START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Robert Spencer: Would a Palestinian State Bring Peace?


World  (tags: New Arab state in Palestine )

Alexander
- 754 days ago - jihadwatch.org
If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not. We will never love them. Absolutely not. The Jews are infidels - not because I say so, and not because they are killing Muslims, but because Allah said..



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Allan Yorkowitz (448)
Thursday November 22, 2012, 10:42 am
Sadly, I have to agree with this author. Until Hamas is literally eliminated, and the Palestinians can breathe, their festering hate will never allow a true truce - never mind peace.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Thursday November 22, 2012, 10:47 am
Allan, in addition to the author's points, I want to add that Palestinian Arabs will lose lots of $$$ coming from EU, US, Canadian taxpayers as a subsidy for "struggling Palestinians". With the cause gone, money will dry out.

Then Gaza will do worse than even Egypt. Why would Arabs in Gaza and West Bank want that?
 

RR Sutton (7)
Thursday November 22, 2012, 10:52 pm
I disagree Bob. Money that is now denied Gaza Palestinians would be given to them if Hamas were eliminated. Further if Hamas were gone the Gaza blockade would end and they would be able to access the resources of Gaza and perhaps not need outside monetary assistance.

I have to agree with Allan and I also wonder how long it will be before Hamas once again breaks the truce.
 

Stan B. (122)
Friday November 23, 2012, 2:30 am
I don't want to see a Palestinian state yesterday, today or tomorrow.
Anyone who thinks they are capable of co-existing with Israel is living in cloud cuckoo land. Recent events have proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
 

Louise D. (38)
Friday November 23, 2012, 3:06 am
The problem with the article is that it is sourced from Jihad Watch which tends to post skewed, one-sided, and inflammatory story that only helps to sow the seed of civilizational conflict. The issue is that Israel has been pounding at the Palestinians for decades and with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf floating around in the Middle East it is going to be neigh on impossible for their to be anything but open hostility, a creation of a Palestinian state however would be a start at the very least.
 

Jennifer Ward (40)
Friday November 23, 2012, 3:30 am
Hamas is a terrorist organisation that is ripping off the very people it claims to help.
 

Gloria picchetti (300)
Friday November 23, 2012, 4:44 am
I disagree witht the article.
 

Adam I. (25)
Friday November 23, 2012, 6:08 am
It would surely bring justice - and there would be no excuses, no longer, from both sides.
Peace would depend on the two neighboring, independent and subject to international laws and conventions countries, as anywhere else.
 

cecily w. (0)
Friday November 23, 2012, 6:10 am
A Palestinian State would not bring peace. Hamas aside, the ethos governing both sides is based on religion, and manifests "Divine Right" nonsense to some degree. Governments on both sides are hell bent on expansion--as evidenced by their Total Fertility Rates.

Almost all "developed countries" now have Total Fertility Rates below the replacement level of 2.1. Israel's is 3.0--and Israel's 20% arab population does not account for this. The Total Fertility Rate for the Palestinian Territories is 4.4. Significant influences in these respective governments must have some reason for encouraging this irresponsibly high reproduction--either they want a continuing supply of their own people to serve as cannon fodder, or they intend to "settle" someone else's territory, or both.
 

Angelus Silesius (66)
Friday November 23, 2012, 6:14 am
The middle east and the USA were great friends until the forcible removal of palestinians from their land. It is sad that Israel could not have been established and the palestinians keep their lands but jews work around them. Among many middle eastern people the USA betrayed them as a friend and has also hurt us enormously financially, as the middle east bought large amounts of U.S. made goods
 

John Gregoire (262)
Friday November 23, 2012, 6:33 am
The statement indicates why we can never trust Islamist governments that lean toward the extremist views of so many of their faith. Sadly, the good Muslims arein the minority. If we regress to calling each other infidels and making that somehow justify violence, we have indeed descended to pre-biblical times.
 

Rob and Jay B. (121)
Friday November 23, 2012, 7:46 am
Robert Spencer is an expert on Islam and its teachings. For exposing Islamic hate teachings he lives under a death sentence. He's a hero. Too bad our so-called leaders don't have half his courage to speak out against this cancer of hate.

For you who know nothing about what Islam teaches and what Hamas' Covenant says, you need to get your head out of the sand. Here are just a few of the verses of hate Mohammed and Allah command of Muslims:

Hamas Covenant (based on Islamic Law):
'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble)

'[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and

international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of

the Islamic Resistance Movement... Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.' (Article 13)

[T]he Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah’s promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7)((related by al-Bukhari and Muslim - Bukhari:V4B52N177 ).)

(Article 8) of the Hamas charter, reads: “Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.”

“He it is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth [Islam], that He might cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists may be averse.” Qur’an 9:33 (It's clear from this verse that Muslims are to 'prevail over all religions')

Qur'an 9:29 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, who do not forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, or acknowledge the Religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission, feeling themselves subdued and brought low." [Another translation says:] "pay the tax in acknowledgment of our superiority and their state of subjection."

Reliance of the Traveller, o9.0:
"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims."
The Reliance of the Traveller is Sunni Islam’s authoritative volume on Sharia law. It is endorsed by Alazhar University, Islam’s equivalent of the Vatican.

"O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends." Qur’an 5:51

“Allah’s Apostle said...’I have been made victorious with terror’” Bukhari 52:220

And there are so many many more. This is not a religion of turn the other cheek, love your enemy, do no violence, forgive and be tolerant - quite the opposite. Those who have studied Islam, as we have, know it teaches the exact opposite of all of these good things and is the only religion that does NOT teach the Golden Rule (except to fellow Muslims).

Until Muslims renounce all the hate against non-Muslims in their scriptures (not possible), there will never be peace with Islam and Islam's war against Israel, Jews and the West will continue until they are defeated once and for all, or we are conquered from within, as their agenda says.
 

Carola May (20)
Friday November 23, 2012, 8:00 am
If our ill-informed, if not downright ignorant, leaders would have advisers as knowledgeable as this man is on these subjects, we wouldn't be in the state we are in now, especially here in Europe. Bless him.

Gloria P, you say you disagree with the article? Just because it contradicts what you want to believe? Tell us what you disagree with and give proofs for them.

Jaime D, give us proofs for your incredible claim. What you say comes off anti-Israel, anti-Jew hate sites but is not based on facts. Do some independent research.

Palestine and 'Palestinians' are a 20th century invention. Jerusalem was founded by the Jews many centuries ago - long before Mohammed had his delusions of grandeur. They built their holy Temple there on their most sacred ground, the Temple Mount, which the invading, conquering and occupying Muslims deliberately desecrated with their Dome of the Rock and al Aqsa mosque, and they still don't allow Jews to come on that, the Jews' holiest site, to pray! How can you defend such nonsense?

Tolerance is a two-way street and with Islam it can always and only be their one way. People forget that almost one million Jews were forced out of their homes in Muslim lands and received refuge in Israel, which took them all in, cared for them and then built a thriving, advanced and free democracy, while making the desert blossom. Contrast that with the discrimination against "Palestinians' by other Arab/Muslims, their lack of financial support and the Palestinians sloth in building a civilisation while living on Western Infidel billions in handouts.

