Netanyahu slammed for 'inaccurate' Holocaust comments

[Morch]

The Palestinians have long ago accepted the state of Israel. Arafat did so in 1993

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.haaretz.c...rders-1.2569155

Hamas’ Meshal Agrees for Palestinian State Based on 1967 Borders

http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.614309

The problem has always been: Will Israel reciprocate and accept a state of Palestine within the 67 borders?

The ball is in Israel's court. They hold all the power.

Still trying to sell those busted links?

Here we go again, one by one....

Arafat's letter (1993) wasn't quite the end of it, as no actual changes were made in the Palestinian National Covenant at the time. This caused quite a lot of difficulties between the sides, with a few repeat acts of Arafat providing partial and unsatisfactory clarifications. The ordeal was supposedly officially concluded in 1998 (in Gaza and with Clinton present). Only it wasn't, quite. More like transferred to a committee etc. The result it that one can find various versions of the covenant, even on official Palestinian websites (mostly in Arabic), with the same evident at the education system. It keeps popping back every now and then (this quote from 2009, for example, and note that the reference to the covenant as if it wasn't changed):

Nabil Shaath, a veteran member of Fatah's ruling Central Committee, told Reuters that the charter "cannot be changed." Azzam al-Ahmad, another senior Fatah leader, said: "It will remain as is. It won't be subject to discussion."

"We have the right to practice all forms of national struggle," Ahmad said. "We are in the phase of national liberation and we have the right to use all means in the fight to end the occupation until we establish the state."

Palestinian analysts said Fatah, seeking to infuse its top ranks with new blood, would find it hard to compete with Hamas if it amended its charter before reaching any deal with Israel to establish an independent Palestinian state.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE57264N20090803?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

If one holds that the Covenant was amended,, and that as such it reflects the notions meant to guide the Palestinians - might be worth to bear in mind that some of the articles supposedly nullified include denial of Israel's legitimacy, denial of the historical-religious connection of the Jews to Palestine, defining Zionism as colonialism, fascism, imperialism and racism. There more in that vein, Wonder is some of our esteemed members would see fit to adopt these amendments?

(the above is from a post of mine made earlier this month)

Next...

You are still linking the wrong peace initiative (must be all that copy/paste effort) - the one here is an Israeli plan. What you refer to is the Arab Peace Initiative (aka the Saudi proposal). Despite your claims, Hamas rejected the plan, and actually carried out one of its deadliest suicide-bomber attacks a day earlier. And no, Iran was not party to this offer - the occasions were Arab League Summits.

The offer also includes topics which are not easily agreed upon and some which are brushed aside (but would inevitably resurface). For those posters not keeping in line with current events - things have moved on in the Middle East. Syria, Iraq and Libya won't be coming back as such, Lebanon is still dysfunctional. But nothing easier than saying that the offer is on the table, eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

Last but not least...

The two Hamas links loop back to topic (at least for me). Not that it matters much....same old.

The first statement was made in 2008, to an EU delegation. The context was trying to secure Hamas from being further blacklisted, and facilitate aid transfers. The statement does not include recognition of Israel nor is it a peace offer. Nor does the article cite the insistence on the Palestinian Right of Return.

The second statement was reported in 2014, at a meeting with Abbas. This was following that summer's fighting in Gaza. Hamas was beaten and with very little by way of outside support. The only possible avenue was patching up things with the PA. Abbas pretty much milked it for all he could. However things didn't get better between the sides, and by the end of the year Hamas was back to its old hardliner slogans (posters are welcome to look up quotes from Hamas's 27th anniversary). Again, the Hamas is not recognizing Israel, but referring to a Palestinian state within the 1967 lines. No, not semantics.

These two statements simply show that Hamas says what it needs to say in order to survive, but tries to do so with the least amount of diversion from its ideology. There is no outright wish for peace, there is nothing permanent subscribed to. In very much the same way, Hamas switched sponsor states as fortune and politics dictated.

Don't let facts confuse you.

Looks like another case of the Israelis never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity for peace when it is offered.

There will come a time when the Israelis will rip the arms off the Palestinian peace negotiators as they desperately try to shake hands on a 2 state solution. It will be the only chance Zionists will have to form a state with a mainly Jewish character, before the Palestinians outbreed them.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians.

Looks like another case of copy/paste gone wrong.

When can't deal with factual criticism, turn to generalized slogans. Deflection 101.

And back with the "time is on the side of the Palestinians" (and "before the Palestinians outbreed them") - wouldn't stop the next argument being centered around genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, right? Logic 101.

Probably won't be long before lecturing others again (as seen earlier on topic) about "educating themselves", "getting facts wrong" and whatnot.

[Ulysses G.]

Surprised ThaiVisa tolerates links to such conspiratorial hate content but a good reminder of the actual mindset and motivations of some who post here.

Indeed. Most of the obsessive anti-Israel crew IMO.

[dexterm]

Sorry thread full

Morch wrote..

Looks like another case of copy/paste gone wrong.

When can't deal with factual criticism, turn to generalized slogans. Deflection 101.

And back with the "time is on the side of the Palestinians" (and "before the Palestinians outbreed them") - wouldn't stop the next argument being centered around genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, right? Logic 101.

Probably won't be long before lecturing others again (as seen earlier on topic) about "educating themselves", "getting facts wrong" and whatnot.

No my Eban parody was deliberate.

I am busy at the moment and have better things to do than argue the minutiae of when an offer of peace was made by Arafat in 1993 that it hadn't gone to some sub committee or other first. Israel should have ripped his arm off in accepting the olive branch, not shilly shally around with delaying tactics for a further 22 years building more settlements swallowing up more land of a future Palestinian state, stealing aquifers, ethnically cleansing more areas of Jerusalem on all sorts of pretexts, provoking wars with Hamas in order to destroy Palestinian unity governments.

