"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

- Michael Rivero

Tnx, nice one!

Ok, come everyone, this isn't particularly groundbreaking news, but I think there is something we are all forgetting.


In 1948, it wasn't as if all of a sudden the Arab Muslim state of Palestine was suddenly attacked by some Israeli Zionist army, occupied, and reseeded with Jews from around the world.


From God knows when to now, the area that is now Israel/Lebanon/West Bank/Gaza was consistently occupied by not only Muslims (in the times following the Arab conquest) but of Christians and Jews of multiple ethnicities (yes, there is such thing as a Jew of Arab descent).

Between the years of the mid-nineteenth century to World War one, there was much talk in both Jewish and non-Jewish communities of creating some sort of small Jewish homeland in areas of what was then the Ottoman Empire. A small trickle of Jews from all around the middle east and Europe joined those already there.

oh, and
Yes: There was no Palestinian State in existence EVER until the Ottoman Empire fell to the British and allies.

When Britain took over its mandate in the Middle East and started making borders, it didn't pay particular attention to ethnic, religious, or even historical divides. That is one of the main reasons that Palestine, Jordan, and North Western Parts of Saudi Arabia remain seperated today.

Middle East was divided on Geopolitical lines favourable to the reatining of British/French interests in the region.

At the same time however, powerful interested groups in Britain began to campaign for the division of the British mandate of Palestine to be divided anda small Jewish area carved out.
Simultaneously, the British Government allowed and condoned increasing Jewish migration to Palestine, increasing the number of areas where Jews found themselves the largest denomination.


Unwisely (as it turned out) the British decided to keep a lid on things until after World War Two, when tensions between Jewish and Palestinian Arab Muslim groups began to get heated and affect British rule.


Several different proposals were attempted to create a solution.

A two-state solution was seen as most pragmatic, despite logistical problems for Jews and Arab Muslims who found themselves on the wrong side of the divide (like in India).

As it turned out though, the Palestinians (and thier powerful Egyptian/Syrian/Iraqi, etc. etc supporters) weren't interested in any Jewish state at all.
Perhaps they were more justified from the view of a claim to the land, but it wasn't as if the state of Israel would destroy the territorial integrity of a well established state. That is something that Palestine has never been.

The zionists got impatient, and did thier best to kick the British out (one thing they had in common with the Palestinians).

Then they declared independance, claiming nearly half of Palestine.

We all know what happened afterwards.




The reason I explained this historical development, is to demonstrate the problems of your analogies, and show the complexity of the situation.

I would say that the state of Israel was created on far more legitimate grounds than the Repupblic of Texas, for example, but it is still a situation of forceful violent takeover.

Darwyn continues to dance around the point:

Why is it okay for Arabs to defy the UN, but not for Israel?

Never floss with a stranger.

-Joan Rivers

A little too late on that joke...

9/11 was a conspiracy

Oh, and I do recognize that for most of the last Millenia the Jewish population was far smaller than the Muslim one. But it always existed in some form from the time of the ancient Egyptians to the inception of modern Israel.

xcurly... I know ;)

FS, there were also some several hundreds of Jews in Poland before WWII, why wasn't Israel formed in southern Poland? Or in New Jersey?

Did anyone else hear that? It was the last shred of credibility and sanity in this thread blowing away.

not neccisarily

Ah, the perrenial, though good, anti Israel point.

There are three main reasons that I can think of;

1- Believe or not, but for the longest time central Europe was actually MORE hostile to its Jewish population than the Middle East. Much of the impetus from the Jewish population to create a homeland was so that they could get out of the increasingly hostile regions of Western, Central Europe, and Russia.

2- Geopolitically, the Middle East was much easier to toy with than say, Europe was. I'm not saying this was a good reason, but it was the reason many theorists were exhilerated with the Middle Eastern Create-a-state game. Those Western Imperialists...