This Palestinian leader says it all:

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism."
-- Zahir Muhsein, PLO executive committee member said in an interview to the Dutch newspaper Trouw in 1977
 

Ge M. (218)
Friday November 23, 2012, 10:23 am
It is as I have been saying for years, the cause of suffering is solely down to the terrorist groups of which Hamas is one. Before Arafat started this process of acrimony, hatred and fear, the Arabs lived in Israel with other nationalities and all got on. I can remember sitting in a cafe in Jerusalem with a Jewish boyfriend and many Arabs. They welcomed us in and gave us some of the strongest coffee I have ever drunk, with mud (filter) and, on the next visit, some of the nicest peppermint tea I have ever had. They were kind, friendly and chatted with us and could not have made us feel more welcome if they tried.

Now they are abused and used by their own. Yet if I speak out the anti-Semites blame Israel and refuse to accept that the terrorists live up to their name.
 

Barbara D. (78)
Friday November 23, 2012, 11:35 am
If the Arabs laid down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If Yisrael laid down her weapons today, there would be no more Yisrael. Benjamin Netanyahu
Sadly, very true.
 

Kathleen B. (37)
Friday November 23, 2012, 12:40 pm
@Barbara D: Seen the death toll from the zionists latest rampage? Five dead Israelis to how many Palestinians?

Netanyahu's clever little word game, the one you swallowed whole, by saying sadly, very true......how do you square that with the over 100 Palestinian deaths to the 5 Israelis? Gazans are bad shots? Gazans have no jets to bomb Tel Aviv, Gazans have no navy, Gazans have no tanks, Gazans don't even have a bomb shelter, but its the MOOOOzlems who are the terrorists?

My dear Barbara, you aren't seeing the forest for the trees, quit believing everything Fox news tells you, you have the news of the world at your fingertips, yet there is no evidence that you avail yourself to the truth.
 

Mori H. (0)
Friday November 23, 2012, 3:23 pm
Perhaps nothing will bring peace but Palestine should be recognized as a State and a Nation as any other country including Israel. It has that right, Peace is a totally different subject .. like mixing apples and oranges.
 

patrica and edw jones (190)
Friday November 23, 2012, 3:29 pm
Palestinians are despised by the other Arab countries. Wherever they go - they cause trouble. So we would say - NO - there will never be peace even if they got their own land. They would still want what Israel has. It is like a constant battle between two forces - Dark and Light - sometimes the two have to try and co-exist but it will always be like living life on the edge.
Kate - why does Hamas continue to bombard Israel daily with rockets? So you think this is ok? Wow you must really hate the Israelis. Would you put up with this aggression from your neighbour. Are you the type who always turns the other cheek? Didn 't think so. Go read so history on the situation and educate yourself.
 

jo M. (3)
Friday November 23, 2012, 3:37 pm
Well, Kate, as for the death toll, didn't we learn after the prisoner exchange that 1 Israeli is worth, what?, 1000 Palestinians?
 

Marie W. (67)
Friday November 23, 2012, 9:16 pm
No, they would find another excuse.
 

Ira Herson (13)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 12:24 am
For those that wonder about a Palestinian State you have to define what it would look like. Is it the PA model or the Hamas model. Or could it be something different.

We have to look to the future and hope that one day there will be a two state solution. It cannot be the Hamas charter as it is founded on the death of Israel. The PA model is very corrupt and is on the brink of collapse.

So it has to be something different.
 

Tommy S. (11)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 12:30 am
Even without intimate knowledge of islam- If one looks at the behaviour of islam worldwide and does not hear alarm bells then one is either a muslim or a fool
Palestine is about religion and the mo-rons envy of the intelligent and anyone can see that clearly alla prefers Jews --- thus the palestinians efforts to murder Jews is so that they are all thats left for alla to pay attention to
(like the spoiled attention seeking barbaric brats they are)
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 3:49 am
If his thesis is correct, then how does he explain the fact that millions of Jews lived in Muslim lands for centures in peace and unmolested? Take medieval (Musim-ruled) Spain, for instance: Jewish culture flourished. It was the Christians who drove out the Jews (1492). Jews lived throughout the Turkish Ottoman Empire in peace and prosperity. Jews were safer in the Ottoman Empire than they were in Christian Europe. Jews flourished in Iraq, Egypt, Morrocco, Yemen, and other Middle Eastern and North African countries until --- drum roll, please! --- the creation of the State of Israel. It was that one act that catalyzed the hatred of Jews that one sees now. Whatever if may say in the dusty texts of the Qu'ran, hatred of Jews by Muslims was not historic.It is a modern phenomenon that was precipitated by the imposition (by force) of a Jewish state upon an Arab territory. Unfortunately, now that Pandora's Box has been opened, there seems to be no solution. All was have is HOPE.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 3:55 am
I might add that not all Palestinians are Muslim. A substantial number are Christian. The Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem is a Palestinian. Some Palestinian Christians live on the West Bank, some live within Israel itself.
(The town of Nazareth is predominantly Palestinian Christian.) I don't have the statistics at hand, but I assume it is Gaza that is monolithically Muslim.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 8:20 am
I'm no expert on the Qu'ran. But I do seem to recall that Mohammed declared that both Abraham and Jesus were prophets. Even that Mary was to be venerated. In fact: the Arabs claim descent from Abraham (via Ishmael).
Mohammed never traveled outside western Arabia, so he can scarcely be considered as having been a cosmopolitan! He doesn't seem to have known much (if anything) about the Roman and Byzantine empires.
If he had anything derogatory to say about Jews, I would assume that he was alluding specifically to the Jewish merchants of Mecca. Like the one who was killed in that vignette related above. He doesn't even seem to have been aware that there was a Judaist kingdom in Yemen, at the very time he lived. (Many modern Yemenis --- while Muslim --- are descendants of those Judaists.)
It's interesting to note that while millions of Jews were driven out of Arab lands when the State of Israel was created (1948), Jews continued to live in peace in (non-Arab) Iran --- and still do so to this day.
Jews also live in peace in Turkey --- which, while a secular state, is overwhelmingly Muslim.
Seems to me that the professor's thesis is skating on very thin ice.
 

Past Member (0)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 9:33 am
Only God alone who governs the people , Who is the infidel,No one has that right .Palestinians owners issue And their just cause .I think the problem is not with the Jews but with Zionists ..All religions must coexist peacefully ..Zionists raping the earth . the Golan Heights Is syria land .Why occupied by Zionists??So Zionism did not want the others to live in peace.We can not accept the idea of ​​Palestine is a religious state....Thanks.
 

monka blanke (84)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 1:41 pm
The source is unreliable/propaganda.
 