All of which more and more make a viable 2 state solution impossible. So be it. Go for a one state solution with the Palestinians as equal citizens.

IMO all the Palestinians need do is keep their heads down, practise passive resistance, flood the social media with images of their daily humiliations, beatings and murders at the hands of the occupying army the IDf and fanatical Zionist colonists under an apartheid system. Simply become a bigger headache for Israelis, who in turn are becoming a bigger headache and embarrassment for the EU and USA.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians. There are not going to be any further large migrations of Jews into Israel...not at least when it's a warzone. So all the Palestinians need do is stay put, work through diplomatic channels to bring Israel before the ICC for war crimes, eventually get their state recognized by the UN, as more people see through the great Israeli hoax: that Israel plays the victim when it is in fact the colonialist aggressor.

Edited October 26, 2015 by dexterm

[Jai Dee]

More off-topic and flame posts have been removed from this thread.

If you feel that a post is offensive or trollish, please do not reply to it... report it and a moderator will deal with it.

[Pakboong]

Income4meandU

I think you and I are on the same side of the argument. Please read the entire thread. This one is unusual because it is about the Israeli Prime Minister that many would consider anti-semetic which is highly unusual and the nature of the issue causes each of us to consider both sides of the issue. Easy to get lost without a program but, I believe it is necessary to read the entire thread in order to stay connected. If you have a need to be rabid about Jews, up to you but it is not the kind of stuff that leads anywhere meaningful. The old saying about flies and vinegar really comes into play here.

Thank you, but we are not on the same side. I read the entire thread. It is not unusual because it is the same tactic. I have considered both sides. The one side was shoved down my throat growing up. The other side I am just finding out about amidst bullets and batteries opening up on me in a hailstorm. Rabid about Jews? Is that the way you see it? Then we are definitely not on the same side. The old saying about riding your motorbike down the road to truth and hitting a swarm of flies that smell like garlic comes to mind.

Good luck to you sir.

[arunsakda]

I just searched the same video on an old Korean ladies' laptop. An open search without logging in. The same conspiracy videos appear in the side bar, so poo-poo to a stupid idea. Heres another classic one "The Khazarian Conspiracy-The Synagogue of Satan - Full Movie. (Are people really willing to waste 01:45 on that?). I agree bombing of cities in WWII was inhumane. Germany began in 1939 with Warsaw. They also launched missiles that could only hit strategic targets by accident, and thus were pure terror weapons. Eisenhowers "death camps"? Very funny. In the US they got the nickname "Camp Fritz". German POWs fatttened up on good food when the population was suffering rationing of every consumer good. They were paid military wages. US soldiers guarding them sometimes slept in the same type of tents as prisoners (in accordance with the Geneva convention) because of insufficient barracks. POWs worked freely in some communities and had such a horrible time schtupping lonely farmwives that they first thing some did was emigrate to America after the war.

I hope income is actuality a child in his jammies who enjoys posting these outrageous things for a reaction, at that they succeed. One who actually believes this rubbish however I feel sorry for and it's not worth responding to. Living in a bubble of ignorance and hate, with imagined enemies behind it all. It's a form of insanity. In actuality other than Palestinians under occupation/inequality there is hardly a person on Earth suffering a legitimate grievance brough on by "Jews" or "Zionists".

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited October 26, 2015 by arunsakda

[Morch]

Your war was lost in 1945, but that won't stop your ilk. Jingthing is right to ignore you.

And here we ago again....I suspect 99.9% of the posters on here who disagree with the Zionist propaganda had relatives who fought against the Nazis, and your suggesting they are Nazi's and they fought for the Nazi's because they dont buy into your Zionist propaganda....

you should be ashamed of yourself....but then again you denied the holocaust as well in another post because your that fanantically blinded in your hatred

Poor attempt at a spin.

The poster UG referred to clearly sees little issues with and glorifies the Nazis. At the same time scorning the allied war efforts as the real crime.

What makes you think that relatives of posters having opposite ideas than yours did not serve during WWII?

Sure you had a point there. Somewhere.

[metisdead]

Posts containing links to off topic videos have been removed as well as the replies.

[Morch]

Sorry thread full

Morch wrote..

Looks like another case of copy/paste gone wrong.

When can't deal with factual criticism, turn to generalized slogans. Deflection 101.

And back with the "time is on the side of the Palestinians" (and "before the Palestinians outbreed them") - wouldn't stop the next argument being centered around genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, right? Logic 101.

Probably won't be long before lecturing others again (as seen earlier on topic) about "educating themselves", "getting facts wrong" and whatnot.

No my Eban parody was deliberate.

I am busy at the moment and have better things to do than argue the minutiae of when an offer of peace was made by Arafat in 1993 that it hadn't gone to some sub committee or other first. Israel should have ripped his arm off in accepting the olive branch, not shilly shally around with delaying tactics for a further 22 years building more settlements swallowing up more land of a future Palestinian state, stealing aquifers, ethnically cleansing more areas of Jerusalem on all sorts of pretexts, provoking wars with Hamas in order to destroy Palestinian unity governments.

All of which more and more make a viable 2 state solution impossible. So be it. Go for a one state solution with the Palestinians as equal citizens.

IMO all the Palestinians need do is keep their heads down, practise passive resistance, flood the social media with images of their daily humiliations, beatings and murders at the hands of the occupying army the IDf and fanatical Zionist colonists under an apartheid system. Simply become a bigger headache for Israelis, who in turn are becoming a bigger headache and embarrassment for the EU and USA.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians. There are not going to be any further large migrations of Jews into Israel...not at least when it's a warzone. So all the Palestinians need do is stay put, work through diplomatic channels to bring Israel before the ICC for war crimes, eventually get their state recognized by the UN, as more people see through the great Israeli hoax: that Israel plays the victim when it is in fact the colonialist aggressor.

