Israel's Netanyahu says Palestinian statehood bid at UN will fail

[dave111223]

With respect to the Arab spring, my point is simply that the deaths stack up by the thousands and scarcely anyone on this forum can be bothered to comment, yet any transgression by Israel seems to attract huge amounts of scrutiny and apparent outrage. Have you considered why this might be?

I think there are a lack of comments on the Arab spring issues because pretty much everyone agrees that a government killing it's own people is wrong...what is there for people to discuss or debate? Assad, Godaffi etc.. are bast*rd; does anyone disagree?

Whereas with the Israel-Palestinian there are a lot of people arguing one side or the other, thus producing more debate and comments.

And as for your Jewish heritage I only ask this because it seems to me that there are not too many "neutrals" arguing on the side of the Israelis, which I think says a lot about the situation. Of course Palestinians and Jews are going to argue their own side come hell or high water so as such, i feel, these opinions carry little weight.

[flying]

because it seems to me that there are not too many "neutrals" arguing on the side of the Israelis, which I think says a lot about the situation.

Bingo with a capital B

[Steely Dan]

because it seems to me that there are not too many "neutrals" arguing on the side of the Israelis, which I think says a lot about the situation.

Bingo with a capital B

Goebbels has two b's Whilst the world relies on oil western governments will inevitably turn a blind eye to the antics of some of the most odious regimes on Earth, who by some cosmic joke have most of the oil. The press reflect the attitudes of their governments and so subliminally people are fed propaganda on a daily basis. Actually western press and governments are probably hoping against hope that a settlement of Arab-Israeli hostilities would lead to the mini Gaza strips within some of their inner cities settling down and assimilating, but sadly that's a delusion.

We are in my opinion dealing with a threat as great as Nazism posed 70 years ago, but most people would rather ignore the canary in the coalmine. I'd like to write more but it would be removed.

[Ulysses G.]

In a 2001 video, Netanyahu, reportedly unaware he was being recorded, said:

Please provide a link to a reputable source that proves this. You have posted some pretty unreliable sources in the past.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[flying]

because it seems to me that there are not too many "neutrals" arguing on the side of the Israelis, which I think says a lot about the situation.

Bingo with a capital B

Goebbels has two b's

Perfectly on cue

You just proved Dave's point perfectly

[Ulysses G.]

it seems to me that there are not too many "neutrals" arguing on the side of the Israelis,

There are not too many "nuetrals" arguing on the side of the Palestinians either. The far left, anti-Semites and radical Muslims all have their own agenda.

[Jingthing]

I was watching Fareed Zakaria the other day and he had 4 Americans "debating" the issue. They basically just all sat there for the entire "debate" saying Palestine is asking for war, repeatedly using words like "Dumb", "Stupid", "Boneheaded"...do they really think the rest of the world is going to swallow a farce debate like this?

Who do you think you're fooling claiming to be neutral? That was an Israel hit piece capped with an anti-semitic cartoon. Be honest, OK?

For example if others don't believe me, your shameless MASSIVE distortion of the recent Fareed Zakaria show.

First of all the panel was a diverse group of people, including a PALESTINIAN American.

Joining me now to make sense of all these four top experts, Elliot Abrams has held top foreign policy positions under Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush; Rashid Khalidi is a Palestinian-American historian who teaches at Columbia University; Gideon Rose is the Editor of Foreign Affairs; and Bret Stephens is the Foreign Affairs Columnist for the "Wall Street Journal."

Secondly, it wasn't presented as a debate, it was a discussion of a hot topic on a news format show.

Thirdly, it is false to say there wasn't a diversity of opinion among the group.

Fourthly, it's a news show for people who really want to get informed. It was not a farce and it's not a propaganda tool of the US government, so the rest of the world is free to digest the opinions there anyway they like.

An example which totally refutes your comic book style false characterization of the content there, Khalidi has a Palestinian background --

ZAKARIA: Is it a mistake? (the UN statehood bid)

KHALIDI: I - I myself think that this is not going to advance Palestinian statehood. But if it ends the illusion among Palestinians that the United States is actually going to help facilitate real self- determination for the Palestinian people, it's probably not a bad thing.

