NEW
Links








[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]To adequately understand the underpinnings of the Arab Israeli conflict, it is imperative to know the history of the region. That is why the first item on the site deals with history. The Chronological Table that follows does not pretend to give an exhaustive review of the history of the region. It gives, however, enough information, in a table format, to help the reader situate the different events in their historical context. Hopefully this will arouse the reader's curiosity enough to pursue the matter further. The emphasis on Iraq is due to the fact that, since the Gulf War, this country has been very much in the news and some background information on it can be enlightening.

[SIZE=+1]Chronological Table of Middle East History with emphasis on Iraq

[SIZE=+1]from 1908 to the present[/SIZE]

top
* * *
After spending 6 months in Iraq from May to November 1995 as an interpreter/translator with UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission in charge of ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction), I came away with these Impressions that I would like to share with the readers.
[SIZE=+1]Impressions from Iraq[/SIZE]
top
* * *

This is an attempt to answer the questions posed by an American university professor concerning the Palestine Question. It is being emphasized here that the solution of this complicated problem must be based on justice if what we really want to achieve is a durable solution, even if this creates a dilemma, especially to those in Isarel who look at this problem from a moral point of view.
[SIZE=+1]Letter from Baghdad - Thoughts on the Palestine Question[/SIZE]
top
* * *

A look back at the origin of the Arab-Israeli conflict and a review of the present situation in the context of a flawed Oslo Agreement.
[SIZE=+1]The Palestine Question, the Oslo Agreement put in context[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Also in Arabic translation[/SIZE]
top
* * *

The story of the Khazars and their kingdom Khazaria is kept a dark secret because it will destroy the Zionist claim to Palestine. The refrain that Zionists keep singing in the media that "the Jewish people are returning to the Jewish people's homeland after almost 2,000 years in exile" (see letter 32) will be meaningless, if it becomes widely known that the majority of the Jews today are, in fact, descendants of the Khazars, a non-Semitic people. The "historic connection" upon which Zionists base their claim to Palestine will turn out to be a hoax.
[SIZE=+1]The Khazars[/SIZE]
top
* * *










[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Initially, I named my site Letters to the Editor because it only had letters that I had written and submitted to the editors of a handful of newspapers. The puropse of these letters to the editor is to provide the average American reader of these newspapers with the factual information he needs to form his or her own opinion. Another goal is to refute, rebut and reply to letters written by Israel's apologists and worshipers who distort the facts and mislead the readers. In a sense, it is "a new way of cross-examining Israel."[/FONT]
[SIZE=+1]List of the Letters to the Editor[/SIZE]
In the course of writing those letters to the editor of the local newspaper in Westchester, a kind of debate took place with Israel's supporters in the county on very specific issues. Letters dealing with the same issue are grouped together for easy access.
[SIZE=+1]List of the issues debated[/SIZE]
Many more issues were debated and discussed. To facilitate searching for these issues a Subject Index is being provided.
[SIZE=+1]Subject Index of all the Letters to the Editor[/SIZE]
top
* * *
This is a series of Exchanges I had with different people through a mutual friend whose name is Richard. All the exchanges deal with the Middle East and all turned out to be fruitless. What I mean by "fruitless" is that they didn't last long for a variety of reasons that I will try to present when I introduce each one of these exchanges.
One must keep in mind that the issue of the Middle East is a tricky one for two reasons. One is that it involves Israel. While Americans have no problem criticizing their own government they are reluctant to criticize Israel for fear of being labeled anti-Semite.
The other is the mainstream media which gives a biased view of the Middle East in favor of Israel. Since the overwhelming majority of the Americans rely on the mainstream media that deliver them well packaged information they are either shocked or incredulous when they hear the other side of the story.
[SIZE=+1]Exchanges[/SIZE]
top
* * *
I am presenting here the Correspondence I had with White Plains Public Library concerning my gift to the Library of a subscription to the Washington Report of Middle East Affairs. The Library rejected my gift.
[SIZE=+1]Correspondence with White Plains Public Library[/SIZE]
top
* * *
I am presenting here the Correspondence I had with Greenburgh Public Library concerning my gift to the Library of a subscription to the Washington Report of Middle East Affairs. Initially, the Library accepted my subscription gift then canceled it altogether.
[SIZE=+1]Correspondence with Greenburgh Public Library[/SIZE]
top
* * *
[SIZE=+1]L i n k s[/SIZE]
Organizations
UN Information System on the Question of Palestine: http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF?OpenDatabase
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs: http://www.washington-report.org
American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee: http://www.adc.org
Americans for Middle East Understanding: http://members.aol.com/ameulink/index.html
Council for National Interst: http://www.cnionline.org
Arab American Roman Catholic Community: http://www.albushra.org
Mid-East Realities: http://www.MiddleEast.org
Bat Shalom of the Jerusalem Link: http://www.batshalom.org
The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories: http://www.btselem.org
Middle East Research and Information Project: http://www.merip.org
USS Liberty: http://www.halcyon.com/jim/ussliberty
Individuals
The Edward Said Archive: http://www.leb.net/tesa
The Chomsky Archive: http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm
Norman Finkelstein: http://www.normanfinkelstein.com
Truth, Justice and Human Right in the the Middle East: http://www.mideastfacts.com
Ali Abunimah: uncovering media myths about the Middle East: http://www.abunimah.org/[/SIZE]
[/FONT]
 
First, it is true that the Arabs willignly sold land to the immigrant Jews. However, one cannot disregard the fact that the Jews only owned 6-7 percent of Palestine by the time of the partition plan. Also, one must take into account the many Jews who had illegaly immigrated to Palestine.