Hartson Doak (33)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 1:53 pm
Since the formation of Israel, the neighboring Arab States have had it on their agendas to destroy Israel. So for 65 years Israel has had to defend itself. The Koran is the next chapter in the book of God'd religion add this to the New Testament. In the Koran there is confirmation that the promises made to the Jews that they would get back THEIR homeland is made. The majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are the Faith they are do to accident of birth. They do not read thier own Holy Book. They just believe the misdirection, out of context and out right lies. Both Clerics of Christianity and the Muslim Faiths are guilty of these crimes against God and man. Till people realize that they are going to be reponsible to God for thier own actions and NOT the cleric, then that is when peace will start.
 

Chris Sterry (0)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 2:03 pm
I do not know if creating a Palestinian state would bring peace. In Northern Ireland we had the IRA, which said it would never recognise Northern Ireland, but a peace did come. There are still some who want conflict, but the peaceful Roman Catholics and Protestants continue to work together.
 

Mary Donnelly (47)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 3:28 pm
Thanks Bob. The answer to the question is that a Palestinian State might reduce tensions in the area, but it would depend on the terms and conditions applied, and how well they were carried out.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 5:45 pm
Mary, you are welcome, I think this question is a good reason for a soul-searching of the world powers.

Personally, I believe Palestinian Arabs will stall negotiations forever, because they will lose a lot if they are given a country. For several reasons:
1. They will lose billions in US and International aid. Who will care about hungry Gaza Arabs more than they care about hungry Yemen Arabs?
2. The Palestinian leaders will need to be busy with economy, jobs, construction, etc. They don't know how to do it, they are great politicians, referring to Jihad on any good occasion.
3. Other Arabs will treat them as losers, failing to stand up to Jihad.


 

Alexander Werner (53)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 6:29 pm
Arthur,

Palestinian Christians are suffering greatly at the hands of Hamas and PA. Nazareth stopped being a city with Christian majority long time ago. Gaza is 100% Sunni Muslims, and Hamas is the branch of the same Muslim Brotherhood that kills, rapes and forcibly converts to Islam Coptic Christians in Egypt.

Persecution of Jews in Islamic lands happened over the ages many times, but you are right that the Jews were safer there than in Europe. But nowaday, all Jews - are subject to robbery in pretty much all Arab countries.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Saturday November 24, 2012, 6:31 pm
Samir,

Golan Heights now belong to Israel because Syria was bombing Israel from these Heights for too long, before Israel captured them. Unprovoked attacks on Israel is Syria's fault and the reason it lost it, like all attackers do.

You may be against and refuse to accept a new Islamic state of Arabs in Palestine, but people in charge don't listen to this obvious point. I 100% agree with you on this one.
 

Donna W. (0)
Sunday November 25, 2012, 8:01 am
Their stated purpose has always been to push Israel into the sea, and get rid of Israel entirely. Why doesn't this country believe this? They do not want to get along with the rest of the world, and especially not with Israel. They have proved this time after time. The more land area they have been given, the more they want. (PS. I'm not a rabid right winger or fundamentalist christian pro-Israeli. I'm just someone who's been watching this since the 1950s.)
 

Rebecca Y. (26)
Sunday November 25, 2012, 2:28 pm
We should stay out of it. They are hellbent on destroying themselves and no "peace treaty" or "State" is going to stop what is happening. Perhaps when one side obliterates the other...perhaps that will stop it...but I doubt it. At this point, I have stopped having an opinion as to what would bring peace. Let them fight it out until the last man drops....let the U.S stay out of it and all the other countries that send aid..STOP sending either side ANYTHING!
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Monday November 26, 2012, 6:05 am
And, Donna, the stated purpose of the hard-line Hasidic Jews is to take over 100% of Palestine and drive out the Arabs, or kill them --- as the ancient Jews killed the Amalekites! You've been watching the scene since the 50s? I've been watching it since the 40s. As I said b efore, and repeat again now: the creation of the State of Israel opened up a Pandora's Box --- which, alas, cannot now be closed. Bet you didn't know that Stalin had already created a Jewish homeland back in the 1930s, at Birobidshan in eastern Siberia! But the Zionists would have none of that: they demanded a "return" to Palestine. The Balfour Declaration of the British government (1917) made provision for a Jewish Homeland in Palestine, but it added that the rights of the indigenous Arab people not be infringed. The Zionists would have none of that, either. It was the weakness of the post-World War II Attlee government in London that allowed the Zionists to muscle their way in and take over Palestine for force, violence, terror, and murder. (I don't think it would have happened, had Churchill been in control of the British government at that time.) So: we are left with the current sorry legacy.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday November 26, 2012, 8:38 am
Arthur, why would you educate yourself first?

Hasidic Jews didn't even participated in political Zionism for a very long time. Even now, some Hasidic sects like Neturei Karta want to disband Israel and wait until Arabs ask Jews to create one.

Jews did not take on Stalin's Birobidshan because they wanted to return to their homeland in The Land of Israel, aka Palestine.

If Arab states accepted Israel in 1948, there would be TWO Palestnian Arab states and one Jewish state. Whose fault was that Arab states decided to go to a war instead?

And, in the first place, why do you think that Arabs are entitled to ALL Middle East lands, left after dissolution of Turksish Ottoman Empire? WhY Jews, Kurds, Druze and many other minorities oppressed in Arab countries were not entitled to have their own states?

So far, only Israel made it at 0.01% of all lands, while Arabs keep 99.99% and are still at war for this tiny piece of land they never cared for. I find it grossly unfair to non-Arab nations.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Monday November 26, 2012, 9:01 am
Bob Algeron: "their homeland"? Where, they contend, their (purported) ancestors lived 2000 years ago!
Perhaps the (remote) ancestors of the Sephardic Jews lived in ancient Palestine. It is certainly debatable as to whether the Ashkenzai (European) Jews are linear descendants of that ancient tribe. (More likely, they are linear descendants of the Khazars, a Central Asian people that converted to Judaism somewhere back there around the 6th century.)
Now, while we're at it: let's give Japan back to the Ainus. After all, the Ainus had the place to themselves 2000 years ago! Let's give Vietnam back to the Khmers --- after all, the Khmers had the run of the place 2000 years ago. Let's give North America back to the Native Americans: after all we Europeans were foreign invaders and stole their land (not to mention their lives!). Mexico back to the Aztecs --- it was only a trifling 500 years ago that they ruled the place. Ditto for Peru and the Incas. Let's give South Africa back to the Hottentots: them there Zulua and Xhosas were invaders from the north! Let's give England back to the Welsh (Britons): the English were foreign invaders (6th century) from Germany. While we're at it: let's give Germany back to the Celts: the Germans were invaders from the East. Give Hungary back to the Slavs: the Hungarians swooped down on the place (from Central Asia) in the 9th century.
Do I succeed in getting my point across? The claim that one is entitled to territory because their (purported) ancestors held it 2000 years ago is patently absurd.
Yes, it's in the Jewish religious books. It should have stayed in the religious books.
There were Jews living in Palestine before World War II, but they were a minority. First the Turks, then the British ruled the place. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire following World War I was another Pandora's Box that was opened. The Ottoman Turks kept peace and stability throughout the Middle East. The collapse of that empire led to the instability that followed, not to mention the establishment of such charming regimes as Saudi Arabia. And you are advocating yet more Balkanization?
Finally: I have quite sure that the Palestinians who were displaced (or killed) by the European Jewish invaders in 1947/48 cared very much indeed about Palestine, and about their being displaced or killed!
As for the Hasidics: it is only a tiny minority to which you make reference. The majority --- living now in Israel --- want to annihilate the Palestianians. After all: didn't their God tell them --- way back when --- to annihilate the Amalekites? Read your Old Testament. I have.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Monday November 26, 2012, 11:31 am
Since at least the 1970s: numerous Israeli "scholars" have been equating the modern Palestinians to the ancient Amalekites. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalek The God of their purported ancestors --- 3000 years ago --- ordered the Israelites to annilhilate the Amalekites. Exodus 17:16; Deuteronomy 25: 17-19.
So much for justice and mercy. These "scholars" now contend that their God intends for them to exterminate the modern Palestinians! Rabbi Moshe Ben-Tzion Ishbbezari (1974); Rabbi Yisrael Hess (1980); "The Genocide Commandment in the Torah." All of this information is readily available online.
And you wonder why the Palestinians hate the Israelis?
 