Not too busy to post incorrect information over and over again.

The details omitted, edited or wrongly presented in your post (and similar posts in the past) are not "minutiae". That reality does not always suit your narrative is a sad fact of life. Slogans, spins and glossing over details is what this narrative is all about.

For example:

Arafat did not make any "peace offer" in 1993. His letter was part of the initial requirements of the Oslo Accords. And he wasn't magnanimous or willing, when it came down to it. The Covenant status not being clear is essentially a violation. PA officials speaking against the change in the Covenant, another violation. Hamas being elected without affirming previous agreements - a gross violation.

Your "IMO" does not change the fact that Palestinians do not practice passive resistance in a consistent and widespread manner. It will also not erase previous justifications and expressions of support made for violent resistance.

The "time is on the side of the Palestinians", until such time as dramatic "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" arguments are brought up. Maybe its time to pull up the impeding-nefarious-plan conspiracy theory

Spins aside, nothing in your latter post makes the former a correct or a factual one. Owning up seems harder than spewing further factually and logically challenged slogans.

[arunsakda]

I never called "you" anything although forum rules allow criticism of ideas and statements. You posted an absurd video that nobody can take seriously as some kind of revelation. In return I am accused of an ad-hominen, not true. Showing sympathy for a persons condition is not an attack. Conspiratorial Ideation (separate from actual paranoid disorder) is actually a subject of concern in Psychiatry now as it is so widespread and tends to affect otherwise "sane" persons. It is cited as an underlying factor in climate change denial, and very similiar to religious belief, is almost entirely impervious to any kind of logic or reasoning. I made a post a few hours ago that was called "jew script" and my so-called ad-hominem attack " bestial" and "sub-human". Now it's "local jew zionists" and "scum".

Do you think you would have made a great columnist for Der Stürmer?

Actually I for one hope you don't get banned and they leave your posts up because they prove the obvious intellectual dishonesty and lack of reasoning ability of those who fall for this kind of thing.

Edited October 26, 2015 by arunsakda

[Jingthing]

Yeah, sure thing. Let the Nazi posts stand. Expose the reality that Israel has scary sometimes genocidal intending enemies from multiple factions, from Western Neo-Nazis, from western "leftist" "progressives" that paint the enterprise of Israel in ridiculously simplistic "white colonist" terms, from most of the Islamic/Arab world as well that has used racist Jew hating rhetoric inspired from both the western left and far right (fascists). Including actual Nazis. With the historical basis of that totally proven in the Grand Mufti's collaboration with the actual Hitlerian Nazis in Berlin and their goal of genocidal extermination of the Jewish people in both Europe and the Middle East.

Folks, do not ever, and I mean ever, believe that the international Israel demonization movement, including BDS, is not heavily infected with the spirit of Jew hating. Calling it "anti-Zionism" is simply cover and we see here time and time again, the more extremist demonizers don't even bother with that cover.

Proactive comment: OF COURSE, that does not mean that all normal criticism of Israeli government policies (as you would expect against any government) is rooted in Jew hatred. Of course not.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Jingthing

[Jai Dee]

Replies to deleted content have been removed from this thread.

Please do not respond any further to any comments made by Income4meandU... he is on holidays and cannot respond.

[dexterm]

Sorry thread full

Morch wrote..

Looks like another case of copy/paste gone wrong.

When can't deal with factual criticism, turn to generalized slogans. Deflection 101.

And back with the "time is on the side of the Palestinians" (and "before the Palestinians outbreed them") - wouldn't stop the next argument being centered around genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, right? Logic 101.

Probably won't be long before lecturing others again (as seen earlier on topic) about "educating themselves", "getting facts wrong" and whatnot.

No my Eban parody was deliberate.

I am busy at the moment and have better things to do than argue the minutiae of when an offer of peace was made by Arafat in 1993 that it hadn't gone to some sub committee or other first. Israel should have ripped his arm off in accepting the olive branch, not shilly shally around with delaying tactics for a further 22 years building more settlements swallowing up more land of a future Palestinian state, stealing aquifers, ethnically cleansing more areas of Jerusalem on all sorts of pretexts, provoking wars with Hamas in order to destroy Palestinian unity governments.

All of which more and more make a viable 2 state solution impossible. So be it. Go for a one state solution with the Palestinians as equal citizens.

IMO all the Palestinians need do is keep their heads down, practise passive resistance, flood the social media with images of their daily humiliations, beatings and murders at the hands of the occupying army the IDf and fanatical Zionist colonists under an apartheid system. Simply become a bigger headache for Israelis, who in turn are becoming a bigger headache and embarrassment for the EU and USA.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians. There are not going to be any further large migrations of Jews into Israel...not at least when it's a warzone. So all the Palestinians need do is stay put, work through diplomatic channels to bring Israel before the ICC for war crimes, eventually get their state recognized by the UN, as more people see through the great Israeli hoax: that Israel plays the victim when it is in fact the colonialist aggressor.

Not too busy to post incorrect information over and over again.

The details omitted, edited or wrongly presented in your post (and similar posts in the past) are not "minutiae". That reality does not always suit your narrative is a sad fact of life. Slogans, spins and glossing over details is what this narrative is all about.

For example:

Arafat did not make any "peace offer" in 1993. His letter was part of the initial requirements of the Oslo Accords. And he wasn't magnanimous or willing, when it came down to it. The Covenant status not being clear is essentially a violation. PA officials speaking against the change in the Covenant, another violation. Hamas being elected without affirming previous agreements - a gross violation.

Your "IMO" does not change the fact that Palestinians do not practice passive resistance in a consistent and widespread manner. It will also not erase previous justifications and expressions of support made for violent resistance.