For those wanting the read the entire transcript of the Middle East section of the show, here it is --

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1109/18/fzgps.01.html

Start at --

ZAKARIA: It's been a tarred few days in the Middle East. An Egyptian mob burned Israel's Embassy in Cairo. Israel's ambassadors to both Egypt and Turkey have been forced out and the Arab World is coalescing around proposals to vote for Palestinian Statehood in New York this coming week.

BTW, AL JAZEERA reports only 30 percent of west bank Arabs support the Abbas led UN statehood bid.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Who do you think you're fooling claiming to be neutral? That was an Israel hit piece capped with an anti-semitic cartoon. Be honest, OK?

What's new? This is pretty typical of the types claiming to be "neutral" on Israel.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[flying]

Who do you think you're fooling claiming to be neutral?

Goodnight Gertrude here we go..............

[Steely Dan]

Who do you think you're fooling claiming to be neutral? That was an Israel hit piece capped with an anti-semitic cartoon. Be honest, OK?

What's new? This is pretty typical of the types claiming to be "neutral" on Israel.

I note that if one happens to be Jewish one is automatically considered a 'Zealot' however if you prefix biased propaganda with the phrase 'As a neutral' you can be anything but neutral and fully expect it to be swallowed uncritically. The lie is gigantic and corrosive.

[Jingthing]

I'm not interested in your resume, dude, I was talking about your post, which was not the post of an objective person. You have the right to your opinion, but to claim you aren't promoting the Palestinian side doesn't wash.

The quote I included from the Palestinian guy was in the EARLY part of the show, so your excuse that you didn't watch and came to the ridiculous biased conclusion of the show doesn't pass the smell test.

The cartoonist is a very famous, virulent antisemite. I accept you didn't know that. Let me ask you this about that particular cartoon which isn't one of his virulent ones. Would someone viewing that cartoon realize these things

-- Gaza was occupied by Israel and Israel gave it back to the Arabs, ejecting their own citizens, as a PEACE gesture.

-- In return the Gazans elected a government labeled terrorist by many countries, openly dedicated to destroying all of of Jewish Israel.

-- Israel on the other hand is not at all interested in claiming the lands of Gaza to be part of Israel.

Yes, the rockets vs. the Israeli retaliation have been disproportionate and its not my interest to rationalize that for them.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Several off-topic posts have been removed as well as quotes and responses to them.

Please stay on topic.

Please refrain from posting personal details on the open forum. They are not germane to the discussion.

[dave111223]

I'm not interested in your resume, dude, I was talking about your post, which was not the post of an objective person. You have the right to your opinion, but to claim you aren't promoting the Palestinian side doesn't wash.

I said that i had no affiliation with either side, but now due to events that i have seen unfold within recent years that I have formed an opinion which is sympathetic to the Palestinians; I still don't understand how i am "not an objective person" I have absolutely zero pre-existing biases or views that would make me nonobjective on the issue.

I believe that still makes me a "neutral" person (as i have no background affiliation)...however a neutral person who has formed an opinion.

If one looks at events and forms an opinion which is not on the Israeli side does that automatically qualify someone as "not objective"?

I'm sure that if i were to go back through a history lesson you'd show me all the injustices etc...I'm sure there were, but as I said my opinion is based on the last few years of events, as seen on CNN and BBC, as prior to that i really had no knowledge of the issues at all as so cannot draw any opinions for past events which go beyond my scope.

And honestly i feel that if you look too much at what happened 50 years ago, what happened 100 years ago, what happened 1000 years ago those events will always cloud your view of the current climate. I wasn't even alive when most of the stuff you are talking about happened.

Edited September 20, 2011 by dave111223

[flying]

I was talking about your post, which was not the post of an objective person. You have the right to your opinion

Obviously he is not entitled to his opinion unless it is in agreement with yours & the usual opinion police.

That is the problem with any topic that involves Israel.

Even if someone named Muhtadi Shapiro came in here with an opinion they would not be considered neutral unless it was

in line with what the opinion police here deem neutral...aka: Israel is 100% right... always.

To question it means you are neither neutral nor fair... You support Nazi's & have an agenda

Now, hey you Mister! can't you read, you got to have a shirt and tie to get a seat

You can't even watch, no you can't eat, you ain't suppose to be here

Sign said you got to have a membership card to get inside

Perhaps a new forum sub-section is in order?

Then you could literally lock out opinions that are not in line with your own.