Donna W. (0)
Monday November 26, 2012, 3:21 pm
To Arthur: Siberia???? Are you surprised that the Jews didn't want to live there? Would you? I say let the Israelis have their tiny piece of property in peace. They've made the desert bloom like a rose, just as the biblical prophecy said. The Arabs should go and do likewise and stop sniveling over a land area smaller than New Jersey.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Monday November 26, 2012, 3:47 pm
Sweetheart: There are some very nice places in Siberia. Ever been to Lake Baikal?
The Jewish Autonomous Region --- it still exists --- is located on the border with China.
Your obvious contempt for Arabs borders dangerously on racism. If it doesn't actually cross the border.
Oh, you believe in Biblical prophesies? I think one of them says the world will come to an end when the Jews rebuild their Temple --- on the site of the old one(s). That, of course, would require first the destruction of the 7th-century Dome of the Rock. Now: THAT would surely bring about Armageddon!!!!!
By the way: you would probably "snivel" too, if your life and property were taken away from you by force and violence. Which is exactly what happened to the Palestinians back there in 1947/48.
 

Free G. (4)
Monday November 26, 2012, 6:06 pm
To post Robert spencer, well known Islamophobia, bigot, blogger of known hate website how ignorant people who post this crap are.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday November 26, 2012, 9:21 pm
Margaret, when you can't say anything that matters, you attack the author? Robert Spencer is a knowledgeable guy and knows what he is saying.

You know, if you want to read something refreshing, you can always resort to your favorite Electronic Intifada.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday November 26, 2012, 9:30 pm
Arthur, I don't know who supports return of all lands listed in Bible to Jews. They are quote bid, if you know of any political party in Israel with such agenda - please let me know.

However, Jerusalem is known to be the capital of Israel from all times.

Why would you want to give this land to Arabs? Arabs never had a state there, they didn't own much of the land and the population was not that great. UN had to declare "Palestinian Refugee" anyone who lived in Israel between Jun 1946 and May 1948, and their descendants forever.

Personally, I don't see any wisdom in this UN decision. This is a blatantly biased decision, favoring Arabs and giving them rights unavailable to any other people. Arabs got a specific and dedicated agency UNWRA paying them big $$ and making them World Best Paid Refugees, evem though many Arab "refugees" were born and grew up in Arab countries!

I hear your argument about historical changes and that they are irreversible. Then why do you even think about Arabs be allowed to immigrate Israel, while they are enemy aliens? There are 22 Arab coutnries, free from Zionists, where these people will live among their brothers and co-religionists.

 

Alexander Werner (53)
Monday November 26, 2012, 9:33 pm
Arthur, sorry, I don't follow you on the "Jewish Autonomous Region" Stalin created in Siberia. I think the Jews make up about 3% of its population. And they continue to leave for Israel or US.

Why wouldn't you suggest to Mr. Putin to re-settle their some Arabs from Palestine? Arab states are usual customers of Russian weapons, Russia supports Arabs and, especially, Palestinian Arabs diplomatically, and that may happen to be a good match.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 5:58 am
Bob: It's obvious that you don't know your Old Testament. Read it sometime.
Jerusalem began as a Canaanite city. David took it by stealth and stratagem. Then, of course, proceeded to kill the inhabitants! Ever heard of history repeating itself? The Jews --- Hebrews, whatever you want to call them --- didn't begin in Palestine (as it later came to be known) --- despite the myths about Abraham ahd Jacob and Joseph that their priests eventually concocted: they were a nomadic tribe in the Sinai that invaded the land of Canaan, slaughtered the natives, and then took that land as their own. Sound famliar?
Also: if you bother to read the Old Testament, you'll find that the ancient kingdom of Israel broke into two following the death of Solomon; the northern section --- the "ten tribes" --- called itself Israel and established its capital at Samaria; the southern (two tribes) section kept Jerusalem and called itself Judah (in later times Judea). The northern kingdom was conquered by Assyria in 722 B.C. and its inhabitants dispersed (the "lost tribes"): those who remained assimilated with Assyrians and other peoples and became the Samaritans --- later to be so despised by the Jews. The southern kingdom survived until 597 B.C., when it was conquered by Babylonia and its population deported to Babylonia (Iraq). A century later, Babylonia was conquered by Persia (Iran): the Persian king Cyrus) allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem --- but only a minority of them took advantage of the offer: the majority elected to keep the good life they had found in Iraw, and their descendants continued to flourish there until A.D. 1948! Those who did return to Jerusalem set up a quasi-state, under suzerainty to Persia. It was actually about this time that the Old Testament as we know it was actually compiled and written down, except for the final books, which came a few centuries later.
The Jews finally threw off foreign shackles in the 2nd century B.C. and established a kingdom which included not only Palestine but much of what is now Jordan and even Syria. This was under the king Alexander Janneaus. But modern Jews don't talk much about Alexander Janneaus! While he was both king and high priest, the adopted many "foreign" customs --- including the delightful Roman method of execution (crucifixion). That kingdom (the Hasmoneans) came to an end when the Roman general Pompey conquered Jerusalem. And Idumean (read: Arab) named Herod was allowed by the Romans to set up a quasi-state: it was he who rebuilt and vastly enlarged the "Second" Temple. After his death: the Romans took direct control of the southern half of Palestine, allowing one of Herod's sons to retain a quasi-state in northern Palestine (Galilee). This tidy arrangement came to an end in 70 A.D. with the Great Revolt --- which the priests of the Temple opposed (and they were the first to be killed by the "Zealots"! A second revolt in 125 A.D. resulted in the remaining Jews being expelled --- mostly to Egypt. (Read: Josephus.)
In the centuries that followed, Palestine was ruled by Rome, Byxantium. and then came the Arab (Islamic) invasion of the 7th century. The language changed from Aramaic and Greek to Arabic. Palestine was ruled first from Damascus and later from Baghdad. There was a brief interregnum by the "Crusaders" from Western Europe in the 12th century, the Palestine reverted to Muslim rule, ruled for a while from Cairo by Saladin. Eventually, it came under the control of the Ottoman Turks and so remained until 1918.
So: it is true: the people living on the territory of Palestine did not have "a state of their own."
But: they DID own their own property there: farms, houses, towns, cities, livestock, etc. It was THAT which was taken away from them for force and violence in 1948 by invaders from northern Europe (the Zionists).
The U.N. decision --- far from being "blatantly biased --- didn't go nearly far enough to compensate the surviving Palestinians for their monumental losses. It is YOU who appear to be blatantly biased, in favor of the Zionists. Incidentally: other U.N. resolutions in subsequent years have labeled Israel as being a racist state --- over the opposition of the United States, which is controlled by the well-heeled Israeli lobby. There is no question that it is an apartheid state: those Palestinians who continue to live on its territory are regarded and treated as second-class citizens. (Do you know of any Palestinian Arabs in the Israeli government?)
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 6:36 am
Addendum: In the 1st century A.D. [C.E., if you prefer]: Jerusalem was the ecclesiastical capital of Judaism.
But it was, by no means, the largest Jewish city in existence. That honor belonged to Alexandria (Egypt) --- and the Jews there all spoke Greek! (Read: Philo.) The second largest was Seleucia/Ctesiphon (Iraq) --- and they were (presumably) all speaking Persian (or whatever variant thereof was au courant at the time --- probably Parthian)..
 