The "time is on the side of the Palestinians", until such time as dramatic "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" arguments are brought up. Maybe its time to pull up the impeding-nefarious-plan conspiracy theory

Spins aside, nothing in your latter post makes the former a correct or a factual one. Owning up seems harder than spewing further factually and logically challenged slogans.

You seem to have a problem for every solution....I hope you are not part of any peace negotiating team...or perhaps that's why tthe Palestinians have endured 22 years of stone walling. The letter offers peace and recognition in black and white ..it can't be any plainer..but you only appear to see invisible ink.

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

IMO if your enemy offers peace,and recognition and puts it in writing preserved in the archives of the Jewish Virtual library no less, you don't quibble like an accountant or lawyer: "Ah but that is only a requirement of the Oslo Accords...do you really mean it?" For crying out loud, you accept it, and get down to the fine details of serious negotiations with a spirit of reciprocal good will.

Arafat's letter of recognition stands and so does the Palestinian offer of peace and recognition.

Where are Israel's letters recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to exist in their own state in peace and security?

Edited October 26, 2015 by dexterm

[Morch]

Sorry thread full

Morch wrote..

Looks like another case of copy/paste gone wrong.

When can't deal with factual criticism, turn to generalized slogans. Deflection 101.

And back with the "time is on the side of the Palestinians" (and "before the Palestinians outbreed them") - wouldn't stop the next argument being centered around genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, right? Logic 101.

Probably won't be long before lecturing others again (as seen earlier on topic) about "educating themselves", "getting facts wrong" and whatnot.

No my Eban parody was deliberate.

I am busy at the moment and have better things to do than argue the minutiae of when an offer of peace was made by Arafat in 1993 that it hadn't gone to some sub committee or other first. Israel should have ripped his arm off in accepting the olive branch, not shilly shally around with delaying tactics for a further 22 years building more settlements swallowing up more land of a future Palestinian state, stealing aquifers, ethnically cleansing more areas of Jerusalem on all sorts of pretexts, provoking wars with Hamas in order to destroy Palestinian unity governments.

All of which more and more make a viable 2 state solution impossible. So be it. Go for a one state solution with the Palestinians as equal citizens.

IMO all the Palestinians need do is keep their heads down, practise passive resistance, flood the social media with images of their daily humiliations, beatings and murders at the hands of the occupying army the IDf and fanatical Zionist colonists under an apartheid system. Simply become a bigger headache for Israelis, who in turn are becoming a bigger headache and embarrassment for the EU and USA.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians. There are not going to be any further large migrations of Jews into Israel...not at least when it's a warzone. So all the Palestinians need do is stay put, work through diplomatic channels to bring Israel before the ICC for war crimes, eventually get their state recognized by the UN, as more people see through the great Israeli hoax: that Israel plays the victim when it is in fact the colonialist aggressor.

Not too busy to post incorrect information over and over again.

The details omitted, edited or wrongly presented in your post (and similar posts in the past) are not "minutiae". That reality does not always suit your narrative is a sad fact of life. Slogans, spins and glossing over details is what this narrative is all about.

For example:

Arafat did not make any "peace offer" in 1993. His letter was part of the initial requirements of the Oslo Accords. And he wasn't magnanimous or willing, when it came down to it. The Covenant status not being clear is essentially a violation. PA officials speaking against the change in the Covenant, another violation. Hamas being elected without affirming previous agreements - a gross violation.

Your "IMO" does not change the fact that Palestinians do not practice passive resistance in a consistent and widespread manner. It will also not erase previous justifications and expressions of support made for violent resistance.

The "time is on the side of the Palestinians", until such time as dramatic "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" arguments are brought up. Maybe its time to pull up the impeding-nefarious-plan conspiracy theory

Spins aside, nothing in your latter post makes the former a correct or a factual one. Owning up seems harder than spewing further factually and logically challenged slogans.

You seem to have a problem for every solution....I hope you are not part of any peace negotiating team...or perhaps that's why tthe Palestinians have endured 22 years of stone walling. The letter offers peace and recognition in black and white ..it can't be any plainer..but you only appear to see invisible ink.

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

IMO if your enemy offers peace,and recognition and puts it in writing preserved in the archives of the Jewish Virtual library no less, you don't quibble like an accountant or lawyer: "Ah but that is only a requirement of the Oslo Accords...do you really mean it?" For crying out loud, you accept it, and get down to the fine details of serious negotiations with a spirit of reciprocal good will.

Arafat's letter of recognition stands and so does the Palestinian offer of peace and recognition.

Where are Israel's letters recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to exist in their own state in peace and security?

I do not have a problem with "every solution". I have issues with incorrect presentation of facts, aimed at creating misleading notions.

Arafat's letter was not a Palestinian initiative nor a peace offer - it was a condition to be fulfilled for negotiations to begin. That the promises made in the letter were never fully realized (and yes, specifically among them is the changing of the Covenant - it appears on your link), doesn't seem to figure in your narrative. It is almost as if you consider the letter itself to be the essence of peace.

What reciprocal goodwill would that be? Was Arafat, generally speaking, exhibiting goodwill?! Palestinians don't make this nonsense claim. Arafat pretty much had to be pushed, cajoled, bribed and threatened by all those involved in the negotiations.

The Palestinians, for some time now, do not unanimously uphold the ideas expressed in the letter. Claiming otherwise would have us revisiting the error-filled post you try so hard to disregard.

Israel was not required, at the time, to provide a letter recognizing the Palestinian state. Other than coming to the negotiation table from a position of strength (which lends some perks), there was no Palestinian state to recognize (as the Palestinians never got around to actually declaring statehood). Instead, the PLO was recognized as representing the Palestinians.

Acknowledging that not all is simple, that reality isn't always what's written in a letter, and that slogans are no replacement for facts - this is not being against peace. It is just a realistic outlook when it comes to the conflict. Your own view seems more of an idealistic one, and you're welcome to it.