3- Historical Claims. Obviously this a contentious point, and always heavily criticized, but the fact is, many Jews were part of a continuous tradition that always saw its origins in the ancient Kingdom of Israel, and the temple of Soloman.
No other place would have been accepted by the crazy Jews.

It would be like if Islam was a minority religion. Even if most of that population lived in Los Angeles or something, Mecca/Medina etc. would still hold special significance.

Now, of course those are empirical reasons, not philosophical and moral justifactions.

But you know what? There are no credible moral and philosophical justifications for the creation, alteration, and fall of states.
The actors are just way too general and ambigious for that kind of classification.

Why does it take nearly four hundred posts to say that both sides are, at this point, fully in the wrong, and both sides should, at this point, be put in fucking time out?

Because we like to talk alot. It's what most humans do I fear :P

And some very special Swords.

Gotcha. :P

Oh, and can I wield you in any future duels against Daniel? ;-)

Whoa hey now are you saying the Republic of Texas was not created legitimately? It was anglos and Tejanoes fighting an autocrat for his violation of the consitution of 1824.. much like the reason why American revolted against the British except that Santa Anna was not even a king but a usurper/dictator. After it was clear Santa Anna would not relent they attempted to secede and through luck were successful.... it was later that pressure on them became such they felt the need to join the US. Why is that illegitimate?

JEEEEWWS! Obvs...
come on, we're all thinking it.

Interesting....


Darwyn gives us this quote: " [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982."


Actual quote from Begin "The children of Israel will happily go to school and joyfully return home, just like the children in Washington, in Moscow, and in Peking, in Paris and in Rome, in Oslo, in Stockholm and in Copenhagen. The fate of... Jewish children has been different from all the children of the world throughout the generations. No more. We will defend our children. If the hand of any two-footed animal is raised against them, that hand will be cut off, and our children will grow up in joy in the homes of their parents."

Dawyn also gives us this quote "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983."

The quote is found on numerous anti-Israel sites, in addition to MIFTAH’s, but the facts do not check out. While Shlomo Lahat was indeed re-elected as mayor of Tel Aviv in 1983, no record was found of any “Chairman Heilbrun.” The quote was traced to a 1988 book, The Hidden History of Zionism, by radical Marxist Ralph Schoenman (dismissed by mainstream historians as a crazed conspiracy theorist), and is one of many bogus quotes in the book attributed to Israeli leaders. According to Schoenman’s footnote, the quote by Heilbrun was hearsay relayed to him in private conversations:

Cited by Fouzi El-Asmar and Salih Baransi during discussions with the author, October 1983

Needless to say, Schoenman’s scholarship, upon which many anti-Israel Web sites depend, leaves much wanting. CAMERA contacted former Mayor Lahat who attested that he has never employed, known or heard of any such person as “Chairman Heilbrun,” and that the reported incident never took place. Lahat also emphasized that he would never allow any of his employees to make such statements, as it completely contradicts his own sentiments about Palestinians.

Summary: Fabricated quote, fabricated source


Information supplied by http://www.camera.org/

Darwyn "It likely won't matter to you dingleberry, but just an FYI -

CNN confirms that Israel broke the cease fire.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4
"

Yes, it does interest me. So I did some research. Here's a investigation of the CNN report.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=1577

I suspect the truth is probably somewhere in between the CNN Report and the Camera.org investigation. But Darwyn, you criticized me for getting all my news from one source. Where do you get yours?

@Invictus. " And I thought the gay marrage one was long" Love and war the two things that occupie man's mind the most.

Denzel, nice article and worth a read. It was well written and had some really good points and I agree with much of it. I'm a little skeptical of the latter half of the article because it sounded like they were blaming most of America's recent problems upon their support of Israel and I'm not sure I believe that the Israeli lobby is as powerful as they make them out to be. I don't really have any evidence to counter their argument while they have quite a bit to support theirs, but I'm sure if someone posted a pro-Israeli article in response and thought it out well a few points could be disputed.