Donna W. (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 9:29 am
Arthur: No, I don't believe in biblical prophecies. I'm just a "preacher's kid" who's heard all the sermons and arguments many times. I don't have "contempt for Arabs", though I am pretty uneasy about anyone whose religion tells them to kill "infidels" who won't convert to their beliefs. I do feel that Israel has as much right to a homeland as Palestinians do, and there should be an amicable way to sort this mess out; but neither side wants to give an inch. (And don't call me "sweetheart"! I'm not that sweet. ; )
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 10:25 am
Donna: Ever heard of Richard the "Lion-Hearted_? He was a Crusader, back there in the 12th century, or whenever. He invaded Palestine. He conquered Jerusalem. What did he then proceed to do? Why: he MASSACRED the entire population: Muslim, Jewish, Christian (Eastern Orthodox variety). Afterwards, he went back to being King of England. Unfortunately for his cause: in the end, the Crusaders were driven out, and the Arabs regained control. At that time: ruled from Cairo under Saladin. (Who, incidentally, was of Kurdish origin.)
There are today Muslim fundamentalists, and there are Christian fundamentalists, and there are Jewish fundamentalists. There are even Hindu fundamentalists!
I say: DOWN with all fundamentalism!
And: Zionism is certainly a form of fundamentalism! They still contend that "God" gave them tha "land of Canaan" --- back there some 3000 years ago. And some of their "scholars" contend that the Palestinian Arabs are the "modern Amalekites" --- whom their "God" ordered them to KILL (men, women, children) back there 3000 years ago. You can look it all up online, quite easily.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 12:43 pm
Arthur, your review of history was OK.

At the end, you lumped Turks and Arabs together under the common cover of Muslims. This is very wrong, and it gives Arabs preferential treatment.

As you know, Jews accepted political partition of the lands, but Arab states went to war. I believe in punishing the bullies, which is the International law. That's why, when Egypt and Jordan lost their lands after failed attack on Israel, I oppose returning lands that they lost to them.

Arab fundamentalism is much worse than Zionism. Zionists agreed to share land, while Arabs did not. Arabs use Mohammed ride in his sleep as a justification to their rights for Jerusalem. This is not the same as having their Temple and city as a capital for centuries.

This is consistent with the recent history: Germany lost lands to Czechoslovakia and Poland, Japan lost islands to Russia, etc. Do you want to start campaigning to return those lands to their previous owners?

Why do you think your Arab nation is entitled to such preferential treatment? Arab states abuse minorities living under their rule, and fight them NOT to let them have their own states. Arab states have more than 10,000 times land than Israel, yet still they force their brothers to fight instead of helping them to resettle, like any other nation on Earth did, and what simple compassion demands.

By the way, if and when the new Saladin comes, he will likely fight Arab states first so that his people could get a state they deserve.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 1:37 pm
Bob: Your arguments are specious. Germany and Japan lost territory as a result of wars that they started.
The Palestinians lost land and property (not to mention lives) as a result of an ILLEGAL invasion by European Jews. The British government of Clement Attlee --- then governing Palestine under a Mandate bestowed by the (now defunct) League of Nations --- at first tried to thwart the Zionist invasion, but then gave up.*
Any agreement by Zionists to share the territory of Palestine was a political strategem, not a bona fide policy.
They wanted --- and still want --- 100% of CANAAN --- the land their "God" granted to them 3000 years ago.
Or so says their Old Testament. (The fact that many early Zionists were atheists is beside the point!)
And, in case you've forgotten, the new state of Israel goined with Britain (by then under the Conservatives again) and the hapless Fourth French Republic in attacking Egypt --- 1956 --- to gain control of the Suez Canal. Only the intervention of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower thwarted that nefarious scheme. (The last U.S. President to have the guts to stand up to the Israeli lobby.)
The 1967 attack by Jordan and Egypt on Israel turned out to be --- for them --- a disastrous tactical error.
They had underestimated the might and resourcefulness of the (U.S.-funded) Israeli military. (Not to mention the incompetence of their own generals!)
We are NOT talking about "other" Arab lands, with whatever many times the area might be involved. (And 90% of that being uninhabitable desert --- a slight little detail you have failed to point out!)
No, sir, the bully in this scenario is Israel, the Israeli government --- especially under its current leader Netanyahu --- and the entire Zionist philosophy.
Of course (as I've said before): now that Pandora's Box has been opened, there is no possibility to revert to the pre-1947 context. The Israelis are in Palestine to stay. But: SO ARE THE PALESTINIANS. They are not going anywhere. When the Zionists finally come to that realization, then --- and only then --- will there be any chance for a lasting peace.
P.S. I never lumped Turks and Arabs together. Didn't I say that the entire area was better off when it was ruled by the Turks? World War I opened up another Pandora's Box! The Sultan (Emperor) of Turkey was also the Caliph (Pope) of Sunni Islam. The abolition of the Caliphate in 1923 facilitated the rise to power of such fanatical regimes as Saudi Arabia. Oh, Pandora, if only we could put you back in that box and close it!
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 1:44 pm
Forgot the footnote: If Churchill had been the Prime Minister of the U.K. in 1947, I suspect there would have been a very different outcome with regard to the Zionist invasion of Palestine. He would have been far more agressive than Attlee was with respect to the situation. Ditto for the Indian subcontinent: Attlee just gave up and allowed the Indian subcontinent to be divided into two warring states. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in the process. Attlee said, in effect: I wash my hands of this situation. Don't put the blame on me.
Ever heard that line before? No? Oh, it was Pontius Pilate. "I wash my hands of the blood of this man."
Read your NEW Testament. And who did he blame for the blood of that innocent man (Jesus)? Why, he blamed the Jewish mob. "His blood be on us and on our children." (Gospel of St. John.)
 