[Jingthing]

It's not idealistic at all. It's a seemingly intentionally distorted cynical narrative designed to place all of the blame on Israel and none on the "Palestinians".

Edited October 26, 2015 by Jingthing

[dexterm]

It's not idealistic at all. It's a seemingly intentionally distorted cynical narrative designed to place all of the blame on Israel and none on the "Palestinians".

No, I don't buy it.

So now you want to blame the Palestinians for a 22 year year delay in peace negotiations because they wrote in 1993 in black and white that

"The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."...but somehow you unilaterally decide..they didn't really mean it.

...while Israel in return made absolutely no reciprocal commitments whatsoever and have since continued to build settlements illegally on land intended for a Palestinian state, stealthily ethnicallly cleansed more of East Jerusalem intended as the Palestinian capital, provoked several wars, and inflicted daily repressions via an illegal occupation.

It's the same old Israeli hoax: the Israelis are the aggressor/invader that somehow try to morph themselves into being the victim.

Give us a break.

Edited October 26, 2015 by dexterm

[dexterm]

sorry thread full

Morch wrote...

I do not have a problem with "every solution". I have issues with incorrect presentation of facts, aimed at creating misleading notions.

Arafat's letter was not a Palestinian initiative nor a peace offer - it was a condition to be fulfilled for negotiations to begin. That the promises made in the letter were never fully realized (and yes, specifically among them is the changing of the Covenant - it appears on your link), doesn't seem to figure in your narrative. It is almost as if you consider the letter itself to be the essence of peace.

What reciprocal goodwill would that be? Was Arafat, generally speaking, exhibiting goodwill?! Palestinians don't make this nonsense claim. Arafat pretty much had to be pushed, cajoled, bribed and threatened by all those involved in the negotiations.

The Palestinians, for some time now, do not unanimously uphold the ideas expressed in the letter. Claiming otherwise would have us revisiting the error-filled post you try so hard to disregard.

Israel was not required, at the time, to provide a letter recognizing the Palestinian state. Other than coming to the negotiation table from a position of strength (which lends some perks), there was no Palestinian state to recognize (as the Palestinians never got around to actually declaring statehood). Instead, the PLO was recognized as representing the Palestinians.

Acknowledging that not all is simple, that reality isn't always what's written in a letter, and that slogans are no replacement for facts - this is not being against peace. It is just a realistic outlook when it comes to the conflict. Your own view seems more of an idealistic one, and you're welcome to it.

Perhaps it is time that idealism and a passion for a permanent solution to this conflict replaced nitpicking and fence sitting.

[Morch]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

You mention the Koran and some sort of imported European/Nazi style pathological anti semitism as a source of Muslim hatred of Israeli Jews, but ignore the enormous elephant in the room...well how about the 100 years of Zionist colonialism, ethnic cleansing, occupation, and thousands of Palestinians killed including over 500 children in Gaza last year alone, over 120 univestigated attacks by fanatical Jewish settlers this year alone, and the daily humiliations, beatings and murders at checkpoints in the occupied West Bank to name but a very small list of possible reasons for Palestinians to dislike occupying Zionists.

Let's have a semblance of reality checking here.

The Mufti and most Palestinians would probably not have given a hoot about Hitler and the Nazis, if they had been given their own nation as promised by the British for helping them defeat the Ottomans in World War 1, and if the waves of illegal Zionist immigrants intent on establishing a Jewish state by displacing Palestinians had never arrived.

Al-Husseini joined the Ottoman Army when WWI broke. He switched sides in 1917, when Jerusalem was captured. The Participation of Palestinian Arabs in the war against the Ottoman Empire was not widespread. There were but a few hundred with the Sharifian Army near the end of the war.

Al-Husseini's politics at the time, and until the late 1920's, were not focused on Palestinian nationalism, rather supporting Pan-Arabic notions (mostly to do with variations of Greater Syria). In the same vein, promises made by the British, were more along the lines of a unified Arab state in the region - not specifically a Palestinian one. Whether intentionally or not, the British became involved in three conflicting propositions - the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, The Sykes-Picot Agreement, and the Balfour Deceleration.

[Morch]

It's not idealistic at all. It's a seemingly intentionally distorted cynical narrative designed to place all of the blame on Israel and none on the "Palestinians".

No, I don't buy it.

So now you want to blame the Palestinians for a 22 year year delay in peace negotiations because they wrote in 1993 in black and white that

"The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."...but somehow you unilaterally decide..they didn't really mean it.

...while Israel in return made absolutely no reciprocal commitments whatsoever and have since continued to build settlements illegally on land intended for a Palestinian state, stealthily ethnicallly cleansed more of East Jerusalem intended as the Palestinian capital, provoked several wars, and inflicted daily repressions via an illegal occupation.

It's the same old Israeli hoax: the Israelis are the aggressor/invader that somehow try to morph themselves into being the victim.

Give us a break.

The above would possibly have merit if one considered your views as synonymous with Palestinian positions.

Since this is not the case, the criticism was apparently specifically directed at your interpretation, rather than aimed at the Palestinians themselves.

The ongoing spin exemplifies this - the Palestinian side did not make an issue of the above at the time, nor is it a main feature in Palestinian claims nowadays.

Israel recognized the PLO as the Palestinian representative, and accepted UN resolutions as basis for permanent agreement. So claiming "absolutely no reciprocal commitments whatsoever" is another misleading statement..Obviously, there was no Palestinian state to recognize at the time. Both sides had their fair share of agreement violations - that you focus solely on Israel's transgressions simply a one-sided narrow view.

[Morch]

sorry thread full

Morch wrote...

I do not have a problem with "every solution". I have issues with incorrect presentation of facts, aimed at creating misleading notions.