Darwyn: so against Israel for defying the UN- and yet what about IRAN? The constant threat to Israel, the constant
300-pound nightclub bouncer cracking its knuckles and growling in Israel's ear........

Israel's military is pre-emptive: you don't get that way by having a long standing peace and firm allies and an understanding with neighbors, you get that sort of "shoot first and shoot them all quickly" attitude out of FEAR.

NO ONE seems to want to bring that up; Darwn and Denzel73 are quick to point out that the PALESTINIANS are being frightened that they are scared- no one seems to realize that Israel is just as scared as the Palestinians are: both fear anihlation from a power just as strong or stronger than themselves.

ISRAEL IS SCARED, and ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

And if YOU had had so many enemies and genocides, YOU'D be a little quick to the trigger, too.

Additionally: the Israelis, contrary ENTIRELY to what Darwyn is stating, DO NOT wish to kill Palestinians- they don't want a genocide on their hands, they know what genocide is and know it is wrong, a genocide is political and national suicide, it would be a horrible crime, and even if you want to see Israel as an evil entitiy, genocide STILL doesn't fit, because, with bigger threats coming from Hamas and Hezbollah and the Syrian-Iranian alliance, a genocide is a way to not only waste resources but los allies for an inevitable war.

Darwyn, if you care at all for the Palestinians, then given the choice, you should be hoping for Israel to wipe Hamas from the map. Hamas is a government- the "real" new-Nazis, if you will.

Let's see how that analysis works out:

Government winning favor with impoverished people, check...
Raising a "youth movement" for soldiers, check...
Anti-West/Jewish theology, check...
Vision of a "new world order", check...
Rallies and demonstrations against other nations, check...
Playing off public anger at loss of land and wars, check...

Need I go on?

And did we try and kill every German in WWII? No- we tried to kill NAZIS, the GROUP.

So WHY are so many civilians dying?

Three reasons: 1) Some civilians always perish in war 2) Israel IS being a tad over-paranoid and agressive, and 3) HAMAS STATIONS ITSELF IN CIVILIAN AREAS FOR JUST SUCH A PURPOSE.

Hamas has mosques and schoolyards and even regular-looking homes as missle plants and training grounds and mortar positions- if soldiers of a destructive regime (do not admit Hamas is destructive and is overall wrong for the West, East, and humanity's empathic natures?) are based in civilian areas, what is the logical conclusion about what will happen to the civilians?

And know: the more Israelis attack, the more Hamas AND civilians they kill; the Hamas men are martyrs for a cause for the regime, the civilians a "dirty Israeli genocide" and Hamas gets more angry Palestinians to join.



You condemn Israel for the same acts that Hamas commits, and you treat Israel as if it is the only nation to ignore the quite ignoreable UN.

The UN won't help, Darwyn- it NEVER does (well, it makes certain pompous European nations feel both powerful and dignified, "settling" disputes with talk and just talk so if things don't work, no blood on THEIR hands, right?"

Israel has a right to exist, as does Palestine- but before both peoples can accept each others claims as right and merge or split peacefully, both must acknowledge their EQUAL wrongs.

Just popping in... I haven't read much of the topic, but I just want to say:

A) I support neither Israel nor Palestine/Hamas. They've both shown themselves to be a great big lot of irresponsible madmen with more explosives and guns than any irresponsible madmen should have.
B) That aside, most of the Middle East and North Africa wants Israel annihilated. I believe the term Iran's president used was "wiped off the map." Israel can hardly be blamed for being a little, ah, batfuckinsane in that environment.

I'm with Panda on this one, as I think I mentioned earlier. I think they both can and should be blamed for their batfuckinsanity, however, no matter how justified it is or they think it is.

Well, to clarify point B: They could justify a little - the Six Day War, for instance, in which Israel's hand was, to some degree, forced.

They cannot justify years of Shelling Each Others' Civilians for Fun and Profit.

You're right, Pandarsenic.

Israel is a little bit like the only shoe store in a neighborhood full of crackhouses.