Free G. (4)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 4:00 pm
"Robert Spencer is an expert on Islam and its teachings."

Really?
 

Free G. (4)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 4:03 pm
Send a Green Star to Arthur Lamirande

Sorry - You are not yet eligible to send Green Stars

Bob you are now accusing Arthur of lumping everyone together. You have invented an Arab/Muslim Collective and have been arguing it for over two years and now you are changing your mind? Are you a shill for Mitt Romney?
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 9:03 pm
Margaret, did you ever heard about Arab League or about One Arab Nation?

You know, when you have nothing to do as a secretary and are not busy typing something on Care2, you could read something useful.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Tuesday November 27, 2012, 9:09 pm
Arthur,

The same way Germany and Japan attacked their neighbours, Arab states attacked theirs, and they must pay for it. Pushing the payment to UN using Islamic majority there is not an answer, even though it is working now.

I will trust you that Zionism is about Old Testament when Israel will demand lands of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon that it had in Biblical Times, when it was called The Land of Israel and before Romans renamed that land to Palestine.

I don't think all Palestinian Arabs will be living in West Bank and Gaza. Personally, I don't care where they live. I am pissed off that Arabs living for 2-3 generations in other Arab countries and yet called and paid as "refiugees".

No other ethnic group got such a deal. Do you consider it fair?
 

Free G. (4)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 3:49 am
"I am pissed off that Arabs living for 2-3 generations in other Arab countries and yet called and paid as "refiugees". "

You have to be kidding? What the hell is the Jewish diaspora Bob? If it makes you feel better Bob to comment on what you think I do or don't, by all means go ahead. If it makes you feel better as a human being, more power to you.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 5:38 am
Well, Bob, it is impossible to carry on a rational discussion with the likes of you. I don't think you have actually read half of what I wrote.
In Biblical times: The "Land of Israel" comprised what later came to be called Palestine (minus the Negev desert), but only briefly, inasmuch (as I previously reported) it broke up into two after only a century or two, and then only the northern segment was called "Israel". The southern segment was called Judah, and it was that segment that controlled Jerusalem. The only time a Jewish state controlled any parts of Jordan or Syria was during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (late 2nd - early 1st centuries B.C.). No Jewish state EVER controlled Lebanon (Phoenicia). Some slight corrections to your obviously shaky history!
And --- how many times must I repeat it? --- it was EUROPEAN JEWS who invaded Palestine, 1947/48.
Opening up Pandora's Box.
You are, obviously, a Zionist fanatic, and I can't waste any more of my valuable time on you.
It's also obvious that you are no gentleman. Talking in that snide sarcastic way to poor Margaret. Tsk Tsk.
Why, you sound just like Benjamin Netanyahu!
By the way: they exhumed Arafat's body and took samples. It's expected that the findings will show that he was poisoned. And who could have done that? Clue: Mossad.
The Israeli secret police are very good at murder.
 

Free G. (4)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 6:22 am
Arthur:

It doesn't take much to figure out that no matter what you post what source you cite and it doesn't matter if Bibi said it himself, if it contradicts Bob's preconceived notion, it just is dismissed. There is a whole thread on proving to Bob that his claim of $10 billion annual aid to Pakistan was completely flat-out wrong and that his own article refuted his outlandish claims. Now that you mentioned Arafat, Bob will most certainly claim that Arafat died of AIDS, as that also filled many a thread. Thanks for the rebuke to Bob, but in all honesty being dissed by the likes of Bob, is actually a compliment. For Bob & Company to actually spend time to checking me out beyond Care2 let's me know that I am being effective. I, on the other hand, give no thought to Bob and the troll squad beyond responding to their posts.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 9:46 am
Arhtur,

"poor Margaret"??? Margaret is not poor. She is doing OK on a union-protected job, charging students $30/hr for a secretarial work. She is not abstaining from advocating for Islam no matter how ridiculous her arguments are.

Arthur, there is a difference between what YOU call A Palestine, and what Romans called Palestine. The fact that that land could host zero, one or two Jewish states at a time does not change neither its name, nor its size.

I do not and will not recognize any supremacy of Arab Nation over other nations. The fact that this nation got 22 states already, and Kurds and Druze got none, and Israel has to fight for 65 years to keep the tiny piece makes anyone with the slightest feeling of fairness drop any support for the Arab cause.

You can say that Jews invaded Palestine in 47/48, even though Jews started coming at the end of nineteenth century. Lots of Arabs invaded Palestine too, to join Zionists' enterprises, in exactly the same way as they do now.

Just don't forget, that Ottoman Empire was not Arab empire, Turks are no Arabs, and squatting lands does not give them ownership.
 

Alexander Werner (53)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 9:53 am
Margaret, don't pretend to be a hapless victim. If you weren't insulting lots of people, you wouldn't be banned from Care2. Don't forget that you checked me off Care2 much more often, than I checked you.

" What the hell is the Jewish diaspora Bob"? What about Jewish diaspora? Does anybody pay anything to Jews expelled in Arab countries for up to three generations after? Germany pays to the real refugees even until now, but not to their great-grandchildren. This is fair, especially considering that Germany pays these compensations voluntarily.

Arab states refuse the issue in the first place and take laws prohibiting return of stolen property to Jews.

See, Margaret, you will remind me about my mistake of 10B, even though Pakistan still remains the largest US Aid recipient. But you will forget your wrong claims, like Jewish Diaspora being paid by UN until the third generation.

We will see very soon if Arafat died of AIDS or from poisoning.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 10:22 am
Well, dear Bob: Do you actually think that I don't KNOW that Turks are not Arabs??????
Hey! I've got news for you: Iranians are not Arabs, either!!!! :) :) :)
The Jews who came to Palestine in the 19th century came in relatively small numbers and did so peacefully, with the acquiesence of the (Turkish) authorities. Those who came in 1947/48 came in massive numbers, without the approval of the (British) authorities, and they came by means of force and violence. Seems that they were too impatient to be processed through an orderly immigration procedure. Imagine how the U.S. government would have reacted had they decided to invade, say, Florida, instead of Palestine!
22 Arab states? Where do you come up with that number? Oh, I suppose if you include the mini-states like Kuwait, Bahrein, Qatar, Abu Dhabi, and the rest of the "Trucial States" in the Persian Gulf, you might have an argument. The only Arab states I find with any significant territory are: Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morrocco, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. That adds up to 13.
And 90% or more of all their territory is uninhabitable desert. The Israelis grabbed and still hold some of the most fertile territory in the Near East. The "land of milk and honey" which their "God" promised to them, so they say, 3000 years ago! (That they had to annihilate the natice Canaanites in order to grab it: oh, just a minor little detail!)
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 10:25 am
This here Robert Spencer doesn't read the Comments? Would be interesting to hear HIS reaction!
 