Arafat's letter was not a Palestinian initiative nor a peace offer - it was a condition to be fulfilled for negotiations to begin. That the promises made in the letter were never fully realized (and yes, specifically among them is the changing of the Covenant - it appears on your link), doesn't seem to figure in your narrative. It is almost as if you consider the letter itself to be the essence of peace.

What reciprocal goodwill would that be? Was Arafat, generally speaking, exhibiting goodwill?! Palestinians don't make this nonsense claim. Arafat pretty much had to be pushed, cajoled, bribed and threatened by all those involved in the negotiations.

The Palestinians, for some time now, do not unanimously uphold the ideas expressed in the letter. Claiming otherwise would have us revisiting the error-filled post you try so hard to disregard.

Israel was not required, at the time, to provide a letter recognizing the Palestinian state. Other than coming to the negotiation table from a position of strength (which lends some perks), there was no Palestinian state to recognize (as the Palestinians never got around to actually declaring statehood). Instead, the PLO was recognized as representing the Palestinians.

Acknowledging that not all is simple, that reality isn't always what's written in a letter, and that slogans are no replacement for facts - this is not being against peace. It is just a realistic outlook when it comes to the conflict. Your own view seems more of an idealistic one, and you're welcome to it.

Perhaps it is time that idealism and a passion for a permanent solution to this conflict replaced nitpicking and fence sitting.

Catchphrases seem to be all you got today.

An Idealist approach would require strong and determined leadership on both sides - not a commodity much in evidence.

Idealism is good on paper, and makes great slogans. Less useful when dealing with everyday situations, frictions and all them details some love to ignore until its too late. The Oslo Agreements, by the way, were an idealistic proposition - in that they did not factor public opinion, and left a host of issues for "later".

What you call "nitpicking" is what actually goes on negotiations of this sort. For those doubting it, read the full text of agreements, rather than the short versions on Wikipedia. Check who mans negotiation teams on both sides - mostly people dealing with details (Erekat, for example, is notorious for knowing all the clauses). When there is not trust between sides, and no goodwill, it is much better to be clear on details and meanings rather than making due with generalized idealistic statements.

What you habitually call "fence sitting" is nothing of the sort. Acknowledging the hurdles standing in the way of peace, is simply realism. Not subscribing to the brand of faux instant peace marketed, is not a position on the necessity of peace. Accepting that there are two accountable sides, rather than one, does not entail total disregard for either side's concerns.

This is pretty much the same as stated in my previous post - the position you present is not even the Palestinian one, but your own. The Palestinians are all for details, as generalized formulas do not seem to work well on their behalf (for example, the lack of clear criteria on further settlement building in agreements).

Edited October 26, 2015 by Morch

[Morch]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Ulysses. Don't be going to Germany or Austria any time soon. By your own written words you are guilty under Holocaust Denial laws. Check it out . Wow, Ulysses, the Holocaust Denier.

Even more troubling is the fact Merkel, in response to the holocaust denial remarks by the Israeli PM, stated Germany accepted all responsibilty for the Holocaust, so one is even calling the German pm a liar as well...

It seems to me the Zionists are that blinded by their own fanactical beliefs and hatred of their neighbours that they would even deny the accepted narrative of the holocaust to forward their agenda...

If a "gentile" on here was questioning the accepted narrative of the holocaust one suspects they would be branded a neo nazi, jew hater, anti-zionist or Arab apologist by the glee club by now

There were numerous links given to quotes of historians and media headlines calling Netanyahu's words nonsense and worse. Many of those quoted are..gasp.. Zionists. Some were even members of Netanyahu's party. Doesn't lend much credence to the blanket statement that "the Zionists are that blinded by their own fanatical beliefs and hatred of their neighbours that they would even deny the accepted narrative of the holocaust to forward their agenda.."

The "gentile" comment is another oddity - considering the lectures on how not-all-Jews-are-Zionists, and rejecting-Zionist-ideology-is-not-antisemitism (both, by the way, not things I dispute). To make things a bit more interesting, the criticism on the double-standards issue highlighted appears also in some of the links mentioned above. Guess some of them Zionists still retain a measure of introspection and integrity even if learned posters feel otherwise.

[Thorgal]

The biggest fascist leader of our time? Hardly, though I can concede some may feel this way, its just not factually correct, What is factually accurate, however, is the role the Arabs played in insinuating into Hitler's design for the Jews, This is an uncontestable fact, and the Grand Mufti was the vital face of this relationship. Hitler even had considerable praise for the Arab/Muslim ability to raise and justify their hatred for jews with the koran. That Netanyahu chooses to discuss this now should raise questions of motive or intent, but it is entirely factual. Having emotive disdain for him does not make one's position sound only... dubious.

Can you elaborate what you call : "the ability to raise and justify their hatred for Jews with the Koran" ?

If not, forum rules should be applied...

Your post 9/11 agenda is once again too transparent !

Are you denying that passages from the Koran and Hadith are used by Muslims to justify animosity and violence toward Jews? Israelis? This is not a question regarding the the correct interpretation of religious texts, but rather pertains to use made of such passages.

I understand completely with your question that you have difficulties to understand the historical background from Islam towards Jews.

I won't elaborate your request towards Israeli's because the nation covers the main Abrahamic religions : Judaism, Christianity and Islam: all 3 share well known common Prophets. To start it's ridiculous to consider that Jewish Prophets are discriminated in the Koran. Islam can't be antisemitic because Arabs are also semitic.

Moreover, Islam and Christianity are not based on ethnicity. Judaism is based on ethnicity. And Israel is with its Declaration of Independency a Jewish state.

Furthermore you limit any possible reply by extracting the question regarding the correct interpretation of Koranic religious texts. Resulting in a too transparent fallacy. Perhaps 300 of these fallacies are documented somewhere on the internet and are even available in Latin, you've just fabricated a cluster that didn't really work.