It is poetic how it was just a matter of time before they showed their true colors:

[h=1]The African refugee problem in perspective[/h] By SUSAN HATTIS ROLEF
05/28/2012 22:02
[h=2]There is a saying in Hebrew to the effect that “a shared problem is half a consolation.”[/h]
ShowImageashxID194928-1.ashx
Photo: Ronen Zvulun/Reuters Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin publicly expressed his disapproval of the words of incitement uttered by several Members of the Knesset against the tens of thousands of Africans who have infiltrated Israel in search of employment and/or refuge, against the background of last week’s anti-African violence in Tel-Aviv.

Though Rivlin admits that there is a growing problem resulting from the presence of such a large body of persons, whose status in Israel is undefined and whose living conditions are unbearable, he emphasized that incitement is not the answer.

“When the public is angry, leaders must restrain the anger, and find solutions, instead of kindling it,” he said, referring especially to MK Miri Regev’s reference to the Sudanese as “a cancer in our body.”

True, many Israelis, especially those living in the towns and neighborhoods where the African infiltrators are concentrated, have reason to be angry, and one cannot deny that the unhealthy situation has resulted in a growing number of cases of theft and sexual attacks on women committed by Africans.

Chief of Police Yohanan Danino has suggested that the way to contend with the problem is to legalize the employment of the Africans, most of whom are idle and unable to make ends meet. But while this might solve part of the problem, it will also result in a growing number of Africans seeking to reach Israel.

In the meantime, the anger among certain Israeli population groups is increasingly accompanied by blind hatred against the Africans, of the sort that Jews have been subjected to throughout the ages. Anyone who watched Interior Minister Eli Yishai on TV last week speaking to African infiltrators being interviewed in detention facilities could not help being impressed with the fact that the contempt and total lack of empathy for these people are not limited just to anonymous crowds.

There is no denying that Israel confronts a real problem, which it has been slow to address. The government was slow to start effectively closing the border with Egypt against all types of infiltrators – traffickers in drugs and women, potential terrorists, and Africans. It has also failed to adopt a clear policy regarding the African infiltrators once they have managed to enter Israel.

Yishai proposes that they simply be concentrated in camps along Israel’s southern border and then deported, though how this can be done both effectively and humanely, given that we are speaking of at least 60,000 human beings, is not clear. He seems to believe that if the Africans cannot be sent back to their countries of origin, third countries will be found that will be willing to receive them.

But this is not realistic, and the thought of long-term concentration camps popping up along Israel’s southern border is disturbing. Though we are not speaking, of course, of concentration camps such as those constructed by Nazi Germany, we are speaking of camps where hapless individuals coming from a continent where starvation, genocidal civil wars, corrupt governments, anarchy and every imaginable (and unimaginable) social malady, are rife, will simply be left to rot.

It should be noted that it is not only Israel that is forced to contend with the problem of African refugees. The current number of African refugees is estimated at around three million. Most of these refugees remain in Africa itself, but growing numbers are trying to escape the African continent northwards.

Most of the refugees who have reached Israel through the Sinai Peninsula are Sudanese and Eritreans, while Europe is facing a flood of refugees from North Africa, though many of them are not of North African origin, and reached North Africa when it still enjoyed relative stability. The violence of the “Arab Spring” in countries like Libya and Tunisia once again shook the ground under these refugees’ feet.

Italy is the first destination of most of the Africans seeking refuge in Europe, and they attempt to reach it by sea. Of those who make it to Italy, most try to cross the border to countries further north. The Europeans are reacting in a similar manner to us – trying to block borders, despite the open borders policy of the EU.

The Europeans don’t want this mass of humanity anymore than Israel does. They also don’t seem to have much of a clue what to do about the problem, beyond closing borders, so consulting them on possible solutions is a futile exercise. The UN Refugee Agency, and all the other international agencies engaged in various aspects of the African quagmire also seem to be at a loss for effective solutions.

There is a saying in Hebrew to the effect that “a shared problem is half a consolation.” I don’t think that this saying applies to the current situation. To paraphrase another Hebrew saying: we are going to have to find a creative solution on our own, and the sooner the better.

The writer teaches at the Max Stern Yezreel Valley College and was a Knesset employee for many years.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=271749

:haha: guess it isn't the sort of news you see in your local channel and of course how mildly written.. There they were inviting anybody to come to Israel as if it were theirs and making its indigenous refugees anywhere at all. Of course given their natural hatred and racism they were hoping they'd be the first to be sacrificed in case a war breaks out with Israel. They could be a sort of front line infantry and now they've just multiplied and taken room from the true 'chosen ones'

Israel was started on terrorism Haganah, irgun and stern gang type of terrorism but ducks and friends possess a couple of brain cells held together by a spirochete so what do we expect anyway? God forbid a word of truth..

 
لميس;1520252 said:


:haha: guess it isn't the sort of news you see in your local channel and of course how mildly written.. There they were inviting anybody to come to Israel as if it were theirs and making its indigenous refugees anywhere at all. Of course given their natural hatred and racism they were hoping they'd be the first to be sacrificed in case a war breaks out with Israel. They could be a sort of front line infantry and now they've just multiplied and taken room from the true 'chosen ones'

Indeed, there is much concerning Israel that's not mentioned in the mainstream media. Take the recent 60 minutes episode that showed Christians in Palestine blaming Israel for their woes, rather than the 'intolerant Muslims.'

It's really telling that the Israeli ambassador criticized the segment, despite not having watched it!:

"Nothing's been confirmed by the interview, Mr. Ambassador, because you don't know what's going to be put on air," Simon shot back.


"True," Oren said.

(I can't provide links yet, so you can google it yourself! :D)
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top