[Jingthing]

I said that i had no affiliation with either side, but now due to events that i have seen unfold within recent years that I have formed an opinion which is sympathetic to the Palestinians; I still don't understand how i am "not an objective person" I have absolutely zero pre-existing biases or views that would make me nonobjective on the issue.

...

And honestly i feel that if you look too much at what happened 50 years ago, what happened 100 years ago, what happened 1000 years ago those events will always cloud your view of the current climate. I wasn't even alive when most of the stuff you are talking about happened.

The opinion you have formed and are now blatantly expressing in a twisted (as I have proven) way is now pro-Palestinian, and is anti-Israeli. Isn't that what I said? Your claim that you STARTED without a bias and are now presenting your opinion as being of more value because of that is totally specious. Ignoring history? That sounds like an endorsement of ignorance. Speaking of ignorance -- Israel gave back Gaza in 2005. Is that too ancient for you to process? GEEZ!

Come on people, shouldn't there be a minimum knowledge base to be taken seriously to comment on Middle East conflict issues?

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[dave111223]

The opinion you have formed and are now blatantly expressing in a twisted (as I have proven) way is now pro-Palestinian, and is anti-Israeli. Isn't that what I said? Ignoring history? That sounds like an endorsement of ignorance.

Yes i have formed an opinion which is sympathetic to Palestinians getting their own state, and i think that Israel is content with the status-quo. Are you just going to try and go around and around and pick on every word until somehow my head explodes and an anti-Semitic bigot pops out?

Yes i think you need to draw a line under history somewhere...how far back do you want to go? Haven't Israel and Palestine been fighting since like 2000BC....should we trace it all the way back and figure out who owes who what? I don't think so, let's draw a line under it and reevaluate what's fair and move on; both peoples need a country and let's go from there.

If Israel were to pull out of Palestine and the Palestinians decided "here's our chance to destroy Israel" i think world opinion would instant swing to back the Israel; i know that my view would.

[govekidao]

Even under an international mandate, Israel will never shrink back to 67 borders. Combine gulf state narcissism with the inability of the international community to deflate malicious zionist conflation between religious and territorial agendas (displayed so aptly in this thread by the willingness to parrot the less-than-pertinent statistic about the ratio of islamic to jewish states being 51:1), and the reality is Israel has enough elbow room to expand its occupation for at least another 5 years, maybe even a decade.

Although publishing by a fiercly pro-Israeli lobby, I think this map of possible future land swaps is a fascinating insight into the strategic aims of the last 50 years of Zionism, and its ultimate end goal to claim as much land as possible before exceeding the limit the international tolerance.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/interactiveMaps/index.html

The sheer sophistication of their campaign is both horrific and awe-inspiring:

-The conscious decision (often credited to FM Abigor Lieberman & Netanyahu) to revert back to the definition 'Judea and Sameria' when commenting in political arenas about the Westbank has totally succeeded in galvanising in many peoples minds a sense of ancient entitlement for the jewish cause.

- In my own country the U.K; the head of the NUS Aaron Porters success in suppressing debate about pro-palestinian issues by equating it to early stage radicalism thus by exploiting the concerns of vunerable institutions of being mis-branded a 'breeding ground for terrorism' ... This despite the fact the British pro-Palestinian movement within academic institutions is largely non-islamic.

-As has been already said, the ability to subtly adapt the wording of Oslo to include recognition of a Jewish state (and all the inherent land ownership implications, and social concessions) and exploit the power of syntax as evidence of a Palestinian rejection of peace

The real tragedy is that internally Israel is a total mess, and indeed having devoted so much of its time toward expansionism and militarisation of its state, has failed to pay enough attention to the issues os social cohesion within its disparate population of 'tax-burden heavy 'unemployed, sexist, religious fundamentalists, VS. a swelling liberal middle class sick of being taxed to fund the Orthodox. If 'price tagging' by hardliners wasn't bad enough, the recent laws passed in light of the cottage cheese incident branding boycotts (despite their admirably peaceful nature) a criminal act are evidence enough this country is on route to becoming just another Middle Eastern pariah, fundamentally comprimised by its dogmatic relationship with an abrahamic faith.

Its all so tragic....