You've also forgotten to mention the notion of time and place. Islamic text sources and historical facts proves the contrary of your assumptions. Here again I recognise a repetitive lack of academical and intellectual arguments. Coded slogans are not advisable in any debate.

Too many historical facts are pointing that Muslim efforts and sacrifices were made and were favourable towards Jews in general :

- Jews and Muslims fought together against Christian crusaders for the multiple sieges of Jerusalem ;

- Muslims defeated the Byzantine Empire and liberated the Jews ;

- Note : in case you attempt to aim at Shia Islam : Persians (non-Muslims) liberated the Jews and allowed the Jews to build the 2nd Temple in Jerusalem ;

- Jews were liberated by the Muslims after the conquest of Spain ;

- Jews were integrated into Muslim Ottoman Empire whereas they were prosecuted all over Europe;

- Muslims fought during WW1 for France and Britain in Europe and for the conquest of the Ottoman Empire remained important for Palestine and Jews with the Balfour declaration ;

- Muslims fought for France and Britain during WW2 in Europe and North Africa and contributed to early liberation of Jews in concentration camps ;

- Only Muslim country under Nazi occupation was Albania. More Jews were present at the end of WW2 than at the beginning. No single Jew has been deported ;

- After creation of State of Israel and Palestinians were expulsed, all Arab countries provided liasons with Zionist agents to provide repatriation to Israel ;

And I can continue...

Just have a look on the map in the link and acknowledge your lack of historical correctness in this matter :

http://www.wired.com/2013/03/the-long-data-of-european-jewish-expulsions/

There are lists on internet available of Jewish persecutions in history which I won't provide due to forum rules. Which ones are not-politically related to Muslims ? Which ones are based on Jihad and Fitna ?

By the way, the Mufti of Jerusalem from OP was not elected by any Muslim scholar to this important religious position. In fact, he was elected by Sir Herbert Samuel, a crypto Jew. The Mufti was hated among the Palestinians because he served previously in Ottoman Empire army as artillery officer.

Moreover he belonged to the Salafist scholar with strong ties with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and neighbouring countries.

Israel never liked the idea that Al Husseini was owner of a chanote of 1 million dunhams in Palestine alone. 1 dunham is 1000 square meters...so he could decide without the British occupiers who could live on it...

His relationship with Hitler and Himmler were pure geo-political, not religious.

History proved that Muslims have a long tradition in being favourable towards Jews. It stopped more or less after the 1st Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897 and all previous Muslim efforts and sacrifices were never even considered from 1947 till today...to make peace in the ME...

Peace treaty between Muslims and Jews started in 622 CE when the Jews didn't even had any army...

http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/treaty22.html

Edited October 26, 2015 by Thorgal

[Thorgal]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

You mention the Koran and some sort of imported European/Nazi style pathological anti semitism as a source of Muslim hatred of Israeli Jews, but ignore the enormous elephant in the room...well how about the 100 years of Zionist colonialism, ethnic cleansing, occupation, and thousands of Palestinians killed including over 500 children in Gaza last year alone, over 120 univestigated attacks by fanatical Jewish settlers this year alone, and the daily humiliations, beatings and murders at checkpoints in the occupied West Bank to name but a very small list of possible reasons for Palestinians to dislike occupying Zionists.

Let's have a semblance of reality checking here.

The Mufti and most Palestinians would probably not have given a hoot about Hitler and the Nazis, if they had been given their own nation as promised by the British for helping them defeat the Ottomans in World War 1, and if the waves of illegal Zionist immigrants intent on establishing a Jewish state by displacing Palestinians had never arrived.

Al-Husseini joined the Ottoman Army when WWI broke. He switched sides in 1917, when Jerusalem was captured. The Participation of Palestinian Arabs in the war against the Ottoman Empire was not widespread. There were but a few hundred with the Sharifian Army near the end of the war.

Al-Husseini's politics at the time, and until the late 1920's, were not focused on Palestinian nationalism, rather supporting Pan-Arabic notions (mostly to do with variations of Greater Syria). In the same vein, promises made by the British, were more along the lines of a unified Arab state in the region - not specifically a Palestinian one. Whether intentionally or not, the British became involved in three conflicting propositions - the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, The Sykes-Picot Agreement, and the Balfour Deceleration.

You forgot to mention a more important 4th conflicting proposition: the Faisal-Weizmann agreement of 1919.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal–Weizmann_Agreement

Original Sykes-Picot agreement was made secretly in 1916 between France and Britain. It was only made publicly in 1919 through a Russian embassy employee.

The Balfour declaration was in fact composed by Lloyd George in 1917.

The Balfour declaration was in fact merged in the original Sykes-Picot agreement but only indirectly released to France end of November 1918, short after the end of WW1. French Clemenceau visited Lloyd George in London. George asked for 2 important changes of the Sykes-Picot agreement to Clemenceau :

- return of Mosul to Britain after the Germans discovered in 1915 the huge quantities of oil reserves

- return of Palestine to Britain due to the Balfour declaration : so far your assumption of a unified Arab nation...

Your assumption that British occupancy aimed a creation of the Greater Arabic nation after the Balfour declaration is false. Check the Arab demographics in that time vs the Jewish...

You're confusing with King Faysal...the Mufti supported the Arab Kingdom of Syria just after WW1.

France separated Greater Lebanon and gived away Hatay State back to the Turks. Syrian-Arab government was removed after the French came in. What you called 'variations'.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Thorgal

[Ulysses G.]

The biggest fascist leader of our time? Hardly, though I can concede some may feel this way, its just not factually correct, What is factually accurate, however, is the role the Arabs played in insinuating into Hitler's design for the Jews, This is an uncontestable fact, and the Grand Mufti was the vital face of this relationship. Hitler even had considerable praise for the Arab/Muslim ability to raise and justify their hatred for jews with the koran. That Netanyahu chooses to discuss this now should raise questions of motive or intent, but it is entirely factual. Having emotive disdain for him does not make one's position sound only... dubious.