Free G. (4)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 11:04 am
Bob - where did I play a hapless victim? It's kind of stalky; almost as bad as Gillian, to delve into my personal life Bob. A tad obsessed comes to mind. The problem Bob is your whole response to anything that challenges you is to go into Spencerspeak and just regurgitate exactly what he writes.

First of all, the whole topic of Jewish diaspora is covered under the thread about Arab Jewry which you can read or re-read. Certainly some Jews were dispossessed, but not to the tune of what is being claimed. In addition, they also had help convincing them to leave by their own Jewish brothers and sisters, terrorizing them into leaving the country they were and immiggrate to Israel.

Secondly, the Israeli government didn't want the Jewish diaspora to make claims or refer to themselves as refugees until recently.

My comment was not in regard to discussion on Arab Jewry, but was in response to your claim "No other ethnic group got such a deal" which clearly another ethnic group does consider themselves refugees, even ones living in New Jersey, born and bred there while she went on a great adventure to the "homeland" to rediscover her Jewish roots.

Where did I ever claim that Jewish diaspora was paid anything by the UN, Bob? You are becoming much of a Gillian it seems. When it is convenient, just make crap up and attribute it to others and call it good. If you want to point out specific mistakes, you let me know where Bob. There never has been anything that I have posted in response to you that I have had to apologize for. It comes from actually reading Bob and knowing what I am talking about nor retract.

I know what the difference is between a credible source of information opposed to blogs written by people who actually have even been condemned by the ADL. While I'm at it Bob, I don't find ways to justify violent acts perpetuated by anyone, and this includes Hamas. The funny thing is, aside from your rabid defense of Israel, do you even think that they would stand by you much less thank you? Do you think that they are going to allow you to make aliyah? They have to take me Bob, it is the law. They cannot refuse me and I don't have to pander to them, but you, on the other hand, no matter how much you pander, won't get in.

Why, instead, don't you actually refute facts that are generally properly cited to prove your argument rather than going after people's personal life Bob? Why don't you let me worry about me, and you can worry about you?

Arthur - I know that the 22 country collective was coming up. Pretty soon he will be suggesting that the Palestinians move to Jordan being completely dispossessed from all of their land. I have suggested that we could refer to other groups like the white collective no matter where they came from as the Whities, but Bob didn't seem to want to adopt the same method of classifying people demographically in this manner. It seems that the criteria he applies to others, doesn't apply to the people he is defending so absolutely.

In case you didn't know, on top of Robert Spencer's blog contributions to known hate website Jihadwatch (under David Horowitz's employ), according to Bob, he is actually a ME expert who advises Presidents. Yup, that's what he does according to Sideshow Bob. They call him up into the White House because as a self-described "expert" I am sure his input is so incredibly valuable they are considering making him Secretary of the State.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 11:57 am
The 22 countries claim might pan out if one includes all the mini-states straddling the Persian Gulf: Bahrein, Qatar, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, etc. (They have all become rich because of oil.)
As for the Palestinians: I just regrettfully conclude that a Palestinian State --- with two segments widely separated from each other by Israeli territory --- is not viable. It would be better for Jordan to annex the West Bank, and Egypt to annex the Gaza Strip. As was the case prior to 1967. The West Bankers would then have full Jordanian citizenship, while the Gazers would have full Egyptian citizenship, including the right to relocate to Cairo. Alas: who --- in any position of power --- is even going to consider such a sensible solution?
I had never before heard of Robert Spencer, until I came across his article here at Care2.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 12:01 pm
P.S. Under my proposal: the Old Walled City of Jerusalem would be put under a United Nations Mandate for 99 years. But, of course, who is going to listen to me? When I sent a letter some months ago to Barack Obama, all I got back was a form letter --- which failed to address even one of the issues I had raised!
By the way: perhaps the best news coverage anywhere in the world comes from Al Jazeera. Main studios in Qatar, with studios also in London. We get it here in New York City on Channel 92, Time-Warner Cable TV.
Hey! Some reporters who previously worked for CNN are now working for Al Jazeera!
 

Free G. (4)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 3:15 pm
Bob - where did I play a hapless victim? It's kind of stalky; almost as bad as Gillian, to delve into my personal life Bob. A tad obsessed comes to mind. The problem Bob is your whole response to anything that challenges you is to go into Spencerspeak and just regurgitate exactly what he writes.

First of all, the whole topic of Jewish diaspora is covered under the thread about Arab Jewry which you can read or re-read. Certainly some Jews were dispossessed, but not to the tune of what is being claimed. In addition, they also had help convincing them to leave by their own Jewish brothers and sisters, terrorizing them into leaving the country they were and immiggrate to Israel.

Secondly, the Israeli government didn't want the Jewish diaspora to make claims or refer to themselves as refugees until recently.

My comment was not in regard to discussion on Arab Jewry, but was in response to your claim "No other ethnic group got such a deal" which clearly another ethnic group does consider themselves refugees, even ones living in New Jersey, born and bred there while she went on a great adventure to the "homeland" to rediscover her Jewish roots.

Where did I ever claim that Jewish diaspora was paid anything by the UN, Bob? You are becoming much of a Gillian it seems. When it is convenient, just make crap up and attribute it to others and call it good. If you want to point out specific mistakes, you let me know where Bob. There never has been anything that I have posted in response to you that I have had to apologize for. It comes from actually reading Bob and knowing what I am talking about nor retract.

I know what the difference is between a credible source of information opposed to blogs written by people who actually have even been condemned by the ADL. While I'm at it Bob, I don't find ways to justify violent acts perpetuated by anyone, and this includes Hamas. The funny thing is, aside from your rabid defense of Israel, do you even think that they would stand by you much less thank you? Do you think that they are going to allow you to make aliyah? They have to take me Bob, it is the law. They cannot refuse me and I don't have to pander to them, but you, on the other hand, no matter how much you pander, won't get in.

Why, instead, don't you actually refute facts that are generally properly cited to prove your argument rather than going after people's personal life Bob? Why don't you let me worry about me, and you can worry about you?

Arthur - I know that the 22 country collective was coming up. Pretty soon he will be suggesting that the Palestinians move to Jordan being completely dispossessed from all of their land. I have suggested that we could refer to other groups like the white collective no matter where they came from as the Whities, but Bob didn't seem to want to adopt the same method of classifying people demographically in this manner. It seems that the criteria he applies to others, doesn't apply to the people he is defending so absolutely.

In case you didn't know, on top of Robert Spencer's blog contributions to known hate website Jihadwatch (under David Horowitz's employ), according to Bob, he is actually a ME expert who advises Presidents. Yup, that's what he does according to Sideshow Bob. They call him up into the White House because as a self-described "expert" I am sure his input is so incredibly valuable they are considering making him Secretary of the State.



Arthur - I think that the possibility of a two state solution is dead, gone and buried. Carlos Strenger wrote a piece on it in today's Ha'aretz that addresses this.