[Jingthing]

The opinion you have formed and are now blatantly expressing in a twisted (as I have proven) way is now pro-Palestinian, and is anti-Israeli. Isn't that what I said? Ignoring history? That sounds like an endorsement of ignorance.

Yes i have formed an opinion which is sympathetic to Palestinians getting their own state, and i think that Israel is content with the status-quo. Are you just going to try and go around and around and pick on every word until somehow my head explodes and an anti-Semitic bigot pops out?

Yes i think you need to draw a line under history somewhere...how far back do you want to go? Haven't Israel and Palestine been fighting since like 2000BC....should we trace it all the way back and figure out who owes who what? I don't think so, let's draw a line under it and reevaluate what's fair and move on; both peoples need a country and let's go from there.

If Israel were to pull out of Palestine and the Palestinians decided "here's our chance to destroy Israel" i think world opinion would instant swing to back the Israel; i know that my view would.

OMG, he thinks "Israel" and "Palestine" have been fighting like this since 2000 BC! Now, I'm speechless. I knew this guy had knowledge gaps, but he's going for a grand prize. OK, dude, let me be clear. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. So does a ten year old child. BTW, that doesn't mean EVERYTHING you have said is wrong. I certainly agree that Israel in general is much more comfortable with the current status quo than Palestinians are in general. Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[Credo]

I am not pro-Israel and I would like to see the Palestinians have a state. But before they are granted statehood, they have to meet the criteria that makes them an independent, functional nation. One of those criteria would probably be a definable border. Another would probably be recognition of other countries. They don't have to like them, but they do need to recognize them.

Some of the hurdles to being a nation will require assistance from other countries or the UN. Recognition of another country comes from within.

As it now stands, they are a nation whose existence is based more on a desire to destroy another country than to function as an independent part of the international community.

Counter arguments about how terrible and bad Israel really belong elsewhere. It already has statehood.

[Jingthing]

I am not pro-Israel and I would like to see the Palestinians have a state.

I am pro-Israel (its continued existence as a Jewish state, NOT all of their policies) and I agree with your post.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[Steely Dan]

I'm sure that if i were to go back through a history lesson you'd show me all the injustices etc...I'm sure there were, but as I said my opinion is based on the last few years of events, as seen on CNN and BBC, as prior to that i really had no knowledge of the issues at all as so cannot draw any opinions for past events which go beyond my scope.

This is why I made my comments general and not to you specifically. Did you know the BBC commissioned an independent report (Balen report) to investigate it's alleged anti-Israel bias? The report was obviously so damning that the BBC not only refused to publish it but also used legal channels to block it's publication through freedom of information legislation.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23628970-the-secret-report-at-heart-of-bbcs-gaza-paranoia.do

The enormity of this can hardly be overstated. Apart from the corporation's legal obligation to be impartial, it had struggled for years to counter allegations that its reporting favoured the Palestinians. The claims meshed with attacks on the BBC for being Left-leaning and undermining its own legitimacy by harbouring a secret liberal agenda. Bosses at the corporation ordered Balen's report to be locked away. When an effort was made to make its findings public through Freedom of Information laws, the BBC spent £200,000 on a legal fight to keep it secret.

Believe me when you know what to look for the BBC bias is insidious and systematic, so I would not blame anyone for being swayed by it if unaware.

[dave111223]

OMG, he thinks "Israel" and "Palestine" have been fighting like this since 2000 BC! Now, I'm speechless. I knew this guy had knowledge gaps, but he's going for a grand prize. OK, dude, let me be clear. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. So does a ten year old child. BTW, that doesn't mean EVERYTHING you have said is wrong. I certainly agree that Israel in general is much more comfortable with the current status quo than Palestinians are in general.

I was under the impression that there were battles between the Israelites other local tribes/civilizations, such as Palestine, around Canaan for many 1000s of years BC is this incorrect?

[Jingthing]

I was under the impression that there were battles between the Israelites other local tribes/civilizations, such as Palestine, around Canaan for many 1000s of years BC is this incorrect?

Civilizations such as Palestine? Oy!

Read a book. Then come back. Who are we kidding. You don't really want to know what happened as recently as 2005. Seriously, if you think I'm going to waste my time informing you about the most basic points of history, well, you're wrong. I don't see that as a good investment. You've already made up your mind anyway and facts and history aren't really part of it.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[dave111223]

Civilizations such as Palestine? Oy!