Can you elaborate what you call : "the ability to raise and justify their hatred for Jews with the Koran" ?

If not, forum rules should be applied...

Your post 9/11 agenda is once again too transparent !

Are you denying that passages from the Koran and Hadith are used by Muslims to justify animosity and violence toward Jews? Israelis? This is not a question regarding the the correct interpretation of religious texts, but rather pertains to use made of such passages.

I understand completely with your question that you have difficulties to understand the historical background from Islam towards Jews.

None of your cherry-picked examples nullify the fact that those passages are in the Koran and the term "anti-Semitic" ONLY applies to Jews. Arabs speak Semitic LANGUAGES. They are not the same genetically.

[arjunadawn]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

Or...is it simply that after 3 generations of oft-times brutal occupation and stealing of lands and demolition of homes,, an oppressed people hate their oppressors?

I think that is the most reasonable and likely scenario. To always try to make it something to do with Jew-hatred is just playing the Jew victim card again....YET again.

SS, you are not incorrect, but it is a lopsided observation. After x generations, yes, people in the current age are aghast and often need little scripture or history to hate, or be angry, etc, because their grievances are very real, very near. But this kind of observation simply cannot exist without context. Jews have been brutalized by Arabs/muslims for millennia. Right, the present is all that matters; I agree. Yet in the ME the past is interwoven with every act. Not sure a population that have been consistently demonized and hunted and killed and raped and slaughtered and maligned for 1,400 years by the divine mandate of their avowed enemies can actually play a victim card. It is evident, the jews are victims in the larger context; 70 years is a hiccup in time.

Jew Hatred? One has to intentionally avoid noting every stone of history crying out that there is a "Jew behind me, come and kill him" in order not to see that jews are victims as well. This is the background in which mindset's like Netanyahu speak, in this case not smartly either. But this is the background and it cannot be conveniently divorced from the present to sterilize arab/muslims as victims alone.

[Seastallion]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

Or...is it simply that after 3 generations of oft-times brutal occupation and stealing of lands and demolition of homes,, an oppressed people hate their oppressors?

I think that is the most reasonable and likely scenario. To always try to make it something to do with Jew-hatred is just playing the Jew victim card again....YET again.

SS, you are not incorrect, but it is a lopsided observation. After x generations, yes, people in the current age are aghast and often need little scripture or history to hate, or be angry, etc, because their grievances are very real, very near. But this kind of observation simply cannot exist without context. Jews have been brutalized by Arabs/muslims for millennia. Right, the present is all that matters; I agree. Yet in the ME the past is interwoven with every act. Not sure a population that have been consistently demonized and hunted and killed and raped and slaughtered and maligned for 1,400 years by the divine mandate of their avowed enemies can actually play a victim card. It is evident, the jews are victims in the larger context; 70 years is a hiccup in time.

Jew Hatred? One has to intentionally avoid noting every stone of history crying out that there is a "Jew behind me, come and kill him" in order not to see that jews are victims as well. This is the background in which mindset's like Netanyahu speak, in this case not smartly either. But this is the background and it cannot be conveniently divorced from the present to sterilize arab/muslims as victims alone.

It is not lopsided. 1400 years of being hunted, and 70 years a hiccup in time are indeed continuing with the victim card when you consider that for the past 70 years, Israeli Jews have been the aggressor.

Do you expect a youth who is witnessing his home being demolished to shrug his shoulders and console himself, "Oh well, I understand the bulldozer driver's need to do this, after all, his great grandfather was gassed at Dachau. And I don't blame the IDF officer overseeing the destruction, because his great great great grandfather was driven out of Russia."

Every single Palestinian living today in Palestine has been and is a victim of Jewish aggression. Their hatred does not need any holy scripture to make it violent.

It's today that matters.

The sins of the father can quite aptly be converted to the transgressions against the great great grandfather. Do today's Palestinian youths have to pay for the transgressions against today's Israeli's ancestors in another land?

Edited October 26, 2015 by Seastallion

[Pakboong]

It is a messed up world when 15,000,000 actually think it is productive to shout louder than the other 7.5 billion to make any point. I don't know the answer but we are limited in how loudly we can shout. The fundamentals of democracy are stretched. I for one, do not think the democracy is the best form of government but it is not up to me to decide.

[Ulysses G.]

Do today's Palestinian youths have to pay for the transgressions against today's Israeli's ancestors in another land?

Today's Palestinians are paying because their fathers and grandfathers picked a fight with a superior foe that they can never best. They brought all their troubles on themselves. Time to realize that and make peace.

Edited October 27, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Seastallion]

Do today's Palestinian youths have to pay for the transgressions against today's Israeli's ancestors in another land?

Today's Palestinians are paying because their fathers and grandfathers picked a fight with a superior foe that they can never best. They brought all their troubles on themselves. Time to realize that and make peace.

You are saying they have to pay for the sins of the father. This is widely accepted as immoral and unjust.

There is only one side that refuses peace, and that is Israel.

[arfurcrown]

UlyssesG post # 208.

Today's Palestinians are paying because their fathers and grandfathers picked a fight with a superior foe that they can never best. They brought all their troubles on themselves. Time to realize that and make peace.

Today's Palestinians are paying because their fathers and grandfathers were terrorised slaughtered and had their land stolen from them in a fight with a terrorist led xenophobic jingoistic group of professional victims who still do carry on their abhorrent activities in order to justify their barbaric and dictatorial actions.

Truth be known the average Israeli wants peace but those Zionists in power do not want peace they want ethnic cleansing so as to be able to walk into a racially sterile area.