My belief of the 2-State solution's demise, doesn't necessarily come from separation of Gaza from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, but actually the non-contiguous nature which now is part of the West Bank due to settlement building. What is left are three or four cantons separated by huge Israeli land masses of roads and settlements making it virtually impossible for people to travel from one part of the West Bank to another.

The issue of Gaza lying outside of the rest of what would be a Palestinian state was addressed through a series of position papers regarding a two state solution by the AIX Group of which one addressed the issue of a territorial link between Gaza and the West Bank. Much thought was given to security, the environment and statutory considerations by the Group. It was quite an interesting read and if you are interested in reading the original 972mag article (which includes a link to the original position paper) it can be found at What Would A Safe Passage Between West Bank and Gaza Look Like.

What I was referring to by the "22 Countries" was Bob's use of creating a Muslim majority or Arab collective in which he recognizes no difference between those who were born and live in Lebanon and those who were born and live in Saudi Arabia. The are just one big pot where he applies big, broad statements defining people under this criteria. In other words, if they are a Muslim/Arab majority country, they are a) guilty of all sins collectively b) should make room for the Palestinians while Israel dispossesses them of the meagre land which has been left to them. That is like saying countries that are predominantly filled with white people are essentially the same. Using that logic, I as a Canadian am as guilty as the US for the debacle of the Iraqi War.

I also want to note that my criticism is of the Israeli government. I actually support the state of Israel and its right to exist and live in relative peace and security. I think it is far too late in the day to go back and undo all of the injustices done. Since the Palestinians have ceded the War of Independence land gain made by Israel, I have no problem with it either. My criticism is not just about the injustice done to the Palestinian population, but of the corner Israel has painted themselves into. A one-state solution, if Gaza were included, would have almost with certainty a Muslim majority. I think we have witnessed first hand what the oppressed do once they gain power. In the case of Palestine, Israel didn't even pick the oppressor to punish, but a population that generally had nothing to do with what I consider the greatest crime committed in history, the Holocaust. How bad do you think it is going to be when a Muslim majority actually governs their oppressor? I am not making this statement based on some view that those who practice Islam are worse than let's say Jews or Christians. I just do know though that people have very, very long memories in regard to what has been done to them and human nature, is human nature.

There are several problems, in my view, of annexation with Jordan. First of all, Jordan doesn't want the Palestinians, and the Palestinians don't want Jordan. I fully believe in the basic fundamental human right of self determination and as it stands, annexation with Jordan isn't going to cut it. These people were promised their own State prior to any promises made to the Zionists. They have fought too long and too hard to give up their demand for a Palestinian state. I think that Israel, with the backing of the United States, has essentially taken, taken and taken. The US will be busy with their own crap and although American Jewry will not air its dirty laundry in public, it is becoming increasingly disengaged. Being loud doesn't necessarily indicate strength, it just is making a lot of noise. This last engagement in Gaza, has made some pretty strong supporters of Israel write things I never thought I would read. Ethan Bronner of the NY Times wrote:

“As long as the crime of dispossession and refugeehood that was committed against the Palestinian people in 1947-48 is not redressed through a peaceful and just negotiation that satisfies the legitimate rights of both sides, we will continue to see enhancements in both the determination and the capabilities of Palestinian fighters — as has been the case since the 1930s, in fact,” Rami G. Khouri, a professor at the American University of Beirut, wrote in an online column. “Only stupid or ideologically maniacal Zionists fail to come to terms with this fact.”

I believe that this is going to take a long while to play out. I do believe though, that the world is getting increasingly tired of Israel's demands, arrogance, aggressive behaviour, all while playing the perpetual victim.
I also agree with your assessment that Al Jazeera is an excellent source for news. I also read Ha'aaretz, 972mag, YNet, JPost (to see what the spin machines are producing). Robert Spencer's blog Jihadwatch was named a hate website by the Southern Poverty Law Centre, as well as by Abe Foxman from the ADL. It is financed by David Horowitz (of FrontPageMagazine) also accused of long standing racism and are in league with Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugged. These blogs are the extreme, extreme pro-Israeli end of the spectrum, full of misinformation, distortion and outright lies. This is why it is difficult to have a meaningful conversation with Bob. He regurgitates what is on these websites and doesn't cross check anything. It is kind of from God's mouth to my ear thinking.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 3:35 pm
If there is no two-state solution, then what is the solution?
The best solution would be for Israel to become a secular multinational state, with equal rights for everyone on its territory. I have about as much chance of winning PowerBall tonight as that happening! (Actually, I have a BETTER chance of winning PowerBall than that happening!)
Let's hope that Netanyahu and his extremist government fall after the January elections. That would be a first step. They've had reasonably sensible leaders in Israel in the past, who have come to agreements with the Arabs. Unfortunately, most of them are now dead.
 

Free G. (4)
Wednesday November 28, 2012, 3:59 pm
Arthur:

I am not disagreeing with you. I think that a two-State solution would have been the best, but unfortunately is gone. A one-State solution is probably going to be the most viable (it will take a long, long time), but something I don't necessarily view as the best solution. All things being equal, a multi-national state where no one's rights were trampled would be wonderful, but I just don't see it happening. I would be extremely happy if I were wrong in my assessment, but human nature is human nature.

As for January elections, I think it will be Bibi again (actually my nickname is Bibi and I have ceased to answer to it) and we can go further down this road of insanity.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 7:33 am
Biblical note: When King Solomon wanted to build his grand Temple, he needed lumber. But: there were no forests in Israel. So: he had to import the lumber. Where did he get it? Why, from the King of Tyre in Phoenicia (Lebanon). Said king's name was Hiram. That name has been popular with Jewish men ever since!
Back in those days, there were extensive forests of cedar in Phoenicia (Lebanon). Today, only a few pathetic remnants remain.
 

Free G. (4)
Thursday November 29, 2012, 12:09 pm
Well today in the land was divided for two people. Now today, we see the Palestinians bid again for upgraded UN status. I wish them well.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Friday November 30, 2012, 8:11 am
Free G: the vote was: 138 to 9 --- in favor.

Those opposed? Israel (naturally), the United States (Israel's lackey in the U.N.), and those great powers:
Czech Republic, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru (!!!), Palau, and Panama.

Hadn't even known that tiny itsy-bitsy Nauru was a member of the U.N.!!! Can't imagine how they can afford to maintain a Mission in New York!

I'll have to read today's New York Times, who find out who abstained.

Netanyahu's response: VENEMOUS!!!!! Always the diplomat.
 

Arthur Lamirande (0)
Friday November 30, 2012, 10:30 am
Didn't poor Susan Rice look pathetic yesterday at the U.N.? Valiantly spouting the Israeli line!
We don't want HER as Secretary of State!
Netanyahu was livid! It would be funny, if he were not so dangerous! And the U.S. government so compliant to every Israeli wish and demand.
With regard to this subject: we haven't had a rational President since Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Where is Eisenhower when we need him?
Whatsat? Carter? Yeh, Carter tried. But Reagan soon dispatched him. Appeals to raw emotion always seem to prevail over reason.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.