Read a book. Then come back. Who are we kidding. You don't really want to know what happened as recently as 2005.

Are the Palestinians not descended from the Philistines and other ancient tribes that battled with the Israelites in BC?

[chuckd]

It would seem Saudi Arabia is stepping up to the plate with some cash for the Palestinians.

The Palestinian ruling party has no income other than foreign aid and they must be running a little short right now so the Saudis will take up some slack.

This will help pay for those charter flights to New York for the UN meeting.

_______________________________________________________

In UN week, Saudi says (sic) to ease Palestinian crisis

By Tom Perry

RAMALLAH, West Bank | Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:40pm EDT

(Reuters) - Saudi Arabia will pay $200 million to the Palestinian Authority, the official Palestinian news agency said on Monday, funds that will ease a financial crisis faced by the authority as it prepares to apply for full U.N. membership this week.

Saudi Finance Minister Ibrahim Alassaf called Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to tell him his government would transfer the funds, the WAFA agency reported.

A shortfall in funding from Arab states including Saudi Arabia had been identified as the cause of the crisis which has highlighted the authority's vulnerability as President Mahmoud Abbas prepares to press the Palestinians' statehood agenda at the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York.

Last week, both the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank identified the authority's financial crisis as a danger to the state-building program which Fayyad's administration has led over the last two years.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/19/us-palestinians-funds-saudi-idUSTRE78I61E20110919

[Jingthing]

Civilizations such as Palestine? Oy!

Read a book. Then come back. Who are we kidding. You don't really want to know what happened as recently as 2005.

Are the Palestinians not descended from the Philistines and other ancient tribes that battled with the Israelites in BC?

No, the Palestinians are NOT descended from the Philistines. (Who weren't even semites!) Is reading a book going to kill you really? BTW, the very idea of a separate Palestinian Arab identity as separate from Arab identity in general is a VERY MODERN concept. Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[mpoppel]

RT @ibnezra: Massive billboard in Ramallah in favor of statehood http://twitpic.com/6npxyc

[Steely Dan]

Civilizations such as Palestine? Oy!

Read a book. Then come back. Who are we kidding. You don't really want to know what happened as recently as 2005.

Are the Palestinians not descended from the Philistines and other ancient tribes that battled with the Israelites in BC?

No, the Palestinians are NOT descended from the Philistines. Is reading a book going to kill you really? BTW, the very idea of a separate Palestinian Arab identity as separate from Arab identity in general is a VERY MODERN concept.

Oh Jing, At least give him a start.

[Jingthing]

RT @ibnezra: Massive billboard in Ramallah in favor of statehood http://twitpic.com/6npxyc

I am sure Abbas was happy to see that, but considering that only 30 percent of his own west bank people are in favor of this UN bid, it's rather hollow.

Why do most west bank Arabs oppose this? Because they don't want a two state solution; they want a one state solution, their state, an Arab state, with right of return of the 9 million global Palestinian identified Arabs to the sovereign land of Israel.

Again, there is a good evidence this entire UN show is just a last hurrah to massage the ego of one man, Abbas.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Jingthing

[Wallaby]

I was under the impression that there were battles between the Israelites other local tribes/civilizations, such as Palestine, around Canaan for many 1000s of years BC is this incorrect?

Civilizations such as Palestine? Oy!

Read a book. Then come back. Who are we kidding. You don't really want to know what happened as recently as 2005. Seriously, if you think I'm going to waste my time informing you about the most basic points of history, well, you're wrong. I don't see that as a good investment. You've already made up your mind anyway and facts and history aren't really part of it.

What a condecending response. He has every right to his opinion based on whatever he wants to base it on. Who are you to dictate who should comment? If you don't like what he said and think it is not worth anything then don't bother responding to him.

He has made it quite clear what he is basing his opinon on. He is also a lot more qualified to have a neutral opion than someone who knows everything about the conflict. That is his point, which seems to escape you. You are frustrated because your are biased based on your knowledge of past events. He is neutral because he does not have that knowledge of past events, he only see it as a recent issue that eveyone wants dealt with and is not the least bit interested in how it all came about.

The world is sick and tired of the fighting and don't care one iota of how it all started or when it all started. People just want it stopped and on the recent evidence it is Israel that is in the wrong.